9/11 CONSPIRACY: ARE THE CRIMINALS FRIGHTENED?

The official explanation that the Twin Towers collapsed due to collision damage and fire stress is blatantly incompatible with basic common sense in light of the surviving evidence. The Twin Towers did not experience a gravity collapse, nor did they implode. Rather, they exploded into fine dust and shredded pieces of steel. This is obvious from the abundant surviving photographic and video evidence, which shows each tower being consumed by a mushrooming cloud in a matter of seconds, depositing more than 75 percent of the mass of each tower outside its footprint in a radially symmetrical pattern.

The jet impacts served as a diversion from the reality that the towers were demolished by insiders. The initial shock and spectacular imagery produced by the crashes focused people's minds on them as the defining moments of the attack. The 18 minutes that transpired between the North Tower and South Tower impacts assured that many cameras would capture the second impact. Flight 175's off-centered impact resulted in most of its fuel burning in a few seconds in a brilliant fireball of over 300 feet in diameter.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• news
• politics
• bush
• 9/11
• inside
• job
• controlled
• demolition
• wtc
• world
• trade
• osama
• 911
• neocons
• bombs
• usa
• explosives
• america

[kingconst07]

has anyone ever heard of air pressure? The massive amounts of weight and pressure on the lower floors of the building from those above cause massive amounts of air to be forced downward. That air and dust had nowhere else to go but out through the windows, which is what you witnessed, not explosions.

[911REICHSTAG]

i doubt that greyish dust, which looks exactly like demolition squibs, is "air pressure" and it wouldnt come out only a few windows and so far below the collapsing area..thats like 25-30 floors.  many witnesses report bomb like explosions after the crash and some even just before. See WTC worker willie rodriguez who reported bombs in the basement well before the plane hit. seismic data backs up his story.

[kingconst07]

Wow, but I'm not quite sure that the fire on the Madrid building wasn't caused by an impact, right? It wasn't just the fire that caused both towers to collapse, it was the damage caused by impact that weakened the steel on the WTC. Your video seems to be a very elementary, if you will, explanantion of the towers' collapse.

[911REICHSTAG]

Do you really believe that the massive steel core and supports could be damaged by a hollow tube made of lightest metal? Steel is infinitely stronger than riveted sheets of aluminum. Thinking otherwise is elementary my friend.

[kingconst07]

If your theory were correct, shouldnt that "hollow tube" have been crushed against the outer core of the WTC?

[911REICHSTAG]

yes anything else would have been impossible. what would happen if you drove an indy car at 200 mph into a mountain? would it leave a cardboard cutout of itself in the mountain or would it crumple up and explode against the outside surface...check out september clues 1-8

[Telekenesis123]

Oh gimme a damn break, how do you explain the molten lava found at the base of the building? an impossibility with jet fuel. How do you explain the collapse of building 7 that wasn't even hit by ANYTHING, my god what did you do watch one of those tv shows dolled out for you sheeple? Pseudo intellectual moron, educate yourself before you speak. O but you workie on planes, you musta be smart, doh!! Like thats supposed to be an answer in itself, take a hike!

[Telekenesis123]

The Manhattan project was way bigger than this and they kept that secret no damn problem.

[sailorvenussun]

Nice video.



[Emsworker68]

@vendetta81 What about WTC 5 and 6? They did not collapse as WTC 7 did from debis stricking them. They had huge damage from the strikes. They burned uncontrolled harder than WTC 7. There was isolated collapses as would be expected but they did not collapse as a whole. Hell, they were not even re-enforced like WTC 7 was and they stood. Oh and they were closer to WTC1 and 2 also. So no, it is not conceivable. But than they did not hold the FCC files on Enron, now did they. You know Enron right?

[Emsworker68]

@vendetta81 That is outright horseshit. Geeze man, even pilots are saying it is horseshit! What. Do they obviously have no idea what they are talking about?

If like you said the plane did the damage than it would not fall semetrically straight down. Especially the first tower to fall. It would have been to its weakened side and slid off the building. Unless you have some explaination how a building struck to the outside of the core columns could fall straight down? Both falls look the same.

[vendetta81]

look, you people obviously have no idea what you're talking about. as i've stated previously i've worked in aviation nearly my entire life. i've investigated failures, crashes and crash sites. all of the evidence i have seen to date is consistent with jet liners causing the collapse of two buildings designed to be able to absorb the impact of an aircraft of around half the weight of those used. i'm not a fan of the things bush did do, but let's face this was a bit far out of his league folks.

[wweuniversity]

they use different stuff to make different buildings madrid uses different stuff

[aquaboy232008]

bull shit

[S5rTNrN3S6Tw6T5v]

this is telling us that this is the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

[vendetta81]

tropophyte, that theory was debunked by whom?

as an aside, it's interesting to note that all of my posts have been given a "bad" vote simply because i don't agree with the general sentiment. after having presented my thoughts in a calm, well thought out manner.

[tropophyte]

Your feelings are apparently hurt. Go away and come back when and if you grow up. Thank you and have a nice day.

[tropophyte]

No this theory has been debunked repeatedly. No sale.