BillyShears said:pominoz said:Who'd a thought?
Well for starters, a lot of Yanks and quite a few Englishmen in this thread.
rickmcfc said:imber50 said:I admit to being a "truth seeker". My mates are always taking the piss out of me but i dont care. I think its fair to say that no one will ever know the whole truth as to what actually happened on 9/11. My part of "truth seeking" is just to ask questions that i dont believe have ever been fully explained. Its been fascinating reading everyone's views on this subject and for me especially the views on WTC 7. I dont know why this building collapsed and why it collapsed in the way that it did. The biggest question i have concerning WTC7 (and i apologise if this has already been asked,ive read through most of the thread and didnt see this mentioned) but how did the BBC report at 10.00pm(our time) that WTC7 had collapsed.When in fact it didnt collapse until 10.27pm our time. The BBC news anchor man in London went over to the reporter called Jayne Standley in New York and she confirmed that WTC7 had collapsed some 5 mins earlier and yet WTC7 was clearly in shot behind her. We will never know the answer to this and no clear answer has ever been given by the BBC.
I take on board what you say, maybe a simple mistake, or a part colapse of the building? Please whatever you do, dont say the BBC were in on it as well.
imber50 said:rickmcfc said:imber50 said:I admit to being a "truth seeker". My mates are always taking the piss out of me but i dont care. I think its fair to say that no one will ever know the whole truth as to what actually happened on 9/11. My part of "truth seeking" is just to ask questions that i dont believe have ever been fully explained. Its been fascinating reading everyone's views on this subject and for me especially the views on WTC 7. I dont know why this building collapsed and why it collapsed in the way that it did. The biggest question i have concerning WTC7 (and i apologise if this has already been asked,ive read through most of the thread and didnt see this mentioned) but how did the BBC report at 10.00pm(our time) that WTC7 had collapsed.When in fact it didnt collapse until 10.27pm our time. The BBC news anchor man in London went over to the reporter called Jayne Standley in New York and she confirmed that WTC7 had collapsed some 5 mins earlier and yet WTC7 was clearly in shot behind her. We will never know the answer to this and no clear answer has ever been given by the BBC.
I take on board what you say, maybe a simple mistake, or a part colapse of the building? Please whatever you do, dont say the BBC were in on it as well.
I dont think for one moment that the BBC where in on it. I may not always believe what i hear or read on the BBC but even i cant stretch things enough to say they had something to do with it. My question was all about where did they get their information from ? I dont know how news channels get there info on that day but i would hope it came from a secure/governmental source
When do you think they did all that precise planning? Was it when all the office workers were at home in bed? What did they tell Frank the security guy as they went in and out each night, and why the fuck didn't Frank or his dog, Jasper, raise the alarm when they saw packages saying 'highly explosive' on them? Was it because that simply didn't happen?foetus said:Say what you will about it being an inside job and what not.....
all I know is that a 110 story building made of concrete and steel will not collapse in on itself in 10 seconds without help from explosives.
WTC 7 was definitely a controlled demolition that would have taken days/weeks to plan. The correct columns have to be identified and right amount of explosives have to be calculated.
The pentagon explosion was sketchy as fuck!
The shit that went down on 9/11 seems to defy physics
foetus said:Say what you will about it being an inside job and what not.....
all I know is that a 110 story building made of concrete and steel will not collapse in on itself in 10 seconds without help from explosives.
WTC 7 was definitely a controlled demolition that would have taken days/weeks to plan. The correct columns have to be identified and right amount of explosives have to be calculated.
The pentagon explosion was sketchy as fuck!
The shit that went down on 9/11 seems to defy physics
Pigeonho said:When do you think they did all that precise planning? Was it when all the office workers were at home in bed? What did they tell Frank the security guy as they went in and out each night, and why the fuck didn't Frank or his dog, Jasper, raise the alarm when they saw packages saying 'highly explosive' on them? Was it because that simply didn't happen?foetus said:Say what you will about it being an inside job and what not.....
all I know is that a 110 story building made of concrete and steel will not collapse in on itself in 10 seconds without help from explosives.
WTC 7 was definitely a controlled demolition that would have taken days/weeks to plan. The correct columns have to be identified and right amount of explosives have to be calculated.
The pentagon explosion was sketchy as fuck!
The shit that went down on 9/11 seems to defy physics
It fell that way because the weight from the undamaged floors above the impact zones fell in when the steel columns buckled. It makes perfect sense why it fell that way, with the explanation provided on documentaries on how it happened. If only one side buckled I could understand it falling side ways then, as the weight would all fall onto that side. That didn't happen though, the entire building fell in on itself because the impact zones were 'like being in a furnace'. Those were quotes on the documentary I watched last night about how unthinkably hot it was because of the jet fuel.foetus said:Pigeonho said:When do you think they did all that precise planning? Was it when all the office workers were at home in bed? What did they tell Frank the security guy as they went in and out each night, and why the fuck didn't Frank or his dog, Jasper, raise the alarm when they saw packages saying 'highly explosive' on them? Was it because that simply didn't happen?foetus said:Say what you will about it being an inside job and what not.....
all I know is that a 110 story building made of concrete and steel will not collapse in on itself in 10 seconds without help from explosives.
WTC 7 was definitely a controlled demolition that would have taken days/weeks to plan. The correct columns have to be identified and right amount of explosives have to be calculated.
The pentagon explosion was sketchy as fuck!
The shit that went down on 9/11 seems to defy physics
I dont know when or how it happened. There were reports that there were fire drills and power outs a few weeks leading up to the attacks. WTC 7 was also a government building that had high security government files in it. Its not like tom, dick and harry would be wondering through their at their own leisure.
Anyway im purely looking at the engineering side. Steel is a strong motherfucking material....the buildings seemed to fall without any resistance. The steel columns where the plane hit may have been damaged, but how come the tower didn't tip towards the side it was hit when it fell? It fell down like a controlled demolition.
The official report said pancake theory yet that seems impossible with the speed in which it collapsed and many other factors.
pominoz said:BillyShears said:pominoz said:Who'd a thought?
Well for starters, a lot of Yanks and quite a few Englishmen in this thread.
As for some of the English believers of a conspiracy, have you read some of the other shit they believe?
Pigeonho said:It fell that way because the weight from the undamaged floors above the impact zones fell in when the steel columns buckled. It makes perfect sense why it fell that way, with the explanation provided on documentaries on how it happened. If only one side buckled I could understand it falling side ways then, as the weight would all fall onto that side. That didn't happen though, the entire building fell in on itself because the impact zones were 'like being in a furnace'. Those were quotes on the documentary I watched last night about how unthinkably hot it was because of the jet fuel.foetus said:Pigeonho said:When do you think they did all that precise planning? Was it when all the office workers were at home in bed? What did they tell Frank the security guy as they went in and out each night, and why the fuck didn't Frank or his dog, Jasper, raise the alarm when they saw packages saying 'highly explosive' on them? Was it because that simply didn't happen?
I dont know when or how it happened. There were reports that there were fire drills and power outs a few weeks leading up to the attacks. WTC 7 was also a government building that had high security government files in it. Its not like tom, dick and harry would be wondering through their at their own leisure.
Anyway im purely looking at the engineering side. Steel is a strong motherfucking material....the buildings seemed to fall without any resistance. The steel columns where the plane hit may have been damaged, but how come the tower didn't tip towards the side it was hit when it fell? It fell down like a controlled demolition.
The official report said pancake theory yet that seems impossible with the speed in which it collapsed and many other factors.