FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Top Reasons Indicating an Inside Job
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:37 pm    Post subject: Still Waiting Reply with quote

So what happened to Grumpy?

What did the NIST specify for the total amount of concrete?

psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

psikeyhackr
Quote:

So what happened to Grumpy?

What did the NIST specify for the total amount of concrete?


Your previous showed you had downloaded the NIST report, look it up yourself.

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:16 pm    Post subject: Hide & Seek Reply with quote

Quote:
Your previous showed you had downloaded the NIST report, look it up yourself.


I have searched. I say it is not there.

But you said:
Quote:
You CAN read, can't you??? Everything you just asked about is here. Quantities, qualities, construction details, all there for those who really want to know.


So if you have found it would you care to tell us where?

psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

psikeyhackr

Quote:
I have searched. I say it is not there.


Considering your basic misunderstanding as documentedhere it is likely your are looking for information on something that does not exist(IE loadbearing floors).

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:08 pm    Post subject: Word Games Reply with quote

Quote:
Quote:
Every floor of that building had to be strong enough to hold the weight of all the floors above.
Not true, each floor was basically identical and designed to support only the load on that floor. It was the CORE COLUMNS and OUTER FRAME MEMBERS that were stronger as you went down the towers.


I am not interested in playing word games with the word "floor". I wasn't talking about the floor slab holding the weight above. I am sure you knew that. The core columns and perimeter columns were supporting the weight of the building. But what was the total mass of steel and concrete on each level, i.e. flor, of the building.

psik

PS - The only argument you have got is trivial and stupid bullshit.

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

psikeyhackr

Understanding that the buildings were not carved out of one block, but were made up of several different components is essential to understanding the cause of the collapse. When you post that each floor was stronger all I can get from that is you lack an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of those towers, so it is you whose"...argument...is trivial and stupid bullshit."

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Peter



Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 2451
Location: The Canadian shield

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:48 am    Post subject: The space-time continuum may be more warped than we thought. Reply with quote

In a time of universal deceit, getting a straight answer appears to require having to turn around...several times at least. Twisted Evil
_________________
The grand design, reflected in the face of Chaos.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grumpy wrote:
psikeyhackr

Understanding that the buildings were not carved out of one block, but were made up of several different components is essential to understanding the cause of the collapse. When you post that each floor was stronger all I can get from that is you lack an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of those towers, so it is you whose"...argument...is trivial and stupid bullshit."

Grumpy Cool


Who said anything was carved out of one block? You need to make up things to maintain your position?

The south tower collapsed after 56 minutes of fire. The 81st floor had to have enough steel to support another 29 levels of the building. Shouldn't that much steel take soem time to heat up enough to weaken?

But we have no idea how much steel was there. The EXPERTS haven't seen fit to tell us. In fact they don't seem to think it is a question worth raising. We can put our faith in experts though. At least some of us can.

psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:21 pm    Post subject: 9/11 Thought Experiment Reply with quote

The 9/11 Truth Movement has gotten extremely complicated and confusing with all of the different perspectives and interpretations of vast amounts of data resulting from the bizarre events of that day. Some of which is neither correct nor important, so inevitably a lot of people dismiss the movement as a bunch of kooks which, unfortunately, some of them are.

So I propose a little thought experiment to simplify things a bit.

Imagine that we have WTC2, the south tower, intact as it was on Sept 10, 2001. Since the plane impacted at the 81st level of the building let's completely remove FIVE LEVELS of the building, 79, 80, 81, 82 and 83. Since each level of the building was 12 feet in height this would leave a 60 foot gap between the top of the 78th level and the bottom of the 84th.

Now that is far more damage than the airliner could possibly do. It eliminates any debate about how hot the fires were and whether they could weaken the steel. Obviously there is not point in discussing fake planes.

The formula for distance from acceleration and time is:

d = 1/2 a t^2

Since gravitational acceleration is 32 ft per seconds squared the data for this problem yields:

60 = 16 * t^2

Therefore the time is about 2 seconds.

1.936491673 sec = t

So the intact upper 27 levels would take 2 seconds to fall and impact the intact lower 78 levels. The formula for velocity from acceleration and time is:

v = a * t

Which for these values yields:

64 ft/sec = 32 ft/sec^2 * 2 sec = 44 mph

Since each level of the World Trade Center was 12 feet the top of the 78th level was:

78 levels * 12 ft/level = 936 ft

Now if the falling 27 stories could maintain a constant velocity from the moment of impact until it reached the ground it is easy to compute how long that would take.

936 ft / 64 ft/sec = 14.625 seconds

If the bottom 78 floors prevent the top from accelerating but crumple at a constant velocity it would take 15 seconds to crush 78 floors. Since the building came down in 11 seconds the top had to crush the bottom and accelerate at the same time. A truly amazing feat.

Are we supposed to believe those 78 level would not cause the falling mass to SLOW DOWN?

What is going to happen the instant the bottom of the 84th level comes in contact with the top of the 78th? They are going to engage in a mutual crushing of steel, concrete and office furniture that would be deadly to behold. But where is the energy to do that crushing going to come from? It is going to come from the kinetic energy of the falling mass. Which means the falling mass is going to SLOW DOWN. It is going to DECELERATE. It is going to undergo NEGATIVE ACCELERATION. Which means it must take longer than 15 seconds to reach the bottom, if it ever does.

But to come up with anything vaguely resembling an accurate analysis of this simplified thought experiment we would have to know the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of the WTC. The expected and maximum loads for each level would probably help too. That would tell us how over-engineered the building was and the extra energy necessary to crush it. Since the people who designed the World Trade Center way back in the 60's, when computers still had CORE MEMORY, it is certainly amazing that our EXPERTS don't even raise such childishly simple questions in these days of laptop supercomputers. The NIST report mentions the total amount of steel in the towers three times but NEVER SPECIFIES the total amount of concrete though it says two types of concrete were were used.

Some people accuse the "conspiracy theorists" of not understanding the difference between static loading and dynamic loading as though the difference is going to cause the overloaded material to burst into dust. But we are dealing with a material state with inputs applied and a known output of a TOTALLY DEMOLISHED BUILDING. The known input is a 150 ton plane with 34 tons of kerosene traveling at 500+ mph. How can we claim to know the state of the material if we don't know the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level. The believers in the official story demand proof of an energy input besides the plane but don't demand accurate information about the subject of the destruction. You can't do an analysis if you don't know what you are analyzing.

Of course we can trust Dr. Sunder of the NIST when he says the buildings came down so fast because they were 70% air. It is astounding that the nation that put men on the moon will tolerate crap like that.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/cons-flash.html

So until we can get such simple information as the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level then talking about fake planes, beam weapons and nuclear devices is absurd because we really don't understand what it was that was destroyed.

psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:22 pm    Post subject: 9/11 Thought Experiment Reply with quote

The 9/11 Truth Movement has gotten extremely complicated and confusing with all of the different perspectives and interpretations of vast amounts of data resulting from the bizarre events of that day. Some of which is neither correct nor important, so inevitably a lot of people dismiss the movement as a bunch of kooks which, unfortunately, some of them are.

So I propose a little thought experiment to simplify things a bit.

Imagine that we have WTC2, the south tower, intact as it was on Sept 10, 2001. Since the plane impacted at the 81st level of the building let's completely remove FIVE LEVELS of the building, 79, 80, 81, 82 and 83. Since each level of the building was 12 feet in height this would leave a 60 foot gap between the top of the 78th level and the bottom of the 84th.

Now that is far more damage than the airliner could possibly do. It eliminates any debate about how hot the fires were and whether they could weaken the steel. Obviously there is not point in discussing fake planes.

The formula for distance from acceleration and time is:

d = 1/2 a t^2

Since gravitational acceleration is 32 ft per seconds squared the data for this problem yields:

60 = 16 * t^2

Therefore the time is about 2 seconds.

1.936491673 sec = t

So the intact upper 27 levels would take 2 seconds to fall and impact the intact lower 78 levels. The formula for velocity from acceleration and time is:

v = a * t

Which for these values yields:

64 ft/sec = 32 ft/sec^2 * 2 sec = 44 mph

Since each level of the World Trade Center was 12 feet the top of the 78th level was:

78 levels * 12 ft/level = 936 ft

Now if the falling 27 stories could maintain a constant velocity from the moment of impact until it reached the ground it is easy to compute how long that would take.

936 ft / 64 ft/sec = 14.625 seconds

If the bottom 78 floors prevent the top from accelerating but crumple at a constant velocity it would take 15 seconds to crush 78 floors. Since the building came down in 11 seconds the top had to crush the bottom and accelerate at the same time. A truly amazing feat.

Are we supposed to believe those 78 level would not cause the falling mass to SLOW DOWN?

What is going to happen the instant the bottom of the 84th level comes in contact with the top of the 78th? They are going to engage in a mutual crushing of steel, concrete and office furniture that would be deadly to behold. But where is the energy to do that crushing going to come from? It is going to come from the kinetic energy of the falling mass. Which means the falling mass is going to SLOW DOWN. It is going to DECELERATE. It is going to undergo NEGATIVE ACCELERATION. Which means it must take longer than 15 seconds to reach the bottom, if it ever does.

But to come up with anything vaguely resembling an accurate analysis of this simplified thought experiment we would have to know the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of the WTC. The expected and maximum loads for each level would probably help too. That would tell us how over-engineered the building was and the extra energy necessary to crush it. Since the people who designed the World Trade Center way back in the 60's, when computers still had CORE MEMORY, it is certainly amazing that our EXPERTS don't even raise such childishly simple questions in these days of laptop supercomputers. The NIST report mentions the total amount of steel in the towers three times but NEVER SPECIFIES the total amount of concrete though it says two types of concrete were were used.

Some people accuse the "conspiracy theorists" of not understanding the difference between static loading and dynamic loading as though the difference is going to cause the overloaded material to burst into dust. But we are dealing with a material state with inputs applied and a known output of a TOTALLY DEMOLISHED BUILDING. The known input is a 150 ton plane with 34 tons of kerosene traveling at 500+ mph. How can we claim to know the state of the material if we don't know the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level. The believers in the official story demand proof of an energy input besides the plane but don't demand accurate information about the subject of the destruction. You can't do an analysis if you don't know what you are analyzing.

Of course we can trust Dr. Sunder of the NIST when he says the buildings came down so fast because they were 70% air. It is astounding that the nation that put men on the moon will tolerate crap like that.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/cons-flash.html

So until we can get such simple information as the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level then talking about fake planes, beam weapons and nuclear devices is absurd because we really don't understand what it was that was destroyed.

psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

psikeyhackr

Quote:
The south tower collapsed after 56 minutes of fire. The 81st floor had to have enough steel to support another 29 levels of the building. Shouldn't that much steel take soem time to heat up enough to weaken?


Well, in tower two, 56 minutes was long enough, tower one a little longer, WTC7 , about 7 hours.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/cons-flash.html

Everything that man said is true, including the 70 air by volume.

As to energy...

Quote:


The Pulverization of Concrete in WTC 1
During the Collapse Events of 9-11

By

F. R. Greening

1.0 Introduction

The collapse of the Twin Towers, seen live on TV in those unforgettable images flashed around the world on September 11th 2001, was made all the more spectacular by the vast quantities of dust and debris that were dispersed over the skyline of Lower Manhattan. Indeed, the fine grayish-white dust that covered everything within many city blocks of ground zero and the granular appearance of the rubble pile suggest that much of the hundreds of thousands of tons of material in the Twin Towers was completely pulverized.

Former BYU Prof. S. Jones in his much debated article “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?”, (available at www.scholarsfor911truth.org ), states that: “ the horizontal ejection of structural steel members for hundreds of feet and the pulverization of concrete to flour-like powder, observed clearly in the collapses of the WTC towers, provide evidence for the use of explosives… .” Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, Jones has never explained why pulverization of concrete could not be a natural consequence of a gravity driven collapse of WTC 1 & 2.

By comparison, F. Greening in his article “Energy Transfer in the WTC Collapse Events of September 11th 2001” and subsequent Addendum, (available at www.911myths.com ), has presented arguments to show that the pulverization of WTC concrete was in fact quite possible without the assistance of pre-planted explosives. Nevertheless, a continuing flow of articles expressing skepticism over the “official story” of 9-11 shows that the counter argument that the energy released by the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 was insufficient to “totally” pulverize the concrete, is still being presented as evidence that the Twin Towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

It should be pointed out, however, that the 9-11 skeptics are apparently unable to offer any quantitative evidence that the observed pulverization of concrete in the collapse of the Twin Towers required pre-planted explosives. Therefore, to help resolve this dichotomy of opinion it is important to ask: are there any experimental data available to support the claim that concrete in the WTC could have been pulverized by gravity driven impact as opposed to explosive blasting?

