Trade centre buildings.....

As we commemorate those who were savegley murdered 15 years ago and pay our respects do any of you believe the conspiracy theories out there that maybe the U.S government played a part in the events of that fatal day?

Me personally I don't but I'm watching a documentary now and it still amazes me to this day how they both collapsed when the impact was so far up the building....obviously a 200/300 tonne plane drying into it will have caused some motion in the building but weren't they built to withstand all eventualities?

Regardless it was still an act of absolute cowardliness and a day that maybe shaped where we are in the world today on the terrorist front.

RIP x

 

I know the planes caused the buildings to fall down because I saw it happen. Planes crashed in to them and then they fell down. You can't always determine cause and effect, but in the case it was pretty obvious. Actually, I didn't even have to see it. If someone said to me that a passenger jet was flown in to a tower block and subsequently that building fell down, that wouldn't be the kind of information I'd question. Much like the people who come up with these conspiracy theories, I'm not a structural engineer, so I can't accurately explain why it fell down, I just know it did because I saw it.

 

Without going into technicalities (because I couldn't if I tried) I seem to remember it was something to do with the inner core structure of each tower being melted by the extreme temperatures generated by the impact of the planes and the burning fuel. So, in effect the buildings collapsed in on themselves, sort of.

 

Many experts believe molten aluminium is the cause of explosions and the eventual collapse. Each plane had up to 70 tonnes of aluminium in its make up. When the planes crashed the fuel tanks obviously ruptured and set on fire, raising the temperature to well over the 660°c, and the molten aluminium was created. This reacts violently with water and makes a massive exothermic reaction and causes explosions, the water came from the towers sprinkler system. This caused a series of floors collapsing, which took the buildings down.
Not my theory.....much more intelligent folk than me came up with this

 

No steel-framed, high-rise building in history has collapsed after extensive fire damage. Except the three towers on 9/11. I say three, because WTC7 went down despite no plane hitting it. Debris struck it though. And there were office fires apparently, but far too many experts suggest it would go against the laws of physics to accept it collapsed as suggested by authorities. The favourite suggestion is controlled demolition.

The other two? Well, two huge airliners flew straight into them, and that is a unique event that then makes things difficult to predict. But you can find arguments that support the official theory and arguments that support controlled demolition. That WTC7 is seen as probably a controlled demolition will only add to any conspiracies surrounding the other two towers.

Whatever happened, they are the only towers/buildings of their kind to collapse as they did. There are lots of others all over the world that have suffered far worse fire damage, and burned for way, way longer, yet remained standing.

I can certainly see why some folk question the official story of the events on 9/11.

I'm still intrigued as to how they collapsed as they did, and so quickly, yet a few days later the government found a passport supposedly belonging to a hi-jacker, in amongst the rubble. A bloke who later turned out to be alive.

Bizarre stuff.

RIP to those who were murdered in New York that morning.

 

I haven't heard a scintilla of credibility to any of the conspiracy theories that have been given. As we've seen in recent years there are too many people prepared to act as whistleblower to keep such a secret out of the public domain. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that we witnessed the truth as those awful events unfolded.

RIP.

 

Planes have crashed into high rises before, result no falling buildings. Buildings (tall ones) have burned for longer and harder. much longer and harder, result no falling buildings.
No other buildings made of concrete and steel have ever collapsed due to fire.
I became fascinated with the topic, as a few years ago I worked in Abu Dhabi, I socialised with a load of engineers. all of who laughed off planes been able to take out the twin towers, one guy stated his firm worked on the central structures on one of the towers, he claimed 3 plane hits wouldn't take them down! he told me to go away and google the melting point of steel etc. Wow. They also banged on about "freefall" (more tower 7) and stated it was impossible for
1. The building to fall in its own imprint, without help.
2. It would take a lot longer for the buildings to come down, due to the structures involved within the buildings (physics 101 lesson).
There are websites out there now with professionals for truth, 1600 highly respected architects, physics majors etc etc professors in their fields challenging the official report from NST. Then of course you have pilots for truth.........then what the hell were the military playing at (NORAD)? One hour between the twin towers and the Pentagon and no strike aircraft near the capital........come on!
Then there's the financial implications, where some very clever people made BIG money just before 9/11 on "put options" (4 to 5 times normal) despite an FBI investigation and a lot of noise (kinda known as insider dealing/ trading) no one was found to be guilty.
In all crimes......one of the key clues to guilt is to follow the money.

 

OOOH nearly forgot guess how much of the defence budget went errrrr missing the day before 9/11?
No ? well it was around $2.3 trillion dollars, probably down the the back of somebody's sofa eh?
Also look at how a guy who only just received pilots licence 12 months before (and was described as not very good) in a single prop aeroplane. then with his couple of mates jumps into one of the most (at the time) sophisticated jet passenger planes in the world and the pulls of a a 330 degree turn, loses 11000 feet. without stalling and burning the thing right up and put it into a side of the pentagon 90 feet off the lawn!!!! When questioned the most experienced boing pilots.........they just describe it as laughable!
Far far too many ridiculous situations. Too many intelligent scientists and professionals countering the "official" report.
I have yet to hear one credible account from the US that would make me comprehensively believe their version of events....... in an underfunded, hastily arranged report.
Bin laden btw was never on the FBI list for the atrocities on that horrible day!

 

Nearly forgot too.........the missing defensive budget of 2.3 trillion dollars.......how about this for sheer coincidence, the part of the pentagon where the records and the auditors were positioned (for the missing money) just happened to be right there, where that genius pilot smashed that passenger plane into! I know......whats the chances eh?
Blast so now we will never know!

 

I knew we'd get one "truther" on this thread.

I blame the UFOs in Area 51.

 

Yeah, but it's ********, like all the rest of it.

http://www.911myths.com/html/rumsfeld__9_11_and__2_3_trilli.html

 

All of that day horrible but a hell of a lot of stuff happened, still waiting for a real official response from NST to ALL the points raised. They have changed their version a couple of times!
Oh no I have a label too "a truther" actually that's substantially better then than any alternative!

 

Its been stated by most of the worlds leading structural engineers that the jet fuel wouldnt have even got anywhere close to hot enough to cause damage significant enough to have brought them down.

Me personally, I believe that somewhere down the line the US government knew what was coming, or knew something was coming and decided to turn a blind eye. So not exactly an inside job but wanted an excuse to be in the middle east.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The passport find was absolutely laughable! If that isnt enough to make people question the 'official version of events' then nothing will. Set up from start to finish. RIP to the victims.

 

It's a sign of the world we live in that being called a truther is an insult. Larry Silverstein insured the towers 4 months prior which specifically covered terrorist attacks. That fateful morning he and his family, who usually were in the north tower at that time, were elsewhere. Lucky Larry subsequently recieved $4 billion, twice as much as originally agreed, due to him claiming that it was 2 individual incidents. On the point of technicalities, steel melts at twice the temperatures that were recorded in the buildings. Plus there's the problem of the lower parts of the buildings which were cold steel. It would've been physically impossible for such a small part of the buildings (the top hotter parts) to crush the sections below, according to Newton's laws of motion. But I guess for this particular day, the truth doesn't count.

 

Just looked it up. Steel beams melt at 2750 degrees and jet fuel burns at a maximum 1500 although I do believe the way they came down (the top failing, and forcing each floor below to collapse) could be credible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

They both had central support. They weren't made of glass. That's what i said about Newton's Law. It's the equivalent of if you were to stand a lorry upright and drop a ford escort onto it, it wouldn't do hardly any damage to the lorry. Especially not total destruction to the point where it reduces to dust.

 

Nobody will ever know if foul play caused the accident that day.

It's the victims and the families of those who were killed who should be remembered on this day (well yesterday) and not overruled by the talk of conspiracy.

RIP to the victims.

Sent from my phone using my hands

 

Absolutely. As Putin said when once asked about it in a phone-in - "if 9/11 was an inside job, does anyone in their right mind think that we wouldn't have exposed it?"