Is the Terror Attacks of 911 the biggest Lie in History ??

Question

Sheeple People who refuse to accept the fact that the Bush administration Orchestrated the Terror Attacks of 911 are just plain ignorant. It's impossible for Jet fuel or Kerosene to melt iron...LOOK AT THE PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS. Also if the floors collapsed causing a chain reaction it would have taken well over 90 seconds for the buildings to come down. They came down at free fall speed....9 seconds. There is no logical argument here. Explosives were pre-planted in the building. Case closed! Why are so many people having a hard time accepting this?

Check out this link....

http://www.organicconsumers.org/Politics/911scandal052305.cfm

Answer 1

It IS one of the biggest lies in history.

It ranks up there with JFK assassination and WWII. We will never know the real reasons nor the real conspirators.

Answer 2

My, my, my, a whole boatload of stupidity and misconceptions to tackle here. Steel does NOT need to be melted to cause structural failure. Temperatures of 1200 degrees F, very possible in a jet fuel fire, would have decreased the structural integrity of the steel in half. This weakening of the molecular structure added to the extra forces of the expanding steel beams (thermal expansion) is more than enough to explain the collapse of the failure of the steel structure.

Your free-fall time is correct, however you fail to mention that this time is an oversimplification of what is actually going on when a building collapses. This would be the theoretical time it would take an object to hit the ground being dropped off the top of the WTC tower, NEGLECTING air resistance or any other retarding force. When this building collapsed, the upper floors had to hit and push through lower floors one at a time (a retarding force slowing down acceleration). This action would most definitely have slowed the building's collapse significantly. Basically, your assumption that the building should be in free-fall is faulty.

Answer 3

Look. buildings of that size are designed to fall in on themselves. Are you aware of the weight that was carried on the floors above plane strikes? Use your head and not your feelings. Don't get pulled in by stupid propaganda. Look into the engineering facts that would happen when the main beams of the building, in the area the strikes, either melt of collapse from impact. Remember, its not only the jet fuel that is burning. Combine all the flammible material in there and your fire is twice as hot! The buildings came down exactly the way they were designed to in a disaster. There is no way the intense weight, of a force being drawn down seperately by gravity, that the rest of the building could have carried the weight. When a weightlifter lifts weight and one his muscles fails the whole thing comes down. unfortunately a building cannot move out of the way like a weightlifter. There were thousands of lives save because they came down that way. You didn't need charges to have them come down the way they did. For crying out loud, get a life!

Answer 4

Strictly, it was not an attack. If they had really wanted to hurt us, they could have brought the planes down onto the D.C security infrastructure/bureaucracy. It seems more they wanted to make a point that Islam exists, even impress the young, gain recruits.

The view that these were CIA robot planes is likely erroneous. Too difficult to get out of an airport, too much eye contact with pilot by ground personnel. Also, remember that the central strut failure happens only after the structure is already impaired, and after one floor collapses on another producing domino effect.
Nevertheless, some things do need to be explained by the govt.

The puffs of smoke coming out of the lower floors probably result from overpressure. But terrorist teams hiding charges shortly prior to attack in maintenance areas cannot be excluded.
Like you, I would like to know, though, how it was that the building in the back came to be "taken down" ??


Congestion is the biggest issue with low oil prices:
IT RISKS THE LOSS OF FOREIGN SCIENTISTS WHO LARGELY POWER U.S. RESEARCH EFFORTS AS THEIR HOME COUNTRIES ALL HAVE EXCELLENT TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE. The only viable solution is a highway-overpass-compatible PRT system called Hallitubes.

Answer 5

"Is the"?

Look - not trying to be the language police, but your rants would be much better received if they were written properly.

I think the biggest lie in history is that 9/11 was an inside job. I've asked you before, so I'll ask again - if the gov't really was heartless enough to slaughter 3000+ people just for showing up to work that day, what makes you think *you* are so special? You would have had a "convenient" accident the first time you posted this hate-filled BS.

Answer 6

Yes my man. Bush, Cheney and that Rumsfeld set the explosives. None of their relatives got killed right brother! Bush had the levees in New Orleans blown up. Bush is responsible for Global warming. Reagan started the aids virus. The Bush grandfather led the attach on Pearl Harbor and blamed it on the Japs. The Bushies do this all for their rich oil friends. They all split up the money off shore. Anyone with brains could see this AT THE PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS. The republicans are all BRAINWASHED my brother!

Answer 7

Look at what you just wrote. Do you admit that the Twin Towers fell? Yes.

Are you denying that planes flew into them at all?

Are you denying that almost 3,000 people died?

So what's your point?

Most of you Alex wannabees can't answer the simple question, "what would the government gain from it?"

A recession that we're still pulling out of?

A hit to the airline industry?

Increased oil prices?

A war that we're pouring money into and losing and that's costing Cheney and co. tons of future contracts?

It isn't logical, it doesn't make sense.

The fact is we simply can't explain the way the towers fell because we're never run lab experiments on running two planes into twin towers.

Sure, there have been a few kooky scientists who have agreed with you, but most agree with what happened as being from a plane.

Until you can provide motive, evidence, and opportunity, you're simply blowing smoke because that idiot in Texas has convinced you to follow him like a sheep.

Answer 8

If true, Dictator Dumbya, a title he has earned BEFORE considering the possiblity of guilt in this event, would be a criminal ranking with the evil of the worst like Hitler. Now if you or someone else has a case with ALL the elements of proof necessary for a prosecution, then the investigative report should earn a Pulitzer.

Answer 9

I'm having a hard time accepting you are allowed out of the asylum. Gas on fire CAN in fact melt steel. There is a great documentary on PBS with engineers going over all the pieces of the building in the scrap heaps and researching film footage.

And what about those pesky planes and passengers that hundreds of witnesses saw fly into the buildings and dozens of injured people in the buildings recount how they saw the plane coming right at them.

Seriously, get help or get educated.

Answer 10

No, it is not. The liberal lie is.

Also, how did they melt steel before? People have been working with steel for 1000's of years using coal and wood. Do you think there was any hydrocarbons or wood in the offices? Any plastic or desks? Any paper? A whole freakin' jet and several hundred people?

Answer 11

come on it didn't met the"steel" it warped it by having temperatures greatly exceed its ability allowing it to bend- once it bent - then it fell.- you say 9 seconds- yes but the entire building did not collpase in 9 seconds- if you watch the tapes you can see internal structures within the smoke still collapsing long after your 9 second count. people have a hard time accepting this because you don't understand physics my friend- stop listening to idiots about physics and listen to a phisicist! your getting your info from the horses rear when you should be listening to its mouth.