Trillion Dollar Conspiracy... 9/11 Mounting Evidence...

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Imagewerx

It'd explain why the concrete turned into dust...


But I'm not so sure that that's true...


I was under the impression that the Mob doesn't exist

The concrete could not have turned to dust based on the OS. The concrete is need to add weight against gaining resistance and keep the speed of collapse as steady as it was. The weight of the top section did not come down evenly on WTC 2 as we all saw and the NIST models showed the down force had actually decreased on the opposite end of the building from the direction of the tipping. So for a "global collapse" to continue evenly down the length of the building there needs to be weight added to the collapse with every floor on its way down. If the concrete is being ejected from the building, and the top section is tipping to one side, it does not leave much down force to spread evenly across all floors to break evenly floor by floor, or global initiation as the OSers say.

Besides the NIST report reeks of limited liability. They do not have to stand behind a single conclusion since it is mentioned in the report numerous times that the results were limited to a small amount of debris evidence as well as limits in time and money.

They were not even paid enough to provide a visual simulation of the results but my guess is because it would have looked ridiculous and unbelievable as all the amatuer attempts to make one were.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

Many of the testimonies I hadn't heard before...
Some will be known to you for sure...

Did you know that the CIA owes it's existence to the events at Pearl Harbour? Great job with 9/11 then..especially since they knew plenty...forget the FBI for the moment.
At the trial of the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the fledgling pilot in Minnesota interested in learning to steer a plane but indifferent as to how to land it, this emerged,

That documents show that on Aug. 23rd 2001, Tenet was given an alarming briefing, focusing on Moussaoui, titled "Islamic Extremist Learns to Fly." Tenet was told that Moussaoui was training to fly a 747 and, among other suspicion-arousing data, had paid for the training in cash., the fledgling pilot in Minnesota interested in learning to steer a plane but indifferent as to how to land it, "Tenet was told that Moussaoui was training to fly a 747 and, among other suspicion-arousing data, had paid for the training in cash. Tenet who had testified previously that he and G.W. were on their hols all of August and had not met, had indeed met with G.W. at least twice, the second being on the 24th August 2001..the day after Tenet was given the data on Moussaoui.

At breakfast on 9/11 itself this occured,
Michael Getler, then-ombudsman for the Washington Post, alluded to one very telling sign leaping out of a conversation between George Tenet and former Sen. David Boren over breakfast on 9/11.

When an aide rushed up to tell Tenet of the attacks, Tenet's immediate reaction was "This has bin Laden all over it...I wonder if it has anything to do with this guy taking pilot training."
So that brings me to Bin Laden, since Tenet already had the info on Bin Laden even before the info on Moussaoui, courtesy of the French authorities.
Some people made the comparisons with Watergate at this stage, 'What did the president know...and when did he know it?'

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
...... gaining resistance

No.

While the columns indeed got stronger on the way down, the floors and their connections do not. Stuff fell on the floors, and there's no way that the weight can be focused onto the columns, therefore the resistance was the same all the way down.

You, as many other fantasists, have taken the Bazant limiting case analysis ( he proves that the collapse would continue to the ground) where he made the assumption that all weight WAS concentrated onto the columns, as what really happened, and then use this as a basis for your faked incredulity. An honest researcher would know about Bazant and the assumptions he made, and why (he wanted to see what would happen in the most favorable case for collapse arrest ) and never make this objection. An activist however, doesn't care and will make any statement that he or she thinks is a logical argument.

It's not....

So for a "global collapse" to continue evenly down the length of the building there needs to be weight added to the collapse with every floor on its way down.

And there was.

If the concrete is being ejected from the building,

A very small percentage was. And drywall too. And insulation dust.

But regardless of this, the weight in motion increased.

The fantasist view is that apparently, ALL the concrete was turned instantly turned to dust and ALL of it was ejected. Pure drivel, and there's zero way to justify it in the real world.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Imagewerx

It'd explain why the concrete turned into dust...


But I'm not so sure that that's true...


I was under the impression that the Mob doesn't exist

Besides the NIST report reeks of limited liability. They do not have to stand behind a single conclusion since it is mentioned in the report numerous times that the results were limited to a small amount of debris evidence as well as limits in time and money.

They were not even paid enough to provide a visual simulation of the results but my guess is because it would have looked ridiculous and unbelievable as all the amatuer attempts to make one were.

They ran out of funds when someone mentioned 'molten metal'

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Imagewerx

It'd explain why the concrete turned into dust...


But I'm not so sure that that's true...


I was under the impression that the Mob doesn't exist

Besides the NIST report reeks of limited liability. They do not have to stand behind a single conclusion since it is mentioned in the report numerous times that the results were limited to a small amount of debris evidence as well as limits in time and money.

They were not even paid enough to provide a visual simulation of the results but my guess is because it would have looked ridiculous and unbelievable as all the amatuer attempts to make one were.

They ran out of funds when someone mentioned 'molten metal'

I believe it was WTC 2 that they had NO blueprint for tenant improvements on all but 2 floors impacted by the plane. That in itself is a HUGE no-no to not have 'as-built' prints to give to the base building. But what was interesting is that these were the floors where the fire simulation was "very sensitive" to the layout of walls and furniture where as in WTC 1 where they DID have a complete set of drawings, the fire model was "NOT sensitive" to the location of walls and furniture. Absolutely ridiculous IMO. NIST completely fabricated the fire model on WTC 2 and forced the fire to behave based on NIST fabrications.

LOL - the laws of physics and reality were suspended that day - nothing like it before or since has (or will) occur and in my opinion, entities within the US shadow government attacked New York and the Pentagon on 11th September 2001 and blamed others so they could attack and control vital Oil reserves and implement fractal reserve banking and consequential economics.

19 Saudi hijackers evaded the most sophisticated security in the world, had NORAD scratching their heads wondering if the whole damn thing was real or fake, which was apparently fake so they were stood-down.

About an hour between the planes hitting tower 1 and tower 2, then a couple of hours later they both collapse, then another tower not hit by a plane collapsed......because it was on fire.

Passport found in the rubble, black boxes still missing, OBL named within an hour as the main perpetrator, Pentagon hit by a missile.

Patriot Act ink was still wet when rolled out, then Afghanistan was freed, and pipeline plans formalized, and poppy fields taken over.

I could go on but you get the picture.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Same old argument, same old misguided science and witness statements.

I am open to the possibility that something untoward happened. But for you people to hash up the same old tired stories is boring. Half the science used to claim "inside job" is so far off and made to fit a theory.

And all those saying we have 1900 engineers and architects to attest...yeah who cares seeming that is under 1 percent of total registered across the US. So when those numbers are truly looked at it means nothing...except the other 99 percent of engineers and architects are laughing at their stupid peers.

originally posted by: projectbane
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Same old argument, same old misguided science and witness statements.

I am open to the possibility that something untoward happened. But for you people to hash up the same old tired stories is boring. Half the science used to claim "inside job" is so far off and made to fit a theory.

And all those saying we have 1900 engineers and architects to attest...yeah who cares seeming that is under 1 percent of total registered across the US. So when those numbers are truly looked at it means nothing...except the other 99 percent of engineers and architects are laughing at their stupid peers.

1% of an entire industry has COME FORWARD to voice their opinion. For you to assume the other 99% disagree with them is quite misleading.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

All 3 of the buildings that were utterly pulverized by sudden destruction were also advertised in previous years as being some of the strongest buildings on earth, and yet all the other ones in the complex were hit far harder and they stood during the years the 3 buildings smoldered while UNDERWATER.

It is truly incredible the fear the firefighters have to talk about that event, most of them are scarred more by the officials who dealt with them than the towers falling on their heads.

And the world which was already duped beyond all belief moved into an even worse situation of being in TOTAL DENIAL.

