on 13. Sep 2010 at 13:27:
Quote:Nick. Are you actually comparing a plane made from aluminium and with 10,000 gallons of aviatioon fuel hitting a steel framed building, with someone not wearing a seatbelt?
Yes, I am.
how and why
?
The WTC building was 70% air. There were steel columns, but obviously these were spaced far enough apart to permit an aircraft fuselage feasibly to penetrate without striking one full on. The outer covering of the WTC, in between floors, was largely glass. Thus, it is entirely possible for the cockpit to enter and not be totally crushed. Equally, it can be reasonably expected that the hijacker was not strapped in as a pilot would be. There is a great deal of debris ejected from the WTC face opposite to that of impact. It is entirely conceivable that some of that debris contained body parts and equally conceivable that some of those parts belonged to a hijacker.
nope .. not acceptable.. now thats double standard..
you claim that the building collapse from the heat of fire and you say the passport paper survived because may be it jumped out
this is really conspiracy theory , the building is enough wide to stop any part of the airplane for passing to the otherside .. may I remind that even the steel black box at the TAIL of airplane didnt survive..
As mentioned many times, WTC building 7 was only very slightly damaged
NY fireman say it was damaged enough to cause them to evacuate. Are they lying?
a firemans evacuation standard is not a norm for a building to collapse..
Quote:3. No plane hit the penatgon at all. Comparing the destruction of a Small Phatom F4 aircraft hitting 30 ft thick concrete at 600mph with the possibility of a commercial airliner hitting 6" thick walls of a building at 300mph, is nonsense.
So is the claim of 6-inch walls at the Pentagon. The walls were 24" thick!! Furthermore, the portion of the structure, known as "Wedge 1" had recently undergone a structural refurbishment. "The exterior walls had been reinforced with steel beams and columns, bolted where they met at each floor."
(See:
http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/today.html &
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.asp)
look in the pictures I dont see any 24" thick walls
or I'm blind
..
Quote:How does ANYONE here explain the steel beams, which were clearly cut at 45 degrees, excatly as they would be in demolition? Anyone at all?
Yes, they were cut at that angle during the rescue/clean-up operation. Cuts are made at that angle to prevent the columns toppling.
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htmhow many were cut ? all of them ?
Quote:What angers me and baffles me, is IF this was a demolition (which I absolutely believe) and someone was trying to hide it, why not evactuate the buildings first? You could still fly two planes into it and still demolish it, but why kill 3000+ people for nothing?
Because it WASN'T a demolition!
there is a saying in my language translated "you cant cover the sun with mud"
paralel explosions in those pictures are amazingly obvious..
you accept or not .. it was..how you explain the explosive chemical remains found in debris..?
Home 
Pages: 
