Military Drills

[Peregrine]

Firstly, I do residential AND commercial drywall installation (I have run my own company for 6 years now), and I'm sure they had 2 layers of 5/8's" rock all over, with 2 layers of 1 inch core board for the elevator shaft (only 'fire-taped' which means one coat) but I can't say what the exact building codes are in NY or if they were followed...irrelevant anyway. I speak with 3 generations of drywall knowledge.

 

Your point? Are you seriously trying to claim that some drywall on the elevator shafts is capable of surviving a direct hit from a large plane flying at 500mph? That drywall is only on the walls, once the crash sliced through the elevator shaft, there would be nothing to stop the fireball.

 

As far as Scott Forbes, we have a statement, and an interview, and I am looking to continue verification on that...but his email is included in the interview, you could contact him if you'd like. I'm sure you could ask the questions that would reveal his knowledge of engineering to say the least.

 

So? Why does having a statement and an interview prove his honesty? Since turning the power off for so long would be such a huge disruption, it should be trivially easy to find some other witnesses saying the same thing.

 

Yes, that's ALOT of cable to pull and replace. It could EASILY have taken longer if it wasn't well staffed, as shown in his interview.

 

Are you honestly this stupid? Have you ever even heard of the concept of parallel circuts? You run a second temporary cable while you're replacing the main one (or just don't pull the old ones until the new ones are in place), and the power only goes out for a few minutes at most while you make the switch.

 

And considering the potential loss of productivity we're talking about here, they would have every reason to put in a little extra effort and do it right.

And yes there was one elevator shaft, the cargo elevator. We'll come back to that.

 

Concession accepted. There was an elevator shaft, so your idea that the fireball didn't have an elevator shaft is absurd.

 

"but it would seem odd to have the elevator shaft run the entire height of the building, I belive they had to be staggered"

 

Your own words moron, claiming that an elevator shaft running the entire height of the building would be odd. And yet there it is in the diagram.

The reason I didn't summarize is that it doesn't seem fair and I think you should be reading this material instead of trusting 'your sites' interpretation of it. As in any court, we can gather experts from both sides to display given opposing points (something I'll be illustrating in a moment with loads of engineer testimony, eyewitness testimony). I am trying to stick with video, pictures, audio, testimony and first hand accounts of the poeple that were there.

 

In other words, you're trying to post such a huge volume of material that I give up and concede the debate out of frustration.

 

And please, tell me why firsthand accounts of people who were there are actually valid? How many of those people were certified engineers capable of making educated statements?

 

You obviously didn't read the links I put up...here are more engineers describing the damage in the basement immediatley after the attack, pre-collapse. I am STILL reading through your sites...are you still reading through the first hand accounts I have provided to you?

 

What's your point? We have two possible explanations for this damage:

 

1) Fireballs traveled through elevator shafts from the crash site.

 

2) There were bombs in the basement, planted for no apparent reason. Since the towers clearly collapsed from the top, long after whatever caused the damage in the basement, these hypothetical bombs accomplished exactly nothing. You're insisting we believe that whoever was behind this conspiracy risked even more exposure to plant useless bombs. This mystery person of course being the same one that had access to demolitions experts to plan and execute an extremely precise demolition of the towers, so the idea that the bombs were supposed to actually do something is a joke.

 

All I was looking for from the floor plan was to determine elevator locations in perspective to the attacked areas...to track our fireball. I'll be quoting from the 9-11 commission report on a few things to show that even there hypothesis doesn't hold up. We have one shaft. More coming...I hate to not finish but I've got to leave for a few hours. I will address the issues as soon as I get in.

 

*sigh*

 

Are you really this stupid? Claiming that the fireball explanation might not be correct isn't enough, you need to produce an alternate explanation. And the only one I can see is the complete idiocy of bombs in the basement.

 

IF FIREBALLS TRAVELLING DOWN THE ELEVATOR SHAFT DID NOT CAUSE THE DAMAGE, THEN WHAT ELSE COULD HAVE?

 

Where is the motive? You STILL haven't answerd this question, and I will not let you ignore it. Post a reasonable motive for the conspiracy, or concede that there isn't one.

