Well Charlie Sheen says it was a bomb so thats good enough for me!:dizzy2:

Congratulations for holding it together for a full thirty posts. I doubt this would have been this civil even a year ago.

Building Seven could be a problem with the establishment backed official conspiracy theory.

It takes a leap of faith to explain that one. Building six and a city street were between the towers and building seven. Building six was not destroyed. The official explanation states that the only way the towers could possibly fall was into their own footprint. It doesn't allow for debris passing over building six and crossing the street to damage building seven.

Building Seven was newer and was a different design than the towers. It was on a different lot. The only thing it had in common was the owner, Larry Silverstein, and maybe the insurance company. Many have called Larry Silverstein a greedy bastard after he tried to collect twice for the damage to the buildings and he held-up new development at the site.

Funny how they use imminent domain to take old folks life-long homes for private development but choose not to use it in a case like this. Maybe the payoffs are different.

I've got a problem with building 7 as well.

It appeared nearly undamaged, and then many hours later it falls as though it suffered a prefect demolotion.

The towers..........NFW that anybody set charges for them.......but building 7 leaves me in a total quandry.

Oh yes, and for you conspiracy theory fans, building seven reportedly contained the investigative files for financial crimes like Enron, their investment bankers, and others like them. The files were destroyed and priorities changed, many prosecutions fell by the wayside. Wall Street's long decline into the muck was hastened but reversed.

Have you read the official report on the Towers? I haven't.

B

Not to mention the fact that Silverstein said, 'Pull it" I think the following is the transcript of his comments:

"(The Fire Department) were not sure that they were gonna be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we´ve had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. They made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse"

The likelihood of anyone piloting two jumbo airliners into the two tallest buildings in the Western Hemisphere was very small too.

.... But it DID happen.

Just because an explanation is "unlikely" does not mean that it is not the correct explanation. "Unlikely" things happen all the time.

Mike

Sure unlikely things happen all the time, but the purpose of any causal explanation is to give an account that explains what happened by providing supporting evidence and discounting alternative explanations. The statement that the explantion is 'unlikely' is an admission by the authors of the report that they don't think it is an explanation worthy of a strong committment.

According to some FDR wanted the Japs to bomb Pearl Harbor. Conspiracy theory's will always be around, but are usualy never proven true.

The '93 bomb was just a cargo van full of low-budget, homemade explosives....

Although it made quite a mess, it released only a fraction of the destructive energy that two commercial airliners' worth of jet fuel and inertia did.

Mike

That's a very good question. I have read the FEMA report, and it contains hand-waving arguments, nothing more. I have also reviewed some of the documents from NIST, but what really catches my eye is NIST is still soliciting analyses. I do not know of a definitive report that models the building structures and how such collapses could occur.

I also appreciate the civility of this discussion. Please let's keep it that way, despite how disturbing the subject is.

The terrorists that brought down building 7 must have used the new super-secret "quiet bombs" as there was no report of any 'report'....:scholar:

Terrorists brought it down?

Bush / Bin Laden....what's the difference?

They can both afford other people to do their dirtywork. Who knows? Maybe the same people.

The most reasonable of the conspiracy theories involves the Mossad. Silverstein used his Israeli connections to do all of the covert work. Or, maybe they used him. There were reports (pictures) of Mossad agents filming the first crash and dancing with glee when it happened. There were reports of a van full of Mossad agents arrested on the scene or in the area of some of the activity with incriminating items. etc, etc. A couple hundred Israeli men with military experience deported in the following couple months.

Building seven wasn't even the next closest building to the towers. There were other buildings closer that didn't sustain significant damage, but seven was destroyed.

...and then there was all of that insurance money.