Federal Grand Jury To Hear Evidence - World Trade Center 9-11 Was Controlled Demolition.

a reply to: Salander

No there was no foul play for sure.... That is just your belief. There has never been any evidence of explosion.
The foul play was the saudis flying planes into buildings.

a reply to: carewemust

They should just admit that they thought a nuke was jammed in the towers and they feared an air burst at that height.

A supersonic missile with nuclear capabilities was lodged in the Pentagon and they were worried.

So boom. Crater. Bye bye to the supposed undetonated nuke.

It was planes in the WTC but they couldn't risk it or take too long deciding. On-site federal agents couldn't get up in time.

The Pennsylvania airliner was shot down on Dick Cheney's authorization. He made up the hero story on the spot.

Edit to add:
The actual controlled demolition used subterranean nuclear devices that were installed and used via delivery tunnels running from WTC#7 to the towers. These nukes brought down the towers into a crater. The smoldering red hot debris burned for almost a month underground after the attack.

a reply to: Sillyolme


It was nothing but foul play and criminal actions, from start to finish, from Vigilant Guardian to class action settlements with surviving family members.

It was an inside job all the way, from the WTC to the Pentagon. That's why so much evidence like video tapes were confiscated and withheld. One of the missions were accomplished when the auditors and records looking at missing funds were destroyed.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Sillyolme


It was nothing but foul play and criminal actions, from start to finish, from Vigilant Guardian to class action settlements with surviving family members.

It was an inside job all the way, from the WTC to the Pentagon. That's why so much evidence like video tapes were confiscated and withheld. One of the missions were accomplished when the auditors and records looking at missing funds were destroyed.

a reply to: Salander

I hope it doesn't work the way it did with the Hitler regime with most of them dying from old age before they could be brought to Justice.

a reply to: tadaman

Are you being sarcastic. I hope so. They had to cut the vertical columns out of the WTC foundation to remove them shows there was no underground nukes. Or the fact they built new skyscrapers at the WTC.

If radioactive decay from fission products was keeping the site hot, you would have radioactive levels greater than Fukushima. People would have dropped dead or violently ill with in hours at being at the site.

a reply to: Salander

You don’t even have credible proof of your pet theory of nukes. Just pseudoscience and lies from YouTube. You back people that exploit 9/11 by pushing false narratives with zero credibility that play to a science challenged target group. And you talk about justice for 9/11 victims when false narratives like nukes are part of the distraction.

a reply to: madenusa

Actual, the Madrid Windsor had a metal structure collapse above the 17 floor. Only the mechanical level stopped total collapse.

Those building had floor truss support along their lengths with concrete columns. The WTC buildings had long floor trusses with no additional support along their lengths.

The WTC had deficient fire insulation. The jet impacts removed fire insulation from the twin towers.

Either WTC 5 or 6 had partial fire related collapse of the structure.

There has now been the Plasco Tehran and Brazil São Paulo high rise building collapses.

I think this has been pointed out numerous times?

Thank you for the example of how conspiracists used items out of context or with no context to create false narratives.

I don't know what to make of this - On the one hand the collapse of the buildings has always sat awkwardly with me, but on the other hand my head simply can not accept that anyone could give the order to bring the buildings down with explosives with 1,000s still inside.

a reply to: UKTruth

I think there are people that would be more than willing to give the order. The problem would be to hire people to secretly install and ready the buildings. Then not have one whistleblower from the install team? Or not one NYPD or NYFD whistleblower. Then you have Engineers and contractors that worked the clean that would know the signs of explosives. People that lost family and friends in the towers.

Below is another good source of information.

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 & 7 FROM AN EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT
By Brent Blanchard
August 8, 2006
c-2006 www.implosionworld.com
www.implosionworld.com...

a reply to: UKTruth

unless it was damage limitation.

a reply to: neutronflux

the charges were installed in construction.
as per regulations in new york and chicago.
the sears tower has the same system installed.
it was evac'ed on 9-11 same as wtcs.

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: neutronflux

the charges were installed in construction.
as per regulations in new york and chicago.
the sears tower has the same system installed.
it was evac'ed on 9-11 same as wtcs.

Im sorry what......youre saying that buildings have charges installed to topple them ? "just in case"

If thats what youre saying i call BS.....you cant tell me that in 19273 they put explosives in the building as a precaution.......which would violate fire standards of any commercial building......

BS man.....

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

check for your self
regs in new york and chicago for large scrapers have to have a demo plan in case of emerg'.
these towers were so big they put 150kt in.
all legal. civil use treaty with the then ussr .



heres mr bennette doing his job and about to knock down wtc 7 after 1 and 2 complete.


www.youtube.com...

a reply to: username74

How would one install explosives in a high-rise building where contractors felt safe working on the building. What safe guards were in place to prevent accidentally detonations. Where was the control room. What explosives were used that would maintain their integrity decade after decade. What preventative maintenance plan was in place to insure the integrity. What was the requirement for inspections and reporting. Where were the required integrity documents required to be held for inspection. What insurance company is going to insure a company that installs self destructing systems in buildings, and their requirements for safe work. What insurance company is going to insure a building with a self destruct system. What are the insurance companies required inspections, safeguards, and preventative maintenance requirements.

The narrative the WTC was built with active pyrotechnics installed for self destruction is total BS.

a reply to: carewemust

Yamasaki and all the original project designers died years ago.
Those involved in the cover up for the planned obsolescence won't be charged either as they can plead it was for the better good of New York city.

a reply to: tadaman

at least you took the time to read it.
it sucks but it makes sense.

a reply to: username74

What contractor is going to work on a building constructed to self destruct?

What explosives are going to maintain their integrity decade after decade.

Where was the controls.

What preventative maintenance plan was in place to insure the system would maintain its integrity.

How would safe guards be used to insure remodeling and updating electrical work didn’t accidentally set the self destruct system off, or disabled the system.

How would such a system survive jet impacts and fires.

Sorry that your narrative is BS.