9/11 Debunked: World Trade Center - No Free-Fall Speed

Debunking every single 9/11 conspiracy theory, one at a time.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• World
• Trade
• Center
• conspiracy
• debunk
• free
• fall
• controlled
• demolition

[unRompecabezas]

@dwheel39 "Just by the very fact a commercial airliner even hit the pentagon after the 2 impacts at the towers had occurred supports the idea of stand down orders, not to mention there are testimonies to this."

Flight 77 had been hijacked even before the second jet hit the WTC towers. You should read up on the details of the confusion that morning. The FAA wasn't sure which flights had already crashed, and since Flight 77 wasn't on the radar anymore, they thought it might have crashed.

[MrAwsome514]

@unRompecabezas "What was the urgent need for symmetrical collapses?"

That statement nailed it for sure. The simple answer is there was no need for it. The same terrorists tried to bomb the WTC once before so why couldn't they just plant a bigger bomb and blame it on them? Or why would they need CD charges when they could have just loaded up the plane with explosives? I mean the plane has a maximum take off weight of 200,000 pounds. It could carry one hell of a pay load.

[unRompecabezas]

@dwheel39 I've never been convinced about the need for CD. It seems like another nonsensical bit of truther dogma. Why exactly would anyone want to wire buildings for demo if he knew fuel-laden jets were going to hit them? What was the urgent need for symmetrical collapses? Why destroy building 7 in broad daylight?

Why go to all the effort and risk? I'm sorry if these are just matters you take on faith and I'm not supposed to question them.

[dwheel39]

@unRompecabezas RENo need for magic ninja demo crews, sinister stand-downs, or vast cover-ups."

Just by the very fact a commercial airliner even hit the pentagon after the 2 impacts at the towers had occurred supports the idea of stand down orders, not to mention there are testimonies to this.

Why would a covert act of loading buildings with explosives be considered "magic"? Is it really that unreasonable to you?

[dwheel39]

@unRompecabezas RE:If terrorists flew the jets into buildings and the fires caused them to collapse, that's the end of the story"

That's begging the very question. It's highly implausible, if not impossible for fires to bring buildings down exactly like controlled demolition. Again, please show me at least one example from history or by experiment that shows buildings coming down like building 7 by fire.

it's been 11 yrs and still no one has an example. Ridicule is offered as a refutation.

[unRompecabezas]

@dwheel39 "it's not either controlled demolition or Al Qaeda"

Sure it is. Occam's Razor, amigo. If terrorists flew the jets into buildings and the fires caused them to collapse, that's the end of the story. No need for magic ninja demo crews, sinister stand-downs, or vast cover-ups.

Do I think we got the whole story? Probably not. But does that mean Bush & Co. engineered it? Nope.

[dwheel39]

@unRompecabezas RE:Until then, step away from WTC7 and read a little about the story of Al Qaeda"

there is no conflict between the two..it's not either controlled demolition or Al Qaeda. The claim is that none of the events could have been pulled off without people on the inside.

[dwheel39]

@unRompecabezas RE:The fact that Northwoods was never implemented proves that our leaders find it impractical or too risky to kill Americans."

No, it wasn't implemented because Kennedy refused to sign. He was going against the wishes of his Joint Chiefs.

It should be shocking that our leaders would even consider such carnage and deception for their own monetary/ political gain.

Many don't accept the "inside job theory" because they still believe we are the good guys. NW puts that to rest.

[unRompecabezas]

@dwheel39 "So the true skeptics are challenging this conspiracy story."

Well, I accept the hijacker story, and that our government failed miserably in protecting Americans on 9/11.

If you have a better story, one that doesn't sound like some maniacal sci-fi fantasy, show me the evidence that supports it. Until then, step away from WTC7 and read a little about the story of Al Qaeda. If you're convinced Bin Laden was a CIA stooge, you might need to educate yourself.