What really happened ....11 september

[Bitstream]

i found the quote:


"do u have any idea how much time i spend every day signing my name? i am going to feel utterly useless if i can't do that anymore,"


"you know, by the time you become leader of a country, someone else makes all the decisions, you may find you can get away with virtual presidents, virtual prime ministers, virtual everything."


that's quite an insight into the reality of american politics.

 

[ratboy88]

Quote from traderNik:

I on the other hand do not hope that you rot in hell. I do not wish bad things for internet personalities; it seems somewhat bizarre to hope someone you don't know rots in hell, and a waste of mental energy besides. Hatred is apparently very draining.

hmmmmmmmmm??? i seem to remember nikki spewing something after his bad friday girls night out:

Quote from traderNik:

.... You are the epitome of the blowhard. While punks like you talk, others like us do. You reap the benefits of the actions of real men. You're a failure and your only life is on an internet message board, like your best friend ZTroll.

Go back to wanking off to your Langan photos and your squib theories, you pathetic piece of shit.



"guessy guessy"?????

You fucking faggot.

and:

Quote from traderNik:


01-13-07 01:43 AM

Quote from ratboy88(nikki):
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL


Quote from ratboy88(nikki):
guessy guessy guessy who's a faggot ? Me!! Wheeeee!!

still more from nikki's "girls gone bad" night out:

Quote from traderNik:

batgirl88, you have officially reached the bottom of the barrel. I presume this filth (the picture of the baby) will be deleted by the time anyone else reads this. You have shown what kind of man you are by posting these pictures for no reason but to titillate your whack-job friends and to view your own handiwork.

And you were talking about not wanting to burn in hell?

Good luck, punk.

Quote from traderNik:

What a fucking joke. A pathetic little cockbreath like you would be rejected on the doorstep of the recruiting office.

How would you lose the weight? Last I checked you have to be less than 350 pounds to do BT.

Quote from traderNik:

Actually, I don't drink, batshitgirl.



I guess you'd like to join up, huh batshitgirl? All those big Marines would probably do it for you.

You've just been hammered into the ground again, revealed as a liar for claiming that you're a patriot and simultaneously admitting that you would desert if called up right now. Time to put your hair in curlers and retire for the night.

Maybe you should just stick to squids. That's an area where you can just prattle on without doing much harm. We'll just stop by every once in a while and laugh at you, wallowing in the muck with the other ET nutbags.

 

[ratboy88]

Quote from traderNik:

........
3. I'm doing everything I can to counter the wild assertions you are making regarding 9/11. Sure. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. There are plenty of people on here who have been patiently providing factual refutations of all the moonbat Google Video lifts. My job is just to point out structural fallacies in the argument. I am not as well-versed in the details of the conspiracy delusion, nor do I want or need to be.
*the best government/official hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.

 

[Bitstream]

the way i write should not be a concern for u and if it is, well... too bad. and please, u have proven nothing, i caught u in a wild lie that wtc was not built taking into account a boeing707 slamming into it; u accused me of lying and i have proven u are full of shit on at least 2 occasions. u can carry on, as i said earlier u degenerated neocons bounce off me. and u make assertion as well, as many as i do. so as long as i am here i will trash any stupid accusation u make.

Quote from traderNik:

A couple of suggestions for you.

1. Start using the word 'you' instead of continually typing 'u'. Also, stop using the word 'innit'. Both of these practices make you look an even greater fool than you likely are.

2. You have been proven to be wrong a few times on here. That is to be expected when you make as many assertions as you do. I'm not sure why it upsets you so much. Everyone (except ZTroll) is wrong occasionally.

3. I'm doing everything I can to counter the wild assertions you are making regarding 9/11. Sure. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. There are plenty of people on here who have been patiently providing factual refutations of all the moonbat Google Video lifts. My job is just to point out structural fallacies in the argument. I am not as well-versed in the details of the conspiracy delusion, nor do I want or need to be.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, (and most interestingly), your politics are abhorrent to me. This does not mean I wish you dead. It is interesting that you are unable to see the difference between these two things. In fact, it is very interesting indeed. Is it not true that there are a breed of fanatics, a breed much discussed on these threads, who feel differently, that is, who wish the deaths of those whose politics are abhorrent to them??

These people wish the deaths of those who do not believe in the same things they do, just as you do. They are called Islamic fundamentalist nutbag murderers.

Hmmm.....

your politics are much more abhorrent since u support a group of murderers and u dont need to go into ct to prove that.

go ahead and buy the whole bogus war on terror, its not your fault if u cant see it is a fabrication to push political agendas. there's at least one politician and a few veteran cia officers as well as many, many concerned citizens that think the same way i do. it's all a matter of opinions and u are just too much of a pigheaded fanatic to see that....really, really sad.

 

[Bitstream]

Quote from ratboy88:

hmmmmmmmmm??? i seem to remember nikki spewing something after his bad friday girls night out:




and:



still more from nikki's "girls gone bad" night out:

yeah he's surely one of the nicest guys i ever met.
so polite and kind. very tolerant and compassionate. u know the kind of guy u would have hang around your children all day.

 

[gblnking]

Quote from Bitstream:

there's no hope for both mainstream parties. it's all the same garbage controlled by big money. clinton himself said "here in america we have virtual president virtual congressmen and virtual senators". or something to that effect. i will search for the exact quote, it is very telling.

I tend to agree with this point about both parties. I'm a third, fourth, fifth party supporter along with runoff elections and tight term limits. When it comes to the 9/11 conspiracy though I'm sorry but I just don't buy it. I don't know about strutural capabilities and fire resistant materials but I do know two things. 1) The buildings were hit by airliners. 2) Nearly the entire Islamic world marched in the streets praising the deaths of all those people. Those two things make them my enemy.
In my opinion I think it's a hell of a stretch to beleive that the administration plotted, planned, and executed 9/11. That they planted engineered explosives and carried out the entire thing without the mainstream media finding out and jumping all over this for the ratings alone.
With that being said I do beleive that it's not to far of a stretch to beleive that the administration may have known something about it prior to the event. That they may have been complacent through thier ignorant beleif that no one would actually carry out such an attack or even that they may have thought that they could gain political favor by this.
Just my opinion. No fact or fiction

 

[Bitstream]

yep, and i respect your opinion. keep in mind tho that there are declassified docs that prove false flag ops to slam planes into major historical bdg and then blame it on the enemy were already planned decades ago. look up operation northwood: the similarities with 911 are chilling.

and yeah the kindest thing u can say to this admn is that they let it happen imo, think about this...the whole neocon team wrote a doc titled re-building american defenses calling for a pearl harbor like event in order to push their revolutionary imperialistic agenda,. so it is safe to say these guys could welcome a terror attack with open arms, and do nothing to stop it. that's why people should be very worried about this govt and possible terror attacks. now they wanna go to war with iran at all costs; if they discover a plot about iranian determined to attack american cities dont u think they would be tempted to let if happen?

Quote from gblnking:

I tend to agree with this point about both parties. I'm a third, fourth, fifth party supporter along with runoff elections and tight term limits. When it comes to the 9/11 conspiracy though I'm sorry but I just don't buy it. I don't know about strutural capabilities and fire resistant materials but I do know two things. 1) The buildings were hit by airliners. 2) Nearly the entire Islamic world marched in the streets praising the deaths of all those people. Those two things make them my enemy.
In my opinion I think it's a hell of a stretch to beleive that the administration plotted, planned, and executed 9/11. That they planted engineered explosives and carried out the entire thing without the mainstream media finding out and jumping all over this for the ratings alone.
With that being said I do beleive that it's not to far of a stretch to beleive that the administration may have known something about it prior to the event. That they may have been complacent through thier ignorant beleif that no one would actually carry out such an attack or even that they may have thought that they could gain political favor by this.
Just my opinion. No fact or fiction

 

[Turok]

Me:
>Actually, the very thing that could convince me of
>demolition is missing, mising , missing -- and that
>is the visual evidence of the organized explosives
>required to slice the outer columns.

>Those few random windows blowing out in the videos
>are neither enough to do the job, nor in the right
>location for the failure sequence.


Bit:
>u are not looking hard enough. there are telling videos
>that show evidence of cutter charges blowing the
>outer columns. will find one for u...u are free to choose
>to see them.

Sure, please post said video(s). I'd be delighted to see a video that shows those outer columns being sliced in the perfectly timed sequence required to collapse those floors all in order like they did.

