full-disclosure - **LosseChange::Debunk it??**

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu May 18 18:41:52 2006
From: duckhacks at gmail.com (Ducki3)
Subject: **LosseChange::Debunk it??**

>Apparently so, since we'll swallow any cockamamie conspiracy theory that
comes along.

Paul, I am not saying I believe all the "conspiracy" Theories or that the
government was behind it. I don't really know. But I do know from reading
the government Northwood documents that it isn't beyond the governments
thoughts to attempt something like this. I know it doesn't mean they did but
it does mean they have thought of doing this.

All I am saying is that it is a possibility and while the counter evidence
you provided is plausible on why the towers collapsed. Sure, I
understand that the amount of Jet fuel spread so quickly on the whole floor
caused structural failure of the trusses causing the building to collapse.
But I am trying to dig up why WTC 7 collapsed when it didn't have raging jet
fuel fire burning through it. The document didn't explain that part.

Val's comment was that many buildings have collapsed from neighboring fires
like the Chicago fire of 1871. As for Chicago Fire of 1871, yes most of the
buildings were gutted out from fire. These are buildings that are pre 20th
century. Made with what? Wood, brick, some steel? I am trying to find a more
modern case of a building collapsing (not gutted) of structural fire
(besides the obvious two towers which a plausible case was already made).

The eye witness accounts of the Pentagon crash. There are indeed numerous
accounts all of which contradict each other. Some people saw American
Airlines, some people saw a commuter looking plane in the area, some a C-130
overhead. Control towers say the plane was maneuvering too fast to be an
airliner.  So I don't buy into any of the eye witness accounts of either
side, I wasn't there. I do know that it's possibly on tape somewhere that
government will not release for whatever security reasons. They did release
a 4 frame clip from the parking lot camera that shows no plane in it. That
does no good.

There are too many things to debate and piece together (WTC 7, Cell phones
at high altitudes, Pre warning messages, Northwood, Pentagon Holes, Collapse
rates, etc.) and some of the conspiracy is utter bull and some seems
plausible to me. I guess it's up to every individual to make that conclusion
on their own by looking at "BOTH" sides, not one. And I'm not applying this
to you Paul but in general because I don't know what you have read and what
you haven't but when people haven't examine both sides and all of the
theories then you have ceased to be a free thinker. Because there isn't just
1 or 2 subjects in this conspiracy theory. There is more than a few dozen.

Peace,

Ducki3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20060518/8cc11cb7/attachment.html