Mystery of WTC 7 - Conspiracy

[OzFox]

What drivel. Even less credibility than the orange video.

[@mrtonycox]

I watched the BBC conspiracy programme over the weekend. Thought it gave a decent view of both sides of each story.

The things that stuck out for me was the WTC7 building (no rationale explanation for the level collapse which match detonations), and also the plane hitting the pentagon... The initial hole was 20 feet, after the collapse of the wall it was 75 feet..

We'll never get the bottom of it and I find the pictures just as disturbing as i did 10 years ago.

[breadandcheese]

This is like p*****g into the wind. These conspiracy theorists are as brainwashed as Jehovah's Witnesses!!

They've always got an answer and nearly always taking things out of context. They are convinced they know something the rest of us don't!!

Very odd.

It's actually the most remarkable experience I've seen of the human psyche.

9/11 is possibly the most documented and captured on film world changing event in history, which many of us watched unfold. There's footage of planes crashing into the twin towers. There's documented evidence of planes taking off from airports. There's black box recordings of cockpit voices. There's the loss of life, on people who took a plane and never returned, or people who went to work (be it office workers or emergency services) who never returned. There's insurance payouts afterwards documenting that it was planes which hit the buildings.

Despite all this, there are people who refuse to believe all this, despite having evidence thrust in front of them and will cling onto it being a conspiracy.

Remarkable and a little bit frightening.

[breadandcheese]

But it's not just jet fuel is it. The forces involved from the plane alone are immense. Having 36,000 gallons of fuel on board just adds "fuel to the fire" so to speak. When a bomb explodes it expels forces, a 200 tonne plane going 350mph carrying fuel and hitting a stationary object expels forces. And those forces are comparable to an absolutely massive bomb, it's as simple as that. Just because it wasn't built to demolish things doesn't mean it can't.

I'm sure this is a stuck record.

You and I have mentioned how force is the most important determiner for crash damage repeatedly pretty much every time a thread on this topic rears its head. I think it has to be mentioned every year when someone brings up the theory. The fantastic equation of F=ma, which all who have done GCSE physics should be aware of, is enough of an answer. I can only assume slipping education standards and people are not aware of this?

Make physics mandatory at GCSE.

[iBleedLeicesterColours]

No one will ever know.

[breadandcheese]

No one will ever know.

I think you'll find they will. Whether people choose to believe is something entirely different.

[danny.]

9/11 is possibly the most documented and captured on film world changing event in history, which many of us watched unfold. There's footage of planes crashing into the twin towers. There's documented evidence of planes taking off from airports.

All the footage shows is that things were not as we have been told.

The planes that hit the towers had something strapped underneath them that a commercial liner wouldn't have.

There was a visible flash *before* the planes hit the towers, and both towers and WTC7 all perfectly fell as would occur with a planned demolition.

The 4th plane that crashed was nowhere to be seen in the 'footage' of that, plus it was reported that it actually landed something completely different.

[OzFox]

It's actually the most remarkable experience I've seen of the human psyche.

9/11 is possibly the most documented and captured on film world changing event in history, which many of us watched unfold. There's footage of planes crashing into the twin towers. There's documented evidence of planes taking off from airports. There's black box recordings of cockpit voices. There's the loss of life, on people who took a plane and never returned, or people who went to work (be it office workers or emergency services) who never returned. There's insurance payouts afterwards documenting that it was planes which hit the buildings.

Despite all this, there are people who refuse to believe all this, despite having evidence thrust in front of them and will cling onto it being a conspiracy.

Remarkable and a little bit frightening.

Yeah but but but but...I saw it on a grainy Youtube video...controlled demolition....and what about that hole in the Pentagon? bla bla bla

There should be a study into the psychology of conspiracy theories, if there hasn't been one already.

Must be some sort of attention seeking gene, or just a way of making life more interesting. "I'm in the know and you're not" etc. Or it could be that some people are just incredibly gullible.

Like you I find the whole thing bizarre. not to mention offensive to the families

[stripeyfox]

People will always look for conspiracys and in the modern world the internet allows like minded individuals to come together and cultivate these ideas BUT the fact of the matter is there is no conspiracy here - well funded and highly organised terrorists took advantage of lax airline security and managed to pull off a pretty spectacular attack. It doesn't make sense that the US government (or factions within it) would want to, or be able to pull this off. And if they did, surely flying an airliner into a building and causing a massive fire and huge loss of life would have been sufficient without having to sabotage the buidlings to make them fall down as well?

[BoneDog]

This is for all you folk who are still persisting to believe that false physics caused the towers to collapse. Full film. New release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jixU7JG4pg

Still not checked replies to my posts. Hopefully be back 'cos there seems to be far too many dipshits around.

[The Doctor]

I'm sure this is a stuck record.

You and I have mentioned how force is the most important determiner for crash damage repeatedly pretty much every time a thread on this topic rears its head. I think it has to be mentioned every year when someone brings up the theory. The fantastic equation of F=ma, which all who have done GCSE physics should be aware of, is enough of an answer. I can only assume slipping education standards and people are not aware of this?

Make physics mandatory at GCSE.

It sort of is, at GCSE you just just study "science" which covers Biology, Chemistry & Physics - the big 3 (or at least this was the case when I was doing GCSE's). It's only at A-level where students can choose to "drop" one or more of the 3 main branches.

[OzFox]

This is for all you folk who are still persisting to believe that false physics caused the towers to collapse. Full film. New release.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jixU7JG4pg

Still not checked replies to my posts. Hopefully be back 'cos there seems to be far too many dipshits around.

Two hours and 19 minutes of drivel. You're having a laugh mate

[Babylon]

One comment that stuck out of the BBC's conspiracy road trip for me, was when the presenter said it was amazing how these conspiracy theorists can be so untrusting and so questioning of the official report. But also gullible and ready to believe almost anything said by those who say it happened a different way.

Someone like El Empty is not qualified to really pass comment on the so called "evidence" the conspiracy theorists present him. Yet he's so ready to believe everything they say. Whilst also trying to discredit anyone who says the opposite in line with the official report. HOW do you know what person is telling the truth when you have neither the knowledge or qualifications to work it out yourself?

[BoneDog]

Defo be back, barring a catastrophe, I can see there's plenty of shit flying around. Who knows what I've missed.

its really shit to think despite the ammount of people who lost lives in these planes that these idiots still come up with these silly theories about explosives and goverment cover ups

Pardon? By 'idiots come up with silly theories about explosives', do you mean the firemen, police, medical staff, reporters and hundreds of other eye-witnesses who heard large explosions over a period of time at all 3 WTC's? And are you calling the many high placed military men who are speaking out, and there will be more, idiots for believing that this could have only happened with inside help?

If it was a plot and set up then who plotted it, how many were involved and why has noone come forward to tell the story?

Why would anyone who was involved in this plot come forward and tell their story? There wouldn't have been hundreds or thousands involved in the operations as some people seem to like to claim.

Planes are, in shape, essentially massive bullets.

That is one of the worst arguements ever. A bullet is dense and designed to penetrate. A 757 is not dense and is full of air, and is mainly made up of soft materials like aluminium and carbon fibre. Have you seen what kind of damage a goose can do to a 757?

Can you tell me why you keep posting this video? Is it supposed to be clever?

Didn't know I'd posted the video before - you have a better memory than me. And no, it's not supposed to be clever. It's supposed to be very, very simple. Simple enough for sheep.

These conspiracy theorists are as brainwashed as Jehovah's Witnesses!!

They've always got an answer and nearly always taking things out of context. They are convinced they know something the rest of us don't!!

Hold on a minute, who claims to have any real answers? You folk who believe the government have no answers, just like the rest of us.

There are two camps here.

1. Those people who believe the official story and claim that nobody in positions of power were involved in planning and allowing 911 to happen.

2. Those people who believe the official story to be false that claim that an element of power were involved and made it happen. (a bit more sense and historical perspective than the first lot)

Just laughing at how some folk trust people like Bush, Cheney etc. (and more importantly those people who are always in the background no matter who the president is). Are you all f*&king mental ?!!!! For Christ's sake man, have you heard or seen anything they've done to your world? Thank f*&k there are people around like those in the video I just posted.

[BoneDog]

One comment that stuck out of the BBC's conspiracy road trip for me, was when the presenter said it was amazing how these conspiracy theorists can be so untrusting and so questioning of the official report. But also gullible and ready to believe almost anything said by those who say it happened a different way.

Someone like El Empty is not qualified to really pass comment on the so called "evidence" the conspiracy theorists present him. Yet he's so ready to believe everything they say. Whilst also trying to discredit anyone who says the opposite in line with the official report. HOW do you know what person is telling the truth when you have neither the knowledge or qualifications to work it out yourself?

Gettin sick of your shit, always talking about me, instead of having a conversation. You like a bit of muck throwing don't you.

You have no clue about the authors, videos or speakers I take note of. I certainly don't follow ANY of the conspiracy theorists out there that you think I do. Icke, Rense, Jones etc. etc. - I'm subscribed or registered to none of them and know nothing of what they are up to.

Nothing to do with me, got that shitkicker?

NOW STOP BEING A BITCH

Back soon yo

[Babylon]

Gettin sick of your shit, always talking about me, instead of having a conversation. You like a bit of muck throwing don't you.

You have no clue about the authors, videos or speakers I take note of. I certainly don't follow ANY of the conspiracy theorists out there that you think I do. Icke, Rense, Jones etc. etc. - I'm subscribed or registered to none of them and know nothing of what they are up to.

Nothing to do with me, got that shitkicker?

NOW STOP BEING A BITCH

Back soon yo

It's about you because you're the one constantly being abusive to anyone who doesn't believe your crack pot theories. You still didn't answer my question. If you are not qualified to work things out (you have already proven a complete lack of understanding regarding GCSE level physics) how do you know who is telling the truth?

If presented with two videos of two "experts", using complex and simple physics to explain things. But they are both coming to different conclusions, how so you know who's story is correct if you can't work it out yourself?

