Remember that this collapse occured in approx 6.5 seconds, nearly free fall speed, there were 24 core supports, and there is a kink in the center of the top of the building durin the collapse. A clear sign of controlled demolition There is also an obvious explosion running up the side of the building, watch it. Additionally there was molten metal dripping found 5 weeks after. Don't forget the owner of the building, larry silverstien said that the building was pulled in a PBS documentary. Does anyone believe the most logical answer is fire?
2006-09-30 22:20:30 · 9 answers · asked by Luke F 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Termites caused it.
2006-09-30 22:23:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well, the fact is, the only way we will ever know whether the 9/11 thing was done by our government is when the Pentagon released the rest of the frames from that one surviving video (there were 6 video cameras pointed to where the "crash" was. 5 of the videos were detroyed. The one that wasn't the only released the frames from before airplane would come into view, and after the explosion. If they would show us the rest of the frames...the ones that would show the 757...then there would be absolutely nothing that anyone could say about whether Bush was involved. We would see if it was a plane, if the plane had windows, whether the plane had a pod on the bottom, etc.
So why, exactly, won't they show those last couple of frames? The ones with a perfect side shot with the sun in the perfect position to capture it perfectly as whatever it was passed by and exploded into the building.
For that matter...why did they destroy the others? That was silly! They could be showing all the people that think that Bush planned this that it obviously was terrorists! Why indeed? The only reason not to show the videos would be because they show something they don't want us all to see, right? Why would you destroy the evidence that supports your case? Noone is that dumb!
If they won't show us the rest of the frames, or at least give us a really good reason why not, then we must assume that it would hurt them.
Cons like to focus on the twin towers, because it's neat and tidy. They have paid scientists saying that it is totally possible that, for the first 3 times in history, the three buildings fell due to fire. Can't really prove either way. Some experts will say one thing, others will say another.
But they don't like to talk about the Pentagon...too messy...too many secrets and questions. Too many unbroken windows and missing videotape and such.
Why do you guys refuse to ask a few simple questions of your government...the government that YOU hired...that are the Employees of all Americans? Don't you think it's an employer's right to ask some questions? Check out some documents that the employee is hiding that may show him doing bad stuff?
All he has to do is show them to a judge that has been given security clearance and all the responsibility that comes with that for protecting the secrets. The judge could tell the employer whether the employee has done something wrong and is covering it up, or whether the employee just had some personal, non-criminal stuff that he didn't feel like sharing or something.
Why won't he? Only one logical explanation.
Guess.
2006-10-01 05:58:42 · answer #2 · answered by corwynwulfhund 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No plane hit this building, and the 9/11 Conmission report has no explanation of what happened.
As you say, the only way the building could have collapsed was by controlled demolition.
2006-10-01 23:20:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
To add insult to injury, the man said pull it, the building was demolished--impossible to set this up in a few hours, mind you-- and then HE was allowed to re-build WTC 7. Can any of us blow up our businesses, get the insurance claim (ask for double damages) and rebuild it, too? Can we?
2006-10-01 08:21:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Marvelous luck that two planes full of rag-heads ran into two buildings there one after the other to hide the demolition derby.
Either that or you're a fooking idiot.
2006-10-01 05:31:54 · answer #5 · answered by Grist 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
definitely a controlled demolition!
2006-10-01 05:41:35 · answer #6 · answered by wahlquist111 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question is moot. It is finished. Unless you are an engineer planning a safer structure, it is meaningless and you are looking for a new edge to conspiracy.
2006-10-01 05:24:40 · answer #7 · answered by Frank 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
This question is getting soooooo boring.
2006-10-01 05:23:29 · answer #8 · answered by Colorado 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
"they" will tell you what they want you to think when "they" want you to think it.
2006-10-01 07:01:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