BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11

Subject: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 01:17 PM

Shanghai's World Financial Center, the tallest building in China upon completion, defied all known physics yesterday afternoon when it caught fire but did not collapse, a modern day miracle in light of the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer limited fire damage implode within two hours....

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/150807_not_collapse.htm

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 01:24 PM

Sorry, Froth. It proves nothing.

Many, many variables are involved. Not just fire, but structural dammage caused by the impact of the planes, among other things.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 01:26 PM

Factors like fire retardant around the columns? The WTC buildings had the retardant, this one didn't. Why didn't this building fall?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:06 PM

When was it built? Of WHAT was it built -- "steel" isn't a complete answer. How does it stand in relation to other buildings and how does that affect the airflow?

Geez, for a self-proclaimed physics major I'd think you'd know that there's much more involved than wishing something was so....

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:11 PM

The article linked is "quaint," but uninformative.

the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer limited fire damage implode within two hours.

"commonly accepted" ????? by whom? [derogatory quesses as to identity and qualifications deliberately suppressed].

I suppose it's "commonly accepted" that any common wood framed home that suffers limited fire damage may "explode" withing 30 minutes as well, but I had a recent fire in my home that scorched the bean soup severely and produced "noticeable" smoke and odor. While the "fire" was confined to the stove burner where it was more or less expected, it was only by some miracle defying the laws of physics" I, and my family, and my home, survived.

I think I deserve equal time in the media.

Damage was severe. I had to clean the pot and open another can.

(If the thread originator is in fact a "Physics Major" it might be suggested that out of respect for those who deserve the title his/her usage might be withheld pending the second year of high school.?)

John

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:13 PM

The Shanghai building looks pretty open to airflow. The blast furnace effect required to achieve temperatures needed to soften steel should have been operating unhindered.

Some people believe the World Trade Centers were brought down by demolitions:

Next, we are shown an incredible bit of detective work on Torins part. He shows a sequence of 12 different pictures of the collapse initiation of the North tower, WTC 1. Torin explains that the antenna on the top of the world trade center is a perfect guide of measurement for height, as there is a standard of changing the paint color of antennas once per fifty feet. The part of the antenna on the roof of WTC 1 appears black, then white alternated every fifty feet. There is a guide wire in the bottom left of every picture that shows that the camera does not move. Why is this picture so interesting? It shows the antenna, which is held up by the core columns, fall before the rest of the building while the fire line on the 78th floor doesn't move. Torin then goes through the hard physics of the scene we're looking at and explains how it directly contradicts the official story, "This building is not collapsing on the 78th floor. The antenna falls 56 feet before the 78th floor falls."

http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=2

Lots of kooks out there, huh? I know there's a simple explanation for why the Shanghai building didn't fall. What is it?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:26 PM

Oh, gee, how did I know this was another 9/11 conspiracy nut thread? Physics Major, if you wish to continue to participate in discussions at Mudcat, please remember that you are required to use a consistent name each and every time you post.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:32 PM

Why didn't the Shanghai building fall? Maybe because it didn't get hit by a couple of airliners?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:35 PM

Now I get it. It was the PLANES that brought down the World Trade Centers. What kind of plane hit World Trade Center 7?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: gnu
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 02:51 PM

The 78th floor may well have failed prior to the failure of the 78th floor exterior walls. As would normally be the case. The floors hold up the walls. The exterior walls are the weakest part of most multible bay high rise structures.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 03:00 PM

Here we go.... Another 300 plus thread where people argue about issues where they've already made up their minds. No one's viewpoints will be changed one bit. Just another waste of space. YMMV. Yawn.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 03:14 PM

That would be nothing new. Try...

                this one

                and this one

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 03:20 PM

"Shanghai's World Financial Center, the tallest building in China upon completion, defied all known physics yesterday afternoon when it caught fire but did not collapse, a modern day miracle in light of the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer limited fire damage implode within two hours."

This is simply a sarcastic bit of crap!!.....You can read the correct analysis- you just don't wish to!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 03:42 PM

Yep. All the dogs are barking exactly as they usually do. No surprise there.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 03:47 PM

No cause was given for the fire in China, and there was no indication of what burnables were present.

For present purposes I'll just assume it was the cardboard hamburgers being fed to the work crew, and that they don't burn very hot. It would be expected that they'd make a lot of smoke(?).

That's sufficient to satisfy my curiosity until some "facts" (as opposed to imaginary delusions) and some "competent opinions" (as opposed to gossip mongering) appear.

It is, of course, encouraging when young and immature minds show an active interest in science and engineering, but it does get tedious constantly explaining that they haven't learned everything just because their high school teacher told them what to read in their introductory texts.

John

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: SINSULL
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 03:54 PM

According to last night's news report, a welder's torch set fire to combustibles within the building and started the fire. If there were any point in it, I would try to explain the difference in the fires and building structures to Physics Major but there isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 04:10 PM

People decide first what view to espouse. That's step # 1.

They then set about explaining, in what they feel is a totally reasonable fashion, why it is obvious that their view is the right one.

And they could just as well have chosen the opposite point of view, in which case they would be arguing with equal confidence from that angle.

And 5 years later, they may indeed be espousing the opposite view, and have forgotten that they once opposed it.

Any thread on the 911 conspiracy theories is a perfect example of people's utter capriciousness and inflexibility in this regard. If you read the discussions dispassionately, and with a degree of humor, you can immediately see that everyone (probably including yourself) has...

#1 - Made up their minds already that their viewpoint (whatever it is) is the only right one, the only one that can be right...and that that is bloody obvious to anyone who doesn't wear a tinfoil hat.

#2 - Set out to examine all the available evidence they can find, which evidence PROVES... to their delight, yes, it PROVES that they are dead right! (no matter what it is they think) And it proves that their opponents are illogical idiots who refuse to look at "the facts". ;-)

#3 - They then watch like hawks for those "idiots" to dare to contradict them, in which case they will have another good excuse to show how brilliant they are by refuting those opponents' pitiful arguments...

You know what it adds up to? Nothing but a big, empty battle of windbag egos. But it gives those restless minds something to do, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 04:19 PM

Gun control and abortion are two other subjects that fall into this category."I think it - so it must be right".

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 04:21 PM

You know, up to now I have always thought that the terrorist airplanes hitting the twin towers were responsible for them collapsing. After reading the story in the link provided by GUEST,Physics Major, I am now convinced that it was all a government plot. Thank you for opening my eyes to the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 04:22 PM

You know what it adds up to? Nothing but a big, empty battle of windbag egos. But it gives those restless minds something to do, doesn't it?

Frankly no. Its as boring and pointless as stirring whaleshit in a tumbler. Why we don't just kill these simpleass fuckin' threads from the gitgo is the real question and incomprehensible to me as well.

Physics Asshole----Blow Me

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 04:32 PM

I too have changed my mind!

I now believe the Twin Towers were brought down by George W. Bush.

He had just mastered the art of piloting the UFO but had not yet mastered the death ray.

He was aiming at Pete Seeger's house and hit the Trade Towers instead.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: SINSULL
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 04:59 PM

Stirring whaleshit in a tumbler? Never tried it. Where do you get the whale shit? What size tumbler? What size turd for that matter? Do you stir with a spoon or an electric mixer? This is fascinating stuff...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 05:06 PM

How about combining this thread with all the other threads on the same subject? All of this crap has been argued about ninety-eleven times before.

GUEST,Physics Major, if you're not a graduate yet as your monicker implies (if that is indeed your field at all), it would seem that you have a lot to learn yet. Why are you here pestering the grown-ups? Go hit the books!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 05:16 PM

You think that stirring whaleshit in a tumbler is boring and pointless, Spaw? Ha! How little you know. I bet you've never even tried it. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 05:42 PM

Got a point there Hawk. But I figure its something similar to talking with a psychiatrist and I have very little experience at that as well. But the experience that I have had leads me to believe its much the same.

Still waitin' for the blow job Physics Dork.........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 05:48 PM

Yeah, it is a bit like that, actually...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Grab
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 07:18 PM

Didn't they used to use whaleshit for a perfume base, on the grounds that it actually smells pretty good? Imagine how pissed off you'd be as a whale if you took one final vengeful shit on the bloke who shot you, and he thinks it's a bonus!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 07:25 PM

Gee. Thank you all for the well thought out responses. I realize the point made in the initial article is rather biased, and that's why I was seeking clarification. And you people sure cleared up the issue for me. Tell me, are you all philosophers or something? I'll have to take your responses to my department head and see what he has to say. Offhand, though, I can see that a larger issue has been brought to light here--does catspaw49 rotate AROUND the thumb in his ass, or is it the thumb that rotates?

I personally believe the 19 men with boxcutters survived the crashes, fell through the roof of WTC7 and hacked away at that building until it fell. They found one of the passports of the Al Qeada Islamo-fascists on top of the smoking rubble of the WTC, and the paper document was a bit scorced but it survived the fireball and pulverization, so that's proof that at least ONE of the hijackers leapt to safety from the plane.

Thanks again for all the help on that Newtonian crap. I'm so glad we don't have to study that anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: skipy
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 07:25 PM

Troll food anyone? if so I can't put it on Ebay for you, if you don't want to feed him, them leave the thread alone & let him starve!
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 07:30 PM

Ambergris (Ambra grisea, Ambre gris, ambergrease, or grey amber) is a solid, waxy, flammable substance of a dull grey or blackish color, with the shades being variegated like marble. It possesses a peculiar sweet, earthy odor similar to isopropyl alcohol. Now largely replaced by synthetics, it is occasionally still used as a fixative in perfumery.

Ambergris was also molded, dried, decorated and worn as jewelry, particularly during the Renaissance. It was often formed into beads.

