Saturday, September 14, 2013

Rethink 911

The first step toward truth is to be informed.....





6 comments:

Anonymous said...

This reporter is reaching. Anyone above the point of impact was lost the second the plane made contact. As far as the manner by which the towers fell, has to do primarily with their "lightweight construction" portions of the upper floor were merely a 1/4" thick. Paper thin. I believe any government conspiracy came after the attack.To disrespect our gov't is fine, to disrespect the dead is uncalled for.

carverchick said...

Thats fine if you believe the offical story...there sre thousands of architects and engineers that disagree...as well as thousands of average people who have looked into this. Questioning what really happened is nit disrespecting the dead...to ignore the evidence is.

Anonymous said...

There are also theories mulling about the Boston Marathon bombing. There are the same type of people spreading the myth that all the death and carnage was staged by the U.S. Gov't. I believe the towers(NYC) fell in that manner because they were unique, the first of their kind using lightweight construction. The floors failed first creating a "pancake" type collapse. To say that a group of people entered the towers and detonated some type of high explosive is far fetched.

carverchick said...

What is far fetched is saying the towers fell because they were of lightweight construction - that may be true of the finish work, but the support beams were not of such light weight construction that fire melted them...it is also well documented that the weeks leading up to 911 the security systems in the towers were shut down several hours a night for upgrades and many office spaces were empty as they were under construction...my point being that as far fetched as it may sound, there are many, many reasons to question the official story. And again - thousands of architects and engineers do not agree that the fires could have caused the support beams to fail. Either way, if you choose to believe the official story that is certainly your right, and I respect that. I do not however, appreciate being accused of disrespecting the dead because I posted a story by a well respected journalist who happens to disagree with the official story. Sure there are many arguments to support it...however there are also many arguments and evidence to punch holes in it which should make many rethink what happened.

ae911truth.org

Thanks for the discussion Anon :)

Anonymous said...

The towers were constructed of tubular steel framing and corrugated steel flooring, both lightweight materials. If you look at the video of the impact of the two planes, you plainly see that the buildings are sliced from stem to stern. The super heated fire fueled by jet fuel quickly consumed the framing and the top of the buildings pancaked the remaining structure on the way down. The failure temp. of steel is 1100 F. How fast do you think this temp. was reached? It's amazing the buildings lasted as long as they did. Lightweight building construction and fire behavior are the two reasons the towers fell. Period. People have been writing books and cashing in on this event ever since it happened. You're more intelligent than that, don't believe the hype.

carverchick said...

sigh....again, thousands of architects and engineers disagree, and am not going to comment on the "sliced from stem to stern" comment. If that is what you choose to believe then that is your right. I seriously do not wish to get into a debate with you about why the official story is questionable, just pointing out that there are many many valid reasons not to believe or dare question the official story. Anyone who is interested in any of this...official story, or why the official story is questionable can easily read and research this.