| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Briga" |
| Date: |
03 Jun 2007 12:49:01 PM |
| Object: |
VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
| User: "Tom Gardner" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 12:52:54 PM |
|
|
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were hired
by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil helmet on,
duct tape will suffice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 03:15:22 AM |
|
|
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were hired
by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil helmet on,
duct tape will suffice.
The government wants the people to buy duct tape , to hold down their
foil helmets. Thats when they figured that the moronic idiots like
yourself are using nails, very interesting !!!
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Gardner" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 05:00:19 PM |
|
|
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4663036a$0$16403$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were
hired by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil
helmet on, duct tape will suffice.
The government wants the people to buy duct tape , to hold down their foil
helmets. Thats when they figured that the moronic idiots like yourself are
using nails, very interesting !!!
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
I'll bet the adhesive in duct tape has mind-control drugs in it! Go back to
the roofing nails!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 06:57:28 AM |
|
|
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4663036a$0$16403$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were
hired by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil
helmet on, duct tape will suffice.
The government wants the people to buy duct tape , to hold down their foil
helmets. Thats when they figured that the moronic idiots like yourself are
using nails, very interesting !!!
I'll bet the adhesive in duct tape has mind-control drugs in it! Go back to
the roofing nails!
Those ZioNazi thugs who work with the gardner put adhesive drugs in
tapes should be locked up. Next they will use nail guns, those fascist
terrorist. They did all of this to start the wars in the middle east,
ZioNazi thugs.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Gardner" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 08:58:44 PM |
|
|
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:46633774$0$16375$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4663036a$0$16403$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were
hired by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil
helmet on, duct tape will suffice.
The government wants the people to buy duct tape , to hold down their
foil helmets. Thats when they figured that the moronic idiots like
yourself are using nails, very interesting !!!
I'll bet the adhesive in duct tape has mind-control drugs in it! Go back
to the roofing nails!
Those ZioNazi thugs who work with the gardner put adhesive drugs in tapes
should be locked up. Next they will use nail guns, those fascist
terrorist. They did all of this to start the wars in the middle east,
ZioNazi thugs.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The wars in the Middle East are just a smoke screen to hide the real terror
going on! It seems that the only place to extract "Bazanthium" is from
empty oil wells. Bazanthium is used to disrupt the nuclear fusion in stars.
The Zorkons are destroying whole solar systems containing life forms that
may one day be capable of overthrowing them as Galactic rulers.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 06:38:13 AM |
|
|
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were hired
by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil helmet on,
duct tape will suffice.
keep on spreading disinformation for the masses.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisin" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 06:34:55 PM |
|
|
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:466332f1$0$16400$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were hired
by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil helmet on,
duct tape will suffice.
keep on spreading disinformation for the masses.
Foolish human! The Zorkons kill those who deny their existence!! Prepare to meet your maker,
moron!!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Buzz" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
08 Jun 2007 12:07:30 AM |
|
|
Eric Gisin wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:466332f1$0$16400$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
Tom Gardner wrote:
"Briga" <Yuming@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4662385a$0$16293$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were
hired
by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil
helmet on,
duct tape will suffice.
keep on spreading disinformation for the masses.
Foolish human! The Zorkons kill those who deny their existence!! Prepare
to meet your maker, moron!!!
Zorkons AKA (Zionist terrorists)
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 03:57:42 PM |
|
|
Tom Gardner wrote:
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were hired
by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil helmet on,
duct tape will suffice.
It's not nice to talk to the insane that way.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Buzz" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
08 Jun 2007 12:09:30 AM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
Tom Gardner wrote:
The aliens from the Zorkon Galaxy used a "Destructo-Beam". They were
hired by the Republicans. Stop using roofing nails to hold your foil
helmet on, duct tape will suffice.
It's not nice to talk to the insane that way.
That is called state sponsored terrorism, the fascist thugs behind 9/11.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vitor" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 04:52:12 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
I have seen the videos. You can get them at www.infowars.com
I am not convinced. It is a whole deal of how the government did 911.
This is just an example of how this whole group think has gotten out of
hand.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
02 Jun 2007 11:37:09 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely
unknown to forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's
have a more credible theory, okay?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 01:04:56 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible theory,
okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 12:17:46 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive
analysis of the debris at the scene and no trace of
explosive remains was found.
Now, do you have a better theory or not? Tell you, I've
already watched that "911 Mysteries" travesty and so
you don't have to trot out anything from there, because
it's so easy to debunk it's not even funny. Got
anything else?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 04:01:08 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the debris
at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
Now, do you have a better theory or not? Tell you, I've already watched
that "911 Mysteries" travesty and so you don't have to trot out anything
from there, because it's so easy to debunk it's not even funny. Got
anything else?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 03:18:59 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any
explosives residue would have been everywhere at the
site. NONE was found. Try again.
Now, do you have a better theory or not? Tell you, I've already
watched that "911 Mysteries" travesty and so you don't have to trot
out anything from there, because it's so easy to debunk it's not even
funny. Got anything else?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 06:10:34 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any explosives residue
would have been everywhere at the site. NONE was found. Try again.
You keep on lying.
Steel columns is the reason why the WTC is a high rise tower, so what
did they do with it, recycle some and ship the rest to china.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vandar" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 05:25:51 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any explosives residue
would have been everywhere at the site. NONE was found. Try again.
You keep on lying.
Steel columns is the reason why the WTC is a high rise tower, so what
did they do with it, recycle some and ship the rest to china.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
Meanwhile, back in the real world...
http://www.amny.com/entertainment/news/am-wtcrelics-pg2006,0,6613706.photogallery?index=1
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 05:08:32 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any explosives residue
would have been everywhere at the site. NONE was found. Try again.
You keep on lying.
Steel columns is the reason why the WTC is a high rise tower, so what
did they do with it, recycle some and ship the rest to china.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
And? So what? If any form of explosive had been used,
it would not have remained on the columns. It would
have been distributed throughout lower Manhattan.
Besides, that site you linked to is telling a lie (or,
being charitable, perhaps simply a falsehood) by the
third sentence - steel-frame buildings HAVE collapsed
due to fire. See McCormick Place for only one.
Of course, that is neglecting the fact that the WTC did
not collapse solely due to fire. Part of it was almost
certainly due to being hit by near 200 TONS of aircraft
moving at 500 or more miles per hour, per tower! Since
that has NEVER happened before, comparing that event to
any other and saying that the WTC collapse was
'unusual' is, shall we say, naive.
Got anything else, or is this a fruitless exercise on
my part?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
04 Jun 2007 06:51:18 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any explosives residue
would have been everywhere at the site. NONE was found. Try again.
You keep on lying.
Steel columns is the reason why the WTC is a high rise tower, so what
did they do with it, recycle some and ship the rest to china.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
And? So what? If any form of explosive had been used, it would not have
remained on the columns. It would have been distributed throughout lower
Manhattan.
Besides, that site you linked to is telling a lie (or, being charitable,
perhaps simply a falsehood) by the third sentence - steel-frame
buildings HAVE collapsed due to fire. See McCormick Place for only one.
You learned about the McCormick Place from the link that I gave you, you
should have read that McCormick Place is a the warehouse-type building
and only the roof collapsed, try to be honest please.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/mccormick.html
Of course, that is neglecting the fact that the WTC did not collapse
solely due to fire. Part of it was almost certainly due to being hit by
near 200 TONS of aircraft moving at 500 or more miles per hour, per
tower! Since that has NEVER happened before, comparing that event to any
other and saying that the WTC collapse was 'unusual' is, shall we say,
naive.
You keep on forgetting that WTC7 is a 47 story building that was not hit
by a plane, that building collapsed in 6.5 seconds that day.
http://www.wtc7.net/
Got anything else, or is this a fruitless exercise on my part?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 06:25:22 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown to
forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more credible
theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any explosives residue
would have been everywhere at the site. NONE was found. Try again.
You keep on lying.
Steel columns is the reason why the WTC is a high rise tower, so what
did they do with it, recycle some and ship the rest to china.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
And? So what? If any form of explosive had been used, it would not
have remained on the columns. It would have been distributed
throughout lower Manhattan.
Besides, that site you linked to is telling a lie (or, being
charitable, perhaps simply a falsehood) by the third sentence -
steel-frame buildings HAVE collapsed due to fire. See McCormick Place
for only one.
You learned about the McCormick Place from the link that I gave you, you
should have read that McCormick Place is a the warehouse-type building
and only the roof collapsed, try to be honest please.
I am being, but I'm starting to suspect that I'm the
only one being so in this conversation.
A small fire, with almost NO load on the roof besides
its own weight, and no impact, and yet the steel
collapsed. Not anywhere close to the kinetic and
destructive force imposed on the WTC frame. Indeed, for
your website to try to compare the two is inherently
dishonest for the reasons I have already given. The WTC
did NOT collapse solely due to fire. But regardless,
McCormick Place shows quite eloquently that fire and
fire alone can cause structural steel to collapse, so
your objection there, false as it is, is still refuted.
Here's something for you to chew on - when you heat
structual steel to the kind of temperatures that
burning jet fuel can easily reach, that steel loses
well over half of its strength. Couple that with the
actual loss of a huge amount of structural framing
caused by those frames being broken by a jetliner
hitting them, and why wouldn't you think steel would
collapse?
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/mccormick.html
Of course, that is neglecting the fact that the WTC did not collapse
solely due to fire. Part of it was almost certainly due to being hit
by near 200 TONS of aircraft moving at 500 or more miles per hour, per
tower! Since that has NEVER happened before, comparing that event to
any other and saying that the WTC collapse was 'unusual' is, shall we
say, naive.
You keep on forgetting that WTC7 is a 47 story building that was not hit
by a plane, that building collapsed in 6.5 seconds that day.
http://www.wtc7.net/
Yeah...that was hit by one of the main WTC towers on
*its* way down and had a gash 20 or more stories tall
ripped in it and halfway through. How do you need a
conspiracy theory to explain anything?
Got anything else, or is this a fruitless exercise on my part?
It's the second one, isn't it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Buzz" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
08 Jun 2007 12:01:24 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely unknown
to forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's have a more
credible theory, okay?
It seems that the ignorant stupid morons who keep making stupid
comments, don't know what they are talking about. There were no
forensic analysis.
Yeah, that's not actually so. There was extensive analysis of the
debris at the scene and no trace of explosive remains was found.
Can you show us where these steel columns from the WTC that were
analyzed ?
And why the sudden interest in steel columns? Any explosives
residue would have been everywhere at the site. NONE was found. Try
again.
You keep on lying.
Steel columns is the reason why the WTC is a high rise tower, so
what did they do with it, recycle some and ship the rest to china.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
And? So what? If any form of explosive had been used, it would not
have remained on the columns. It would have been distributed
throughout lower Manhattan.
Besides, that site you linked to is telling a lie (or, being
charitable, perhaps simply a falsehood) by the third sentence -
steel-frame buildings HAVE collapsed due to fire. See McCormick Place
for only one.
You learned about the McCormick Place from the link that I gave you, you
should have read that McCormick Place is a the warehouse-type building
and only the roof collapsed, try to be honest please.
I am being, but I'm starting to suspect that I'm the only one being so
in this conversation.
A small fire, with almost NO load on the roof besides its own weight,
and no impact, and yet the steel collapsed. Not anywhere close to the
kinetic and destructive force imposed on the WTC frame. Indeed, for your
website to try to compare the two is inherently dishonest for the
reasons I have already given. The WTC did NOT collapse solely due to
fire. But regardless, McCormick Place shows quite eloquently that fire
and fire alone can cause structural steel to collapse, so your objection
there, false as it is, is still refuted.
The design of a warehouse is totally different than that of a high rise
tower, you can not compare both. The walls did not collapse check the
photo in the link.
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/talks/collapse/mccormickfire.html
Here's something for you to chew on - when you heat structual steel to
the kind of temperatures that burning jet fuel can easily reach, that
steel loses well over half of its strength. Couple that with the actual
loss of a huge amount of structural framing caused by those frames being
broken by a jetliner hitting them, and why wouldn't you think steel
would collapse?
You are talking out of ignorance.
The WTC was designed to withstand MULTIPLE plane impacts, the heat
generated by the jet fuel and the damage to steel was all taken in
account when they designed the towers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGhWkRAR1Vc
Fact: WTC #7 WAS NOT hit with a plane, the building collapsed in the
same manner of Controlled Demolition. You can download the photos of
WTC7 from this link.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/230806wtccomplex.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/mccormick.html
Of course, that is neglecting the fact that the WTC did not collapse
solely due to fire. Part of it was almost certainly due to being hit
by near 200 TONS of aircraft moving at 500 or more miles per hour,
per tower! Since that has NEVER happened before, comparing that event
to any other and saying that the WTC collapse was 'unusual' is, shall
we say, naive.
You keep on forgetting that WTC7 is a 47 story building that was not
hit by a plane, that building collapsed in 6.5 seconds that day.
http://www.wtc7.net/
Yeah...that was hit by one of the main WTC towers on *its* way down and
had a gash 20 or more stories tall ripped in it and halfway through. How
do you need a conspiracy theory to explain anything?
Got anything else, or is this a fruitless exercise on my part?
It's the second one, isn't it?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Obwon" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
08 Jun 2007 12:13:40 PM |
|
|
Yep... The outter walls of the towers were not
load bearing walls. That's a factoid that has escaped
most people. The towers were designed with massively
crossbraced steel cores, it was these cores that bore
the load of the buildings. The outter walls were merely
hanging onto floor joists that connected them to the core.
Now... Guess how many of the core columns were lost
to the planes in each tower? Can't answer? Then
google it and find out.
Neither the fuel nor the heat from the fuel, was spread
evenly throughout the buildings. If melting steel was
to result in the buildings collapse, they should have
toppled, not fallen down through their own resistance.
Obwon
O][ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ][O
"You can fool some of the people all the time,
and those are the ones
you want to concentrate on".
http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/george_w._bush/
George W. Bush quotes
O][ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ][O
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Briga" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
11 Jun 2007 05:16:53 AM |
|
|
Obwon wrote:
Yep... The outter walls of the towers were not
load bearing walls. That's a factoid that has escaped
most people. The towers were designed with massively
crossbraced steel cores, it was these cores that bore
the load of the buildings. The outter walls were merely
hanging onto floor joists that connected them to the core.
Now... Guess how many of the core columns were lost
to the planes in each tower? Can't answer? Then
google it and find out.
The second tower was hit in the corner (very minimal damage to the 47
core columns)and after 56 minutes the tower collapsed. Notice how the
portion of the building above the plane impact tilted and was about to
fall aside then self destructed, this web page does a good job pointing
out that http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69b.html
Neither the fuel nor the heat from the fuel, was spread
evenly throughout the buildings. If melting steel was
to result in the buildings collapse, they should have
toppled, not fallen down through their own resistance.
