Lindseyw Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 All this talk has made me wonder if I should cancel my holiday in the Bermuda triangle this year ? Never. You should go !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venger Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 In what way was it 'wrong'? Flight 11 hit North Tower @ 8:46 AM Flight 175 hit South Tower @ 9:03 AM South Tower collapsed 29 minutes before North Tower even though it was struck 17 minutes after. The fire in the South Tower was also much smaller as most of the jet fuel was burned out outside of the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Lockerbie blew up mid air with a bomb on board though I think the CIA took over the investigation and our bobbies were warned off, very suspicious I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beakerzoid Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Flight 11 hit North Tower @ 8:46 AM Flight 175 hit South Tower @ 9:03 AM South Tower collapsed 29 minutes before North Tower even though it was struck 17 minutes after. The fire in the South Tower was also much smaller as most of the jet fuel was burned out outside of the building. Check Chapter 2 of the FEMA report. It covers some factors in the collapse, such as the faster speed, and thus impact, of the flight into the South Tower. or that the impact was on the corner, and thus closer to support struts than the 'central' impact of north tower. Then the fact the impact was 20 floors lower...so the load above was heavier. All seem like reasonable factors as to why it would collapse quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Not officially but many have crashed in strange circumstances though, Lockerbie, You mean the one the Libyans admitted to blowing up in an act of state sponsored terrorism just before they handed over the bombers? New York. The one that suffered separation of the tail? NTSB report and the one over Korea spring to mind. Ah, you mean the one that the Soviet Government admitted to shooting down by mistake? All explained away with strange stories. Hmmm, I'd argue with that point US military aircraft are on 24 hour standby, caught them on the hop ? No they aren't in the USA. There hasn't been any reason to have them on standby for years. What threat would require a 2.5 minute scramble? There are aircraft in Europe and Asia and the Middle east that are, but not on the Homeland. That may have changed, but that's retrospect for you Anyway, it's irrelevant because they still wouldn't have shot them down bacuse there was no day to day guidance in place at that time that even remotely suggested it. I suspect it would be difficult to get anything shot down today without presidential approval TBH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 The fact that if the building had fallen naturrally they would toppled sideways causing total devastation. The charges were installed at the manufacture of them to facilitate demolition, when they were no longer required. The order to pull them down was to prevent any further loss of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abdul Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 You mean the one the Libyans admitted to blowing up in an act of state sponsored terrorism just before they handed over the bombers? Err... I thought Libya didn't admit to it, but instead 'accepted responsibility', which may or may not have been a diplomatic way of saying: 'We had nothing to do with it, and we're tired of being blamed for it. The British and Libyan economies may benefit from each other if you accept our £millions compensation, and I'd really like to meet Mr Tony Blair' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbradley Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 definately something suspect about the whole deal:huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Errr... come on artisan. Let's not lose touch with the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwhatref Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 No there shouldn't be an independant enquiry. A bunch of nutters hijacked two planes and flew them into the WTC. They collapsed as a result of this probably due to some weakness that no one would have thought to identify back then. I'm with Beakerzoid on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.