 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject: Has Anyone Seen this movie "Iraq for Sale"? |
 |
|
Link to movie "Iraq For Sale"
Has anyone else seen this?
Here are some of the allegations in the movie.
| Quote: | Haliburton/KBR
Haliburton runs 67 water treatment plants 63 were not providing safe water and marines were showering in it every day.
Invoices had $7,000 per month lease for an SUV chrome rims, leather interior.
Most drivers for trucks from Pakistan, India, a few US civilians.
When they get wrong equipment delivered, instead of sending it back, they burned them in burn pits and reordered.
New vehicles with no filters so the gas would eat them up. Trucks with no spare tires on them were blown up and replaced by new ones.
Drivers told to drive empty trucks to each camps, risking their lives in order to bill the government.
US Troops had to train KBR contractors to do the jobs they were already doing.
Titan Corporation and CACI International
Titan Corporation provides linguist services and CACI International was a database company from Arizona. These private contractors were in charge at Abu Garab and ordered troops to do the torture.
Most Titan linguists could not read or write in Farsi or Arabic and were never trained. Most were hired over the phone with no verification. They got paid for being in Iraq to do translation that sometimes harmed troops because they misunderstood what they were translating.
CACI employees were supposed to provide the software and database software to extract the informaion from prisoners once it was entered into the system. Instead, they had to get the information themselves from the prisoners and had no training on how this should be done.
Blackwater
Families of contractors that died on the bridge in Falujia say company was cutting corners instead of protecting their employees and that after they died, they lobbied Congress for even more contracts with no guarantee of protecting.
Blackwater received over 200 million in contracts one year after Falujia.
Blackwater Katrina contract $243,000 per day.
Troops were encouraged to get fat and receive an Honorable Discharge so they could get hired by private security firm for 5 times their current salary. |
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NortonPete
PO2
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The "movie" was made by Robert Greenwald political activist who is closely aligned with Moveon.org.
If you can't believe the distortions of the MSM this guy's "facts" are going to
be a real stretch of reality.
People demonize Halliburton ( I own this stock) but they are a unique company with unique resources. When the government bought the $500
hammer years ago it was never explained the amount of red tape that created its cost.
I did take the time to watch the entire Loose Change movie about the supposed conspiracy of 9/11. That movie was for the birds.
Watched closely it actually proved that it was based on nothing but a voice over.
You could actually see the WTC building floors pancaking into themselves and
driving the columns of the above floors through the lower floors.
Definitely not from an explosion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NortonPete wrote: | | I did take the time to watch the entire Loose Change movie about the supposed conspiracy of 9/11. That movie was for the birds. Watched closely it actually proved that it was based on nothing but a voice over. You could actually see the WTC building floors pancaking into themselves and driving the columns of the above floors through the lower floors. Definitely not from an explosion. |
Four problems with your observations of the WTC buildings and the pancake theory.
Link to the "Pancake Theory" Simulation Debunked
One is that there would be some resistence from each floor as they hit each other, even if minimal, it would not be a freefall.
The second problem is the fact that the floors were built around a core, so even if the floors did pancake, the core should have been standing. Where's the core?
The third problem is this WTC 7 video. Why did this building fall? The explanation for WTC 1 and 2 is that the fuel from the airplanes was so intense that the heat melted the steal which caused the collaspe. No plane hit WTC 7 and there has not been a valid explanation for that collaspe which occured at 5:00 P.M.
The fourth problem is the recent reports of human remains found on the roof of nearby buildings. If the building pancaked like you say, the human remains would have been smashed into each floor, not flung across the sky onto ajacent buildings.
Experts: New bones found at WTC are in good shape for DNA matches
His lab is already processing fragments recently found on the roof of a skyscraper south of the site. It is much more difficult to extract DNA from those body parts because they were subjected to rain and extreme heat and cold for years.
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NortonPete
PO2
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm really not going to spend the time needed on this. Other people have done a much better job.
My brother-in-law ran a scap yard on the NJ side that sold all the beams to China. At his insistence I begrudgingly went there
and saw first hand the 30+ foot high piles of the beams. They were twisted
from the weight and absolutely no signs of blast damage. ( I doubt any reasonable size charge could have "cut" those beams ) and how on Earth could any army of demolition experts rig one of the largest building in the world on every floor. Its actually laughable.
I worked in 7 WTC for years for Salomon Bros. 7WTC was built over an old
Con Ed power station. Not a single beam from the power station lined up with the design of 7WTC. Imagine building a 2nd floor on your house and not having any of the bearing walls above a lower wall. Before they occupied the
building Salomon removed an entire floor, beams and all, to create this grand trading floor. The 5th floor ( where the collapse began ).
You need to study the architecture of these buildings they were not the usual construction found in NYC. Why? they were built on landfill not bedrock. Its incorrect to believe that they had a center core like other Manhattan buildings, they really didn't. The strength came from their exterior walls like a big box. Not like the Empire State building. Most of the conspiracy comments are from people who know nothing about the WTC design. I watched them being built. They would pour a floor which was basically attached to the exterior beams by clips. Once those clips failed the floor would drop. Once they began to drop and shear anyone will tell you that there would be no resistance.
(I just had a disaster in my wifes closet. the top shelf pulled loose because of too much weight. It took out all 8 shelves below it in a free fall )
Besides when a demolition team takes out a building it starts at the bottom and uses the weight of the building as an advantage. The movie actually shows this in tapes of real demolition.
As for the remains found one was already identified. A flight attendant on the plane that hit at over 500mph.
But people will believe almost anything. I know people with advanced degrees who honestly believe we never landed on the Moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Truth always somehow rears it's head and interferes with good conspiracy theories. Sorry, SBD, but your links have also been debunked several times over.
One of the main conspiracies to prove a conspiracy is the collapse of WTC 7, erroneously reported as "controlled demolition." What most neglect to state about WTC 7 is the 20 story gash in the building and heavy involvement of fire from the collapse of the towers.
Another is the Silverstein quote;
| Quote: | | "I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, you know, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." |
Since "to pull it" is a demolition term meaning to bring one down, it was wrongfully assumed that was what Silverstein meant. Upon questioning the quote, Silversteins spokeman stated;
| Quote: | | "In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building." |
Debunking 911 Conspiracies
Popular Mechanics 911 Myths Debunked
Even more interesting is this conspiracy theorist debunking the other conspiracy theorist. Go figure.
Explosives Debunked
Of course, some will not accept any evidence wishing to believe their favorite conspiracy instead and denying what they saw with their own eyes. Still, most others can easily see through the conspiracy's and realize we were attacked by just who attacked us.
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NortonPete
PO2
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LewWaters wrote: |
One of the main conspiracies to prove a conspiracy is the collapse of WTC 7, erroneously reported as "controlled demolition." What most neglect to state about WTC 7 is the 20 story gash in the building and heavy involvement of fire from the collapse of the towers. |
Thanks Lew for that link. I never saw those pictures of 7 WTC.
You can clearly see the alteration to the building between the 5th and 7th floors. ( about 2/3 of the way down "how it used to look" )
(Salomon Brothers, removed a floor to make a 2 story trading floor, it was quite impressive and cost millions )
I searched once for any info on this and found nothing.
I wondered how this alteration was missed.
The WTC building complex was built by the Port Authority, they were able to get around NYC building codes. The fire retardant on the beams was sub standard.
They had a terrible fire a few years after it opened and were forced to improve the sprinkler system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
From the most recent version of the NIST report.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
| Quote: |
NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.
|
| Quote: |
7a. How could the steel have melted if the fires in the WTC towers weren’t hot enough to do so?
OR
7b. Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certified the steel in the WTC towers to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours, how could fires have impacted the steel enough to bring down the WTC towers?
In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).
However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.
UL did not certify any steel as suggested. In fact, in U.S. practice, steel is not certified at all; rather structural assemblies are tested for their fire resistance rating in accordance with a standard procedure such as ASTM E 119 (see NCSTAR 1-6B). That the steel was “certified ... to 2000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours” is simply not true.
|
| Quote: |
13. Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?
NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.
NIST considered the damage to the steel structure and its fireproofing caused by the aircraft impact and the subsequent fires when the buildings were still standing since that damage was responsible for initiating the collapse of the WTC towers.
Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel in the wreckage to have melted after the buildings collapsed. Any molten steel in the wreckage was more likely due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile than to short exposure to fires or explosions while the buildings were standing.
|
| Quote: |
14. Why is the NIST investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 (the 47-story office building that collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, hours after the towers) taking so long to complete? Is a controlled demolition hypothesis being considered to explain the collapse?
When NIST initiated the WTC investigation, it made a decision not to hire new staff to support the investigation. After the June 2004 progress report on the WTC investigation was issued, the NIST investigation team stopped working on WTC 7 and was assigned full-time through the fall of 2005 to complete the investigation of the WTC towers. With the release and dissemination of the report on the WTC towers in October 2005, the investigation of the WTC 7 collapse resumed. Considerable progress has been made since that time, including the review of nearly 80 boxes of new documents related to WTC 7, the development of detailed technical approaches for modeling and analyzing various collapse hypotheses, and the selection of a contractor to assist NIST staff in carrying out the analyses. It is anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007.
The current NIST working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 is described in the June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (Volume 1, page 17, as well as Appendix L), as follows:
An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;
Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and
Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors) resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.
|
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
