| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Just watched Loose Change - Final Cut; Some things I dont understand. | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 28 2009, 01:59 AM (336 Views) | |
| Bernard | May 28 2009, 01:59 AM Post #1 |
|
Hi everyone, I have just watched Loose Change and have some thoughts which I hope that those of you with more background knowledge can clear up for me. I have, over the years, watched various documentaries about 9/11 but this seems to be the most comprhensive 'independent' investigation. However, even this production does raise some fairly fundemental questions - and here's just a couple: 1. The documentary states that the plane that flew into the Pentagon made a decision when it reached the Washington Memorial - if it turned left it would have hit the White House, but it turned right to hit the Pentagon - why? If you want to make a terrorist statement, surely hitting the White House would be the biggest statement you could make. 2. The extensive discussion about the WTC towers and Building 7 possibly having undergone a partial/full controlled demolition using explosives. For this to be the case explosives must have been planted. For the type of demolition which took place - if it did take place- the explosives will have had to have been carefully placed. This will have taken time & so there should be people out there who have knowledge of this. The positioning will have taken place over hours, if not days, & will have had to have been placed directly on the steel structure(s). So, why didn't workers etc see this happening before the WTC was attacked? Someone who hasn't been sworn to silence must have seen something! I hope you can help to sort out my lack of understand. Best wsihes, Bernie |
 |
 
|
| Miragememories | May 28 2009, 08:24 AM Post #2 |
|
If the participants of this inside job valued the unique historical/architectural significance of the White House, attacking the bland, easily restored architecture of the Pentagon would appear to be a more attractive option. Also, the Pentagon does represent the military homebase of the world's No.1 superpower. It can easily be argued that it was a very attractive symbol for a terrorist attack.
This subject has been covered many times. The NIST in their final WTC 7 Report released last summer, amazingly concluded that a single column failure was sufficient to produce the collapse. A single column felled by fires fueled by office furnishings. Regarding your concerns about how come office workers did not see the preparations for the WTC 7 controlled demolition, they probably did on occasion. The trick is in knowing that what you are seeing is not what it appears to be. WTC 7 was subject to substantial renovation activity, including various servicing upgrades. This type of activity would have provided easy access to the critical core columns, and given that it was pre-9/11, would not have drawn much attention. MM |
|
|
|
| Bernard | May 28 2009, 12:34 PM Post #3 |
|
Thanks MM, Not being an American does mean that I do not understand the true significance of the Pentagon compared to the White House! Re the collapsing towers. I have, today, been doing some research and the NIST statement may not be as far from the truth as it may appear to be. We need to go back to the Titanic to see where I am coming from. One of the reasons that the Titanic got holed so badly was the high sulphur content of the steel plates used to build it. If steel has a high sulphur content then, under a high impact it behaves in a 'brittle' way and not a ductile way - which is what we would expect. So, my theory is based upon the quality of steel that was used to build the towers. If it contained a high (relative term) sulphur content then once floors of the tower statred to collapse then the high impact created on lower floors could result in the steel actually 'breaking' (brittle) and not 'bending' (ductile) as would normally be expected. Just another angle to try to explain the way the towers collapsed. I still can not believe that charges could have been planted without someone seeing what was happening! Best wishes, Bernie. |
|
|
|
| Gizzmo | Jun 4 2009, 05:09 PM Post #4 |
|
HI im new here too  as regards them being able to plant these explosives, i think thats the simplest part of the WTC question's.. the WTC had many empty offices and its common knowlege that in the time running up to 9/11 normal working life was disrupted in many ways, people were mived about suposidly for upgrade work, so it was in everyones interest to move around the building while this work was being carried out, almost all companys complained of the amount of dust in the building during the time runnning upto 911... work was also being carried out within the lift shafts (the core of the building if im not mistaken) it would have been very easy for work to be carried out in that area without causing a spectical... The floor (i forget the #) that was completly clear, as i no offices walls or anything, where people reported noises comming from there and there was no access to that floor without a special key to open the lift doors, offices, bellow heard heavy sounding noises from above, though it is possible that it wasnt actualy that floor but somthing was going on... as already said its hard to go back and think the way we used to, if i get on the tube tommow and see a briefcase sitting there im probably going to report it to somone where as before 911 i would have handled it myself as the fear or terrorism wasnt there before 911 to the degree it is now.. what im saying is people were not questioning everything they saw back then like we do now, if your brother comes to your house you probably wouldnt think twice about leaving him in the room with your wallet on the table, but if you found out he stole $100 from you mother a week ago im damn sure you would be carefull where you left you wallet, know what i mean???... surcurity was very strange also running upto 911, power cutts where banks holding millions of $$$ were given days notice, this is unheard off!, doors and camera's were not functioning, the surcurity of the whole building was literly shut down... getting the explosives into the towers was not hard imo and was probably the easiest part of the whole operation imo |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Welcome Newcomers! · Next Topic » |
2:19 AM Dec 5
