Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
-
@juanv.soler said:
I am not so sure now about that web. Money helping always takes me out.
All the information is available for free. They are asking for a support. They collect money for certain tasks and they show exactly how much they collected. There is no requirement to send them a penny.
@petercharles said:
Steel at elevated temperature isn't very strong so without protection it would soon have started to buckle and collapse.
The most important thing about steel structure under fire is that a fire cannot produce a sudden collapse of the whole structure, similar to that achieved in controlled demolition. Fire can not give such a precision. Those buildings would never collapsed this way even if the whole buildings were set on fire (all floors).
Even if the structure of all three buildings was weakened by fires on several floors, it is impossible to make the whole building disintegrate. We would have witnessed gradual, asymmetric destruction.The chemical signature of thermite in the dust and presence of molten metal is something that makes things even more obvious.
-
whether conspiracy or not, i think the terrorists could have never in their wildest dreams hoped to accomplish so much. "we" (the free world) played right into this, and gave up a lot of ours rights and freedoms.
-
I have a lot of doubts about 9/11 and I tend, very much, to think, that it was done in purpose to frighten the people and so invade Irak and now Afghanistan, not forgetting Yemen neither Iran.
But really it would not be any surprise now for me, that those invaded and humiliated and with so many familiars killed, could make another disaster in the United States.
What Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth pursue is an Ethic stuff. It has to be done. The trouble is that if the economy does not recover, and, that new attack happens, we will not recover for years, for the USA will take all the money left to make another war.
What to do ? We are trapped.
unless something new brings concord to the world
what else ? -
Just sometimes I think "everyone hates America", even their own citizens.
I remember back to when "everyone loved the USSR". A workers paradise, everyone with plenty to eat, wonderful homes, and it was the Nazi's who killed all those Polish officers. But with the passage of time now we know different.
Maybe with the passage of time all will become clear about 9/11, but not yet. And maybe just as some refuse to believe the truth about the USSR, and others don't believe the Nazi's killed millions of Jews (and others), some will always refuse to believe the truth about 9/11 whatever that truth is.
-
@unknownuser said:
Just sometimes I think "everyone hates America", even their own citizens.
@unknownuser said:
some will always refuse to believe the truth about 9/11 whatever that truth is
.Yet if we do not believe what you believe then we are American haters?
-
There was an new video released by A&E:
9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3; Low-Res. - YouTubeIn this feature length documentary with cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from more than 50 top experts in their fields -- high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more. Each is highly qualified in his/her respective fields. Several have Ph.D's -- including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis. She, along with the other experts, exposes the fraud of NIST and discusses how the scientific method should have been applied and acknowledges the "overwhelming" evidence of high temperature incendiaries in all dust samples of the WTC. High-rise architects and structural engineers layout the evidence in the features of the destruction of these three high-rises that point inevitably to explosive controlled demolition.
[flash=480,385:v8e0snxq]http://www.youtube.com/v/lw-jzCfa4eQ[/flash:v8e0snxq]
-
9/11 truthers = crazy
-
I'd agree with Jeff...there is very little to an aircraft beyond the solid bits. I've seen quite a few programmes in which archaelogists have disinterred fighter aircraft that went down in WWII. One in particular in which a spitfire buried itself 30ft deep in a peat bog. This didn't even have a chance to burn, it went straight underground. nevertheless there was little left beyond the engine block, landing gear and the wing guns.
Quite apart from the fact that tens of thousands of people actually saw those planes fly into the towers. What were they...papier mache?
That said, I'm sure the full truth hasn't been revealed...too much ass-covering involved. -
Damn
The unintended consequence of the "information age" is that the conspiracy advocates have free an uninhibited access to multiple information outlets. This is the same type of BS that the prestigious Dr. Rosie O'Donnel, steel fire expert has parroted for some time. I guess Dr. O'Donnel has never seen a blacksmith.
I put these theories up there with " witches, zombies, and free energy". Now if we could just direct their "hot air" to a wind mill, maybe we would have a wind mill that would have an efficiency better than 15%.
-
I am personally fed up with those of you who comment on the A&E movement without even watching the document. You are so attached to a vision of full of justice and beautiful USA, that you immediately dismiss facts that do not correspond with the vision.
I don't know why you Alan comment on the plane debris, while the E&A movement concentrates of unnatural way all THREE WTC buildings collapsed on that day. The planes are not relevant here. The document refers to the reasons of the collapse and how a structure of a building naturally resists its destruction.
Ken, this information wouldn't have a chance of reaching you, if there were no alternative ways to get it to you. People who support E&A request for a new investigation are not conspiracy theorists. Those are professional, structural engineers, people who perform controled demolitions and who know well how a building works.
I am amazed, how many resist a thought that there is something wrong with the way the buildings collapsed. The official explanation is simply misleading.
-
The planes are entirely relevant, Tomasz...given that both the main towers collapsed at precisely those floors which were impacted by the planes. That is, everything above the impact point dropped en masse onto what was below.
Anyone claiming that the buildings were somehow wired for demolition would need to demonstrate how you manage to syncronise the demolition circuitry with the exact point of entry of those planes...and then how such circuitry would survive such an impact and inferno in order to fire the charges some considerable time later.I'm neither as gullible nor dismissive as you suggest. There are a whole load of questions surrounding 9/11 that stink to high heaven; not least the fortuitous discovery of the passports of some of the supposed hijackers. However, I'm not overly impressed by the fact that gravity that day was demonstrated to act directly downwards. That's what it's supposed to do, isn't it?
-
hey wait.. wasn't this case already solved by noon or so on 9-11-01?
by that time, I already knew who did it, why they did it, and how they did it.. no need for further investigation.
-
Digging up old bones, eh?
-
@unknownuser said:
I am personally fed up with those of you who comment on the A&E movement without even watching the document. You are so attached to a vision of full of justice and beautiful USA, that you immediately dismiss facts that do not correspond with the vision.
You seem a little too willing to chalk up other people's 'resistance' (a telling choice of words, btw) to some perceived political bias. You might as well question our cognitive abilities outright.
-
@escapeartist said:
Digging up old bones, eh?
not necessarily.. a new (on topic) video was released.. see this post on the last page:
http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?p=393844#p393844.
-
@unknownuser said:
I don't mind resistance, when it comes to commenting presented videos. I cannot stand when someone doesn't check what the architects report say and send very primitive comments that doesn't bring something to discussion.
Sigh. On my foes list you go.
-
@unknownuser said:
Sigh. On my foes list you go.
I wasn't referring to your post, neither find your comment primitive.
-
@unknownuser said:
You are so attached to a vision of full of evil and ugly USA, that you immediately dismiss facts that do not correspond with the vision.
Tomasz, I fixed your quote to present another opinion with at least as much credibility as your original (which I consider beyond the realm of fact).
Edited to remove any implication of a direct quote. Although, I think it was clear from my original context that I was modifying a quote to make a point.
-
@david. said:
@unknownuser said:
You are so attached to a vision of full of .... and ..... USA, that you immediately dismiss facts that do not correspond with the vision.
I fixed your quote to present another opinion with at least as much credibility as your original (which I consider beyond the realm of fact).
David, please do not edit quotations, because this is against forum rules. I understand your intention though. You just pointed out that those two statements cannot and aren't true.
I have brought up the thread, because I have found the new document released by A&E. This a voice of architects and engineers, who as professionals, want to express their opinions and doubts regarding official NIST report. Please check, for example, Tom Sulivan's comments at 44:00, who is an explosives expert. The whole document is an expression of those doubts based on professional experience and their particular field of knowledge.
@unknownuser said:
@unknownuser said:
I am personally fed up with those of you who comment on the A&E movement without even watching the document. You are so attached to a vision of full of justice and beautiful USA, that you immediately dismiss facts that do not correspond with the vision.
You seem a little too willing to chalk up other people's 'resistance' (a telling choice of words, btw) to some perceived political bias. You might as well question our cognitive abilities outright.
I don't mind resistance, when it comes to commenting presented videos. I cannot stand when someone doesn't check what the architects report says and send very primitive comments that don't bring something to discussion.
@alan fraser said:
...and then how such circuitry would survive such an impact and inferno in order to fire the charges some considerable time later.
The thermite cutters can be radio controlled, as other explosives, I guess.
@alan fraser said:
However, I'm not overly impressed by the fact that gravity that day was demonstrated to act directly downwards. That's what it's supposed to do, isn't it?
What is the smoking gun is the symmetry of all three collapses. Have planes hit those buildings centrally? No. There would be an asymmetrical failure if there was no other means then fire involved.
Suprisingly the third building WTC 7, that was not hit by a plane, collapsed in a perfect demolition like manner. Please check already mentioned 44:00 at least. -
There are loopholes in that presentation large enough to drive a bus through; and that's before you get to all the stuff that is conveniently omitted. I couldn't find anything that stands up to unbiased scrutiny.
However, beyond all the detail remains the simple question of motive. Why? To justify going to war? When has the US ever needed an excuse of that magnitude to invade somewhere? And how on earth could you guarantee keeping it a secret..for all time...no deathbed confessions, or whistleblower books that would earn countless millions.
My own feeling is that any organisation that has the word 'Truth' as part of its name is probably using it as ironically as countries that have the word 'Democratic' in their title.
Rather more convincing arguments to be found here.
Advertisement