DNA LEVEL reconstruction is completely evident, the tentacles of design in which to make such a ploy work amongst so many people at all levels, to make them FEAR FOR THEIR VERY SOULS, at the thought of openly questioning such an event, is telling.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
No, no and thrice no.

It was a bunch of poorly trained Arab terrorists, expertly guiding the planes into the towers. Okay, it was the first case of steel structured building to collapse because of fire, but this was an unprecedented event.

Did you know that on the morning of 9/11 Rumsfeld was in a security meeting at the Pentagon trying to secure funding for further security measures against acts of terrorism, when the plane was expertly flown into it? Can you imagine how the conversation turned once the attack occurred?

Good ole Don raced to the scene, rolled up his sleeves and got on with aiding the injured.

Nice word choice, not so subtle, but a valiant try. Poorly trained. Not so much, as they took pilot lessons, the same type of lessons that many amateur pilots take on their quest to be get their wings.
Expertly flown. I'm not a pilot, but I know plenty, and I know it doesn't take a trained CIA operative to fly a plane into a building.

Leave the bias at home, it makes me take you less seriously, when you may truly have a point.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

1% of an entire industry has COME FORWARD to voice their opinion. For you to assume the other 99% disagree with them is quite misleading.

You have got to read this, Pay close attention to this part:
The president and board had told him (Richard Gage), "We believe that the NIST investigation and the resulting NIST report are valid and credible”

And this part:
I see no credibilty whatsoever in the 911 truth movement and I believe, like the vast majority of tall building professionals, that all the failures at the WTC ( WTC 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7) were a direct or indirect result of the planes that were flown into the two towers. I have carefully looked at the evidence that the 911 truth movement presents and I cannot see any evidence of a controlled demolition. Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views.

When peddling his 9/11 claptrap Richard Gage's name is inevitably followed by the initials “AIA” obviously meant to suggest that the AIA (American Institute of Architects) endorses his views and/or that membership in the group is some sort of special honor like being a member of the National Academy of Sciences or Royal Society. But the truth is that full membership in the AIA is open to anyone with a valid US architects license who pays their (tax deductible) dues [1] and the group has fully accepted the “NIST report and recommendations” [2]. Gage obviously knows the former and has acknowledged he was aware of the latter in a letter to the group's president.[3]. The president and board had told him, "We believe that the NIST investigation and the resulting NIST report are valid and credible” [4]. So his use of the acronym is obviously a misleading attempt to beef up his credibility or perhaps he suffers from initial envy and like Fetzer, Jones, Griffin and other prominent truthers wanted the right to string three letters after his name. The group at least once (apparently privately) advised him not to create the impression there was any link between them and his group AE911T [5] But the AIA never AFAIK specifically and publicly disavowed Gage's views.

Not that is until now. Scott Frank, head of media relations for the AIA, told veteran journalist Jeremy Stahl writing for Architect, the group's magazine, “We don’t have any relationship with his organization whatsoever”, “It is somewhat troubling that he sort of portrays the notion that we have a relationship when we certainly do not” and “there is absolutely zero relationship … [between our groups], nor will there ever be in the future.” [6]

Gage recently wrapped up his 'WORLD PREMIERE TOUR “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out” Final Edition', which included an event at the AIA's national HQ in Washington D.C. and tried to make it seem as if this indicated some sort of endorsement of his views but “acknowledged that this was not an official AIA event but a rented space open to all members of the public, adding that he feels he hasn’t been given his proper due by the organization in the past.” [7]

Though this seems to have been the first time the national organization specifically rejected Gage's snake oil. Rick Bell head of the group's NY chapter who witnessed 9/11 said of Gage, “the professional community discredits this guy. We rent to just about anybody but if this guy came to me I’d say we don’t want your money, we don’t want you in our building.” [8] Gary Kohn chairman of KPF, NY's largest architectural firm and 'the AIA’s spokesman in the aftermath of the attacks, called Gage’s theories “ridiculous”' [9]. In response to a controversy over renting one its room for one of Gage's presentation's the Royal Institute of British Architects stated “any perception that this event was associated with the RIBA is regrettable. We will be reviewing our policy on private hire of our building in the light of this event.” [10] The RIBA's former president also criticized the event [11]. While AFAIK they have not specifically said anything specifically about Gage and his gaggle but the chairman Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitats (CTBUH) said:


I see no credibilty whatsoever in the 911 truth movement and I believe, like the vast majority of tall building professionals, that all the failures at the WTC ( WTC 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7) were a direct or indirect result of the planes that were flown into the two towers. I have carefully looked at the evidence that the 911 truth movement presents and I cannot see any evidence of a controlled demolition. Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views. [12]


The American Society of Civil Engineers also seems not to have specifically addressed controlled demolition theories but the report they prepared in conjunction with the Structural Engineers Association of NY (SEAoNY), other engineering associations and FEMA concluded that the towers collapsed due to the plane impacts and resulting fires and they later endorsed the far more through report and resultant recommendations prepared by NIST [13].

educationforum.ipbhost.com...

www.architectmagazine.com...

So does the other 99% have an opinion ? ,,,,,, It appears they do.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
LOL - the laws of physics and reality were suspended that day -

Passport found in the rubble,

This video will explain to you the physics involved in getting the passport out of the building and on to the street.

It uses small words and big pictures making it easy to understand.

the architect for the building stated, that the trade centre buildings were designed to withhold multiple planes crashing into them.... a reply to: Imagewerx

a reply to: Sublimecraft

19 Saudi hijackers evaded the most sophisticated security in the world, had NORAD scratching their heads wondering if the whole damn thing was real or fake, which was apparently fake so they were stood-down.

Are you saying that today a person could not get onto a small single engine plane, dispose of the pilot and then fly it into any skyscraper in the US?
Where is this 'sophisticated security' you talk about?

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: Sublimecraft

All 3 of the buildings that were utterly pulverized by sudden destruction were also advertised in previous years as being some of the strongest buildings on earth,

Care to provide a valid source for that claim?

I still hold WTC7 to be one of the most important pieces of evidence in this case. At the end of the day I believe that one thing is certain, namely that the official story is not 100% accurate. I think the recent discussion and revelations, from members of Congress mind you, PROVES this point. They have not told us what was in the mssing pages of the commission report, but they've given enough information for us to know that there were actually other nations involved in the plot. That right there proves there was a conspiracy. To the naysayers who claim there was no conspiracy, and that the commission's report was accurate, these most recent revelations come from that report itself. So there is a bit of shooting yourselves in the foot in that instance, since it WAS a conspiracy of some type, and involved more entities than the group of terrorists and their networks that we were told about.

And considering just how shocked the members of Congress were who actually have access to the report, I am willing to bet that there was foreign government involvement in some capacity, most likely from individuals who are high up on the chain of command in those governments. We can be sure Saudi Arabia is one of these nations, but there are supposedly more. And then there is the fact that this information was SUPPRESSED from us, the public, when we have every right to know. If it were simply that some unimportant individuals within these countries were helping the hijackers, what is so damning about that evidence that it must be kept secret? This indicates that the involvement went way beyond just ordinary citizens in these countries helping the terrorists, and suggests foreign government involvement. So my main point is that the 911 report itself tells of a conspiracy, and this is beyond reproach considering we have been alerted to the existence of this fact. It is not like one can claim this evidence does not exist, which I can assure you many "truthers" would have done if there was no proof of the fact, even though they could not have known that with any certainty.

a reply to: FlyingFox

LOL!! That actually has more substance to it than the "official" reports..

One thing to consider about the passports thing is a lot of the alleged hijackers are actually still alive...so how any why were their passports there in the first place?

whatreallyhappened.com...

a reply to: Zenem
Nope they're all dead. There is no evidence of any of them being alive dated after sept 28 2001 that is the day the FBI released their full identities. Before that date there was some confusion, after that date no confusion.