Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

250+ 9/11 Smoking Guns

Options
13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    Diogenes wrote: »
    It must be awful living in your live in baseless fear and paranoia.

    Yes, and ignorance is bliss.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Kernel wrote: »
    Yes, and ignorance is bliss.

    pithy, and utterly irrelevant, you've not shown how I'm unaware of anything, rigor meanwhile hasn't offered any evidence that London will be "ringed in steel", I'm left as baffled as ever.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    Diogenes wrote: »
    pithy, and utterly irrelevant, you've not shown how I'm unaware of anything, rigor meanwhile hasn't offered any evidence that London will be "ringed in steel", I'm left as baffled as ever.

    http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/automatic_number_plate_recognition/

    see feb 03 2006. Also a lot of information on the implementation of this technology. Welcome to the police state.


    Here was the testing if the process in Liverpool. Automatic Number Plate Recognition, also used at petrol stations in england, every car number plate is read, put through a computer and validated before the pumps are turned on. No wonder the copying of number plates is rampant!

    http://mp.useconnect.co.uk/html/news/news/march/kh08-03a-cars.htm

    As for Dublin, anyone on the malahide road will have seen all the camera positions in place, also the M1 to newry is littered with camera positions, awaiting implementation. I luckily dont be around other parts of dublin, but I would imagine the same thing is happening on all major routes into and out of the city, eg n7,n9, and so on.

    http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/02/08/minister-for-justice-ducks-questions-on-number-plate-surveillance-scheme/

    I assume this is alright, if not, what have you to hide????????????


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/automatic_number_plate_recognition/

    see feb 03 2006. Also a lot of information on the implementation of this technology. Welcome to the police state.

    Here was the testing if the process in Liverpool. Automatic Number Plate Recognition, also used at petrol stations in england, every car number plate is read, put through a computer and validated before the pumps are turned on. No wonder the copying of number plates is rampant!

    http://mp.useconnect.co.uk/html/news/news/march/kh08-03a-cars.htm

    UK have been scanning license plates for years. Why would the average person care? Has someone been falsely accused of something using this technology?
    As for Dublin, anyone on the malahide road will have seen all the camera positions in place, also the M1 to newry is littered with camera positions, awaiting implementation. I luckily dont be around other parts of dublin, but I would imagine the same thing is happening on all major routes into and out of the city, eg n7,n9, and so on.

    http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/02/08/minister-for-justice-ducks-questions-on-number-plate-surveillance-scheme/

    I assume this is alright, if not, what have you to hide????????????

    There are traffic cameras on all the routes around Dublin. It's for helping with the traffic... luckily.

    Why would introducing this automatic number plate reading system to catch people in stolen cars and with no tax/insurance be a bad thing? Why would I care if the government knew I travelled from point A to point B? My mobile phone could tell them that already.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    meglome wrote: »
    UK have been scanning license plates for years. Why would the average person care? Has someone been falsely accused of something using this technology?



    There are traffic cameras on all the routes around Dublin. It's for helping with the traffic... luckily.

    Why would introducing this automatic number plate reading system to catch people in stolen cars and with no tax/insurance be a bad thing? Why would I care if the government knew I travelled from point A to point B? My mobile phone could tell them that already.


    So I have proved my original point, and yet another attack is launched. If you do not care for your privacy then you will get a serious wake up call in the future. As for cameras helping traffic??????? There is a thing called infrastructure investment, I believe that helps traffic flow.

    As for the UK there have been numerous cases of mistaken identity, people have been arrested and locked up until they could prove that they were not at the given place.

    Let me ask you a question, would you let cameras inside you own house?, given that it may be robbed some day and that person may be caught on camera.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    So I have proved my original point, and yet another attack is launched.

    I don't think you have.
    If you do not care for your privacy then you will get a serious wake up call in the future. As for cameras helping traffic??????? There is a thing called infrastructure investment, I believe that helps traffic flow.

    And when you cannot build any more roads?

    The congestion charge eases traffic flow. How do you suggest it is enforced? Toll booths on every road in central london? You've yet to prove anything sinister about it.
    As for the UK there have been numerous cases of mistaken identity, people have been arrested and locked up until they could prove that they were not at the given place.

    Evidence? Links?

    Let me ask you a question, would you let cameras inside you own house?, given that it may be robbed some day and that person may be caught on camera.

