It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

a new way to demolish buildings?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
if the WTC really collapsed the way they say it did, then why do demolition company's go to all the trouble of strategically placing explosives at various points around the building?
why dont they just put a buttload of explosive on an upper floor and just let the building "pancake" into its own footprint???
i guess demolition experts know something we dont.




posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Because buildings dont pancake like that.

And theres a high risk that they would slide down vertically.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:53 AM
link   
EXACTAMUNDO!
i was being sarcastic. i dont beleive for a minute that such a perfect demolishion (by airplanes) could happen TWICE.

[edit on 8-9-2006 by river rat]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Read my signature line and who worte it.

Also, who was contracted to cleanup the site?

Are you suggesting that there is only one way to demolish a building especially if you have military equipment and unlimited resources?

Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has said:
"By differentially controlling the velocity of failure in different parts of the structure, you can make it walk, you can make it spin, you can make it dance." (Else, 2004)

[edit on 8-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:04 AM
link   
You know what was something that bothered me. If it was al qeauda, and they were doing it to make significant damage, why did they attack when most people werent even at work yet? When not just before early noon? There were only 3,000 people in the towers in the morning, but when everyone arrived at work there couldve been 10, maybe 20 thousand.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
You know what was something that bothered me. If it was al qeauda, and they were doing it to make significant damage, why did they attack when most people werent even at work yet? When not just before early noon? There were only 3,000 people in the towers in the morning, but when everyone arrived at work there couldve been 10, maybe 20 thousand.


The minimization of casualties is not an AQ hallmark... it is a flase flag operation hallmark... suspicious indeed. Also, I have always thought they would hit as LOW as possible to maximize casualities.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by WolfofWar
You know what was something that bothered me. If it was al qeauda, and they were doing it to make significant damage, why did they attack when most people werent even at work yet? When not just before early noon? There were only 3,000 people in the towers in the morning, but when everyone arrived at work there couldve been 10, maybe 20 thousand.


The minimization of casualties is not an AQ hallmark... it is a flase flag operation hallmark... suspicious indeed. Also, I have always thought they would hit as LOW as possible to maximize casualities.


I think whoever was in charge is just glad they HIT both of them in the first place!!!

As long as that part was taken care of by the "terrorists", they would be able to take it from there. I also agree that those same "terrorists" would want maximum casualty, so why do it so early in the day? They are portrayed as masterminding & executing the greatest terror plot in history, yet there are facts like this that just seem to be the greatest blunders ever thought of while masterminding & executing the greatest terror plot in history. BUT- Obviously there hade to be SOME reason for it. I doubt we'll ever know. . .



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts


Are you suggesting that there is only one way to demolish a building especially if you have military equipment and unlimited resources?

[edit on 8-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]


no, im calling into question the governments account of the events.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   
maybe all the flights later in the day were already booked solid and they were not able to reserve seats? maybe for all the planes to make it to their targets at about the same time they used a combination of flights that would be reaching their targets with the right syncronisity?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by bokinsmowl
maybe all the flights later in the day were already booked solid and they were not able to reserve seats? maybe for all the planes to make it to their targets at about the same time they used a combination of flights that would be reaching their targets with the right syncronisity?


This was supposedley planned over a year in advance... I thnk they could have gotten the tickets.

So many flights come and go in the morning hours, it would not have been a challenge to synchronize at 10-ish and have everyone in the buildings. IMHO



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join