9/11 Moment of silence

[EvilChild]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

You can call me crazy all you like, but you also have to call the 9-11 commissioners crazy who said it was a fraud, and they wrote the story that you fellows are defending. You are defending an outdated story that the writers admit to being fraud.

It's not simply a group of conspiracy theorists that believe 9-11 was an inside job. It's Engineering Professionals, Military Generals, Intelligence Analysts, Demolition Squads, and its quickly becoming the majority of American citizens that believe 9-11 was an inside job.

Hell, it's American Intelligence Generals:
American Intelligence General confirms plane did not hit Pentagon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MTDpHGkgqY&feature=related

And like I've said a million times before, its even the 9-11 Commissioners. Including the chairman.

We only want a new investigation. One that is not done by an arm of the Federal Government. We need an independent investigation with real evidence.

If 9-11 was not an inside job, why doesn't the government grant an independent investigation into the attacks? It seems like the simplest way to lay it all to rest is to get a real investigation.

First off, the major general is retired and does not speak for the pentagon or the military at all. The guy in the video also believed that people can walk through walls and formed alot of the basis for the movie "The Men Who Stare at Goats". Not to mention project stargate. Finally, the major general was placed on retirement after security breaches. So, yea I'm going to take that video with a grain of salt.

As far as the plane flying into the building and not leaving wing marks? Apparently planes have lost the ablility to fly anything but completely level with the ground. Although, it's possible that a smaller plane was used and not flight 77. Smaller planes are harder to track than larger planes and would probably do that amount of damage. So again we are left with "who was flying the planes?"

As far as the commission is concerned. Keep in mind that one of the major things that the commission revealed was that there were major screw ups in the government and that the disconnect and failures of the FBI, CIA, etc was why we failed to prevent the attack.

Now using that context, reexamine the quotes you gave. I'm sure you can see why people wanted to cover their asses.

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Alright, I know this post is quite long, but if you're interested in the 9/11 stuff I suggest you read it. I was bored and wrote this up in response to some posts here instead of doing homework. =p Shouldn't be much controversial here, just some information and fun facts.

after watching the moment of the fall in slow motion, you are able to see that there were several dynamites exploding in the base of the building. Do you really think an Arab could pass the towers security and plant them there?

The so called explosions that can be seen as the towers fall are bursts of air caused by the weight of the falling debris rapidly compressing the air within the building. This is what I assumed when I saw the puffs coming out of the base and below the falling debris before I had read the different conspiracy theories, and this is what the official explanation is.

More like military grade nano-thermite. (which the rubble of the WTC was tested POSITIVE for)

You know, I'm not a professional engineer so I can't really explain too much about the collapse. (but here ARE 1300 professional architects and engineers that say the official story is BS: http://www.ae911truth.org/)

The same argument was used about the crashing of the Hindenburg. Thermites can consist of a diverse range of fuels and oxidizers, the majority of which could be found almost anywhere. Take the most common one, I mean the one most people somewhat know, aluminium-iron(III) oxide. The chemicals react like this.
Fe2O3 + 2Al → 2Fe + Al2O3 + heat
Lets take that apart a bit for the non scientists.
Fe2O3 is Iron(III) Oxide, also known as Hematite, and is the mineral that the steel industry gets the majority of its iron from. We also know Fe2O3 as rust, although this is a simplification. Rust contains a large amount of Fe2O3 and other iron oxides. This is the oxidizer in this reaction. 2AL is of course pure aluminum. The two are mixed into a fine powder and heated to start the reaction. The reaction results in pure Iron and Aluminum Oxide, and what we're interested in, massive amounts of heat.

Nano-thermite is one of the keywords here, referring to thermite where the Iron(III) Oxide and Aluminum are present in nano-particle form. This means the individual particles are between 1 and 100 nanometers in size, an extremely fine powder. This means that they react easier, faster, and stronger. That would be a big advantage, I can say from personal experience that getting a normal Iron(III) Oxide thermite reaction started can be a bitch, propane torches can work but it's difficult, the times I've done it in classes we've used exothermic magnesium reactions (If I remember that part correctly, who really thinks of how the reaction is started when you're waiting to watch things be melted =p) Anyways, all the info aside nanoparticles may seem like they'd have to be man-made but they can and do exist in nature abundantly, it's just getting a large amount together for the reaction that would be difficult. I would say that it's likely that evidence of nanothermite could be found at the site whether or not it was used, I bet evidence of nanothermite could be found at most steel structure fires.

