9/11 Truth: Structural Failures vs. Controlled Demolitions

[chretien]

Yeah, i said "extreme example" regarding my own post. About the jews even. So basicly we're either talking about other quotes or you were defending my own extreme point

About my "failsafe" theory, i believe it would work much like sending a nuke, in a smaller scale.

Let's say building A is about to tobble over, with people and firmene inside. You phone up the mayor(as these things would probably be delegated) and tell that if the failsafe isn't activated, the building might fall over on central New York. The mayor, even if it's one helluva call to make, gives the order and the building is brought down.

But it's only a possibility, no facts or anything to back it up and i wouldn't call it a "conspiracy", but actually a reasonable failsafe.

The problem with that is that tall buildings don't fall over.
There would need to be lateral forces far greater then the vertical forces (i.e. gravity) for it to collapse in any direction other than straight down. These buildings are built to withstand sustained lateral loads from strong winds. If two ~100 ton airliners moving at several hundred miles per hour can't knock a building over then I think it's safe to say that not very much can. Even if the winds were strong enough to damage the building, it still wouldn't topple over as it's simply not stiff enough to maintain it's integrity from such an unbalanced load.

Also how do you rig a building that size without anyone noticing? 'Er excuse me builderm8s, go and take the afternoon off and leave us the keys while these dodgy looking men in camos check the wiring. Yeah that's what they're doing, just checking the wiring.'
If they did routinely somehow rig buildings then that would be monumentally stupid. What if rats chewed through cables and shorted the system? Oops your building just exploded for no reason.... What if terrorists found out about this system of ready-to-blow office blocks and figured out how to hack the controls? Bye-Bye Manhattan.

 

[Nerve]

Also how do you rig a building that size without anyone noticing? 'Er excuse me builderm8s, go and take the afternoon off and leave us the keys while these dodgy looking men in camos check the wiring. Yeah that's what they're doing, just checking the wiring.'

There was an 18 hour planned outage of all power (and security cams) the weekend before 9/11.

Not that I want to support the conspiracy theories, but some questions seem to have a right to be asked imo. I also feel the towers going down the way they went seems very dodgy, but I'm not qualified to voice an opinion on this.

 

[Marc]

don't put too much credence into what this US govt stooge has to say.

Summary of Kilsheimer's Lies

• Finding one of the black boxes (a major lie)

• When he arrived at the Pentagon

• That he was accompanied by his engineers on the first day

He's a poor liar.

Tam

CONSPIRASEE!!!!!!!

Where is your evidence that hes a liar.

What about the countless joe public witnesses who said it was a plane?

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

 

[Gorbachioo]

Why would the US government crash the pentagon with a military plane and then claim it was a Boeing? They could just crash the Boeing, they have the resources for it and would leave less possibility to be discovered.

Why would the US government fly the planes in the WTC towers when they can demolish them with an explosion? If they simply exploded the towers and blamed Al-Qaeda, they'd have achieved the same effect.

And how exactly would Al-Qaeda demolish the WTC towers? :touch:

 

[evzy]

There was an 18 hour planned outage of all power (and security cams) the weekend before 9/11.

Not that I want to support the conspiracy theories, but some questions seem to have a right to be asked imo. I also feel the towers going down the way they went seems very dodgy, but I'm not qualified to voice an opinion on this.

Got any links to stuff about that power outage- I havent heard that one before -there was a blackout in New York well after 9/11 but nothing that I remember beforehand -

I have family who live/work in New York - my Brother in law was working in an office block just down from the towers when it happened - he had walked past them 30mins prior to the first impact and saw the whole thing unfold. He has never mentioned any blackouts to me, nor is he a believer in any of the nonsense spouted on here.

 

[tamtap]

CONSPIRASEE!!!!!!!

Where is your evidence that hes a liar.

What about the countless joe public witnesses who said it was a plane?

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm

gah!!

first witness quote in your link "I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke."

There are no pictures showing a big gouge in the ground. In fact there is no damage whatsoever to the ground.

Another scam site.

Tam

 

[Marc]

That site is full of shit, for example the wheel they say was in the wreckage:

http://www.rense.com/general32/aedrive6.jpg

The wheel found at the Pentagon is too small to of come from a Boeing 757. If we count the amount of holes in each wheel we find.

Boeing 757-200 Wheel Has: 10 holes.

