Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » September 11 (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: September 11
Pete at Home
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Originally posted by Funean:
It's been five years today. Let's talk about it, and take a moment to remember the lives that were ended or permanently changed that morning.

[ September 13, 2006, 10:02 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Member # 3081

 - posted      Profile for wakeup   Email wakeup       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Fortunately the collapse of WTC Building 7 sheds new light on this subject.

Situated across Vesey Street and separated from the North Tower by Building 6,which did not itself collapse, even after sustaining extensive damage from fire and falling debris, WTC 7 showed no significant damage at all in photos taken just before it collapsed. There were a few internal fires, but they weren't large enough or hot enough to even break out the windows. Significantly, this 47-story monolith collapsed completely and uniformly straight down in less than seven seconds. Totally! The whole thing was sheared to the ground! The article states "NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated." Working hypothesis? Is that anything like a conspiracy theory? What evidence is offered to support this?

The unavoidable facts are that an airplane did not strike WTC
7, the discreet distance separating it from the North Tower protected it from falling debris, and there was absolutely no evidence of structural damage.

Conspicuous by its absence is any mention in the article about the stunningly short time span of the collapse. Quite possibly the under-seven-second swiftness was too much for even the "working hypothesis" to explain. Anyone with basic logic skills now knows that this was, in fact, a controlled demolition; and happily this reinforces suspicions about the towers too.

Posts: 45 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1