9-11 was an inside job

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="Taxpaying_Acorn"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="CRS98"]

To #5, steel loses half of its strength at 648 ° C. Also don't bring back conspiracies, it'll just make you look stupid. Read this article for more information.

AHUGECAT

a) The fires weren't that hot

b) It would need to be reduced to 20% to make it collapse, not half.

- Why did BBC say steel melts at 800 C (almost 1500 F)?

- The fires were not hot anyways. The sooty smoke showed that the fire was starved for oxygen.

- The way the jet hit the South Tower shows the ST shouldn't have collapsed like that.

- The tower fell too fast for it "just to be weakened."

You... actually believed the cell phone calls? The Government must love its propaganda, it works pretty well.

You... actually believed the cell phone calls? The Government must love its propaganda, it works pretty well.

AHUGECAT

The government can't keep a secret if their life depended on it.  How do you expect something like this to be kept hidden?  Someone in the FBI would have leaked footage or files that proved that the government planned it all.

Also, i don't know what you mean by Larry Silverstein said "Pull it."  When did he say that, where, and why?
helium_flash

And with that... you best just stop right there because you're pushing the limits. Talking about conspiracies and so forth are okay. But when you walk on this ground, it could get touchy for some people. Just a heads up.Taxpaying_Acorn

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane. They lied about the Osama tapes, so I am sure they would not hesitate to lie about phone calls.

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

AHUGECAT

[QUOTE="Taxpaying_Acorn"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="Taxpaying_Acorn"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="CRS98"]

To #5, steel loses half of its strength at 648 ° C. Also don't bring back conspiracies, it'll just make you look stupid. Read this article for more information.

AHUGECAT

a) The fires weren't that hot

b) It would need to be reduced to 20% to make it collapse, not half.

- Why did BBC say steel melts at 800 C (almost 1500 F)?

- The fires were not hot anyways. The sooty smoke showed that the fire was starved for oxygen.

- The way the jet hit the South Tower shows the ST shouldn't have collapsed like that.

- The tower fell too fast for it "just to be weakened."

You... actually believed the cell phone calls? The Government must love its propaganda, it works pretty well.

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

quiglythegreat

With PicoCell technology, yes. But the aluminum alloy does not allow RF frequencies. Even if you used a window in the plane the plane is moving so fast each call would last 2, 3 seconds at the most.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

AHUGECAT

With PicoCell technology, yes. But the aluminum alloy does not allow RF frequencies. Even if you used a window in the plane the plane is moving so fast each call would last 2, 3 seconds at the most.

These stupid conspiracy theories are an insult to this country's intelligence. Sheesh, people. How the heck could you possibly believe that 9-11 was an inside job...
Dutch_Mix

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

quiglythegreat

With PicoCell technology, yes. But the aluminum alloy does not allow RF frequencies. Even if you used a window in the plane the plane is moving so fast each call would last 2, 3 seconds at the most.

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

AHUGECAT

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

quiglythegreat

With PicoCell technology, yes. But the aluminum alloy does not allow RF frequencies. Even if you used a window in the plane the plane is moving so fast each call would last 2, 3 seconds at the most.

These stupid conspiracy theories are an insult to this country's intelligence. Sheesh, people. How the heck could you possibly believe that 9-11 was an inside job...
Dutch_Mix

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

quiglythegreat

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be? It's not meant to be offensive, but it's just my opinion backed up with the fact you can't use a cell phone on a plane.

helium_flash

With PicoCell technology, yes. But the aluminum alloy does not allow RF frequencies. Even if you used a window in the plane the plane is moving so fast each call would last 2, 3 seconds at the most.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

quiglythegreat

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

[QUOTE="Dutch_Mix"]These stupid conspiracy theories are an insult to this country's intelligence. Sheesh, people. How the heck could you possibly believe that 9-11 was an inside job...
Taxpaying_Acorn

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

AHUGECAT

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

AHUGECAT

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

[QUOTE="Taxpaying_Acorn"][QUOTE="Dutch_Mix"]These stupid conspiracy theories are an insult to this country's intelligence. Sheesh, people. How the heck could you possibly believe that 9-11 was an inside job...
mark4091

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

Taxpaying_Acorn

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

AHUGECAT

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

Seriously...those calls were way too clear. It was like super quality...there is no way that would happen...nor were the terrorists so damn stupid.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

AHUGECAT

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

a55assin

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

Seriously...those calls were way too clear. It was like super quality...there is no way that would happen...nor were the terrorists so damn stupid.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

quiglythegreat

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

The guy in those videos looked NOTHING like Bin Laden.

