9/11 again!!?

Question

ok, so my question is - did the authorities order the demolition of the WTC? Before people jump down my throat let me explain why Im asking - I dont think 9/11 was an inside job, or the work of GWB or dr evil or whatever. The footage of planes flying into the towers is undeniable, its stupid to argue that it was anything other than an act of terrorism.

But, the buildings collapsed vertically. Although Im no engineer I find it a bit weird that they would do this when hit from one side only. Is it possible that in order to prevent further loss of life that the towers were demolished in a controlled fashion? I think the horror of 9/11 could only be compounded if the WTC towers had collapsed onto other buildings.

Its a controversial question, Im not trying to offend anybody I just want to see what people think - could such an act be justified? Please please please dont fill the answer section with rants

Answer 1

The way the buidlings collapsed is not uncommon, it is typical of a lift slab construction accident. The heat from the thousands of pounds of burning jet fuel heated the metal on the effected floors to where the steel fatigued and the weight of the 30+ floors caused it to collapse. The weight continued to fall one level on top of the other at the speed at which the top of the buidling was falling, 128 feet per second. The columns and clips are designed to bear a limited amount of weight, not the weight of the entire structure.

In order to arrange a controlled demolition it would have taken weeks and thousands of pounds of charges. Since they could not have been planted the day of the crashes they would have had to have been planted over months without the different building tenants being aware of the major construction work involved in it.

Since the tenants of the buildings included federal law enforcement, international banks, commodities brokers and dealers and other financial organizations the alarms were sophisticated and redundant. To get by those alarms and CTTV systems, to remove and replace sheet rock, to move and replace furniture and to clean and repaint surfaces would have required crews of hundreds working for months to rig the three buildings with charges and not be detected.

The idea of the buildings being rigged is conspiracy theorists talking but to date not a single shred of evidence of how it could have been done has been brought forward. Had the planes crashed 20 or 30 floors lower the buildings would probably have collapsed much faster and may very well have toppled as you mentioned.

Answer 2

I can't imagine why anyone would give a thumbs down to the two excellent long answers above. They are exactly right. Watch any of the documentaries about the disaster on the History Channel or the Discovery Channel or whatever and you will see what they are saying illustrated by architectural drawings and computer animation. Given the velocity of the planes and the fact that they were loaded with jet fuel, the impact plus the intense fire just melted away enough support beams so that a pancake effect began. (Plus, the special construction of the towers, which aimed at providing a maximum amount of interior work space unimpeded by beams spread throughout the building inadvertently added to the problem.) The wonder is that the buildings lasted as long as they did.

Of course, explanations such as these won't satisfy conspiracy theorists who probably think the cable channels are owned by "the authorities." And "any kid with a set of Lincoln Logs" doesn't know squat about the complex structure we're talking about.

Answer 3

Things are always happening that We The People are blinded by the right or those in power. Anything is possible.
I really never heard a reasonable explanation as to why the plane crashed (it was really shot down) or why the buildings collapsed vertically. I bet if those in power making those decisions had relatives in the plane or inside one of the buildings, something different would have occurred. One can only hope there is a hell so that people that so lightly are responsible for so many deaths find themselves there along with the terrorist.

Answer 4

I dont believe The conspiracy theorists either I think its more complex. I just cannot imagine how 2 basically identical buildings could collapse identically while being struck in different parts, why didnt the one that was hit in the corner tilt or tumble why straight down. Any kid with a box of lincoln logs knows this stuff. Personally I think the terrorists got in the buildings and placed the explosives. It was covered up so the guys that own the buildings still got the insurance payment rather than getting slapped for bad security.

Answer 5

I went to school for engineering, just graduated a year and a half ago. We watched a video of the making of the World Trade Center. These buildings along with many other modern age buildings are designed to do just that. In case of a tragedy like 9/11 or whatever, they are designed to collapse floor by floor, causing a domino effect. The reason behind this is to cause minimal disaster to surrounding buildings. Not that I thought it was great that it happened, but I found it quite remarkable. Me being an engineer, have taken great astonishment in how these buildings were designed. The Buildings were also designed with steel beams that were designed to pick up support for ones that have given out. In the case of 9/11 and the angle that the building was hit, took out too many of these beams. The remaining beams could only support for so long, causing them to give out and that's when the building came down. These terrorists were smart in this part. They studied the architecture and engineering of these buildings and knew exactly what they had to do to take them down.

Answer 6

If you watch any video NOT endorsed by the Conspiracy nutcases, you will see the collapse was the result of just that. COLLAPSE. not demolition charges.

One of the towers was clearly leaning about 5 degrees off true before it collapsed. kinked at the point of impact. The towers did not fall STRAIGHT DOWN ON THEMSELVES in a controlled way.

The collapse started at the damaged area. the upper part dropping intact into the lower part. then pancaking down floor after floor with the debris above mushrooming out and racing past the collapse zone to the ground. the supposed "squibs" are nothing more than air and debris being forcibly ejected out the windows as the collapse progressed.

http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2003/wtc/images/cleanup.jpg
This is a graphic showing the damage zone and where cleaning was needed. take note of the pink, brown, and crosshatched areas. these are the footprint of the collapse.
Not so controlled was it?

WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES OF COLLAPSE
http://paregoricspills.com/wtc/wtccrunch.jpg
Here you can clearly see that the collapse starts at the impact site. the top portion of the tower is leaning out to the left. and debris is falling and mushrooming out. not dropping straight down in a controlled way.

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/images/911.wtc.6.crater.west.air.jpg
Aerial View of the collapse site. Note the severe damage to surrounding building. Looks controlled to you?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5405555553528290546&q=WTC&pl=true
This video clearly shows the buckling of the floors at the point of impact. as the camera zooms out you will see again the top portion lean over in an UNCONTROLLED COLLAPSE
No sign of explosives being used at all. (Because there were none)

A great site with lots of detailed reports and analysis (Both official and unofficial) is listed in my source. some of the images are taken from this site.

All of your conspiracy sites will get their "Evidence" from people not qualified to make the claims they do. or are taking things "Out of Context". and a lot of it is just plain "Made up from fiction". Also note the CT's ignore and disregard all real proof that contradicts them and never succeed in proving them wrong otherwise.




END OF STORY

Answer 7

I was there and it is of great interest to me.No, I believe although it looks as if they came down with the help of something inside the buildings, the intense heat that was caused by the planes melted the supports.However, if you look at footage of World Trade 7, it does look like it imploded.

Answer 8

I agree the planes hitting WTC can not be denied. I can't say if it was an inside job or not with the planes. Noone on those planes survived so all we can go by are the phone calls and the radio traffic.
Now with the towers fallen I do think that there was some sort of inside job there. Yes the planes could had made them fall, but like you said wouldnt they have fallen into other buildings instead of str8 down?
Sorry but all I can give is my opinion, can't give actual facts.

Answer 9

Think about this; the buildings withstood the impact. Impact did not bring then down. Wind-whipped burning high-octane jet fuel weakened the structure's metal support and a collapse took place. As each building collapsed it pancaked straight down. It was the excessive heat of the burning jet fuel that brought them down.

Answer 10

The observations you have listed bothered me as well. Further, It is difficult to understand how WTC building #7 could implode with only minor damage: Having been underreported by the media only made it more suspicious. After doing some research on the 9/11 attack, both on the WTC buildings as well as the Pentagon, there is little doubt, in my mind, that our government's story is part of "The Big Lie".

Most all the evidence that is available to us, show that the WTC buildings were rigged with explosives. Our own government had motive as was well as an opportunity to do this crime. Here is the evidence, presented for your scrutiny.

FAKE CONFESSION
The official government story is that the 9/11 attack was orchestrated by Al Qaeda, which is lead by Osama bin Laden. The proof our government provided was a video with Osama confessing to the crime. The problem with the video is that the person in the video does not look like Osama bin Laden: See picture.
http://911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk519bkcLjg

EVIDENCE
There are many other factors that do not fit the official story. They include, secondary explosions that were seen, heard, reported, and recorded by firefighters, in and around the WTC buildings.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=firefighter+bombs+in+the+building
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHz9YWVgJWM

Here is a video clip showing a trail of explosions just before the destruction wave.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_DkzhonpGY&mode=related&search=

Molten, beyond red hot, "steel" was video recorded coming out of the South Tower just before it collapsed. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to turn steel to liquid. Melted red hot steel was also found in "ground zero" of all three WTC buildings, including WTC7; the one no jet ever hit.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk&search=thermite
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3D2myMbQjQ

FORENSICS
A chemical analysis of the solidified molten iron,conducted by independent firms, yielded an explosive, called Thermite. Also found was a WTC core beam; most probably cut using the demolition cutting charge (Thermate). No core beams were left standing beyond a few feet high, for it to have been cut by an Iron Workers torch. Click on pic. to enlarge.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html

CONFESSION
We also have a video recording, where owner Larry Silverstein, admits to demolishing WTC7.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329

MOTIVE
The New Conservatives (Neo-Cons), with the help of their friends, started planning the invasion of Iraq, shortly after Pres. Bush took office. Apparently, the plan would include the attack of the WTC buildings. It did this to get the support of congress and the nation, to attack Iraq. Read it from their own PENAC document. Pay special attention to the section entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" page 50 and the top of page 51, where it states we need a new Pearl Harbor attack to get the ball rolling.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

OPPORTUNITY
Witnesses saw a work crew going into the WTC buildings with rolls of wire, supposedly for internet upgrades. Tenants were moved around while crews "upgraded" the cable systems. The Port Authority cut power to the building for a whole weekend, just prior to the attack; shutting down the entire security systems. Witnesses also heard crews operating heavy hammering equipment that left a gray cement like dust, in the building. This activity took place just weeks before the 911 attack: The Port Authority had released control of the buildings to Larry Silverstein, six weeks prior to the attack: He made upwards of $5 billion off of the attack.
See "9/11 Mysteries" video: Time = 1:03:55 through 1:07:00 and 1:19:55 through 1:24:09
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911+mysteries&hl=en-CA

__________________________________

There is also strong evidence to support a Douglas A-3 Skywarrior armed with a missile hit the Pentagon. One thing we can be certain about; it was not a Boeing 757, as our government claims. Listen to this retired General, He says, "The Plane does not fit the hole; so what did hit the Pentagon...?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VoUN-7RVU&eurl=

One might expect to see three holes in the pentagon, one for the main body and two more for each engine. The engine and engine parts were found outside of the building, they never penetrated the building thus no hole was created by them. The deep 18 foot hole was most probably made by an on board missile and not the aircraft itself. A radiation expert claims high-radiation readings near the Pentagon indicates depleted uranium (DU) munitions may have been used.
http://www.rense.com/general67/radfdf.htm

Witnesses say, the U.S. military secretly had Raytheon Co. refit an A-3 Skywarrior with new jet engines, a missile, and a Global Hawk guidance system, just prior to 9/11. Coincidentally, five key executives of Raytheon Co. went missing on 9/11. The official word is they died in the hijacked planes on 9/11.
http://tomflocco.com/fs/WitnessesLink.htm

The Jet engine(s) found may be key to identifying what type of aircraft hit the Pentagon: At the very least, they help determine a Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon. Both the jet engine housing as well as a "front end rotor head" have been identified as belonging to a Pratt & Whitney JT8D jet engine. The P&W JT8D engine has been used on the smaller Boeing 727 as well as a retrofit for the A-3 Skywarior. Two P&W JT8D's do not provide enough thrust to get a Boeing 757 off the ground much less sufficient power to perform the military precision maneuvers the aircraft in question did.
http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
http://www.karlschwarz.com/02-02-05_Schwarz.pdf

A photograph of a cracked windshield found at the crash site strongly resembles the top canopy glass found on the Skywarrior: No windows of this shape are found on a Boeing 757.
http://home.att.net/~carlson.jon/911Pentagon.htm

The landing gear is one part found in the crash site that may be linked to a Boeing 757. It could also be a part that was retrofitted on an A-3 Skywarrior, since the wheels would most likely need to be replaced with something still available.
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/084.html

A geometric analysis can show the aircraft that hit the Pentagon is under 85 feet long and therefore too small to be a Boeing 757, which is over 155 feet long. An A-3 Skywarrior is 76 feet 4 inches long. See geometric analysis: also see revision note under comments.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Avt4N5qfsIKkwbXeL7iLXmPsy6IX?qid=20061122203115AAj8XR6