18 years ago today

quote:

---

Originally posted by The drunken scotsman:
Funnily enough there was a programme on last night which explained the way the towers fell. It was likely the burning aluminium from both planes mixing with water and other substances, thereby causing the explosions that were heard moments before the towers collapsed. I don?t think the official report picked up on that which probably has added weight to the conspiracies. Its all very well that structural engineers have commented about the way the towers fell but we haven?t ever seen anything on this scale involving large buildings burning away with jumbo jets lodged inside them.

An entire demolitions team would have had to have been rigging up wiring and explosives inside some of the busiest office buildings in the US for days if not weeks and no one saw them and queried it? No one who was involved in that small part of it has broken cover in almost 20 years?

That one task would have required the silence of thousands of people. To pull the whole thing off, with a nod to many of the theories, would have required the cooperation of (amongst others) politicians, federal employees, all branches of the military, airport security, air traffic control, aviation engineers......

Why go to all that effort in the first place? Surely 2 planes crashing into the worlds most iconic buildings in a blatant act of terrorism would be enough to get the message across without making the buildings collapse?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smoogie:

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeVzi:

There were people rejoicing, in the UK, and that makes me sick to my stomach. I won't go into detail as i'm sure it would trigger some snowflakes here.

---

I never saw anyone rejoicing in the UK. I know that the Guardian ran a nasty piece on it but they have since backtracked on it. In Britain we have great sympathy

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The drunken scotsman:
Funnily enough there was a programme on last night which explained the way the towers fell. It was likely the burning aluminium from both planes mixing with water and other substances, thereby causing the explosions that were heard moments before the towers collapsed. I don?t think the official report picked up on that which probably has added weight to the conspiracies. Its all very well that structural engineers have commented about the way the towers fell but we haven?t ever seen anything on this scale involving large buildings burning away with jumbo jets lodged inside them.

An entire demolitions team would have had to have been rigging up wiring and explosives inside some of the busiest office buildings in the US for days if not weeks and no one saw them and queried it? No one who was involved in that small part of it has broken cover in almost 20 years?

That one task would have required the silence of thousands of people. To pull the whole thing off, with a nod to many of the theories, would have required the cooperation of (amongst others) politicians, federal employees, all branches of the military, airport security, air traffic control, aviation engineers......

Why go to all that effort in the first place? Surely 2 planes crashing into the worlds most iconic buildings in a blatant act of terrorism would be enough to get the message across without making the buildings collapse?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeVzi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smoogie:

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeVzi:

There were people rejoicing, in the UK, and that makes me sick to my stomach. I won't go into detail as i'm sure it would trigger some snowflakes here.

---

I never saw anyone rejoicing in the UK. I know that the Guardian ran a nasty piece on it but they have since backtracked on it. In Britain we have great sympathy

---

you just said you were 14, so you'd hardly be exposed to that. My mate was working in a factory that day, with men from a certain ethnicity who were happy about it, and showed that. I've since heard stuff myself to that effect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triquatra:
I don't think it's that suspcious to be honest. The whole thing wreaks of human incompetence, error and panic.


I do find it pretty funny that people believe that the Bush administration were so wickedly intelligent and clever as to keep something so far-reaching, under wraps, even from wikileaks...and everyone involved, despite being a country so well known for chasing the money/fame, staying utterly, stone cold silent.


or is it more likely that third hand reporting issues that arose on the day were down to incompetence and panic?


Building 3 has a perfectly reasonable explanation, but I guess the entirety of the NIST were someone 'payed off' too, haha.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The drunken scotsman:
Why dont you tell me why you think building 3 collapsed? See my post again. How many professionals with no conscience would have had to be involved in this murderous act?

Ill concede that, on the face of it, it looks suspect but for all of these theories there is a logical explanation which is much more believable than the actions which would have needed to occur for there to be something more sinister at play. In this case, the logical explanation is that it was in the vicinity of 2 of the worlds biggest skyscrapers which happened to crash down. This is far more believable than anything else Ive heard. There is further evidence out there but most people buying into the theories arent interested in looking at it.

---

HappyHardcore.com

1999 - 2024 HappyHardcore.com
audio: PRS for music. Build: 3.1.73.1