Ventura on 9/11

[A.G.]

Very interesting:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQdlBAp-24g

[The Mad Jackyl]

He's wrong.

[A.G.]

I don't know. I never thought that the Towers colapse was from the plane impact. The way the buildings colapsed was identical to ANY demolition job. I watched all the clips I could find on that.

Now, conspiracy aside, I could see the decision being made to bring the towers down after the planes hit. If the towers started to tilt and colapsed sideways, the damage would be immense and more people would die needlessly. A dicision to do a precision drop at the last minute to avoid that would be logical. Get as close up to the fire as possible, set charges, and bring it down before it falls over on it's own. That would make sense to me.

[The Mad Jackyl]

I've seen things like that "documentary" Loose Change pick apart some things, such as zooming in on things in the photos that they believed were evidence of explosions blowing out windows several floors below the uppermost floors that were collapsing (actually, that is caused by the pneumatic pressure as tons and tons of concrete collapse, sending the air rushing downwards into lower floors.)

What bugs me when people talk about this subject are when they bring up the bit about the fuel not burning hot enough to melt the steel. They are actually correct on this. When the plane hits, you see most of the fuel blow out in a huge fireball on the other side anyways. What people who say this have not considered is that the fireproofing covering the internal support was damaged and that the structural integrity of the steel is then weakened and prone to failure. It turns into steel that is tempered by heat, thus making it weaker and less able to support the weight as well and that's when weight gets unevenly distributed. The fires weakened the trusses supporting the floors, making the floors sag. The sagging floors pulled on the exterior steel columns to the point where exterior columns bowed inward. With the damage to the core columns, the buckling exterior columns could no longer support the buildings, causing them to collapse.

[A.G.]

OK, what about the other building? Nothing hit it and it "just colapsed" 5 hours later. Why would that happen? And why would it colapse EXACTLY the same way the Towers did?



It's hard to believe the Official Story about the colapse of the towers when the same story about the Pentagon wall is complete BS.



Or this:



Where is the damage that would've been caused the by the wings? Even the glass windows are still in tact! And that they also claimed that most of the plane, including the TITANIUM engines were desintigrated. That's not possible.

[The Mad Jackyl]

I've been waiting for a little down time such as now in which I could manage to address your last post sufficiently to my satisfaction. Looking up the Loose Change documentary (I use that word very lightly here), I see that there's been a 2nd revision of this featurette film. A lot of significant changes have been made, some of which I'll illustrate here.

AG, your common sense pays off well this time, as you are absolutely right that titanium alloy engines could not, and would not disintegrate. The people who collaborated on Loose Change did their research this time (after jumping to conclusions, that is) and in this 2nd edition maintain that the engines on Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon were not titanium, but Rolls-Royce engines, made from some other completely different alloy of which I'm not sure

As for the size of the hole, I had better information once upon a time, but I think it might have been in paper form. So this part of my explanation is somewhat lacking, so I'll offer this tidbit from Wikipedia.

Several researchers have argued that the wings would cause less damage than the plane's main body,[77] that photographs of large amounts of wreckage and debris matching a 757 have become available, that the appearance of the size of the hole is typically misrepresented; and that the actual fuselage diameter of 12 feet is a much more relevant dimension for the deepest parts of the hole than the overall 44-foot height of the 757's tail.[78][79] They also emphasize reports from numerous eyewitnesses, including commuters on nearby roads,[80] nearby apartment buildings,[81] and other surrounding locations. Many witnesses saw the aircraft close up as it approached the Pentagon and described it as an American Airlines Boeing 757.

[A.G.]

But how can a coputer, a wooden desk, and a PAPER book be right where the whole is and not be damaged? That's the issue here. If a plane hit a building, things like wooden desks and paper books would NOT be left undamaged.