Ambergris occurs as a biliary secretion of the intestines of the sperm whale, and can be found floating upon the sea, or in the sand near the coast. Because giant squids' beaks have been found embedded within lumps of ambergris, scientists have theorized that the whale's intestine produces the substance as a means of facilitating the passage of hard, sharp objects that the whale might have inadvertently eaten.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambergris

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 08:29 PM

"does catspaw49 rotate AROUND the thumb in his ass, or is it the thumb that rotates?"

Well you may THINK you is a 'Fiscis Majer', but you sure ain't no "Anatomy Major'...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:19 PM

I think they both rotate simultaneously, but I am not about to investigate the matter up close, thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:25 PM

I personally use a blender to stir whaleshit. Just make sure the lid is on tight or your wife gets really, really mad.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:26 PM

"Tell me, are you all philosophers or something?"

Yes!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:29 PM

I definitely am, and proud of it too. A philosopher is a great thing to be, but they don't have the kind of respect now that they did in more enlightened societies of the past.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:36 PM

""Tell me, are you all philosophers or something?""

Yep!

But there ain't no money in it these days...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:45 PM

Do you prefer fruit cup or the pudding?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 10:56 PM

I'm greedy - I'll take both!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:00 PM

"I'm greedy - I'll take both!"

Made with whaleshit??? Now that is foolish.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:06 PM

Ah, but if it's made outta whaleshit, at least it won't catch fire, explode and fall down when some robot controlled plane flies into it...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:14 PM

Yes indeed. You're philosophers with a capital F. With so much gray matter having put the matter of 9/11 to rest, I don't know why any wackos out there would pay attention to statements like this:

...Add to his (Torins') resume the fact that he designed and implemented well over 100 controlled demolitions. He was not just helping at a lower level in the demolitions - he was the guy responsible for calling the shots....

... With his demolitions experience, he immediately knew those towers could not have fallen like that without explosives....

..."But the craziest, most truly unhinged conspiracy theory for the towers falling on 9/11?" Torin asks rhetorically. "Fire." The official story cannot be recreated by any experiment. NIST is the government agency involved in attempting to model what happened to the world trade center on 9/11, and they fail horribly. NIST never models what happens after the collapse initiation, and even what they do model before that is easily debunked. NIST created 16 separate physics programs to simulate the WTC 1 & 2 collapses and only got 1 to collapse partially. Torin adds, "When they did, [in the computer model] they removed 40% of the structural support." The cross trusses that the towers received a significant amount of their strength from had to be removed to have a collapse in the computer simulation....

...A few slides are shown of progressive collapses throughout the world. None of them are anything like what happened to the world trade center with its pulverized concrete 100 microns or smaller just seconds after the start of collapse, and then its complete destruction....

...Several slides are then presented that show the hard physics and observed time of WTC 2 falling. Worst-case scenario would require 0.5 seconds per floor for collapse. "The absolute minimum amount of time for a progressive collapse would be 43 seconds." How long did it take for the building to fall in reality? About 8.6 Seconds....

..."For the towers to fall at so close to free fall speed, over 110,000 separate and independent structural support points had to fail simultaneously. 'Pancake theory' does NOT explain the failure of the cores." Torin explains passionately, obviously upset with the lies being told to the American people. "Nothing is holding the building up - No resistance. 110,000 structural failures at the same time."...

http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=2

It goes on and on and on, but the man is obviously a raving psychotic. And I don't care if he saved over a hundred lives in Iraq and is more decorated than a wedding cake, he's dangerous. Imagine talking like that about the OFFICIAL government version of 9/11. What should we do with people like this? They're obviously guilty of treason, questioning the government and all, when we're at war with terrorism. Should we just toss them across the border the government has wisely left open in this war? Should we force them onto drugs, for their own safety? Forced-labor camps, to make them pay for the harm they've done to the American way of life? I mean, this 9/11 wacko talk is endangering my educatation, dammit. If I can't graduate and serve the Homeland, then why bother? These people threatening our Homeland need to be dealt with.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:18 PM

"fall at so close to free fall speed"

s = 1/2 g t² ...

It's obvious then, the towers were made of whaleshit...


La la lalalala

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: open mike
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:19 PM

it is not whale excrement it is re-gurgitated..
and i thought spaw said staring at whale shit
in a tumbler. you would be less likely to get
any on you that way.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:25 PM

"Worst-case scenario would require 0.5 seconds per floor for collapse"

This shows that our 'Fiscis Majer' is gonna fail... except in Mental Masturbation 101... and destroys any credibility of the 'expert source' quoted...

Things fall, not with a 'speed' or velocity to use real Physics Jargon, but with an 'acceleration'. This means that each subsequent falling floor would 'fall in a different period of time'... each one shorter than the one before...

Back to the tinfoil hat mate...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:39 PM

Here's the Chief. The soo-pah Chief, fellas. Ol'Chief Broom. Here you go, Chief Broom...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:45 PM

I know the guy's full of it. What the heck would he know about demolitions? He only did a hundred of them. So do you think he's insane?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:46 PM

Physics Major - Hey, man, I believe you. But why are you trying to convince a handful of people on this forum who don't believe you? What's the use, really? And what difference would it make even IF you managed to convert one or two of them?

...which you are not going to....obviously...

Most people would rather die than change their minds, after all.

Why do you bother?

Why here, I mean? Talk about an exercise in futility. I gave up talking about a couple of specific things on this forum as time went by, because it's just not worth the aggravation. It achieves nothing. It's like talking to a dog about Mark Twain's books. Completely useless.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 Aug 07 - 11:57 PM

Hey Hawk......Listen, if you had a Weim instead of that Dachsie you would happily be reading and discussing Twain classic every day. AND, I'll have you know I can and DO change my mind! Like in this case here.......Physics Limpdick can blow a whale instead!!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 12:04 AM

LOL! Awww...shit, Spaw. Man, my dachshund can talk rings around those danged weimaraners, but he doesn't like Twain, that's all. He prefers reading those weird Florida-crime-satirical novels that have been so popular lately.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 12:28 AM

Every forum is different, Little Hawk. On this one, I've found a bunch of people who know the truth but are afraid to admit it, and it amuses me to rub their noses in it.

Mainly I just copy and paste (like from that excellent site I've referenced a couple of times here), and I copy to several forums. Mudcat...I guess it amuses me because so many here are older, and it's hard for the old to accept change. But their grandkids are being taught that the old folks are just in the way, and the U.S. rocks! Kill the Arabs! Old folks saw this in Germany, and it's happening here, and no one should be allowed to close their eyes to it. Deny it if they must, but they have to be made to watch.

Then you have moderators on mudcat who openly say they look forward to the destruction of America, so you have to hate people like that. Best way to gig them is with the truth. I hope America falls right on them.

Mixture of reasons I post on mudcat, if it matters.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 02:21 AM

"moderators on mudcat who openly say they look forward to the destruction of America"

Damn. I must have missed that...

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 05:19 AM

I believe you, Physics Major. Indeed, it is not the first time someone comes to Mudcat asking perfectly sensible and innocuous questions, seeking the truth behind what seems to be a web of lies surrounding the whole 9/11 business, only to be met with derogatory remarks. But some of us can glimpse the truth, so please, please persevere...

You will find more supporting evidence here and also in this thread. There is also something about it in Wikipedia, that is if the dark forces haven't interfered with it already.

But of course those who don't want to believe cannot be persuaded by rational argument. Still, don't give up. You know what is right - fight for the truth!




Laugh - I nearly sh*t myself.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 08:24 AM

"it is not whale excrement it is re-gurgitated.."

Oh, sorry, You're right, it's not whale shit, it's whale puke...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:08 AM

Does anyone have a recipe for banana bread? I'd really appreciate one, but please put measurements in ounces or grams, NOT 'cups'. I don't have any cups, only some very large mugs that I bought at Tesco, so I'm unable to measure in 'cups'.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:21 AM

A (US) cup is a volume measurement, and is just about 235 millilitres.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Wesley S
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:23 AM

Many years ago I knew two women that dated married men over and over again. And then they would bemoan the fact that the relationship "just didn't work out". Bullshit. They repeatedly set themselves up for failure because they wanted to suffer. I think our "guest" "Physics Major" , "Froth", whoever suffers from a similar problem. YMMV.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:26 AM

There once was a man from Nantucket....

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:51 AM

Little Hawk is absolutely right. These types of threads always draw out the usual suspects who regurgitate their entrenched opinions ad nauseum.

And the chief usual suspect is, of course, Little Hawk himself, who can be depended upon to come around and remind us once again that these types of threads always draw out the usual suspects who regurgitate their entrenched opinions ad nauseum.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 10:18 AM

ॐ

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: SINSULL
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 10:53 AM

Actually, when I first read the conspiracy theories, I was horrified and intrigued. So I investigated them, read, watched assorted documentaries, even endured the ridicule of friends and relatives until I reached the conclusion that the theories are nonsense. No pre-conceived decision. I was hoping baby bush was behind it. Alas, he wasn't.

It works both ways. Some of us looked into it with an open mind and disagreed with the theories.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 12:21 PM

The most open minded person in the world wouldn't be convinced of anything by the story in the link that began this thread. Nor was that the intention, as GUEST,of-many-names has admitted.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 12:30 PM

Got that right, Bee-Dub. Expect more of the same soon. We just cannot help being ourselves, can we? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 02:11 PM

"But their grandkids are being taught that the old folks are just in the way, and the U.S. rocks! Kill the Arabs! Old folks saw this in Germany, and it's happening here, and no one should be allowed to close their eyes to it. Deny it if they must, but they have to be made to watch."

ummm...you wanna clarify that, oh Learned One? That sounds periously close to something that would get you banned from most sites.

"...so many here are older, and it's hard for the old to accept change."

So, I assume YOU are young? And that you don't believe YOU will have wisdom and perspective to sort out truth from nonsense when if YOU get old?

and yes, I am a philosopher...certified and with degree, so *I* have official permission to pass judgment on your logic and reasoning....you get about a D-. Retake Basic reasoning 101 and we'll see if we can get you past your stumbling blocks...ok?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 07:58 PM

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 08:02 PM

Don, I must say that your above post has more than a thousand times the logic and brilliance of anything that Froth/Physics Major/Dicklessjabone has ever posted here.

Good job!!!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 08:10 PM

Oops! Premature submit.

I gather from GUEST,Phisicks Major's remarks about all the "old people" here on Mudcut (and "old people" in general; definition:   anyone who is no longer in their 'teens) that he, she, or it must be barely out of pubescence. Well, that sort of thing is understandable, I guess, in those whose brains are still in the process of developing.

Kinda reminds me of--who was it, Abbie Hoffman?--who said "Never trust anyone over thirty!" It was a fairly satisfying day when Hoffman's thirtieth birthday came rolling along. (Snicker snicker). Remarks like that do tend to sneak up and bite you in the ass.

Don Firth (my computer's in the shop. I'm using my wife's.)

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 08:54 PM

I can't decide - Fox's U-Bet or Bosco?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:10 PM

Well Don, Abbie had 22 non-trustworthy years before he may or may not have committed suicide when he was 52.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 09:13 PM

Not that Don was paying any attention at the time, but it wasn't Abbie who said that famous quote. Your right Don, sometimes quotes do bite you in the ass.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 10:00 PM

". . . over thirty!"

I can't remember off-hand now who it was who said it, but it was a real mantra for some hard-charging young-uns back in the Sixties. Not much sense of history or of the future.

To any smart-assed kid who mades snide remarks about "old people," I figure "Just wait. . . ."

"Time heals all wounds and wounds all heels," as my drinking uncle used to say.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 10:06 PM

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 16 Aug 07 - 11:56 PM

Was it Jerry Rubin?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Fitzgerald
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 07:09 AM

The laws of PHYSICS changed on 9/11.

Now, fire from airplane fuel burning at 1800 degrees can melt structural steel whuch normally starts to melt at 2700 degrees.

Happy Studies, y'all PHYSICS students out there, and PH.D. researchers too!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 09:31 AM

Rubin supposedly said it during the DNC in 68, but the saying goes back further. Jack Weinberger, a civil rights activist, had used the phrase in 1964.

Like "don't eat yellow snow", we probably will never know who said it first.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 09:33 AM

By the way, Weinberg said it when he was being questioned about government plants in the civil rights movement. In an attempt to find out what was being planned, the government sent stooges to infiltrate.   The saying "don't trust anyone over 30" was meant to be careful about who you are talking to.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 12:48 PM

It was Harry Lee Wigley who said "don't eat yellow snow" first.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth (computer still in the shop)
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 01:48 PM

I thought it was some anonymous Yeti.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 03:55 PM

Now, fire from airplane fuel burning at 1800 degrees can melt structural steel whuch normally starts to melt at 2700 degrees.

Perhaps one of the things you'll learn about as a physics major is what we potters call "heat work". The basic idea is that heat-induced change is not the result of temperature alone, but the cumulative result of temperature plus duration of exposure. Potters monitor firings by use of pyrometric cones which deform (melt) in a predictable manner determined by the amount of heat work done, not strictly by the temperature reached. The same cone deformation can be achieved by "soaking" a kiln for a couple of hours at 2150ºF as by rapidly raising the temperature to 2300ºF.

Also, fuels can be induced to yield temperatures far above their "maximum burning temperature" by increasing surface area, increasing air flow, and confining combustion to a chamber. Potters who fire their kilns with wood routinely achieve temperatures in the 2300ºF range even though the "maximum burning temperature" of wood is said to be around 1100ºF.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Aug 07 - 10:01 PM

You should be proud that the only skyscraper to fall in this manner was built in the good ol USA USA USA

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 02:27 PM

The 40 story Deutsche Bank building next to the ground zero site in New York, where the world trade center once stood, caught fire yesterday and burned intensely for seven hours without collapsing

This represents another modern day miracle in light of the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer limited fire damage implode within two hours. This building had even suffered structural damage on 9/11 and had been partially dismantled....

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/ground_zero_building_catches_fire_does_not_collapse.htm

ANOTHER one caught fire but didn't collapse. What's going on here? Fire brings down steel buildings. Period. The 911 Commission report said so. Why didn't this building fall?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth (computer still in the shop)
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 03:32 PM

The 40 story Deutsche Bank did not take the hammer-blow of being struck by 125 tons of airliner traveling at about 300 mph (which, more that likely, popped a few rivets in the girders that hold the building together), and immediately thereafter get anointed with 11,000 gallons of accelerant (burning jet fuel), nicely distributed by pouring itself down elevator shafts and stairwells.

Nor, in the case of Building 7, did it have a 65,000 gallon tank of diesel fuel (which had already been tagged as dangerous) in the basement explode.

Just because one steel building remains standing during a fire doesn't mean that another will.

That straw isn't going to keep you afloat, Froth.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 03:51 PM

Don't bother Don. She still can't answer the question about Foxs U-Bet or Bosco.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 04:01 PM

"...Fire brings down steel buildings. Period. The 911 Commission report said so."

Pooh! That's not what the Commission said, and you know it!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 04:08 PM

Why do you say "she"? Are you sure who the person is?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 04:13 PM

Yes I am.   Don't forget, I am part of the consipracy as a government agent and we know exactly where she lives (Cleveland). The black helicopters are circling.   She is actually the third person to take up the mantle, the other two were terminated. Our jobs are never done.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth (computer still in the shop)
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 04:34 PM

And I'm Station Head of the West Coast office.

Don Firth (I carry a Walther PPK and drive an Aston Martin DB-5 with lots of neat options.)

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 04:41 PM

hey! Here I am just 30 minutes from the White House, and all *I* have is sharp lathe tools and sharp wit! I get Bush's helicopters going OVER me on the way to Camp David, and not even a missile handy!....

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 05:26 PM

Heh! Well, Bill, if you did fire one I think your own demise would follow in very short order, so be glad...

We'd all get to read about you in the paper.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 07:48 PM

"I get Bush's helicopters going OVER me on the way to Camp David, and not even a missile handy!...."

Careful Bill, remember Arlo's words from "The Pause Of Mr. Claus":

"And within two minutes, and not two minutes from when he
hangs up the phone, but two minutes from when he first put
the dime in, they got 30,000 feet of tape rollin'; files on tape;
pictures, movies, dramas, actions on tape. But then they send
out a half a million people all over the entire world, the globe,
they find out all they can about this guy."

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 08:32 PM

No, guys. It was fire that weakened the steel to the point of initiation of collapse. The temperatures were hundreds of degrees below what's (if you believe in science), but it was fire that caused the collapse of the towers. And WTC7's collapse was blamed on diesel fuel first, but that was 6 explanations ago. I'm not sure what the government is saying caused it now. The firefighters say it was a demolition job, but then what do they know?

I'm just amazed the Deutsch Bank building didn't collapse. Seven hours of that heat, and a collapse didn't follow. Something's wrong here.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 09:56 PM

And which firemen are these?

Perhaps you need glasses, Froth. Let me help you:

Just because one steel building remains standing during a fire doesn't mean that another will.

You're flunking physics, I take it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Aug 07 - 10:09 PM

It was beauty that killed the beast.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 01:17 AM

There ain't a single one of you that is half as smart as he thinks he is.

Oh, and talk's cheap. I got a nickel for all I've heard from you bozos. And with that, ya still owe me 3 cents.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 09:45 AM

That would make half of us who are twice as smart as one of you put together.   Talk isn't that cheap - check your internet provider bill. You us a dime!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 11:47 AM

"I'm just amazed the Deutsch Bank building didn't collapse. Seven hours of that heat, and a collapse didn't follow. Something's wrong here."

WTC7 had an atrium/ampitheater on the ground floor, extending up about 3 floors...a large open space, bridged by several special trusses. These were subjected to 7-8 hours of fire(probably from the diesel fuel line which ran beside them), along with the damage to the structure caused by debris from the collapsing tower.

The Deutche Bank did not.

Why do YOU want all buildings to behave exactly the same, when they are NOT the same?

You have an opinion, and you are trying to pick & choose among all the facts to support YOUR opinion.

(Oh, by the way...I saw last night an interview with a **professional** demolition expert whose company spent weeks on the WTC7 site, digging and taking photos. They found NO evidence of 'controlled demolition'...no burnt fuses, no evidence of beams cut by shaped charges, no blasting cap residue, no strapping meterial used for placement of charges...NOTHING!) I assume he was just paid to lie, hmmm?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 07:17 PM

Yeah Bill, I saw that too and really enjoyed it. Of course the truth and reality mean very little to Physics Crapper but they had a nice profile of his type as well. Interesting stuff.

Still waiting for the blowjob Physic...........If you don't wanna', that'skay. Kiss My Ass instead!!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 07:21 PM

Bill/Spaw...where was that? I may go looking for a rerun.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 07:28 PM

it was on....The Discovery Channel??? I go thru the clicks and don't always remember where it was.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 08:25 PM

Hey Art......Actually it was The History Channel and it will be on again.

History Channel Link to 9/11 Progrgam


Enjoy!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 09:54 PM

Thanks...got it.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 10:30 PM

Oh yeah...that was #100 - what a waste of bandwidth!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 21 Aug 07 - 11:34 PM

I just can't argue with you fillosofers. Here's a photo of WTC5 on the left and WTC7 on the right:

http://prisonplanet.tv/images/august2006/230806wtc4a.jpg

It's obvious from the raging inferno engulfing 5 that it should continue standing, while the absence of flames in 7 means it HAS to fall. No more NEWtonian physics, just NEW physics. It's about time physics were changed to serve political ends.

And here's a picture of WTC6 after the fire. It was whacked by debris and burned all day, but it followed the laws of the New Physics and didn't fall:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/august2006/230806building6.jpg

Homeland Uber Alles, you Heroes of the Homeland. We have to get in lock goosestep on this. I SUPPORT your New Physics. I'm SICK of that bullshit math and schooling. Just give me a gun and tell me who questions the government's version of 9/11. Homeland Uber Alles. Keep up the good fight.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 12:44 AM

Physics is obviously not your field. You might be better at reading the entrails of birds or something like that. You have at least a meager talent for seeing things when there's nothing there to see.

Get yourself a crystal ball, maybe.

(Look out!! Here comes another black helicopter!!)

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 10:31 AM

But gee, Don, our fizzics expert can just LOOK at those building pictures and SEE that his theory is right, while all the incompetent fools with their meager dozens of years of experience, who dug thru the debris, measured pieces, took close up pics, and conducted all those exhaustive inquiries, couldn't figger it out!

I think he should start his own site, teaching the art of diagnosing damage and other maladies by remote visual inspection!
Perhaps we could send in pictures of auto accidents and have him explain who was at fault and what basic design structures failed in the vehicles.

....or maybe his 'expertise' is only relevant for fires...or when government conspiricies are involved. Hard to know how to utilize such a talent....

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 11:47 AM

Physics Major is not a "he". It has been proven.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 11:51 AM

Oh well then I definitely want the blow job. I take back the option of kissing my ass.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 12:25 PM

You will need at least $10 from what I've heard.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 12:51 PM

well, I care little about gender...foolishness is gender-irrelevant.
I am not used to referring to trolls as 'it', but I guess I could practice..

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 01:13 PM

Homeland, Homeland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt...

Sing along guys. Stomp those jackboots in time.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 01:22 PM

You wear those boots well Physic... marching right in step as you've been doing since day 1.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Big Mick
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 01:24 PM

Same old, same old from our age old troll. I watched the History Channel show. It debunked all of this gobbledegook analysis by the tin hat brigade, as well as showing the very few things that were troublesome. It took time to be complete and even handed.

I note that when confronted by facts, this tired old troll just resorts to trying to make Nazi comparisons. Sign of a lack of intellect and debate skills. Here's another clue: It's obvious from the raging inferno engulfing 5 that it should continue standing, while the absence of flames in 7 means it HAS to fall. No more NEWtonian physics, just NEW physics. It's about time physics were changed to serve political ends. Once again, even in the face of scientific fact, the tired old troll uses words like "it's obvious......", when, in fact, it is not obvious.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 05:20 PM

From Cleveland, eh? I suppose he/she/it will also say that it is a violation of the laws of physics for the Cuyahoga River to catch on fire?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth (computer still in the shop)
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 06:11 PM

When it comes to the Nazi references and the "Homeland Up Your Alles" bit, I have already recommended to GUEST,Fuzzy Major (was it in this thread, or several threads back?) that there are places in this country where he/she-it would fit right in:    little colonies of Super-Patriots and Real Americans in places like northern Idaho, eastern Oregon, and upstate Michigan where they prepare to defend other Real Americans from naughty folks like the United Nations and the many other Ominous World Governmental Organizations (particularly those that no one—even they—know about, but are undoubtedly out there lurking), and the encroachment of Evil Influences like anyone who might have skin of a different shade or whose eyes aren't shaped quite like theirs.

These folks really have a lot of fun. They play soldier, just like when they were little kids, running around in the woods, only now they have real guns. They spend their time target practicing and preparing themselves to fend off the inevitable invasion by the United Nations, and/or the imminent attempt by our own government to round up everyone and pack them off to concentration camps and gas chambers (thereby displaying a certain sympathy for one of the many groups that terrifies them (i.e., Jews and their well-know International Conspiracy).

This really is lots of fun! And the many times these stalwart defenders of our freedoms get mosquito-bit, wade though patches of poison ivy, or trip over tree roots and land with their faces in cow-pies is small price to pay for Maintaining Our Freedoms. And they can feel so-o-o-o-o superior to anyone who thinks they might be a little--paranoid. Or just plain nutz!!

Really, Foozy-Chirps, think about it. It's just your thing!

No need to thank me.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 06:21 PM

There's an old saw that says.. "give a small boy a hammer, and everything he sees looks like a nail."

It could be rephrased as "Give a small mind a conspiracy theory, and everything he sees and reads becomes suspect."

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 22 Aug 07 - 08:18 PM

Looks more like

"99, 100, change hands..." to me...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 06:58 PM

"The official story (of 9/11) is false. ... Now why is the official theory an outrageous conspiracy theory? Because every one of the major elements in it can easily be shown to be false."

http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html

Look at these idiots. Tin foil hats. They're stoopid and nutcases. I hate them too because these are the kinds of perfessers that give you homework.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 07:53 PM

I believe I am on record probably even more times than you, Physics Major, and likely earlier than you as saying that the official version of 9/11 events do not add up. No point getting riled with folks who chose to see things differently. Frankly, however, I don't give a rat's ass who does or who doesn't agree with me. Many of these folks are friends of mine (despite that they wear blinders to do with 9/11), and they're good people, also. Relax a bit. I don't think 9/11 will be solved any more than Kennedy's assassination was. Time will take its toll and other events will loom larger in the minds of pe3ople. Just post the new info you find and let folks ridicule what you have to say. If they enter into personal attacks against you, just tell 'em to get stuffed. And move on with your presentation.

Keep well.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 10 Sep 07 - 09:07 PM

Put on your tinfoil. Asymmetrical damage does not cause symetrical falls unless the cavemen of Tora Bora say so. Okay?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 12:29 AM

"Asymmetrical damage does not cause symmetrical falls"

What a load of engineering/physics/architectural nonsense.

Please, 'Fiscs Majer' quote your engineering/physics/architectural authoritative sources for the style of large scale construction in question.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 12:59 AM

Well, in this particular case, NIST couldn't get the towers (in computer simulations) to fall as they did on 9/11. They couldn't get them to fall straight down into their own footprints. Symmetrical falls resulting from asymmetrical damage. Or no, one simulation worked after they removed all the core columns. But what NIST didn't take into account was the strong Mojo of the Cavemen of Tora Bora. Ossama's hoodoo alone allows him to appear on TV years after he died, and looking younger than ever. I don't know if he's working with black cat bones or eye of newt, but he put the straight downward whammy on those towers. So I'm sick of these so-called physicists referring to Newton's laws and the impossibility of what Fox News TOLD us happened. Buildings were hit, compromised on one side, but they didn't topple, they fell straight down. Newtonian physics need to be revised to take into account the Tora Boran Hoodoo and if anyone disagrees, well then just shoot them. They're with al Qaida.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 01:18 AM

"couldn't get the towers (in computer simulations) to fall as they did on 9/11"

only proves that the 'simulations', did not reflect reality, as many simulations are well known to not do.



"they didn't topple, they fell straight down"

Trees topple, but they are a unit structure, acting as a lever: no joins! Tall chimneys START to topple, then the forces break them apart and they stop rotating as a lever and the bits fall straight down. The buildings had HOW MANY MILLION INDIVIDUAL JOINTS? As the forces increased on each succeeding lower layer, the joints failed due to overload even more readily. Monocoque style construction, where the failure of ONE joint spreads the ensuing stresses over all the rest, thus gradually overloading them and eventually causing MOST of them to fail, do not behave like simple unit levers.

You may well be using 'common sense' based on what you have experienced in the world around you, but that has little relevance to the engineering/physics/architectural reality, of which you clearly have little relevant practical experience.



"Newtonian physics need to be revised to take into account the Tora Boran Hoodoo and if anyone disagrees, well then just shoot them. They're with al Qaida."

Hiya Redneck!

As I said - "little relevant practical experience", logic not overriding emotion.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 01:39 AM

Do I need to post the photo of the top quarter of the tower going over sideways, just before it does the physically impossible and corrects itself prior to falling straight down? Isn't what SHOULD have happened called continuation of angular momentum? An absolute, unless other forces (explosives) are brought into play. I'm not saying the government did it, I'm just saying that bin Laden had to point one powerful mojo stick to interrupt the angular momentum from his cave in Tora Bora. He is indeed a master of time and space, and we need to work on formulae that incorporate his mojos and hoodoos into our new bin Ladean physics. Maybe I could do my dissertation on that. I could even create a new symbol for "19 men with boxcutters." Something like pi.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 09:26 AM

This is a report on research by a Cambridge engineer on the collapse.
I expect he is bankrolled by CIA.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6987965.stm

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 09:45 AM

"One thing that confounded engineers was how falling parts of the structure ploughed through undamaged building beneath and brought the towers down so quickly," said Dr Seffen.

Conspiracy theorists see evidence of a "controlled detonation"
He added that his calculations showed this was a "very ordinary thing to happen" and that no other intervention, such as explosive charges laid inside the building, was needed to explain the behaviour of the buildings.

From Keith's link.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 10:12 AM

"Do I need to post the photo of the top quarter of the tower going over sideways"

Yep!


"before it does the physically impossible and corrects itself prior to falling straight down"

And you KNOW so much that you know it CAN'T be explained by structural engineers/architects?


