[Liberty4eva]

Originally Posted by Shasown

At the time of Jowenkos interview he was told to all intents and purposes WTC 7 was intact, he wasnt informed about the damage to the north side of the building.

Wasnt just the BBC who prereported WTC -7 had collapsed Aaron Brown of CNN announced the building had or was collapsing, then like a minute later announced it was about to collapse. Reporters live misspeak on occasion, using it as proof of a conspiracy shows how lacking your critical thinking skills are.

Given the overall confusion fear and panic isnt it possible she got confused? The BBC reporter on the spot was taking live feed from the London studio which in turn was taking live feed from US TV stations.

Remember that the Fire dept chief expected the building to collapse and issued orders pulling people away from WTC 7 at 3:00 in the afternoon.

It begs the question: HOW DO THEY KNOW IT'S GOING TO COLLAPSE? No other building in the history of steel-structured buildings completely collapsed due to fire. They tell you it's going to collapse because that way when it does collapse people, most of whom have no knowledge of buildings, won't think it's peculiar.

Of course she could get confused but the BBC's reaction when asked about the "confusion" suggests something more. They at first said they couldn't find the video in their archives which was laughable, considering that it was perhaps the biggest event of the last decade.

Originally Posted by Shasown

As for witnesses hearing explosions did they hear explosions, what sounded like could be explosions or did they hear the sound of reinforced concrete supports cracking under the immense loadings?

The term "explosion" gets used by dozens and dozens of eye-witnesses. But the phrase "building cracking", "building collapsing" nor any other phrase not using the word "explosion" gets used by eye-witnesses when describing the sounds.

Originally Posted by Shasown

As for the free fall of the building, what way do you expect a building to drop if lower floors collapse?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7485331.stm

I would expect the building to collapse gradually, not in the same manner as a controlled demolition. When a building collapses by natural means, there are dozens of ways it can collapse. Because the building supposedly suffered asymetrical structural damage, one would think it would collapse in the direction of the damage and not straight down into itself. If it collapsed due to fire I would expect it to collapse gradually over the course of hours and not seconds.

Someone once said "the bigger the lie, the easier the sell". The buildings were demolished in broad daylight with a million eyes and cameras on it. Who would ever suspect that anyone would have the audacity to do such a thing? The people who collapsed those buildings and the people who sold the lie had an advanced understanding of mass human psychology. They understood that it would be so obvious that it would be invisible to most people.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

It begs the question: HOW DO THEY KNOW IT'S GOING TO COLLAPSE? No other building in the history of steel-structured buildings completely collapsed due to fire. They tell you it's going to collapse because that way when it does collapse people, most of whom have no knowledge of buildings, won't think it's peculiar.

No other steel structured building has collapsed because of fire? Crap, try the Sight and Sound Theatre, Strasborg, Pennsylvania, 1997 or the Kader Toy Factory 1993.

They knew it was going to collapse because of the fires and the structural damage, they had worried over it collapsing for hours, thats a proven fact sustained by radio transmissions, even TV broadcasts etc that the conspiracy theorists like yourself conveniently ignore.

Youtube video

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

Of course she could get confused but the BBC's reaction when asked about the "confusion" suggests something more. They at first said they couldn't find the video in their archives which was laughable, considering that it was perhaps the biggest event of the last decade.

Dont know anything about the BBC's decisions on their answers to requests for the tapes, but whatever way you look at it they would have been damned if they did and damned if they didnt produce by conspiracy nuts, "see she admitted they knew it was going to collapse" against "the BBC are in on the conspiracy". Thats the way conspiracy nuts work.

But no tell you what lets assume you are correct, the wicked perpetrators of this dastardly plot gave a foreign news outlet a script of the afternoons business so they could follow it easier. Do you realise how insane that sounds?

If you actually follow up on the supposed preknowledge why did Reuters admit to pushing out a report the building had collapsed timed at a few minutes before the BBC reporter announced the same live on air, shortly after realising their mistake and pushing that out on the wire?

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

The term "explosion" gets used by dozens and dozens of eye-witnesses. But the phrase "building cracking", "building collapsing" nor any other phrase not using the word "explosion" gets used by eye-witnesses when describing the sounds.

Yeah because people hear loud bangs and assume explosion, after all they see and hear the same on TV all the time, how many times do you reckon anyone has heard a reinforced concrete support pile snap because of pressure?

You do realise using other footage from other TV coverage there isnt the blast wave from an explosion nor the pause for the inertia buildup when the building finally does collapse? Something that would happen in a controlled demolition, again facts conveniently ignored by conspiracy theorists because it doesnt fir the conspiracy. You cant change the laws of science.

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

I would expect the building to collapse gradually, not in the same manner as a controlled demolition. When a building collapses by natural means, there are dozens of ways it can collapse. Because the building supposedly suffered asymetrical structural damage, one would think it would collapse in the direction of the damage and not straight down into itself. If it collapsed due to fire I would expect it to collapse gradually over the course of hours and not seconds.

Large buildings are designed to stand enormous pressures and strains, otherwise they would collapse in high winds etc. Consequently buildings will take an enormous amount of damage before exentually dropping straight down. Big heavy buildings will drop due to the way its built, you do realise certain methods of building are not allowed in skyscrapers to reduce the possibility of toppling? You cant change the laws of physics just to suit your theory.

WTC7 also had other pecularities, which necessitated strange engineering to overcome, an electrical substation partially underneath, the load over this area was therefore shared over the rest of the building by the use of cantilevers.

Youtube video

How do you know the damage was asymetrical on all floors, a lot of fuel oil was stored on certain floors for use in emergency power outages, when that lot went up it gutted the whole floors not just one small area.

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

Someone once said "the bigger the lie, the easier the sell". The buildings were demolished in broad daylight with a million eyes and cameras on it. Who would ever suspect that anyone would have the audacity to do such a thing? The people who collapsed those buildings and the people who sold the lie had an advanced understanding of mass human psychology. They understood that it would be so obvious that it would be invisible to most people.

Ah yes everyone would swallow the apparent truth apart of a few people who dont follow the pack, they saw right through the conspiracy eh?
Even nowadays most people know the truth that the moon is pretty much a dead lump of rock but you still get people howling at it. Because they know the real truth eh?

[Callum]

10 years since it happened next month, can't believe it's been that long. There was a programme about the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 on BBC2 last night, in fact there are lots of them on in the next 2 weeks, I still fully believe that terrorists were behind it personally.

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by Callum

10 years since it happened next month, can't believe it's been that long. There was a programme about the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 on BBC2 last night, in fact there are lots of them on in the next 2 weeks, I still fully believe that terrorists were behind it personally.

x2

[InOne]

I've weird how 9/11 get's a mention on here all the time but 7/7 never does

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by InOne

I've weird how 9/11 get's a mention on here all the time but 7/7 never does

The death toll was alot smaller and it wasn't anywhere near as gob smacking as 9/11

[MTVN]

Yeah plus there isnt all the conspiracy theories surrounding 7/7, I think I did hear about one but it's basically been debunked

[arista]

Originally Posted by Callum

10 years since it happened next month, can't believe it's been that long. There was a programme about the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 on BBC2 last night, in fact there are lots of them on in the next 2 weeks, I still fully believe that terrorists were behind it personally.

That Conspiracy on BBC2 was Utter Rubbish.


Of Course it was Saudi and other Terror gangs.


ITV1 and ITV1HD are doing a special on 9/11
on thursday 9PM

[arista]

Originally Posted by InOne

I've weird how 9/11 get's a mention on here all the time but 7/7 never does

Because 9/11 was the main start of it
and smashing into the World Trade Centre
with planes full of fuel
was one of the most Clever Evil terror attacks.


7/7 in our underground and that bus
are terrible and just as Evil
led by Terror Leader Khan
who was a simple supply teacher.

[Callum]

Originally Posted by arista

That Conspiracy on BBC2 was Utter Rubbish.


Of Course it was Saudi and other Terror gangs.


ITV1 and ITV1HD are doing a special on 9/11
on thursday 9PM

Yeah I saw the advert for that, will be watching. There's one on History channel too.

I have a really bad feeling that they're going to want and try to do something for the 10 year mark, I hope I'm wrong. But saying that the security around the world is a lot better than it was 10 years ago so I don't think they'd get very far.

[InOne]

There is something on ch5 at 8 about the kids or something, the one that lost parents

[CharlieO]

I am truly facinated in everything to do with 9/11. It all amazes me and I think I actually do believe some of the conspiracy theories. I need to watch more documentaries about it because it's been a while since I have seen some.

[Jordan.]

I'm watching the program on C5 now.

[Jarrod]

The C5 Program is sad. :/

[Grimnir]

[InOne]

That prog on ch5 was so depressing

A good insight to the lives affect though I guess

[Livia]

The thing that sticks out like a sore thumb to me about 9/11 was that a plane hit the Pentagon and left no wreckage. Until someone can explain that, I guess the "missile" theories will continue.

