9/11

[bush_cheney2004]

The Project for a New American Century, written in 2000 and signed by the names Donald Rumsfeld, Paul wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Lewis Libby, Richard Perle among others, outlined a massive military expansion, particularily in the middle east. Within this document (which was later incarnated as the National Defence Strategy once the admin took office) there is a sentence which states: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor"

From the horses mouth. It goes deeper if your willing to look.

This false assertion is debunked in the "Screw Loose Change" video, to wit:

Claim: The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) called for a "New Pearl Harbor" which resulted in 9/11 helping them acheive their goals.

Truth: PNAC did not call for anything, they merely stated the timetable for their transformation would be slower. The transformation dealt with technological modification of the military, and has had absolutely nothing to do with the results of 9/11 or the invasion of Iraq.

http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

[Riverwind]

The evidence to date strongly suggests the basic story is a fabrication designed as a pretext for a massive policy shift.

Absurd. The evidence to shows that four planes were hijacked by muslim extremists and crashed them into buildings. You would realize this too if you took the time to put together a plausible alternate explaination because you would find that there is no plausible alternate explaination.

[kuzadd]

I do not have to provide alternative scenarios, the BURDEN OF PROOF lies with the American gov.

Sorry - it doesn't work that way. The overwhleming weight of the evidence available supports the widely accepted explaination. The US government has done its job. If you seek to convince others that the government has not done its job the the ONUS IS ON YOU to provide an alternate explaination. Your are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

The fact that you refuse to provide one demonstrates that are simply blowing a lot of hot air. Why should anyone take you seriously?

oh but it does work that way riverwind, despite your incoherent arguements.

The burden of proof, was on the US administration.

They failed.

Everyone should be wondering what then is the reality, and they should be questioning the US administration, not the people who are capable of seeing beyond the BS?

Instead, which demonstrates your capacity for the inane, you insist on prosecuting the wrong people.

The overwhelming weight of evidence DOES NOT support the official theory, that is why there are SO MANY questions and questioners, but, pfft, that flies right over your head.

You are deluding yourself, becasue NO MATTER what you say, bottom line, it was up to the Bush administration, to prove, there conspiracy theory, was true, they failed.

Look how quickly you jumped on BC's bandwagon wrt combustible metals, so badly you wish to believe the official story, when BC jumped in to muddy the waters, you jumped in also.

NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

But there you were, looking, foolish.

[kuzadd]

The evidence to date strongly suggests the basic story is a fabrication designed as a pretext for a massive policy shift.

Absurd. The evidence to shows that four planes were hijacked by muslim extremists and crashed them into buildings. You would realize this too if you took the time to put together a plausible alternate explaination because you would find that there is no plausible alternate explaination.

"The evidence to shows that four planes were hijacked by muslim extremists and crashed them into buildings."

No riverwind, the evidence, does not show that.

The evidence, shows that ONE plane, had been hijacked.

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidenc..._transcript.pdf

It does not indicate, who or why.

There is NO evidence, wrt the other planes, only conjecture and speculation.

no recorders were found from the other planes, therfore there is NO evidence.

You really do not grasp evidence, do you?

[Riverwind]

The burden of proof, was on the US administration.

You just don't get it do you: truthies are considered to be a bunch of raving lunatics by the majority of people. Most posters on this forum think I am wasting my time even responding to your rediculous claims. If you want you arguments to be taken seriously then the onus IS on you to provide an alternate explaination. Deny it if you like but that is the reality. A court room is an artifical environment and the rules of evidence used there do NOT apply.

NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

Aluminimum was used in the constructions of the WTC tower and the planes. Alumininium is a combustable metal. IOW - once again you have your facts wrong.

There is NO evidence, wrt the other planes, only conjecture and speculation. no recorders were found from the other planes, therfore there is NO evidence.

Phone calls from passengers from all planes reports arab hijackers. That is evidence.

Furthermore, you have ZERO evidence that anyone other than muslim hijackers took over those planes. Provide a plausible alternate explaination and you might have a point. Until then you are blowing a lot of hot air...

[buffycat]

Kuzadd: NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

Aluminimum was used in the constructions of the WTC tower and the planes. Alumininium is a combustable metal. IOW - once again you have your facts wrong.

Wrong Riverwind.

Aluminium is non-magnetic and non-combustible, properties invaluable in advanced industries such as electronics or in offshore structures.

http://www.world-aluminium.org/production/...properties.html

More at the link.

Try again, or don't bother and spare us all.

[Peter F]

At this moment...prior to the 'cellphone calls were faked' pages...lets review what we have so far regarding the possibile explanations of the events on 9/11:

Plausible explanation A)

4 planes were hijacked

- 1 plane flew into WTC1 (hijacked by Muslim fanatics)

- 1 plane flew into WTC2 (hijacked by Muslim fanatics)

- 1 plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania (hijacked by Muslim fanatics)

- 1 plane flew into the Pentagon (hijacked by Muslim fanatics)

Plausible explanation

only 1 plane was hijacked

- the hijacked plane crashed in Pennsylvania (hijacked by unknown persons)

- 1 plane flew into WTC1 (no explanation yet of how)

- 1 plane flew into WTC2 (no explanation yet of how)

- a missile hit the Pentagon (no explanation yet of where the missile was fired from)

edit: not my smileys. I don't use smileys. I don't know how they got there.

Do please carry on.

[psikeyhackr]

Potential energy is the mass * acceleration * height.

Are you computing the potential energy from the ground?

If you take a hollow glass sphere to the roof of a 3 story building and hold it 35 feet above the sidewalk the potential energy is the mass of the sphere times gravitational acceleration times 35 feet. If you let it go that energy won't be released until it hits the sidewalk. It is not going to shatter 5 ft from your hands.

If you are computing the potential energy of the World Trade Center relative to the ground then why were things bursting and turning into dust hundreds of feet into the air far from the ground.

If the building had tilted over at the 5th floor and come down like a chopped tree then this potential energy would make sense but the building would have remained intact until it hit the ground.

psik

[M.Dancer]

Kuzadd: NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

Aluminimum was used in the constructions of the WTC tower and the planes. Alumininium is a combustable metal. IOW - once again you have your facts wrong.

Wrong Riverwind.

Aluminium is non-magnetic and non-combustible, properties invaluable in advanced industries such as electronics or in offshore structures.

http://www.world-aluminium.org/production/...properties.html

More at the link.

Try again, or don't bother and spare us all.

Please...aluminium burns and melts.

This is contrary to my experience. Aluminium does burn, and surprisingly (with relevance to the shuttle) it can do so in near-vacuum conditions. Several years ago, against the accepted knowledge of experts in the field, I devised a process that achieves this, operating at a pressure of around 10-3 millibars (0.1 pascals).

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1782...nium-burns.html

So be sure to remove your hat when outside in the sun.

[GostHacked]

Is anyone going to address what I posted a few pages back? Or am I gonna have to scroll through more pages of no added value?

[M.Dancer]

Is anyone going to address what I posted a few pages back? Or am I gonna have to scroll through more pages of no added value?

yes?

[Peter F]

Is anyone going to address what I posted a few pages back? Or am I gonna have to scroll through more pages of no added value?

Is this what you are referring to?

I have a theory on why the blacc boxes were not recovered from the WTC site, and why (not sure if anyone tried) to read information off the hard drives that could have been found in the rubble. I know shock is not good for hard drives, for I have killed a few by dropping them, but the platters can be taken out and read in a clean room ect. One nice large electromagnetic pulse would have taken care of that. Sure that would affect more than whatever was in the buildings at the time. Surrounding buildings and other electronic gear would have been useless after that fact.

So this to me is a cover up of wrong doing by large companies, in coheasion with the judicial system which influences government. They tried to hide the mistakes by another mistake.

The banker-conspirators somehow made the black boxes useless?

Sure. Why not? Now just find some facts to substantiate the theory and your on your way.

[GostHacked]

No the black box thing waws just addressing the black box thing.

What I am getting at is there is a consolidation of corporate power that has gone on recently, just like the corporate buildup of the 70's 80's until congress came in and broke up all the companies.

More people with hand in the influcencian pie. More people, the less of a voice you have, compared to before when you owned all the companies. Now it is getting that way again, companies are merging and becomming more monopolistic again. The control is now back to a few instead of the many. More power again for those individuals, more influence on the corporation, but also on government through lobbyists.

