Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
9/11 Debate
(03-21-2021, 05:28 AM)kruddler date Wrote:Do you need an engineer to explain to you the different relative strengths of the buildings they crashed into?
 Yes, go for it!
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:29 AM)kruddler link Wrote:Building was actually designed to withstand the impact of a plane flying into them.

Which adds to the level of mystery of why it didn't work.
I remember watching something about the design of it and they said it wasn't defined for it. Ill Try and dig it up.
2017-16th
2018-Wooden Spoon
2019-16th
2020-dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:30 AM)Baggers date Wrote:Well, fellow CSC Members, yours truly has just learned of a tragedy close to home. One of my closest mates of around 46 years has just died of Covid. Shattered. Top bloke. Super intelligent. Overweight but otherwise healthy... he was on secondment in the Philippines. 66 years of age. Family shattered. We're all in disbelief. Not one of those to die from Covid with another underlying issue. Covid... then pneumonia (no previous lung issues)... then gone. Apparently received full, quality medical care.

I lived with his family in 1974 when serving at HMAS Waterhen, Waverton (I was a 'spook' - encryption and decryption stuff). Waterhen was a land base for patrol boats/mine sweepers etc. Beautiful family. Like a brother. He was doing an economics degree. Although a Sydneysider I steered him to the BlueBaggers in the AFL. Communicated with him only a few days ago... he was as bright as ever.
Sorry to hear this [member=61]Baggers[/member], reality of this is not nice at all and not trivial.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:17 AM)Baggers link Wrote:Most of the fuel was reported, live at the time, to have exploded and belched out of the buildings. This was later confirmed. As I've mentioned... I simply remain suspicious of the official story and probably am in the 'splinters on clacker' group.
Nothing wrong with that. You are at least looking into the other side of the debate, which is more than anyone else arguing against it.

Truthfully, i was on the complete other side of the fence.
As mentioned before, the biggest road block for people entertaining the possibility that it was deliberate is the 'Why?' question.
Why would the US (potentially) do that to themselves?

They have a history of it in their own declassified documents.

Once that question, the biggest road block, had gone....i looked at other questions....and there was more than enough evidence as to why the official party lines didn't make sense either.
The more you look, the more you find.
As Mav said, its a rabbit hole.
However, just because you are curious about 1 rabbit hole, doesn't mean you bother heading down others.

Play the ball on its merits.
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:34 AM)LP link Wrote:Yes, go for it!

Sure.

I've found this video. Its compiled by 3400 architects and engineers and they explains things in a way that even you can understand.
There are actually 3 parts to it.

Would you like a link?
Reply
I'll be bowing out of this and other discussions for a while. The death of my mate makes discussion about fires and buildings seem somewhat tiny at the moment. Still in shock and disbelief. Just communicated with his sister and his mum, time for Shano to head north and support my 'other' family.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:35 AM)Gointocarlton date Wrote:I remember watching something about the design of it and they said it wasn't defined for it. Ill Try and dig it up.
Take out the "wasn't" and you have [member=20]kruddler[/member]‍ have posted the same thing.

Surely one word can't bring down a building?

PS: I believe I saw the same interview, someone involved with the original design. I suppose he was just "covering his ar5e!"
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:35 AM)Gointocarlton link Wrote:I remember watching something about the design of it and they said it wasn't defined for it. Ill Try and dig it up.

I've heard otherwise.

The US government has even had war game scenarios which involves what would happen if terrorists tried to fly planes into the WTCs. I think it was talking about that where it was mentioned that the buildings were designed with this possibility in mind.
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:37 AM)kruddler date Wrote:Sure.

I've found this video. Its compiled by 3400 architects and engineers and they explains things in a way that even you can understand.
There are actually 3 parts to it.

Would you like a link?
No, I'd prefer an explanation in your own words, using your physics training.

If you've gone to the trouble to watch it all, I'm happy for you to summarise and explain it in the common language I can understand.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Reply
(03-21-2021, 05:39 AM)Baggers link Wrote:I'll be bowing out of this and other discussions for a while. The death of my mate makes discussion about fires and buildings seem somewhat tiny at the moment. Still in shock and disbelief. Just communicated with his sister and his mum, time for Shano to head north and support my 'other' family.

There are more important things in life to worry about.

You do you.

Apologies.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)