Engineers Reveal Hard Evidence of Explosive Demolition at World Trade Center

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Dude, some of the windows were still intact...how the hell does that happen when a Boeing trashs into it?

LJS9502_basic

7557119a-b0b4-411f-8473-9ab0e1e5a8cc1.03.01

it was aplane with missile under it....i heard something like that

I would not be surprised if the bush administration knew of the coming attacks and did nothing, or even if they were more involved because I didn't ever and will never trust that administration. That being said, I'll wait until the majority of people believe it, or it is shown irrefutably to be a fact before I form an opinion on it.

I would not be surprised if the bush administration knew of the coming attacks and did nothing, or even if they were more involved because I didn't ever and will never trust that administration. That being said, I'll wait until the majority of people believe it, or it is shown irrefutably to be a fact before I form an opinion on it.

tocklestein2005

majority of people believing it doesnt mean its true

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Not saying anything, but did they ever find the plane remains of the boeing 757 at the pentagon?

DroidPhysX

Not really. I've seen a lot of pics/videos of the crash, and i saw no remains of the planes outside the pentagon. Infact, while browsing i saw this

majority of people believing it doesnt mean its true

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

majority of people believing it doesnt mean its true

Omni-Slash

or some dudes who suck at flying planes, hijacked a plane and did some l33t manouversand crashed into the towers.....all in a country which is said to be worlds most securest and where even a fly cant move without being detected.

majority of people believing it doesnt mean its true

[QUOTE="Omni-Slash"][QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

majority of people believing it doesnt mean its true

sikanderahmed

or some dudes who suck at flying planes, hijacked a plane and did some l33t manouversand crashed into the towers.....all in a country which is said to be worlds most securest and where even a fly cant move without being detected.

pah. yahoo. They make a living off exaggerated headlines and rewording. I refuse to take seriously anything they pump out

On the subject of the Pentagon, I feel the need to remind everyone that this all occurred next to a busy highway. There were countless eyewitnesses who testify that they saw a plane.PannicAtack

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

[QUOTE="Omni-Slash"] yeah but a bunch of crazies not looking at evidence and somehow thinking that a goverment that can barely keep out of it's own way was somehow able to masterfully pull off this attack without giving off any warning signs to anyone ahead of time is laughable...LJS9502_basic

or some dudes who suck at flying planes, hijacked a plane and did some l33t manouversand crashed into the towers.....all in a country which is said to be worlds most securest and where even a fly cant move without being detected.

i meant secure airspace

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

or some dudes who suck at flying planes, hijacked a plane and did some l33t manouversand crashed into the towers.....all in a country which is said to be worlds most securest and where even a fly cant move without being detected.

sikanderahmed

i meant secure airspace

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

or some dudes who suck at flying planes, hijacked a plane and did some l33t manouversand crashed into the towers.....all in a country which is said to be worlds most securest and where even a fly cant move without being detected.

sikanderahmed

i meant secure airspace

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] So you are saying no crime happens in the US? :|LJS9502_basic

i meant secure airspace

they were at the wrong place and flying too low and it seems nobody noticed

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

i meant secure airspace

sikanderahmed

they were at the wrong place and flying too low and it seems nobody noticed

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The planes were legal flights.:?LJS9502_basic

they were at the wrong place and flying too low and it seems nobody noticed

righhht.

or some dudes who suck at flying planes, hijacked a plane and did some l33t manouversand crashed into the towers.....all in a country which is said to be worlds most securest and where even a fly cant move without being detected.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Dude, some of the windows were still intact...how the hell does that happen when a Boeing trashs into it?

7557119a-b0b4-411f-8473-9ab0e1e5a8cc1.03.01

it was aplane with missile under it....i heard something like that

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The planes were legal flights.:?LJS9502_basic

they were at the wrong place and flying too low and it seems nobody noticed

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

they were at the wrong place and flying too low and it seems nobody noticed

DanC1989

A plane didn't hit building 7, it collapsed later on in the day.DanC1989

[QUOTE="DanC1989"]A plane didn't hit building 7, it collapsed later on in the day.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DanC1989"]A plane didn't hit building 7, it collapsed later on in the day.DanC1989

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DanC1989"]A plane didn't hit building 7, it collapsed later on in the day.DanC1989

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DanC1989"]A plane didn't hit building 7, it collapsed later on in the day.DanC1989

As for the "explosions," that is attributed to diesel storage tanks. Building 7 was *severely* damaged by debris from the collapse of one of the towers, it got caught in a massive fire, and it collapsed as a result. The firefighters will testify to that much - they predicted it would collapse.

Precisely what evidence? And it's entirely possible that these 1200 engineers are quacks.

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="DanC1989"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The structure was weakened.....LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Precisely what evidence? And it's entirely possible that these 1200 engineers are quacks.

