Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: JOHN MATRIX on January 23, 2007, 06:04:36 PM
-
1. the planes caused an inferno so hot that it supposedly melted the steel enough to collapse the building, so how were people able to be seen in the holes where the plane/explosion/fireball took place right after? there were survivors from the areas where the planes hit, there were obviously fires and trauma injuries but the thing i cant get is, this fireball totally blanketed the couple floors where the plane went thru, and supposedly continued burning hot enuf to melt the steel support beams, but yet people were able to run around and survive in this same place where steel was being melted and even make it out alive?
2.why did the president of the united states, upon being informed that 2 planes justhit the WTC, continue to sit and have storytime for SIX to EIGHT MINUTES before deciding it was probably time to stop storytime and go take care of business????
-
the look on prez bush's face was that of a patsy
my personal theory is he just realized the magnitude of the operation and knew he would be remembered as one of the most evil men in history, perhaps he didnt have full knowledge of the scope of the attacks himself
-
1. the planes caused an inferno so hot that it supposedly melted the steel enough to collapse the building, so how were people able to be seen in the holes where the plane/explosion/fireball took place right after? there were survivors from the areas where the planes hit, there were obviously fires and trauma injuries but the thing i cant get is, this fireball totally blanketed the couple floors where the plane went thru, and supposedly continued burning hot enuf to melt the steel support beams, but yet people were able to run around and survive in this same place where steel was being melted and even make it out alive?
After several years of lawsuits to get them un-sealed, the families were finally able to obtain firefighter recordings in 2006. What they heard, in the soon-to-be-killed firefighters' own words, was that just minutes before the first (south) tower collapsed, the firefighters were two floors below the fire and were planning to knock out the two small remaining fire pockets with only two hoses.
2.why did the president of the united states, upon being informed that 2 planes justhit the WTC, continue to sit and have storytime for SIX to EIGHT MINUTES before deciding it was probably time to stop storytime and go take care of business????
Bush knew about THREE of the hijackings before he ever got out of his limo at 8:59 AM.
The FAA told the 911 Commission that at 8:17 AM it told the Secret Service detail about the first hijacking, and clued them in to each additional one within ONE MINUTE of the mayday call or course diversion.
Mr. Bush told the journalists that he already knew about the FIRST plane crash. Records show he also knew about 3 hijackings, of course. Your real question should be, "Why would he continue to read books with children, a location publicly advertised, 3 miles from teh Sarasota-bradenton airport, after hearing of THREE hijackings and TWO BUILDING ASSAULTS?"
You tell me.
-
wheres beach bum and the 'i need a university report' to believe the sky is blue crowd? ;D
-
There's some good head-nodding and group-think going on in this thread - I'll leave you guys to it.
-
There's some good head-nodding and group-think going on in this thread - I'll leave you guys to it.
if you have an alternative vision as to things, please share!
The Firefighter tapes are clear, and soon after that statement the collapse occurs. Not sure how to debate the firefighters' account of events, as they were there and we were not. (And - supposedly they were standing exactly 20 feet (2 stories below this raging inferno which was bending steel, yet they are remarkably un-disintegrated).
and...
The 911 Commission report has the FAA testifying they informed the Sec Srvc within one minute of each hijack. Not sure we can debate that one.
and...
Bush said "I figured that was one bad pilot!", which means he either forgot there were 3 hijackings right before then, or his Sec Service team didn't tell him about it when they told him about the plane hitting the tower. Does either of these scenarios make sense to you?
-
if you have an alternative vision as to things, please share!
The Firefighter tapes are clear, and soon after that statement the collapse occurs. Not sure how to debate the firefighters' account of events, as they were there and we were not.
and...
The 911 Commission report has the FAA testifying they informed the Sec Srvc within one minute of each hijack. Not sure we can debate that one.
and...
Bush said "I figured that was one bad pilot!", which means he either forgot there were 3 hijackings right before then, or his Sec Service team didn't tell him about it when they told him about the plane hitting the tower. Does either of these scenarios make sense to you?
More so than any suggestion or explanation of 9/11 you've been able to give, thus far.
-
1. the planes caused an inferno so hot that it supposedly melted the steel enough to collapse the building, so how were people able to be seen in the holes where the plane/explosion/fireball took place right after? there were survivors from the areas where the planes hit, there were obviously fires and trauma injuries but the thing i cant get is, this fireball totally blanketed the couple floors where the plane went thru, and supposedly continued burning hot enuf to melt the steel support beams, but yet people were able to run around and survive in this same place where steel was being melted and even make it out alive?
2.why did the president of the united states, upon being informed that 2 planes justhit the WTC, continue to sit and have storytime for SIX to EIGHT MINUTES before deciding it was probably time to stop storytime and go take care of business????
1. yup, how, it never could have happened and one day it will be proven.
2. botched photo op... We were never suppose to ask why, we were only supposed to be further outraged, the nation attacked and the president sat innocently reading to kids... BAH! ::)
-
More so than any suggestion or explanation of 9/11 you've been able to give, thus far.
Okay. You believe that one of these scenarios:
1) Bush forgot about 3 hijackings after being told minutes before, or
2) His Sec Service team didn't tell him about it when they told him about the plane hitting the tower
is more reasonable than maybe he knew and allowed it to happen?
Um, okay. Your opinion would then be that Bush either has selective amnesia or he is protected from vital information by his team because of the pressing issue of reading about goats. My contention is that it's much more reasonable that he was aware of the events happening and lied about it. Perhaps one day history will prove one of us correct.
-
Okay. You believe that one of these scenarios:
1) Bush forgot about 3 hijackings after being told minutes before, or
2) His Sec Service team didn't tell him about it when they told him about the plane hitting the tower
is more reasonable than maybe he knew and allowed it to happen?
