M8 AND 8 SERIES
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
BIMMERPOST Universal Forums Off-Topic Discussions Board Politics/Religion Sep 11 victim family's go to court long live trump

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      02-11-2017, 09:07 AM   #23
insanecoder
Brigadier General
1348
Rep
3,209
Posts

Drives: 340isDrive
Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6speeds View Post
In the news over here in Saudi Arabia . That In US sep 11 familys go to court asking for money from Saudi Arabia, time to take this to peoples court for real fact checking

This is taken from news media over here i will translate 4u.....
Finally US government have to take back seat unblock and let the people take saudia to court provide evidence or black box or any actual plane parts or anything from any of the 4 sights.

Also they have to prove how jet fuel sooooo highly inflammable that it would consume its self in seconds (cold fire)would actually melt thik solid steel structure shown in video evidence and eye witness.

They would have to explain with straight face how flight 93 actually stayed in one piece went underground and disappeared
and many other silly cartoonish questions.

I agree lets take it to peoples court for some real fact and truth checking this will put US govt on the spot to provide these people any type of real evidence, black box ,plane parts hahaha

It your govt block this case i will gladly help pay lawyer fees to get these family some answers.
I'd just like to know how WTC 7 which is a steel structured asymmetrical-shaped modern building which was NOT struck by a plane nor jet fuel & experienced only office fire and minor debris could:
1) collapse completely
2) collapse symmetrically
3) collapse in free-fall rates

did a ghost plane crash into it?
even if we fabricated/imagined that a plane crashed into it.. why the hell would it collapse free fall symmetrically and completely
smoking gun

Last edited by insanecoder; 02-11-2017 at 09:28 AM..
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 09:13 AM   #24
Jaghave
Colonel
795
Rep
2,136
Posts

Drives: 2016 BMW 340i (Auto) RWD
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: New Jersey

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by insanecoder View Post
I'd just like to know how WTC 7 which is a steel structured asymmetrical-shaped modern building which experienced only office fire and minor debris could:
1) collapse symetrically
2) collapse completely in freefall rates

did a ghost plane crash into it?
even if we fabricated/imagined that a plane crashed into it.. why the hell would it collapse freefall symetrically
smoking gun
All those intelligence paper in that building caught on fire and burn hotter than jet fuel.
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 09:24 AM   #25
insanecoder
Brigadier General
1348
Rep
3,209
Posts

Drives: 340isDrive
Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
All those intelligence paper in that building caught on fire and burn hotter than jet fuel.
All the intelligence in our country burned up with 911..
If it looks like sh!t.. smells like sh!t .. I dont care what they tell ya it is.. its SH!T
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 09:34 AM   #26
Lups
...
Lups's Avatar
10933
Rep
15,288
Posts

Drives: I don't own a car.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
I believe he would support the family since it appears he doesnt buy the current official story

I've never built a skyscraper but that clip was not done by a person who has building experience.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joekerr View Post
You're still a little new here, so I'll let you in on a little secret. Whenever Lups types gibberish, this is an opportunity for you to imagine it to be whatever you'd like it to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta0311 View Post
How would you know this? Did mommy catch you jerking off to some Big Foot porn ?
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 11:54 AM   #27
Zippster
Major
Zippster's Avatar
United_States
459
Rep
1,134
Posts

Drives: 17 BMW M2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

I stopped at how could jet fuel melt thick steel beams, Dude, you heat the steel up enough - far from the melting point and it fails, Yes 100,000 pounds or so of jet fuel can do that.
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 12:12 PM   #28
Lups
...
Lups's Avatar
10933
Rep
15,288
Posts

Drives: I don't own a car.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippster View Post
I stopped at how could jet fuel melt thick steel beams, Dude, you heat the steel up enough - far from the melting point and it fails, Yes 100,000 pounds or so of jet fuel can do that.
Let alone the heating of the steel beams causes irrefutable damage to the structure.

But hey, maybe it was the gnomes....
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joekerr View Post
You're still a little new here, so I'll let you in on a little secret. Whenever Lups types gibberish, this is an opportunity for you to imagine it to be whatever you'd like it to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta0311 View Post
How would you know this? Did mommy catch you jerking off to some Big Foot porn ?
Appreciate 1
Zippster459.00

      02-11-2017, 12:24 PM   #29
Zippster
Major
Zippster's Avatar
United_States
459
Rep
1,134
Posts

Drives: 17 BMW M2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
Let alone the heating of the steel beams causes irrefutable damage to the structure.

But hey, maybe it was the gnomes....
Or the Gremlins riding in the airplanes, all airplanes have them! I never thought of that..... Shit!
Appreciate 1
Lups10933.00

      02-11-2017, 12:31 PM   #30
Lups
...
Lups's Avatar
10933
Rep
15,288
Posts

Drives: I don't own a car.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippster View Post
Or the Gremlins riding in the airplanes, all airplanes have them! I never thought of that..... Shit!
Yeah, conspiracy theory dudes lost a talent when they said I can't join their ranks! They thought my theory of a sock stealing washing machine developed by the sock making industry was far fetched and told me I can't join their club!

Fuck those bitches!!

I've built a lot, it's my hobby. I have a basic understanding on how things react to changes of conditions and what one has to consider while going up 10ft off the ground, and an other ten, and an other ten. I also like watching clips of houses that are demolished, since I dream of doing that to mine every time I have to clean.

That makes me no expert, but it gives me some ground to think the gnomes were involved. They since then moved to the washing machine industry, so your buildings are safe!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joekerr View Post
You're still a little new here, so I'll let you in on a little secret. Whenever Lups types gibberish, this is an opportunity for you to imagine it to be whatever you'd like it to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta0311 View Post
How would you know this? Did mommy catch you jerking off to some Big Foot porn ?
Appreciate 1
Zippster459.00

      02-11-2017, 04:14 PM   #31
Zippster
Major
Zippster's Avatar
United_States
459
Rep
1,134
Posts

Drives: 17 BMW M2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
Yeah, conspiracy theory dudes lost a talent when they said I can't join their ranks! They thought my theory of a sock stealing washing machine developed by the sock making industry was far fetched and told me I can't join their club!

Fuck those bitches!!

I've built a lot, it's my hobby. I have a basic understanding on how things react to changes of conditions and what one has to consider while going up 10ft off the ground, and an other ten, and an other ten. I also like watching clips of houses that are demolished, since I dream of doing that to mine every time I have to clean.

That makes me no expert, but it gives me some ground to think the gnomes were involved. They since then moved to the washing machine industry, so your buildings are safe!
Well, until you mentioned the gnomes, it made me think of those cartoons we had with the Gremlins in airplanes hitting engine parts with a hammer and such! Gnomes and Gremlins, probably share DNA.

They did not let you in because of one flaw in your theory, its the damn dryer that eats the socks! Get a grip!

You do seem to have a pretty good handle on construction, are you a civil engineer?
Appreciate 1
Lups10933.00

      02-11-2017, 05:05 PM   #32
Lups
...
Lups's Avatar
10933
Rep
15,288
Posts

Drives: I don't own a car.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippster View Post
Well, until you mentioned the gnomes, it made me think of those cartoons we had with the Gremlins in airplanes hitting engine parts with a hammer and such! Gnomes and Gremlins, probably share DNA.

They did not let you in because of one flaw in your theory, its the damn dryer that eats the socks! Get a grip!

You do seem to have a pretty good handle on construction, are you a civil engineer?
Leave the dryer out of it you fucking lunatic!! I want my socks fluffy!!

But wait, gremlins could also be blamed?

Mmmm we can be friends again.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joekerr View Post
You're still a little new here, so I'll let you in on a little secret. Whenever Lups types gibberish, this is an opportunity for you to imagine it to be whatever you'd like it to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta0311 View Post
How would you know this? Did mommy catch you jerking off to some Big Foot porn ?
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 05:08 PM   #33
Zippster
Major
Zippster's Avatar
United_States
459
Rep
1,134
Posts

Drives: 17 BMW M2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
Leave the dryer out of it you fucking lunatic!! I want my socks fluffy!!

But wait, gremlins could also be blamed?

Mmmm we can be friends again.
Ok good!!

Now when you see my avatar you might change your mind, I think its funny, Its meant to be funny, hopefully not too abrasive.
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 05:17 PM   #34
Lups
...
Lups's Avatar
10933
Rep
15,288
Posts

Drives: I don't own a car.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippster View Post
Ok good!!

