Former Bush Admin Economist Says WTC Collapse 'Bogus'

Talk about anything and everything not related to this site or the Dreamcast, such as news stories, political discussion, or anything else. If there's not a forum for it, it belongs in here. Also, be warned that personal insults, threats, and spamming will not be tolerated.
User avatar
AuroEdge
DCEmu Mega Poster
DCEmu Mega Poster
Posts: 1667
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Anywhere
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Former Bush Admin Economist Says WTC Collapse 'Bogus'

Post by AuroEdge » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:58 am

A former Bush team member during his first administration is now voicing serious doubts about the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9-11. Former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds comments that the official story about the collapse of the WTC is "bogus" and that it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7.

Reynolds, who also served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas and is now professor emeritus at Texas A&M University said, "If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an 'inside job' and a government attack on America would be compelling." Reynolds commented from his Texas A&M office, "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely to be correct either. The government's collapse theory is highly vulnerable on its own terms. Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapse of the three buildings."

Read Article Here
-------------------------------------

"I've been sayin' it for ten damn years haven't I Migel?"
Image
"The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is
that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too." -Oscar Levant
User avatar
SuperMegatron
DCEmu User with No Life
DCEmu User with No Life
Posts: 3520
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 8:47 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by SuperMegatron » Thu Jun 16, 2005 7:51 am

He is a economist. What qualifies him to speak on this? This is like taking diet advice from eviln.
BlackAura
DC Developer
DC Developer
Posts: 9951
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2001 9:02 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by BlackAura » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:48 am

And the fact that a large aircraft collided with each building had nothing to do with it? What an idiot.
User avatar
Hawq
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Posts: 7817
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2002 1:43 pm
Location: Great Britain
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Hawq » Thu Jun 16, 2005 12:53 pm

Maybe he was thinking of the fact the wtc was designed to survive being hit by a plane? (of course this was a good many years before the bigass planes we have these days). Of course it was a fairly neat straight down collapse thats normally associated with a controlled demolition but it was found in investigations that the fire weakened the structure ion the same way a demolition team would have to ensure a neat collapse (I remember it from a documentary on it & various demolitions I've seen on tv where they take out some internal supporting bits first for control)
Of course the thing thats not in doubt is that it was a fundraiser, they knew what was planned & did nothing so they could get a bigger budget for the following year.
Image
The Prisoner - Makes NGE's ending look almost intelligible.
theres no-one else to blame

Bored? figure out where the above lines from. Answers
User avatar
AuroEdge
DCEmu Mega Poster
DCEmu Mega Poster
Posts: 1667
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Anywhere
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by AuroEdge » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:02 pm

Hawq wrote:Maybe he was thinking of the fact the wtc was designed to survive being hit by a plane? (of course this was a good many years before the bigass planes we have these days). Of course it was a fairly neat straight down collapse thats normally associated with a controlled demolition but it was found in investigations that the fire weakened the structure ion the same way a demolition team would have to ensure a neat collapse (I remember it from a documentary on it & various demolitions I've seen on tv where they take out some internal supporting bits first for control)
Of course the thing thats not in doubt is that it was a fundraiser, they knew what was planned & did nothing so they could get a bigger budget for the following year.
The WTC towers were built in the early 1970s. If memory serves me correctly the first B747 Jumbo Jet was built in 1970, which is bigger than the planes that struck the WTC towers. I don't claim to know what happened to the towers, but it was not as stated. The towers were huge. You would have to see them in real life to really see just how big they were. I just don't believe the planes hitting over halfway up the towers would make the whole thing collapse and on top of that building #7 as well. Oh well...
Last edited by AuroEdge on Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is
that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too." -Oscar Levant
User avatar
Wagh
Wagh
Posts: 5736
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 7:59 pm
Location: YSOH
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Wagh » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:03 pm

SuperMegatron wrote:He is a economist. What qualifies him to speak on this? This is like taking diet advice from eviln.
or taking legal advice from you.
Bush and Hussein together in bed
Giving H-E-A-D head
Y'all motherfuckers heard what we said
Billions made and millions dead
User avatar
Hawq
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Posts: 7817
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2002 1:43 pm
Location: Great Britain
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Hawq » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:11 pm

AuroEdge wrote:
Hawq wrote:Maybe he was thinking of the fact the wtc was designed to survive being hit by a plane? (of course this was a good many years before the bigass planes we have these days). Of course it was a fairly neat straight down collapse thats normally associated with a controlled demolition but it was found in investigations that the fire weakened the structure ion the same way a demolition team would have to ensure a neat collapse (I remember it from a documentary on it & various demolitions I've seen on tv where they take out some internal supporting bits first for control)
Of course the thing thats not in doubt is that it was a fundraiser, they knew what was planned & did nothing so they could get a bigger budget for the following year.
The WTC towers were built in the early 1970s. If memory serves me correctly the first B747 Jumbo Jet was built in 1970, which is bigger than the planes that struck the WTC towers. I don't claim to know what happened to the towers, but it was not as stated. The towers were huge. You would have to see them in real life to really see just how big they were. I just don't believe the planes hitting over halfway up the towers would make the whole thing collapse and on top of that building #7 as well. Oh well...
Well the speed had some part to paly as well, I forget the exact details of what size plane they were designed to survive, obviously not the ones that hit em or the ones that hit em at the speed they did
Image
The Prisoner - Makes NGE's ending look almost intelligible.
theres no-one else to blame

Bored? figure out where the above lines from. Answers
404NotFound
DCEmu Ex-Mod
DCEmu Ex-Mod
Posts: 4970
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2001 3:40 pm
Location: The Canadian-Mexican border.
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by 404NotFound » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:31 pm

Hawq wrote:Maybe he was thinking of the fact the wtc was designed to survive being hit by a plane? (of course this was a good many years before the bigass planes we have these days). Of course it was a fairly neat straight down collapse thats normally associated with a controlled demolition but it was found in investigations that the fire weakened the structure ion the same way a demolition team would have to ensure a neat collapse (I remember it from a documentary on it & various demolitions I've seen on tv where they take out some internal supporting bits first for control)
Of course the thing thats not in doubt is that it was a fundraiser, they knew what was planned & did nothing so they could get a bigger budget for the following year.

I still don't see how anybody could think that they fell neatly. Controlled implosions collapse inward. The WTC collapse was more of a "flower" effect of sorts, with metal and shards shooting far outward.
User avatar
arrowhead
DCEmu Super Fan
DCEmu Super Fan
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sat May 11, 2002 5:21 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by arrowhead » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:39 pm

They were designed to be able to withstand being hit by small passenger planes like (sp) sezna's (sp). They were talking to the engineer on the news and thats what he was saying anyway. This guy is a fucking jackass, and that all there is to it really. .
Shut that cunts mouth before I come over there and fuck start her head
User avatar
Roofus
President & CEO Roofuscorp, LLC
President & CEO Roofuscorp, LLC
Posts: 9888
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:42 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Roofus » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:48 pm

AuroEdge wrote:The WTC towers were built in the early 1970s. If memory serves me correctly the first B747 Jumbo Jet was built in 1970, which is bigger than the planes that struck the WTC towers. I don't claim to know what happened to the towers, but it was not as stated. The towers were huge. You would have to see them in real life to really see just how big they were. I just don't believe the planes hitting over halfway up the towers would make the whole thing collapse and on top of that building #7 as well. Oh well...
The buildings did survive the impact. Quite well, too. What happened was the heat from thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel melted the steel supports.
User avatar
AuroEdge
DCEmu Mega Poster
DCEmu Mega Poster
Posts: 1667
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Anywhere
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by AuroEdge » Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:49 pm

arrowhead wrote:They were designed to be able to withstand being hit by small passenger planes like (sp) sezna's (sp). They were talking to the engineer on the news and thats what he was saying anyway. This guy is a fudging jackass, and that all there is to it really. .
Uh, no. They had one of the engineers on an interview say that they would survive being hit by a full loaded jetliner.
Image
"The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is
that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too." -Oscar Levant
Egotistical EvilN
DCEmu User with No Life
DCEmu User with No Life
Posts: 3516
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 12:34 am
Location: Birmingham, Al
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Egotistical EvilN » Thu Jun 16, 2005 3:56 pm

SuperMegatron wrote:He is a economist. What qualifies him to speak on this? This is like taking diet advice from eviln.
He might have overheard something.

and..I has lost 23 pounds, bitch.
Image
Image
User avatar
FETUS
Knight of Null
Knight of Null
Posts: 2938
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Large fries
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by FETUS » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:56 pm

<--steel detailer
Those buildings were lucky they didn't fall from the original impact with how much stress those beams already had on there. Take the broken concrete and the fire burning that hot theres no way they could have survived that. Now I won't even go into how inferior steel from the 70's is, but it's pretty bad.
User avatar
SuperMegatron
DCEmu User with No Life
DCEmu User with No Life
Posts: 3520
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 8:47 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by SuperMegatron » Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:56 am

EvilN wrote:..I has lost 23 pounds, bitch.
:lol: Greatest eviln quote ever
Jeeba Jabba
Jeeba Jabba
Posts: 9102
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 7:00 am
Location: New Orleans, Louisiana
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Jeeba Jabba » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:27 am

Random_Troll wrote:
SuperMegatron wrote:He is a economist. What qualifies him to speak on this? This is like taking diet advice from eviln.
or taking legal advice from you.


2 great zingers.
User avatar
AuroEdge
DCEmu Mega Poster
DCEmu Mega Poster
Posts: 1667
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Anywhere
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by AuroEdge » Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:51 pm

Flaccid FETUS wrote:<--steel detailer
Those buildings were lucky they didn't fall from the original impact with how much stress those beams already had on there. Take the broken concrete and the fire burning that hot theres no way they could have survived that. Now I won't even go into how inferior steel from the 70's is, but it's pretty bad.
While I would trust a steel detailer to know more about this than an economist, I would not trust a steel detailer over the head engineer of the WTC project on the dynamics of the WTC collapse.
Image
"The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is
that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too." -Oscar Levant
jaredfogle
DCEmu Turkey Baster
DCEmu Turkey Baster
Posts: 2663
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 8:34 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by jaredfogle » Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:13 pm

Economists are generally intelligent folk, and this particular one worked for Bush. He also "served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas and is now professor emeritus at Texas A&M University." So his credibility shouldn't really be an issue.

There's some very considerable evidence that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by the US government. They're certainly capable of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

And here's a flash animation that raised questions on the subject and links to more reading:
http://tfyqa.com/images/pentagon.swf

EDIT: This place has more information relevant to this topic (somewhat technical at times), the other two are interesting, though:
http://physics911.ca
Where's toastman? I'm bored.
CoasterKing
Gone Postal...
Gone Postal...
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 5:45 pm
Location: UK
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by CoasterKing » Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:08 pm

It was CGI
Image
User avatar
Roofus
President & CEO Roofuscorp, LLC
President & CEO Roofuscorp, LLC
Posts: 9888
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:42 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Roofus » Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:56 pm

jaredfogle wrote:Economists are generally intelligent folk, and this particular one worked for Bush. He also "served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas and is now professor emeritus at Texas A&M University." So his credibility shouldn't really be an issue.

There's some very considerable evidence that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by the US government. They're certainly capable of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

And here's a flash animation that raised questions on the subject and links to more reading:
http://tfyqa.com/images/pentagon.swf

EDIT: This place has more information relevant to this topic (somewhat technical at times), the other two are interesting, though:
http://physics911.ca

Oh shut up.
User avatar
pixel
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Posts: 4971
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2002 10:52 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 3 times
Contact:

Post by pixel » Sun Jun 19, 2005 7:24 pm

CoasterKing wrote:It was CGI
lmao :lol:
Post Reply