Quote:
I know this happened a long time ago, and I apologize to those that this may cause a soft spot for, and those that have already heard of this, but this is information I've just heard about not a month ago.
The 9/11 conspriacies:
About 6 years ago a plane crashed through the World Trade Center twin towers. Some thaought this a terrorist attack, some not so sure.
Those that have actually witnessed the collasp have made statements such as: "I swear, I heard a bomb explode from the inside."
The question that's been asked was, "Was this terrorist, or our own U.S. Govermnent?"
The evidence brought up to support the claims of the Government bombed the inside of the building are:
1. The many citizens that have claimed to have felt and/or heard bombs from the inside.
2. Caught on video, the huffs of smoke exploding on lower levels of the building then where the fire actually was.
Even firemen are sceptics to the buildings colapsing due to a fire. Many have stated that it looked more like a controlled demolishen then a terrible event. They said the red flames could have only possibly reached a small amount over 2000 F, when the melting point of the steel was 3000 F.
Also, even if the fire were to destroy the building, the fourty-seven steel beams, that were the core of the building, should still have been standing.
And, over that last half a century (probally more) in the history of the world, only three steel based buildings have been destroyed. The Twin Towers, and building no. 7. They were all destroyed on the same date, and no plane ever hit building no.7, so was that to be destroyed by terrorist too?
Sure, that makes sense, but the plane crashed through the building. Exploding, in it, so how could the jet engine do anything? I understand the steel weakening, but, could it really have weakened enough in less then the half-a-minute (About 13 seconds) Tthe twin towers collasped? At free-fall speed? The same way a controlled demolition would have worked?
And what about the trained fire/policeman? do they have no idea what a bomb feels like? And we don't know the reasons why the government would do this, but we do know they were trying to cover it up. Look at video one. Also, do you work in legislature? how do you know they would have no reason to do this? Do you know how much secret crap thier keeping from us?
And the conspiricies aren't pinning the entire nail on the Government. They're just the largest suspect. The actual thing people are on about is that 9/11 could not have happened the way the media sold it. The plane was the magician's trick, the smoke and mirrors are the conspiracies. They blame the government because they seemed to have been covering it up.
Video one comepletely shows the government selling a story through mass media. Like cover story 1, the guy was not a resident of New York. He retained no accent, and seemed not to be phased by the event, in fact he was down right excited to explain it. Government placed him there. How in the world could he explain what happened when it just happened minutes earlier? Firemen and policemen didn't even understand! How would he?
Video #4 shows the British Broadcast Channel saying, to the rest of the world, what happened to the WTC and building #7. But one: When they broadcast it, it didn't even happen until 23 mins later, and in the window building #7 was still there.
Did you watch the videos? #2 and 3 show how it was immpossible for the WTC to collasp the way is did due to fire. Look at video 2, it'll compare far more intense fires in steel buildings, that left the core standing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GDa-L4hHHo
EXTRA, EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT! more on the other conspiricy!
The next two videos explain how the collasp of the TT is scientificly impossible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnSSz8AXNYQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlqM6-tppgw
The newest conspiracy is also a missile was launched before the plane hit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io
And how did the rest of the world, Through the BBC, learn of how Building Number 7's collasp 23 mins before it happened?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oNhbsJ81Q4
Now, Also explain why the media never mentioned of the core that did not survive. And why all the concrete under the TT was pulverised to dust? Fine dust finer than sand? You try it: drop a brick of concrete from the empire state, and see if it turns to dust. And from a fire created from a fuel, how does it create a fire that makes it so the largest piece of the building they could find is a telephone? NOt even- The keypad of the telephone? And why is there no trace of the plane at all. When it fell into the building, did it stay in there and wait for the fire to comepetly burn it into nothing? NO!
And of course, why would a red fire do this much damage? white/yellow flames are hotter, and really you need a blue flame (the hottest of them all) to melt and weld STEEL?
The 9/11 conspriacies:
About 6 years ago a plane crashed through the World Trade Center twin towers. Some thaought this a terrorist attack, some not so sure.
Those that have actually witnessed the collasp have made statements such as: "I swear, I heard a bomb explode from the inside."
The question that's been asked was, "Was this terrorist, or our own U.S. Govermnent?"
The evidence brought up to support the claims of the Government bombed the inside of the building are:
1. The many citizens that have claimed to have felt and/or heard bombs from the inside.
2. Caught on video, the huffs of smoke exploding on lower levels of the building then where the fire actually was.
Even firemen are sceptics to the buildings colapsing due to a fire. Many have stated that it looked more like a controlled demolishen then a terrible event. They said the red flames could have only possibly reached a small amount over 2000 F, when the melting point of the steel was 3000 F.
Also, even if the fire were to destroy the building, the fourty-seven steel beams, that were the core of the building, should still have been standing.
And, over that last half a century (probally more) in the history of the world, only three steel based buildings have been destroyed. The Twin Towers, and building no. 7. They were all destroyed on the same date, and no plane ever hit building no.7, so was that to be destroyed by terrorist too?
Sure, that makes sense, but the plane crashed through the building. Exploding, in it, so how could the jet engine do anything? I understand the steel weakening, but, could it really have weakened enough in less then the half-a-minute (About 13 seconds) Tthe twin towers collasped? At free-fall speed? The same way a controlled demolition would have worked?
And what about the trained fire/policeman? do they have no idea what a bomb feels like? And we don't know the reasons why the government would do this, but we do know they were trying to cover it up. Look at video one. Also, do you work in legislature? how do you know they would have no reason to do this? Do you know how much secret crap thier keeping from us?
And the conspiricies aren't pinning the entire nail on the Government. They're just the largest suspect. The actual thing people are on about is that 9/11 could not have happened the way the media sold it. The plane was the magician's trick, the smoke and mirrors are the conspiracies. They blame the government because they seemed to have been covering it up.
Video one comepletely shows the government selling a story through mass media. Like cover story 1, the guy was not a resident of New York. He retained no accent, and seemed not to be phased by the event, in fact he was down right excited to explain it. Government placed him there. How in the world could he explain what happened when it just happened minutes earlier? Firemen and policemen didn't even understand! How would he?
Video #4 shows the British Broadcast Channel saying, to the rest of the world, what happened to the WTC and building #7. But one: When they broadcast it, it didn't even happen until 23 mins later, and in the window building #7 was still there.
Did you watch the videos? #2 and 3 show how it was immpossible for the WTC to collasp the way is did due to fire. Look at video 2, it'll compare far more intense fires in steel buildings, that left the core standing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GDa-L4hHHo
EXTRA, EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT! more on the other conspiricy!
The next two videos explain how the collasp of the TT is scientificly impossible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnSSz8AXNYQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlqM6-tppgw
The newest conspiracy is also a missile was launched before the plane hit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io
And how did the rest of the world, Through the BBC, learn of how Building Number 7's collasp 23 mins before it happened?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oNhbsJ81Q4
Now, Also explain why the media never mentioned of the core that did not survive. And why all the concrete under the TT was pulverised to dust? Fine dust finer than sand? You try it: drop a brick of concrete from the empire state, and see if it turns to dust. And from a fire created from a fuel, how does it create a fire that makes it so the largest piece of the building they could find is a telephone? NOt even- The keypad of the telephone? And why is there no trace of the plane at all. When it fell into the building, did it stay in there and wait for the fire to comepetly burn it into nothing? NO!
And of course, why would a red fire do this much damage? white/yellow flames are hotter, and really you need a blue flame (the hottest of them all) to melt and weld STEEL?