Now when you see my avatar you might change your mind, I think its funny, Its meant to be funny, hopefully not too abrasive.
We two will will never agree on everything, but we two can still talk about our different views. A middle finger shown is like a grain of sand in a shoe compared to what we will face if we decide to keep talking.

You're always you, and I'm me. We might not agree on much but the respect is there apparently.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joekerr View Post
You're still a little new here, so I'll let you in on a little secret. Whenever Lups types gibberish, this is an opportunity for you to imagine it to be whatever you'd like it to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta0311 View Post
How would you know this? Did mommy catch you jerking off to some Big Foot porn ?
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 05:30 PM   #35
Zippster
Major
Zippster's Avatar
United_States
459
Rep
1,134
Posts

Drives: 17 BMW M2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
We two will will never agree on everything, but we two can still talk about our different views. A middle finger shown is like a grain of sand in a shoe compared to what we will face if we decide to keep talking.

You're always you, and I'm me. We might not agree on much but the respect is there apparently.
True, we are shaped by our experiences in life and the beliefs we are taught by parents and others. It does not mean it's always right. I'm still trainable.

cheers
Appreciate 1
Lups10933.00

      02-11-2017, 08:32 PM   #36
insanecoder
Brigadier General
1348
Rep
3,209
Posts

Drives: 340isDrive
Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippster View Post
I stopped at how could jet fuel melt thick steel beams, Dude, you heat the steel up enough - far from the melting point and it fails, Yes 100,000 pounds or so of jet fuel can do that.
Most of the jet fuel blew out..
Besides jet fuel is essentially kerosene.. no kerosene cannot cause steel to melt kerosene burns at 700C max whereas steels melts at double that.

That said temperatures found at WTC exceeded the temperatures of kerosene burn for some strange reason.. which is why many believe it was some other accelerant involved.

Besides, WTC 7 was never doused with jet fuel and it simply completely collapsed in freefall all at once..
Appreciate 0
      02-11-2017, 09:01 PM   #37
zx10guy
Colonel
2061
Rep
2,281
Posts

Drives: 2013 135i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by insanecoder View Post
Most of the jet fuel blew out..
Besides jet fuel is essentially kerosene.. no kerosene cannot cause steel to melt kerosene burns at 700C max whereas steels melts at double that.

That said temperatures found at WTC exceeded the temperatures of kerosene burn for some strange reason.. which is why many believe it was some other accelerant involved.

Besides, WTC 7 was never doused with jet fuel and it simply completely collapsed in freefall all at once..
http://www.popularmechanics.com/mili...-trade-center/

'"MELTED" STEEL

Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

FACT: 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."
'

'WTC 7 COLLAPSE

Claim: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."


Fire Storm: WTC 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. Damaged by falling debris, the building then endures a fire that rages for hours. Experts say this combination, not a demolition-style implosion, led to the roofline "kink" that signals WTC 7's progressive collapse. (Photograph by New York Office of Emergency Management)

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom—approximately 10 stories—about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors—along with the building's unusual construction—were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
'
Appreciate 1
thegump16.50

      02-11-2017, 10:56 PM   #38
Mr Tonka
is probably out riding.
Mr Tonka's Avatar
United_States
5851
Rep
2,299
Posts

Drives: Something Italian
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweatypeninsula

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zx10guy View Post
http://www.popularmechanics.com/mili...-trade-center/

'"MELTED" STEEL

Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

FACT: 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."
'

'WTC 7 COLLAPSE

Claim: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."


Fire Storm: WTC 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. Damaged by falling debris, the building then endures a fire that rages for hours. Experts say this combination, not a demolition-style implosion, led to the roofline "kink" that signals WTC 7's progressive collapse. (Photograph by New York Office of Emergency Management)

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom—approximately 10 stories—about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors—along with the building's unusual construction—were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
'
There is absolutely no room in this thread for facts, logic and real physics. Get this shit out of here!




I happen to have the experience of watching a metal building burn while firefighters refused to go in only 15 minutes after the fire started (by a dumpster outside the building) because they feared the metal was already fatigued by the fire and would collapse at any moment. Well, it took about 30 more minutes for the 62' high roof to collapse. The ignition source for this fire was later determined to be a vehicle fire which started next to the dumpster which caught construction debris within the dumpster on fire. The dumpster was next to a window which broke due to the heat created by the burning dumpster and moved inside the building which was mostly office space attached to a warehouse holding carpet & padding. It's pretty surreal watching your building be consumed by the inside out only to collapse in on itself.

No jet fuel, no bombs, no controlled demo... just building steel beams exposed to an environment in which they were not designed to withstand.
__________________
"There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice. -Charles de Secondat"
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic59612_1.gif
Appreciate 3
Lups10933.00
MKSixer15734.50

      02-12-2017, 12:12 AM   #39
Zippster
Major
Zippster's Avatar
United_States
459
Rep
1,134
Posts

Drives: 17 BMW M2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by insanecoder View Post
Most of the jet fuel blew out..
Besides jet fuel is essentially kerosene.. no kerosene cannot cause steel to melt kerosene burns at 700C max whereas steels melts at double that.

That said temperatures found at WTC exceeded the temperatures of kerosene burn for some strange reason.. which is why many believe it was some other accelerant involved.

Besides, WTC 7 was never doused with jet fuel and it simply completely collapsed in freefall all at once..
I probably didn't explain myself well here, I was not saying jet fuel melted steel, but rather a hot fire can cause steel to fail, not going to argue temps of burning Jet fuel, both buildings failed.
Appreciate 1
Lups10933.00

      02-12-2017, 12:50 AM   #40
6speeds
Private First Class
25
Rep
155
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Manual RWD

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
I believe he would support the family since it appears he doesnt buy the current official story

Oh waw i just looked this video two times cant believe the US president said there was bombs planted in twin towers... i am now true believer that president trump looks out for his own people and cares about his own country. Yes it deserves second look why not

US has been to many many wars as result of 9/11 many many people killed trillions of dollars wasted. US has put its people in front line fighting other peoples wars (israel).

Question about jet fuel melting sollid steel is a joke its not if it can or not but how long dose jet fuel need to burn to actually melt solid steel it was consumed in seconds .. video and witness and firefighters said there was molten steel running down like liquid.

also why did bush stay in that classroom for 20 minutes after been told america under attack?????????????????????????

Also everybody and his grandmother know that planes just DO NOT go underground it just dosent happen in real life

Its shame some people try to make all Americans look stupid
Appreciate 0
      02-12-2017, 08:13 AM   #41
Mr Tonka
is probably out riding.
Mr Tonka's Avatar
United_States
5851
Rep
2,299
Posts

Drives: Something Italian
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweatypeninsula

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6speeds View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
I believe he would support the family since it appears he doesnt buy the current official story

Oh waw i just looked this video two times cant believe the US president said there was bombs planted in twin towers... i am now true believer that president trump looks out for his own people and cares about his own country. Yes it deserves second look why not

US has been to many many wars as result of 9/11 many many people killed trillions of dollars wasted. US has put its people in front line fighting other peoples wars (israel).

Question about jet fuel melting sollid steel is a joke its not if it can or not but how long dose jet fuel need to burn to actually melt solid steel it was consumed in seconds .. video and witness and firefighters said there was molten steel running down like liquid.

also why did bush stay in that classroom for 20 minutes after been told america under attack?????????????????????????

Also everybody and his grandmother know that planes just DO NOT go underground it just dosent happen in real life

Its shame some people try to make all Americans look stupid
You watched it two times and still weren't able to comprehend what he said. : Maybe English isn't your first language so you can have a pass. What he was implying was he thought the hijackers must have detonated a bomb on the planes as they impacted the buildings.

Anyone trying to argue that 9/11 was an "inside job" by saying jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough melt steal should immediately have their opinions and theory discarded. As if a 600,000 pound piece of metal, fuel, wires and other combustibles will have no effect on a building that it crashes into other than how hot the jet fuel will burn. Simple thought processes like this is why people using them get sent to the kids table by anyone who understands real world physics.
__________________
"There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice. -Charles de Secondat"
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic59612_1.gif
Appreciate 3
Lups10933.00
thegump16.50
Zippster459.00

      02-12-2017, 09:42 AM   #42
zx10guy
Colonel
2061
Rep
2,281
Posts

Drives: 2013 135i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
You watched it two times and still weren't able to comprehend what he said. : Maybe English isn't your first language so you can have a pass. What he was implying was he thought the hijackers must have detonated a bomb on the planes as they impacted the buildings.

