No announcement yet.

The collapse of WTC1, 2 and 7

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    The Swiss are known to build explosives into their structures for defense purposes. For instance they put explosives in the collumns of a bridge as it is built so that they can easy destroy it to not allow an invading army the use of it.
    But would business buildings be considered as strategic to military purposes, similar to bridges?

    I don't have a link, but I recall reading a report that, for a several-week period in the months prior to September 11, at least one bank of elevators was closed off in each tower "for maintenance," and the closed areas were monitored by armed guards.

    But the implication is that, no matter how the explosives got there, there had to be a human decision made to activate them. And that this occurred so soon after impact that it seemed to be part of a "plan." So, if explosives really did collapse the towers, who made the decision to do it? It's no wonder that the official "investigation" (wink, wink) cannot reveal this without also revealing the "plan."

    We do know that such a decision was made about the third collapse, from the recorded admission of the owner that it was decided to "pull it," the term used by professional demolishers. But why pull it? The reason given was obviously part of the overall cover-up, and I suspect the real answer to that question would also answer the question for the first two towers.