Um, okay. Your opinion would then be that Bush either has selective amnesia or he is protected from vital information by his team because of the pressing issue of reading about goats. My contention is that it's much more reasonable that he was aware of the events happening and lied about it. Perhaps one day history will prove one of us correct.
Absolutely, I do, even if I don't necessarily confirm the version of events you have given above. Your conspiracy theory is absurdly complex at a level that for the Bush Administration to have been able to pull it off, you would have to admit unimaginable intellect and foresight on their behalf. Do you then concede Bush is a genius of logistics and manipulation? Or do you still think he is a blundering fool? Please advise, as right now you’re contradicting yourself.
-
More so than any suggestion or explanation of 9/11 you've been able to give, thus far.
BRUCE, im only asking that you explain to me how could people have been surviving, even running around, in the same exact location where there was a fire raging intense enough to melt/warp fireproof steel beams?
im not trying to be sarcastic, i seriously am looking for an explaination to this.
bruce?
-
Absolutely, I do, even if I don't necessarily confirm the version of events you have given above. Your conspiracy theory is absurdly complex at a level that for the Bush Administration to have been able to pull it off, you would have to admit unimaginable intellect and foresight on their behalf. Do you then concede Bush is a genius of logistics and manipulation? Or do you still think he is a blundering fool? Please advise, as right now you’re contradicting yourself.
No, I am not contradicting myself. I'm said many times that I believe Bush was a forced participant on the days' events, even detailing out the threats he received using Secret Service terminology. Condi Rice told Tony Snow on FOX the Sunday after 9/11 that there was indeed a mole which shared access to top secret daily password into with those making threats.
On this thread I surmised the more likely option is that Bush KNEW and didn't act.
I never said he planned or executed anything.
-
BRUCE, im only asking that you explain to me how could people have been surviving, even running around, in the same exact location where there was a fire raging intense enough to melt/warp fireproof steel beams?
Here is a woman waving from the exact gash where the plane hit.
-
Videos of the towers indicate the fires of September 11, 2001, were less severe than your typical office fire. The dark colored soot in the smoke plume indicates an oxygen starved fire. Such a fire will burn well below the maximum 825 deg C (1,520 deg F) that a hydrocarbon fire can burn at when the fuel and air are mixed in perfect proportions. Of course, if the hydrocarbon is mixed in perfect proportions and burnt in pure oxygen rather than air, then temperatures of about 3,000 deg C (5,500 deg F) can be achieved.
Some thoughts about the World Trade Center Tower fires (from various sources).
(1) One complaint is that much of the jet fuel burnt outside the buildings. This was particularly true in the case of the south tower. After the impact nearly all of the jet fuel would have been spread throughout the area as a flammable mist. When this mist ignited it would have emptied the building of almost the entire fuel load, which then "exploded" outside the building. This is exactly what was seen in the videos of the impacts.
(2) If any quantity of liquid jet fuel did manage to accumulate in the building, then its volatility would lead to large amounts of it being evaporated and not burnt (pyrolysed) in the interior of the building. This evaporated fuel would burn on exiting the building, when it finally found sufficient oxygen.
(3) The jet fuel fires were brief. Most of the jet fuel would have burnt off or evaporated within 30 seconds, and all of it within 2-3 minutes (if all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor as a pool, it would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes). The energy, from the jet fuel, not absorbed by the concrete and steel within this brief period, would have been vented to the outside world.
This means that the jet fuel fire did not heat the concrete slabs or fire protected steel appreciably. Large columns such as the core columns would also not heat appreciably, even if they had lost all their fire-protection. Unprotected trusses may have experienced a more sizeable temperature increase. The jet fuel fire was so brief that the concrete and steel simply could not absorb the heat fast enough, and consequently, most of the heat was lost to the atmosphere through the smoke plume.
(4) Even if the fire-rated suspended ceilings and spray on fire-protection from the trusses was removed by the impacts and the trusses were heated till they had lost most of their room temperature strength, we know from the Cardington tests and real fires like Broadgate, that the relatively cold concrete slab will supply strength to the structural system, and collapse will not occur. Remember, that at Broadgate and Cardington, the beams/trusses were not fire-protected. Consider this quote: After the Broadgate Phase 8 fire and the Cardington frame tests there were benchmarks to test composite frame models. Research intensified because almost all the tests had unprotected steel beams (no fire rated suspended ceiling and no spray-on fire retardant) but collapse was not seen [3].
(5) Since the jet fuel fire was brief, and the building still stood, we know that the composite floor slab survived and continued to function as designed (until the buildings were demolished one or two hours later). After the jet fuel fire was over, burning desks, books, plastic, carpets, etc, contributed to the fire. So now we have a typical office fire. The fact that the trusses received some advanced heating will be of little consequence. After some minutes the fires would have been indistinguishable from a typical office fire, and we know that the truss-slab combination will survive such fires, because they did so in the 1975.
(6) Of course, most of the weight of the building was supported by the central core columns. There is no indication as to how these 47 massive columns might have failed (at least in the case of the north tower, some of these columns, perhaps two or three, would have been displaced by the impacts). We know that the jet fuel fire was too brief to heat them appreciably. Since the central core area contained only lift shafts and stairwells, it contained very little flammable material. This meant that the core columns could only have been heated by the office fire burning in the adjacent region. Consequently, the core columns would have never got hot enough to fail. But we already know this because they did not fail in the 1975 WTC office fire.
(7) Also, the building engineers placed the ventilation system in "purge mode." This forced fresh (cool) air into the core area keeping it free of smoke and hot gases.
