|
|
Unleashed: Unanswered 9/11 questions
The collapse of New York’s World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001 is arguably one of the most well documented events in human history. Less well documented is the controversy over why the buildings fell as they did.
At the time of writing, 357 architectural and engineering professionals have signed a petition which directly challenges the National Institute of Standards & Training’s official finding that the destruction of these massive buildings was caused solely by structural damage from the impact of jet airliners and the resulting fires.
[…]
Current research indicates that an incendiary (thermite) may have been used to sever the massive box columns of the towers, causing the buildings to plummet to the ground at close to free-fall speed.
[…]
“As no reports have come to light of any steel framed buildings collapsing due to fire, and as all steel framed buildings which had collapsed had done so due to explosive demolition, the logical way to have started the investigation of this surprising event would have been to question whether explosives had been used. This apparently did not occur.
William Rodriguez, an acknowledged hero of 9/11 who single-handedly rescued fifteen people from the North Tower, described a massive explosion in the basement which occurred before the first plane struck, pushing him upwards out of the seat of his chair.
The New York Fire Department’s oral histories project contains 118 witness statements which are strongly consistent with explosive demolition. Incredibly, none of this shocking testimony was included or acknowledged in any official investigation, including the 9/11 Commission.
If the towers were wired with explosives by terrorists prior to the planes, that would imply a lack of security on a massive scale that would be worth hiding. On the other hand, how do you hide that much work to rig buildings like that? If terrorists didn’t do it, why would the towers be rigged with explosives? Leaving aside the wacko’s government conspiracies, are other buildings routinely wired to blow to bring them straight down if something happens to prevent them falling onto other buildings? An interesting ‘protection’ scenario for the neighborhood that would be worth hiding for many reasons.
And then there’s this article from a few months ago with quotes from military experts like this one:
“A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible,” said Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret). With doctoral degrees in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Col. Bowman served as Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.
“There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up,” continued Col. Bowman. “Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible. Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.”
This conspiracy is as likely as God is to an atheist.
Hey guys…..!!! Are we being baited??? I watched the video put up on this blog, and it shows one of the smaller buildings from WTC, that was damaged in the initial attack and was brought down by controlled demolition a day or two later. Brought down becase they weren’t sure they could make it safe, I think.
Where’s the problem? What piqued the interest of Uncle Dave to put it on the blog today?
#54, Car,
Investigate what??? Every item the conspirators come up with has been disproved. Their favorite thing is about questioning things taken out of context.
Fact, the building owner told the Fire Chief to “pull” the building. In Fire talk that means the building is in imminent danger of falling in. PULL all fire fighters out NOW. Conspiracy theory says this was a covert signal to destroy the building.
Fact, NORAD did not have any planes in the sky that morning. The only time NORAD puts planes in the sky is when there is a known threat or unidentified plane on the radar entering North American airspace. Neither NORAD nor the FAA monitored all air traffic at that time. Even today there is the same procedure. There are, however, at least two F-16s available to take off on quick notice in the Washington DC area today. There are also several missiles ready to fire on a moments notice for anything violating forbidden airspace around Washington DC.
Fact, those “exploding” windows from controlled demolitions were actually the windows exploding from the axial load placed upon them exceeding their load limits. With the air being compressed as the ceiling fell in, the air would push the glass fragments out of the building.
Fact, the “Oral Histories” of NY Fire Fighters are consistent with the windows exploding because of axial compression.
Fact, the government can not keep a secret. The Manhattan Project involved several different sites producing different objects. Each site was its own community with little contact with the outside world. All correspondence with the outside world was censured. The entire project took only three years from start to finish. Of that, less than 18 months was actual production of the bombs. Only those at the very top knew the whole story.
In contrast, government insiders were telling us how the Iraq invasion was based on lies even before Americans left for Iraq.
Fact, William Rodriguez, one of the quoted people above, later filed a RICO claim against Bush Sr., Bush Jr., two Bush brothers Neil and Marvin, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and several others. The suit was dismissed for lack of credible evidence. His claim that there was an explosion before the plane hit has not been substantiated by anyone else.
Fact, while there have not been any other steel framed buildings that fallen in due to fire, neither has there been any building where the water has been shut off or some supports destroyed, others damaged, and insulation blown off of others.
Fact, Conspirators claim the hole in the Pentagon is too small for a 767. Actually photos show the damage to be the right size. They also claim photos of the plane hitting the building are fake. As are the pictures of the wheel and partial tail section on the lawn. Yet they can proffer no evidence that they are fake or the debris on the Pentagon lawn was fabricated.
I love you conspiracy guys!
First you tell us that Bush and crew are the most inept, ignorant leaders on the face of the planet and then in the same breath tell us that they can pull off the most devious plan in the history of mankind with absolutely no witnesses and nobody in the know, blowing the whistle!
It’s great entertainment. You should write sci-fi
Ever watch some of the YouTube videos and then slo-motion them (click ’em on and off CAREFULLY)? The central core (where the elevators were) stayed up a bit before crumpling.
Wouldn’t a controlled detonation take them out simultaneously?
Fact: Planes were flown into the WTC.
Fact: WTC buildings collapse or were damaged.
Beyond that, it’s all speculation.
The only way to begin to believe that Building 7 was “pulled” would be to believe that Building 7 had been set up prior to September 11 to be demolished. The only way to believe that WTC Buildings 1 & 2 were “pulled” would be to believe that they also were rigged, prior to September 11 with explosives.
Who was responsible? Who had prior knowledge of the events? Who was involved?
It is the scope necessary to pull this off that stops me from believing the “Truthers” about this being an “inside job”. How many pounds of explosives are necessary to take down buildings that size? How long does it take to set up controlled demolitions of that size? How does one prepare and execute such demolitions without anyone else seeing, hearing or suspecting that something is amiss?
And while there may be a few “bad apples” out there, I can hardly begin to believe that there would be enough people in the various branches of government that not only would harbor these types of thoughts, but would be able to put together the type of network and organization necessary to pull this off, and then hold such solidarity for 7 years without someone, somewhere, spilling the beans.
Building 7’s proximity to WTC 1&2 led to it’s demise. Remember, the underground in New York is like Swiss Cheese with holes and tunnels running every which way. Is it any surprise that destroying the structural integrity of the ground it was built on would have an effect on the structural integrity of the building itself? I think not.
Hey Mr. Gawd, we’re not interested in the “other” facts! We only want “certain” facts taken out of context that might imply a conspiracy.
#14: JVP = Nice job, most of these aspartame slurpers willfully dont want the truth.
Jet fuel is 3/4th kerosene and it can only burn up to 1800f..Steal only (begins) to mealt at 2500f..That being said, (along with that woman standing inside the exact hole the plane went through)..How did fuel that (in controlled) circumstances that only burns at 1800f Max) bring (2) towers down in less than 2 hours?..Not only that, building (7) only had a few office (carbon) fires..and it had a bomb proof command center…..All those buildings came down @ gravity speed?..wake up folks..time to stop using that public schooling you were trained on…and use common logic.
#70 Gawd,
You bring up good points, there are some people that have flawed information and are investigating the wrong areas. The surprising things to me and give me reason to question are the following:
1) WTC 7 going down like a controlled demolition.
2) The planes were not taken down by our Air National Guard (especially the one that hit the Pentagon). There are two possible reasons for this:
1. they were in a training session conducting drills on the very same thing that occurred ( I believe this is a confirmed fact).
2. they didn’t want to take the planes down because they thought they could get them to veer course and land peacefully and then it became too late so they let them fly into the buildings… maybe they didn’t want to create more damage somewhere else.
3) The events that followed… we spent 6 months or so tracking down bin Laden and then moved directly to overthrow Iraq and set up shop there… to go from one course of action to a completely different one seemed premeditated. Faulty intel.. sure that happens. Look where we are now.
4) There was a lot of money being made… mostly people/ corporations already pretty dam rich to begin with.
5) The NIST report leaves glaring holes in the report. I think it needs more work to fill the gaps.
So, those are some of my questions I can think of at the top of my head. I am sure there were other things that gave me pause against the popular explanation. Much of it the cause for it having occurred can be attributed to incompetence or just bad timing for certain things. WTC 7 makes me really skeptical about the NIST reports contents. I know they are working on gathering more info on WTC 7, but it is leaving me intensely curious.
http://www.loosechangethefinalcut.com just watch that video before making any comments. It will make you think how crazy some conspiracy theories are. It’s just good to have the facts so you can really start thinking who was behind the terrorist attacs.
Maybe the WTC case will be re-opened, but does it matter. What matters is that the WTC buildings were full of asbestos, and to remove it would’ve cost billions of dollars. On 9.11 all the asbestos was conveniently spread over New York (even lot of it was absorbed by the rescue workers), and people were not told the air was way below the quality standards for weeks.
This whole place started going down
when Dvorak started outsourcing
provocations to his “editors” or
“mods” or whatever. I realize that he’s
busy and/or half-snockered on wine,
but, really! Are they relatives, or
guys he lost bar bets to?
Mr GA (#71),
Spot on!
#77 – ZZ,
Please don’t cite that piece of crap “film”. It’s so full of bullcrap ideas it’s laughable.
Carcarius, All your “reasons to question” have been answered over and over and over. Post #37, post#41 (link), post #43 and, praise the lawd, Mr. Gawd Almighty himself…post #70.
Give it up already.
Carcarius (#76),
Your points 3 and 4 can apply to just about everything/anything greedy politicians do…
#77 – ZZ,
Just re-read my post and it sounds insulting. Didn’t mean it that way. Should’ve said something like: Don’t post that trash film for these whackos to go watch. They’ll crap their pants with conspiracy ecstasy.
Hmm must be a really slow news day or the site editor is just a lazy person if he is going to post junk like this
its a sad day when dvorak stoops to the level of the huffington post
Google video
“ring of power” it follows the money trail quite well, I think.
I do feel like a Wacko to even consider the possibilities though.
If the WTC collapse was a demo job then show me photos of the preparations, the holes drilled into the supports, the setting of the charges, interviews of the people who prepared everything and who set off the charges. This was a public place.
Otherwise, I’m just going to go with what I saw – the planes hit the buildings and the buildings collapsed shortly after. You can wave your hands all you want, but it’s really that simple.
#84 – Better the Huffington Post than a whack-a-doodle right wing rag like WorldHate Daily though, huh?
http://tinyurl.com/67cgla
http://www.ae911truth.org/
The (professionals) have spoken.
In times of great national distress, it is quite common for individuals to attempt to rationalize the event in a way that is psychologically comfortable to them. In some people it come in the form of denial and in other in the form of conspiracy theories.
People in denial, refuse to listen to or accept anything no matter the source.
The problem dealing with conspiracy theorists is that they keep re-interpeting the facts to fit their theory, rather than adapting the theory to fit the facts.
On this issue 9/11, I don’t know what really happend beyond what I saw that day. So when it comes to “who do you beleive?”, I have to rely upon the reputations of others as a guide. The reputation of Popular Mechanics is one I value very much, over these unknown groups.
I think 9/11 is another JFK, where opinion and fact will never be reconciled.
Time to move on, remember the past, deal with the here and now, and be vigilant of what’s beyond the horizon.
I have never read a more stupid and idiotic load of crap than to read some of things posted in this so-called technology blog than the shit here today.
And this is coming from someone who agrees with Mister Mustard that Bush has fucked up a lot of stuff. (Don’t quote on that MM.)
I have a degree in common sense so that naturally leaves me out of the dumbass conspiracy conversations.
It all seems to come down to this:
1. Fire did not cause collapse
2. Crash of planes caused collapse
3. Building was badly built. Lots of proof of that.
Basically the plane knocked the pylons / girders out of the bolts. Didn’t take much after that to cause a failure of one floor, then a cascade.
We’ve seen an entire bridge collapse just because it needed the structural strength of the pavement to keep it from failing.
Shoddy construction + woodpecker. Occam’s Razor indeed.
GEEZ! nist IS the National Institute of Standards & TECHNOLOGY (http://www.nist.gov/)
*NOT*
“National Institute of Standards & Training” as the “journalist” asserts.
If he can’t be bothered to get the name of the agency right, I think a lot more of the piece is likely to be crap as well.
Listen, this was not a demolition style detonation. I am sorry.
First, the controlled demolition of a large structure takes a lot of planning, even more explosives, and requires the installation of a ton of control systems, detonation cord, drilling into columns, column preparation, etc.
The towers clear exhibit a pancake style failure. The fire created by the initial impacts is clearly visible in the videos post collision. Everyone seems to focus on “burning the steel” and “fireproofing would have prevented the collapse”.
First, you are neglecting the many tons of combustible materials, as well as aviation fuel that was ignited at the point of impact. Now, add the powerful updrafts caused by the burning fuel, and you get a powerfully hot fire.
Fireproofing is not magic, and neither is steel. Fireproofing is rated for temperature and time. Both of these were exceeded in the intense fire. Now, combine this with the open floor plan design of the towers (ie. exterior column grid, and compact interior column grid with large interior spans) and the sagging steel creates severe enough deformations for floor failures. Complete failure follows quickly afterwards as the combined weight of the floors above easily surpass the resistance and load bearing capacity of the floors below.
To Summarize:
Installation of demolition materials to “cut the columns” would have taken a lot of time, and would not have been able to be hidden.
Fires arising from the combustion of office materials, paper, furniture, dry wall, etc would burn easily hot enough to overwhelm the fire resistant capacity of the structural system.
Structural collapse of one or more floor systems would easily exceed the load bearing capacity of the lower floor systems.
QED: Building Collapses.
And, in case you are wondering, I am a structural engineer, studied and taught the design of steel structures, and will take that assessment over that of a nuclear engineer from the air force. Different discipline entirely.
#93–Concerned==if I understand your penultimate sentence, then what is your opinion on global warming? Human caused or not?
People who are skeptical of the capability of the US government to fake a terrorist attack on their own country should read this:
http://tinyurl.com/5sezrc
The important part is in the conclusion, where is is proposed to the defence senate that a “latter day Pearl Harbour” like incident is what is required to whip America into the kind of military state it should be. I will let you draw our own conclusion about our government. As for the democrats not saving the world, you will notice that this proposal was made in Clinton time.
[Please use TinyUrl.com for overly long URLs. – ed.]
What we basically have here are two wacky conspiracy theories, the government’s, and everyone else’s.
Which wacky conspiracy theory does the EVIDENCE support?
Two words – SECONDARY EXPLOSIONS
We have lots and lots of video, audio, eye witnesses, even Police and Fire Fighter eyewitnesses.
It seems some people won’t believe anything unless Bill O’ Reilly says it’s true.
SECONDARY EXPLOSIONS – EXPLAIN THAT!!!
yeah, and everyone blamed Muslims and Islam for the death of WTC. It seemed that the enemy was within themselves. Now how shocking is that? In the Muslim countries, no one believes that a small Muslim group executed such a sophisticated attack like this. The planning, funding, the execution all were so big that what were the American intelligence were smoking ? Its all done by your own people to fool them inorder to occupy Iraq for oil. There was not a single Jew killed in those wtc towers, well that’s another story.
What mattered was to destroy two buildings by explosives and occupy 2 countries in the war on terror, quite efficient I say. The truth always comes back to bite you when you least expect it. Too bad most of you Americans are worried about recession than the truth.