http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/nyregion/02fatigue.html?pagewanted=all



Should I be surprised that this is from the NYT? Are they tired of 9/11?


Actually, I thought this:


"An organization called myGoodDeed.org was begun last year to urge people to do something nice for Sept. 11, and, if they want, to post it on its Web site. “We asked what should 9/11 be 20 or 30 years from now, and the big concern is that people will become tired of conventional ceremonies,” said David Paine, president of the organization.

Some 150,000 deeds were posted last year, with more than 40,000 intentions clocked so far this year. One person chose to put quarters in expired parking meters. Another is knitting socks for soldiers. A boy said he would help his mother around the house and not torment his siblings."


... was a great idea.




Grace and Peace

It is a great idea.

However, having lived in NY during 9/11 I have to say that nothing is too much in my mind. To this day I cannot see the images of those planes hitting the towers without being reduced to a giant mess. The amount of people that are no longer in my life or in the lives of my friends could never allow me to become "fatigued" of those speaking about this event.

I can see how good deeds is used as an observance. I can't recall if there has been an official commemorative day of remembrance on our (US) calendars, but if not, than I think there should be.


Bobby

Ask nearly anybody today what they know about the USS Arizona. Or the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Time passes too quickly and if we're not reminded occasionally, more will get bored.
More will find a reason to forget.

Ask someone within earshot to name the faces on Mount Rushmore. And ask
Why they are up there.

The eleventh day of the ninth month took on an eerie distinction. Welcome.

Captain Rich:

Had to look up the USS Arizona, and was to young for the Cuban Missile Crisis or even Kent State [ mentioned by NYT].

Its diffferent reading about it versus living through it or hearing it first hand - I've talked to a Pearl Harbor and a Omaha Beach survivors.




Glinda:


So sorry for your losses.








Grace and Peace

Hello in:

Before they make the DAY a special day, I think they ought to fill in the hole with something - like a MEMORIAL!!

excon

Yes, Agree

Thanks for posting that article. Interesting.

One of the strengths of America is that it is a forward looking country. After all, life will be lived in the future, not the past. Most Islamic countries look to the past, past tribal fueds and insults, and that is one of the main reasons for their cultures failing badly. Why, in the Middle East people still talk about unfortunate events that happened in the Seventh Century!

What is the problem with remembering 911 on 9/11? America had a wake up call on that date, and there was much to learn from the events of that day. Lots of people like to and moan about what is in the media; guess what, a person can live WITHOUT THE MEDIA. In fact, people would be wise to discontinue their media addiction, television news is ENTERTAINMENT, there is no doubt about that.If one doesn't watch the media, one isn't irritated!

I have no doubt that Americans in urban areas are forward looking people... it is the next Jihadist attack we have to deflect vial intelligence and preparedness. I have no doubt that our federal government representatives in Congress and the Presidency, and those running for office in 2008 know what their duty is regarding protecting out urban areas from violent attack.

We must not allow ourselves to become fatigued, too many people needlessly lost their lives.

The 9/11/01 attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center was an "inside job", which all Americans should continue to do all possible to investigate. Start with Professor David Ray Griffin (http://www.wanttoknow.info/050504davidraygriffin) and Professor Steven E. Jones Physics Professor Says Science Points To WTC Controlled Demolition (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/121105twintowers.htm)

What really happened is worth finding out:

The 9/11 Hijackings - An Inside Job? (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/inside.html)

Letsroll911.org - 911 Was An Inside Job - Flight 175 Missile, Pod, - Phil Jayhan (http://www.letsroll911.org/phpwebsite/)

ALEX JONES' MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE - 9-11: AN INSIDE JOB PART 1: MICHAEL MOORE WHITEWASH (http://www.martiallaw911.info/insidejob1.htm)

Former MI5 Agent Says 9/11 An Inside Job (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/270605insidejob.htm)

Report Cites Major CIA Lapses Before 9/11, Watchdog Slams Agency For Failing To Tackle Al Qaeda Effectively - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/21/terror/main3190960.shtml)

I would have a big town party on 9/11. It wouldn't be to celebrate what happened, but to weave an evil act into a positive one.

Evil it was and still is until they are all caught and punished.

Road2DC (http://www.road2dc.com/)

9/11 Truth Grand Junction > Home (http://www.911TruthGroups.org/grandjunction)

The 911 Truth Group is doing their best to find answers.

Let me guess... you think fire can't melt steel

The 9/11/01 attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center was an "inside job", which all Americans should continue to do all possible to investigate.

Oh puhleeze!

Spare me the off the wall conspiracy theories.

Evil will never be positive and the people who performed this evil act need to be punished to the full extent of the law as an EXAMPLE, or the PEOPLE MAKE THE EXAMPLE, which ever comes first; if all laws of right wing punishment have been removed.

Laws need to apply to the elite as well as the common population. Unjust laws made by an unjust government to exempt themselves are not just laws for the people. A just law will provide for the greater good of ALL THE PEOPLE.

Evil will never be positive and the people who performed this evil act need to be punished to the full extent of the law Hello Martha:

I'm right with you. Who did it? Don't just tell me "inside". I don't know anybody named inside.

excon

We must not allow ourselves to become fatigued, too many people needlessly lost their lives.

The 9/11/01 attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center was an "inside job", which all Americans should continue to do all possible to investigate. Start with Professor David Ray Griffin (http://www.wanttoknow.info/050504davidraygriffin) and Professor Steven E. Jones Physics Professor Says Science Points To WTC Controlled Demolition (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/121105twintowers.htm)

What really happened is worth finding out:

The 9/11 Hijackings - An Inside Job? (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/inside.html)

Letsroll911.org - 911 Was An Inside Job - Flight 175 Missile, Pod, - Phil Jayhan (http://www.letsroll911.org/phpwebsite/)

ALEX JONES' MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE - 9-11: AN INSIDE JOB PART 1: MICHAEL MOORE WHITEWASH (http://www.martiallaw911.info/insidejob1.htm)

Former MI5 Agent Says 9/11 An Inside Job (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/270605insidejob.htm)

Report Cites Major CIA Lapses Before 9/11, Watchdog Slams Agency For Failing To Tackle Al Qaeda Effectively - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/21/terror/main3190960.shtml)
Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet and it appears you have been duped into believing them regarding 9/11.

“To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM Editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.”

I have read the links you provided and some are plain silly, while others are more credible, never the less I ask you to read only one link.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html)

tomder55:

You say, "let me guess .... you think fire can't melt steel"

Fire will melt steel, but try and see if you can build a fire with a minimum supply of jet fuel and get it hot enough to melt a thick extremely strong heat tested steel beam without the use of COKE, the by product of COAL, in a blast furnace; which, of course you do know was NOT at the top of the WORLD TRADE CENTER, don't you?

It seems like Homeland Security should set up a public controlled experiment using jet fuel to prove that jet fuel can, in and of itself, burn through one steel beam, as there were lots of steel beams melted completely down in the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. I would be interested in seeing an experiment of this type to prove the 9/11 incident. It would shut me up as long as I could verify that it was really steel and really jet fuel being used. Let every state and every county participate so as to put the 9/11 conspiracy to rest. Perhaps for an easier experiment, the government could distribute blowtorches fueled with air and jet fuel ONLY, so that the population can see for themselves if jet fuel will melt down even a small part of an I-Beam.

It requires temperatures of at least 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to melt steel. Diesel jet fuel does not reach these temperatures and the fires in the buildings were short lived. Firefighter tape recordings prove that only small pockets of fire were still burning in the buildings seconds before their collapse.

Physics Professor Says Science Points To WTC Controlled Demolition (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/121105twintowers.htm)

An acetylene torch burns at 6000 degrees Fahrenheit, which is hotter than the 5,800 degree surface of the sun, AND WILL BURN THROUGH STEEL. But who had the torches to create temperatures that were as hot or hotter than the surface of the sun? And how did they get there? An acetylene torch is under pressure and burns both oxygen and acetylene to get a high enough temperature to melt steel. WE KNOW STEEL WAS MELTED, AND LOTS OF STEEL WAS MELTED, by acetylene torch type heat that brought down the WORLD TRADE CENTERS, NOT the fire caused by the planes fuel, which was NOT an intense enough heat, and mostly burned outside the building as you can see from the pictures.

ScottGem:

I do not care anything about conspiracy theories. The only thing I am concerned about is an experiment to see if regular air and jet fuel will melt a large steel tested I-Beam, not just turn the beam red in one spot, but melt it down to a puddle. I think the experiment should be conducted with the participation of Professor David Ray Griffin and Professor Stephen E. Jones, who I am sure would gladly participate.

excon:

Who did it? The BUSH administration government: George W. Bush, Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, using the FBI, the CIA, and corporate mercenaries, as well as the U.S. military.

Dark_crow:

Facts of physics are not theories, but facts. Scientific principle along with cause and effect has to reign, rather than nebulous belief; regardless of your propaganda to the contrary.

You should read the information on these sites. It is plain to see that you do not read. Once you pull your head out, you will find there are many shades of color other than brown, believe it or not there is a whole spectrum that in combination can form infinite color combinations. You are crowing in the dark.