In this report we address these questions and after considering the available evidence conclude that the pulverization of WTC concrete by gravitational collapse of each tower was indeed quite possible. Furthermore, we show that the predicted concrete particle size distribution is consistent with observations of the concrete debris at, and adjacent to, ground zero.

2.0 The Specific Energy of Concrete Pulverization in WTC 1

In this report we will focus on the collapse of WTC 1 since the upper section of this Tower had much less kinetic energy available to pulverize concrete than the energy available from the collapse of WTC 2. It follows that the energy budget for the collapse of WTC 1, compared to WTC 2, represents the more stringent test of the “natural collapse” hypothesis. In other words, if the available evidence demonstrates that the collapse of WTC 1 released sufficient energy to account for the observed pulverization of the concrete in the building, the collapse of WTC 2 would have been even more energetically favorable to the pulverization of concrete.

In this report we have used data from the NIST Final Report, especially NCSTAR 1-1A, 1-2A and 1-6D, whenever possible. However, for the mass of the upper section of WTC 1 we use the value 58 ´ 106 kg taken from Z. P. Bazant and Y. Zhou’s 2001 paper in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics: “Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? – Simple Analysis”.

We calculate the mass of concrete on each WTC 1 floor as follows:

Core floor area = 862 m2

Out-of-core (Office space) floor areas:

2 long one-way slabs = 1,225 m2
2 short one-way slabs = 486 m2
4 two-way slabs = 1,137 m2

Total out-of-core area = 2848 m2

The floors in the core areas were made of normal weight concrete, density 1760 kg/m3

The floors in the office areas were made of lightweight concrete, density 1500 kg/m3

Volume of 5-inch normal weight concrete per floor = 109.5 m3

Weight of normal weight concrete per floor = 193 tonnes

Volume of 4-inch thick lightweight concrete per floor = 289.4 m3

Weight of lightweight concrete per floor = 434 tonnes


Total weight of concrete on one floor of WTC 1 = 627 tonnes


As described in some detail in Greening’s “Energy Transfer in the WTC Collapse” the concrete on the 95th floor of WTC 1 was impacted by the mass of the 15-storey block of floors above the aircraft impact zone. In order to determine the energetics of this collapse we note that the drop distance was 3.7 meters and with the relation v = Ö(2gh) we find the impact velocity, vi, was 8.52 m/s. Then, using Bazant’s value for the mass of the upper section of WTC 1, M15 = 5.8 ´ 107 kg, the kinetic energy of the falling mass at the moment of impact is given by:

E = ½ M15 vi2 = 0.5 ´ 5.8 ´ 107 ´ (8.52)2 Joules = 2.1 ´ 109 Joules

Thus we see that the first major energy transfer in the collapse of WTC 1 occurred when 2.1 gigajoules of kinetic energy was delivered to the 627 tonnes of concrete on the first impacted (~95th) floor. We now consider how concrete would behave under this degree of impact loading.

In order to compare the behavior of different materials under impact loading and other damaging events such as explosions, we need to consider the mass specific energy input, Ei, imparted to the material, defined as the energy input per unit mass. Thus for the particular case of the WTC 1 collapse we determine Ei (with the gram as the unit of mass) as follows:

Ei = (2.1 ´ 109) / (0.627 ´ 109) J/g = 3.36 J/g

Thus we conclude that the mass specific energy input of the first impact of the upper section of WTC 1 on the layer of concrete on the 95th floor was 3.36 joules per gram. This level of energy input will now be evaluated by comparison to published data on the energetics of a wide range of impact phenomena in order to establish:

• Is a ~ 3 J/g impact potentially damaging to concrete? And, if so, what degree of
concrete pulverization is to be expected from such an impact?


3.0 The Impact Loading of Brittle Materials

The impact strength of concrete and other brittle materials such as rocks, minerals, glass and ceramics, has traditionally been determined by a number of techniques:

• The Drop Hammer: See for example: B. P. Hughes, “Concrete Subjected to High Rates of Loading in Compression.” Magazine of Concrete Research 24, 25, (1972) and P. H. Bischoff et al. “Impact Behavior of Plain Concrete Loaded in Uniaxial Compression.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics 121, 685, (1995)

• The Ballistic Pendulum: See for example: H. Green, “Impact Strength of Concrete.” Proceedings of the Inst. of Civil Engineers 28, 383, (1964) and B. P. Hughes et al. “The Impact Strength of Concrete Using Green’s Ballistic Pendulum.” Proceedings of the Inst. of Civil Engineers 41, 731, (1968).
• The Split Hopkinson Bar: See for example: B. Lundberg “A Split Hopkinson Bar Study of Energy Absorption in Dynamic Rock Fragmentation.” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mineral Science 13, 187, (1976) and C. A. Ross et al. “Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Tests on Concrete and Mortar in Tension and Compression.” ACI Materials Journal 86, 475, (1989).

All these techniques involve a projectile (hammer) of known mass and kinetic energy striking a fixed target (concrete or rock sample). The effects of the impacts are usually monitored by the recoil behavior of the system and other experimental aids such as strain gauges and high-speed photography. See for example: S. Mindess, “A Preliminary Study of the Fracture of Concrete Beams Under Impact Loading Using High Speed Photography.” Cement and Concrete Research 15, 474, (1985).

A survey of the literature quoted above shows that most researchers used hammers or equivalent projectiles with masses in the range 3 to 350 kg dropped from heights in the range 0.2 to 3.5 meters. The actual combinations of hammer mass and drop height were such that impact kinetic energies in the range 10 to 2000 joules were investigated. In addition, because samples with weights from 20 grams to 70 kilograms were impacted, data and impact behavior for mass specific energy inputs between 0.02 and 0.9 J/g are available in the above references. These data show that significant fracturing of concrete occurs at impact energies above 0.1 J/g.


The predicted particle size distribution of WTC concrete may be compared to data on WTC dust samples collected in the vicinity of ground zero after the 9-11 attacks. Such comparisons are not straightforward, however, because WTC dust samples contain other pulverized material, such as gypsum (from wallboard) and vitreous fibers (from insulation), in addition to concrete. Furthermore, samples collected within a few city blocks of ground zero contained a higher percentage of concrete than samples collected at locations more than 0.5 km from the WTC site. This type of fractionation of the different components of WTC dust is to be expected for the atmospheric dispersion of pulverized material exhibiting the wide range of particle sizes noted above. However, regardless of the details of the concrete particle size and contribution to the WTC dust, it is concluded that 2/3rds of the concrete debris fell within the approximate footprint of the two towers.

In the final section of this report an energy balance analysis of the collapse of WTC 1 is presented and the energy consumed in crushing concrete on one floor (234 MJ) compared to other contributions to the energy dissipated by the collapse. As expected, the plastic strain energy dissipated by the buckling of columns (284 MJ) is confirmed to be the largest drain on the kinetic energy driving the collapse but clearly the energy to pulverize the concrete is comparable in magnitude. However, and more importantly, it is argued that such energy sinks should be summed over two WTC floors per impact to allow for the simultaneous destruction of the uppermost floor of the lower, fixed section and the lowest floor of the descending section. Nevertheless, such a conservative assumption still leads to an energy decrement that is only a little over one half of the input kinetic energy, thereby assuring a self-sustaining progressive collapse of WTC 1.

By way of a footnote to this report, the pulverization of concrete by explosive blast is briefly considered and it is shown that, without the help of gravitational collapse, the degree of concrete pulverization observed during the destruction of WTC 1 would have required over 600 tonnes of high explosives.


http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/search?q=Concrete+core

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aAzzAa



Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 1140

PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If all this can known, and also shown by computer simulation, then
you cannot dismiss the fact that it could have been worked out in a similar fashion prior to 9/11. What you have done is present a working model for such an event to be staged. It takes us back to whether or not there exist minds that would even contemplate such a thing. And if there are, would it explain the poor defences that day, as well as a few other anomolies, the funniest of which is the finding of the terrorist's passports.

The choice is whether to be the kind of person that doesn't want to view their leaders (and those behind the scene) as manipulative mass degrading puppets, or the kind of butchers that have lost touch with their humanity. I'd say the odds are in favor of some pretty nasty minds being in existence. When one take the overall global picture into account, any honest person would have to say there are an elitist bunch taking the urine out of the poeple. And I still have the faith to believe these atrocities will wake the people up, and they will confront the butchers and say "we're not gonna take it". Maybe the coming recession will be the crossroads that will define a new direction for humanity as a whole.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 5 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.