Re: 9-11 article

 
Why do you kook and IDIOT hate america? I'll use small words so your
pea brain can understand. What you saw happen is what made those
building fall. There was no american government conspiracy, there was
no man made thermite used of any kind. To say otherwise is to admit
you should never have been allowed to graduate from kindigarten much
less ANY college on the planet...even the degree mill you got yours
from.
--
Keith

 Schiffner wrote:


  That's what we've been trying to tell you for years.
The question is, when you see WTC7's obvious demolition,
why do you try to blame it on an ordinary office fire?
Take a look for yourself. WTC7 on the left - known
demolition on the right. What you see are two controlled
demolitions. Gradual asymmetric heating can't possibly
do that to a hurricane and earthquake resistant, highly
redundant and resilient steel framed structure. It's an
absurd and physically impossible fantasy - even a form of
insanity.

  http://tinyurl.com/c8c3q4

  Let us know if you disagree with anything written below, and
if so, why. The writer proves that fires couldn't have caused
WTC7's fall, and he uses a clear, logical combination of evidence,
basic physics, and common sense to do it.

  http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/f/LeggeLastTry4.pdf


"If you think about the nature of the collapse, supposedly due to
fire weakening the steel, you will agree that it would only be
necessary to follow the early stages of the collapse to determine
its character. If heat is the cause, the steel will weaken gradually
and will start to sag in the region where the fire is most intense.
At that moment the steel will have almost enough strength to hold up
the weight of the building, but not quite. So we have the force of
gravity acting downwards, trying to produce an acceleration of 32
feet per second per second, and the force of the hot steel pushing
upwards, a force a bit less than that of gravity. Let us say we are
looking at it at the moment when the strength has declined to the
point where the steel is capable of pushing upwards with 90% of the
force required to hold the building up against gravity. There would
thus be a net downward force of 10% of gravity. Now acceleration is
proportional to force and we have a net force of 10% of gravity
so we would see an acceleration downwards of 3.2 feet per second
per second.
When you graph the data you find that the fall did not start with a
motion which could be ascribed to a small net force of that order.
The downward acceleration of the roof was very close to free fall
right from the start, 30 feet per second per second, and continued
at that rate until out of sight. There is no hint of a slow start.
This tells us that the steel supports went from adequate strength to
virtually no strength in an instant. For reasons stated above this is
absolutely impossible if the loss of strength is due to the application
of heat."




--

  http://911research.wtc7.net
  http://www.journalof911studies.com/
  http://www.ae911truth.org

 Actually fool it was all bullshit...but what would I know. I have
blown things up for a living. Also did more than a fair bit of
logistics getting explosive items from storage to site adn you and
your cult leaders have done what tinkerbelle'?

Bupkiss that's what. You and they are full of shit. You have proven
anything whilst I have proven what a bunch of idiots and clueless
fuckwads every single person that believes you are.

Not only am I smarter than you I've been out thinking you for a decade
with half my brain on loan to NASA.
--
Keith

 Schiffner wrote:


  That's what I've been telling you for years. Your cave
man cartoon fairly tale is beyond bullshit - it's
insanity.
 
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/04/witness-who-fingered-911-mastermind-was.html

Witness Who Fingered 9/11 "Mastermind" Was Himself Crazy

I have previously pointed out that the self-confessed 9/11 "mastermind"
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed also falsely confessed to crimes he didn't commit.

However, a second witness - Abu Zubaida - fingered Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed as the 9/11 mastermind (Zubaida was subsequently severely
tortured for many months. But he initially identified KSM even before
being tortured).

So we have independent confirmation that KSM was the chief architect of
9/11, right?

Well, the New Yorker notes this week:

     The F.B.I.’s point man on the Abu Zubaydah interrogation, Daniel
Coleman, had read Zubaydah’s diaries and concluded that he “had a
schizophrenic personality.”

Indeed, the Washington Post noted in 2007:

     Retired FBI agent Daniel Coleman, who led an examination of
documents after Abu Zubaida's capture in early 2002 and worked on the
case, said the CIA's harsh tactics cast doubt on the credibility of Abu
Zubaida's information.

     "I don't have confidence in anything he says, because once you go
down that road, everything you say is tainted," Coleman said, referring
to the harsh measures. "He was talking before they did that to him, but
they didn't believe him. The problem is they didn't realize he didn't
know all that much."

     ***

     Abu Zubaida ... was a "safehouse keeper" with mental problems who
claimed to know more about al-Qaeda and its inner workings than he
really did.

     ***
     Looking at other evidence, including a serious head injury that Abu
Zubaida had suffered years earlier, Coleman and others at the FBI
believed that he had severe mental problems that called his credibility
into question. "They all knew he was crazy, and they knew he was always
on the damn phone," Coleman said, referring to al-Qaeda operatives. "You
think they're going to tell him anything?"

Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Ron Suskind writes that Coleman
advised a top FBI official at the time:

     "This guy is insane, certifiable, split personality."

So the two witnesses who said that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the 9/11
mastermind were:

     * A guy who confessed to a crime he didn't commit, and was
waterboarded 183 times in one month, and

     * A guy who was crazy even before the CIA started torturing him,
who claimed to know a lot more than he really did

No judge in the country would convict based upon such flimsy evidence.

 
[snip idiocy]

Stop posting this shit to sci.physics, you walking example of
confirmation bias.