(8) You should consider that it has been calculated that if the entire quantity of jet fuel on the aircraft was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction, then the jet fuel could have only raised the temperature of this floor to, at the very most, 257 deg C (495 deg F). You can find the calculation here.
(9) Another reason that we know the fires were not serious enough to cause structural failure, is that witnesses tell us this. The impact floors of the south tower were 78-84. Here are a few words from some of the witnesses:
Stanley Praimnath was on the 81st floor of the south tower: The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway.
Donovan Cowan was in an open elevator at the 78th floor sky-lobby: We went into the elevator. As soon as I hit the button, that's when there was a big boom. We both got knocked down. I remember feeling this intense heat. The doors were still open. The heat lasted for maybe 15 to 20 seconds I guess. Then it stopped.
Ling Young was in her 78th floor office: Only in my area were people alive, and the people alive were from my office. I figured that out later because I sat around in there for 10 or 15 minutes. That's how I got so burned.
Eagar claims temperatures were hot enough to cause the trusses of the south tower to fail, but here we have eye-witnesses stating that temperatures were cool enough for them to walk away.
Interestingly, a tape of radio conversations between firefighters exists (but only relatives of the dead men have been allowed to hear it). Kevin Flynn, of the New York Times, reported:
Chief Orio Palmer says from an upper floor of the badly damaged south tower at the World Trade Center. Just two hose lines to attack two isolated pockets of fire. "We should be able to knock it down with two lines," he tells the firefighters of Ladder Co. 15 who were following him up the stairs of the doomed tower. Lt. Joseph G. Leavey is heard responding: "Orio, we're on 78 but we're in the B stairway. Trapped in here. We got to put some fire out to get to you." The time was 9:56 a.m.
So now we know that, just a few minutes before the collapse of the south tower, firefighters did not consider the fires to be that serious, and were in fact able to get right into the impact region without being killed by the heat that was (according to Eagar) so intense that the trusses glowed red-hot and failed.
(10) Another reason that we know the fires were not as serious as claimed, is that there are photos of people in the impacted region after the planes hit the building (and before it collapsed). The above photos show at least two survivors of the impact and the initial jet-fuel fire.
This photo is an enlargement of the second of the above photos. It clearly shows a women trying to see what is happening on the street below. It is also possible that the brown area to the left may be another women lying on the floor and looking down, but the picture resolution does not allow a us to be sure. An enlargement of the picture of the male survivor is presented on the left below. Initially, we thought that the images had been doctored and the survivors added with Photoshop, but it turns out that the picture of the woman actually appears in the FEMA report (page 18 of Chapter 2: WTC 1 and WTC 2). I have enlarged the relevant section of that photo and circled the woman. The enlargement of the FEMA report photo is presented below on the right, but you should go to the FEMA report and check for yourself.
You can watch a video of the woman waving for help here.
(11) When fully developed fire conditions (temperatures of over 700°C) are reached, this results in the breaking of window glass. For example, the 1988 First Interstate Bank fire in Los Angeles, which showed greater heating effects over larger regions than those observed in either tower, rained broken window glass down on the streets below, presenting a considerable hazard to those on the ground. The First Interstate Bank did not collapse.
(12) If the temperatures inside large regions of the towers were of the order of 700°C, then these regions would have been glowing red hot and there would have been visible signs of this from the outside. Even pictures taken from the air looking horizontally into the impact region show little sign of this.
(13) Another reason the fire would not have been as hot as your typical office fire (at least on the impact floors) is that cross ventilation would have cooled it somewhat. Consider the quote: Cross ventilation resulting from (broken) windows present in opposite walls causes a high intake of air and cooling effects [3].
(14) If there had been severe fires burning in the core region this would have made the stairwells impassible. However the stairwells below the impact region on the North Tower were sufficiently clear to allow some occupants close to the impacted floors to escape and to allow firemen to reach at least the floors around the 70th level. In the South Tower, at least one stairwell remained operable as there were survivors from above the impact region.
-
Sigh, one point at a time, fellas.
-
Sigh, one point at a time, fellas.
No, I am not contradicting myself. I'm said many times that I believe Bush was a forced participant on the days' events, even detailing out the threats he received using Secret Service terminology. Condi Rice told Tony Snow on FOX the Sunday after 9/11 that there was indeed a mole which shared access to top secret daily password into with those making threats.
On this thread I surmised the more likely option is that Bush KNEW and didn't act.
I never said he planned or executed anything.
-
The indication that you think it's likely Bush had foreknowledge of 9/11, and yet was too dumb to play a part in it himself, is amusing me. That fits your little agenda just nicely.
-
The indication that you think it's likely Bush had foreknowledge of 9/11, and yet was too dumb to play a part in it himself, is amusing me. That fits your little agenda just nicely.
No. I am completely not following you here.
I can know my little brother is going to hack into Citibank and steal all their money. I am definitely too dumb to help in any way. Is this an impossible scenario?
I can know my sister plans to rob the stagecoach tomorrow. I can't ride a horse or handle the steel, so I'm going to wait in the saloon. Aside form time travel limitations, also not impossible.
And the agenda? Um, we were ramping up the war machine and had informed UK and IND about the attack months prior, down to the day. The taleban fucked us over on the pipeline and war was happening with or without 9/11.
-
Videos of the towers indicate the fires of September 11, 2001, were less severe than your typical office fire. The dark colored soot in the smoke plume indicates an oxygen starved fire. Such a fire will burn well below the maximum 825 deg C (1,520 deg F) that a hydrocarbon fire can burn at when the fuel and air are mixed in perfect proportions. Of course, if the hydrocarbon is mixed in perfect proportions and burnt in pure oxygen rather than air, then temperatures of about 3,000 deg C (5,500 deg F) can be achieved.
