• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How 9/11 was done

Very true, not explosives. Consider though, that although it was a controlled demolition it was not supposed to look like a controlled demolition. In official CD situations one does not have to consider sound levels. I am sure that it is possible to accomplish WTC-CD with 'civilized' sound levels.

It's amazing what you manage to be sure of on the basis of no information of understanding. First of all, sound levels - or rather, blast levels, which are essentially the same thing - are of crucial importance in some official CDs, as there is a requirement to minimise damage to surrounding structures. Secondly, you may want to comment on NIST's analysis of possible blast events in the collapse of WTC7, which concluded that the smallest possible charge to bring about collapse of column 79, similar in size to the largest of the WTC1/2 core columns which would have to be severed in any sane CD scenario, would have generated noise levels of greater than 130dB within half a mile of the event, which is loud enough to cause permanent hearing damage. Quite simply, nobody heard anything that loud. And don't try to invoke silent explosives as an explanation unless you're playing for laughs; the blast level is what causes both the cutting action and the sound level, so it's physically impossible to have one without the other. From the audible record, it's not possible for the Twin Towers or WTC7 to have been brought down by explosives.

Mind you, I will not attempt to market myself as a CD expert but if I watch this hilarious video clip where a flower pot with thermite eats itself through the engine of a car then I notice that there are no explosive sounds whatsoever. No doubt a similar effect can be accomplished with vertical steel beams without suggesting awkward truther types potential society destabilizing ideas.

Again, certainty based on ignorance. If it is "no doubt" possible to melt through a steel beam with thermite, how come in seven years nobody has been able to suggest a way of doing it? And another point: your original reason for doubting what you like to call "the official story" was the appearance of an explosion as the Twin Towers collapsed. Thermite can't explain this, can it?

So your original cause for suspicion was in fact your own personal interpretation of the visual appearance of the collapse, one that, as you've been informed, is inconsistent with the audible record of the collapse. However, rather than accept the need to re-evaluate your original interpretation, you've chosen to invoke non-existent technologies to construct a nefarious explanation of the collapse that doesn't even correspond to your original interpretation. This is not even a serious attempt at saving the hypothesis; you're trying to save your original hypothesis by contradicting it.

But keep on repeating everything the conspiracist websites tell you, by all means. Since we already know why all that is wrong, it's easier to point it out to you than if you actually try thinking something up for yourself.

Dave
 
Oh, and now you have to explain how they got the thermite to cut sideways. Getting it to cut through an engine block is easy because the thermite is always in contact with it and has gravity helping. To cut a vertical column, the evil joooooos would need to figure out away to get the extremely hot material to stay in contact with the column as its burning. I seriously doubt this is even possible. Perhaps you would like to show how they could do this. And then you have the problem of how these magical devices survived the impact and fires, since the collapses clearly started at the impact points.

Sure, I would be glad to enlighten you on this subject.

In this dutch video it is shown how thermite is routinely used to bring down buildings. At 0:25 you can see that thermite charges are attached to columns at an angle in order to make the building 'walk'. The effect is that after the beam/column is cut the building moves somewhat horizontally so it can fall straight down afterwards. At 1:42 WTC columns are shown that are cut at an angle, as is routinely the case with controlled demolition:
 
So, perhaps you could name just one person who got one of the phone calls in question and thinks it was a fake. No?

Probably nobody, since I have made it clear that high quality sound morphing was a reality in 1999 and thus in 2001.

We have been through this already. Please refresh your memory by rereading earlier pages.
 
Sure, I would be glad to enlighten you on this subject.

In this dutch video it is shown how thermite is routinely used to bring down buildings. At 0:25 you can see that thermite charges are attached to columns at an angle in order to make the building 'walk'. The effect is that after the beam/column is cut the building moves somewhat horizontally so it can fall straight down afterwards. At 1:42 WTC columns are shown that are cut at an angle, as is routinely the case with controlled demolition:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You really don't know much about this do you? Those columns in the first video were not cut with thermite. They were cut using torches sometime after the collapse. There are pictures of workers doing this. How do you think they got the steel into manageable pieces to take away from the site? Besides, it makes zero sense for them to cut columns at the base since the collapse started at the top.

