In Detroit in 2000 a gasoline tanker truck exploded on the elevated overpass exit ramp from I-75 to I-94. Also the explosion of a gasoline tanker truck will leave a big crater in the highway.
http://www.greatdreams.com/homeland-security.htm
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051124/NEWS12/51124008
A gasoline tanker crashed and burst into flames near the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge creating such intense heat that a stretch of highway melted and collapsed.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/29/highway.collapse.ap/index.html
It may not seem that burning gasoline is so hot but burning gasoline has a temperature above 1500° E (945° C). Therefore, it can heat objects in the fire area above its ignition temperature.
http://www.columbusfire.net/fire/gasoline.shtml
Steel is not an element. It is a compound. The melting point of steel depends on the mixture of the elements it contains.
Iron (Fe) is an element that is the main component of steel. The "melting point" of iron is
1535.0 °C (1808.15 K, 2795.0 °F)
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/fe.html
Steel is an alloy comprised mostly of iron, with a carbon content between 0.02 % and 1.7 % by weight, depending on grade. Carbon is the most cost-effective alloying material for iron, but various other alloying elements are used such as manganese and tungsten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel
At what temperature does a floor truss begin to sag if it is not coated in fire-resistant insulation? How hot can a fire burn if it is well (very well) ventilated? 1000 degrees F? 2000 degrees F? According to NASA jet fuel CAN burn as hot as 3000 degrees F. See this video to understand how the WTC tower 1 and 2 collapsed...the drywall was the "inside agent"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Sa0u3XAYkIs
The high temperatures of the burning jet fuel, steel, plastics and other components made the whole area intensely hot and structures nearby were irrepairably damaged (building 7).
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XImQ6a-VrnA&mode=related&search=
Larry Silversteing, building owner and FDNY pulled building 7.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=C3E-26oVIIs
Rosie O'Donnell will be leaving "The View" in June. Rosie O'Donnell used emotion to obfuscate fact and her celebrity status to rally people to impeach President Bush. On "The View " Rosie O'Donnell adamantly declared that, "it was the first time in history that fire melted steel' (in building 7 of WTC).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba6j2k6wzdQ&mode=related&search=.
She begins her tirade with, "Historically have governments ever faked incidents or incited incidents to get them into war."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fPtEQk0k3YI
2007-04-30 23:14:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think you want an answer and I hate to have to defend the current den of loonies in the White House but I doubt if these guys could pull any grand conspiracy off. Almost every policy they have tried to implement has been a disaster. They have mishandled the energy policy, the war, the occupation, medical costs, education, environment, they can't fire appointed attorneys when all they have to say is you're fired because we want to appoint someone else. This group of brainiacs stumbled into office and through several elections where they managed to lie their way to power. Now, simply putting their machinations in the light has almost shut down the government, Wait until someone gets real evidence. You will long for the good old days of gridlock, instead of paralysis and devastation. But, I do not believe the Bushketeers are part of any conspiracy except the plot to keep us in the dark.
2007-04-27 14:47:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by pedrodepaca78 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
People like to attach aliens, lazers and reptiles to alternative 9/11 to discredit them.
There is no evidence Bin Laden carried out the attacks so it goes both ways.
There are accounts of WTC shutdowns on weekends at least for a month or more, under the security company headed by Marvin Bush.
The Osama tape appears to be faked as the Bin Laden doesn't look like the Bin Laden we know and love.
Think about the official 9/11 story and ask yourself, is this story really believable, or do I just believe this story because it was all I heard for a year straight, day in and day out?
Ask yourself why Bush stonewalled an investigation for two years Automatic read flag to any rational thinking person.
2007-04-27 15:10:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
You mean besides the fact, that not one conspiracy group has yet to articulate just how the WTC could have been brought down with demolition's.
Not one has articulated just how the explosives were planted and connected without a single tenet in the WTC noticing anything amiss.
Just how would someone gain access to the support column's without Tenets noticing that walls were being torn out?
Just how were the explosives connected without tenets noticing miles of det cord strung all over the building.?
Why would they both fly airlines into the buildings and use explosives ?
Why would they blame it on 19 saudi's, instead of 19 Iraqi's or 19 Taliban or 19 Iranians?
You would think the head of security for the WTC who died on 9/11 might have noticed all this activity.
