Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

54,471 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Galileo

Mill Valley, CA

#257863 Jul 25, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
And what's the tensile strength of 60xx welding rod?
Trick question but relevant.
And how much stress and in which directions can a 1/4" fillet 1-2" long take before it breaks along the heat affected zone?
And how much force were the welds exposed too?
And geometry of the structure no doubt was important but the reality is any structure can fail given the right conditions given that the materials used to construct it had limits of force they could withstand before plastic deformation made them next to useless as load bearing members.
It was not a pancake collapse, it was initiated by pancaking but the collapse was progressive with the joints between the hat trusses and the perimeter columns failing and causing the structure to globally collapse.
pig you don't know which end of a welding rod to stick in the stinger.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257864 Jul 25, 2013
chazmo wrote:
<quoted text>
So then an eyewitness stating 'explosions means explosives?...
And lava means 5000F lava on the 85th floor?...
And molten steel flowing from the 85th floor as seen from 1 mile away...
Is an actual witness statement of fact?...
Does my speaking to witnesses that actually walked the pile...
And that were present after the first Tower fell...
And before the second?...
And saw the damage to the front of WTC7?...
And were present for the collapse of WTC7...
Albeit from a safe distance...
You really can't believe that.
WTC 7 had minimal damage.
WTC 3, 4 and 5 had severe heavy damage because the debris from the towers rained down upon them, and none of them collapsed. They were smaller buildings therefore they would be much lighter weight and not as strong as WTC 7
onemale

Pana, IL

#257865 Jul 25, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
And what's the tensile strength of 60xx welding rod?
Trick question but relevant.
And how much stress and in which directions can a 1/4" fillet 1-2" long take before it breaks along the heat affected zone?
And how much force were the welds exposed too?
And geometry of the structure no doubt was important but the reality is any structure can fail given the right conditions given that the materials used to construct it had limits of force they could withstand before plastic deformation made them next to useless as load bearing members.
It was not a pancake collapse, it was initiated by pancaking but the collapse was progressive with the joints between the hat trusses and the perimeter columns failing and causing the structure to globally collapse.
I don't believe they used little 1/4" fillet welds on the strongest buildings in the world.
You always want to indicate the architects who designed it are all a bunch of dumb bastards, well I cannot believe that either.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257866 Jul 25, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
The designers said they planned for a 707 possibly off course coming in for a landing. What that would mean is flying around 150mph or less with most of the fuel burned already. Yea, the so called controlled fall wiped out the entire WTC complex along with most of the NYFD equipment.
Yes, a 767 is larger than a 707 but not that much larger. The main difference the 767 contain a higher percentage of fiberglass than a 707. the 767 was designed to be much more energy efficient. I posted the specs of both in the past; obviously you conveniently ignored it.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257867 Jul 25, 2013
chazmo wrote:
<quoted text>
Impossible?...
Are you sure you don't mean improbable?...
I meant impossible
onemale

Pana, IL

#257869 Jul 25, 2013
I have been slammed for asking difficult questions but here it goes again. Why has Osama Bin Laden never been indited for 9/11? Check the FBI website for yourself. Simply look for the FBI top 10 most wanted, Bin Laden is on there all the charges against him are listed but there is nothing about 9/11. The most devastating attack in America and it's not listed. They have not gave one shred of evidence that he did it. Condoleezza Rice stood up said they had the evidence and would reveal it to the public but they never did. Why not???. When the FBI was pressed as to why, they said we don't have enough of evidence.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257870 Jul 25, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a 767 is larger than a 707 but not that much larger. The main difference the 767 contain a higher percentage of fiberglass than a 707. the 767 was designed to be much more energy efficient. I posted the specs of both in the past; obviously you conveniently ignored it.
I already explained the difference in what the designers thought might happen and what actually did happen. Since these ideas were theoretical, none of this has any bearing on what actually happened.
The fact is the buildings stood for a fairly long period of time until the structure weakened to the point of failure. You left out the part that the sprinkler systems failed due to damage also. Since the hijackings were the real test, everything else is moot. What we have is design theory vs. reality. Theory is all well and good until the real shit hits the fan.

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#257871 Jul 25, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe they used little 1/4" fillet welds on the strongest buildings in the world.
yes they would
One word,Contractors.

Ask Porkpie Hat for an honest answer

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#257872 Jul 26, 2013
Galileo wrote:
<quoted text>pig you don't know which end of a welding rod to stick in the stinger.
Do they sell welding rod at the 7/11 where you work oh elevator boy sheep STREEY CORNER JEEBUS?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#257873 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>I don't believe they used little 1/4" fillet welds on the strongest buildings in the world.
You always want to indicate the architects who designed it are all a bunch of dumb bastards, well I cannot believe that either.
There were 1/4" fillets all over that building, look at the drawings.

But you, as always, dodged the question.

How much force could the welds withstand and how much force were they subjected to?

Btw, 60xx consumable has a tensile strength of 60ksi.

70xx, 70ksi.

