People act like 2 planes didn't crash into the fucking buildings. How many people would it take to plant the explosives? How many floors had explosives? Where were they placed? Who were the people that would have planted the explosives? The only type that could pull this off are the SF types, and the ones I know wouldn't have done shit like this. And for all you out there who say diesel can't melt steel need to educate yourselves on blacksmithing because getting metal red hot makes it soft enough to be bent by hand, easily. I've seen tanker fires cause concrete bridges to fail, that fuel can't reach temperatures to melt rocks either.
No idea, never put any thought into it. Why go though the extra hassle, the 2 larger buildings came down and the skyline was forever changed. Why even target a short building in the same area if explosives were going to be used. If the plan was to use explosives why stop at the wtc buildings. Hell why even blow them up from the inside, 5 or 6 Oklahoma city style van bombs would have done the trick much easier. Where did the explosives come from? The military? Fucking Chelsea manning leaked all kinds of shit, this kinda stuff can't be kept under wraps. Look at all the leaks coming from Trump's administration, that shit leaks like a sieve, and the crap that's leaked is a millionth less juicy.
I was going to call you a shill, however, I read through your profile. So i will say this, look at your comment really read it. you dismiss WTC 7 with no thought. How did a building that was in no way damaged fall like it was on purpose?
I have demolitions experience, I've gotten to blow up all kinds of shit. Best I ever got to set off was 800 pounds of bangalore torpedoes in one shot. I've watched the videos, I didn't see any evidence. Shape charges and breaching charges could be tamped down with water or blankets, and you wouldn't see them. Iv bag taped to a charge stuck on a wall sprays water backwards, but directs the force forwards. Pros would be able to hide their work, which is why I think everyone eyes are lying to them.
TNT isn't explosive enough to cut a tree and it won't cut metal which leaves rdx/c4 . 7 hours of fires would have lit c4 on fire rendering it useless and the demolition would have been more chaotic and not as complete. If it was the government / military and the plan would be to lie anyway, why risk detection planting charges in the inside f the building when a tim McVeigh would be just as effective.
My point is this. If it was an inside job then the execution was perfect, despite a thousand moving parts nothing there was no major mistakes. The were no charges weren't stumbled upon. They all remained intact with raging fires all around them. There were no significant premature detonations, every single charge was set off at the correct time. Plans that sophisticated never work.
The triggering device would have to be radio, since it wouldn't have been possible to daisy chain det cord to everything. If they were shielded for fires and water would have made them so bulky it would have taken a large crew to get everything in place in a few days otherwise the risk of discovery would have grown exponentially the more time before the attack lapsed. It doesn't make sense to me to engage in all the extra risk of detection, risk of whistle blowers, risk of failure when the planes would be enough. Why not add a dirty bomb to the planes if the goal was war. There were no bombs at the pentagon, and would there be bombs where flight 93 what was the target, would they set up charges for that target and if so who removed them? Nobody stumbled upon them at a time of heightened vigilance?
As far as how a building can fall like that, regardless if you believe the NIST simulation is a red herring or an attempt at a cover up, the simulation is sound.
view the rest of the comments →
bman0321 ago
People act like 2 planes didn't crash into the fucking buildings. How many people would it take to plant the explosives? How many floors had explosives? Where were they placed? Who were the people that would have planted the explosives? The only type that could pull this off are the SF types, and the ones I know wouldn't have done shit like this. And for all you out there who say diesel can't melt steel need to educate yourselves on blacksmithing because getting metal red hot makes it soft enough to be bent by hand, easily. I've seen tanker fires cause concrete bridges to fail, that fuel can't reach temperatures to melt rocks either.
AncienRegimePremysyl ago
What's your reasoning for WTC 7, then?
bman0321 ago
No idea, never put any thought into it. Why go though the extra hassle, the 2 larger buildings came down and the skyline was forever changed. Why even target a short building in the same area if explosives were going to be used. If the plan was to use explosives why stop at the wtc buildings. Hell why even blow them up from the inside, 5 or 6 Oklahoma city style van bombs would have done the trick much easier. Where did the explosives come from? The military? Fucking Chelsea manning leaked all kinds of shit, this kinda stuff can't be kept under wraps. Look at all the leaks coming from Trump's administration, that shit leaks like a sieve, and the crap that's leaked is a millionth less juicy.
Tangent-love ago
I was going to call you a shill, however, I read through your profile. So i will say this, look at your comment really read it. you dismiss WTC 7 with no thought. How did a building that was in no way damaged fall like it was on purpose?
bman0321 ago
I have demolitions experience, I've gotten to blow up all kinds of shit. Best I ever got to set off was 800 pounds of bangalore torpedoes in one shot. I've watched the videos, I didn't see any evidence. Shape charges and breaching charges could be tamped down with water or blankets, and you wouldn't see them. Iv bag taped to a charge stuck on a wall sprays water backwards, but directs the force forwards. Pros would be able to hide their work, which is why I think everyone eyes are lying to them.
TNT isn't explosive enough to cut a tree and it won't cut metal which leaves rdx/c4 . 7 hours of fires would have lit c4 on fire rendering it useless and the demolition would have been more chaotic and not as complete. If it was the government / military and the plan would be to lie anyway, why risk detection planting charges in the inside f the building when a tim McVeigh would be just as effective.
My point is this. If it was an inside job then the execution was perfect, despite a thousand moving parts nothing there was no major mistakes. The were no charges weren't stumbled upon. They all remained intact with raging fires all around them. There were no significant premature detonations, every single charge was set off at the correct time. Plans that sophisticated never work.
The triggering device would have to be radio, since it wouldn't have been possible to daisy chain det cord to everything. If they were shielded for fires and water would have made them so bulky it would have taken a large crew to get everything in place in a few days otherwise the risk of discovery would have grown exponentially the more time before the attack lapsed. It doesn't make sense to me to engage in all the extra risk of detection, risk of whistle blowers, risk of failure when the planes would be enough. Why not add a dirty bomb to the planes if the goal was war. There were no bombs at the pentagon, and would there be bombs where flight 93 what was the target, would they set up charges for that target and if so who removed them? Nobody stumbled upon them at a time of heightened vigilance?
As far as how a building can fall like that, regardless if you believe the NIST simulation is a red herring or an attempt at a cover up, the simulation is sound.