Impact zones 1&2

[helloperator]

Can anybody explain how 1 & 2 had charges exactly at the plane impact zones and were not destroyed by the impact and fire?

It's always puzzled me

[sensimillia]

and were not destroyed by the impact and fire?

i´m no no-planer, but if there were no planes there propably weren´t any impact..;) don´t know if i understand the question...

[helloperator]

Ok...to clarify...

POINT 1: 1&2 basically cracked at the impact zones and began to fall. (The plane impact zones) Is this still accepted?

POINT 2: How could explosive charges have survived the impact of the planes and the fires at those impact zones? How could charges still be detonated at the impact zone if a plane and fire had crashed into the charges around that area likely causing them to be damaged?

do you get what I mean?

(I am asking this from a 'yes there were planes' perspective)

[killtown]

Can anybody explain how 1 & 2 had charges exactly at the plane impact zones and were not destroyed by the impact and fire?

It's always puzzled me
A question I have been asking for a while now to planers and still haven't gotten a satisfactory answer. I have gotten answers like they used "bomb-proof bombs"!

[helloperator]

Well yeah, I have asked this question for a couple of years now and haven't really ever been convinced by a logical answer.

The tower with the spire...when you look at that apparently it starts to come down from the spire...as the spire is the fisrt thing to move...so possibly the core was blown.

But killtown...even a no planer has to have problems with the collapse at the line of "impact"...even if there were no planes...they certainly exploded something up there....risking damage to any charges rigged in that area....so what's the answer?

Did 1 and 2 come down at the "impact" (I'm calling it impact zone for convinience at this stage) because of explosives? Why were the explosives still able to function if a large area of the building where said explosives should have been, was damaged due to "impact"/ explosions or fire.

I need this question answered

[killtown]

Yeah, I doubt we'll ever get a logical answer from the planers about how were the perps able to rig the Towers with explosives and not have them blown up and/or malfunction when the alleged 767 plane with tons of fuel in it exploded into them.

You're question is a good one that I can't answer. I think something more than traditional explosives/thermite was used, but I can't say what because I don't know what it was. All I know is planes didn't crash into the towers and fire didn't bring them down. That's enough to prove a conspiracy, so wondering what really took them down is a moot point.

[mercuryrapids]

Going for major speculation here:

If the planes were flown by remote control, they could be directed to hit a specific region of the buildings, say a four-floor target. These floors might not have had explosives rigged into them.

Like I say, though, that's speculation. Also doesn't answer why the planes didn't hit at the same level on both towers.

I have to add that the planes may have caused a lot of damage, but one chap in a window office saw one of the planes approaching and it actually crashed into his floor. He dived under his desk and survived!

[sensimillia]

He dived under his desk and survived!

the old duck and cover, eh?:D

[killtown]

I have to add that the planes may have caused a lot of damage, but one chap in a window office saw one of the planes approaching and it actually crashed into his floor. He dived under his desk and survived!
That's Stanley Praimnath. I recommend you watch this video about him if you think he's legit:

http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=1382

Here is a gif of a reenacted of his alleged story where he alleged escape without a single burn. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out this guy's story is full of you know what:

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/9633/stanelypraimnath3mr0.gif

[helloperator]

What about the possibility that a control centre somewhere had something like a computer display that showed those rigged explosives active and then those that suffered damage...it wouldnt be hard to rig something like this. all they would need to do is look at a virtual display of the building...it's grid of active (undamaged explosives) and activate the nearest active explosives to the impact zone.

Is that possible? Do you know what I mean?

[mercuryrapids]

It could be argued that he survived because he was in an outer office. The mass of the plane probably went right over him.

[mercuryrapids]

Aren't demolition charges covered with protective material anyway? They are designed to cut the supporting members, not anything else. They have to be protected from other charges going off around them. Probably wrong about that, though, but I'm sure I've read or seen that somewhere.

[helloperator]

Yeah...well a direct hit by an areoplane...or by an explosion (for the npt dudes....or was the explosion and smoke cgi too?) would surely render them useless. Which is why I think they had sensors showing on a computer at a command centre that could tell them exactly which charges were operative and which ones were damaged and inoperative

[veritas2007]

The tower with the spire...when you look at that apparently it starts to come down from the spire...as the spire is the fisrt thing to move...so possibly the core was blown.

I think you're referring to the North tower. Have a look at this 26 second clip of the collapse. You can see the collapse point is near to the original 'impact' damage.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=385461126000133930&q=9%2F11+wtc+collapse&total=1012&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=3


It looks to me that charges set off beneath the 'impact' damage could have triggered the collapse.

