Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The collapse of WTC1, 2 and 7

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • missouriboy
    replied
    quote:
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • joeaguy
    replied
    The explosion theory is plausable, but the cause is not necesarily a conspiracy. Persoanlly I am a raving liberal who thinks the current government was more than capable of conspiring to either stage, or "allow" all of the events of that day for the ends that are currently unfolding, but I think sanity requires the consideration of other alternatives.

    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. The USA has always thought in a similarly paranoid manner and may have done the same, but unlike the Swiss they didn't tell anyone. Now what if the buildings did collapse partially or asymetricly? The damage to surrouding buildings would have been much greater, it would have taken much longer to take down the burned out husks of the towers which would be a sad landmark on the skyline for months, and maybe even greater loss of life depending on how the collapse proceeded. Also these buildings were full of government offices, etc, whose contents no one wanted public, so its better to destroy it in fire than let the papers fly.

    I was living in Brooklyn at the time, close enough that papers from the towers and the whole big dust cloud covered my neighborhood. What scared me even more than the events of the day itself was the hysteria afterwards that was imposed on the city from the outside, and which the rest of the country took up voluntarily. New Yorkers wanted to move on with life and be great again, no one would let us.

    There's no right way to handle this kind of thing, just ways to rationaize your actions. The above is a possible rationalization, right or wrong, and it might not have been the best one. I do think the public deserves an even closer look at everything than what it got.

    Leave a comment:


  • hm0504
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by missouriboy:
    quote:
    pre-positioning explosives in all three buildings, which then detonated when the two planes hit the twin towers.
    No. The explosives detonated much, much later. 5:20PM in the case of WTC7, which was not even hit by a plane.

    Also, recall that there are only a handful of companies in the world with the expertise to demolish large structures with explosives. To my knowledge, Mr. Atta has never been associated with any of them.


    Perhaps Mr. Atta inadvertently discovered a much more efficient way to bring down large buildings in a relatively clean and efficient manner! Maybe from now on, demolition experts will just fly, asummedly pilotless, planes into the buildings they want to demolish. Now there's an idea!

    Leave a comment:


  • grl66
    replied
    Just a thought, but doesn't the fact that the only three, steel framed high rise buildings to collapse as a result of fire, happening on the same day make people think?

    Leave a comment:


  • missouriboy
    replied
    quote:
    Also open jet fuel (as opposed to just downwind of a compresser turbine) does not burn hot enough to melt stuctural steel.
    True. In fact, not even hot enough to melt aluminum cans. This is a simple, known fact that you could prove by yourself. Yet, there were still pools of molten iron found at ground zero two weeks later.
    quote:
    I don't beleive we are being told the whole truth.
    Good. Honest inquiry is good.

    Leave a comment:


  • missouriboy
    replied
    quote:
    pre-positioning explosives in all three buildings, which then detonated when the two planes hit the twin towers.
    No. The explosives detonated much, much later. 5:20PM in the case of WTC7, which was not even hit by a plane.

    Also, recall that there are only a handful of companies in the world with the expertise to demolish large structures with explosives. To my knowledge, Mr. Atta has never been associated with any of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • fred950
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by missouriboy:
    quote:
    ...it is a conspiracy theory and hence labelled so along side some very wacky ones. Many people automatically dismiss conspiracy theories simply because they see them as the ramblings of a crack pot.
    That's why I never brought up any references to the many other sources of this same information. But this reference is to the 9000-word report of the research done by a senior physics professor at a respected institution, Brigham Young University. Is he a "crackpot" too? If not, then the extent to which his facts agree with those prior reporters, indicates those prior reporters are not crackpots either.


    Perhaps Mohammed Atta simply wanted to hedge his bet by pre-positioning explosives in all three buildings, which then detonated when the two planes hit the twin towers. Seems the most likely explanation to me.

    Same here. It doesn't make sence that the third tower would collapse since it was not hit. Also open jet fuel (as opposed to just downwind of a compresser turbine) does not burn hot enough to melt stuctural steel.

    Another point to concider; some sixty odd years ago anU S Army Air Corps bomber rammed the Empire State Building. Not only did it NOT collapse, the gyroscopes it the upper floors had shown that it barely swayed AT ALL!

    I don't beleive we are being told the whole truth.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trailscout
    replied
    Perhaps Mohammed Atta simply wanted to hedge his bet by pre-positioning explosives in all three buildings, which then detonated when the two planes hit the twin towers. Seems the most likely explanation to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • missouriboy
    replied
    quote:
    ...it is a conspiracy theory and hence labelled so along side some very wacky ones. Many people automatically dismiss conspiracy theories simply because they see them as the ramblings of a crack pot.
    That's why I never brought up any references to the many other sources of this same information. But this reference is to the 9000-word report of the research done by a senior physics professor at a respected institution, Brigham Young University. Is he a "crackpot" too? If not, then the extent to which his facts agree with those prior reporters, indicates those prior reporters are not crackpots either.

    Leave a comment:


  • grl66
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by missouriboy:
    quote:
    ...I'm shocked that it was/is not all over the news with all these inconsistencies. How is this not more of an issue?
    Tara, allow your fine intelligence to deduce the answer to that question. The "establishment" media in this country is part of the team... has been for decades.


    This information has been available on the net for some time. Could it be it has not become more of an issue because Americans won't believe their government is possible of this? It would be a tough pill to swallow that's for sure.

    Another reason could be because it is a conspiracy theory and hence labelled so along side some very wacky ones. Many people automatically dismiss conspiracy theories simply because they see them as the ramblings of a crack pot. With some of the rather imaginative conspiracy theories around, how can you blame them.

    I personally can't subscribe to the more "way out" theories going around like the "there were no planes" theory or the "missle firing plane" theory, both which use very little hard evidence to back themselves up, but with regards to the 3 towers actually collapsing, it would appear there's something that's just not right there.

    Of course the chances of actually finding out the truth are slim to say the least. It certainly makes for interesting reading though. Could it have been the biggest Psy Op in American history?

    Leave a comment:


  • Tara
    replied
    oh belive me missouriboy, i'm aware of that already, it's pathetic... it's just with something THIS big I'm still amazed.

    Leave a comment:


  • missouriboy
    replied
    quote:
    ...I'm shocked that it was/is not all over the news with all these inconsistencies. How is this not more of an issue?
    Tara, allow your fine intelligence to deduce the answer to that question. The "establishment" media in this country is part of the team... has been for decades.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atlanta Runner
    replied
    Tower 7 fell late in the day if I remember right. Maybe around 5:00 to 5:30. I only got part of the way through but will get around to reading the whole thing. Interesting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tara
    replied
    I'm only part-way through it but so far this is really fascinating and disturbing...

    I feel like I only have a slightly vague memory of a smaller tower even collapsing (and I read/watch A LOT of news)... and I'm shocked that it was/is not all over the news with all these inconsistencies. How is this not more of an issue?


    **EDIT**

    Here we go - I found this mention of it without even looking - Tucker Carlson had the author on his show... for a whole 6 minutes.
    http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8063563/#051116a

    Leave a comment:


  • missouriboy
    replied
    http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X