9.11 Inside Job... MORE PROOF

The Dark Side of Will · Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:29 pm

Does too!!!

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:36 pm

The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!

I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Look at every other steel frame skyscraper fire..."Biggity

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:09 pm

The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!

Does not - neener, neener, neener

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:18 pm

EBSB52 wrote:
The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!
Does not - neener, neener, neener

Does too.. From what I read, fire took down these steel skyscrappers. Fire destroyed these buildings

Seriously though, I am very suspicious of what went on at building 7. The two towers is very plausible, #7 is not and deserves a better public examination.

I did just read two things however:
- #7 had tens of thousands of gallons of diesel fuel tanks located just below the "command center".
- McCormick Place was a steel structure that collapsed due to a smallish fire.

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:31 am

DiggityBiggity wrote:
The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!
I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Look at every other steel frame skyscraper fire..."Biggity

Let me reinforce Will's point. You're looking at Building X which didn't collapse when Y happened. Then saying that since Y happened, why did Building Z collapse?!?!?!

I haven't ever died in a car accident, but I'm not going to try driving into a concrete lane divider any time soon.

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:19 am

Indy wrote:
DiggityBiggity wrote:
The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!
I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Look at every other steel frame skyscraper fire..."Biggity
Let me reinforce Will's point. You're looking at Building X which didn't collapse when Y happened. Then saying that since Y happened, why did Building Z collapse?!?!?!

I haven't ever died in a car accident, but I'm not going to try driving into a concrete lane divider any time soon.

Let me say it again...NO STEEL SKY SCRAPER HAS EVER FALLEN DUE TO FIRE...EVER!!

Your concerned leader

Diggity"I'm so done with this"Biggity

Blue Shift · Post by **Blue Shift** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:18 am

Ok, planes crashed into the buildings. They burned, steel softened, it collapsed. Other buildings got taken down in the process. What's so hard to believe about that?

It's nice to examine all possibilities and everybody very well should, but you're trying to seriously state to us that people on our side of the line had a hand in 9/11? Conspiracy theories are fun, but they get old. Come on guys.

The Dark Side of Will · Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:55 am

DiggityBiggity wrote: I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

WOW. You've got nerve, Mofo.

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:02 am

The Dark Side of Will wrote:
DiggityBiggity wrote: I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

WOW. You've got nerve, Mofo.

Building 7 was not hit by an airplane.. and was farther away than any other building in the complex... how bout you read the facts

Your concerned leader

Diggity"I'm done with this thread..."Biggity

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:08 am

DiggityBiggity wrote:
The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!
I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Look at every other steel frame skyscraper fire..."Biggity

soryr biggiti - but until you take some engineering courses - then study the design of the twin towers and how it was not like any other skyscraper - it was designed to implode to minimize colateral damage for crying out loud - its structure was practicly exoskelital...

and saying that no other skyscraper has fallen due to fire.. lots of steel framed buildings have fallen due to fire - how many skyscrapers have had jetliners full of fuel slam into them?

oh since no other skyscrapers have then it must be impossible - no planes coul dpossibly had hit the towers since its never happened before.

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:39 am

Kohburn wrote:
DiggityBiggity wrote:
The Dark Side of Will wrote:Does too!!!
I'm sorry Will.. you're ignorant, and wrong...

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Look at every other steel frame skyscraper fire..."Biggity
soryr biggiti - but until you take some engineering courses - then study the design of the twin towers and how it was not like any other skyscraper - it was designed to implode to minimize colateral damage for crying out loud - its structure was practicly exoskelital...

and saying that no other skyscraper has fallen due to fire.. lots of steel framed buildings have fallen due to fire - how many skyscrapers have had jetliners full of fuel slam into them?

oh since no other skyscrapers have then it must be impossible - no planes coul dpossibly had hit the towers since its never happened before.

Kohburn...BUILDING 7 WAS NOT HIT BY AN AIRPLANE!!

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Building 7!!"Biggity

P.s. As for engineering courses... 90% of my friends went or still attend Drexel University for Engineering... All of them are on my side... Buildings DO NOT collapse that way due to fire only... and we're talking about building 7 here.. I've already said I would agree to disagree on Tower 1 and 2

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:48 am

ah well I assumed you weren't since you never answered my last question

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:53 am

Kohburn wrote:ah well I assumed you weren't since you never answered my last question

I'm sorry Koh... I must have missed it, I try and respond to everyones question... what was it?

Your concerned leader

Diggity"My apologies"Biggity

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:13 am

DiggityBiggity wrote:
Kohburn wrote:ah well I assumed you weren't since you never answered my last question
I'm sorry Koh... I must have missed it, I try and respond to everyones question... what was it?

Your concerned leader

Diggity"My apologies"Biggity

you brought up the bunker - my question was.. was the bunker damaged at all? sicne it is after all a bunker it should have been unharmed -

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:18 am

Kohburn wrote:
DiggityBiggity wrote:
Kohburn wrote:ah well I assumed you weren't since you never answered my last question
I'm sorry Koh... I must have missed it, I try and respond to everyones question... what was it?

Your concerned leader

Diggity"My apologies"Biggity
you brought up the bunker - my question was.. was the bunker damaged at all? sicne it is after all a bunker it should have been unharmed -

The building was completely destroyed.. I couldn't find anything to say the bunker was still in tact

Your concerned leader

Diggity"no pictures, no articles, nothing"Biggity

Kohburn · Post by **Kohburn** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:44 am

for #7 I wouldn't say the conspiracy would be so much how did it come down - so much as why..

the quick removal of debris is pretty straight forward - sensative materials (whether for good cause or coverup is should fall right along with the "why")

true controlled demolition they cut away all the concrete surrounding the beams, and cut partway into the beams then place shape charges.. I don't see how that could possibly have been done in a hurry - it takes weeks to prep a building for demo..

now some sort of self destruct is quite fascinating.. don't know if there si any record of it ever being done before

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:11 am

Kohburn wrote:for #7 I wouldn't say the conspiracy would be so much how did it come down - so much as why..

the quick removal of debris is pretty straight forward - sensative materials (whether for good cause or coverup is should fall right along with the "why")

true controlled demolition they cut away all the concrete surrounding the beams, and cut partway into the beams then place shape charges.. I don't see how that could possibly have been done in a hurry - it takes weeks to prep a building for demo..

now some sort of self destruct is quite fascinating.. don't know if there si any record of it ever being done before

This is what I'm saying... Larry Silverstein admitted the building was pulled... and you're right, it takes weeks to plan.. so how did they know??

your concerned leader

Diggity"That's all I'm asking"Biggity

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:36 am

One more time...

This is building 7's location.

This is building 7 two hours prior to collapse

Now... here a couple of examples of other steel structures that were on fire... that didn't even come close to collapsing

Interstate Bank Building 1988

One Meridian Plaza 1991

Caracas Venezuela 2004

Windsor Building, Madrid Spain 2005

Your concerned leader

Diggity"Use your own brains here, stop being sheep"Biggity

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:04 pm

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

The Dark Side of Will · Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:21 pm

The Dark Side of Will wrote: Pictures of burning sky scrapers are nice, but you've got to look at what was burning and where it was burning. Was there a gas line into the building? Fuel oil tanks for heat? Some refrigerants are flammable and the right (wrong) design in the air conditioning could release a lot of hot burning stuff. You just don't know enough to say one way or the other.

zonyl wrote:I did just read two things however:
- #7 had tens of thousands of gallons of diesel fuel tanks located just below the "command center".
- McCormick Place was a steel structure that collapsed due to a smallish fire.

Hmm...

Real Fiero Tech

9.11 Inside Job... MORE PROOF

Was 9.11 an inside job?