9/11: Inside Job or Terror Attack?

cyrusdvirus

Thor wrote: »

Difficult yes, Impossible hell no!!!

It would difficult to get a plane upside down and still fly a fair distance before crashing, But that apparently happened aswell.

All I'm say is that if your intention is to take something down, You aim for the bottom, Or at least as close as you can get.

They didn't and aimed for the top and could have easily gotten closer to the bottom if they wanted too.

Or maybe, given that these lads had very basic flying skills, they figured they'd just aim for the 2 buildings they could hit, and not worry about where they wanted to hit them.

Bin Laden himself said that he never expected the towers to fall, the most he hoped for was that the parts above the impact would fall off/ collapse.




Feck it, they nearly missed the south tower!

endabob1

I know this is the interweb home of conspiracy theorists but almost 50% of people believe there was some elements of an inside job, WOW that is an astonishing insight to the psyche on here.

Thor

gatecrash wrote: »

Or maybe, given that these lads had very basic flying skills, they figured they'd just aim for the 2 buildings they could hit, and not worry about where they wanted to hit them.

Bin Laden himself said that he never expected the towers to fall, the most he hoped for was that the parts above the impact would fall off/ collapse.




Feck it, they nearly missed the south tower!

It was also reported that they made 'Unexplained Expert Maneuvers' when reaching New York, Something to do with an extremely high degree turn, Something only an "EXPERT" could have done.

Also, I'm not talking about that hard of a Maneuver, Just simply aim lower.

The real argument is how the hell did they fall, The jet fuel would have burned up in the initial impact and i highly doubt the computer stuff and carpet burned hot enough to melt metal.

--Kaiser--

Thor wrote: »

It was also reported that they made 'Unexplained Expert Maneuvers' when reaching New York, Something to do with an extremely high degree turn, Something only an "EXPERT" could have done.

Also, I'm not talking about that hard of a Maneuver, Just simply aim lower.

The real argument is how the hell did they fall, The jet fuel would have burned up in the initial impact and i highly doubt the computer stuff and carpet burned hot enough to melt metal.

There is no argument about how they fell. Experts in the field know exactly how they fell and have detailed it at great length. You may not understand how they fell but you're an uninformed ignoramus and no-one cares what you think

Thor

Here is the MIT engineer, Explaning how what happened had to be controlled demolition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCLHL5iToJ8

Apologies if it has been posted before.

cyrusdvirus

Thor wrote: »

It was also reported that they made 'Unexplained Expert Maneuvers' when reaching New York, Something to do with an extremely high degree turn, Something only an "EXPERT" could have done.

Also, I'm not talking about that hard of a Maneuver, Just simply aim lower.

The real argument is how the hell did they fall, The jet fuel would have burned up in the initial impact and i highly doubt the computer stuff and carpet burned hot enough to melt metal.

The real argument? Good Jesus Christ, how many times does it have to be explained??

Plane carrying fuck loads of fuel crashes into tower, weakening it's outer shell.

No matter what way you look at it the fuel does not flash burn in an instant. Pour a litre of petrol onto the ground and light it. see how long it takes to burn out. It is not instant.

The fireproof protection on the metal supports was blown away by the impact, and most importantly the metal DOES NOT NEED TO MELT, just lose its structural strength. heat it enough to soften it and have a couple of thousand tonnes of building sitting on top of it, and see what happens.

--Kaiser--

Thor wrote: »

Here is the MIT engineer, Explaning how what happened had to be controlled demolition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCLHL5iToJ8

Apologies if it has been posted before.

I have an engineering degree, does that mean I'm right about any old nonsense I start spouting? You only need common sense to know controlled demolition was impossible (how do you rig explosives in a building that don't detonate when a plane full of 1000's of gallons of jet fuel crash into it?)

Of course it was a terrorist attack , just dont know who is in control of the terrorists . So it might be an inside job. It might not .

Thor

I apologies if I'm not as gullible as some people, But to be fair, Alot of things don't add up.

I have read countless articles about 'How they fell' and all of them make massive assumptions.

They fact is that, That the disbelieve is caused simply by fact, Things that aren't being explain through the great explanations giving by those articles that say everything make sense and this was a terrorist attack.

Even the US government didn't think it was, They spent something like $40,000,000 trying to find out if bill Clinton cheated on his wife!!

They spent just about $600,000 on investigating the twin towers collapse. They have also stated all the evidence of the collapse was destroyed.

I'm not saying i know what happened that day, I'm just saying some things don't add up.

Forgive me if this get's to personal for you, Just remember the title of the thread and the reason it's here.

teol

Thor wrote: »

Here is the MIT engineer, Explaning how what happened had to be controlled demolition.


Apologies if it has been posted before.

Who cares what a former electrical engineer thinks.

Thor

What he said make senses and because he is the one asking questions, the best people can do is go after his credentials

Argue the merits and facts!!

If what he says is nonsense and ridiculous then please prove what he is saying is wrong.

The point is that you can't because what he says is FACT! there is no assumptions made on his part towards his end results.

That can't be said for the explanations given for there collapse.

smash

I once heard a theory that the WTC changed it's cleaning service company a moth before the incident, where during the day all the cleaners were women and at night they were all men. And this is when the towers were rigged. I asked the guy to show me a link to that theory and he couldn't find one.

cyrusdvirus

Thor wrote: »

What he said make senses and because he is the one asking questions, the best people can do is go after his credentials

Argue the merits and facts!!

If what he says is nonsense and ridiculous then please prove what he is saying is wrong.

The point is that you can't because what he says is FACT! there is no assumptions made on his part towards his end results.

That can't be said for the explanations given for there collapse.

I don't have access to youtube at work, so what is he saying? I'll prove it wrong.

teol

Thor wrote: »

Even the US government didn't think it was, They spent something like $40,000,000 trying to find out if bill Clinton cheated on his wife!!

They spent just about $600,000 on investigating the twin towers collapse. They have also stated all the evidence of the collapse was destroyed.
.

You are full of bull****. Why don't you do a bit of research before spouting crap.

Following the massive terrorist attacks against New York and Washington, the FBI dedicated 7,000 of its 11,000 Special Agents and thousands of FBI support personnel to the PENTTBOM investigation. "PENTTBOM" is short for Pentagon, Twin Towers Bombing.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/intelligence/timeline

gbee

gatecrash wrote: »

The real argument? Good Jesus Christ, how many times does it have to be explained??

Plane carrying fuck loads of fuel crashes into tower, weakening it's outer shell.

Yea, I don't know why people don't get it? A man is crucified and three days later is alive again, he's the son of God, for feeeec sake.

orangebud

I think there has to be a new investigation some thing just dont add up

I was working in a bar when 911 happened. A bus load of Americans had came for irish coffee 30 minutes before it all happened, Felt kind of guilty charging them for the overpriced Irish coffee

the local pisshead got free pints of them great day for him :P

dr.bollocko

Oh look.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1489

A 9/11 subforum of the conspiracy theories forum where threads like this are welcomed.

They might be more welcoming to alternative points of view there than here.

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

There is no argument about how they fell. Experts in the field know exactly how they fell and have detailed it at great length. You may not understand how they fell but you're an uninformed ignoramus and no-one cares what you think

teol wrote: »

You are full of bull****. Why don't you do a bit of research before spouting crap.

Ease up on the personal stuff.

This thread is done.