Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → If this doesn't make you shiver... Nothing ever will.
123
If this doesn't make you shiver... Nothing ever will.
2004-10-13, 7:31 AM #1
http://www.911review.org/Wiki/FrontPage.shtml
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 7:39 AM #2
Fearmongering and conjecture. They cant even provide a credible motive.
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.
2004-10-13, 7:40 AM #3
I'm not shivering.
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2004-10-13, 7:40 AM #4
I think this goes in the same catagory as the moon landing conspiracy claims.

Interesting, but nonsense. I've heard the 'Pentagon crash conspiracy' claim before, and that's been disproven.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. " - Bertrand Russell
The Triumph of Stupidity in Mortals and Others 1931-1935
2004-10-13, 7:40 AM #5
Spork you know damn well there is no way you could have read any sizeable amount of material from that website in only 8 minutes. Unless you've seen the site before that is.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 7:42 AM #6
I feel like starting a "Did we land on the moon" thread.
2004-10-13, 7:42 AM #7
I refuse to read that.
The people who write those are insensitive and are just trying to attract attention towards themselves.
[01:52] <~Nikumubeki> Because it's MBEGGAR BEGS LIKE A BEGONI.
2004-10-13, 7:43 AM #8
i began reading it, but then i got hit in the face by a cricket bat... on this bat were the words "i don't care".

no shivers here.
2004-10-13, 7:43 AM #9
I recall arguments that defend the tower's collapsing (the fire got insanely hot, and there was a lot of fuel on board the planes) and arguments that support the fact that a plane crashed into the Pentagon (photos of airplane wreckage at the site). The other arguments I haven't heard before. Food for thought... but not serious thought. I won't take it too seriously. That guy is being too antipatriotic for me.

2004-10-13, 7:47 AM #10
It does make me wonder, what evidence is there that Osama bin Laden was involved? What exactly proves it was him?
Also, how do they know who the hijackers were? They'd know who was on the plane, but they wouldn't know who hijacked it, unless it was somehow recorded onto the little black box?

Note that I'm posing these as serious questions, not as claims that there isn't any evidence.

Quote:
That guy is being too antipatriotic for me.


Uh, I don't think "patriotism" has anything to do with this. It shouldn't do, anyway.

Should you just idly support your government no matter what, simply because you 'love' your country? No. You should ask questions, always ask questions. Especially about the World Trade Centre attacks.


The problem with this guy is that he's forming conclusions too easily, without looking at the non-conspiracy explanations. What he should be doing is trying to address each and every explanation and then trying to disprove that in order to prove his conspiracy theory. But he's just sort of ignoring them all.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. " - Bertrand Russell
The Triumph of Stupidity in Mortals and Others 1931-1935
2004-10-13, 7:52 AM #11
Don't you people understand? I'm not saying this stuff is true... But why would we believe anything our government tells us about this? After all... What has our government done in the past? Well lets see:

They LET pearl harbor happen, just to get into a war.

They discovered the first ever magic bullet, that has the ability to travel in a random pattern and hit 4 different people.

We never saw ANY reason to go BACK to the moon... in the past 30 some odd years or so... Cause you know, we already know everything about the moon... From a total of something like 19 days of being there?

There are WMD's in Iraq. Right...

I mean the list goes on and on. That's all I can think of now. But man oh man... Just TRUST your government. They would NEVER lie to you. It's not like they would sacrifice thousands of lies to get into a war... Oh... then there's always that Pearl Harbor thing to remember...
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 7:52 AM #12
It doesn't make me shiver, but it does raise quite a few questions. Reading through it, I find that it brings up a lot of valid questions. Interesting.
D E A T H
2004-10-13, 7:56 AM #13
I'm quite interested in the claim that:

Quote:
# 7 of the supposed "hijackers" turned out to be alive and not even in the US on 9/11.
# 3 of the "hijackers" listed a US Navy base as their address on their drivers licences.


Especially the first one. I'd like some more information on that one.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. " - Bertrand Russell
The Triumph of Stupidity in Mortals and Others 1931-1935
2004-10-13, 8:03 AM #14
http://thewebfairy.com/video/pentagon121.swf
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 8:04 AM #15
Quote:
Originally posted by Bill
Spork you know damn well there is no way you could have read any sizeable amount of material from that website in only 8 minutes. Unless you've seen the site before that is.


Right, because the all-important and conclusive facts will be hidden away deep within the website, and not prominently displayed on the front page - which is as far as 95-99% of visitors will get.

And FYI I did read all of the front page.
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.
2004-10-13, 8:14 AM #16
Quote:
Originally posted by Bill
http://thewebfairy.com/video/pentagon121.swf


Wrong.

It's been disproved quite a bit, but I can't be arsed to trawl Google. It's still an interesting flash video, though.
Hey, Blue? I'm loving the things you do. From the very first time, the fight you fight for will always be mine.
2004-10-13, 8:21 AM #17
Quote:
Originally posted by Bill
They LET pearl harbor happen, just to get into a war.


Inconclusive evidence at best.

Quote:
They discovered the first ever magic bullet, that has the ability to travel in a random pattern and hit 4 different people.


Not ever having heard of this, I'd like to know more, and why it means that the government lied (assuming that the claim is false).

Quote:
We never saw ANY reason to go BACK to the moon... in the past 30 some odd years or so... Cause you know, we already know everything about the moon... From a total of something like 19 days of being there?


It's insanely expensive to do? It's dangerous? Going to the moon isn't a week-long cruise.

Quote:
There are WMD's in Iraq. Right...


One thing right, at least.

Quote:
It's not like they would sacrifice thousands of lies to get into a war... Oh... then there's always that Pearl Harbor thing to remember...


You can stop waving the bloody shirt now, Mr. Republican.
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2004-10-13, 8:22 AM #18
Uh.... I'm a hardcore Democrat... Unless your republican comment was sarcasm...
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 8:38 AM #19
Quote:
Originally posted by Bill
Uh.... I'm a hardcore Democrat... Unless your republican comment was sarcasm...


http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/gahff/html/ff_022000_bloodyshirt.htm
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2004-10-13, 9:01 AM #20
Oh... Well... now that you put it that way, Wolfy.

Cry about it. It's not my fault our government is twisted.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 9:06 AM #21
Quote:
" No steel structured skyscraper in history has collapsed due to fire."

First time for everything. Also, airplane fuel burns long and hot. All that kerosine (I think that's the fuel) burning there has got to weaking the steel structure. Not to mention those buildings were TALL. There was a lot of weight to them especially on the second tower.
Code to the left of him, code to the right of him, code in front of him compil'd and thundered. Programm'd at with shot and $SHELL. Boldly he typed and well. Into the jaws of C. Into the mouth of PERL. Debug'd the 0x258.
2004-10-13, 9:19 AM #22
Man it says specifically that Kerosene does not burn hot enough to melt steel.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 9:26 AM #23
Alright listen Bill, youre going to have to start backing up what you are saying with real knowledge. YES airplane fuel can burn hot enough to DAMAGE the steel. No, it didnt completely melt it, but the heat that it was burning at caused massive structural damage to the supports of the building.
Also, a lot of the support for the building was provided by the external steel skeleton which was severley damaged by the impact of the airplanes.
CNN had a video on last year I think which documented that day. The exploding airplane sent a jet of burning fuel straight down the elevator shafts to the lobby floor which you can hear and possibly see clearly.

I am sick and tired of these people being so inconsiderate.
[01:52] <~Nikumubeki> Because it's MBEGGAR BEGS LIKE A BEGONI.
2004-10-13, 9:28 AM #24
Quote:
Originally posted by Bill
Oh... Well... now that you put it that way, Wolfy.

Cry about it. It's not my fault our government is twisted.


A subjective statement based on weak evidence.

Oh, and:

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/latest/wtc.php

Quote:
Why Did It Collapse?

Tim Wilkinson, Lecturer in Civil Engineering

(This is an initial suggestion on one possible reason for failure, and should not be regarded as official advice)

The structural integrity of the World Trade Center depends on the closely spaced columns around the perimeter. Lightweight steel trusses span between the central elevator core and the perimeter columns on each floor. These trusses support the concrete slab of each floor and tie the perimeter columns to the core, preventing the columns from buckling outwards.

