start watching around 40min into the film. Bush says that he saw the 1st plane hit WTC on TV before he went into the classroom in Flordia. Problem is that the 1st plane hit was never on TV...
sweet. his ghost still haunts us. Now we can finally answer that age-old question, "Can ghosts smell your farts?"
Personally I don't buy the inside job theory simply because it relies on the hyper-competency of the government. I had a few questions in the back of my mind, until I renewed my drivers license the other day. the DMV is full of the government's cream of the crop in my opinion.
And on a final note, if you are still dead, do you plan on staying dead for long? If so, have you considered haunting the women's locker room at your local gym, or will you and tumbles relive that love scene from Ghost?
And the problem with Bush saying anything is that he's an idiot, and he embarrasses himself constantly by saying things that are idiotic, and I have little reason to believe that his supposed quote on this video is something besides another one of those instances. I'm with rfuller on this one....the government isn't competent enough to execute that kind of operation.
Agreed... Bush & Co. can't even operate velcro without fucking it up.
That said, I firmly believe one of two scenarios is what actually happened:
1) The Bush administration, despite mountains of evidence indicating 9/11 was in the works, failed to anticipate it because of their sheer ineptitude and because intelligence agencies had been staffed with political hacks.
2) The Bush administration, knowing full well that 9/11 (or something of that magnitude) was in the works, didn't lift a finger to stop it because they knew they'd reap enormous political gains from it and be able to use it as a pretext for the invasion of Iraq as well as a radical expansion of executive power at home.
I want to believe the former, but everything I read seems to indicate the latter.
I disagree. I think the Bush white house has done almost exactly what they set out to do - make billions and give themselves absolute power.
Sure, Iraq could have been better, but I don't think they were as stupid as they come across.
Nope, when it comes to billions and billions, possbily over decades, I think you'll get the "best" minds in the world working towards it.
911? I dunno, but it was damn convenient timing. Perfect timing, really, to ensure that Wolfovitz's agenda from '92 was carried out. And it was, almost exactly as planned.
Just remember, people will care a lot more about making sure there are billions lining their pockets than a few thousand people here and there. Just look at history. It's power and greed and The B admin is the epitome of it all.
An almost genius admin, imho. They took complete power, eliminated all opposition, fired/hired/broke laws, etc. as they wanted to and seem to be getting away with it all. That didn't happen from dumb luck.
Too much coincidence, imo, given the Wolfovitz Papers (I still can't believe how few people know what those are, as I am far from knowledgeable on politics, in general).
OK, I just watched the video and I agree with myself above. He says that at one of his "town hall meetings".....you know, the ones where they herd all the mindless sheep in and he gets to perform and gets lots of applause for doing nothing very spectacular.
Anyway, almost nothing that he says in that clip is to be believed, because he's just saying it for the herd.
I do still think that the election was rigged though, so if you want to talk about conspiracies, be my guest.
I personally find way to many coincidences to not at least consider the possibility that 9/11 was in some way aided or perpetrated by some level of our government.
Those who are either too proud, too stubborn or too complacent to accept that there are far to many undetermined factors to be have any kind of certain opinion on the event, are the ignorant assholes.
I know that those of us who say the bush government isnt capable of such a massive undertaking are speaking with their tongues in their cheeks. However i still feel its naive to think there is something inherently different about Americans that prevents us from being brainwashed and misdirected.
lletdown Im shocked you buy into this. If you guys really truely felt this way than why arent you in the streets guns raised? Oh ya - you took away your guns - continue bending over than and complaining in anonominity on an architecture thread.
People - 2 mid sized passenger jets full of fuel crashed into a light structure and burned on live television. Thousands of flights took off in the estern sector that same hour. Even if they had some intel it a needle in a hey stack. At this point its worthless arguing the logic.
You forgot Silverstein's double insurance payout on the towers 2 acts of terror instead of clause. He paid $100 million for 99 year lease on the towers. Thats less than a million a year!!! He got paid $5 billion.
I guess Bush AND the Jews blew up the towers. I mean c'mon - its obvious -
yes. these are my rambling comments from a previous thread:
le bossman
Total Entries: 45
Total Comments: 1626
06/22/07 12:25
in order for the inside job to be executed properly, it would've relied on a number of difficult tasks being perfectly performed, according to most of what i've heard about the conspiracy theory.
1) someone would've had to have snuck explosives into wtc, and placed them at key points, possibly exactly where the planes would crash, (and maybe tower 7) undetected. this could've never been done by wtc staff as many of them died in the attacks.
2) there would've been enormous risk that the planes would've never reached their targets, and the criminal evidence (planted bombs) wouldn't have been destroyed, or that the explosives in the buildings wouldn't have been detonated, or even detonated too early. i hope they had a contingency for the rescue workers finding tons and tons of C4 in wtc 2 the next day if it wasn't hit.
3) suppose the pentagon jet didn't exist, instead a missle hit the pentagon. if the wtc jets existed, i'd say the other 2 do by default, but since we're talking possibilities, i'd say there were far, far too many witnesses there for the grainy video to be much of a counterpoint. and why would they attack their own staff, since we all know they were all in on it? and what run of the mill pilot could they ever convince to shoot a missle at the pentagon anyway?
4) the penn jet didn't exist. this doesn't make any since as the victims were calling their families on the phone. also, if these planes didn't exist, then united and american airlines were in on it as well. that is one big conspiracy.
if you want to know the likely success of any string of events, go back to high school math. multiply the probability of the first event's success by the second, and then by the third, and so on. the probability of all of these tasks occuring successfully, in addition to the whistle not being blown, is quickly reduced even if individually they all have very high likelyhoods. this is why the iraq war didn't work; there were too many risks involved.
i mean, i don't think there's anything wrong with speculating, and i'm not a forensics expert nor do i know "everything" that happened, but i don't think its that this was the work of 19 islamic terrorists as opposed to all of the above (and more) things i've heard about the so-called conspiracy. believe me, i think it in everyone's best interest to question government, and to take media matters with a grain of salt, but sometimes some good 'ol common sense can also lead one to the most probable scenario, as i also know the world is not black and white.
evil,
im not saying i buy into it. All im saying is that its ignorant and naive to completely deny that its possible. If i was convinced that the government had somehow perpetrated the whole thing, then yeah maybe i would be out in the streets, but I am unfortunately too cynical to believe its a conspiracy, and too cynical to rule out our governments involvement.
I dont think it sounds 'retarded' at all, in fact, the only thing retarded coming out of the conversations on this subject is your abject disdain for dissenting opinions... or even the consideration of dissenting opinions is.
if you believe government involvement then that default makes a concpiracy dude - you cant not believe in conspiracy and not rule out government invlovement - thats paralyizing to the mind.
My abject disdain for the dissenting opinion here is that its fallacy to call this event a concpiracy - what you want me to do do? Tell my brother he didnt stand outside the world financial center that morning and didnt see jets fly into the towers? That even the Jordanian guys in the deli in his building in battery park before the 2nd plane hit were already shouting in anger that this must be Osama? Lletdown - I met you before - I just am surprised I wouldnt think you fall into this circle of cynicism and hate these concipiracy people breed. Your smarter than that.
Another question - why dont concpiracy people ever think the conspiracy is more logical like the arab states are secretly funding a massive terror campaign through intermediaries like al queada so they dont draw attention to themselves? Why do they default blame the USA and make everyone else the victim? What in their fragile mind makes them so fatalistic?
your kind of missing my point here evil. first off, im not denying that 9/11 happened or that jets crashed into the towers. And it is the truth that a couple arab states are funding campaigns against western targets, i think thats pretty well established.
the point is that i can not rule out government involvement. whether that makes me an idiot in your mind i could really care less. though im confused how it paralyzes the mind to consider 2 competing theories.
Its false logic you are using if your only 2 options are conspiracy or not. There are gray area's; there are varying levels of involvement.
Did the government bomb pearl harbor? no, they didnt. Were advanced warnings of a Japaneses attack delayed for political gain? its possible, and some would claim likely. Did the government coordinate or aid the destruction of the twin towers? probably not... Did the government ignore growing signs and direct threats of a massive terrorist attack on american soil for possible political gain? its possible, and some would claim likely...
what about the cores of the two buildings. There is NO way that they could have collapsted in on themselves they way that they did without being weakened by explosives. The 'official' video doesnt even explain this. They show the floor slabs shearing off of the core, but never show the core fall.
The steel should have fallen to one side or another, not straight down
As for the incopentacy of the Bush administration, they have hijacked a country, re-written a constitution, and lined their pockets with America's $$$...and done so fairly well
I have no problem believing that the towers fell the way they did because of the planes. The fact that they didn't fall over immediately was a testament to how they were built in the first place.
