• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Somebody would have talked.

'll wait for a more legit news site. At least Breitbart.
 
I seriously doubt this sort of thing will be significantly reported.

It will be interesting to see how the hardcore 911 folks follow up on this. I'd like to check on the fellow' credentials to see if it can be ascertained that he was with the military and even the CIA. After leaking something THIS (ahem) explosive I would be surprised if he's easily found on any CIA roster sheets very handily.

Now if somebody has info from 10 or 20 years ago, he may be listed somewhere. That would be interesting.
 
I think even the lunatic fringe of right wingers would understand that something was up with WTC7.
 
I think even the lunatic fringe of right wingers would understand that something was up with WTC7.

No!!!!!!!!!!!! You're not a true American patriot and just a bad American if you even entertain the slightest possibility that WTC7 was brought down exactly like every planned building demo that was ever designed before and since. Nope! a big fire done did it. And Just because no fire ever took out a structure with such efficiency, it's because this fire had lotsa jet fuel. And lotsa jet fuel has been known to get super hot and make buildings come straight down in 30 seconds, perfectly in their own footprint. I don't believe none a this crazy stuff.
 
In fairness, although I don't agree with it at all, there has long been an argument WTC7 was badly damaged on the back side by debris from WTC2 when it fell. The theory is that the significant damage (that was never very clearly shown in photographs, but did exist), weakened the building and helped with the collapse.

The problem with that theory of course is that if a side or corner of the building had been "shelled out" as the theory goes, the building would not have fallen straight down, but would have tilted toward the section that had been scooped out by the falling debris. Furthermore, nowhere in the original NIST report is that ever mentioned, much less discussed. In fact WTC7 is never discussed at all in the NIST report. We can conjecture why, but unfortunately others would argue that conjecture is all it would be.

More interestingly, if you take a look at WHERE the fires were burning in WTC7 before it fell based on the (at the time) live video footage and the photographs and compare that to the floorplan of the building. You see something quite telling. The CIA offices were burning. The Homeland Security offices were burning, the SEC offices were burning.

Coincidence? Undoubtedly.
 
Last edited:
Because I love you and it's funny...

 
The 19 hijackers are alive, and living in Bermuda.
 
Just a potential new whistle-blower who will undoubtedly be ignored and then discredited.

Nothing to see here. Move along, move along. Just stay far far away from high-rise steel frame buildings. Thermal expansion is real!
 
Conspiracies are entertaining.
But a guy on his deathbed claiming he and the CIA were responsible seems too fishy and "entertaining". The story is made to attract the hardcore conspirist I think.

A bunch of angry terrorists hijacked planes and were on a mission to cripple America. They affected many lives. That's it. I'm open into seeing and accepting conspiracies. Applause to those who try their hardest and research. But sometimes reality is a plane brought those buildings down
 
Not remotely plausible MTC.

You'd have to accept that the most highly protected building in the country, possibly the world could be hit by a commercial airliner.

- in the middle of a national terror attack.

- You'd have to believe that our national defense system actually has NO defense against aircraft merely turning off their electronic transponders. (As I've often mentioned, we should be thankful Russia never sent a bunch of bombers over during the cold war and simply turned off the transponders as they approached the eastern seaboard. We would have been screwed.)

- You'd have to believe that not one, not two, but three buildings can collapse due to impact force, jet fuel and office furniture fires. (Well in two of them anyway. The third building had nothing but general office fires.) If you believe that, then you must accept that the vast majority of high rise buildings currently standing in the world today are highly susceptible to collapse because 3 of them fell in one day. This is not an isolated "freakish" phenomenon. This is clearly a critical and endemic design flaw in high rise steel frame buildings.

- You'd have to believe that a commercial aircraft could punch a clean round hole in the reinforced concrete wall of the pentagon BEFORE disintegrating utterly into small bits of debris that could be picked up by hand.

- You'd have to believe a commercial airline nose-dived into a country side and pretty much obliterated itself and all the passengers as emergency personnel couldn't find or identify any human remains on site.

- You'd have to reconcile completely symmetrical collapses of buildings and you'll never find any architect or engineer who would suggest that any building is designed for that kind of catastrophe scenario. Yet it happened precisely like that 3 times in one day.

- You'd have to explain the molten steel in the sub-floors of WTC1 and 2 after the collapse, well documented in video and photographic photos as well as eyewitness statements.

- You'd have to discount all the accounts of secondary explosions occurring in all the buildings shortly before they collapsed.

- You'd have to explain why radically devout islamic terrorists were reportedly drinking, using cocaine and visiting strip clubs shortly before embarking on a jihad-death mission for their faith.

- You'd have to explain the trace particles of thermite found in the dust collected from 911 sites. Thermite particles that were later tested and found to be highly volatile explosives.

- You'd have to explain why NIST refuses to allow other scientists access to their research or computer models to explain the forces and events leading to tower and building 7 collapses.

- You'd need to come up with a plausible reason for Mayor Gulliani calling everyone out of the emergency management bunker even before the first tower was hit per testimony from Barry Jennings.

- You'd need to understand how emergency personnel knew hours ahead of time that WTC7 was doomed to collapse.

- You'd need to explain how BBC news channels were reporting the collapse of WTC7 between 21 and 13 minutes before it actually collapsed and showing live video of the building in the background while reporting on its having already collapsed.

- You'd need to tell experience pilots how they're wrong about the operating thresholds of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon and WTC2 and why the wings wouldn't have torn off based on the g forces of the final turns.

- You'd further need to explain how the wing tips of the planes (about 1" worth of aluminum) were able to slice through steel framing ranging from 8" to 2' thick making those nice "airplane shaped holes".

- You'd need to not only defend that jet fuel can flash heat steel as well as start office fires that begin to soften metal, but that those fires could, within only an hour to two hours, cause enough stress on a few floors to bring about the silly buckling theory.

- Then you'd need to give explain why the large "top section" of building falling on much much larger "bottom section" of the building didn't grind itself up as it fell, thus neutralizing it's energy as physics suggests it should.

(Honestly, I could do this ALL frickin day...)
 
Last edited:
Hot metal bends pretty damn easy. Put a bunch of stress from the floors above and down she goes...simplified. This stuff has been debunked so many times it's not even funny. But you know IF it was a reality this country is in a major mess. Knowing how people couldn't keep a secret this big and it would involved a great many folks to pull it off. I'll go with Islamic shitheads. That is the sum of the most probable...
 
people mainly pushed the conspiracies out of hatred for Bush. With him long out of office, i doubt many will get worked up about it unless they find video of Bush at WTC pushing down an old-timey dynamite plunger.
 

Uhhh, okay. Some other "breaking stories" from the same site:

* Angelina Jolie's Daughter Used To Be Adorable, But Today She Looks Insane

* 33 Amish Facts That Will Make Your Skin Crawl

* Trump Voters Shocked After Watching This Leaked Video

* What Will Smith's Ex-Wife Looks Like Today Is Insane, Try Not To Gasp!

* 15 Insane Secrets Hotel Workers Would Never Admit

* CIA Report: Military Shoot Down UFO Before Being Killed By Aliens

* Official Study: You're More Likely To Get Cancer Than Start A Family

Yeah, that **** sounds so reasonable. I mean, balanced, intelligent, not overblown bullshit, right? Amirite?!?

CIA shooting down aliens while Will Smith's wife looks like a crazy Amish women and I am more likely to get cancer than start a family while those craaaazy stories from hotel workers?!? What, what???
 
people mainly pushed the conspiracies out of hatred for Bush. With him long out of office, i doubt many will get worked up about it unless they find video of Bush at WTC pushing down an old-timey dynamite plunger.

That's very true -- the conspiracy theorists point the finger at Bush.

But this guy claims the planning started in 1997 -- Bush had nothing to do with it. It's another Clinton scandal!
 
That's very true -- the conspiracy theorists point the finger at Bush.

But this guy claims the planning started in 1997 -- Bush had nothing to do with it. It's another Clinton scandal!

Yup. Bubba turned down a hand-cuffed Bin Laden when he was offered to him. He could've prevented all of it.
 
It is true, the Bush administration couldn't have actually planned the 911 attacks, at best they could have only pulled the trigger.

But more likely they were involved in more of a cover up.

Hot metal bends pretty damn easy. Put a bunch of stress from the floors above and down she goes...simplified.

First off, nobody has ever argued that. But you need to remember that the buildings were double reinforced grids. As the floors "sagged" they would have pulled the outer walls inward. This would NOT cause a symmetrical collapse but a "falling over". And it would certainly not cause 3 buildings to symmetrically collapse. Furthermore, you'll remember that the buildings were reinforced with a central core of reinforced beams those would never have simply collapsed. They were not part of the floor grid. They would have remained standing and in fact are not even part of the NIST model for the collapse. (Which I'm sure you are aware of since you've read the full NIST report.)

Second, As the top floors fall, they grind into the lower floors. This reduces their force. The fires heating the metal and weakening the structure were isolated on a dozen or so floors. So after that section began to fall, the rest of the building was structurally intact. Therefore as the top chunk began to fall, the lower section would have received the load and eventually stopped the collapse or moved the fall to the side. You KNOW this. If you are even remotely willing to look at it logically you can see it. To consider otherwise is a concerted effort to hide your head in the sand. It really is.

If you choose to believe the "official" conspiracy theory then you must truly avoid any high-rise steel frame building as you must believe in your heart that it is inherently unsafe. 3 of them fell in one day in precisely the same way. If the top 3rd should for any reason begin to collapse the entire structure MUST and I do mean MUST fall. And it doesn't require a plane to hit it as we saw with WTC7. It can just be isolated office fires. You can defend that hill if you want to. But avoid large buildings as you clearly know in your heart that they are unsafe.
 
I do believe the pats***** are an inside job. ..haha. 100% on that wagon. Now if a group of cia and nsa guys came out and said yes this is what happened. I'd buy it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wig
Uhhh, okay. Some other "breaking stories" from the same site:

* Angelina Jolie's Daughter Used To Be Adorable, But Today She Looks Insane

* 33 Amish Facts That Will Make Your Skin Crawl

This made me laugh.
 
Along those same lines......dying CIA guy, an nat. And it was on Youtube, so you know it is true.


 
Hey, in fairness - The Amish ARE creepy.
 
Top