NationStates Jolt Archive


Was 9/11 a conspiracy?

Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 01:52
Here's a post from an outside forum. I thought I'd share it with you.

Here is a timeline of the events of September the 11th. Please read this whole post before commenting.

***********


7:45 a.m.: Mohammed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari board American Airlines Flight 11.

7:59 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 a Boeing 767-223ER with a maximum capacity of 181 passengers and 23,980 gallons of fuel, lifts off from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, bound for Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California. Take-off was scheduled for 7:45. There are supposed to be 92 victims on board American Airlines Flight 11, yet when you add up the official death manifest list that was published on CNN.com, there are only 86 victims.

The same goes for the other three flights of September 11th. Add up the passenger and crew lists from all 4 flights of 911 and you have officially 266 people on board. Yet when one adds up the 4 official death manifest lists published on CNN.com, there are only 229 names. Somehow 37 people are missing from the 4 CNN.com official death manifest lists, including all 19 of the hijackers. There is not even one Arabic name there. Why?
http://911Timeline.net/36or37missingand70percentempty.htm

One other thing; CNN.com says there are 45 fatalities on United Airlines Flight 93, others say there are 44. This would make 36 missing, and 265 deaths for all 4 airliners.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/2001/010911-2.htm

The 4 airliners of September 11th, 2 Boeing 767’s and 2 Boeing 757’s had a total passenger seating capacity of 762 people. There are only 229 passengers and crew members on the four death lists, so, how could these flights possibly be 70% empty?
http://911Timeline.net/36or37missingand70percentempty.htm

Boeing 757 Seating Charts: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family...ing_charts.html (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_seating_charts.html)

Boeing 767 Seating Charts: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767family...ing_charts.html (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767family/pf/pf_seating_charts.html)

8:01 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 93 a Boeing 757-222 with a maximum capacity of 200 passengers and 11,489 gallons of fuel, rolls from the gate in Newark International Airport, Newark, New Jersey with 44 people aboard bound for San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, California. United Airlines Flight 93 will sit on the ground for 41 minutes before taking off. There are supposed to be 44 victims on board, yet when you add up the official death manifest list that was published on CNN.com, there are only 33 victims.

8:14 to 8:20 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 goes off course and is hijacked.

8:14 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 175 a Boeing 767-222 with a maximum capacity of 181 passengers and 23,980 gallons of fuel, lifts off from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, bound for Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California. Take-off was scheduled for 7:58. There are supposed to be 65 victims on board, yet when you add up the official death manifest list that was published on CNN.com, there are only 56 victims.

8:20 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 77 a Boeing 757-223 with a maximum capacity of 200 passengers and 11,489 gallons of fuel, lifts off from Dulles International Airport about 30 miles west of Washington D.C. and the Pentagon, bound for Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California. Take-off was scheduled for 8:01. There are supposed to be 64 victims on board, yet when you add up the official death manifest list that was published on CNN.com, there are only 56 victims


8:25 a.m.: Boston air traffic control notified several air traffic control centers that a hijack is in progress with American Airlines Flight 11. Boston air traffic control first lost communication with American Airlines Flight 11 more than 11 minutes ago. What took them so long to start to implement procedure? Why didn’t they also notify North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) at this time?

If they did follow procedure and notify NORAD at 8:25 and NORAD followed protocol and ordered the 102nd Fighter Wing of the Otis Air National Guard Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts to scramble at say 8:26 – two F-15’s would have been airborne by no later than 8:32 – these F-15’s would have had at least 14 minutes and 26 seconds to reach the WTC before American Airlines Flight 11 impacts the north side of the North Tower (1 World Trade Center) at 8:46:26. If these two F-15’s were flying at top speed, 14 minutes and 26 seconds is exactly twice the amount of time need to reach the WTC. These two F-15’s could have been at the WTC in just over 7 minutes, or as early as 8:39. Even a spokesperson for Otis said that their F-15’s could reach the WTC in 10 to 12 minutes, which would have them there at 8:42 to 8:44.

These two F-15’s could have easily intercepted American Airlines Flight 11. If only Boston air traffic control, which notified several air traffic control centers that a hijack is in progress with American Airlines Flight 11 at 8:25, had also notified NORAD. Why didn’t they? Or did they follow procedure, and notify NORAD, and NORAD is lying about it. Let me state that it is NORAD’s job to know every inch of the skies over North America, so they must have known that American Airlines Flight 11 was hijacked somewhere between 8:14 and 8:20.

8:26 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 is heading westnorthwest, its location is between Albany and Lake George, New York, when it suddenly makes a 100 degree turn to the south and starts heading directly toward New York City. American Airlines Flight 11 finds the Hudson River and follows it all the way south till it impacts the north side of the North Tower of the WTC.

Almost 40 miles north of the WTC on the Hudson River is by far the number one terrorist target in the United States, Indian Point and its 3 nuclear power stations, 2 of which are online. These 3 nuclear stations have accumulated 65 years worth of stockpiled highly radioactive waste. Indian Point is only 24 miles north of the New York City border. It is surrounded by the densest concentration of population in the United States, the northeast corridor. Why did American Airlines Flight 11 fly directly over the number one terrorist target in the United States, Indian Point nuclear power stations, and not hit it?


8:36 a.m.: A NORAD spokesman, Major Mike Snyder, has been reported to have said, that the FAA notified NORAD of a hijacked aircraft, American Airlines Flight 11, about 10 minutes before it impacted into the World Trade Center.

http://www.attackonamerica.net/didhijacker...airdefense.html (http://www.attackonamerica.net/didhijackersflythroughholesinusairdefense.html)

8:37 a.m.: Flight controllers ask the United Airlines Flight 175 pilots to look for the lost American Airlines Flight 11, about 10 miles to the south. They respond that they can see it. They are told to keep away from it. This incident is not included in The New York Times flight controller transcript. Why?

8:38 a.m.: Boston air traffic center notifies NORAD that American Airlines Flight 11 has been hijacked.

8:39 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 flies directly over the number one terrorist target in the United States, Indian Point nuclear power stations. Indian Point has 3 nuclear power stations (1 is offline and the other 2 have been online since 1973 and 1976), which are only 24 miles north of New York City.

If American Airlines Flight 11 hits Indian Point correctly in any of three different ways, they could have caused a meltdown and a release of vast amounts of radiation. There are also a cumulative 65 operating years worth of highly radioactive waste stored at Indian Point. Casualities could possibly be upwards of 20 million people prematurely dieing from radiation poisoning. The whole northeast corridor from New York City to Boston would instantly become a wasteland for thousands of years.

Why did American Airlines Flight 11 jeopardize their mission by flying another 7 plus minutes (when they could and should have been intercepted by the USAF) down the Hudson River to hit the WTC between the 94th and 98th floors where they ended up "only" killing less than 3,000 people when they could have hit their enemies’ number one target?

The mastermind behind these "terrorists" hijackers would have soon figured out their best and only shot against the strongest military foe in the world would have been to hit them first and hit them as hard as you can. Why didn't they hit Indian Point?

If the terrorists were targeting the WTC, don't you think they would have waited until around 11:00 when these buildings were full with 50,000 plus people? And of course, to cause the most deaths and destruction isn't it elementary to strike these buildings as low as possible, which would have been around the 25th to 30th floors?

So, why did this well planned "terrorist" attack kill only 3,000 people when they could have easily killed ten times that many? This reasoning also goes along with the Pentagon attack. Why was the Pentagon hit on the so-called "peaceful" west side which was mostly under construction as opposed to the command center east side of the Pentagon?

