Posts: 11295
-
Karma: 502
It is really easy to be drawn in (or seduced, if you will) to negligible "evidence" if you are not fully aware of both sides. And you are not aware of how that film puts it: "the official side." You don't think that film was at all biased? Or the information presented in an equal manner? Far from. It is akin to the just rapid online conspiracy movement, which is rather limited to the internet (albeit, frighteningly, towards television). It presented nothing new, just monotonous guesswork.
First off, your first set of inquiry has been explained (well, attempted to be explained) numerous times.
Nobody said the fires melted the steel, because it couldn't melt it. But yes, it did weaken it. By how much? I don't know, but there are people with the know how to find out, and have investigated it far, far more than the guy who created this film. Who knows exactly how bad the damage was, but one structural failure can lead to an entire failure. So while the building was designed to take the impact of a plane, and the steel cannot melt, certain elements of failure and weakening can lead to a complete collapse.
And as for that one building shown, it was, after all, a much smaller building, built vastly different, and had an incident that was by no means similar to the circumstances at the World Trade Center. To compare them is foolish; apples and oranges.
Windows exploding at the bottom of the building? I don't think anybody is denying that. But have ever considering what happens to a building when it gets hit by an airplane? As your faithful movie describes, the building is made of steel, and thus can bend. It is even designed to allow flexibility on the windiest of days, and because of its height, it will alter inches, maybe feet. Look what happened to the John Hancock building when it was constructed. It is not the same situation, but slight variations in the moldings for the windows caused them to blow out without any impact of any kind,. When those planes struck, where does that energy and force go? The building isn't fully static, so some of that massive amounts of energy is going to work its way down that building.
WTC7 has been attempted to be explained so many times its ridiculous. You, like most of the conspiracy believers, have misconstrued little itty bitty things that have no relevance. The biggest, of course, is that initial FEMA report that seems to find its way into every single discussion known to man.
As for your views on Bush and such, obviously they are left of center, which I guess can explain why you are quick to believe that it is a government orchestrated event. I'm a liberal, but fuck, common sense is a great tool, as is critical thinking, and of course, being educated doesn't hurt in matters such as these. And by that I mean really diving into this personally. Rather than looking at a bunch of videos on YouTube, look at documents from both sides, official statements. Look at the visual evidence from pictures. However, it is amazing what people think they see (i.e. a missile hole in the pentagon, no windows on planes [there were], puffs from explosions [compressed air by any chance?], etc. etc.}.
But Bush a terrorist? How? He may have called for the war in Iraq with flawed evidence, but there is a very distinct different between people with guns in uniform and people with missile launchers sitting in a building with their family shooting at people as they go by, or walking into a market in Tel Aviv and blowing some people up. Bush may be a fool, bad leader, whatever, and thousands may die as a result of his incompetancy, but he is not a terrorist, because literally, he isn't!
As for Bin Laden, how is he not smart enough? History channel has an excellent program about his life, and if you love watching things, you can see that he is quite educated, not to mention bloody wealthy. Oh, and he has utter contempt for the Western World. He has issued decrees that Muslims kill Americans. Funny, eh? The World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 by Islamic extremists, one such was Ramzi Yussuf. It was orchestrated by al-Qaeda, who is founded by nobody other than Osama bin laden. 2001 wasn’t the first time. Also, look at the nature of terrorist attacks in the past, or should I list them considering none of these online videos contain anything regarding them. And quite frankly, it is crucial to understand that there are people who conduct these acts on western countries, especially people that are allies of Israel.
And speaking of Bin Laden, he claimed responsibility for the attacks. Should we not believe him? Was he paid by the Bush administration? I guess so, because it is obvious. There is no proof, but it is obvious.
