http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pJQ2yZfTY0
2006-10-13 06:34:28 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
this is important
2006-10-13 06:37:50 · update #1
It looks like controlled demolition to me. The 9/11 Conmission report, and especially the NIST report ignore the facts regarding the steel core of the building.
One old government report states that
The core columns were box sections fabricated from A36 steel plate and were 36 inches [91.44 cm] x 14-16 inches [35.56-40.64 cm] with plate thickness from 3/4 inch [1.91 cm] to 4 inches [10.16 cm].
So Imagine a pieces of steel 4 inches thick.
Now turn that into a box section 36 inches by 14 inches. That means there is only a 6 inch gap, if we are using 4 inch steel.
It is almost, but not quite, a solid steel piece
36 inches wide and 14 inches thick.
So, you have the idea.
Now, take 47 pieces of steel like that, point them vertically, add cross brcaes of similar dimensions, and call them the central core. Yes, there were 47 such columns in the central core.
These are the dimensions at the lower floors of the building. Higher up, they came progressively lighter, and eventually used steel ONLY three quarters of an inch thick.
Isn't it amazing how these incredibly strong structures are just simply excluded from all government analyses of the collapse.
The governments latest NIST report implies that there were no central core columns, and that the floors spanned the whole width and breadth of the buuilding, with no internal support. Simply ridiculous.
How did they all break into convenient 30 foot long pieces?
How on earth could the floors collapse without leaving ANY of this central core sticking up?
2006-10-13 12:21:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. When will people stop believing everything they see on the net. The sheer magnitude of the type of conspiracy that you seem to think happened would be mind-boggling. The Bush-haters love this stuff. Personally, it makes me sick and sad. This country is so polarized that I have serious doubts about it's very survival. Lunatic Islamic extremists destroyed the Twin Towers and other surrounding buildings. If anyone had even the smallest amount of evidence, don't you think they would have taken it to the New York Times by now? I know, the government controls all of the media.... right. How about the French media, they hate us. The French media would be all over it. The Canadian media would run with it. But no. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing by the Bush administration. These are just the wet dreams of a few kooks. It saddens me.
2006-10-13 13:46:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nothing of the conspiracy theories of 9/11 are remotely true, except that of the Al-Qaida hijackers. I have heard everything from the temperature of the jet-fuel to people being forced from their offices a few weeks before 9/11. And the truth? Most of these theories were made up by internet losers who somehow convinced dull-witted individuals that their lies and false information are true. There may be a rogue scientist or professor to back up some claims, but none of them are considered experts in their fields. Every theory can be explained in scientific and logical ways as incorrect.
Let's not impose unneeded emotional effects on those that lost relatives for the sake of a twisted joke.
2006-10-13 14:01:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ok, yes on Buidling 7 there is something up there most likely.
But not the main two towers.
Building 7 housed secured government locations and a bunker for government. We have no idea what ( and will never know) what the government stored or housed in that building.
It is possible the damage to the building was serious enough that all back up power and main power failed, which could have caused certain materials to be unstable or cause a serious containment issue.
If this was the case destroying ( with perhaps a back up destruction device already in place) was used to control the situation
So in general the orgianl crash may have caused the damage to the extect the government had to destroy the rest of the building for either security of mateials in the building, or safely if there were chemilas or bio material in there.
2006-10-13 13:40:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
As much as the Media hates GWB, it would be front page news around the world if this idea had even a shred of credibility.
2006-10-13 13:41:22 · answer #5 · answered by Kelly T 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The conspiracy kooks just never stop. Its frightening
2006-10-13 13:44:20 · answer #6 · answered by J D 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Don't know, don't care. Irrelevant.
2006-10-13 13:36:32 · answer #7 · answered by college_republicans_club 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I certainly do, it was pulled!
2006-10-13 13:48:24 · answer #8 · answered by Ammy 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
crap...more conspiracy weirdo's?
2006-10-13 13:37:40 · answer #9 · answered by bushfan88 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