|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 0:44:08 GMT -4
You're trying to say that the possibility of reconstruction contracts (where, in Iraq?) is sufficient to buy the silence of every structural contractor in the USA? Are you trying to say there are so many reconstruction contracts available that every one of them can expect to be satisfied? Every structural engineers firms are on the list for the reconstruction that does not mean each and everyone of them will have their part. If you were owner of a structural engineers firm will you go against the official story?
|
|
|
Post by jaydeehess on Mar 30, 2006 0:46:00 GMT -4
So all structural engineers in the USA are willing to cover for the murder of 3000 people? Why talking about covering? As far as I know they were not mandated for an independant analysis right? Only few selected firms who were part of NIST. Has anyone told Jay Utah about this? His firm will be really ticked off to know that his actions are causing them to lose gov't contracts. Maybe it doesn't matter since he isn't a structural engineer.(IIRC)
|
|
|
Post by jaydeehess on Mar 30, 2006 0:47:43 GMT -4
You're trying to say that the possibility of reconstruction contracts (where, in Iraq?) is sufficient to buy the silence of every structural contractor in the USA? Are you trying to say there are so many reconstruction contracts available that every one of them can expect to be satisfied? Every structural engineers firms are on the list for the reconstruction that does not mean each and everyone of them will have their part. If you were owner of a structural engineers firm will you go against the official story? If I thought that there was evidence that explosives brought down buildings and killed 3000 people, YES!
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 0:47:55 GMT -4
Why talking about covering? As far as I know they were not mandated for an independant analysis right? Only few selected firms who were part of NIST. Has anyone told Jay Utah about this? His firm will be really ticked off to know that his actions are causing them to lose gov't contracts. Maybe it doesn't matter since he isn't a structural engineer.(IIRC) Are you suggesting than Jay is opposed to the official story?
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 0:59:59 GMT -4
I asked: feelfree222 replied:
So now it's only the owners of a structural engineers firm. What about the employees in the firm?
Make up your mind.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 1:02:01 GMT -4
Jaydeehess said:
Actually, I'm starting to think that feelfree222's idea that all American structural engineers are willing to agree to the official line because they're ALL hoping to get reconstruction contracts is the dumbest 9/11 CT of all time.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 1:33:18 GMT -4
I asked: feelfree222 replied: So now it's only the owners of a structural engineers firm. What about the employees in the firm? Make up your mind. The owners of these firms have employees right?
|
|
|
Post by 911: Inside Job on Mar 30, 2006 1:36:10 GMT -4
I can safely say that it is not a conspiracy board... not one that is friendly towards conspiracy theories anyway.
Face it, without conspiracy theorists posting, this board would run out of material pretty quick.
I've got only 31 hours in a small plane, no pilot's license and some experience with flight sims and I'm confident that I could make that maneuver. A turn with a descent is no biggie. And the way they describe it hit the building, it sounds like they are trying to say they were trying to avoid hitting the lawn. I don't think they cared. As long as they hit the building it really didn't matter if they hit the lawn first. As I've said elsewhere and I'm sure others can back me up, if you don't have to take off or land, and you don't care about safety or comfort of the passengers or fuel economy, flying is just an aim and go experience. Anybody can do it.
You don't have to be a pilot to know that it is highly improbable if not impossible for even an experienced pilot to fly a large jet plane in that low and leave no marks on the grass. The alleged wings left no marks on the building either. Where did they go? Where did the giant engine parts go? The Pentagon attack is one big smoking gun. It was most likely an unmanned drone or missile. That's why they released only a few frames from the security camera, none of which showed anything resembling the alleged airliner about to hit the building.
I like how in a single post you jump from using mainstream news to support your beliefs to claiming the mainstream media brainwashes the public and can't be trusted. Which is it? Are they on your side or not?
Good question. First of all there's a big difference in depth of coverage between wire services and television news. The most powerful weapon mainstream propagandists have is the ability to not report or partially report something, leaving important information out of the story. So partial truths are usually reported, not outright fabrications.
It is possible to get real information from mainstream print articles and television to a lesser extent, but it usually requires culling it from multiple sources. That's what Alex Jones is good at. He also gets the breaking stories before they have time to flush it down the memory hole. This happened quite a lot shortly after 9/11. Eyewitness reports of bombs going off in the basement of the towers were quickly replaced with the establishment version of events. People who saw or heard such things were generally intimidated into silence by the various "investigative" (cover-up) agencies.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 1:43:11 GMT -4
feelfree222 asked:
Presumably some do and others don't. What's your point?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 1:46:53 GMT -4
Every structural engineers firms are on the list for the reconstruction that does not mean each and everyone of them will have their part. If you were owner of a structural engineers firm will you go against the official story? If I thought that there was evidence that explosives brought down buildings and killed 3000 people, YES! So if an Mechanical Engineering Professor thought that there was evidence that -thermite- and explosives brought down buildings and killed 3000 people you will be interested to listen to it ?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 1:51:08 GMT -4
feelfree222 asked: Presumably some do and others don't. What's your point? I only reply to your post Reply #34 ;D I talk about the project of reconstructions of the towers The employees working for a firm which the owner of that firm receive a contrat also benifit.Right?
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 1:55:27 GMT -4
911:InsideJob said:
I understand there's evidence of jet's wings and engines striking objects on the approach to the Pentagon, like light poles and a portable generator. I'm no aviation expert, but I've heard about an effect which provides planes close to the ground extra lift. So perhaps unlikely but not impossible.
Are you able to make your claim as an aviation expert, or is it simply something which appeals to your common sense?
What's the Pentagon made of? Thick concrete walls. What's it designed to resist? External attack. If you look at the impact marks of the planes on the WTC buildings, you can clearly see the wings sliced through the thin skin of those buildings. But when they struck the wall of the Pentagon, they were destroyed. I understand jet fuel stored in the wings burst through windows at wing height, but otherwise, the structure of the Pentagon was much stronger than the structure of the wing. The same for the engines, I understand. These are not structures designed to survive an impact with solid concrete at several hundred kilometres an hour.
What exactly sort of drone or missile are you talking about? Something the size of a 757? Do you have any evidence these exist? What about what eyewitnesses saw? What about the remains of a 757 found on the site? What about the DNA of people on the flight which is said to have crashed into the Pentagon being found in the wreckage?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 30, 2006 1:55:42 GMT -4
I can safely say that it is not a conspiracy board... not one that is friendly towards conspiracy theories anyway.Face it, without conspiracy theorists posting, this board would run out of material pretty quick. That's fine by me... I wish there was no need for a forum like this, and I'm sure most of the other members would agree with me. I would love to see the moon hoax theory die and go away forever. As long as there are people out there who perpetuate silly conspiracy theories, myths, and urban legends there will have to be people to counter them.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 1:58:15 GMT -4
feelfree222 said:
Yes, they'll be paid salaries. What is your point?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 2:00:12 GMT -4
Whats your point? I asked: feelfree222 replied: So now it's only the owners of a structural engineers firm. What about the employees in the firm? Make up your mind.
|
|