official 9-11 thread

[dphantom]

Kazani-

Defense Department budget for FY 2007 was $439 billion.

Yes, it is true their is old technolgy depoyed at DoD installations. I worked with 50's/60's equipment in the 80s/90's in very sensitive areas.

So I know you hate the US and desperately want to believe the US government is evil, but until you provide a comprehensive hyposthesis describing how and why the official report is a coverup, you simply have no case.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions. Just don't expect an answer unless you provide your own answers first.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
this is what that guy says on that website:

It has recently been suggested that the terminal trajectory of American Flight 77 -- the aircraft that impacted the Pentagon on September 11th -- as reconstructed by (a) nearby obstacles, and (b) fragmentary data from the Flight Data Recorder, is implausible given the performance limits of the aircraft. Some have further suggested that this leads one to conclude that a coverup of one form or another is underway.

In this whitepaper, we will examine the measurements and the mathematics in an effort to verify or refute these claims.

he examined the measurements and the mathematics........ok. he didnt examine the blackbox data did he???

he can examine all he wants too. he's tracking something alright. something hit those poles. something hit the pentagon. something killed those people. was it a 757????????? i just dont think it was.

anyway, he still doesnt go into ground effect. i searched the whole thread. again, this could just be a propaganda site!! hahaha

Our source, having had direct and extensive personal flying experience at low altitudes, also completely dismissed the feasibility that a Boeing 757 could be flown for any significant distance at just 20 feet above ground. He also cited other pilots of large commercial aircraft who concurred.

A phenomenon called 'ground effect' describes the energized cushion of air between the wings and the ground which increases in energy the faster the plane flies. Flight 77 is reported to have whisked up the highway and into the Pentagon at breakneck acceleration, even increasing in speed before it hit, a maneuver described as impossible by the pilot at 20 feet above the ground, due to the reaction of the energized ground effect layer which would simply not have allowed it, even if the pilot was furiously pulling back the throttle which was not the case.

http://www.propagandamatrix.co...06/230506doesntfly.htm

theres other sites that talk about ground effect as well.

Well finally you admit to what you believe concerning 9/11, at least a small portion. Have you ever bothered to look at the copious amount of evidence that shows a 757, specifically AA77, hit the Pentagon? The fuselage parts? The engine parts? The DNA findings? And if you don't believe a 757 hit the Pentagon, what do you think did?

As far as ground effect, I didn't say JREF went into ground effect. I stated that I had addressed the issue previously in here.

Anyway, does this source have experience flying a 757 at 30 ft off the ground at 400 or 500mph? I doubt it. No doubt you're also aware that ground effect really isn't an issue at such high speeds, or that the computers of a 757 will compensate quite a bit for ground effects, or that larger aircraft @ 7+ tons aren't really subject to the deleterious issues presented by ground effects, or that ground effects are actually beneficial and easily controllable which is why we have vehicles like hovercrafts? Of course, the "truthers" will never tell you any of those things.

btw, the PFT site is misleading you on the altimeter issue. You might want to do some more research on that.

ive seen parts but when members of the military say "where is the engine" i start to wonder myself. its a part of something, maybe an engine. especially that military guy that it was his job to analyze the soviets and he states that the hole is too small for that large of an aircraft to fit through it. the tailfin not making a mark on the wall. these guys dont seem like the highschool c.t.ers. they are very well educated. its not just the altimeter issue. the flight path is off too. isnt there a computer these guys were using to analyze this data. i would believe it more if more people had this specialized comp to do the analysis.

as for the ground effect, from my previous post-

A phenomenon called 'ground effect' describes the energized cushion of air between the wings and the ground which increases in energy the faster the plane flies.

when u say comps will compenstae quite a bit for ground effects, do u mean in autopilot mode??