Some thoughts about the World Trade Center Tower fires (from various sources).
(1) One complaint is that much of the jet fuel burnt outside the buildings. This was particularly true in the case of the south tower. After the impact nearly all of the jet fuel would have been spread throughout the area as a flammable mist. When this mist ignited it would have emptied the building of almost the entire fuel load, which then "exploded" outside the building. This is exactly what was seen in the videos of the impacts.
(2) If any quantity of liquid jet fuel did manage to accumulate in the building, then its volatility would lead to large amounts of it being evaporated and not burnt (pyrolysed) in the interior of the building. This evaporated fuel would burn on exiting the building, when it finally found sufficient oxygen.
(3) The jet fuel fires were brief. Most of the jet fuel would have burnt off or evaporated within 30 seconds, and all of it within 2-3 minutes (if all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor as a pool, it would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes). The energy, from the jet fuel, not absorbed by the concrete and steel within this brief period, would have been vented to the outside world.
This means that the jet fuel fire did not heat the concrete slabs or fire protected steel appreciably. Large columns such as the core columns would also not heat appreciably, even if they had lost all their fire-protection. Unprotected trusses may have experienced a more sizeable temperature increase. The jet fuel fire was so brief that the concrete and steel simply could not absorb the heat fast enough, and consequently, most of the heat was lost to the atmosphere through the smoke plume.
(4) Even if the fire-rated suspended ceilings and spray on fire-protection from the trusses was removed by the impacts and the trusses were heated till they had lost most of their room temperature strength, we know from the Cardington tests and real fires like Broadgate, that the relatively cold concrete slab will supply strength to the structural system, and collapse will not occur. Remember, that at Broadgate and Cardington, the beams/trusses were not fire-protected. Consider this quote: After the Broadgate Phase 8 fire and the Cardington frame tests there were benchmarks to test composite frame models. Research intensified because almost all the tests had unprotected steel beams (no fire rated suspended ceiling and no spray-on fire retardant) but collapse was not seen [3].
(5) Since the jet fuel fire was brief, and the building still stood, we know that the composite floor slab survived and continued to function as designed (until the buildings were demolished one or two hours later). After the jet fuel fire was over, burning desks, books, plastic, carpets, etc, contributed to the fire. So now we have a typical office fire. The fact that the trusses received some advanced heating will be of little consequence. After some minutes the fires would have been indistinguishable from a typical office fire, and we know that the truss-slab combination will survive such fires, because they did so in the 1975.
(6) Of course, most of the weight of the building was supported by the central core columns. There is no indication as to how these 47 massive columns might have failed (at least in the case of the north tower, some of these columns, perhaps two or three, would have been displaced by the impacts). We know that the jet fuel fire was too brief to heat them appreciably. Since the central core area contained only lift shafts and stairwells, it contained very little flammable material. This meant that the core columns could only have been heated by the office fire burning in the adjacent region. Consequently, the core columns would have never got hot enough to fail. But we already know this because they did not fail in the 1975 WTC office fire.
(7) Also, the building engineers placed the ventilation system in "purge mode." This forced fresh (cool) air into the core area keeping it free of smoke and hot gases.
(8) You should consider that it has been calculated that if the entire quantity of jet fuel on the aircraft was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction, then the jet fuel could have only raised the temperature of this floor to, at the very most, 257 deg C (495 deg F). You can find the calculation here.
(9) Another reason that we know the fires were not serious enough to cause structural failure, is that witnesses tell us this. The impact floors of the south tower were 78-84. Here are a few words from some of the witnesses:
Stanley Praimnath was on the 81st floor of the south tower: The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway.
Donovan Cowan was in an open elevator at the 78th floor sky-lobby: We went into the elevator. As soon as I hit the button, that's when there was a big boom. We both got knocked down. I remember feeling this intense heat. The doors were still open. The heat lasted for maybe 15 to 20 seconds I guess. Then it stopped.
Ling Young was in her 78th floor office: Only in my area were people alive, and the people alive were from my office. I figured that out later because I sat around in there for 10 or 15 minutes. That's how I got so burned.
Eagar claims temperatures were hot enough to cause the trusses of the south tower to fail, but here we have eye-witnesses stating that temperatures were cool enough for them to walk away.
Interestingly, a tape of radio conversations between firefighters exists (but only relatives of the dead men have been allowed to hear it). Kevin Flynn, of the New York Times, reported:
Chief Orio Palmer says from an upper floor of the badly damaged south tower at the World Trade Center. Just two hose lines to attack two isolated pockets of fire. "We should be able to knock it down with two lines," he tells the firefighters of Ladder Co. 15 who were following him up the stairs of the doomed tower. Lt. Joseph G. Leavey is heard responding: "Orio, we're on 78 but we're in the B stairway. Trapped in here. We got to put some fire out to get to you." The time was 9:56 a.m.
So now we know that, just a few minutes before the collapse of the south tower, firefighters did not consider the fires to be that serious, and were in fact able to get right into the impact region without being killed by the heat that was (according to Eagar) so intense that the trusses glowed red-hot and failed.
(10) Another reason that we know the fires were not as serious as claimed, is that there are photos of people in the impacted region after the planes hit the building (and before it collapsed). The above photos show at least two survivors of the impact and the initial jet-fuel fire.
This photo is an enlargement of the second of the above photos. It clearly shows a women trying to see what is happening on the street below. It is also possible that the brown area to the left may be another women lying on the floor and looking down, but the picture resolution does not allow a us to be sure. An enlargement of the picture of the male survivor is presented on the left below. Initially, we thought that the images had been doctored and the survivors added with Photoshop, but it turns out that the picture of the woman actually appears in the FEMA report (page 18 of Chapter 2: WTC 1 and WTC 2). I have enlarged the relevant section of that photo and circled the woman. The enlargement of the FEMA report photo is presented below on the right, but you should go to the FEMA report and check for yourself.
You can watch a video of the woman waving for help here.
(11) When fully developed fire conditions (temperatures of over 700°C) are reached, this results in the breaking of window glass. For example, the 1988 First Interstate Bank fire in Los Angeles, which showed greater heating effects over larger regions than those observed in either tower, rained broken window glass down on the streets below, presenting a considerable hazard to those on the ground. The First Interstate Bank did not collapse.
(12) If the temperatures inside large regions of the towers were of the order of 700°C, then these regions would have been glowing red hot and there would have been visible signs of this from the outside. Even pictures taken from the air looking horizontally into the impact region show little sign of this.
(13) Another reason the fire would not have been as hot as your typical office fire (at least on the impact floors) is that cross ventilation would have cooled it somewhat. Consider the quote: Cross ventilation resulting from (broken) windows present in opposite walls causes a high intake of air and cooling effects [3].
(14) If there had been severe fires burning in the core region this would have made the stairwells impassible. However the stairwells below the impact region on the North Tower were sufficiently clear to allow some occupants close to the impacted floors to escape and to allow firemen to reach at least the floors around the 70th level. In the South Tower, at least one stairwell remained operable as there were survivors from above the impact region.
dude this was so awesomely thorough i lost track of how many points i wanted to quote.
BRUCE you have been severely owned.
-
I have a hard time believing 911 could have been pulled off without there being leaks or defectors, or those approached by the plan who turned it down but kept their mouth shut.
A meticulous plan carried out with precision seems out of the realm of possibility for the same administration that couldnt get a handle in Iraq. Although, one could say in Iraq they are just keeping enough troops there to ensure that massive amounts of money are being made while not enough to achieve the stated objective. But again, I don't think that is the case.
-
No. I am completely not following you here.
I can know my little brother is going to hack into Citibank and steal all their money. I am definitely too dumb to help in any way. Is this an impossible scenario?
I can know my sister plans to rob the stagecoach tomorrow. I can't ride a horse or handle the steel, so I'm going to wait in the saloon. Aside form time travel limitations, also not impossible.
And the agenda? Um, we were ramping up the war machine and had informed UK and IND about the attack months prior, down to the day. The taleban fucked us over on the pipeline and war was happening with or without 9/11.
Analogies are imperfect by nature, so I'll forgive you for being complete inaccurate with the above ones. The difference between someone’s brother - and the leader of the free world (and the most powerful), should already be evident to you. Try and use some logic.
-
does that pic look suspicious to anyone else
-
does that pic look suspicious to anyone else
even if it was it doesnt matter, there is plenty of video evidence as well as thousands of eyewitness testimonies depicting people in/around the actual crashsites, peering out and falling/leaping to their deaths. this is common knowledge and accepted by all...these people as well as the ones who made it down were standing right at the heart of an inferno supposedly so intense that they should have been instantly killed.
-
does that pic look suspicious to anyone else
You can watch the video of the woman waving here:
http://guardian.150m.com/video/woman-waving-close.avi
I have a hard time believing 911 could have been pulled off without there being leaks or defectors, or those approached by the plan who turned it down but kept their mouth shut.
Why? Do you not find it possible the purpitrators could have found a team of a few hundred people who LIKE what they were doing? Also, the $2.3 trillion missing dollas buys a lot of quiet.
It's weird that you don't question the ability to pull off such a mission, but get bedazzled on how they'd keep the team quiet afterwards.
If it was me, I'd put em on a plane that night and dive em into the sea!
-
You can watch the video of the woman waving here:
http://guardian.150m.com/video/woman-waving-close.avi
Why? Do you not find it possible the purpitrators could have found a team of a few hundred people who LIKE what they were doing? Also, the $2.3 trillion missing dollas buys a lot of quiet.
It's weird that you don't question the ability to pull off such a mission, but get bedazzled on how they'd keep the team quiet afterwards.
If it was me, I'd put em on a plane that night and dive em into the sea!
And yet you've been able to figure the whole thing out, Rob! And you're telling everyone about it, too! Funny how this all mighty crack team of devious plotters couldn't stop you from blabbing. Or maybe you're just wrong.
-
Analogies are imperfect by nature, so I'll forgive you for being complete inaccurate with the above ones. The difference between someone’s brother - and the leader of the free world (and the most powerful), should already be evident to you. Try and use some logic.
BRUCE, in the global scheme of things, those 3000 deaths may have saved 300 million.
The attacks justified the wars. The wars keep the oil in our hands. China or Russia won't be on our door over some bullshit false flag op in 20 orr 40 years.
Leaders of nations sometimes have to make hard choices for the long term viability of those nations.
Many people wouldn't be able to make that choice and we do need leaders that will.
Did this happen on 9/11? I don't know.
-
And yet you've been able to figure the whole thing out, Rob! And you're telling everyone about it, too! Funny how this all mighty crack team of devious plotters couldn't stop you from blabbing. Or maybe you're just wrong.
Maybe i'm completely wrong!!
maybe the hundreds of scholars, scientists, military men, CIA agents, etc who believe it was an inside job are ALSo wrong.
maybe the 36% who called it an inside job in a scripps nationwide poll are wrong.
I dunno.
it's an interesting debate topic though. perhaps one day there will be a second, complete investigation to answer the questions that a growing % of our nation possess.
-
BTW -
Two questions were asked about the fire damage and the Presidents actions vs. his knowledge.
I answered, based upon the information provided in the 911 commisison report and the released firefighter tapes.
Suddenly those 2 questions become calls of "but, but, how would they keep all those involved quiet" and "the leader of a nation wouldn't do that".
