A few deep questions about 9/11

reply to post by defcon5

Truth movement tactic 103… “Misquote and twist the posters comments around to fit your agenda”
I never said it was an ordinance, I said it done for liability reasons…

I know this from tall buildings I have worked in, its done for safety, security, and liability reasons. Also in a fire they don’t want you heading to the roof, as 99.999% of the time rescues are preformed from the ground, and by heading to the roof your stand a higher chance of getting trapped or overcome by smoke as it climbs out of the building.

So there is no law on the books, eh? So, it is “not mandatory” and I just proved you are only given us your opinion and crying it is a fact, that all sky scrapers must keep their roof top doors locked.

In stead you come back crying “Truth movement tactic 103…”? I was not aware there was a ”Truth movement tactic 103” would you bee so kind to give me the website so everyone can learn from this?

Thanks for the replies everyone. I wish I could go to the library and pick up some of these books that yall recommend but I am still stuck here in this third world country so I wont be able to till I return to the states. Continue fighting the good fight on ignorance and I look forward to evenmore replies in the future.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


The fires were raging all the time and growing. A chopper pilot is not going to try a rescue when there is no good place to land or hover over, and especially with the heat and smoke coming up.
However helicopter pilots DID MENTION tilting of the top floors prior to collapse, including floors partially collapsed and intense fires.

We all know it takes weeks even months in some cases to 'wire' a building for controlled demolition no ? What if and its a big one i agree totally, what if they were 'pre-wired' when they were built ? That the 'explosives' were there all the time in the walls and fabric of the buildings ? A real whacky out there idea i admit so dont flame me for it ? If there is one thing i have learned in this life is that ANYTHING is possible !

Respects

reply to post by ProRipp


Anything is possible indeed but can wires and bombs last that long being dormant inside a building without being inop? I guess when my crew and I were looking for mines by the border to Iran from the old Iraq/Iran war they were still armed today so perhaps it can be done.

reply to post by ProRipp

We all know it takes weeks even months in some cases to 'wire' a building for controlled demolition no ? What if and its a big one i agree totally, what if they were 'pre-wired' when they were built ? That the 'explosives' were there all the time in the walls and fabric of the buildings ? A real whacky out there idea i admit so dont flame me for it ? If there is one thing i have learned in this life is that ANYTHING is possible !

WTC 1 & 2 were built in early 1970's - some 30 years before.

Explosives as they age become unstable - either will fail to detonate or
go off unpredicably.

Also figure at some point someone would discover the explosives or wiring

Explain why the alleged explosives did not detonate when the aircraft
plowed through the building. Or in the subsequent fires.

reply to post by thedman

Er as you will see IF you re read my post i never made a claim as fact that they were pre- wired i threw it out as a 'What If' so why are you asking me to explain why the planes crashing in didn't set them off ? I would understand if i had stated it as fact, but i didn't so wind your neck in ! You stated your thoughts and thanks for that !

reply to post by ProRipp


Or, following the same "what if,"what if it was special paint. Someone leaves you paint their office, or since it was built in the 70's, you need to put a new coat of paint on the walls? It is not a new theory, by any means, but something else leaving you scratching your head

www.scribd.com...

First of all, the last time I checked, ATS IS a conspiracy theorist website, isn't it ?

And haven't we been alerted to the fact that the Govt. is monitoring us conspiracy theorists ?!

In an attempt to discredit our "Wack Job" , "Nutty", conspiracy theories ?



All of the fancy far fetched conspiracy theories aside. The original designers and architects had designed WTC to absorb the impact of a large jetliner, the largest at the time being the Boeing 707. Which is similar in weight to that of a Boeing 767/757 more or less.

But we are told that the resulting fire was the eventual cause of the collapse.

The reason why I am bringing this up is that Jet Fuel is Kerosene and not the highly combustible 100 octane aviation gasoline that is used in propeller engines.

Kerosene is essentially lighter fluid, a light weight oil. Not near as combustible as gasoline, because it's vapors can't ignite so it doesn't explode but only burns.

I own Kerosene heaters , that are constructed of steel, that i use to heat my garage when working on my vehicles in the fall/winter as well as during power outages in my home to prevent my pipes from freezing.

You normally can't smell them burning, and if you do, they're smoking as a result of being starved of air and you merely need to raise the wick a tad.

The fires in the WTC 1 & 2 were smoking, indicating that they were also starved of air, AND not burning at the optimum high temperature of 700 or so degrees in which KEROSENE normally burns.

Long story short, these heaters burn KEROSENE for hours I might add, the chimney components glowing red hot, and they don't sag or deform the relatively thin stamped steel,in which their cabinets are constructed of at all !

Thats exactly why I have questions about many of facets of the made for TV story we are told by the MSM.

Because when you get right down to it, the story just doesn't add up.




The Truth Shall Set You Free

reply to post by nh_ee


Well thought out sir, and true.

Throw in the fact that the steel had Fire-proofing sprayed on it.

Makes a fire induced collapse , silly.