Jump to content

Shooting in Denver


catmag
 Share

Recommended Posts

No, you're wrong at the outset. The Towers were a Framed Tube design.

The strength was in the outer walls. The central core held the lifts, taking very little of the structural load.

 

 

 

Do your homework properly.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 415
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

 

nowt wrong with correcting spelling mistakes.

 

In the meantime, use your superior intellect to read posts properly, as I said. Which you still aren't doing. Stop presuming you know what I say or think and concentrate on what I actually post. I have never said that "everybody would walk down the street carrying guns" or any other similar anti-west leftie shite scaremongering that you make up in your head imagining I have said when I haven't. There's a good boy now.

 

Edit. [sorry for the edit] I also said later, smashing their head in with a baseball bat is also OK. So I think my meaning is obvious enough, especially to someone as clever as you.

 

Sigh. Let's make things simple. You have said you think guns should be legal for those that want them. Would this make you feel personally more safe, and do you think it would increase or decrease violent crime, and it's consequences if this happened. Can you answer this.

 

I can appreciate TP's point about putting the djinni back in the bottle, but to want to actively take it out to me is crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem Bobby. It's best to take some time to check out stuff like that and considering you are interested in stuff like architecture it might help you form at least some kind of solid opinion either way.

 

I've studied a lot about 9/11 and many other happenings and I form my own opinions on discrepancies I see or interviews that just seem staged.

 

I naturally cannot prove, physically what I term a conspiracy but I'm not in it for that, I'm basically looking at it and making a judgement for myself so that I don't get duped by future happenings.

 

I have a lot of theories and some are bizarre as far as other people would think but to me, I say there's a feasibility to what I say even though many would say I'm simply stark raving mad lol.

I'm hearing ya and appreciate you're not forcing your views on anyone.

 

Fair play to you for raising your head above the parapet as it were too ! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not seen it tbh. It's very interesting. Who do they - and you - think would carry out such a controlled demolition and why ?

Who is actually fully behind it I don't know for certain as I don;t actually know who controls what as far as countries go but let's just say, I do not subscribe to the box cutter terrorists hijacking planes scenario.

 

The purpose of it all in my opinion fits a few agenda's.

 

Firstly, those towers were built in the early 70's when asbestos was the in thing for fire proofing and would have cost a fortune to strip out and the lease holder was supposedly told to bring the buildings up to spec by removing the asbestos, which would have cost tens of millions to do for each building on the complex.

Secondly , if reports are accurate, they were only half occupied and losing money hand over fist.

 

So, a possible solution could have been to demolish the complex but use it as a tool in order to invade Iraq and Afghanistan by making the public believe the country is under attack and making people so angry, believing terrorists are behind the hits that they actually scream for a war on terror and giving their blessing to sending troops in to whip the countries arses who sanctioned it.

 

I don't know if this is the actual case but I don't believe a bunch of rag tag terrorists can take over 4 planes, turn of transponders etc after overpowering the pilot, co pilot, navigator and stewards, plus passengers on all 4 planes, using box cutters and managing to not only fly the planes but to navigate them, obviously using an A to Z map that was handy, turning the planes around and managing to aim for the towers, flying at supposedly 500mph at 800 feet and crashing into them as if they were a hot knife going through butter, yet were in the air for supposedly a long period of time, whilst the air defence sat back and finished their coffee, sandwiches and card games before jumping into their jets to look for the planes.

 

The reason interceptor jets weren't scrambled was because no commercial airliners were hijacked in my opinion.

Edited by wolfy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you're wrong at the outset. The Towers were a Framed Tube design.

The strength was in the outer walls. The central core held the lifts, taking very little of the structural load.

 

 

 

Do your homework properly.

I've done my homework.

 

The Central core did hold the lifts as I explained yet they also knitted the outside of the building to them by steel struts.

 

The official reason for collapse was the steel trusses warping then falling onto each other and if that was the case, they would have all had to break at virtually the same time all around the building, so what was acting on the central core?

 

No way can a steel structure collapse straight down like they did.

 

If they were made of weakened concrete and no steel, I would believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if it was a controlled demolition-

How did they manage to covertly rig sufficient demolition explosives on every floor without a single person raising a slightly suspicious eyebrow?

How did they coordinate the timing of the detonations so that none of it was evident to onlookers.

Who pressed the button to blow them?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what was seen to hit the towers?

 

Btw, this has been done to death on here previously. You are Parky cubed in the lunacy states (whilst being perfectly pleasent).

Media CGI was what appeared to hit the towers if you were watching the news channels.

 

What actually really hit the towers, I can only guess at and my guess is, it wasn't planes but missiles, coupled with previously planted cutter charges strategically placed to open up a cartoon sized plane gash.

 

A plane is a hollow tube of aluminium with a nose that is basically carbon fibre with aluminium wings.

 

If those planes really hit those buildings, the wings would have folded back and half of the plane at least would have fallen to the ground.

 

Those planes sailed into those buildings as effortlessly as any of us would sail through an open door.

