Cheney, Neocons Considered Killing Americans in Pretext to Attack Iran

[ironglow]

Sheesh TM;
  I ask for proof and all you offer is another tinfoil hat website..
   Even then i browsed through it as long as I could keep from being bored to tears and laughing to death with the realization that there are some folks that eat such
   stuff up..hook, line and sinker..
  First; I still see no proof of R Reagan being involved in any kind of cocaine..in fact as far as I went, io didn't even see his name mentioned !
  
    I did take the liberty of searching your first "journalist" cited . Sarah McClendon had a few strange quirks:

  1) Early in WW2 she wrote articles in the Beaumont, Texas newspaper complaining what a bad bunch the WACS (women's Army Corps) were...
    then, she went right out and signed up with the WACS !

  2) Insists that Lee Harvey Oswald clearly did not alone kill JFK..

  3) Firmly claimed that Vince Foster was murdered.

  4)In her 1996 book she said she believed that the Air Force's "Project Mogul" was the source of the crash at Roswell, NM.
    Then she asked several presidents about the reality of UFOs being alien life forms..Later on, when she asked Prez Clinton about
   the reality of UFOs at Roswell etc. being aliens; when the Prez said he didn't know but indicated that he doubted such conspiracies,
  she opined that since the presidents didn't agree with her..someone had to be lying to them also..

[rex6666]

Sounds like that a couple of folks here are trying to say REV. WRIGHT was correct in all he said.
Maybe they would like to run him for PRES.
SUCH BS

[rex6666]

TM
you say all that you report is true and correct.
you also say that our government is lying to us and doing corrupt things all over the world.
You want us to believe you FBI reports and other reports you talk about.
If i am not mistake the FBI is part of the gov. and all the reports you wants us to believe
come from one of your chosen GOVERNMENT agencies.
This guy Seemore Butts or what ever his name is, what makes him so credible, because
he won a Pulitzer prise < so did AL GORE>

[rex6666]

NO
My belief is you want everyone to believe what you want them to believe and try to put down
anyone that disagrees with you. That is what i read in every post you make on any subject,
granted you do your home work.

[superhornet]

TM7--Good grief man, don't you ever get tired of trying to update and prove that which cannot be proven? Is there a conspiracy behind every waking moment of your life??  Are your brain cells so full of theory that you have trouble sleeping at night?  And now, proof that there were explosions in the WTC other than the fuel tanks of the doomed aircraft ?? What proof? Some dream that some one came up with??  Bush did it, Cheney did, Rove did it, Olly North did it, Holy smokes, we all did it ?  And please, don't hand me that famous drivel of yours, that I don't understand whats happening in the world.  Get with Michael Moore as you and he would make a perfect team ...  Give it a rest man, before the white coat specialist come for you......Doctor Superhornet

[Casull]

My suggestion is to practice a little skepticism and a show-me attitude, and a little less blind acceptance of tall tails from the government

That is exactly what I do.  Except that I practice "a llittle skepticism and a show-me attitude" as to the acceptance of unproven conspiracy theories and leftwing "supporting" internet cites.   

[Casull]

Definitely, and well you should; and likewise when proof and reasonable doubt enter the equation we have to buck up and face it even if it is a pain to our personal reality basis.  The problem or cure arises when the alternative info sites make more sense than the official sites and news outlets. I mean it isn't like Governments haven't hatched plots, lied, covered up, distorted facts, connived, ripped off, and so on ever before....is it?  I'll send you a copy of my book, "Sheople Herding Made Easy."

TM7, that's the problem with so much of what you post, the alternative info sites just DON'T make more sense.  The theories and conspiracies so often defy logic and common sense.  As some have pointed out, the government is not very good at covering things up, and some of your proposals are so far out there, it's virtually impossible to believe that these things could be true without some SOLID PROOF coming out.  As for your book, you can keep that.  Must not be that good, given your inability to pursuade very many to follow your ideas.   

[Casull]

and are simply hard to deny from a reasonable doubt vantage.  So what are you trying to defend...we know what you are trying persecute.?

TM7, what are you talking about?  I wasn't even referring to MS tangent about Iran/Contra, but was dealing with THIS THREAD.  Now, show me some solid proof that Cheney was planning to kill Americans to start WWIII, and I might rethink considering this asinine nonsense.   

[deltecs]

By God I think you're starting to get it!  It just so happens that the entire government is not as intergrated as you might think. There are factions in any government any where (especially one as large and bloated as ours) that can excercize leverage for various private concerns at the expense of us citizens believing in legitmate and honest and elected government.  Alot of people criticize me for criticizing the governments of these factions  (and their apparent agendi).  ..... 

By your own reasoning, factions in government are exercising leverage for private concerns and that our government is large and bloated, yet still maintain 9/11 was a conspiracy involving it.  With a government as large and bloated as ours, then how is it that no one has come forward to expose those conspirators?  Are you trying to tell me that all the conspirators are so secretive that no leaks have occured to substantiate the conspiracy, from 1st hand knowledge, instead of hypothesis and conjecture, when no where else in government that has been possible?  Until I receive first hand knowledge or proved in court that a conspiracy initiated by our own government was the reason for 9/11, I'll have to believe my own eyes and claims by Mulim terrorists for 9/11, instead of attempts to find government supported documents that favor ones predetermined conclusion.

[Cabin4]

Well,,,Seems like we have evolved to the point that some here are admitting bombs went off in the WTC, even in the third and completed collapse...

...TM7

Who here would be dumb enough to believe that the twin towers were NOT bombed during the Clinton administration? I think the pictures are very clear and so are the arrests and convictions.

[Cabin4]

Clinton had Vince Foster killed by the FBI and it was made to look like a suicide. Clinton was involved in drug running out of Columbia during tenure as Gov in Ark. Planes landed in Ark that carried drugs for distribution in USA during his term. You can find this on the internet and even Jerry Falwell released a video documenting what he believed was the corruption of Clinton which included the prior and much more. All of it collaborated with so called eye witnesses. Maybe some of it's true. I could care less about Clinton and can't stand him and his wife. Don't really care to get into picking up on all the conspiracies and spreading them on forums.

In the work place you find people that will say false things about people they don't like. It does not make it true. Politicians and our Government are just being subject to the same tactics as the common work place but because they are so huge and impact so many people, it make its way all over the "F"ing place. People like TM7 pick up on it and because he has a gripe with Bush he helps spread it around. Simple as that.

[Swampman]

Col. North was and is a hero.  I can't believe some of the crap people invent.  Smoking hash will do that.

[Swampman]

"I think some people are beginning to think we have a problem."

Some people think that Obama should be our next President.  Smoking hash will do that. 

[billy_56081]

With every post our friend the TrueMuslim makes, it is further proof Ron White was 100% correct.

"reliable sources" Why the heck are all these "reliable sources" allways annonymous?

[deltecs]

I'm sorry that I have to call BS on some of the 9/11 stuff.  For every 100 that relates some conspriracy about 9/11 and US government involvement, there are another 200 that say it was terrorists.  Each and everyone claims to be an expert on some level to back up their point. Al Quada has openly admitted blame for the 9/11 acts, yet everyone has such a preconceived conclusion that this just isn't possible, so must be some sort of conspriracy within our government or by some government employees working for their own ends.  For every reason I tender in disagreement, the conspiracy theorists cite lack of research or throw conjecture and skepticism from these so called experts back at me.   NOTHING IN THESE POSTS SO FAR, HAVE CONVINCED ME THAT TERRORISTS DID NOT COMMIT 9/11.  NOTHING, REPEAT NOTHING, ANYONE HAS POSTED HAS ALL OR ENOUGH ELEMENTS OF TRUTH OR FACT TO CHANGE THE TERRORISTS ASSERTIONS AND IS ONLY SUPPOSITION FOR THEIR PRECONCEIVED BIAS AND CONCLUSIONS.   Throwing a lot of rhetoric from scientists, engineers, and other so called experts without first hand knowledge is much like the Global Warming hypothesis.  Yes, it may be true, but is not proved.  Yes, the models show irregularities, but the models also indicate dicrepancies in actuality.  Yes, there are just as many meteorological scientists and maybe more, that say climate change is not man made, or even happening.  YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU LIKE AND I'LL EXPRESS MY SKEPTICISM REGARDING ONE'S CONCLUSIONS AS DERIVED FROM THE EVIDENCE AND SOURCE SUPPORTING IT.  BUT I'M GETTING A BIT IRRITATED THAT WHEN I OPINE A DIFFERENT OPINION WITH LOGIC REGARDING CONTRADICTIONS IN THESE POSTS, I'M EITHER IGNORANT, UNEDUCATED, GULLIBLE, LIBERAL, OR SOME OTHER NAME CALLING IN ORDER TO DISCREDIT MY OPINION OR LOGICAL REASONING.  AS FOR THE 400 BELIEVERS ON 9/11 TRUTH ALONE FOR THE ENTIRE US, I CAN FIND 400 IN ANCHORAGE, AK THAT DISAGREE, ALONE.  WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THE 300,000,000 US CITIZENS WHO HAVE  EXPRESSED AN OPPOSITE OPINION?  ARE THEY TO BE DISCOUNTED, JUST BECAUSE ONE THINKS THEY ARE WRONG?   I TRULY WONDER WHAT WILL HAPPEN, IF AT SOME FUTURE DATE THE CONSPRIRACY THEORISTS AND GLOBAL WARMING ADVOCATES ARE WRONG?  WILL THEY RENDER A TRUE APOLOGY OR JUST SAY OOPS OR ATTEMPT LIKE DEMOCRATS TO VINIDICATE THEIR PREVIOUS POSITIONS?   ENOUGH SAID.

[Cabin4]

.
Cabin,,,,right, and what fools. or accomplices, would NOT be on guard for other attempts. The statistical probability of 3 buildings totally falling in one day from aysymetrical random damage in mere seconds, 2 of which were designed to sustain airliner hits and a third sustaining minor damage is simply totally improbable and never seen before anywhere on the planet.... alot of coincidences and first happenings that day. Look up the legal sigificance of being an 'accomplice'. By the way, even heroic Rush mentioned bombs in the WTC last attack. So everything bad happened under the devil Clinton, but his friend Bush is squeaky clean..is that what you are saying?
.

...TM7

Critical points you left out:

1. The actual mechanical engineers admitted that they never designed the towers to handle a fire fueled by a few hundred thousand pounds of jet fuel. The temperature melted the steel allowing the towers to collapse.
2. Whats wrong with the theory of stupidity and incompetence as an explanation why our government failed to protect the towers from follow up attempts? Why must it always be connected to a wide spread purposeful attempt?
3. Why is Clinton left out of all the conspiracy theories yet he was in office for many terror attacks and never responded with force. Sounds to me like Clinton may have been protecting Bin Laden by never unleasing the force and power of the USA. Yet Bush sends troops to fight the terrorist and he's actually conspires with the terrorists to blow up the twin towers and the pentagon! Seems a little backwards to me.
4. Whats wrong with the explanation that the terrorist simply out smarted the CIA and the rest of the intel services?
5. Bush was in office for less then 9 months but you give him credit for bombing the twin towers in unisin with Bin Laden's plan which started years earlier. I guess this means that Bush 2 was meeting and having communication with Bin Laden for years in advance yet even his worst political enemies have yet to come up with a single piece of evedance to connect Bush with Bin Laden or any terroists (internal or external) for that matter.

All just a coincidence I guess....

[DakotaElkSlayer]

Col. North was and is a hero.  I can't believe some of the crap people invent. 

  You a Rosenberg fan, too?!!!

Jim

[ms]

 Re: Cheney, Neocons Considered Killing Americans in Pretext to Attack Iran
« Reply #52 on: Yesterday at 07:58:46 PM »   

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Col. North was and is a hero.  I can't believe some of the crap people invent.  Smoking hash will do that. I guess if I smoked hash as you did I would think north was a hero.

[superhornet]

TM7----Of course it is not my intent to question your character or motives...only you can do that.  I have only one question for you and then I shall move on to more positive aspects...IF all the things you have talked about on this forum are true...Why is not half the country in jail for all the participation you claim ,
Who is in jail for 9/11    Good luck and I hope you feel better soon....

[rex6666]

TM
i know YOU think you are an intelligent man but some times you lead others to think other wise
When you hit the towers with a plane and break the supper structure then set it on fire , it does
not take much to make it fall.
I understand that some people have to have some drama in their life to keep them going, you
add a little conspiracy theory to that and some folks go wild, please see a good doctor.
I think ms is trying to cause TM to have a heart attack ms knows exactly what to feed him.

[Casull]

the only problem is this letter has been proven to be likely falsified.

proven to be likely falsified.  Talk about double speak.  ROFLMAO

[no guns here]

Not being an expert, I went to do a bit of research...

Boeing 767 holds 23.980 gallons
They were fuled for cross-country flight plus alternate plus reserve... likely fully fueled...

From Popular Mechanics website-
"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 to 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." "



Ahhhh heck, I'm not gonna argue with those who want to read conspiracies into almost EVERY act that started a war by every county in the 20th century.  Of course there was a conspiracy, ONE country or a groups of countries wanted to take over another country or even the whole world!!!  They had to conspire!  War doesn't just happen.  It has to be planned, down to the minute in some cases...   Ya'll can read the story at Popluar Mechanics called "Debunking the 9/11 Myths"


later,
ngh

[zombiewolf]

I think it would be more productive to forget about collapse theories,(I'm pretty convinced the planes could have taken them down)
and get to why were we (U.S.) caught with our heels down!

also, here's something from the last article I read on the subject. (Scientific American)
 http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=when-the-twin-towers-fell

Excerpt:
A lively discussion then ensued about whether the terrorist pilots knew where to hit the buildings for maximum effect. McNamara opined that the position of impact seems significant. "They hit them at just the right place�about two thirds to three quarters of the way up. The earlier [truck bomb] attack showed that the explosion at bottom had little effect and that it's much easier to collapse a building from the top than the bottom. If they had hit the very top of the building, the fire damage wouldn't have had such a catastrophic effect. At the bottom, the columns are much heavier and stronger and so they would have taken a much larger load." Connor offered that one would "need graduate-level engineering training to choose the prime target location."


Goat-herders did not do this....ZW

[Casull]

Goat-herders did not do this....ZW

In case you didn't know this, Bin Laden is not a goat herder.  He is a MILLIONAIRE owner of a CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.   

[zombiewolf]

Goat-herders did not do this....ZW

In case you didn't know this, Bin Laden is not a goat herder.  He is a MILLIONAIRE owner of a CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.   

Ah ha! Now we're getting somewhere...

1. The Bush and Bin Laden families have had relations for over 20 years.


2. Osama says HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACKS OF 9/11! - Here is the transcript of what you were not allowed to hear from Osama bin Laden's own mouth: - Not many people know that, after September 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden issued a statement on tape that he had nothing to do with the attacks on America and that such actions were against the teachings of Islam. Americans were prevented from accessing this information because we were told that Osama could possibly have an embedded "secret code" in the tape that would alert other terrorists cells to "activate" and target other American cities. - Osama bin Laden: "I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States."

3.FBI PROTECTS OSAMA BIN LADEN’S “RIGHT TO PRIVACY” IN DOCUMENT RELEASE - Judicial Watch, the public interest group that fights government corruption, announced  that it has obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) in which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has invoked privacy right protections on behalf of al Qaeda terror leader Osama bin Laden. In a September 24, 2003 declassified “Secret” FBI report obtained by Judicial Watch, the FBI invoked Exemption 6 under FOIA law on behalf of bin Laden, which permits the government to withhold all information about U.S. persons in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when the disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) (2000)) - Before invoking privacy protections for Osama bin Laden under Exemption 6, the FBI should have conducted a balancing “test” of the public's right to disclosure against the individual's right to privacy.
http://tvnewslies.org/html/bin_laden_ties.html

Go ahead, discredit the source...It's alternative!

[billy_56081]

Another "annonymous" source that the X files folks take as Gospel.

[Casull]

Ah ha! Now we're getting somewhere...

1. The Bush and Bin Laden families have had relations for over 20 years.


2. Osama says HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACKS OF 9/11! - Here is the transcript of what you were not allowed to hear from Osama bin Laden's own mouth: - Not many people know that, after September 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden issued a statement on tape that he had nothing to do with the attacks on America and that such actions were against the teachings of Islam. Americans were prevented from accessing this information because we were told that Osama could possibly have an embedded "secret code" in the tape that would alert other terrorists cells to "activate" and target other American cities. - Osama bin Laden: "I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States."

