2
   

Experts Claim Official 9-11 Story is a Hoax ! FINALLY!

 
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:21 pm
Glad to know my memory is correct. I recall discussions by the talking heads that Building 7 might have to be demolished, but then it collapsed on its own.

But after four years, I don't really trust my memory about it.
0 Replies
 
Zippo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:23 pm
Tico, why have they removed this page from the official website ?

click on the cached link below :

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:tx3UDhWYg2EJ:www.yesvirginia.org/About_Us/NewsArticle.aspx%3Fnewsid%3D377++yesvirginia+newsid%3D377&hl=en
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:38 pm
I still make the assertion that no explosives residues were monitored on the EPA monitors which were installed the very day of the collapse.
We all saw the buildings on tv and how their collapse was propogated. Each one started at the place where the planes hit and thats a visible fact.
You dont have to melt steel , merely soften it (like a blacksmith does in a furnace) Once steel gets red hot it "creeps". Itll bend at its points of insertion. Thats exactly what the beams did and it only took one floor lift.

We talked about DC also in another thread (the claim was that there was no plane) Well on the SCience network station last week, they had a piece on the Pentagon and guess what. They actually had a single frame showing the trail end of a plane halfway into the building. This was from one of the security cameras. It was just one or two frames (resolution isnt great on security cameras). But there it was.

The self appointed investigators see a chance to make some of their 15 minutes last longer and maybe make some money. the forensic evidence is too overwhelming.

Add to that fact that we all saw the planes crash into the building and I personally knew one old couple from Lubec Maine who were on one of the planes.
This thread is rubbish and not worth consideration.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:43 pm
Zippo wrote:
Tico, why have they removed this page from the official website ?

click on the cached link below :

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:tx3UDhWYg2EJ:www.yesvirginia.org/About_Us/NewsArticle.aspx%3Fnewsid%3D377++yesvirginia+newsid%3D377&hl=en


I'm not sure I understand your question. What "official website" are you talking about? The yesvirginia.org site? It appears the page you linked to is still there (follow this link).

While I don't understand your question, I'm sure you will clarify. And I'm sure you are going to explain to me about a vast conspiracy involving Israel. I eagerly await your response .....
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:45 pm
farmerman wrote:
This thread is rubbish and not worth consideration.


It's not worth serious consideration ..... but it has entertainment value, you must admit.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:49 pm
Beating your head against a brick wall has entertainment value.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 04:59 pm
parados wrote:
Beating your head against a brick wall has entertainment value.


Well, watching you beat your head against a brick wall would certainly be entertaining.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 05:20 pm
I'm not going for the hyperbole...I swear I find it impossible to believe that people really buy this. I thought it was just a murmur rabid partisans liked to put in the background. They have actually brainwashed people.

Astonishing!



<and, ok, funny>
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 05:30 pm
farmerman wrote:
I still make the assertion that no explosives residues were monitored on the EPA monitors which were installed the very day of the collapse.
We all saw the buildings on tv and how their collapse was propogated. Each one started at the place where the planes hit and thats a visible fact.
You dont have to melt steel , merely soften it (like a blacksmith does in a furnace) Once steel gets red hot it "creeps". Itll bend at its points of insertion. Thats exactly what the beams did and it only took one floor lift.

We talked about DC also in another thread (the claim was that there was no plane) Well on the SCience network station last week, they had a piece on the Pentagon and guess what. They actually had a single frame showing the trail end of a plane halfway into the building. This was from one of the security cameras. It was just one or two frames (resolution isnt great on security cameras). But there it was.

The self appointed investigators see a chance to make some of their 15 minutes last longer and maybe make some money. the forensic evidence is too overwhelming.

Add to that fact that we all saw the planes crash into the building and I personally knew one old couple from Lubec Maine who were on one of the planes.
This thread is rubbish and not worth consideration.
farmerman, Your D.C. story is total bullsh!t. All the damage to the pentagon is completely inconsistant with a Boeing 757 travaling 530 mph and weighing 100 tons.

The hole in the pentagon from the wreck was aprox. 16 ft wide. Do you know how wide a Boeing 757 is? not to mention their are two 6 ton titanium jet engines on the wings.

What happen to the wings? They didn't hit the building. The wreckage is not on the lawn.

Who knows where your freinds from Maine went but they weren't in what hit the pentagon.
0 Replies
 
AliceInWonderland
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 05:43 pm
Yes, Amigo, you're absolutel correct - the size of the hole ON THE SECOND FLOOR of the Pentagon was far to small for the whole jet with wings. But that is meaningless since the jet entered at ground level. Are you deliberately choosing to ignore the 90 ft ground-level hole? But then, I guess you're also choosing to accept "evidence" from a man who only looked at photos rather than the folks that examined actual physical evidence. Fascinating.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 05:49 pm
There is no damage to the lawn. the impact happaned where the hole is. The windows next to the whole are still intact. Don't waste my time.

Either you don't know what the hell your talking about or your lying.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 05:55 pm
Amigo wrote:
farmerman wrote:
I still make the assertion that no explosives residues were monitored on the EPA monitors which were installed the very day of the collapse.
We all saw the buildings on tv and how their collapse was propogated. Each one started at the place where the planes hit and thats a visible fact.
You dont have to melt steel , merely soften it (like a blacksmith does in a furnace) Once steel gets red hot it "creeps". Itll bend at its points of insertion. Thats exactly what the beams did and it only took one floor lift.

We talked about DC also in another thread (the claim was that there was no plane) Well on the SCience network station last week, they had a piece on the Pentagon and guess what. They actually had a single frame showing the trail end of a plane halfway into the building. This was from one of the security cameras. It was just one or two frames (resolution isnt great on security cameras). But there it was.

The self appointed investigators see a chance to make some of their 15 minutes last longer and maybe make some money. the forensic evidence is too overwhelming.

Add to that fact that we all saw the planes crash into the building and I personally knew one old couple from Lubec Maine who were on one of the planes.
This thread is rubbish and not worth consideration.
farmerman, Your D.C. story is total bullsh!t. All the damage to the pentagon is completely inconsistant with a Boeing 757 travaling 530 mph and weighing 100 tons.

The hole in the pentagon from the wreck was aprox. 16 ft wide. Do you know how wide a Boeing 757 is? not to mention their are two 6 ton titanium jet engines on the wings.

What happen to the wings? They didn't hit the building. The wreckage is not on the lawn.

Who knows where your freinds from Maine went but they weren't in what hit the pentagon.


From the link I posted earlier, regarding the Pentagon attack:

Quote:
Big Plane, Small Holes

CLAIM: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile--part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."

FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide--not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.


Apparently, Amigo, either you don't know what the hell your talking about, or you're lying. Which is it?
0 Replies
 
AliceInWonderland
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 06:06 pm
Yep, I'm lying, along with the families of those on the plane, along with the firefighters on the scene, along with the eye witnesses that saw the plane hit the building, along with Boeing (they must be lying about the dimensions of their planes), along with air traffic controllers, crash investigators and all the other hundreds of folks who were on the site. Please tell me how you would get all of those people to go along with a conspiracy.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 06:35 pm
Nevermind, I think a boeing 757 hit the Pantagon. Scratch everything I said.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 06:35 pm
Re: Experts Claim Official 9-11 Story is a Hoax ! FINALLY!
Ticomaya wrote:
I'm particularly interested in your link to the article you posted:

Magginkat wrote:
Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax
Mon Jan 30, 11:37 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/


It's a link to Yahoo's News site, but I don't find that "news article" there. In fact, I can only find the article in two places on the Net: emediawire.com, and disinfo.com (which points to the emediawire.com article). Now, emediawire.com appears to be a press release outlet, and it appears to me that all that's going on here is James H. Fetzer, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota Duluth -- and part time investigator of conspiracy theories, including Who Really Shot JFK? -- has signed up there, and posted this "press release" on that site. (Referring to himself as a "distinguished scholar" was a nice touch, btw.)

So my question is, what's with your attempt to lend this spurious press release legitimacy by attaching the news.yahoo.com link, to make it appear as if this was a story put out by a legitimate news wire?

Thanks Tico, for that bit of fact-digging and -checking. Very useful.

Thanks also for the way you and Farmerman counter claims with facts elsewhere in the thread. Fighting conspiracy theories is a thankless task but someone's got to do it - and you just got to keep doing it... the same bogus claim or theory will be forwarded a dozen times every time someone doesnt hold it up against the concrete proof.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 06:37 pm
Welcome back, Amigo!!
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 08:51 pm
AliceInWonderland wrote:
Yep, I'm lying, along with the families of those on the plane, along with the firefighters on the scene, along with the eye witnesses that saw the plane hit the building, along with Boeing (they must be lying about the dimensions of their planes), along with air traffic controllers, crash investigators and all the other hundreds of folks who were on the site. Please tell me how you would get all of those people to go along with a conspiracy.


Why do you think the US has such a large budget deficit? There were a LOT of people to pay off. We hid the payoffs by pretending to invade Iraq. I don't know how we are going to pay off all the people that are in on that conspiracy. Oh wait, That's right we have all the oil money from Iraq after our pretend invasion.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 08:55 pm
You can go to the SCience channels Program on the History of the Pentagon. They actually had one of the security cameras showing the planes tail section skidding into the building.

Im glad youve given up on the "explosives" theory for the WTC.
0 Replies
 
Magginkat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 09:24 pm
Re: Experts Claim Official 9-11 Story is a Hoax ! FINALLY!
Ticomaya wrote:
Magginkat wrote:
I guess the truth was becoming too much for the Bushie crowd in the old Bush Aftermath thread. Apparently the author 'locked' it to prevent the posting of further truths! Perhaps to prevent the posting of this:


As the "author" of the "old Bush Aftermath" thread, I'm at a loss to figure out what power you think I wield over whether that thread is locked or not. I'm not sure why it's locked, but I just feel terrible that you aren't able to spam it up as you would like. It has been locked in the past, usually when visiting leftists such as yourself demonstrate a lack of ability to communicate civilly.

I'm particularly interested in your link to the article you posted:

Magginkat wrote:
Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax
Mon Jan 30, 11:37 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/


It's a link to Yahoo's News site, but I don't find that "news article" there. In fact, I can only find the article in two places on the Net: emediawire.com, and disinfo.com (which points to the emediawire.com article). Now, emediawire.com appears to be a press release outlet, and it appears to me that all that's going on here is James H. Fetzer, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota Duluth -- and part time investigator of conspiracy theories, including Who Really Shot JFK? -- has signed up there, and posted this "press release" on that site. (Referring to himself as a "distinguished scholar" was a nice touch, btw.)

So my question is, what's with your attempt to lend this spurious press release legitimacy by attaching the news.yahoo.com link, to make it appear as if this was a story put out by a legitimate news wire?



Gosh Tico,

As the self-proclaimed genuis of A2K I thought you would be able to find the story without me holding your hand and guiding you..
But just for your poor helpless souls is a Tiny URL version for you.

http://tinyurl.com/a73v8
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2006 09:34 pm
poor deluded souls maggin, Amigo,


Do this experiment. Take a metal rod (structural steel) . Hang a weight to its center with a stainless wire.Brace it between two sawhorses. Hit it with a blowtorch at a mid flame, just to redden the rod. Watch it bend. It didnt melt, it "creeped" Thats how we make iron tools and horseshoes. We soften em up, we dont melt em.
You seem stuck on some really simple concepts . Im sure that your going to keep up this conspiracy theory, despite solid forensic evidence.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 07/25/2021 at 05:17:07