 

If people want to believe that planes can do that then I won't tell you you are wrong but I will not accept that it's possible.

 

For a plane to do that, it not only has to go through the outer steel, it also has to somehow slice all the floors open on the floors it hits.

 

My theory...IMPOSSIBLE 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if it was a controlled demolition-

How did they manage to covertly rig sufficient demolition explosives on every floor without a single person raising a slightly suspicious eyebrow?

How did they coordinate the timing of the detonations so that none of it was evident to onlookers.

Who pressed the button to blow them?

There was power downs previously and sniffer dogs were taken out of the building.

Floors were empty and many of them.

The elevators are in the central core including the service elevators.

It's not hard for a crew to rig it up using state of the art explosives.

 

It was evident to onlookers, including firemen, some of who stated, " we went about 3 blocks and all we heard was , boom boom boom boom boom, as if they were planning to take a building down". another said, " it's as if the building had detonators inside"...

 

Who pressed the buttons... anyone can press a remote controlled sequenced detonator for anywhere close by from any vehicle, building or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just glad we don't have anyone on here that lost loved ones on 9/11 having to listen to your ludicrous theories.

 

What happened to the people who supposedly died on the planes then? 4 of them worked for the company I worked for at the time - were they sat on a missile?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is Wolfy, you might think you're original or a freethinker, but all this batshit crazy stuff you refer to has been on the internet for a decade.

 

The conspiracy of the Universe revolving round the Earth was new to me I admit, but even that was debunked 400 years ago.

 

A word of caution though. Not all these conspiraciy theories are as harmless as people might think. There are some pretty unpleasent people involved with the 'allopathic' conspiracies you mentioned on the other thread who believe in all sorts of - for a better word - evil stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Media CGI :lol:

How do you explain the hundreds of examples of footage taken by ordinary people , clearly showing commercial airliners hitting the towers?

We're they all " in on it" too?

Yes I've seen a lot of these so called amateur footage by these so called ordinary people, have a look yourself because some of the footage is amazing, even managing to zoom in on the plane hitting at just the right time, even though it's supposedly going at 500mph 800 feet up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What were the people on the scene looking at then? I can't believe I'm even entertaining this with questions when you just basically claim that everything was magically faked and it pulled the wool over the eyes of everyone on Manhattan that day, and those over the water in New Jersey watching it unfold, not to mention the millions at home who were all watching a special effects show put on by the major news networks.

 

You genuinely think this is a plausible explanation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is Wolfy, you might think you're original or a freethinker, but all this batshit crazy stuff you refer to has been on the internet for a decade.

 

The conspiracy of the Universe revolving round the Earth was new to me I admit, but even that was debunked 400 years ago.

 

A word of caution though. Not all these conspiraciy theories are as harmless as people might think. There are some pretty unpleasent people involved with the 'allopathic' conspiracies you mentioned on the other thread who believe in all sorts of - for a better word - evil stuff.

I have never said anything about what I'm saying is original, it just happened that topics tend to take different routes at times and this is no different.

 

I'm simply giving my take on stuff I've looked at, it doesn't mean I'm correct in all I'm saying but it also doesn't mean I'm wrong either, it's simply stuff that doesn't add up and appears phoney.

 

I'm sure there''s many things that you question...it might not be conspiracies like this but I'm sure certain things don't add up to you.

 

All topics cause conflict and differing opinions which makes them interesting and a topic would immediately become boring if it was put up and everyone said, " oh yeah I agree2...end of topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chez might like him but I think he is a scary wank shaft tbh

 

A plane is an aluminium tube and if it hit the building it would collapse to the floor? :lol: I can smash a window with a stone never mind a fucking jumbo jet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many.

I don't know how many, I'm no full on expert on how things were done, I'm giving an opinion on what could have happened...It's a theory.

 

I'm also giving my opinion on what didn't happen and one of them is buildings like that collapsing under their own weight at free fall speed without the use of explosives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chez might like him but I think he is a scary wank shaft tbh

 

A plane is an aluminium tube and if it hit the building it would collapse to the floor? :lol: I can smash a window with a stone never mind a fucking jumbo jet!

Yeah, well try and smash a steel building with that same stone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how many, I'm no full on expert on how things were done, I'm giving an opinion on what could have happened...It's a theory.

 

I'm also giving my opinion on what didn't happen and one of them is buildings like that collapsing under their own weight at free fall speed without the use of explosives.

In your self confessed, non expert opinion.

 

Righto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What were the people on the scene looking at then? I can't believe I'm even entertaining this with questions when you just basically claim that everything was magically faked and it pulled the wool over the eyes of everyone on Manhattan that day, and those over the water in New Jersey watching it unfold, not to mention the millions at home who were all watching a special effects show put on by the major news networks.

 

You genuinely think this is a plausible explanation?

I don't expect you to believe a word I say, that's up to you.

 

There's plenty of people who were asked if they saw the plane and they said," there was no plane, it was a bomb" and some said, the building just exploded.

 

Have a look for yourself if you want to and if not, that's fine by me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.