Just watch

[aquaphase]

911 Loose Change

[ree-ree]

Oh yeah. Jeremy sent that to me. He said it was a pretty long, so give yourself some time.

I still haven't had a chance yet, but this reminded me to check it out.

[lennon]

i watched the entire video about a month ago. it has some good points. one being why did building #7 fall as the trade centers did. it was on fire from debris from the other buildings but concrete and/or steel structures dont usually fail due to fire.

some of the other details seemed made up but i was too lazy to actually research any of ot.

[Dogatron]

I just watched it. Really good. I think the best section was about the pentagon. How the plane only made a hole something like 16 ft wide...that means the wings and engines must have bounced off the wall (as they didn't penetrate and stayed on the outside/lawn area of the pentagon) yet none were found

[brine]

didn't the wings burn up and disintigrate?

[Dogatron]

didn't the wings burn up and disintigrate?

I think the story is the engines and the wings went into the pentagon and melted without a trace yet the photo of the pentagon before the section collapsed didn't show much damage to the areas where supposidly two 6 tonne engines slammed into them

[ifihadahifi]

This might help answer some of the questions regarding the Pentagon crash.

[sam]

I can only add to the conversation on one point, the WTC 1 & 2 collapse. The Loose Change information is bullshit. First, structural steel melts at over 2500 degrees F. However, it yields (looses its load carrying capacity) at around 1200 degrees. The combination of paper, insulation and synthetic fabrics and carpets commonly found in buildings can produce much higher temperatures. They refer to ASTM E119. This test is for a fire protected assembly, not steel itself. This ties in exactly with the official story that the initial explosion blew the fire protection (spray-on mineral fiber no denser than wadded up paper towels) off of the steel and the fire started by the aircraft and sustained by the building contents, caused the structure to fail. The WTC was innovative because there were no columns between the core and exterior at all for maximum leasable space. This explains the clean, progressive, collapse as connections fail and put increasing stress on those below. Also, the elevator and stair shafts were protected with shaftliner, 2" thick gypsum board, similar to your house's walls. This has very little resistance to explosion. The design that was supposed to resist the impact of a 707 was purely for the structure without any of these other factors included. As for the multiple explosions on the lower levels of the WTC, they could have been electrical transformers that have to be distributed throughout the building fairly regularly.

Any way, it was interesting and I don't doubt that the full story is more complex than what we have been told, maybe even including several levels of deceit and conspiracy. However, if the rest of their "facts" are as poorly formed as the ones I am familar with, then this thing shouldn't be taken very seriously. I'm guessing a lot of their evidence is Da Vinci Code style, if it happens at roughly the same time, then it must be connected.

[aquaphase]

Thanks for the very educated insight Sam. The WTC stuff didn't concern me as much as the Pentagon stuff. Even on 9/11, me and my buddies at work were pretty damn sure no plane had hit it. It just didn't look like a plane crash site.

[sam]

Maybe I got a little too into that, but if that info is so far off, its hard for me to trust the rest of their specifics.

I think the most interesting conspiracy would be one where it was both Al Qaeda and the government. Maybe they came across the plot and decided to twist it to their own advantage, piggybacking on them. At any rate, the neo-con interventionist experiment carried out by the new light & lethal army looks like a pretty inneffective combination for nation building. The long-term outcome doesn't appear to have favored them. Oil and gold, as always, come out on top.

[Dogatron]

Thanks for the very educated insight Sam. The WTC stuff didn't concern me as much as the Pentagon stuff. Even on 9/11, me and my buddies at work were pretty damn sure no plane had hit it. It just didn't look like a plane crash site.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060516/ap_ ... t_11_video

^^

[aquaphase]

I guess ILM is finally done w/ the footage?

[Dogatron]

I guess ILM is finally done w/ the footage?

haha...I was gonna say something along those lines but I don't know a photoshop equivilent of a video editor so I stuck with the eyebrows ^^