[Switch]

Peregrine, watch it please. I don't care if you think that so long as you think the person is stupid flaming is okay, because it isn't. It's still against the rules. No name calling or accusations of stupidity, or do you want another 24hr ban? Stick to debating without the jabs at other people's intelligence. Thank you.

[Alanador]

It's cool as far as I go, no harm no foul. But your rules are your rules and I do not mean to demean them by saying that. He feels as strongly about this as I do.

 

The motive Peregrine is fear...regaurdless of who perpetrated the crimes. I mean, isn't that obvious? It is essentially the meaning behind terrorism...to instil terror. What can you accomplish with fear...anything else really, as you so eloquently wrote in the Political Science definition thread. Governments everywhere use fear as a tool. Correct? More coming as soon as I can.

 

And to disprove something we need resonable doubt. That's it. And here we go.

 

So a plane crashed into any of these given buildings. It lost 15% of it's fuel outside (as per NIST report), burned off 15% more in the first fireball (as per NIST report...the offical 9-11 commission that is...), which leaves us with 70% off the fuel expended into the rooms and floors which feed the fires the came after that. By the 9-11 commissions own account this fire could only burn for 15 minutes. So with that 15 minutes it collected...created another fireball as it poured into the elevator shaft and mixed with the air inside...which shot down and devasted the the basement sub floors and parking garage...(removing 50 ton machines in the basement in it's process...gone) this is concured by many engineers recounts of the smell of kerosine. Okay. This assumes a combustable fire source...the jet fuel. which ...no matter what it did, could only burn for 15 minutes (as per 9-11 commission). The structures are so weak by this damage they soon fall...some engineers are amazed at how long it stood, others are shocked that it fell at all. All speculation, and expert after expert can be brought in as in any case to bolster either side's arguement. But...the fires burned until December 20th. How would a fire, based on a depleteable fire source, dependant on oxygen to conitnue breathing...burn for the next 3 months...smothered under steel and concrete...to the heat degree instensity that was noted by everyone involved, to have revealed red and white hot iron up until it was finally extinguished? That my friend, seems to be the biggest impossibilty. More coming....

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20030422113455/...002-NewYork.pdf

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/NCW/8142aerosols.html

 

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

 

http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.ph...order=0&thold=0

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/19/...ain321907.shtml (important)

 

http://www.seau.org/SEAUNews-2001-10.pdf

 

 

If we assume even at your level, that they didn't pay attention to the information...that they acted inefficiently. THAT IS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE. But, I assume more. I believe they interpreted the information correctly and allowed it to happen, acting as if (quoting condi rice) "Who would have ever thought they would do this?"...well our military did. They've been running that drill since the 70's. I further believe they are using the fear that came from this to consolidate power into one position. All these laws they implement (Partiot Act etc etc), have clamped on our rights in an undeniable fashion...it's not our rights that caused these inefficiencies to occur, it was their negligence (or as I suspect...conscious decision not to act), by the privileged individuals privvy to that info )by perhaps summarily dissmissing information provided to them by their staffs. Why should we lose liberty after liberty becuase they failed, why are we punished, why is the southern border effectively OPEN? I believe this was some kind of restructuring of the branches that will allow future presidents too much power in one central position, not to make Bush king, but to insure future presidents have ultimate authority. Let's assume Bush can use these powers conservatively...but what about the next president...or the next. Surely the war in Iraq will outlast this president, not to mention the undefinable war on terror (WWIII e.g "Global War on Terror), which has no clear enemy, or victory in sight. And so these laws will remain in effect, and may get more stringent in fact. Ohio just passed a modified version of the Patriot Act, a stricter version. This is a coup ( n 1: a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force [syn: coup d'etat, putsch, takeover]) ... I would add to that, by fear.

[ThetaOrionis01]

The jet fuel wouldn't have been the only combustible material in the building - unless the building was empty you'd have furniture, soft furnishings, paper, plastic cable insulation, cleaning materials, paint, wall tiles etc etc.

 

The huge amount of debris would have acted as insulation, preventing the intense heat generated by the fires from escaping. With the heat trapped inside, all it would take was a fresh supply of oxygen (eg when covering material is removed during demolition) for the fires to start burning again.

[Alanador]

read the chemical analysis of the dust cloud, there's the material...atomized.

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/NCW/8142aerosols.html

 

A combustable source of fire like jet fuel kerosene needs oxygen to be kept burning...and we arent just talking hot...we're talking white hot, and red hot steel far into December. Molten steel dripping off of beams as they were removed. All started from a fire source that could itself only ignite what material wasnt blown out of the building for 15 minutes. The fires upstairs at the impact zone were out...why is there so much damage below...molten steel? What did they have in that basement to catch fire in that manner, I'm sure there are chemicals, like any machine shop but really? Steel would absorb the heat and transmit it out...like a heat sink on a cpu. Granted steel isn't copper or aluminum...but 3 months? For the fires to still be burning?!!

 

And did you read about the weeks upon weeks of water the fire department used...he said it was like creating a lake! Please read these links...they also used fire retardants...what normal fire defies that?!!

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/19/...ain321907.shtml (very important to those theories...)

[ThetaOrionis01]

Alanador... how much of a scientific background do you have? Just curious.

[Alanador]

Theta I don't have much. Does that mean I should not look to other experts interpretations? Or what about the first hand account of the impact zone as having only two isolated pockets of fire at the 78th floor, and that he (the fireman-Battalion seven I think) needed only 2 lines to contain it. Only 2 hoses? Does that sound like a towering inferno? And that's at the impact zone itself...they later ask Battalion nine to move to the 80th floor! Can you honestly say common sense has no part in this? BELIEVE me I hope I'm wrong and that this is ALL just coincidence, or circumstance...but really. The dust cloud analysis is by the only folks who analyzed it, there is no way for me to go back in time and sample the cloud myself...even if I had a clue where to begin with it. I more than anyone hope I lose this debate...but there are mitigating factors here. And yes, negligence that includes loss of life, especially 3000 lives...is criminal. And the 9-11 commission points to 'inefficiencies"...who is held accountable for this? No one...actually, my bad...a stark raving mad lunatic who can't even speak a coherent thought in defense OR implication of himself, let alone stand as the ONLY accused person of 9-11. That's not to say I don't want to see him hang...or that I do...it is an observation. I'm sure there was a fireball...but does that mean there wasn't explosives...can both 'truths' exsist together? I am genuinly worried...for me, my family...for you...and yours...and peregrine...and karkarinus...and loveme....and every stranger and neighbor around me.

 

The execute branch and judicial branches are now intertwined...to the point that which ever 'party' runs congress is irrelevant. Said Congress can pass a law such as the banning of torture...but then the executive can then use executive authority to state it does not afftect him or anyone he appoints. So we propose a law, and he says...well....what and where defines torture?...we tell him...he opposes the law...then he flip flops and says he backs it...becuase his judiciary branch has told him it's ok, you can use execute order...and he will be able to do this as long as we are at war...how long do you think we'll be at war anyway?

 

Quote from Washington Times...

 

WASHINGTON -- When President Bush last week signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees, he quietly reserved the right to bypass the law under his powers as commander in chief.

 

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washingt...ew_torture_ban/

 

We see this same pattern with the NSA program...First there is no roving wiretaps...then ok there is roving taps, but we use FISA for that...then ok, well there is this other program (thank goodness it was even reported!)...outside of FISA...but it's ok, my judiciary branch has shown me I have extended constitutional powers, and they assure me it's legal! Besides...they're an independant agency...Well we say, how about a list of the names of the folks you have been tapping? Well no, that'd be an invasion of privacy!!! AN INVASION OF PRIVACY?! I think these points are mute...

 

At what point will I have sacrificed enough liberties to compensate for THEIR "inefficiencies" or more frankly egregious mistakes or intentional gambit's, that have forever scarred the human psyche as we know it...world wide.

 

What is the sense of making congress jump through it's hoops only to reserve executive authority? There is a consolidation of power to the seat of the presidency.

[Peregrine]

The motive Peregrine is fear...regaurdless of who perpetrated the crimes. I mean, isn't that obvious? It is essentially the meaning behind terrorism...to instil terror. What can you accomplish with fear...anything else really, as you so eloquently wrote in the Political Science definition thread. Governments everywhere use fear as a tool. Correct? More coming as soon as I can.

 

WHY WOULD THE GOVERNMENT NEED THIS FEAR SO DESPERATELY? YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED THE QUESTION.

 

So a plane crashed into any of these given buildings. It lost 15% of it's fuel outside (as per NIST report), burned off 15% more in the first fireball (as per NIST report...the offical 9-11 commission that is...), which leaves us with 70% off the fuel expended into the rooms and floors which feed the fires the came after that. By the 9-11 commissions own account this fire could only burn for 15 minutes

 

Theta Orionis already said it, but let me emphasize this point... the fuel was NOT the only thing burning.

 

But...the fires burned until December 20th. How would a fire, based on a depleteable fire source, dependant on oxygen to conitnue breathing...burn for the next 3 months...smothered under steel and concrete...to the heat degree instensity that was noted by everyone involved, to have revealed red and white hot iron up until it was finally extinguished? That my friend, seems to be the biggest impossibilty. More coming....

 

Have you even bothered reading what I post? I already explained how this works, the rubble pile works like an oven, and retains its heat for a very long time. You'll notice that the heat was limited to underground sections of the rubble pile, not the surface.

 

And if the combination of plane fuel and rubble wasn't enough to do it, then what was? Thermite (as you proposed earlier) suffers from the same problem, the amount of it required to fuel the fire for so long is vastly beyond what you could conceal in the towers. Same with any other kind of explosives.

 

And no matter what your prefered damage source, NONE of them could keep it hot that long without the "oven" effect. Even if you burned it so hot the steel was just short of vaporizing, steel (like most metals) is an excellent heat conductor. The pile would quickly cool, unless you're making the absurd claim that someone was constantly adding fuel to the underground fires, for no apparent reason. And if you want to use the oven effect, then you don't need this extra heat source beyond the fuel and the building itself.

f we assume even at your level, that they didn't pay attention to the information...that they acted inefficiently. THAT IS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE.

 

Your point? I don't deny that the "it can't happen here" belief prevented the government from doing everything it could to prevent the attacks. Mistakes were made, and only revealed in hindsight once people were shocked into action. But that doesn't make it a conspiracy.

They've been running that drill since the 70's.

 

Do you even understand how military drills work? The US military has, within that same time period, conducted drills against repelling an invasion from CANADA. It's the military's job to make plans for every possible scenario, no matter how unlikely.

 

I believe this was some kind of restructuring of the branches that will allow future presidents too much power in one central position, not to make Bush king, but to insure future presidents have ultimate authority. Let's assume Bush can use these powers conservatively...but what about the next president...or the next.

 

Do you have any idea how stupid this sounds? You're claiming that the current government murdered thousands of people and caused massive damage to the economy, not for any direct gain, but so FUTURE PRESIDENTS could have more power. They're willing to commit these horrible acts so someday after they're dead, SOMEONE ELSE can have power?

 

And lets not forget that it's a double-edged sword... sure, they might accomplish their agenda, but they're just as likely to have that precedent get used by their exact ideological opposite.

 

==========================================================

 

 

 

read the chemical analysis of the dust cloud, there's the material...atomized.

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/NCW/8142aerosols.html

 

A combustable source of fire like jet fuel kerosene needs oxygen to be kept burning...and we arent just talking hot...we're talking white hot, and red hot steel far into December. Molten steel dripping off of beams as they were removed. All started from a fire source that could itself only ignite what material wasnt blown out of the building for 15 minutes. The fires upstairs at the impact zone were out...why is there so much damage below...molten steel? What did they have in that basement to catch fire in that manner, I'm sure there are chemicals, like any machine shop but really? Steel would absorb the heat and transmit it out...like a heat sink on a cpu. Granted steel isn't copper or aluminum...but 3 months? For the fires to still be burning?!!

 

Thank you for so effectively killing your own credibility with this argument. Do you even understand the concept of a smoldering fire, trapped under countless tons of rubble and insulated from any possible way of cooling?

