Do you believe the OFFICIAL 911 story?

[Exe Gesis]

Loose change makes a strong case for conspiracy and up until the end I couldn't quite see what the incentive for such madness would be.... being a trader I should have guessed... billions of bullion missing from under the towers

That's another thing we haven't really touched on much...the missing gold. And you'd think, to get all that out would require it to be taken away BEFORE the planes hit, BEFORE Sept 11. That'd be a large operation. No coincidence that day(s) before Sept 11 all that gold is shipped out secretly. It would've been impossible to do in the minutes between the plane hitting and the tower falling, especially with all those firemen and people running around. Not to mention...there were blasts in the basement. They'd know to bring that building down they'd wanna clear out all that gold beforehand.

 

[bzparkes]

That all seems really, really far fetched...

Not really. I understand from a standpoint that most people wouldn't want to believe it, and conspiracy theories are very biased ( just look at Port Arthur). However, there are some very valid points that have been raised and need some serious addressing.

 

[waspy]

I've been reading some of an interesting article from the Journal of Engineering Mechanics (only just released in March) that goes in depth into the WTC collapses. Uses a lot of structural engineering lingo (i don't understand a lot of it, a lot of maths and only structural engineers would be able to understand it all) but that's to be expected considering it's from an engineering journal. Anyone who'd like a copy can PM with their email. It's authors have done a lot of work regarding the WTC collapse since 2001 so its fair to say they are experts, which none of us are (and very few or no conspiracy theorists are for that matter). This article mainly regards the actual collapse of the building after failure, something the NIST report doesn't cover at all really.

One interesting point:
*Completely destroys any theory that collapse could have been stopped by other floors. The forces on the floor below failure floor were calculated to be 31 times greater than the design limit on the lower floor. It's no wonder they fell so fast when the load on lower floors was 31 times higher than what it could hold. Also, they calculated that even if the failure floor was 0.5m above the floor below, progressive collapse was still inevitable.

Here is a brief overview of their report on the collapse:

1. About 60% of the 60 columns of the impacted face of framed
tube and about 13% of the total of 287 columns were severed,
and many more were significantly deflected. This
caused stress redistribution, which significantly increased the
load of some columns, attaining or nearing the load capacity
for some of them.
2. Because a significant amount of steel insulation was stripped,
many structural steel members heated up to 600°C, as confirmed
by annealing studies of steel debris NIST 2005 the
structural steel used loses about 20% of its yield strength
already at 300°C, and about 85% at 600°C NIST 2005;
and exhibits significant viscoplasticity, or creep, above
450°C e.g., Cottrell 1964, p. 299, especially in the columns
overstressed due to load redistribution; the press reports right
after September 11, 2001 indicating temperature in excess of
800°C, turned out to be groundless, but Bažant and Zhou’s
analysis did not depend on that.
3. Differential thermal expansion, combined with heat-induced
viscoplastic deformation, caused the floor trusses to sag. The
catenary action of the sagging trusses pulled many perimeter
columns inward by about 1 m, NIST 2005. The bowing of
these columns served as a huge imperfection inducing multistory
out-of-plane buckling of framed tube wall. The lateral
deflections of some columns due to aircraft impact, the differential
thermal expansion, and overstress due to load redistribution
also diminished buckling strength.
4. The combination of seven effects—1 Overstress of some
columns due to initial load redistribution; 2 overheating
due to loss of steel insulation; 3 drastic lowering of yield
limit and creep threshold by heat; 4 lateral deflections of
many columns due to thermal strains and sagging floor
trusses; 5 weakened lateral support due to reduced in-plane
stiffness of sagging floors; 6 multistory bowing of some
columns for which the critical load is an order of magnitude
less than it is for one-story buckling; and 7 local plastic
buckling of heated column webs—finally led to buckling of
columns Fig. 1b. As a result, the upper part of the tower
fell, with little resistance, through at least one floor height,
impacting the lower part of the tower. This triggered progressive
collapse because the kinetic energy of the falling upper
part exceeded by an order of magnitude the energy that
could be absorbed by limited plastic deformations and fracturing
in the lower part of the tower.

 

[waspy]

That's another thing we haven't really touched on much...the missing gold. And you'd think, to get all that out would require it to be taken away BEFORE the planes hit, BEFORE Sept 11. That'd be a large operation. No coincidence that day(s) before Sept 11 all that gold is shipped out secretly. It would've been impossible to do in the minutes between the plane hitting and the tower falling, especially with all those firemen and people running around. Not to mention...there were blasts in the basement. They'd know to bring that building down they'd wanna clear out all that gold beforehand.

Hahahahaha....the old missing gold story.

The gold was there on 9/11, about $230 million worth, and was all recovered during the cleanup. Evidence to suggest a ship out? The gold wasn't in the area near your supposed basement explosion anyway, it was under one of the smaller WTC buildings. By the way, how many people died in that explosion? Any evidence of anyone killed? Don't even mention the "truck full of gold" theory either, the news report that mentioned a truck near the gold only said that it needed to be removed to get to the gold! Purely more creating quoting by CT's.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Hahahahaha....the old missing gold story.

The gold was there on 9/11, about $230 million worth, and was all recovered during the cleanup. Evidence to suggest a ship out? The gold wasn't in the area near your supposed basement explosion anyway, it was under one of the smaller WTC buildings. By the way, how many people died in that explosion? Any evidence of anyone killed? Don't even mention the "truck full of gold" theory either, the news report that mentioned a truck near the gold only said that it needed to be removed to get to the gold! Purely more creating quoting by CT's.

I honestly have not even looked into the gold topic at all. I just 'know' that all the gold got salvaged or taken away without damage. I have not even looked into that issue.

As for the journal you referenced...shoot it along. Just click g.g. and send email.

Also, the official story and subsequent reports done that are done to seek corroboration with the official story have changed 3 times at least already. That's pretty suspicious in itself. Also, one of my best friends is a structural engineer back in the States. He personally says that there's a lot of suspicious findings that don't add up, but at the same time says that he cannot give a definitive for or against purely because he doesn't have access to the blueprints, the architectural plans, and finer details of the WTC construction to be able to give a definitive opinion. He is, by the way, gung ho ex-military pro-Bush. And he even says there's a lot "scientifically" on face value that is suspiciously not right.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Just quickly....what you quoted from the journal....sounds like they're just rehashing the old story again of pancake collapse based on the the same temperatures that FEMA gave.

The most recent report was that the COLUMNS not the joints or the floors collapsed. This report is re-hashing the out-dated findings that it was pancake collapse. The most recent official explanation is actually now that the columns collapsed inwards, thereby 'dragging' the floors down into itself therefore causing a pulverizing and outward expulsion of debris. The vertical columns collapsed....therefore, not a pancake collapse...by their reckoning.

 

[waspy]

I believe that summary was from their own research, which i plan on reading at some stage as they seem to bring up some good points that the NIST don't.

I think your friend is wise by not commenting before seeing blueprints etc, that's what anyone should do. People (structural engineers that is) who have seen the blueprints, have access to all info, have all come to similar conclusions to the article posted above.

 

[blueblooded]

I do not know what to believe, it is really interesting to see all the evidence which suggests otherwise to the supposed true story.

The thing i cannot get my head around is why they would do it. Oil? overthrowing Saddam in the long run? Having an excuse to attack the middle east which was becoming increasingly powerful in comparison to the west as a result of a plethora of natural resources? Do these things command the biggest act of terrorism ever seen? The answer is probably not. But funnier things have happened, i truly believe the moon landing was staged(USA not wanting USSR to get there first they were miles ahead in preparation and then amazingly the US get there first defying logic in physics and angles in the process), in that instance the evidence is damning so anything is possible, the evidence in this instance although it makes you wonder it doesn't lead you to a direct conclusion.

I think the biggest questions lie in the most simplest of things rather than all the scientific evidence.

1.For me i cannot believe a couple of blokes(3 0r 4 a flight i think it was) took over flights with 100 plus people on them with stanley knives! You reckon once you got the gist of what was going on a dozen or so people would have rallied against them and stopped them until it was to late at least on two or three of the four flights. I mean stanley knives FFS, guns, machetes, you'd understand the fear but a stanley knife is a bit hard to fathom. If i knew i was about to die as a result of a the old stanley i reckon i'd have a crack at em and a handful if not the majority of other blokes and women for that matter would have done the same. Lets not mention the pilots showing some balls. They clearly did not posses guns cos they would have used them. Although in that situation you would be ****ting yourself.

2.Bin Laden the most wanted man in the world is also nowhere to be seen, here is a man that has supposedly orchestrated the biggest act of violence on the most powerful and well resourced nation on earth and six years later they still cannot find him! That is unbelievable imo.

3.The hole in the pentagon is also quiet interesting who knows what happened there.

4.Why weren't the planes shot down once the authorities knew what was going on?, i cannot believe they did not know what was happening until not one not two not three but four planes where used as missiles on american landmarks and civilians. Surely they would have seen a pattern forming and alerted the military.

Things do not add up in the most simple areas let alone the more scientific and i have absolutely no idea about steel bending, heat affecting and planes disappearing on impact. What i do know is that those above four things do not seem logical imo.

Either way it is pretty scary, though i do not why they would do it to themselves. If they did and it ever was proven fact i reckon all hell would break loose, literally! And if it was true it goes to prove we are all just puppets at the hands of these so called leaders with agendas that are literally out of this world and have no regard for the people that they are elected to serve.

P.s The interests of the west 'It was in our best interest to orchestrate a terrorist attack on our own pretending it was at the hands of middle eastern terrorist organisations in order to have an excuse to send military to the region to claim land and the vast natural resources that it provided in order for us the US to control the most valuable natural resource on earth-oil-and increase the power that our country had in an economic sense. Sacrificing a few thousand lives initially was seen as small price to the long term economic benefit' (Some US official)
If this quote came out in fifty to a hundred years i would not be surprised, i guess we will never know.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I do not know what to believe, it is really interesting to see all the evidence which suggests otherwise to the supposed true story.

The thing i cannot get my head around is why they would do it. Oil? overthrowing Saddam in the long run? Having an excuse to attack the middle east which was becoming increasingly powerful in comparison to the west as a result of a plethora of natural resources? Do these things command the biggest act of terrorism ever seen? The answer is probably not. But funnier things have happened, i truly believe the moon landing was staged(USA not wanting USSR to get there first they were miles ahead in preparation and then amazingly the US get there first defying logic in physics and angles in the process), in that instance the evidence is damning so anything is possible, the evidence in this instance although it makes you wonder it doesn't lead you to a direct conclusion.

I think the biggest questions lie in the most simplest of things rather than all the scientific evidence.

1.For me i cannot believe a couple of blokes(3 0r 4 a flight i think it was) took over flights with 100 plus people on them with stanley knives! You reckon once you got the gist of what was going on a dozen or so people would have rallied against them and stopped them until it was to late at least on two or three of the four flights. I mean stanley knives FFS, guns, machetes, you'd understand the fear but a stanley knife is a bit hard to fathom. If i knew i was about to die as a result of a the old stanley i reckon i'd have a crack at em and a handful if not the majority of other blokes and women for that matter would have done the same. Lets not mention the pilots showing some balls. They clearly did not posses guns cos they would have used them. Although in that situation you would be ****ting yourself.

2.Bin Laden the most wanted man in the world is also nowhere to be seen, here is a man that has supposedly orchestrated the biggest act of violence on the most powerful and well resourced nation on earth and six years later they still cannot find him! That is unbelievable imo.

3.The hole in the pentagon is also quiet interesting who knows what happened there.

4.Why weren't the planes shot down once the authorities knew what was going on?, i cannot believe they did not know what was happening until not one not two not three but four planes where used as missiles on american landmarks and civilians. Surely they would have seen a pattern forming and alerted the military.

Things do not add up in the most simple areas let alone the more scientific and i have absolutely no idea about steel bending, heat affecting and planes disappearing on impact. What i do know is that those above four things do not seem logical imo.

Either way it is pretty scary, though i do not why they would do it to themselves. If they did and it ever was proven fact i reckon all hell would break loose, literally! And if it was true it goes to prove we are all just puppets at the hands of these so called leaders with agendas that are literally out of this world and have no regard for the people that they are elected to serve.

P.s The interests of the west 'It was in our best interest to orchestrate a terrorist attack on our own pretending it was at the hands of middle eastern terrorist organisations in order to have an excuse to send military to the region to claim land and the vast natural resources that it provided in order for us the US to control the most valuable natural resource on earth-oil-and increase the power that our country had in an economic sense. Sacrificing a few thousand lives initially was seen as small price to the long term economic benefit' (Some US official)
If this quote came out in fifty to a hundred years i would not be surprised, i guess we will never know.

Excellent post. Because you remain skeptical of both sides yet think a lot about it using your own BS meter, your own understanding of things.

Tho I do delve deeply into the scientific stuff, I also think someone in this thread posted a perfect and brief summary focused on the simple stuff.

They said something like...the pentagon has thousands of cameras trained everywhere, why would the Govt refuse to show anything other than a doctored inconclusive few seconds? Because no Boeing hit the pentagon. It's not rocket science FFS.

I think that sums it up pretty well. Other things like Bush caught out saying he saw the first plane crash (when no tv footage existed), or Sandy Berger stealing and destroying documents that would jeopardize the official story, or marvin bush head of security of WTC, or the patriot act itself as a direct intended outcome as well, or the Bush govt caught out lying about WMD, or the DNA evidence of passengers found all the way up to C-Wall hole when plane vaporized, or the missile hole itself of C-wall (only bunker busters can penetrate that many walls of reinforced concrete), or the fake bin ladin video, etc,etc...all these types of simpler things to me is pretty tell-tale.