9/11 covered something else up other than government complicity in the whole event, it also had to do with those that have the large corporate monopolistic control over things as well. Power is where it is at. Money has the power to influence the government. Maybe it was something by large corporations to bribe the government in a way. Because of all the scandals with companies like Enron (the only game in town in California after deregulation and became a nightmare for residents with rolling blackouts while the company made money hand over fist in it)

WTC was home to many government entities. Securities and Exchanges, CIA, Secret Service, Justice Department and other investigative branches had offices at WTC site. Could be that corporate america is the one behind this but blackmailed the government into doing the bidding for them. So the investigations would just disappear. There was more companies than just Enron that were being investigated.

So a corrupt corporate america blackmailing the government to make it all go away. WTC was also the financial center of the United States. So it is like the US had all the eggs in one basket when this shit went down. Not very smart of them, is it.

I am done with bombs and planes. We need to look at some history and compare it with the day on 9/11 and how things have gone since. This will get a clearer picture than 140 pages of 'yeah but thermite, bombs, planes, no one can do it ect ect' .....

Start looking into the why of 9/11.

[kuzadd]

Kuzadd: NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

Aluminimum was used in the constructions of the WTC tower and the planes. Alumininium is a combustable metal. IOW - once again you have your facts wrong.

Wrong Riverwind.

Aluminium is non-magnetic and non-combustible, properties invaluable in advanced industries such as electronics or in offshore structures.

http://www.world-aluminium.org/production/...properties.html

More at the link.

Try again, or don't bother and spare us all.

Riverwind doesn't grasp the difference between combustible metal and non-combustible. nor does riverwind understand that combustible metal would NOT be used as a construction material in a highrise, where FIRE is a grave concern.

Riverwind has been wrong so many times it is immeasurable.

[kuzadd]

Kuzadd: NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

Aluminimum was used in the constructions of the WTC tower and the planes. Alumininium is a combustable metal. IOW - once again you have your facts wrong.

Wrong Riverwind.

Aluminium is non-magnetic and non-combustible, properties invaluable in advanced industries such as electronics or in offshore structures.

http://www.world-aluminium.org/production/...properties.html

More at the link.

Try again, or don't bother and spare us all.

Please...aluminium burns and melts.

This is contrary to my experience. Aluminium does burn, and surprisingly (with relevance to the shuttle) it can do so in near-vacuum conditions. Several years ago, against the accepted knowledge of experts in the field, I devised a process that achieves this, operating at a pressure of around 10-3 millibars (0.1 pascals).

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1782...nium-burns.html

So be sure to remove your hat when outside in the sun.

ROFLMAO!

absolutely clueless!

from riverwind's article

"In a large vacuum chamber, aluminium wire is continuously melted, vaporised, and burnt in a stream of oxygen, and deposits a coating of aluminium oxide onto a web of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film moving past at high speed from reel to reel. Counter-intuitively, the process even improves the vacuum through a "getter" effect, by mopping up any traces of water vapour present"

again aluminium wire is continuously melted, vaporised, and burnt in a stream of oxygen,

in a stream of oxygen

in a stream of oxygen

apples and oranges, apples and oranges.

[kuzadd]

No the black box thing waws just addressing the black box thing.

What I am getting at is there is a consolidation of corporate power that has gone on recently, just like the corporate buildup of the 70's 80's until congress came in and broke up all the companies.

More people with hand in the influcencian pie. More people, the less of a voice you have, compared to before when you owned all the companies. Now it is getting that way again, companies are merging and becomming more monopolistic again. The control is now back to a few instead of the many. More power again for those individuals, more influence on the corporation, but also on government through lobbyists.

9/11 covered something else up other than government complicity in the whole event, it also had to do with those that have the large corporate monopolistic control over things as well. Power is where it is at. Money has the power to influence the government. Maybe it was something by large corporations to bribe the government in a way. Because of all the scandals with companies like Enron (the only game in town in California after deregulation and became a nightmare for residents with rolling blackouts while the company made money hand over fist in it)

WTC was home to many government entities. Securities and Exchanges, CIA, Secret Service, Justice Department and other investigative branches had offices at WTC site. Could be that corporate america is the one behind this but blackmailed the government into doing the bidding for them. So the investigations would just disappear. There was more companies than just Enron that were being investigated.

So a corrupt corporate america blackmailing the government to make it all go away. WTC was also the financial center of the United States. So it is like the US had all the eggs in one basket when this shit went down. Not very smart of them, is it.

I am done with bombs and planes. We need to look at some history and compare it with the day on 9/11 and how things have gone since. This will get a clearer picture than 140 pages of 'yeah but thermite, bombs, planes, no one can do it ect ect' .....

Start looking into the why of 9/11.

I am with you gosthacked

and somewhere back there, I made a statment in kind

"one needs history, an understanding of US foreign policy, a knowledge of oil interests, some understanding of geo-political strategy, and bingo!

To NOT question 9/11 and the US govs. involvment is to be willfully blind."

which I believe you replied to.

Bombs and planes aren't necessary. see above quotation.

[kuzadd]

The burden of proof, was on the US administration.

You just don't get it do you: truthies are considered to be a bunch of raving lunatics by the majority of people. Most posters on this forum think I am wasting my time even responding to your rediculous claims. If you want you arguments to be taken seriously then the onus IS on you to provide an alternate explaination. Deny it if you like but that is the reality. A court room is an artifical environment and the rules of evidence used there do NOT apply.

NO building would be constructed with combustible metals, that doesn't make sense. Ya know fire codes?

Aluminimum was used in the constructions of the WTC tower and the planes. Alumininium is a combustable metal. IOW - once again you have your facts wrong.

There is NO evidence, wrt the other planes, only conjecture and speculation. no recorders were found from the other planes, therfore there is NO evidence.

Phone calls from passengers from all planes reports arab hijackers. That is evidence.

Furthermore, you have ZERO evidence that anyone other than muslim hijackers took over those planes. Provide a plausible alternate explaination and you might have a point. Until then you are blowing a lot of hot air...

"You just don't get it do you: truthies are considered to be a bunch of raving lunatics by the majority of people."

and so?

Is that supposed to PROVE something?

IMO, it means zip!

Yet, you use it, to justify your righteousness, hilarious!

Most people thought, many people, great thinkers, scientists, truthtellers, are "raving lunatics" who are then persecuted or imprisoned and them time shows them to be correct.

The only thing that demonstrates IMO, is , that the masses will swallow any swill, from a "leader" be it political /religious etc., In fact, there are reams of human history that demonstrate that!

The few that stood up to Hitler were persecuted, but, they were right.

The few that stood up to numerous other dictators, Stalin , Mao were persecuted and killed.

BUT the MASSES, went along.

So by saying that you are demonstrating that the masses, will go along to get along and fail to question authority.??

well, nothing new under the sun, BUT, it doesn't make them right now does it?

Do me a favour, stop "wasting your time" you accomplish nothing, I won't be broken up

lol

editted to add:

one is left wondering, given your 'masterful debating skills' (facetious)

your 'superior' knowledge (facetious)

and the 'ample evidence' (facetious)provided by the Bush admin, why riverwind you resort, to the #1 propoganda device, repeatedly????

Name Calling-giving an idea a bad label-is used to make us reject and condemn the idea without examining the evidence.

Those who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence. It's a vestige of the weak, and yet, since you come from the position of 'righteousness' why is it you resort to it????

[bush_cheney2004]

WTC was home to many government entities. Securities and Exchanges, CIA, Secret Service, Justice Department and other investigative branches had offices at WTC site. Could be that corporate america is the one behind this but blackmailed the government into doing the bidding for them. So the investigations would just disappear. There was more companies than just Enron that were being investigated....

Could be? Hmmmm...my company had two floors in WTC1...we never got the memo about conspiring with federal, state, and local government entities to commit air piracy and mass murder. However, we did get the stories of our employees who fried to death near elevator doors in the monthly newsletter.

[Peter F]

Could be that corporate america is the one behind this but blackmailed the government into doing the bidding for them. So the investigations would just disappear. There was more companies than just Enron that were being investigated.

