9/11 News report-"something ignited ...tremendous explosion...could have been a bomb"
Top Comments
All Comments (21)
-
these people are just crazy. lol
-
people already know the truth. they just try to be politically correct. It also hurts their ego since they are feed the idea that we are the "greatest" nation on earth. It's so sad to see that being a liar in this case means being "patriotic". there have been massive payouts to keep people quiet who heard explosions after explosions. those planes were not regular passenger planes. the passports of the so called hijackers were most likely faked.
-
@jabg2011 A quote from N.F.P.A. 921 "Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion fear, or anarchy. The terrorist may include fire as but one of a variety of weapons, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, used in furthering his or her goal…" This guide is ALWAYS followed; on 9/11, however, it wasn't. There was no excuse, particularly since the terrorists used bombs in the '93 attack.
-
@jabg2011 "N.F.P.A. 921 19.4.8.2.6 – Extremism” addresses terrorism specifically. A quote from it: "Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion fear, or anarchy. The terrorist may include fire as but one of a variety of weapons, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, used in furthering his or her goal…" This guide is ALWAYS followed; on 9/11, however, it wasn't. There was no excuse, particularly since the terrorists used bombs in the '93 attack.
-
@jabg2011 "N.F.P.A. 921 19.4.8.2.6 – Extremism” addresses terrorism specifically. A quote from it: "Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion fear, or anarchy. The terrorist may include fire as but one of a variety of weapons, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, used in furthering his or her goal…" This guide is ALWAYS followed; on 9/11, however, it wasn't. There was no excuse, particularly since the terrorists used bombs in the '93 attack.
-
@jabg2011 A proper investigation starts by looking at ALL of the evidence. But on 9/11 the story was already ahead of the investigation. Only after all of the eyewitnesses were interviewed and the building remains examined and tested would the investigation come to a conclusion. However, the steel was quickly shipped off for recycling (NONE of the steel from WTC 7 was examined AT ALL). A proper investigation was never done.
-
@jabg2011 You are wrong. If a firefighter reports hearing an explosion, an investigation MUST examine if explosive devices were used. The 2001 Edition of the National Fire Protection Association NFPA 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations DEMANDS it. When an event is investigated NOTHING is excluded; if several firefighters testify to hearing explosions the investigation MUST examine this.
-
@Ezlivin That doesn't answer my question. We saw 2 planes fly into the towers. We can imagine the chaos taking place inside the towers after that happened. There is no reason to assume that any loud bangs heard were the result of explosive devices placed inside the buildings.
-
@jabg2011 The first WTC attack in 1993 used bombs. William Rodriquez testified before the 9/11 Commission: "He immediately thought the explosion was caused by a generator. Shortly after the first explosion a second explosion rocked the building and caused the office's false ceiling to collapse. Following these explosions Felipe David, who was severely burned, ran into the office. Rodriguez said there was a third explosion and he believed then the explosions were caused by an earthquake."
explosions everywhere that day it seems
lushfauna 5 months ago 7
How many times do eyewitnesses have to say "explosion" before we take them seriously? The buildings did not fall down because of aircraft impacts.
Ezlivin 6 months ago 5