    Rigor thats what we call a strawman argument. No one is suggesting that this happen.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    Diogenes wrote: »
    I don't think you have.

    Yes I have. You will find that within a year this will be in place.
    Diogenes wrote: »
    And when you cannot build any more roads?

    Public transport. If the public had a decent transport network, cars would not be required.
    Diogenes wrote: »
    The congestion charge eases traffic flow. How do you suggest it is enforced? Toll booths on every road in central london? You've yet to prove anything sinister about it.

    Your right, they ease traffic flow. Just as an increase in any product will reduce useage. (unless we are talking about handbags where and increase in price seems to stimulate demand.) As for sinister, as I said if you pay the man on demand, you will never feel his rath. A bit like the mafia asking for protection money, pay up and you are protected.

    Diogenes wrote: »

    Evidence? Links?

    I know of a number of personal cases, however as every expressed opinion must be backed up by a media reference I will have a look around.[/quote]
    Diogenes wrote: »


    Rigor thats what we call a strawman argument. No one is suggesting that this happen.

    Rigor knows exactly what a strawman argument is. Look at the threat of terrorists.

    As for strawman in the law as opposed to media, you might want to look into the capital letter spelling of your name on official documents such as passports etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭MCMLXXXIII


    jessop1 wrote: »
    how convenient it all was.
    meglome wrote: »
    Yup it was reasonably convenient alright. Does that prove something or just raise some suspicion?
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I don't think the thousands of people who died on the day found it particularly convenient. Leaving that aside, I refer you to bonkey's "puddle" analogy above.
    Kernel wrote: »
    Mere thousands of people are inconsequential to the NWO or the US government (if you don't believe in a NWO). Millions have died to forge the world as they want it.

    Of course it raises a lot of suspicion, and we need to realize that suspicion is as good as it's going to get for a LONG time. The US government and others would never let that leak.

    As for the thousands of people...it is no good at all. However, the attack was said to be an "Attack on America." I don't think the WTC was an icon. If the attack was on american identity, monuments such as the statue of liberty would have been destroyed. As tall as the WTC was, destroying Merrill Lynch HQ didn't affect the financial market any more than a regular war would have. Back to the people that died...this was supposed to be a carefully planned event, with years in the making. I have a feeling that if these people were trying to do as much damage as possible, they would have waited until AFTER people came to work that morning. An average of 50,000 people worked there. By the time you subtract the amount of people that died on the planes, only about 1,500 people died, which would be 3% of the working population. That doesn't make very much of a statement. Also, I think they would have crazhed in to an occupied part of the Pentagon. I find it strange how the "plane" hit right in the middle of the area being rennovated and then vaporize.

    Those lives were a small price to pay for the US government, especially now that more people have died in Iraq fighting about it than the amount that died on 9/11 during the actual event.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    MCMLXXXIII wrote: »
    I find it strange how the "plane" hit right in the middle of the area being rennovated and then vaporize.

    Ah jesus we've said this a dozen times in here the plane didn't vaporise. There were bit of it lying all around. Hundreds of people saw a plane, it was a ****ing plane.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Yes I have. You will find that within a year this will be in place.

    You still haven't explained what "this" actually is. What is this ring of steel?

    Public transport. If the public had a decent transport network, cars would not be required.

    London has got a decent public transport system, the congestion charge has gotten cars off the road, what's your objection to it?
    Your right, they ease traffic flow. Just as an increase in any product will reduce useage. (unless we are talking about handbags where and increase in price seems to stimulate demand.) As for sinister, as I said if you pay the man on demand, you will never feel his rath. A bit like the mafia asking for protection money, pay up and you are protected.

    Um, what?

    I know of a number of personal cases, however as every expressed opinion must be backed up by a media reference I will have a look around.

    I wait with baited breath.
    Rigor knows exactly what a strawman argument is. Look at the threat of terrorists.

    Um, what, are you suggesting muslim extremists don't exist...
    As for strawman in the law as opposed to media, you might want to look into the capital letter spelling of your name on official documents such as passports etc.

    Again, er what are you blathering on about?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    Diogenes wrote: »
    You still haven't explained what "this" actually is. What is this ring of steel?

    A total surveillance network. I think the links provided would give an adequate insight.
    Diogenes wrote: »
    London has got a decent public transport system, the congestion charge has gotten cars off the road, what's your objection to it?

    Invasion of privacy.

    Diogenes wrote: »
    Um, what, are you suggesting muslim extremists don't exist...

