Guest wrote:Professor Feng Xiao wrote:calitom wrote:my mom's office was a couple blocks from the world trade center. thank God she was really agile back then(before her hips were wrecked by a bad surgeon)-so she got out of there and practically ran to her apartment several blocks north before the air got too bad ..So many people have died from WTC related lung disease.
we called her all day til my uncle finally got hold of her..
WTC conspiracy theorists(mostly right wingers) are real douchebags
so what made wtc 7 fall in its own footprint then
it was never hit by a plane and it would be impossible for just a fire to make it fall
unless the steel girders were 50% cardboard you fucking gullible twat
and lets not forget the dancing Israelis filming it from a high rise car park in queens
It didn't fall into it's own footprint, it made a right mess.
It had raging fires inside from top to bottom which were left to burn and a huge damaged side.
It had two of the worlds biggest buildings collapsing right next to it which possibly damaged the foundations.
What's the alternative? Controlled demolition? Why didn't the explosives set off when the fires were raging for hours? How did they get placed there and by who? Can't be just one person, would need a big team. The theory falls flat straight away. It just doesn't make sense.
I mean you don't have to be anyone special to understand that uncontrolled fire in a building with damage to the side of it and maybe weak foundations could be the cause of collapse. It makes more sense than other theories.
Professor Feng Xiao wrote:Guest wrote:Professor Feng Xiao wrote:calitom wrote:my mom's office was a couple blocks from the world trade center. thank God she was really agile back then(before her hips were wrecked by a bad surgeon)-so she got out of there and practically ran to her apartment several blocks north before the air got too bad ..So many people have died from WTC related lung disease.
we called her all day til my uncle finally got hold of her..
WTC conspiracy theorists(mostly right wingers) are real douchebags
so what made wtc 7 fall in its own footprint then
it was never hit by a plane and it would be impossible for just a fire to make it fall
unless the steel girders were 50% cardboard you fucking gullible twat
and lets not forget the dancing Israelis filming it from a high rise car park in queens
It didn't fall into it's own footprint, it made a right mess.
It had raging fires inside from top to bottom which were left to burn and a huge damaged side.
It had two of the worlds biggest buildings collapsing right next to it which possibly damaged the foundations.
What's the alternative? Controlled demolition? Why didn't the explosives set off when the fires were raging for hours? How did they get placed there and by who? Can't be just one person, would need a big team. The theory falls flat straight away. It just doesn't make sense.
I mean you don't have to be anyone special to understand that uncontrolled fire in a building with damage to the side of it and maybe weak foundations could be the cause of collapse. It makes more sense than other theories.
oh and the foundation collapse was so uniform it dropped it in its OWN footprint
because thats what all 3 did
and there are explosives that are fire retardant like c4 for instance just wrap the devices in a foil blanket
but these explosive would have been deep in a concrete drilled pocket anyway next to the steel frame
so yes controlled demo is the far most logical conclusion it would have taken a few nights work for covert operatives
to have rigged it all but yes far far the most logical conclusion
how else was they gonna justify the invasion of the middle east and there goal of regime change in 5 arab countries
as planned by the project for the next american century attended by chaney rumsfelt and bush
the only winner of 9/11 was the american federal government
they ripped up the constitution passed the patriot act and got into the 100 year middle east war
and an even bigger fucking military budget
it was win win win win
Professor Feng Xiao wrote:Guest wrote:Professor Feng Xiao wrote:calitom wrote:my mom's office was a couple blocks from the world trade center. thank God she was really agile back then(before her hips were wrecked by a bad surgeon)-so she got out of there and practically ran to her apartment several blocks north before the air got too bad ..So many people have died from WTC related lung disease.
we called her all day til my uncle finally got hold of her..
WTC conspiracy theorists(mostly right wingers) are real douchebags
so what made wtc 7 fall in its own footprint then
it was never hit by a plane and it would be impossible for just a fire to make it fall
unless the steel girders were 50% cardboard you fucking gullible twat
and lets not forget the dancing Israelis filming it from a high rise car park in queens
It didn't fall into it's own footprint, it made a right mess.
It had raging fires inside from top to bottom which were left to burn and a huge damaged side.
It had two of the worlds biggest buildings collapsing right next to it which possibly damaged the foundations.
What's the alternative? Controlled demolition? Why didn't the explosives set off when the fires were raging for hours? How did they get placed there and by who? Can't be just one person, would need a big team. The theory falls flat straight away. It just doesn't make sense.
I mean you don't have to be anyone special to understand that uncontrolled fire in a building with damage to the side of it and maybe weak foundations could be the cause of collapse. It makes more sense than other theories.
oh and the foundation collapse was so uniform it dropped it in its OWN footprint
because thats what all 3 did
and there are explosives that are fire retardant like c4 for instance just wrap the devices in a foil blanket
but these explosive would have been deep in a concrete drilled pocket anyway next to the steel frame
so yes controlled demo is the far most logical conclusion it would have taken a few nights work for covert operatives
to have rigged it all but yes far far the most logical conclusion
how else was they gonna justify the invasion of the middle east and there goal of regime change in 5 arab countries
as planned by the project for the next american century attended by chaney rumsfelt and bush
the only winner of 9/11 was the american federal government
they ripped up the constitution passed the patriot act and got into the 100 year middle east war
and an even bigger fucking military budget
it was win win win win
Professor Feng Xiao wrote:calitom wrote:my mom's office was a couple blocks from the world trade center. thank God she was really agile back then(before her hips were wrecked by a bad surgeon)-so she got out of there and practically ran to her apartment several blocks north before the air got too bad ..So many people have died from WTC related lung disease.
we called her all day til my uncle finally got hold of her..
WTC conspiracy theorists(mostly right wingers) are real douchebags
so what made wtc 7 fall in its own footprint then
it was never hit by a plane and it would be impossible for just a fire to make it fall
unless the steel girders were 50% cardboard you fucking gullible twat
and lets not forget the dancing Israelis filming it from a high rise car park in queens
HobbitFeet wrote:oh come on
crumple zone may have been a crude way to express it, but most people knew what Stooo meant
tall buildings have a series of failsafes built in, these are mainly to withstand seismic events not terrorist planes as the attacks that happened were very much unchartered territory
things like TMDs and systems where the base is isolated from the main structure, even spiral rebar (which is probably the reason the pentagon didn't collapse in a far worse manner) the lower floors practically hung from the upper floor
anyway it's pointless discussing any of this
Fletch wrote:Stooo wrote:Rolluplostinspace wrote:They were built to handle multiple strikes and if anything the impact should have sent the buildings sideways.
But they collapsed into themselves. What would you expect in a densely populated city, building codes that let the fucking things crash into the streets?
Why didn't Grenfell tower block fall?
It was on fire for longer and yet remained standing.
Guest wrote:So according to you Fletch...who brought down the buildings and why?
Professor Feng Xiao wrote:Guest wrote:Professor Feng Xiao wrote:calitom wrote:my mom's office was a couple blocks from the world trade center. thank God she was really agile back then(before her hips were wrecked by a bad surgeon)-so she got out of there and practically ran to her apartment several blocks north before the air got too bad ..So many people have died from WTC related lung disease.
we called her all day til my uncle finally got hold of her..
WTC conspiracy theorists(mostly right wingers) are real douchebags
so what made wtc 7 fall in its own footprint then
it was never hit by a plane and it would be impossible for just a fire to make it fall
unless the steel girders were 50% cardboard you fucking gullible twat
and lets not forget the dancing Israelis filming it from a high rise car park in queens
It didn't fall into it's own footprint, it made a right mess.
It had raging fires inside from top to bottom which were left to burn and a huge damaged side.
It had two of the worlds biggest buildings collapsing right next to it which possibly damaged the foundations.
What's the alternative? Controlled demolition? Why didn't the explosives set off when the fires were raging for hours? How did they get placed there and by who? Can't be just one person, would need a big team. The theory falls flat straight away. It just doesn't make sense.
I mean you don't have to be anyone special to understand that uncontrolled fire in a building with damage to the side of it and maybe weak foundations could be the cause of collapse. It makes more sense than other theories.
oh and the foundation collapse was so uniform it dropped it in its OWN footprint
because thats what all 3 did
and there are explosives that are fire retardant like c4 for instance just wrap the devices in a foil blanket
but these explosive would have been deep in a concrete drilled pocket anyway next to the steel frame
so yes controlled demo is the far most logical conclusion it would have taken a few nights work for covert operatives
to have rigged it all but yes far far the most logical conclusion
how else was they gonna justify the invasion of the middle east and there goal of regime change in 5 arab countries
as planned by the project for the next american century attended by chaney rumsfelt and bush
the only winner of 9/11 was the american federal government
they ripped up the constitution passed the patriot act and got into the 100 year middle east war
and an even bigger fucking military budget
it was win win win win
Guest wrote:A building fully involved in fire left to burn.
A building damaged by the collapse of the two towers.
A building rocked by two of the worlds biggest buildings collapsing right next to it.
Or
A covert team took a few nights to rig a fully functioning building.
I'm no expert and I don't particularly like governments but come on. I do know two things though, you need to read up on how a controlled demolition works and you need to visit your doctor if you really believe what you have typed.
A demolition of a building that size, the explosives would not survive the fires and damage and also you would see the explosions happen.
Fletch wrote:HobbitFeet wrote:oh come on
crumple zone may have been a crude way to express it, but most people knew what Stooo meant
tall buildings have a series of failsafes built in, these are mainly to withstand seismic events not terrorist planes as the attacks that happened were very much unchartered territory
things like TMDs and systems where the base is isolated from the main structure, even spiral rebar (which is probably the reason the pentagon didn't collapse in a far worse manner) the lower floors practically hung from the upper floor
anyway it's pointless discussing any of this
Failsafes are the exact opposite of 'crumple zones' which are built in weakness.
If you wanted a memory lane thread you should have titled it appropriately and put it in the snug.
Fletch wrote:Fletch wrote:Stooo wrote:Rolluplostinspace wrote:They were built to handle multiple strikes and if anything the impact should have sent the buildings sideways.
But they collapsed into themselves. What would you expect in a densely populated city, building codes that let the fucking things crash into the streets?
Why didn't Grenfell tower block fall?
It was on fire for longer and yet remained standing.
Bump for the fire theorists.
Fletch wrote:Guest wrote:A building fully involved in fire left to burn.
A building damaged by the collapse of the two towers.
A building rocked by two of the worlds biggest buildings collapsing right next to it.
Or
A covert team took a few nights to rig a fully functioning building.
I'm no expert and I don't particularly like governments but come on. I do know two things though, you need to read up on how a controlled demolition works and you need to visit your doctor if you really believe what you have typed.
A demolition of a building that size, the explosives would not survive the fires and damage and also you would see the explosions happen.
9/11 missing gold.
Jon55 wrote:I am not trying to make this seem like nothing but I lived through the IRA bombings of Birmingham and I know the Americans funded them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_pub_bombings
Return to The Sleeping Dogs' Arms
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests