Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]When I commented, I really didn't mean to step into a battle. But the point of my post was just to say that anyone can go read oodles of info online, the official 9/11 report, lots and lots of archived US and foreign press stories - and then make one's own judgements for ONESELF. Hence my "grain of salt" comment, etc. An emotional subject for many? Yes. A need to start an emotional debate here on the LUG? No. Scott Adam Bridge wrote: > Sigh. > > On 6/23/06, Walt Johnson <walt@waltjohnson.com> wrote: > >> >> >> Walt Johnson wrote: >> >> > Hell, I'm not into conspiracy but far as the company line on why they >> > collapsed, bullshit. At least one of the a/c spent the majority of >> > it's fuel load out the other side of the tower. To attribute the >> > simultaneous collapse to airspeed and fuel load seems quite gullible. >> > >> > I watched the Challenger explode from my front yard, having left KSC >> > an hour or so earlier. Of course the initial shock of a disaster such >> > as that carries it's own emotional bagage but eventually truth rears >> > its ugly head. Watching the shuttle explode on tape many times raised >> > some questions in my mind. It did not appear to be the type of >> > explosion that would insure all sboard woould perish instantly. The >> > offical KSC line claimed instant death to all and they spent months >> > "searching" for the wreckage before it was recovered. Now, even a >> > Cesna 172 carries an ELT so who would believe it took that long to >> > recover the crew compartment? >> > >> > GREG LORENZO wrote: >> > >> >>Scott McLoughlin writes: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>Walt Johnson wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>>I was amazed at how fast they both came down. Plane crash or no, >> there >> >>>>is something not quite kosher about the twin and simultaneous >> collapse. >> >>>>Walt >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>If you google, you will find a number of Web resources on how >> >>>odd it was that the towers came down so quickly. One report >> >>>was from some reputable group of physicists or something. In >> >>>any case, you'll find it very sober reading/take it with a grain >> >>>of salt/etc. etc. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >>If they were a 'reputable group of physicists' they would be >> posting the simple fact that these buildings were designed to >> withstand an impact from a Boeing 707 coming into New York to land >> with a minimal fuel load at an airspeed of approximately 180 mph. NOT >> a Boeing 767 almost fully loaded with 90,000 litres of jet fuel at an >> airspeed in excess of 500 mph. In effect both buildings were doomed >> from the instant of impact on. The amount of time to full structural >> failure probably determinable mathmatically. >> >> >> >>The internet is choc o' bloc with all kinds of conspiracy and other >> nuts who have nothing better to do with their time then to spin such >> nonsence. >> >> >> >>Regards, >> >> >> >>Greg >> >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>Leica Users Group. >> >>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Pics @ http://www.adrenaline.com/snaps Leica M6TTL, Bessa R, Nikon FM3a, Nikon D70, Rollei AFM35 (Jihad Sigint NSA FBI Patriot Act)