If one plane didn't do the job at Indian Point, two planes most definitely would have done the job. United Airlines Flight 175 flew very close to Indian Point; it was literally within a couple of minutes flying time.

http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/JetCouldWre...rNRCAdmits.html (http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/JetCouldWreckNuclearNRCAdmits.html)

8:40 a.m.: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) notifies NORAD that American Airlines Flight 11 has been hijacked. Even NORAD officially admitted that the FAA told them about the hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11 at 8:40.

NORAD Press Release: http://StandDown.net/NORADSeptember182001PressRelease.htm

AP Article On NORAD PR: http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/8MinutesAway.html

8:43 a.m.: The FAA notifies NORAD that United Airlines Flight 175 has been hijacked. NORAD has officially admitted that the FAA told them about the hijacking of United Airlines Flight 175 at 8:43.

8:44 a.m.: Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, talking about terrorism at the Pentagon says, "Let me tell you, I’ve been around the block a few times. There will be another event."He then repeats it for emphasis, there will be another event."

8:46 a.m.: NORAD orders the 102nd Fighter Wing of the Otis Air National Guard Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts to scramble two of their F-15 fighters. This is from the 102nd Fighter Wing's mission statement of September 11, 2001. "Our aircraft and their crews are on continuous 24-hour, 365-day alert to guard our skies. The 102nd Fighter Wing's area of responsibility includes over 500,000 square miles, 90 million people, and the major industrial centers of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C."

NORAD, by their own account, held on to this most vital information of these two hijacking for at least 6 minutes before ordering Otis to scramble. NORAD may have held on to the vital information of American Airlines Flight 11 for perhaps 8 minutes, maybe 10 minutes, possibly up to 26 minutes, and let us not forget that the last transmission of American Airlines Flight 11 with Boston air traffic control occurred at 8:13:31, so maybe NORAD had over 32 minutes before they notified Otis to scramble their two F-15’s.

How could NORAD possibly hold on to the 8:40 information of the American Airlines Flight 11 hijacking, and not immediately scrambled Otis? How could NORAD possibly hold on to the 8:43 information of the United Airlines Flight 175 hijacking, and not have immediately scrambled Otis? How could NORAD, by their own account, hold on to the most vital information of both of these hijackings for three and six full minutes before notifying Otis to scramble?

NORAD Press Release: http://StandDown.net/NORADSeptember182001PressRelease.html

AP Article On NORAD PR: http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/8MinutesAway.html

Two New York Times articles apologetically describing this:

Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It
http://www.attackonamerica.net/pentagontrackeddeadlyjet.html

Chronology of Plane Crashes: Orders, at the Time of Impact
http://www.attackonamerica.net/ordersattimeofimpact.html

8:46:26 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 11 impacts the north side of the North Tower (1 World Trade Center) of the WTC between the 94th and 98th floors. American Airlines Flight 11 was flying at a speed of 490 miles per hour (MPH).

8:47 a.m.: NORAD informed of American Airlines Flight 11 striking the World Trade Center.

8:51 a.m.: Bush arrives at Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida for a photo op with 16 second graders. He is there to promote his administration's new bill on education.

8:57 a.m.: The FAA formally notified the military that American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the WTC. Until then, the two F-15’s fighters from Otis did not know the plane had crashed -- Yet at 8:47 a.m. NORAD had been notified. Why does it take over 10 minutes to inform the two F-15’s of this, especially when United Airlines Flight 175 is headed directly for New York City?

9:01 a.m.: Bush later makes the following statement. "And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I used to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a horrible accident.' But I was whisked off from there -- I didn't have much time to think about it." Bush could not have possibly seen the first plane (American Airlines Flight 11) hit the WTC, because the only video showing this was not shown on television till later in the day. So how could he have possibly seen and said this?

9:02:54 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 175 impacts the south side of the South Tower of the WTC between the 78th and 84th floors at a speed of over 500 MPH. Parts of the plane including an engine leave the building from its north side, to be found on the ground up to six blocks away.

Now the only airliner left in the sky with its IFF transponder signal off which has just made a 180 degree turn over southern Ohio / northeastern Kentucky and has been heading directly back to Washington D.C. and The Pentagon since 8:59 a.m. -- is American Airlines Flight 77. Why didn’t these two F-15’s that were 71 miles from NYC and the WTC, immediately redirect to intercept the only dangerous airliner in the sky, American Airlines Flight 77?

These two F-15’s had 34 minutes to reach Washington D.C. before American Airlines Flight 77 hits the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. The mission of these two F-15’s from the 102nd Fighter Wing of the Otis Air National Guard Base is to protect the skies from Washington D.C. to the north. The F-15 has a top speed of 1875+ MPH, so they could have closed the 300 or so miles from their current position to Washington D.C. in just about 10 minutes. At top speed they could have been at the Pentagon 24 minutes before American Airlines Flight 77 hits it.

Even if they were flying at the same speed NORAD says that they covered in the last 71 miles till they reach the WTC (532.5 MPH or only 28.4% of top speed) they would have beat American Airlines Flight 77 to the Pentagon. Why didn’t these two F-15’s directly fly to intercept the only known airliner still in the sky that is hijacked, and heading directly for the nations capitol?

Still, much worse, why didn’t these two F-15’s upon reaching the WTC at 9:11 and now knowing that American Airlines Flight 77 has been heading dead on for Washington D.C. for 12 minutes, finally try to intercept? The WTC is about 250 miles from the Pentagon. They still have 26 minutes to intercept American Airlines Flight 77 before the Pentagon gets hit at 9:37. All they have to do is to fly only 576.9 MPH or 30.8% of their top speed to beat American Airlines Flight 77 to the Pentagon. What do we pay these guys to do?

Still, unbelievably worse, these two F-15’s could have waited in New York City till 9:26 before heading down to protect Washington D.C. and the Pentagon. By 9:26 American Airlines Flight 77 has now been heading directly back to Washington D.C. for 27 minutes. American Airlines Flight 77 is the only airliner in the sky with its transponder signal off, and off course. If these F-15’s were flying at top speed, they could be at the Pentagon in under 10 minutes. They can leave New York City at 9:26 and still beat American Airlines Flight 77 to the Pentagon by one minute. Why didn’t these two F-15’s leave at any time between 9:03 and 9:26 to intercept American Airlines Flight 77, the only airliner in the sky with its transponder signal off, and also off course? Why, NORAD?

NORAD Press Release: http://StandDown.net/NORADSeptember182001PressRelease.html

AP Article On NORAD PR: http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/8MinutesAway.html

Two New York Times articles apologetically describing this:

Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It
http://www.attackonamerica.net/pentagontrackeddeadlyjet.html

Chronology of Plane Crashes: Orders, at the Time of Impact
http://www.attackonamerica.net/ordersattimeofimpact.html

There is a very important video of what looks very much like an F-15 streaking by the WTC just as United Airlines Flight 175 impacts the South Tower of the WTC. Why isn’t anyone talking about this video?

Take a look for yourself at: http://www.MyCountryRightOrWrong.net/F-15.html

9:05 a.m.: Andrew Card walks up to Bush while he is listening to a Goat Story with 16 second graders in Sandra Kay Daniels’s class at Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida. Card whispers in his ear "A second plane has hit the World Trade Center. America is under attack." Bush (commander-and-chief?) keeps listening to this Goat Story with these children for at least 7 minutes, and perhaps as long as 18 minutes. Why didn't he excuse himself from these children right away, and immediately address this national emergency, is totally unexplainable.

There is no way this should have happened. What of course should have happened, was as soon as the secret service found out about United Airlines Flight 175 impacting the WTC (now knowing it was a "terrorist" act), they would have immediatly grabbed Bush and brought him to an undisclosed location. There is no way the secret service leaves Bush in a place (Emma E. Booker Elementary School) where everyone knows he is. This had to be a "stand down".

9:05 a.m.: West Virginia flight control notices a new eastbound plane entering their radar with no radio contact and no transponder identification. They are not sure it is American Airlines Flight 77. Supposedly they wait another 19 minutes before notifying NORAD about it.

9:06 a.m.: The FAA formally notified the military that United Airlines Flight 175 had been hijacked.

9:10 a.m. to 9:20 a.m.: United Airlines Flight 93 was hijacked.

9:12 a.m.: The FAA formally notified the military that United Airlines Flight 175 had crashed into the WTC.

9:16 a.m. to 9:20: The FAA notifies NORAD that United Airlines Flight 93 has been hijacked. (Reported as 9:20 a.m. in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) No fighters are scrambled in specific response, now or later. There is the possibility the fighters sent after American Airlines Flight 77 later headed towards United Airlines Flight 93. NORAD's own timeline inexplicably fails to say when the FAA told them about the hijack, the only flight they fail to provide this data for.

9:23 a.m.: Bush talks privately with Cheney, his National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller and Governor George Pataki of New York. Why does Bush wait from 9:05 (when Andrew Card tells him of United Airlines Flight 175 hitting the WTC) till 9:23 to finally call? He still does not give the authority to the fighters to shoot down any hostile airliners. What is he waiting for?

9:24 a.m.: The FAA notifies NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77 has been hijacked. The FAA lost contact with American Airlines Flight 77 when the transponder signal stops at 8:55 a.m. -- Why does it take 29 minutes for the FAA to tell NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77 has been hijacked?

9:24 a.m.: NORAD orders the 1st Fighter Wing from Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Virginia to scramble two, possibly three F-16 fighters. This time NORAD does not sit on this vital information for six minutes before notifying Langley AFB. Langley is 130 miles south of Washington D.C. and the Pentagon. The F-16 has a top speed of 1500 MPH.

Why wasn’t Langley AFB scrambled at 8:20 or 8:40 or 8:46 or at the very least at 9:02:54? How could NORAD possibly have waited the 21 minutes from the time United Airlines Flight 175 hits the South Tower of the WTC at 9:02:54 before finally scrambling Langley at 9:24? Waiting these 21 extra minutes to finally scramble Langley is the real smoking gun that no one can get around.

9:30 a m.: Bush, speaking to the nation from Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida, says the country has suffered an "apparent terrorist attack" and "a national tragedy." He would chase down, "those folks who committed this act." Bush also said, "Terrorism against our nation will not stand." It was an echo of "This will not stand," the words his father, George H. W. Bush, had used a few days after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990-in Bush's opinion, one of his father's finest moments.

This address to the country should have been said at least 15 to 20 minutes earlier. But of course he had much more important business to attend to, he was listening to the Goat Story with the 16 second graders from 9:05 till at least 9:12 and possibly as long as 9:23. Watch the video of Bush addressing the country from Emma E. Booker Elementary School.

http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/BushAtEmmaEBookerSchool.mov

9:32 a.m.: Secret Service agents burst into Cheney's White House office. They carry him under his arms -- nearly lifting him off the ground -- and take him to the security of the underground bunker in the White House basement.

9:40 a.m.: Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta, summoned by the White House to the bunker, was on an open line to the Federal Aviation Administration operations center, monitoring Flight 77 as it hurtled toward Washington, with radar tracks coming every seven seconds. Reports came that the plane was 50 miles out, 30 miles out, 10 miles out-until word reached the bunker that there had been an explosion at the Pentagon.

9:45 a.m.: Bush's motorcade leaves the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida headed for Air Force One at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport.

9:55 a.m.: Bush arrives at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport and boards Air Force One.


9:59:04 a.m.: The south tower of the World Trade Center suddenly collapses, plummeting into the streets below. A massive cloud of dust and debris quickly fills lower Manhattan. It is later explained (disinformation) that the collapse was not directly caused by the impact, but the intense heat caused by the fire fueled by the jet's fuel weakening the steel support beams of the concrete floors. The WTC towers were built to withstand a 707 being flown into them. A 767 carries almost the same amount of fuel as a 707.

Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded very interesting seismic activity on September 11, 2001 that has still not been explained.

While the aircraft crashes caused minimal earth shaking, significant earthquakes with unusual spikes occurred at the beginning of each collapse. The Palisades seismic data recorded a 2.1 magnitude earthquake during the 10-second collapse of the South Tower at 9:59:04 and a 2.3 quake during the 9-second collapse of the North Tower at 10:28:31.

The Palisades seismic record shows that -- as the collapses began -- a huge seismic "spikes" marked the moment the greatest energy went into the ground. The strongest jolts were both registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before the falling debris struck the earth.

These unexplained "spikes" in the seismic data tends to lend credence to the theory that perhaps a massive explosion(s) in the lowest level of the basements where the supporting steel columns of the WTC met the bedrock caused the collapses.

A "sharp spike of short duration" is how seismologist Thorne Lay of University of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph.

The two unexplained spikes are more than twenty times the amplitude of the other seismic waves associated with the collapses and occurred in the East-West seismic recording as the buildings began to fall.

In the basements of the collapsed towers, where the 47 central support columns connected with the bedrock, hot spots of "literally molten steel" were discovered. Such persistent and intense residual heat, 70 feet below the surface, could explain how these crucial structural supports failed.

Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself "the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures." Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived on the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation.

AFP asked Loizeaux about the report of molten steel on the site. "Yes," he said, "hot spots of molten steel in the basements." These incredibly hot areas were found "at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven levels," Loizeaux said. The molten steel was found "three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed," Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously at 5:20 on September 11th.

Construction steel has an extremely high melting point of about 2800° Fahrenheit (1535° Celsius). Asked what could have caused such extreme heat, Tully said, "Think of the jet fuel."

A way to prove that explosives had blasted the supporting steel columns of the Twin Towers would be to examine fragments from them among the debris for evidence of what metallurgists call "twinning". While steel is often tested for evidence of explosions, despite numerous eyewitness reports of explosions in the towers, the engineers involved in the FEMA-sponsored building assessment did no such tests.

The WTC debris was removed as fast as possible and no forensic examination of the debris was permitted by the FBI or any other government agency. Almost all the 300,000 tons of steel from the Twin Towers was sold to New York scrap dealers and exported to places like China and Korea as quickly as it could be loaded onto the ships, thereby removing the evidence.

The magazine Fire Engineering, a respected journal of firefighting for 125 years, which publishes studies of catastrophic fires, criticized the American Society of Civil Engineers and FEMA investigations as "a half-baked farce." Fire Engineering editor WiIliam A. Manning wrote in the January issue: "...the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers." Why is such there disparity in opinion within the ranks of the fire-engineering community?

The immense clouds of dust and apparent disintegration of the 425,000 cubic yards of concrete of the World Trade Center cause me to question the MIT account of events. Describing the ruins, television evangelist Dr. Robert Schuller said that "...there was not a single block of concrete in that rubble." One observer described the scene "as if some high-energy disintegration beam or laser had been focused on the towers and pulverized the concrete into minute particles of ash and dust." The 110-ten-story World Trade Center reduced to dust by jet fuel?

Dr. Michael Baden, New York state's chief forensic pathologist and an expert in pathology said in September that most of the victims' bodies should be identifiable, because the fires had not reached the 3200°F for 30 minutes necessary to incinerate a body. At a November press conference, Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, told grieving relatives that many bodies had been "vaporized." Are we to believe that the people killed on 9/11 were "vaporized" at 1700° F?

The World Trade Center smoldering pits of molten steel burned for exactly 100 days, despite the constant spray of water being applied. The fires were finally reported extinguished on December 19.

Also, the collapses of the south tower at 9:59:04 took only 10 seconds while the collapse of the north tower at 10:28:31 took only 9 seconds, this is only slightly more than a free fall from the same height, indicating that there was very little resistance. Yet the floors themselves are quite robust, each one is 39" thick; the top 4" is a poured concrete slab, with interlocking vertical steel trusses underneath. This steel would absorb a lot of kinetic energy by crumpling as one floor fell onto another. So how did both of the towers fall so quickly?

In a newly release audio, two of New York City’s Bravest are heard to have made it up to where United Airlines Flight 175 impacted, the 78th floor. Their voices where calm, they explain what was needed to help the many causalities and to put out the two small fires that they discovered. The type of fire that these two NYC Firemen describe does not seem to jive at all with the inferno that is blamed for melting the support beams and bringing down the first steel high-rise or skyscraper ever.

Also, Louie Cacchioli 51, another NYC firefighter, assigned to Engine 47 in Harlem, has stated on September 11, 2001: "We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building. I had just asked another firefighter to stay with me, which was a good thing because we were trapped inside the elevator and he had the tools to get out."

"There were probably 500 people trapped in the stairwell. It was mass chaos. The power went out. It was dark. Everybody was screaming. We had oxygen masks and we were giving people oxygen. Some of us made it out and some of us didn't. I know of at least 30 firefighters who are still missing. This is my 20th year. I am seriously considering retiring. This might have done it."

When cameraman and Jules Naudet arrived at WTC tower one along with other crews of NYC Firemen and entered the building's ground floor lobby, they were to a one completely puzzled, actually astonished, to find significant and widespread damage to the entire lobby area; although not of a deep, structural kind. Moreover, nowhere was there any indication whatsoever of an incendiary-type explosion or any kind of fire in this area.

Yet the incredible number of blown-out windows and other extensive though rather superficial damage throughout the lobby area was profoundly perplexing to these experienced professional firefighters in relation to the impact of the plane eighty stories above. As one put it: "The lobby looked like the plane hit the lobby!"

Other reports, from firemen, have said that the FBI’s offices in NYC that were on the 22nd, 23rd and 24th floors of the north tower of the WTC were totally destroyed, presumably by bombs.

Seismic article: http://www.americanfreepress.net/09_03_02/...w_seismic_.html (http://www.americanfreepress.net/09_03_02/NEW_SEISMIC_/new_seismic_.html)

Seismic charts: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/WTC_20010911.html

Seismic article: http://www.firehouse.com/tech/news/2002/0121_terrorist.html

Seismic article and chart: http://serendipity.magnet.ch/wot/bollyn2.htm

Fire still burning: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991634

Fire still burning: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/letters.html

The Twin Towers Were Deliberately Demolished: http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers / http://wtc7.net


[b]10:03 a.m.: According to the FBI, the cockpit voice recorder stops and United Airlines Flight 93 crashes near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, in Somerset county, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh.

10:28:31 a.m.: The North Tower of the World Trade Center collapses. The fact that the northern tower withstood much longer than the southern one is later attributed to three facts: the region of impact was higher, the speed of the airplane was lower, and the affected floors had their fire proofing upgraded.

Exactly at the beginning of the collapse of the north tower there was a seismic event that was the equivalent to a magnitude 2.3 earthquake. This unexplained "spike" in the seismic data tends to lend credence to the theory that perhaps a massive explosion(s) in the lowest level of the basement where the supporting steel columns of the WTC met the bedrock that caused the collapse (see 9:59:04 a.m. # 109).

The Twin Towers Were Deliberately Demolished: http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers / http://wtc7.net


*********************

And those are the major events of 9/11. For a more detailed list, refer to this link: http://911timeline.net

Here some more interesting thoughts:

This was not the first time a plane hijack has occurred over American soil. The maximum allowable time for intervention was 10 minutes, yet it was roughly 34 minutes before fighters were scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes. That leaves roughly 24 minutes where absolutely nothing happened. This is unprecedented, because in all the other hijacks there was never this kind of delay...EVER.

There is no other logical explanation for those 34 minutes when 10 minutes is the maximum allowed time for intervention.

And who gets the blame? Richard Meyers was promoted to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest military position (save for Commander in Chief) in the country after the worst attack on America is committed under his watch. George Bush's approval rating soars due to this "military blunder". I do not think this was a blunder, but a well organized plot.

Also, heads of the Congressional Intelligence Committee had lunch with the head of the Pakistani ISI, where they authorized a wire transfer of $100,000 dollars to Muhammad Atta.......alleged ringleader of the 9/11 attacks.


The delays in intercepting those hijacked planes are unprecedented. There is no other logical explanation for those 34 minutes when 10 minutes is the maximum allowable time for intervention. If those had been Russian fighters or bombers in American airspace, I bet we would have had fighter in the air pretty damn quick.

Therefore, in light of all the evidence that I have presented, I can only conclude the following.....there must have been a military order. An order for NORAD to stand down and allow the planes to crash? An order from the government to commit these attacks to justify military action in Afghanistan which would then lead to military action in Iraq? Both do not seem so out of this world, now do they?

There is no doubt in my mind that this attack was planned by the Bush administration. Was it so that Bush Sr. could once and for all get to Saddam and make it seem totally justified because he failed back in the early 90's (to get Saddam)? Was it so that Bush's friends would become billionaires off of war profits? I think it's safe to say that both of these accusations do not seem so out of this world after all.
BastardSword
03-09-2004, 02:01
Bush later makes the following statement. "And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I used to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a horrible accident.' But I was whisked off from there -- I didn't have much time to think about it." Bush could not have possibly seen the first plane (American Airlines Flight 11) hit the WTC, because the only video showing this was not shown on television till later in the day. So how could he have possibly seen and said this?

Even as a democrat who dislikes Bush i'll admit some of that article is bias. But this point is a good question...
Did Bush lie about what he saw? Or did he know somehow about the plot?

It could have been because he was freinds with Osama's family and Osama was jealous.
Also oil companies but everyone knows that argument.
Cannot think of a name
03-09-2004, 02:05
Even as a democrat who dislikes Bush i'll admit some of that article is bias. But this point is a good question...
Did Bush lie about what he saw? Or did he know somehow about the plot?

It could have been because he was freinds with Osama's family and Osama was jealous.
Also oil companies but everyone knows that argument.
I don't trust the administration or what's happened, but I believe that this is more than likely a semantic problem, which is to say he had seen that the first plane had hit the building. Given the president's difficulty with language it's not unreasonable to assume that is what he was saying, the whole razor thing and all....
Katganistan
03-09-2004, 02:08
Funny how not one of these sources is from a mainstream, reputable media source.

Oh, except the PBS one on the fires still burning.

If CNN had an discrepancy in the count, then why are there no links to CNN.com????
IDF
03-09-2004, 02:10
I believe it was a conspiracy, there was more than 1 person involved so it was by definition a conspiracy
Paxania
03-09-2004, 02:12
Talk about crackpot conspiracy theories!
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:13
I believe it was a conspiracy, there was more than 1 person involved so it was by definition a conspiracy

LoL. Perhaps I should have made the title 'Was 9/11 a US government conspiracy?'
Paxania
03-09-2004, 02:15
Here's a subject for discussion: if JFK was in color, why did Michael Moore do a remake?
Katganistan
03-09-2004, 02:15
I believe it was a conspiracy, there was more than 1 person involved so it was by definition a conspiracy

Actually, you are correct. :) It was a conspiracy conceived of and carried out by the hijackers for certain, and Al-Quaeda by their own admission via Osama Bin Laden's lovely reports.
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:16
Actually, you are correct. :) It was a conspiracy conceived of and carried out by the hijackers for certain, and Al-Quaeda by their own admission via Osama Bin Laden's lovely reports.


Ha, alright I fixed it!
Undecidedterritory
03-09-2004, 02:17
I own the 911 report and faithfuly follow the news. the only conspiracy I see is the one of the far left trying to destroy the President.
Kleptonis
03-09-2004, 02:18
Why did American Airlines Flight 11 fly directly over the number one terrorist target in the United States, Indian Point nuclear power stations, and not hit it?

Perhaps instead of going for most damage possible, they wanted to attack what they thought were the symbols of America. The pentagon can be symbolized as our influence and power in international affairs, and the WTC would symbloize the power of corporations and capitalism in America. just a thought though.
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:18
Damn...I forgot you can't edit titles.....
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:19
I own the 911 report and faithfuly follow the news. the only conspiracy I see is the one of the far left trying to destroy the President.


The 9/11 Commission's report? I dunno, it sounded...kinda thrown together to me.
Superpower07
03-09-2004, 02:26
I really dont give a flying f*ck about if it was a conspiracy anymore - the assholes who did this should be killed (though I am an ardent pacifist), even if it was our own government :sniper:
GrayFriars
03-09-2004, 02:27
I can answer the why not Indian Point question, cause I live right by there and we get the whole worst-case scenario thing all the time. The construction of the IP power plant would survive a hit from an airline, for it would hit not very importatnt structures. Attacking iot from the sky would be a futile effort.
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:27
the assholes who did this should be killed (though I am an ardent pacifist)


LOL. I'm thinking about putting that in my sig. :D
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:29
I can answer the why not Indian Point question, cause I live right by there and we get the whole worst-case scenario thing all the time. The construction of the IP power plant would survive a hit from an airline, for it would hit not very importatnt structures. Attacking iot from the sky would be a futile effort.


Yeah, but I believe the author (not of the quoted post, but of the '9/11 Timeline" website that was cited) says that if 2 planes were involved that one of the reactors might break and releash radiation.

Is that true?
MKULTRA
03-09-2004, 02:32
Here's a post from an outside forum. I thought I'd share it with you.
I said it was a conspiracy when I first came here--I knew it was only a matter of time before the evidence cought up with my belief
GrayFriars
03-09-2004, 02:34
Yeah, but I believe the author (not of the quoted post, but of the '9/11 Timeline" website that was cited) says that if 2 planes were involved that one of the reactors might break and releash radiation.

Is that true?
not from what I've heard. That could be lies so we all don't panic, but I've been told that it could survive. Of course they would evacuate the area before anything to horrible could happen, at least that's what I'm told. :p
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 02:35
not from what I've heard. That could be lies so we all don't panic, but I've been told that it could survive. Of course they would evacuate the area before anything to horrible could happen, at least that's what I'm told. :p

LOL, interesting!

By the way guys, thanks for keeping this topic civil. I quoted the same post on another forum and I got flamed into a crisp. @_@
Ashmoria
03-09-2004, 02:40
QUOTE == Construction steel has an extremely high melting point of about 2800° Fahrenheit (1535° Celsius). Asked what could have caused such extreme heat, Tully said, "Think of the jet fuel."

A way to prove that explosives had blasted the supporting steel columns of the Twin Towers would be to examine fragments from them among the debris for evidence of what metallurgists call "twinning". While steel is often tested for evidence of explosions, despite numerous eyewitness reports of explosions in the towers, the engineers involved in the FEMA-sponsored building assessment did no such tests.

The WTC debris was removed as fast as possible and no forensic examination of the debris was permitted by the FBI or any other government agency. Almost all the 300,000 tons of steel from the Twin Towers was sold to New York scrap dealers and exported to places like China and Korea as quickly as it could be loaded onto the ships, thereby removing the evidence.

The magazine Fire Engineering, a respected journal of firefighting for 125 years, which publishes studies of catastrophic fires, criticized the American Society of Civil Engineers and FEMA investigations as "a half-baked farce." Fire Engineering editor WiIliam A. Manning wrote in the January issue: "...the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers." Why is such there disparity in opinion within the ranks of the fire-engineering community?

The immense clouds of dust and apparent disintegration of the 425,000 cubic yards of concrete of the World Trade Center cause me to question the MIT account of events. Describing the ruins, television evangelist Dr. Robert Schuller said that "...there was not a single block of concrete in that rubble." One observer described the scene "as if some high-energy disintegration beam or laser had been focused on the towers and pulverized the concrete into minute particles of ash and dust." The 110-ten-story World Trade Center reduced to dust by jet fuel?

Dr. Michael Baden, New York state's chief forensic pathologist and an expert in pathology said in September that most of the victims' bodies should be identifiable, because the fires had not reached the 3200°F for 30 minutes necessary to incinerate a body. At a November press conference, Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, told grieving relatives that many bodies had been "vaporized." Are we to believe that the people killed on 9/11 were "vaporized" at 1700° F?

The World Trade Center smoldering pits of molten steel burned for exactly 100 days, despite the constant spray of water being applied. The fires were finally reported extinguished on December 19. == UNQUOTE

OHMYGOD IT WAS THE TESLA DEATH RAY!!

you know, the one that was responsible for that "meteor hit" in siberia at the turn of the last century??

the bush's must have gotten ahold of it and waited it NOW to use it

THE FIENDS!!

that's IT, im voting for kerry!
Daiglopia
03-09-2004, 02:51
Some of that stuff is creepy. I mean, I can understand incompetence, but NORAD not reacting swiftly to FOUR HIJACKED PLANES?! I mean, that just seems absurd. The Bush quote is also rather chilling, given the circumstances. And as for the nuclear reactor (which, if I know my shit, could be caused to meltdown if hit by one, and especially if by two, planes), again, something just seems wrong. Now, I understand that some of this stuff is bias; the thing is the parts that aren't. NORAD really didn't react. The secret service really did take forever to respond. George Bush, idiot though he may be, does have competency around him, and would have phoned his cabinent members and NSA director much quicker. In retrospect, I do have trouble believing that a fire on the 92nd floor of a building could do what I saw happen to the WTC. If this is true (and it very well could be), George Bush has a lot of explaining to do.
Katganistan
03-09-2004, 02:55
I said it was a conspiracy when I first came here--I knew it was only a matter of time before the evidence cought up with my belief

LOL yes, evidence.....
Daiglopia
03-09-2004, 03:08
Explain this to me, non-believers. We all saw the planes hit the side of a building. Then we saw the buildings fall - STRAIGHT DOWN! How in the name of God could that happen? I think I am, for once and for all, convinced. Someone other than Osama, or at least with more power, must have done something that caused those things to come down. It doesn't make sense. There is no reasonable explanation for that. If anything, they should have slid to one side, and the tops fallen off, something of that sort.
Cebat
03-09-2004, 03:09
About the bombs in the basement thing. When i first say the towers collapes on 9/11 2001, i thought that bombs would be used in the basement to destroy it, cause it didnt' make sence to me that planes hitting the top of the building would make the entire thing fall down. But maybe it wasnt' the president that put the bombs there. Maybe the terrorists drove in big vans full of explosives during the confusion?
Colodia
03-09-2004, 03:12
Can someone explain to me why someone with orders to simply hit the higher levels of the WTC (OBL said it himself, he just figured the top levels would collapse), would hit the top buildings? Letting alone the simple fact that New York has quite a lot of sky scrapers that could've been hit instead and **** up the whole plan.

Besides, even if they did get past all the other sky scrapers and found a momentary break to attempt to hit the WTC at a lower angle, they would be going much too fast in order to go down low enough, and would hit the WTC at such an angle that it would most likely have an undesired effect.
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 03:15
Explain this to me, non-believers. We all saw the planes hit the side of a building. Then we saw the buildings fall - STRAIGHT DOWN! How in the name of God could that happen? I think I am, for once and for all, convinced. Someone other than Osama, or at least with more power, must have done something that caused those things to come down. It doesn't make sense. There is no reasonable explanation for that. If anything, they should have slid to one side, and the tops fallen off, something of that sort.


Here's a GIF of a building being imploded from 'howstuffworks.com'. Notice any similarities?

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/building-implosion-1.gif
Daiglopia
03-09-2004, 03:24
Can someone explain to me why someone with orders to simply hit the higher levels of the WTC (OBL said it himself, he just figured the top levels would collapse), would hit the top buildings? Letting alone the simple fact that New York has quite a lot of sky scrapers that could've been hit instead and **** up the whole plan.

Besides, even if they did get past all the other sky scrapers and found a momentary break to attempt to hit the WTC at a lower angle, they would be going much too fast in order to go down low enough, and would hit the WTC at such an angle that it would most likely have an undesired effect.

After looking at pictures, I'm guesstimating that they could've hit at least at the 60th floor or so, with no obstructions visible. What's more, wouldn't a downward angle, with the resulting increase in speed be desirable? Not to mention that it would then travel through more floors, and, I assume, cause more structural damage. Now, I am not a physics major or anything of that nature, but I do believe that a sharply angled vector into the building would be the most damaging, and the lower, the better. Either the terrorists were very stupid, or very bad at flying planes, or someone told them to hit at the top.
Colodia
03-09-2004, 03:27
After looking at pictures, I'm guesstimating that they could've hit at least at the 60th floor or so, with no obstructions visible. What's more, wouldn't a downward angle, with the resulting increase in speed be desirable? Not to mention that it would then travel through more floors, and, I assume, cause more structural damage. Now, I am not a physics major or anything of that nature, but I do believe that a sharply angled vector into the building would be the most damaging, and the lower, the better. Either the terrorists were very stupid, or very bad at flying planes, or someone told them to hit at the top.
You blew away everything but Osama's words.
Kwangistar
03-09-2004, 03:28
After looking at pictures, I'm guesstimating that they could've hit at least at the 60th floor or so, with no obstructions visible. What's more, wouldn't a downward angle, with the resulting increase in speed be desirable? Not to mention that it would then travel through more floors, and, I assume, cause more structural damage. Now, I am not a physics major or anything of that nature, but I do believe that a sharply angled vector into the building would be the most damaging, and the lower, the better. Either the terrorists were very stupid, or very bad at flying planes, or someone told them to hit at the top.
Well, unless Colodia made it up, Osama himself said he thought it would just be the top levels collapsing, suggesting that he did tell them to hit the top.
Frisbeeteria
03-09-2004, 03:35
Either the terrorists were very stupid, or very bad at flying planes, or someone told them to hit at the top.
Exactly how many multi-engine jet aircraft had these Florida-flight-school-trained pilots ever flown into buildings before this?

300+ miles-per-hour these guys were trraveling, and they hit a building a few hundred feet wide dead on ... and I mean dead on. I don't care how fanatical you are, deliberately crashing a plane isn't going to give you the steadiest hands. Here's a challenge for you: Take out your mom's minvan on the Interstate at 80 mph and try to hit an upright yardstick square on with the hood ornament. You even get to do it without worrying about altitude.

These bastards were lucky to hit the city and not the Hudson River. Conspiracy, bah.
Daiglopia
03-09-2004, 03:37
Well, unless Colodia made it up, Osama himself said he thought it would just be the top levels collapsing, suggesting that he did tell them to hit the top.
You still fail to explain the structural collapse. Look into it: the fires could not have melted steel under any circumstances. The building could have, and did, withstood the force of the impact. It fell straight down despite having damage to the sides. Something (or should I say some things?) are not adding up. I am not someone who normally believes conspiracy stories (although the JFK shooting does bring up an interesting point: how does a man miss with his first shot, and then score two hits within three or four seconds of his first shot using a bolt-action rifle? My grandfather, who was a Marine marksman with an M-1, said it took him about five-ten seconds to get lined up for a second shot after firing, and added that it was much harder to hit the second time with that kind of speed. But I digress.), but this one has too many pieces missing, and too many pieces wrong. Don't look at this as liberal propaganda, think rationally. Buildings with damage on the sides don't fall straight down, whatever the circumstances. But the WTC did. How? Someone knows, and it's likely the same someone who told NORAD not to dispatch F-16s.
Katganistan
03-09-2004, 03:50
Explain this to me, non-believers. We all saw the planes hit the side of a building. Then we saw the buildings fall - STRAIGHT DOWN! How in the name of God could that happen? I think I am, for once and for all, convinced. Someone other than Osama, or at least with more power, must have done something that caused those things to come down. It doesn't make sense. There is no reasonable explanation for that. If anything, they should have slid to one side, and the tops fallen off, something of that sort.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

NOVA: The Twin Towers collapsed essentially straight down. Was there any chance they could have tipped over?

Eagar: It's really not possible in this case. In our normal experience, we deal with small things, say, a glass of water, that might tip over, and we don't realize how far something has to tip proportional to its base. The base of the World Trade Center was 208 feet on a side, and that means it would have had to have tipped at least 100 feet to one side in order to move its center of gravity from the center of the building out beyond its base. That would have been a tremendous amount of bending. In a building that is mostly air, as the World Trade Center was, there would have been buckling columns, and it would have come straight down before it ever tipped over.

Have you ever seen the demolition of buildings? They blow them up, and they implode. Well, I once asked demolition experts, "How do you get it to implode and not fall outward?" They said, "Oh, it's really how you time and place the explosives." I always accepted that answer, until the World Trade Center, when I thought about it myself. And that's not the correct answer. The correct answer is, there's no other way for them to go but down. They're too big. With anything that massive -- each of the World Trade Center towers weighed half a million tons -- there's nothing that can exert a big enough force to push it sideways.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000B7FEB-A88C-1C75-9B81809EC588EF21

http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aawtc-collapse.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/sept11_towers020912.html

Revolutionary Design

Before the construction of the towers, the problem with older skyscrapers had been that they were crowded by a grid of steel columns to keep them up. Tenants wanted more open space for their offices.

The trade center would be different: All columns were shifted to a central core with the elevators and stairs, and to the buildings' outer skin.

"The column-free space was an essential part of the design, fundamental to the design," says Robertson. "So it was a new kind of building and offered wonderful opportunities to rethink how structure, architecture, elevators, how all this should go together to form something that was exceptional."

The outer columns were made from prefabricated steel sections, lifted into place and bolted together. There were 59 columns on each side — 283 columns in all — reaching 1,360 feet into the sky.

The floors were concrete, held up by steel trusses underneath. They linked the outer skin to the inner core. So, the towers were spacious inside and sturdy on the outside.

"From a structural engineering perspective," says Edward DePaola, a principal in the engineering firm of Severud Associates, who took part in the preliminary investigation, "those buildings were magnificent." ....

...But meanwhile, the jetliners had done untold damage inside the buildings as they crashed and disintegrated. Elevators, sprinkler pipes, and emergency stairs were all cut off, except for a single stairway in the South Tower.

As a result, peoples' location in the buildings determined their fate. Below the impact zones, 99 percent of the occupants got out alive. Above — except for Brian Clark and three other people who found the one intact stairway — everyone was trapped and died. ...

...The fuel, says engineer DePaola, "ignited three, four, or five floors simultaneously." ...

...As temperatures on the upper floors rose to 1,100 degrees Fahrenheit or more, engineers say the buildings' steel structure began to weaken. Beams and columns probably glowed orange, the way iron does in a blacksmith's shop. With nothing left to protect them, engineers say the trusses began to sag.

Finally, somewhere, the steel gave way — each floor destroying the one beneath it.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540044.stm

Of course, this isn't as sexy as your bomb theories....

Also remember the nature of the stuff INSIDE the towers..... tons of paper (burned memos rained into my yard 8 miles away), xerographic and printer toner (HIGHLY flammable and indeed, printer toner can be EXPLOSIVE), and synthetic carpet, plastics, woods etc. -- all of which ALSO would have burned (not just the fuel!)
Reich Nationalist Fury
03-09-2004, 04:02
Your theory failed to convince me in any way what-so-ever. Time problems are common in the beurocracy that we have made, no one ever really expected something like this to happen, and our government would easily have been caught on this early if it had been true. The media is left wing for the most part, and would have eaten it up if there was even a little chance. Sorry.

-Fury
Frisbeeteria
03-09-2004, 04:18
the number one terrorist target in the United States, Indian Point nuclear power stations
Says who again? I'm pretty well informed, but I've never heard it mentioned as a specific target. The World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, the White House, those I've heard of. Hit a nuke station and you create a nasty local problem. Take out American iconic buildings, and the nation stops.

It's an interesting theory, AMF, full of fury and ideas; but it comes down to bureaucratic inertia and inexperienced pilots. But you knew that all along, dind't you?
Daiglopia
03-09-2004, 04:21
Also remember the nature of the stuff INSIDE the towers..... tons of paper (burned memos rained into my yard 8 miles away), xerographic and printer toner (HIGHLY flammable and indeed, printer toner can be EXPLOSIVE), and synthetic carpet, plastics, woods etc. -- all of which ALSO would have burned (not just the fuel!)

A)1535º C (2795º F)- melting point of steel
~825º C (1517º F)- maximum temperature of hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere without pressurization or pre-heating (premixed fuel and air - blue flame)
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/meltdownre.html

I think we can both agree that, given that, steel will not melt with jet fuel.

B) All of the flammable items you mentioned would have been consumed quickly in the prescense of jet fuel. The burned memos were likely from a lower floor, as everything in those floors would have been burned (and if you are making a case for melted steel, then they would have been burned rather quickly).

C) You fail to explain the molten lakes of steel found in, of all places, the basement. These pools were not extenguished until a weeks worth of water sprayed from fire hoses had been used on them. I doubt that jet fuel could heat steel enough to keep it melted for a minute, much less a week.

D) George Bush's statement: I remember that there was no video of the first tower getting hit. Only the second tower had footage on national television within the day. His statement makes no sense unless he was so unshocked by the experience that he forgot how the day's course of events went.

E) The towers fell almost as fast as they would have in free-fall, in a vacuum. They were made of steel and concrete. They had withstood a severe bomb in the basements. But a plane hitting it near the top of the building, without the capability to make steel melt, can make it so unstable that it can essentially free-fall, without any of the other floors providing a signifigant amount of resistance? I would not want to work in that building, if it was so precarious.

All in all, the unexplainables are numerous, and the coverup (such as the fire sale of the steel and scrap iron, made as quickly as possible) is poorly done, even for the Bush Administration. I can see no way that this could have been the result of what we have been told it was the result of. Either the terrorists are much more organized than we ever dreamed (in which case, we may well be setting ourselves up for something real bad in the near future by pissing them off in Afghanistan and Iraq), or it was an inside job.
Katganistan
03-09-2004, 04:27
Says who again? I'm pretty well informed, but I've never heard it mentioned as a specific target. The World Trade Centers, the Pentagon, the White House, those I've heard of. Hit a nuke station and you create a nasty local problem. Take out American iconic buildings, and the nation stops.

Buchanan, NY Population (2000): 2,189 , about 50 miles from NYC.

As Frisbeeteria said, a nasty local problem... but it would not have had the same impact (pun intended).
Calembel
03-09-2004, 04:28
I can't believe I'm replying to this nonsense, but here goes.

1. Body counts. So they don't get the count right the first time. They never do. I would guess the differences are because of some no-shows that couldn't be contacted immediately. Besides how does the number of people on the flights make it a conspiracy?

2. Traffic control loses contact. They weren't expecting the planes to go crash into the WTC. You don't pull the fire alarm everytime you smell a little bit of smoke, it's probably just burnt toast.

3. Nuclear plants. If they would have crashed into the nuclear plants you would be screaming conpiracy because they didn't hit the Twin Towers only 24 miles away.

4. Airplanes told to stay away. Nothing at all unusual here. They just didn't want a mid-air collision. Why wasn't it in the New York Times transcript? It would be helpful if you would put a link up. I don't what this proves anyway.

5. Why not wait until 11:00? It makes much more tactical sense to do it early. After all there's less people on board that might resist. Surely you don't expect them to fly around for three hours. Besides, they got their point across well enough killing only 3,000.

6. Why not strike low? Well for one, the airliners were flying relatively low anyway. I'm sure they were quite nervous and didn't want to crash before they hit their target. Especially considering they were flying nearly 500 mph. As for your suggested 25-30 stories, that's running a huge risk of hitting the surrounding buildings, some of which were at least that high or higher. Besides, they towers collapsed, didn't they?

7. Donald Rumsfield saying there will be more. I am telling you now, there will be another terroist attack in the United States. I must be in on a conspiracy!

8. NORAD took 6 minutes to scramble. 6 minutes really isn't that long. NORAD is meant to defend the US against incoming threats from overseas. Somethings take time. Six minutes is not too shabby given what it was designed for.

9. Bush couldn't have seen the first plane hit. So he saw the second plane hit. How hard is that to figure out? Also note that he didn't say which plane he saw hit, so it wasn't even a misstatement.

10. Why didn't F-15s head to D.C.? I have an idea, let's do a little thinking here. Two airliners are hijacked and they both hit New York. Gee, says the first F-15 pilot, two planes just hit New York, I'll bet this third one is headed towards D.C.!

11. That F-15 video. All it shows is a smudge which is also heading straight towards the ground. You say it was taken when the 2nd plane hit. With all the TV cameras around (I believe some were even broadcasting live), why wasn't it caught tape? This looks like a bad doctoring job to me.

12. Bush continues reading to children. Do you really think there's anything Bush could have done in those 7 minutes?

13. Everyone knew he was at the school. I didn't. I'll bet you didn't. Why did the Secret Service leave him there? There wasn't a threat in the area, so what?

14. Bush doesn't order the Air Force to shoot down airliners, etc. Of course not. He leaves that to the commanders in charge. You don't see him calling in shots in Iraq do you? Someone once said (something like) "the more battles that are commanded from afar (President, etc.), the more likely it is to fail". Basically, you leave to the people who are actually there.

Also, an order to shoot down any hostile airliners is debateable. You have to have a very good definition. Low-flying won't cut it. What if Bush gave the order and they accidentally got one that wasn't hijacked? All the blame is laid at his feet. The airliner would have to get pretty close to a building to be sure it's a threat, then the fighter would have to hope his missile hits it in time and the inertia won't make the plane hit the building anyway. Not to mention the fact that launching missiles while flying low over a populated area is generally frowned upon.

15. Why wait 21 minutes to notify Langly. See #10. Also please remember: No one is denying that there was failure to communicate. Just because there is a few minutes lapse where there should have been talking, doesn't make a conspiracy. In this case, they simply didn't see an attack in New York as a threat to D.C. To say otherwise is Monday morning quarterbacking.

16. WTC was built to withstand a 707 being flown into them. One, the 767 is larger than the 707. Two, it wasn't just jet fuel burning, there was stuff inside the building burning too.

17. The ground shook when the buildings collapsed. You wouldn't expect the ground to shake when the planes hit. Sure they might shake the building a bit, but not much. But when the entire 110 story building comes crashing down it's more likely. I might also be helpful to remember that a 2 earthquake really isn't that big at all.

18. George Bush's approval rating soars. How does this prove a conspiracy. It would be quite a gamble to plot this and hope your ratings go up. For all he knew they could just have easily have gone down.

19. Bush used it to justify invading Afghanistan. Yep, we got a whole lot of stuff out of Afghanistan. Ooh, lookie, I've never seen a rock like that before :rolleyes:.

BTW: Where do you get the idea that the number one terrorist spot in the U.S. is that nuclear plant you keep talking about?
Katganistan
03-09-2004, 04:34
A)1535º C (2795º F)- melting point of steel
~825º C (1517º F)- maximum temperature of hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere without pressurization or pre-heating (premixed fuel and air - blue flame)
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/meltdownre.html

I think we can both agree that, given that, steel will not melt with jet fuel.

B) All of the flammable items you mentioned would have been consumed quickly in the prescense of jet fuel. The burned memos were likely from a lower floor, as everything in those floors would have been burned (and if you are making a case for melted steel, then they would have been burned rather quickly).

C) You fail to explain the molten lakes of steel found in, of all places, the basement. These pools were not extenguished until a weeks worth of water sprayed from fire hoses had been used on them. I doubt that jet fuel could heat steel enough to keep it melted for a minute, much less a week.

D) George Bush's statement: I remember that there was no video of the first tower getting hit. Only the second tower had footage on national television within the day. His statement makes no sense unless he was so unshocked by the experience that he forgot how the day's course of events went.

E) The towers fell almost as fast as they would have in free-fall, in a vacuum. They were made of steel and concrete. They had withstood a severe bomb in the basements. But a plane hitting it near the top of the building, without the capability to make steel melt, can make it so unstable that it can essentially free-fall, without any of the other floors providing a signifigant amount of resistance? I would not want to work in that building, if it was so precarious.

All in all, the unexplainables are numerous, and the coverup (such as the fire sale of the steel and scrap iron, made as quickly as possible) is poorly done, even for the Bush Administration. I can see no way that this could have been the result of what we have been told it was the result of. Either the terrorists are much more organized than we ever dreamed (in which case, we may well be setting ourselves up for something real bad in the near future by pissing them off in Afghanistan and Iraq), or it was an inside job.

The fires burned until December. Explain that.

Also, you apparently did not read or do not choose to accept what all these reputable sources say: it was a combination of: Supports being sheared. Jet Fuel burning. The weight of the floor above falling, crushing the supports directly below it, and the momentum of such leading to the pancaking.

I notice I cite Scientific American, Architects.Org, PBS, etc.... which are your experts?

Funny -- most people scream the that media is liberal and therefore out to get Bush. Are you saying that it is conservative and out to protect him?

Here is a source that says steel melts at 1500 degrees and explains how to do it in a school physics lab. You might want to look at the graphic which explains the relationship of time + temperature to the process.

http://www.schoolscience.co.uk/content/4/physics/corus/heat/psch3pg1.html
Ashmoria
03-09-2004, 04:38
im tellin ya

its the TESLA DEATH RAY

i bet its a vast conspiracy by the yale skull and bones society

thats IT, bush AND kerry are in on it.

the FIENDS

im voting for nader
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 04:39
It's an interesting theory, AMF, full of fury and ideas; but it comes down to bureaucratic inertia and inexperienced pilots. But you knew that all along, dind't you?


Actually not my opinion. I found it on a different forum and found it interesting.
Calembel
03-09-2004, 04:42
I'm voting for this guy (http://www.davebarry.com/images/bumpersticker.JPG).
Copiosa Scotia
03-09-2004, 04:56
I'm voting for this guy (http://www.davebarry.com/images/bumpersticker.JPG).

Heck yes. Dave Barry is my hero.

And yeah, I'm not sure this theory needs any more debunking than it's already gotten.
Paxania
03-09-2004, 05:52
Explain your theory in relation to the first World Trade Center attack, the embassy bombings, and the USS Cole.
Automagfreek
03-09-2004, 06:05
Explain your theory in relation to the first World Trade Center attack, the embassy bombings, and the USS Cole.


You forgot to read my post that sits just slighty higher than this one.
HARU
03-09-2004, 06:06
his is not the only reason I believe 9/11 to be a conspiracy but it helped solidify me belief that it was/is. I have believed that it was a conspiracy from day one (9/11/01)
http://www.thoughtcrimenews.com/secondplanearrow.jpg

The arrow is pointing at something attached to the underbally of the plane. (Just in case the plane missed?)
Arenestho
03-09-2004, 06:33
Very interesting read. It is slightly biased and doesn't include human error, but it was interesting none the less.

Another interesting point to make is look at the damage supposedly by a plane crashing into the Pentagon. The hole isn't all that big, atleast compared to the size of the aircraft which suppoedly hit it. The damage also looks like it was cut by an axe at one point and the other area slanted down. There is no wreckage of an aircraft to be seen.
Frisbeeteria
03-09-2004, 07:33
There is no wreckage of an aircraft to be seen.
My photographer friend in Arlington was on the scene, with cameras, within 2 hours. There were plenty of clearly identifiable pieces of aircraft in his shots.

By the way, when a hollow aluminum tube hits a reinforced concrete and stone wall at 300+ mph, it doesn't look much like an airplane anymore.
LordaeronII
03-09-2004, 08:26
I'd like to see a good clear motive....

So far I've seen you present 3 things as motive...

a) Ratings
b) War in afghanistan
c) War on Saddam

a) No one, NO ONE is stupid enough to slaughter their own economy for the SLIGHT chance that MAYBE their ratings will soar. I personally think it would have been more likely that the ratings would have gone down (complaints of lack of airport security under his administration and such)

b) What exactly was in afghanistan that was actually important enough that you believe an upper class American citizen, elected leader of the nation, would destroy a part of the pentagon, destroy the world trade centers, and crash 4 jets, then create a huge conspiracy to hide it all. What was that important?

c) The war on Iraq was not directly related to 9/11.
Chellis
03-09-2004, 08:56
The main thing for me is the nuclear reactor. A huge jetliner flying at 500mph, more as a nuclear reactor should be easier to identify and so you have to worry less about hitting the wrong target, would damage the reactor, and a good chance of causing it to meltdown. Multiple attacks, even moreso of a chance. Why go to hit an economic symbol, when you could possibly kill millions of your enemies?

There is no reason in my mind why they wouldnt have gone for the huge, glorious target. It was a risk, but one worth taking to kill millions of your enemy, as opposed to a number in the thousands.