I say 'impact' because I'm not sure what hit them yet. Planes, misiles or a.n. other.

[cyince]

What about the possibility that a control centre somewhere had something like a computer display that showed those rigged explosives active and then those that suffered damage...it wouldnt be hard to rig something like this. all they would need to do is look at a virtual display of the building...it's grid of active (undamaged explosives) and activate the nearest active explosives to the impact zone.

Is that possible? Do you know what I mean?

I think that that would be highly unlikely. Consider that anywhere from 50-500 charges would have to be placed in the towers. For each to broadcast a signal that wasn't picked up, or interfered with by office equipment (cordless phones, blue tooth devices, wireless keyboards, wi-fi, cell phones, microwaves etc) and could send a two way signal a great enough distance without some sort of secondary power supply would introduce even more logistical problems than the controlled demolition theory currently has. Consider each explosive would then have to have its own independent frequency that couldn't interfere with anything in the wtc.

[helloperator]

good point cyince....so HOW was it done then?

Fans of the official story LOVE this issue. I would love an answer.

[cyince]

I have to confess, i believe the 'official' story. The logistics involved in prepping the buildings for a demolition are too great. Consider they would be the three biggest buildings ever 'demolished'. There are simply too many variables in my mind to have potentially thousands of pounds of high explosives and their requisite paraphernalia in the buildings where thousands of people could potentially see them before the detonation. In addition there is no evidence that any demolition prep work was done before the attack. Removing drywall, windows, supporting walls and such.

[helloperator]

To that all I can say is....wtc7

[killtown]

It could be argued that he survived because he was in an outer office. The mass of the plane probably went right over him.
Yet the massive explosion shooting back that allegedly came from this 767 didn't toast him?

[cyince]

A controlled demolition of WTC 7 would have all the same logistical difficulties as I previously mentioned, add to the fact that there would be no reason to demolish the building. The only compelling evidence left that WTC7 was a demolition was the fact that looks similar to one from much of the footage.

[killtown]

no reason to demolish the building.
How do you know? Do you say that because you can't think of a good enough reason to convince yourself?

[cyince]

How do you know? Do you say that because you can't think of a good enough reason to convince yourself?

I guess i should have said I don't beleive that there is a reason to demolish the building. Of the arguments I've seen for a demolotion none of them has convinced me.

What is the reaon you beleive WTC7 had to be demolished?

[killtown]

What is the reaon you beleive WTC7 had to be demolished?
If someone shot your parents, would you need a reasonable motive before you'd asked for the shooter to be prosecuted?

I don't care what their motives were. I only care that they did it.

[cyince]

If someone shot your parents, would you need a reasonable motive before you'd asked for the shooter to be prosecuted?

I don't care what their motives were. I only care that they did it.

I don't think the situations are analagous, however i will play along. Yes..IF my parents were shot I would want the shooter to be prosecuted. First however i would need evidence that they were in fact shot, who shot them, and what their motives were for shooting them were. In fact in order to prosecute in a murder case motive is one of the biggest factors.

Ignoring motive is counterproductive in my opinion to finding truth.

[mercuryrapids]

Yet the massive explosion shooting back that allegedly came from this 767 didn't toast him?

Good point and well made, sir... :)

This also adds fuel to the fire (pun kind of intended) that the vast majority of fuel ignited outside the building.

[helloperator]

Disregarding the symmetrical collapse of wtc7 isn't a good idea.

Meanwhile....I'm still no closer to working out what happened to the explosives at the impact zones.......

[ukor]

It seems very likely (from Chris Bollyn's research) that the areas struck by the planes weren't random.

It's also known that destruction on the floors hit wasn't total - the famous 'woman on the edge' photo proves that for WTC1 and as has been pointed out, the majority of the fuel exploded outside the building in WTC2.

Therefore we can assume that the planes accomplished part of the demolition themselves in the areas they hit, and other charges assigned to those areas could be left unharmed.

Gordon Ross has theorised from the pattern of destruction that can be deduced from the remains of the 'spire', that the lift system was almost certainly used to place what could be truckloads of explosives in key areas.

And finally, explosives from the thermite family are heat resistant.

[helloperator]

Heat resistant but not impact resistant....so perhaps you dont have to set off every charge

[phreedom]

Going for major speculation here:

If the planes were flown by remote control, they could be directed to hit a specific region of the buildings, say a four-floor target. These floors might not have had explosives rigged into them.

Like I say, though, that's speculation. Also doesn't answer why the planes didn't hit at the same level on both towers.

because who ever did it was pretty clever and went at great lengths to blind you and i

[helloperator]

What question are you answering there phreedom?