SICK!!! Truthers buy 45 ad space in NYC with exploding WTC bldg. video...

Shame on you.

 

No, not really. But thanks for your feeble attempt anyway.

 

Actually, RW'RS are more into this one! (THOUGH I know 1 who is on the left, this is first cousins to the 'GOVERNMENT IS OUT TO GET YOU' crowd. That ain't so much
on the LEFT! That's the RW pushing the edge of sanity.

 

If they want to waste money on ad space, so be it. This is coming from a New Yorker whose office is just a few blocks from ground zero.

 

CONDI RICE BEING TOLD, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN! Clinton had a BIN LADEN unit. Look into what happened to it. Wasn't that headed by the RICHARD CLARKE that the right hates down to his core? The same guy who served 3 presidents and the same guy who apolgized to the families of 911 "we failed you" who
was then EXCORIATED by Conservatives of all stripes?? YES, I HAVE NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT HAD GORE ASCENDED TO THE PRESIDENCY THAT HE WON FROM THE PEOPLE, THERE IS A SUPERB CHANCE CLARK WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THROUGH to a PRESIDENT GORE!! Except he wouldn't have had to TRICK Gores people into taking a meeting!

I said it, I meant it and the more I read year after year, the more I am sure! Delayed, averted, squashed, lesser--but NOT the 9/11 that happened.

And remember that big gawky ugly spinster that was the laughing stock of the Right? JANET RENO's FBI averted a big one in LA (I believe LAX). She made her FBI dig down and I don't know who made the quote but "they shook the trees". As for TIMELINES?? The Cole was Clinton's fault, right! FINE, if so horrific, why didn't GWB go in and bomb the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of 'em the second he got sworn in?? 2 months later was too late for JUSTICE? For payback?? Pleaaase! In fact, had he, would there have been a 9/11? Your indignation is duly noted and found to be patently absurd.

 

Ouch! That one hurt

You owned him on that one

- - - Updated - - -

Wow, still being but hurt from the 2000 election. You lost twice, get over it

 

I'll ask again............

Congressional Record: September 26, 2002 (Senate)
Page S9364-S9366

HOMELAND SECURITY

In September 1998, the Intelligence Community obtained information that Usama Bin Laden's next operation could involve flying an aircraft loaded with explosives into a U.S. airport and detonating it; this information was provided to senior U.S. Government officials in late 1998.

In the fall of 1998, the Intelligence Community received additional information concerning a Bin-Laden plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington, DC, areas;

In November 1998, the Intelligence Community learned that a Bin Laden was attempting to recruit a group of five to seven young men from the United States to strike U.S. domestic targets.

In the spring of 1999, the Intelligence Community learned about a planned Bin Laden attack on a U.S. Government facility in Washington, DC.

Additionally, in 1999, the threat of an explosive-laden aircraft being used in a suicide attack against the Pentagon, CIA headquarters, or the White House, was noted in a Library of Congress report to the National Intelligence Council.

In late 1999, the Intelligence Community learned of Bin Laden's possible plans to attack targets in Washington, DC, and New York City during the New Year's Millennium celebrations.

On December 14, 1999, an individual named Ahmed Ressam was arrested as he attempted to enter the United States from Canada with detonator materials in his car. Ressam's intended target was Los Angeles International Airport. Ressam, who has links to Usama Bin Laden's terrorist network, has not been formally sentenced yet.

In March 2000, the Intelligence Community obtained information regarding the types of targets that operatives in Bin Laden's network might strike. The Statue of Liberty was specifically mentioned, as were skyscrapers, ports, and airports, and nuclear power plants;

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s092602.html

What did you expect Bush to do in a few months that Clinton couldn't accomplish in 2 YEARS? Be specific.

 

It is sick because these people are trying to make themselves feel relevant using a tragedy.

.

That is not alledged it is real Parts of the Tower fell on WTC7 that is called a fact.

You can't figure it out doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Your ignorance is not evidence.

They didn't but they knew it would because you know Science..... The building was bulging and they were certain it would collapse and that is not magic. Again your ignorance is not evidence.

again ignorance is not evidence.

I think there is an architect on this thread who weighed in.

 

There is noise recorded in the video; a muffled (re: internal) explosion...

[video=youtube;XrnmbUDeHus]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus[/video]
​

To be fair, sound could have easily been added to the video later. But what is indisputable is how the entire building collapsed at the same time, evenly and precisely as a controlled demolition ought to fall. The only other explanation aside from a controlled demolition would be God's will that made that building fall so perfectly in tune with itself, without even a hint of that "chaos" that you are babbling about.

 

CBS owns that billboard.
CBS is a liberal organization.
Why did CBS sell that space and show that video ?

You're calling the truthers "sick".... but libs are showing the video.

Can we safely assume "libs are sick" ?

 

So you are not disputing that, theoretically, it can be done. You'll note that only certain areas of the support columns of the building would have to be severed, while gravity would take care of the rest, which looks like exactly what happened in the WTC 7 video that I posted above.

How Building Implosions Work

Yes, about that pile of rubble:

​

Building 7's Rubble Pile

​

 

Concrete has a strong tension strength, but can "explode" under compression. Right under my office, we have a lab that compresses concrete cylinders in order to test the compression strength of a concrete batch. Sometimes the the concrete cylinders "crush" without a sound (if they are green), but most of the time the "pop" of cylinders sounds like an explosion.

The standard compression strength of structural concrete is 3,500 - 5,000 psi. If there were 10 columns (yes, I know there were more then 10 columns) that were 1' x 1', they could hold a combined weight to 3,600 tons. They were already holding up a concrete building. While the columns were probably adequate to hold up the building, I'm sure no one sized them to also support debris from two buildings collapsing on top of WTC 7.

A block of concrete that is 1' x 1' x1 ' weights around 200 lbs. It would not take much concrete falling on top of WTC 7 to overcome the weight limits of the columns....not even considering the added force of the concrete falling from great heights.

Once one column fails, it would create a chain reaction of the failure of the other columns, as the columns are acting in unison to support the building. It would be like 10 people holding something heavy in the air and one of those 10 sitting down, leaving the other 9 to hold the object.....then another person sitting down....etc. What you are seeing on the face of that building that look like "explosions" are the failing of the columns shortly after one or more of the columns had already failed.

 

facts are boring.... conspiracies are more fun. Quit boring us.... noone wants to hear things that are boring....

 

Lol...too bad...I shall bore some more.

These bullets do not dispute structural failure.

Buildings that fail because of earthquakes do not fall within their footprints because of the shifting actions of the ground. If you build a house of cards on a carpet and then pull on the carpet, the card house will fall in the opposite direction that you pull the carpet. That is what is happening in an earthquake.

Controlled demolition acts the same as a building failing because of weight. It is the same concept. Any explosions would "break" a few of the support beams, which in turn causes the failure of other support beams. Gravity causes the building to fall straight down.

 

My buddy did his masters thesis on the 9/11 conspiracies. He is one of the smartest guys I've ever met (getting his phD right now) and the most he could come up with was that while there are some questions that will go unanswered, a cover up of this size and magnitude is completely and utterly impossible.

 

NO 'we' lost once. I was in the room, I saw the ballots. America lost twice!

 

More than half of your fellow Democrats are "truthers", so who exactly are you complaining about?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/More_than_half_of_Democrats_believed_Bush_knew.html

 

What explosion? I didn't hear anything. Also take note in your video how the penthouse falls I to the building about 5 seconds before the rest of the tower falls. If this was "controlled det" please explain that. Also having personally seen a controlled det before I would like to ask how come I couldn't hear any explosion in this video but when I had seen a det it was louder then the 155 mm howitzers I work with firing HE rounds.

 

So, if we tell you your constant race card throwing is just a nutty conspiracy theory, we'll not hear from you again?

 

No.

I dispute any attempt to claim that the buildings were destroyed by explosive charges. Especially building 7.

There would be no way to set the hundreds of charges without somebody noticing.

None.

 

It depends on what these 10 persons are holding, right? A slab of gyproc or a giant ball, for exemple. In the former's case, there could have a cave-in in its collapse.

The flat, straight (and convenient) fall of the building still bug me - If the fall was caused by localised debris or fires, wouldn't it been more irregular? By instinct, I always object when the enforced theory implies a lot of highly improbable theorical physics.

Yeah - I saw that too. This gives credence that at that point, the center of the building was already giving in.

I still don't know what to think in this case.

On one hand, there would be a highly insured building, maybe with secret databases that threatened his surroundings - if it didn't fell on that day, we would have been forced to pull it anyway. A demolition job made along commercial practices would take a lot of studies, verifications, analysis etc, but a military job wouldn't bother with much of these procedures. Some thermites here and there, mid-building would be enough to let gravity in.

On the other hand we have flaming debris that, in conjonction with individual AC fuel, melted the ensemble of the structure up until breaking point in a nice, convenient pile of rubble.

Bah. More likely, the light of Venus was reflected upon a weather balloon trapped in pocket of gas caused by a solar flare, huh?

 

So you are the all knowing ballot guru.

You lost twice, and you will lose again in a couple of months in the mid-terms

 

this is some dumb flamebait.

 

Where are they? I have met ONE! One does not make HALF. I'll them it is BS, a waste of time, and STUPID! If LIBERAL Bldg 7 conspiracists are on this board, listen to me...

IT IS BULL---! IT IS A WASTE OF TIME, A WASTE OF BRAIN POWER AND STUPID!

 

This is not flamebait. Did you forget WHAT DAY I put up the story? It was TACKY! It was INSENSITIVE! It was a waste money. It was a SHOW by arrogant KNOW IT ALLS who don't know S. And yes FOX, CBS, NBC, and even a TRUMP would have gladly let the fools part with their money!