As for the second video, those looked like regular explosive shaped charges (ie, not thermite) to me. I am certainly not going to take the word of some idiot twoofer that made a youtube video. Perhaps you can find evidence that is not a youtube video that thermite is used to cut large vertical columns. Don't worry, I don't expect you to actually do this.
 
Last edited:
In this dutch video it is shown how thermite is routinely used to bring down buildings. At 0:25 you can see that thermite charges are attached to columns at an angle in order to make the building 'walk'.

Those are shaped explosive charges, not thermite. It would be impossible to melt through a beam with thermite devices that small, from simple thermodynamics; thermite burns at around 2500ºC and steel melts at about 1500ºC depending on composition, so any thermite device cannot possibly melt more steel than two-thirds of its own thermal mass. Just one more thing you're too lazy or ignorant to work out for yourself, and have simply chosen to believe because a liar on the Internet has said something that seems to support your fantasies.

Probably nobody, since I have made it clear that high quality sound morphing was a reality in 1999 and thus in 2001.

We have been through this already. Please refresh your memory by rereading earlier pages.

Please refresh yours by rereading the subsequent pages in which you were shown to be laughably incorrect.

Dave
 
Again your concern to protect the good reputation of a guy under whose supervision no less than 3 planes were destroyed is touching, albeit somewhat tempered by the fact that this guy has the potential to destroy your little theory. I wish you displayed a similar concern regarding innocent people who got tortured in Abu-Graibh or waterboarded in American Gulags on the basis of the mindless acceptance of said little theory. And do not give me this WMD story (another falsification), attempts were made to also link Saddam to Al-Qaida/Mohamed Atta.

Excuse me?? When did I refer to any of those? I simply said you have provided no evidence about Zalewski. Do you think I am so foolish as not to notice your failure to address my actual point? What a low opinion of my intelligence and reading skills you must have.

Also, if "this guy has the potential," then provide the evidence you have got. Go ahead. Please. I am waiting.
 
Last edited:
Very true, not explosives. Consider though, that although it was a controlled demolition it was not supposed to look like a controlled demolition. In official CD situations one does not have to consider sound levels. I am sure that it is possible to accomplish WTC-CD with 'civilized' sound levels.

Mind you, I will not attempt to market myself as a CD expert but if I watch this hilarious video clip where a flower pot with thermite eats itself through the engine of a car then I notice that there are no explosive sounds whatsoever. No doubt a similar effect can be accomplished with vertical steel beams without suggesting awkward truther types potential society destabilizing ideas.

For a couple of years.


A little hint here, when you make a statement of fact, it really has to be a fact, not just what you really hope is a fact. Ok?

Saying you are sure of something is making a statement of fact. When you make that statement and it is not a fact, it destroys your credibility.

Have you done any investigation independent of the truth movement?
 
Probably nobody, since I have made it clear that high quality sound morphing was a reality in 1999 and thus in 2001.

We have been through this already. Please refresh your memory by rereading earlier pages.


What thread have you been reading?

It has been pointed out (repeatedly) that the voice morphing technology you linked to, could, at best change the tone of a voice to match a pre-recorded soundtrack!
For example: you are singing along to a song (karaoke), it can make you sound better. It's glorified lip-syncing.

You would have to have every single phrase to be said recorded exactly.

Which requires you to know exactly what the response from the other end will be.

Why don't you save yourself the whole "voice-morphing" problem, and say that your conspirators had pre-recorded the victim side of the telephone calls.
It still has insurmountable problems, but you remove the added problem of voice morphing.



Oh, and to a forum search for thermite and thermate. The hypothesis that those substances are useful in demolitions is wrong.




Finally: Do you have a response to the following posts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4216102&postcount=570
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4240875&postcount=639
 
Last edited:
Sure, I would be glad to enlighten you on this subject.

In this dutch video it is shown how thermite is routinely used to bring down buildings. At 0:25 you can see that thermite charges are attached to columns at an angle in order to make the building 'walk'. The effect is that after the beam/column is cut the building moves somewhat horizontally so it can fall straight down afterwards. At 1:42 WTC columns are shown that are cut at an angle, as is routinely the case with controlled demolition:

burnthrough.jpg



 
All this is correct. A large amount of fuel survived the initial deflagration, over a timescale of seconds. Once air was able to re-enter the building, the remaining fuel quickly began to burn. In doing so it set fire to the contents of the building, which also began to burn. It's likely the jet fuel was entirely consumed in a matter of minutes. The building contents then continued to burn until, and (in the rubble pile) after, the collapse. However, the majority of it survived the initial deflagration, so your comment that "the fireball represented all the fuel" is simply and categorically wrong.

Dave

OK, let's for the time being accept that it took a couple of minutes for all the fuel to burn. Then what fires caused the final collapse? I am sure that the energy content of 10,000 gallons of fuel (minus fireball) contained way more heat than a few pages on the printer, curtains, carpets and what have you. And more specifically why was the core weakened? From what fire?
 
OK, let's for the time being accept that it took a couple of minutes for all the fuel to burn. Then what fires caused the final collapse? I am sure that the energy content of 10,000 gallons of fuel (minus fireball) contained way more heat than a few pages on the printer, curtains, carpets and what have you. And more specifically why was the core weakened? From what fire?

There were plenty of things to burn in the WTC towers. You can see from pictures and videos that the towers were raging infernos the whole time until the collapses. Office fires can get plenty hot enough to weaken steel. Oh, and the core weakening is not what caused the collapse. You would know this if you did any actual investigation.

Why did the collapses initiated according to NIST? Hurry answer quickly, don't google it, I want to see if you actually know this.
 
ONe more time for Roman Hruska!

Okay, once yet again...

Here:
378493828c209ff7.jpg


is the famous "angle-cut column" picture featured in that cheesy dutch video, enlarged to show some important details.

Notice the striated appearance of the cut edges? Those are called "drag lines" and they are characteristic of cutting with an oxygen-fuel torch.

Here:
378493828c33b894.jpg


is a picture from an online manual for welders, showing the drag lines found in cuts of varying quality. Source
If you click forward a page in the manual, you'll find that in shop work that cut would probably have been judged sloppy. Since the purpose here wasn't to cut metal to size with a view to making something with the cut piece, but rather to clear the debris from the site, such considerations don't apply.

Now here:
37849382ac10cb23.jpg


is a picture of a thermal lance, another form of oxy-fuel cutting, being ued to cut through a block of steel considerably thicker than the columns at the WTC. Note that the slag is mostly found adhering to the side away from the torch, where the pressure of the oxygen jet has pushed the molten oxides.

Now look at the angle-cut column photo. Notice that on the upper and farther sides of the column the slag is adhering to the inner side of the steel while on the lowest cut it is on the outside.

If your nonexistent thermite demolition charges had been attached to the outer sides of the column, which is the only way they could have been attached, the slag should have been deposited on the same face- inner or outer- of all four sides. OTOH, this observation is easily explained if the column was cut by the ironworkers working on the site cleanup. They made the upper and side cuts from the outside of the column, then bent it over and finished cutting it free from the now-exposed inner face.

And finally, look at this wider view:
378493831008fe4d.jpg


Notice how the slag has dripped onto debris lying below the cut? The debris was produced by the collapse, therefore the cut was made after the collapse. Period. QED.

I've lost count of how many times I've explained these very things to ignorant truthers who are still stuck years in the past. It is growing very tiresome.
 
Probably nobody ...
THen why did you reply to a point about the phone calls by claiming that some family members were CTs?

... since I have made it clear that high quality sound morphing was a reality in 1999 and thus in 2001.

We have been through this already. Please refresh your memory by rereading earlier pages.
We have been through this already. Please refresh your memory by rereading earlier pages, where you will find that all the gizmos you linked to which could do non-realtime voice morphing when provided with a voice sample could not do realtime voice morphing without being provided with a voice sample.
 
Last edited:
Very true, not explosives.

My, how times change. 'Twas but a week ago you wrote:

Alright, I make it very easy for you... look at this picture:

Now, what do you see? Pancaking? You're kidding right?

What millions of thoughtful normal mortals see is that concrete is sprayed far away from the building. And that my friend is impossible with mere gravitational implosion of the building. The spraying of concrete is caused by huge explosions.

And with the recognition of these explosions the lame government story of Arabs causing the destruction of the Twin Towers can go where it belongs: in the dustbin.
Now, if you no longer believe that these effects are evidence of explosions, on what do you base your claim of a CD?

I am sure that it is possible to accomplish WTC-CD with 'civilized' sound levels.
You've been sure of a lot of things. A week ago you were sure that the collapse: "is impossible with mere gravitational implosion of the building. The spraying of concrete is caused by huge explosions."

No doubt ...
No doubt?

Ah, there speaks the man who a week ago announced: "with the recognition of these explosions the lame government story of Arabs causing the destruction of the Twin Towers can go where it belongs: in the dustbin."

No trace of doubt crept into that proclamation, either.

... a similar effect can be accomplished with vertical steel beams without suggesting awkward truther types potential society destabilizing ideas.

For a couple of years.
The fact that it took these "awkward Truther types" a couple of years to realise that explosives go BANG and that they'd have to think of another dumb idea reflects rather poorly on them. "Awkward" is not quite the word I'd use.

---

So, now that apparently you think the manner of the collapse is not in any way evidence of the use of explosives, do you have anything you even think is evidence of a CD?
 
Last edited:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2_srNT8-Ow

The floor size is irrelevant. The only relevant parameter is temperature.


You used the word "minute". "Minute" is a comparative of physical scale, not temperature. But if you want to talk temperature:

In conjunction with this, modelling studies have been undertaken in order to examine various hypotheses about the mechanism of floor-to-floor fire spread. Field modelling using FDS and SOFIE, together with the Law external flaming model as adopted in Eurocode 1 (Annex B), suggested that flame temperatures near the glass on the floor above the fire might have been of the order of 850°C.

Performance Of Concrete In Fire

By comparison upper air temperature limits in the WTC were about 1100°C.


Watch the video to see the raging fires that lasted for 19 hours; WTC-fires halted largely after 20 minutes or so.

Oh so now you're arguing not on scale, nor on temperature, but on duration? I guess an Atomic explosion is super-minute then... :rolleyes: Keep moving those goalposts.


What fell off from the Madrid tower was concrete, not steel, see video.

:dl:

Here's a picture of all the collapsed steel in the Windsor Tower. Try again.


As you can clearly see: the whole steel framework stood upright after the inferno. No weakening at all.

Are you serious?


75% of the fuel was 'dumped on the floor', you claim, amidst a raging fire. This must have been inflammable fuel then! Highly interesting. Is it patented? I mean it is very safe for children! Great wonder though that these planes were able to fly at all on inflammable fuel. :D

The fuel created the raging fire, genius.
 
OK, let's for the time being accept that it took a couple of minutes for all the fuel to burn. Then what fires caused the final collapse? I am sure that the energy content of 10,000 gallons of fuel (minus fireball) contained way more heat than a few pages on the printer, curtains, carpets and what have you. And more specifically why was the core weakened? From what fire?

Again your baseless claim fails.

Kerosene contains 125,800 BTUs per gallon. Which gives us 1.26*10^9 BTUs for the total fuel upon impact.

The WTC office areas were approx 30,000sqft. NIST used a combustible load of 4psf (though some say this is an underestimate). That's 120,000lbs of material minimum. 60 tons per floor.

According to this: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/mswaste/mswtable4.pdf ....the BTU content of potential combustibles varies from 10 million per ton (Wood) to 38 mil/ton (polypropylene). I'll assign a lower figure of say 15 mil/ton, which gives us 9*10^8 of BTU per floor.

WTC2 had fires on 6 floors. WTC1 on at least 12. That is a potential energy of 5.4*10^9 BTU and 10.8*10^9 BTU. Rough calculations but you get the idea.
 
Last edited:
9/11 investigator [/edit=chillzero]Name restored. Do not alter member names to insult them[/edit], without Googling, can you tell me what the Monroe Effect is and why it nullifies the already dead "cutter charge" hypothesis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, I see that 9/11 investigator
Edited by chillzero: 
Name restored. Do not alter member names to insult them
hasn't given any response to the idiotic thermite hypothesis and its debunking. Nor has he shown that he even knows what the lying shills at NIST even say about the collapses. What does this mean?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, I see that 9/11 investigator hasn't given any response to the idiotic thermite hypothesis and its debunking. Nor has he shown that he even knows what the lying shills at NIST even say about the collapses. What does this mean?

