Poll

How do people think these buildings came down?

Two jets and jet fuel and impact velocity.
As above but also the buildings were quite old and not that well made.
The jets and a descision by someone 'to pull' the them.
They would never have collapsed like that without explosives weakening them.
Morrisey did it.

Author Topic: 9/11 Controlled demolition.  (Read 70597 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jimburst

  • General Member
  • Yeah Buddy!
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #75 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 03:56:09 PM »
Yep, there are people with practically the entire alphabet after their name who say global warming is a myth, the earth is 6000 years old, evolution is false and aliens are abducting texans and probing them.  I don't believe them either.

Aliens etc - astro-physicists have worked out the probability that they exist using complex mathematical models and basic probability theory. Its Billions and billions to one on that they exist.

* Note to self - stop coming over as a bit of a t***.

but the billions of years it would take for them to get here would mean that they have a TINY window of opportunity to get here and find us evolved enough to report on the probings, while they would have to, on their own planet, evolve sufficiently to make working cryogenics and REALLY f***ing FAST spaceships, target our planet and have an interest in our vastly inferior race... first ;)
A splatterhouse turd done in the manky toilets of a discotheque, brought on my the consumption of cowies or toot.

Offline johnnypd

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #76 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 03:58:03 PM »
did it really look like a planned demolition?

it looks more like the top falls onto the bottom at the point where the planes entered:



so not a straight-down collapse, in fact the collapse took out some nearby buildings too, and made some damaged beyond repair (130 liberty st). you can tell that it collapsed more at one side than the other, cos the steel lattice at one side stayed erect for up to 15 storeys after the collapse.

Offline Rehhagel

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #77 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:07:00 PM »
Quote
BlufGrandma
Considering how many are on that list, you've picked suspiciously few, my dear.

My nan talks like that, maybe you two are friends?

Here's a task for you grandma: how many on the list are structural engineers, what %? how many have had their theory published in academic peer review journals to ensure reliability?

Some have defined themselves as physicists, physics is a broad subject, it does not means they are experts in all sub categories of physics, such as structural engineering which is what is required in regards to explaining the tower collapse.

An I.T expert may have some knowledge of programming, but he's not an expert in programming, a programmer is. Programming is a category within I.T, and so is networking, so is web design.

Come on grandma, you have to ask yourself why so many on the list are not even physicists. Once you've done that, ask yourself why you needed to adopt Parky's grandma character "my dear".

Stubbs

  • Guest
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #78 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:35:01 PM »
Parky's outlandish drivel on this board, including his conspiracy thoeries are cringeworthy.

Parky hails Castro as a legend, hates America with a passion and defends Islamic terrorists who deliberately murder civillians.

I guess that makes him pretty well qualified to offer credible, well-argued debate on 9/11, huh?

In my opinion, you're a marxist fruitcake who's a few cans short of a six-pack.  blueyes.gif

Offline JH

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #79 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:42:36 PM »
what's the point of the planes if they have explosives placed inside the building?

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #80 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:46:50 PM »
If the buildings came down without the planes...They would have to explain how terrorists had that much time and access to such a prominent building. The way the buildings were constructed with the 12 pillar central steel core, it couldn't be levelled with a truck bomb or summat....Many charges have to be placed at key points on the internal frame, all this takes time.

Offline David Icke - Son of God

  • General Member
  • Bellend
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #81 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:47:12 PM »
what's the point of the planes if they have explosives placed inside the building?

I suppose it would be much harder to explain how terrorists were able to rig explosives got into a category 1, high security building than just saying they twocked some planes and flew them into the WTC.
"Following media reports this morning the chairman wishes to make it clear that Alan Shearer has never said to him that he would knock seven bells out of anyone."

Offline Keefaz

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #82 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:52:14 PM »
did it really look like a planned demolition?

it looks more like the top falls onto the bottom at the point where the planes entered:



so not a straight-down collapse, in fact the collapse took out some nearby buildings too, and made some damaged beyond repair (130 liberty st). you can tell that it collapsed more at one side than the other, cos the steel lattice at one side stayed erect for up to 15 storeys after the collapse.

Aheah... fake.

Offline BlufPurdi

  • Administrator
  • Speaking truth to stupid since 2005.
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #83 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 04:55:56 PM »
Quote
BlufGrandma
Considering how many are on that list, you've picked suspiciously few, my dear.

My nan talks like that, maybe you two are friends?

Yeah.

Here's a task for you grandma: how many on the list are structural engineers, what %? how many have had their theory published in academic peer review journals to ensure reliability?

Some have defined themselves as physicists, physics is a broad subject, it does not means they are experts in all sub categories of physics, such as structural engineering which is what is required in regards to explaining the tower collapse.

An I.T expert may have some knowledge of programming, but he's not an expert in programming, a programmer is. Programming is a category within I.T, and so is networking, so is web design.

Come on grandma, you have to ask yourself why so many on the list are not even physicists. Once you've done that, ask yourself why you needed to adopt Parky's grandma character "my dear".


Zero, I imagine, the way you've snatched at this.  However, does that make what has been published by the site wrong?  Forget whether it is, just that, because they aren't structural engineers, they must be wrong?  BlueStar's site was interesting, and tried (successfully?) to debunk theories, but we'll see on that.

And I called you my dear, because the Aliens told me to.  That might well be Parky...
Making mistakes is how you learn.
Every generation must fight the same battles again and again and again. There is no final victory, and there is no final defeat, and so a little bit of history may help.
“What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.
That is why no one with power likes democracy and that is why every generation must struggle to win it and keep it – including you and me, here and now.

Offline Elephant

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #84 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:08:40 PM »
did it really look like a planned demolition?

it looks more like the top falls onto the bottom at the point where the planes entered:



so not a straight-down collapse, in fact the collapse took out some nearby buildings too, and made some damaged beyond repair (130 liberty st). you can tell that it collapsed more at one side than the other, cos the steel lattice at one side stayed erect for up to 15 storeys after the collapse.

Aheah... fake.

Seconded.

That picture is fake.

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #85 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:09:21 PM »
''And I called you my dear, because the Aliens told me too.  That might well be Parky...'' Blufatino


 :lol:

Offline johnnypd

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #86 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:11:51 PM »
sorry elephant, keefaz, but that's how it happened.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SrSuu0fw1mI

suppose that's a fake too  :roll:

Offline Elephant

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #87 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:13:19 PM »
I wouldn't be surprised if that was fake too tbh.

Offline ChezGiven

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #88 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:15:30 PM »
My take on 9/11

The CIA were complicit in some way.

The terrorists were al qaida operatives.

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet????????

Silverstein is a dodgy f***er.

Offline BlufPurdi

  • Administrator
  • Speaking truth to stupid since 2005.
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #89 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:20:11 PM »
sorry elephant, keefaz, but that's how it happened.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SrSuu0fw1mI

suppose that's a fake too  :roll:

Agreed, it's not fake.  Although, the photo looks weird, for whatever reason.  One buidling clearly toppled to the side, that was due to the plane hitting more to the side then the first impact which was pretty much the centre.  The top part of the building falling to the side though doesn't mean it couldn't have started falling due to controlled explosions though. 

Infact, if that was falling to the side, which it clearly was, why didn't it just fall off?  Surely it wouldn't have been placing all its weight on the floors below? 
Making mistakes is how you learn.
Every generation must fight the same battles again and again and again. There is no final victory, and there is no final defeat, and so a little bit of history may help.
“What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.
That is why no one with power likes democracy and that is why every generation must struggle to win it and keep it – including you and me, here and now.

Offline Lagerstedt

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #90 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:20:24 PM »
Exactly who is this Silverstein?

Just read that he insured the buildings for a couple of hundred million dollars six months prior to the attack. He made around 4-6 billion dollars on that insurance..

Is that for real or is that just pure bullshit?

Offline BlufPurdi

  • Administrator
  • Speaking truth to stupid since 2005.
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #91 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:24:44 PM »
My take on 9/11

The CIA were complicit in some way. - Agreed.

The terrorists were al qaida operatives. - Agreed.

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet???????? - Good point.

Silverstein is a dodgy f***er. - Agreed.

The lack of financial support for the commission looking into 9/11 is also something to be suspicious about.  More money was given to the investigations into Clinton and his blowjobs, than the greatest attack on America in the modern era.  It was also delayed for a bizarre amount of time.  The man that headed the commission Lee H. Hamilton also believes they were set up to fail.  Given the delays and lack of funds.  He also admits that he thinks the official version of events will change over the decades.
Making mistakes is how you learn.
Every generation must fight the same battles again and again and again. There is no final victory, and there is no final defeat, and so a little bit of history may help.
“What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.
That is why no one with power likes democracy and that is why every generation must struggle to win it and keep it – including you and me, here and now.

Offline BlufPurdi

  • Administrator
  • Speaking truth to stupid since 2005.
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #92 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:25:31 PM »
Exactly who is this Silverstein?

Just read that he insured the buildings for a couple of hundred million dollars six months prior to the attack. He made around 4-6 billion dollars on that insurance..

Is that for real or is that just pure bullshit?

That's for real.  No conspiracies there, just search his name, it's all 'FACT!'
Making mistakes is how you learn.
Every generation must fight the same battles again and again and again. There is no final victory, and there is no final defeat, and so a little bit of history may help.
“What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.
That is why no one with power likes democracy and that is why every generation must struggle to win it and keep it – including you and me, here and now.

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #93 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 05:54:41 PM »
Chix:

''My take on 9/11

The CIA were complicit in some way. Don't agree, mainly because the CIA were the victims of swinging cuts afterwards and also took the most criticism. This organisation is geared to survive and wouldn't bring this on themselves. One
CELL OF THE CIA...Perhaps.

The terrorists were al qaida operatives. Broadly agree although some would have been with the security services, who's I don't know. Others would have been told they were part of an excercise and wouldn't have known jack s*** till the last few minutes.

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet????????VERY GOOD POINT AND YET another example of your fine mind.

Silverstein is a dodgy f***er.'' One of the dodgiest. People are still looking for the gold that was apparently kept under one of the towers.

Offline Lagerstedt

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #94 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 06:00:38 PM »
Exactly who is this Silverstein?

Just read that he insured the buildings for a couple of hundred million dollars six months prior to the attack. He made around 4-6 billion dollars on that insurance..

Is that for real or is that just pure bullshit?

That's for real.  No conspiracies there, just search his name, it's all 'FACT!'

I mean, are there any evidence of an insurance like that?

For the record, I'm not much for conspiracies and especially not in this case. People are talking about USA faked the moon landing, which I'm fine with. But 9/11, with thousands of casualties, you got to be more careful. I find all this conspiracy talk rather disrespectful to be honest...

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #95 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 06:04:32 PM »
I agree Lager, I don't think the civilian Govt had anything to do with it. Too risky with too many chances to get found out.

Offline Rehhagel

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #96 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 06:38:42 PM »
Quote
Bluf
Zero, I imagine, the way you've snatched at this.  However, does that make what has been published by the site wrong?  Forget whether it is, just that, because they aren't structural engineers, they must be wrong?

It makes whatever they write unlikely to be true and unreliable due to their lack of expertise in terms of experience and/or qualifications and/or publications in academic journals etc.

What exactly can a Folklore scholar know about structural engineering? about as much as you or I. I know nothing at all about structural engineering.


Offline peasepud

  • General Member
  • Forum bastid
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #97 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 08:04:45 PM »
Chix:

''My take on 9/11

The CIA were complicit in some way. Don't agree, mainly because the CIA were the victims of swinging cuts afterwards and also took the most criticism. This organisation is geared to survive and wouldn't bring this on themselves. One
CELL OF THE CIA...Perhaps.

The terrorists were al qaida operatives. Broadly agree although some would have been with the security services, who's I don't know. Others would have been told they were part of an excercise and wouldn't have known jack s*** till the last few minutes.

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet????????VERY GOOD POINT AND YET another example of your fine mind.

Silverstein is a dodgy f***er.'' One of the dodgiest. People are still looking for the gold that was apparently kept under one of the towers.

I love this guy ;)

Knightrider

  • Guest
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #98 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 08:29:31 PM »
what's the point of the planes if they have explosives placed inside the building?

To shock and awe. To create the drama that was 9/11. Had they just pressed the button to bring them down (17 seconds to collapse) it wouldn't have had the same impact.

Just assuming BTW, I don't know where I stand on the whole 9/11 topic, much less the controlled demolition theory. I will say this, however, we would be foolish to write off opponents of the official story as crack-pots and mad conspiracy theorists, especially when there are valid and legitimate issues being raised by professionals. I for one would not be shocked or surprised if I were to one day learn that 9/11 was one big staged event by the US/and others. They are more than capable and they've masterminded far worse, let us not forget.

All I know is that the whole event prior, during and after stinks from the top to the bottom. If pushed I would say I'm skeptical of all or any "official" line and having watched the whole event live, I just don't buy the "bad guys did it" line. They had help and lots of it in my opinion.

I don't believe we are at war with terror either, there are other agendas directing that, but for what end, who knows.

Offline Keefaz

  • General Member
Re: 9/11 Controlled demolition.
« Reply #99 on: Friday 15 September 2006, 09:31:49 PM »
Tbh, I'd be a lot more worried about terrorists if I thought they could rig one of the most populated and used buildings in the world with explosives. In comparison, hijacking a plane is (or was) a piece of p*ss that any of us could do.