couchtripper

I wonder if the idea that the buildings had explosives built into them during construction has been asked? It would make sense to do so as the architects would know that it would only have a set lifespan and it would make it a lot cheaper and easier to demolish when that time came.

i think i've only ever heard alex jones use the word government 'shills'

heres a pic;



and another



plus building 7 is all the evidence you need - that was so obviously a controlled demolition

faceless wrote:I wonder if the idea that the buildings had explosives built into them during construction has been asked? It would make sense to do so as the architects would know that it would only have a set lifespan and it would make it a lot cheaper and easier to demolish when that time came.

You are getting close to the truth. Though the explosives would have been placed when demolition was expected.

The explosives were probably placed in the month prior to 911. They had lots of power-downs and strange "maintenance works" throughout the building (including a UNIQUE total shut-down of power which meant all doors open and no CCTVs).

In addition, a reason to have these explosives is the safety of the buildings around it, i.e. if there was a risk of a "toppling over", it would be safer to bring the buildings "straight down" "into their basement"

luke wrote:i think i've only ever heard alex jones use the world government 'shills'

Damn .. our listening habits uncovered by a slip of the keyboard.

faceless wrote:I wonder if the idea that the buildings had explosives built into them during construction has been asked? It would make sense to do so as the architects would know that it would only have a set lifespan and it would make it a lot cheaper and easier to demolish when that time came.

see that could be a possibility - that it was designed with those in place, and someone decided instead of taking the risk and the buildings falling at an angle, they decided to bring it down on itself

snap (almost).

Also, how convenient the cuts were frequent enough to end up with steel beams just short enough to be loadable onto trucks (to be sent off overseas to be melted to destroy the evidence)

Mandy wrote:

faceless wrote:I wonder if the idea that the buildings had explosives built into them during construction has been asked? It would make sense to do so as the architects would know that it would only have a set lifespan and it would make it a lot cheaper and easier to demolish when that time came.

You are getting close to the truth.

How do you know what is truth and what isn't?

My theory is just as valid as any other - there is no evidence to deny the idea as far as I'm aware.

It was just my viewpoint, not a statement of fact.

I believe explosives and wiring decay over time. Having said that, I would not be surprised if there were explosives added during the building (which is face's point -- so we agree on that), but I would have expected them to be replaced at some point in the last few decades.

I believe the detonations were triggered via remote control. That necessitated battery powered triggering devices, which would not have lasted decades.


Thermite was invented in 1800's, but unsure when the more powerful "thermate" was invented. The colour of molten metal during the fire indicates thermate was used.

[web]<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/BoJJIYWMZlY&re ... ram><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/BoJJIYWMZlY&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>[/web]

nice one nico