Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]


BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job

Related threads:
Sept 11, 2001 - 10 yr anniversary thread (39)
BS: Remember 9/11 (123)
BS: Building What? 9/11 (68)
BS: Firefighters for 9/11 Truth: Press Conference (311)
BS: Did We Imagine 9/11??? (128)
BS: An Investent And Momento Of 9/11, Not! (12)
BS: The Legacy of 9/11 (25)
BS: Kerry acknowledges WTC7 demolition (167)
BS: David Ray Griffin's 9/11 debunking book (1)
BS: 9/11 Solved-Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Confessed (121)
BS: 9/11 eyewitness in WTC sub-basement (23)
BS: Five years after 9/11 (88)
WTC survivor - virus (Hoax) (2)
BS: Did the FBI bomb the WTC in '93? (111) (closed)
BS: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories (24) (closed)
BS: why did the wtc fall down (62) (closed)
BS: Were the 9/11 Hijackers Gay? (161) (closed)
BS: Great Collection of 9/11 Related Stuff (2) (closed)
BS: WTC Attackers: An Alternative View (14) (closed)
Is this the WTC? (19)


CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 02:26 AM
The Fooles Troupe 15 Jul 07 - 02:56 AM
CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 10:11 AM
GUEST,sooo sweet 15 Jul 07 - 12:57 PM
robomatic 15 Jul 07 - 12:58 PM
Peace 15 Jul 07 - 01:07 PM
Peace 15 Jul 07 - 01:10 PM
GUEST,sooo sweet 15 Jul 07 - 01:44 PM
Peace 15 Jul 07 - 01:53 PM
robomatic 15 Jul 07 - 02:04 PM
CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 02:07 PM
GUEST,sooo sweet 15 Jul 07 - 02:08 PM
Peace 15 Jul 07 - 02:11 PM
CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 02:12 PM
cookster 15 Jul 07 - 02:13 PM
cookster 15 Jul 07 - 02:14 PM
CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 02:26 PM
Don Firth 15 Jul 07 - 02:39 PM
Bill D 15 Jul 07 - 02:43 PM
pdq 15 Jul 07 - 02:47 PM
robomatic 15 Jul 07 - 02:49 PM
robomatic 15 Jul 07 - 03:17 PM
CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 10:35 PM
CarolC 15 Jul 07 - 11:00 PM
Peace 15 Jul 07 - 11:50 PM
Peace 16 Jul 07 - 12:02 AM
GUEST,sooo sweet 16 Jul 07 - 12:02 AM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Jul 07 - 01:16 AM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Jul 07 - 01:24 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 01:26 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 01:28 AM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Jul 07 - 01:31 AM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Jul 07 - 01:33 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 01:35 AM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Jul 07 - 01:48 AM
Jim Lad 16 Jul 07 - 02:33 AM
robomatic 16 Jul 07 - 03:50 AM
Peace 16 Jul 07 - 10:41 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 10:42 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 10:50 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 07 - 11:07 AM
Bill D 16 Jul 07 - 11:09 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Jul 07 - 11:21 AM
Peace 16 Jul 07 - 11:24 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 11:25 AM
Teribus 16 Jul 07 - 11:30 AM
CarolC 16 Jul 07 - 11:31 AM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 16 Jul 07 - 11:38 AM
Peace 16 Jul 07 - 11:47 AM
Peace 16 Jul 07 - 11:52 AM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum Child
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:26 AM

Were those buildings steel I beam construction, foolestroup?

After the physical tests didn't produce the desired result, they used the computer model, which also didn't produce the desired result until they changed the parameters beyond anything that would have been considered realistic under the circumstances, and then, and only then, did the computer model result resemble the conclusion they had already reached prior to any testing having been done.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:56 AM

"used the computer model, which also didn't produce the desired result until they changed the parameters beyond anything that would have been considered realistic under the circumstances"

Competent engineers know that "scale models often don't"

For instance aircraft nodel enthusiasts know that scale models of full size planes often won't fly. They need serious modification (not to scale) to make then fly and cbe ontrolable in the air.

Would those who claim to know better than us experienced 'naysayers' please explain why? :-P


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 10:11 AM

Scale computer model, Foolestroupe? Where did the article saying anything about 'scale' in reference to the computer model?

If you people put half the level of scrutiny into the 'official' whitewash as you pretend to put into the whistle blowers' accounts, the 'War on Terror' would be over by now.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 12:57 PM

So stove burners have to be replaced every 30 years? Or every couple of years? How many years did the towers burn?

As far as Ebbie, CarolC, I've found her intransigence to be a good thing. For whatever reason, she refuses to publicly acknowledge the obvious.   And that's good. She is the howling wind that the shouted truth needs to overcome. I think she poses as a hardhead just to stimulate debate. She gives people a chance to state and restate the obvious fact that 19 men with boxcutters didn't go from Cessna classes to trick flying of passenger jets, get NORAD and the FAA to drop the ball over and over for an hour and a half, then get congress to cover up the whole affair with a whitewash.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 12:58 PM

CarolC:

I took a look at the website you are drawing your information from. It looks polished and intelligently set up. The main quesion to me is whether Mr. Ryan is as he presents himself and whether what he says is true is true. He is contradicting information of UL and NIST and therefore the question comes up as to who or whom to believe.

He presents himself as a 'whistleblower' and maintains that got him fired. I am unclear on that.

I don't necessarily believe that simply because an organization with a bunch of capital letters, UL or NIST, comes out with a polished representation of the truth that that IS the truth, but I admit it is commonly how most of us arrive at our opinions when 'the authorities' explain 'em to us. And I (think I) know better than to believe authorites simply because they are authorites and even when they are well intentioned.

So I appreciate your link to Mr. Ryan and it helps me understand where you are getting your doubtful inclinations from. There is no objective reason for you to believe me over Mr. Ryan. However, I think you need to find some alternate grounds to choose between Mr. Ryan and NIST.

I have had experience with honest to God protected by the courts whistle blowers (long story). Being protected by the courts, they actually maintained their positions within the companies they blew the whistle on. Other whistle blowers left their positions and satisfied themselves with working on the outside looking in and howling wildly. It's not terribly efficient, but it's the price we pay for allowing everybody to have an opinion, and occasionally positive things come out of it. In the case I'm personally familiar with there were no great revelations of turn-the-tables misconduct, what was revealed was a great deal of benign neglect. As often happens, the big upward career moves were made by the non-involved.

Getting back to WTC, the Nova show that I saw, and that is referenced in Mr. Ryan's article, was pretty convincing. The big disjunction between what it presented and what Mr. Ryan maintains is that he says there was no evidence that any of the insulation was blown off the structural metal or that any of the metal was heated beyond 500 deg F. I think there should be evidence that proves one side or the other to be wrong.

From my own unrelated observations I've seen the results of trailer fires which only serves to supplement my belief that there is a lot of combustible stuff in a metal framework which can get very hot very quickly.

Mr. Ryan's web site claims that all the metal was recycled. The Nova program showed experts going through piles of WTC wreckage to find and mark and recover for analysis structural metal from the collision area. Obviously the great majority of wreckage would not be necessary to hang onto, and I'm sure most of it was recycled or used as landfill.

There is a website with the NIST story of what happened with WTC7 but I'm sure you can easily find it if you want to.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 01:07 PM

Ebbie is a gem. Period.

Congress didn't cover up 9/11. They got the same snowjob the rest of us got. Also, the buildings fell in 6 and 6.5 seconds respectively--if what I read on a site is so. The question that needs asking is why there seemed to be squib charges that blew as the buildings were falling. Various videos show puffs of 'smoke' when the towers were coming down.

Much about 9/11 has been (IMO) clouded in secrecy. Why were the building re-insured shortly before the planes hit? Where was the friggin' wreckage on the lawn at the Pentagon? Why has so little been heard about or from the families of the people who died in the crashes?

Yelling at people doesn't change anything. Despite that I agree with much of what you say, your remarks about Ebbie really piss me off, sooo sweet. She is one of the nicest people to post on Mudcat. Considered in what she says, open and honest. Please stick to the subject--9/11.

That there was and is a coverup has been something I've held to for years now. It's not a new thing to me. I've been told I waer a tinfoil hat and had the odd asshole post about aliens, etc. So fuckin' what? Let it go, OK, and please be polite to my friend.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 01:10 PM

And to show you waht kind of person she is, I expect if she reads this she'll message me and tell me politely to clean up my language. And of course I'll say, "Yes ma'am."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 01:44 PM

And that's why Canada remains a dominion.

Meanwhile, we're trying to figure out how the laws of Newtonian physics were suspended on 9/11. Foolstroupe has offered an interesting new theory. He says the towers actually burned for years before falling. And somewhere back there beardedbruce said the towers fell from rust.

I think we're getting somewhere at last.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 01:53 PM

Good line. LOL.

Part of the problem is that there are sites that offer 'evidence' that just isn't very good. Problem we run into is (and has been) that sites offer speculation as proof and we do on occasion look like idiots. (Well, many people, but not you or me!)

Are you aware of sites that are class acts? For and/or against our position? Serious question there, sooo sweet.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:04 PM

Okay here's some more alternatives:

Someone up on that restaurant at Elevation 101 sneezed real hard at just the right place.
Reason the other one came down - sympathetic reverberations (and a second bloody 767).

Tuning fork effect. Whenever two tall towers are placed next to each other over a common foundation, they vibrate at a fundamental frequency. At some point this results in catastrophic weakness at nodal points. Given the slightest provocation, someon falling over, a dropped pen, a dropped call, a 767 flying into the side of the building, a collapse will ensue.

It's a little discussed fact, but there are quantum effects registerecd on objects when they are looked at. While the quantum effects are not cumulative, the effect of staring at something and drawing a focus on it have reciprocal effects. So it wasn't really the 767 jet airplanes flying into the WTC towers which brought them down, but the act of all of the people looking, staring, photographing, tuning in on, them that broke the camel's back. We ourselves brought down the World Trade Center.

When the bloody great 767's hit the buildings, a lot of people were rendered extremely nervous and before they hit the stairwells, many o them went to the bathroom. The water pressure rose and fell precipitously with thousands of synchronous flushes and many pipes were brought to the bursting point, critically weakening them and putting the added burden on the steel structure, which would otherwise have withstood the crash of the 767s and fire following.

Monster almost invisible ants, the result of too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. (Aided by the impact of two heavy fuel laden Boeing 767 jet aircraft).

Higher than normal gravity waves (they were temporary, too). Gravity follows large aircraft as they cross the sky overhead, or, in this case, fly into high rise buildings.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:07 PM

Do you know how one might check out Mr. Ryan's background, robomatic?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:08 PM

http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:11 PM

Ya see, there goes Robomatic, an otherwise intelligent, erudite, friendly and perspicacious fellow with whom I have had a good on-line friendship for years. He adroitly avoids the questions about 9/11 and writes the answers instead. Yet, when the smoke settles, he and I will still be friends. Besides, he's living in 23 hours of daylight about now, so I will send him the tinfoil for his windows that I don't need for my hat.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:12 PM

I think you need to find some alternate grounds to choose between Mr. Ryan and NIST.

Mr. Ryan is hardly my only source, robomatic. There are literally hundreds of people who, like him, are blowing the whistle. Many of them have backgrounds that are very easy to verify. I presented Mr. Ryan as only one example. I can provide more of them here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: cookster
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:13 PM

Hey Peace, why don't ya check your messages?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: cookster
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:14 PM

Disregard what I just said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:26 PM

The Nova program showed experts going through piles of WTC wreckage to find and mark and recover for analysis structural metal from the collision area.

So where is this material, and why aren't we being shown the results of the analyses? Seems like it wouldn't be too difficult to put all of this speculation to rest simply by providing the material to several different independent testing agencies and publish the results publicly. Or even better, make the material available to anyone who wants to study and test it, and subject any results that are published to peer review. Just like we do for any other kind of science.

And while we're at it, it wouldn't be too difficult for the government to release the video footage of the Pentagon that was taken by the security cameras of the hotel across the road (which was confiscated by the FBI), so people can see for themselves that what crashed into the Pentagon was what the official whitewash says it was.

And although your experience has been that sometimes whistle blowers don't get fired, I don't think you could possibly be suggesting that they never do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:39 PM

As far as the "squibs" or explosions further down in the buildings as they were collapsing, I believe I have already covered that further up the thread.

HERE.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:43 PM

wreckage at the Pentagon

Google search- Pentagon + wreckage


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: pdq
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:47 PM

So, why don't the burners on my stovetop buckle and sag and collapse?


There is an almost infinite combination of iron and other elements that can properly be called steel. People learned a long time ago the carbon will make iron stronger. That combination is called steel.

More recent metallurgists have added chromium, cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, phosphorus, silicon, sulfur, tungsten, vanadium, and probably others . Each combination has different characteristics of hardness, flexibility, heat resistance, corrosion resistance, etc.  

The alloy used to make a stove grill is too hard and brittle to make large steel buildings. Buildings require girders to flex in response to wind (and possibly earthquakes). The steel used in the Trade Towers was perfect for the job, under normal circumstances.

Due to the extreme heat from the burning jet fuel and other combustible materials, the steel beams in the Trade Towers lost strength, and, when sufficiently weakened, were unable to carry the load they were given. The buildings collapsed. It is simple physics.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 02:49 PM

Carol:

Answer to question as to how to check for Mr. Ryan's bonafides, I don't know.

Peace:

I'm somewhat surprised that you harbor doubts as to the 'ficial 'splanation of WTC coming down, but like you say, we'll still be on-line buds. You and CarolC are entitled to your doubts. I am pretty much convinced by the footage of the event itself. Planes hit, started fire, building collapsed from the top down. I understand how explaining it minute by minute can get technical, but it's much easier to throw stones (figuratively speaking) than to stick to hard events.

I always thought it was harder to explain why the towers didn't fall the first time they were bombed from the underground. People just found that easier to accept, and we didn't have a huge contagion of internet kibbitzers back then in the early 90's.

Carol you wrote, first quoting me and then posing your own question/challenges:
"The Nova program showed experts going through piles of WTC wreckage to find and mark and recover for analysis structural metal from the collision area."

So where is this material, and why aren't we being shown the results of the analyses? Seems like it wouldn't be too difficult to put all of this speculation to rest simply by providing the material to several different independent testing agencies and publish the results publicly. Or even better, make the material available to anyone who wants to study and test it, and subject any results that are published to peer review. Just like we do for any other kind of science.

I don't know. If it were a murder victim, there would be a pathology/ coroner report, and the body would be buried. There is probably an analogy to how evidenciary material is treated here. There should also be lots of photographs and notes. Whether they are public property or not is a good question to ask. Maybe one could obtain what you wish via FOIA.

And while we're at it, it wouldn't be too difficult for the government to release the video footage of the Pentagon that was taken by the security cameras of the hotel across the road (which was confiscated by the FBI), so people can see for themselves that what crashed into the Pentagon was what the official whitewash says it was.

I'm told there was plenty of debris immediately after the impact. Since the Pentagon is a governmental/ security resource, if I were in charge of things, I would not release any information including camera footage. I would understand that the doubter/ provocateurs would not be satisfied and I would deny would-be terrorists the opportunity to learn anything from the footage.

And although your experience has been that sometimes whistle blowers don't get fired, I don't think you could possibly be suggesting that they never do.

I not only could not possibly be suggesting, it, I am not suggesting it. I am noting that honest to god whistleblowers have legal rights which can be enforced and I've been witness to the fact. There are also plenty of storytellers and professional prevaricators, and hopefully they can be separeated from the true reporters.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 03:17 PM

sorry about mis-spelling 'separated' in that last line. twas a typo


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 10:35 PM

If it was really the plane they said it was that hit the Pentagon, Bill, there shouldn't be any problem with releasing the video footage that was taken by the security cameras at the hotel across the street from the Pentagon, and which were confiscated by the FBI, so everyone can see for themself. This would end the speculation.

On the other hand, there are also eyewitnesses who say when they got to the crash site immediately following the 'crash', they could not see any sign of an airplane having crashed into the building.

From this site...

http://patriotsquestion911.com/


Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force veteran. Member adjunct faculty, Political Science Department, James Madison University. Instructor, University of Maryland University College and American Public University System. Author of African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (2001).

* Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...

More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 11:00 PM

I don't know. If it were a murder victim, there would be a pathology/ coroner report, and the body would be buried. There is probably an analogy to how evidenciary material is treated here.

No, a human body has to be disposed of for obvious reasons. Non-flesh and blood evidence of a crime is supposed to be kept (and even some flesh and blood evidence is kept, for that matter). The debris from aviation disasters is kept for a long time so that disaster and aviation experts can examine it carefully to try to learn what caused the accident.

If there are lots of photographs and notes, the government could quite easily end all of the speculation about what really happened by releasing it to the public. Or at the very least, allowing independent researchers to examine it.


I'm told there was plenty of debris immediately after the impact.

Some people say this. But there are eyewitnesses who say otherwise. See my previous post.


I am noting that honest to god whistleblowers have legal rights which can be enforced and I've been witness to the fact.

Yes. Mr. Ryan has filed a lawsuit for wrongful termination. This is what he says in the website about it...


By all accounts, the unprecedented events of September 11th, 2001 "changed everything". It is therefore critical that conscientious Americans, as well as all good people around the world, understand these events in detail. Unfortunately the official reports, including The 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST WTC Report, written by those working under the direction of the Bush Administration, fall far short of providing the explanations needed.

Both the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and my former employer, Underwriters Laboratories (UL), seem to have taken the stance that the public does not have a right to know what fire resistance tests were performed on the steel component assemblies used to build the World Trade Center (WTC) towers. But since NIST's latest story for collapse of the WTC towers depends on the fire-induced failure of these steel components, there is little information that could be more important at this time.

When I worked there, top management at UL made clear to me that UL performed these required tests. They have since stated that there is "no evidence" that any firm tested the steel. Being tax-exempt, due to their status as a public safety-testing organization, UL should be held accountable for being honest and open with the public about the history of their testing.

To help ensure this accountability, I've filed a lawsuit against UL for wrongful termination. My attorneys and I hope to gain more information about UL's role in the testing of the WTC steel assemblies, and any other involvement UL has had with the WTC towers or the NIST investigation. Since this lawsuit represents a critical need for information about public safety, we invite the public to contribute to our legal defense fund.

Thanks for your help. Kevin Ryan

http://ultruth.com/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 11:50 PM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 12:02 AM

Some interesting observations on Youtube. Worth watching.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: GUEST,sooo sweet
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 12:02 AM

I don't know about that steel analysis on the stove burners. Fooltroupe's mother's stove is 30 years old and the WTC towers were 40 years old, and who knows WHAT kind of innovations were made in the ten years between the creation of the towers and the creation of the stove burners. I'll need to see some numbers on that one.

And if the steel in the towers was made to withstand trauma, why didn't it? The negligible swaying caused by the plane impacts stopped within 20 minutes, I read somewhere, so motion didn't contribute to the collapses, which means the "raging infernos" inside the buildings caused the collapses. But those infernos were in the areas where people were walking around.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_woman.html

If a fire is NOT hot enough to burn up a person, how can it be hot enough to melt steel?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:16 AM

"Scale computer model, Foolestroupe? Where did the article saying anything about 'scale' in reference to the computer model?"

If computer models are so good, why can't they forecast the weather better? They have some of the largest computers in the world working on that...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:24 AM

I'm talking about the electric burners "hotplates" that died, not a 'grille',


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:26 AM

More eyewitnesses at the Pentagon, from this site...

http://911courage.org/linked_docs/pentagon.pdf


-Barbara Honegger, M.S. is Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School (1995−present), the Navy's advanced science, technology and national security affairs university. This research, as all of Honegger's research and publications on September 11, are solely in her capacity as a concerned private citizen and do not imply official endorsement. Honegger served as Special Assistant to the Assistant to the President and White HousePolicy Analyst (1981−83); was the pioneering Irangate author and whistleblower on the October Surprise (October Surprise, Tudor, 1989; and Iran−Contra expose documentary film "Cover−Up"); and was called as a researcher / witness at both the October 23, 2004, and August 27, 2005, Los Angeles Citizens 9/11 Grand Jury hearings held at Patriotic Hall in Los Angeles, Calif. Much of the information and analysis contained in this evidence summary was presented at the L.A. Citizens Grand Jury hearings and at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence conference held at American University in Washington, D.C. in July, 2005.-


Converging Lines of Proof of a 9:32 Violent Event at the Pentagon on September 11, well before the Official Story says anything hit the building:

Multiple standard−issue, battery−operated wall clocks on the walls of the area of the Pentagon attacked on 9/11−including one in the heliport just outside the west face−were stopped between 9:31 and 9:32−1/2 by a violent event, almost certainly a bomb or bombs inside the building and/or in a truck or construction trailer parked right outside the west face. The first Associated Press report, in fact, stated that the Pentagon had been damaged by a "booby trapped truck." The Navy posted the stopped heliport clock on an official website and another of the stopped clocks is in the 9/11 display at the Smithsonian Institution.2 These are just some of the west section Pentagon clocks that stopped between 9:31 and 9:32−1/2 on September 11.

April Gallop, an Army employee with a Top Secret clearance, was at her desk in the Army administrative offices in the west section of the Pentagon on 9/11, the area of the building most heavily destroyed, when what she said sounded and felt "like a bomb" went off. "Being in the Army with the training I had, I know what a bomb sounds and acts like, especially the aftermath, and it sounded and acted like a bomb. There was no plane or plane parts inside the building, and no smell of jet fuel." Ms. Gallop still has the watch she was wearing that morning, which stopped shortly after 9:30.

The FAA's [Federal Aviation Administration] timeline document "Executive Summary−Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis−−September 11, 2001" reads: "0932: ATC (Air Traffic Control) AEA reports aircraft crashes into west side of Pentagon."3 The time is the critical fact here, not the claimed cause.

Denmark's soon−to−be Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller was in a building in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 from which he looked out, heard an explosion and saw the smoke first rise from the Pentagon. He immediately looked at his watch, which read 9:32 am. He gave radio interviews in Denmark the next morning in which he stated that the Pentagon had been attacked at 9:32.4

On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and now Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave the Secretary of the Navy lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in which Gonzales explicitly and clearly states that "The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32". A tape of this segment of his talk was played at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence at American University in Washington, D.C. in July 2005, and is on the public record...


...In the Air Force's own account of the events of 9/11, Air War Over America, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) general who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled on 9/11, although too late, Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack there that morning, and that this pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building. This fighter jet−not Flight 77−is almost certainly the plane seen on the Dulles airport Air Traffic Controller's screen making a steep, high−speed 270−degree descent before disappearing from the radar. [When a plane flies low enough to go undetected, it is said to be "under the radar."] Military pilots−like the one sent by Gen. Arnold on 9/11 to reporton the Pentagon's damage−are trained to fly 500 feet above ground in order to evade radar detection. In fact, when the Air Traffic Controller responsible for the plane and her colleagues watched the extremely difficult 270−degree maneuver on her screen, they were certain that the plane whose blip they were watching perform this extremely difficult feat was a US military aircraft, and said so at the time. It almost certainly was.

Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower the current official time for "Flight 77" impact, 9:37, to 9:32 am−the actual time of the first explosions there−is that they decided to pretend the blip represented by Arnold's surveillance jet approaching just before 9:37 was "Flight 77." As the official cover story claims that the alleged 9:37 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning, yet by the time Arnold's surveillance jet arrived on the scene the violent event had already happened, the Pentagon cannot acknowledge the earlier 9:32 time without revealing an attack on the building prior to the alleged impact.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:28 AM

If computer models are so good, why can't they forecast the weather better? They have some of the largest computers in the world working on that...

If computer models are unreliable, why are you willing to accept the NIST version of events based on their (highly tweaked) computer model?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:31 AM

"If computer models are unreliable, why are you willing to accept the NIST version of events based on their (highly tweaked) computer model?"

Who said I was?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:33 AM

"the alleged 9:37 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning, yet by the time Arnold's surveillance jet arrived on the scene the violent event had already happened, the Pentagon cannot acknowledge the earlier 9:32 time without revealing an attack on the building prior to the alleged impact."

Prior to the alleged airplane - there was a military helicopter that took off in front of the camera, then a loud explosion and smoke - then a military man came on and said it had gone down.

You only saw this here live in Australia... never heard of it again...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:35 AM

Who said I was?

Well, do you accept it or not?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 01:48 AM

"Well, do you accept it or not?"

I'm an experienced Computer Systems person.

Show me the code.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Jim Lad
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 02:33 AM

Gas Burners are made of alloys & cast iron. They are beneath the flame and in fact do not even come into contact with the flame. The hottest part of the flame is up around the tip of the blue part. The burner just never gets hot enough to melt even when the skillet is over top. However, were you to force some air into the burners, you'd have a different story.
Electric burners probably would melt if it wasn't for thermostats and fuses. Again, they don't get hot enough.
The twin towers lost their integrity when the planes flew into them. The flames were fed by jet fuel and fanned by updraughts in much the same way as your wood stove is when the door/damper is left partially open. I'm sure that the climate control system in each of these buildings, which alters the air pressure within, played some part but have not heard anything on this.
Steel softens when intense heat is applied. That's why the blacksmith uses a blast furnace rather than a garden hose. Not rocket science by any means.
It would have been a miracle if either building had remained standing.
As for conspiracies... From what I've seen in the past couple of weeks, I would have no problem accepting that your government knew of a plot but not the specifics. Given their proven disregard for human life, I would accept that they would allow an act of terror as an excuse to raid Afghanistan, Iraq and whoever is next on the list.
I cannot imagine for one second though that they would have allowed 911, had they known the magnitude of the event.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: robomatic
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 03:50 AM

Yeah, I watched the Youtube, looked at the written stuff, it doesn't really add up to much. We've got four downed airliners, WTC impacts on tape, and some convincing explanations. The part about the falling towers displays the naysayers lack of understanding about physics and energy, that's all.

I'm inclined to follow up on the Ryan fellow, see if he's legit. The rest of 'em are pretty meager for logic or convincingness.

And of course, we have a tape of Osama being honored and taking credit for it, or have y'all forgotten that (I mentioned it above, but I guess people want to believe what they want to believe).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 10:41 AM

Yeah. And only days after the 9/11 events the entire bin Laden family was allowed to leave the USA and return home--without being questioned.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 10:42 AM

Yeah, I watched the Youtube, looked at the written stuff, it doesn't really add up to much. We've got four downed airliners, WTC impacts on tape, and some convincing explanations. The part about the falling towers displays the naysayers lack of understanding about physics and energy, that's all.

Is this in reference to anything I've posted? Because I can't see what, of the things I've posted, it might be in reference to.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 10:50 AM

The rest of 'em are pretty meager for logic or convincingness.

LOL


The logic you and others appear to be using is that anyone who challenges the official whitewash must, by definition, not be credible, and so whatever they say must also not be credible, regardless of what they say, or how true it is. I know that's a logical fallacy of some kind.

The eyewitnesses at the Pentagon simply reported what they saw, heard, and smelled. This doesn't require logic, and they witnessed what they witnessed. If you choose to not believe them, I suggest it's because of the logical fallacy I described above.

And of course, we have a tape of Osama being honored and taking credit for it

We have a tape of somone posing as Osama taking credit for it. But a lot of experts on bin Laden say it's not him. Immediately after the attack, bin Laden denied having had anything to do with the attack.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:07 AM

"somewhere back there beardedbruce said the towers fell from rust"

Nowhere did I say that . If this is an example of your conprehension of the written word, please go away.

I DID explain about oxidation, but I have NEVER made the claim that the towers fell from rust. I believe, from the evidence availible to me , that they fell from the damage caused by the aircraft collisions and the subsequent fires, both fueled by jet fuel and by the flammabel materials in the buildings. As I was not actually in the building at the time it fell, I do NOT claim to KNOW what "MUST" have happened.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:09 AM

" "Being in the Army with the training I had, I know what a bomb sounds and acts like, especially the aftermath, and it sounded and acted like a bomb. There was no plane or plane parts inside the building, and no smell of jet fuel."

and she WAS familar with the sound of planes hitting buildings so she could compare?

There WERE plane parts inside the building...and outside...I just posted links to pics of them. What kind of evidence do you need? Do you really think the first responders carried fake twisted metal in to further the conspiracy?

All the counter evidence noted is of people who 'think they didn't see, smell or hear' anything like a plane....and you DISCOUNT the eyewitness reports of all those who did? And you have NO credible notion of where that missing plane was, if not in small chunks around the Pentagon?

Go LOOK at those images.......................


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:21 AM

"The logic you and others appear to be using is that anyone who challenges the official whitewash must, by definition, not be credible, and so whatever they say must also not be credible, regardless of what they say, or how true it is. I know that's a logical fallacy of some kind."

LOL

So you choose to read and accept the "witnesses" that you feel are credible, and it is okay to dismiss others as part of an "official whitewash". How conveninent that is!

The problem is NONE of us are experts in this. I have no experience with building demolition, and neither does Carol. We each choose to read and accept what we are predisposed to believe. Victims of propaganda.

What NO ONE has come up with is a convincing motive. Every crime has a motive, and there have been no LOGICAL motives. Sure, the idea that a crime of this sort would justify a war is one THEORY, but the complex plan - and the potential for a HUGE backfire would have negated this operation in any portion of the planning stage. The outcome would have been the same if a plane simply crashed the building - our emotions wanted revenge. No one benefited by the buildings collapsing, regardless of the urban legends that try to say people gained financially. There is no proof of that.

The biggest problem is - this red herring tears our attention away from the true facts - we have a moron in the White House, our "defense" was terrible, we botched any chance to prevent this - and we are in just as bad a position today. The real criminals are allowed to get away while our attention is diverted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:24 AM

The fire is, IMO, very much a red herring.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:25 AM

and she WAS familar with the sound of planes hitting buildings so she could compare?

She doesn't need to have experienced a plane hitting a building to know the difference between the smell of kordite and the smell of jet fuel.

There WERE plane parts inside the building...and outside...I just posted links to pics of them. What kind of evidence do you need? Do you really think the first responders carried fake twisted metal in to further the conspiracy?

Something may have hit the building after the initial blast. Most of the evidence seems to suggest this, and the debris you are talking about could be from that. But whatever it was clearly didn't hit the building at the time of the initial blast. Something else created the initial damage to the building... not the jetliner.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:30 AM

"Yeah. And only days after the 9/11 events the entire bin Laden family was allowed to leave the USA and return home--without being questioned." -Peace - 16 Jul 07 - 10:41 AM

Now taking into account that Osama Bin Laden is one of 51 members of the Bin Laden family we are talking about, lets take a look at Peace's - Yeah.

1. How many members of the Bin Laden family are members of Al Qaeda?

2. At the time, and it was within the first 48 hours after the attacks, nobody knew who was responsible. It took about five days for Colin Powell to come out with a categoric statement that it had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam Hussein, Iraq or any other country.

For a start I do not believe for one second that, "the entire bin Laden family" was in the USA, some members of the family were. Now maybe Peace can tell us how many were travelling on Diplomatic Passports.

For another, under what pretext would Peace have held those people for questioning - racial profiling perhaps? Just a hunch? Pure bloody-mindedness?

They had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the events of 11th September, 2001. Without proof positive to the contrary, please do not try to manufacture something out of thin air and ask people to buy it. Remember something about presumption of innocence?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:31 AM

So you choose to read and accept the "witnesses" that you feel are credible, and it is okay to dismiss others as part of an "official whitewash". How conveninent that is!

Nope. That's not what I'm doing. I accept that the other witnesses may have seen what they say they did. But it's pretty easy to see that the two kinds of witness accounts don't have to cancel each other out. The people who say they saw an airplane probably did see one. But that doesn't prove that it was an airplane that caused the initial blast.


No convincing motive?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Where the hell have you been LIVING the last five years, Ron? The endless WAR ON TERROR is the motive. Chipping away at our civil liberties for the purpose of consolidating power into the hands of a small few people is the motive. TRILLIONS of dollars of money is the motive. WAKE UP, Ron. Open your eyes and look around you!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:38 AM

"The endless WAR ON TERROR is the motive"


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL - AND LOL!!!!

You still don't get it, nor do you answer my question.   

Wake up Carol, they did not need this elaborate plan to get the results - that is what negates this theory. Simply flying planes into those buildings would have the same results - there was no need for demoltion, the damage was done and the motive would have been there.

What world have you been living in?   Look around.

LOL!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:47 AM

"For a start I do not believe for one second that, "the entire bin Laden family" was in the USA," The entire bin Laden family that was in the US was allowed to leave. I believe the number was about 15 (somewhere between 13 and 17).

As to diplomatic passports--who knows? Maybe you will locate that info for us, T.

Fact is that the American--meaning US people--are NOT satisfied with the bullshit report given by the commission. And THAT will eventually hang the fuckers responsible. The head of FEMA is now talking about his 'gut reaction' to do with pending attacks. He has access to friggin' intelligence networks--so FU#K his gut reaction. These bastards ARE hiding stuff. Hell, two years back when I posted a pic here of one of the tire rims at the Pentagon site, I also posted that that tire rime (from the plane) was NOT the same as Boeings pics of the tire rims they use on that plane. That was sluffed off. Bullshit!
I am not going to spend my time seeking piss-ant shit like how many bin Laden family members were in the US. I had though due to faulty memory that it was 17. I was wrong. It's about two dozen. You want a fuckin' argument, go argue with the people who wrote the following.

Read it for yourself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: Peace
Date: 16 Jul 07 - 11:52 AM

"Remember something about presumption of innocence?"

This coming from a guy who has defended the shit in Guantanamo? Give it a rest!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 18 May 11:28 PM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 2022 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.