wibble, both explanations seem unlikely, pre-planted charges, conspiracy theories aside, would not have detonated as planned baring in mind the damage, and the timeline for a proper precise demolition is tight, but I can't find anything better to fit the observations of events that day and the inconsistency in the news reports.
World Trade Center Dust Contains Evidence of Explosives
- Thread starter SexyGreyFox
- Start date
wibble, both explanations seem unlikely, pre-planted charges, conspiracy theories aside, would not have detonated as planned baring in mind the damage, and the timeline for a proper precise demolition is tight, but I can't find anything better to fit the observations of events that day and the inconsistency in the news reports.
Observations of the building showing signs of sagging and damage before it collapse. Does not support any demolition CT.
As for the media. They where just mistakes. A green wall behind them showing pictures. The news presenters can't see whats on the green wall and wouldn't even know which building is which.
As for the media. They where just mistakes. A green wall behind them showing pictures. The news presenters can't see whats on the green wall and wouldn't even know which building is which.
Soldato
On the weekend of 9/8,9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC for 36hrs
there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors.
Caporegime
Citation. Also any proof that such an action was in any way suspicious.
Even assuming it's true.
That is a very short time to prepare a building for demo.
Even harder when they can't remove everything they do in a usual demo and no one saw any tampering.
Then on top of that you have the damage from wtc2 and the partial collapse of WTC7 then shows signs of column failures before the collapse.
So we have evidence that goes against a controlled demo and none for it.
Soldato
Last edited:
Caporegime
Not really. But I suppose it's easy to come up with coincidences at this stage. I'm not at all convinced that the ability to sneak a bit of explosive material into a tower block is in any way proof that you could sneak in enough to destroy the whole of the twin towers.
Soldato
The guys name was Scott Forbes a British guy with a office in WTC
All depends on how many people you got working for you, same as any job.
Lots of people did But the FBI\Nist did not interview them even though the BRITISH people told them.
and do a youtube for "tan house flats" its in halesowen they did not remove anything before the demo.
I know because I was there to watch it.
Caporegime
There is, I believe, a great deal to be said for the policy of dragging certain people *cough*deuse*cough* from their homes and beating them violently with large sticks.
Just saying.
Just saying.
Can we consider this:
Why would the government have overengineered such an elaborate setup when all they would have to have done is get some turds on the plane.
Think of it this way. Massive operation to kill thousands of americans by having loads of potential witnesses and defectors, not to mention deathbed confessions by planting explosives
OR
Manipulate some ragheads into blowing up a plane and potentially give them easy access to a plane (eg they left a gun under a seat or the key to cabin).
hmmmm....
*P.s I think its all a load of crock
Why would the government have overengineered such an elaborate setup when all they would have to have done is get some turds on the plane.
Think of it this way. Massive operation to kill thousands of americans by having loads of potential witnesses and defectors, not to mention deathbed confessions by planting explosives
OR
Manipulate some ragheads into blowing up a plane and potentially give them easy access to a plane (eg they left a gun under a seat or the key to cabin).
hmmmm....
*P.s I think its all a load of crock
Soldato
It was not just one guy there was a lots of them, even Scotland Yard
told Nist, but Nist did not get back to them.
Now go on FLAME the Scotland Yard
evidence first.
And please discredit how wtc7 fell including the photo evidence of partial collapse. Or are you trying to say the explosives where rigged in such a way to demolition certain sections first and other suh photographic annomilies.
How does no power from 50th floor up on one tower. Account for the other 2 and a half towers.
Also do you want to put a reasonable set of events that happened that day that show or prove Controlled demo, with supporting evidence.
Or can't anyone as CTs never seem to be able to string a credible situation together. Just poke holes in stuff with lies and miss quotes.
And please discredit how wtc7 fell including the photo evidence of partial collapse. Or are you trying to say the explosives where rigged in such a way to demolition certain sections first and other suh photographic annomilies.
How does no power from 50th floor up on one tower. Account for the other 2 and a half towers.
Also do you want to put a reasonable set of events that happened that day that show or prove Controlled demo, with supporting evidence.
Or can't anyone as CTs never seem to be able to string a credible situation together. Just poke holes in stuff with lies and miss quotes.
Last edited:
Soldato
There is, I believe, a great deal to be said for the policy of dragging certain people *cough*deuse*cough* from their homes and beating them violently with large sticks.
Just saying.
Oh look a Aussie keyboard warrior....nothing new there
Wish I could spell like you and talk big words to make me look hard
Soldato
See now you for got the 10sec free fall that happend just about the 50-60th floor.
AND THAT WS YOUR MATES NIST NOT ME.
anyway..time to go to work..
The free fall you are talking about is on wtc7 which was not around those floors.
As has been showen you have read rubbish and believed it. Go read up on it from all sides.
To use a CT favourite Open your eyes.
Look here for some basic explanations
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm