Bring It On!

For All the 9/11 Conspiracy “America Did It” Theorists Out There:

April 30th, 2007 | by steve |

Did y’all notice what happened in San Francisco particularly the Oakland side of the Bay Bridge this weekend? A gas truck carrying 8,000 gallons of gas crashed and blew up melting steel, cement and black top.

Amazing differences here compared to 9/11!!

One the truck wasn’t going 500 mph, so the structural integrity of a 40 ton objecting striking the overpass at an insanely high rate of speed did not happen.

Second, accident occurred on top of the over pass in the wide openness of the night sky. Which means, it wasn’t enclosed increasing air pressure with heat.

Third, it was automobile fuel and not jet fuel which to my knowledge does burn hotter than jet fuel but did not have other combustible materials besides those tires.

So my hypothesis is this:

All you whack jobs with your little videos and your denials of Popular Mechanics (An actual science and engineering authority) need to chill. Those were planes during 9/11 that struck the Pentagon and the WTC. Got it? Dorks!

  1. 16 Responses to “For All the 9/11 Conspiracy “America Did It” Theorists Out There:”

  2. By tos on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    That is too much we were just talking about this today. 9/11 was the first time fire ever melted steel,at least what they said on the DU.

  3. By steve on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    Yeah well… fire melted steel here too. Fucking George Bush and his magical anti-Christ powers.

  4. By Rosie O'Donnell on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    No, dammit, FIRE HAS NEVER MELTED STEEL! EVER!

  5. By steve on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    LOL!!! Funny Craig!!

  6. By Craig R. Harmon on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    Thanks!

  7. By Charlie on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    This is my take on the 9/11 inside job argument.

    There is no way it was a military job. The military is a leaky machine, we would have heard about it by now. (IE Lt. Spacely Sprockets would have said: I cannot tell a lie I blew up those buildings.)

    However, there is credible evidence that there were warnings that were ignored. Cheney, Wolfie and the crew were waidting for a second Pearl Harbor and that’s what they got.

    But finally, they used 9/11 to make sweeping changes to the Bill of Rights, started two wars and a third “war on terror” which they called a permawar at the beginning.

    Like it or not, 9/11 was the Reichtstag Fire of our time.

  8. By steve on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    I was just talking about planes hitting buildings not rewriting the Constitution.

  9. By Craig R. Harmon on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    There’s no way THIS government blew up those buildings…it was a SUCCESSFUL operation.

  10. By steve on Apr 30, 2007 | Reply

    And it was done cheaply!!

  11. By Charlie on May 1, 2007 | Reply

    Good point guys. I was just clarifying my position. I get labeled a leftist around here and that’s really accurate.

    Anytime I hear 9/11 and “inside job” I foam at the mouth and have siezures.

    Charlie

  12. By Jersey McJones on May 1, 2007 | Reply

    My whole problem with the “America did it” consipracy theory is that I do not believe the Bush administration would be competent enough to keep such a secret. Evil enough to try? Maybe. But not smart ebough to pull it off. Even they have to know that about themselves.

    JMJ

  13. By steve on May 1, 2007 | Reply

    This is a valid debate though. Those kids in that fought against popular mechanics are the type of liberals that I am truly against (Which means I like the rest of you, including Dusty…:)) It’s bad enough when your point is made by ignoring all kinds of other facts that actually prove the planes struck the buildings and it’s terrible when you go up against a neutral scientific magazine who has people that do nothing but research accidents for a living.

  14. By tos on May 1, 2007 | Reply

    Of course Bush could never have planned something this spectacular in 6 or 7 months so what you would have to say to these nut jobs is that this was being planned before Bush got into office. Oh wait it was being planned before he got in.

  15. By Charlie on May 1, 2007 | Reply

    Regardless of how it happened, what is important to me is how they used it. There was certainly incompetance bordering on criminality and plenty of warning. However, even if it were “accidental” they used it as an excuse to do a lot of things they could not have done otherwise.

  16. By steve on May 1, 2007 | Reply

    “There was certainly incompetance bordering on criminality and plenty of warning.”

    Really? I don’t see how there was a true warning. Those people over their are always shouting stuff about America. This one? Hmmpf…Two weeks before 9/11 I walked on the plane with enough tools to take the plane apart. I only did it because I was running late and I drug both of my bags on the plane with me. I think that the terrorists knew the lapse in security and made a plan. How that is a President’s fault?

  17. By Lazy Iguana on May 2, 2007 | Reply

    It is true that a gasoline or even jet fuel fire can not get hot enough to melt steel. You need a blast furnace for that shit.

    However, it is possible that a non blast furnace fire COULD weaken steel. Blacksmiths have known this forever. Why do you think they put iron into a furnace, heat it till it glows, then hammer it? Because they like having a coal fire going all day in the middle of the summer?

    Under a heavy load, all you need to do is weaken steel just a little bit. It will start to bend, and this will do unpredictable things to the load distribution.

    I never bought into the whole “conspiracy” theory regarding 9-11. It requires too many leaps of faith. I can deal with one leap, or maybe two - but not a dozen.

    By the way - I do not think it was ever a “mainstream liberal” belief that the WTC buildings were rigged to go down. Unless you want to also say that is a mainstream Republican belief that the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that the Grand Canyon was created in a week during the Noah Flood incident.

    Now the story that Bush had a war plan for Iraq long before 9-11 and was waiting for something to happen to give him excuse to portion off all Iraq’s oil I can buy. Why not. There had to be SOME reason for the push to war - and WMDs were not it. This is what the Republicans are saying today, even though we all clearly remember the yellow cake and bio weapons stories of only a few short years ago. Oh yea - and to spread freedom. Whatever.

    But you can not really compare a bridge to a building. I do not think a burning fuel truck would have brought down the WTC buildings. And a jet crashing into a bridge would take the bridge out right away. You do not build a Honda Accord like you build a 2 1/2 ton army cargo truck - why would you assume that you build a bridge like a 100+ story building?

Post a Comment

Fish.Travel