As a little at home experiment try and find a rusty piece of metal somewhere, I used a tube-anchor, and wrap it with aluminum foil. Then take a metal hammer (preferably rusty too, might be more difficult if you take care of your tools unlike my family =D) and strike it against the object. If done correctly you'll see a small spark and the area of the aluminum foil where you struck will look slightly burned/melted. This is a tiny thermite reaction. After completion please await the arrival of government agencies to arrest you for being a terrorist.

What I can say is jet fuel (kerosene) does not burn hot enough to weaken fire resistant construction grade steel which begins to weaken around 2700 degrees F while jet-fuel TOPS OUT at 1700. Office fires? 600-700 degrees. We are missing about a 1000 degrees here, folks.

And

How/why did building 7 fall? (yes, a third building fell on 9-11... no plane hit it)

Steel begins to melt at (arguably, depends on the grade/type) 2700 degrees. The office fires + fuel averaged something like 1200 degrees. But, as I believe someone has brought up here, you don't need to reach the melting point to significantly damage the integrity. Take blacksmiths, the metals they use are not brought anywhere near their melting points. The 2700 degree range is also based on the heat-resistant coating on the steel, much of which was stripped by the impact of the places (only around the impact of course). Either way, it's a bit like a domino effect. People say that the collapses look too much like controlled demolitions, but my favorite explanation I've heard for this is simply: “That's kind of how large buildings tend to fall”.

Trade centers 1, 2 and 7 all had their structural integrity compromised by damage. 1 and 2 by the planes, and with 7 the north side was almost completely destroyed by the collapse of the tower 2. As the fires within tower 7 raged, it's owner decided that enough lives had been lost that day and told the fireman to pull out and let it burn down.


EDIT -----> I wanted to add this because I just read a couple of the posts immediately before mine and thought about it. Regarding anything referring to the type of damage caused and the remains identified of the planes, theres a few things you have to take account of. First of all, planes are extremely flimsy, they're not made to impact anything. Any videos you've seen of planes hitting runway and skidding hundreds of yards in whole chunks / fireballs share one common theme, the planes were at a landing or takeoff angle and speed; meaning they were going relatively slow and at a low angle.

As the planes are flimsy, at the speeds they were going when they hit steel structures as in the world trade center, or the network of support columns as in the Pentagon, and the hard dirt in the case of the one that crashed into the field, they are almost vaporized. You have a better chance of finding body pieces than part of the plane. Specific to the Pentagon plane, it hit at a very sharp angle, and wing marks wouldn't be too evident, although they can be seen. There is also some controversy around a almost perfect hole found deeper into the Pentagon, raising suspicion of internal bombs. This can be explained by the way the plane struck the building, causing it to be as said before almost vaporized, and leaving just a shaft of plane parts, debris, and fire shooting through the building. Where it finally stopped at that wall it left that mark.

_____________________________________________________________

I wont address any of the specific political stuff, but I will give my broad opinion. 9/11 was an event that shocked us to the core, I was 10 years, 10 months, 13 days old when it occurred, and I remember it as clearly as any memory from within the last year. Events like this, we don't want to believe that they can happen without some vast conspiracy, it weakens our belief in the foundations of our lives, and theres a limit to which the majority of us will allow that to happen. The reason we have conspiracy theories is the same reason we have religion.

The reality is, Bush was just as much as he looked to be, as much as you can say that about any president. He was not some master manipulator, and no matter where you look you will not be able to follow the strings of our lives to some grand puppet master. Our government is not some vast omniscient, omnipotent entity; it is a collection of individuals, each with their own motives and agendas, and there is no possibility of dozens of people working together to so perfectly cover up such a conspiracy if it exists. When three politicians sit down at a table, there you will find at least five conflicting factions.

I don't know if I can say either way if I am personally for or against the war. While I believe mistakes were and still are being made, I believe in the reasons why we are still there. Heres what I believe in, from our declaration of independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

"that all men are created equal"

Where do we draw the line with this? Who is an American and who is not? Myself, I see America not as a collection of lands, but as a collection of ideals. Every person in the world has these rights, all men are (all mankind is) created equal. I believe as Americans it is our duty to find and stamp out these human rights violations, and that we should be proud to do so. The costs are of course high, which is true of anything worth doing; as Jefferson said: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Anyways, I'll end my post for now, as I've gotten a bit on a rambling course, and need to get back to schoolwork. (yay, Psychology =/)

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

First off, the major general is retired and does not speak for the pentagon or the military at all. The guy in the video also believed that people can walk through walls and formed alot of the basis for the movie "The Men Who Stare at Goats". Not to mention project stargate. Finally, the major general was placed on retirement after security breaches. So, yea I'm going to take that video with a grain of salt.

Although I haven't seen the movie, I do know that it was at least based off of truth. The fact is that the CIA does indeed run insane projects like the one in the movie where they attempt to train super soldiers that have the ability to stop a goats heart with their mind. (it was a book before it was a movie) As an example, research the mind control experiment MK-ULTRA. The CIA kidnapped Americans and used them in mind control experiments.
Here's a little description of MK-ULTRA:
Project MKULTRA, or MK-ULTRA, was the code name for a covert, illegal CIA human research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. This official U.S. government program began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s, and it used U.S. and Canadian citizens as its test subjects.[1][2][3][4] The published evidence indicates that Project MKULTRA involved the use of many methodologies to manipulate individual mental states and alter brain function, including the surreptitious administration of drugs and other chemicals, sensory deprivation, isolation, and verbal and sexual abuse.
MK-ULTRA is not a conspiracy, its American history.

As far as the plane flying into the building and not leaving wing marks? Apparently planes have lost the ablility to fly anything but completely level with the ground. Although, it's possible that a smaller plane was used and not flight 77. Smaller planes are harder to track than larger planes and would probably do that amount of damage. So again we are left with "who was flying the planes?"

The wall of the Pentagon always leaves more questions than answers.
Why was there no wing damage?
How come those engines the size of a small house weighing tens of thousands of pounds left no impact wound?
Everyone knows that the nose of a jet is very fragile, so how was there a perfect circular hole punched into the wall about 4 or 5 walls deep? By walls, I mean buildings. (Take a look at how the Pentagon is structured) First responders do say that there were bodies recovered at the scene though which could have been pentagon employees or passengers.
Another interesting fact is that there was indeed luggage all over the lawn.
Eyewitnesses also say that there was a military jet in the area (which could have possibly launched a missile)
Government employees did take security camera footage from all the local gas stations that caught the impact.

There are just so many unanswered questions, and no-one in the 9-11 truth movement claims to know them all. We just won't ever find out what really happened without an independent investigation or an insider going public.

Inside job? Maybe. Cover up? Definitely.

Thank you for providing real discussion to the thread.

 

[whoever]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

zip

nice point of view.
about the explosions, they were at specific points where the base of the structure was held. it wasnt random puffs of air... this official explanation is far from the truth imo.
And about the quote you made: If every men are created equal, who has the right to judge whats good(human rights) and whats not? Iraq didnt do nothing to anyone but to their own people, so if they have a problem there, it should be up to them to solve it or not. USA had nothing to do with that. Attacking Afganhistan could be accepted as a retaliation to the 9/11 for the ones who believe it was really Bin Laden who did it, but why the fuck did USA had to invade Iraq? Americans elect themselves as the judges and protectors of the world but they forget that other countrys values and moral/ethics are way different than theirs and many people around the world would hate to live under the american way.

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Iraq didnt do nothing to anyone but to their own people, so if they have a problem there, it should be up to them to solve it or not. USA had nothing to do with that. Attacking Afganhistan could be accepted as a retaliation to the 9/11 for the ones who believe it was really Bin Laden who did it, but why the fuck did USA had to invade Iraq? Americans elect themselves as the judges and protectors of the world but they forget that other countrys values and moral/ethics are way different than theirs and many people around the world would hate to live under the american way.

First, could you edit your post not to include my entire post just for the sake of space? =p

The situation in the middle east is complicated, and in our lifetimes we have severely limited viewpoints. I doubt many if any of us are over 40 here (yes, there are some I'm sure), but we have to look back that far and further to get a full view, which is extremely difficult to do. For the most part, we (America the entity) has been molding the middle east since the world wars, and our current conflict could be viewed as our attempt to correct this.

Compare it with the situation of WWI and WWII(not really a comparison really because the middle east played a huge role in both). After World War One, we and other countries basically abandoned Germany to manage on its own; this allowed for the rise of (Name emitted due to Godwins Law), who fed off the dissidence of the German people and started World War II. After World War Two, we realized our mistake and aided the German people in rebuilding.

The current war in the middle east could be seen as our do-over attempt to set things right in the middle east, with the various terrorists and organizations being synonymous with the Axis powers.

 

[EvilChild]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Although I haven't seen the movie, I do know that it was at least based off of truth. The fact is that the CIA does indeed run insane projects like the one in the movie where they attempt to train super soldiers that have the ability to stop a goats heart with their mind. (it was a book before it was a movie) As an example, research the mind control experiment MK-ULTRA. The CIA kidnapped Americans and used them in mind control experiments.
Here's a little description of MK-ULTRA:
Project MKULTRA, or MK-ULTRA, was the code name for a covert, illegal CIA human research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. This official U.S. government program began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s, and it used U.S. and Canadian citizens as its test subjects.[1][2][3][4] The published evidence indicates that Project MKULTRA involved the use of many methodologies to manipulate individual mental states and alter brain function, including the surreptitious administration of drugs and other chemicals, sensory deprivation, isolation, and verbal and sexual abuse.
MK-ULTRA is not a conspiracy, its American history.


The wall of the Pentagon always leaves more questions than answers.
Why was there no wing damage?
How come those engines the size of a small house weighing tens of thousands of pounds left no impact wound?
Everyone knows that the nose of a jet is very fragile, so how was there a perfect circular hole punched into the wall about 4 or 5 walls deep? By walls, I mean buildings. (Take a look at how the Pentagon is structured) First responders do say that there were bodies recovered at the scene though which could have been pentagon employees or passengers.
Another interesting fact is that there was indeed luggage all over the lawn.
Eyewitnesses also say that there was a military jet in the area (which could have possibly launched a missile)
Government employees did take security camera footage from all the local gas stations that caught the impact.

There are just so many unanswered questions, and no-one in the 9-11 truth movement claims to know them all. We just won't ever find out what really happened without an independent investigation or an insider going public.

Inside job? Maybe. Cover up? Definitely.

Thank you for providing real discussion to the thread.

Yes, the movie was based off of truth. But the real issue is, are you going to believe everything that this guy says?

Why was there no wing damage? I already offered one reasonable explanation in which the plane was not flying perfectly level with the ground on impact but was actually flying at an angle. Another possibility is that a smaller plane actually flew into the building. I'm sure there was a lot of confusion that day and officials might have just assumed that Flight 77 was hijacked and therefore the culprit of hitting the pentagon. However, it's also possible that another smaller plane was used to hit the pentagon. Although, that's just hypothetical.

The engines wouldn't leave some independent impact wounds, they would be with the rest of the damage.

The rest of the jet carried through into the building causing damage further in. Something like a jet engine moving fast enough could easily punch through a building and leave behind a small hole.

My hypothesis: The jet aircraft hit the building tilted left ~45 degrees with the nose also tilted down at time of impact. Most of the impact would go into the ground which explains why the plane didn't penetrate more of the pentagon, and the tilt of the aircraft in relation to the ground is why the wings did not leave any marks (as one would have been aimed into the ground and the other would have been above the building).

Alternatively, a smaller plane was used and flown directly into the pentagon. No one would have needed to hijack such a plane and it would have been easy enough to just take off from the local airport and fly directly into the pentagon.

 

[whoever]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

The current war in the middle east could be seen as our do-over attempt to set things right in the middle east,

Thats what im talking about. Who are you to tell whats right? What would be "do it right" ? Something that seems right for an entire nation can be a crime for other nation. None in Iraq ever asked for american help and never will.
Imo thats whats wrong about the whole thing.
Each country should take care of its own people before going in another country to change how things are there.
Even USA being a 1st world country and an example for the international economy, there are still many things to concern with in USA like health care which would be a lot better than trying to convince Iraquean people that the american way of life is better than their own.

ps: ill edit the post lol.

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

The so called explosions that can be seen as the towers fall are bursts of air caused by the weight of the falling debris rapidly compressing the air within the building.

Very possible. Eye witnesses said that huge fireballs rushed down the elevator shafts. At some points in the video, windows are blown out 20-30 stories below but who knows, it still could have been pressure.

Engineers claim that there was a huge jump on the Richter scales before the towers fell and many minutes (maybe hours) after the planes hit. What caused them to jump we don't know. Just another unanswered question of September 11th. It could have been explosives planted in the basement to weaken the structure. Firefighters mentioned a 20 ton (Don't recall exact #) Vault door in the basement laying there crumpled up like tin foil. This was before the buildings collapsed of course, and when the firefighters were inside rescuing people. One man rescued another man who was in the basement who had all of his skin hanging off. The basement was around 80 stories below the plane collision I believe. All the firefighters agree that explosions were heard. (not pertaining to the plane impact)

I would say that it's likely that evidence of nanothermite could be found at the site whether or not it was used, I bet evidence of nanothermite could be found at most steel structure fires.

This question could easily be solved by simple tests, that is, if the government would actually grant us an independent investigation. haha

After completion please await the arrival of government agencies to arrest you for being a terrorist.

Steel begins to melt at (arguably, depends on the grade/type) 2700 degrees. The office fires + fuel averaged something like 1200 degrees. But, as I believe someone has brought up here, you don't need to reach the melting point to significantly damage the integrity.

I agree, but remember that rivers of molten steel were found, still in liquid form, 2 months after sept. 11th.

it's owner decided that enough lives had been lost that day and told the fireman to pull out and let it burn down.

Close, he said "Pull It". Many demolition squads argue that it is a popular term meaning detonate the explosives, otherwise; bring it down. Whether it was taken out of context or not, that's for you to decide.

But as for fact we know that Larry Silverstein bought the complex for 3.2 billion dollars. Around a month before September 11th, Larry insured the complex specifically for terrorism. In the end Larry's payout was around 7.2 billion dollars, which equals around 4 billion dollars profit. Whether it was a sinister insurance scam, inside job, or not,... Larry still made a lot of money.

Ahhh. Real debate.

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

The wall of the Pentagon always leaves more questions than answers.
Why was there no wing damage?
How come those engines the size of a small house weighing tens of thousands of pounds left no impact wound?
Everyone knows that the nose of a jet is very fragile, so how was there a perfect circular hole punched into the wall about 4 or 5 walls deep? By walls, I mean buildings. (Take a look at how the Pentagon is structured) First responders do say that there were bodies recovered at the scene though which could have been pentagon employees or passengers.
Another interesting fact is that there was indeed luggage all over the lawn.
Eyewitnesses also say that there was a military jet in the area (which could have possibly launched a missile)
Government employees did take security camera footage from all the local gas stations that caught the impact.

The plane hit the pentagon at an odd angle. Most of what the engines would have hit would have been damaged before they reached the building. The circular hole I mentioned in my post just before yours, it was caused by the fireball/debris that traveled through the building. The way the pentagon was constructed it was like a giant cheese grater to the plane (That comparison just horrified me), the support columns basically vaporized it.

As to the "military jet", a theory which is mentioned at all three crash sites based on witnesses of planes I believe? The plane that crashed in the field, a smallish white plane could be seen circling the area. Air Control had lost the planes signal in that area and asked the flyer of the plane, a private recreational craft, if they would investigate. The flier of the plane was later horrified to know that she was the center of one of these conspiracy theories.

Part of the reason we had such poor defenses during the attacks was because our air defense plans were outdated, or rather did not apply to attacks from within the country. They were coldwar-era plans that called for our fighters to defend us from our ocean borders. We only had something like four fighter jets ready for action at the time of the attacks, we really weren't prepared at all, and they all went out over the seas. When the plane was reported flying over DC "six miles from the whitehouse" the jet(s) scrambled back, but didn't get there in time to do anything more but see what happened.

I wouldn't wanted to have to be one of those few fighter pilots that day, possibly forced to take action against a commercial jet. While it could have possibly saved many lives, I'm glad no person had to do that.

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Close, he said "Pull It".

I was trying to remember what he said with that one, but couldn't. =p
I used to watch a show on discovery, or possibly history, about demolishing buildings/structure/whatnot. Not once did I hear the phrase, "Pull it", that I remember. A lot of other phrases, but that one never stuck out. Although that's more subjective. =p

I'd have to say this;
for the few times I've heard conspiracy theory believing people experienced with demolishing structures state that this is a term; I've heard other, more unbiased demolition experts (including the one in charge of the towers investigation) say that it's a load of bull.

