DescentBB

I know.

Zuruck wrote:Thanks Topher, I grew up in Colorado, I know how tall the mountains are. Airphones work through the transmission of the airplanes, hence, no interference. Cell phones really don't work at altitude, besides, how many cell phones are there in rural Penn??

What does rural Pennsylvania have to do with cell phones? I'm missing something. People on the airplane called their relative's cell phones through the airphones, what does that have to do with cell phone reception on the airplane itself?

Zuruck wrote:I'm not saying 9/11 was caused by the govt, I'm saying as an American you HAVE TO ASK QUESTIONS!!

This is exactly what a conspiracy theorist does. They ask questions to get attention but they will never be satisfied with the answers they get, so all they can do is ask more questions no matter how nonsensical they become ("What if the government diverted people from the plane and killed them in secret!?").

Ack, grammar error. I meant cell phone towers in rural Penn. And no Toph, you're wrong. It's not un-American to ask questions, that's exactly what they have you believing. This country USED to be that you didn't have to just believe what they told you, but now it seems that so many of you suffice to just that.

Why does the US govt rely on Popular Mechanics to prove the 9/11 fiasco? Why was there no plane debris in Penn? Why did Bush wait 11 min before blinking on 9/11? Why did the FBI not do a single thing concerning the memo that an officer wrote about the very thing that Rice said they had no idea was going? Connect the dots big guy, they didn't have a hand in it but they weren't too far behind.

It's like hockey, you don't want to get the instigator but you want to fight, get the other guy to start the fight.

Zuruck wrote:Ack, grammar error. I meant cell phone towers in rural Penn. And no Toph, you're wrong. It's not un-American to ask questions, that's exactly what they have you believing. This country USED to be that you didn't have to just believe what they told you, but now it seems that so many of you suffice to just that.

Quote me where I said it was un-American to ask questions.

Zuruck wrote:Why does the US govt rely on Popular Mechanics to prove the 9/11 fiasco?

What should we rely on if not science and physics?

Zuruck wrote: Why was there no plane debris in Penn?

Lots of pictures of plane debris:
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-photos.html

Zuruck wrote: Why did Bush wait 11 min before blinking on 9/11?

Because he was told to by his aid behind the camera. I can't and won't justify why that's a good or bad move. I think inciting a panic by rushing out of the room would have been a bigger media blunder than not doing anything. None the less, I don't think Bush's reaction points to any clear conspiracies.

Zuruck wrote: Why did the FBI not do a single thing concerning the memo that an officer wrote about the very thing that Rice said they had no idea was going?

Now there is a good American question. Could 9/11 have been prevented? That's a debate for a different thread.

Zuruck wrote: Connect the dots big guy, they didn't have a hand in it but they weren't too far behind.

You're making quite the claim here. No debris found at the Pentagon and Bush not moving from his seat then means that the government didn't have anything to do with it? So what hit the Pentagon if there wasn't a plane? And what's the plane-like debris including engines shown in the links above? And explain it all without the governments involvement, since that's your claim.

Zuruck wrote: It's like hockey, you don't want to get the instigator but you want to fight, get the other guy to start the fight.

And what is Lobber/Diedel/every other consipracy theorist that wants attention doing to you? Lets state some vague psuedo-ideas and let everyone else run with them. They don't even state facts! They just ask questions and people turn those questions into facts and now no one is claiming anything, just saying "think about", all because you're afraid of being proven wrong and losing your lime light.

No one has made any kind of stance on an idea yet. "9/11 was caused by the government planting bombs in the World Trade Center". That would be a claim and then people can argue for or against it. Instead it's ask a barage of factually disjoint questions just to prove what didn't happen instead of showing evidence to something else that did.

Zuruck wrote:Why was there no plane debris in Penn?

There was. There was plenty of it. It just didn't look like you expected it to. When a plane hits the ground at close to 500mph there is very little left that is recognizable as an airplane.

Exactly. You're talking about essentially a hollow aluminum tube with a narrow aluminum wing sticking out on either side. What out of that do you think would survive an impact at 500 mph? Besides maybe a few engine components, I don't think you'd get anything that was much bigger than a crushed soda can. At that speed, you're talking about total disintegration. Aviation disaster experts have said as much.

As for the whole question of Bush setting up some sort of conspiracy, I could really care less how people feel about the Bush Administration. (I'm also wondering, Diedel, what your views on America's foreign policy had anything to do with the topic at hand to begin with, but that's a completely different question.) But making absolutley ridiculous and impossible claims just makes you sound stupid and invalidates whatever pertinent points you may also be making. There is no possible way that anyone in this country could get away with any sort of cover-up of this magnitude; it completely goes against human nature. Think about what happens when you have a juicy secret and aren't supposed to tell anyone; the first instinct you have is to blab it from the nearest rooftop, isn't it? Multiply that feeling by about a million, and that's what you'd have for someone involved in that sort of cover-up. Long story short: it would have stayed \"covered up\" for maybe the better part of three days.

I do think terrorists brough down the WTC and hit the Pentagon, I believe the Penn plane was shot down. Maybe they really wanted to rush the cabin but in the end, I think it was a couple of missiles that brought it down. It's the perfect cover story to make everyone feel happy. Name a couple of schools after them, the govt never has to tell anyone that they shot down Americans. In the end, they did what they had to do, and I think most people understand that, it's the coverup behind everything that makes people sick. Most would understand when you say \"it was either the plane or who knows what else\"...

EVIDENCE

I'm not gonna comment too much on the pentagon as i havn't done much reaserch on it, but i really find it strange that the day before the \"airplane\" hit, the pentagon published thier budget for the year and announced that they were somehow missing like 400 billion...... shame that the records were stored in that section of the building that got hit!

as for the twin towers, i have looked into this a bit.

As for the personal quotes, all you have to do is look pick up a copy of the New York Times where they posted the intervies of everone who saw the towers come down, they are quite interesting.

Here is a copy and past of some of my favorite eyewitness reports, now remember if you want to see the originals, just go and look for yourself.....

Kevin Darnowski -- Paramedic (E.M.S.) I started walking back up towards Vesey Street. I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

Karin Deshore -- Captain (E.M.S.) Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building.

Brian Dixon -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.) I was watching the fire, watching the people jump and hearing a noise and looking up and seeing -- it actually looked -- the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because the whole bottom I could see -- I could see two sides of it and the other side -- it just looked like that floor blew out. I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out. Then I guess in some sense of time we looked at it and realized, no, actually it just collapsed. That's what blew out the windows, not that there was an explosion there but that windows blew out. The realization hit that it's going to fall down, the top's coming off. I was still thinking -- there was never a thought that this whole thing is coming down. I thought that that blew out and stuff is starting to fly down. The top is going to topple off there.

Stephen Gregory -- Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.) We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.
...
[It was at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw.
...
He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them too.
...
I know about the explosion on the upper floors. This was like at eye level. I didn't have to go like this. Because I was looking this way. I'm not going to say it was on the first floor or the second floor, but somewhere in that area I saw to me what appeared to be flashes.


To sum up the 500 or so reports, the vast majority aggred that they heard 3 very loud bombs go off and alot of poping seconds before the collaps of each tower....

Next that Popular Mechanics report is so full of crap my pc still stinks from loading the page.... it reports that the heat from the jet fuel COULDN'T have possably melted the steel from the towers.

Here is as far as I agree with them. Jet fule does not burn hot enough to melt steel,let alne get it to where it is whit hot. But several videos and alot of eye whitnesses had seen MOLTEN WHITE HOT steel pouring out of the building right before it collapsed( it looked strangly like thermite detonation).
On top of that, up to 6 weeks after the collapse, the cleanup crews recorded that they were still comming acrossed MOLTEN RED hot steel. What could have possably melted the steel ALL THE WAY to the basement??

Some other strange facts about the tempature-

The smoke was a very dark black and very thick... anyone who has volinteered for your local fire department knows this is a sign of a not so hot fire or one that is going out...

One of the fire fighters made it up to the 78th floor and stated that the fires were almost out!!!

there is plenty of video and photos of people STANDING in the gaping holes where the planes hit, after the fires died down a bit.... seems to me that if it was SOOOO hot on that floor that it weakened the steel, and caused that pancake collapse.... these people would have died on the spot from the heat...


Other strange facts

Bankers Trust, which was up against one of the towers had a fiery 600 ton chunk of the tower fall all the way through the building starting fires through many of it's floors, but somehow building 7 which SOMEHOW started on fire even much later(it wasnt hit by debris or a plane) collapsed.

the fire systems of all these buildings were set on \"test\" mode at 8:30 in the morning disableing the sprinkler system(read eye witness reports, no fire supressions systems were working and several fire fighters noticed)

Why did the investigation not turn up the fact that Marvin Bush headed up the secruity for the tower complex up untill the day of 9/11 and starting 3 weeks before the planes hit, all bomb sniffing dogs were removed and large sections of the buildings were cleared out for \"security upgrades\" ect...

if the building collapsed by this pancake theory, how did it do so at nearly free fall? If the supports didnt melt as the Popular Mechanics article states, shouldn't they have put up SOME resistance???

And again, why did building 7 collapse again? no plane and the fires were very small.... 2 other big skyscraper fires have happened since 9/11 and one burned from floor to roof the other one was from half way up to the roof, neither was designed nearly as well but they burned WHITE HOT(you could see the steel glowing) and they didnt collapse..... seems strange to me since building 7 was only on fire for 4 to 5 hours and collapsed and these other 2 burned for like 17 and 32 hours(i think) and didnt collapse and one was still supporting a construction crane. I guess we hired the wrong construction crews????