67gt500

Yes, you're stating the obvious..but you'd have to look it up. It doesn't look extensively damaged. Believe you me, I have an open mind about it all but in the case of WTC7..it doesn't add up. Especially when you factor in Jennings and his eyewitness testimony of explosions.DanC1989

In reality I think the only thing the govt probably could have done that they didn't was to shoot down at least one of the planes.....but I think no-one had the political set to do it......and while that is GWs fault....I don;t think any president today would make that dicision either..the media backlash would have been horrific...Omni-Slash

You said it perfectly. The person would get run out of office with people saying "I know of 100 better ways of solving that problem than you"

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DanC1989"] Of course..but by what? :P I wouldn't really have an qualms with the WTC collapses if it weren't for this one, not many buildings collapse from fire damage. And then if this one was pre-planned then obviously it brings the rest very much into question as they were the catalyst for its collapse. Look up Barry Jennings.67gt500

Precisely what evidence? And it's entirely possible that these 1200 engineers are quacks.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="67gt500"] lol - no, it's more likely that the people running America are quacks...67gt500

[QUOTE="67gt500"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]But damage to a building CAN bring it down.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="DanC1989"]Yes, you're stating the obvious..but you'd have to look it up. It doesn't look extensively damaged. Believe you me, I have an open mind about it all but in the case of WTC7..it doesn't add up. Especially when you factor in Jennings and his eyewitness testimony of explosions.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DanC1989"]A plane didn't hit building 7, it collapsed later on in the day.DanC1989

By what? When 2 massive buildings collapses the vibrations will rock any building around it very heavily. Why do buildings fall during earthquakes or after? Their structures get weakened by the force of the vibrations. You add tons of debris hitting the the building, the thing was going to fall. In NYC buildings aren't built to withstand earthquakes. I guarantee if it happened in LA, other buildings around the site wouldn't have been nearly as effected as they are built to withstand earthquakes.

When they do controlled demolitions in any major city, they always take great care on how the building falls so that the vibrations created by the collapse do not weaken the older structures around it.

Remember with the WTC were hit by planes they didn't just bounce off... the whole buildings were shook to their core. NYC buildings do not have to be up to earthquake standards. You crash a massive plane into a tall building, it's going to weaken the whole thing. The parts that were the weakest were where the planes physically hit. Since they hit on the top, but didn't topple the buildings right away (if they would have hit a stone structure like the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Tower, things would have been far different), they would fall straight down into themselves because the bottom of the buildings were still the most structurally intact.

Just thinking with some basic physics and logic is enough to know that there were no explosives needed to bring those buildings down.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="67gt500"] Right, IF that damage is delivered in the form of properly applied explosives..67gt500

How do you think massive amounts of Americans which would be needed to carry this out would allow the government....which most people distrust to start with....to go about attacking other innocent Americans and say nothing? I cannot fathom that.....

[QUOTE="DanC1989"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] The structure was weakened.....Wasdie

By what? When 2 massive buildings collapses the vibrations will rock any building around it very heavily. Why do buildings fall during earthquakes or after? Their structures get weakened by the force of the vibrations. You add tons of debris hitting the the building, the thing was going to fall. In NYC buildings aren't built to withstand earthquakes. I guarantee if it happened in LA, other buildings around the site wouldn't have been nearly as effected as they are built to withstand earthquakes.

When they do controlled demolitions in any major city, they always take great care on how the building falls so that the vibrations created by the collapse do not weaken the older structures around it.

Remember with the WTC were hit by planes they didn't just bounce off... the whole buildings were shook to their core. NYC buildings do not have to be up to earthquake standards. You crash a massive plane into a tall building, it's going to weaken the whole thing. The parts that were the weakest were where the planes physically hit. Since they hit on the top, but didn't topple the buildings right away (if they would have hit a stone structure like the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Tower, things would have been far different), they would fall straight down into themselves because the bottom of the buildings were still the most structurally intact.

Just thinking with some basic physics and logic is enough to know that there were no explosives needed to bring those buildings down.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="DanC1989"]Yes, you're stating the obvious..but you'd have to look it up. It doesn't look extensively damaged. Believe you me, I have an open mind about it all but in the case of WTC7..it doesn't add up. Especially when you factor in Jennings and his eyewitness testimony of explosions.DanC1989

7557119a-b0b4-411f-8473-9ab0e1e5a8cc1.03.01

It tipped because unlike the two towers which were hit directly and thus vibrations ran through the entire core towards the top, weakening the internal structures, the vibrations came from the ground on one side, weakening the bottom supports instead of the core supports of the buildings. This woudl weaken one side more than the other which woudl cause it to top.

Also the WTC towers had a stronger exo-skeleton to them.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="DanC1989"] Of course..but by what? :P I wouldn't really have an qualms with the WTC collapses if it weren't for this one, not many buildings collapse from fire damage. And then if this one was pre-planned then obviously it brings the rest very much into question as they were the catalyst for its collapse. Look up Barry Jennings.67gt500

By what? When 2 massive buildings collapses the vibrations will rock any building around it very heavily. Why do buildings fall during earthquakes or after? Their structures get weakened by the force of the vibrations. You add tons of debris hitting the the building, the thing was going to fall. In NYC buildings aren't built to withstand earthquakes. I guarantee if it happened in LA, other buildings around the site wouldn't have been nearly as effected as they are built to withstand earthquakes.

When they do controlled demolitions in any major city, they always take great care on how the building falls so that the vibrations created by the collapse do not weaken the older structures around it.

Remember with the WTC were hit by planes they didn't just bounce off... the whole buildings were shook to their core. NYC buildings do not have to be up to earthquake standards. You crash a massive plane into a tall building, it's going to weaken the whole thing. The parts that were the weakest were where the planes physically hit. Since they hit on the top, but didn't topple the buildings right away (if they would have hit a stone structure like the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Tower, things would have been far different), they would fall straight down into themselves because the bottom of the buildings were still the most structurally intact.

Just thinking with some basic physics and logic is enough to know that there were no explosives needed to bring those buildings down.

Even after severe quakes, many structures take massive damage without being completely razed...67gt500

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="67gt500"] lol - no, it's more likely that the people running America are quacks...67gt500

Even after severe quakes, many structures take massive damage without being completely razed...67gt500

Again... the west coast and places prone to earthquakes have FAR different building standards.

Why did all of the buildings in Haiti collapse yet the ones in Chili (which was a larger earthquake) didn't?