the most incredible illusion ever - millions duped by the amazing 'Thermite'
how the fuck, those lard infused dullards can still swallow the crap doled out by their 'government' is truly strange and unatural

just read the top twenty style column on the right

www.ae911truth.net/
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 11:58, 20 replies)

I totally agree
I'm no conspiracy nut, and some of the theories are ridiculous, but it's my firm belief that the towers did not collapse due to fire from jet fuel and only jet fuel.

If you want a laugh though watch 'September Clues' on YouTube. It's fruitcakes like that who give conspiracy theorists a bad name!
(Northern Lovely, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 12:04, closed)

two simple facts
FACT: Jet fuel (kerosine) burns at 800° to 1500°F, now where NEAR hot enough to melt steel (2750°F).

FACT: Thermite (used in military demolitions WoooOOOooOO!) burns at 4500°F

molten pools of steel under all three demolished towers took three months to cool
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 12:14, closed)

Err- I don't think anyone is saying that "jet fuel alone" did this
I suspect the somewhat invasive delievery method of putting said jet fuel into a plane and flying it into the side of the building rather than delicately pouring it through the roof exits may have helped.

Besides there is still the other big question. So we accept this is all a government engineered conspiracy. The co-operation and ensuing silence of thousands of people across dozens of organisations both state and private is achieved and the Republican administration briefly has some of the highest approval ratings of all time.

Then what?

This same group of extraordinary people couldn't rustle up a convincingly deadly looking weapon to "uncover" in Iraq and hasn't done a thing about the Republicans being sufficiently fisted in the polls since 2004 that the only candidate they are fielding is the nearest thing that passes for a centrist in the GOP these days and even he is looking like he's going to lose.
(Leonard Hatred briefly did some work on, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 12:33, closed)

"FACT: Jet fuel (kerosine) burns at 800° to 1500°F, now where NEAR hot enough to melt steel (2750°F)."
Steel DOES NOT need to melt in order to fail.
Any temp above 700 deg C would be enough to significantly weaken it to the point of failure*.
*Obviously dependant on the load acting upon it.
(oneinthepink is at your cervix m'lady, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 13:37, closed)

Conspiracy
Yep, you're quite right - the fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel.

But at those temperatures, steel loses at least 50-60% of its strength. It doesn't need to melt, it just needs to get hot enough :)

Yay for conspiracy nuts - they're always so entertaining.

EDIT: Bah, oneinthepink got there first. Good man.
(calamarain just invented dehydrated water, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 13:38, closed)

jesus - wake up guys
the site is backed by some of the most respected structral engineers and architects you could hope to find. they are telling you THIS IS SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE

Leonard Hatred
makes no difference how the fuel got there - the towers were built to withstand such crashes - much more violent crashes in fact
no amount of kerosine could melt - not bend but MELT steel. weakened steel would not cause a neat demolition style drop - at free fall rates

the point of this was nothing to do with iraq this is about mass public manipulation to provide funding for defence projects that allow the US goverment to maintain its lucrative agreements with global corporations

one in the pink
true steel can fail with heat applied - far more intense fires than this have partially damaged buildings an invoked a partial collapse
the third tower was hit with no planes and only had a few fires on various floors

no where in the world previously has any fire provoked a collapse in a steel framed building - ever.

but we get three in one day - one that simply had a few fires burning in it

a CHILD could see they were controlled demolitions

'Go Back to Sleep, America. Your Government is in Control Go Back to Sleep'. Bill Hicks
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:13, closed)

Just jet fuel?
We might also note that offices tend to be full of furniture, carpets, paper and other rather flammable things which burn quite nicely. So it's not *just* jet fuel. Otherwise we might as well claim that a house fire was a government conspiracy because an unattended candle is such a small heat source that it couldn't possibly gut a house.

I'm a bit worried by how many people are buying into this 9/11 conspiracy nonsense. Are people *really* so uncritical, or do they just like speculating?
(richardm, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:14, closed)

^^^^
didn't know sheep could type
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:16, closed)

I see
So you're just uncritical then. Fair enough.
(richardm, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:17, closed)

go and read the evidence, watch the collpase at the link in my post then read below
As your own eyes witness — WTC Building #7 (a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane) exhibits all the characteristics of a classic controlled demolition with explosives: (and some non-standard characteristics)
1. Rapid onset of “collapse”
2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse
3. Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at nearly free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance
4.“Collapses” into its own footprint – with the steel skeleton broken up for shipment
5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
6. Tons of molten metal found by CDI (Demolition Contractor).
7.Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.
8.FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
9.Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional
10.Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”.

This is not a 'collapse', it is an explosion!

As seen in this revealing photo the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions: (and some non-standard characteristics)
1.Extremely rapid onset of “collapse”
2.Sounds of explosions and flashes of light witnessed near the beginning of the "collapse" by over 100 first responders
3."Squibs", or focused explosions, 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos
4.Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust
5.Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
6.Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves
7.Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at nearly free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance
8.1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint
9.Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away
10.Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 4 - 20 ton steel beams up to 500 feet
11.Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure
12.Tons of molten metal found by FDNY and numerous other experts under all 3 high-rises
13.Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.
14.FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
15.more than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3.Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

BECAUSE IT SEEMS DIFFICULT, OUTRAGEOUS OR JUST PLAIN MAD DOESN'T MEAN IT DIDN'T HAPPEN

Physicists find it practically impossible to explain how this could happen as reported - however and large and growing body of Engineers, Scientists, Architects etc can find no plausible explanation OTHER than a controlled demolotion


wake up america
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:18, closed)

Skeptical
Haven't most of these theories been thoroughly disproven?

As I mentioned in another post, the problem with a lot of these "facts" are quoted by people who have do their research arse about face. They have a conclusion that they wanted to come to such as "building 7 was destroyed in a controlled explosion" then scour for the facts to back this up, ignoring anything that contradicts this conclusion. There's a term for this, but I can't be bothered going to SkepDic to look it up.

Building 7 was leaning, making ominous creaking noises and showing signs of colapse, well before it came down, which is why the FDNY abandoned it to it's fate.

i think there are a lot of unanswered questions about 9/11, but they are somewhat hidden by conspiarcy theories like Loose Change. There is a school of thought that these conspiracies are put about to deflect the questions that should be being asked, like how there were such massive breaches in security and how no-one noticed that all this was being planned or, if they did notice, why nothing was done to prevent it.

Saying that it was just an excuse to start a war is massively unrealistic, not least because the planning would have had to have been started in the previous administration (Clinton) then handed over to GWB, without there being any leaks.

And the leaks are the important things here. The sheer number of people who would have been involved in plotting this kinda thing would mean that someone would squal at some point and the truth would come out.

My take on it it that the security forces dropped the ball and allowed it all to happen.
(ScousersPet, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:32, closed)

911 Conspiracies
www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

Maddox says it so much better than I ever could.
( DarkSon a time and date will follow this username on, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:39, closed)

@scouser
I think the term you're looking for is confirmation bias.

atheism.about.com/od/logicalflawsinreasoning/a/confirmation.htm
(ring-finger is also a verb, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:47, closed)

heheh!
I LOVE conspiracies! It's what makes being human fun - imagination!

I agree with Scouser, the Intelligence Agencies dropped 1 huge bollock letting it all happen when early that very year they had been warned of plans to hijack planes in US airspace and use them as weapons.

Every single weak theory has been debunked. Christ, Charlotte Church can't even go on holiday without someone leaking where she's gone - how many people would need to be silenced to keep it a secret?

It's America's arrogance thats their downfall - they just can't believe that people would dare attack them - so when it happens it's disbelief and recrimination
(TheManofScience, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 14:57, closed)

Exactly
Confirmation bias, the very one.

An awful lot of people in the world seem to believe that there is this evil machine called "The Government" that is only there to deceive, control and generally fuck over the people they govern and, therefore, anything that The Government says is automatically a lie.

This seems especioally prevalent in the US. When I was in Las Vegas last, I was heading to a gun range in a taxi and the driver asked me if we had guns back home. When I said we don't, he said "Who does? The Government?" You could actually hear the capitalisation in his question. I had visions of our half-blind PM packing a Glock and the demon headmaster Jack Straw toting an AK...
(ScousersPet, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 15:35, closed)

^^ Agrees with all of it

As for 9/11….

I don’t know. I really don’t know.

So many lives were lost. So many more ruined forever. It didn’t happen on its own. Someone was responsible.

I’m one of the lucky ones. My life was not affected one cocking jot.

But I do sit here with a built in, incessant disdain and mistrust of governments (ours and the US) due to the way they appear to treat us plebs. It makes my bile boil. Unfortunately, I’m too stupid, too lazy and too chicken shit to actually do anything to try and change policy, to make a difference…therefore I titillate myself by sitting back and lapping up improvable conspiracy theories until my ringpiece aches.

I’m a bad…bad man but I admit that deep down I would actually like 9/11 to be a massive conspiracy. Not for the ‘blame culture, not for the bringing down of the government and the compensation to the victims, not even for the discovery of the ‘truth’, whatever that is….

For no other reason than it would be the veritable holy grail of scandals, conjecture and gossip.

Imagine if the government suddenly came up with:

“Ah well, it’s a fair cop. We nearly fooled you though, didn’t we? Here’s how we did it and oh…thanks for the all the cash….SUCKERS!”

Imagine the aftermath.

That would be cool.

Actually, thinking about it…then the conspiracy theories would start about WHY they have suddenly ‘owned up’, and the wheels would start turning again.

Bring it on, I say.
( Pooflake braces for an onslaught..., Tue 8 Jul 2008, 16:20, closed)

don't be ridiculous pooflake
governments tell the ABSOLUTE truth to their citizens

but if they found some nasty little worms in there acting without their knowledge or consent - lets say in the CIA or the NSC [yes i did mean the NSA - cheers len, aplos for the tyop)

well?

mutters
*back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left back and to the left*
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 16:34, closed)

I assume you mean the NSA?
OK, What then? They proceeded to get inside men in the NYPD, NYFD, Boeing (who's recent conduct suggests that they can't keep a secret even when paid), the FAA, American Airlines, United Airlines, The NYTA and any number of other organisations who have all kept shtum since the most extraordinary piece of organisation since D-Day.

I'll weigh up the probabilities and until this one gets sorted, go with something near the official line thanks.
(Leonard Hatred briefly did some work on, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 16:55, closed)

^^
'until it gets sorted'

?

you mean with something like the Warren Report

okay dokey
( spimf ™ is whoever you want him to be, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 17:05, closed)

This gets my goat
All these stupid 'merkins crying foul, about an event that changed the world brought about by some fanatical terrorists, who also did the same in the UK (lest we forget 7/7), but no! The government did it.
The reason why they collapsed like they did? The whole places were tinderboxes, with highly flammable furniture & walls, and all it took was it to weaken, like it would at those temperatures, and the weight of the top stories would have caused it to fail like it did, and as it went down, the stories below would have not been able to take the weight.
As for WTC7- I think that was debunked the other night, as the fire went unchecked throughout the whole building, as the firemen were not fighting fires, but were put only on evacuations.
So, please, theres nothing weird about this, just bloody horrific.
( Duke Of Belmsford has got 99 records, but Jay-Z ain't one, Wed 9 Jul 2008, 8:05, closed)