World Trade Centre Dustification

[john-e89]

I defy anyone who has investigated 9/11 with an open mind and listened to the numerous structural engineers and architects who categorically state that the towers could not possibly have collapsed as a result of the planes impact and resulting fires, and that furthermore the near ‘free-fall’ collapse is only explainable by controlled explosion, not to seriously question the official story.

Whilst I’m not disregarding conspiracy theories, surely an explosion of enough magnitude to bring these towers down would have been heard, flashes seen on detonation? To be 100% sure of a successful demolition there would have to be explosives on all sides near the ground, I can’t believe it wouldn’t have been seen or heard..?

 

[thanatu55]

I defy anyone who has investigated 9/11 with an open mind and listened to the numerous structural engineers and architects who categorically state that the towers could not possibly have collapsed as a result of the planes impact and resulting fires, and that furthermore the near ‘free-fall’ collapse is only explainable by controlled explosion, not to seriously question the official story.

Whilst I’m not disregarding conspiracy theories, surely an explosion of enough magnitude to bring these towers down would have been heard, flashes seen on detonation? To be 100% sure of a successful demolition there would have to be explosives on all sides near the ground, I can’t believe it wouldn’t have been seen or heard..?

There are thousands of reports by witnesses of explosions taking place such as these

[youtube]G1zED8dy63w[/youtube]

[youtube]PfxkcBmZfK0[/youtube]

[youtube]eAAveeeVVfM[/youtube]

[youtube]QPUAVMGX454[/youtube]

 

[TitanTim]

I think it's beyond doubt something else brought the towers down after all these were immensely strong structures originally designed to withstand multiple jet airliner hits. I can't honestly believe an aircraft made of aluminium would have the capability to do the damage it did. The video I originally posted is the eye opener for me as the buildings didn't just collapse they turned to dust in the air. Explosions possibly helped but the idea of a free energy weapon being used that we don't understand must be something to be explored. There's far too many questions than answers and the fact that respected people in their field suspect some weapon of some kind was used boggles the mind and why it was done.

Tim.

 

[thanatu55]

Why is another excellent question. One theory is that war = money. In order to justify war it needs, in part, public backing. To gain public backing the population needs to have something to fear. The fear and threat of terrorism pre and post 9/11 are night and day. This enhanced fear of a terrorist organisation was later taken advantage of as a driving tool to infiltrate Afghanistan and then later Iraq. In fact, Al Quaeda pre 9/11 didn't exist as a formal organisation. It was a creation by the Americans to label a network of terrorist sleeper cells throughout America and the rest of the world which was never proven to exist, and the term 'Al Quaeda' was never knowingly used by Bin Laden until after 9/11 when he learned that it was the term the Americans had given it. It went on to be an idea that inspired radicalization and terrorist acts which eventually mutated into what we know today. The war in Iraq was used as the justification for the formation of the intensely extreme groups of today, and all could have been avoided.

An excellent hour long BBC documentary post 9/11 pre 7/7 can be found here:
https://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/power_of_nightmares_politics_of_fear

And a full transcript of the documentary can be found here:
https://www.wanttoknow.info/war/power_of_nightmares_transcript_3

 

[john-e89]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the people needed to carry out dropping two towers, from the initial conversations, final decisions, planning, pilots, to execution of demolition equipment and trigger pulling all happily went along with the murder of 3odd thousand people as though it was nothing special and no one has blabbed etc? You would need a big group of psychopaths all capable of mass murder from several different trades and officials. Really???????

 

[MrPT]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the people needed to carry out dropping two towers, from the initial conversations, final decisions, planning, pilots, to execution of demolition equipment and trigger pulling all happily went along with the murder of 3odd thousand people as though it was nothing special and no one has blabbed etc? You would need a big group of psychopaths all capable of mass murder from several different trades and officials. Really???????

John, you clearly don't understand the rules of the game. The onus is on you to prove that it didn't happen. If you can't, then the towers must have been blown up deliberately using a giant death ray, because the idea that a devastating, unprecedented event had devastating, unprecedented consequences is just too boring.