Don't get so deep, guys. Logistical and moral issues are hard to debate, and impossible to convince. How can either of us prove or disprove what a man *would* do? How can either of us prove what an unknown team would/would not do?
The 2 questions posed by John Matrix CAN be answered.
-
haha these threads always end up the same- the current orthodox debater completely ignores the simple questions. 240 provides an extremely thorough arguement/answer. orthodox guy resorts to bashing 240 and never even tries to answer the simple question. what else is new
-
haha these threads always end up the same- the current orthodox debater completely ignores the simple questions. 240 provides an extremely thorough arguement/answer. orthodox guy resorts to bashing 240 and never even tries to answer the simple question. what else is new
If i start to answer #1 it would be like reopening a can of worms. Maybe A_joker will feel like it.
BUT #2 is one of my favorate.
- while it's hard for us to view BUSH objectively regarding how he acted because we are emotionally involved in the outcome of 9/11, it still puzzles me how he reacted. THere wasn't even a look of surprise. That's why i believe there may have been prior knowledge to the attacks
-
I am just commenting on the last post only. If he flipped out..looked scared or anything but how he actd he would have been crucified. It was a no win situation no matter how he acted.
-
I have my own beliefs about 9/11, just as 6 billion other people all have their beliefs.
Statistically - too many anomalies that day.
Militarily - We were prepping for a war and it was too coincidental
Defensively - too many independent failures of protocol that day.
Scientifically -
Geopolitically - fit the US agenda perfectly.
Human - Bush didn't perform like most would, and his words were not the truth.
Publically - Bush wouldn't deny he knew about the attacks in advance. Clinton or Reagan would have grabbed that fcking reporter by the collar and slapped him senseless for insinuating such a thing. Bush stammered and said "there's a time for politics..." repeatedly. Also "I'm a good man..." when asked right after 9/11 "what do you feel in your soul" was odd.
Fact is, none of this matters until the folks we elect order it looked into based upon lobby dollars and legal actions by victims groups. We're just spectators and voters!
-
I am just commenting on the last post only. If he flipped out..looked scared or anything but how he actd he would have been crucified. It was a no win situation no matter how he acted.
hey, you're a military man. Did you find it odd that the secret service even stopped at the school, knowing 3 planes had been hijacked and one crahsed already, when Bush arrived at 8:59?
Wouldn't protocol call for something OTHER than going to the publicly planned event in an open location like a FL grade school?
-
He was already there as i understand it. I think as soon plane 1 hit they got him moving an as soon as they realized it was an attack they did their thing until we realized it wasn't nuclear. It was a timing thing.
-
He was already there as i understand it. I think as soon plane 1 hit they got him moving an as soon as they realized it was an attack they did their thing until we realized it wasn't nuclear. It was a timing thing.
You understand incorrectly. FAA said under oath they told the Secret Service at 8:17 AM.
He admitted to reporters that he knew about plane 1 hitting before he sat down. Thought it was "one bad pilot". Then, 2 min later he was told about plane 2.
he then sat for 13 minutes reading. Then he used the phone to talk to condi and dick and friends. From the classroom next door. Pics of this call show everyone standing around pretty calmly actually.
Then, at 9:30, as planned all along via his itinery, he spoke to the crowd outside before boarding his limo.
Bush knew about 3 hijackings and 2 crashes and stayed on the campus for about 30 minutes. These are undeniable facts. There is a very nice google video showing a split screen - 4 videos. One is bush reading. The other 2 are CNN and ABC showing what is happening.
So check the facts, brother. They knew when they opened that limo door about 3 hijacks and one crash. Common sense dictates you reroute and you don't get outta that limo. It's an unprecedented attack already (3 simultaneous planes you know about so far) - who in their right mind goes into a classroom at that point?
-
The president has stated that he saw the first plane hit the tower on T.V. while he was in the hallway of the kids school...He then went in and read with the kids...Thats when the 2nd plane hit and he was told during the middle of reading with the kids....
The most telling thing about the Presidents statement is that how could he have scene the first plane fly into the building when nobody saw the actual footage until the next day...Some People actually believe that he is telling the truth that he did actually see the first plane hit on closed circuit that was postioned to see it all go down...No inside Job huh?..It was a major blunder by him stating this...
-
The president has stated that he saw the first plane hit the tower on T.V. while he was in the hallway of the kids school...He then went in and read with the kids...Thats when the 2nd plane hit and he was told during the middle of reading with the kids....
The most telling thing about the Presidents statement is that how could he have scene the first plane fly into the building when nobody saw the actual footage until the next day...Some People actually believe that he is telling the truth that he did actually see the first plane hit on closed circuit that was postioned to see it all go down...No inside Job huh?..It was a major blunder by him stating this...
The other blunder was the FAA testifying that they realized plane 1 was hijacked at 8:16 - and that by 8:17 they had informed the Secret Service.
Bush was still at his hotel at that time. They knew a US airliner had been hijacked. This is HUGE!
As he dressed and prepped, he heard about plane #2 being hijacked! This it GIGANTIC!
As he drove in the limo, he heard about plane #3 being hijacked. UNREAL!!!!!!!!!!!!
As he drove in the limo, he was told about (or watched) crash 1 - INSANE!!!!!
When he got out of the limo (8:59), a school employee ran over and told him about the crash at the towers, he assured her that he already knew.
This is according to protocol and FAA testimony. Bush DID NOT change plans before arriving (despite evidence he knew) and DID NOT change plans afterwards.
Bush knew about a hijacking from 8:17 to 9:30 - NEVER DIVERTED FROM HIS ITINERARY WHATSOEVER!
Is this weird to anyone???????
-
The president has stated that he saw the first plane hit the tower on T.V. while he was in the hallway of the kids school...
This directly contradicts the video of the woman running over to his limo and him calmly reassuring her that "I know" as he stepped out.
Odd?
-
The other blunder was the FAA testifying that they realized plane 1 was hijacked at 8:16 - and that by 8:17 they had informed the Secret Service.
Bush was still at his hotel at that time. They knew a US airliner had been hijacked. This is HUGE!
As he dressed and prepped, he heard about plane #2 being hijacked! This it GIGANTIC!
As he drove in the limo, he heard about plane #3 being hijacked. UNREAL!!!!!!!!!!!!
As he drove in the limo, he was told about (or watched) crash 1 - INSANE!!!!!
When he got out of the limo (8:59), a school employee ran over and told him about the crash at the towers, he assured her that he already knew.
This is according to protocol and FAA testimony. Bush DID NOT change plans before arriving (despite evidence he knew) and DID NOT change plans afterwards.
Bush knew about a hijacking from 8:17 to 9:30 - NEVER DIVERTED FROM HIS ITINERARY WHATSOEVER!
Is this weird to anyone???????
LOOK, if you can back that up with video, or a recording of the president saying that and the prove the FAA thing in a similar way.
We might actually have a real angle on a massive cover up in which George BUSH is a part of.
-
I am just commenting on the last post only. If he flipped out..looked scared or anything but how he actd he would have been crucified. It was a no win situation no matter how he acted.
::)
I try to stay away from the eye roll only but gotta launch it on this one ;D There wasn't even a double take from him. No rush for secret service to do their job... Oh brother on and on with this one, it stinks rotten to the core... But again why are you engaging in these debates? Once again this is topic where you can't and probably should agree. You may not believe it but I've got all the respect in the world for what you are doing despite not agreeing with these wars. I'm considering putting an end to any debate contrary to the president's policy online because it's completely new territory for troops in the field to be actively participating in the debate back home... This is an extremely strange dilemma for me. At the same time why should I shut up with what I believe. Back in the day I wouldn't have expected to engage in political debate in public where my opinion was contrary to the presidents war policy and expect to get away with it, I simply wouldn't have been able to do so. So with today's situation, it's awefully odd for me to see a blind eye turned to opinions that agree with it still being taboo for you to pubically disagree. I don't know the answer, only that something is off with this.
-
I enjoy some of the stupidity that goes on here. Plus some of it is interesting. And I can't say a whole lot about what happens or comment about the war, where I'm at now. I'm far from a coolaide drinker....besides you'd shit if u knew what I did for the Army. Its very contrary to alot of what i post here, which is why i enjoy it. Have a good one.....
-
I enjoy some of the stupidity that goes on here. Plus some of it is interesting. And I can't say a whole lot about what happens or comment about the war, where I'm at now. I'm far from a coolaide drinker....besides you'd shit if u knew what I did for the Army. Its very contrary to alot of what i post here, which is why i enjoy it. Have a good one.....
I understand, not that you would have but please don't let the shit from this board get you worked up. I really don't want to see stuff said here, especially by me, hinder any of you guys by getting you worked up over something said here. If you're getting a laugh out of it cool.
-
LOOK, if you can back that up with video, or a recording of the president saying that and the prove the FAA thing in a similar way.
We might actually have a real angle on a massive cover up in which George BUSH is a part of.
Here's the deal. I've been posting this for months. There are 8 people here who already know this. Then, you have brianx and BRUCE, who would ignore a handwritten confession as "they wouldn't do that". Delusional will say anyone who thinks this should be executed. Mr I will say it's made up. It's pretty predictable here.
I thought my case for fire completely pwned the shit out of the official story. People shurgged it off, as they already knew or were blocking it out.
Tonight, I could come home and spend 4 hours detailing this with the video clip, the statements, a complete timeline. but why? 8 of you already know. The two in the middle (including you) already believe there should be a 2nd inevstigation. And 3 or 4 people here will never even read it.
You have the pieces. I've posted all this before. It's all over google and youtube video, you can see the lady run over to the limo with your own eyes and hear bush's denial, then you can google the FAA youtube piece on "we had a running communication of all info with NORAD and Sec Srve one minute after learning of hijacking at 8:16 AM".
So I'm done spending hours trying to convert nobody :) You have the tools and it's at your fingertips. but the times of me spending 4 hours typing out everything so Mr I can say "that's all made up" or delusional can say "I will shoot you in the head for writing this", kinda a wate of time.
history will prove me right. I'll be a stale old man, logging on to look for the doubters, and they'll be too busy shitting on whatever that conspiracy theory of that day is. Fuckem.
-
Bush reading to those kids was merely an alibi. Can you think of a more corny ass scenario for him to 'coincidently' be involved in at that moment in history?
-
Bush reading to those kids was merely an alibi. Can you think of a more corny ass scenario for him to 'coincidently' be involved in at that moment in history?
What we saw that morning could have been viewed as simple poor judgment and lack of following protocol (everyone in DC was rushed underground immediately, but Bush was allowed to read books in an open unfenced campus?
But, the FAA f'cked that story up by telling the world that Bush's team KNEW about the 1st hijacking 41 minutes before his limo opened the door, and about the other two hijackings and first hit before it arrived.
It's a load of BS, but they investigated themselves and clearned themselves, so I guess they are free and clear. And there will always be stupid people who will believe despite the evidence and motives, positional power equates to moral infallibility. Idiots.
-
The way I see it...if he was hidden away in a bunker it would be easier to allege that he was orchestrating the events, which was probably his brilliant 2 cents to the whole thing.
but because he was in a school, looking dumbfounded or whatever...people point the finger else where
-
The way I see it...if he was hidden away in a bunker it would be easier to allege that he was orchestrating the events, which was probably his brilliant 2 cents to the whole thing.
but because he was in a school, looking dumbfounded or whatever...people point the finger else where
Yep. A school was a good parking spot for him. Staging the "tell him in front of the cameras" was a nice touch.
Ari Fleischer (his press secretary) holding up a big sign that said "Don't say anything yet" was beyond comical. Would Reagan, JFK, or CLinton have sat for 13 minutes reading about goats after hearing this? Waiting for their f'king PRESS SECRETARY to give them permission to speak? Pathetic.
-
Those other cats you mentioned would of pulled a knife from their boot, ran outta the room, slid accross the hood of one of their escalades and gotten to work.
i compare bush's balls to those of a woman in a margerine comercial
-
Those other cats you mentioned would of pulled a knife from their boot, ran outta the room, slid accross the hood of one of their escalades and gotten to work.
i compare bush's balls to those of a woman in a margerine comercial
The vetting process to become US president is huge. I mean, the kinda tests and training thye must undergo.
Bush's behavior that day, like all things with a presidency, was controlled and planned. No way did he hear about hijacking #1 at 8:17 then change nothing until 9:31. This does not happen. The fix was in.
-
Here's the deal. I've been posting this for months. There are 8 people here who already know this. Then, you have brianx and BRUCE, who would ignore a handwritten confession as "they wouldn't do that". Delusional will say anyone who thinks this should be executed. Mr I will say it's made up. It's pretty predictable here.
I thought my case for fire completely pwned the shit out of the official story. People shurgged it off, as they already knew or were blocking it out.
Tonight, I could come home and spend 4 hours detailing this with the video clip, the statements, a complete timeline. but why? 8 of you already know. The two in the middle (including you) already believe there should be a 2nd inevstigation. And 3 or 4 people here will never even read it.
You have the pieces. I've posted all this before. It's all over google and youtube video, you can see the lady run over to the limo with your own eyes and hear bush's denial, then you can google the FAA youtube piece on "we had a running communication of all info with NORAD and Sec Srve one minute after learning of hijacking at 8:16 AM".
So I'm done spending hours trying to convert nobody :) You have the tools and it's at your fingertips. but the times of me spending 4 hours typing out everything so Mr I can say "that's all made up" or delusional can say "I will shoot you in the head for writing this", kinda a wate of time.
history will prove me right. I'll be a stale old man, logging on to look for the doubters, and they'll be too busy shitting on whatever that conspiracy theory of that day is. Fuckem.
I'm not asking you to spend 4 hours looking for something.
I figure if there is a video of the pres saying that then you'd have it and would be able to post it easily. Also i would think you'd have something tangible on the FAA thing.
I'm interested int he truth. If you make statements such as you have made i just assume you'd have checked it out and have something ready to back it up with.
What you are claiming here is BIG. but if you can't back it up with a recording or a video of BUSH saying it then it's all 9/11 CT BS.
I believe you have a video or a recording to back your claims up.
please post it.
-
ok, i'll dig for it. i posted the video before - someone might have it - it's 4 split screen, showing the woman running up to the limo to tell him. i have her name, position and statement in one of my books. I also have the complete FAA timeline in my 911 Ommissions book.
if the other minds here can chip in, by all means. I will try to scan the pages later tonight and search for the clip i posted of the 4/split.
This is what eevn Lou Dobbs bitched about - no one's story fit the FAA's records - everyone just sat idle (NORAD and Bush) for 45 minutes while they knew 3 planes were jacked. Those 45 min allowed the planes to reach targets. I'll dig.
-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5752277067931547109&q=9%2F11+bush+split
here's the video.
-
2
-
3
-
Andrew Card is watching the tv as the second plane hits. he oddly waits exactly 120 seconds to walk in and tell Bush.
-
Bush waited 700 seconds after being told of the second crash, to exit the classroom.
Imagine counting to 700 knowing America is under attack, and you're the leader of America.
later on i'll dig up FAA stuff, unless someone wants to do it for me lol
-
I think everyone else has nodded off with this 'analysis'.
-
i was looking for bush saying he saw the video of the first plane hitting.
What was outlined in the video only suggests he knew about it. (that's an easy thing to do but isn't something that could hold up) The FAA proof would help.
What evidence do we have of the FAA knowing it was hijacked at 8:17?
What evidence do we have of them notifying the SS 1 minute later?
-
i was looking for bush saying he saw the video of the first plane hitting.
oh - he said it twice - it's on cnn.com and on whitehouse.gov - links to real player video here - http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bushlie.html
What was outlined in the video only suggests he knew about it. (that's an easy thing to do but isn't something that could hold up) The FAA proof would help.
yeah - the FAA destroyed all their tapes showing initial reactions, but at 8:26 there were hijack signals coming in, and the supervisor couldn't destroy that. If it was an inside job, the idea would be to wait as long as possible before reporting it.
What evidence do we have of the FAA knowing it was hijacked at 8:17?
it's in the 911 commission book - i was reading it on the can earlier but haven't found that line yet from their testimony. I will dig it up tho. I can pinpoint the 8:26 hijack call from the pilot tho. the original deviation was 8;16 (changed course, stopped answering, and killed transponder) at 8:16 but oddly, those missing tapes would have shown the conversations for those 10 minutes. at ANY rate - 8:26 it all hit the fan officially, and Bush had 34 minutes to find out about hijack before getting out of that limo.
What evidence do we have of them notifying the SS 1 minute later?
They knew before that, actually - Sec srvc has their own radar screen and are connected. And FAA said NORAD and sec srvc were on phone in less than one minute. cheney and clarke both confirmed on meet the press. I will dig it up.