[Vote] Who did 911?

[BADecker]

What I´ve never understood since 9/11

Since a certain structural damage plus fuel explosion/burning worked so perfectly on three out of two massive skyscrapers in New York City

why are they still using those complicated and time consuming and I´m sure vastly more expensive old methods of demolition charges going off in sequence? It´s very unusual for businessmen to go to any special lengths to unnecessarily increase expenses and time spent. It´s mysterious.

I mean; they had computer models show how it took place and then it rather obviously follows that those computer models could be put to practical use in planning and setting up building demolition. But all that business is still using outdated and expensive high explosives and all that manpower and fuss and time around that??? Doesn´t make sense.

I agree.

I should think that someone would start a model airplane factory designed for the demolition of different sized buildings.

This is really a good money-making venture. Make the models scaled down (or up) as necessary for the size of the building being demolished. Then sell them to demolition companies. Demolition could be prepared in the factory instead of all that BS out in the field, where you have to go through costly preparations to get the building to come down just right.

Great idea, galdur!

 

[1715206367]

1715206367

[1715206367]

1715206367

[1715206367]

1715206367

[1715206367]

1715206367

[1715206367]

1715206367

[galdur]

You don´t need any aircraft. Just need to damage one side of the structure and have a certain amount of fuel in place. The computer model will plan it for you. It doesn´t even have to be all that exact as was demonstrated on 9/11. The aircraft hit the towers differently and at different heights. The fuel blew up differently, you remember the huge fireball in the South tower, the latter. As an added bonus; if you need to get rid of another nearby building you hardly need to do anything at all there as we saw on 9/11. It´s all in the computer models.

[BADecker]

You don´t need any aircraft. Just need to damage one side of the structure and have a certain amount of fuel in place. The computer model will plan it for you. It doesn´t even have to be all that exact as was demonstrated on 9/11. The aircraft hit the towers differently and at different heights. The fuel blew up at a different rate. As an added bonus; if you need to get rid of another nearby building you hardly need to do anything at all there as we saw on 9/11. It´s all in the computer models.

I Get it...

Do it just right, and you can take down additional buildings... just like Building 7 went down!

Wow! What a concept! The whole demolition industry is going to change, once they see your posts!!!

I feel sorry for you. There probably isn't any way you can cash in on this great idea... is there?

    (LOL!)

[galdur]

You don´t need any aircraft. Just need to damage one side of the structure and have a certain amount of fuel in place. The computer model will plan it for you. It doesn´t even have to be all that exact as was demonstrated on 9/11. The aircraft hit the towers differently and at different heights. The fuel blew up at a different rate. As an added bonus; if you need to get rid of another nearby building you hardly need to do anything at all there as we saw on 9/11. It´s all in the computer models.

I Get it...

Do it just right, and you can take down additional buildings... just like Building 7 went down!

Wow! What a concept! The whole demolition industry is going to change, once they see your posts!!!

I feel sorry for you. There probably isn't any way you can cash in on this great ides... is there?

    (LOL!)

Well, I was ranting about this on conspiracy message boards like a decade ago and trying to get funds for starting a company to put this into practice, but alas no takers. It´s very strange for such a 100% sure thing, comes ready made with government certified test results and all.

[galdur]

Yeah yeah, I´m in my element in this 9/11 stuff.  But got bored of it long ago.  

[BADecker]

You don´t need any aircraft. Just need to damage one side of the structure and have a certain amount of fuel in place. The computer model will plan it for you. It doesn´t even have to be all that exact as was demonstrated on 9/11. The aircraft hit the towers differently and at different heights. The fuel blew up at a different rate. As an added bonus; if you need to get rid of another nearby building you hardly need to do anything at all there as we saw on 9/11. It´s all in the computer models.

I Get it...

Do it just right, and you can take down additional buildings... just like Building 7 went down!

Wow! What a concept! The whole demolition industry is going to change, once they see your posts!!!

I feel sorry for you. There probably isn't any way you can cash in on this great ides... is there?

    (LOL!)

Well, I was ranting about this on conspiracy message boards like a decade ago and trying to get funds for starting a company to put this into practice, but alas no takers. It´s very strange for such a 100% sure thing, comes ready made with government certified test results and all.

In Russia, they would REQUIRE you to do your demolition the government way.

 

[BADecker]

Just recapping this whole little section here...   

