[Changleen]

When I've seen buildings demolished with explosives at the base they've fallen pretty fast...

Well, Duh...

Are there any buildings that we can carry out controlled experiments on? Something built the same way and a plane full of neo-conservatives?

Unfortunatley no, but you can do several pretty simple thought experiments yourself and/or mock up similar situations with models. Anyway you look at it, what happened doesn't stack up.

Secondly, there are lots of videos of controlled demolitions, and you can compare those to the 9/11 collapses and see the many many similarities for yourself.

And WTC7! Remember WTC7!

 

[Changleen]

OK, Enough about 9/11. It happened, and many many things have happened because of it. Most of these things are bad, for the world and for America. I think we all agree on that. How are we going to limit this damage?

Priority One: Remove the leadership which uses and aggravates the situation. Deal with the problem, not the symptoms. George Bush is scratching a fungal infection of hatred and division people like him seeded in the 1950s. We need to stop scratching for a start, it only spreads the fungus.

 

[enkidu]

Again, to be even entertaining questions about the above, you are "considering the possibility that the US government fired a cruise missile into its own department of defense as a staged terrorist act."

Is this the case?

Watch "911 in Plane Site" DVD. It's well documented with CNN, Fox News and many other clippings from that day, September 11th.

The initial hole was about 16 Ft. Not large enough for 44 Ft x 125 Ft Boeing plane. No wreckage of plane was ever filmed on the lawn of the Pentagon throughout the day when firefighters were extinguishing the fire.

 

[fluff]

Watch "911 in Plane Site" DVD. It's well documented with CNN, Fox News and many other clippings from that day, September 11th.

The initial hole was about 16 Ft. Not large enough for 44 Ft x 125 Ft Boeing plane. No wreckage of plane was ever filmed on the lawn of the Pentagon throughout the day when firefighters were extinguishing the fire.

I don't remember seeing any plane wreckage around the WTC, but I remember seeing one fly into the towers...

 

[fluff]

Well, Duh... Unfortunatley no, but you can do several pretty simple thought experiments yourself and/or mock up similar situations with models. Anyway you look at it, what happened doesn't stack up.

Secondly, there are lots of videos of controlled demolitions, and you can compare those to the 9/11 collapses and see the many many similarities for yourself.

And WTC7! Remember WTC7!

Post up (or pm me) a bunch of links to these things.

I still think the accepted explanation makes more sense than any conspiracy theories I've heard.

 

[MMike]

44 Ft x 125 Ft Boeing plane.

because 757's are cubes?

 

[enkidu]

because 757's are cubes?

I think 44 Ft x 125 Ft measurement is the wing tip to wing tip length x bottom to tail (rudder ?) tip. If the fuselage only made the initial hole of approx. 16 Ft dia., we would expect the wreckage of torn off wings, engines and a tail all over the area. No? But there was none. (Obviously, I'm not an expert. But the photographic documentation was convincing. I don't think the videos and pictures are doctored, in other words.)

MMike, you worked at Boeing. I would be interested in your assessment of what kind of damage (heat, size of wreckage etc.) 757 would have made.

Fluff, the WTC airplanes exploded as it entered in the towers, but in the Pentagon's case there is no sign of immediate explosion. A wooden desk, an open book and other items are shown on videos and photographs all in tact sitting right next to the 16 Ft dia. hole.

 

[ridetoofast]

its the things that enk mentioned above that make me HIGHLY skeptical of the pentalawn...

Fluff, the WTC airplanes exploded as it entered in the towers, but in the Pentagon's case there is no sign of immediate explosion. A wooden desk, an open book and other items are shown on videos and photographs all in tact sitting right next to the 16 Ft dia. hole.

actually the pics ive seen were FAR smaller that 16' dia

 

[Changleen]

Fluff, I'll dig out all those links I collected. I don't have them here at work, so you have to wait.

One more thing WRT the hole in the Pentagon vs. the hole in the hole in the WTC - The WTC holes are proper cartoon style silouettes(sic) of the planes, right out to the wingtips. Fair enough the walls of the WTC may not have been as strong as the Pentagon (indeed it has been alleged that they are not by detractors of 'alternative' theories) but we must remember that

a) The WTC was still steel reinforced concrete, and
b) The engines are by far the most dense and strong component of any plane (the fans are constructed from single crystals of nickle based super-alloy, one of the strongest materials humanity has learned to make), and that a wing impacting horizontally (like a blade) is far stronger and resistant to impact than the body of the plane, which is essentially a hollow cylinder. Many other crash site photos bear this out.

With this in mind, surely any holes in the apparantly plane-resistant Pentagon should surely be made by the wings and engine rather than the body of the plane?

 

[fluff]

Fluff, I'll dig out all those links I collected. I don't have them here at work, so you have to wait.

One more thing WRT the hole in the Pentagon vs. the hole in the hole in the WTC - The WTC holes are proper cartoon style silouettes(sic) of the planes, right out to the wingtips. Fair enough the walls of the WTC may not have been as strong as the Pentagon (indeed it has been alleged that they are not by detractors of 'alternative' theories) but we must remember that

a) The WTC was still steel reinforced concrete, and
b) The engines are by far the most dense and strong component of any plane (the fans are constructed from single crystals of nickle based super-alloy, one of the strongest materials humanity has learned to make), and that a wing impacting horizontally (like a blade) is far stronger and resistant to impact than the body of the plane, which is essentially a hollow cylinder. Many other crash site photos bear this out.

With this in mind, surely any holes in the apparantly plane-resistant Pentagon should surely be made by the wings and engine rather than the body of the plane?

Bear in mind that the Pentagon is a lot lower than the WTC and a direct hit flying level would be very much harder to achieve.

 

[MMike]

(the fans are constructed from single crystals of nickle based super-alloy, one of the strongest materials humanity has learned to make),

And yet they fare remarkably poorly against a 3 lb bird.......

 

[ohio]

the fans are constructed from single crystals of nickle based super-alloy

single crystals, huh? Gosh it's convenient that a crystal happens to be the exact shape of an ideal fan blade...

Or does that mean that the fan blade is built up one itty-bitty crystal at a time (maybe by tiny little gnomes)?

 

[ohio]

its the things that enk mentioned above that make me HIGHLY skeptical of the pentalawn...

You can't ONLY be skeptical of the pentagon crash. If you're skeptical of the pentagon, you're skeptical of the towers. If your certain of the towers you must be certain of the pentagon. They HAVE to be connected.

Even for conspiracy theorists, there is NO WAY that the US government managed to randomly pick the exact same day to blow up its pentagon as a bunch of loony extremists chose to fly some planes into the WTC.

So you're saying you also think it's possible that the US government was behind flying two passenger planes into a civilian structure, killing thousands of its own citizens.

 

[MMike]

fan blades 101

 

[fluff]

fan blades 101

Where do they get the birds?

With a large forward facing area, resistance to bird ingestion is required. Ingestion of a number of medium size birds has to be demonstrated by running an engine at take-off power and requiring it to ingest four birds within the space of one second. The engine continued to deliver power, accelerating and decelerating for a total period of thirty minutes to simulate the likely operating procedure following a severe ingestion incident.

Edit: I see they neglect to mention how the blades should deal with being flown into buildings.

 

[MMike]

Where do they get the birds?

With a large forward facing area, resistance to bird ingestion is required. Ingestion of a number of medium size birds has to be demonstrated by running an engine at take-off power and requiring it to ingest four birds within the space of one second. The engine continued to deliver power, accelerating and decelerating for a total period of thirty minutes to simulate the likely operating procedure following a severe ingestion incident.

Edit: I see they neglect to mention how the blades should deal with being flown into buildings.

Special farms...euthansized as humanely as possible... At least that's what they told us during my orientation when I started at Pratt and Whitney...

 

[valve bouncer]

Special farms...euthansized as humanely as possible... At least that's what they told us during my orientation when I started at Pratt and Whitney...

I hope they remember to thaw them out before use.

 

[Damn True]

Here is the thread, take off your tinfoil hat and look at page #3.

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122146&page=1&pp=15&highlight=steel

 

[Archslater]

Fluff, I'll dig out all those links I collected. I don't have them here at work, so you have to wait.

One more thing WRT the hole in the Pentagon vs. the hole in the hole in the WTC - The WTC holes are proper cartoon style silouettes(sic) of the planes, right out to the wingtips. Fair enough the walls of the WTC may not have been as strong as the Pentagon (indeed it has been alleged that they are not by detractors of 'alternative' theories) but we must remember that

a) The WTC was still steel reinforced concrete, and
..........QUOTE]

The WTC's outer shell was just delicate steel beams closely spaced with glass infill. It is just the floor slabs and inner core structure that was reinforced concrete. The outer shell would easily be punctured by an aluminum airplane traveling at high speed, making an "airplane shaped" hole. The pentagon's shell was reinforced masonry /concrete, which likely caused the wings, etc... to break up, although I don't recall seeing the photos that you described showing a small 16' hole.

I've been to a lot of the conspiracy websites, and the arguments are full of holes........ like people confident that it wasn't a 757 because the landing gear rim at the crash scene was a different style than that which they saw on other 757's. I'm sure boeing only manuf. 1 style of rim over 20 years of production.

 

[Changleen]

And yet they fare remarkably poorly against a 3 lb bird.......

The Frozen chicken test I believe you are reffering to. That's more about the tollerences of the engine being altered than it's complete destruction by impact.

 

[ohio]

I can't remember who said this first:

"Never explain by consipracy what can be explained by stupidity"

 

[Changleen]

The WTC's outer shell was just delicate steel beams closely spaced with glass infill.

'Delicate' steel girders? OK, whatever. And they were encased in concrete, itslef further traditionally reinforced. I've posted photos of the construction, search for them. There was no steel exposed to the elements.

The outer shell would easily be punctured by an aluminum airplane traveling at high speed, making an "airplane shaped" hole.

And indeed it was.The question is the extent which the pentagon would be affect by similar circumstace.

The pentagon's shell was reinforced masonry /concrete, which likely caused the wings, etc... to break up, although I don't recall seeing the photos that you described showing a small 16' hole.

There was initially only a small hole in the outside of the Pentagon before it collapsed. So, if the wings and so forth broke off where were they? They just vapourised? Two engines, two of the larger sets of landing gear, the wings and tail, none of that would have fitted through the hole.

I've been to a lot of the conspiracy websites, and the arguments are full of holes........ like people confident that it wasn't a 757 because the landing gear rim at the crash scene was a different style than that which they saw on other 757's. I'm sure boeing only manuf. 1 style of rim over 20 years of production.

I think the point there was the components which were photographed at the site were considerably smaller than those you might expect in a 757.

 

[Changleen]

single crystals, huh? Gosh it's convenient that a crystal happens to be the exact shape of an ideal fan blade...

Or does that mean that the fan blade is built up one itty-bitty crystal at a time (maybe by tiny little gnomes)?

No, It means the casting of each blade is extremely precisely controlled during it's cooling so only one crystal propagates through the entire structure. It's very awesome. In any normal casting, millions of crystals initiate at the solidification temperature, and grow into each other. The boundries of these crystals are weak points in the metal. No boundries = far stronger metal.

 

[Changleen]

So you're saying you also think it's possible that the US government was behind flying two passenger planes into a civilian structure, killing thousands of its own citizens.

If you remember they're also responsible for a war of choice - sending thousands of US troops to their deaths and maimings, and the willfully prosecuted deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians, cutbacks in medicare, and general shafting of the environment, all just to further personal agendas, it's not such a stretch of the imagination is it?

 

[Changleen]

I can't remember who said this first:

"Never explain by consipracy what can be explained by stupidity"

This is a good argument, but then what about the fact no planes were scrambled to intercept 4 hijacked jet liners which were known to be hijacked for nearly 2 hours, despite on many many previous occasions having intercepted other aircraft who had veared of course after only 15 minutes? That was a regular response time for the fighter bases whose job it is to intercept errant aircraft. What about WTC7? What about the refusal of the Feds to release basically any of the 'evidence' they had collected from any of the sites? There are simply too many problems with the story for it to be written off as a collosal list of 'coincidences' and 'oversights'.

 

[Changleen]

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633

That is a great site actually. You should check out the reading room. You need to spend a good hour or to on there, there is a lot a lot a lot of stuff.

 

[Changleen]

Having spent literally hundreds of hours reading about 9/11 **** since the event, the situation which seems most likely to me is this: Bush administration maybe with Mosad's (Israeli secret service) help (or vice versa) discovers plot by Islamic extremists to fly plane into WTC and other targets. Rather than quashing it, enables it and adds dramatic flourishes in order to further neoconservative agenda.

Part of the neoconservative agenda requires / asks for a myth which unites the American people against 'evil' in order to unite society. 9/11 fits the bill too perfectly and there are too many questions about the execution not to raise my suspicion. Have any of you actually read the 9/11 commissions's report? I have. It's a ****ing joke. At no point does it address any of the serious questions.

 

[Changleen]

Here you go:

# Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
# Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
# Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
# Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
# Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?
# Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge?
# How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA's radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military?
# How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent?
# What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state?
# Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers?
# Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here?
# Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?

 

[fluff]

I prefer to think of the adminstration as being incompetent enough not to have prevented the attacks and unprincipled enough to use the effects to further their own agenda.

It's a much more believable theory given the basic stupidy of groups of people.

 

[Changleen]

I prefer to think of the adminstration as being incompetent enough not to have prevented the attacks and unprincipled enough to use the effects to further their own agenda.

It's a much more believable theory given the basic stupidy of groups of people.

But somehow on September 11th their 'incompetance' (read: conveniant events) spread like peanut butter across all the agencies involved or affected, and receded immediately after. I would seriously believe these guys (hijackers) simply got lucky if it was not for the sheer amount of times they got lucky in a row.

 

[fluff]

Given enough time and effort anyone can get lucky... We have no idea how many others get really close to being just as 'lucky'

 

[Changleen]

Given enough time and effort anyone can get lucky... We have no idea how many others get really close to being just as 'lucky'

If you were truly right we would be in a situation like Iraq with sucessful and thwarted attempts all the time. Do you truly believe AQ is the only group who wants to harm the US today? There are many. Only one was 'allowed' to succeed. There is very little wrong with western intelligence. It's protected us for 60 years to a greater extent than it has come close to failing us to this degree. Like I said, this could easily have been the 1 in 100 times they got lucky, but they got way too lucky for my liking, at too convenient a time for the administraton.

 

[fluff]

If you were truly right we would be in a situation like Iraq with sucessful and thwarted attempts all the time. Do you truly believe AQ is the only group who wants to harm the US today? There are many. Only one was 'allowed' to succeed. There is very little wrong with western intelligence. It's protected us for 60 years to a greater extent than it has come close to failing us to this degree. Like I said, this could easily have been the 1 in 100 times they got lucky, but they got way too lucky for my liking, at too convenient a time for the administraton.

Consider:

Al-qaeda isa term coined to group many disparate terrorist groups together.
The relatively recent situation in Afghanistan (war against the USSR) which created so many militant Jihadis.
Relatively recent funding to undertake such enterprises.
The lack of many commercial airliners less than 50 years ago.
The recent acceptance of Jihadi groups to use suicide attacks.

These attacks have no been likely for much more than ten years, bombings in Madrid and London testify to continued assaults, intelligence is a tool wielded by governments for their own ends...etc, etc.

In order to get to where we are today the US did not need to bomb the WTC or the Pentagon, they could have attacked Saddam anyway for sone other flimsy excuse - it's not as if they had any support after all, eh?

The terrorists will get lucky again, probably not on the same scale but it was only the scale that was different...

 

[ridetoofast]

i used to work in a factory that manufactures IGTS, industrial gas turbine blades

that 'single' crystal is started by a tiny pig tail at the base of the investment casting that allows the molten alloy to flow very slowly out of the casting making contact with the base of the jig.

the casting is also both poured MUCH slower than a typical turbine blade and is COOLED much slower to allow for orientation and then subsequent propagation of the 'single' crystal.

one pour of a single crystal blade typically took an entire 8 hr shift

fyi for any of you metal geeks out there...