qkk20 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

dude i love you , yeah by now it should be more than obious for people too know that it was an inside job, nut remember a lot of people in america , have been turned to zombies, just like the movies ,they are warnings now the robocops will come, and the aliens and a lot of different shit!

antiklaus (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

And you can tell that the structure was unevenly loaded because? Yeah, exactly. It wasn't. IF it had been, you'd have seen the structure tilting... or you'd have seen extreme warping of steel on one side only, especially during collapse. In fact, the structure would have toppled over, not collapsed symmetrically into rubble in sizes where less than 1% needed to be cut to put onto trucks, because it was already the right size.

antiklaus (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Wow, 50% huh? So a building built with 20 times the capability of supporting the weight loses half of that capability... That still means it could hold 10 more times. Totally insufficient weakening to cause systemic collapse.

MyWhalecrap (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I think this guy thinks too much of big words he might not understand.

louislode (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Also notice that the insider "expert" is asked if he thinks explosive devices were placed in the buildings. The perpetrators new that this thought would come op in peoples minds later. To which question the "expert" therefore immediately without the slightest hesitation answers "No.." to wipe that thought of the republic's awareness. They had it all figured out beforehand psychologically. Typical of propaganda.

louislode (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

2. Just before the building actually collapsed the BBC transmission was "mysteriously" broken off completely.(I am not aware of such a thing happening before nor after.) But it had to be done, otherwise it would become too obvious that scenario had been pre-written... Google: BBC report on building 7.

louislode (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

1. Here the BBC reports live on the morning of 9/11 that the "Salomon" building 7 has collapsed, while it is still seen standing behind their lady reporter. The reporter read all the "news" off the prompter right above the lens of the camera. This "news" item was released a bit too early, a small glitch in the overall near perfect timing of the whole propaganda operation.

meepage332 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Learn some physics, metal loses about half its strength under intense heat. 11/9 was caused by angry terrorists not the American Government.

JoeMiozza (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Thank you for highlighting my point. You say the 'load was redistributed'. With the damage almost exclusively on one side, the loads on the remaining structure were tremendous, but also there within amplified through leverage due to UNEVEN redistribution if the load. Keep in mind we are towards the top of the building where the columns are the narrowest, then burn the remaining structure in a jet-fuel fed fire. The fire hardly has to be as hot or long. So, not 'irrelevant', just 'in addition to'

sbrenn (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

How odd it is then, that in the latest Loose Change film, they had to include a statement up front, stating the firemen didn't agree whith what was suggested. And pools of lava and calling a report a farce doesn't mean the government was in on it. Just a guy with an attitude or ten reasons for that pool to form. But please... believe what you want. I don't lose any sleep over it. I'm afraid you will be posting vids in 40 years time.