Buildings don't fall down just because they're on fire pt911

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was mate. The big zooming planes knacked loads of the support columns and structure. The remaining few supports were weakened by fire just enough to give way. Pretty obvious marra.
Aye those light aluminium tubes filled with people can do a lot of damage to concrete and steel.
 


I don't buy into the radio controlled planes but destroying the building for the other reasons I do believe. There's plenty of reasons for the elite to do it.

Surely you must accept that there are bits about the whole event which just doesn't add up?

There are bits that are probably impossible to figure out due to the extreme nature of the forces at work and the sheer number of individual interactions happening in a split second. If you've been to the area you'll see it's all contained in a 'bathtub' to keep it from sinking and all the buildings were linked underground so it's perfectly possible that some buildings couldn't stand the shock of the big towers collapsing from below plus the strain from the fire (caused by the burning debris).

Aye those light aluminium tubes filled with people can do a lot of damage to concrete and steel.

Full of fuel which ignited.
 
There are bits that are probably impossible to figure out due to the extreme nature of the forces at work and the sheer number of individual interactions happening in a split second. If you've been to the area you'll see it's all contained in a 'bathtub' to keep it from sinking and all the buildings were linked underground so it's perfectly possible that some buildings couldn't stand the shock of the big towers collapsing from below plus the strain from the fire (caused by the burning debris).



Full of fuel which ignited.
Have a read of this mate, its genuinely interesting...

http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm#

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html - this one is good, compares other skyscrapers that have caught fire.

@ProfessionalMackem @Heeeed the Ball have you seen these?
 
Have you not seen how a stray paint chip floating in space at high speed can potentially destroy the ISS? Not to mention the jet fuelled fire.
I thought the fire went out almost immediately hence all the smoke.
Nah I was just pissing about mate. The reason I don't think the American authorities had any hand in what happened is the number of people who would need to be involved. I can't believe that that many Americans could have so little regard for their fellow man that they would allow themselves to be involved in rigging the building, or even just allowing the hijack to take place by not acting on intelligence. Also I can't believe one of them wouldn't have blabbed by now. There are a lot of loose ends and unanswered questions about 9/11 but I don't think the. Authorities are complicit.
 
Last edited:
has trump ever discussed 911?
I can't decide whether he's going to be one of the good guys or not.

On paper he's a liability of baboon proportions but he's very much his own man and not part of the establishment.

I wouldn't be surprised if the elite have shit a brick or two about him getting elected and will now be doing everything they can to get him in side.
 
I agree.

For a moment, given the title, I thought it was about 9/11. But then realised that would be daft as they came down due to 757s being flown full pelt into them.
I've seen buildings collapse due to fire, obviously nothing on the scale of 9-11. I accept the twin towers could collapse like due to a huge weight failing over a relatively small footprint. However building 7 or whatever it was looks canny odd. I would expect that to fail in stages. God knows what millions of tonnes of rubble slamming into the earth does to nearby foundations but It does look like a perfect demolition job to be fair :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top