Thinking about them falling still gives me a weird feeling in my stomach to this day.
what about the explosions at the base of the towers before they fell...as well as the explosions (squibs) on the face or the tower that preceeded the collapsing portion of the tower....
ha ha. well, my explanation would be what about WTC 3-6? why not just destroy them all? wtc 7 was a high rise that was right next to 1&2. it wasn't designed to take the loads from a 1400' avalanche of concrete and steel right at its base.
also, it wasn't a 'significant' landmark in the spirit of the other attacks. i don't think wtc 7 is a smoking gun exactly. maybe if the empire state building had just fallen down for no reason, then you'd have something. personally i don't think its that strange that numero 7 came down. i'm more surprise that the church across the street didn't fall down.
The way I see it, no matter how many experts, professionals, and engineers study and talk about the collapse on 9/11, there really is no equivolent precedent for reference. A lot of things happened on that day that weren't explainable, but not necessarily because it had to be some huge conspiracy but because no one really knows exactly what happens when planes crash into two gigantic towers. There are just way too many variables. Just because no one really understands everything that happened doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. Not to say there couldn't have been something fishy going on, as they say "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you."
seven wasn't a landmark but it did have several important tenants..
a major reason for conspiracy theories is that 7 is a potential target
of convenience...alot of information conveniently disappeared.
it's possible structural damage by falling debri caused the collapse
and that appears to be the proposed theory..but there doesn't seem
to be any photographic evidence.
as far as fires FEMA wrote:
Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by
fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and
how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this
time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained
massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low
probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and
analyzes are needed to resolve this issue.
as others have said no steel structure buildings had collapsed due
to fire before the towers collapsed.
guys seriously - you'r architects and your debating the validity of the most basic and simple of any collapsed strucures. F=MA guys, the shear force of just 1 slab accelerating and pancaking 12' below will start a progressive collapse straight to the ground. And 7 had a a massive transfer beam visible from the verizon side, like a huge hole in the building which once it went down came the tower. And steel buildings collapse everyday due to fire. The most closest resemblence would be a barjoist warehouse structure collapsing due to fire weakened steel. Thats basically the vert force resolution of the trade towers - similar to the SC sofa store fire - light open web steel trusses
I have a hard time believing this thread is even serious - are you just trying to pull our chains mdler?
well i guess your right then. looks like its case closed mdler. i can't possibly think of any more reasonable alternatives to your "evidence." thank you for making me see the light of day and come to understand the true level of depth and sinister nature of this conspiracy. i'll be checking my semen for microphones when i go home and masturbate tonight
regardless of how it happened, it's probably a good thing that the trade towers collapsed. after the planes hit them that morning i remember sitting there watching it on tv and wondering how in the world was somebody going to fix those building? they had massive gashes in their sides, some 80 stories above ground and with another 20 floors sitting on top of that. who the hell would even get near that to take a look?
i dont want to get into this again evil, but your mentioning F=MA in reference to how simple the collapse was warrants one last comment. the towers fell significantly faster than would be expected in a pancake collapse. The first tower fell within a second of what would be expected in a free fall collapse. meaning the upper floor plates met little to no resistance from lower plates as they cascaded down.
the most telling evidence that 9/11 was an inside job
start watching around 40min into the film. Bush says that he saw the 1st plane hit WTC on TV before he went into the classroom in Flordia. Problem is that the 1st plane hit was never on TV...
http://www.tv-links.co.uk/link.do/9/4752/7823/50616/73748
ps, I'm still dead
apparently you have to paste the link into your browser
still dead...
mdler, how'd you die? And i'm afraid another flame war this way comes...
...well its good your still dead b/c I am reviwing the "Music For Your Funeral" thread and selecting a mdler song.
sweet. his ghost still haunts us. Now we can finally answer that age-old question, "Can ghosts smell your farts?"
Personally I don't buy the inside job theory simply because it relies on the hyper-competency of the government. I had a few questions in the back of my mind, until I renewed my drivers license the other day. the DMV is full of the government's cream of the crop in my opinion.
And on a final note, if you are still dead, do you plan on staying dead for long? If so, have you considered haunting the women's locker room at your local gym, or will you and tumbles relive that love scene from Ghost?
did anybody see that new show 'traveler' last night? obviously the fbi is a crack operation.
mdler was your death an inside job?