USA Today did a report on the computer hardrives that were recovered, starting 1 hour BEFORE the first plane hit, there was alot of money being transfered around. this went on till the buildings went down... Again WTF is up with that????

There is way too much fishy crap for me to post it all on here, I just wonder how long till most Americans look at just what is going on, it didnt take Bush long to put together that so called Patriot Act, for me I believe he had it ready to go all along.....

Teddy wrote:To sum up the 500 or so reports, the vast majority aggred that they heard 3 very loud bombs go off and alot of poping seconds before the collaps of each tower....

And what's a 110 story tower collapsing in on itself suppose to sound like?

Teddy wrote: Here is as far as I agree with them. Jet fule does not burn hot enough to melt steel,let alne get it to where it is whit hot. But several videos and alot of eye whitnesses had seen MOLTEN WHITE HOT steel pouring out of the building right before it collapsed( it looked strangly like thermite detonation).

Really? Show me the videos

Teddy wrote: On top of that, up to 6 weeks after the collapse, the cleanup crews recorded that they were still comming acrossed MOLTEN RED hot steel. What could have possably melted the steel ALL THE WAY to the basement??

Pictures please.

Teddy wrote: Some other strange facts about the tempature-

The smoke was a very dark black and very thick... anyone who has volinteered for your local fire department knows this is a sign of a not so hot fire or one that is going out...

Really, I don't see how you can draw conclusions about the smoke. Smoke's color is determine by it's thickness and the material it's burning. How does heat figure into this?

One of the fire fighters made it up to the 78th floor and stated that the fires were almost out!!!

Ok, what about the 79-110 floors?

there is plenty of video and photos of people STANDING in the gaping holes where the planes hit, after the fires died down a bit.... seems to me that if it was SOOOO hot on that floor that it weakened the steel, and caused that pancake collapse.... these people would have died on the spot from the heat...

Show me. Plenty of pictures of people above the whole, I haven't seen plenty of photons of people instead the whole though.

Bankers Trust, which was up against one of the towers had a fiery 600 ton chunk of the tower fall all the way through the building starting fires through many of it's floors, but somehow building 7 which SOMEHOW started on fire even much later(it wasnt hit by debris or a plane) collapsed.

It was hit by debris, see below.

the fire systems of all these buildings were set on "test" mode at 8:30 in the morning disableing the sprinkler system(read eye witness reports, no fire supressions systems were working and several fire fighters noticed)

Why did the investigation not turn up the fact that Marvin Bush headed up the secruity for the tower complex up untill the day of 9/11 and starting 3 weeks before the planes hit, all bomb sniffing dogs were removed and large sections of the buildings were cleared out for "security upgrades" ect...

The World Trade Center was an enormously complex structure. Over 50,000 people worked their everyday. Show me a place where 50,000 people work on less than 16 acres and you'll be able to collect tons of seemingly relavent tidbits of information. For example, say the White House is hit by a tornado. Do records of window washers having the day off prove the government caused it?

if the building collapsed by this pancake theory, how did it do so at nearly free fall? If the supports didnt melt as the Popular Mechanics article states, shouldn't they have put up SOME resistance???

Standing for over an hour after having been hit by an airliner isn't resistance? As soon as 20 stories of concrete fall the 15 feet to the next floor, there's no way it's just going to hold it. The material will just continue to fall through, pushing all other material out of the way. You can see puffs of smoke as all the air is thrust out the window from the floors below as the material falls through the center. Also, the towers didn't collapse in a straight downward motion, they billowed out to the sides.
http://www.terrorism-victims.org/terror ... lapse1.jpg

And again, why did building 7 collapse again? no plane and the fires were very small.... 2 other big skyscraper fires have happened since 9/11 and one burned from floor to roof the other one was from half way up to the roof, neither was designed nearly as well but they burned WHITE HOT(you could see the steel glowing) and they didnt collapse..... seems strange to me since building 7 was only on fire for 4 to 5 hours and collapsed and these other 2 burned for like 17 and 32 hours(i think) and didnt collapse and one was still supporting a construction crane. I guess we hired the wrong construction crews????

17 and 32 hours?
What?
What place where the sun don't shine are you pulling this from? Please brief yourself:
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/c ... gy.attack/
The tower burned for about an hour. Building 7 burned for 4-5 hours. So it's been on fire from jet fuel for significantly longer than the towers.

To quote the link:
"5:20 p.m.: The 47-story Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex collapses. The evacuated building is damaged when the twin towers across the street collapse earlier in the day. Other nearby buildings in the area remain ablaze. "

So it's not just a fire, it was also the enormous amount of material that fell across the street onto it. No other building has had such damage to it, any reference to hotels or houses burning for hours and not collapsing are missing this factor.

USA Today did a report on the computer hardrives that were recovered, starting 1 hour BEFORE the first plane hit, there was alot of money being transfered around. this went on till the buildings went down... Again WTF is up with that????

OMG! O RLY?! I mean, it wasn't the World Biscuit Towers or even the World PB+J Towers, what was their real name again?

There is way too much fishy crap for me to post it all on here, I just wonder how long till most Americans look at just what is going on, it didnt take Bush long to put together that so called Patriot Act, for me I believe he had it ready to go all along.....

No, please, we're just getting started. Post any more fishy "crap" you come across.

Wow Teddy, can you post a picture of yourself wearing that tin foil hat?

Ok, rub the 2 brain cells you have together and re-read what i wrote. I never said the twin towers burned for more then an hour, I was refering to two other big buildings, One in Venezuela and one in Madrid. THese buildings burned very hot and were not nearly as well made as the WTC complex... yet they didnt fall...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... fires.html

and now it's your turn to show some evidence.... show me Pics of where building 7 EVER got any damage from debris, and how did it catch on fire from jet fule? show how exactly this happened, building 7 was on a diffrent city block.....The official report states that they dont know what started the fires, or why the building actually collapsed, the only possable explanation is desel fuel used for the emergeny generator somehow caught on fire.....


As for the black smoke it is often a sighn of incomplete combustion, usually by a fire that is not hot enough to completely burn what is on fire...

since your too lazy to google this topic, i'll round up some links of those pic's

pics of molten steel pouring out of building(there is a much better video out there)
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Thermite2.htm
Keep in mind, it was IMPOSSABLE for jet fule to get the steel to where it was white hot, even popular mechanics states that

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidenc ... hole1.html

Here are some pic's of people climbing down into the open hole in the building, on the floor where the jet crashed where the fires were so hot that it weakened the beams....If you think these were photo choped, the news also had some clips of this.

Teddy wrote:and now it's your turn to show some evidence.... show me Pics of where building 7 EVER got any damage from debris, and how did it catch on fire from jet fule? show how exactly this happened, building 7 was on a diffrent city block.....The official report states that they dont know what started the fires, or why the building actually collapsed, the only possable explanation is desel fuel used for the emergeny generator somehow caught on fire.....

Building 7 damage (from a Building 7 conspiracy site!)
http://www.wtc7.net/docs/June2004WTC7_P ... ropped.jpg

But again, all you're doing is trying to show something didn't happen, you're not making any kind of statement. "Building 7 was demolitioned by charges" would be a statement. Asking questions isn't proving anything.

As for the black smoke it is often a sighn of incomplete combustion, usually by a fire that is not hot enough to completely burn what is on fire...

Ok, show me a source. How can there be thermite reactions that are so hot they make steel white hot and yet the fire isn't burning completely? Come on, what are you trying to say? "WTC was destroyed from thermite reations after the plane crashed into it" would be saying something.

pics of molten steel pouring out of building(there is a much better video out there)
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Thermite2.htm
Keep in mind, it was IMPOSSABLE for jet fule to get the steel to where it was white hot, even popular mechanics states that

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidenc ... hole1.html

Yup, I'll give you jet fuel can't turn steel molten white hot. However, lots of other things can cause sparks too, such as:

Fireworks! http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/3620 ... ire300.jpg
Electricity! http://www.uncletaz.com/library/scimath ... owcoil.jpg
Lasers! http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl= ... safe%3Doff

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, it's thermite. Why would someone put thermite at one place in the WTC tower?

Remember, the structual strength of the tower is the outershell, so if someone was trying to take the tower down with explosives, they'd have to blow out an entire side of one floor's outer beams. Meaning you'd see thermite reactions all over the place for an entire floor.

And most of all, why run an entire airplane into the building and then cause thermite reactions right below where the plane impacted? It seems odd that their mechanism would still work immediately after a plane crashed on the floor above.

So, I'll make a statement, feel free to prove me wrong. "The sparks were an electrical wire coming up against the steel".

Here are some pic's of people climbing down into the open hole in the building, on the floor where the jet crashed where the fires were so hot that it weakened the beams....If you think these were photo choped, the news also had some clips of this.

I don't really have a hard time believing that people could hang out there.

Here's my claim: "The fire was on the other side of the tower, causing that half of the building to weaken and eventually fail, causing the floors above to fall". So, the plane goes in one side, floors collapse internally, the fire is extinguished on that side as the wind blows into it, the fire rages on in the other causing that side to weaken and fail.

Yes, that side was on fire initially.
http://www.laughtergenealogy.com/bin/wt ... _plane.jpg

But the wind was blowing into it, so the smoke and flame swould shoot out the other side.
http://www.laughtergenealogy.com/bin/wt ... losion.jpg

Wow, that's quite a long linky ... *elbow* *elbow*