Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

It seems the attack on Twin Towers is still not settled on this forum. Some facts need to be explained.

For instance
What was the reason why the buildings took so long collapse?
How did they collapse?
What was the sound people thought were explosions as it was collapsing?
Was it built to withstand Fire?
Was it built to withstand explosions?

The last two are very easy to explain. The answer to both is yes. However it was not designed to withstand an explosion followed by fire like the plane exploding fully loaded with fuel. Which in fact caused its collapse.

The reason why it took so long to collapse was because that's how long it took for the steel supports to heat enough to give way and the sound which sounded like explosions was the collapse of one floor on to the next one below which overloaded and caused it's collapse till till the whole thing collapsed.

The fact that the two airplanes caused the incident is beyond doubt. This idea that it was an inside job is just false. If anything the Yanks are guilty of was their checks at the internal air travel with the checks of what people took with them into the plane.

The logic was good though for their ignorance. They did not believe that anybody in Yanklands could do anything bad on plane. I mean they are simple folks after all. Listen to what comes out of the mouth of the Trump supporters and you will see how stupid half of the Yanks are.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-the-twin-towers-fell/

[Lordo]

Here is another documentary about how they collapsed.

[Robin Hood]

Now this could be interesting ....... as I said in my Ukraine post, I never spent a lot of time on the Twin Towers as it was so obviously very difficult to discuss without going into the realms of Newton’s Laws of Motion in a big way. At the end of the day the ONLY explanation will have to comply with Newton otherwise the info is false.

I have a few queries on your ‘facts’ ............

LORDO:

It seems the attack on Twin Towers is still not settled on this forum. Some facts need to be explained.
For instance What was the reason why the buildings took so long collapse?

Who can say ..... when how they collapsed is still a mystery!

How did they collapse?

By what you see on videos, it was most probably a controlled demolition! This is an interesting interview .... with an expert in controlled demolition. It is related to WTC7 but I would say that what he says COULD be applied to the Twin Towers. He died a few weeks later in an unexplained road crash in the Netherlands! https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2nnzaz

What was the sound people thought were explosions as it was collapsing?

Watch this from about 1 minute. At 1:16 there is a shudder on the camera and at the same time an enormous increase in the smoke billowing out of the tower. Then at 1:31 the collapse starts. This camera is fixed to a building so the judder was structural not someone bumping the camera. There is also a second video (which I have yet to locate), which shows the same sequence from a different building and a different angle and distance. The judder is also seen on that footage.

As two cameras at two different locations show the same judder at the same time but hundreds of meters apart, then it was more than just a local ‘traffic’ shake ..... it was a big one, was recorded some miles away in an observatory and was recorded as an explosion signature not an geological event. So at a guess an explosion? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaydhlOVogk

Was it built to withstand Fire?
Was it built to withstand explosions?
The last two are very easy to explain. The answer to both is yes. However it was not designed to withstand an explosion followed by fire like the plane exploding fully loaded with fuel. Which in fact caused its collapse.

Yes they were designed for that scenario ....... but then I disagree with your explanation!

The fuel from the aircraft, much of which (70-80%) constituted the external fire ball, was NEVER a factor in the collapse sequence as the rest of the fuel burned off in under two minutes ...... all that was left to burn was office partitions and furniture. There was no intense heat as was proved by videos of survivors standing in the entry gash waving to rescuers on the ground. Liquids will always fall they don’t flow uphill and neither would they pool on the impact floors. So the idea that fire softened the steel in only feasible if you ignore the obvious laws of physics.

The reason why it took so long to collapse was because that's how long it took for the steel supports to heat enough to give way and the sound which sounded like explosions was the collapse of one floor on to the next one below which overloaded and caused it's collapse till till the whole thing collapsed.

See above. The impacts especially the second one was asymmetrical and the fire and major damage were on the one side of the building.
Again if you stick to Newtons Laws, a symmetrical collapse, straight down, at free fall acceleration (all recorded) was impossible. As Newton says a body descending under the pull of gravity will take the line of least resistance. In this case the top would have toppled as one side of the building was still relatively undamaged ...... and it didn’t slow down until the latter stage of collapse.

Your ‘pancake’ theory again thanks to Newton, was also proved wrong. In that theory the impact, as each floor collapsed onto the floor below would have slowed the collapse down ...... not increase the acceleration. Also take into account the floors were all ‘light’ concrete which powders when crushed hence the dense WHITE clouds of dust.

The fact that the two airplanes were the obvious indication of what apparently caused the incident, is beyond doubt.

This idea that it was an inside job is just false. If anything the Yanks are guilty of was their checks at the internal air travel with the checks of what people took with them into the plane.

I agree that the aircraft were obviously involved but that event was allowed for in the design ....... like the impact of a Boeing 707 at cruising speed and fully loaded! But there are theories that are plausible (no substantive evidence) that would explain how a controlled demolition could be achieved over a period of time without raising suspicions.

The logic was good though for their ignorance. They did not believe that anybody in Yanklands could do anything bad on plane. I mean they are simple folks after all. Listen to what comes out of the mouth of the Trump supporters and you will see how stupid half of the Yanks are.

It is not just the Yanks who are easily fooled ...... there are several on this forum that refuse to accept anything other than the official line.

But let me say NOW to correct the record, that I believe there are people in very high places within the US upper echelons of power that know the truth, but I don’t think The US Government were directly involved and The Government were not part of the plot. Maybe a few in Government ..... maybe?

[Lordo]

When the incident with the Twin Towers happened my first thought was who the hell came up with such an idea and how did they work out what would happen in such a situation. The answer was very simple they have seen the Paris air crash by Concorde into a hotel next to the airport at 15th of July 2000.

If you look at the video in the minutes below it explains quite well the incident and how it collapsed.
6:16 – Structural engineer said the circumstances were outside of what they considered when they designed the building. They consider wind, earthquake, fire inside the building and explosion inside the building but not combinations.
41:20 – explains the fireproofing which was sprayed on the steel. Fireproofing was dry fragile material. Blown away by the explosion. Most of the steel in the scap yard had very little retardant on it.
43:44 – Trusses used to build the floors were weak. Unprotected truss will fail within 5 or 10 minutes in a fire was the comment of the fire engineer.
47:18 – explains how the columns collapse without the trusses stabilising effect.
Looking at the way it collapsed there is no evidence of any explosion inside as explosion would have shown smoke coming out of the building horizontally on every face in all angles. This was a very uniform failure. Once the first floor collapsed, each floor below was unable to carry the load so it had to go too.

[Lordo]

Here is the accident that happened previous year in Paris to show what a plane can do to a building. That also happened minutes after take off.

[Robin Hood]

Here is the accident that happened previous year in Paris to show what a plane can do to a building. That also happened minutes after take off.

Sorry but there is no similarity. If the hijackers needed a trigger for their plan then i would suggest the 1945 crash of a US B-25 bomber lost in the fog of New York, into the Empire State building, which killed 14 people, would be more likely.

But going back to WTC7 ........... this came into my inbox today, so it is still a subject that gets talked about:

"Strange things happened on 9/11"- Robert Kennedy, Jr. | Redacted with Clayton Morris

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8TcjdKjJFk

[Lordo]

Here is the accident that happened previous year in Paris to show what a plane can do to a building. That also happened minutes after take off.

Sorry but there is no similarity. If the hijackers needed a trigger for their plan then i would suggest the 1945 crash of a US B-25 bomber lost in the fog of New York, into the Empire State building, which killed 14 people, would be more likely.

But going back to WTC7 ........... this came into my inbox today, so it is still a subject that gets talked about:

"Strange things happened on 9/11"- Robert Kennedy, Jr. | Redacted with Clayton Morris

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8TcjdKjJFk

Kennedy says he does not know, he has not looked into it.

As to where they could get the idea from, they did not need to look for the idea, It was all over the news. I am merely saying if they were planning an attack of some sort, it would have given them an idea how to do it.

When it comes to control devises, like I said before if there were explosions you would have seen the signs of the smoke blowing out. The smoke you saw was consistent with fire in the floors and the collapse was also consistent with each floor collapsing on the next floor down.

Here is one with controlled explosion. Compare the two and you will see what I mean. There is no similarity what so ever. What people heard was what they though was explosions but in fact the noise was floors snapping from the girders. The fireman described it as a train derailing. That is the noise the train derailing makes too.

[Londonrake]

The events which took place in the US on Sept 11th 2001 have probably been the most widely observed, investigated and commented upon such in modern history. There can't be anybody, with even a passing interest in what happened, that doesn't know how it unfolded

There had already been one Al-Qaeda attempt at destroying the WTC, with an explosives laden truck in Feb 1993. Two US embassies and a warship had also been attacked by Islamists from the organisation. Funded, trained and controlled by Bin Laden from his Taliban safe haven in Afghanistan.

In what was a well planned and coordinated attack (on YouTube you can find a video of Bin Laden and his cohorts boasting about it). 19 Saudi Al-Qaeda Islamists hijacked 4 US aircraft, using knives that were part of model construction tool kits. 7 of them had trained for months at US flight schools in simulators on how to fly the aircraft concerned.

Having seized control of the aircraft, one of them - flight 77 - headed to Arlington Virginia where it was crashed into the Pentagon. The passengers on a second - flight 93 - having realised what was happening, attacked the flight deck and the aircraft crashed into a field in rural Pennsylvania. It's target was in Washington and thought to be the Capitol. The other 2 - flights 11 and 175 - crashed into the WTC towers. Something like 80 million Americans and an estimated 2 billion other people watched the second plane crash and related events live. Subsequently, there were numerous forensic analyses of what happened, including a major US Commission public investigation.

Cue theme from the X files.

The idea that it was all part of a cunning plan by - people US but now it seems unknown (for 15 years it's been clear that Hood was implying the USG were the culprits but even the great never-wrong has come to accept how ridiculous that claim was it seems) and that the plan - to actually blow up the buildings - has remained successfully hidden over a period of 22 years is - to any rational person - absurd (aka bonkers). However, that doesn't deter your average Conspiracy Theorist of course. A fundamental tenet of such being that people are just gullible idiots who will believe anything (moon landings/Kennedy/Monroe - etc, etc). Only the gifted few, who can investigate and unearth the "real truth" about such things (from a keyboard in Souni FFS ) know what actually happened.

A rare occasion when - on the whole - I agree with Lordo.

Nevertheless, I am sure it will all pop up again sometime. Like a game of whack-a-mole.

[Lordo]

If you compare the two buildings you can clearly see how first internal explosions take place followed by the big ones at the ground floor level. Noting like what happened in Twin Towers. Never mind all the other evidence just that fact shows there were no controlled explosion's, just the sound of each floor made as they broke off the walls.

[Londonrake]

Never mind all the other evidence just that fact shows there ……………..

I think the first 6 words pretty much sum up Hood’s attitude to and obsession with the events of 9/11 and - what I stated above were “the facts” - never mind them or not.

I should add, like a lot of Conspiracy Theories, the perpetrators are ultimately presented as all-powerful, malignant and completely untraceable ghosts. Because ghosts of course is what they are.