Defending the Truth

It would take thousands of our dear, sweet Ali's to build a highrise, plus maybe a few H80W's to help her.

Heck, we moved our office to another location in the same building last week. Instead of hiring young, big and burly men to help move us, we oldies did the job ourselves. And I'm the baby of the company at only 54. BOO HOO!!

I get it just fine. I was making a whole other point here as you will soon see.

Shaped Charges and the World Trade Center Collapses Tell me again how explosives wouldnt "cut" the support beams? They are in fact designed and used regularly to cut support beams. That picture is text book of what thermite does. And there are several examples.
Not impressed with the MELTED parts of he top of it?

All of the steel on the top floors, (where the fire was) Had protected steel.



Yea, what would he know about demolishing buildings, he only owns a building demolition company. LOL, my goodness. He knows alot more about it than you thats for certain.

I thought you said the boeing 707 didnt exist at the time? Which is it AP? In the mans own words he said it was made to take the hit from a 707 FULLY FUELED.

It isnt just my theroy. 46% polled in NYC said they believe this to be a inside job. You didnt even look at those video's did you?

But for the sake of argument, lets say that you are correct. Lets say the first 2 buildings fell do to structural and fire damage(which it wasnt). Lets move on to the biggest mystery of all, building number 7. Though buildings 3 and 4 (which are much closer to the towers stayed structuraly sound, even though heavely damaged) With out being hit by a plane, without any where near the damage as other buildings around it, it fell in 6 seconds flat, as well as any demolition crew in the world could have done. Lets have a look at WTC 7 compaired to a well planned out demolition of another building, side by side.



Any fool can clearly see this building fell with purpose. This building fell with intent, from a very well trained demolition crew. There is no way around it.

The 707's existed in the 1950's. They were loud and smoky.

Boeing 707 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The planes that flew into the WTC were 767's. The 707's were no longer used on domestic routes.

Do you know what a weld is? It's MELTED materials used to fuse two joints together...So I'd EXPECT there to be 'melted' points on that piece, where the BONDING MATERIAL MELTED, causing the two pieces to come apart...

They literally cut out portions that were damaged in the 93' explosion, then inserted new portions and welded them together...

I realize that YOU need to ignore that and paint it as something else, but the simple fact is, what that picture shows is not unusual in fire/collasp sitations regarding welded pieces of steel.

Not demolision...But weldings failing.

No darling Gracie, they didn't. Only PARTS of the steel...Certain LOCATIONS of the steel structure, had the fire-proofing paint on them.

Funny how it went from your original claim of 'they made fire-resistant heavy steel' to now you are willing to acknowledge that it wasn't but was instead paint...Yet you still insist in trying to twist it into your conspiracy into something other then what the truth is...Kinda like your 'experts' do...Backtrack about what they previously claimed then change the story as the facts change their original arguments?

You better go back and re-read my posts Gracie...I never said that they never exsisted...I said the building was built to withstand wind stresses...Not fire...Such as the planes' fuel would cause. That the steel wasn't designed to be 'fire-resistant' like you were claiming, in regards to the plane's fuel not being able to soften it's structure through the heat generated.

And Robertson never said they made the building to withstand a plane impact...Simply that they theorized that it should be able to withstand a plane impact. But when questions about fire integrity did arise after the massive office fires, he did analyze the possibility of whether or not the towers could stand through a massive fire. He then stated in his findings that it couldn't be determined at all IF the buildings could withstand an impact with a plane, because they hadn't figured into it FUEL burning from the plane...Just the Boeing itself, fully LOADED WITH PASSENGERS...Not fully loaded with fuel...but with PASSENGERS.

In otherwords, he himself stated that there was no way of determining whether or not the claims about a plane impacting the towers could actually be supported, as they hadn't figured into it all the factors of such an incident especially in regards to the fuel or other combustible materials in the office spaces themselves....That their original claim was based solely on incidents regarding the Empire State Building, and only took into consideration that the planes would be in a slower landing speed rate and just carrying passengers...Full seating. Not fuel, but PASSENGERS.

And when 9-11 happened, he re-stated those same sentiments...That they hadn't taken into consideration that fuel from the planes themselves would cause the towers to collasp. That a plane would approach the towers at full speed (not landing speed), or that the planes would be fully loaded with fuel (not passengers). He had no reason what-so-ever to re-state his earlier findings that there was a fire probability flaw in the building design then (in the 70's) or right after they collasped (2001).

So in otherwords...the Boeing 707 Myth is just that...A myth that they never really checked into prior to putting the towers up. They had faith it could based on the Empire State Building surviving head on plane collisions...But hadn't done study samples or tested for such a possibility in regards to their specific design or other qualifying factors...Such as the fuel.

I've seen the videos...And it's great photoshop work...But that's all it is...People making videos, telling you what you should be seeing, and you swallowing it hook, line, and sinker as usual Grace...

I really could care less who all agrees with you...There's not a shortage of stupidity, gullibility, or conspiracy nuts in our country...The fact that others swallow that hog wash along with you doesn't mean it makes it true...There's millions of fools out there that believe the moon landing is fake...Who when polled agree with that story...

But doesn't make it true at all, so why is it your preferred conspiracy, with the same holes in it as the moon walk one...Is 'truth'?

Well darling, it isn't.

P.S...I went back and re-read my posts...I owe Gracie an apology...For some reason, my thoughts didn't work well with what I posted and did indeed state that Boeings didn't exsist then?

I have no clue or excuse for why I said it...As I do know better. All I can think is that I wasn't clarigying incidents involving the Empire State Building, incidents that the claims to the Towers were based off of, when Boeings didn't exsist. It just came out saying something else instead. LOL!

That's the problem when the mind works faster then the fingers...Sorry Grace, I did say it unintentionally...I am more then aware Boeings exsisted then, and I wouldn't intentionally state that they didn't to begin with.

For two months in the spring on 1978, Ali, I worked with the Department of Airports at L.A. International. I had a view of the jetlines taking off to the west, so it meant they flew over the ocean.

Every morning, TWA usually had those 707's, and I could see a smoky trail for miles until they turned around to continue to fly over the mainland USA, on their way to eastern cities. They were always noisy, and took off from the right side of my window view.

Actually I deleted that post Highway, and re-edited my last post to Gracie with an apology...For some reason, what I wrote into what she's pointing out, wasn't what I was thinking at the time I wrote it...

I ment to say:

At the time the Empire State Building was hit, Boeings didn't exsist. And the plane impact scenerio that the builders of the WTC were basing their 'a Boeing 707 won't bring it down' was based off of the incidents of planes hitting the Empire State Building...In otherwords, if the Empire State Building could survive a direct on plane hit...Then their design could also survive a head on with a Boeing 707...

And the largest plane to have hit the Empire State Building was a B-25 bomber in 1945...With little damage to the building...That was the largest plane craft they had at that time. And that's what the designers soley based their claims on in regards to the WTC.

Of course, I get to have an interesting time responding to posts period here...I'll be on a thought of what I'm trying to say, and my mom will ask me to stop and help her with something...So by the time I get back, what I started to say is completely forgotten so I quickly try to finish the post and I just click 'post response' then go to the next discussion before mom calls me again to get her something to drink, turn her on her side, help her to the bathroom, fluff her pillows, cover her up, etc. that is required in full-time care of someone that's unable to care for themselves at the moment...LOL!

Hence the reason why I haven't posted much since she moved in...Hard to get involved in a discussion and post clear thoughts when you're being constantly interrupted.

I would suggest that if you have Microsoft Word, type your response on that, until you hear the bell. Or if you have to, save it and then you can open it when you return. That way, you may not lose your train of thought.

I remembering you saying something about being your mom's Johnson and Johnson nurse, without my poor dear Ali having little time for herself. But you are a wonderful daughter to your mom, Ali. I salute you. And here is something for your mom for Mother's Day.

We had two nurses there for awhile, but mom's coverage only allowed for a limited time the therapyst which ended a month and a half ago...And they extended her home care nurse for a few more weeks till mom's doctor gets hold of us about the daily shots he's trying to get her qualified for (her bone treatment) so the nurse can show us how to give mom the shots...

But mainly, she just now shows up to take mom's vitals then leaves...In otherwords, doesn't give me a break at all in caring for mom, since I have to let her know how mom's been while she wasn't present. And that's about to end and we still haven't heard back from the doctor as to if she's qualified for the shots...

Add into that hubby and I couldn't even really go out for our anniversary this month cause my brother would only watch her an hour...I really don't get a break from the 7/24 care of her.

Not that I'm gripping. I know when I've needed help, she's been there for me so I'm happy to return the favor. But trying to do anything that takes concentration is a lost cause. LOL!

She hears me typing or moving about and immediately calls me to help her with something. Luckily I can type fast...But by the time I get done with her, I really have forgotten what my original train of thought was with whatever I was doing.

Right now though...She's sleeping deeply. Doctor upped her anti-depressants and it knocks her out. Which gave me time to bathe my dogs, clean out the fridge, and scrub the oven out. ROTFLMAOL!

Right now I'm just taking a break before I have to wake her up and re-drug her.

Ohhh, and enjoying not hearing my name called every few minutes. If they keep her knocked out tomorrow, I'm hoping to work on one of my jewelry pieces...Tried to work on it a few weeks ago and kept breaking the strands...That becomes costly, to say the least.

The Following User Says Thank You to highway80west For This Useful Post: AlicornsPrayer (Today)



LOL, why are you thanking him? YOU are the one who said boeings didnt exist yet, after I told you it was built to take the crash of a boeing 707. He is proving ME right, not you.