My 9/11 theory

[matthew3896]

The buildings were damaged so badly they had become dangerous and unstable. There was concern something catastrophic might happen if no action was taken. Reluctantly, a controlled demolition was initiated in order to prevent the situation from becoming even worse.

And then conspiracy theorists find out about the controlled demolition and say that's what was planned all long.

It's basically plausible deniability. The genius of a properly-planned conspiracy is no one can ever really tell if it's a conspiracy or just a natural event.

 

[Joe Kings]

How would there be controlled demo? youre dumb

 

[quickfeet]

The buildings were damaged so badly they had become dangerous and unstable. There was concern something catastrophic might happen if no action was taken. Reluctantly, a controlled demolition was initiated in order to prevent the situation from becoming even worse.

And then conspiracy theorists find out about the controlled demolition and say that's what was planned all long.

It's basically plausible deniability. The genius of a properly-planned conspiracy is no one can ever really tell if it's a conspiracy or just a natural event.

I see where you are coming from. I've never been able to understand the physics of how these buildings where hit so high up, yet they collapsed straight downward

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Reluctantly, a controlled demolition was initiated in order to prevent the situation from becoming even worse.

That would make sense, to someone who does not understand controlled demolition. One cannot..... all opon a sudden, make a decision to demo a building in that way. It cannot happen in the manner that you, and Silverstein suggest.

The genius of a properly-planned conspiracy is no one can ever really tell if it's a conspiracy or just a natural event.

This is very true, and the main reason the truth eludes most today.

 

[TheRealJohnCooper]

Paging @MortgageHorn

 

[Golbez]

There was no time to setup a "controlled" demolition after the planes hit.

Sure it was a "controlled" demolition, but it was setup before 9/11 lol.

My generation has paid for that day more than any other. 20 years of warfare, over a damn false flag.... That's over half of our lives if not more the younger Millennials go.

Same shit different decade though.... Gulf of Tonkin and Vietnam.... One could even argue that Pearl Harbor were the Japanese being setup to get us in WW2.

 

[MalO]

How would there be controlled demo? youre dumb

The skyscraper's steel frame wouldn't collapse straight down into its own footprint unless demolition charges were carefully placed to do exactly that.

In the absence of a carefully planned demolition if any part of the frame buckled the entire skyscraper should have tilted over and crashed down onto all the other buildings in downtown Manhatten.

A plane hitting it would have only damaged part of the frame, and created asymmetric stress on it, with damage on one side but not the other.

Even if rocket fuel poured into the elevator shafts, they were located in the center of the tower and not the outside edge where much of the frame is. Even if the rocket fuel weakened the frame, each floor wouldn't have collapsed onto the next top down all the way down to the ground. The fuel would have weakened the frame at one stress point and made it collapse and topple at that point.

What we saw was clearly and obviously a controlled demolition.

 

[MalO]

I read a theory that the towers had a failsafe built in to collapse them straight down if they were ever structurally compromised, to prevent them from toppling down on top of other buildings, causing an even larger disaster.

Which raises the question - do other skyscrapers have such failsafes? The Empire State building? The Sears tower? Others?

Who gets to decide when to activate the failsafe? Is there a big red button they push?

It raises implications about terror attacks. Why bother bringing bombs into these skyscrapers if they are already rigged with bombs? Could a hacker take control of the failsafe?

I'm not sure what to think about that. It's plausible, and if it was a failsafe they would cover it up because SIlverstein was banking on a huge insurance payout. Bringing the towers down deliberately would not be covered by insurance.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Pearl Harbor were the Japanese being setup to get us in WW2.

10 years prior, there was a training exercise that mapped the whole thing out. Of course, that would be a logical move, since Pearl Harbor was our most western base, and of huge strategic advantage.

The skyscraper's steel frame wouldn't collapse straight down into its own footprint unless demolition charges were carefully placed to do exactly that.

Correct

What we saw was clearly and obviously a controlled demolition.

That is what some evidence shows for sure

I read a theory that the towers had a failsafe built in to collapse them straight down if they were ever structurally compromised

Which is bullshit. What you are referring to is a "crush zone". It is built into modern cars, not buildings. In engineering a building, typically a factor of 10 is used. Meaning if a floor is rated to support 100 lbs, it will fail at 1000lbs, just to give a perspective or the strength of such a building.

do other skyscrapers have such failsafes?

No.

 

[Golbez]

 

[Golbez]

And the melted steel at the bottom of the 45 degree cut.

 

[TheRealJohnCooper]

10 years prior, there was a training exercise that mapped the whole thing out. Of course, that would be a logical move, since Pearl Harbor was our most western base, and of huge strategic advantage.

Correct

That is what some evidence shows for sure

Which is bullshit. What you are referring to is a "crush zone". It is built into modern cars, not buildings. In engineering a building, typically a factor of 10 is used. Meaning if a floor is rated to support 100 lbs, it will fail at 1000lbs, just to give a perspective or the strength of such a building.

No.

Link to the 10 year old training exercise please and thank you.

 

[Golbez]

U.S. Navy Exercise Simulated Pearl Harbor Attack 18 Months Before It Happened

Dedicated to World War II Aviation

www.worldwariiaviation.org

I don't know about 10 years prior, that would kinda predate aircraft carrier strategy all together.

 

[Golbez]

Still remember it like it was yesterday. Start at 40 minutes.

All the debunks on that are bullshit arguments.

 

[kingsolomonwisdom]

1.) Jevvs did it
2.) Jevvs told us they were going to do it for decades via TV, video games, magazines, their own currency, etc.
3.) No planes, pre set bombs
4.) Thousands of Jevvs didn't show up to work that infamous day (if they worked at the Trade Center or within a close proximity). All of them were messaged and told not to go to work on that day.


-Note: I love everybody and everything I say is for comedic purposes only. Hilary Clinton is an angel
Pro LGBTQPedo
Pro cutting off penises
pro killing unborn babies
Pro FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, MIB, NAACP, BLM, etc
pro-Semite
annnnnd don't sue me bro

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Link to the 10 year old training exercise please and thank you.

The First Attack: Pearl Harbor, February 7, 1932

Did a little-known military exercise in 1932 presage the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor nearly a decade later?

www.military.com

your welcome faggot

 

[weaponoffreedom]

And the melted steel at the bottom of the 45 degree cut.

RDX would do that easily, or ANFO.

45 to 60 degree cut is textbook, but I think these are closer to 60, which his optimum.