I knew he wouldn't be gone long.
And the problem with Bush saying anything is that he's an idiot, and he embarrasses himself constantly by saying things that are idiotic, and I have little reason to believe that his supposed quote on this video is something besides another one of those instances. I'm with rfuller on this one....the government isn't competent enough to execute that kind of operation.
Agreed... Bush & Co. can't even operate velcro without fucking it up.
That said, I firmly believe one of two scenarios is what actually happened:
1) The Bush administration, despite mountains of evidence indicating 9/11 was in the works, failed to anticipate it because of their sheer ineptitude and because intelligence agencies had been staffed with political hacks.
2) The Bush administration, knowing full well that 9/11 (or something of that magnitude) was in the works, didn't lift a finger to stop it because they knew they'd reap enormous political gains from it and be able to use it as a pretext for the invasion of Iraq as well as a radical expansion of executive power at home.
I want to believe the former, but everything I read seems to indicate the latter.
I disagree. I think the Bush white house has done almost exactly what they set out to do - make billions and give themselves absolute power.
Sure, Iraq could have been better, but I don't think they were as stupid as they come across.
Nope, when it comes to billions and billions, possbily over decades, I think you'll get the "best" minds in the world working towards it.
911? I dunno, but it was damn convenient timing. Perfect timing, really, to ensure that Wolfovitz's agenda from '92 was carried out. And it was, almost exactly as planned.
Just remember, people will care a lot more about making sure there are billions lining their pockets than a few thousand people here and there. Just look at history. It's power and greed and The B admin is the epitome of it all.
An almost genius admin, imho. They took complete power, eliminated all opposition, fired/hired/broke laws, etc. as they wanted to and seem to be getting away with it all. That didn't happen from dumb luck.
Too much coincidence, imo, given the Wolfovitz Papers (I still can't believe how few people know what those are, as I am far from knowledgeable on politics, in general).
You guys make architects look like ignorant fu*ing assholes. Flame on.
OK, I just watched the video and I agree with myself above. He says that at one of his "town hall meetings".....you know, the ones where they herd all the mindless sheep in and he gets to perform and gets lots of applause for doing nothing very spectacular.
Anyway, almost nothing that he says in that clip is to be believed, because he's just saying it for the herd.
I do still think that the election was rigged though, so if you want to talk about conspiracies, be my guest.
I personally find way to many coincidences to not at least consider the possibility that 9/11 was in some way aided or perpetrated by some level of our government.
Those who are either too proud, too stubborn or too complacent to accept that there are far to many undetermined factors to be have any kind of certain opinion on the event, are the ignorant assholes.
I know that those of us who say the bush government isnt capable of such a massive undertaking are speaking with their tongues in their cheeks. However i still feel its naive to think there is something inherently different about Americans that prevents us from being brainwashed and misdirected.
lletdown Im shocked you buy into this. If you guys really truely felt this way than why arent you in the streets guns raised? Oh ya - you took away your guns - continue bending over than and complaining in anonominity on an architecture thread.
People - 2 mid sized passenger jets full of fuel crashed into a light structure and burned on live television. Thousands of flights took off in the estern sector that same hour. Even if they had some intel it a needle in a hey stack. At this point its worthless arguing the logic.
You forgot Silverstein's double insurance payout on the towers 2 acts of terror instead of clause. He paid $100 million for 99 year lease on the towers. Thats less than a million a year!!! He got paid $5 billion.
I guess Bush AND the Jews blew up the towers. I mean c'mon - its obvious -
See how retarded you sound?
yes. these are my rambling comments from a previous thread:
that this was the work of 19 islamic terrorists as opposed to all of the above (and more) things i've heard about the so-called conspiracy. believe me, i think it in everyone's best interest to question government, and to take media matters with a grain of salt, but sometimes some good 'ol common sense can also lead one to the most probable scenario, as i also know the world is not black and white.
le bossman
Total Entries: 45
Total Comments: 1626
06/22/07 12:25
in order for the inside job to be executed properly, it would've relied on a number of difficult tasks being perfectly performed, according to most of what i've heard about the conspiracy theory.
1) someone would've had to have snuck explosives into wtc, and placed them at key points, possibly exactly where the planes would crash, (and maybe tower 7) undetected. this could've never been done by wtc staff as many of them died in the attacks.