Wheel Found At The Pentagon Has: 8 holes.

Also the photo they say is one of the engines.

http://www.rense.com/general32/Damage9.jpg

Well Rolls Royce who make the engine say different:

“It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I’m familiar with, and certainly not the AE 3007H made here in Indy.”

- John W. Brown, spokesman for Rolls Royce (Indianapolis)

So its defo not a 757, question is what was it ? Kind of rule out civil aircraft so that only leaves Military stuff.


Tam

where to fucking start. Lets start with your "boeing have 10 holes"

o fucking rly?

as for your quote from John W Brown. gg, just leave out the rest of the quote why dont you

"Asked again if the disc in the photo is a piece of a Rolls Royce RB211-535, or from the AE 3007 series, Brown said he could not answer.

AFP then asked Brown if he was actually familiar with the parts of an AE 3007H, which is made at the Indiana plant: "No," Brown said. "I don't build the engines. I am a spokesman for the company. I speak for the company."

You see, Brown doesnt even work at the plant that makes the RB211 engine, the engine that was found on 757s

But i guess you knew all this anyway, just chose to ignore it so you could scream "conspiracy"

 

[old.Tohtori]

chretin asked a few good questions.

On the part on HOW it could be implemented, is only a matter of how much money their willing to put in the failsafe project.

They could use their own contractors? Maybe during frequent maintenence of the buildings, there are a lot, they plant the system. All a guess to me. Maybe the explosives are in the waterbarrels of the waterdrink machines!! (joke)

About the terrorists or rats gaining control of the explosives, this would be easy to secure with a failsafe within the failsafe. Basicly the rats would chew stuff, wires would circuit badly and the whole system would go offline. In lamen terms.

With the terrorists, if the detonation is remote like the nuclear devices, well, let's hope the terrorists don't get their hands and hack THAT frequency either

And one thing is that only a crazy Seel like me would think of such a failsafe thingy. COme on, bombs on f*cking buildings man!

 

[Marc]

gah!!

first witness quote in your link "I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke."

There are no pictures showing a big gouge in the ground. In fact there is no damage whatsoever to the ground.

Another scam site.

Tam

hahahahahahaha of course "its a scam". There are no fucking pictures of dead people, so did no one die then?

 

[tamtap]

where to fucking start. Lets start with your "boeing have 10 holes"

o fucking rly?

as for your quote from John W Brown. gg, just leave out the rest of the quote why dont you

"Asked again if the disc in the photo is a piece of a Rolls Royce RB211-535, or from the AE 3007 series, Brown said he could not answer.

AFP then asked Brown if he was actually familiar with the parts of an AE 3007H, which is made at the Indiana plant: "No," Brown said. "I don't build the engines. I am a spokesman for the company. I speak for the company."

You see, Brown doesnt even work at the plant that makes the RB211 engine, the engine that was found on 757s

But i guess you knew all this anyway, just chose to ignore it so you could scream "conspiracy"

"Now I have seen someone supposedly debunk this. However the picture of the wheel they provided was not from the same model Boeing 757. (The Boeing 757 that supposedly struck the Pentagon was a Boeing 757-200.)"


keep up

Tam

 

[tamtap]

hahahahahahaha of course "its a scam". There are no fucking pictures of dead people, so did no one die then?

don't like the fact i gave ? Are you honestly suggesting in this picture taken following the crash we are all missing the huge ground damage ?

http://911physics.atspace.com/IMG/pentagonhole.jpg

Surely your not that stoooopid ?


Tam

 

[Marc]

"Now I have seen someone supposedly debunk this. However the picture of the wheel they provided was not from the same model Boeing 757. (The Boeing 757 that supposedly struck the Pentagon was a Boeing 757-200.)"


keep up

Tam

omg they both use the same landing gear. The back wheels have 8 holes, the front wheels have 10.

 

[Marc]

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/image.php?p=427

count the holes on the back wheels

 

[Marc]

don't like the fact i gave ? Are you honestly suggesting in this picture taken following the crash we are all missing the huge ground damage ?

http://911physics.atspace.com/IMG/pentagonhole.jpg

Surely your not that stoooopid ?


Tam

ok, go through all the testimonies and debunk them all

 

[Chronictank]

The problem with that is that tall buildings don't fall over.
There would need to be lateral forces far greater then the vertical forces (i.e. gravity) for it to collapse in any direction other than straight down. These buildings are built to withstand sustained lateral loads from strong winds. If two ~100 ton airliners moving at several hundred miles per hour can't knock a building over then I think it's safe to say that not very much can. Even if the winds were strong enough to damage the building, it still wouldn't topple over as it's simply not stiff enough to maintain it's integrity from such an unbalanced load..

Actually the WTC was build around a supporting core, the outer wals would not have given way without the central core collapsing first.
Now the explosion was nowhere near the central core, so assumably the fire spread to the core (there are 47 core supports).
The whole structure is built around this core:

Now in order for the building to collapse the core needs to fall, this is supported by video footage (assuming this hasnt been tampered, you can find your own source to verify )
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/wtc1_close_frames.html
Notice the antenna (which is connected to the core for grounding purposes) drops first, this indicates that the core was the first to collapse (as required for the building to collapse)
NIST ran simulations using all the evidence they saw on camera

Notice that the “the pulling forces on the perimeter
columns by the sagging floors were adjusted” (NIST, 2005, p. 142;
emphasis added) to get the perimeter columns to yield sufficiently – one
suspects these were “adjusted” by hand quite a bit -- even though the UK experts
complained that “the core columns cannot pull the exterior [i.e.,
perimeter] columns in via the floor.” (Lane and Lamont, 2005; emphasis
added.)

There is a very good reasn for this, the floors of the WTC are connected using angle clamps, these would give way if the floor dropped so the core falling would not result in the outer wall dropping too:

So why did it fall? who knows, we are very obviously not being told the truth whatever that may be, quite possibly designers of the building took short cuts they didnt publisize, we will never know as the blueprints are not for the public to see or the safety inspectors failed to do a proper check of the supports, or the building was desinged to fall in such a fashion to save the surroundings either way we wont know.
Personally i think Mr Seel is onto a winner, the building was designed to collapse that way to the buildings around it, and this information will never, and wont ever be made public (only real way would be to see the blueprints) or there was external factors involved, e.g Al Quaeda managed to infiltrate a high security building and plant explosives at the base of the core or someone didnt do their job correctly along the way causing the supports to fail when they werent supposed to.

Sources:
http://www.911truthseekers.org/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1
http://www.tenlinks.com/NEWS/special/wtc/clifton/p1.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/experts/articles/eagar_jom/eagar_0112.html#ref5

Either way i believe its impossible that Al Queda did this on their own, there was someone very significant helping them on their way. Be it another terrorist organisation who isnt named for sake of on going operations, or someone involved with the US govenment. Give it 50 years and the info will probably be released (ableit not in its entireity) asuming ww3 doesnt happen and we are all dead and we will have a better insight into what really happened

 

[SethNaket]

As I said, why do people keep linking to these sites that can't even get highschool-level physics right? I can spot a hundred errors just skimming through the pages, yet I sure as hell can't model accurately what happens to a collapsing building. So how on earth can you believe those people are any better at it?

I can't believe people actually take this stuff to heart when, like marc pointed out, you only have to actually look at a real airplaine to see that these wild theories of "not the right number of holes in the wheels!" are just made up.

 

[tamtap]

ok, go through all the testimonies and debunk them all

Say what you want the picture showing no damage to the ground says it all.

cheers

Tam

 

[Marc]

Say what you want the picture showing no damage to the ground says it all.

cheers

Tam

fucking lol

straws

clutching

at

I have proved everything you have had to say as utter bullshit and this is the best you can come up with

 

[- English -]

why dont the USA government just show those tapes which recorded the pentagon incident happening from the local garage.. instead of seizing them instantly? Surely it would put them ahead if they prooved this.. i mean, its why alot of people are wodnering what really did happen.

 

[Dahakon]

why dont the USA government just show those tapes which recorded the pentagon incident happening from the local garage.. instead of seizing them instantly? Surely it would put them ahead if they prooved this.. i mean, its why alot of people are wodnering what really did happen.

Yeah, but if they did then all the c/t would be prooved wrong, so the people who believe them will start looking at what the US gov is really doing, stuff like the patriot act and the govs in afric that they support which are commiting genocide on their own populations. But this way, everyone ignors whats important, and conentrates on crap like most of this stuff. These theories are just carrying on with what the modern media do, which is to make people interested in unimportant stuff, while the real issues are ignored by everyone.

 

[Raven]

not going to get involved in whether or not the US did it but there are a lot of unanswered questions about the whole thing. why were the videos taken from the petrol station shortly after the pentagon crash and why are they still not being shown to the public (think they let us see 3 blurry frames) why was there no damage to the lawn, look at any plane crash and you have a massive gouge in the earth on impact. where on the building did the wings hit? there would be at least some damage but there isnt, just a nice tidy hole. 255,000 lb of plane doesnt just vaporise on impact and would take hours to burn away (even if airline fuel can burn hot enough to turn metal into vapour) especially when they would have had fire suppression measures inside the pentagon and also fire crews on site. though i dont think even the US government would be stupid enough to plant the wrong type of engine there.

 

[Marc]

not going to get involved in whether or not the US did it but there are a lot of unanswered questions about the whole thing. why were the videos taken from the petrol station shortly after the pentagon crash and why are they still not being shown to the public (think they let us see 3 blurry frames) why was there no damage to the lawn, look at any plane crash and you have a massive gouge in the earth on impact. where on the building did the wings hit? there would be at least some damage but there isnt, just a nice tidy hole. 255,000 lb of plane doesnt just vaporise on impact and would take hours to burn away (even if airline fuel can burn hot enough to turn metal into vapour) especially when they would have had fire suppression measures inside the pentagon and also fire crews on site. though i dont think even the US government would be stupid enough to plant the wrong type of engine there.

if you search the internet you can find answers to all these questions

 

[tamtap]

omg they both use the same landing gear. The back wheels have 8 holes, the front wheels have 10.

nice find but as you will see they look nothing like the wreckage at pentagon.

http://www.planespotting.net/images/C/c2MjZiM2JiYzQ0YmIwZDJlNzE2NmVmMz.jpg

Tam

 

[tamtap]

fucking lol

straws

clutching

at

I have proved everything you have had to say as utter bullshit and this is the best you can come up with

The only thing you have proved is your 'theory' is correct in your own mind.

Grats.


Tam

 

[Marc]

nice find but as you will see they look nothing like the wreckage at pentagon.

http://www.planespotting.net/images/C/c2MjZiM2JiYzQ0YmIwZDJlNzE2NmVmMz.jpg

Tam

jesus christ were you born stupid or did you have to work at it.

Now be gone, im bored of making you look like a fool

 

[Zede]

jesus christ were you born stupid or did you have to work at it.

Now be gone, im bored of making you look like a fool

For someone who smokes weed, and the conspiracy behind that, im very surprised at your lack of skepticism ! or is it illegal cause its bad for you...yar ofc it is !

Really marc, you would not be out of place atm at a republican rally wavin' the stars and bars at Junior !!

 

[Marc]

For someone who smokes weed, and the conspiracy behind that, im very surprised at your lack of skepticism ! or is it illegal cause its bad for you...yar ofc it is !

sorry, youve totally lost me?

 

[evzy]

Tamtap you sir...are a tool.

 

[Zede]

sorry, youve totally lost me?

exsqueeze me if im wrong !( i thought u smoked pot) we all know pot is illegal, thanks to the usa, and the perpetual pressure of the us petrochemical industry, always will be.... or am i wrong, maybe it is illegal cause its gonna make me smoke crack some day soon

i dunno u just seem to have your knickers in a twist on this one, I mean c'umon 9/11 is more strange than a bag of strange things on a strange day - no need to dismiss it all so vehemently.

 

[Marc]

exsqueeze me if im wrong !( i thought u smoked pot) we all know pot is illegal, thanks to the usa, and the perpetual pressure of the us petrochemical industry, always will be.... or am i wrong, maybe it is illegal cause its gonna make me smoke crack some day soon

i dunno u just seem to have your knickers in a twist on this one, I mean c'umon 9/11 is more strange than a bag of strange things on a strange day - no need to dismiss it all so vehemently.

Only thing I wont dismiss is the possibility that dubya knew about it and failed to act. Only he and his mates know the truth about that. Every other conspiracy theory has been disproved with effortless ease by experts. It just winds me up when conspiracy theorists ignore facts. Take tampon for example. He claimed the 757 had 10 holes in its wheels. It took me all of 2 minutes to find this was incorrect. Or they twist things to suit themselves. See tampons quote from that rolls royce dude. He didnt post the full quote.