[JasonParis]

While some elements of 9/11 have never made much sense to me (including the collapse of WTC 7), I'm pretty much of the belief that things happened largely as we've been told via the media. However, I can perhaps phathom a situation where a few key heads in the Bush Administration knew, and/or suspected, an attack was immenent and decided to look the other way in order to advance their bellicose agenda following an attack.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

More like unconvinced. Planes just don't smash through 5 reinforced concrete rings (each about 10 feet thick), completely vapourizing in the process (ie. little to no wreckage) while fitting neatly into a 16 foot wide hole with no sign of the engines having any impact anywhere (which would have been by far and away the greatest cause of damage). That and the improbably flight path the plane took, the confiscation of tapes, silencing of witnesses etc. Colour me suspicious...

After the attacks wasn't there a statement released by the CN Tower's principal engineer that a plane slamming directly into it at full speed would be akin to throwing a chunk of butter into a knife? I guess the truth is that it would have flown right through the CN Tower, possibly leaving a nice little hole in the middle!

i doubt the pentagon walls were 10 feet of reinforced concrete. what's the point of having all that when you have windows? IIRC, one of the wings of the plane was sheared off by a reinforced concrete pillar while another hit the ground. that's why there's wasn't a cutout of the cross section of the plane at the pentagon.

if all the rings were 10 feet of reinforced concrete, would a missile even make it through all of them?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

While some elements of 9/11 have never made much sense to me (including the collapse of WTC 7), I'm pretty much of the belief that things happened largely as we've been told via the media. However, I can perhaps phathom a situation where a few key heads in the Bush Administration knew, and/or suspected, an attack was immenent and decided to look the other way in order to advance their bellicose agenda following an attack.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=5#wtc7

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

 

[kettal]

Aren't the engines are attached to the wings, which would be the first things to break off during impact. Why would you expect the engines to cause the most damage?

 

[Second_in_pie]

Aren't the engines are attached to the wings, which would be the first things to break off during impact. Why would you expect the engines to cause the most damage?

Because they're big heavy balls of solid steel filled with constantly exploding fuel? If you've seen any demonstration of an airplane crash, know anyone in aviation, or have even just looked at a plane for a while, you might start to see why the engines cause a lot of damage.

 

[kettal]

I'm not an expert, but the wings which the engines are attached to, I'd expect them to fold in this scenario. The wings aren't exactly built to withstand hitting concrete, are they?

 

[gristle]

The only part of the engines that would easily survive would be the titanium shafts. Otherwise, aircraft engines are built with the lightest weight materials possible. A five-hundred kilometre-an-hour impact with a solid object would essentially vapourize most of the engine. That action would occur with explosive force.

 

[afransen]

I don't think you understand how hot it has to be for aluminum to vaporize. Jet fuel is not going to get you there.

 

[kettal]

I don't think you understand how hot it has to be for aluminum to vaporize. Jet fuel is not going to get you there.

I don't know if you were using the word vaporize literally...

 

[gristle]

Planes just don't smash through 5 reinforced concrete rings (each about 10 feet thick), completely vapourizing in the process (ie. little to no wreckage) while fitting neatly into a 16 foot wide hole with no sign of the engines having any impact anywhere (which would have been by far and away the greatest cause of damage). That and the improbability of the flight path the plane took, the confiscation of tapes, silencing of witnesses etc. Colour me suspicious...

Sure, be suspicious - given that planes don't fly into buildings every day. It's not something everyone is used to seeing. But don't let the relative rarity of the event, and the unrecognizable results, automatically make you look to conspiracy theories for answers.

The impact of an aircraft going at 400 to 500 kph into a solid body would result in the aircraft essentially being vapourized (or better described as shattered into a forward-moving mass of densely compacted fragments). It does not mean that the solid aircraft has vanished; it means that the the mass of the aircraft is still there - just in a highly chaotic state but still with considerable forward momentum. The force of the aircraft hitting a solid object like a wall results in an explosion wherein the wall is also fragmented at the area of impact. As with every explosion, the force of the event dissipates over distance. Stronger objects suffer less damage.

