alt.education

On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:53:17 -0800 (PST), charles q
wrote:

>On Mar 7, 12:21 am, MACK DADDY wrote:
>> On Mar 6, 2:51 pm, Pisano wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 07:24:56 -0800 (PST), Merlin
>>
>> > wrote:
>> > >On Mar 5, 4:51 pm, Pisano wrote:
>> > >> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 13:04:05 -0800 (PST), Merlin
>>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> >On Mar 5, 1:40 am, kenpis...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > >> >>         Where is the respect for the dead?  Where is the respect for their
>> > >> >> surviving families who, seeking the truth for nearly a decade, have
>> > >> >> been fought every step of the way?
>>
>> > >> >The surviving families have had the truth for some time now. The
>> > >> >buildings fell as a result of fire heating the support beams until
>> > >> >they would no longer support the buildings.
>>
>> > >>         The jet fuel burned away relatively quickly.  Most of it
>> > >> outside of the buildings in those huge fireballs.  That is why in at
>> > >> least one video segment shown live in early news reports you can
>> > >> clearly see a woman standing in the gaping hole left by one of the
>> > >> airplanes, holding onto a torn piece of metal.  If it were actually
>> > >> hot enough to weaken steel inside, she would have certainly succumbed
>> > >> to such an intense heat very quickly indeed.
>>
>> > >Your scenario is naive, uneducated and you assume something you don't
>> > >have any possible proof of.
>>
>> >         That sounds more like a description of the "official story".
>>
>> >         But I *provided* proof.  You, however, snipped it out.
>>
>> >         Why ever would you do that?
>>
>> >         Here . . . let's put it back again:
>>
>> >        http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_woman.html
>>
>> > > Obviously you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
>>
>> >         Sorry, but I know exactly what I am talking about.      
>>
>> > >> >The fact that you choose not to believe the truth doesn't negate it.
>>
>> > >>         The fact that it ISN'T true . . . does, however, negate it.
>>
>> > >You and a comparative few conspiracy nuts who haven't enough education
>> > >to know any better think that the obvious isn't true. What you think
>> > >really doesn't matter. No one will ever take you seriously.
>>
>> >         Believe me.  There are plenty of people who take this
>> > seriously.  Probably at least 1000 times or more as many as are now
>> > openly talking about it.
>>
>> >         And this is why:
>>
>> > >>         Structures of steel and concrete simply can not fall through
>> > >> successive layers of progressively stronger steel and concrete as
>> > >> quickly as they would fall through thin air.  It defies the laws of
>> > >> physics.  Also, most of the steel columns and beams on the ground were
>> > >> found in sections, averaging around 30 feet in length.
>>
>> > >What bullshit. Obviously it can. It did. What is your educational
>> > >background in Physics? People who are respected as experts have
>> > >determined that you're full of shit.
>>
>> >         You mean like these guys?
>>
>> >        http://www.ae911truth.org/
>>
>> >         "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth"
>>
>> > >>         For the entire structure to fall the way it did, at free-fall...
>>
>> > >Well there you have it. It didn't fall at "free-fall". Why would you
>> > >say such an obvious lie?
>>
>> >         It is certainly not a lie, but indeed the obvious truth.
>>
>> >         Why again, did you snip out the rest?
>>
>> >         Here.  I'll put it back for you:
>>
>> > >>        For the entire structure to fall the way it did, at free-fall
>> > >>speed, without being previously rigged for demolition would require
>> > >>that literally hundreds of thousands of welded and bolted construction
>> > >>joints failed simultaneously, all the way down to the ground.
>>
>> >         Now look here:
>>
>> >        http://www.ae911truth.org/twintowers.php
>>
>> >         In the alternative . . .
>>
>> >         Do the math yourself, and then get back to me.  :)
>>
>> > >> >There is nothing that you would accept as proof. You WANT it to be a
>> > >> >conspiracy no matter how foolish your reasoning is.
>>
>> >         How did the planes bring down Building 7?
>>
>> >         It wasn't hit by any plane, and only partially hit by debris.
>>
>> >         Both immense towers "collapsed" on top of Buildings 3 and 5.
>>
>> >         Why didn't Buildings 3 and 5 collapse?
>>
>> > >>         The official story is, in fact, a conspiracy theory.  
>>
>> > >Bullshit.
>>
>> >         Sure it is.  It goes something like this:  "A group of 19
>> > muslims who were members of a foreign terrorist organization and a
>> > wealthy relative of the prominent Bin Laden family engaged in a
>> > conspiracy to use box cutters to hijack four commercial jet airliners,
>> > completely evade NORAD defenses and crash those planes into various
>> > buildings in the United States . . . (Blah-blah-blah)."
>>
>> > >> >Why discuss something that you have no intention of changing your mind
>> > >> >on?
>>
>> > >>         I am not looking to change "my" mind.
>>
>> > >You wouldn't, no matter what was proven to you.
>>
>> >         I've seen plenty enough proof to make up my mind.  I certainly
>> > have no need of your approval or endorsement to do that.
>>
>> > >> >You're performing mental masturbation.
>>
>> > >>         One picture is worth a thousand words:
>>
>> > >>        http://tinyurl.com/yvqmda
>>
>> > >Exactly.
>>
>> >         Yes.  Exactly.
>>
>> >         Note that in the photo the upper portion of the south tower is
>> > falling away in a southernly direction, thereby removing the load
>> > entirely from the northern face of the building, and eventually from
>> > the rest of the structure.  What then, in particular, are we to assume
>> > was causing the violent voluminous ejection of such a mass of material
>> > from not only the northern face, but the remainder of the structure as
>> > well?
>>
>> >         Also, what turned not only the concrete, but most everything
>> > else in the building into a fine powder?
>>
>> > > A building right after a jet flies into it and explodes,
>> > >resulting in the collapse of the building.
>>
>> >         The World Trade towers were designed to withstand even
>> > multiple hits from large passenger airliners, and remain structurally
>> > sound.
>>
>> >         Design Life built into Trade Center:
>>
>> >        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTf9w3NMR5o
>>
>> >         Introduction to Structural Engineering and Steel Design:
>>
>> >        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KVg5kljuU0
>>
>> >         "September 11, Revisited" Watch the movie online:
>>
>> >        http://911revisited.com/
>>
>> > >> >Quit, it'll make you go blind.
>>
>> > >> You have obviously been masturbating far more than I have.
>>
>> > >Not hardly. You and your bunch of idiots are nothing but another
>> > >version of Chicken Little.
>>
>> >         You mean like these guys?
>>
>> >        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIbNymjsDvA
>>
>> >         Or is Faux News out there terrorizing America again with scary
>> > reports of "imminent terror attacks" from invisible boogy men?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> The terrorists who took down the twin towers are George dumbya Bush
>> and Shlong Cheney!- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>I believe that it runs much deeper than Bush and Cheney


I think the terrorists attacked us because they hate Freedom.