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.


9/11 and Hitlers Parliment Building

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 01:36 PM

Originally posted by TheMythLives
In my honest opinion this was the disaster needed to open up the final doors for the NWO. Now all the NWO needs is a disaster to happen and the masses will accept it with open arms. The solution to the problem (The Coming Disaster) is the most scariest. The world will need as many people as necessary to help aid in the fall of the NWO.

I'm not a structural engineer but I've seen one forensic aspect of the 9/11 WTC incident discussed on other forums which has definitely caused many people to view the whole thing as just a touch too shady. Namely, the structures of the twin towers - after struck at the very top by the airplanes - began to IMPLODE. When demolishing decrepit buildings within a city for removal it always requires a strategic placement of explosives within the structure so as to cause an implosion and thereby safeguard adjacent buildings from damage. Could the WTC implosion have been caused by such strategic explosives placed within the structure once the airplanes had collided with the top end?

posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by civilized mammal

Giving this thread a little bump, to have fresh eyes look down upon it. But back to your question, I believe the WTC was made to withstand an airplane collision:

“The Office of Special Planning (OSP), a unit set up by the New York Port Authority to assess the security of its facilities against terrorist attacks, spends four to six months studying the World Trade Center. It examines the center’s design through looking at photographs, blueprints, and plans. It brings in experts such as the builders of the center, plus experts in sabotage and explosives, and has them walk through the WTC to identify any areas of vulnerability…”O’Sullivan consults ‘one of the trade center’s original structural engineers, Les Robertson, on whether the towers would collapse because of a bomb or a collision with a slow-moving airplane.’ He is told there is ‘little likelihood of a collapse no matter how the building was attacked.’”

Very Interesting isn't it?

In fact, no steel-framed building structures had ever collapsed due to fire before or since 9/11. This further supports Skilling’s analysis about the possibility of jet fuel destroying the WTC towers. According to Paul Thompson, “the analysis Skilling is referring to is likely one done in early 1964, during the design phase of the towers. A three-page white paper, dated February 3, 1964.” This ‘white paper’ concluded that:

“The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.”

And I thought this was rather interesting:

“Leslie Robertson, one of the two original structural engineers for the World Trade Center, is asked at a conference in Frankfurt, Germany what he had done to protect the twin towers from terrorist attacks. He replies, ‘I designed it for a 707 to smash into it,’ though does not elaborate further.”

He designed it so that a 707 would smash into it? Most likely this means that he designed it to withstand a direct hit.

Also according to Robertson, the WTC towers were “in fact the first structures outside the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airplane.”


new topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in