A lil 9/11 truth for ya
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (69)
sorted by:
Try to find some interior pics of the twin towers. I was in one of the towers back in 1980 and even at the top of those buildings the support columns were massive. I'm talking about two inch thick steel girders. How can an airplane cut through several girders even when a bird and a hail stone can cause such damage? We've been lied to for a couple of hundred years. Heads need to roll for all the lies and theft which has occured.
TDLR: The building would have shredded the plane, and proper fire retardant system would have allowed the fuel to burn itself out in less than 2 hours with virtually zero structural damage to the building (superficial damage is NOT structural damage).
They intentionally monkeyed with the fire retardant coating on the targeted floors for one of the buildings to make sure there was a big fire:
"Overview of the Structural Design of World Trade Center 1, 2, and 7 Buildings", NIST; https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=910105
Did they hit the wrong floors on WTC2? The intended targeted ones likely had the thermal protection also modified like WTC1.
Both towers designed to withstand the impact of an aircraft and associated fires due to impact of a B-25 bomber airplane into Empire State Building in 1945: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Empire_State_Building_B-25_crash
Design of World Trade Center Towers: Aircraft Impact
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center
Note that the 707 was a smaller version and earlier derivative model of the planes that supposedly hit with similar structural construction as a largely aluminum skin attached to minimal 7000 series aluminum frames and spars.
Agreed. The fires and explosions were for "show". Clearly some sort of concrete pulverization and timed charges on support columns caused the demolition.
The vertical columns were 5" thick at the bottom.