What I´ve never understood since 9/11

Since a certain structural damage plus fuel explosion/burning worked so perfectly on three out of two massive skyscrapers in New York City

why are they still using those complicated and time consuming and I´m sure vastly more expensive old methods of demolition charges going off in sequence? It´s very unusual for businessmen to go to any special lengths to unnecessarily increase expenses and time spent. It´s mysterious.

I mean; they had computer models show how it took place and then it rather obviously follows that those computer models could be put to practical use in planning and setting up building demolition. But all that business is still using outdated and expensive high explosives and all that manpower and fuss and time around that??? Doesn´t make sense.

I agree.

I should think that someone would start a model airplane factory designed for the demolition of different sized buildings.

This is really a good money-making venture. Make the models scaled down (or up) as necessary for the size of the building being demolished. Then sell them to demolition companies. Demolition could be prepared in the factory instead of all that BS out in the field, where you have to go through costly preparations to get the building to come down just right.

Great idea, galdur!

 

You don´t need any aircraft. Just need to damage one side of the structure and have a certain amount of fuel in place. The computer model will plan it for you. It doesn´t even have to be all that exact as was demonstrated on 9/11. The aircraft hit the towers differently and at different heights. The fuel blew up differently, you remember the huge fireball in the South tower, the latter. As an added bonus; if you need to get rid of another nearby building you hardly need to do anything at all there as we saw on 9/11. It´s all in the computer models.

I Get it...

Do it just right, and you can take down additional buildings... just like Building 7 went down!

Wow! What a concept! The whole demolition industry is going to change, once they see your posts!!!

I feel sorry for you. There probably isn't any way you can cash in on this great idea... is there?

    (LOL!)

Well, I was ranting about this on conspiracy message boards like a decade ago and trying to get funds for starting a company to put this into practice, but alas no takers. It´s very strange for such a 100% sure thing, comes ready made with government certified test results and all.

Yeah yeah, I´m in my element in this 9/11 stuff.  But got bored of it long ago. 

In Russia, they would REQUIRE you to do your demolition the government way.

 

[galdur]

Here´s one of my favorite lines from when I was in the 9/11 message board battles

If you believe that reinforced skyscrapers can fall through themselves at virtually free fall speed in a gravity driven event you can not also believe that parachutes work.

Cute, huh?  

[BADecker]

Here´s one of my favorite lines from when I was in the 9/11 message board battles

If you believe that reinforced skyscrapers can fall through themselves at virtually free fall speed in a gravity driven event you can not also believe that parachutes work.

Cute, huh?  

Oh come on. Parachutes have that big bundle of air under them, slowing them down. All the Twin Towers had was massive amounts of steel and concrete slowing THEM down.

 

[galdur]

Here´s one of my favorite lines from when I was in the 9/11 message board battles

If you believe that reinforced skyscrapers can fall through themselves at virtually free fall speed in a gravity driven event you can not also believe that parachutes work.

Cute, huh?  

Oh come on. Parachutes have that big bundle of air under them, slowing them down. All the Twin Towers had was massive amounts of steel and concrete slowing THEM down.

 

Well, it´s just extremely unlikely. For obvious reasons the steel gets thicker the closer to the bottom of the building. So you have lesser mass pushing an increasingly greater one. It´s difficult to imagine how the energy sink is supposed to add up in a gravity driven event. Imagine the energy it takes to turn all the concrete to dust I think 50,000 tons in each tower. You saw those huge pyroclastic clouds rushing out over Lower Manhattan. We´re talking massive amounts, tens of thousands of tons of material moving at speed. And then you have all the steel.

[BADecker]

Here´s one of my favorite lines from when I was in the 9/11 message board battles

If you believe that reinforced skyscrapers can fall through themselves at virtually free fall speed in a gravity driven event you can not also believe that parachutes work.

Cute, huh?  

Oh come on. Parachutes have that big bundle of air under them, slowing them down. All the Twin Towers had was massive amounts of steel and concrete slowing THEM down.

 

Well, it´s just extremely unlikely. For obvious reasons the steel gets thicker the closer to the bottom of the building. So you have lesser mass pushing an increasingly greater one. It´s difficult to imagine how the energy sink is supposed to add up in a gravity driven event. Imagine the energy it takes to turn all the concrete to dust I think 50,000 tons in each tower. You saw those huge pyroclastic clouds rushing out over Lower Manhattan. We´re talking massive amounts, tens of thousands of tons of material moving at speed. And then you have all the steel.

I agree. But Spendy and his engineers think they have that one covered... somehow. I think I'll go read a science fiction novel.

[galdur]

In fact I remember reading in 2002 or 3 a report from the NYC Comptroller where it was stated that insurance claims OUTSIDE the WTC site were higher than those of the site itself. The damages from all that dust were stupendous. I wonder how many people are aware of this very interesting fact.

[BADecker]

In fact I remember reading in 2002 or 3 a report from the NYC Comptroller where it was stated that insurance claims OUTSIDE the WTC site were higher than those of the site itself. The damages from all that dust were stupendous. I wonder how many people are aware of this very interesting fact.

I agree. If they wanted to demolish the buildings, they could have removed all the people, and then torn them down nicely and safely.

They didn't want nice and safe. Among the things that they wanted was an excuse to set up Homeland Security, and to invade the Middle East.

They murdered 3,000 people to get their excuse. And now that they have been over in the Middle East, they have murdered hundreds of thousands more. Some of the leaders in the American government are evil incarnate.

(I gotta get back to reading my sci-fi novel.)

[galdur]

In fact I remember reading in 2002 or 3 a report from the NYC Comptroller where it was stated that insurance claims OUTSIDE the WTC site were higher than those of the site itself. The damages from all that dust were stupendous. I wonder how many people are aware of this very interesting fact.

I agree. If they wanted to demolish the buildings, they could have removed all the people, and then torn them down nicely and safely.

They didn't want nice and safe. Among the things that they wanted was an excuse to set up Homeland Security, and to invade the Middle East.

They murdered 3,000 people to get their excuse. And now that they have been over in the Middle East, they have murdered hundreds of thousands more. Some of the leaders in the American government are evil incarnate.

(I gotta get back to reading my sci-fi novel.)

I think those towers were generally past their expiry date by the turn of the century. After the internet came along with widespread online trading, demand for office space close to Wall Street simply decreased. When you have such huge properties, that has to hurt. Also there was a very expensive asbestos removal issue and that was an overhang that had to be dealt with sooner or later. So they were on borrowed time if you will and most likely a financial burden for the owners. I think it´s one big layer-cake of a scam which combined several interests. Insurance companies took a big initial hit but they didn´t mind because they got to raise premiums massively and make it all back with big interest. Remember how Warren Buffett was whining on about the next major terror attack in the years after 9/11?

Insurance scam, political scam, windfall for the war industry etc..when these more or less intertwined interests strike gold simultanously on the same day you have to be suspicious. ESPECIALLY since that very first thought of any police detective worth their salt, WHO BENEFITS, was studiously avoided. Follow the money? No way.

[BADecker]

In fact I remember reading in 2002 or 3 a report from the NYC Comptroller where it was stated that insurance claims OUTSIDE the WTC site were higher than those of the site itself. The damages from all that dust were stupendous. I wonder how many people are aware of this very interesting fact.

I agree. If they wanted to demolish the buildings, they could have removed all the people, and then torn them down nicely and safely.

They didn't want nice and safe. Among the things that they wanted was an excuse to set up Homeland Security, and to invade the Middle East.

They murdered 3,000 people to get their excuse. And now that they have been over in the Middle East, they have murdered hundreds of thousands more. Some of the leaders in the American government are evil incarnate.

(I gotta get back to reading my sci-fi novel.)

I think those towers were generally past their expiry date by the turn of the century. After the internet came along with widespread online trading, demand for office space close to Wall Street simply decreased. When you have such huge properties, that has to hurt. Also there was a very expensive asbestos removal issue and that was an overhang that had to be dealt with sooner or later. So they were on borrowed time if you will and most likely a financial burden for the owners. I think it´s one big layer-cake of a scam which combined several interests. Insurance companies took a big initial hit but they didn´t mind because they got to raise premiums massively and make it all back with big interest. Remember how Warren Buffett was whining on about the next major terror attack in the years after 9/11?

Insurance scam, political scam, windfall for the war industry etc..when these more or less intertwined interests strike gold simultanously on the same day you have to be suspicious. ESPECIALLY since that very first thought of any police detective worth their salt, WHO BENEFITS, was studiously avoided. Follow the money? No way.

Yep. I agree.

Have any of the people who died outside of the collapses themselves - like the first responders - been diagnosed with asbestos poisoning, or with such poisoning as cause of death?

[galdur]

In fact I remember reading in 2002 or 3 a report from the NYC Comptroller where it was stated that insurance claims OUTSIDE the WTC site were higher than those of the site itself. The damages from all that dust were stupendous. I wonder how many people are aware of this very interesting fact.

I agree. If they wanted to demolish the buildings, they could have removed all the people, and then torn them down nicely and safely.

They didn't want nice and safe. Among the things that they wanted was an excuse to set up Homeland Security, and to invade the Middle East.

They murdered 3,000 people to get their excuse. And now that they have been over in the Middle East, they have murdered hundreds of thousands more. Some of the leaders in the American government are evil incarnate.

(I gotta get back to reading my sci-fi novel.)

I think those towers were generally past their expiry date by the turn of the century. After the internet came along with widespread online trading, demand for office space close to Wall Street simply decreased. When you have such huge properties, that has to hurt. Also there was a very expensive asbestos removal issue and that was an overhang that had to be dealt with sooner or later. So they were on borrowed time if you will and most likely a financial burden for the owners. I think it´s one big layer-cake of a scam which combined several interests. Insurance companies took a big initial hit but they didn´t mind because they got to raise premiums massively and make it all back with big interest. Remember how Warren Buffett was whining on about the next major terror attack in the years after 9/11?

Insurance scam, political scam, windfall for the war industry etc..when these more or less intertwined interests strike gold simultanously on the same day you have to be suspicious. ESPECIALLY since that very first thought of any police detective worth their salt, WHO BENEFITS, was studiously avoided. Follow the money? No way.

Yep. I agree.

Have any of the people who died outside of the collapses themselves - like the first responders - been diagnosed with asbestos poisoning, or with such poisoning as cause of death?

I´m not familiar with that. But apart from the asbestos there´s plenty of other dangerous stuff around. And it gets pulverized. All the smoke detectors? Didn´t they contain some radioactive shit? And then psychopaths said that it was all safe and the rescuers and clean up crews didn´t even need face masks. I´ll tell you why they didn´t need masks, it was because if they had worn them people would have gotten the message and hauled ass out of Manhattan. Now; that would have been a drag for Wall Street and New York City.

[Racey]

I thought you guys would like this, maybe you already know about it.
From August of this year Fourteen Incredible Facts About 9/11

The link above was from here Propaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams

[Spendulus]

In fact I remember reading in 2002 or 3 a report from the NYC Comptroller where it was stated that insurance claims OUTSIDE the WTC site were higher than those of the site itself. The damages from all that dust were stupendous. I wonder how many people are aware of this very interesting fact.

I agree. If they wanted to demolish the buildings, they could have removed all the people, and then torn them down nicely and safely.

They didn't want nice and safe. Among the things that they wanted was an excuse to set up Homeland Security, and to invade the Middle East.

They murdered 3,000 people to get their excuse. And now that they have been over in the Middle East, they have murdered hundreds of thousands more. Some of the leaders in the American government are evil incarnate.

(I gotta get back to reading my sci-fi novel.)

I think those towers were generally past their expiry date by the turn of the century. After the internet came along with widespread online trading, demand for office space close to Wall Street simply decreased. When you have such huge properties, that has to hurt. Also there was a very expensive asbestos removal issue and that was an overhang that had to be dealt with sooner or later. So they were on borrowed time if you will and most likely a financial burden for the owners. I think it´s one big layer-cake of a scam which combined several interests. Insurance companies took a big initial hit but they didn´t mind because they got to raise premiums massively and make it all back with big interest. Remember how Warren Buffett was whining on about the next major terror attack in the years after 9/11?

Insurance scam, political scam, windfall for the war industry etc..when these more or less intertwined interests strike gold simultanously on the same day you have to be suspicious. ESPECIALLY since that very first thought of any police detective worth their salt, WHO BENEFITS, was studiously avoided. Follow the money? No way.

Asbestos?  Bah.  Lots of buildings around in every city that have handled that.

[Spendulus]

I thought you guys would like this, maybe you already know about it.
From August of this year Fourteen Incredible Facts About 9/11

The link above was from here Propaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams

The propaganda is that steel beams were melted, or needed to be melted, for the towers to fall.

But propagate on, don't let me stop you.

[BADecker]

I thought you guys would like this, maybe you already know about it.
From August of this year Fourteen Incredible Facts About 9/11

The link above was from here Propaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams

Thanks. This is old stuff. But it is great to review it.