Were the Twin towers demolished by explosives?

Question

The way the twin towers were destroyed is reminiscent of a demolition rather than the impact of the planes. Both buildings collapsed straight down rather than topple and fall. Coincidence or strategy? also the hole in the pentagon was only 16 feet across...not the size of an airliner. There were no engines found at the pentagon.....suggestive of a cruise missile strike??

Answer 1

You know, no matter what the question, subject or wit of it, or whether you agree or not, at least accept te opinion of others.

What one notes here with this question, with most answers obviously from Americans, is the blanket refusal to listen to the views of others or critical points of view.

And they claim they are a democratic people, murdering people all over the world so that they can speak freely, ha, and then they insist on silencing the voices on here.

Democratic my ar se.

Answer 2

Exactly how many buildings the size of the twin towers have you witnessed or seen video of to support your supposition that they should have toppled? I think the answer is zero since such an incident had never before happened.

I am not a structural engineer so until someone comes up with prove to the contrary...not just theories...I have to believe what I saw when the jets slammed into the towers.

As for the Pentagon...I've seen the videos and read some of the cruise missile theories but again not conclusive proof has been provided. I don't have an answer for that one except to say...why not use cruise missiles on every target rather than leave their plans open to human error or the actions taken on Flight 93 which defeated their plans to hit the White House?

Answer 3

I'm in the UK and even I saw the planes fly into the buildings on television.

As I understand it, the Twin Towers collapsed because their frames lost structural strength after a time due to the heat of the fire. Once one floor, at the level the plane has flown into, collapses onto the one below, the next floor more or less immediately fails, causing the domino efect so appalling on television.

Skyscrapers are designed so that if they fail they collapse vertically: it would have been even worse if they had toppled over sideways. It has to be posible to demolish them vertically at the end of their normal lives.

I recollect reading that to conserve weight the Twin Towers were constructed of aluminium, which is highly combustible at high temperatures, such as those at which aircraft kerosene burns. A steel structure might not have collapsed in the same way: the Empire State Building has survived impact from a plane. This is obviously important because it implies we need not feel that skyscrapers are inherently unsafe.

There is nothing in the pictures I have seen of the collapse of the Twin Towers to make me think this was not primarily due to the impact of the two airliners.

Answer 4

No they weren't. Modern buildings are designed to be demolished neatly so it's not too surprising the Twin Towers fell straight down without toppling, that's what they were designed to do.

The hole in the Pentagon was substantially wider than 16' across, I have the downloaded photo to prove it. More like 60' wide I'd say. The aircraft engines would have been buried in the Pentagon rubble.

Answer 5

The only thing you conspiracy theorists do is allow the terrorists time to make their next move is it not bad enough that thousands died without idiotic stories like yours upsetting relatives even more, people like you should be locked up for inciting terrorism. Heres one for you idiot a cruise missile would have made a far bigger mess than the plane did

Answer 6

Yes, but building seven fell perfectly too, all 4 corners at the same time and no planes hit that building.People tend to forget about building 7. Re pentagon and flight 93, look at the wreckage, I mean lack of wreckage, no engine casings no seats no luggage no wheels no wiring no wings no tail sections no body parts all of these are consistant with a crash yet nothing of the sort at these 2 sites.

Answer 7

the bush-loving followers are gonna belittle you big-time for asking this.

a simple fact is that WTC 1,2 & 7 are the ONLY high-rise buildings EVER to collapse from just a fire. it is structurally impossible for those massive steel-reinforced buildings to come down that way after burning for only an hour to 1 1/2 hours. the jet fuel argument is empty, and the second plane's jet fuel fell outside the tower anyway since it hit nearer the corner.

really, the only thing that stops me rom thinking 9/11 was a massive coverup for the insurance money, airplane stock payout, haliburton contracts and a pretext to push our good ol' american ideaology where it isn't wanted is the sheer incompetence of every cabinet member of the white house as well as rudy guiliani. those people are as dumb as you can possibly get and thinking they could pull something of this magnitude off is giving them far too much credit. however, everything else clearly spells out a set up. for crying out loud at least 9 of the 19 supposed highjackers are alive!

Answer 8

all the hard evidence shows that other explosives where used. the pentagon is the most protected buildings in the world if a plane hit then there would be pictures . where are they.

Answer 9

here go 2 the links below and discover 4 urself.
i believe the Twin Towers were allowed 2 happen, staged and abetted by Israel
the Pentagon was undergoing refurbishment and wow what do u know the bit the plane supposedly hit was there.
and flight 93 was shot down, it was on it's way 2 the Whitehouse 4 heavens sake, it was shot down in the interest of safety.
PS listen 2 CJ above. watch loose change.
1&2. Michael more and What really happened have them if u get stuck.

Answer 10

No! Explosives were not used to take down the Twin Towers.