We must help ourselves KUS.

All this conspiracy crap is nonsense. The world trade centre destruction was what it was. An attack by misguided religious zealots

The real concern (conspiracy) was voiced in 1961 by outgoing president Dwight D Eisenhower.

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/ ... ndust.html

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

We now see the results of the "disastrous rise of misplaced power".

colin wrote:MF4...I suggest you watch the movie.

I'll see your movie and raise this link
http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/youmeand ... 70/44.html
Follow the link (I had to copy/paste it) on this to a report on the collapse of tower 7.

THere can always be alterate explanations of things if you accept enough wildly implausible necessary statements as fact. Many Americans who are otherwise very intelligent people think that evolution never happened and that God created the universe in 4004 BC, simply because the Bible has enough ages that when added together you get that number. If the Bible is infallible, it must be that way. Apparently a majority of Americans also think that angels are actual, real entities that personally help them out.

We had centuries of struggle of reason over religion, with torture of the early scientists and philosophers by the Church. This struggle was to get past this kind of thinking.

Occam's Razor says that if you have two alternate explanations, one is relatively straight forward the other is very convoluted, the simple answer is almost invariably the right one. You can see from the link there that the conspiracy theorists will stick to a fact - like that the gov't never released any documents about the collapse of tower 7 - long after the fact is shown to be false.

Not to say that governments can't blow up buildings to create bad guys; the Nazies burnt down the Reichstadt to gain a 'law and order' mandate; even the RCMP burnt down innocent farmer's barns to gain cred with the FLQ; even those agents provacateur police dressed up as masked terrorists holding big rocks last week in Quebec are along this line.

But closing down all the buildings so hordes of technicians can swarm around packing thermite around structural beams up above the ceiling for total destruction of a very well designed building? And none of them sold their story?

Of course the buildings collapsed in a similar manner to demolition. Bin Laden is an engineer; his family has decades of construction and demolition experience. His first attempt to bring down the twin towers with a truck bomb in the basement came very close to working. Or was that a CIA thing too, looking forward 15 years or whatever to the Iraq war? (which had nothing to do with 911, of course it was used to reduce any public dissent in the US, the rest of the world didn't accept the link).

The amusing thing is that the CIA did of course TRAIN bin Laden in guerrilla warfare to destabilize the Soviet-backed government in Afganistan. So they are certainly involved in the tragedy, but indirectly.

colin wrote:We must help ourselves KUS.

ok, sign me up, you are appealing to my counter-internal-inside-doubleagent- roadrage-and-terrorist streak When's my first Semtex training

holy crap, two posts demoting mine, edit:

more force four wrote: But closing down all the buildings so hordes of technicians can swarm around packing thermite around structural beams up above the ceiling for total destruction of a very well designed building? And none of them sold their story?

Well, if so I bet there's a few unmarked graves around

I got a chance to watch it. Not really all that new but nice summary on the WTC and banking issue. The NAU idea is certainly scarry. With the wide range of topics, they had to skim a bit and for more details I would recommend "Money Masters" , "911 Mysteries", "Terrorstorm" and "The Power of Nightmares". Get different viewpoints and information before judging. Though I must admit, it is more comfortable to know less.
"Ignorance is bliss"

mortontoemike

All this conspiracy crap is nonsense. The world trade centre destruction was what it was. An attack by misguided religious zealots

I think this is a bold statement, there are many professionals in both the engineering and demolition industry that have pointed to a lot of evidence that leads to the conclusion the towers were blown up.....why would they put their reputations on the line over such a controversial issue? Maybe because they cannot stand to see such an event be accepted for face value.

To date, there has not been an investigation into the collapse of the towers that has not been conducted by the US government. Why would the US government not allow an independent entity to conduct its own investigation?

Never in history had a protected steel building collapsed due to fire but all of a sudden building 7 falls completely to the ground within seconds.

I would believe engineers and demolition experts who are not involved in the political arena ANY DAY over the US government and the Bush administration.

Power point presentation:

http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

unfortunately all the evidence was conveniently and intentionally shipped off to parts unknown, i forget the details, but , of course by a company that specializes in taking down tall buildings, probably contracted from start to finish. There were also issues with the buildings prior to the event, the cost of fixing said issues was astronomical, the owner benefitted greatly by having the buildings destroyed, he got the money, the gov't got it's false flag and excuse to go around the world invading and messing up sovereign countries...and Mr Putin has had enough of that...good on ya Vlad, about time someone showed some balls...

Read this "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation" by MIT engineer Thomas W. Eagar. Conspiracy theorists use information selectively and ignore anything that does not support their theory.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/01 ... -0112.html

A more detailed refutation can be found here.

http://skepdic.com/refuge/bunk27.html

and "A 9/11 conspiracy virus is sweeping the world, but it has no basis in fact"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... 31,00.html

And "Nutty 9-11 Physics" by University of Wisconsin professor Steven Dutch. He addresses ALL of the supposed irregularities.

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htm

The US CIA and Pentagon and Bush are very dangerous, but not because they are attacking their own citizens. They are dangerous because they have destabilized the United Nations, ruined the lives of 27 million Iraqis including 4 million who are refugees, and have legitimized the right for rogue nations to act unilaterally based on lies and deception whenever they please.

Spend 2 hours reading "The Mess They Made" by Gwynne Dyer instead of watching 9/11 conspiracy nonsense. That's sobering!

Mike- Apart from the towers collapsing so strangely and odds/loose ends mentioned, one of the primary questions I always had was:

If the zealot objective is to kill as many infidels as possible, why only hit the towers with such huge risk, money and planning involved....didn't know about structural issues with the towers, that would be a good enough reason for some.

If you could just set off a chlorine, cyanide or some such gas in any football stadium, on a windless day, where security is next to zero...it being NFL Sunday and all...60-80,000 rich consumers in one go Why do they bother with trains, suicides etc. to get 2-20? Other targets are soooo easy, I'm sure even their little brains have come across those ideas.....or am I giving them too much credit or not enough to existing US security Gotta love the airshow in Seattle harbor every time I go there when any little rowboat comes in How is that possibly sustainable

KUS wrote:Mike-

If the zealot objective is to kill as many infidels as possible

Sorry, I'm not Mike, but the objective was never to kill as many infidels as possible - it was to attack the symbols of US power and foreign policy - The World (not the US) Trade Centre, the Pentagon, and presumably the White House.

Kus;

The towers didn't collapse strangely. The support columns where the planes struck failed and the stories above collapsed on the stories below. As Dutch points out:

"Until 9-11, our only experience in bringing down very large buildings was controlled demolition. The highest buildings (apart from broadcast towers) brought down were in the 30 story range. Once the building starts to fall, the physics is going to be the same regardless of the initial cause. So alleged similarities between 9-11 and controlled demolitions prove nothing. You might as well argue that the collapse of Mount St. Helens in 1980 was set off by explosives because it looked just like a landslide caused by explosives."

Gravity causes things to fall toward the earth - down.

Muslim extremists have always had a thing about the WTC. It a symbol of affluence and power and, well, superiority.

If Bush et al. wanted to create an excuse to invade Iraq it would have been far easier to hide some WMD's somewhere there rather than to destroy a fair chunk of New York, by vaporizing US citizens, in US aircraft, to cover their tracks. It's just plain nutty-silly conspiracy flap-doodle.

So how do you explain the demolition of building 7? Why was it already rigged with explosives?

How do you know the anti-conspiracy theory scientists aren't being paid?

IMHO, Anyone who has seen things collapse and has a smidgen of mechanical intuition would really think the buildings collapsed in a most bizarre fashion.

But hey, my sense so far in this world is that most people don't possess a smidgen of intuition ...

Moreover,

The debate about the collapse is totally peripheral anyway. If you know a teensy bit about the U.S., you already know the U.S. government is the greatest malevolent force ever to exist!!

You can all get your aluminium foil hats @ I'm nuking futs.becalm

Tower 7: "Trusses on the fifth and seventh floors of the building were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another; with the south face heavily damaged, the other columns were likely overtaxed. In engineering terms, the “progressive collapse” began on the eastern side, when weakened columns failed from the damage and fire. The entire building fell in on itself as the slumping east side dragged down the west side in a diagonal pattern."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/9 ... 13805.html

Also, see the "National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster" section on WTC 7 at the bottom of the page.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

US Dangerous? See my earlier post regarding "The Mess They Made" ...