Tornadoes can drive small twigs through car tires, and streams of water propelled at high speed can be used as cutting tools. Such things sound weird until you see them. Many impact sites where aircraft have directly hit mountain sides leave virtually no discernible remnants of the plane.

 

[AGTO]

I don't think you understand how hot it has to be for aluminum to vaporize. Jet fuel is not going to get you there.

When ignited, aluminium burns like magnesium. Thermite can be ignited with a match.

and streams of water propelled at high speed can be used as cutting tools.

Only if the water stream contains an abrasive like aluminium oxide.

 

[Dan416]

It's really sad to see that almost 30% of respondents to this poll have little to no common sense. My guess is that those 30% are the same ones who believe the world will in end in 2012, and then again in 2066, and then again in 2166, and then again in 2666, and then again in 6666. And then again in 666,666. Isn't that a bit much apocalypse, even for one planet?

 

[Kamuix]

No common sence? we're not the ones who constantly buy into propaganda and continue to believe lies about 9/11 when it's obvious that it was staged. There's more evidence to anyone needs to see to know that it was staged. It's more sad to see people how narrow minded people are.

Trust me.. If you actually take a look at some of the videos about the way the system works and how it works and you've seen what i have. you won't be able to continue to believe that 9/11 was not staged. Or for that matter that global warming is real(It's been officially proven fake. but you guys don't look at the facts.. you look at the propaganda.

And something like.. because you guys subconsciously don't want to believe that the government would do such a thing, and that you've been lead on to believe by:

-Propaganda
-Lies taught to you in school(global warming)
-The general publics understanding
-The illusions like for example the illusion that all scientists agree on GW.
-The fact that it's been a general belief for so long
-The unimaginable idea that the government could be that corrupt/bad
-The Media

So you have emotional mechanisms to easily let this stuff^^(that has no proof behind it but things that seem real) re-convince you of the lies. And whenever real convincing things about how they're lying come out from the other side, the Ignorant or Narrow minded based sub-conscious mechanism allows you to easily dismiss it as crazy and stupid because you've already judged the other side based on what the establishment and possibly Friends/family/people you associate with in real life has lead you to believe. so it feels like you've seen enough to know it's obviously true and there's literally no debate. So therefor emotionally give it no chance.

It all makes sense when you take a look at it though, there's no denial when you see it all! Remember deceptions have happened many times in history in other nations that's a known fact. So why is it so hard to believe it could be happening through our government? Remember what a deception is and how it works, and that it's happened on wide scales before. Knowing that maybe you'll give this a chance? because i don't see a reason why not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOYwur6T6tc

^^here's an interesting new show by Jesse Ventura and this one's about global warming. One of the MANY things covering this issue. Also there's many things covering things that you can watch by searching Youtube. And BTW don't dismiss Youtube as being a bad source for things like this. Because almost every TVshow/Documentary/Movie etc is uploaded to youtube so by dismissing youtube you dismiss all of that. Even The Obama Deception and Fall of the republic is right on youtube.. A HIGHLY recommend that you watch them.. PLEASE! just give it a chance if you can. We need to continue waking people up to what's gong on right now so that we can help defeat the NWO and bring back Democracy and Freedom and a good government!

 

[gristle]

And BTW don't dismiss Youtube as being a bad source for things like this. Because almost every TVshow/Documentary/Movie etc is uploaded to youtube so by dismissing youtube you dismiss all of that. Even The Obama Deception and Fall of the republic is right on youtube.. A HIGHLY recommend that you watch them.. PLEASE! just give it a chance if you can.

I don't intend to sound mean, but you come off as a little desperate here.

What is it about September 11th that drives people to believe in the most complicated scenarios? Why is it so difficult to accept it for what it actually was?

As for global warming, I'm as open minded as the next guy on the topic, but I don't buy the extreme scenarios that are all too often advertised. These scenarios are unproven and really push the far end of any attempts at prediction. But citing a Jesse Ventura TV show? As a valid source?

 

[Kamuix]

Well he goes over quite a few important things about 9/11 and it just aired a week ago. Interesting watch for those who are interested. I sometimes wish i could say i didn't buy it. But from my point of view what i've seen is much more then i need to, to feel i know. It definitely changed my perspectives on things when i first started getting into it