Dark_crow:

Facts of physics are not theories, but facts. Scientific principle along with cause and effect has to reign, rather than nebulous belief; regardless of your propaganda to the contrary.

You should read the information on these sites. It is plain to see that you do not read. Once you pull your head out, you will find there are many shades of color other than brown, believe it or not there is a whole spectrum that in combination can form infinite color combinations. You are crowing in the dark.

MIT Engineer Breaks Down WTC Controlled Demolition (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1822764959599063248)

ScottGem:

I do not care anything about conspiracy theories. The only thing I am concerned about is an experiment to see if regular air and jet fuel will melt a large steel tested I-Beam, not just turn the beam red in one spot, but melt it down to a puddle. I think the experiment should be conducted with the participation of Professor David Ray Griffin and Professor Stephen E. Jones, who I am sure would gladly participate.

First, there was not a "minimum" amount of jet fuel. The hijackers specifically targeted cross country flights so that they would have a full load of fuel. That was actually one of the blessings of their plan. Had they chosen flights that had taken off later in the day, the loss of life would have been much greater.

Second, I believe computer simulations WERE done to show how the towers collapsed that confirmed the combination of factors that contributed to it.

Third, it was a combination of factors. The planes plowing into the buildings tore up a significant portion of the supporting beams. There was no need to melt the steel to a puddle, all that was necessary was to heat it enough to weaken it so the weight of the upper floors would contribute to the collapse. That's why the south tower collapsed first even though it was hit later. Because it was hit lower so there was more weight pressing on the damaged supports.

So much for that.

ScottGem:

That can't be true. The amount of jet fuel will not change the temperature at which jet fuel burns. IMPOSSIBLE. And even if GOD granted a dispensation for jet fuel to burn at a higher temperature for the purposes of the terrorists, the beams in the CENTRAL STRUCTURE of the building would NOT have heated evenly and the building would have collapsed SIDEWAYS, instead of straight down in its own footprint. The plane plowed into only ONE SIDE of a FOUR-SIDED building and the jet fuel from the fuselage may have got to the CENTRAL SUPPORT BEAMS on the side that it plowed into and those beams would have been heated by the burning jet fuel, but the other THREE SIDES would not. It was demolition that destroyed all three buildings. Demolition has been agreed to on Building 7, and all buildings came down in exactly the same manner. Not only did we watch it happen, but it is on tape. The blast did not go outward from the other THREE SIDES of the building. All of a sudden the buildings came straight down evenly with all sides parallel in a demolition manner, rather than listing inward to the blast site. And, buildings that collapse without the aid of explosives produce large piles of in-tact concrete that DOES NOT TURN TO DUST AS THEY ARE FALLING, as was witnessed on 9/11/01.

What do you think about the United States having a Controlled Jet Fuel Steel I-Beam Burning Experiment of the same equivalent circumstances? I think an experiment would be wonderful for the United States to be able to see what really happened as it would either confirm or deny the circumstances of the collapse of the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. I think it is imperative, because IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THINKING PEOPLE TO BELIEVE ANYTHING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS SAID, and it appears to be a cover up, especially since this REPUBLICAN administration is a culture of lies, deceit and corruption; and the 9/11 Commission was also a part of the cover up; otherwise the 9/11 Commission would have made a demonstration of how it ACTUALLY happened to either confirm or deny the circumstances of the collapse of the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. I still want to have a controlled experiment and if our government is unwilling to do an experiment, it is only because they know how it will turn out.

Watch the video and listen to the people. There were lots of EXPLOSIONS:

MIT Engineer Breaks Down WTC Controlled Demolition (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1822764959599063248)

Why would Muslim supposed fanatics go to great lengths to wire the largest complex of buildings in the world with explosives when a topple collapse would have caused more damage to lower Manhattan, have been cheaper and would have killed more Americans? Think about it.

Also, Molten steel found in the basement of the WORLD TRADE CENTERS suggests that the commonly used explosive thermite more than likely is responsible for the collapse. Buildings not destroyed by explosives would have insufficient directed energy to produce the large quantities of melted steel that was discovered. The molten steel was found five days after the collapse, on Sept. 16, when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) used an Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) to locate and measure the site’s hot spots.

Physics Professor Says Science Points To WTC Controlled Demolition (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2005/121105twintowers.htm)

You really need to peruse these sites.

Martha
-----------

Consider this:

Let us say that the Twin Towers were an "inside job," how do you explain the Pentagon plane and United Flight 93?

Also one of your links implicated Israel?

The cbs link faults this administration, but terroristic actions were taking place againts the USA in the 90s under a different administration.


Also consider this:

You have the right to express an opinion different from the US government, disparage the President. That is what makes this country great.

In a country like Iran, or taliban controlled Afghanistan, or Iraq under Sadamm
Would you have this same freedom? If you were Muslim in these same countries could you convert from Islam to a different faith?



Grace and Peace

Martha, I didn't say the amount of fuel would change the temperature it burned at but it would affect the length of the burn.

As I recall the simulations, the pancaking effect of the collapse was proven out. Also, if you look at the collapses, they began around where the planes hit.

I am not a fan of this administration, far from it. But to believe that anyone wired the towers to collapse is just ludicrous.

I did look at some of the sites you link to. I don't see anything but wild speculation.

inthebox:

"Let us say that the Twin Towers were an "inside job," how do you explain the Pentagon plane and United Flight 93?"

Transcript: Alex Jones Interviews Col. Donn de Grand-Pre, U.S. Army (ret.): Explosive New 9/11 Revelations and Explanations

Read this transcript:
Transcript: Alex Jones Interviews Col. Donn de Grand-Pre, U.S. Army (ret.): Explosive New 9/11 Revelations and Explanations (http://www.prisonplanet.com/022904degrand.html)

The Pentagon was hit by a pilotless remote controlled drone or a Global Hawk cruise missile.

Flight 93 was engaged by the North Dakota Air National Guard that had moved their "Happy Hooligans" of the 119 Fighter Group out of Hector Field, Fargo, North Dakota to Langley Air Force Base in Southern Virginia prior to 9/11/01. Flight 93 was on a course for either the Capitol or the White House with totally unconscious people on board flying by remote control. The U.S Army Adjutant General of the State of North Dakota ordered the North Dakota Air National Guard's 119 Fighter Group of "Happy Hooligans" out of Langley AFB, Virginia to engage Flight 93. Flight 93 was shortly engaged with two (2) Sidewinder missals and brought down over Pennsylvania about 10:00 AM 9/11/01. THERE WERE NO HIJACKERS. Let's Roll was all made up theatrics for the media and the public.

Cheney is closest to the action, knows exactly what happened and was probably most involved in all the details of 9/11/01.

EXCERPTS FROM ALEX JONES' INTERVIEW WITH COL. DONN DE GRAND-PRE:

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: It wasn't an overnight thing. You see, as I outline in book 1, and I carry that on in book 2, as well as book 3, we were on the verge of a military coup d'etat. And this was long in the planning and even after the 78 days of bombing Kosovo, it became critical. And we were close to a coup d'etat at that time. In my survey of the reports and the pilots who worked with that, a coup was a possibility. In fact, a coup d'etat was pulled on the morning of September 11th. Only it was an administrative or what we call a cold coup d'etat.

Alex Jones: Or reverse coup d'etat.

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Yes, in fact...

Alex Jones: A counter revolutionary junta.

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Well that is correct. And as we delved into that, we found that the culprits, including Rumsfeld, were part of a neocon group that had been planning this thing for literally years prior to September 11th.

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Okay, I've got three books out, Alex, under the title, "Barbarians Inside the Gates." Book 1 was "The Serpent's Sting," Book 2 is "The Viper's Venom," Book 3 which just came out is "The Rattler's Revenge." And I'd like to quote from Book 2, which came out October of 2002. There is a very important paragraph there. It says, "The trigger for the 911 activity was the imminent and unstoppable world-wide financial collapse which can only be prevented temporarily by a major war, perhaps to become known as World War III. To bring it off one more time, martial law will probably be imposed in the United States."

Alex Jones: And now we've seen Gen. Eberhart say that that's the next step. Tommy Franks said that's the next step. Are those now chilling statements?

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Yes, they are. This next step will be preceded by what I write up in book 1 ' "The Serpent's Sting." I wrote of a coming coup d'etat. And this was written in the year 2000. And sure as blazes, it's coming. And it will be preceded by these kinds of things as enunciated by Tommy Franks, among others. So we are in a world of hurt, Alex.

Alex Jones: Now, by a coup d'etat, you mean another intensification of a reverse coup d'etat to keep the people from fighting against the New World Order or do you mean the type that Bill Clinton successfully stopped in his administration?

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Well, I'm talking about the administrative coup d'etat that came off September 11th.

Alex Jones: You're talking about an intensification of the elite in a coup d'etat against America.

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: That is correct.

Alex Jones: Well, I mean, it's ongoing. They are federalizing everything, they are militarizing everything, they're engaging in the classic takeover, are they not?

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Yes, there are. And from this, Alex, and I bring this out very clearly in book 3, the only way we can stop it is with the classic counter-coup d'etat where the military steps in. And under the aegis of the military itself, disengaging or disemboweling the civilian hierarchy and taking over and re-running or re-organizing the federal government.

Alex Jones: Now the problem is they've got so many CFR minions in the Pentagon. We know that Clinton had some officers terminated and, in their office, shot multiple times and the rest of it. We know that that happened but the question is how many of the high level officers are on the globalist team?

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: I can only say several of the highest level are members now of the Council on Foreign Relations. The important thing to consider is how many of them are sincere in their beliefs as enunciated by the CFR. I believe there are several sleepers and I believe I know some of them personally who are three and four-star generals. They are members of the CFR but "their heart belongs to Jesus," if I can use that expression because they are true Semper Fidelity people. Some of them happen to be Marines. And I'm counting on them to do the right thing. And I bring this out in book 3.

Col. Donn de Grand-Pre: Yes, that's plausible, that's correct. I don't believe it will happen in exactly that fashion. And the thing about a coup d'etat and a counter-coup d'etat is you never know when it's going to happen. You never know exactly who is involved. This is a plus for any planners of a counter-coup d'etat.

Alex Jones: Well, this is certainly dividing the wheat from the chaff. How many people, and we'll get the answer to the question when we get back from your feelers in the Pentagon, how many people in there now know that an element of the global system, a crime syndicate, carried out 91, I mean, only an idiot would know, would think they didn't but the point is, this has got to be accelerating the division. And I want to get your take on the pulse of that and we'll take calls when we get back. Stay with us.

ScottGem:

There was NO pancaking effect. A pancaking effect would slow the building down at each floor. The buildings came straight down within seconds and they didn't burn for any length of time, either. The molten steel did smoldered for a long time, but ALL the jet fuel was burned in a short amount of time.

Flight 93 was engaged by the North Dakota Air National Guard that had moved their "Happy Hooligans" of the 119 Fighter Group out of Hector Field, Fargo, North Dakota to Langley Air Force Base in Southern Virginia prior to 9/11/01. Flight 93 was on a course for either the Capitol or the White House with totally unconscious people on board flying by remote control. The Adjunct General of the State of North Dakota ordered the North Dakota Air National Guard's 119 Fighter Group of "Happy Hooligans" out of Langley AFB, Virginia to engage Flight 93. Flight 93 was shortly engaged with two (2) Sidewinder missals and brought down over Pennsylvania about 10:00 AM 9/11/01. THERE WERE NO HIJACKERS. Let's Roll was all made up theatrics for the media and the public.


Oh puhleeze! And how do you account for the relatives of passengers who received calls from them during the flight?

Now I will tell you another FACT. I was in Tower 2 that morning. I worked for a firm that occupied the middle floors of that building. The department I worked for was in charge of Facilities maintenance and security. It would have been very hard for explosives to have been planted without their knowledge. I also saw a documentary about the head of security for Dean Witter who occupied most of that tower including the floors where the second plane hit. For explosives to have been planted he would have had to know about it, yet he died that day trying to rescue people.

Sorry, lady, but go peddle your papers someplace else. I don't know who this Alex Jones or alleged Col are, but that interview is garbage. But you go on believing it if it makes you happy. Would you like some tin foil to make hats to protect your brain waves?

ScottGem:

You are correct, NO TERRORIST planted those explosives. There were a lot of explosives and the explosives were planted over a long period by our own government at convenient times well in advance of the 9/11 airplanes attack. There is no way that much of an explosion could have been done expediently by foreigners. I'm certain there were quite a few people who would possibly be able to get more truth out about how it was done who died in the WORLD TRADE CENTERS explosions.

Read what the Retired U.S. Army Colonel says. The U.S. Army gave metals to the pilots that brought down Flight 93, READ THE INTERVIEW, but nothing was on the news. HUSH, HUSH. The RIGHT WING EXTREME owns the media and seldom is anything told to the masses except what the EXTREME RIGHT WING wants them to hear or read. The internet is the only hope for any kind of democracy.

If you want understanding, instead of contention, you really need to read this interview, and, if you choose, call the Colonel. He gave his phone number.

Alex Jones is a "for truth" National Radio Broadcaster and you can find him on the internet by just typing in Alex Jones on a Google Search, but here is a url:

Alex Jones' Infowars.com :: There is a War on for Your Mind! (http://www.infowars.com/)

Remember anything "truth" can be checked if you are willing. I trust Alex Jones as he has been an advocate for truth many years.

I am in hope that http.www.democracynow.org (http://www.democracynow.org) will do a report on Flight 93 and the Pentagon.

Oh lady you are a piece of work. You so want to believe this garbage its ludicrous.

I didn't say terrorists couldn't have planted explosives, I said NO one could have planted explosives! You have no clue about the interior structure of the building, I do. There is no way, especially after the '93 bombing, that packages of explosives could have sat undetected for the length of time you are talkiing about. The interior on most floors were set to be very flexible, so cubicles were constantly being moved around. You claim there is no way the planes could have caused the collapse, I tell you there is no way explosives could have been placed as you claim. Not a chance!

I don't care what this colonel says. If he claims there were no hijackers on Flight 93 and that all the passengers were unconcscious that is totally refuted by the phone calls made to relatives from the plane. That alone eliminates his credibility.

Sorry lady, but everything you've claim I've been able to refute. What you have is a few nutcases who've come up with some plausible conspiracies that don't survive the light of truth but which have appealed to your paranoia so you buy into it.

Again, go peddle your papers somewhere else. Because I've had enough of your garbage.

I'm just going to relax through all the conspiracy stuff. In time, one story will be accepted.

ScottGem:

Whether you know it or not, demolition was placed. Demolition placement doesn't require a lot of space. You need to be more learned about demolition before you make such ignorant statements.

No, you BELIEVE demolition charges were placed due to some paranoid fantasy. You have no clue what I know about demolition. It doesn't matter how small a charge might have been placed. I KNOW how the floors in that building were set up. I know there is no way that such charges could have sat undetected for any length of time. What do you know of demolition besides the ravings of paranoid conspiracy theorists?

What I stated was stated not from ignorance but from first hand knowledge of the management and security of the buildings. The only ignorance I see here is yours.

You made a statement earlier that the media is controlled by the "Right Wing extreme". I'm sure that comes as a surprise to the jewish liberals ;) usually cited by conspiracy theorists. I'm also sure that Bush wishes the media was so controlled. If it were true, then why wasn't Cheney's hunting "accident" totally suppressed? It defies logic to think that if what your sites say is true that it wouldn't have become more mainstream. I've looked through some of the sites you linked and see nothing but garbage. I'm sure, if I searched, I could come up with sites that debunk this garbage. But I'm not going to waste my time. There are a number of facts that I know to be true by experience and first hand knowledge that debunk this garbage.

Pentagon [/B] was hit by a pilotless remote controlled drone or a Global Hawk cruise missile.

Thanks for that info. I'll call my friend who was sitting on 395 and saw a plane through his driver's side window plow into the pentagon... It's amazing how they make those cruise missile thingys look so much like real planes...

/Stop feeding the troll, people.

Whether you know it or not, demolition was placed.



I heard similar theories concerning the Oklahoma City federal building bombing. What are the sources for such claims? While I do acknowledge that our government has shown ignorance on occasions, I have read nothing yet that would lead me to believe that the government initiated or deliberately murdered it's own people. Understand that I didn't vote for George Bush in 2000 or 2004. Aside from other issues, most of my criticism of the man has to do with his plans post 9/11 and how the current administration is carrying out the Iraqi war campaign.



Bobby

jillianleab:

What do you mean troll? This isn't a PARTISAN BLOG, is it? I understood this to be a discussion blog for politics.

OK, your friend saw an airplane hit the Pentagon, where is this airplane, that isn't a drone or a missal, so people can go see it and take pictures? Why are there no pictures? This was a big happening and there should have been lots of pictures and movies before it was cleaned up, surely there were, but where are they and why can't we see them? It is illogical that pictures wouldn't have been taken of an airplane crash into the Pentagon. You are correct though, drones for sure look like airplanes and I understand some missals do as well.

There is plenty of footage of the two planes slamming into the towers. So you would have us believe that these alleged conspirators flew two planes into the towers, but used some drone to attack the Pentagon? And what happened to AA Flight 77 if it didn't crash into the Pentagon?

You talk about illogic when there is so much illogical and just plain wrong about your off the wall theories.

Yes, and people like this, are just plain criminal, they do a disservice to the people who was on the planes, who died, they show no respect to the family of the people on the planes who lost their love ones,

They do injustice to the tears of the family members who may have heard their love one for the last time on a cell phone from that plane.
I can not believe someone can hate one political group or political person so much they will believe these lies and live in a world of fanticy that they actually believe these things.
And yes political forums and sane thoughts are always welcome, but this belongs with the elvis sightings and the big foot beleivers.