Obwon
O][ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ][O
"You can fool some of the people all the time,
and those are the ones
you want to concentrate on".
http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/george_w._bush/
George W. Bush quotes
O][ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ][O
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Sr." |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
10 Jun 2007 07:22:58 PM |
|
|
/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
11 Jun 2007 10:39:03 PM |
|
|
Briga wrote:
The second tower was hit in the corner (very minimal damage to the 47
core columns)and after 56 minutes the tower collapsed. Notice how the
portion of the building above the plane impact tilted and was about to
fall aside then self destructed, this web page does a good job pointing
out that http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69b.html
Yeah... and hundreds of people witnessed the crash and saw the
wreckage of the UFO that crashed in Roswell.
The only problem with you Loony Liberal's conspiracy theory is
that it lacks motive.
You're all in a tizzy about how the gubbmint knocked down the
tower - but you don't have any reasons WHY they might do such a
thing.
All you have to support your faith is your inner paranoia that
the gubbermint is out to gitcha.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cameron L. Spitzer" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
08 Jun 2007 07:29:29 PM |
|
|
In article <o-idnTt2D-Z-0P7bnZ2dnUVZ_tCtnZ2d@giganews.com>, IAAH wrote:
Briga wrote:
You learned about the McCormick Place from the link that I gave you, you
should have read that McCormick Place is a the warehouse-type building
and only the roof collapsed, try to be honest please.
I am being, but I'm starting to suspect that I'm the
only one being so in this conversation.
A few weeks ago we had a steel and concrete freeway ramp
destroyed by fire in Oakland.
The gasoline tanks involved were smaller than the diesel
tank which fed the fire under the bridge in WTC 7.
You did know WTC 7 was built on a bridge, right?
The middle of the building was unsupported at ground level.
The 911 hand-wavers love to point out that they can't
find another steel frame office building which has burned down.
But somehow it doesn't bother them that they can't find
buildings anything like WTC 1, 2, and 7 that have
had multiple adjacent floors fully involved in fire that
have *NOT* fallen down. Can the hand-wavers even find
office buildings of similar dimensions that have not
caught fire? One hundred one-acre floors, with
unsupported spans of over fifty feet. Pretty strange
buildings.
The fallacy in the 911 hand-waver claim that "steel frame
buildings" don't burn down is that buildings of the
size, shape, and construction style of the WTC buildings
are so rare that none had ever burned before 911.
For all anybody knows, buildings like that *ALWAYS*
fall down when a fire gets completely out of control.
The hand-wavers can only point to buildings much smaller
than the WTCs.
Cameron
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
09 Jun 2007 09:14:44 AM |
|
|
Cameron L. Spitzer wrote:
In article <o-idnTt2D-Z-0P7bnZ2dnUVZ_tCtnZ2d@giganews.com>, IAAH wrote:
A few weeks ago we had a steel and concrete freeway ramp
destroyed by fire in Oakland.
The Oakland-Bay bridge... It seems to get destroyed with
alarming frequency.
The 911 hand-wavers love to point out that they can't
find another steel frame office building which has burned down.
I wonder what they think the motive for that would be? They
shriek and shriek that it was some kind of government conspiracy
- without giving any reason why the gov would do it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cameron L. Spitzer" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
09 Jun 2007 03:17:07 PM |
|
|
In article <oByai.24920$YL5.17963@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
Cameron L. Spitzer wrote:
In article <o-idnTt2D-Z-0P7bnZ2dnUVZ_tCtnZ2d@giganews.com>, IAAH wrote:
A few weeks ago we had a steel and concrete freeway ramp
destroyed by fire in Oakland.
The Oakland-Bay bridge... It seems to get destroyed with
alarming frequency.
Actually it was a short span in a freeway intersection
known as the "Oakland maze." It's east of the Bay Bridge
toll plaza.
The 911 hand-wavers love to point out that they can't
find another steel frame office building which has burned down.
I wonder what they think the motive for that would be? They
shriek and shriek that it was some kind of government conspiracy
- without giving any reason why the gov would do it.
The motive is pretty obvious. You don't even have to be
a conspiracy enthusiast to see it. On Sept 10 2001, the
Bush Administration was a failure. Its legislative agenda
was so extreme that it couldn't even move in a right wing
Congress controlled by its own party. Bush was proving
to be a pampered daddy's boy with no managerial or
leadership talent, and surrounded by crooks taking advantage
of that. They needed a "security" crisis on the scale of
the Cuban Missile Crisis to whip up a nationalistic frenzy
and terminate any attempts at investigative journalism.
And they needed an excuse to destroy a nation that was
producing too much oil and depressing the market price.
What they got with 911 was both a Reischtag Fire and
Pearl Harbor. *Exactly* what they needed. The 911 Truth
movement got that part of it right, almost immediately.
It took them years to drift into a singleminded focus on
"controlled demolition."
(If you don't know what the Reischtag Fire did for
the Nazi party in Germany, look it up. The parallels
are uncanny, especially the similarity between the
Nazis' Emergency Law and the USA P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Acts.)
They even got opium production reestablished in a nation
whose fundamentalist theocracy had shut it down.
International trade in "illegal" drugs is one way the
"intelligence" agencies fund their covert wars.
That's plenty of motive. They also had means and
opportunity.
My Alternative Alternative Story is much simpler than
the 911 Truth Movement's Alternative Story: The WTC
buildings weren't the overbuilt marvels of engineering
that both the 911 Truthers *and* their debunkers agree
they were. They were shoddy firetraps, whose structures
were barely strong enough to withstand the weather and
the vibration from the subway trains. There was as much
fraud and corruption in their construction as there is
in any other privatized government boondoggle project
on that scale. Most of the "concrete" was really a
lightweight grout, poured into the deck pans over hardly
any reinforcement, barely able to withstand a stiletto heel,
which is why it pulverized when the shock wave went by.
They might even have fallen down in a
few more years *without* a fire.
And the insiders *knew* that. There were strategically
important Federal agencies in all three buildings, and
the General Services Administration is pretty good at
studying a building before they lease floors for
those agencies. When the CIA warned the
White House these attacks were coming, all the White
House had to do was stand back and *let it happen*.
No huge, complex conspiracy to somehow wire three huge
office buildings for demolition without anybody
noticing. Just the usual conspiracy to substitute
inferior construction materials, long since covered up.
(Hey, do ya think that Oakland freeway ramp was built with
exactly the materials its designers specified?
We found out after the '89 quake that other parts of that
same freeway were missing a *lot* of steel that appeared
in the design drawings. Google "cypress freeway earthquake")
And in summer of 2001, just a few protocol changes and some
war games rescheduled, to make sure the four planes
wouldn't be intercepted after they all lost radio
contact at about the same time.
Cameron
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: VIDEO; September 11 Revisited: Were Explosives Used? |
03 Jun 2007 03:20:00 AM |
|
|
On Jun 2, 11:37 pm, IAAH <i...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
Briga wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939
Yeah.....
If explosives were used, they were of a type entirely
unknown to forensic analysis techniques. C'mon, let's
have a more credible theory, okay?
I dont have a dog in this fight, dont claim to know what happened. But
I read that *IF* Thermite, Thermate, and C-4 was used, as charged,
that the explosion would have blown tiny droplets of molten steel out
the windows, which would have hardened even before they hit the glass,
and shot out like shotgun pellets. Since they would be 1000 to 50
microns in diameter, some would have landed in cracks of the sidwalks,
windowsills, and niches in facing buildings. And if the 911 conspiracy
theorists are correct, all they have to do to prove it, is go down
there with a magnet and an ice pick to pluck out some of the debris
and show us what sticks to the magnet.
I have posted this MANY TIMES over the past month or so, and the
silence is just deafening. If I cared about this issue, and lived in
Manhattan, I'd hop on the subway and go down to the WTC area and have
a look. all those people living there, and nobody can get off their
fat ***** to give us some real *evidence* to go on?
WTF?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
