Shocking Conspiracy!! You be the judge

Then whay didn't G.W. use that info, for his 2nd run?

Um, exactly how do you figure it would have helped GW's reelection chances if he'd talked about 9/11 being an inside job?

Everything the government does should be investigated. That said, it sounds like this guy is off his meds.

A few questions to the hook line and sinker folks. 1. Why did the WTC towers collapse pancake style from top floor first down, when the planes hit much lower? If you've ever seen a botched building implosion, it will topple where the explosives failed to go off, not pancake. 2. Why did WTC 7 collapse? It wasn't out of sympathy for the towers. Cover up ? Absolutely. Did our government have a hand in it? Don't know the answer, but I'll remain skeptical.

Overheard a few days ago. Obama to Leon Panetta: You assured me we could use the photos, look at the freezer burn!

HEARTLESS wrote: A few questions to the hook line and sinker folks. 1. Why did the WTC towers collapse pancake style from top floor first down, when the planes hit much lower? If you've ever seen a botched building implosion, it will topple where the explosives failed to go off, not pancake. 2. Why did WTC 7 collapse? It wasn't out of sympathy for the towers. Cover up ? Absolutely. Did our government have a hand in it? Don't know the answer, but I'll remain skeptical.

:Koolaid:
Sound like a "birther", o sorry "truther"
See folks fools on both sides. Thank you Heartless!

HEARTLESS wrote: A few questions to the hook line and sinker folks. 1. Why did the WTC towers collapse pancake style from top floor first down, when the planes hit much lower? If you've ever seen a botched building implosion, it will topple where the explosives failed to go off, not pancake. 2. Why did WTC 7 collapse? It wasn't out of sympathy for the towers. Cover up ? Absolutely. Did our government have a hand in it? Don't know the answer, but I'll remain skeptical.

If you go back and look at the collapse sequence, you will see that the collapse started at the point of impact. The upper floors of the towers were indeed intact when the collapse started. The South Tower was hit second, and lower, and collapsed first. If you watch the collapse of that tower again, you can clearly see the upper floors lean towards the corner which gave way. Same for the North Tower. It is easier to see that the area above the impact remained intact at the start of the collapse because of the radio antennae on top of it. It too leans over as it starts down.

Now figure that each floor had a dead load of somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,000 tons. On the South Tower, where the impact was between the 78th and 84th floors. Each tower, you may remember, had 110 floors. That means there were 26 floors above the impact zone, at 3,000 tons each. You may also remember the design of the towers. A continuous concrete floor surrounding a central frame. Each floor was supposed to be able to hold an additional percentage of its weight, but even if that additional percentage was 100%, having 26x that weight fall on it would have caused it to fail and slide down to the next floor, and that floor would fail and slide down, and that would fail and slide down until the entire mass reached the earth.

The North Tower was hit between the 92nd and 98th floors. When the top 12 floors of that tower fell as a unit, the failure of the floors below it was for the exact same reason. None of the floors were designed to hold that amount of weight all by themselves.

As far as WTC7 - it used the same principles in its construction. WTC5, which didn't collapse, used the older methods since it was only 9 (IIRC) stories tall. You can clearly see the difference in methods of construction if you look at what remained of WTC5 after fire gutted it. Simple physics Heartless. Ockham's Razor is alive and well.

Just re-watched the videos, and yes the top portions collapse onto the lower portion. So since the 9 11 report didn't mention WTC 7, what brought it down? Yes I saw your statement on the same principles of construction.

Twin towers mystery resolved, fire brought down WTC7

Federal investigators with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) handed down the findings of a three-year investigation which said fire from falling debris caused the collapse of the building making it the first time a fire had caused the total failure of a modern skyscraper.

"The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," said Dr. Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator on the NIST team. "It did not collapse from explosives or fuel oil fires."

Skeptics have long believed that fire and debris alone should not have caused the collapse of such a strong building and have hinted at a timed explosion as being the cause of the collapse. The building was not hit at any stage by the hijacked aircraft.

However the report dismissed this suggestion saying other factors brought the building down.

"Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail," said Sunder. "Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oils played a role in the collapse that brought the building down."

However, the report is unlikely to satisfy conspiracy theorists, with the New York Times quoting a survey claiming 1-in-7 Americans believes the attack on the World Trade Centre was an inside job.

For a demonstration video of why the building fell, see the NIST Web site by clicking here .

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.ph ... -down-WTC7



BOO!

Do witches say Boo?