Printable View
After visting most of the websites that concern the events of 9-11-01, I located this forum by contacting 911Truth, and they suggested it.
I really do have a few things to say about [that] and I have several questions that I would like discussed about 9-11.
I admit, I have not gone through this forum very much at all . . . yet! I will no doubt ask questions that you guys will think is " old hat." Hope you don't mind.
I'll be back later.
Thanks
Art
Thanks for signing up.
Here's a good place to get you started as far as what's on this site.
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15847
Thanks
Welcome aboard Art.
Welcome. Here's a good film to start with:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...68779414136481
Hey Art ...you seem well above par so far socially ...glad to have you aboard. You can probably disregard most of my posts..they only consist of ironic jokes (poorly might I add) and making fun of Augmentor's 3rd nipple.
But..Hey Dude
HEY . . . NOT WORRIED. AFTER AN EXPERIENCE I HAD ON A SHOOTING FORUM I PARTICIPATE IN, WELL . . . "STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK MY . . .
YOU KNOW THE REST.
Doesn't N320AW mean something as far as planes go?
Hey Art, welcome to the YBBS family. I (we) hope you enjoy your stay.
I usually don't post much in the 9/11 forum simply because I'm not nearly as informed as most of these guys. Jon (and many others) are great teachers.
~Dennis
First, thanks for the earlier welcome. I think I found a spot where I can speak of September 11, 2001 without getting my head bashed in! Maybe not! Anyway, I have a lot of questions about that day and of course, some opinions too.
Instead of going there at this time, I found a way, I think, that may let you guys know where I am coming from on this thing, and to illustrate an incident on another forum that really caught me off guard.
A couple of months ago I posted, in the General Topic area, a question that I hope would bring out some good discussion about 9-11-01. I played the devil's advocate a bit with the question. Well! Over 3-4 days my question for discussion produced over 150 responses of which 98% called me everything in the book, that wasn't flattering, by any stretch of the imagination. Nut cake, weird, crazy, etc. Those were the nicest comments about my character! I think it is important to note that most of these guys are generally conservative in their thinking, albeit not so open-minded about the good ol' U.S. Government!
What I would like to do, if no one objects, is to copy/paste just my original thread and also a much later post by me on the same thread when I got sick and tired of the name calling. I'd had quite enough, thank you.
Maybe this will help you understand where I am coming from on the tragedy of that day. I would appreciate your taking time to read both. Your opinion is very important to me.
Thanks
N320AW
Member
http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/zeroavatar/41280
Offline
Member #47779
1712 posts
North Georgia Mountains GA
http://images.zeroforum.com/default/report_post4.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/notepad_add4.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/send_im_cloud2.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/msg.gif September 11, 2001! Who was really behind it and why? Lets talk about it.8:00 PM 10/16/2007 http://images.zeroforum.com/buttons/demo/reply.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/buttons/demo/edit.gif
In 2004 I was stopped at a stop-light in my patrol car. An elderly man suddenly appeared at my driver window and handed me a video-tape. He said only, " You need to watch this." He and his wife were in the car behind mine. At home the next day I watched it. It was a tape about 9-11 by Alex Jones, http://www.infowars.com, a Texas radio talk show host who is quite well known. It was interesting, but I didn't give it much thought at the time. The video was primarily a conspiracy theory about what happened on 9-11. The Bush administration was essentially behind it, Jones says.
Fast forward to September 2007. I recently viewed, on the Internet, a high-acclaimed documentary called " Loose Change." It is a must see. It was also on the History Channel I understand. " Loose Change " makes a lot of points and asks a lot of questions about what happened on 9-11-01. For instance:
Why did Donald Rumsfeld state that Flight 93 was shot down?
How did the WTC towers 1 & 2 collapse onto themselves?
Why did little-damaged building #7 collapse in 7 seconds later that day?
Why did Bush say he saw, on TV, the the first plane hit the tower? It was never on TV!
Why was Bush out of town that day? Coincidence?
Why no video tape from a security camera across the street from Pentagon? That camera would have shown a wide-angle shot of the area. It was immediately seized by the FBI. No tape has surfaced!
And on and on . . .
