The 'conspiracy'
Locane
Join Date: 2003-11-14 Member: 22882Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2003-11-14 Member: 22882Members, Constellation
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">What I think</div> Actually, whoever posted that conspiracy thread was kind of on my train of thought.
The world trade centers were created originally as a conglomerate of corperations who were ignoring US embargos and sanctions. Totally ignoring them.
The towers were specifically designed to withstand an impact from a commercial jet liner. No joke, they were MADE to take what they took.
The towers imploding in on themselves, as seen in the 1,000 videos out of them, is ONLY characteristic of a rigged and very well exececuted demolitions operation. If you'll notice, all the supports go out first, then the building falls. There is no such thing as a naturally occuring implosion - look at any other destruction video and you'll see what I'm talking about.
If you study video footage of actual collapsing buildings, ones hit with cars (from a hurricane or tornado) or are just plain damaged, they do not fall straight down, and they certainly do not vaporize into dust, as the towers did.
Osama Bin Ladin's parents (who have decried their son as a heretic and a traitor, even going so far as to change their name) held a lot of the shares of a security company called Haliburton, whom (amazingly!) **** Cheney used to be CEO of.
A lot of very rich arab investors held stock in Halliburton, before the war totalling an extraodinary 28% of it's stock. These are the same arab investors that funded Bush's campaign - ever wonder where he gets all his money?
So now that we have the facts down, lets look at things:
What does Bush and Co. have to gain by destroying the towers?
1. The elmination and/or severe hampering of the corperations ignoring US embargos and sanctions.
2. The united American people, and an almost garunteed second term.
3. The excuse to invade Iraq (even though Iraq had NOTHING to do with it) and occupy the country, soaking up the oil.
4. Suddenly, Americans are in danger! We need a good, reliable, security company who is willing to take the burden! Hey, Halliburton, you're pretty good at that right? Here's a couple billions worth of a government contract!
And what happens to Halliburton stock? It triples. And guess who sells out the moment it has done so. That's right, the 28% that the Arab investors and Osama's parents had totalled together. Everyone gets really fat rich, and the US of A gets to occupy one of the largest and richest sources of oil on the planet. All for the low low price of 6,000+ innocent american lives.
--Locane
The world trade centers were created originally as a conglomerate of corperations who were ignoring US embargos and sanctions. Totally ignoring them.
The towers were specifically designed to withstand an impact from a commercial jet liner. No joke, they were MADE to take what they took.
The towers imploding in on themselves, as seen in the 1,000 videos out of them, is ONLY characteristic of a rigged and very well exececuted demolitions operation. If you'll notice, all the supports go out first, then the building falls. There is no such thing as a naturally occuring implosion - look at any other destruction video and you'll see what I'm talking about.
If you study video footage of actual collapsing buildings, ones hit with cars (from a hurricane or tornado) or are just plain damaged, they do not fall straight down, and they certainly do not vaporize into dust, as the towers did.
Osama Bin Ladin's parents (who have decried their son as a heretic and a traitor, even going so far as to change their name) held a lot of the shares of a security company called Haliburton, whom (amazingly!) **** Cheney used to be CEO of.
A lot of very rich arab investors held stock in Halliburton, before the war totalling an extraodinary 28% of it's stock. These are the same arab investors that funded Bush's campaign - ever wonder where he gets all his money?
So now that we have the facts down, lets look at things:
What does Bush and Co. have to gain by destroying the towers?
1. The elmination and/or severe hampering of the corperations ignoring US embargos and sanctions.
2. The united American people, and an almost garunteed second term.
3. The excuse to invade Iraq (even though Iraq had NOTHING to do with it) and occupy the country, soaking up the oil.
4. Suddenly, Americans are in danger! We need a good, reliable, security company who is willing to take the burden! Hey, Halliburton, you're pretty good at that right? Here's a couple billions worth of a government contract!
And what happens to Halliburton stock? It triples. And guess who sells out the moment it has done so. That's right, the 28% that the Arab investors and Osama's parents had totalled together. Everyone gets really fat rich, and the US of A gets to occupy one of the largest and richest sources of oil on the planet. All for the low low price of 6,000+ innocent american lives.
--Locane
Comments
The towers imploding in on themselves, as seen in the 1,000 videos out of them, is ONLY characteristic of a rigged and very well exececuted demolitions operation. If you'll notice, all the supports go out first, then the building falls. There is no such thing as a naturally occuring implosion - look at any other destruction video and you'll see what I'm talking about.
If you study video footage of actual collapsing buildings, ones hit with cars (from a hurricane or tornado) or are just plain damaged, they do not fall straight down, and they certainly do not vaporize into dust, as the towers did.[...]<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They were also never tested. No airliner ever flew into the towers of the WTC before that day. They were designed and built to take the impact of an airliner, but in hindsight, that design appears to have been faulty. The <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_Collapse' target='_blank'>Tacoma Bridge,</a> while not related to the WTC, is a very good example of a structure collapsing under circumstances that it was designed to withstand due to unforeseen conditions.
I was halfway into typing a detailed account on how exactly the collapse happened, but I found it much easier to simply <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center' target='_blank'>link to a much better article.</a> It also mentions your theory that the towers were demolished.
I've taken the liberty to quote what I believe to be the most important sections:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, however, WTC towers 1 and 2 were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 lost in fog, looking to land. The modeled aircraft was a 707 weighing 263,000 lb (119,000 kg) with a flight speed of 180 mph (290 km/h), as would be used in approach and landing situations ([1], page 17). The 767s that actually hit the towers had a kinetic energy more than seven times the modeled 707 impact.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not to mention that, most likely, a plane "lost in fog, looking to land" would have been at the end of its journey, not the beginning, and would therefore have carried substantially less fuel than the two planes that hit the towers, leading to smaller fires.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The two towers collapsed in markedly different ways, indicating that there were in fact two modes of failure. The north tower collapsed directly downwards, "pancaking" in on itself, while the south tower fell at an angle during which the top 20 or so stories of the building remained intact for the first few seconds of the collapse.
Subsequent modeling suggests that in the north tower the internal trusses supporting the building's concrete floors failed as a result of heat-induced warping. This placed additional stress on the bunched core columns, which themselves were losing integrity from both impact damage and heat. When the core columns gave out on one of the impact floors, this floor collapsed into the floor below. Once the collapse started, it was unstoppable; the huge mass of the falling structure had sufficient momentum to act as a battering ram, smashing through all the intact floors below. This theory is supported by witnesses from within the tower stating they heard "something like a heavy freight train approaching". There is some visual evidence that it was the core that collapsed first. It can be seen in videos that the large antenna, which was built on top of the core, starts downward a fraction of a second earlier than the rest of the building.
In the south tower, heat warping weakened the single-bolt connections between the floorplates and the initially intact external columns surrounding the impact hole, effectively creating a "hangman's drop" for that portion of the building above the point of failure. Eventually, the gravity load on these bolts increased beyond the breaking point as the joins, floorplates and columns weakened. Again, the momentum of the collapsing structure was sufficient to smash everything below it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's why (fortunately), the buildings more or less simply collapsed into themselves. The falling upper parts simply crushed everything below them. After all, objects in free fall tend to go straight down, and the supports were designed to support the weight of the tower - not to withstand the impact of the whole structure falling onto them.
The accepted sequence of events regarding the collapse of the twin towers of the WTC on the eleventh of september, 2001, is as follows:<ul><li>Airplane hits north tower.</li><li>Airplane hits south tower.</li><li>South tower collapses due to damage suffered from airplane impact.</li><li>North tower collapses due to damage suffered from airplane impact.</li></ul>If you want to deal with conspiracy theories, claiming that this is false is probably your worst angle of attack.
Ummm.. of course the supports are going to go first. If the supports didnt' fail then the building wouldn't have collapsed.
I also like how just having troops in a country let us magically soak the oil into our economy. We have no domain over any of the oil there. We aren't pumping them dry, we aren't using our occupation as a means to get it. We ARE rebuilding the oil infrastructure (which was BADLY damaged after the initial invasion) and are not even up to pre-war capacity.
Not to mention, when we do leave (which is being talked about for 2006) Iraq is then its own nation. We do have established food for oil programs in the region, using our vast midwest food crops in exchange for oil. That's hardly "soaking up the oil."
I don't care about forum rules, but my GOD you are a complete and utter FOOL for believing this is fake, I almost lost my uncle during that thing and I was scared ****less for three days.
Too bad the people who cry CONSPIRACY have probably never been to the actual site a couple months after it happened, you could still see the smoke from the river <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Edit: Censored myself because the forum didn't.
And the people who DID know it wouldn't just be saying "lol the building imploded!!!!!" or anything, they'd be stating exactly where each device was and so on, so the people claiming it was a conspiracy weren't involved in it (obviously).
So that + pretty much every real piece of evidence + common sense ended the conspiracy idea for me.
then what about all the people that died?
The damage to the Pentagon?
The loss of two HUGE monuments
The loss of dozens of firefighters and policemen
The phone call from that plane that was forced to crash in my homestate field... who's passengers valiently wrested control from the terrorists and then slammed the plane harmlessly into a field instead of say, TMI.
THINK ABOUT WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID!!! Is he fricken SANE to say it's a government consperiacy?
Cause, if it IS a consperiacy... I'm gonna kill "Dubyah" with my bare hands...
And I know it wasn't a consperiacy...
Here in PA, we got some of the "floating" debries- ashes and such actually made it's way down here, a very light coating... but a coating none the less. Let me tell you... that's a sobering sight...