 |
Duration: 00:60 minutes Upload Time: 2007-01-20 06:31:32 User: representativepress :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day |
|
Tags:
September 11th 9/11 Truth Movement Controlled Demolition theory Debunked Debunking Debunks Debunk baptized Baptism Adri
Description: My email to Adri: Dear Adri, I read your article, "The Jenga hypothesis, or how I learned to start worrying" which contained this factual error "mere moments before their respective virtual implosions - nine to 10 seconds before in each case, actually - the 110-story steel structures had shown no signs of imminent collapse, such as characteristic sagging or tilting." That simply isn't true, you could not see the sagging of floors or bowing of steel columns but others saw it (see photos of this at the links below) . Unfortunately, you are spreading the same misinformation that David Ray Griffin spreads. Griffin erroneously writes "The buildings were perfectly motionless up to the moment they began their collapse." The fact is, before the collapse of either tower, evidence the structures of the WTC were failing, columns bending, floors sagging, was reported by Police, Firemen and civilians. We can see in the photos that the exterior columns were bowing in the minutes before the collapse, in the case of the South Tower, the bending was evident as early as 18 minutes after the plane's impact. Griffin is simply wrong. Please read over my article WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory http://www.representativepress.org/BowingDebunksExplosives.html and my blog post: http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/05/911-conspiracy-people-are-still-at-it.html Please watch my videos: Facts the "9/11 Skeptics" don't want you to see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGAoRrBoPRM What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg Re: Investigate 911 campaign http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puzLR00lznI If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I hope you can write a correction in your next column and perhaps give out the links to my videos and articles so that more people can be exposed to the facts. I also want to "galvanize the student population of this country" but the only way to do it right is to stick to the facts. Please help me get the facts out to others. Please mention my YouTube channel ( http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=representativepress ) and the videos I made on this subject in your article. Sincerely, Tom Murphy ----------------- Adri's article: http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2007/01/18/70347 facts about WTC7: WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours. WTC1 collapsed and the debris spilled into the surrounding streets and onto WTC 7 among others, damaging the building. http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/09/wtc-7-was-severely-damaged-on-south.html |
|
Comments | |
| darkgatherer ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 06:47:38 9/11 "truth" folks aren't really concerened with evidence, facts or reality. __________________________________________________ | |
| invertedbeard ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 07:34:08 the physical characteristics of the collapses can be debated ad-infinitum. A lot of it is related to the belief system of the individual, and can be very subjective. What most people can probably agree on is motivations, of individuals & government involvement. I have no doubt that corrupt sub-USA government was involved in these attacks, directly or indirectly. __________________________________________________ | |
| representativepress ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 08:51:44 invertedbeard, look again. The pre-collapse bowing and sagging was witnessed and photographed. This isn't about believing it or not, we know it happened. And since it happened, it shows the fire were taking their toll on the buildings. the buildings' structure were failing BEFORE the collapses, THAT ISN'T HOW A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION HAPPENS. Let's deal with reality: the horrific foreign policies - put an end to this crap. __________________________________________________ | |
| genghis6199 ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 09:00:01 so where are these photos.??? you 'official story' people are funny, what you're saying is that other people saw sagging so they're right?. ffs dude. less talk more upload. i have hundreds of hours of video of 911 and i see no sagging. are you just making this up or what?. please upload or shut up. __________________________________________________ | |
| invertedbeard ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 09:04:16 I afraid I dont agree with your hypothesis. I dont believe that the fire would cause massive structural weakness. Data from Previous fire damage structures, dont support catastrophic failure which was witnessed on the day. Other factors may have caused sagging and bowing. But to the extent of the complete structure, I dont agree. Could the the collapse be a compound problem? yes it could, but from fire - i doubt it. __________________________________________________ | |
| invertedbeard ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 09:04:26 As I say we could debate the nature of the collapse for light years to come. But we both agree that horrific foreign policy is a motivating factor. Until the cancer is removed from the government, idealogical fanatics will have more grain for the mill. __________________________________________________ | |
| invertedbeard ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 09:08:25 As I say we could debate the nature of the collapse for light years to come. But we both agree that horrific foreign policy is a motivating factor. Until the cancer is removed from the government, idealogical fanatics will have more grain for the mill. __________________________________________________ | |
| Gargar0th ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 11:40:12 acutaly your wrong representativepress it wasnt a usual controlled demolotion it started from the top basicaly there was explosions in the basement(even before than plane hit) and other places that weakned the strucuture and after that there was the major explosions starting at the top that brought it down, there could have not been explosions since there was no gas like they claim, it was a class A building(no gas) i sugest you do some research __________________________________________________ | |
| zsnes3260 ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 13:45:31 Yeah he's right, All these conspiracies are here to steer us away from the real truth. And thats America's awful foreign policies in the middle east. __________________________________________________ | |
| darkgatherer ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 15:11:27 The fire alone didn't have to cause all the damage because remember the buildings were hit by air planes full of fuel at hundereds of MPH. So comparing previous examples of fire damage is not relevant if those buildinds were also hit with a plane this size. __________________________________________________ | |
| darkgatherer ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 15:16:05 If it had none of the characteristics of a classic controlled demolition then how can you guy say that you know it is one? Isn't interesting that in both buildings the collapse began at the impact zone? Not at the bottom or the top. In fact unlike a real controlled demolition the bottom was never blown out, it was crushed by debris of the falling building. There are no signs of a controlled demolision. __________________________________________________ | |
| brianconcannon ::: Favorites 2007-01-20 23:56:23 WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane, only had 2 small fires at one end of the building, but still came down as one at free fall speed. Do you work for the US Government or Israel ? __________________________________________________ | |
| representativepress ::: Favorites 2007-01-21 00:06:46 WTC1 collapsed and contrary to the claims of 9/11 conspiracy people, it did not collapse into its footprint like a controlled explosion. Instead, as the building collapsed, the debris from WTC 1 spilled into the surrounding streets and onto WTC 7 among others, damaging the building. __________________________________________________ | |
| brianconcannon ::: Favorites 2007-01-21 01:32:55 yea but the buildings in front of WTC7 were alot more badly damaged, and they didn't come down. But then again they didn't contain sensitive documents about the rigged 2000 election, CIA investigations and Wall Street investigations, etc. There were alot of relieved people about when that info was lost, lol. __________________________________________________ | |
| Gargar0th ::: Favorites 2007-01-21 11:25:46 in fact it was not, you can see hole in one of the towers with sattelite images and the rest of the blown tower is around that hole, you have to understand that the explosions started syncronized between floors starting at the top you can actualy see the explosion through the windows 20 floors or so below the falling build, and you fail to point out what was those explosions since there is no gas. __________________________________________________ | |
No comments:
Post a Comment