I feel the collapse of the two WTC towers leaves more unanswered questions than anything else. They fell at " free-fall " speed, to the ground completely, in about 9 seconds! In other words, as the documentary demonstrates, a billiard ball, dropped from the 110th floor of a building would hit the ground in 9.2 seconds! How can a building, supposedly collapsing from it's top 1/3 section, fall into itself in that short period of time? How about a controlled demolition or implosion!
Anyway. I've gone off enough . . . for now. This award-winning documentary, available on Google Video and a couple of others. Heres the Google link to it:
Lets talk about this. It's important to all of us! http://floridasportsman.com/art/patriot.gif http://video.google.com/videop...53501
About 140 posts later!
N320AW
Member
http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/zeroavatar/41280
Offline
Member #47779
1712 posts
North Georgia Mountains GA
http://images.zeroforum.com/default/report_post4.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/notepad_add4.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/send_im_cloud2.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/msg.gif Re: September 11, 2001! Who was really behind it and why? Le ... (tennmike)3:18 PM 10/17/2007 http://images.zeroforum.com/buttons/demo/reply.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/buttons/demo/edit.gif
I read the Popular Mechanics stuff on the various aspects of 9-11, with particular interest in the two WTC tower's collapse. As I said earlier, their collapse leaves a lot of questions. It's interesting that PM did not address the " core " collapse in these buildings. The cores, seen below in center of the structure, bears the primary load for the building support.
http://www.forumpictureprocessor.com...mages/core.jpg
PM " theorized " that burning jet fuel poured into these, more than 110 story, shafts and weakened the steel core structures. (?) thus the ultimate collapse. That " theory " by PM does not hold any truth whatsoever! First, jet fuel, which is nothing but high-grade kerosene, will burn itself out in just a few minutes. It surely may ignite something else that is combustible, but the jet fuel itself burns itself out very quickly. Would one not think, after the collapse, we would see these cores sticking straight up where the buildings collapsed around them? They don't seem to be anywhere, but they were there. In 8 ft. long sections. Since the lower cores, lets say the lower 50% have not been afftected by heat . . . then why would the bottom sections fail? And in nice 8 ft. lengths! Coincidental in a random collapse of TWO structures?
In the core shafts there is very little that will burn. Steel does not burn. Concrete does not burn, so what would burn in the core shafts, hot enough, to weaken the core-columns so they would allow the buildings to collapse? NOTHING! Furthermore, both WTC #1 & 2 collapsed into themselves almost identically! Since the fires in each building were not contained, most would say their similar collapse was just coincidental! That is very naive thinking at best.
About flight #93 over Pennsylvania: Now I take the opposing point of view. Why would the U.S. military " shoot down " this aircraft 200 miles from Washington, D.C.? Although it was flying, ultimately, toward Washington, it's intended destination was NOT known . . . unless you believe in conspiracy theories! I do not know if it was shot-down or not, but I tend to think it wasn't.
On the cell phone calls from flight 93, I have a big problem. Being a pilot, I have attempted to use a digital cell phone many times while flying. It is almost impossible to get a signal. In the days of analog type cell phones it was easy because with analog the signal from the towers to the phone was very long range and the signal, as distance from the cell towers increases, slowly diminishes. Not so with the digital crap we have today, and on 9-11-01. Digital capability requires towers to be erected fairly close to one another to maintain an un-interrupted signal. That is why they are constructed along roads . . . not away out in the boondocks. Since flight #93 was not following any roads, it is very unlikely a digital signal could be maintained. A so-called " dropped call " we experience today was not a particular feature of analog phones. I wish they were back. Digital sucks!
So how could all of the callers on flight #93, traveling across cell-phone towers at 450 knots, sit there and have these un-interrupted conversations when, in the country away from cities in a car, we're lucky at maintain a simple signal for more than a few minutes? If it doesn't work well at 60MPH it sure isn't at 500!
One more thing about flight #93 is weird in the extreme and has not been examined to my knowledge. The navigation equipment in today's airliners is very sophisticated and requires a lot of knowledge to operate. These towel-heads were not experienced pilots at all. They never went to weeks of schooling to learn to use GPS and VOR navigation systems that are in a B-757. If an inexperienced pilot is placed over Ohio or Pennsylvania and asked to fly to Washington, D.C. how is he going to navigate a straight-course to their? The two aircraft that left Boston airport had it easy. Keep the Atlantic ocean on your left side and you'll eventually see New York City! Likewise, the aircraft that hit the pentagon, left Dulles airport which is only about 20 miles West of Washington. Go East for a few minutes, and there is the Nations capitol!
Modified by N320AW at 3:45 PM 10/17/2007
THEN MY FINAL CURTAIN-CALL!
N320AW
Member
http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/zeroavatar/41280
Offline
Member #47779
1712 posts
North Georgia Mountains GA
http://images.zeroforum.com/default/report_post4.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/notepad_add4.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/send_im_cloud2.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/default/msg.gif Re: (tv_racin_fan)4:05 AM 10/20/2007 http://images.zeroforum.com/buttons/demo/reply.gifhttp://images.zeroforum.com/buttons/demo/edit.gif
Your premise has some points, but your analysis is a little faulty!
First, just to set this aside . . . The towers were constructed in such a way to withstand the impact of a fully loaded Boeing 707. The B-707 and B-767 have extremely close dimensions. The B-767 has a 10 ft. wider wingspan than the the B-707. Both aircraft have maximum weights well over 300,000 lbs. Both aircraft can carry almost the same amount of fuel. Very close specifications, except for one thing. The B-707 has four engines, the B-767 has two.
Now, as to the collapse scenario you posted. It doesn't matter at all where you obtained it because the best mechanical engineer on Earth cannot dispute Sir Issac Newton. Maybe an apple fell on his head one day, and he went nuts, but every engineer with a diploma will not disagree with his principles . . .gravity & acceleration for instance. I'm not going to sit here and peck-out Newton's laws of motion, but I will show anyone who cares, why it is directly related to the collapse of towers #1 & #2 momentarily.
On impact of the two B-767's, into these towers, the destruction was amazing around the floors hit, but that destruction was contained in a relatively small area when compared to the overall size of each building. The fuel on-board the aircraft immediately ignited and spread across a portion of the floors hit. The majority of the fuel was consumed almost instantly after impact. Fireball, obviously. The rest stayed in that part of the building and burned . . . igniting any combustible materials. So now we have a fire. Nothing particularly " spectacular " as compared to many high-rise fires; some with flames reaching many story's high. Although the jet fuel was completely consumed in less than 10 minutes, other stuff, as Chamberlain was so kind to point out, continued to burn.
I'm not going to attempt to theorize what damage the aircraft did to the interior structure, because even the " 9-11 Commission " or the NIST cannot come to a conclusion about that! So I'd like to talk about the collapse of the buildings. As I said in the original post, the collapse interests me more than anything else.
You stated that high-tensile strength steel, which the towers used, just snaps apart instead of bending at some point in high heat. Right? Well, it has never been stated by anyone that the fires and temperatures within the area was uniform whatsoever.Most of the fire areas were contained within a section of each of the floors. There certainly would have been some spreading of the fire, but no one knows for sure. Now, we have a structure with several floors on fire in the top 1/3rd of the building. By the way, nobody above the impact area survived!
I think it would be safe to assume that if this fire was not related to an aircraft impact, the building would not have collapsed. However, this is not the case so something else contributed to the ultimate collapse. Of course, the amount of damage done by the planes, the fires notwithstanding, is unknown. So, instead of letting Nero fiddle while Rome burns, lets discuss it. That's all the " 9-11 Commission " was able to do!
Obviously, the planes caused damage inside the buildings, albeit we don't know how much. A man on the street might say the aircraft impacting internal structures, combined with the weakening of some of the steel supports caused the collapse. H'mm? Maybe, and maybe not!
You stated, as above, that this high-tensile steel support structure, which by the way, includes those massive central core vertical beams, will just give way quickly once a certain amount of heat & stress were applied. Probably true, however, there is one little tiny thing that must be remembered here and now. All of those beams and supports in the fire areas were not heated to the same temperature and additionally, those same beams and supports were not under the same stress equally! No uniform temperatures. No uniform stress loads due to un-even damage within.
