Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
One of the many problems with the controlled demolition
hypothesis...in every video I've ever seen of a controlled demolition
of a building, there is a series of extremely loud and usually visible
explosions preceding the collapse....BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG...I
don't see or hear this in the WTC collapse videos.
--
On 8/3/08, Charles Zwicky <cazwicky@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> I have an alternative theory to present:
>
> In 1993 an attempt was made to tip over the WTC building via a truck
> bomb in the corner of the parking garage.
>
> This attack was primitive and ineffective largely because the bombers
> were ignorant of the building's design.
>
> The "powers that be" were suddenly faced with the real possibility
> that there may be a situation where the buildings could become
> unstable if they were damaged due to fire or bombing or whatever and
> cause unspeakable collateral damage to lower Manhattan.
>
> The buildings were therefor prewired for controlled demolition
> sometime over the following 18 years and the decision was made to
> implode them after the planes hit in September 2001.
>
> The "official" explanation (i.e. jet fuel caused the colapse) is
> preposterous, as is the attept to blame the collase of WTC #7 on
> "raging fires".
>
> -Chuck Zwicky
>
>
>
>> > They're talking seriously and from an engineer's POV about such
>>> apparent facts as that not a single steel-frame skyscraper in history
>>> has ever collapsed due to fire, even though many have burned much
>>> hotter than the Twin Towers did, or could have if it was only a jet-
>>> fuel fire.
>>
>>I was not aware of this. Where can I find information about these
>>other skyscraper fires with no collapse? Were the fires as large as
>>the ones at the WTC?
>>
>>--
>>Mark Smart
>>http://cdbaby.com/cd/marksmart
>>http://www.marksmart.net
>
>
> --
> ...
> http://www.zmix.net
>
>