[QUOTE="a55assin"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

quiglythegreat

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

Seriously...those calls were way too clear. It was like super quality...there is no way that would happen...nor were the terrorists so damn stupid.

[QUOTE="a55assin"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

quiglythegreat

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

Seriously...those calls were way too clear. It was like super quality...there is no way that would happen...nor were the terrorists so damn stupid.

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

Bunk .. bunk I say (to this thread).LiquidZ08

The guy in those videos looked NOTHING like Bin Laden.

a55assin

1. There is no debris on the Pentagon lawn. The lawn just happened to be almost 100% clean.
Even if the plane hadn't been a plane, but a missle, to use the conspiracy theorists favorite myth, there would have been a large enough explosion to scatter debris on the lawn. The Pentagon was built to withstand such an attack, and as such, little debris would have blown away. This does not prove that it was an inside job.

2. Lack of wing damage at the Pentagon.

The nice thing is that it only took 18 minutes for the attacked section to collapse. Few, if any, photographs were taken of the site before that time.

3. The Osama tapes are clearly not Osama, judging from context and how he looks.

Explain how someone looking different is proof that they aren't the same person.

4. The fire in the WTCs were not that hot, and were starved for oxygen. If they were hot enough to make the building collapse then people couldn't have jumped to their suicide (after all they should've burned).

5. If the fire didn't need to melt the steel, even the fire had heated the steel to 1022 F it still would not have been enough to make the tower collapse.

Four and five are together. The building had plenty of windows, and I'm fairly certain that the holes made by the planes weren't sealed back up magically, rendering four busted. As for five, it should go without saying that a Boeing 767, full of people, luggage, and jet fuel, has an enormous amount of kinetic energy, wiping out the majority of the steel beams where they crashed. Even if the heat from the burning jet fuel hadn't softened the metal (more on that later), the increased load on the remaining superstructure would have sent it tumbling.

The energy given off by the flames didn't have to melt the steel, yes. All it had to do was soften them. As energy is taken in by metal, the bonds between their ions begin to break down, making it more malleable. The flame did just that, and because of the decreased tensile strength of the beams, it wouldn't have taken much for the building to collapse. Case in point: water. Though water isn't a metal, it evaporates. Water doesn't need to boil to evaporate, though. All that has to be done is to maintain a level of heat and water vapor will be formed.

6. How did the South Tower collapse in perfect symmetry, when much of the jet fuel flew out of the side of the building?

Because the additional weight wouldn't have been swayed as easily by the wind or by the remaining superstructure at the crash zone, sending it down straight.

7. World Trade Center 7 collapsed - but why? And why did Larry Silverstein say "pull it" which means demolition?

Or the phrase "Pull it" meant for the firefighters in the building to get out of Dodge?

8. Motives: Iraqi War, Patriot Act, Oil, Drugs. Benefitters: USA, Israel.

Just because the motive is there doesn't mean that that is why these events occured.

AHUGECAT

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

a55assin

[QUOTE="a55assin"]

The guy in those videos looked NOTHING like Bin Laden.

quiglythegreat

Hey...that might be it. But do you know? Would it be so hard to place someone like that by the US gov't?...said to be the strongest super power in the world.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Maybe newer phones, but cell phones in 2001 couldn't be reached, much less at possibly 30,000 FT in the air.

quiglythegreat

Possibly.... even 8,000 FT in the air is too much. The Government DID use fake Osama tapes, so it is likely they used fake phone calls.

Ummm the person in the video is clearly not Bin Laden. His facial features are different, he's wearing a gold ring, he's right handed in that video (or perhaps he was just happening to write with his left hand? :lol:), and they just happened to find it in Afghanistan is a small secluded space... that's right - they said that they found the VHS tape in Afghanistan. I am not kidding.

And the planes were 8,000 feet because pilots were piloting them? It's not like the Muslim terrorists suddenly put it lower in 1 second flat.

I looked more into the phone call lies, and they didn't use cell phones but the passanger phones, such as Barbara Olsen. I am looking more into her story, and so far it seems like bull.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]1. There is no debris on the Pentagon lawn. The lawn just happened to be almost 100% clean.
Even if the plane hadn't been a plane, but a missle, to use the conspiracy theorists favorite myth, there would have been a large enough explosion to scatter debris on the lawn. The Pentagon was built to withstand such an attack, and as such, little debris would have blown away. This does not prove that it was an inside job.

2. Lack of wing damage at the Pentagon.

The nice thing is that it only took 18 minutes for the attacked section to collapse. Few, if any, photographs were taken of the site before that time.

3. The Osama tapes are clearly not Osama, judging from context and how he looks.

Explain how someone looking different is proof that they aren't the same person.

4. The fire in the WTCs were not that hot, and were starved for oxygen. If they were hot enough to make the building collapse then people couldn't have jumped to their suicide (after all they should've burned).

5. If the fire didn't need to melt the steel, even the fire had heated the steel to 1022 F it still would not have been enough to make the tower collapse.

Four and five are together. The building had plenty of windows, and I'm fairly certain that the holes made by the planes weren't sealed back up magically, rendering four busted. As for five, it should go without saying that a Boeing 767, full of people, luggage, and jet fuel, has an enormous amount of kinetic energy, wiping out the majority of the steel beams where they crashed. Even if the heat from the burning jet fuel hadn't softened the metal (more on that later), the increased load on the remaining superstructure would have sent it tumbling.

The energy given off by the flames didn't have to melt the steel, yes. All it had to do was soften them. As energy is taken in by metal, the bonds between their ions begin to break down, making it more malleable. The flame did just that, and because of the decreased tensile strength of the beams, it wouldn't have taken much for the building to collapse. Case in point: water. Though water isn't a metal, it evaporates. Water doesn't need to boil to evaporate, though. All that has to be done is to maintain a level of heat and water vapor will be formed.

6. How did the South Tower collapse in perfect symmetry, when much of the jet fuel flew out of the side of the building?

Because the additional weight wouldn't have been swayed as easily by the wind or by the remaining superstructure at the crash zone, sending it down straight.

7. World Trade Center 7 collapsed - but why? And why did Larry Silverstein say "pull it" which means demolition?

Or the phrase "Pull it" meant for the firefighters in the building to get out of Dodge?

8. Motives: Iraqi War, Patriot Act, Oil, Drugs. Benefitters: USA, Israel.

Just because the motive is there doesn't mean that that is why these events occured.

tycoonmike

[QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

quiglythegreat

[QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

quiglythegreat

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

Edit: This is how the call should have been...if it were real. "OMG, HELP me GOD..there are fudging terrorists on the fudging plane! We are all going to die..they r going to crash!!! omfg!

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]1. There is no debris on the Pentagon lawn. The lawn just happened to be almost 100% clean.
Even if the plane hadn't been a plane, but a missle, to use the conspiracy theorists favorite myth, there would have been a large enough explosion to scatter debris on the lawn. The Pentagon was built to withstand such an attack, and as such, little debris would have blown away. This does not prove that it was an inside job.

2. Lack of wing damage at the Pentagon.

The nice thing is that it only took 18 minutes for the attacked section to collapse. Few, if any, photographs were taken of the site before that time.

3. The Osama tapes are clearly not Osama, judging from context and how he looks.

Explain how someone looking different is proof that they aren't the same person.

4. The fire in the WTCs were not that hot, and were starved for oxygen. If they were hot enough to make the building collapse then people couldn't have jumped to their suicide (after all they should've burned).

