this is a response to JQP from another thread that is more relevant here...
>>The primary open issues revolve around the towers that fell that weren't hit.<<
there are many open issues there, on that we can agree.
>>The BS I was talking about was about the main towers that were hit. A lot of people don't understand why they fell the way they did but the design of those buildings made it fairly predictable.<<
i disagree based on my current understanding, but i'm open to any actual evidence you might put forward. the top portion of the building looks to have been vaporized almost immediately.
you can see the earth shaking explosion about 8 seconds before the buildings came down.
youtube.com
this video is compelling that explosions brought down the building, not a pile drive top portion of the building...
youtube.com
not the explosions are coming from the corner column - this is not due to some kind of pressure wave as the glass would blow out long before the corner columns would blow out.
this visual evidence is consistent with a cutter charge being attached to the support - note the smoke continues to eject from the beam as the building falls.
youtube.com
what is the explanation for this?
not to mention the inexplicable molten steel (even the government investigators have to lie to try and provide cover
for this physical impossibility given the official story):
watch him lie here to try and deflect from admitting the impossibility:
youtube.com
>>Even knowing why they fell how they did I am still somewhat surprised at how little damage was done to the surrounding buildings.<<
how is that they fell? how did that tonnage of cement and steel vaporize like that? how did the steel melt? what was the massive explosion that shook the earth about 8 seconds before the building came down?
>>There was no way the twin towers were going to fall over, but they sure made a nice neat pile.<<
as i pointed out before, one of the top portions of one of the buildings tilted severely at the very beginning of its motion. if the building below it had any ability to apply an upward force, one would expect the top portion to keep rolling and fall off the building.
>>I have no trouble believing that our government would do something that immoral/unethical, especially with Cheney in charge.<<
the gulf of tonkin was an admitted false flag even and 58k americans died - many civilians that were drafted into the military.
this has all been done before.
>>Bush was leader in name only and NOT the guy in charge. That idiot couldn't even pronounce "nuclear" correctly. He was just a puppet because Cheney was unelectable (for some pretty obvious reasons). Cheney desperately wanted to invade Iraq (this has been documented) because it would be highly profitable for Halliburton, a company he was beholden to. Halliburton did indeed make a killing on the war. Remember the "no bid" contracts awarded to Haliburton?<<
ok, so motive has been established in your mind.
>>I figure it could have gone down like this. The administration knew about the plan in advance and decided to take advantage of it. The explosives were planted ahead of time as a backup. When it became obvious that there would not be enough damage to start the desired war, the explosives were utilized.
If those terrorists had only known just how badly they were being used, by both sides...<<
i'm just following the evidence here. i do not know it all, so i don't even know some of the paths to follow.
we can speculate all day about what could have happened, but what we really need is an honest investigation.
something neither the bush administration, nor the obama administration nor congress has any will to allow happen.
again, contrary to all investigative protocol. |