After the initial plane impacts, it appeared to most observers that the structure had been severely damaged, but not necessarily fatally.

It appears likely that the impact of the plane crash destroyed a significant number of perimeter columns on several floors of the building, severely weakening the entire system. Initially this was not enough to cause collapse.



However, as fire raged in the upper floors, the heat would have been gradually affecting the behaviour of the remaining material. As the planes had only recently taken off, the fire would have been initially fuelled by large volumes of jet fuel, creating potentially enormously high temperatures. The strength of the steel drops markedly with prolonged exposure to fire, while the elastic modulus of the steel reduces (stiffness drops), increasing deflections.



Modern structures are designed to resist fire for a specific length of time. Safety features such as fire retarding materials and sprinkler systems help to contain fires, help extinguish flames, or prevent steel from being exposed to excessively high temperatures. This gives occupants time to escape and allow fire fighters to extinguish blazes, before the building is catastrophically damaged.

It is possible that the blaze, started by jet fuel and then engulfing the contents of the offices, in a highly confined area, generated fire conditions significantly more severe than those anticipated in a typical office fire. These conditions may have overcome the building's fire defences considerably faster than expected.

Eventually, the loss of strength and stiffness of the materials resulting from the fire, combined with the initial impact damage, would have caused a failure of the truss system supporting a floor, or the remaining perimeter columns, or even the internal core, or some combination. Failure of the flooring system would have subsequently allowed the perimeter columns to buckle outwards. Regardless of which of these possibilities actually occurred, it would have resulted in the complete collapse of at least one complete storey at the level of impact.

Once one storey collapsed all floors above would have begun to fall. The huge mass of falling structure would gain momentum, crushing the structurally intact floors below, resulting in catastrophic failure of the entire structure.

(US readers note: storey is the Australian/English spelling of story)



Sydney Morning Herald graphic adapted from the information on this page.

The only evidence so far are photographs and television footage. Whether failure was initiated at the perimeter columns or the core is unknown. The extent to which the internal parts were damaged during the collision may be evident in the rubble if any forensic investigation is conducted. Since the mass of the combined towers is close to 1000000 tons, finding evidence will be an enormous task.

Perimeter columns, several storeys high, and still linked together, lie amongst all the debris on the ground.



This photograph shows the south tower just as it is collapsing. It is evident that the building is falling over to the left. The North Tower collapsed directly downwards, on top of itself. The same mechanism of failure, the combination of impact and subsequent fire damage, is the likely cause of failure of both towers. However, it is possible that a storey on only one side of the South Tower initially collapsed, resulting in the "skewed" failure of the entire tower.

The gigantic impact forces caused by the huge mass of the falling structure landing on the floors below travelled down the columns like a shockwave faster than the entire structure fell. The clouds of debris coming from the tower, several storeys below the huge falling mass, probably result from the sudden and almost explosive failure of each floor, caused by the "shockwave".

(Pictures taken from various news sources on the Internet)
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2004-10-13, 9:37 AM #25
How exactly is any of this "inconsiderate"?

People died, no-one is disputing that.

Saying that perhaps it wasn't Islamic radicals that were behind it, how is that in any way 'inconsiderate'? Suggesting the government was involved, how is that 'inconsiderate'?

We need to work out exactly what happened that day, and more importantly, why. Asking the questions, finding the answers, surely that is the most considerate thing you can possibly do for those that died.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. " - Bertrand Russell
The Triumph of Stupidity in Mortals and Others 1931-1935
2004-10-13, 9:38 AM #26
http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/physics_1.html

Read.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 9:38 AM #27
This pretty much made me discredit anything on that site.
.
2004-10-13, 9:42 AM #28
Yeah that about did it for me to.

This site = suxzor.
2004-10-13, 9:43 AM #29
Are you kidding me? Bush is TOTAlly the same as Hitler:rolleyes:
www.dailyvault.com. - As Featured in Guitar Hero II!
2004-10-13, 9:50 AM #30
You know, I'm going to film school. I want to be a great director. I know that in the subsequent years between now and the time I become a successful director more information will come to light about this series of events.

I have a feeling this is going to be to me what JFK was to Oliver Stone. Most of the movie JFK relied on pure speculation... Speculation that has been rampant since JFK was killed. But most of it is simply believed at this point. Right after JFK died everyone simply believed that Oswald did it. Even though the warren comission relied heavily on the magic bullet theory.

Does anyone happen to know that they didn't lose radar contact with flight 11 until about ten minutes after a plane crashed into the first tower? How is this possible? Does anyone know that fighters that were scrambled to shoot down flight 11 took a detour out to sea before showing up at NYC. Does anyone know that when fighters were scrambled to shoot down flight 77 that they too took a long detour before showing up at DC. But planes crashed into the tower... and the pentagon. The plane that crashed into the first tower made a wound in the side of the building TOO SMALL for it to have been a 767. There are detailed videos where it looks as though missiles are being fired from the plane just before impact. Colleges with seismometers have measured that just before the first tower fell, there was a shockwave parrellel to that of a nuclear weapon coming from beneath the surface. What was this shockwave? Physicists have done studies that state the building could NOT have fallen in the amount of time that it fell without significant planning and an organized detonation.

Flight 93 was shot down. It's the one that "crashed" in PA. PEOPLE SAW IT GET HIT WITH MISSILES! The planes right engine was found several miles from the crash site. The heat seaking missiles of the F-16 fighters would have zeroed in on the engines, causing them to be taken out. Why else would the engines be several miles from the rest of the crash? Did they bounce backwards?

I say to hell with that. If I ever get the money... and the time... I'm piecing this together and showing the world what they didn't see on CNN. I'm beginning to think that Michael Moore didn't even scratch the surface of 9/11.

EDIT: Spelling is my friend.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 9:53 AM #31
I don't think they'll ever truely find out what happend.
2004-10-13, 9:59 AM #32
While much of that site seems to be crack-pot-esque, There are some interesting questions to it. Of course, there's fairly obvious reasons that the Bush administration doesn't want any more investigation into it than possible; it would certainly cost the Republican party any chance of possessing the presidency for at least 8 years. (Very few people actually think Clinton could have done anything, and was so remote from the events, he wouldn't be harmed).

However, the question of how the towers might have collapsed is an interesting one. Here's and article that tries to calculate how much energy the explosion might have generated, compared to how much would've been needed to cause true structural damage:

http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2003/07/3248_comment.php

I also looked through the blueprints for the buildings a few months after 9/11, and I noted that the strength of the structure did not primarily rely on the exterior walls; they only provided about 40% of the support for each indiviudal floor. Thus, it would have made sense for the floors to eventually "break away", and slide out of the building. However, the main structure relied on an extremely heavy concrete core over 40' wide, that was reinforced with steel. It's unlikely that flames, even in the thousands of degrees, would have caused serious damage to it; the core was designed to protect the building against collision by massive jets, such as the 747 of the day. This leaves me a bit puzzled as to how the towers perfectly collapsed, and without destroying a single building outside of the WTC complex (though a few were severly damaged). I theorize that perhaps the terrorists might have taken measures beforehand to ensure the destruction of the buildings; planting explosives might have been a possiblity, but would have required some very clever use of them. However, I don't think that it is possible to underestimate Osama Bin Laden's skill with explosives, so that remains a possibility; it would be an even more embarassing security failrure for the US.
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you...
2004-10-13, 10:00 AM #33
We don't KNOW what happened to Kennedy... But we've got a pretty good idea. And in a time when EVERYTHING is documented... I don't think this will remain secret forever. When all of the accountable parties start dying off... we'll start getting our info.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 10:03 AM #34
And the most puzzling part is... the second tower collapsed FASTER than the first one. Most of the jet fuel burned up when it spewed out the side of the building. There is no way those things collapsed on their own.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 10:05 AM #35
PROOF! PROOF! PROOF! PROOF!
WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR PROOF OF ALL OF THESE SILLY STATEMENTS!
Quote:
Does anyone happen to know that they didn't lose radar contact with flight 11 until about ten minutes after a plane crashed into the first tower? How is this possible?

The plane changed its route and whoever was flying it simply did not respond to the Air Traffic Controllers. I dont know how they lost the radar signal, but logic tells me it was turned off or you're making this part up.

Quote:
Does anyone know that when fighters were scrambled to shoot down flight 77 that they too took a long detour before showing up at DC. But planes crashed into the tower... and the pentagon.

Uh... wtf?

Quote:
The plane that crashed into the first tower made a wound in the side of the building TOO SMALL for it to have been a 767. There are detailed videos where it looks as though missiles are being fired from the plane just before impact.

That is the stupidest thing i have EVER heard. The videos were on the news and everything. Too small? Those buildings were big. Had you ever seen them? Hell, the impact is recorded on numerous videos, why dont you watch them before coming up with ludicrous statements like this. I know people that were there. NO MISSILES WERE FIRED. Seriously, wtf are you thinking.

Quote:
Colleges with seismometers have measured that just before the first tower fell, there was a shockwave parrellel to that of a nuclear weapon coming from beneath the surface. What was this shockwave? Physicists have done studies that state the building could NOT have fallen in the amount of time that it fell without significant planning and an organized detonation.


You do realize when things like this happen, you cannot accurately define a time period in which things will happen. Equations may apply, but most of the work is highly theoretical since nobody knows exactly what things were going on to cause structural damage to the buildings and things like that

I am really curious where you are from. Something tells me you are nowhere NEAR New York and have NO idea what this entire disaster feels like. You have no idea how much it has affected everybody I know.
[01:52] <~Nikumubeki> Because it's MBEGGAR BEGS LIKE A BEGONI.
2004-10-13, 10:11 AM #36
No motive, no case.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
2004-10-13, 10:12 AM #37
Look, it just happened, just like they faked the moon-landing, hitler massacred jews, kennedy got shot, and pearl harbour got bombed, just accept it, they happened and you cant change anything
nope.
2004-10-13, 10:14 AM #38
READ THE PAGES OF THAT WEBSITE!

You will not have a hard time finding that information.

And what does it matter if I live near NYC or not. I live in the United States. I have an internet connection. And I have the capacity for critical thinking. I don't believe everything that is spoon fed to me on the news... because... my god... the governemt just MIGHT be lying.

And you wanna talk about how much 9/11 is affecting everyone. Well why, if you're so worried about it, wouldn't you be pissed off about this information? It points us in the exact opposite direction of everything the news has told us about this event! If I knew people there, and I found out that they may have not died the way I thought they did, I would be alot more pissed off than I am now.
>>untie shoes
2004-10-13, 10:23 AM #39
You know what really is pissing me off? You are.
I dont care what you THINK happened. My BEST FRIEND was killed on september 11th. I do not take it very lightly when people say stupid crap like this.
Yes it does matter how close you are to new york city. THere was a study done (a real one, not one made up by some loon) that shows how people were affected to these events, The further away from ground zero you were, the less it affected you. I lived 20 minutes away from New York City when it happened and my town had 8 people killed.
I dont care what you want us to think happened.
I am not pissed off at this "information" because all of it is rediculous.
I have met at least 100 firefighters that were IN these buildings while this was going on. Dont you tell me that there was "extensively planned out explosives" in this building.

How dare you tell me my friend possibly died in a way I dont know? He was a firefighter and was disregarding his own saftey to save a number of people in one of those buildings. I dont know exactly how he died because it hurts too much to ask, but I do know that there was weeks of pain and agony before we finally found out what happened.

Why cant you just drop it. I dont need you telling me this crap. Its not going to make anything better.
[01:52] <~Nikumubeki> Because it's MBEGGAR BEGS LIKE A BEGONI.
2004-10-13, 10:28 AM #40
Oh well... hot damn... not a "real study." I don't care what your study says. 9/11 pissed me off alot. This information pisses me off even more.

I can't believe that you're reacting like this. If I were you I'd be reading this information, instead of simply disregarding it because it's not what you want to believe. How do you think relatives of those killed at pearl harbor felt when they found out that we could have stopped it from happening?
>>untie shoes
123

↑ Up to the top!