 

[Marlon]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the people needed to carry out dropping two towers, from the initial conversations, final decisions, planning, pilots, to execution of demolition equipment and trigger pulling all happily went along with the murder of 3odd thousand people as though it was nothing special and no one has blabbed etc? You would need a big group of psychopaths all capable of mass murder from several different trades and officials. Really???????

That's exactly where I was John a few years back. But gradually as the official story made less and less sense I was forced, almost against my will, to look at possible alternatives.

 

[patriot66]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the people needed to carry out dropping two towers, from the initial conversations, final decisions, planning, pilots, to execution of demolition equipment and trigger pulling all happily went along with the murder of 3odd thousand people as though it was nothing special and no one has blabbed etc? You would need a big group of psychopaths all capable of mass murder from several different trades and officials. Really???????

John, you clearly don't understand the rules of the game. The onus is on you to prove that it didn't happen. If you can't, then the towers must have been blown up deliberately using a giant death ray, because the idea that a devastating, unprecedented event had devastating, unprecedented consequences is just too boring.

+1

 

[TitanTim]

I was the same a few years back, all the codswallop conspiracy theories annoy the hell out of me but until you realise it's not just a case of 2 planes crashing and the towers falling it just wasn't physically possible. I don't dispute it was terrorists but those towers were given a helping hand for which I think it was something far more sinister than terrorism alone. There's loads of of interviews with rescuers who said things were just not right on the day, explosions, immense heat from the base of the pile that took 3 months to extinguish, incinerated vehicles blocks away but no other damage around them. Hardly anything from inside the towers survived. Lots unexplained.

The official NIST report is a bit of a joke concluding the top collapsing floors was enough to topple the towers completely and turn them both to dust with hardly anything left except a small pile.

Tim.

 

[thanatu55]

The rules of the game are in the title, conspiracy 'theory'. Everything is theoretical. There is no one story banded about and people will probe and ponder as long as the numbers don't add up.

Do I think lazers, death rays and fake terrorists were used? Doubtful. Do I think the government would take advantage of a bad situation to suit their own means? Definitely.


We all buy into this vision of good vs evil. We are the brave hero's trying to distinguish all that is bad in the world. We would never think of doing anything those evil Russians/Arabs/Cubans/Koreans/Islamists etc. etc. etc. would do, who are busy scheming and plotting in the shadows. I think you would find in reality we can be just as bad as anyone else. We are spoon fed the beliefs we are supposed to uphold while the things that go on behind closed doors would shock and disgust us all, evidenced by documents that eventually do become declassified over time available for anybody to read if you take the time detailing our own dark and murky past.

Examples:

- NATO carried out terror bombings in Italy with the help of the Pentagon and CIA and blamed communists in order to rally people's support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism

-American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan code-named Operation Northwoods to blow up American airoplanes (replacing the planes) and commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba, only to be thwarted by JFK who refused to implement it.

- The HSCA Committee carried out a second investigation into the assassination of JFK which ruled without doubt that a conspiracy took place, Oswald implicated too, without ever identifying who the wider perpetrators were.

- Mind control techniques were experimented with in the 50's and 60's with the aim of turning someone of any background into an assassin and erase their actions from memory.

All according to officially released, previously classified documents. These are the things that conspiracy theorists point to when the present can't justify the facts and the past points to a world of underhand and crazy sounding tactics.

 

[dans6490]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the people needed to carry out dropping two towers, from the initial conversations, final decisions, planning, pilots, to execution of demolition equipment and trigger pulling all happily went along with the murder of 3odd thousand people as though it was nothing special and no one has blabbed etc? You would need a big group of psychopaths all capable of mass murder from several different trades and officials. Really???????

Exactly, It sounds implausible but then so does the official narrative. At least it does when you look below the surface.

I don’t know what to believe but I certainly don’t believe they were brought down, solely, by the two aircraft.

Maybe the same psychopaths that planned, discussed and convinced the western world to attack a country and kill thousands of people on both sides for a reason that was proven to be false whilst destabilising an entire region for decades and also managed to cover up the real reasons, also played some role in the twin towers.

 

[john-e89]

Heat brought them down. 90,000litres of aircraft fuel produced an uneven fire of up to 150 deg’c difference Inside the towers to the perimeter. A weakening and buckling of smaller joists inside the buildings led to the collapse of floors by their mounting clips as the fire burnt. As each floor toppled it created a domino effect, until the building could not stand its own weight and internally fell. In a nutshell.

This is what I believe, it makes sense, I understand the whole report.

Mass murder? Sorry, you’ll never convince me. But that’s just me obviously, we all have our opinion on what we’ve read, I’m not knocking anyone for their views.

 

[TitanTim]

Heat brought them down. 90,000litres of aircraft fuel produced an uneven fire of up to 150 deg’c difference Inside the towers to the perimeter. A weakening and buckling of smaller joists inside the buildings led to the collapse of floors by their mounting clips as the fire burnt. As each floor toppled it created a domino effect, until the building could not stand its own weight and internally fell. In a nutshell.

This is what I believe, it makes sense, I understand the whole report.

Mass murder? Sorry, you’ll never convince me. But that’s just me obviously, we all have our opinion on what we’ve read, I’m not knocking anyone for their views.

That simply isn't true John, it's been proved aviation fuel burns nowhere near hot enough to melt steel trusses and most burnt off soon after initial impact. Thermal cameras showed core fire temps weren't much over 120 degrees which is about the temperature a standard building fire where furniture and carpets etc are burning, again nowhere near the temps needed to melt steel to the point it buckles and fails. The only way the floors failed to have a building collapse in 10 seconds free fall is purposeful demolition to remove the floors before the proceeding floors collapse. Can you believe that 10 floors collapsing would have the downward inertia to pulverise an entire building in 10 seconds, if so then it goes against laws of physics, it just isn't possible, remember each tower was in fact 2 towers one with a core column and outer column so immensely strong structures. This is why to me the official story doesn't make sense.

Tim.

 

[Nictrix]

Is it time yet to move on to the Titanic and how the whole iceberg thing never happened and that it was all an insurance scam with the Titanic and its sister ship swapped before leaving port?

If you like false flag incidents do a quick search on Sandy Hook.

Also look for crisis actors. These are people who seem to always be there when these disasters take place.

 

[thanatu55]

It would be more believable if it weren't for three towers all going down exactly the same way, one not even hit by a plane. Maybe by some freak occurrence one goes down, the other suffers major structural damage and the third internal/external fire damage. But all three go down in exactly the same manner? All into their own footprint, no toppling? All at free fall speed?

No tower either before or since has ever gone down from fire damage. As an example of something a little closer to home, just look at Grenfell, Madrid or Dubai.

 

[dans6490]

It’s easy to mock anyone who doesn’t agree with the official narrative but the “facts” are damning, wether you like to believe them or not.

Nobody is saying they believe that fairies live at the bottom of the garden or agree with every conspiracy theory out there.

There have been a lot of polls done on who were the perpetrators and it’s clear that a lot of people have similar thoughts.

One such poll found that nearly half of the New York residents questioned, “believe individuals within the U.S. government knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act."

 

[z4pilot]

It would be more believable if it weren't for three towers all going down exactly the same way, one not even hit by a plane. Maybe by some freak occurrence one goes down, the other suffers major structural damage and the third internal/external fire damage. But all three go down in exactly the same manner? All into their own footprint, no toppling? All at free fall speed?

No tower either before or since has ever gone down from fire damage. As an example of something a little closer to home, just look at Grenfell, Madrid or Dubai.

It's completely believable - two of the towers were mirror images of each other and suffered the same type of impact and damage, so why would they not collapse in the same way? You can't compare what happened in New York to any other city because those fires weren't caused in the same way, the buildings weren't the same age and possibly weren't built to the same building regs - there are too many variables to draw any meaningful comparisons.

 

[thanatu55]

And the third?

 

[TitanTim]

Strange though that the likes of Grenfell tower was literally incinerated and most likely constructed to nowhere near the standards of the twin towers yet didn't collapse :?

Tim.

 

[Ducklakeview]

I for one don't believe the "official version" of events.

For one, those buildings were apparently designed to withstand an impact from a plane much larger than those allegedly flown into them.

Secondly, they way in which they came down was WAY too much like a "controlled" demolition.

Just two of my own personal thoughts on the matter..

Mike