Boston bombing

**Edbear** · 18th May 2013, 13:06

Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback

Then can you tell me why BOTH of the bombers weren't actually killed? You know...like the pilots they trained...so they can't speak?

And the others who tried to help them get away and hide the evidence...

**mashman** · 18th May 2013, 13:23

Originally Posted by Edbear

The hypothesis is seriously flawed and falls down on your opening statement. There is no "You and your group" ruling this world.

That is the ultimate conspiracy theory. You should read your avatar...

of course there is. Any and every ogranisation needs a structure within which to carry out its business. Whoever has the money and the ear of the govts (note I said ear, not control) then they have the power to control the world. That's a FACT jack.

Amsel (Amschel) Bauer Mayer Rothschild, 1838: "Let me issue and control a Nation's money and I care not who makes its laws".

Did you think that was just a meme that some geezer from the 19th century came out with? If so, why did presidents of the US fight against these guys and create lots of anti-Amsel type meme's of their own?

I did read my avatar, seems like you misunderstand it as well as most other things.

**mashman** · 18th May 2013, 13:26

Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback

Then can you tell me why BOTH of the bombers weren't actually killed? You know...like the pilots they trained...so they can't speak?

Why would I need to kill them? They were fucked the moment they volunteered. And who is going to believe a terrorist?

**Katman** · 18th May 2013, 13:29

Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback

...so they can't speak?

Yes, I wonder how his throat wound is coming on.

**Crasherfromwayback** · 18th May 2013, 14:39

Originally Posted by mashman

Why would I need to kill them? They were fucked the moment they volunteered. And who is going to believe a terrorist?

Well obviously all of the *intelligent* folk anyway.

Originally Posted by Katman

Yes, I wonder how his throat wound is coming on.

Yeah soon as I'd posted I wondered how long that'd take! Self inflicted too ya know...

**mashman** · 18th May 2013, 16:22

Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback

Well obviously all of the *intelligent* folk anyway.

What has intelligence got to do with anything? If you believe that you are fighting for a cause, then you can be the smartest fucker on the planet or indeed the dumbest fucker on the planet, but you'll still be fighting for the same thing.

**scumdog** · 19th May 2013, 12:10

Originally Posted by mashman

You want a conspiracy. Hypothesis: You and your group run the world. You know that you need to keep the people in check so that you can carry on living the way you do. It's no mean feat with 7 billion people, so how do you do it. Well fear seems to be the ultimate tool. You've pretty much got most of it sewn up with the employment slavery racquet, but some people just don't like you taking their resources and will defend what they class is theirs. How to manage them. Pay someone within their organisation very well to do your bidding. You won't be the bitch, you just need to sew the seeds. We need an excuse to pump more money into the economy and to justify the defense budget. I'll talk to my terrorist friend and suggest that we take out the WTC. I will arrange for their people to come to the US and will pay for them to be trained at pilot school. Because they will die for their cause no one will know who knows who and where the original order came from, they will train and then smash a couple of planes into some buildings. the rest will take care of itself.

Yours Sincerely

Ruler of the world. Gotta go, I've got a marathon to bomb and a budget to fleece.

**avgas** · 19th May 2013, 13:29

Originally Posted by oneofsix

I've seen many explanations as to why those main buildings collapsed the way they did, as I suspect you and Ed have. Mainly around the age of the design (that's how I some it up) and quantity of gas on board. Trouble is it is hard to get all the facts and nothing but them. More interesting to my mind is the Pentagon, seen some interesting explanations of the disappearing plane wreckage.

Any Jenga champion will tell you that if you take to many blocks out of the middle, the top falls to the weakest side.
Any woodsman will tell you that you need to force tree to fall away from you.
Any demo expert will tell you that if you collapse a building within a radius of 1/3 of its height - it's a job well done (towers were better than that).
Any structural engineer will tell you that solid steel I beams loose structural integrity at 900 degc and dissolve a 1300 deg C. But also cool faster as well (which is why I is good and box not so good).
Any physics major would calculate the rate at which a weight would fall before the potential energy of a impact would melt steel is significant.

All of them will say nothing when it comes to 911 if they are smart. Not only could you lose your accreditation - you could lose your life on that one. People have disappeared for less.

Doesn't have to be at that level also. Can be on a much smaller scale. How many NZ tunnelling specialists were at the trial of Pike River? I can tell you that Solid energy has 4, and even Pike had 5 employed in the years prior. All the pike ones left before it happened. They all probably still curse under their breath.
It is career suicide to talk out about things that get covered up - best idea is to move on and hope the next company listens.

**Katman** · 19th May 2013, 14:43

Ed will tell them all, they're wrong.

**Edbear** · 19th May 2013, 14:49

Originally Posted by oneofsix

I've seen many explanations as to why those main buildings collapsed the way they did, as I suspect you and Ed have. Mainly around the age of the design (that's how I some it up) and quantity of gas on board. Trouble is it is hard to get all the facts and nothing but them. More interesting to my mind is the Pentagon, seen some interesting explanations of the disappearing plane wreckage.

Originally Posted by avgas

Any Jenga champion will tell you that if you take to many blocks out of the middle, the top falls to the weakest side.
Any woodsman will tell you that you need to force tree to fall away from you.
Any demo expert will tell you that if you collapse a building within a radius of 1/3 of its height - it's a job well done (towers were better than that).
Any structural engineer will tell you that solid steel I beams loose structural integrity at 900 degc and dissolve a 1300 deg C. But also cool faster as well (which is why I is good and box not so good).
Any physics major would calculate the rate at which a weight would fall before the potential energy of a impact would melt steel is significant.

All of them will say nothing when it comes to 911 if they are smart. Not only could you lose your accreditation - you could lose your life on that one. People have disappeared for less.

Doesn't have to be at that level also. Can be on a much smaller scale. How many NZ tunnelling specialists were at the trial of Pike River? I can tell you that Solid energy has 4, and even Pike had 5 employed in the years prior. All the pike ones left before it happened. They all probably still curse under their breath.
It is career suicide to talk out about things that get covered up - best idea is to move on and hope the next company listens.

Yes, I have seen every video and virtually every interview. The towers collapsed as the designers expected they would given the forces and heat they were subject to. They were designed to resist an impact by a small aircraft as per the regs at the time. They were an exoskeleton and due to the intense heat, they simply became a vertical stack of dynamos. The floor under the top floors that were above, the floors burning and several storeys above, could not handle the weight collapsing on it and the towers were both doomed from moment of impact.

People don't seem to think about the fact that the planes did not hit the top of them but much lower down and it was not just a couple of floors collapsing, it was the entire weight of nearly the top third of both towers coming down.

Building 7 was not merely a couple of localised minor fires. It too was bound to collapse due to the intense heat of major internal fire, not seen from outside on the street. Engineers have clearly shown in video evidence and by people inside the building what the true story was.

But of course, the "highly intelligent" conspiracy theorists can't understand things like actual facts...

The Pentagon was definitely hit by the 757 and there is abundant photo and eyewitness testimony from paramedics and others about parts, including body parts, uniforms and signage. Again, the heat of the fire was intense but enough of the plane survived to prove what it was.

**bogan** · 19th May 2013, 15:04

So to summarise the two sides:

Engineers in the know think it is technically likely for the towers to fall that ways.
Engineers in the know have extreme doubts about that likelyhood, but are smart enough to realise it is not wise to speak out against a government that may have murdered thousands of people for a lot less.

Leaving little chance of the conspiracy theorists being proved right, or wrong.

Personally, I wouldn't be that surprised either way, but I won't be wasting time investigating it based on the flawed premise that the answers are actually available.

**Edbear** · 19th May 2013, 15:12

Originally Posted by bogan

So to summarise the two sides:

Engineers in the know think it is technically likely for the towers to fall that ways.
Engineers in the know have extreme doubts about that likelyhood, but are smart enough to realise it is not wise to speak out against a government that may have murdered thousands of people for a lot less.

Leaving little chance of the conspiracy theorists being proved right, or wrong.

Personally, I wouldn't be that surprised either way, but I won't be wasting time investigating it based on the flawed premise that the answers are actually available.

That is you to a 'T'. That way you never have to learn anything and can sit back and be a typical keyboard warrior, criticising and remaining comfy in your prejudice.

**bogan** · 19th May 2013, 15:16

Originally Posted by Edbear

That is you to a 'T'. That way you never have to learn anything and can sit back and be a typical keyboard warrior, criticising and remaining comfy in your prejudice.

Agree with the first, I've always tried to pare a problem right back to the heart of its issue, I consider it a worthy trait not only as an Engineer, but for many other things as well. As for the rest, overreaction much?