>also those "squibs" do infact correspond exactly to the
>very same pivotal reinforced floors designed to prevent
>total collapse.

I have to admit that you've lost me on this statement, but I will respond generically -- I'll be looking forward to some evidence supporting your claim that what appears (in the video I've seen so far) to be very rare and widely distributed occurances some ways ahead of the collapsing floors to rather be "exactly" placed on "pivitol" floors.

JB

 

[Haroki]

Quote from Bitstream:

there are many documents describing the concrete walls surrounding the core, i already gave u one link earlier and that's just one doc.
also oxford uni describe it.

here's one:

http://algoxy.com/conc/core.html

and another:

http://www.ussartf.org/world_trade_center_disaster.htm

and again, scroll down 'till u get to the design and description:

http://www.discover.com/issue/oct-02/feature/featbuildings

there are many many more links in the internet.


and these are quotes from wtc engineers:


frank a. demartini, on-site construction manager for the world trade center, spoke of the resilence of the towers in an interview recorded on jan 25, 2001.

"the building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. that was the largest plane of the time. i believe that the building could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like a the mosquito netting on your screen door --this intense grid-- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. it really does nothing to the screen netting."


john skilling who was one of the two structure engineers responsible for designing the wtc.

skilling recounts his people having carried out an analysis, which found the twin towers could withstand the impact of a boeing 707. he says, "our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel [from the airplane] would dump into the building. there would be horrendous fire. a lot people would be killed, but he says." the building structure would still be there.". "the buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner [boeing 707], traveling at 600miles per hour. analysis indicates that such collision would result in only LOCAL DAMAGE WHICH COULD NOT CAUSE COLLAPSE OR SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE TO THE BUILDING AND WOULD NOT ENDANGER THE LIVES AND SAFETY OF THE OCCUPANTS NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA OF IMPACT."

Where to begin -

Ok, algoxy.com makes a rather poor case for the concrete, honestly. The best evidence seems to be sunlight shining through the building, showing the hallways.

But even funnier is the second link you give. It starts right off in the second para under The Structural System heading with the statement that it was the first super tall building designed without any masonry. FYI - masonry = cement or brick...... It has several more references to wallboard providing the fireproofing to the core steel, with no mention at all of concrete...
It DOES however, have 2 mentions of concrete cladding from some British engineers, BUT it was dated Dec 2001, so maybe they were ill informed. Funny thing, the first link you gave was to a British run site..... I see a pattern here.

The 3rd link was dead, but I searched around a little and found this passage:

Reinforced concrete is much tougher than gypsum, but it is not fireproof. The heat of a fire dehydrates the concrete, and it eventually crumbles.

http://www.discover.com/issues/oct-02/features/featbuildings/

This is the same link. I see absolutely no reference here to the core being concrete in the core, other than for the floors.

So overall, I'd say your evidence for concrete covering the core was VERY weak and definitely contains some conflicts and inconsistencies. I'm sure there's some actual construction plans out there somewhere - Library of Congress, NY city Library, something... Go find it if you want to convince others...

WTC engineers -

DeMartini was a construction manager - so I don't know that he was an engineer or not, do you ? And the netting comment seems a little odd too, since a mosquito net is under tension and the exterior panels would be under tension OR compression , depending on which side of the tower they were on and on load factors such as wind direction, etc. And anyways he states that the towers were designed to withstand the impact of --- A ---- jet plane. The use of A generally means - ONE !!! He states as his OPINION that the towers could withstand multiple impacts. If you want to claim THAT, then it would be an accurate statement.....

As far as Skilling goes - who knows how good a study they did. Remember, this building was designed in the 60's so no computer modeling was available to them. Who knows if they figured the insulation being removed. Do you have a link saying he did?

 

[ratboy88]

Quote from Haroki:

Where to begin -

Ok, algoxy.com makes a rather poor case for the concrete, honestly. The best evidence seems to be sunlight shining through the building, showing the hallways.

But even funnier is the second link you give. It starts right off in the second para under The Structural System heading with the statement that it was the first super tall building designed without any masonry. FYI - masonry = cement or brick..... blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, ad nauseam, etc. i am an iron welding specialist from working on a chopper... LOL LOL LOL.. ok gotta run to ihop now for some buttermilks.

*the best fema/nist hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.