It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


911 WTC collapse

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 16 2003 @ 10:11 PM
Hi all, does anyone here buy into the Controlled demolition collapse theory?

[Edited on 16-11-2003 by HowardRoark]

posted on Nov, 16 2003 @ 10:17 PM

With a face in order to get the post to take

posted on Nov, 16 2003 @ 10:20 PM
I agree, it may look like it, but only because the arcitcture(# spelling) of the building made a demolition work that way.

Not a controled demolition

posted on Nov, 16 2003 @ 10:26 PM
It was a controlled demo for sure.

Otherwise a heck of a lot more people would have died from those craft crashing into the buildings.

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 10:55 AM
Yeah the fact that it was before most people got to work and that the majority of the people there were evacuated had nothing to do with it?

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 10:57 AM
I don't really know, but I seriously doubt it.

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 10:59 AM
Not a controlled demo...

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 11:15 AM
there was no REAL investigation of the 9/11 attacks. Why the coverup? How did a STEEL building collapse from fire? (something that has NEVER happened!)

How did Bush see the first plane hit the WTC?

" QUESTION: ... how did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?

BUSH: Well... (APPLAUSE) Thank you, Jordan (ph).

Well, Jordan (ph), you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida.

And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works.

And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident."

But I was whisked off there -- I didn't have much time to think about it, and I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my chief who was sitting over here walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower." "

Now here is something interesting:
New $20 Shows 9/11 terrorism

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 06:49 PM
ATS has a wonderful search feature in which you can gather information about posters' past opinions regarding issues like this. There have been (ballpark figure) well over 1,000 posts on this very topic. There's a lot of other interesting stuff going on in the world relevant to ATS so I don't think consistently rehashing the same topics in new threads is necessary. Just use the search feature and you can find a treasure trove of info on such topics.

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 06:57 PM

it's obvious you didn't get your position based on competence.


two of the world's taller buildings possibly blowing up or at least partially collapsing within an area of one of the highest densities of office space in the world, normally would have killed more people on the street and in other buildings in the area.

this would have caused liability nightmares as well as unneeded property destruction when the only area desired to be redeveloped was the world trade centre itself. This area is now happily being re-developed by its happy new owner.

nonetheless this was not GWB's project as many here like to claim, who knows maybe the Whitehouse is fighting for the guys that did do this and conveniently forgot to tell us that.

the thing to remember in 911 that the trail of involvement will lead to the top if one dares to follow it.

[Edited on 18-11-2003 by THENEO]

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 06:59 PM
Search ^^^

But, since you asked, I personally believe it was a controlled demo, why? Because of the way it fell.

- Imploded, not exploded.
- That metal was designed the withhold that kind of fire, yet, mysteriously failed.
- I believe there is PROOF somewhere that the FBI/CIA knew something about 9.11.01 PRIOR to the attacks, yet, don't stop it. Suspicious if you ask me. On top of it, there is a cover-up of a no investigation policy. Hmm..


posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:04 PM
If this were true and the wtcs were demoloshed and the pentagon was hit with a cruise missile, then waht about the al-quaida(sp). Surely all those videos must have been faked? Who knows. I find the fact that the wtcs might have been demoloshed (by our government?) plausible, but the coverup for this must have been massive.

[Edited on 17-11-2003 by MrJingles]

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:10 PM
the way i look at it, and this might piss some people off, is that it was the government that flew planes, that had an autopilot override thingy in it so the pilot cou8ldn't push more than 1.5 Gs, into the buildings and the al-q......bin ladens gang decide3d to take credit for the lot which in turn help the government start a global geonicidle hatred of muslims.....kinda reminds you of what happened in ww2 with hitler and the jews yes?
I think that he whole 9 11 thing was a huge setup and that there is more going on than we will ever know or be told about.
Thoughts anyone?

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:11 PM
imploded not exploded? Of course it collapsed in on itself. The building didn't contain any amount of explosive to cause an Explosion, but fell in on itself, story on top of story, because of the type of damage that was sustained.

Oh but how? The way the World Trade Towers were constructed played a big part in it. They are just huge slabs of concrete suspended by load bearing iron beams connecting to the core of the entire structure.

The buildings were huge tubes with floors suspended. Of course it is going to collapse in on itself and not be blown apart sending peices flying in every direction..

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:11 PM
Yet again -
why oh why cannot you people accept what happened ?

If you crash a plane into that sort of structure it falls - not like a tree it collapses from inside.

All this talk of demolition is denial of the truth - America wake up - there are bad guys out there - and they will continue to win whilst you fight amongst yourselves.

In all the years of IRA activity in the UK i have NEVER heard it said that a particular bombing was by the government - we knew we had an enemy.

Now since 2001 all i hear about the WTC is its the govt they did it

We have defeated the IRA - have you Al Queeda ? - I would suggest that a shift in thoughts might be important at this time

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:17 PM
I did a little work on them when they were going up.
You have to understand a building like that is a house of cards you undermine part of it and the rest could not support it . no way
Im shure it happened just the way you saw it on Tv .

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 07:35 PM
13) How was it possible for the World Trade Centers two towers to have completely collapsed as a result of two jet planes?
The towers in fact stood for forty-five and ninety minutes after the crashes. The official story is that the burning jet fuel caused the steel girders supporting them to melt. However, there is simply no credibly scientific evidence to support this story. The WTC towers were designed to take the impact of a Boeing 707. It is highly unlikely that fire from the jet fuel could have melted the steel girders. This is especially true of the South tower since the plane did not hit it directly. Therefore most of the fuel did not fall inside the building. The South Tower was hit second and fell first. Both towers collapsed evenly and smoothly in a manner consistent with that caused by a planned demolition...

This is #13 on a list of 22 reasons why 9/11 was a coverup.
To read the rest of this excerpt, go to the following link:

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 08:07 PM
Lets lock this topic, otherwise it turns into a repeat of about 10 other threads on the same subject.

No offense to the Trevian

posted on Nov, 17 2003 @ 08:18 PM
i definately have to say the collapse was a controlled demolition. not exactly sure of how accurate this is either but suposidly the fire fighters in the wtc reported hearing explosions in the wtc right before it collapsed.

posted on Nov, 18 2003 @ 02:49 AM

. Why the coverup? How did a STEEL building collapse from fire? (something that has NEVER happened!)

There's no cover-up.

A BBC documentary crew fully investigated why the building collapsed, and in the resulting film spoke to architects, designers, and analysed structural wreckage from the towers.

Basically, from what I recall, it was down to basic flaws in the design. The fire-proofing material sprayed on the inner structural beams and suchlike was very badly done, very patchy, and in places totally insufficient. As a result, due to the overwhelming heat caused during the terrorist incident, certain intregral beams warped, and the floor levels collapsed downwards, one after the other, which each new level adding more weight and gaining more speed as it travelled downwards through the building - kind of like a vertical dominoe effect.

This may have led to the explosion looking like a controlled demolition, but in reality it was one of those situations where a number of rare flukes all happen at the same time - which ironically isn't that uncommon in major accidents that lead to huge loss of life.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in