So a corrupt corporate america blackmailing the government to make it all go away

Except that none of these things did go away. Apparently, the government cooked up 9/11 to cover up Corporatist crimes. Then the government prosecuted the corporatists anyways.

Sorry. Doesn't make sense.

[Hollus]

Because there is no mystery and government officials have better things to do than placate every loonie with a conspiracy theory. If you don't believe that flight 77 hit the pentagon then explain:

1) what happened to flight 77 and the people on it?

2) why would anyone bother to use a missle and make a plane dissappear?

No one will take your demands for the tapes seriously unless you can come up with a plausible answer to those questions. In fact, no one should take you seriously unless you answer those questions.

Freedom of Information Act. The tapes in question are exactly what is needed to answer those questions you put forth. Why where they confiscated and classified? If there is nothing to hide why are they hiding it?

[Hollus]

The Project for a New American Century, written in 2000 and signed by the names Donald Rumsfeld, Paul wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Lewis Libby, Richard Perle among others, outlined a massive military expansion, particularily in the middle east. Within this document (which was later incarnated as the National Defence Strategy once the admin took office) there is a sentence which states: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor"

From the horses mouth. It goes deeper if your willing to look.

This false assertion is debunked in the "Screw Loose Change" video, to wit:

Claim: The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) called for a "New Pearl Harbor" which resulted in 9/11 helping them acheive their goals.

Truth: PNAC did not call for anything, they merely stated the timetable for their transformation would be slower. The transformation dealt with technological modification of the military, and has had absolutely nothing to do with the results of 9/11 or the invasion of Iraq.

http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

Merely stated the timetable for thier transformation would be slower. You dont find that a little disconcerting? Anyway the PNAC was about more than what your debunking video would have you believe. Section III Repositioning Today's Force:

"Indeed the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussien."

"...retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be and essential element is U.S security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region."

A letter to President Clinton in 1998: " In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy."

PNAC had in its sights permenant military presence to protect American strategic interests(Unocal's long standing efforts for a tans-Afghan pipeline) and the removal of Saddam (the most militarily vulnerable centrally located state in the middle-east and home to vast undeveloped oil resource which had trillion dollar contracts with France and Russia to be implemented once sanctions would have been lifted in 2002)

[kuzadd]

Freedom of Information Act. The tapes in question are exactly what is needed to answer those questions you put forth. Why where they confiscated and classified? If there is nothing to hide why are they hiding it?

Hollus, if you will notice, riverwind tries to set out the parameters of discussion, tries to make the rules, and creates arguements, which he/ she then argues for or against them.

In otherwords riverwind has huge control issues.

if you stay you will realize this.

Unfortunately riverwind needs to realize he/she cannot control everything.

Until then watch out!

[M.Dancer]

Now explain why all the witnesses to Flight 77 hitting the Penatgon are lying......or how all of the video evidence was doctored....or as the above poster says, how the passengers and plane of flight 77 became the Oceanic Flight 815 got Lost and what role does 4, 8, 15, 16 23 and 42 play?

[ScottSA]

Now explain why all the witnesses to Flight 77 hitting the Penatgon are lying......or how all of the video evidence was doctored....or as the above poster says, how the passengers and plane of flight 77 became the Oceanic Flight 815 got Lost and what role does 4, 8, 15, 16 23 and 42 play?

It doesn't matter that 1000s of people saw it in real time and reported exactly the same thing. What matters is that TeH EiVl BsUH Did It!1!11!!1!1!1!!1

[Hollus]

Ofcousre we know that steel, or any substance burned, will never become hotter than the fire or heat applied to it. We know that steel melts at a temperature no less than 2750'F. And, we know that at optimal conditions (such as the burning jet fuel while injecting oxygen) jet fuel will burn at 1800'F. So do you have a proffesional opinion to explain that one?

False...there are several exothermic reactions that will become hotter than initiating heat.

The steel needn't have melted at all....it only only had to lose strength and stiffness (elastic modulus) at the elevated temperatures for the open span design.

We recently had another demonstration of the effects of heat on steel reinforced concrete structures:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269118,00.html

Are you implying that there was a exothermic reaction within the WTC? The sample of the molten metal contained iron and aluminum, which would be expected in any steel sample, but also sulphur which is a by-product of a thermate reaction.