5. If the fire didn't need to melt the steel, even the fire had heated the steel to 1022 F it still would not have been enough to make the tower collapse.

Four and five are together. The building had plenty of windows, and I'm fairly certain that the holes made by the planes weren't sealed back up magically, rendering four busted. As for five, it should go without saying that a Boeing 767, full of people, luggage, and jet fuel, has an enormous amount of kinetic energy, wiping out the majority of the steel beams where they crashed. Even if the heat from the burning jet fuel hadn't softened the metal (more on that later), the increased load on the remaining superstructure would have sent it tumbling.

The energy given off by the flames didn't have to melt the steel, yes. All it had to do was soften them. As energy is taken in by metal, the bonds between their ions begin to break down, making it more malleable. The flame did just that, and because of the decreased tensile strength of the beams, it wouldn't have taken much for the building to collapse. Case in point: water. Though water isn't a metal, it evaporates. Water doesn't need to boil to evaporate, though. All that has to be done is to maintain a level of heat and water vapor will be formed.

6. How did the South Tower collapse in perfect symmetry, when much of the jet fuel flew out of the side of the building?

Because the additional weight wouldn't have been swayed as easily by the wind or by the remaining superstructure at the crash zone, sending it down straight.

7. World Trade Center 7 collapsed - but why? And why did Larry Silverstein say "pull it" which means demolition?

Or the phrase "Pull it" meant for the firefighters in the building to get out of Dodge?

8. Motives: Iraqi War, Patriot Act, Oil, Drugs. Benefitters: USA, Israel.

Just because the motive is there doesn't mean that that is why these events occured.

tycoonmike

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

a55assin

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

a55assin

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

Edit: This is how the call should have been...if it were real. "OMG, HELP me GOD..there are fudging terrorists on the fudging plane! We are all going to die..they r going to crash!!! omfg!

[QUOTE="a55assin"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

Taxpaying_Acorn

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

Exactly..if she knew that she was going to die...what would it matter...was she the only person there to think of such a thing? how stupid is that. She wasn't panicking...she used a steady voice describing everything on the plane...who the **** was she? a CIA agent?

[QUOTE="a55assin"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

joetira

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

Edit: This is how the call should have been...if it were real. "OMG, HELP me GOD..there are fudging terrorists on the fudging plane! We are all going to die..they r going to crash!!! omfg!

That's why I said "I think".

And...if they had no guns...the whole story doesn't make sense. Why would a couple of terrorists hold off a whole plane of passangers?

[QUOTE="joetira"][QUOTE="a55assin"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

a55assin

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

Edit: This is how the call should have been...if it were real. "OMG, HELP me GOD..there are fudging terrorists on the fudging plane! We are all going to die..they r going to crash!!! omfg!

That's why I said "I think".

And...if they had no guns...the whole story doesn't make sense. Why would a couple of terrorists hold off a whole plane of passangers?

[QUOTE="joetira"][QUOTE="a55assin"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="a55assin"]

Have you heard the calls? It's not hard to find them a little bit strange. It even sounds fake...like on of those kidnap calls.

a55assin

...actually, yes.

And one other little thing. Why only one? A female...

Terrorists with guns...I think there were guns...were on the plane, would a lone female passanger really make that call..how brave would she have to be...really.

Edit: This is how the call should have been...if it were real. "OMG, HELP me GOD..there are fudging terrorists on the fudging plane! We are all going to die..they r going to crash!!! omfg!

That's why I said "I think".

And...if they had no guns...the whole story doesn't make sense. Why would a couple of terrorists hold off a whole plane of passangers?

[QUOTE="Taxpaying_Acorn"] And with that... you best just stop right there because you're pushing the limits. Talking about conspiracies and so forth are okay. But when you walk on this ground, it could get touchy for some people. Just a heads up.AHUGECAT

Well considering it's impossible to use cell phones on a moving plane... what else would the Governments lie be?

7. World Trade Center 7 collapsed - but why?
AHUGECAT