Who is really behind the 911 attacks?
04 December 2002, 06:28 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I've attacked a 911 - he cut me up - won't be driving his porker for quite some time!
But as far as the September 11th attacks go, who is really behind them and what are the goals? There was a documentary on channel 4 about this - I will try and get the transcript.
Have a look at this http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/911/Conspiracy/
PS - I don't think the moon-landing was a hoax!
But as far as the September 11th attacks go, who is really behind them and what are the goals? There was a documentary on channel 4 about this - I will try and get the transcript.
Have a look at this http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/911/Conspiracy/
PS - I don't think the moon-landing was a hoax!
04 December 2002, 07:03 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just an observation ...
there's an article in the link that claims that the uniformity and total collapse of the twin towers suggest supplementary demolition charges.
however, independent metallurgical investigation on the wreckage, carried out by channel 4 and screened back in september of this year, showed that the fire retardant coating on the ceiling strut supports had, in places, come away from the metal it was protecting. this was, in part, due to a fine patina of rust forming on parts of the metal, prior to treatment when the towers were being built, resulting in the bond between foam and steel being compromised.
basically, the foam sloughed off in places over time, exposing small areas of bare metal. a repair programme to replace the missing foam had been underway for more than a year when the towers were hit.
the result of flying a fully loaded kerosene bomb into the towers at 400mph, reaching temperatures in excess of 1500 degrees caused the exposed metal to buckle and collapse at the impact point. the remainder of the building below then collapsed in stages like a house of cards, unable to cope with the shock and stellar levels of torque generated.
make you own mind up but if the rest of the link is as forensically and intellectually flaccid as this, then it's just the usual extreme conspiracy theory tripe.
there's an article in the link that claims that the uniformity and total collapse of the twin towers suggest supplementary demolition charges.
however, independent metallurgical investigation on the wreckage, carried out by channel 4 and screened back in september of this year, showed that the fire retardant coating on the ceiling strut supports had, in places, come away from the metal it was protecting. this was, in part, due to a fine patina of rust forming on parts of the metal, prior to treatment when the towers were being built, resulting in the bond between foam and steel being compromised.
basically, the foam sloughed off in places over time, exposing small areas of bare metal. a repair programme to replace the missing foam had been underway for more than a year when the towers were hit.
the result of flying a fully loaded kerosene bomb into the towers at 400mph, reaching temperatures in excess of 1500 degrees caused the exposed metal to buckle and collapse at the impact point. the remainder of the building below then collapsed in stages like a house of cards, unable to cope with the shock and stellar levels of torque generated.
make you own mind up but if the rest of the link is as forensically and intellectually flaccid as this, then it's just the usual extreme conspiracy theory tripe.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jayallen
Was it you?
4
19 September 2015 07:42 PM