HQ Images From The 09/11/2001 Attack on the Pentagon

pbraasch · #**301** ● 05-04-2012, 01:08 AM

Nope. There was no reinforced concrete in the core (or exterior walls) of the Twin Towers. The core was steel columns and, yes, gypsum sheetrock. If the core had been concrete, the only way to take those buildings down would have been one floor at a time. Dropping the entire basement substructure probably would not have caused them to collapse.

Do you believe buildings of that size would stand merely being held up by steel rods and gypsum?

pbraasch · #**302** ● 05-04-2012, 01:10 AM

Originally Posted by ebneter ↗

Um... from that angle it appears to not be leaning and not on fire.

There are many, many, many images of the extensive fires in the building and much eyewitness testimony of the damage to the building and the degree to which it was leaning.

And, incidentally, physics says that the building could not collapse at greater than freefall speed no matter what caused the collapse. Ipso facto, therefore, you're wrong.

Could you also please show me pictures and/or video of building 7 on fire and leaning. If I am wrong, I just want proof first.

robot · #**303** ● 05-04-2012, 03:36 AM

Dude, have you ever fucking in been in WTC 1 or 2 before they were taken out. I'll say this again - the buildings used to fucking lightly sway. Yes, they were cleverly put together as described by experts and the ironworkers union who built the mother fuckers. Piss off already.

Originally Posted by pbraasch ↗

Do you believe buildings of that size would stand merely being held up by steel rods and gypsum?

robot · #**304** ● 05-04-2012, 03:46 AM

You should look at this - there is a picture of WTC 7 on fire as you read down. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

The mention the concern about the slurry wall but you have to also remember something else - there was an entire catacomb of underground mall and transit under that area - the whole fucking complex area was unstable after 1 & 2 fell. It smelt burnt for weeks. There was dust all over the place. The National guard had humvees sealing off access beyond Broadway - you couldn't get to Church street anymore that day.

pbraasch · #**305** ● 05-04-2012, 03:54 AM

Originally Posted by robot ↗

Dude, have you ever fucking in been in WTC 1 or 2 before they were taken out. I'll say this again - the buildings used to fucking lightly sway. Yes, they were cleverly put together as described by experts and the ironworkers union who built the mother fuckers. Piss off already.

Robot, no, I was never in the towers. All super structures are built to sway to some extent to compensate for wind pressure at high altitude.
Sears Tower, now called Willis Tower, in Chicago, where I grew up, used to be the tallest skyscraper in the U.S, and had tolerances for wind pressure at the presipice. But, if you could, please tell me the point you're trying to make.

pbraasch · #**306** ● 05-04-2012, 04:06 AM

Originally Posted by robot ↗

You should look at this - there is a picture of WTC 7 on fire as you read down. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

The mention the concern about the slurry wall but you have to also remember something else - there was an entire catacomb of underground mall and transit under that area - the whole fucking complex area was unstable after 1 & 2 fell. It smelt burnt for weeks. There was dust all over the place. The National guard had humvees sealing off access beyond Broadway - you couldn't get to Church street anymore that day.

Robot, my friend, it seems you werethere that day, and my heart, all of it goes out to any of you i
.

You know, it is a shame that people in this country and around the world have to fight about what they think happened on 9-11. Bottom line was it was bad for everyone around the world.

robot · #**307** ● 05-04-2012, 04:07 AM

LOL .... My wife is from Chicago and I've been in the Sears tower ... you've never felt sway like this building. My point is that if it were of a more rigid construction like say the Empire state building or Sears Tower, then perhaps it would have remained standing or collapsed unto itself differently. I get the sense from some that they can't see this building being so vulnerable or contructed in the way described .... But it was.