It means that he'll come back in a couple of days and move on to another fantasy, then when we point out it's just another fantasy he'll remind us that he's already demonstrated beyond the possibility of dispute that thermite must have been used to demolish the Twin Towers.

Dave
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have spend some time watching (for the 2nd time) and annoting this video 911 Mysteries Part 1 - Demolitions (90 minutes):

2:05 – view on two fireballs
2:19 – minute size of the fires inside the towers prior to the collapse
2:58 – see the shadow of the fireball from the 2nd onto the 1st tower: size at least 100 meters.
3:19 – eye-witness with schmug explanation; probably planted
3:29 – another view on the minute size of the fire
3:51 – core of the official theory: ’Fire caused collapse’
4:10 – towers were designed to withstand large airliner crash (B707)
5:00 – denial of official story that the B676 were larger/heavier than the B707's the buildings were designed for
5:15 - full view on the fireball 2nd tower (5:18 zoomed in)
5:22 – firemen report about the minute size of fires ('2 isolated fires… able to knock down with 2 hoses')
5:45 – FEMA report confirmed that most of the fuel was consumed in the initial fireball during the first minutes after impact
5:55 – official story about how the fires supposedly brought down the buildings
6:16 – smoking buildings, meaning oxygen starved fires (like smoking, hardly burning wood blocks in a camp fire)
6:47 – person waving from a smoking story; impossible if there were raging fires.
7:08 – person from WTC Construction & Project Management states that the towers were probably able to withstand several impacts, not just one
7:35 – towers designed to withstand wind gusts of 225 km/h; buildings swing in the wind (the more than 100 meters high Euromast in Rotterdam/Netherlands can have an amplitude of 1 meter at the top during storm!). This kills the 'trusses broke off due to thermal deformation'; the buildings were flexible enough to withstand a theoretical thermal expansion of a couple of milimeters (if there was any sizable expansion in the first place).
7:50 – no difference between plane impact and a hurricane
8:40 – never in the history of the world has a steel building collapsed due to fire
9:04 – in 1975 there was a fire in WTC north tower that burned for 3 hours on several floors (twice as long as on 911); nothing happened then
9:28 – fires in Madrid (Windsor tower) in 2005; burning for 20 hours, much more severe than WTC; building’s core structure was undamaged
9:43 – comparison Madrid/WTC in 1 shot to see the difference
10:49 – clear impression of structural design twin towers
11:18 – excellent clear view on trusses and floor elements
11:32 – graphical representation of the official story of why the towers fell
11:52 – essence of the official story: ’if you drop your pants your legs will be destroyed as well’. Fortunately this is not true as is confirmed every night as we go to bed. Self defeating explanation: the core remains upright; in reality it came down as well. This can only be explained through controlled demolition of the core.
12:31 – witnesses report that there was no exessive heat inside the towers
12:45 – famous description by firefighters of how the towers came down, by explosions
13:05 – witness reports explosions before collapse
13:20 – other witness: explosions sounded like gun fire
13:27 – 3rd witness talks about explosions observed from 8th floor; several more witnesses report explosions before the collapse. Conclusion: the building was rigged with explosives that went off either unintentionally early or intentionally to pre-weaken the entire structure in preparation for its final collapse
14:00 – eyewitnesses that explicitly state that explosives were planted in the building
14:40 – the sound of explosions reaches us before we visually see the start of the collapse; the sound of imploding floors and trusses should have reached us after it. This is certain proof that explosions preceded and thus caused the collapse.
16:02 – thermal properties of steel; melting point 1500 C or higher (2750 F)
16:29 – open fires never hotter than 650 C. (red orange flames like in the WTC); steel stoves don’t melt even if they are used for months (iron stoves are obviously not cooled like car engines)
17:55 – likewise it is complete impossible that small scattered fires brought down these towers
19:10 – again the official story: a few floors failed and crushed upon lower floors crashing them in turn by their sheer weight and thus causing a domino-effect
19:25 – even if you accept (against all odds; remember the flexibility of the tower) that the fire caused floors to collapse, than the collapse of the core remains a mistery. Even the outer columns/mesh had probably to stay upright while the floors pancaked.
20:00 – collapse WTC identical with controlled demolished buildings
21:13 – metal and concrete is hurled away from the buildings sideways; a 270 ton piece of steel (weight twice of a Boeing airliner!) was hurled away 120 meter into a neigbouring building! Beams where sticking out of several neighbouring buildings.
22:44 – the falling top of the tower all over sudden disintegrating in mid-air!
24:47 – illustration of the free fall speed of the buildings
27:51 – proof that explosions took place in the basement prior to the collapse
28:36 – testimony William Rodriguez
31:00 – [/B]testimony of explosives everywhere in the basements of both towers and everywhere else[/B]
33:15 – prior to the collapse the building was systematically destroyed in slow pace by numerous explosions causing floors to collapse prior to the final collapse
33:45 – smoke from the tower at street level
35:24 – camera registers several explosions before the collapse
35:53 – squibs (demolition jargon) spraying from the building below the collapse level; well known phenomena during controlled demolitions
37:38 – very clear squib from the sky-lobby
42:29 – molten metal. 8 weeks after the collapse there were still fires raging with underground molten metal with debris temperatures of 600 C.
43:15 – Steven Jones stating that the only explanation for the presence of molten metal was that explosives like thermite had been used; thermite has molten iron as an end product, watch this <a href="http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=S84UMbF0s2k">short clip</a>.
45:20 – second product of thermite reaction, aluminium oxide visible as white smoke
45:24 – evidence of thermite usage at 81-floor
46:00 – even the NYT confirmed that sulphur was found on the iron; sulphur lowers the melting point of iron (thermate) and gives even faster results
47:13 – official from demolition industry explains that usage of timers is the reason why it is called controlled (demolition).
47:27 – linear shape charge
47:55 – there are thousands of different types of explosives
49:15 – pre-weakening is standard procedure (hence all these observed explosions before the final blow in both towers)
49:42 – the beams that were found cut under an angle
51:32 – sequence of how the buildings were brought down
53:19 – Giuliani confessing that they knew in advance that the buildings were going to collapse.
54:10 - Silverstein idem dito: the decision was made to pull the building
55:09 – Silverstein, someone with 'international connections' (Israel comes to mind)
55:29 – explicit mentioning in the lease contract that Silverstein was allowed to rebuild the buildings in case they were destroyed
55:52 – Silverstein won 7 billion dollar on his initial investment of 15 million dollar (that’s a ROI of 500)
57:20 – WTC3/4/5/6 were infinitely more damaged than WTC7, but did not collapse; WTC7 did collapse
57:45 – construction workers in front of WTC7 who say that 'the building is coming down soon'!
58:15 – Silverstein caught lying about the meaning of the word 'pull'. There were no fire fighters to pull from the building. It’s real meaning was to bring down the building. Implying that the building had been prepared long before to come down (it is impossible to decide, plan and implement such an operation in a few hours)
58:42 – witness who says that the WTC7 first floor came down first and the rest followed (classic controlled demolition)
1:00:30 – possible motives for the intentional destruction of WTC7 (destruction SEC fraud records Worldcom and Enron)
1:04:45 – WTC power down weekend (South Tower from the 48th floor up… “This process, Forbes recalled, began early Saturday morning (September 8th) and continued until mid-Sunday afternoon (September 9th) – approximately 30 hours.”)
1:07:15 – the twin towers were big money losers
1:07:50 – WTC asbestos problem: al steel beams had been sprayed with fire proof asbestos; removal was almost undoable; costs expected to exceed 1 billion dollar. The 911 attack provided an opportunity for renewal of the complex (at the cost of European insurers: Allianz, Lloyds, Swiss Re, Zurich FS and others)
1:22:00 – companies were moved within the twin towers prior to 9/11; mysterious construction work was going on in the vacated spaces; people coming to work in the morning noticed that the office spaces were very dusty (implication: construction workers had worked at night ’preparing’ the building)
1:25:40 – view on the size of the fireball in comparison to the entire length of the building: a sphere at least one quarter of the entire building. Note that a second fireball was present at the point of impact.

After viewing this video one is left with a reinforced absolute certainty that these 3 WTC towers were deliberately brought down.

1 - the inexplicable collapse of the core
2 - the endless earwitness accounts of explosions everywhere in the buildings
...and all the rest.
 

Back
Top Bottom