Explosive News

Originally posted by moonwalk420
reply to post by rainfall

 

i mean honestly how could a skyscraper fall in free fall when it wasnt even hit..thats odd it seems like it was scheduled to be hit but missed and the detonation went of as planned....

I know.......and to think there are STILL people posting here that are pretending that the OS is true.....

The Hudson Department Store Implosion:

In 24 days, CDI's 12 person loading crew placed 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on 9 levels of the structure. Over 36,000 ft. of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay devices were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system. As the implosion required the detonation of a total of 2,728 lb. of explosives

www.controlled-demolition.com...


According to Loose Change, the security from WTC was ONLY DOWN FOR 5 DAYS PRIOR TO 9/11.

Explain how two buildings that were MUCH bigger could be rigged in much less time?

You can't.

So no free fall. No rigging the buildings in 5 days. No thermite.

It's almost like someone flew planes into them...

reply to post by rainfall


Of course they didn't fall in free fall... even your emoticon can see that.

No building can ever be structurely sound after planes crashing through them, fires burning inside for hours on end or falling debris smashing against it's sides. The reason they fall then is because of damage sustained from all or part of these. nothing more.

reply to post by seethelight

wow, your the one line king!
A king with one source! Linked more than once... I hope you don't get your info from one place only, because according to other sites the holocaust didn't exist either and they can debunk the whole thing... but luckily for me, I have that thing called... what is it? oh yeah, common sense!

I truly can not fathom what goes through the minds of the people that still believe the official reports with all the evidence stacked against them... Hope I hope, blind stinking hope that the world is a great place and the govt loves us to death.

I guess the 1000 professionals in the one field that knows about this stuff are all crazy! l

Originally posted by redgy
No building can ever be structurely sound after planes crashing through them, fires burning inside for hours on end or falling debris smashing against it's sides. The reason they fall then is because of damage sustained from all or part of these. nothing more.

uhhhhh building 7 was not hit by a plane...
no building has ever collapsed due to fire (official reasoning for the collapse)...
Planes have hit skyscrapers before without the building falling (a bomber once hit the empire state building!)...

but yeah, building 7 is your smoking gun... hmmm the building housing NSA and CIA information convieniently collapses, wasn't hit by a plane, falls into its own footprint only after a FEW hours.... not countless of hours as you say... building have burned for days without crashing!... and it wasn't even the closest building to the 2 other towers that both fell at roughly the same time, after only a few hours of being hit, and opened the gateway to a false war...

I wish I were as blind as some of you! Life would be a whole lot easier!

Originally posted by redgy
No building can ever be structurely sound after planes crashing through them, fires burning inside for hours on end or falling debris smashing against it's sides. The reason they fall then is because of damage sustained from all or part of these. nothing more.

Well o.k. then........nothing to see here....move along....

reply to post by Odessy


You think it makes more sense typing a bunch of things like, "I really can't fathom that anyone... yada yada yada".

Why waste my time?

Until you show me how a building that's core collapsed at a slower rate then it's external walls and a building that's top obviously fell to one side is in free fall I don't need to show you multiple sources.

Though if you spent half as much time checking the link I provided as you do rabbiting on about people's stupidity, in comparison to you, you would realise that the link leads to a site that is FULL OF SOURCES.

But hey, you'd have to think for yourself to do that...

reply to post by Odessy


The WTCs were the only building ever build like the WTCs.

And guess what, they were both hit by planes and they both behaved in the same way.

If only one had fallen (which would make less sense IMO) what would you guys be saying?

They didn't fall in free fall, the amount of thermite taken would've been, literally, TONS, there was no time for conventional explosives to have been placed, in the 10s of thousands, as they would be in a controlled demo, etc. etc.



[edit on 24-2-2010 by seethelight]

BTW:

If you go and read many of the statements on the AE911 website you'll see that many of them are not moved by their professional knowledge AS IT RELATES to 9/11, but by "evidence they've read online.

If I believed all the stuff I read online and didn't bother to check it, I'd probably believe this nonsense as well..

