I
still argue that there were cover-up conspiracies involving JFK's
assassination, Oklahoma bombing, Flight 800, and I am proudly a
Birther and AGW denier. Because the preponderance of evidence
demands it. While there are compelling aspects of the 9-11 *Truther argument , I could not buy
into them. Had Obama been president at the time, maybe (srsly).
But, I would sooner believe that FDR engineered Pearl
Harbor than the Bush Admin was involved in this.
No (well, almost) way.
The most compelling Truther
claim is that timed explosive charges had been strategically placed to
bring down the Twins. That 200+ firemen, who were in the
buildings,
swore they heard a series of explosions just before each building
collapsed was bothersome.
So it was that when barraged with promos for Smithsonian's 'Missing Evidence' series, pushing "Jack the Ripper Found" and "Twin Towers" stories, I
finally watched the Ripper. Not
that I give a crap, but by god I think they did find the sumbitch! That
episode was so thorough in its analysis that I decided, what the hell,
let's see why the Truthers are right. Yes, I fully expected that
would
be the claim, and it pissed me off that they may after have been
right. I was wrong.
Molten aluminum is 3 times more powerful than TNT when it comes into
contact with water.
If you can watch the full episode, do. And yes,
there
are still dissenters, just as there are still people who think I'm the
cause of hot weather. FKM. |
I am convinced that Obama is a "birther" as well. He faked his own birth certificate, diddin he?
ReplyDeleteSir H the Comet
Hmmm…I don't think FDR "engineered" Pearl Harbor, but many folks believe he knew about it beforehand and did nothing. As to the WTC, if explosive charges had been placed -- as in the manner of the first bombing (in 1993) -- then why take the trouble to hijack 2 planes to fly into it? And what of the other 2 planes?
ReplyDeleteIn general, I tend to go with what G. Gordon Liddy says about conspiracies: "Three people can keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
I have, and still believe, the "explosions" were fire extinguishers and water pipes exploding due to internal pressure from the heat.
ReplyDeleteGo see "What Could Possibly Go Wrong" on the Science Channel Cuzin Rick
ReplyDeleteAluminum burns and it burns hot. The Navy found this out when they started building the upper works of ships out of the stuff.
ReplyDeletehttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/USS_Belknap_collision_damage.jpg
The fire doesn't have to get hot enough to melt the steel. It just needs to get hot enough that the shear, tensile, and compression strength of the steel can no longer bear the load. This is why structural steel in building is encased in concrete as concrete acts as an insulator as well as providing additional strength. In the case of WTC towers 1 & 2, the trusses were covered in asbestos which likely got blown off during the impact. Once the pins securing the trusses to the column got hot enough, they failed causing the trusses to detach and collapse.
What a crock of bullshit! Donald Trump himself said on the tube that the tower were actually built to survive that impact, actually only ten per cent of the structure was damaged. But the lawyer lobby mafia forced the owners to remove the asbestos cladding of the structure and without the asbestos, the steel just burned away like with a cutting torch...add oxygen to hot steel and it burn like saltpeter! Asbestos is just as harmless as beach sand...Asbestosis come from inhaling massive amounts of fibers, just like silicosis come from inhaling massive amounts of road dust. Initially, asbestos was seen as so harmless that workers' unions refused the wearing of breathing apparatuses. Working on carbon brakes, roofing and asphalt will give you cancer far faster.
ReplyDeleteBurning steel, or acetylene torch:(the "explosions" were floors actually slamming on the lower ones...collapsing the burning, weakened structure)
http://www.loupiote.com/photos/7293564588.shtml