By the way, In the 5 seconds it took to review your sham article, safe to say, its a pos. "The fires MAY have burned to 1500C" Bullshit. The NIST study said the fires may have burned as hot as 1000C for the first 15 min. Then dissipated to no hotter than 500C for the remainder. But what the hell does the NIST know compared to 'channel4news'. "The 767 was loaded with 24,000 gallons of jet fuel" Bullshit. Try reading the start of the thread. None of the hijacked aircraft were chartered on international flights. They were domestic hops - 10,000 gallons tops. "It's likely that the impact damaged columns at the core of the building too â preventing people from escaping down stairwells" Which is why tens of people from floors above escaped safely through the impact zone and lived!! Its a miracle!!! They must have floated down!! "The 767's hit in just the right place to bring the towers down" Bullshit. The towers were designed to take the kinetic impact and ensuing fire of a heavier aircraft. The engineers even postulated this 'weak grid' structure could survive 'multiple' jet liner impacts. But what the fuck do the engineers know. Again, this is Channel4 news were talking about here!!! "The floors of the towers spanned 40,000 square feet, yet fire chiefs argue that it's impossible to fight a fire in an open plan floor space of half that square footage." Ooooooooooo!! The invincible 100 story towering inferno argument!!! Problem is, no one floor was engulfed in flames - or even close. Fire crews radioed in for ONLY TWO lines to put out the rapidly dissipating fire. Towering inferno = two lines to put out. You're a brainwashed sheep, bronks. Congratulations.
Never argue with a stupid moron. He will eventually beat you down to his level of stupid miserable existence. You should read up on research that has explicitly shown that neo-commies are mentally unbalanced psychotics. They love to be told what to do and what to think. They think in black and white. They are usually religious fundmentalists.
Thanks for the link. Indeed, 'the Bankers' own the world. Its terrifying. The more one digs, the more deprave it becomes. Ever watch Alex Jones' expose of bohemian Grove? The northern cal retreat for our nations 'Christian conservative leaders' where they give mock human sacrifices to the Canaanite God Molach? Totally fucked. These people are absolute shitbags.
Am I the only one here who believes that a little bit of "information" or "knowledge" can be a dangerous thing? I think that you guys are speaking with a bit too much authority about a topic that is laced with propaganda and about which none of us here really knows enough of the facts. And I think that few of you here actually understand the science behind what you are saying. In this environment, the person to be most wary of is the one who appears the most confident. Since I am out of my depth here, I will leave you experts to hammer out the fine details. I'm not suggesting that there are not questions to be asked, but some of you guys are over the top in my opinion.
there are way too many inconsistencies..from rummy slippin' and sayin' that flight 93 was brought down by a missile to that fuselage of the supposed flight 175 with no passengers windows and modified to da bone with military gadgets, and ehmm not to mention wtc7 collapsin' in sympathy with the 2 towers... the list goes on and on and on... I think we deserve some answers, that's da least.
time to wake up and educate yourself... this shit is just getting way to easy to spot. your first lesson is : go watch the detonation charges climb the wtc7 bldg.
Again, I'm not suggesting that I know more than anyone else here. If anything, I know less about the details. However, I'm suggesting that the knowledge-to-confidence ratio seems a bit low in this thread.
I am not aware of all of the details, but I understand that Flight 175 departed from Boston and was supposed to go to Los Angeles. The distance between Boston and Los Angeles is almost as far as from Boston to Portugal. I don't think that qualifies as a "hop." Why are you apparently engaging in the same type of misinformation as those who you are pointing your finger at? I am not looking to engage in a debate on a matter about which I am fairly uninformed, but why are you embellishing?
I may be over the top with my suggestions that there are seeds in this that have the potential to catalyze some big changes in six years. Just mark my words. But the evidence stands by itself...er, at least till it falls down inexplicably in a haze of dust. JohnnyK