Your post regarding welding was pure bunk.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#257874 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>I meant impossible
Prove it then.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257875 Jul 26, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it then.
Prove commonsense???
When one pace of metal sits atop another piece that is welded and bolted it isn’t too difficult to figure out.
You haven't proved they only used 1/4 fillet welds.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257876 Jul 26, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
yes they would
One word,Contractors.
Ask Porkpie Hat for an honest answer
Contractors do the work according to the blueprints.
Just like my former workplace as a machinist it was my job to machine parts according to the blueprints.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#257877 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove commonsense???
When one pace of metal sits atop another piece that is welded and bolted it isn’t too difficult to figure out.
You haven't proved they only used 1/4 fillet welds.
It's absolutely incredible how disingenuous twoofers are to a man!

First, the point of 1/4" fillets was to make you understand how dumb your comment was...I know, you don't get it.

Second, your post claimed pancaking was impossible for the given geometry....prove it.

Because what you said, in effect, was that placing a beam on a ledge makes that joint infinitely able to withstand any compressive force regardless of materials or how large the force.

That's just plain stupid and obviously wrong but gives an idea of how a) dumb twoofers are or b) how willingly they lie.

You choose.

And here's some reading material for you by real professionals,

"Failure of connections, as a result of overloading, occurred
within the heat-affected zone of the base metals"

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search...

I know, you'll ignore it in favour of your delusions regardless of the fact that you quite obviously have no clue what you're talking about.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#257878 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>Contractors do the work according to the blueprints.
Just like my former workplace as a machinist it was my job to machine parts according to the blueprints.
Good grief.

And people wonder why twoofers get abused.?
Bald Eagle

Laconia, NH

#257879 Jul 26, 2013
Just for kicks wrote:
<quoted text>DO YOU KNOW WHO THE 1st LIBERAL WAS BENEDICT ARNOLD
DID YOU KNOW THAT I CAN RUN FASTER THAN YOU
RedHorseRevelati on

AOL

#257880 Jul 26, 2013
.

Bible PROOF 1.5 BIL MUSLIMS to die --

http://youtu.be/n7ok0g8iwJI

.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#257881 Jul 26, 2013
Oh is that why Mohammed Atta and 18 dumb and dumber Arab college students, some of whom flunked out of flying school and could not solo a Cessna, allegedly was able to FOOL:

The largest, most modern, technologically superior defensive and offensive military force in the world, namely NORAD, FAA, Washington DC Air National Guard, New York Air National Guard, Northeast Air Defense Sector and the US Air Force long enough to hijack 4 commercial airliners, fly them hundreds of miles around the US country side and then fly them into buildings in New York City and Washington DC without one of them being intercepted? Flying time for the four hijacked airliners indicates a total of one hour and twenty-five minutes elapsed between the time that Boston Air Traffic Control lost contact with the first allegedly hijacked Flight 11 and the Pentagon was allegedly attacked by flight 77.

They didn't have the right equipment! Oh now its so clear.

So the next time many wargames are scheduled on one day we can expect another false flag black op attack by our own govie that can't be foiled by our elite defensive forces.

I got it now. Huh Eh !

What part of "welding rod" don't you understand?

Both!

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#257882 Jul 26, 2013
Spain indicts bin Laden for attacks
The Wall Street Journal
September 17, 2003

MADRID, Spain (AP)- Spain's leading investigating judge issued the first known indictment against Osama bin Laden in the Sept. 11 attacks yesterday, accusing al-Qaida of using the country as a base to plot the devastating strikes on New York and Washington.

Investigative magistrate Baltasar Garzon indicted 35 people for terrorist activities connected to bin Laden's al-Qaida network. In a nearly 700-page document, Garzon wrote that Spain served "as a place or base for resting, preparation, indoctrinating, support and financing" of al-Qaida.

The indictment charged bin Laden and nine others with membership in a terrorist organization and "as many crimes of terrorist murder ... as there were dead and injured" in the deadly Sept. 11 attacks.
onemale wrote:
I have been slammed for asking difficult questions but here it goes again. Why has Osama Bin Laden never been indited for 9/11? Check the FBI website for yourself. Simply look for the FBI top 10 most wanted, Bin Laden is on there all the charges against him are listed but there is nothing about 9/11. The most devastating attack in America and it's not listed. They have not gave one shred of evidence that he did it. Condoleezza Rice stood up said they had the evidence and would reveal it to the public but they never did. Why not???. When the FBI was pressed as to why, they said we don't have enough of evidence.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257883 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
You really can't believe that.
WTC 7 had minimal damage.
WTC 3, 4 and 5 had severe heavy damage because the debris from the towers rained down upon them, and none of them collapsed. They were smaller buildings therefore they would be much lighter weight and not as strong as WTC 7
FALSE WTC7 had major damage.

FALSE WTC7 had a unique construction and heavy loading on the seventh floor.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min Stilgar Fifrawi 856,199
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 5 min Robert F 596,817
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 7 min Knock off purse s... 6,172
LOUD CRYIN' SPOILED Black Kids in Wal Mart!!!!! 9 min Burke Devlin 71
"How much WIGGLIN' you plan on DOIN'??! lol 13 min Knock off purse s... 14
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 15 min rahul 297
REALITY: Tiger Woods is a SICK TRICK! 21 min Knock off purse s... 7
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 26 min I Am No One_ 444,411
The Christian Atheist debate 30 min HipGnosis 1,095
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 58 min bad bob 177,233
More from around the web