"how falling parts of the structure ploughed through undamaged building beneath and brought the towers down so quickly"

Only the ignorant and uneducated would be 'surprised' by that.It was to be expected, taking into account the construction style and scale of the building.

You never seen a building (perhaps a closer similarity, taking into account scale, would be a 3 story wood 'post and beam construction' one) that you are demolishing fall down? Obviously!

Why don't you go and play in the traffic on those tin foil hat sites yo get so much fun out of? You are only making us laugh at your ignorance, arrogance and stupidity. You will never learn, obviously.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 01:52 PM

Conspiracy theorists see evidence of a "controlled detonation"

No, conspiracy theorists say 19 men with boxcutters took their flight-school flunk-out experience and did top gun flying into their targets. That's the conspiracy theory.

Here's a link to the photo of WTC 2 falling sideways:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/site1049.jpg

Here's an explanation of angular momentum as it applies to this event: "Conservation of angular momentum requires that an object continue to rotate around its center of mass once set in motion, unless acted on by an outside force. Even if the tower beneath it had completely given way, leaving it nothing more to push against laterally, the rotation once started would not abruptly stop. But the top section does not stop rotating and drop straight down, as some have claimed. What does in fact happen is that the top section breaks up internally so that it no longer behaves as a rigid object, relieving it of the obligation to conserve angular momentum.. By turning into a slurry of concrete dust and shattered steel the rotation becomes dissipated into the motion of what is essentially a fluid..."

From this webpage:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/

Who do these people think they are, to question the mojo of the mighty bin Laden?

http://www.infowars.com/images2/cartoons/070907pers.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 09:37 PM

"What does in fact happen is that the top section breaks up internally so that it no longer behaves as a rigid object, relieving it of the obligation to conserve angular momentum"

Not exactly, (that's a pretty sloppy 'layman translation' explanation) the energy expended in the disintegration lessens the angular momentum (conservation of energy).

"By turning into a slurry of concrete dust and shattered steel the rotation becomes dissipated into the motion of what is essentially a fluid."

One (slower moving due to the breakup) fluid in another, air, which means that it is braked in its 'rotating motion', and starts to drop straight down under gravity.

Why does it "break up" - Well, 'Fiscs Majer', you obviously can't understand that either. That's already been well explained to those who want to understand.

You pretty obviously are 'cutting and pasting' stuff you cannot understand, or misunderstand, or even deliberately 'pretend to misunderstand', just to 'stir'.

The fact that your writings here demonstrate that you clearly cannot understand the science, as displayed by your questions and responses, reveals you as either an ignorant uneducated fool, or an intentional malicious trouble maker, trying to have some 'fun'.

The fact that you wish only to be an anonymous GUEST, only being forced to have many 'clever names' now to stop being deleted, adds weight to the second.

Subject: RE: BS_ China's skyscraper, Fire & 9-11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Sep 07 - 09:47 PM

QUOTE
Here's a link to the photo of WTC 2 falling sideways:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/site1049.jpg
UNQOUTE

Photoshop.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 01:21 AM

lol. I was going to call you a bullshit artist, but you're more like a bullshit finger painter. Photoshop. lol. HUNDREDS of those pictures and videos of the event are on the internet.

The top section of WTC2 began falling sideways, then the building started disintegrating, beams shooting hundreds of feet UPWARDS and out, pulverization ABOVE the point of collapse. lol.

But I like the idea that bin Laden is mojo master of photoshop. Simplify it for the masses. 19 men, boxcutters, Top Gun fliers who just faked flunking out of flying school, and bin Laden manipulating photoshop pictures in the Caves of Tora Bora. Yeah, it all adds up when you look at it that way.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 02:04 AM

http://paregoricspills.com/wtc/wtccrunch.jpg

That's a good one. You can see the blasts going off on the side. That's why the top section "righted" itself, because the opposite side of the building was being blown. If those explosions hadn't occurred, the top section would have kept following its downward angular momentum. But it didn't.

Some interesting things on this forum. I forgot about this:

Another report came from Scott Forbes, an employee of Fiduciary Trust, a firm which was located on floors 90 and 94-97 of the South Tower. Eighty-seven employees of Fiduciary Trust were killed on 9/11. In an email account, Forbes reported that over the weekend of September 8-9, 2001, floors 50 and above of the South Tower experienced a "power down," meaning that all electrical current was cut off for about 36 hours. The reason officially cited was that the electrical cables in the building were being upgraded. Forbes was an information technology officer in charge of Fiduciary Trust's computer network; his attention was engaged by the power down because it fell to him to shut down all the company's computers and related systems before the power went out. After the power down, he had to turn the computers back on again, and restore service on the network. Because there was no electric power above the fiftieth floor, there were also no security cameras and no security locks. There were however many outside engineering personnel coming in and out of the tower at all hours during the weekend. Forbes lived in Jersey City and could see the WTC towers from his home; when he saw the conflagration on the morning of 9/11, he immediately related it to the events of the previous weekend." (Tarpley)

http://www.gnn.tv/threads/6031/Former_Bush_Team_Member_Says_WTC_Collapse_Likely_A_Controlled_Demolition

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 09:02 AM

"http://paregoricspills.com/wtc/wtccrunch.jpg"

Funny how that looks exactly like the other one you posted... except that there is another building in the way... which is interesting, because this means that they must be from different angles... but having studied Arts as well as Sciences (a B.A. not B.Sc., you know!) the perspective is not relatively right for the two relative angles of the same building. In fact, the second one looks just like the same Photoshop trick has been done with exactly the same part image on a different photo from the first one. If they are supposed to be of the 2 separate buildings, amazing isn't it, that the part above the 'breaking apart point' shows the same number of floors, even though the buildings were struck at different heights (and thus numbers of floors) above the ground!!!

I see no 'blasts' on the 2nd photo (or even the first) - however I do see a few fireballs where the pressure of the collapse has forced fireballs on various floors out of shattered windows.

You're a good spinner of incompetent bullshit - keep making me laugh!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 02:21 PM

So are you saying the top of WTC did NOT break away as shown? Is that what you're saying?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 04:00 PM

"So are you saying the top of WTC did NOT break away as shown?"

You have to be more specific. Are you asking if the WTC did not break apart as people saw it, or are you asking if it did not break away that you saw it?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 04:40 PM

Did the top of WTC2 break away and start falling sideways, before the collapse of the building?

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/site1049.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 06:30 PM

"his calculations showed this was a "very ordinary thing to happen" and that no other intervention, such as explosive charges laid inside the building, was needed to explain the behaviour of the buildings."

The author is a Cambridge University engineer, what are your qualifications?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 07:44 PM

So, fool, did the top of WTC2 break away and start falling sideways, before the collapse of the building? I look forward to this chat.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 09:37 PM

I'm starting to get strong intuition as to who you are now... :-)

"did the top of WTC2 break away and start falling sideways, before the collapse of the building?"

Well, you have made it clear what you 'know'.

I personally wasn't there. I only know what I saw on the TV live, replayed several times over the next few hours, on the other side of the world.

Unlike you, I don't have X-ray eyes, or 'messages from God or aliens or other tin foil hatter conspiracy nuts' about what happened.

From distant memory, at the distance, and perspective of the shots I saw, and in complete accord with what I expected, was a very slight rotation of a few degrees of the top segments, which then slammed into the lower segments, overloading everything successively, but the whole thing basically overall mostly fell straight down - the top segment was at a very slight angle as it rode the collapsing bottom segment to the ground, then it continued to break up as it smashed into the rubble pile beneath it. If you look at the 'radio masts', you can clearly see this.

The top segment was at absolutely NOTHING like the angle in those, what appear to be doctored, photos. I saw nothing like any 'blasts', merely the expected pressure wave shattering windows, and expelling dust and some flames.

"break away and start falling sideways"

You and your fellow tinfoil hatters are pretty hopeless with the words and the semantics, which is why you and your mad uneducated mates keep confusing/distracting yourselves: you all keep on using words with multiple vague meanings, and mungling up the differing concepts due to wrongly using words with vague, ambiguous meanings, wrongly equating incompatible things.

You wrongly use 'break away' - as if some magic aliens lifted the damn thing up - it only fell (Blame Newton and his 'gravity' thing!) because the supports underneath it 'lost integrity'. (And we have already thrashed out all that BS you keep spouting about how and why that occurred in other threads elsewhere!)

To quote Stan Freburg
"When I was a youngster, my home ran away from me."
"You mean you ran away from home."
"No - we lived in a covered wagon and I fell out."

To topple a building with explosives, they usually start the sequentially time delayed charges at the bottom and ripple up, so that the upper floors collapse 'neatly' onto the rubble below - they 'blow' every floor: these 2 collapsed as a unit from above the impact points, to shatter the lower segment floors in descending order below, then the upper sections disintegrated. The 'puffs' are the expected pressure wave shattering windows and venting from top to bottom as expected from Newton.

The alleged 'extra plane bulges' match what is on the model planes you can buy at kit shops.


QUOTE
""his calculations showed this was a "very ordinary thing to happen" and that no other intervention, such as explosive charges laid inside the building, was needed to explain the behaviour of the buildings."

The author is a Cambridge University engineer, what are your qualifications?"
UNQUOTE

M.A. (B.S.)

Master of the Art of Bull Shit, or should that be M.A. (I.W.) Ignorant Wanking?
...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 10:26 PM

From distant memory, at the distance, and perspective of the shots I saw, and in complete accord with what I expected, was a very slight rotation of a few degrees of the top segments, which then slammed into the lower segments, overloading everything successively, but the whole thing basically overall mostly fell straight down

And you have degrees? Man.

You also use the word "magic" and that seems to be what you think was in play on 9/11. The top 34-floor section of WTC2 was falling sideways, then the structure beneath it collapsed, and the top segment REVERSED its angle of momentum. It moved back in toward the center of the building as it began falling and disintegrating. Impossible under normal "no bombs" conditions. Under normal conditions, even if the lower floors had suddenly vanished, the 34-floor block moving sideways should have continued that downward angular motion. Something caused it to defy the laws of physics, so it was either explosives or Tora Boran magic. Take your pick.

The videos on the web clearly show what I just described. Videos shot from various angles and distances. The top segment of WTC2 reverses its direction before disappearing into the cloud of dust.

The NIST report doesn't even talk about the collapses of the buildings. It describes what happens up to the point of "initiation." Didn't even have to refute Newton and all those troublemakers--just reshaped metallury and thermodynamics, then stopped before they had to do the same to hard physics.

A couple of footnotes from the NIST report:

The focus of the Investigation was on the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the "probable collapse sequence," although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached…(NIST, 2005, p. 80, fn. 12; emphasis added.)

The results were a simulation of the structural deterioration of each tower from the time of aircraft impact to the time at which the building became unstable, i.e., was poised for collapse. …(NIST, 2005, p. 142.)

The violation of the angular thing, and the free-fall speed thing are impossible to explain unless bombs were involved, so the government just didn't address the actual falls of the buildings.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 10:44 PM

The fact an engineer is from a given school means little. Bush has his degree from where?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 10:47 PM

Pardon ME. Degrees. Yale and Harvard. Well, THAT certainly speaks volumes.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: bobad
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 10:52 PM

The point is not which school the engineer is from, it is that being an engineer qualifies him to offer informed opinion on engineering matters.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 10:54 PM

Gotcha.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 12 Sep 07 - 11:34 PM

Okay, I looked at the photo and here's what I see:

The section of the building which is falling is roughly a cube. All six sides are nearly squares, and they're all of about the same dimensions. It's tilting outward at about 20º, possibly as much as 30º. That's not enough to cause a cube to tip over. A perfect cube doesn't tip over until it is tilted 45º. Anything less, and it will right itself. The tilt is counterbalanced by the weight of the rest of the cube.

Try it. Take a die out of your Monopoly set and try to make it fall over by tilting it less than 45º. You'll never do it. Now imagine that die is 300' on all sides. It's going to behave in exactly the same fashion.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 10:20 AM

"The top 34-floor section of WTC2 was falling sideways, then the structure beneath it collapsed, and the top segment REVERSED its angle of momentum."

Sorry Einstein, but the last part of your sentence is your own spin on it and not at all an objective observation.   However, let us assume you are correct and let us assume that there were bombs in the building to bring it down. Using your supreme intellectual skills, explain to us how a bomb would "reverse" the "angle of momentum" of a disintegrating building.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 10:22 AM

"The heighth of insanity is doing what you've always done expecting to get different results."

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 10:51 AM

Insanity is not necessarily a bad thing. That may be why anyone opens this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 10:56 AM

"The heighth of insanity is doing what you've always done expecting to get different results."

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 11:14 AM

Insanity is not necessarily a bad thing. That may be why anyone opens this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 11:17 AM

LOLOL

Hi, Ron. Good to see you.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 11:21 AM

:)   Good to see you Peace!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 04:53 PM

As I recall, as one of the buildings began to collapse in on itself, the top section (above the impact point of the airliner) did begin to heel over a bit, but it continued to fall straight down. It would be a violation of the laws of physics for it to have done otherwise. Buildings that tall, whatever the cause of their collapse, do not fall over sideways like felled trees. They collapse into their own footprint (give or take a scattering of debris when they hit the ground).

Don Firth

P. S. I'm amazed that this discussion is still going on.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 10:13 PM

Don, I'm not...


:-)

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 13 Sep 07 - 10:23 PM

Truth to tell, neither am I. It is characteristic of the members of the Flat Earth Society and others like them never to give up. Oh, well, it must be nice to have all that time to piddle away. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 12:10 AM

The top section is taller than it is wide, so it's not a cube, and it was top-heavy, with the reinforced roof, but fine, say it behaved like a cube.

It was falling sideways and rotating as it fell, then the videos show it righted itself and reversed its rotation as the building beneath it began to disintegrate.

The NIST report stopped at the point of the initiation of collapse. They didn't even try to explain the behavior of the top section of the building.

The top section righted itself and changed direction of rotation. The unnatural behavior could have been due to 1) unnatural outside forces (which could only be demolitions) or 2) natural forces that contradict OTHER natural forces which were at work that day. I know bombs were in the buildings because I see the video evidence and have read the chemical analysis of the debris, but I think #2 above is the primary reason NIST stopped short of addressing the actual falls.

The government said steel was weakened to the point of collapse by fires as hot as those you can achieve on your stove top (your stove doesn't melt). But the government said some puny little fires weakened the steel in the buildings. Then the top of WTC2 started falling over sideways, and the most likely thing that stopped it's falling and reversed its spin would be the steel columns on the opposite side of the building. It collapsed and fell towards one side, then the lower floors began to mysteriously vaporize and fall, but enough of the external supports were in place on the opposite side to pull the top section back into place.

That's what it LOOKS like happened, but how can that be so? The conspiracy theorists say steel is hardly more able to withstand heat than wood, so how could those opposing supports pull that amount of weight back into line? Reason is, steel is incredibly strong. Strong enough to withstand a few minutes of kerosene fire followed by burning trashcans. But the govt would have a LOT of explaining to do if they went into the true nature of steel, so let's just stop the report there and stamp "final" on it.

THE TOP 40
REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY OF SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

Who pays you people to support the government's 19 cavemen story, by the way? Olesko works for one of the Homeland Security torture universities, so that's his paymaster, who what about the rest of you?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 12:36 AM

Ho hum. 19 cavemen, eh? You do know that Jarrah, Atta, Shehhi and Hanjour all had commercial pilot ratings and time in jet simulators, right?

And who pays you to accuse the government of murdering nearly 3000 of its own citizens? Are you really an Al Quaida operative?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 02:01 AM

From the London Guardian:

The chair and vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, respectively Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, assert in their book, Without Precedent, that they were "set up to fail" and were starved of funds to do a proper investigation. They also confirm that they were denied access to the truth and misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the federal aviation authority; and that this obstruction and deception led them to contemplate slapping officials with criminal charges.

Despite the many public statements by 9/11 commissioners and staff members acknowledging they were repeatedly lied to, not a single person has ever been charged, tried, or even reprimanded, for lying to the 9/11 Commission.

From the outset, the commission seemed to be hobbled. It did not start work until over a year after the attacks. Even then, its terms of reference were suspiciously narrow, its powers of investigation curiously limited and its time-frame for producing a report unhelpfully short - barely a year to sift through millions of pages of evidence and to interview hundreds of key witnesses.

The final report did not examine key evidence, and neglected serious anomalies in the various accounts of what happened. The commissioners admit their report was incomplete and flawed, and that many questions about the terror attacks remain unanswered. Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission was swiftly closed down on August 21 2004.

I do not believe in conspiracy theories. I prefer rigorous, evidence-based analysis that sifts through the known facts and utilises expert opinion to draw conclusions that stand up to critical scrutiny. In other words, I believe in everything the 9/11 Commission was not.

The failings of the official investigation have fuelled too many half-baked conspiracy theories. Some of the 9/11 "truth" groups promote speculative hypotheses, ignore innocent explanations, cite non-expert sources and jump to conclusions that are not proven by the known facts. They convert mere coincidence and circumstantial evidence into cast-iron proof. This is no way to debunk the obfuscations and evasions of the 9/11 report.

But even amid the hype, some of these 9/11 groups raise valid and important questions that were never even considered, let alone answered, by the official investigation. The American public has not been told the complete truth about the events of that fateful autumn morning six years ago.

What happened on 9/11 is fundamentally important in its own right. But equally important is the way the 9/11 cover-up signifies an absence of democratic, transparent and accountable government. Establishing the truth is, in part, about restoring honesty, trust and confidence in American politics.

There are dozens of 9/11 "truth" websites and campaign groups. I cannot vouch for the veracity or credibility of any of them. But what I can say is that as well as making plenty of seemingly outrageous claims; a few of them raise legitimate questions that demand answers.

Four of these well known "tell the truth" 9/11 websites are:

1) Scholars for 9/11 Truth, which includes academics and intellectuals from many disciplines.

2) 250+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns' a website that cites over 250 pieces of evidence that allegedly contradict, or were omitted from, the 9/11 Commission report.

3) The 911 Truth Campaign that, as well as offering its own evidence and theories, includes links to more than 20 similar websites.

4) Patriots Question 9/11, perhaps the most plausible array of distinguished US citizens who question the official account of 9/11, including General Wesley Clark, former Nato commander in Europe, and seven members and staffers of the official 9/11 Commission, including the chair and vice chair. In all, this website documents the doubts of 110+ senior military, intelligence service, law enforcement and government officials; 200+ engineers and architects; 50+ pilots and aviation professionals; 150+ professors; 90+ entertainment and media people; and 190+ 9/11 survivors and family members. Although this is an impressive roll call, it doesn't necessarily mean that these expert professionals are right. Nevertheless, their scepticism of the official version of events is reason to pause and reflect.

etc. Excellent article.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/peter_tatchell/2007/09/911_the_big_coverup.html

So how are you paid to support the 9/11 lie, artbrooks? You got a government job? A pension? Government contracts? Wife with government income? Prospect of employment with the welfare state fascists if they take the white house and continue the lie? Those are the reasons Hitler's Germans had for supporting him, so what are yours?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 10:32 AM

"Olesko works for one of the Homeland Security torture universities"

booga booga booga I'm coming for you next Major!!! Hide your possessions and head for the hills. Roll up your tar-paper shack and grab your favorite goat.

Is that the best you have? You resort to lies and innuendo when you can't face reality?   You work for the conservatives that are spreading these lies. You just a low life tool that has been brainwashed into this cult. Get the help you need. These pleas for help are just the start. Get yourself checked in before you check out.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 11:17 AM

"the videos show it righted itself"

It hit the floor beneath, and due to momentum transfer, it stopped rotating... Geez!!!!! We have to spell this BASIC PHYSICS crap OUT?!!!

For a "Physics Major" you do present as pretty fooking dumb, mate, I'd say you're gonna fail!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 01:07 PM

There was no 'floor beneath it,' fool. The floors were being pulverized. Zipper squibs down the sides of the buildings.

And you work in conjunction with a government-funded university/radio media outlet, Olesko. Your job depends on that continued inflow of government money, so of course you'll defend whatever the government tells you to defend. But I'm curious--do they tell you in seminars what you have to do to serve the party, or do you just pick up your fascist talking points through the grapevine?

The 'talking points' can be heard daily on Rush Limbaugh and National Public Radio. One is 'right wing' and one is 'left wing', but both support the government's line of BS regarding the so-called war on terror. The Democrats vote to go along with Bush on the wars and the destruction of American civil liberties, then NPR airs some 'dissenting voice' and suggests that the voice is expressing the 'Democratic' attitude. And on the other side, Limbaugh criticizes the Democrats for not being behind the president, while the DEMOCRATS SUPPORT HIM WITH THEIR VOTES. See how it works? They put up a 'dissenter', who becomes the focus of attention for both the right and the left. And Olesko's a part of that. I suspect he does it for his paycheck, but I could be wrong. He could be just another misguided welfare-state fascist. They're not too bright.

But I'm curious why you other Americans support the fascists in Washington DC. The right-wing fascists are about to lose their elected positions, so now we're hearing more from the left-wing fascists. The welfare-state fascists. And I'm surprised you Democrats are suddenly in favor of the war and the loss of your civil rights. You acted so pissed off about those things before the 2006 election. A report a while back said 53% of Americans now receive a 'significant' portion of income from the government, so is THAT the reason you support genocide and the destruction of your founding documents? Because of money? I can understand supporting fascism for ideological reasons, but because of MONEY? Help me out here. Why do you support the fascist status quo?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 01:17 PM

There you go again.. speaking like your old buddy Reagan. You like to pontificate to cloud the fact that you are part of the same regime you pretend to attack.

You aren't fooling anyone.

You know very well that I am not employed by the university, and the course that you have twisted into some diabolical plot (like you did 9/11) is nothing more than a security course that is taught at colleges all across the country.

You are guilty and you can't hide the blood on your hands you sniveling coward. Grow a set and stop twisting the facts to fit your script. Think for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Wesley S
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 01:20 PM

Let me get this right. Anyone who disagrees with you supports the fascist status quo?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 01:31 PM

Wesley - one Pysick Major's talking points has been that you are either with her or against her. Doesn't that sound familiar to the spew that the commander-in-chief has tried to espouse?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 05:35 PM

There is no difference between the right-wing corporate fascists and the left-wing state-welfare fascists.

Use health insurance, as an example. Democrats are upset that big pharmaceutical companies are getting away with huge profits under GWBush. Corporate pharma WRITES the legislation the congress passes and Bush signs. The Democrats are mad.

Enter Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, etc.--Democrats who say the government should take over healthcare.   

This is classic fascist absorption. First, government allows private businesses to monopolize an industry, then the government nationalizes that industry. The SAME PEOPLE CONTINUE TO OWN AND RUN THE INDUSTRY, but the citizens are sold the lie that the industry is somehow now more "accessible" and "universal" under the "liberals."

That's what the left-wing fascists like Olesko are pushing. I know he does it for a meal ticket, but I wonder why some of you others endorse this kind of tyranny in the U.S. Why would you promote the continued consolidation of the assets of the U.S. into the hands of a few corporate elite? Roche and the big drug companies are controlling the healthcare industry under Bush, and they'll continue to do so under a Democratic white house. All that's going to change is the rhetoric. So, why do you tolerate this? Why do you endorse left-wing fascism? Is it a conscious decision? Do personal financial concerns cause you to turn a blind eye to things like this and the "bi-partisan" coverup of 9/11, or are you truly in favor of tyranny?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Wesley S
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 05:57 PM

"or are you truly in favor of tyranny?"

Hey I loved Gene Tyranny. I thought her best movie was "Laura" but she was good in "The Razor's Edge" too.

Gene Tyranny

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 06:26 PM

"The government nationalizes that industry. The SAME PEOPLE CONTINUE TO OWN AND RUN THE INDUSTRY." You do know that "nationalize" means that the government assumes ownership, with or without compensation to the former owners? Or is your understanding of economic/political theory as basic as your physics?

Oh, forget it. Continue to babble, as you prefer. I think I'll find something more interesting to do, like inventory navel lint.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 08:54 PM

Jayzuz!! Is this physick character actually allowed out without a nurse? Why do they let him/her/it play with computers?

Gets more bonkers with every post!

Don Firth

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know! I, too, and part of the Nazi-Commie-Left/Right Wing-Fox News-NPR-Bush-Clinton-Obama-Cheney-Alfred E. Newman-Karl Rove-Illuminati-Masonic-U. N.-black helicopter-Jewish International Conspiracy-Cub Scouts-Nose Pickers Anonymous Interplanetary Conspiracy.

I confess! I confess!

Fell better now, Fizzick?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 11:02 PM

The corporations will BECOME the government. You guys can't even complete a simple equation? When the "liberals" nationalize healthcare, Merck and Roche and the other big pharma companies will be hired to run the healthcare system they already own because "they have the experience needed." Welfare-state fascism.

My favorite story of the day. Do a search for Victoria Zdrok, Geraldo Rivera's "expert" for the airline piece. Dr. Zdrok is a pornstar. This thing is hilarious. The 9/11 lie is sooo dead:

Says Geraldo At Large host Geraldo Rivera to the crowd, chanting "9/11 was an inside job" at the beginning of the show: "Get a life."

The protesters continue chanting as Rivera reports on the high temperature in New York City (87 degrees Fahrenheit), causing the death of one dog left in a hot car. As Dr. Jennifer Ashton explains, the heat from inside a car will cause a dog, unable to sweat, to go into organ failure.

As the chants continue in the background, Rivera and Ashton look over the results of a baking experiment. The inside of the car used in the experiment, as it turns out, was hot enough to bake their batch of cookies to completion.

"The proteins in our body literally become denatured," explains Dr. Ashton, of the effects of a hot car interior. "They separate, and that's how people die." ...

"We've been surrounded by an activist--radical--I don't know, Communist group. I don't know who the hell they are," says Rivera after returning from commercial. Vocal protests continue unabated in the background.

To screams and chants, Rivera and correspondent Laurie Dhue discuss the minutiae of Republican Senator Larry Craig's arrest. Also giving their input are psychologist Dr. Victoria Zdrok and three detectives who have worked on sex stings.

"As this group of misfits behind me continue their chanting," Rivera quips, he waves his fist at the camera to express his annoyance. ...

"All Hell is breaking loose on 6th Avenue," says Rivera, as video is taken of police approaching the crowd to make arrests.

"You need a permit to protest -- or demonstrate -- here in New York, but this anarchist group came forward. They really are one of the least attractive groups of demonstrators I've ever seen."

After a few more choice words and the desire to avoid using "foul language," Rivera returns to his scripted story: The story of Southwest Airlines passenger Kyla Ebbert, told to change her outfit by attendants.

In a gesture of solidarity, female correspondents Pirro, Zdrok and Ashton appear on stage with Ebbert in outfits identical to the one that prompted her booting from the plane.

"Did you realize that you were going to get caught in such a controversy?" asks Rivera.

"Never," responds the former Hooters waitress, with banners waving behind her and chants continuing in the background. "I never imagined that this outfit would get me noticed for anything other than it's a very cute outfit."

When asked if she could believe it when it was the outfit that caused her to be ejected from the flight, Ebbert affirmed that she could not have imagined that situation taking place.

Judge Pirro, while not sure if there are grounds for a lawsuit, commends Ebbert for standing her ground.

"This is why we live in a free country," says Dr. Zdrok. "We are free to wear what we want to wear as long as it's not offensive."

"You have to be strong and stand by your beliefs," says Dr. Zdrok to Ms. Ebbert.

"They should be more concerned about terrorism than someone as innocuous as a college student who's dressed in the way kids dress," says Pirro.

Ebbert is a student of international business, and has "now decided to pursue law."

The following video is from Fox's Geraldo at Large, broadcast on September 8.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/911_truthseekers_arrested_for_protesting_Foxs_0909.html

All hell breaking loose over 9/11 truth, people being harrassed and arrested by police in the background, while Geraldo and his perverts give you a story about cookies, then an aside on homosexual politics, then a judge and a pornstar talking about living in a free society.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Don Firth
Date: 14 Sep 07 - 11:07 PM

You obviously watch too much television, Fizzywig. It's turned your brain to oatmeal.

That explains a lot.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 08:48 AM

"the heat from inside a car will cause a dog, unable to sweat,"

Total failure in Physics AND Biology...

The dog still sweats... till it dehydrates...

... oh AND Home Cooking... actually, I typoed Coking - but that's pretty close too! :-)

... part of the 'cooking process' of meat is partial dehydration ... steam comes off (both processes!)



"Ebbert is a student of international business, and has "now decided to pursue law.""

Hope he stays away from any case that involves me...


Ok, I know I'm a bit slow, but what does Dr Drokiedrok have to do with 9/11?

Oh I see, it's another desperate 'look over there' debating tactic typical of our troll...


"You obviously watch too much television, Fizzywig. It's turned your brain to oatmeal"

Ah! The satellites have been hacked!

I do so love closure...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 09:39 AM

The point of the story is that a thousand people were in the background as Geraldo Rivera did his show on the streets of New York City. The people in the background were screaming "911 was an inside job!" while Geraldo went through his schtick with his hookers. A thousand people demonstrating on live TV. The jig is up. The 19 cavemen story has been exposed, despite the best bi-partisan efforts to popularize it.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 10:24 AM

"That's what the left-wing fascists like Olesko are pushing. I know he does it for a meal ticket,"

Thanks for the compliment. I also hope that your rants will someday help me to get a paycheck for my radio work.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 01:16 PM

Thanks for posting the link to the Geraldo broadcast. It's a fascinating and rather hilarious look at the trivial stuff that passes for "news" in the USA. It's not news at all, it's merely a means of momentarily entertaining and distracting a passively ignorant society that lives largely in denial.

Nothing new about that.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 01:29 PM

The Geraldo Rivera piece (video at the previous link) is a perfect microcosmic example of what's going on with American media and the expansion of fascism triggered by 9/11. You folks overseas would do well to study the video. It will show you WHY Americans seem so blase about the atrocities being perpetrated by the American government.

On the day the piece was filmed, Geraldo was outside in NYC just doing another of his usual distraction broadcasts. Look at him. He's dressed like a buffoon. And his topics--a dead dog in a car, baking cookies in a hot car, a senator's bathroom sex antics, then an "in depth" piece about a woman's apparel on a plane flight. His expert consultant on the piece is a porn star.

So that's on his agenda when he goes outside to film, but then a crowd of a thousand people shows up. They're chanting that September 11 was an inside government job. Geraldo pushes on with his show. He tries to ignore the crowd, but when he can't, he tries to portray them as anarchists, communists, bathroom perverts, "ugly," etc. The last portrayal of the demonstrators is the most telling when it comes to the media's handling of the 9/11 truth movement in America. Geraldo tells the demonstrators to "get a life" at the beginning of the episode, but he seems to be just fine with his life of serving the people who murdered 3000 on 9/11. Geraldo's a happy guy because he gets recognized from TV and gets to hang out with porn stars. He has no problem living in a burgeoning military dictatorship. And then when he encounters REAL people, who DO have a problem with being ruled over by murderous thugs, he reveals his deepest feelings on the subject. The demonstrators are ugly. See, it's all about appearances to him. He can't deal with the thing behind the pasteboard mask, so he primps and preens and feels offended when people who are concerned about their childrens' futures intrude on his little bit of air time. He feels offended because they're ugly. What a guy.

So much for my analysis of a turd. But that's why America seems so unconcerned about what's going on in the world. We're being shown garbage about porn stars and dead dogs instead of REAL stories.

About half of Americans now believe the govt had a hand in 9/11. More every day. The game's over. False flag terrorism will never work again in America. Now the govt will have to resort to brute force rather than deception in order to achieve their goals. All they can do is try to hand the police state powers over to the "other team" and hope the Democrats will make use of the concentration camps.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 01:31 PM

Cross-posted. Yep. That's it Little Hawk. That piece of video is a gift from above. It illustrates perfectly... I already chewed that cabbage.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 03:28 PM

There was an old Arnold Schwarzennegger movie in the 80's which envisioned a future American society run by a military dictatorship, with extremely heightened security everywhere (for "protection of the public" of course...), all kinds of checkpoints to pass through on your daily trips to work or shopping, and I.D. to present, and TV everywhere. Yes, flashy TV entertainment and sensational yet trivial "news" shows were the opiate of that society. The poor, who could not afford TVs, were living in festering urban ghettos with a huge outdoor TV screen mounted in every neighborhood, so they could watch for free! A kindly government service. ;-) The TV shows, of course, were designed to maintain the status quo, keep people distracted, and they were much like the crap we watch now...really not a whole lot of difference.

The well-off lived in gleaming highrises, shopped in shiny malls, and wore groovy clothing...like Geraldo. They joined fitness clubs, went out to fancy restaurants, and NEVER entered the awful ghettos where the poor struggled daily just to survive.

One was expected to follow all the rules, talk the talk, and do one's job....

The movie was called "The Running Man". It was pretty typical Hollywood action fare, but its view of the future was rather prophetic in some respects.

The protagonist is a member of the government security forces. He flies a heavily armed attack helicopter. When ordered to fire on a protest demonstration of unarmed civilians in a plaza, he refuses, and is arrested. The fire mission goes ahead, of course, executed by some other more obedient helicopter pilot.

The protagonist is later presented on TV news reports as a rogue killer, a terrorist who disobeyed orders and used his military helicopter to slaughter a group of unarmed citizens in a public plaza. He has become society's official "bad guy" in one simple dissemination of false news reports that everyone believes without a moment's hesitation, and why wouldn't they? He is condemned to face imprisonment and probable death.

Thus the Network TV News serves perfectly as the government's organ of deception, and and the loose ends are neatly disposed of...the demonstration is quashed, the demonstrators are mostly killed (or arrested and detained...permanently), and the disobedient pilot is also disposed of.

Only it's a Hollywood movie, so you know that Arnold is going to find a way to beat them in the end. ;-)

In real life, single individuals do not normally find a way to beat something like that. (in my opinion) But it does finally get beaten... By what? By its own insanity. It falls eventually under the weight of its own iniquity, because it is based on unreal premises. It becomes intolerable to too many people, and it falls. That's what happened to Hitler's Nazi Germany, for example...and to Stalin's regime...and to Mussolini's...and to Tojo's. In time they fail, and they are swept away.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Peace
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 03:47 PM

"In real life, single individuals do not normally find a way to beat something like that."

That is true. But (I think it was) Seeger who did a song that included a line that went "one and one make a million". If ya don't try, for sure ya lose. If you do, you may lose anyway, but it's kinda neat to let the bastards know they were in a fight. I always hoped that when my time came, I'd be thinking of ways to be "lookin' good." It's a goal at least.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 05:59 PM

For sure. That's why I would never fault anyone for trying, even if "resistance is futile"...(as the saying goes)

Better to face death with honor, right?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: GUEST,Physics Major
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 12:04 AM

The censors at mudcat don't want this news posted on its own, so I'll put it here. It continues a theme brought up earlier here anyway.

Fascism. Hillary-style:

WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that a mandate requiring every American to purchase health insurance was the only way to achieve universal health care but she rejected the notion of punitive measures to force individuals into the health care system.

"At this point, we don't have anything punitive that we have proposed," the presidential candidate said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We're providing incentives and tax credits which we think will be very attractive to the vast majority of Americans."

She said she could envision a day when "you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview — like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination," but said such details would be worked out through negotiations with Congress....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070918/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_ap_interview_6

If you don't know what's wrong with this, then you're comatose. Textbook example of welfare-state fascism. The Clintons have served the insurance industry forever, but this is a bit much. They're going to make it MANDATORY that you PURCHASE health insurance. Remember the good old days when auto liability insurance was optional? Now you have to have it or you can be fined. Today are the good old days when health insurance is optional. Tomorrow you'll be fined if you don't have it. The precedent is there.

This is SO over the top. A pure giveaway to PRIVATE insurance companies who are now going to have LAWS passed saying you have to PAY them for "protection." This is sheer mafia behavior. This is private corporations taking over the government--welfare-state fascism.

You are going to be a CRIMINAL if you don't pony up a thousand bucks a month to the insurance companies. And if they follow the liability insurance model, once the health insurance thing is mandatory, the price will DOUBLE. And if you're caught TWICE without health insurance, you'll go to JAIL.

And the woman who would be King tells a flat out lie when she's talking about vaccinations being mandatory. Vaccines are not mandatory in any of the United States. Parents have an opt-out clause. You DON'T HAVE TO LET STRANGERS INJECT FOREIGN SUBSTANCES INTO YOUR CHILD'S BODY. But a woman like Clinton, would would tell a murderous lie like that, do you think she gives a damn about YOUR health?

This is a consequence of not demanding the truth concerning 9/11. Because you let the killers remain in power, you will now be thrown to the "other party" to be chewed on for a while. The heir apparent in that party once talked about It Takes a Village, and she wanted to take care of you, etc., but now you see she wants to make you pay for insurance you can't afford. And punitive steps for not having insurance are on the table. And you won't be getting health insurance as a job benefit any more because you have to be self-insured TO EVEN APPLY FOR THE JOB! And THIS is what you fucking Democrats support?! You don't NEED health insurance, you are already BRAIN DEAD!

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 09:06 AM

Ah and all this BS relates to "China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11" in what way?

I see, it proves that you accept that you were talking unscientific crap - OK.


"The censors at mudcat don't want this news posted on its own"

You misunderstand. They just want to confine your hysterical gibberish to ONE open THREAD AT A TIME...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 09:33 AM

Save the cheerleader and save the world

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Wesley S
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 10:43 AM

"Remember the good old days when auto liability insurance was optional?"

Major - I'm curious. Do you think that all insurance should be optional?

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Sep 07 - 12:24 AM

"all insurance should be optional?"

It is expected to be - by those insuring their stuff. What is not expected is that those paying out also regard it as optional...

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Sep 07 - 01:06 AM

Wibble, wibble wibble.

Subject: RE: BS: China's skyscraper, Fire & 9/11
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Sep 07 - 01:25 AM

Blood! Let's have BLOOD!

(Sick!)

Don Firth