2) there would've been enormous risk that the planes would've never reached their targets, and the criminal evidence (planted bombs) wouldn't have been destroyed, or that the explosives in the buildings wouldn't have been detonated, or even detonated too early. i hope they had a contingency for the rescue workers finding tons and tons of C4 in wtc 2 the next day if it wasn't hit.
3) suppose the pentagon jet didn't exist, instead a missle hit the pentagon. if the wtc jets existed, i'd say the other 2 do by default, but since we're talking possibilities, i'd say there were far, far too many witnesses there for the grainy video to be much of a counterpoint. and why would they attack their own staff, since we all know they were all in on it? and what run of the mill pilot could they ever convince to shoot a missle at the pentagon anyway?
4) the penn jet didn't exist. this doesn't make any since as the victims were calling their families on the phone. also, if these planes didn't exist, then united and american airlines were in on it as well. that is one big conspiracy.
if you want to know the likely success of any string of events, go back to high school math. multiply the probability of the first event's success by the second, and then by the third, and so on. the probability of all of these tasks occuring successfully, in addition to the whistle not being blown, is quickly reduced even if individually they all have very high likelyhoods. this is why the iraq war didn't work; there were too many risks involved.
i mean, i don't think there's anything wrong with speculating, and i'm not a forensics expert nor do i know "everything" that happened, but i don't think its
where the x is it should say beyond a reasonable doubt
evil,
im not saying i buy into it. All im saying is that its ignorant and naive to completely deny that its possible. If i was convinced that the government had somehow perpetrated the whole thing, then yeah maybe i would be out in the streets, but I am unfortunately too cynical to believe its a conspiracy, and too cynical to rule out our governments involvement.
I dont think it sounds 'retarded' at all, in fact, the only thing retarded coming out of the conversations on this subject is your abject disdain for dissenting opinions... or even the consideration of dissenting opinions is.
if you believe government involvement then that default makes a concpiracy dude - you cant not believe in conspiracy and not rule out government invlovement - thats paralyizing to the mind.
My abject disdain for the dissenting opinion here is that its fallacy to call this event a concpiracy - what you want me to do do? Tell my brother he didnt stand outside the world financial center that morning and didnt see jets fly into the towers? That even the Jordanian guys in the deli in his building in battery park before the 2nd plane hit were already shouting in anger that this must be Osama? Lletdown - I met you before - I just am surprised I wouldnt think you fall into this circle of cynicism and hate these concipiracy people breed. Your smarter than that.
Another question - why dont concpiracy people ever think the conspiracy is more logical like the arab states are secretly funding a massive terror campaign through intermediaries like al queada so they dont draw attention to themselves? Why do they default blame the USA and make everyone else the victim? What in their fragile mind makes them so fatalistic?
your kind of missing my point here evil. first off, im not denying that 9/11 happened or that jets crashed into the towers. And it is the truth that a couple arab states are funding campaigns against western targets, i think thats pretty well established.
the point is that i can not rule out government involvement. whether that makes me an idiot in your mind i could really care less. though im confused how it paralyzes the mind to consider 2 competing theories.
Its false logic you are using if your only 2 options are conspiracy or not. There are gray area's; there are varying levels of involvement.
Did the government bomb pearl harbor? no, they didnt. Were advanced warnings of a Japaneses attack delayed for political gain? its possible, and some would claim likely. Did the government coordinate or aid the destruction of the twin towers? probably not... Did the government ignore growing signs and direct threats of a massive terrorist attack on american soil for possible political gain? its possible, and some would claim likely...
what about the cores of the two buildings. There is NO way that they could have collapsted in on themselves they way that they did without being weakened by explosives. The 'official' video doesnt even explain this. They show the floor slabs shearing off of the core, but never show the core fall.
The steel should have fallen to one side or another, not straight down
As for the incopentacy of the Bush administration, they have hijacked a country, re-written a constitution, and lined their pockets with America's $$$...and done so fairly well
tumbles
you are going to get kicked off Archinect and hauled off to a prision somewhere for those coments
hopefully you'll go to guantanamo... michael moore says they get really good healthcare!
I have no problem believing that the towers fell the way they did because of the planes. The fact that they didn't fall over immediately was a testament to how they were built in the first place.