3.FBI PROTECTS OSAMA BIN LADEN’S “RIGHT TO PRIVACY” IN DOCUMENT RELEASE - Judicial Watch, the public interest group that fights government corruption, announced  that it has obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) in which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has invoked privacy right protections on behalf of al Qaeda terror leader Osama bin Laden. In a September 24, 2003 declassified “Secret” FBI report obtained by Judicial Watch, the FBI invoked Exemption 6 under FOIA law on behalf of bin Laden, which permits the government to withhold all information about U.S. persons in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when the disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) (2000)) - Before invoking privacy protections for Osama bin Laden under Exemption 6, the FBI should have conducted a balancing “test” of the public's right to disclosure against the individual's right to privacy.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Pretty savy for a goat herder.  LOL

[zombiewolf]

Another "annonymous" source that the X files folks take as Gospel.

Fine, here ya go...

For Immediate Release
Apr 20, 2005    Contact: Press Office
202-646-5172



FBI PROTECTS OSAMA BIN LADEN’S “RIGHT TO PRIVACY” IN DOCUMENT RELEASE

Judicial Watch Investigation Uncovers FBI Documents Concerning Bin Laden Family and Post-9/11 Flights



(Washington, DC)  Judicial Watch, the public interest group that fights government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) in which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has invoked privacy right protections on behalf of al Qaeda terror leader Osama bin Laden.  In a September 24, 2003 declassified “Secret” FBI report obtained by Judicial Watch, the FBI invoked Exemption 6 under FOIA law on behalf of bin Laden, which permits the government to withhold all information about U.S. persons in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when the disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) (2000))

 

Before invoking privacy protections for Osama bin Laden under Exemption 6, the FBI should have conducted a balancing “test” of the public's right to disclosure against the individual's right to privacy.  Many of the references in the redacted documents cite publicly available news articles from sources such as The Washington Post and Associated Press.  Based on its analysis of the news stories cited in the FBI report, Judicial Watch was able to determine that bin Laden’s name was redacted from the document, including newspaper headlines in the footnoted citations.

 

“It is dumbfounding that the United States government has placed a higher priority on the supposed privacy rights of Osama bin Laden than the public’s right to know what happened in the days following the September 11 terrorist attacks,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “It is difficult for me to imagine a greater insult to the American people, especially those whose loved ones were murdered by bin Laden on that day.”   

 

The redacted documents were obtained by Judicial Watch under the provisions of the FOIA and through ongoing litigation (Judicial Watch v. Department of Homeland Security & Federal Bureau of Investigation, No. 04-1643 (RWR)).  Among the documents was a declassified “Secret” FBI report, dated September 24, 2003, entitled: “Response to October 2003 Vanity Fair Article (Re: [Redacted] Family Departures After 9/11/2001).”  Judicial Watch filed its original FOIA request on October 7, 2003.  The full text of the report and related documents are available on the Internet by clicking here (Adobe Acrobat Reader required).


© Copyright 1997-2004, Judicial Watch, Inc.



Got any thing to contribute, billy? Or are you just here to stick your tongue out and put your thumbs in your ears?

[deltecs]

Deltecs....
  I think you are getting your feathers ruffled unnecessarily.  Where in this thread has anybody posted anything impuning a lack of intellect on your part or called you any names, etc.? The sad truth is that the majority of Americans do not believe that 911 happened as simply as we have been told and that there is more behind the scenes from a) somebody deliberately left the door unlocked, to b) they planned and did it. If your embraced 'official conspiracy' theory was ever trialed in a bonafide court of law it is likely that it would not be convicted..that's how flimsy the evidence is and why blocking of official motions is common place in the courts. Perhaps this dam will break.  As for ex-cia asset al quaida (if there is such a thing as ex) admitting anything it is chatter and background noise, or more stagecraft.
  I as one citizen will gladly tip my head in humility if I am proven wholely wrong on this sordid affair....will you do the same?  ....

by TM7  ...you haven't been paying attention and I would assume that by your own admission refuse to pay attention...like the mayor in Jaws (remember the movie) you won't know you have a problem until it swims up and bites you in the arse (famous movie line). You are in a minority. The amount of information released about your 911 event has been monumentally overwhelming, and I presume the dam will break once the current admin vacates office.

I think if you look up the definition of ignorant, it means lack of knowledge or refusal to learn.  Your own words infer ignorance, personal attacks, and then refuse to acknowledge you've done so, which does impugn my posts.  The facts still exist.  There is not enough evidence or supporting facts from you or anyone else regarding 9/11 with conviction, that others of equal stature and peerage have disputed with enough credibility to lend support to the 9/11 Commission findings.  Yes, I've already admitted discrepancies in the official version.  Yes there are inconsistancies with your posts from doubtful sources or at least bias, as well.  Yes, I think it may have happened, just as you relate, if more credible facts come to light.  Yes, I've concluded by deductive logic, with the facts as currently known that terrorists actually commited the crime.  No, I do not believe government, in this instance, either conspired or took action in destruction of the WTC.  I am not in the minority on this issue.  Just because a lot, which in this case is an extremely small percentage of the Nation's population, are screaming government involvement, does not make me in the minority.  If I was in the minority, then the majority (quote liberal media) would be clamoring for investigations, sales, and the money making opportunity in an election year.  Do I hear anything?  Very, very, very, little.   I saw the WTC come down on 9/11 in real time.  It did not fall as you have posted, with the bottom floors giving way and the top collapsing on them.  The tower collapsed at the level of the aircraft impact, with the remaining weight of the top floors too heavy for subsequent floors to support the mass.  For instance, energy expended is a product of velocity squared.  If the 80th floor of a 100 story building collapses, the 20 stories above it falling on the 79th floor pounds the supporting structure with impressive energy and shock loads to the main beams.  Each subsequent floor below that with the additional weight of struture being added to floor by floor and the effects of gravitation acceleration, places unbelievable strain on the lower level floors, which this building was never designed to maintain.  If explosives were planted at ground or near ground level, then the building from the point of the explosives detonation upward would all move at once downward with the ground impact damaging the structure from the bottom upward.   This did not happen that way.  The building from the aircraft impact downward collasped from the top down on each lower floor instead of vice versa in an explosives demolition.  I have no answer for building 7, other than debris or whatever from WTC, which caused the collapse of it.  It is a more likely explanation than demolitions planted to explode at the same time as the aircraft hit the WTC.  If demolitions were planted at the WTC and exploded, it would have to have been done at the floor level impact site instead of ground, or near ground level, as you have suggested with your so called experts.  The building could not have fallen the way it did, if located at ground level.  If exploded at impact floor level, the pilots would have to be most accurate to hit the correct floors in both building for them to collapse as they actually did.  And that cannot happen according to your previous comments and posts, as evidenced by the flight pattern and miss of the 5 story Pentagon building, so pilot accuracy was hit and miss.  If pilot accuracy is hit and miss, then there is no way the WTC could have planted demolitions at the correct level for the building to fall as it did and still be convincing enough for the public to believe it.  This is the truthful logical derivation and nothing you have posted from any so called expert has convincingly exposed any evidence to the contrary.  Notice I have not posted any insulting or derogative terms to your posts, while you have repeatedly attempted to discredit others and especially mine with personal attacks.  You have stated you would gladly tip your hat at this sordid affair if proved wrong, will you do the same when you impugn others with personal attacks meant to discredit their opinions or facts?  The quotes above are yours and yours alone.  Yes, if you are proved right that terrorists did not commit this heinous crime, I'll be the first to acknowledge my mistake with a public apology.  

[Casull]

Rex6666.....The facts are that the towers were built to sustain two loaded 707 hits at higher speeds, a plane not unlike the 767, and no other buildings I know of were ever built to handle airliner hits except these two.  This is documented engineering fact and supported by the build schedule.  They were also built to handle sustained hurricaine force winds of 120mph.  Those suckers were built, and #7 was not hit by a plane and had only incidental fires yet collapsed in less than 7 seconds.  No steel frame buildings on the planet has ever succumbed to 50-60 minute fires and random damage with a total symetrical collapse at the speed of gravity...even if it was hit by an airliner. Haven't you ever seen fire damaged buildings; or watched demolitions?

Wasn't the Titanic built to be unsiinkable?