9/11: More Proof of Controlled Demolition @ World Trade Center

reply to post by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by weedwhacker
A few "puffs" (from air that had to go somewhere)

Originally posted by _BoneZ_[/i[
Gotta love this programmed, unprovable response.

Dude!

Just compare videos!!!!

(HINT: In a planned "CD" ---or "controlled demolition" --- the building is 'prepped' beforehand, to include....THE REMOVAL OF THE WINDOWS on the exterior!!!!!!)

Get it, yet????

Window failure is indication that the building is unstable and risk of collapse is high .

Was taught that by FDNY chief officer for class on building collapse that windows shattering or being popped
out of frames is sign that building is now structurally unstable. As the building twists the windows either shatter
from the pressure or are dislodged.

The FDNY chief told us once see that happening time to clear the building FAST and set up collapse zone
around it as good chance building is coming down

What do they teach you over a A&E Truth besides parroting clowns like Gage ? Doesn't anyone have real world
experince?

"How many of those steel-structured highrises , that never collapsed from fire , had a comparable design with the WTC ?"

Probably none, since those other steel structured buildings were not designed to handle multiple airline impacts, hurricane force winds, changes in air pressure and an enormous amount of weight just to mention a few things.

How about the 1975 fire at the WTC which started at the 11th floor and spread to six other floors while raging for over three hours? Gee, the building did a great job of supporting a lot more weight at the area of damage and not collapsing than it did on 9/11.

In summary, in 1975 a three hour fire and the fire damaged area of the building has no problem holding up over 100 stories of the building. On 9/11, a 56 minute fire with the damaged area holding up only 30 stories of building causes the entire building to collapse and be obliterated. Sure, that makes a lot of sense...especially to the "useful idiots" who believe the official story.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Oh yea , that was the very same incident that caused them to do an inspection , that revealed that substantial amounts of the fireproofing had already fallen off of the steel !

The very same inspection that revealed that the fireproofing was only HALF AS THICK as it was supposed to be .

Thanks for reminding me of that .

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
since those other steel structured buildings were not designed to handle multiple airline impacts,

Neither was the WTC designed to handle multiple aircraft impacts, please show proof from a designer of the WTC that it was capable