How good?
How many hours and what certifications do you claim a pilot needs to crash a plane?
12 minute mark.
Seriously dan, is your contention that they were all, in fact, expert pilots hired by some shadowy organization in the US government to still kill themselves while looking like ty pilots who didn't even know how to work the intercom on the plane?
Explain your theory.
It's been a month so cosmored the ty shill is back to spam the same and pretend like it was not refuted. Mock his stupidity and move on.
Yeah, it's easy. None of the tinfoil crowd can say what his theory is. They all just vomit up YouTube after YouTube and strike a pose.
Chumpy deflecting again because his beloved 911 Commission report is crumbling to the piece of crap it is...
I am not deflecting at all. If you want to see some deflecting watch what happens when I do this.
Dan, in your own words, tell us in as much detail as would befit someone who researched this for 12 years what you think really happened on 9/11.
I eagerly await your reply.
That's not the topic of this thread...this thread is about 911 and consequently the official government report of the attacks, not to speculate about alternative theories....see who's deflecting....
I see you are deflecting.
The thread is about real 9-11 research. That's why it is called real 9-11 research.
You claim to have done over a decade of real 9-11 research, so tell us what you've think really happened on 9-11 based on your decade plus of real 9-11 research.
Or just try to deflect more. Whatever.
Do you even read my posts in this thread? I mean to stay here till we get the political will to re investigate 911, especially with all the new revelations about possible state involvement in the attacks....although honestly, i think I'll be dead before anyone convinces a congress to buy one less warship we don't need and investigate the single largest terror event on American soil...
The problem with that is you and the others whining about a new investigation don't know anything about the multiple investigations that have already taken place. This thread is here to give you that information.
You never read any of it.
Not one link.
Since you refuse to know what has already been investigated, you are in no position to demand a new one.
STFU you know those investigations had limited budgets and no subpena powers...
See? You're only talking about one committee.
Nothing else.
The twoof movement did nothing to actually investigate anything. They put all their money into spooky YouTube music and self-fellating websites and circle jerk meetups.
That's who you want to cast your lot with.
Paul is a little late to the party, but...
Rand Paul: Cheney used 9/11 as excuse to invade Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton
By Tom Boggioni
Monday, April 7, 2014 7:53 EDT
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/0...f-halliburton/
Watch the Western Kentucky video below:In a videotaped 2009 speech before student Republicans at Western Kentucky University, Rand Paul — who was just beginning his run for the Senate seat he eventually won — explained that former Vice President Cheney, who counseled against war in Iraq in 1995, pushed for war following 9/11 to benefit his former employers at military contractor Halliburton.
In the video, discovered by David Corn at Mother Jones, Paul can be seen standing at a lectern describing Cheney’s opinion in 1995, when he said that invading Iraq would be, “a disaster, it would be vastly expensive, it’d be civil war, we would have no exit strategy.”
Paul said:
There’s a great YouTube of Cheney in 1995 defending Bush Number One , and he goes on for about five minutes. He’s being interviewed, I think, by the American Enterprise Ins ute, and and he says it would be a disaster, it would be vastly expensive, it’d be civil war, we would have no exit strategy. He goes on and on for five minutes. Cheney saying it would be a bad idea. And that’s why the first Bush didn’t go into Baghdad. Cheney then goes to work for Halliburton. Makes hundreds of millions of dollars, their CEO. Next thing you know, he’s back in government and it’s a good idea to go into Iraq.
<snip>
The day after 9/11, George Tenet is going in the House and Richard Perle is coming out of the White House. And George Tenet should know more about intelligence than anybody in the world, and the first thing Richard Perle says to him on the way out is, ‘We’ve got it, now we can go into Iraq.’ And George Tenet, who supposedly knows as much intelligence as anybody in the White House says, ‘Well, don’t we need to know that they have some connection to 9/11?’ And, he says, ‘It doesn’t matter.’ It became an excuse. 9/11 became an excuse for a war they already wanted in Iraq.
<snip>
It’s Cheney in 1995 being interviewed on why they didn’t go into Baghdad the first time under the first George Bush. And his arguments are exactly mirroring my dad’s arguments for why we shouldn’t have gone in this time. It would be chaos. There’d be a civil war. There’d be no exit strategy. And cost a blue bloody fortune in both lives and treasure. And this is Cheney saying this. But, you know, a couple hundred million dollars later Cheney earns from Halliburton, he comes back into government. Now Halliburton’s got a billion-dollar no-bid contract in Iraq. You know, you hate to be so cynical that you think some of these corporations are able to influence policy, but I think sometimes they are. Most of the people on these committees have a million dollars in their bank account all from different military industrial contractors. We don’t want our defense to be defined by people who make money off of the weapons.
<snip>
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/0...f-halliburton/
Maybe the WH has a better understanding of what is going on in Florida, but refuses to act...
lol all that will do is over Rand's presidential hopes.
Looks like I need to drag this one up.
Scary maths.http://www.debunk911myths.org/
http://www.jod911.com/
PE= m *9.8*413= 4073m
Mass is, by definition, simply a measurement of how much force a given amount of material will exert AT REST on an object that is resisting gravity.
SOOOO
The top floor would hit the ground with the same force as a 4073 story building, if that fall was unimpeded.
Now let's consider the fall of the top 30 stories.
They fell through the 3-5 floors of damaged sections and impacted the building below with some amount of force.
Let's call the distance accelerated as 3 floors and be generous. This is 11 meters.
Acceration of an object for 11 meters at 70% of gravity(dan's figure), would yeild an ending velocity of:
v^2= 2ad=2*9.8*.7*11=150=v^2, find the square root of 150, and bada bing, you get 12 meters per second
Subs ute this into the kinetic energy equation:
ke= 150*.5*m=ke=75m
This means the 30 floor section impacts the undamaged portion with the kinetic energy of SEVENTY FIVE TIMES ITS MASS.
Think about this for a moment.
The lower section of the building is designed to hold that 30 stories stationary plus a safety margin of 10 or 20%. So the maximum force that the underlying structure could apply to that falling section is 1.2 times its mass.
Further:
That falling section having as much kinetic energy as 75 times its mass means that it is effectively applying the same amount of force at the impact point that a 2270 story building would. if you held it stationary. (simple math: 30*75)
For the statement "the building would not have collapsed without explosives" implies that the building could have been TWENTY TWO TIMES TALLER THAN IT ACTUALLY WAS without collapsing.
STILL FURTHER
Your calculations seem to imply that the building structure below could absorb 30% of the falling energy.
IN JUST THE FIRST 11 METERS OF A 400 METER COLLAPSE THERE IS 62 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF FORCE REQUIRED TO COLLAPSE THE BUILDING.
Your assumption of about 1/3 the energy used to collapse the building is about 20 times what is reasonable. (1/62*20= 1/3) (more actually, if you consider the further distance and mass)
What happens, then when MORE mass is added AND accelerated?
Even if half the mass falls away or off to the side, there is still FAR more force and energy than would be needed to collapse the building WITHOUT ANY EXPLOSIVES.
Years of training if you ask Dan.
So scary, in fact, that they will likely be ignored.
'Sup Ag?
Back from under my rock. Been quite busy. When I get back to SA, we should grab a beer.
Absolutely...say the word amigo.
Bet u couldn't do it...
Years of training if you ask Dan.
Bet u can.
Get a plane and try.
Jesus Christ how many different theories do you like?
You guys just pick up anything and post it.
So it's Cheney because of Haliburton. Is this the one you want to stick with? What's next? How many GD people are you going to blame? This is an endless mindless charade.
There are currently 10 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 10 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote