ok, no structural damage, but what was the structural damage to the WTC-- being banged into from the side? so if the plane whacked into it sideways, why didnt it flop over sideways? if you kick a weeble-wobble, does it fall down or pancake vertically?

also was WTC7 structurally damaged?

It's obvious that you don't know, or don't want to know the engineering details of WTC 1 & 2. WTC 1 & 2 were "tube" designs. They weren't a conventional design using steel columns and beams throughout the structure --like the old Empire State Building for example. If you don't believe me, contact Leslie Roberson, the man who designed WTC 1 & 2 -- I already posted his e-mail.

WTC 1 & 2 weren't "bumped", they had massive holes torn in their sides by those airplanes. I saw it with my own eyes; you saw a TV show. Unless you were there to see it, it's hard to appreciate just how large those holes were. When I got to a spot where I could see the buildings clearly, I was shocked --not that they collapsed, but that they stood up for as long as they did after the airplane impacts.

Pistons can't melt, huh? Somebody should have informed this piston. Bad piston, don't you know you can't melt from some silly old gasoline fire.

That worn out piston was exposed to countless MILLIONS of high octane explosions at atmospheric pressures of 10 to 1 over many, many years. These explosions occur in a tiny place of say, 50 Cubic Inches, called a combustion chamber. Ultimately, they wear out and need repair.

The WTC buildings were briefly exposed to a very low intensity, oxygen starved kerosine fire. Conspiracy theorists inside the American Government are putting a fairytale about that this low heat smouldering fire was caused by a Bed Sheet wearing Arabian Madman with this big white Turban who Manchurian Canditaded 19 completely invisible Arabs to commit suicide by crashing two Planes into the WTC and that alone caused the destruction of THE ENTIRE WTC COMPLEX OF SEVEN BUILDINGS!

You believe that Fiss?

Really?

You actually think Osama was responsible for Larry Silverstein's $7 BILLION insurance windfall on 911?

Listen PM me, I've got this real estate opportunity in LOWER TASMANIA. It's the chance of a lifetime..........

FISSLE!

ARE YOU LISTENING? ARE YOU DEAF?

WALK US THROUGH THE DETAILS? OK?

STEP 1: Plane crashes into building.
Step 2: ??????
...
Step ??? - whole buidling collapses at freefall speed.

Go ahead, now, don't IGNORE the question. Every vertical column, every outer wall, every floor, ALL FALL DOWN at freefall speed an hour or so later. Come on now, FISSLE, WE ARE ALL LISTENING! Give us the details. Surely you have it all worked out, now, or do you just beleive it because SOMEONE YOU LIKE TOLD YOU SO ON TV?

Contumacyman

He never said liquid oxygen, moron. Only you did, you word-twisting shabbas goy.

I keep "taking something completely out of context"? How about those bullshit videos, of stitched together sound bites, that you all keep offering as "proof".

BTW, jet engines don't operate on liquid oxygen, they use air for the combustion process -- rocket engines use liquid oxygen. Moron.

Originally Posted by Augustus Sutter
Your idiotic attempts to act as though you know something are really pathetic. You keep taking something completely out of the context in which it is being discussed and using it as inductive logic to prove your point. Take this gem you just posted for instance. Jet fuel lying in a puddle on fire doesn't burn very hot. Jet fuel mixed with oxygen and compressed does get hot. Why does anybody bother with this moron? Without Jacob P. Slovianski here to spin and constantly reframe the debate you show yourself for the lame dullard you are.

He never said liquid oxygen, moron. Only you did, you word-twisting shabbas goy.

You beat me to that observation.

Obviously he is running out of ammo to rubuttle the argument. By making up what AS said he is in essence out of info to debate further. From now on it will be a re-hash of old arguments and further taking statements out of context. He's not really very good at this at all. By saying that he has seen how big the hole is cuz he was "close" to the building makes him even further in the hole cuz earlier he said that he was there but not anywhere near to be as "close" as he said he was. I'd like a retraction of these inconsistencies or at least a clarification.

The North Tower was hit first, at 8:45 a.m. The plane (not necessarily a Boeing jumbo jet though) hit the tower directly, in the center, and all the jet fuel which was not immediately consumed in the fireball entered the building, causing a major fire. Then at 9:03 a.m. the South Tower was hit, but whoever was controlling the plane did not manage a direct hit; rather the plane hit the tower toward a corner and at a shallow angle, and comparatively little of the jet fuel entered the building, most being consumed in the fireball (click on the image at left for further evidence).
The fire in the South Tower was thus less intense than that in the North Tower. But the South Tower collapsed first, at 9:50 a.m., 47 minutes after impact, whereas the North Tower collapsed at 10:29 a.m., 1 hour and 44 minutes after impact. Had the fires been the cause of the collapse then the North Tower, with its more intense fire, would have collapsed first. Or, put another way, had the fires been the cause of the collapse then the South Tower, hit after the North Tower, and subjected to a less intense fire, would have collapsed after (not before) the North Tower collapsed.

Note: This page assumes that an on-board hijacker was piloting the plane, but its argument concerning the cause of the collapse remains valid if the plane was actually being controlled remotely (see below).

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc_0413.html#demolition

-------------------
If the number 7 building came down in a free fall from the impact of the souronding debris , Then the 93 wtc bombing should have collapse as well from the massive explosion underground garage that killed six people, injured more than 1,000 and caused half a billion dollars in damage.

I keep "taking something completely out of context"? How about those bullshit videos, of stitched together sound bites, that you all keep offering as "proof".

BTW, jet engines don't operate on liquid oxygen, they use air for the combustion process -- rocket engines use liquid oxygen. Moron.

Look, I know you are a little slow, and as Momus pointed out I never said Jet engines operate on liquid oxygen nor did I imply that. Here is a little lesson about how jets compress air, oxygen being the most important component of air, and how they make jets and turbofans go:

Combustion Area
This high-pressure air then enters the combustion area, where a ring of fuel injectors injects a steady stream of fuel. The fuel is generally kerosene, jet fuel, propane or natural gas. If you think about how easy it is to blow a candle out, then you can see the design problem in the combustion area -- entering this area is high-pressure air moving at hundreds of miles per hour. You want to keep a flame burning continuously in that environment. The piece that solves this problem is called a "flame holder," or sometimes a "can." The can is a hollow, perforated piece of heavy metal. Half of the can in cross-section is shown below:

The injectors are at the right. Compressed air enters through the perforations. Exhaust gases exit at the left. You can see in the previous figure that a second set of cylinders wraps around the inside and the outside of this perforated can, guiding the compressed intake air into the perforations.

Large jetliners use what are known as turbofan engines, which are nothing more than gas turbines combined with a large fan at the front of the engine. Here's the basic (highly simplified) layout of a turbofan engine:

You are really a sickening and not very clever dullard, always putting words in people's mouths and twisting what they say. You really have no idea what you are talking about and since you are not an Aeronautical Engineer, by your own logic, should shut your mouth.

Look dumb-ass I know you are a little slow, and as Momus pointed out I never said Jet engines operate on liquid oxygen nor did I imply that. Here is a little lesson about how jets compress air, oxygen being the largest and most important component of air, and how they make jets and turbofans go:

You are really a sickening and not very clever dullard, always putting words in peoples mouths and twisting what they say. You really have no idea what you are talking about and since you are not an Aeronautical Engineer, by your own logic, should shut your mouth.

As if the nitwit is going to understand the workings of jet engines.

Obviously, the validity of this inquiry has left you and Fissle too far behind to understand what we are talking about.
Either catch up, or go find something else to blabber about.

No, I'm not going anywhere. Too bad you can't do squat about it.

Somthing tells me that you just showed up about 100 posts ago, in regards this subject. This has gone on and on and on...

Stick around, Hatey, help us puff up another 9-11-2001 conspiracy-theory thread.
We're not going anywhere either. You better upgrade the quality of your input, though, you're under closer scrutiny now. Relying on filthy ad hominems and other kikelike krap may reveal your agenda to be counter to that of the forum.

I picture Dov Zakheim, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feth, Limbaugh, Libby, et al. and other neocon murderers swinging from the gallows together for high treason. Do you think shit-talking small fry such as yourself deserve to join them?

No, I'm not going anywhere. Too bad you can't do squat about it.

Somthing tells me that you just showed up about 100 posts ago, in regards this subject. This has gone on and on and on...

Stick around, Hatey, help us puff up another 9-11-2001 conspiracy-theory thread. I picture Dov Zakheim, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feth, Limbaugh, Libby, et al. and other neocon murderers swinging from the gallows together for high treason. Do you think shit-talking small fry such as yourself deserve to join them?

They should I reckon. Just go back and see how MANY posts they made all to destroy the discourse on this matter. These fleas are all over the internet. They are paid peanuts probably.

No, I'm not going anywhere. Too bad you can't do squat about it.

Somthing tells me that you just showed up about 100 posts ago, in regards this subject. This has gone on and on and on...

To the contrary.

I can see where more and more valid information is being added in a progressive manner to this inquiry.

And I can see that you and Fissle, et al, are still screaming nonsense from the Dark Ages.

For those who are new to the so-called 9-11 truth movement, John O'Neill was an FBI agent who investigated Osama bin Laden. After being frustrated by a lack of support from the justice dept, he left the FBI and took a job running security at the WTC. Within days, 9-11 happened and O'Neill died in the collapse of the towers.

I seem to recall O'Neill was in charge of the FBI investigation of the suicide attack by Arab terrorists on the USS Cole in Yemen (?) some years back. This was another suspicious event many think designed to deflect from something nasty Israel was doing to the Palstinians at the time.

As I recall O'Neill may have been getting very close to unearthing the REAL culprits when the US Ambassador stepped in and asked that he be removed from the case.

The US Ambassador to this country was, suprise, suprise, a Kikess. What was it O'Neill was close to finding that caused her to have him shipped back to America? Could it have been that he found out that a certain 'shitty little country' was bombing American Naval Vessels and blaming invisible Kamikaze Arabians with big turbans?

Izzy has an expression, 'never forget' implying revenge. O'Neill was offered the job of Chief of Security by Larry Silverstein and given an enormous salary of (I believe) $350,000.00 Pa. 911 was his FIRST DAY on the job and he was killed.

Was he LURED to his death by the 911 conspirators?

Or was this just co-incidence?

Gee, it was lucky Silverstein stayed home that day, wasn't it?

ETA: I refuted your childish arguments in numerous other posts. Apparently facts, logic and science mean nothing to any of you. From here on out, I refute your moronic bullshit with equally moronic bullshit.

In that dank mind of yours you "refuted" something, perhaps, but sourbelly disagreement ain't refutation in the real world.

For anyone else: My "childish argument" is that ZOG has been killing people and working against the White Race for decades; and ZOG had the means, motive and opportunity to pull off a job like 911.

The details about what actually DID happen on 911 -- as I have stated endlessly -- none of us will know till we issue warrants for the ZOGlings in charge and their security state enablers.

We CAN gather a large database of coincidences from that day in support of what probably did not happen. We can deduce from the put options and the advance warnings that it was an inside job. Details won't be known for sure till our side is running the rack room at Gitmo and we can strap down Bush, Cheney, et al. and question them the way they question others.

All the above are opinions. People disagree with opinions all the time and unlike Fissile I invide intelligent disagreement.

But opinions can't be "refuted" they can only be banned. Fissile is too much like ZOG about this sort of thing, I'm sorry to report. Way too much like ZOG.

you're under closer scrutiny now. Relying on filthy ad hominems and other kikelike krap may reveal your agenda to be counter to that of the forum.

Not really. In fact a third ally of yours just got suspended for trolling/flaming. Hey, I'm just on here to supply a rhetorical comeback here and there, which reminds me--it's about time to post another of my disclaimers.

I picture Dov Zakheim, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feth, Limbaugh, Libby, et al. and other neocon murderers swinging from the gallows together for high treason. Do you think shit-talking small fry such as yourself deserve to join them?

Yawn...ho hum. Look, would you mind not typing silly things like that? People are viewing this, you know.