Anyone trying to argue that 9/11 was an "inside job" by saying jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough melt steal should immediately have their opinions and theory discarded. As if a 600,000 pound piece of metal, fuel, wires and other combustibles will have no effect on a building that it crashes into other than how hot the jet fuel will burn. Simple thought processes like this is why people using them get sent to the kids table by anyone who understands real world physics.
I sort of remember the architect of the two World Trade Towers saying the design leveraged the outer "shell" of the building as the load bearing members tied together by the steel beams. Given this knowledge, it's very easy to see how 1) a plane punching a big sized hole through the side of the building and 2) the resulting fire disturbing the structural integrity of the horizontal steel beams would cause a major compromise of the overall structure.

I have flashbacks to one of the engineering classes I had in college called Mechanics I, which was a combination of statics and dynamics. I see the building as one of many exercise problems in the statics part of the class: whether it be a truss, bridge, etc. It's eye opening when you have an engineered structure where all parts of it depend on how the forces balance out and even with one small component being taken out how big of an impact it has in the overall balance of the entire structure.
Appreciate 2
Lups10933.00
thegump16.50

      02-12-2017, 01:04 PM   #43
bbbbmw
Major General
2370
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

I think the OP was saying that if Trump clears the way for US citizens to sue Saudi Arabia in US courts, then during the trial the "real" truth will come out, as Saudi Arabia defends itself.

Because everyone knows that people from Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, all Saudis promote peace across the globe, and have a utopian society where everyone is equal, and wealth is shared.
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      02-12-2017, 01:39 PM   #44
Mr Tonka
is probably out riding.
Mr Tonka's Avatar
United_States
5851
Rep
2,299
Posts

Drives: Something Italian
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweatypeninsula

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zx10guy View Post
I sort of remember the architect of the two World Trade Towers saying the design leveraged the outer "shell" of the building as the load bearing members tied together by the steel beams. Given this knowledge, it's very easy to see how 1) a plane punching a big sized hole through the side of the building and 2) the resulting fire disturbing the structural integrity of the horizontal steel beams would cause a major compromise of the overall structure.

I have flashbacks to one of the engineering classes I had in college called Mechanics I, which was a combination of statics and dynamics. I see the building as one of many exercise problems in the statics part of the class: whether it be a truss, bridge, etc. It's eye opening when you have an engineered structure where all parts of it depend on how the forces balance out and even with one small component being taken out how big of an impact it has in the overall balance of the entire structure.
Exactly. I'm in the flooring business and on a hand full of occasions when working in a high-rise condo we were required to apply about 25000 pounds of floor patch to level a floor out. The condo board had to get building engineers involved to see if the building could withstand the additional weight on only one side of a single floor. On all but one occasion, the engineers disallowed the additional floor patch because they determined that much weight on just one side of a single floor could compromise the building. One of them explained that the weight alone would not cause the building to fail or anything like that, but rather the weight not being balanced throughout the floor could cause a failure during a hurricane or a more improbable earth quake.

It's almost as if people have never jumped on a scale or something. Next time on a grocery store scale, just step on as normal. Then just jump about 1" and see if you don't peg the scale when landing.

100 pounds falling from just 4 feet can have an impact of 20,000 pounds when it lands. A typical office floor can withstand 50 pounds per square foot. At 10000sf for floor (100'x100') building that's 500,000 pounds. A 747 alone weights more than that when loaded. Just discount that extra weight and realize when the supports fail on a single floor, the 10 floors above it, weighing some 10,000,000 pounds will instantly collapse the floor it lands and and one by one, in quick succession, do the same to every floor below it. That 10mil pounds is compounded by the falling force to equal something like 2,000,000,000 pounds. Thats BILLION.

I'm no expert but this is basic physics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbbbmw View Post
I think the OP was saying that if Trump clears the way for US citizens to sue Saudi Arabia in US courts, then during the trial the "real" truth will come out, as Saudi Arabia defends itself.

Because everyone knows that people from Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact, all Saudis promote peace across the globe, and have a utopian society where everyone is equal, and wealth is shared.
From his flight 93 comment, i assumed he was implying that the conspiracy would come to light when SA told everyone the truth.
__________________
"There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice. -Charles de Secondat"
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic59612_1.gif
Appreciate 1
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:54 AM.




m8
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST