i want to pick one thing out of this shitpile of crazy because it's the one thing about this 9/11 truth bullshit that really bugs me to death
AAFitz wrote:If one of them fell over sideways, instead of crumbling straight down, the damage could have been much, much more severe, and the loss of life even more devastating.
I dont think its impossible in this situation, to imagine that the government, would take safety precautions, of fitting the buildings to be able to be dropped in an emergency. It would be a tough decision, and no one would ever want to be the one who had to make it, and it may even have been the correct one, but it certainly isnt that far fetched.
...
If, hypothetically, someone did have to make a call to demo those buildings, because it was determined they might fall and do more damage, then its inherent that they would never, ever, ever hear the end of it. The lawsuits would be beyond belief, and it simply would never matter if it was the correct decision.
I hate to simplify things like this, but the simplest explanation, often is the correct one. Hijackers hijacked those planes. They crashed them into the buildings. Building 7 seems to have been demolished professionally. If building 7 was wired to blow, it was probably done so previous to the day. If so, its very likely that the other buildings were wired to blow too, in case of an emergency. All speculation, but not at all impossible to believe given the situation.
Now possibly, someone had to give the order, and killed countless people that could have been saved, and possibly someone gave the order, and saved countless people that could not.
look, guy, skyscrapers do not fall down sideways. it doesn't happen. i'm not saying it's rare, or even extremely improbable. a skyscraper falling sideways is
physically impossible. further, even if such a thing were possible, why wouldn't the architects build the structure to fall vertically, naturally, if it toppled, instead of installing some secret, arcane demolition button to do the same?
this is a really good post on a separate forum about the wtc collapse written by an actual expert. it is elucidating and everyone should read it but here is the pertinent portion:
No building design would have fallen over like a tree with this sort of impact, physics and strength of materials take a lot of issue with that. That's actualy what the 1993 plot was, by detonating a bomb in the parking garage they had hoped to get one tower to fall and smash into the other. That would have been a trick even if they had put some serious explosives engineering into the plot. We have a hard enough time designing big things with a strength to weight ratio that stands against gravity in one static direction, start to tip it and it collapses like a pile of silly string, not like a redwood. When that moment force goes the wrong way it doesn't take much to turn steel into ribbons, and the fulcrum point just crumbles as the top comes down. If you tried you could get a falling building to favor one direction and fall into an area one or two times its circumference, but I doubt you could make a thousand foot skyscraper fall over and wipe out an area the length of its full height, unless it was designed and built specifically to hold together in that situation. Yeah, no.