    What, if foreign troops go rampaging around you country killing and raping, would you not make a stand. Americans should introduce democracy at home before they attack others.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    MCMLXXXIII wrote: »
    Of course it raises a lot of suspicion, and we need to realize that suspicion is as good as it's going to get for a LONG time. The US government and others would never let that leak.

    As for the thousands of people...it is no good at all. However, the attack was said to be an "Attack on America." I don't think the WTC was an icon. If the attack was on american identity, monuments such as the statue of liberty would have been destroyed. As tall as the WTC was, destroying Merrill Lynch HQ didn't affect the financial market any more than a regular war would have. Back to the people that died...this was supposed to be a carefully planned event, with years in the making. I have a feeling that if these people were trying to do as much damage as possible, they would have waited until AFTER people came to work that morning. An average of 50,000 people worked there. By the time you subtract the amount of people that died on the planes, only about 1,500 people died, which would be 3% of the working population. That doesn't make very much of a statement. Also, I think they would have crazhed in to an occupied part of the Pentagon. I find it strange how the "plane" hit right in the middle of the area being rennovated and then vaporize.

    Those lives were a small price to pay for the US government, especially now that more people have died in Iraq fighting about it than the amount that died on 9/11 during the actual event.

    The New York skyline is icon. The most noticable part of the skyline was the Twin Towers. It was the perfect target for attack. Although the Statue of Liberty is more iconic, it's destruction wouldnt' have nearly the same effect as destroying the towers.

    And the timing is more to do with when the planes could be hijacked and not when would be the time to kill most people. The object of terrorism is to create a state of fear, not to just kill people. The body count means nothing in the grand scheme of things, where the terrorists are concerned. Their ideologies are much more important.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭Offalycool


    Nobody has given an official satisfactory explanation of the almost symmetrical collapse of World Trade centre seven, five hours after the attacks. The photo and video evidence does not demonstrate fires that could be responsible. Other WTC structure such as tower six received more direct damage from fire and falling material and it did not symmetrical collapse, indeed it had to be pulled down by clean up operations . I don't believe anybody who holds the official "Islamic terrorist conspiricy" can explain this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    A total surveillance network. I think the links provided would give an adequate insight.

    They were pure speculation.
    Invasion of privacy.

    And how do you expect that the congestion charge is collected instead?

    What, if foreign troops go rampaging around you country killing and raping, would you not make a stand. Americans should introduce democracy at home before they attack others.

    So you believe that the sept 11th, 7/7, bali and madrid bombings were carried out by Muslim extremists?

    he photo and video evidence does not demonstrate fires that could be responsible. Other WTC structure such as tower six received more direct damage from fire and falling material and it did not symmetrical collapse, indeed it had to be pulled down by clean up operations . I don't believe anybody who holds the official "Islamic terrorist conspiricy" can explain this.

    Offaly search the forum, we've been through all this already you're throughly wrong on all of the above.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭Offalycool


    Dio.. I assume you are talking about this thread here? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055187627&highlight=WTC+7&page=4


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Offalycool wrote: »
    Dio.. I assume you are talking about this thread here? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055187627&highlight=WTC+7&page=4

    I was thinking more like the
    megamerge thread, thousands of posts in that, start about page 14 is my bet, all aspects of 911 conspiracy theories discussed.

    WTC7 was hit by massive amounts of masonry, had sustained uncontrolled fires raging in it for hours.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    Diogenes wrote: »
    WTC7 was hit by massive amounts of masonry, had sustained uncontrolled fires raging in it for hours.

    Can you prove that?


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Kernel wrote: »
    Can you prove that?

    I believe it's you with something to prove, us sceptics seem to mostly believe the official line.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Kernel wrote: »
    Can you prove that?
    Knock yourself out.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Kernel wrote: »
    Can you prove that?

    There is photographic evidence (as Oscar pointed out) that the building was engulfed with flames, and badly damaged, there is countless testimony from firemen who reported that it was clear that the building was coming down.

    Here's a fun game Kernel it's been 7 years, and no one in the truth movement has come up with an adequate alternative theory for how WTC 7 came down. Please dont mention Jowenko, who has slunk below the radar and refused to explain how the WTC 7 went down, or expanded on why (according to him it was the documents, making it the most complicated shredding operation in history).

    Offaly the largest building CT in history was no where near as large as the WTC 7. It took dozens of people months, to work on a building (completely empty and stripped bare) to cut the supporting columns, and lay the charges.

    Offaly can you explain how for the first time in history a building full of people was prepped for demolition without the knowledge of the occupants.

    You claim that no one in the official "Islamic terrorist conspiricy" can explain the collaspe of WTC 7. If you read the thread I linked to, I think you'll find you are very wrong. However I defy you to find a conspiracy theorist who has a (credible) working hypothesis of the why and how the WTC 7 was "CT'd"...

    But hey your record here is batting nought for noughr, so feel free to prove me wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 30 Eeb


    There is no photographic evidence I'm aware of that shows the building engulfed with flames.
    What's your explanation for how it collapsed and what authorities endorse it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    There's no photos of it being an inside job, yet you believe that, no problem.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 30 Eeb


    You have no idea what I believe because I never told you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    good comeback :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Eeb wrote: »
    There is no photographic evidence I'm aware of that shows the building engulfed with flames.

    Really would you like some youtube video that begs to differ?

    or if you need a photo

    ats27400_WTC7b03.jpg
    What's your explanation for how it collapsed and what authorities endorse it?

    Hey don't take my word for it, are you accusing the following firefighters and paramedics of being liars?
    When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories. –FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers

    We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca

    ...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

    I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that.

    All morning I was watching 7 World Trade burn, which we couldn't do anything about because it was so much chaos looking for missing members. –Firefighter Marcel Klaes

    The concern there again, it was later in the afternoon, 2, 2:30, like I said. The fear then was Seven. Seven was free burning. Search had been made of 7 already from what they said so they had us back up to that point where we were waiting for 7 to come down to operate from the north back down. –Captain Robert Sohmer

    Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.

    At this point Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down. –Firefighter Vincent Massa

    Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable. –PAPD P.O. Edward McQuade

    At Vesey St. and West St., I could see that 7 WTC was ablaze and damaged, along with other buildings. –M. DeFilippis, PAPD P.O.

    [Note: the fires in 7 were probably not mainly due to damage from the south tower, but from the north.]
    So yeah then we just stayed on Vesey until building Seven came down. There was nothing we could do. The flames were coming out of every window of that building from the explosion of the south tower. So then building Seven came down. When that started coming down you heard that pancaking sound again everyone jumped up and starts.

    Q: Why was building Seven on fire? Was that flaming debris from tower two, from tower two that fell onto that building and lit it on fire?

    A: Correct. Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of tower two [sic: he probably means tower one] in building Seven and the corners of the building missing and whatnot. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block. –Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy
    http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...IC/9110413.PDF

    "And there's so little they can do to try to fight the fires in these buildings, because the fires are so massive. And so much of the buildings continues to fall into the street. When you're down there, Dan, you hear smaller secondary explosions going off every 15 or 20 minutes, and so it's an extremely dangerous place to be." –CBS-TV News Reporter Vince DeMentri

    Well, they said that's (7) fully involved at this time. This was a fully involved building. I said, all right, they're not coming for us for a while. Now you're trapped in this rubble, and you're trying to get a grasp of an idea of what's going on there. I heard on the handy talky that we are now fighting a 40-story building fully involved.

    ...And 7 World Trade was burning up at the time. We could see it. ... the fire at 7 World Trade was working its way from the front of the building northbound to the back of the building. There was no way there could be water put on it, because there was no water in the area. –Firefighter Eugene Kelty Jr.

    The time was approximately 11a.m. Both of the WTC towers were collapsed and the streets were covered with debris. Building #7 was still standing but burning. ...We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside. –PAPD P.O. William Connors

    "There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker." We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse. –Paramedic Louis Cook

    Building 7 fire makes rescuer of NT stairwell victim’s route impassable (just before collapse):
    I remember it was bad and I'm going to get to a point where we came back that way on the way up. We couldn't even go that way, that's how bad the fire was, but by the time I was coming back it was rolling, more than a couple of floors, just fully involved, rolling.

    ...So now it's us 4 and we are walking towards it and I remember it would have at one point been an easier path to go towards our right, but being building 7 -- that must have been building 7 I'm guessing with that fire, we decided to stay away from that because things were just crackling, falling and whatnot.

    ...He had called me and said “Hey Jerry don’t try and get back out the way you went in which was big heads up move because he said that building was rolling on top of the building that we were passing. That building was on fire and likely to collapse more too. –Firefighter Gerard Suden

    I remember Chief Hayden saying to me, "We have a six-story building over there, a seven-story building, fully involved." At that time he said, "7 has got fire on several floors." He said, "We've got a ten-story over there, another ten-story over there, a six-story over there, a 13-story over there." He just looked at me and said, "**** 'em all. Let 'em burn." He said, "Just tell the guys to keep looking for guys. Just keep looking for the brothers. We've got people trapped. We've got to get them out." –Lieutenant William Ryan

    I walked around the building to get back to the command post and that's when they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down. ...They had three floors of fire on three separate floors, probably 10, 11 and 15 it looked like, just burning merrily. It was pretty amazing, you know, it's the afternoon in lower Manhattan, a major high-rise is burning, and they said 'we know.' –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy

    All taken from here


    So are all these firefighters liars Eeb?

    In fact anyone claiming that no one can counter the "truth movement" on WTC7 should take a look at Mark Robert's comprehensive and through dismantling of the lies surrounding WTC 7 and pretty much all conspiraloonary bollocks at his site here


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 30 Eeb


    Firstly, there are no flames in that photograph. The claim that there is photographic evidence that the building was "engulfed with flames" is not backed up by that photograph or any others I have seen. There are photos that show raging fires on two or three floors and that is all I have seen.
    Secondly, I called nobody a liar and I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't level such accusations at me.
    Lastly, your answer to my question wasn't an answer to my question.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Eeb wrote: »
    Firstly, there are no flames in that photograph. The claim that there is photographic evidence that the building was "engulfed with flames" is not backed up by that photograph or any others I have seen.

    There is smoke billowing from every floor in the building.
    There are photos that show raging fires on two or three floors and that is all I have seen.

    Possibly because the smoke hides the fire?
    Secondly, I called nobody a liar and I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't level such accusations at me.

    Well examine the testimony there are dozens of firefighters saying the building was engulfed by flames. Are they lying?
    Lastly, your answer to my question wasn't an answer to my question.

    The building suffered massive structural damage from falling debris from the twin towers. Coupled with the fact that it had massive uncontrolled fires raging inside for over five hours. Thats why it collapsed.

    Tell me, why do you think it collapsed?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 30 Eeb


    I can see smoke in that photograph. I have seen no photos that show the building engulfed in flames and I don't think you have either.
    A lot of people clearly say the building was on burning badly, I didn't question that and I don't call them liars.
    As for what brought the building down - clearly there are two possibilities. Either you're right and it fell symmetrically in 7 seconds because of damage sustained by the falling masonry and fires, or Danny Jowenko is right and it was brought down by a controlled demolition.
    An independent investigation that considers both possibilities should get closer to what happened. You wouldn't have a problem with that would you?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Eeb wrote: »
    I can see smoke in that photograph. I have seen no photos that show the building engulfed in flames and I don't think you have either.

    I have, otherwise what is causing all that smoke?
    A lot of people clearly say the building was on burning badly, I didn't question that and I don't call them liars.

    So you admit that dozens of firefighters support my assetion.
    As for what brought the building down - clearly there are two possibilities. Either you're right and it fell symmetrically in 7 seconds

    It did neither of those things.
    because of damage sustained by the falling masonry and fires, or Danny Jowenko is right and it was brought down by a controlled demolition.
    An independent investigation that considers both possibilities should get closer to what happened. You wouldn't have a problem with that would you?

    I don't which is why I wait for the NISTs report on the matter.

    Or do you not think the NIST is independent enough?

    Tell me, who do you think should investigate WTC 7?


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Eeb wrote: »
    As for what brought the building down - clearly there are two possibilities. Either you're right and it fell symmetrically in 7 seconds because of damage sustained by the falling masonry and fires, or Danny Jowenko is right and it was brought down by a controlled demolition.
    An independent investigation that considers both possibilities should get closer to what happened. You wouldn't have a problem with that would you?
    There are other possibilities. It could have been demolished by directed energy weapons from space. It could have been invaded by mutant steel-eating termites. Perhaps too many of the occupants had parties where the subwoofers and dancing shook the joints of the building apart. Perhaps the chemtrails are so corrosive that they dissolved the supports and caused the building to collapse. Perhaps a herd of invisible pink unicorns attacked all at once and caused the collapse.

    Do you think all these possibilities should be given equal weight in an "independent" investigation?


Advertisement