9/11 documentary now

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

You've missed the point.

I agreed it was designed for a lower speed collision and that ljworld link backs it up. It doesn't mention a 600mph collision.

Not according to NIST:

 

[west didsblue]

Not according to NIST:

Do you actually bother reading the whole of my posts.
Quoting NIST who quote the 1964 Port Authority white paper isn't proving anything that hasn't been discussed.

 

[Citizen in Pakistan]

Ok, I get it, you're not a fan of the USA. What's the relevance to 9/11 though? They didn't have to destroy a section of their largest city and kill thousands of their own population to justify a war.

I like US, i have worked with US nationals for good part of my 10 year professional life and found them to be great people to work with, there is difference between being opposed to a government policies of a specific country and in being opposed to the whole country

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

Do you actually bother reading the whole of my posts.
Quoting NIST who quote the 1964 Port Authority white paper isn't proving anything that hasn't been discussed.

Whoosh....

You claimed the 1964 Port Authority white paper "doesn't mention a 600mph collision." Nist say it did.

 

[west didsblue]

Whoosh....

You claimed the 1964 Port Authority white paper "doesn't mention a 600mph collision." Nist say it did.

No I said John Skilling didn't mention a 600mph collision. It was in the Port Authority white paper. Go back one page and read it. Your comprehension skills appear to be sadly lacking.

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

No I said John Skilling didn't mention a 600mph collision. It was in the Port Authority white paper. Go back one page and read it. Your comprehension skills appear to be sadly lacking.

Why is the fact that John Skilling didn't mention it so important? It was in the White paper.

 

[west didsblue]

Why is the fact that John Skilling didn't mention it so important? It was in the White paper.

Because Les Robertson, who was the lead structural engineer and was John Skilling's colleague, said the port authority got it wrong in the white paper and no such analysis exists.

 

[SWP's back]

How do you know some charges weren't set off by the crashes but masked by the huge fireballs created by the combustion of aerosolized jet fuel? Secondly, explosives can be engineered so that heat alone will not detonate them. For example, high explosive RDX requires the simultaneous delivery of high heat and pressure to induce detonation. Thirdly, it is relatively easy to design casings for explosives that would allow them to survive even the most violent assaults. The casings of jetliners' black boxes protect their contents from impact accelerations of 3,400 Gs and from temperatures of 2,000ºF for up to 30 minutes.

You're not even thinking about this rationally are you?

I've already said I'm out. There's literally no point arguing with fanatics. Enjoy.

 

[2sheikhs]

Who do you think happened to the towers then, did they collapse due to planes hitting them or did they collapse because of explosives?

Personally, I believe that all the relevant people in the USA either knew of the timings of the attacks or had more involvement.
This isn't the same as someone claiming they've seen lord lucan /loch Ness monster /elvis, it's a whole catalogue of scientific and logical unlikelyhoods that when put together, don't ring true.
In answer to your question, explosives.

 

[2sheikhs]

I've already said I'm out. There's literally no point arguing with fanatics. Enjoy.

Good choice.
You're best sticking to selling pensions or whatever it is you do. Every argument you've put forward on here is pure shit .