737 Crashes into World Trade Centre

Remove this Banner Ad

mate, I don't know the details but

1) what temperature does aluminium burn at?
2) what did they do with the passengers including the australian and chinese national
3) how did they convince an airline that a plane that supposedly crashed but didn't disappear
4) how does a conspiracy like that, involving so many people remain unresolved other than on youtube?
1) the more important question is what can create enough heat to make aluminium burn?
2) how the hell should I know
3) ditto
4) ditto - well hundreds of thousands were involved in building the atom bomb in secret - it's sad but you can't get the mainstream media to even speculate - the holocaust was kept secret - JFK assassination - Stalin's purges - Reichstag fire - see when it's them and not us it becomes folk lore with little but an accusation - stolen generation - Catholic priests sodomizing boys - domestic violence - Sadams WMDs - Abu graib - gizmo -

There are secrets everywhere. The problem here is the sheer bloody minded evil of it. How could the number required keep so cravenly silent. But if you care to actually look - there are confessions and testimonies available (some nutty but most cast serious doubt on the official story)

The sad thing is that Australia is one of the most gullible populace in the world. In most places around Europe and even America a greater portion of the public suspect foul play then we do. We are dumb - just turn on your free to air tv for a few minutes.
 
thanks for the link

I will read tonight. Is there a section I should pay special attention towards?
I read the document in its entirety some 10 years ago when I first became enraged and convinced that the whole thing was just planned. So I can't recall the exact pages
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/pnac.htm
This link will give you the short hand version by truthers
You can just Wikipedia it too
But the full original read gets you into the mindset and perspective.
 
* you're. and lol yeah, im "desperate" to point out you never read the document you're claiming as a source :thumbsu:
My troll - why bother if you have no interest - we have debated this and every time you runaway to mummy. Don't you remember before you decided any discourse with me would be exclusively ad hominems? You narrated your truther past and how you found yourself in the gutter of life, homeless, pissed on and many other degradations. And then your Damascus moment where you realised fox and cnn would embrace you and now you are born again - free of doubt. And none shall doubt.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

1) the more important question is what can create enough heat to make aluminium burn?
2) how the hell should I know
3) ditto
4) ditto - well hundreds of thousands were involved in building the atom bomb in secret - it's sad but you can't get the mainstream media to even speculate - the holocaust was kept secret - JFK assassination - Stalin's purges - Reichstag fire - see when it's them and not us it becomes folk lore with little but an accusation - stolen generation - Catholic priests sodomizing boys - domestic violence - Sadams WMDs - Abu graib - gizmo -

There are secrets everywhere. The problem here is the sheer bloody minded evil of it. How could the number required keep so cravenly silent. But if you care to actually look - there are confessions and testimonies available (some nutty but most cast serious doubt on the official story)

The sad thing is that Australia is one of the most gullible populace in the world. In most places around Europe and even America a greater portion of the public suspect foul play then we do. We are dumb - just turn on your free to air tv for a few minutes.

I remember from fire fighting training in the military that alumium was set on fire in a gas flame and then we had to run in with water to put it out. When done the fire becomes even more immense.

So not sure what temperature exactly but from memory the danger temperature is only 600 degrees.



I would suggest flame from avaition fuel would exceed 1,000 degrees and any water sprinkler system would be an added disaster.
 
My troll - why bother if you have no interest - we have debated this and every time you runaway to mummy.

there is no "debate". you're a nutter, and from time to time i bother to laugh at you.

Don't you remember before you decided any discourse with me would be exclusively ad hominems?
You narrated your truther past and how you found yourself in the gutter of life, homeless, pissed on and many other degradations. And then your Damascus moment where you realised fox and cnn would embrace you and now you are born again - free of doubt. And none shall doubt.

lol, i have no truther past. but hey, points for using your own bullshit this time rather than just copying somebody else's :thumbsu:

I read the document in its entirety some 10 years ago

lol. either you're a ****ing liar or you simply didn't understand the document. either option is possible, but the former is far more likely.
 
Young me was traumatized that Cheez TV wasn't on, then mum came in and told me... scary shit.
I was watching tv series of Lock stock and 2 smoking barrels on ABC, I thought that was a mind blowing plot twist for the first minute or so. Had no idea the buildings would actually disintegrate as they did so went to bed after number 2 hit. I still find it unlikely that they would fall at freefall speed after being hit by an aeroplane, which is really made very flimsily. Its like an aluminium can breaking a concrete pillar.

Maybe the building did plausibly fall from the fire, I'm happy to remain agnostic on this. This is hardly the only strange thing that occured that day. The Pentagon hit was odd, and the official story that barely trained terrorist hit the buildings so precisely is odd too.
 
Last edited:
I still find it unlikely that they would fall at freefall speed

:( it's more than 14 years since it happened, why on earth are you still repeating this stuff?

grabbed the first relevant google image search i could find. there are plenty more for you to find on your own if you want.

freefall-3.jpg


i can't be bothered drawing on the image and re-uploading it, so words will have to do.

can you see the debris? see how it is out-pacing the upper structure that's driving the building's collapse? that is what is falling at free fall speed. quite obviously the upper part is not.

14 years ffs.
 
Its like an aluminium can breaking a concrete pillar.

how does a table tennis ball smash through a paddle?



The Pentagon hit was odd, and the official story that barely trained terrorist hit the buildings so precisely is odd too.

got pretty much everything you should need. lots of primary sources. you would have to be extraordinarily unreasonable to doubt flight 77's role on 911 in the face of overwhelming evidence.

http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.com.au/
 
:( it's more than 14 years since it happened, why on earth are you still repeating this stuff?

grabbed the first relevant google image search i could find. there are plenty more for you to find on your own if you want.

freefall-3.jpg


i can't be bothered drawing on the image and re-uploading it, so words will have to do.

can you see the debris? see how it is out-pacing the upper structure that's driving the building's collapse? that is what is falling at free fall speed. quite obviously the upper part is not.

14 years ffs.
While I did qualify that statement in the edit, 2 things- 1 it still fell really fast. 2 those pieces could have been impacted from above, giving them additional acceleration. The construction must have been pretty shitty, if the fire was the cause of the fall, and even worse if the aluminiun can plane was.

Also with the progress in drone tech could it have been possible the planes were controlled remotely?
 
Even if it was exactly as official, the response of attacking Saddam and not even sanctioning the Saudi's is bat shit crazy too.
 
While I did qualify that statement in the edit, 2 things- 1 it still fell really fast. 2 those pieces could have been impacted from above, giving them additional acceleration. The construction must have been pretty shitty, if the fire was the cause of the fall, and even worse if the aluminiun can plane was.

Also with the progress in drone tech could it have been possible the planes were controlled remotely?

their construction was somewhat compromised as the mafia controlled the cement and building industries. in response techniques were developed to increase the use of alternative building materials.

it worked a treat until planes hit them.
 
Even if it was exactly as official, the response of attacking Saddam and not even sanctioning the Saudi's is bat shit crazy too.

yep

I think daddy bush felt the job wasn't finished
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

1 it still fell really fast.

yes, it did. and we know why don't we? don't we? :(

hJdqzcp.jpg


those pieces could have been impacted from above, giving them additional acceleration.

but we know they weren't though? we have the collapses on video. im sure you've watched them many times. it is quite obvious that a significant amount of debris out-paced the point of collapse.

The construction must have been pretty shitty, if the fire was the cause of the fall, and even worse if the aluminiun can plane was.

the construction of the towers was amazing. they contained more office space than some US cities. they were built to move several feet at the top under heavy wind loads. they achieved these things by using the design you can plainly see above- a "hollow" tube with most of the structural steel on the outside of the building. but there was very little on the inside, certainly nothing that could bear the weight of the upper part of the structure (once it collapses).

Also with the progress in drone tech could it have been possible the planes were controlled remotely?

possible? im sure it would be possible to do that from a technological point of view. is that what happened? no.
 
:( it's more than 14 years since it happened, why on earth are you still repeating this stuff?

grabbed the first relevant google image search i could find. there are plenty more for you to find on your own if you want.

freefall-3.jpg


i can't be bothered drawing on the image and re-uploading it, so words will have to do.

can you see the debris? see how it is out-pacing the upper structure that's driving the building's collapse? that is what is falling at free fall speed. quite obviously the upper part is not.

14 years ffs.
You can't see anything wrong with that picture?
What is forcing the building down? Dust?
Seriously? There is a solid structure and above it what?
Long live stupidity
 
there is no "debate". you're a nutter, and from time to time i bother to laugh at you.



lol, i have no truther past. but hey, points for using your own bullshit this time rather than just copying somebody else's :thumbsu:



lol. either you're a ******* liar or you simply didn't understand the document. either option is possible, but the former is far more likely.
No truther past? Did you post this?
"first, let's make one thing clear. conspiracy theories are my thing. i don't take my cues from "the MSM", and have spent an embarrassing, shameful amount of time learning all about the ones popularised since the advent of the 56k modem. ..."

No calling people liar, nutter is your thing
But then you leave evidence to the contrary
You look say any nonsense that comes to mind it seems

I suspect all this conspiracy chasing has made you confused

What is it you said you didn't say grasshopper?

I suggest you need to go back and delete your own posts
 
just read it

nothing in it
I provided you the link because you asked why would the USA do it?
This document is written by high ranking staff in the military and the bush administration
It provides you motive and the requirement - in their own words - for a cataclysmic event like Pearl Harbour
It doesn't necessarily prove anything but it answers your question.
 
I remember from fire fighting training in the military that alumium was set on fire in a gas flame and then we had to run in with water to put it out. When done the fire becomes even more immense.

So not sure what temperature exactly but from memory the danger temperature is only 600 degrees.



I would suggest flame from avaition fuel would exceed 1,000 degrees and any water sprinkler system would be an added disaster.
The aluminium would need to be very small in powder form - aluminium in larger pieces merely conducts heat
I am no expert but black smoke says to me the fire was not so intense
Survivors managed to pass by the floors in question
Firefighters reported the fires could be put out

This really is all beyond a joke that such serious questions are of no interest
The commission report authors were pissed with the report and resources available to them.
 
I provided you the link because you asked why would the USA do it?
This document is written by high ranking staff in the military and the bush administration
It provides you motive and the requirement - in their own words - for a cataclysmic event like Pearl Harbour
It doesn't necessarily prove anything but it answers your question.

I think you have taken a comment out of context. It is a fact that politics does swing by a pendulum and complacency builds up before politics reacts and responds by over-reacting.

This complacency was clearly demonstrated at the beginning of WW2. The war started in 39 but it took about a year before the real war began as everyone was caught off guard.



I'm not hear to defend the actions of the US but let's stick to the facts. Chasing rabbits down holes only serves further to confuse issues and makes the concept of accountability even harder.
 
The aluminium would need to be very small in powder form - aluminium in larger pieces merely conducts heat
I am no expert but black smoke says to me the fire was not so intense
Survivors managed to pass by the floors in question
Firefighters reported the fires could be put out

This really is all beyond a joke that such serious questions are of no interest
The commission report authors were pissed with the report and resources available to them.

your comments and claimed facts go against the reports which claim the heat was intense, material was dripping from the above and the fact fire fighters couldn't put out the blaze (rather they used fire breaks).
 
No truther past? Did you post this?
"first, let's make one thing clear. conspiracy theories are my thing. i don't take my cues from "the MSM", and have spent an embarrassing, shameful amount of time learning all about the ones popularised since the advent of the 56k modem. ..."

hahahaha! :drunk:

none of that has anything to do with being a truther you imbecile. conspiracy theories are my thing- i know a whole lot more about the popular ones than your average guy. i didn't learn about them from "the MSM", and the amount i know about them and/or the time i've spent on idiots like you is embarrassing and shameful because you guys are ****ing morons.

your inability to understand what you've quoted here is just a tiny example of your capacity for making accurate/reasonable inferences when parsing information.

No calling people liar, nutter is your thing
But then you leave evidence to the contrary
You look say any nonsense that comes to mind it seems

I suspect all this conspiracy chasing has made you confused

What is it you said you didn't say grasshopper?

I suggest you need to go back and delete your own posts

as above. LOL :D
 
hahahaha! :drunk:

none of that has anything to do with being a truther you imbecile. conspiracy theories are my thing- i know a whole lot more about the popular ones than your average guy. i didn't learn about them from "the MSM", and the amount i know about them and/or the time i've spent on idiots like you is embarrassing and shameful because you guys are ******* morons.

your inability to understand what you've quoted here is just a tiny example of your capacity for making accurate/reasonable inferences when parsing information.



as above. LOL :D
Which begs the question
Why would such an intelligent person spend so much time on the infinitude of nutty conspiracies? How do you guard against becoming a nutter yourself?

An hour of ufo alien sites drives most people for the nearest pub? To expose yourself to the full spectrum of nonsense out their would change your psychological state and makes it quite understandable you are so desperate to stand on solid ground.

You can see how this must disqualify you from the possibility of any objectivity. Your strident abuse and resort to name calling suggests this obsession has you somewhat unhinged.

The smallest question sees you plastering huge pictures and over the top juvenile abuse. Dismissing all and sundry as nutty.

Your way too emotional
I'm not quite sure what to make of your condition.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

737 Crashes into World Trade Centre

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top