I was part ( very small part) of helping with questioning of some of the people invovled with the flight school and also some other people who had ties to some of the terrorist that highjacked the plane. So I know it was planes, and only those people who want to hate so bad they will accept lies because they don't want to believe the truth

BABRAM:

1st of all, knowledge of welding and the temperatures it takes to melt steel. Forget the stuff about conspiracy theories, I want publicly controlled experiments with jet fuel in a torch so that I can see that jet fuel will melt steel. An experiment for actual fact doesn't seem to me to be outrageous. So, lets just do an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and see if we can melt steel and the controversy will be over. Why is that so hard? NASA found that steel was melted, which it appears to me is why the WORLD TRADE CENTER BUILDINGS came down.

Let me see, they used less quality steel as part of cost savings, building inspectors passed poor or improper quailty.
The material was stressed, the planes hitting the towers also damaged structure. The weight of each room falling down onto the other, had a sheer effect.

And of course there is always a chance there was explosive material in the planes,

Not sure what NASA was doing, since they have nothing to do with investigation of any accident.

And no your experiment does not take into effect all of the conditions.

Now this has nothing to do with building 7 which was a different issue, and many of the nut cases start talking about issues of building 7 and the planes hitting,

ScottGem 12:17 AM:

Ditto my post to BABRAM at 01:36 AM.

I already mentioned that computer simulations were done that supported what actually happened. And what did NASA have to do with anything. Did you read somewhere they found this melted steel? I'll bet it was another of your conspiracy theorists trying to make the off the wall junk seem plausible.

You seem to pin everything on your belief that the planes alone could not have caused the collapse. This while ignoring all the other facts and the implausible nature of your conspiracy theories.

Fr_Chuck:

Either I believe or I don't believe. Either I love or I hate. Plenty of emotion to make me not want to check facts. Do you know that everything you wrote in your post is propaganda?
Propaganda is binary emotional rhetoric. It would be nice to get past the binary emotional rhetoric.

Let me see, tapes of people calling their family, deaths of people on the plane, all facts, lots of film showing planes hitting the towers, all facts.

Investigations I personally did or assited FBI on, all real. Sorry but there is a differnece between facts and made up stories.

It is when these silly made up stories offend the family of the passengers on the planes, that it is no longer funny to hear people say there were no planes.

Fr_Chuck:

Either I believe or I don't believe. Either I love or I hate. Plenty of emotion to make me not want to check facts. Do you know that everything you wrote in your post is propaganda?
Propaganda is binary emotional rhetoric. It would be nice to get past the binary emotional rhetoric.

You ARE a piece of work. And the garbage you are spouting ISN'T propaganda? Give me a break. That was so hypocritical!

I've debunked so much of what you've said with FACTS, but you don't want to hear facts. You just want to believe the worst about Bush and his administration.

BABRAM:

1st of all, knowledge of welding and the temperatures it takes to melt steel. Forget the stuff about conspiracy theories, I want publicly controlled experiments with jet fuel in a torch so that I can see that jet fuel will melt steel. An experiment for actual fact doesn't seem to me to be outrageous. So, lets just do an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and see if we can melt steel and the controversy will be over. Why is that so hard? NASA found that steel was melted, which it appears to me is why the WORLD TRADE CENTER BUILDINGS came down.


OK. So now you want an experiment? But that's not the sources I asked for. What we do know is that two large towering infernos after being hit by jet airliners did melt steel. Nothing outrageous at all. It happened. Steel melts within two 110 story bonfires and NASA knows the massive pile of debris smoked and smoldered for 99 days. Martha that's NINETY-NINE days. I welcome you to reality.



Bobby

BABRAM:

Why not an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and a piece of steel equivalent of the steel in the towers. The people who built the towers could find equivalent steel. I'm certain the steel can be found. It would set all theories to rest. I have heard no good reason why not.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4)



"Melted" Steel

CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."


FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure too much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."



_____________________________________________



Bobby

ScottGem:

When I am talking about the PENTAGON, I am not talking about the WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS. Answers for the WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS that were well publicized, are not answers for the PENTAGON at all, so don't do that.

BABRAM:

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F.??

It takes 5,000 degrees to melt steel.

You're wrong again Martha.

What's the melting point of steel? (http://education.jlab.org/qa/meltingpoint_01.html)

That depends on the alloy of steel you are talking about. The term alloy is almost always used incorrectly these days, especially amongst bicyclists. They use the term to mean aluminum. What the term alloy really means is a mixture of metals, any kind of metals. Almost all metal used today is a mixture and therefore an alloy.

Most steel has other metals added to tune its properties, like strength, corrosion resistance, or ease of fabrication. Steel is just the element iron that has been processed to control the amount of carbon. Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).

________________________________________________


Bobby

BABRAM:

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. ?????

It takes 5,000 degrees to melt steel.

Actually its only about 2700 degrees.

But, as I said earlier the steel didn't need to melt, just lose some if its structural strength. There was NO ONE single factor that caused the collapse, but a combunation of factors. However, explosives placed in the building was NOT one of them.

BABRAM:

Steel is an alloy, that is why it takes such high heat to melt it. How can an open air public experiment be arranged with a jet fuel torch to steel, so this can be put to rest? It wouldn't be too costly, the people who made that building would probably give us a piece of steel comparable to what was put in the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. They have records of what that building was made with. Why does an experiment have to be an argument?

Hey MarthaA,
There was a new program on TV that proved most of that stuff wrong. But if you want to keep arguing with these guys, why don't you sign on to your other profile ThomasG and back up your argument like you did in my North American Union post. Too bad you forgot to switch back from ThomasG to MarthaA for a response and gave yourself away.

Scott,

That was my focus in posting the Popular Mechanic article. BTW many steels have a melting point of even less than 2700 degrees. Respectfully, Martha and others will believe as they choose. I just hope we presented enough facts to give her something to reconsider from a scientific community view. I'm going to give this particular issue a rest now. Some of the accusations are beyond silly for my taste and willing participation.


Bobby

First a torch will not have the same result as tanks of it exploding, the fire thing called "flash point" which can be a lot more extreme than the pure burn temp, same issue that happens in house fires. Add to this the other fluids in the planes,

And of course we don't know all of the itmes stored in all of the governmetn storage in some of the buildings. Like building 7 that had a secure gov bunker.

BABRAM:

Steel is an alloy, that is why it takes such high heat to melt it. How can an open air public experiment be arranged with a jet fuel torch to steel, so this can be put to rest? It wouldn't be too costly, the people who made that building would probably give us a piece of steel comparable to what was put in the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. They have records of what that building was made with. Why does an experiment have to be an argument?


Martha, it doesn't take the 5,000 degrees as you blatantly stated. You're not reading the factual information provided by several contributors besides myself. Believe as you like, and by all means please experiment until your content. I think that's healthy and I do encourage your curiosity. I've participated enough time to the subject.


Bobby

Martha will not be joining us at least for now, there appeared to be multiple user names on her IP address. This is banned pending review.

BABRAM:

1st of all, knowledge of welding and the temperatures it takes to melt steel. Forget the stuff about conspiracy theories, I want publicly controlled experiments with jet fuel in a torch so that I can see that jet fuel will melt steel. An experiment for actual fact doesn't seem to me to be outrageous. So, lets just do an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and see if we can melt steel and the controversy will be over. Why is that so hard? NASA found that steel was melted, which it appears to me is why the WORLD TRADE CENTER BUILDINGS came down.


I want the Kennedy files released to the public, so that I can know for SURE that it wasn't George Bush, Sr. who planned the shooting on behalf of the CIA and was rewarded for his silence by eventually becoming president.

Please, lady... urinate in one hand and want in the other, and see which fills up faster.

Edit: Bah, I didn't see she'd been banned before I posted my sarcasm.

ScottGem:

I do not care anything about conspiracy theories. The only thing I am concerned about is an experiment to see if regular air and jet fuel will melt a large steel tested I-Beam, not just turn the beam red in one spot, but melt it down to a puddle. I think the experiment should be conducted with the participation of Professor David Ray Griffin and Professor Stephen E. Jones, who I am sure would gladly participate.

Y'know, no one has ever, in an official capacity, made the claim that any of the steel I-Beams melted or puddled -- Those are claims made by so called 'experts' who never once set foot on the sites.

The official report maintains that the steel I-Beams twisted from exposure to flames in excess of 700 degrees, which is consistent with temperatures used to bend, form and fold steel in a foundry.

Dark_crow:

Facts of physics are not theories, but facts. Scientific principle along with cause and effect has to reign, rather than nebulous belief; regardless of your propaganda to the contrary.

You should read the information on these sites. It is plain to see that you do not read. Once you pull your head out, you will find there are many shades of color other than brown, believe it or not there is a whole spectrum that in combination can form infinite color combinations. You are crowing in the dark.

The problem with "the information on these sites" is that the information is being put forward by people who never once set foot on any of the sites in question.

How can any of these people put forth conclusive theory's when they have failed to examine any of the hard evidence first hand?

Martha will not be joining us at least for now, there appeared to be multiple user names on her IP address. This is banned pending review.

Oh gee, I was just about to share some of my knowledge from working in the paint industry. Paint factories and other structures well filled with hydrocarbons are always constructed out of poured concrete to reduce the damage in a fire. You need to go no further than the nearest concrete parking garage. Skyscrapers are built with steel because it is cheaper and stronger unless it gets too hot.