[GypsyGoth]

Originally Posted by Livia

The thing that sticks out like a sore thumb to me about 9/11 was that a plane hit the Pentagon and left no wreckage. Until someone can explain that, I guess the "missile" theories will continue.

In a show the other night they said that the person heading the crime scene investigation had it all removed so it could be examined, she was interviewed and it showed photos of people carrying some wreckage away.


edit: this was one of the pics I think http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon_18.html

[Livia]

Originally Posted by GypsyGoth

In a show the other night they said that the person heading the crime scene investigation had it all removed so it could be examined, she was interviewed and it showed photos of people carrying some wreckage away.

How long would it take to remove wreckage from a passenger plane? I've seen aerial photographs taken less then an hour after the impact; there were marks on the ground, lamp posts had been bent horizontal but there was no wreckage. I expect all sorts of photographic evidence exists but I've not seen anything yet that makes me think, ahhh yeah - that's what happened. I'm not saying I buy into the conspiricy theory, but when things don't add up you start making up your own ending.

[lostalex]

I'm not anti-conspiracy theorists at all, I love conspiracy theories. I'm way into UFO's especially, so i'm not gonna be the kind of person who will say that conspiracy theorists are stupid or crazy or just trying to sell books...

...that being said, I don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job. If it was an inside job it would literally require THOUSANDS of people to put it togther, and i don't believe for a second that thousands of Americans could keep their mouths shut. Americans are KNOWN around the world for being loud mouths lol, and it's true.

I think people see the American =government as being in control of everything all the time, almost omnipotent, but they arn't. The US government can't even balance the budget, but you think they could conspire and hide something as big as this?

America doesn't need an excuse to start wars, just look at Iraq. So why would they do 9/11 just to invade afghanistan, a country that NO ONE cares about, and has NO OIL, and NO benefit to America whatsoever.

Ibelieve 9/11 was exactly what it seems. Especially because it had already been tried before in 1993.

I would like to ask the conspiracy theorists, do they also believe that the al-queda attack on the twin towers in 1993 was also an inside job?

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Grimnir

the official version of 9/11 is bull****

people who blindly accept anything they get told are ****ing morons and deserve everything coming to them

libya war is bull****. bin laden death was bull****

you people all love your bull****

once it kicks off in iran and pakistan there will be a false flag nuclear attack on america and all the same people will believe the bull****

BASTARDS

well why don't YOU enlighten us and tell us exactly what went down seen as you obviously know it all? Funny how people on internet forums always think they know the real truth.

and whatever theory you come up with I bet it throws up far far more baffling questions than the official version.

Me, Ill stick with the simple notion that it really was a spectacular terrorist attack. Because, frankly, that really does make the most sense. By far.

[Grimnir]

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Grimnir

USA has a debt of around 14 billion. Who does it owe this debt to?
The same people who OWN the USA. Just like any company or business, they need to make money. Huge amounts of money.
War is a great way for them to make money.
Doesn't matter what they fight for, as long as there is WAR.
USA has to "borrow" MONEY to fight all these wars it engages in.
Sometimes the wars have bonuses such as OIL or in the case of Afghanistan OPIUM (Taliban put a virtual end to opium farms).
There always has to be "the enemy".
For a long time is was the dirty communist. Any enemy of the USA was labelled a commie, dirty red scum. Why? Because they were opposed to capitalism. Why is this bad? MONEY. Its bad for business.
Now the enemy is ISLAM. War on terror. 9/11 triggered everyone to fear and hate Islam. They are the boogeyman.
The US government is a puppet of the mega wealthy and powerful bankers and businessmen. The world is a business. The board are evil.
Majority of people are stupid and naive, they make excellent customers and consumers.

Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

[Grimnir]

[Zippy]

I love how Grimnir speaks of America like its run by cold calculating robots on some evil mission.

Be more specific. These decisions are made by humans. Who exactly are you accusing and what is their individual motives for being involved in such evil plotting? How many do you think are in on all of this? Don't you think there would be leaks?

Its easy to make these sweeping accusations but when you zoom in on the individuals who run America its very hard to see why they would behave in such a ruthless calculating way. They have way too much to lose if caught out. You speak as if theyre some tight collective with the same twisted thinking. Who exactly are you accusing?

for all your yapping about US debt and motive you fall way short on specific details.