Seriously, I am not turning on my TV till mid-Sept. Did Japan and Germany and London do this much self-pitying whining in the early- mid-1950s for the tenth anniversary of WWII?
I had never heard of this story, could you elaborate a lot on it (with loads of links preferably)?
My mom’s going on a fundraising trip to the U.S. next month, and she’ll be giving a sermon at her old Atlantic City synagogue on September 10th. I told her to make it about 9/11. She said that that doesn’t have anything to do with what she’s raising money for; I said that it doesn’t matter - no-one will want to talk about anything else.
Have you ever seen a controlled demolition?
The thing about a controlled demolition is, they blow up the supports at the bottom of the building, and then gravity does the rest. If you ever watch one, it’s a weird event…it almost looks like the building is falling into a hole because the upper levels are more or less intact as the building collapses.
That’s not what happened with the WTC towers. The didn’t collapse starting at the bottom, they collapsed from the top down. Find 100 videos of controlled collapses, and you’ll never see one that collapses the way the towers did, with one story after another failing and falling onto the story below.
Therefore, the notion that this was exactly like a controlled demolition is easily disproven. If it was a controlled demolition, it would be a type of demolition that has never been done before.
When you say “it looked like a controlled demolition”, what you really mean is that the buildings collapsed more or less in a downward direction, instead of toppling over like a building in a cartoon. Except how else is a building supposed to collapse? The forces holding the building together are very weak compared to the force of gravity. The buildings couldn’t stay together while leaning over like a tree being chopped down for the same reason we can’t build skyscapers that lean over. Gravity would collapse it before it can lean over more than a few feet.
Is this suspicious somehow? If the towers were demolished by explosives, whoever planted the explosives could have blown up either tower in whatever order they pleased.
In these threads there are only two answers to this question: “No” or “I watched a video of a demolition on YouTube and it looks identical, plus this guy says it was definitely a controlled demolition.”
Revised thread title for clarity.
Yesterday, on a hockey board I read, some nuts were going on and on about “how to explain that the buildings fell at FREE FALL VELOCITY thereby breaking the Laws of Physics?!?!”
I’m not a physicist, only a mechanical engineer, but…WTF? Gravity pulled them down…free fall…laws of physics intact… how does this affect the balance on the third and fourth lines and whether or not our team will make the playoffs?
It’s going to be a long couple of months, isn’t it?
Where are you seeing all of this whining?
Comparing a country that was attacked by terrorists to two countries who started wars of imperial consquest is perhaps not the most well-advised of comparisons.
I am sorry I said anything–when I came back here I said I would stay out of all serious discussions and keep my opinions to myself, and here I am breaking my own rule. Lesson learned, mouth closed.
The towers were not the target. The terrorists were angry at the airlines for losing their luggage and wanted to break them. They were going to smash airplanes to teach them a lesson. The towers were just an east target to pick out.
Eve, despite the subject matter, this is not a serious discussion.
I’m not sure it’s even a discussion.
It’s so ridiculous. If anything, it’s a miracle those buildings stood as long as they did, considering the damage those planes did. I’d like to know if any of these conspiracy theorists would be willing to stand in the lobby of a 100-story building that was hit by a huge airplane, with an inferno raging 70 stories above their heads and engulfing multiple floors of the building. My guess is…no, they mostly wouldn’t, cause they know darn well that building’s coming down.
I think a lot of this rests with eyewitness accounts. Go to YouTube and look at live coverage on NYC TV stations. You can hear people giving live reports saying, the building exploded. However on camera you can clearly see the second jet crashing into the WTC, but the people on the ground talking to the news are saying, there was no plane it was an explosion.
Show you how good an eyewitness account. They didn’t see it all. of it I’m sure it seemed like an explosion to them.
Why? It’s not like the OP is coming back. Leave the title as worthless as the OP.
If nothing else, so people can avoid the thread if they’re sick and tired of topics like this.
I prefer the xkcd compromise theory.
Why do people keep bringing up these silly conspiracy theories? I’m just ‘asking questions’ here, but it seems to me that this has been so completely debunked that anyone still bringing it up is either delusional or militantly ignorant.
Just asking questions here, but why? Why could the collapse ‘only’ have been by controlled demolition? In fact, what actual evidence is there that there was a controlled demolition? Where is the det cord? Where is the chemical evidence of explosives used? Where is the evidence that the building core was preped for demolitions? Where is there any evidence at all that the buildings were brought down using demolitions?
But which was hit by a huge amount of falling debris and in which (after said debris carved out an entire face of the building) burned for many hours before collapse with no fire suppression (because it was destroyed by said falling debris and because the fire department had a few other things going on that day to be trying to fight a fire there). Gee, I don’t know…what could have possibly cause such a collapse in those circumstances??
Um…oh yeah! Must have been explosives. MAGICAL explosives that could survive having literally tons of debris fall on the building they were in, could survive a fire raging for hours, and then be detonated on command and leave no trace! Yeah, that is definitely the simplest and most likely explanation! 
You tell me, ace. Why did the mystery black ops types do that? And while you are at it, how did the magic explosives survive the planes crashing into them? Or was that all faked as well? And why did the towers start to collapse from the point of impact of the planes, and not from the ground up, as happens in most ‘controlled demolition’ thingies? And how did they detonate the magic explosives without leaving any physical evidence? And how did they know exactly where the planes would hit so they could start their controlled demolitions from those exact spots? And how did they prep the building and set those explosives without anyone knowing? And…well, I’m just ‘asking questions’ here, right?
It’s funny how the ‘just asking questions’ crowd is all over asking (stupid fucking inane) questions, but are never up for answering any of them. Feel free to come back into the thread and answer some, since all your (stupid fucking inane) questions have been previously fielded with ease. To be fair, this ain’t our first rodeo WRT 9/11 Truther non-sense…
-XT