Loose Change - Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Johnny Pixels said:
I was thinking. Why do the Loosers deny the panacake collapse theory? Surely it works to their advantage because it reduces the amount of explosives required to achieve the collapse of the tower. By just having explosives sever the supports holding say one or two floors then the same collapse would happen, but with a much smaller number of explosives required. They wouldn't have to answer half as many questions about collapse times, cutting beams, explosives in the lobby etc, ie the main points they can't answer because they're wrong.

Obviously I know it's still a ridiculous idea, but the conspiracy theory seems to have be as different as possible from the official explanation. A good comparison I suppose would be having someone else shoot JFK, but from exactly the same position as Oswald. That way the theory is identical to the official story, but Oswald is the patsy. They'd never buy it because it's not different enough. How wierd is that?

ETA: And this is my 911th post too...
Click to expand...

Whenever the pancake collapse is mentioned on the LC forums, someone will post a picture of a 3 or 4 story building collapse in Pakistan or some other country in the Middle East. The building had a pancake collapse from an earthquake and all the floors are stacked neatly on top of each other. It then follows with "Why don't the WTC towers look like this?"

It is then followed by me smacking my head against my desk.
 
I listened to Fetzer's interview with Alan Colmes earlier on. Amazing. I was expecting the cool, reasoned argument of an academic and instead heard the hysterical bluster of a typical CT nut. One thing I had to check. Early in the interview, Colmes and Fetzer correct an erroneous impression made in an earlier interview - that there were college courses on 9/11. But Fetzer goes on to say:

"I've learned, actually, since you last had me on, that there is a course for freshmen taught at Harvard, if my information is correct ,by a fellow called Ernest May, who interestingly was an advisor to the 9/11 Commission"

Professor Ernest May was a Senior Advisor to the 9/11 Commission. Sally Makacynas, Professor May's assistant, responded to my enquiry about any such course as follows:

"The course you've heard about is a small freshman seminar (limited to
12) which deals with 9/11 and the 9/11 Commission.
Sincerely,
Sally Makacynas"

So, a seminar not a course. Probably Professor May discussing his experience of the 9/11 commission and not the squib and thermite fest Fetzer would like to believe.
 
Gravy said:
I'll be out there, handing out the link to my debunk of their literature. Thanks, Abby!
Click to expand...

You folks still planning on keeping an eye on Dylan and friends during the 9/11 stuff in September? I've been thinking about hopping on a train up to New York myself to watch all that go down.

On a not-really-related note, I was just checking out that "Free Press International" guy again and found out that he has what may be the world's lamest podcast. Great source there, Dylan.
 
Class said:
Whenever the pancake collapse is mentioned on the LC forums, someone will post a picture of a 3 or 4 story building collapse in Pakistan or some other country in the Middle East. The building had a pancake collapse from an earthquake and all the floors are stacked neatly on top of each other. It then follows with "Why don't the WTC towers look like this?"

It is then followed by me smacking my head against my desk.
Click to expand...

That's about how I feel every time they make a big deal about WTC7 being 300 feet from the North Tower, without mentioning that the Twins were more than 1300 feet tall. And I especially have to restrain myself from beating my head against the wall every time they ask why WTC buildings 4, 5, and 6 didn't collapse the same way the taller-than-they-were-wide buildings in the complex did.
 
Johnny Pixels said:
I've just had a look at this thread. This was the post that got me:



Threatening someone with box cutters is illegal? But they're such a useless weapon. Why didn't he just laugh in his face like his hero Dylan Avery would?
Click to expand...

Lmao. The irony, its painful.

Jenny didnt take this too well. She made a thread about it.
 
tacodaemon said:
You folks still planning on keeping an eye on Dylan and friends during the 9/11 stuff in September? I've been thinking about hopping on a train up to New York myself to watch all that go down.
Click to expand...
One of my gubmint contacts says that before September all the CTs are going to be put in FEMA concentration camps, given injections of happy juice, and tracked with RFID implants, while a jet above releases chemtrails to surpress rebellion.
 
XXX said:
Just finished the Fetzer/Wood interview show.

It's a total comedy act. I laughed out loud when she talked about the grand piano and the "parachute effect"...just listen to it, the whole thing is horrible. "Where are the pankakes?" There's at least 4 WTF?! moments in this. I can't believe people would say such stupid things.

Ever notice how most everything in the 9/11 truth movment is a (bad) analogy? Lots more of them in this interview.

So according to "Professor" Woods, it should have taken the WTC 97 seconds to collapse. OK....And all structural engineers in the world are keeping silent according to Fetzer, and they all have a special place reserved for them in hell for not standing up to the official story (his wording). :jaw-dropp

Just an unbelieveable interview. And I love how every caller that brings their own "anaylsis" about the collapse is immedietly praised by Fetzer as he instantly accepts whatever they are saying as "an excellent point".
Click to expand...

I did a post on the damn em to hell section, and a bit more.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/06/jim-fetzer-condemns-all-structural.html

Now I need to take a break from this idiot, before I put my hand through the wall or something.
 
Gravy said:
Yes, some were, such as at least one of the calls Barbara Olson made to her husband from her personal phone. That's the one Avery says couldn't have happened because she wouldn't have been able to get her credit card out of her purse.

$&*^(*&()&$^%#^(&)(*_* !:mad:
Click to expand...
Ah, thanks.

I echo your last statement.
$&*^(*&()&$^%#^(&)(*_* !:mad:
 
XXX said:
"Where are the pankakes?"
Click to expand...
LOL
This reminded me of an argument I had on another message board. The person I was arguing with said that the buildings couldn't have collapsed "pancake style" because, "the elevator shafts ran through the center of the building leaving a hole in the middle so it should have collapsed like a donut."
:covereyes
 
JamesB said:
I did a post on the damn em to hell section, and a bit more.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/06/jim-fetzer-condemns-all-structural.html

Now I need to take a break from this idiot, before I put my hand through the wall or something.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you've got several post's worth of material on this interview alone. So much stupidity in there. I love the blog BTW.

I swear, I need to make a list of all the moronic analogies that the 9/11 folks have made to try and explain things they don't understand. For example we have...

* WTC couldn't have collapsed like that because as a tree falls it doesn't turn into sawdust.

* WTC couldn't have collapsed because if the Kebler elves carved a home in the inside of a tree that tree wouldn't fall (listen to the interview!)

* No plane hit the Pentagon because if you stomp on a soda can (made from aluminum) the can doesn't disintegrate.

* No plane hit the Pentagon because if you light a kerosine fire under a soda can, the can doesn't "vaporize"

* No plane hit the WTC because if you build a little model of the WTC and push a model jet into it, the wings break off.

ect, ect...
 
XXX said:
I'm sure you've got several post's worth of material on this interview alone. So much stupidity in there. I love the blog BTW.

I swear, I need to make a list of all the moronic analogies that the 9/11 folks have made to try and explain things they don't understand. For example we have...

* WTC couldn't have collapsed because if the Kebler elves carved a home in the inside of a tree that tree wouldn't fall (listen to the interview!)


ect, ect...
Click to expand...


That was in there? You are joking right? It is hard to tell with these people.
 
XXX said:
I'm sure you've got several post's worth of material on this interview alone. So much stupidity in there. I love the blog BTW.

I swear, I need to make a list of all the moronic analogies that the 9/11 folks have made to try and explain things they don't understand. For example we have...

* WTC couldn't have collapsed like that because as a tree falls it doesn't turn into sawdust.

* WTC couldn't have collapsed because if the Kebler elves carved a home in the inside of a tree that tree wouldn't fall (listen to the interview!)

* No plane hit the Pentagon because if you stomp on a soda can (made from aluminum) the can doesn't disintegrate.

* No plane hit the Pentagon because if you light a kerosine fire under a soda can, the can doesn't "vaporize"

* No plane hit the WTC because if you build a little model of the WTC and push a model jet into it, the wings break off.

ect, ect...
Click to expand...

Has screwloose ever pointed at Ct'ers say the darndest things?
 
JamesB said:
That was in there? You are joking right? It is hard to tell with these people.
Click to expand...

I AM NOT KIDDING. Play the M3U, the part starts at 28:14, right after she talks about the moronic tree/sawdust parallel. Just listen. She even says that she said this AT AN ENGINEERING CONFERENCE!!
 
XXX said:
I AM NOT KIDDING. Play the M3U, the part starts at 28:14, right after she talks about the moronic tree/sawdust parallel. Just listen. She even says that she said this AT AN ENGINEERING CONFERENCE!!
Click to expand...

I knew it, it was the Keebler elves who were behind it! Damn little rodents... (muttering to self)
 
There's a great show on the History Channel right now called "The 9-11 Hijackers: Inside the Hamburg Cell."
Anyone else watching?

From the History Channel Site:
For years, they remained nearly invisible, a small group of dedicated men waiting for the perfect chance to strike. Then, on September 11, 2001, after five years of preparation, they took action. Now, the full story and the details of their ambitious plan have come to light.

THE 9/11 HIJACKERS tracks the progress of the unassuming college students who became religious martyrs. These men, now known as the Hamburg Cell, were responsible for the cultivation of the al-Qaeda plot code-named "the planes operation". The group's leaders were four well-educated Muslim men who shared a common belief in radical Islam. Though Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Ziad Jarrah, and Ramzi Binalshibh hailed from different countries--Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Yemen--a spirit of brotherhood prevailed among them. And in time, they committed to a singular purpose--to translate their religious fanaticism into catastrophic action.
Click to expand...
 
Johnny Pixels said:
Johndoex also claims to have flown at 2000ft regularly between Laguardia and JFK. This was in response to his claim that the twin towers were designed to take a full speed, full load, just taken off, aircraft strike, not just a low fuel, low speed, lost in fog, trying to land. I pointed that the nearest airports were 8 miles away from the WTC complex, and I wanted to know why a plane would be flying at 1300ft, and therefore endangering the towers, when it took off 8 miles away.
Click to expand...

The FAA has a minimum obstruction clearance altitute (MOCA) of 1000ft for altitudes below 5,000ft and 2,000ft for altitudes above 5,000ft. In other words, if you're flying over a city you have to maintain an altitude at least 1,000ft above the highest building.

This article has a little info on MOCA's and the attempt to standardise them around the world.

-Andrew
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom