WTC designed to survive impact of 707

Not that we didn't already know this, but here's the link

phoenix.akasha.de...

Had the buildings been built as designed, they would have stood for many hours more, allowing everyone to escape.
Thanks to the fear intstilled by junk scientists and semi-knowledgeable morons, the WTC towers did not have asbestos intalled all the way up, and the planes struck above where the asbestos installation stopped.

The fact that the towers fell is no surprise.

The author's intention is to bring you to a flase conclusion by giving you partial facts.

It doesnt take much thought to see the official line is a line of crap. Thoise towers were destroyed by implosion, not from the plane strike. TGhey neat way they collapsed, on top of the other factors in the plane crash itself. I was very surprsied the WTC collapsed, when I saw it happen, I was very confused. It reminded me alot of of the other controlled demolitions i have seen. Strangely, when it collapsed, it reminded me of the Kingdome here in Seattle when we ilpoded it. It spread a cloud of thick debris through downtown Seattle, all the way up to Capitol hill and even the University district. It fell neatly too, like the towers did, and it was much lower to nthe ground. This was clkearly a controlled demolition, otherwise, the towers surely would have fallem alot more lopsided and taken out far many more city blocks than they did.

About the article - An impact is one thing, but huge explosions and superhot jetfuel-fueled fires is another.

OTOH

Skadi - I agree that it seems extremely unlikely that the towers would have fallen so neatly, straight down. Especially the tower which took such an awkward corner shot.. I don't see how that fits with the pancaking theory when one distinct area obviously took so much more impact.
Of course, I know nothing about building demolition, jet-fuel fires, or the design of 110-story buildings so I'm left with an uneducated opinion and differing facts/opinions from the two sides.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
It doesnt take much thought to see the official line is a line of crap. Thoise towers were destroyed by implosion, not from the plane strike.

blah - crap

Where you here?

Did you "see it"?

I did.

Did you talk to people who were in it?

I did.

No implosions. Slow subtle failures, then sudden collapse.

Actually, William, my aunt lives in New York, she worked at the post office. She was on her way out of the city on foot, didnt even bother to get her car. She was a few blocks away from the bridge. She heard a loud crack, like a huge thud. She turned around, a few seconds later, she said the top of the tower disappeared from view, just over the buildings.

And since the first tower collapsed just 1 hour after being hit, I think thats simply an awfully short span of time to have such catastrophic failure. especially when the second tower collapses soon after, in a likewise manner.

William, your not the only person from New York City on this board.

I know people who witnessed everything, even had a friend in old apartment building in Queens who passed away in it... Their testament is something different. The buildings didn't collapse only due to a plane, it had help.

Funny, I read about how the towers would be doomed to fall in the event of such a strike as they weren't protected with asbestos in the upper floors, and the falls were as expected.

No surprise, no conspiracy, no flag on the play.

Well, of course you read it Thomas, like they are going to publish the truth?

I learned to stop listening to media blather long ago when I realized it was 99% crap wrapped in a thin shell of semi truths. Now I use it mainly as a tool to spot BS, compare, and measure.

So of course the media is gonna sing the offical BS. Like they would give airtime to anyone who questioned the offical story.

Originally posted by Illmatic67
The buildings didn't collapse only due to a plane, it had help.

Yeah, a really hot fire.

I've talked to some people that were escaping down the steps... and the father of an accountant in our office was in the first tower hit, 91st floor, directly opposite the impact.

The stories I hear are that everyone inside knew it was about to fall from the structural sway, noises of stress, and cracking walls.

Why is everyone so interested in creating mystery in this event?


Elf... I don't trust the media either, that's why I talked to the people who were there. I never heard anything from the people experiencing the event first-hand that would indicate any ounce of truth in the theories of "implosion conspiracy".

Look at the tapes of the second plane hitting.

It almost missed the entire building, the fireball was consummed in the air, not in the building.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Well, of course you read it Thomas, like they are going to publish the truth?

I learned to stop listening to media blather long ago when I realized it was 99% crap wrapped in a thin shell of semi truths. Now I use it mainly as a tool to spot BS, compare, and measure.

So of course the media is gonna sing the offical BS. Like they would give airtime to anyone who questioned the offical story.

You misunderstand, I read of this years before the attacks. It was the architect who wrote the article. Don't even remember the guy's name or where I'd come across the writing, but he was miffed that the anti-asbestos group would pu his buildings and the lives of the occupants at risk.

William, the reason I mentioned this is because she told me that she heard the boomn, then after a few seconds of delay, the tower disappeared from view. the delay itself is conspicuous. My aunt called the next day because the phone lines were so busy. She cried as she told me about it. She said she was afraid another plane was gonna crash, because the word got out other planes were jacked. As she was fleeing, she heard the loud boom. That made her stop and turn around, fearing another plane, or a bomb, might have hit. She looked toward the towers, to see if something else had happened. She saw the tops for a few seconds, straing to see if she could see anything else going on. the the top of one began to decend, with much noise, crackling, and crumbling.

the reason I think they were imploded is in part, because of what Ive read, compared to what other say, compared to eyewitness. Tho my aunt was very distraught and a nervous wreck, she was very specific in her description of the tower collpasing, the first one. The fact she heard a loud boom, had enough time to turn and look at the direction of the tower, then after that, it descended, sounds like an implosion. It was like that at the kingdome destruction, and other implosions ive seen, first that loud crack, then.after a few seconds, the puffs of dust, then the building falls down.

After reading other sources and comparing them to the Media spin, I suspect the offical story sounds more and more like crap.

TC, the fireproofing is mentioned alot. I know, Ive heard it alot. The thing is, jet fuel burns at about 800 degree F. Steel melts at higher temps than that, like 1500 or something like that. Fire proffing or no, the heat of the jet fuel, given than buch was spent and spalttered elsewhere, plus cooling from wind and open space, was not sufficent enpough to weaken the tower in like 1 hour time span.

And the fire fighteres, who know alot about building safety, wouldnt have sent 100 guys in up the stairs if they thought the building was gonna fall on thier head in such a short time.

Ok everyone if those gas tanks were burning SO HOT that they brought down both towers, how could this person stand just underneath then and not be dead from the heat or the fumes?

[Edited on 25-7-2003 by John Nada]

Skadi, I know nothing of these things, I might be buying a load of crap and not even know it, but, as I said, the architect is the one who weighed in on the subject and he should know.
Furthermore, if their was no worry of the fire causing the structure to buckle and collapse, what was he bent out of shape about to begin with?

John, is that the first tower or the second tower?

It's an interesting picture to say the least, says a lot of things.

sorry I don't know, I'll try and find out.

John
You are begining to see the light.
I'll just say one more thing and be gone...
A quote:

"Terrorism is the best political weapon, for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death"
Adolf Hitler

Want to speed up the NWO process, other tactics failing or not fast enough...
Do a 9/11

Well, TC, Im not totally invalidating the arcitects concerns about it, he was voicing a possibility asnd something that should have been adressed.

Still, the other stuff remains. Its hard to believe anything anymore with all the BS flying out there. One simply must make a judgement based on facts, comparisons, intuition, and other persons expewriences, and sometimes, u might see the truth.

So what are yall implying???? That no plane hit the towers taht everyone is lying. Also is that pic below where the impact was. I mean if it was after the impact and it was jsut hte fire u could stand a floor or to under it and survie cause heat travels up so it would be a whole lot cooler there.