Most importantly, if it was a term used within the demolition "society" to refer to calling for the demolition of a building, why would this guy use it? He's not experienced in demolition as far as I've been told. People make it sound like it's the demolition equivalent to "Timbeeeer" or "Fooourr", but I just don't see it.

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

As to the "military jet", a theory which is mentioned at all three crash sites based on witnesses of planes I believe? The plane that crashed in the field, a smallish white plane could be seen circling the area. Air Control had lost the planes signal in that area and asked the flyer of the plane, a private recreational craft, if they would investigate. The flier of the plane was later horrified to know that she was the center of one of these conspiracy theories.

I heard about that. The debris of the plane that crashed in shanksville PA (the field you are talking about) was scattered as far away as 4 miles from the main crash site. It is very likely that the plane was shot down to protect the white house. The government might have covered it up in an attempt to protect the pilot that was forced to shoot it down, or even lawsuits from grieving family members. Imagine the horror of finding out that the plane that our military shot down wasn't, in fact, hijacked at all. (That is not a fact, just an idea) In any case, I believe that we as Americans deserve the real answers.

Part of the reason we had such poor defenses during the attacks was because our air defense plans were outdated,....shortening quote...., but didn't get there in time to do anything more but see what happened.

Another question pertaining to this subject is why our military scheduled war games in Canada on the morning of Sept. 11th. If you research the amount of times we actually participate in war games as far away as Canada it is very rare if at all. We know that there are still good military men and woman that might even deny orders to do the right thing. If 9-11 was in fact an inside job of sorts, the planes wouldn't have been around to protect us. This could have been a way for criminal elements to prevent the real military from doing anything about it. Once again, this part is just an assumption.

This bit is off topic, but interesting none the less:
Today's iPhones (just one) have more processing power than our entire air defense's technology had put together in 1960-1965 or so.

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

I was trying to remember what he said with that one, but couldn't. =p
I used to watch a show on discovery, or possibly history, about demolishing buildings/structure/whatnot. Not once did I hear the phrase, "Pull it", that I remember. A lot of other phrases, but that one never stuck out. Although that's more subjective. =p

The exact term "Pull It" is not necessarily an industry standard. Pulling a building, does mean a controlled demolition, however.

Here are some examples, some of which predate 9-11 (if not all)

Date: January 9, 1996
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: City Building Inspector
SUBJECT: Demolition of Dangerous Building
City staff have contacted the property owner by phone to request that he
obtain a demolition permit and pull down and demolish the building,
however, the owner has demonstrated no desire to cooperate.
http://199.175.219.1/ctyclerk/cclerk/960116/a5.htm

Sept. 24, '98
Four executive members of the Atebubu youth association (AYA) have been arrested by the police
over the demolition of a building which was being rehabilitated for use as the office of the Atebubu town council.
Members of the association allegedly went on rampage and pulled down the building because, according to them "as a swish building, it was not fit to be used as a town council office."
http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=4018


The next house erected in Seneca was a concrete stone building, put up by Downing & Stewart;
the latter soon after selling to A. M. Smith. Downing & Smith sold to L. J. McGowan,
who finally pulled down the building and erected the substantial stone structure in which Hazard & Sons now do business.
http://www.kancoll.org/books/cutler/nemaha/nemaha-co-p4.html

The Gweru Synagogue complex was sold to a church, the KweKwe one sold to the Hindoo Community as a temple, I understand it has since been re-sold. The Kadoma Synagogue was also sold to a church last year who pulled down the building and I understand built a larger complex on the site.
http://www.zjc.org.il/showpage.php?pageid=261


‘When I lived at Lyddon House some twenty years ago, a very old cottage adjoining was pulled down.
The building was largely of rubble and one of the men engaged in the task of demolition, found embedded in a wall, the hoof of an ox shod with a miniature horse shoe
http://www.apotropaios.co.uk/dorset_survey.htm

: the President soon spread his Lodgings westward on their present site;
and the old Hospital buildings were not pulled down.

The quadrangle was given its present appearance little more than a hundred years ago. The north side was pulled down. The building was said to be in a dangerous state of decay,
but in fact the demolition was apparently carried out at the instigation
of a faction among the Fellows during the long vacation.



For those who are following along and do not know what we are talking about, Here is a 24 second video clip of the owner of the WTC talking about Pulling building 7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100

"we made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse."

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

I heard about that. The debris of the plane that crashed in shanksville PA (the field you are talking about) was scattered as far away as 4 miles from the main crash site..

That's actually one of my favorite examples of mismanagement of information being pressed as fact. When this crash first occurred, one of the reporters used Mapquest and used that distance in the report. Well, the path from the crash to Shanksville has to go around Indian lake and all that, debris doesn't. =p As the crow flies the actual distance from the crash site to Shanksville was something like one and a half miles, significantly closer. Also, I believe the so called debris was things like papers, which could have blown even further.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Edit --->

Pull down != Pull it =p.

That ones just so shaky to me, I don't see how anyone can argue much for it. It seems to me that it'd be legitimate that he'd say that, I might say it in the same situation. In my head I'd be going "Alright, enough is enough, it's just a building, I should just tell them to pull out of there and not risk their lives for things any more" and then go to conversation and go "Alright, pull it"

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Please watch this short video: (just try to bare 37 seconds of Bush speech. )

If you can, debunk what he is talking about. I am reading around looking as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I&feature=related

In the video:
Bush: Operatives were instructed to ensure that the explosives went off high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping. He then goes on to talk about Al Quida (sp?)

If this video is talking about 9-11, there is no mention of explosives in the official report.

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

That's actually one of my favorite examples of mismanagement of information being pressed as fact. When this crash first occurred, one of the reporters used Mapquest

I am aware of that, but the mapquest directions say 6-7 miles. In a direct line from the crash, the distance was 3-4 miles.

Pull down != Pull it =p.

That ones just so shaky to me, I don't see how anyone can argue much for it. It seems to me that it'd be legitimate that he'd say that, I might say it in the same situation.

I agree. Its definitely not proof. In fact, if I was in charge of an independent investigation of 9-11 I would not bring this subject up at all. It's just thought provoking at most.

 

[Sundoom]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Your all douchebags and assholes. I love how this thread clearly says "Moment of Silence" and yet all of you want to argue about 9/11 conspiracies - go make a different thread saying "A conspiracy or no"

For everyone who did not give condolences in this thread I give a big FUCK YOU AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF THIS THREAD - assholes...

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Sorry for all the videos, but watch a part of this one...

If you are busy, fast forward to 1:10, we have already discussed everything before that point.

at that 1:10 mark, Donald Rumsfeld says "Shot down the plane over Pennsylvania"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LJXoXpAHE

 

[woodycook]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Your all douchebags and assholes. I love how this thread clearly says "Moment of Silence" and yet all of you want to argue about 9/11 conspiracies - go make a different thread saying "A conspiracy or no"

For everyone who did not give condolences in this thread I give a big FUCK YOU AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF THIS THREAD - assholes...

I have already gave my condolences to all the victims of 9-11, including those innocent citizens killed in the middle east. I explained that by asking questions, we are doing the family members a favor.

A large percentage of those family members are asking questions themselves...

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Key to that speech would to be finding the rest of it, can't go on much without context. I'll look around. Also, I love the immediate link on that page. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0&feature=fvw

Did a little more researching, and he is talking about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed giving up information; Bush himself is saying nothing, it's a quote from Khalid, so the question is what does Khalid mean. Might it be a safe assumption to say that they are using the term "Explosive" simply to refer to the planes involved, as that's the purpose of the planes in their plan.

I don't believe that the "official reports" (Not that there is any such report that could be called the "official" report as far as I know) are 100% true, I'm just skeptical about both sides.

 

[DoubleA]

Re: 9/11 Moment of silence

Your all douchebags and assholes. I love how this thread clearly says "Moment of Silence" and yet all of you want to argue about 9/11 conspiracies - go make a different thread saying "A conspiracy or no"

For everyone who did not give condolences in this thread I give a big FUCK YOU AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF THIS THREAD - assholes...

Yeah, we had our moment of silence, on 9/11. I made sure to wake up early in the morning just so I could be awake at the time it happened. Remember, children should be seen, not heard, and grownups are talking.