Mothering Forum banner
1 - 20 of 93 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,212 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635160132,00.html

This is a BYU physics professor:

"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes - which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.
As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation."

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
Having only gotten C's in my physics classes... he makes some decent points. It is odd how the buildings collapsed perfectly, like a scheduled demolition, almost. On the other hand, I did see a convincing PBS documentary about how the impact of the planes blasted the fire-proofing materials off the beams and joists, and it was pretty much like a bunch of dominoes falling once that happened.

If this were true - HOW FRIGHTENING! The question becomes - who did it, then, and why? Were they in cahoots with the guys on the planes (we know the planes were highjacked, as telephone calls from victims attest)? I'm sure some would suggest it was a US inside job... if that were the case, it would have had to have been a "bi-partisan" effort far deeper and way more scary than just involvement by the current administration. That would mean that the bi-partisan 9/11 commission and other investigations have covered it up. And what would be the purpose in pretending planes did it? Why not just set some bombs and then point at the terrorists for having set them?

Very weird.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,733 Posts
well they do know that they don't know much

lol that would be a great name for a kid
Theysay Theyknow

Anyhow I do believe that the other buildings might have been brought down as it is common practice to 'pull' a building and there is recorded firefighting about pulling the other buildings to control damage.

It really is our 'grassy knoll' eh?

I think greed brought down the towers, shot down that plane, and who really stood to profit the most from erradicating the world trade centre, its contents? It could be alquaeda whatever that really is, but whoever it was wasn't local as the massacre of those firefighters is horrific. But if you look at money and its flow then you realise that OBL was funded by the CIA, the saudis for being the most hardlined opressive muslim group are best buddies with the usa....and now we've given up our freedoms for whose profit?

Could have been the "muslims" its a nice next target after the iron curtain proved to be b.s.... like USSR was ever really a real threat and ....but 'we need a common enemy to unite us' who of bush's horsemen was that pre 911.

there are also weird pictures of people peering out of the 'holes' left when it should have been 'too hot'. Is life really more like the xfiles? Or london it went from hard to obtain plastic explosives to hair spray or something?

Now I don't mean this to be stereotypical and I am a muslim myself but my goodness I've never known a few arab men to be able to be able to coordinate meeting at one place at the same time, its not a culture that really thinks about time in the same way
never mind within seconds of eachother...

in life I figure the one who does the most talking is the most guilty or has the most to hide. the one that profits the greatest has the most motive...follow the words and the money..

but if it was not the 'muslims' then is jihad warranted?
(I don't mean bomb strapping type but who is the enemy? are muslims being attacked for being muslims? I think that is the goal of what is going on to create a new cold war by enticing the arab world into a holywar....)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,840 Posts
How interesting. I find this point especially intruiging:

Quote:
• Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel - and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,277 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by SKK
On the other hand, I did see a convincing PBS documentary about how the impact of the planes blasted the fire-proofing materials off the beams and joists, and it was pretty much like a bunch of dominoes falling once that happened.
Ditto on the crummy geometry et al. grades in HS as well as the PBS NOVA documentary: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,083 Posts
I have always believed that "9/11" was allowed to happen along with assistance from secret parts of the US government. I wouldn't be surprised if there were bombs stratigically placed around the building to ensure its collapse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,840 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by SKK
On the other hand, I did see a convincing PBS documentary about how the impact of the planes blasted the fire-proofing materials off the beams and joists, and it was pretty much like a bunch of dominoes falling once that happened.

Wouldn't explain, however, why WTC-7 came down. Just read this interesting article about that building and how quickly and thoroughly its debris was removed and destroyed:

http://www.wtc7.net/steeldisposal.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,487 Posts
I've always believed there was a conspiracy brewing somewhere. The places that planes crashed is protected air space and there's no way a commercial airliner would have gotten through that easily without someone pulling strings somewhere.

They knew the planes were off course before they hit the WTC, yet nothing was done to stop them. Commercial airliners don't just disappear, and jets weren't scrambled until AFTER the planes had already hit the WTC.

I don't trust the US government to play fair or even keep the best interests of the citizens a priority. I can't wait for the revolution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
OK, I've given this some more thought... and talked to my physics major dh about it (he got A's not C's)

When and how would bombs have been placed? How would it have been done without anyone knowing it? When a company does a controlled demolition of a stadium or building, it takes a long time, and a great deal of expertise, to place the dynamite such that the building falls properly. Equipment is needed. How and when would this have been done at WTC such that no one would have seen it or known about it? I mean, a fly-by-night, clandestine bomb-setting operation failed in 1993. It would have been a lot more, and a lot more noticeable in order to bring those buildings down.

On 9/11, when the Towers fell, there was a great deal of video footage - did any of it show anything that looked like bombs exploding at the base of the building? Eyewitness accounts - yes I know people were running away for dear life, but someone would have seen it, wouldn't they?

I can't explain WTC7, but it appears there were no casualties in there, so what would have been the point? And I come back to the point of - why planes at all? I mean, if you are bombing, set the bombs. If you want to pretend it was terrorists setting the bombs, point to terrorists... why involve planes at all?

I guess I'm skeptical.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,212 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by sistermama
Also just read that the 9/11 Commission Report doesn't even address
WTC-7.

WTC-7 is really important, because before 9/11 no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire.

AND no steel-framed building has collapsed due to fire AFTER 9/11, either.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,212 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by SKK
O I mean, a fly-by-night, clandestine bomb-setting operation failed in 1993. It would have been a lot more, and a lot more noticeable in order to bring those buildings down.

.
Yep. So, IF in fact it is true, that means much, much more of an "inside" job.

And, answering your "why planes at all" question...the article calls it a "diversionary tactic."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
I'm a building engineer, and I can tell you that there's really no way that the buildings would have stayed up for that long, THEN crashed to the ground, after the airplane impact. It's either going to be sudden (minutes) or not at all. The concrete and steel those buildings were made of would have cut a plane in half like a cheese-grater, and not felt the worse for wear, burning gasoline or not. Sure, there would have been a HELL Of a lot of repairs to be done, but they wouldn't have collapsed. Even if the top collapsed, more would have remained at the bottom.

Two answers: bombs on planes, or bombs NOT on planes.

Thats just me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by A&A
Yep. So, IF in fact it is true, that means much, much more of an "inside" job.
Inside or outside job - wouldn't someone have seen either (1) the placing of the bombs or (2) the bombs actually going off?

Quote:

Originally Posted by A&A
And, answering your "why planes at all" question...the article calls it a "diversionary tactic."
But why the need for a diversionary tactic? Why not just set off bombs and then point to terrorists as having set those bombs? I mean, it would have been just as believeable, if not moreso, that terrorists would have set bombs, since they apparently had already done so once.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,733 Posts
Quote:
This is unbelievable.
yep what is believable these days?
the economy is doing well
bird flu is going to kill so many of us
....

there are many weird things about 9-11, but in life sometimes weird unexpected things happen. I don't think either senario 'fits' well, so who has the best evidence? who has the evidence? is it credible...?

heard a great line today don't hate the media become the media blog


alison
 
1 - 20 of 93 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top