2007-04-27 14:01:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by jeeper_peeper321 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
The only fact in this question is,if you hate George W Bush,it's an inside job,if you like George W Bush it's not,it's the same argument people have been making over the area 51 flying saucer story,I neither like Bush nor hate him,and neither there has been any evidence to link him to the attack or evidence that he was not on it,do you think the democrats especially Reid,Sharpton and Hillary who hate his guts would keep quiet,do not tell me you have more evidence available to you than they do,them being in government contact,or are you insinuating they are also part of the plot
2007-04-27 14:07:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is no defense when one has to defend such ludicrous theories. Some sources supporting the official theory have tried with "facts" but the problem was that the facts they used were faulty at best.
2007-04-27 17:27:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by V 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
I agree. When this subject arises on a thread, it usually attracts 15 to 25 responses at least. They are obviously afraid that the truth is going to get to too many people.
2007-04-27 14:01:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by robinhood 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
They have no valid argument. The facts suggest that the official 9/11 story simply isn't what happened.
2007-04-27 14:32:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by AZ123 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'll show you one very specific example how some 9/11 theory made misleading claim. And you have to read this entire explanation in order to understand.
There is a BBC article that talks about people being identified as 911 hijackers. What happened was that 911 hijackers have used false ID. As you know some criminals use fake IDs. So when some of the IDs were traced back, they were traced to its original owner. Making it look like hijackers are 'alive' to authorities. Because their IDs are traced to live people.
Hijackers died in plane crash. But owners of stolen IDs are alive. So the BBC article is titled
Hijack 'Suspects' Found Alive and Well.
And note the quotation mark around 'Suspects'. BBC didn't mean hijack suspects are alive. If you read this article you'll quickly see another line in it that says "Mistaken identity."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
This article, which talks about mistaken identity is used by 911 conspiracy people all the time to claim that hijack suspects are still alive. When the article in fact, do not say they are.
From that BBC article.
" FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt."
They didn't find actual hijackers and that's why the title had quotation mark around 'suspects.'
911 conspiracy people turned this article about mistaken identity into 911 mystery.
There are lot of misleading claims like this one in 911 conspiracy.
I should remind you 911 conpiracy people call so called 'non believers' all kinds of names too. They call people idiots and closed minded for not doing their own 'research.' Name calling comes from both sides.
There's lot of things in 911 conspiracy theory that also defy common sense.
WTC is claimed to have been set up for demolition, but when jet plane runs into it, the crash do not set off any explosives in the building. WTC is on fire, but it does not set off demolition explosives?
911 is claimed to be execuse for Iraq War, but non of the hijackers are from Iraq.
People ignore fact that Iraqi dissidents have asked our gov over 10 years to remove Saddam since 1991 Iraq War.
Pentagon is said to be hit by Tomahawk missile which contains 1000lbs of high explosives, but leave hole 20ft wide? And no bomb crater? It was reinforce concrete wall which planes can't penetrate, so only the pointed nose punched relatively small hole while the rest of plane exploded. If it was missile damage would have been far worse. These missiles can penetrate bunkers, destroy city block, but only made 20ft hole in Pentagon?
WTC7 had more damage than fire. Initial report do say fire, but the report was not finished at the time. They do not report unfinished report. Investigation on structural part need to be finished to be reported. More reports are due out in 2007. Such investigation can take many years and this is not TV show where everything gets done in couple of minutes.
People claim Silverstein admitted to blowing up his own building by using insider slang 'pull' when he is not a demolition expert and same time they claim he wanted insurance money. So... he wanted insurance money and decides to admitt blowing it up on his own?
That's like someone telling their insurance company, 'I burned down my house, give me my insurance money.'
Silverstein is not that stupid. You think man like him, who owned number of multimillion dollar buildings will be so stupid he'll go on TV to confess to a crime?
And why? If it is 'inside job'?
If you know the history of our Iraq policy and neocon's ideas about democracy promotion, 9/11 played relatively small part in case for Iraq War 2003.
2007-04-27 17:07:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are few Americans around who would kill themselves for their God (or for Bush/Cheney). especially in the CIA or other government agencies.
The evidence I see is that some lunatic suicidal guys flew themselves and airplanes into the buildings. No American, much less 19 Americans, would have done that.
2007-04-27 14:47:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