The actual buildings and how they fell are not really the question. That one mysterious 3rd building being blown up is alittle suspicious. Ive seen how the arguement of just how the building fell, and wthink it really interesting howso much propganda 'investigations' have all focused on the building falling, versus the way intel was mishandled? Too convenient if you ask me.
No ones digging into why RICE didnt want to pay attention to the CIA's warnings. stuff like that pails in comparison but lets put on a show with cool illustrations that show how the buildings fell, instead of WHY they fell, just to keep the american public diverted from whats the real issue
But why NORAD was not even in the picture at the time. Which is exactly what happened in the London bombings. Both plots were timed when NORAD was running drills..London Bombing was timed exactly as Their authorities were preparing for response for the exact type of threat in the exact location.
Thats too convenient to be a coincidence.
This propelled war INTO IRAQ!!!
Which deviated from the real targets.
That raises suspicion right there.
RICE ignoring that big titled report that she 'doesnt recall', that says what a threat Bin Laden truly was from the CIA.
Then Bush's administration not taking control of Bin Laden when the Saudi's offered him up to them.
All that is more useful evidence in explaining a conpiracy theory.
Add it all up, and the fact that Bush continues to want to stay in the region ... well, that only shows intent and motive.
My only hope is that his ultimate plan of creating new military installations in the middle east is foiled, and his effort that he hoped would secure his legacy never gets fulfilled and Bush becomes the worst of all presidents to ever have served.
thats the best realistic outcome we can hope for.
Ideally I wouldlove to see him tried convicted and executed for his war crimes
But we'll let GOD deal with him
2007-02-18 22:59:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by writersbIock2006 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Science makes me believe it, dear. They didn't collapse because they were hit. If that were the case, they wouldn't have stood for hours afterwards. They collapsed because of the fires, fueled in part by burning jet fuel, that raged inside. The jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel, but it does burn hot enough to cause structural steel to lose over half its strength. When the steel has the consistency of Silly Putty, the building collapses.
One of the designers of the towers said that they had designed the buildings to withstand an airplane hit - which is only reasonable, considering how often the Empire State Building has been hit - but they never designed them for the kind of fire that resulted on 9/11.
Take a look at the link below for more information.
2007-02-19 06:45:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Look buddy, just to settle this, It was ON LIVE TV, so trust me, it was probably the planes. And if not, then sign me up for the next theory just like a magic bullet passing through JFK and Connelly. I personally don´t believe it, but it is fine to believe that too, that is why we were born with brains and not computer chips in the hollow area where an actual cerebrum might be. I don´t like Bush but to me your theory sounds silly. But hey, many of mine sound silly too. Ten four, maybe in the next life. This is Sir Major Tom to ground control, can anybody hear me. Is there more life out there, let me know, budddddddddddy.
Peace
2007-02-19 07:27:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by nassim420 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The airplanes were only part of the problem. The resulting fire caused the steel supports to melt. As the floor above the impact collapsed it brought with it the full inertia of all of the weight above it to the floor below. Repeat the process over and over until you run out of floors. Gravity pulls things straight down. What part do you not understand?
2007-02-19 07:33:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jacob W 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm all for a good conspiracy but this is too much. It's up there with the one about the plane not actually crashing into the Pentagon and still being in service to this day.
2007-02-19 06:48:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by homer28b 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Dude...maybe because u kno NOTHING about how buildings work. My cousin is an architect who helps works on high rises and he said about 95% of skyscrappers in the world would have done the same. Why dont u spend ur time trying to disprove the moon landing or something.
2007-02-19 06:45:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
What? Are you trying to sell conspiracy books or something? Are you one of those who believe that Elvis is still alive? C'mon, genius. You really should spend your time on most productive things.
2007-02-19 07:11:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Beachman 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
No matter what anyone ever says to you i'm sure you'll never change your mind about 9-11 being a conspiracy so why even bother asking this question.
2007-02-19 06:42:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by julia4evert 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Physics. Metallurgy. Science.
2007-02-19 07:02:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by jack_scar_action_hero 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
The buildings were designed to fall exactly the way they did.Do some research into the building of the twin towers and you will find that to be true.
2007-02-19 06:44:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jan 7
·
0⤊
1⤋