It is so easy for some people to simply state that the buildings fell vertically, into themselves, because of the above. Most do, but they haven't done their homework!
Now understanding how ridiculous the above scenario is for just one building to make such a perfect fall . . . how about two buildings doing exactly the same thing! As a subset to this, please remember that these aircraft are primarily made of aluminum! Most areas of these planes are essentially hollow. Wings, fuselage, etc. The heaviest part are the engines. They are primarily made of steel and titanium. Titanium is very heat resistant and lighter than steel. Anybody ever see hollow aluminum cut through high-tensile UL approved structural steel. I'll wager no one raised there hand! Furthermore, since the jet fuel was consumed in a few minutes, the continuing fire was fueled by interior contents only. This raises a question that has been addressed. It is the approximate temperature of the fires that may have compromised the integrity of the steel structural supports. Don't forget those massive vertical core support beams! I have seen so many temperature assessments it's incredible. Now I know that the temperature of burning jet fuel is around 550 F. degrees in open air. (Open air means the fuel & air are not being compressed as in a jet engine) Well, if we understand at what temperature jet fuel burns now the question is: At what temperature would the building contents burn? Hotter than jet fuel? I hardly think so. We're talking the same type of contents that could be found in the average home! These do not produce blast-furnace temperatures! Also, while speaking of the fires and temperatures, many people have come to think the temperature weakened the steel structures. Probably did, but remember something. These steel structures were only subjected to the heat from the burning contents for less than an hour in one building and about an hour and a half in the other. If someone is prepared to prove that cold, high-tensile, structural steel, will weaken enough to cause a complete and instantaneous collapse when heated to even jet fuel burn temps for such a short amount of time, as was in the WTC towers, I would certainly like to hear an explanation. Even " Popular Mechanics " states that this steel must reach 800 F. degrees to just weaken some.
Heres Issac's apple tree theory which coincidentally applies to the collapse of the WTC towers. You are correct, as a whole, both towers were about 95% air. Not a vacuum, just air. You said something that, if I didn't know any better, would let pass, but I cannot in any way. You said essentially that as the floors collapsed downward [they] were gaining speed. I would certainly appreciate an explanation of this magical feat! Two factors have to be dealt with in analyzing that statement. First is the mounting RESISTANCE ENCOUNTERED as each floor fell onto the next. That there is an increasing resistance, there is no doubt, but how can these floors accelerate under these conditions. Surely their fall is directly related to gravity, but think of the massive resistance encountered along the way! This will slow it down. Secondly, what is actually falling? Well, a lot I guess, but I am referring to each floor, as most do. Some theorists have drawn a parallel between the elapsed time of each collapse to the dropping of a billiard ball from the identical height. It shows that the drop/fall times are almost the same. It actually does make a lot of sense, but I want Issac Newton's opinion, and it has been shown for centuries to be true. It has to do with aerodynamics, something I can really relate to. It is very simple and again, it is related to the WTC collapse. Newton theorized, and then proved that if two objects, of the identical weight, but different aerodynamic characteristics, were dropped from a given height they would impact the ground at different times. So, if one was to drop a 1 pound billiard ball and a 1 pound plate from the same height, the ball would land before the plate, because the ball has a better aerodynamic profile than the plate. Likewise, a spear of same weight as a ball would hit the ground sooner than the ball because it is has a better ballistic coeficient. (This IS a shooting forum you know) For aerodynamic functions, the floors of the WTC suck. Nothing could be less streamlined than they. Assuming we could dislodge one of these floors with a super helicopter (JGunpilot at the controls) and lift a complete floor to say 10,000 ft., then find a billiard ball of equal weight and lift it to 10,000 ft. and drop both, which is going get down the fastest? BALL by a very, very wide margin. BUT WAIT . . there's more! Remember the billiard ball tests? That little ball fell 110 story's in the SAME LENGTH OF TIME it took the towers to completely fall! Keep in mind Newton's law. Two items. SAME WEIGHT, SAME BC, Both hit simultaneously. Now I do not know how heavy each tower was, but it's a bit more than a cue ball for sure. The question, at least for me is, how did two identical buildings collapse, in little more than one hour, and fall IDENTICALLY the same way. The only plausible answer is COINCIDENCE! Since the odds are enormously against such an occurance . . . I think I'll sit back and wait for something a little more palatable to chew on!
Discussing the towers, et al... really isn't my thing. I'm one of those "devil's advocates" you spoke of regarding them. Also, I realize that I'm not intelligent enough to be able to discuss it. I'm not an engineer of any kind. I'm not a metallurgist, a physicist, an architect, an explosives expert, etc... So, I leave it to those more qualified. I do know there are issues with the official account that I can talk about. Like the fact that NIST has yet to explain the collapse of WTC7, etc...
Anywho... if you want to talk about things like the 9/11 Commission, the Joint Congressional Inquiry, Whistle-blowers, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Bush, Norman Mineta, NORAD, the environmental impact of 9/11, the PNAC, and on and on and on, I'm your man.
Hey dark, good to hear from you again... Always nice to know you haven't been run over by a truck.
I guess I should call the new guy NAW? Wait, the name is Atr? Thanx for joining us Art. I am in Jon's corner about the whole towers thing. There is little point in debating these things now. There is no crimescene, thus no way to prove nor DISprove any of our theories.
Further, the "movenment is so rife with infighting and shills there is also little point in travelling that road either.
Where does that leave us, I wonder?
What kind of infighting? Don't understand.
What about a " class action " suit against the government by a tremendous amount of people who, I am sure, would be delighted if someone would or could get the ball rolling!
Even a private investigation financed by millions of people would be great.
Or am I missing something somehwere on any in-action so far?
Something is currently underway in NYC. A ballot initiative to get a new investigation. In New York, that just may be doable.
A ballot initiative???? Ballot initiative = POLITICS!
This was a crime against the United States of America . . . not just NYC.
Is there a Woodward and Bernstein out there, or does anyone seem to care!?
What gives? The old saying, " Time cures all wounds," is that what's at play in this country? I certainly hope not.
IS ANYONE OUT THERE DOING SOMETHING OR JUST STICKING THEIR HEADS IN THE SAND? Quick-sand, I would hope. I need a little encouragment here guys . . . that the truth of 9-11-01 will be exposed, and I mean quickly!!!
Well N320AW, I have no legal power. I don't have the ability to subpoena an individual to testify under oath. However, I have posted well over 1,000,000 9/11 Truth related posts on the internet. I have written well over 50 articles pertaining to 9/11 Truth. I have created the "Who Is? Archives." I wrote "Now That You Know, What Can You Do?" on the 911Truth.org site. I was a member of the 911Truth.org Steering Committee. I have maintained my website, by archiving 1000's of pieces of information, and spending several $1000 to keep it up. I have been to Rep. Weldon's office to drop off things like the "Terror Timeline", "A New Pearl Harbor", and several other books. I have confronted Rep. Weldon on the 9/11 subject at a town hall meeting. I have interviewed 9/11 family members Donna Marsh O'Connor, Bob McIlvaine, and have been instrumental in building bridges between the families and the 9/11 Truth Movement. I attended the 2004 9/11 People's Commission in Washington D.C. I attended the 2005 Emergency Truth Convergence in Washington D.C. I attended the 9/11: Revealing The Truth, Reclaiming Our Future conference in Chicago, and was a speaker for the "Grassroots Workshop." I attended the 9/11 Accountability Conference in Chandler, AZ, and spoke twice. Once about how "they would never", and once about "credibility behind our message." I also made an hour and a half movie about that. I attended the West Hartford 9/11 Symposium, and at that event, I took Q&A from the audience for the families, and the first responders. I attended the 2006 anniversary at Ground Zero, and made a 2 hour movie about it. I have held 3 fund raisers for the 9/11 First Reponders raising over $6000. I have had two front page articles in my local newspaper. I have been interviewed several times on several different radio shows popular within the movement. I was on the National Opie & Anthony radio show. I helped Dr. Peter Dale Scott write a paper on JFK, 9/11, and the war. I currently maintain three 9/11 Truth blogs. One here, one at www.visibility911.com, and one at www.911blogger.com. I have paid money out of my pocket to make sure a 9/11 family member could be at Ground Zero this past anniversary. I started the "9/11 Truth: Door To Door" series, and have taken part in random activism in my area, as well as on the "eleventh of every month." I helped to insure the creation of 9/11: Press For Truth. In January and Febrary of 2008, I am helping someone else to rent out a movie theater for every Tuesday in those months, and we are going to show 9/11: Press For Truth, and In Their Own Words: The Untold Stories Of The 9/11 Families as a double feature. I have contacted 1000's of media, 100's of Congressmen, and have worked almost every day in the last 5+ years towards 9/11 Truth, and have almost maintained a 16 hour 9/11 Truth day to boot for most of those 5+ years.
The NYC Ballot initiative is one way of getting a new investigation. We have to try EVERY avenue that is NON-violent because once we become violent, they know exactly how to deal with us.
I have done everthing within my power to make sure that the truth about 9/11 is exposed, and those responsible are held to account for their crimes. My head is FAR from the sand.
You must understand my mounting frustration when the people on that forum I referred to earlier responded with such disdain at the idea the U.S. Government (aka Bush administration) being involved in such an atrocity! People I meet elsewhere seem to lean in that direction also. I believe those apparent attitudes are an extremely dangerous omen of things to come.
People, in general, do not like to hear " bad news." Most shy away from it if possible. I grew up during the cold war and remember vividly the day I received in the mail a vanilla envelope with construction information on how to build a home fallout shelter. The return address was: The President of the United States.
You see, I had written off to receive this material from some public sponsored group. In that time Americans took the Soviet Union very seriously. In fact, it was a way of life for many years. Of course, I'm not telling you anything you do not know, however, I saw a nation of people that were genuinely concerned about our nation being literally or figuretivly vaporized. Just about every 1950's Saturday afternoon " B " grade movie was a science-fiction tale about the " monsters " created by the Atomic bomb experiments in New Mexico.
My observation, in having kicked around for 60 years now, is that the society I was reared in was a much more polite and caring than we have today. Maybe it was our nation's relief that WW-II was behind us. I don't know. But, I do know this. People in this country, at that time, took a much more active interest in this country's overall welfare than todays culture would ever attempt to do. Our society today, when compared to the earlier ones, seems to some how dis-associate itself from the problems we all collectively face. High school students can't find their own state on a map and so it seems to go. It all bothers me a great deal.
I know very little about politics. It's something I have never been adept at. My above post was aimed at the general attitude I have encountered of late. It wasn't aimed at you. I don't even know your name or who you are. Nevertheless, I just cannot comprehend the events of 9-11-01 being probably orchastrated the Uncle Sam, and it appears that nothing is being done to get to the root-cause of that day.
I have watched just about every 911 conspiracy video there is, and the one another posted here, that I had not seen. Generally speaking, I do have a little trouble with some of the information presented. Making one's case utilizing the bad guy's sound bites is not particularly convincing evidence of anything. It happens a lot though.
These videos ask a lot of great questions, but do not give any answers to them. Take, for instance, the BBC reporter in NYC (standing at the window in Manhatten) and the anchor in London. Has anybody asked these two how they came to know about the collapse of B7 before it collapsed? I have yet to hear an explanation of that! Assertions that flight 77 would have encountered a " high speed stall " while approaching the area of the Pentagon by maneauvering so abruptly. Who saw this plane doing all of this? A high speed stall? Nope. Sorry. And that is one area (aviation) that I can speak on intelligently.
There is no sense, I gather, from re-hashing all of this stuff. I just want to see the people of this great country respond to those events with fervor, and yes, many who do not are most certainly " sticking their heads in the sand." With what you outlined as your efforts . . . you sir, are most certainly not one of those who do not seem to care!
Wow Jon, for being non-violent, you sure dropped the bomb in here! wOOt. I'm not going to list my accolades. I don't have to justify myself to anyone. Suffice to say, my belief, and speaking about that belief, cost me a job that paid almost 85K/year. Further, I entered this movement with my blood.