New Hearing

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Between watching everyone arguing whether the towers fell because of secret hush-a-boom controlled demolitions..

edit on 10-8-2011 by NewAgeMan because: quote fixed

No way, those buildings fell from jet fuel and gravity alone...
/sarcasm off

reply to post by Juanxlink

No way, those buildings fell from jet fuel and gravity alone...

But when you add structural damage......

reply to post by samkent

But when you add structural damage......

Except nowhere except in your imagination was the structural damage even a contributing factor to the eventual collapse.

OFFICIAL VERSION: At the required temperatures to initiate collapse the best estimates of damage caused by the planes for both towers was irrelevant to the event.

In other words, even if some columns were severely damaged, the temperature required to make the rest fail would have made the structure fail in the absence of any damage to the columns to begin with and the extent of the fire needed to be large enough that the number of additional columns that needed to fail had there been no damage was of no consequence.

www.cs.purdue.edu...

From an engineering perspective, impact damage to the core structure had a negligible effect on the critical thermal load required to initiate collapse in the core structure.

But don't let the real world bother you. Please, go ahead, make up some more stuff, it has never stopped you guys before.

reply to post by hooper


The traveling circus of "cry on demand" actors? Is that what you're referring to?

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by hooper

 

The traveling circus of "cry on demand" actors? Is that what you're referring to?

edit on 11-8-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)

Not following you (in more ways than one), to whom are you referring? The host, moderators of the hearing? The attendees?

reply to post by hooper


the $200 was a bit frustrating but considering the impact 9/11 had on me and my life... how could I NOT attend!? I want to be there to see/report on what's being discussed. I live in Toronto and can afford the money, so why not.

As for the feasibility of the shop, we've been here five years now. We're not eating steak & lobster every night.. but we're surviving. Toronto is North America's fourth largest market so you'd think there would be enough interest in these ideas, theories, etc. Besides, when you look at who owns/operates the majority of the bookstores in Canada... HEATHER REISMAN... you can see why we felt it important to open up.

www.chapters.indigo.ca...

fourth paragraph, last sentence. Having someone like her dictate what Canadians have access to in terms of literature, etc.. is rather disturbing.

Maybe we'll cross paths one day and have a good chat!

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by hooper

 

The traveling circus of "cry on demand" actors? Is that what you're referring to?

edit on 11-8-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)

Not following you (in more ways than one), to whom are you referring? The host, moderators of the hearing? The attendees?

I didn't see your link at first, but the cry on demand family members.

Themes on days 1, 2, and 4 will include: al-Qaeda, air defense failures, anomalies of Flights 77 and 93, the nature of false flag terrorism, and psychological resistance to accounts that challenge the official one.

Nothing about the fact that real life planes can't do what they claim.

Seems like another "Truth Movement" designed Hoax Maintenance hearing. Need to bolster the planes myth, it doesn't have the "impact" it once did.

reply to post by fattyp


Ok, correct me if I'm wrong but it appears to be that Indigo is the Borders of Canada. I know these chains have a lot of influence with regard to reading material in general but I think its a bit of a stretch to say they dictate what people read. Here in the USA sometimes Borders (and formerly Barnes and Knoble) are often the only bookstores in more remote areas but in urban areas there are plenty of non-chain bookshops. Also, Amazon has done much more to promote diversity in reading materials in the past decade then any number of bookstores.

As for the hearing, does it bother you that these people are going to charge $200 so that you can hear them make criminal accusations?

reply to post by Yankee451

Nothing about the fact that real life planes can't do what they claim.

And here, in a nutshell (pun intended) is the reason that a "new investigation" would be meaningless. No matter how bias the investigation may be there will always be one or two delusions that will remain unaddressed and unsatisfied.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Yankee451

 

Nothing about the fact that real life planes can't do what they claim.

And here, in a nutshell (pun intended) is the reason that a "new investigation" would be meaningless. No matter how bias the investigation may be there will always be one or two delusions that will remain unaddressed and unsatisfied.

As long as the investigations are limited to "al Qaeda", "planes" and "security failures", you bet it will be meaningless.

Action speaks louder than words, nothing more needs to be discussed other than whos going to go arrest bush, his cabinet, the joint chiefs, the israelis, the saudis ,the Pakistanis then whos going to run the country after they arrest obama and his crew

reply to post by Yankee451

As long as the investigations are limited to "al Qaeda", "planes" and "security failures", you bet it will be meaningless.

So basically, as long as the investigations are limited to reality than they shall remain meaningless to you.

reply to post by hooper


Its been ten years of "investigating" your version of reality...you satisfied with the investigations to date?

reply to post by Yankee451


Yep, no problems. I know some folks would like to see the intelligence and law enforcement communities scrutinized a little more, but to what end? A dozen folks can come forward now and claim that they had suspicions, but short some exact knowledge there wasn't much we could have done. Would have beefing up security at the major aiports have helped? Maybe. But as far as we know the hijackers were not heavily armed and none of them had a history (other than being Middle Eastern) that would have kept them off the planes.

But then you don't believe there were any planes or any victims so that's all moot to you, huh?

reply to post by hooper

But then you don't believe there were any planes or any victims so that's all moot to you, huh?

Please stop putting words into my mouth. You haven't read my posts, and I've never claimed there were no victims.

You on the other hand fabricated a sister who witnessed in person CGI planes slicing through steel like a hot knife through butter. Your credibilty, if it ever existed, is in shreds.

reply to post by Yankee451


Im still waiting for you to answer the question I asked you months ago. HOW did your "CGI airplanes" get onto all the privately owned still cameras that day?

reply to post by vipertech0596


Name one privately owned still camera that caught the bullet-fast 500 MPH plane, and I'll see what I can do to help.

reply to post by Yankee451


Images from Web cam taken by artist Wolfgang Staehle of impact on WTC 1

On September 8, 2001, Wolfgang Staehle, a German-born Internet artist, set up two cameras in an apartment window in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, both pointed at the skyline of Lower Manhattan. As part of an art project he called “2001,” Staehle had carefully calibrated the cameras’ shutters to trip at four-second intervals, hour after hour, day after day, automatically snapping postcard-style stills of the city. Staehle’s panoramas would then be transmitted over the Internet to twin film projectors, their beams directed at the wall of a West Side gallery. Gallery patrons would then view the changing electronic mural in virtual “real time,” as theatre-goers might view a wide-screen movie, twenty-four-by-nine-feet. Every four seconds, the scene would shift. A boat or a cloud would seem to twitch. The sun would meander across the cityscape and its apron of bridges. The webcams would capture the metropolis in a Zen-like state, subtly coming to life over the course of a morning.

That is, until 08:46:50, on September 11. At that instant, as evidenced by the time code in the lower right-hand corner of the frame, Staehle’s cameras happened to catch an aircraft approaching the north tower of the World Trade Center, then its impact, then the explosion. Unwittingly, he had documented the first salvo of the deadliest terrorist strike in American history, a series of attacks which would claim the lives of nearly 3,000 people in a coordinated assault by four teams of suicide hijackers from the extremist Islamist faction, al-Qaeda
.

Plane approaching - upper right corner



Impaact

click.si.edu...

Fireball

click.si.edu...

But I have total faith that you will will find some excuse to dismiss them....


"Its so nice to be insane. No one asks you to explain..."

Helen Reddy

reply to post by thedman


Thedman...

Thanks...pretty busy right now, gotta barbeque....google Tina Cart and Richard Clark, and you'll find Wolfgang's very perspective.

What else you got?

reply to post by Yankee451


I was right - you and the other loons found an excuse

So what about Staehle images which were displayed in gallery for days before