>>>>>>>>>What I find amasing is that some people in US still watch and actually believe, whatever above
>>>>>>>>>mentioned budle-of-disgrace-media is digesting and throwing at them as an daily output.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Okay, if I understand your reasoning, you are saying that it is believable that the CIA hired Al Quaeda to fly planes into buildings in Manhatten because four years later in Basra 2 SAS were caught in Basra dressed as Arabs in a car full of guns and plastique.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why it has to be CIA 'hiring' Al-qaeda ? It is those Arab students claiming that not me.
>>>>>>>When you put it this way, it certainly sounds like 'black helicopter'. But how black is that helicopter really ?
>>>>>>>Only thing that is for sure is that 9/11 was NOT done by 19 cave men, nor that buildings colapsed the way they did
>>>>>>>as result of fire. All the rest is complete mystery, which will probably remain mystery forever.
>>>>>>>What I am saying is that given history of undercover inttelligence operations it is not hard to believe
>>>>>>>that some crazy or corrupt fractions of it are capable of commiting attrocities in the name of some greater good.
>>>>>>>(or massive profits).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And NO I DO NOT believe 9/11 was done by US government. What they did was, since this event
>>>>>>>suited certain interests, they simply distorted proper investigation and exploited consequences of this tragedy
>>>>>>>for pushing for consecutive wars. Only God knows how many secret services, agencies, military groups, militias,
>>>>>>>security companies (and God know what other crazies) are out there who have military experience (kind of top national skill huh ?) and acces to re$ources necessary for commiting crime like that.
>>>>>>>On top of it they are cross-connected with other such 'units' all over the world, which are connected to drug syndicates,
>>>>>>>terrorist groups and so for. Finding particular group is perhaps is like looking for needle in haystack. They will never get found. Flashing fake passport on TV and saying Al-qaeda did is exactly saying; We have no clue, and we don't care either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It is actually unimportant who really did it, point is that this event showed how easy was to create global mess
>>>>>>>when it suits certain interests, and how unprepared was US to deal with it in a prudent way. When greatest power
>>>>>>>on the world can be pushed in a state of euphoria/hysteria (and 2 wars thereafter) this easy, then whole world security
>>>>>>>is actually one big house of cards which can be brought down very easy. This is something everybody should be worried about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why do you say the towers did not collapse as a result of fire? The heat generated by that amount of burning jet fuel was well above the melting point of the metal support beams.
>>>>>
>>>>>No still-frame building EVER colapsed as result of fire. At the point and the time of of impact temperature might have reached
>>>>>melting point of (naked) steel beams. But jet fuel melting steel beams all the way through thick cement of support columns
>>>>>and then building colapsing at free fall speed is totally banana (pancake) story.
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/eagar-0112.html ?
>>>>
>>>>>Tank fuel full of
Termite might have sufficed in destroying the building, but tank full of jet fuel
>>>>>(which burns in mater of seconds) to do this kind of damage is simply impossible.
>>>>>And then on top of that you have WTC7 which colapased without even being hit by plane.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here is hotel building (234 meeters high) that went totaly burned. What caused fire were actual explosives
>>>>>(fireworks stuff gone on fire)
http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3133520>>>>>But building did not colapse.
>>>
>>>(Replying to your link a few lines up, an engineering analysis).
>>>
>>>Very interesting. Thank you for posting it. I stand corrected about the fire having been hot enough to melt steel.
>>>
>>>Does the report exactly answer its own question? What caused the top 10 floors to collapse?
>>
>>Only relevant bit I could see:
>>"As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way
and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips."
>
>Yes, I saw that. But what caused the one or two floors to give way? Down the rabbit hole....
there was a discovery program about a recreation of the conditions of the blaze on 911 where they used a cad program to recreate the scenario of the plane's impact, the weight, velocity, fuel capacity, etc. What they saw when they ran the simulation was that temperatures exceeded 15,000 degrees on those floors, if I remember correctly, and it cause the steel beams to liquify and break, causing them to collapse. They then had the actual beams shipped to their lab's where they ran structural tests on them and were able to recreated the simulation...
