Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:
noone wrote:
Rob Kleinschmidt <Rkleinsch1216128@aol.com> wrote:
And the problem with all of the above is that neither thrmite,
disintegration rays or nukes provide a plausible alternative.
You find the official story to be more plausible than demolition?
Really? Even with respect to WTC7?
I find there's no demolition scenario that makes any kind
of reasonable sense.
So, in RobWorld, strategically placed demolition charges can't
cause steel framed buidlings to explode and disintegrate all the
way to the ground at virtual free fall speed, but fires limited
to a few floors near the top of the building can. Wow. You really
have lost all sense of logic, reason, and reality.
It's also not plausible to argue WTC7 was a demolition if
the twin towers weren't.
And of course, WTC7's demolition was even more obvious than the
towers'.
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html
Demolition scenarios also wind up atributing more structural
integrety to the towers than do the people who built them
or their professional colleagues.
Insupportable kook drivel. The towers was radically over engineered
to support many times their own weight and survive hurricane force
winds, multiple jet impacts, and severe fires.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
"There is evidence that the Twin Towers were designed with an even
greater measure of reserve strength than typical large buildings.
According to the calculations of engineers who worked on the Towers'
design, all the columns on one side of a Tower could be cut, as well as
the two corners and some of the columns on each adjacent side, and the
building would still be strong enough to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour
wind. 7 Also, John Skilling is cited by the Engineering News Record
for the claim that "live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be
increased more than 2000% before failure occurs." 8"
The fire and collapse model looks more plausible than
anything else suggested
There is no collpase model, and it has been proved beyond any
doubt to be not only implausible, but violate the laws of
phsyics.
Like I said, airplane hits building, building burns
and eventually falls down.
Violating not only precedent, but the laws of physics,
common sense, logic, and realty. And of course, WTC7
still wasn't hit by a plane.
--
http://911research.wtc7.net
http://stj911.org
http://stopthelie.com/1-hour_guide_to_911.html
http://www.911truth.org
Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Ever wonder who benefits from the 300 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21
"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...
.
|