Thinking about them falling still gives me a weird feeling in my stomach to this day.
Who will join me in avanging mdler's death?
what about the explosions at the base of the towers before they fell...as well as the explosions (squibs) on the face or the tower that preceeded the collapsing portion of the tower....
....and the collapse of WTC 7
you guys are exactly like the people that insist the oklahoma city bombing was perpetrated by the gov't in order to make the michigan militia look bad
you guys are just like the people who insist this
is justified by this
someone please explain WTC 7, then
ha ha. well, my explanation would be what about WTC 3-6? why not just destroy them all? wtc 7 was a high rise that was right next to 1&2. it wasn't designed to take the loads from a 1400' avalanche of concrete and steel right at its base.
also, it wasn't a 'significant' landmark in the spirit of the other attacks. i don't think wtc 7 is a smoking gun exactly. maybe if the empire state building had just fallen down for no reason, then you'd have something. personally i don't think its that strange that numero 7 came down. i'm more surprise that the church across the street didn't fall down.
jesus held that church up
well that must be how bush new it was a war between good and evil
The way I see it, no matter how many experts, professionals, and engineers study and talk about the collapse on 9/11, there really is no equivolent precedent for reference. A lot of things happened on that day that weren't explainable, but not necessarily because it had to be some huge conspiracy but because no one really knows exactly what happens when planes crash into two gigantic towers. There are just way too many variables. Just because no one really understands everything that happened doesn't mean there is a conspiracy. Not to say there couldn't have been something fishy going on, as they say "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you."
seven wasn't a landmark but it did have several important tenants..
a major reason for conspiracy theories is that 7 is a potential target
of convenience...alot of information conveniently disappeared.
it's possible structural damage by falling debri caused the collapse
and that appears to be the proposed theory..but there doesn't seem
to be any photographic evidence.
as far as fires FEMA wrote:
Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by
fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and
how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this
time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained
massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low
probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and
analyzes are needed to resolve this issue.
as others have said no steel structure buildings had collapsed due
to fire before the towers collapsed.
philarch
i do believe planes have crashed into buildings before...
the empire state building..and the pirelli building i believe?
but i guess they were smaller planes..
what about the visable explosions at the base of the towers before they fell?
I mean, they found the passport of one of the highjackers at the scene of the crime...all the evidence they needed
there were quite a few inerviews with people who heard/felt explosions
in the basement..correct? prior to them falling.
Yep
they also have recorded sciesmic (sp?) activity indicating large blasts before the buildings fell
guys seriously - you'r architects and your debating the validity of the most basic and simple of any collapsed strucures. F=MA guys, the shear force of just 1 slab accelerating and pancaking 12' below will start a progressive collapse straight to the ground. And 7 had a a massive transfer beam visible from the verizon side, like a huge hole in the building which once it went down came the tower. And steel buildings collapse everyday due to fire. The most closest resemblence would be a barjoist warehouse structure collapsing due to fire weakened steel. Thats basically the vert force resolution of the trade towers - similar to the SC sofa store fire - light open web steel trusses
I have a hard time believing this thread is even serious - are you just trying to pull our chains mdler?
well i guess your right then. looks like its case closed mdler. i can't possibly think of any more reasonable alternatives to your "evidence." thank you for making me see the light of day and come to understand the true level of depth and sinister nature of this conspiracy. i'll be checking my semen for microphones when i go home and masturbate tonight
my microphone has semen in it
yeah well so does my digital camera
and Iraq had WMDs, and Iraq and Al Queda are linked, and...
mdler, how old are you?
27
regardless of how it happened, it's probably a good thing that the trade towers collapsed. after the planes hit them that morning i remember sitting there watching it on tv and wondering how in the world was somebody going to fix those building? they had massive gashes in their sides, some 80 stories above ground and with another 20 floors sitting on top of that. who the hell would even get near that to take a look?
i don't think its the collapse though that people are worried about. i think its more along the lines of the whole death thing.
besides, lebbeus woods couldve found a way
i dont want to get into this again evil, but your mentioning F=MA in reference to how simple the collapse was warrants one last comment. the towers fell significantly faster than would be expected in a pancake collapse. The first tower fell within a second of what would be expected in a free fall collapse. meaning the upper floor plates met little to no resistance from lower plates as they cascaded down.
if George Bush says it was Al Queda evildoers, then thats what it was
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.