911

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 07:30:30 -0800, "asadi"
wrote:

All I can say is...burning buildings don't collapse like the towers did, in
particular building 7

Well of course they don't, UNLESS the folks in those buildings
weren't wearing their aluminun foil hats. Those thing make all the
difference. Yep. Sure do. Did they find any foil hats amongst the
wreckage? Of course they didn't. I rest my case.

d8o()

Frank Reid © 2008 wrote:
There are conspiracy theorist who blame this on Warren Buffet, AIG, my
company, and a whole host of other folks.
Go to the engineering and construction part of this site
http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/wtc/index.htm for better info on the
collapse.
In short, the heat destroyed the structural integrity of 4 floors.
The weight of the material (floors) on top dropped straight down on
the floors below, exploding them.
Bldg 7 was severely damaged by the fall of the two other towers, lost
structural integrity.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=5
snip

Yeah, that's what they'd *like* you to believe. The American public
just isn't ready to accept Martian Budweiser ultimatums and fully
cloaked photon torpedoes but the truth will be known when the history
books are written.

--
Ken Fortenberry

The 911 is a great car, of course, especially the turbo model.
However, the new Nissan GT-R at ~$72K is faster and more nimble at
half the price.

Dave

On Dec 11, 3:00*am, riverman wrote:
On Dec 11, 3:15*pm, "asadi" wrote:

....Okay, we are never going to really know what happened to Kennedy.....and
I'm ready the latest book by Bugliosi...and I have been cruising around
trying to get information on the World trade center collapses and building
7.

To say that the collapses and how they occurred were 'drilled' into us as a
part of our training is putting it mildly....I have tried to approach it
objectively and to be honest....I no longer believe what I was told..

Anybody got bourbon and a campfire?

john

The whole thing fell apart for me when it was reported that someone
found the passport of one of the hijackers lying in the street near
Ground Zero a few days later.

Yeah, right.

--riverman

I like this one.
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero...erreurs_en.htm

An how did they pick 757s? The only american air line at time capable
of remote control. 757s are all wired up for hands off landings from
40,000 to the runway.

An how did they pick 757s? *The only american air line at time capable
of remote control. *757s are all wired up for hands off landings from
40,000 to the runway.- Hide quoted text -

Huh? Remote control and hands off landings are two totally different
things. Most modern airliners can do hands off landings (747, 737s,
many 727s).
Frank Reid

I like this one.http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero...erreurs_en.htm

By the way, the friggen plane hit the ground and folded up like a
taco. I was a couple of miles away and I know 3 folks that were in
the parking lot that saw it. Get real.
I... must... not... listen... to... stupid... conspiracy...
theorists...
Frank Reid

wrote:
riverman wrote:
"asadi" wrote:
....Okay, we are never going to really know what happened to Kennedy....and
I'm ready the latest book by Bugliosi...and I have been cruising around
trying to get information on the World trade center collapses and building
7.
To say that the collapses and how they occurred were 'drilled' into us as a
part of our training is putting it mildly....I have tried to approach it
objectively and to be honest....I no longer believe what I was told..
Anybody got bourbon and a campfire?
The whole thing fell apart for me when it was reported that someone
found the passport of one of the hijackers lying in the street near
Ground Zero a few days later.

Yeah, right.

I like this one.
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero...erreurs_en.htm

There is only one thing which could have caused that damage to the
Pentagon and that is Martian photon torpedoes. Obviously the planes
themselves were incinerated by high powered laser death rays before
the Martians launched the photon torpedoes.

The whole horrible tragedy is easily explained if one just looks at
the facts with calm detachment and logic. I mean isn't it obvious ?
The Martians were *REALLY* ****ed off that Clinton ignored their
demand for Budweiser.

--
Ken Fortenberry

asadi wrote:

Watch the video....in regards to Bldg. 7...fire was on one side, the metal
wold have warped...trust..you're a spook (I mean that as a compliment...you
secret spy stuff) ... and I used to put out fires...

You've mentioned that you were a fireman twice now so apparently
you believe it has some relevance. With all due respect to your
career as a fireman, how many fires did you see there in Dayton
which involved a seven building complex with two 110 story towers
doused in thousands of gallons of jet fuel ?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest the answer is, "zero".

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Dec 11, 2:15*am, "asadi" wrote:
To say that the collapses and how they occurred were 'drilled' into us as a
part of our training is putting it mildly....I have tried to approach it
objectively and to be honest....I no longer believe what I was told..

Anybody got bourbon and a campfire?

Oh boy, a subject on which I have bona fide expertise. I can tell
you, with professional certainty, that the explanations offered (and
deferred) by the US government are entirely consistent with sound
structural engineering theory and principles. Especially in WTC 1 &
2, the likelihood of a gradual deformation/failure of the floor
framing leading to a catastrophic buckling of the primary columns is
an entirely plausible concept, and one that is not contradicted by any
of the video evidence I've seen.

The failure mechanism of WTC7 is less certain; but the scenarios
theorized by the official reports are also consistent with the video
evidence. From what I've read, when they weren't sure, they said so.

I've participated in several long-running discussions with folks who
were hell bent on believing some controlled demolition nonsense
despite ample evidence to the contrary and unexplainable
inconsistencies in the totality of that idea; but folks will believe
what they want to believe, the facts be damned.

So as a genuine, registered, experienced, practicing structural
engineer, I'd stake my license on the failure mechanism of the WTC
buildings being almost exactly what the official explanation suggests.

That said, I believe there's still plenty of room for conspiracies
within many of the other aspects of the attack, not the least of which
is the financing and training of the terrorists, and who knew what and
when. There are more than enough odd "coincidences" and associations
to suggest that the official story obfuscates some important facts
about the attacks as a whole; but as for the collapses themselves,
there's little doubt among the engineering community as to what really
happened.

Joe F.

rb608 wrote:
snip
There are more than enough odd "coincidences" and associations
to suggest that the official story obfuscates some important facts
about the attacks as a whole; but as for the collapses themselves,
there's little doubt among the engineering community as to what really
happened.

Martian photon torpedoes. Am I right or am I right ?

--
Ken Fortenberry