And did you read about the weeks upon weeks of water the fire department used...he said it was like creating a lake! Please read these links...they also used fire retardants...what normal fire defies that?!!

 

Which actually has the potential to make it worse.

 

http://www.ornl.gov/info/press_releases/ge...r=mr19970808-01

 

http://www.world-aluminium.org/news/montreal/epstein.htm

 

Hot aluminum can react violently with water, so badly that mold explosions are a significant issue in the aluminum casting industry. And lets not forget what the reaction involved in thermite is...

 

Fe2O3(s) + 2Al(s) → Al2O3(s) + 2Fe(s)

 

Or in plain terms, rust + aluminum + heat = much more heat. Or, rusty steel building frame + aluminum + hot fire = VERY hot fire. And since the rust provides the oxygen source, you can't put it out with water.

 

============================================

 

Theta I don't have much. Does that mean I should not look to other experts interpretations?

 

No, it just means you have exactly zero credibility on scientific issues, especially when you're arguing that the experts are wrong. It means your judgement that my explanations aren't good enough means absolutely nothing.

 

And just to be clear, I don't have my engineering certification yet either, I'm still working on it. But I'm a lot more qualified to look at the arguments and judge whether they are valid. And the overwhelming majority of the conspiracy arguments just don't work... they sound good to an ignorant audience, but their so-called facts are completely wrong.

 

Or what about the first hand account of the impact zone as having only two isolated pockets of fire at the 78th floor, and that he (the fireman-Battalion seven I think) needed only 2 lines to contain it. Only 2 hoses?

 

AS FAR AS HE KNEW. And I guess you don't understand how structural failure works... two pockets of fire, if burning hot enough and combined with enough previous damage, could easily bring down the whole tower.

Does that sound like a towering inferno? And that's at the impact zone itself...they later ask Battalion nine to move to the 80th floor

 

Thank you for proving your complete ignorance of engineering here. You don't need a towering inferno at the moment of collapse for it to happen. And of course the idea that the fires were out completely is just absurd, anyone with eyes can see that there was still smoke and fire at the moment of collapse.

The dust cloud analysis is by the only folks who analyzed it, there is no way for me to go back in time and sample the cloud myself...even if I had a clue where to begin with it.

 

What dust cloud analysis? Could you post a link to exactly what you're talking about? Why would you need to sample the cloud yourself, are you claiming the dust had traces of explosives that shouldn't have been there?

And the 9-11 commission points to 'inefficiencies"...who is held accountable for this?

 

Can you honestly not figure out the difference between complacency and active conspiracy? Of course there were inefficiencies, nobody though something like this could actually happen to us, and evidence that in hindsight appears obvious might have been overlooked. But it's a huge leap from "mistakes were made" to "the government planned the attacks", and you still haven't provided any evidence for the second.

 

 

OMG THE GOVERNMENT IS ABUSING ITS POWER

 

 

Now you've really lost it... and I mean your sanity as well as the debate. You've gone from claiming flaws in the official story of the attacks to ranting about the new American Empire's desire to control every part of your life.

[Alanador]

Peregrine, I read every link you post attentively, and appreaciate the time you have personally devoted to this, and I appreciate your first hand knowledge of this topic. I would respectfully ask for a few days to review your information in detail. Also, if everyone here is in agreement with Peregrine I will concede, as you all seem extremely intelligent and questioning by nature, and I dont wish to waste anyone's time, including my own.

 

To Peregrine-

 

I did not mean to say the government desperately needed the fear element. I may not have expressed my idea correctly, I think they capitalized on an opportunity that presented itself through the intelligence agencies, many whistle blowers are stepping forward saying information was ignored and documents are routinely fabricated or altered. They would have known that if an attack like this occured that they would have political might and the strong support of the people to back a move of aggression that we thought was against the perp. Were they complacent or did they participate tacitly? Or if Scott Forbes interview is true (I haven't had a chance to get back to searching for this one's verification), did they perhaps insure the building would fall, perhaps even taking some part in the event. Maybe even capitalize economically from the event?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1548118.stm

 

The dust cloud analysis was posted twice (I will post again in a moment). It shows not explosives...but just about everything else in that building. It seems all of the building materials atomized as well as ALL the contents of the building (my knowledge in sheet rock was not to say it would survive, I never implied that. I brought it up in reference to staggering in construction, everything is staggered for strength, it would seem to make sense that elevators would have to stagger as well...in some sense I was right. They only had one elevator run the entire height, out of 200. The sheetrock would have atomized, as hitting it even with a hammer pulverizes it)...what was left to burn that either wasn't blown out of the building or atomized in the collapse? And my point about the fires is not "how could the building collapse from them if they were out" but rather..."If the fires were almost out, or at least controllable with 2 hoses, how could the last remaining elements of fire end up at the bottom of the building after a collapse to be insulated by the debris? Where it then burns so hot it creates an infernal oven...which then continues to burn for three months due to said oven conditions?" I will re-check - but I believe the Assisstant Chief Engineer stated 'percussive' or 'concussive' damage, not fire damage in the basements and lobbies...he does say one shop is 'gone'...as in gone..., he also describes white smoke as well as black soot. The black soot would be the fireballs footprint...where is the white smoke from that he desribes? His description also does not state that the basement and lobby levels are on fire at the time, just lots of white smoke. He even desrcibes wondering why the sprinklers were on. He does remember the smell of kerosene, I do not doubt the fireball existed, but if the lobby and basements weren't on fire and the ball expended itself rather quickly after passing down 78 floors, how does the steel in the basement heat up to melting temp? After a quick look at your aluminum research I would say there is one inconsistancy with the research and the WTC site...the reseacrh indicates this reaction is accompanied by explosions....violent explosions...these were not reported. I do not doubt the oven existed, but rather what got that oven started...

 

Quoting...

The dust "was unlike any dust and smoke mixture I had ever seen before," Lioy said. The fluffy, pink and gray powder "was basically a complex mixture of everything that makes up our workplaces and lives." Six million sq ft of masonry, 5 million sq ft of painted surfaces, 7 million sq ft of flooring, 600,000 sq ft of window glass, 200 elevators, and everything inside came down as dust, said Greg Meeker of USGS. The only thing that didn't get pulverized was the WTC towers' 200,000 tons of structural steel. That was just bent, Meeker said.

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/NCW/8142aerosols.html

 

I know you think the dust settled and fueled the fire...but it didn't, it moved...it was transient (airborne), check out the full article. The largest portion of the cloud dissipated over 4 days or something crazy...

 

If the government did at least tacitly participate it would immediatley benefit this president, by allowing a second term to install more like minded administrators, short term goal - right?. BUT, the real damage is over time...this president sees a jump in executive power and solidifies his judicial branch (and luckily the supreme court as things would work out) setting up the next presidency, which can then run with the ball. Ultimatley what is the president, he is a frontman, the 'face' of the government, not unlike the singer in a band. In one interview he said he couldn't disclose the detailed information about NSA...becuase he didn't know all the details they function under, (I tend to think that is another lie but I digress), due to the fact they are an independant agency, that they'll let him know when he needs to know, and that he trusts them, so should we. Many members of the administration survive from term to term, serving under many presidents is quite common. Is it hard to imagine an agenda that will move beyond any one president? How about Iraq?

 

Why?

 

You're so damn buggered by this.

 

Why?

 

Haven't you answered that very question time and again in the political alignment thread yourself?

 

Quoting...

 

"But in reality, people are selfish. There will always be people who try to exploit the system and act selfishly, so the entire system collapses. Instead of complete equality, you have a system dominated by those selfish enough to take advantage of everyone else's contributions."

 

or this one..

 

"Hi, I'm Peregrine. My friends over there with the guns are going to kill you unless you obey me. Have a nice day!"

 

slightly better was....

 

"Hi, I'm Peregrine, your new senator. I'm going to bend your system through politics until I get what I want."

 

But my favorite was this one...

 

"Simple... form a large enough group of similarly selfish people, and start telling other people what to do. The same way that governments everywhere make the citizens obey their laws."

 

And don't say it's out of context. The same human nature that applies to someone taking advantage of communism is the same human nature that drives someone to abuse ANY system...capitalism just rewards them for it...until the money is gone that is....

[Peregrine]

I did not mean to say the government desperately needed the fear element. I may not have expressed my idea correctly, I think they capitalized on an opportunity that presented itself through the intelligence agencies, many whistle blowers are stepping forward saying information was ignored and documents are routinely fabricated or altered.

 

It's a pretty big leap from incompetence in the intelligence branches to active involvement in a conspiracy, you know... even forged documents don't prove one, as it's not hard to see an element of covering your mistakes, or lying to tell a superior what they want to hear and keep your job.

They would have known that if an attack like this occured that they would have political might and the strong support of the people to back a move of aggression that we thought was against the perp. Were they complacent or did they participate tacitly?

 

And again, why would they need it? The people who attacked us (or in conspiracy world, the ones whotook the blame) were clearly evil. If the government really wanted a war, simply saying "we're liberating afghanistan" could hardly have been worse than the awful approval ratings the real-world war has produced.

 

Or if Scott Forbes interview is true (I haven't had a chance to get back to searching for this one's verification), did they perhaps insure the building would fall, perhaps even taking some part in the event.

 

The Scott Forbes interview is almost definitely false, apparently even the conspiracy theorists deny its legitimacy. The most obvious reason is the lack of matching testimony... the power-off state would have caused a massive disruption for a lot of people. It should be a trivial task to find some other witnesses supporting his statements, but where are they?

 

And that ignores the fact that 36 hours is nowhere near long enough to set the demolition charges. If there were in fact demolition charges, they were done very professionally... we have a nice neat collapse, not the massive destruction that would have been produced by the brute force method of "quickly sneak in a few large bombs".

 

 

Maybe even capitalize economically from the event?

 

Who would profit? The US economy in general took a huge blow from the attacks, depending on how much of the recent ecnomoic problems you want to blame on the attacks. And any half-competent economic expert (and this hypothetical conspiracy, if there is one, was not done by incompetent morons) would realize this.

 

Silverstein got the insurance money, but at the cost of losing his property. If he wanted money, why not just sell the buildings on the open market? Zero risk, no murdering thousands of innocent people. Even if you try to argue that he might have recieved more from the insurance payments, when you're already making obscene amounts of money, would you risk losing it all if your extremely dangerous conspiracy was revealed, just to get a little more?

 

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1548118.stm

 

And this is surprising how? All it says is that the terrorists who planned the attack might have tried to gain a little more from it through stock trading. If anything, it's evidence against a conspiracy, and in favor of the terrorists being entirely responsible.

 

The dust cloud analysis was posted twice (I will post again in a moment). It shows not explosives...but just about everything else in that building. It seems much of the building materials atomized (my knowledge in sheet rock was not to say it would survive, I never implied that. I brought it up in reference to staggering in construction, everything is staggered for strength, it would seem to make sense that elevators would have to atgger as well...in some sense I was right. They only had one elevator run the entire height. The sheetrock would have atomized, as hitting it even with a hammer pulverizes it), along with alot of other stuff...what was left to burn that either wasn't blown out of the building or atomized in the collapse?

 

Here's a hint, learn some physics and chemistry before making arguments like these. The atomizing argument is actually a very strong one explaining the basement damage. Turning something to dust doesn't keep something from burning. In fact, it does the exact opposite, it makes it burn so fast you get more of an explosion than a fire.

 

Look up the dangers of grain silo explosions for an idea of what I'm talking about, in the right circumstances dust in the air can explode with devastating results. And channel that explosion down an elevator shaft and you get massive damage in the basement from the shockwave, not the flames.

 

And my point about the fires is not "how could the building collapse from them if they were out" but rather..."If the fires were almost out, or at least controllable with 2 hoses, how could the last remaining elements of fire end up at the bottom of the building after a collapse to be insulated by the debris?

 

Two reasons:

 

1) The fires were obviously not out, as anyone with eyes can see from the video shortly before the collapse. At most, that "two hoses" comment refers to the pockets of fire in one small section of the building.

 

2) Even if the fires did not expand downward through the debris pile, they still had rubble from 20-30 floors on top of them. So they might not be at the bottom, but they had plenty of rubble covering them to produce the insulating effect.

 

 

 

 

 

And in any case, what's your point? We have indisputable evidence that the fires existed, and far beyond the amount of time they could last without the insulating effect. Steel is a very good conductor of heat, and could not have remained hot for so long without it. So we have two scenarios:

 

1) The insulating effect was enough, so it doesn't matter exactly how hot the fires were.

 

2) The insulating effect wasn't enough, so there had to be a constant input of fuel deep underground, for months after the collapse. But why? Why intentionally add fuel? What possible purpose would doing this serve, especially given the difficulty of arranging it?

 

 

Where it then burns so hot it creates an infernal oven...which then continues to burn for three months due to said oven conditions?" I will re-check - but I believe the assisstant chief engineer stated 'percussive' damage, not fire damage, he also describes white smoke as well as black soot. The black soot would be the fireballs footprint...where is the white smoke from that he desribes. He does remember the smell of kerosene, I do not doubt the fireball existed, but if the lobby and basements weren't on fire and the ball expended itself rather quickly after passing down 78 floors, how does the steel in the basement heat up to melting temp?

 

It doesn't need to. The collapse very obviously started from near the top of the building. And then the collapse burried the burning metal under 20-30 floors worth of debris. The hot metal seen long after the collapse wasn't necessarily from the basement structure, it was just buried deeply enough by the collapse to be under the surface.

 

 

After a quick look at your aluminum research I would say there is one inconsitstancy with research and the WTC site...the reseacrh indicates this reaction is accompanied by explosions....violent explosions...these were not reported. I do not doubt the oven existed, but rather the source of the 'oven'.

 

Under some circumstances, violent explosions. But the point is, it's an exothermic reaction, and it's basic chemistry that there are plenty of factors which can change the reaction rate. And anyway, it's just one possible factor, and one that is actually magnified by adding water to the situation.

 

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

 

This paper gives much more detail on the exact reactions involved.

 

If the government did act at least tacitly participate it would immediatley benefit this president, by allowing a second term to install more like minded administrators. BUT, the real damage is over time...this president sees a jump in executive power and solidifies his judicial branch setting up the next presidency, which can then run with the ball. Ultimatley what is the president, he is a frontman, the 'face' of the government.

 

Do you really think it's that simple? Here's a nice hypothetical sequence of events...

 

1) Bush's government executes the conspiracy successfully, against all odds, and gains power.

 

2) Bush abuses his power.

 

3) Bush's sucessors abuse their power.

 

4a) A couple presidents later, the republican president is caught in a scandal (sex scandal, business scandal, whatever). The scandal-president is defeated overwhelmingly in his next election, even if his party's ideology might hold a majority, their reputation has been fatally damaged.

 

4b) Or more simply, public opinion and voter alignments shift and the other party wins an election.

 

5) A democrat government gains power and uses the precedents set by the republican abuses to push through a far-left agenda, undoing all the work of the republicans and passing law after law that the people behind the conspiracy absolutely hate.

 

 

Politics is never a static thing, and anyone with a little common sense would realize that their hold on power couldn't last forever. So besides the massive risk of their conspiracy being exposed (with fatal consequences... probably literally), they're giving their most hated opponents the power to destroy them.

 

 

In one interview he said he couldn't disclose the detailed information about NSA...becuase he didn't know all the details they function under (I tend to think that is another lie but I digress) due to the fact they are an independant agency, that they'll let him know when he needs to know, and that he trusts them, so should we

 

Or more likely than some grand conspiracy, one person is not capable of keeping track of every single agency in absolute detail. They HAVE to trust their advisors to tell them what they need to know.

 

Many members of the administration survive from term to term, serving under many presidents is quite common. Is it hard to imagine an agenda that will move beyond any one president? How about Iraq? More coming....

 

Yes, it's very hard. Any agenda that could survive beyond administrations from completely different parties would have to be a politically neutral one. And if it's so inoffensive that its supporters can survive the transition in ideology, why do they need a conspiracy to hide it?