Is it had to imagine that there's a lot of gullible people in the world? Nope... have you been ATS for long?

And besides, I hear total war is gonna break out in the next 5 days, guaranteed.

reply to post by rainfall


thats right, there is nothing to see here.
nothing with building 7 or why else it fell, all the blame lies with the terrorists on those planes and no-one else.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
considering the gravity of all the evidence for CD

Just what evidence would that be exactly? Truthers keep claiming that there is evidence for CD, but so far have not showed any evidence for Cd at all.

yet came down in "pure free-fall acceleration.

overall, it did not -- that is just a lie truthers push.

"mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking."

except again there is zero evidence 90,000 tons of concrete and metal decking being pulverised...


[edit on 24/2/10 by dereks]

actually dereks, it is a lie the deniers are claiming that the building did not fall at free fall speed. It did. Why don't you check out the NIST report on building 7. After trying to prove it did not fall at free fall speed, they were left with no choice but to admit that IT DID. Which is why before the truthers said the building fell at "near" free fall speed, and the deniers called this a lie, but it was not a lie, so now they rightly word it as PURE free fall speed. And as for evidence of controlled demolition, I'm guessing you did not read the scientific paper on nano thermite because it was in some journal you never heard before, however, that does not make it any less SCIENTIFIC.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by ancient_wisdom]

reply to post by seethelight


yet WTC 7 was not hit by a plane, and you seem to be intentionally ignoring the fact that the thermite was nano thermite, meaning it would not take tons.

Originally posted by redgy
No building can ever be structurely sound after planes crashing through them, fires burning inside for hours on end or falling debris smashing against it's sides. The reason they fall then is because of damage sustained from all or part of these. nothing more.

remind me again, did the IRS building in Austin, Texas collapse after a plane crashed into it? After fires burned inside for hours? With falling debris? It was a smaller plane, but also a smaller building, yet no collapse. And then we have WTC 7 collapsing with no planes hitting it.

Originally posted by seethelight
The Hudson Department Store Implosion:

In 24 days, CDI's 12 person loading crew placed 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on 9 levels of the structure. Over 36,000 ft. of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay devices were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system. As the implosion required the detonation of a total of 2,728 lb. of explosives

www.controlled-demolition.com...


According to Loose Change, the security from WTC was ONLY DOWN FOR 5 DAYS PRIOR TO 9/11.

Explain how two buildings that were MUCH bigger could be rigged in much less time?

You can't.

So no free fall. No rigging the buildings in 5 days. No thermite.
t
It's almost like someone flew planes into them...

Well as you said before, WTC has a different design. All you would have to do is place explosives in certain places. And the hudson department was working with just explosives, not planes being used as missles, or raging fires for that matter.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by technical difficulties]

[edit on 24-2-2010 by technical difficulties]

If I was the CIA/NSA alphabet whoever and I had documents that might be interpreted in a light other then the intended purpose of holding the Republic of these United States primary and I had the power to build a building I would be sure I could demo the building as well.

Tradecraft 101

reply to post by rainfall


People don't need to believe the OS is completely true to not believe the demolition theory. I probably lean in that direction, still don't believe one way or the other mind you. But this religious fanaticism that some people have in regards to that day completely ruins things for alot of people on the fence in terms of demolition theory.

Would be great in my life time to see those who murdered their own brought to justice.

I also note the usual names are now derailing in pairs? although Im quite sure they themselves are getting fed up trying to keep the false front going. In other words we are more awake and it actually brings a smile to my face nowadays.

Respects

[edit on 24-2-2010 by captiva]

rather than arguing with all these deniers, why not just turn our attention to this video

www.youtube.com...

Total proof that bombs were planted in the buildings.

If you are so sure that the OS is true, why not make a video debunking "Total Proof..." and have it get 14,600,000 views (oh, while at the same time having youtube ban one of your accounts like what happened to NufffRespect.)

You guys are so yesterday...

did you not hear the new official reason wtc7 fell was "phenomena"