payne1000

This video shows the South Tower being demolished with explosives: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc

payne1000

But those massive concrete slabs didn't fall straight down. They were blown into pieces and hurled hundreds of feet outward from the center by powerful explosives: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc

payne1000

The concrete floors didn't come apart by hitting the ground. They were exploded in the air. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc

emarine

So once again Larry you try and prove your conspiracy theory with more youtube conspiracy theory BS... Your expert claims that the squibs ejecting at speeds of 100mph proves the point... nothing but compression of airspace in a pancake collapse... Explosions exceed the speed of sound... plain and simple... your expert lacks creditability in the most basic physical aspects to form a respectable opinion ... Here is some basic info to dispute your link...

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/sound.html

Gener

Of course they would. Why do you think we use demolition experts to bring buildings down and not just burn them down? Fires burn at an uneven level on each side of the building. Therefore the building has to topple. It has to! It can happen in no other way. Some people refer to the building in Nazi Germany, (I forget the name but the government brought it down and blamed it on other groups) and say, see, it came straight down. Not the same thing. The steel frame was still there. Buildings cannot fall straight down. They just can't do it. Sooner or later the structure will topple. Even with controlled demolitions, you have to be an expert, a very high level expert to know where to put the explosions in order to make sure no part of the structure leans in the process and topples.

Furthermore. The government's argument that the weight of the stories above the fire forced the building to free fall also is impossible physically. It cannot happen. Much of the building above the fire was already turned to dust. This also cannot happen unless high level weapons are used, which due to old age I cannot remember the name of. The fire would not create that much dust that instantaneously, and dust does not have the weight to cause the floors below to fall.

And the real kicker is, even if the above could happen, the floors below could not fall at the same rate as gravity. I don't care how much weight is bearing down upon them. The steel beams below would not yet have been affected by the heat of the fire. They would still hold until adequate pressure had been placed on them.

It has been years since I have studied this, so I am at a great disadvantage here because I just do not remember all the arguments on either side. I do know that a critical analysis of the situation leads to "knowing" that the government is lying. The 9/11 commission report has been proven to be a fraud, and the government has changed their story many times since then. A critical analysis of the 9/11 commission report shows that it is deeply flawed. That is all there is to it. The government is lying. Period. And there is NO valid argument against that.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

No; just pictures of the plane wreckage at the Pentagon, and in PA.

You know: Engines; tail sections, wings, bodies, luggage. Things like that.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

This video shows the South Tower being demolished with explosives: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc

payne1000

It's hilarious that you trolls are so desperate to defend the official lies that you attempt to demonize Youtube. As I've said before, Youtube doesn't produce the information they transmit. Mainstream media does produce the lies and propaganda they foist on the public. Mainstream media is the true demon and all of it is owned and controlled by Zionists.
As far as physicist Chandler lacking credibility, you don't even have to listen to him to see the truth in the video. The distance the falling debris is thrown outward from the building along with severed steel beams is proof that explosives were used. Even NIST has backed away from the pancake theory.

This is not enough fire to bring a building down.


This would come closer to a fire that could cause a building to fall, but the mandarin Hotel remained standing.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Why is that so hard for more people to understand?
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Gener

It is hard for people to understand because it frightens them, and they do not want the truth. They are paranoid about it and as usual they project their own paranoia out on other people. Kevyn says we should all be in a mental institution. Yet it is he and those like him who really should be there. They are the ones who are too afraid to face the truth. And of course, this is one of the government's favorite tricks. They cannot support their ridiculous story so they say, "Whoever doesn't believe us should be locked away." What an excellent way to get around freedom of speech. The government tells us what to believe and we either believe it or are deemed crazy. Put them in mental institutions. That way we can pretend we have free speech when we really don't. The sad truth is people are not going to wake up. They just won't do it. They are too afraid, and they project their fear out onto us.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

So true; but no matter what anyone believes, we have to live reality.
Ignoring it, only prolongs what they choose to ignore.



:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Jeffhunter

The only pictures I saw of the pa site shows a hole in the ground and nothing else. I researched all the other plane crashes I could and they all had recognizable plane debris but the pa site is just a hole. It looks like a missile strike.

payne1000

Don't forget, many of those who work continuously on forums to cover up the lies of 9/11 and all the evil deeds that came with it are paid trolls. The perpetrators control the mainstream media but they haven't yet been able to control the internet. They must employ a vast army of trolls in an attempt to keep the truth from the majority.

payne1000

Or just explosives planted in the ground.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

I opened a site that showed the ditch/scar on an earlier google map, before it was used as the "landing" site. To me it looked like a minor excavation/ mine pit looking for something. Then it never materialized.
A lot of witnesses said; no plane, no bodies,, no luggage, etc.