9/11 [split topic]

[TheBrownBottle]

And in this respect, I think, better resembles 9/11. People in positions o power and influence saw a genuine and more-or-less unexpected (it's possible that some within the government and state suspected that such a thing was in the pipeline but were ignored or ridiculed) and enormously catastrophic terrorist event and thought "that's awful, but how can we use it to our advantage?"

It happens all the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine

Yep, that would pretty much be my take on it

[Sin Agog]

And in this respect, I think, better resembles 9/11. People in positions o power and influence saw a genuine and more-or-less unexpected (it's possible that some within the government and state suspected that such a thing was in the pipeline but were ignored or ridiculed) and enormously catastrophic terrorist event and thought "that's awful, but how can we use it to our advantage?"

It happens all the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine

I do remember Osama Bin Laden's name being bandied about in the preceding few months before 11/9.  He even distinctly telegraphed that an event of that order would be coming soon in a city near you.  Bloody Russell Brand dressed up as him on MTV on September 12th as he interviewed Kylie Minogue.  That doesn't mean I think it was allowed to happen, but it was a possibility that was then exploited within an inch of its life.

[TheBrownBottle]

I do remember Osama Bin Laden's name being bandied about in the preceding few months before 11/9.  He even distinctly telegraphed that an event of that order would be coming soon in a city near you.  Bloody Russell Brand dressed up as him on MTV on September 12th.  That doesn't mean I think it was allowed to happen, but it was a possibility that was then exploited within an inch of its life.

I remember bin Laden being featured in an FHM article (I was a hormonal teenager, forgive me) in the months prior (he was #1 on the FBI 'most wanted' list). I don't think he made the '100 Sexiest' list, mind.

[kngen]

Without wanting to get too meta-conspiracy about a conspiracy, I bet the intelligence agencies who were asleep at the switch, the neo-cons who rushed headlong into war with the wrong country and about half of the Saudi royal family FUCKING LOVE the fact that any analysis of 9/11 and its fallout is bogged down over jet fuel melting steel beams and whether or not you could use a mobile phone on United Flight 97.

Definitely draws attention away from the intelligence briefing notes that said 'BIN LADEN ABOUT TO BRING A GIANT FUCKDOWN TO YOUR HOUSE, AMERICAN IMPERIALIST SCUM' in the days leading up to the attacks.

I read The New Pearl Harbor a while back. There's definitely some interesting stuff regarding intelligence failings and Mohammad Atta's links to the CIA-sponsored Pakistani secret services (ISI), which - to my knowledge, at least - have never really been resolved (although I'm more than happy to be corrected, if there's material out there). Ditto parallels to Operation Northwoods, and the language used in the PNAC's documents that gave the book its name.

But when I got to chapter about controlled demolitions etc, my heart sank. I had a feeling that this was going to be the issue that people will take sides over, as it's far less abstract than the murky world of geopolitics, rogue nations and the states that sponsor them for their own ends. And here we are ...

[Jim Bob]

I do remember Osama Bin Laden's name being bandied about in the preceding few months before 11/9.

Haha.  This tickled my funny bone.  I can image Partridge being pedantic enough to say that.  I don't mean that as an insult, by the way.

[thugler]

Fuck sake. This again!

BUILDINGS DON'T EAT PLANES!

[madhair60]

I actually agree with Wolfie.

[Wolf8312]

This is a side by side comparison of building 7 coming down aside another (accepted) controlled demolition. No similarities?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73qK4j32iuo

Really?

[Rizla]

What way do you expect a building to fall that wasn't a controlled demolition? Sideways? Up?

[Wolf8312]

What way do you expect a building to fall that wasn't a controlled demolition? Sideways? Up?

Surely you know that a steel framed high rise collapsing due to fire cannot fall straight down symmetrically into its own footprint, through the path of 'greatest resistance' while attaining speeds of (or anywhere close to) gravity right?

Right?

Characteristics of destruction by fire:

Slow onset with large visible deformations
    Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
    Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

[idunnosomename]

the first tower was actually hit by a plane. but the other one was knocked over by my spontaneous boner on seeing it. sorry

[Rizla]

Surely you know that a bler bler derpy werpy derp. Gwiy?
Gloop?

Characteristics of burpy durp -

blerby blooby blab blob
    Asymmetrical plip plop plap
    Evidence of woopy doopy doop

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Surely you know that a steel framed high rise collapsing due to fire cannot fall straight down symmetrically into its own footprint, through the path of 'greatest resistance' while attaining speeds of (or anywhere close to) gravity right?

explained this already and you didn't watch the video

ps WTC7 damaged nearby buildings as it fell

[thugler]

Characteristics of destruction by fire:

According to what?

Please show something saying this that isn't connected to the conspiracy stuff perhaps?

Otherwise it has no basis in the field.

Not to mention that a building falling down due to fire can happen in a number of ways and for different reasons. Every building is different

[idunnosomename]

god that hulkster montage. i remember that. glorious

[Al Tha Funkee Homosapien]

god that hulkster montage. i remember that. glorious

A true classic.

[Jim Bob]

explained this already and you didn't watch the video

Of course he didn't watch the video.  People like Wolfy aren't actually interesting in facts.  They are only interested in watching videos which allow them to wallow in confirmation bias for their ludicrous little conspiracy theories.  He likes to feel superior to the "sheeple", as he almost certainly refers to anyone who's not a stark raving loon like him.

[madhair60]

Of course he didn't watch the video.  People like Wolfy aren't actually interesting in facts.  They are only interested in watching videos which allow them to wallow in confirmation bias for their ludicrous little conspiracy theories.

sorry but I saw this and remembered this

Well, just look at the seats that were the first to be booked; the exact same seat positions in every cinema.

it's not even remotely the same thing but i still remembered it and it gave me a small giggle

[Jim Bob]

sorry but I saw this and remembered this...

...it's not even remotely the same thing but i still remembered it and it gave me a small giggle

Thing is that was likely true.  There's more than enough evidence to support it.  I know it's hard for some people to fathom that major corporations like Disney like to fudge numbers and use underhand tactics, but it happens.

[Cold Meat Platter]

I know this is pointless but just in case anyone is reading who hasn't taken in enough info.

None of the hijackers were identified as Iraqi or Afghani. The majority were Saudi.

[Operty1]

Surely you know that a steel framed high rise collapsing due to fire cannot fall straight down symmetrically into its own footprint, through the path of 'greatest resistance' while attaining speeds of (or anywhere close to) gravity right?

Can you post your credentials regarding your education on architecture, engineering, And building demolition?

Did you do the decades of work for your opinions or just skip to YouTube side by side comparisons? Because the argument that one thing looks the same as another thing therefore there is no difference is child's play.

[Fr.Bigley]

I know this is pointless but just in case anyone is reading who hasn't taken in enough info.

None of the hijackers were identified as Iraqi or Afghani. The majority were Saudi.

They were German cars? Well fuck my hat I didn't know that!

[Cold Meat Platter]

They were German cars? Well fuck my hat I didn't know that!

Oh, aye. Especially:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i39WvMaRMSs

[Operty1]

I've got the perfect video for you wolfie, and as it's on YouTube so you know it's legit:

https://youtu.be/X2xlQaimsGg

This deals with everything You need to know.

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

A true classic.

Posted on the Something Awful forums on the day of the attacks if I'm not mistaken? Or at least shortly thereafter.

[confettiinmyhair]

Luck https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/september-11-blind-luck-decided-who-lived-or-died/597688/
I've always believed that there was no conspiracy during the attacks (though you can argue about conspiracies surrounding political act's post 9/11), the audacious plan simply worked, well mostly. All acts of terror require degrees of fortune, however well planned.

[Cuellar]

Surely you know that a steel framed high rise collapsing due to fire cannot fall straight down symmetrically into its own footprint, through the path of 'greatest resistance' while attaining speeds of (or anywhere close to) gravity right?

Right?

Characteristics of destruction by fire:

Slow onset with large visible deformations
    Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
    Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

Now do characteristics of destruction by having a fuck off plane flown into you

[TheBrownBottle]

Even beyond that, the characteristics of the destruction are completely predictable & simple to model.  Temperatures of c.1,000C were recorded inside the towers - not high enough to melt steel, but more than high enough to vastly reduce its strength and make collapse inevitable.  It was the internal steel columns of the frame lattice which had a catastrophic failure, which lead to the concrete slabs collapsing one on top of the other. The outer steel structure (which contained a sizeable proportion of the frame) was undamaged by fire; the concrete slabs on each floor therefore dropped like a concertina, inside the frame (and taking the frame with it - which can be clearly seen in any film of the collapse).  It goes without saying that there is no 'speed of gravity' (at least outside of a vacuum).  The 'path of least resistance' is therefore straight down.  Pseudoscientific daftness.

I'm a construction industry professional who has worked on some colossal projects (as in ten figure sum huge), and as a consequence I've met lots of very smart folks who work as structural engineers..  I'm yet to meet anyone who thinks 9/11 involved controlled explosions (not that I tend to bring this up regularly).  Believe me, if 9/11 was a result of controlled explosions, every structural engineer on the planet would be shouting it from the rooftops (after all, when do they get to do anything as exciting as blow the top of a massive conspiracy?  They're usually beavering away making sure an office block can stay upright, which is an important but dull process.  Showing that the twin towers weren't destroyed by a terrorist attack would be too much to keep quiet).

What I don't have is a YouTube video showing the world my ignorance of basic physics, so I guess this is just an argument from authority, amirite?

Please seek help Wolf.

[idunnosomename]

Posted on the Something Awful forums on the day of the attacks if I'm not mistaken? Or at least shortly thereafter.

SA kind of misremembered its reaction to 9/11. There were a lot of people putting American flags in their signatures for weeks. The classic tribute.avi was posted on Oct 15 2002 and it was thought to be pretty edgelordy then

[touchingcloth]

Even beyond that, the characteristics of the destruction are completely predictable & simple to model.  Temperatures of c.1,000C were recorded inside the towers - not high enough to melt steel, but more than high enough to vastly reduce its strength and make collapse inevitable.  It was the internal steel columns of the frame lattice which had a catastrophic failure, which lead to the concrete slabs collapsing one on top of the other. The outer steel structure (which contained a sizeable proportion of the frame) was undamaged by fire; the concrete slabs on each floor therefore dropped like a concertina, inside the frame (and taking the frame with it - which can be clearly seen in any film of the collapse).  It goes without saying that there is no 'speed of gravity' (at least outside of a vacuum).  The 'path of least resistance' is therefore straight down.  Pseudoscientific daftness.

I'm a construction industry professional who has worked on some colossal projects (as in ten figure sum huge), and as a consequence I've met lots of very smart folks who work as structural engineers..  I'm yet to meet anyone who thinks 9/11 involved controlled explosions (not that I tend to bring this up regularly).  Believe me, if 9/11 was a result of controlled explosions, every structural engineer on the planet would be shouting it from the rooftops (after all, when do they get to do anything as exciting as blow the top of a massive conspiracy?  They're usually beavering away making sure an office block can stay upright, which is an important but dull process.  Showing that the twin towers weren't destroyed by a terrorist attack would be too much to keep quiet).

What I don't have is a YouTube video showing the world my ignorance of basic physics, so I guess this is just an argument from authority, amirite?

Please seek help Wolf.

They should have toppled to one side. That's just science.