[OzFox]

Didn't know I'd posted the video before - you have a better memory than me. And no, it's not supposed to be clever. It's supposed to be very, very simple. Simple enough for sheep.

Well, it appeals to sheep so you got that right. As I pointed out, the video is a contradiction and doesn't exactly help your argument.

Thank f*&k there are people around like those in the video I just posted.

Thank f*&k they're in a distinct minority

[Brown Fox]

All the footage shows is that things were not as we have been told.

The planes that hit the towers had something strapped underneath them that a commercial liner wouldn't have.

There was a visible flash *before* the planes hit the towers, and both towers and WTC7 all perfectly fell as would occur with a planned demolition.

The 4th plane that crashed was nowhere to be seen in the 'footage' of that, plus it was reported that it actually landed something completely different.

Well there was nothing strapped under them because if you watch the videos of it happening it just looks like a normal bloody plane. And show me a video with a flash before they hit because thats just bull. You've just made a load of things up for the sake of it there. When you can actually watch real footage of it happening etc. and you still believe there were flashes and extra things strapped to planes when they are 100% not there you know know someone is talking complete shit.

[zubi]

Two hours and 19 minutes of drivel. You're having a laugh mate

did you even watch the video before? It could be interesting seeing how they are reputable architects.

Thanks for that el, will check that out when I have the time

[Babylon]

a) Pardon? By 'idiots come up with silly theories about explosives', do you mean the firemen, police, medical staff, reporters and hundreds of other eye-witnesses who heard large explosions over a period of time at all 3 WTC's? And are you calling the many high placed military men who are speaking out, and there will be more, idiots for believing that this could have only happened with inside help?

b) Why would anyone who was involved in this plot come forward and tell their story? There wouldn't have been hundreds or thousands involved in the operations as some people seem to like to claim.

c) That is one of the worst arguements ever. A bullet is dense and designed to penetrate. A 757 is not dense and is full of air, and is mainly made up of soft materials like aluminium and carbon fibre. Have you seen what kind of damage a goose can do to a 757?

a) People hear explosions shocker. Have you ever stood near a building on fire? I've stood near a full on factory fire and I can tell you there are all sorts of noises going off. You've just had two planes hit two huge building, raging fires all over the place. Debris and bodies falling left right and centre, floors collapsing. What are you expecting a nice quiet building? These people are experts in explosions, their going through god knows what with everything happening around them... and you think they know the difference between one kind of bang and another.

b) Of course there would need to be hundreds of people involved, it would take a bloody team of people to set explosives in one tower alone let alone three.

c) Can you please stop with this ridiculous argument about the plane being some kind of feather light object. PARTS of the plane are made from lightweight materials. Many parts ARE NOT made from light materials. The plane weighs 100's of tonnes, it is not a feather like object. Get a gcse maths book and do some working out for goodness sake.

[The Doctor]

That is one of the worst arguements ever. A bullet is dense and designed to penetrate. A 757 is not dense and is full of air, and is mainly made up of soft materials like aluminium and carbon fibre. Have you seen what kind of damage a goose can do to a 757?

While they have different purposes, in shape the fuselage of a plane is basically a cylinder tapering to a point, much like a bullet. Hence why I said in shape planes are essentially massive bullets.

Planes may be made up of mainly soft materials than bullets but that is hardly relevant - If I was to take 50 thousand tons of aluminium and launch it at a brick wall in speeds exceeding 300mph it would do a large amount of damage because of the force it would have from such a high weight at such speeds.

Finally, almost anything can do masses of damage to a 757, for instance if a reasonable sized bird was to fly into the engine it would jam up the engine and cause the plane to crash and cause very severe damage technically creditable to the bird. So what's your point?

edit: And I notice you've not mentioned anything about the weights or volatility of jet fuel as I posted, why not?

[danny.]

Well there was nothing strapped under them because if you watch the videos of it happening it just looks like a normal bloody plane.

No it doesn't, it has a big cylinder shaped object underneath it. - it's fairly easy to see on the footage, you can see the shadows it casts.

And show me a video with a flash before they hit because thats just bull. You've just made a load of things up for the sake of it there.

It's on all the various videos I've seen, watch them in slow-mo frame by frame.

[zubi]

Well there was nothing strapped under them because if you watch the videos of it happening it just looks like a normal bloody plane. And show me a video with a flash before they hit because thats just bull. You've just made a load of things up for the sake of it there. When you can actually watch real footage of it happening etc. and you still believe there were flashes and extra things strapped to planes when they are 100% not there you know know someone is talking complete shit.

He's not making it up, check the vid

[Babylon]

He's not making it up, check the vid

You can't even see anything.

Please start actually presenting evidence, because so far it's nothing but laughable.

[stripeyfox]

All the footage shows is that things were not as we have been told.

The planes that hit the towers had something strapped underneath them that a commercial liner wouldn't have.

There was a visible flash *before* the planes hit the towers, and both towers and WTC7 all perfectly fell as would occur with a planned demolition.

The 4th plane that crashed was nowhere to be seen in the 'footage' of that, plus it was reported that it actually landed something completely different.

And what was this strange item "strapped underneath" the aircraft?