Who did 9/11?

[Alen]

obama .

Do elaborate, would you?

[Paroxysm]

Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Dark[A]ce]

Oh sweet uncle sam, the steel columns don't need to melt to structurally destabilize the building. Simply heating it reduces it's load capacity and that's not to mention that fact that this is a steel mother fucking tower, it has immense pressure on the support beams. The reason the twin towers didn't topple over is because these building are designed from day one to fall down because in-case you haven't noticed buildings don't stay up forever and eventually they need to be torn down. In a larger city like New York designing builds that are inclined to topple over is career suicide.



Osama Bin Laden worked for the CIA in the sense that they gave him money and weapons to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan during the aptly named Soviet war in Afghanistan. After the war Laden had weapons, money and his only small army. In other words the CIA dun goofed.

seriously,.are you mad? >.<
when in human history have u seen a steel building collapse from fire? none
yet 3 steel buildings collapse on the same day in the same way which were fire proof.
secondly, even if the steel columns were to fail, the solid core of the building should be still standing.
thirdly,
"The reason the twin towers didn't topple over is because these building are designed from day one to fall down because in-case you haven't noticed buildings don't stay up forever and eventually they need to be torn down." no sir, what u just said there is total bs lawlz. This methad is called 'demolition' as we sat and watched 911 fall.

You sir just made some stupid points lolz, cnt stop laughing.
made my day.

just another vid to help it through your thick skull:

[marcusalier]

seriously,.are you mad? >.<
when in human history have u seen a steel building collapse from fire? none
yet 3 steel buildings collapse on the same day in the same way which were fire proof.
secondly, even if the steel columns were to fail, the solid core of the building should be still standing.
thirdly,
"The reason the twin towers didn't topple over is because these building are designed from day one to fall down because in-case you haven't noticed buildings don't stay up forever and eventually they need to be torn down." no sir, what u just said there is total bs lawlz. This methad is called 'demolition' as we sat and watched 911 fall.

You sir just made some stupid points lolz, cnt stop laughing.
made my day.

just another vid to help it through your thick skull:
YouTube - 9/11 Truth: Steel Buildings Don't Collapse From Fire

couldn't agree more!
9/11 was an epic fail on the governments behalf, it was easily unravelled, so to say

[Alen]

seriously,.are you mad? >.<
when in human history have u seen a steel building collapse from fire? none
yet 3 steel buildings collapse on the same day in the same way which were fire proof.
secondly, even if the steel columns were to fail, the solid core of the building should be still standing.

Now just add a collapsing top to the weakened structure.

thirdly,
"The reason the twin towers didn't topple over is because these building are designed from day one to fall down because in-case you haven't noticed buildings don't stay up forever and eventually they need to be torn down." no sir, what u just said there is total bs lawlz. This methad is called 'demolition' as we sat and watched 911 fall.

You sir just made some stupid points lolz, cnt stop laughing.
made my day.

Actually they are made that way, who in their right fucking minds would risk building a building that didn't collapse that way?

just another vid to help it through your thick skull:
YouTube - 9/11 Truth: Steel Buildings Don't Collapse From Fire

I would have preferred something that took into account everything, thank you very much.

[Zen]

as i stated before, i do not think the USA did this to themselves, its to stupid, and if they needed a cause to go to war they had the Intel from the Clinton adminstration/high thension after the USS Cole.

but, just pointing out a fact, the united states has attacked itself to go to war (vietnam, the gulf of token incident)

[Casavir]

you bloody idiot,coeus is right.
The buildings are made that way so they can demolish them.
If they made them sooo powerful that they couldn't be destroyed without falling on other buildings,how would they clear that section eg in 100years to make something better without destroying more buildings?

Darkace,do us all a favour and gtfo this section.please.

[Visiblegaming]

you bloody idiot,coeus is right.
The buildings are made that way so they can demolish them.
If they made them sooo powerful that they couldn't be destroyed without falling on other buildings,how would they clear that section eg in 100years to make something better without destroying more buildings?

Darkace,do us all a favour and gtfo this section.please.

My question is...Why in the world made a building so freaking huge it can't be demolished with a risk of killing THOUSANDS!...I mean Why!?

*carrys on humming arab money*

[Alen]

My question is...Why in the world made a building so freaking huge it can't be demolished with a risk of killing THOUSANDS!...I mean Why!?

*carrys on humming arab money*

Because they could and because it was a sign of power / wealth / whatever

[Dark[A]ce]

Now just add a collapsing top to the weakened structure.



Actually they are made that way, who in their right fucking minds would risk building a building that didn't collapse that way?



I would have preferred something that took into account everything, thank you very much.

"Now just add a collapsing top to the weakened structure."
1. the 'weakened structure' it strong enough to hold 15 floors.
if uve never done physics before, stfu.
2. the base and core is not weakened. heat/fire rises. therefore leaving top half weak and the base solid.
the building was built to withstand what happened on 911
if u havent researched the structure of the twin towers deeply, gtfo.

"Actually they are made that way, who in their right fucking minds would risk building a building that didn't collapse that way?"
1. they were made that way? show me some proof they were built that way.
2. i gotta a better question for you, why would american government even take down TT in the first place?
3. the way in which u take down and building/tower is called demolition.
definition of demolition - destruction: an event (or the result of an event) that completely destroys something.
do me a favour and explain why bombs were planted in building.

p.s. before u talk about the word 'structure' do some deep research on it.

[Alen]

"Now just add a collapsing top to the weakened structure."
1. the 'weakened structure' it strong enough to hold 15 floors.
if uve never done physics before, stfu.
2. the base and core is not weakened. heat/fire rises. therefore leaving top half weak and the base solid.
the building was built to withstand what happened on 911
if u havent researched the structure of the twin towers deeply, gtfo.

15 floors that aren't collapsing, that is. And I think I might know more about physics than you (do correct me if you're actually studying physics

"Actually they are made that way, who in their right fucking minds would risk building a building that didn't collapse that way?"
1. they were made that way? show me some proof they were built that way.
2. i gotta a better question for you, why would american government even take down TT in the first place?
3. the way in which u take down and building/tower is called demolition.
definition of demolition - destruction: an event (or the result of an event) that completely destroys something.
do me a favour and explain why bombs were planted in building.

p.s. before u talk about the word 'structure' do some deep research on it.

The Collapse of Buildings

Read and be amazed. I think you might need to do some research of your own

As for the bombs, why wouldn't terrorists want to make sure the building collapsed?

[Dark[A]ce]

15 floors that aren't collapsing, that is. And I think I might know more about physics than you (do correct me if you're actually studying physics




The Collapse of Buildings

Read and be amazed. I think you might need to do some research of your own

As for the bombs, why wouldn't terrorists want to make sure the building collapsed?

"Pancake Theory" is impossible lolz, use common sense. >.>




For the people who still say, "I don't believe that the World Trade Center could have been destroyed by controlled demolition . . . how could they have possibly planted bombs without anyone seeing them?"

In fact, there were plenty of opportunities to plant bombs in the World Trade Center. For example:

Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers five days before 9-11

The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11

There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.

And -- as an interesting coincidence -- a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers, thus giving it free reign to the buildings.

These are just a few of the known, public examples of opportunities to plant bombs. There were undoubtedly many additional opportunities available to skilled operatives.

hmmmmm who do u think did it? -.-

edit : ya, i did studied AS/A2 physics for 2 years

[lies']

I did 9/11.

[Dark[A]ce]

cool story :O

[[MPGH]Doc]

"Pancake Theory" is impossible lolz, use common sense. >.>

YouTube - Debunking Novas Pancake Theory of WTC using common sense


For the people who still say, "I don't believe that the World Trade Center could have been destroyed by controlled demolition . . . how could they have possibly planted bombs without anyone seeing them?"

In fact, there were plenty of opportunities to plant bombs in the World Trade Center. For example:

Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers five days before 9-11

The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11

There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.

And -- as an interesting coincidence -- a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers, thus giving it free reign to the buildings.

These are just a few of the known, public examples of opportunities to plant bombs. There were undoubtedly many additional opportunities available to skilled operatives.

hmmmmm who do u think did it? -.-

edit : ya, i did studied AS/A2 physics for 2 years

You do realise that the video you posted, supposedly using "common sense" (even though it tries to pass immense heat as negligible and doesn't even take into account the initial damage caused by the planes impact, which would have weakened the surrounding external support by roughly 40-50%), doesn't use scientific fact but just tries to discredit NOVA claims. None of the videos trying to discredit NOVA claims take into account the actual planes impact and the amount of debris that would remain inside both towers would act as fuel for the fire, infact the videos try to explain the whole as if it were caused by an office fire. There is no mention of the impact on the external supports that a crash would have. There is no mention of the amount of jet fuel that would be burning within. Both Flight 175 and Flight 11 had over 50% of their fuel remaining, both originating from Logan, with destinations to LA Int'l. Type A-1 Jet Fuel has an autoignition threshold of 210 °C (410 °F), and has an open air burning threshold of 287.5 °C (549.5 °F). Are you saying to me that the temperatures within those towers were less than that?

Sorry if it's a bit messy but I've just woken up.