Dan Minette wrote:
So, it seems that we agree that the planes flying into the building are
sufficient for the buildings to collapse. We also agree that the pattern of
the collapse is consistent with rigorous structural analysis of the
buildings.
It is a very weird and unlikely concept, the whole conspiracy theory
idea, but the more I look at it the less I accept the 9/11 commissions
findings, so no, I don't agree, but I cant claim expertise in the matter.
The explanations these gentlemen give are
tailored to explain what was seen in the evidence, what they don't do
is eliminate alternate explanations and that is the item that I would
like to see.
The alternative explanation is that, in addition to the planes flying into
the WTC, bombs were placed by persons unknown, but probably connected with
someone like Dick Cheney, a while before that...and that the planes flew
into just those floors where bombs were placed. The bomb people either had
to be really really good spooks, or coordinated with WTC security. Given
the track record of the CIA and the plumbers, etc., I don't think of anyone
who is quite that good.
Further, the blasts couldn't have occurred on the outside structures,
because there would have been some outward puffs....that would not be part
of the general flames....even with the burning, multiple explosions of would
be seeable. But, on the inside, which is full of melted aluminum which
could explode, the bombs could be masked. So, I don't think that I could
falsify the existence of modest size bombs on the inner columns.
It appears that we agree that the well accepted explanation is both simple
and sufficient to explain what has been observed. In contrast, the
conspiracy theory relies on a number of variables all lining up perfectly to
conceal the blast. For example, how did all of this coordination work,
between the AQ members and Dick, or whoever set up the bombs? How did they
know just which floors to hit, and how could those undertrained pilots be so
good at hitting just the right floors?
I would agree, but they didn't need to hit the right floors
Watch "The Great Conspiracy" - bottom right here:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=9%2F11
its an hour, but it is interesting. In it they show some videos of the
collapse and in it is clear that the mast on top of WTC 1? begins to
collapse down into the core of the building well before the rest of the
structure, indicating that the central supports of the building (the key
to its structural integrity) were the first things to go. They attribute
this, and the damage on the ground floor prior to collapse, to bombs in
the basement of the building (and elsewhere) that were triggered after
the impact and that were the cause of the collapse. These bombs cut the
central supports and initiated the collapse. They also have people
inside the building, and seismic records etc that allegedly corroborate
the idea. One thing that explains something that always worried me about
the collapses but I never knew why, is the fact that the whole thing
took around 10 seconds, in both cases. Given the height of the buildings
( I didn't take notes when I was watching, so watch it for details -
they even have formulas !) this is basically free fall speed. So the
structure of the building, even the thousands of tonnes of undamaged
hurricane-proof steel and concrete below the collision levels, did
absolutely nothing to impede the collapse speed. It is as if the whole
building just broke into a zillion separate pieces and fell at free fall
speed to the ground.
That video and this one, which covers some of the same ground but is
more about the Pentagon impacts:
911 Loose Change Second Edition (from the same link)
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=9%2F11
are both pretty good. Why is the hole in the Pentagon so small, where is
the plane debris, why are the engine remains that do exist from the
wrong plane, why wont the government release the videos of the impact
from nearby security cameras etc. And weird coincidences like that the
pilot of the plane that hit the Pentagon was an ex-air force pilot who
was part of a training exercise in which a plane was flown into the
Pentagon just before he retired from the air-force to join American
Airlines, all the put options on its stock a few days before, that
Marvin Bush was kinda in charge of WTC security at the time of the
attack, that Bush said he had seen the first impact before he went into
the school room and talked to reporters about it ( a - he couldn't have
and b - WTF?), that three separate exercises planned for the same day
had denuded the US of air cover and confused any response to the
hijacked planes etc etc.
It is just too strange to contemplate that it was an inside job, that
part of it is the thing I find very hard to accept, the idea that anyone
would think that they could get away with it. But there are a lot of
things that don't seem to add up. And the 911 Commission (which took 411
days to start, and had an initial budget of 3 million, versus a week
and 50 million for the Challenger disaster) report looks more like a
whitewash to me the more I learn about it. If you have time, I suggest
watching both those videos, they are not over the top, include a lot of
what seem to be facts (videos we have all seen for example, but looked
at more carefully) and, if nothing else, a fascinating look at the
conspiracy theorists art.
Andrew
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