 

[event8horizon]

phantom-

when u say-
So I know you hate the US and desperately want to believe the US government is evil, but until you provide a comprehensive hyposthesis describing how and why the official report is a coverup, you simply have no case.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions. Just don't expect an answer unless you provide your own answers first.

how can one provide a comprehensive hypothesis when important intel is classified. the financial ties in saudi arabia and pakistan are classified. the israeli angle is classified. some of the wargames are still classified. i think the cia was running multiple drills that morning.....classified. i wouldnt doubt if those mossad guys were working on drills with the cia. and i would really like to see when and where those "blips" on the radar popped up and who was in control of putting those blips on the radar. the ptech software allowed for this and from what i read, it sounds like there was an admin version that would allow the user to have greater control.

as for the blips, could this be one??

Phantom Flight 11
At 9:21, NEADS received a call from Colin Scoggins, the military liaison at the FAA Boston Center, reporting that Flight 11 had not, in fact, hit the North Tower at 8:46 as they were told, but that it was still in the air and heading towards Washington. NEADS responded to this report by giving a scramble order to three fighters on alert at Langley Air Force Base, and by 9:24, they were in the air. After at first heading east out into the Atlantic, the fighters then flew north-west towards Washington, arriving around 10:00.[6]

 

[KAZANI]

Originally posted by: dphantom
Kazani-

Defense Department budget for FY 2007 was $439 billion.

Yes, it is true their is old technolgy depoyed at DoD installations. I worked with 50's/60's equipment in the 80s/90's in very sensitive areas.

So I know you hate the US and desperately want to believe the US government is evil, but until you provide a comprehensive hyposthesis describing how and why the official report is a coverup, you simply have no case.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions. Just don't expect an answer unless you provide your own answers first.

Actually, I was refering to this trillion $ hole:
9/10/2001: Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: KAZANI

Originally posted by: dphantom
Kazani-

Defense Department budget for FY 2007 was $439 billion.

Yes, it is true their is old technolgy depoyed at DoD installations. I worked with 50's/60's equipment in the 80s/90's in very sensitive areas.

So I know you hate the US and desperately want to believe the US government is evil, but until you provide a comprehensive hyposthesis describing how and why the official report is a coverup, you simply have no case.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions. Just don't expect an answer unless you provide your own answers first.

Actually, I was refering to this trillion $ hole:
9/10/2001: Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon.

kazani- u might want to look behind the 2.3 trillion to the man in charge, Dov S. Zakheim. they have "found" 2/3rds of the money supposedly.

anyway- look into "the vulcans"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vulcans

The Vulcans is a nickname used to refer to Republican Presidential candidate George W. Bush's foreign policy advisory team assembled to brief him prior to the 2000 U.S. presidential election. The Vulcans were led by Condoleezza Rice and included Richard Armitage, Robert Blackwill, Stephen Hadley, Richard Perle, Dov S. Zakheim, Robert Zoellick and Paul Wolfowitz. Other key campaign figures including Dick Cheney, George P. Shultz and Colin Powell were also closely associated with the group but were never actually members. During the campaign, Bush sought to deflect questions about his own lack of foreign policy experience by pointing to this group of experienced advisers. After the election, all the members of the team received key positions within the new Bush administration.

do u see any familiar names!!!!!

Rabbi Dov S. Zakheim was CEO of SPS International, part of System Planning Corporation, a defense contractor majoring in electronic warfare technologies, including
remote-controlled aircraft systems, and the notorious Flight Termination System (FTS) technology that could hijack even a hijacked
plane and land or crash it wherever.

He was then appointed to be Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller from 2001 to 2004 under the George W. Bush administration, and served in this capacity until April 2004. During his term as Comptroller, he was tasked to help track down the Pentagon's 2.6 trillion dollars ($2,600,000,000,000) worth of unaccounted transactions [1]. He initiated a number of processes that led to the reduction of that sum by two-thirds by the time of his departure [2]

Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, and the United States Naval Institute, and a member of the editorial board of the journal The National Interest.

his family-

his granddad - Julius Zakheim (Zhabinka), born in the Ukraine, was a Russian rabbi who married a relative of Karl Marx. He was a Menshevik/Bolshevik and played a leading role in the 1905 turmoil that paved the way for the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution.

Father ...Rabbi Jacob I. Zakheim Born 1910 He was from a Polish town near Bialystok - same as Yitzhak Shamir. The family numbered Menachem Begin and Moshe Arens as friends.

Dov's father was an active member of Betar.

Betar was formed in 1923 Riga, Latvia, and it's goal was control of the Mideast (and it's oil). Jabotinsky knew the Jews needed their own country and they chose Palestine and claimed it as a Jewish state "on both sides of the Jordan."

im still looking into his family history but this guy is very interesting!! how the hell a dual citizen can hold such a high office is questionable.

 

[event8horizon]

since common courtsey shut down my thread dealing with a new development, we can always go to this tread and discuss these things.
p.s. common c. we havent discussed this new develpment because it just came out!!!

this is an interesting development. the nist has released their final report showing how they think the wtc 7 collapsed. only problem is they had NO steel to analyze. its all photo/video evidence and a computer simulation. from what ive read, they havent released the "evidence" they present so we cant view the video/photos that they had access too. fema had steel to analyze and it showed some very interesting characteristics.
just wondering what people think with nist not analyzing or having access to that steel fema had access too. and how, using the scientific method, one would come to the conclusion they did NOT HAVING ANY STEEL TO ANALYZE!!!

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_...rought_7_wtc_down.html


"Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event," said Dr. Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator on the project.

"Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7."
In particular, the 77-page report concluded that a crucial steel support column was weakened.

"When this critical column buckled due to lack of floor supports, it was the first domino in the chain," said Sunder.

Sunder said his team looked for evidence of an explosion but found no signs of a large boom or other noise.

Investigators also concluded there was no evidence that the collapse was caused by fires from a substantial amount of diesel fuel that was stored in the building.

now for the fema wtc sample.

Although the exact location of this beam in the building was not known, the severe erosion found in several beams warranted further consideration.
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfication with subsequent intragranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel. This sulfur-rich liquid penetrated preferentially down grain boundaries of the steel, severely weakening the beam and making it susceptible to erosion. The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F), which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel.

Summary for Sample 1

The thinning of the steel occurred by a high-temperture corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.

Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel.

The sulfidation attack of steel grain boundaries accelerated the corrosion and erosion of the steel.

******that steel from the fema sample could have been a contributing factor for the collapse and there is NO mention of that sample in the nist report*******

the whole nist study:
http://www.ae911truth.org/docs..._1A_for_public_comment[1].pdf

 

[BeauJangles]

If WTC 7 was brought down by explosives you realize you're talking about thousands of detonation points, hundreds of miles of detonation cord, and probably months of setting the whole thing up. Plus, detonation cord and explosives don't play nicely with fires that have been raging all day.

We just rehashed this whole argument in OT.

 

[Genx87]

http://kevinchiu.org/emote/facepalm.jpg

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: KAZANI

Originally posted by: dphantom
Kazani-

Defense Department budget for FY 2007 was $439 billion.

Yes, it is true their is old technolgy depoyed at DoD installations. I worked with 50's/60's equipment in the 80s/90's in very sensitive areas.

So I know you hate the US and desperately want to believe the US government is evil, but until you provide a comprehensive hyposthesis describing how and why the official report is a coverup, you simply have no case.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions. Just don't expect an answer unless you provide your own answers first.

Actually, I was refering to this trillion $ hole:
9/10/2001: Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon.

The money was never missing. If you read what Rumsfeld said, he claimed it was a travesty to the American taxpayer that the DoD was unable to track with 100% accountability the money that flows through it due to aging computer systems and compartmentalized budgeting. The 2.3 trillion dollars refers to money that was inadequately documented and the report declaring this money was 'missing' was released in February 2000, not Sept 10, 2001 and had been an ongoing story in the news.

The other argument that goes hand-in-hand with the "9/11 covered up trillions of missing dollars" argument is the one that the plane hit an accounting office in the Pentagon. Yet, this doesn't jibe with the overall assessment of many 9/11 truth sites that claim there's no way a relatively untrained pilot could even hit the side of the Pentagon. Now they're trying to claim he didn't just hit the building, but hit an office he was aiming for?

Further, Army financial statements were only provided in an overall DoD document, not a stand-alone, and therefore could not be audited. The biggest effect the attacks had was to partially delay the accounting of one department in the DoD. Finally, financial concerns have been raised about the DoD since the early 1990s (all well-documented), why suddenly try to cover it up in 2001?

edit: Just dug this up -- of the 2.3 trillion unaccounted for in February 2000, all but $700 million has now been accounted for. Of course that does leave a large sum missing, but like I said, the DoD has had accounting issues for decades and I don't see how this missing money provides any motive whatsoever for the attack on the Pentagon.
http://www.defenselink.mil/new...sarticle.aspx?id=43927

 

[dphantom]

More tinfoil hat stuff. Will this never end????

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles
If WTC 7 was brought down by explosives you realize you're talking about thousands of detonation points, hundreds of miles of detonation cord, and probably months of setting the whole thing up. Plus, detonation cord and explosives don't play nicely with fires that have been raging all day.

We just rehashed this whole argument in OT.

months of advance...
i found this article interesting

http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id324.html

Prior knowledge of 9/11 attacks overheard in Hebrew
December 1, 2006 -- In October 2000, approximately 11 months prior to September 11, 2001, a former Israeli Defense Force member and veteran of the Yom Kippur War (1973) was collecting English Ivy cuttings at the Gomel Chesed Cemetery located at McCellen and 245 Mount Olive Ave. in Newark, NJ. The Gomel Chesed Cemetery is a ?Jewish? cemetery

While he was scouting the cemetery for ivy cuttings, he overheard what he believed to be a conversation spoken in Hebrew, which drew his attention. Curious, he walked toward the voices until he was close enough to accurately hear the conversation and confirm that it was indeed being spoken in Hebrew. He found himself along a heavily vegetated fence line that sat on top of an eight-foot high retaining wall, which concealed his presence from the men engaged in the conversation. The two men he saw and overheard were casually leaning against the retaining wall beneath him.
What the observer of these happenings heard beneath him after the normal niceties were exchanged between the three men alarmed him. The man who arrived in the Town Car said, ?The Americans will learn what it is to live with terrorists after the planes hit the twins in September.? One of the men that had been leaning against the retaining wall expressed concerns regarding whether the upcoming presidential election (November 2000) between Bush / Cheney and Gore / Lieberman could impact the plans. The man that arrived in the Town Car pacified the doubts by saying, ?Don?t worry, we have people in high places and no matter who gets elected, they will take care of everything.?
According to his account, on February 9, 2001, approximately 8 months prior to the airplanes being flown into the twins, he sent an e-mail to then Attorney General Ashcroft informing the Attorney General that he had important terrorism-related information. The U.S. Department of Justice did not directly respond to the source. It forwarded the e-mail to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Shortly thereafter, on March 28, 2001, the source received a letter from Arthur Radford Baker (FBI) informing him that if he had information to share, he should contact the FBI Newark Division. The source contacted the FBI Newark Division and was told that two agents would be in contact with him, but no FBI agents came at that time.

On the day that the source received a response letter from Arthur Radford Baker, June 26, 2001, now less than 3 months prior to the 9/11 attacks, two FBI agents finally paid a visit. They were Agent Robin Gritz and Agent Andrew Stengel. The agents were shown the second letter received that day from Arthur Radford Baker by the source. The letter informed the source that the FBI would not be able to do anything on his behalf.
Without the guarantee of protection, the source was unwilling to disclose the complete details of what he heard at the Gomel Chesed Cemetery in October 2000. However the two agents, Gritz and Stengel, spent 2-3 hours attempting to draw the information out of the source. What he did tell Gritz and Stengel is that there would be an attack in New York City and airplanes would be used. He emphasized once again that he could not provide greater detail without a guarantee of protection.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles
If WTC 7 was brought down by explosives you realize you're talking about thousands of detonation points, hundreds of miles of detonation cord, and probably months of setting the whole thing up. Plus, detonation cord and explosives don't play nicely with fires that have been raging all day.

We just rehashed this whole argument in OT.

It's people that have nothing better to do.

They also have zero knowledge about the building in question.

They have no idea that there was more infrastructure below these buildings than you see above ground as with the case with many buildings in New York City.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
[snip]

http://www.popularmechanics.co.../research/4278874.html

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest
Conspiracy theorists have long claimed that explosives downed World Trade Center 7, north of the Twin Towers. The long-awaited report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conclusively rebuts those claims. Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes, pointing to thermal expansion of key structural members as the culprit. The report also raises concerns that other large buildings might be more vulnerable to fire-induced structural failure than previously thought.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

Conspiracy theorists have long pointed to the collapse of the 47-story structure as key evidence that the U.S. government orchestrated or abetted the 9/11 attacks. No planes struck the building, and the commonly available views of the exterior didn't show significant damage. Yet, at 5:20 pm, 7 hours after the collapse of the Twin Towers (WTC 1 and 2), WTC 7 rapidly fell in on itself. Since WTC 7 housed Secret Service and CIA offices, conspiracy theorists claimed that the building was destroyed in a controlled demolition in order to obliterate evidence of the U.S. government's complicity in the terrorist attacks. "It is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved," stated actress and TV personality Rosie O'Donnell of ABC's The View in March 2007. "For the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible," she said.

Spurred by conspiracy theorists' questions, investigators did look specifically at the possibility that explosives were involved. "Hypothetical blast events did not play a role in the collapse of WTC 7," the report states, adding that investigators "found no evidence whose explanation required invocation of a blast event." Moreover, the smallest charge capable of initiating column failure "would have resulted in a sound level of 130 dB [decibels] to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile." Witnesses did not report hearing such a loud noise, nor is one audible on recordings of the collapse.

 

[NeoV]

event, please stop

people SAW a plane hit the pentagon - just because there is no zapruder film of it doesn't mean it didn't happen

go away

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: BeauJangles
If WTC 7 was brought down by explosives you realize you're talking about thousands of detonation points, hundreds of miles of detonation cord, and probably months of setting the whole thing up. Plus, detonation cord and explosives don't play nicely with fires that have been raging all day.

We just rehashed this whole argument in OT.

It's people that have nothing better to do.

They also have zero knowledge about the building in question.

They have no idea that there was more infrastructure below these buildings than you see above ground as with the case with many buildings in New York City.

tell that to the 420 Architects & Engineers that would like to see all the evidence put into the equation.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

 

[Brainonska511]

Sigh...

It's one thing to be skeptical. But that's not the case here. For the good of everyone, please just place your tinfoil hat back on and sob in the corner that they are coming to get you since only you know the truth...

 

[event8horizon]

tlc-
u know i love debating u. did that popular mechanics article go into the fema sample that showed the steel "liquified"???

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Sigh...

It's one thing to be skeptical. But that's not the case here. For the good of everyone, please just place your tinfoil hat back on and sob in the corner that they are coming to get you since only you know the truth...

so u would rather ignore hard core forensic evidence that showed that steel had be "liquified" from wtc7. thell me what u think of that sample without sending me to frank greening (i think that was his name). and are u ok with people involved with science bypassing evidence and constructing a hypothesis around it.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Sigh...

It's one thing to be skeptical. But that's not the case here. For the good of everyone, please just place your tinfoil hat back on and sob in the corner that they are coming to get you since only you know the truth...

so u would rather ignore hard core forensic evidence that showed that steel had be "liquified" from wtc7. thell me what u think of that sample without sending me to frank greening (i think that was his name). and are u ok with people involved with science bypassing evidence and constructing a hypothesis around it.

I'm not ignoring anything. You're a nutjob (probably lacking in any kind of mechanical/structural engineering degree) who's come out of the woodwork.

And as such, this is my last response in this crazy ass thread.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Sigh...

It's one thing to be skeptical. But that's not the case here. For the good of everyone, please just place your tinfoil hat back on and sob in the corner that they are coming to get you since only you know the truth...

so u would rather ignore hard core forensic evidence that showed that steel had be "liquified" from wtc7. thell me what u think of that sample without sending me to frank greening (i think that was his name). and are u ok with people involved with science bypassing evidence and constructing a hypothesis around it.

I'm not ignoring anything. You're a nutjob (probably lacking in any kind of mechanical/structural engineering degree) who's come out of the woodwork.

And as such, this is my last response in this crazy ass thread.

sorry dude if u cant hang. i look to others that are more educated in that area.
check out these guys that have 400 + Architects & Engineers that also present a plausible hypothesis.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

they also have a good movie u can watch too.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
u know i love debating u. did that popular mechanics article go into the fema sample that showed the steel "liquified"???

The PM article spoke to what the NIST report talked about. If NIST decided not to address the WTC sample then clearly they felt it wasn't relevant to why WTC7 collapsed.

Besides, you and I already had a long discussion previously concerning the sample and the oxidation and sulfidation issues and I explained how it could have happened via the materials present in the WTC. That's also beside the fact that there is NO evidence of thermate or thermite of any type being present. In fact, the WTC steel was tested for the presence of detonation chemical residue by FEMA and none were found. So what would prompt NIST to redouble their efforts?

Also, the NIST report specifically says that there is no evidence of explosives. You are ignoring what the NIST report states so you can continue down a path that has already been debunked.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Sigh...

It's one thing to be skeptical. But that's not the case here. For the good of everyone, please just place your tinfoil hat back on and sob in the corner that they are coming to get you since only you know the truth...

so u would rather ignore hard core forensic evidence that showed that steel had be "liquified" from wtc7. thell me what u think of that sample without sending me to frank greening (i think that was his name). and are u ok with people involved with science bypassing evidence and constructing a hypothesis around it.

I'm not ignoring anything. You're a nutjob (probably lacking in any kind of mechanical/structural engineering degree) who's come out of the woodwork.

And as such, this is my last response in this crazy ass thread.

sorry dude if u cant hang. i look to others that are more educated in that area.
check out these guys that have 400 + Architects & Engineers that also present a plausible hypothesis.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

they also have a good movie u can watch too.

And look at the thousands of architects and engineers and demolitions experts who say there is no evidence that anything other than planes brought down WTC 1 and WTC 2 and that the explanation that fire + structural damage from debris brought down WTC 7.

Here's a good example of a smaller building (smaller than WTC 1 or 2, comparable to WTC 7).

http://www.controlled-demoliti...qItemId=20020304145120

In 24 days, CDI's 12 person loading crew placed 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on 9 levels of the structure. Over 36,000 ft. of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay devices were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system. As the implosion required the detonation of a total of 2,728 lb. of explosives, CDI implemented 36?primary delays" and an additional 216 ?micro-delays" in the implosion initiation sequence in an attempt to keep detonation overpressure to a minimum.

That building took 24 days to wire, and was a total of 33 stories and 2.2 million sq ft. WTC 1 and 2 are 11.2 million sq ft and 110 stories. WTC 7 was 47 stories, 1,868,000 sq ft of office space (so more when we count maintenance rooms, etc).

So you're trying to argue that somebody rigged up at least WTC 7 with explosives and did so over nearly a month, planting thousands of charges and rigging up miles of detonation cord without a single soul noticing? Or was every person in the WTC complex also in on the conspiracy?

Plus, I bring it up again. Detonation cords would not last in the fires seen in WTC 7. There's simply no way a fire rages for hours like they did inside that building and not detonate something prematurely.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: BeauJangles
If WTC 7 was brought down by explosives you realize you're talking about thousands of detonation points, hundreds of miles of detonation cord, and probably months of setting the whole thing up. Plus, detonation cord and explosives don't play nicely with fires that have been raging all day.

We just rehashed this whole argument in OT.

It's people that have nothing better to do.

They also have zero knowledge about the building in question.

They have no idea that there was more infrastructure below these buildings than you see above ground as with the case with many buildings in New York City.

tell that to the 420 Architects & Engineers that would like to see all the evidence put into the equation.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

Have any of those people actually been to New York City?

Have you?

 

[First]

9/11 Truthers thirty years from now will be this generations version of Elvis sightings.

Sad, but true.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
9/11 Truthers thirty years from now will be this generations version of Elvis sightings.

Sad, but true.

But I did see Elvis, now prove me wrong! :laugh: