9/11 - A Planned Demolition ???

[waveslider]

PS you must be a breakout trader

[james_gsx]

This whole thing was debunked far too many times.

Can't we just agree that something of that magnitude is far too large for the government to plan and never have any sort of leak 6 years later?

I've heard all the arguments for and against a conspiracy, and I chose not to believe one happened. I've seen more independent evidence against the theory for it, so for those of you who will think I am brainwashed by the government please don't bother.

Of all the research I've done on this topic (because I've argued it too many times) I find Steve Maddox to have the best review, enjoy

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....i?u=911_morons

[Reaver]

While on paper it seems like the conspiracy would be possible....human nature pretty much precludes it from actually being feasible.

Same reason communism doesn't work.....too many loose ends to count on....

[michaltrade]

In politic, argument without end.
In war, the winner is always right, the "good guy".
In trading, both winners and losers are smart!!! (well, a fool will not trade).
Richer does not mean smarter. Who is smarter than who?

[OAC]

I agree. People obsessed with conspiracy theory probably has mental problems like someone is always out to get them. I was kind of curious
how it looks from the law of physics point of view. I live 30 minutes outside of NYC and I can tell you there was just a absolutely huge dusk cloud generated from the collapse. As the engineering professor pointed out in the film clip. When the concrete converts to dusk cloud, tremendous kinetic energy is released. As we know Einstein's equation E=MC2, when all the energy is released, where did the mass go. Without mass , there would'nt be the Pankcake effect claimed by FEMA which one floor cave into the next floor below and so on. Also when one floor cave into another floor, the flloor below create temporay support( Like our pivots ?). They estimate for 100
floors or so to fall like a domino, it will take minimum of 45 seconds. But if you view the footage , it only took 15 seconds. To make the long story short, the only plausible explanation is the TWC was brought down by explosives
placed at various strategic locations. As who has planted there explosives ? I will let you guys figure it out. Do I believe there are evil people who are in very powerful positions in our society, well I would'nt rule that one out either.

[james_gsx]

The pancake theory was never supported.

	Quote:
	2. Why did NIST not consider a “controlled demolition� hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation as it did for the “pancake theory� hypothesis? A key critique of NIST’s work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a “progressive collapse� after the point of collapse initiation and the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.

	Quote:
	NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory� of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system�that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns�consisted of a grid of steel “trusses� integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.

	Quote:
	NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition� theory since there is conclusive evidence that: * the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and; * the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors. Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation. In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

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


A lot of that stuff is on the Maddox site I posted for those interested.

[OAC]

There is a thing in trading , I think in the army too, called KISS principle.
Kiss It Simple and Stupid. Lawyers use fancy words and many people would'nt trust them. I believe if I drop a rock from the top of a 100 story bldg, when it hit the pavement, it may break into smaller pieces, but it won't be in powder form. When all the jet fuel get ignited, most is waisted in a large ball of fire in the air. What ever is left is no way enough to convert most of that concrete that we see into powder form. Energy are not created but only from one form to another, if I remember correctly from high school.

[james_gsx]

Well thats a lot of dust that was created, the towers didn't just fall and turn to dust if thats what you mean? They fell and there was a ton of debris everywhere.

[brownsfan019]

	Quote:	jbtrades
	I stand corrected. I did not know that "General Discussion" was code for "Conspiracy Nut Discussion".

You can't be serious.

Have you bothered to read any of the other threads in General Discussion?

Any of them?

This is the first thread in recent memory to fall under the 'conspiracy nut' discussion. This is the first thread that could actually stir some debate on this forum.

Next time take a look around before posting your remarks.

[brownsfan019]

	Quote:	Reaver
	While on paper it seems like the conspiracy would be possible....human nature pretty much precludes it from actually being feasible.

I have to agree with Reaver on this one. When I first watched Loose Change, it definitely stirred up some emotion. And like Reaver said, it does seem possible on paper. But pulling this off in real life would be difficult with so many people needing to be involved AND then not one soul saying a word since. It's just hard to believe that it could have been planned out so perfectly and that there would not be at least one whistle blower.