You’re saying they put explosives in the towers and then didn’t care if they worked or not?
Of course there would be. They want the hypothetical demolition charges to go off, don’t they? That means the charges, their detonators, and the wiring connecting to them, has to remain intact. No, they can’t rely on the fire to set the charges off. The plastic explosives used in cutting charges doesn’t explode if you set it on fire - it needs a very specific detonation shock to set it off.
Even worse, our hypothetical demolitionists are risking having the wires cut or detonators disabled, leaving intact unexploded cutting charges in the debris pile to be found by rescue workers or cleanup crew, which would have been a bit of a giveaway. No, you can’t rely on the collapse of the building to set them off either. Plastic explosives are surprisingly insensitive to heat and impact.
Two. WTC 2 fell on and utterly obliterated a church across the street.
And if these explosions were supposed to be triggered remotely, there would have to be transmitters that would also need to remain intact in order to work.
I always love the idea of remote detonation in the area of the world where radio traffic is probably at its highest level. Nope, no early detonation waiting to happen there, no sir!
How exactly did the planes not set off the pre placed explosives? How were the det cords not damaged? I know that modern explosives are very stable, but there is no way they are that stable. Hole in your logic, such as it is.
CAPT
Edit from upthread, I did not know modern explosives are that stable.
There were reports of expolsions in the sublevels of both buildings, all caught on video by eyewitnesses. There are pictures of “squibs” on the floors preceeding the collaspe, some say they are air pockets, but the kind of look like charges too.
All of you must have seen all this, I’ll link to them if I have to, but come on. You are all telling me you are trying to debate me and have not even looked at other evidence? Really?
They kind of look like charges so they must be.
This was dealt with already:
The fact that none of the rubble looked like it had been cut by an explosive is pretty compelling, too, isn’t it?
..
You are not the first to link to videos claiming to see squibs. We have seen them here many times.
There are no puffs suggestive of squibs, and no visible evidence of planned explosives.
Reports which, BTW, were of the fireball of fuel coming down the shaft after the impact.
Not that these are in any way relevant since the collapse certainly didn’t start in the subbasements.
Not true.
These ‘squibs’ are happening as the building is already collapsing. They also have no demolition charge sound. “looks like” isn’t good enough.
Yes. You are completely and utterly wrong. This stuff was debunked over 6 years ago on average.
There were not only reports of explosions in the basements, but people injured by those explosions as well. It is instructive to look at the nature of their injuries. Eyewitnesses to the explosions in the basements report people with blackened clothing and skin, and in some cases with skin burned off or hanging off them.
Demolition explosives are very high speed, but don’t actually generate much heat. Injuries from being too close to that type of explosion are typically due to shrapnel or barotrauma due to the shock wave. The injuries seen on the people in the basements of the towers are consistent with being exposed to burning liquid or vapors. There is evidence that following the airplane impacts burning jet fuel poured down the elevator shafts, which would be consistent with the injuries and eyewitness reports.
There are, but it is important to note that these happen after the collapse has already begun. Furthermore, the color of the puffs of dust/smoke don’t seem to resemble the explosions from cutting charges, which as already pointed out are very bright, very fast, very loud, and leave a black smoke cloud.
We have. Why do you assume that the people who disagree with you have not seen all the evidence? You are not the first 9/11 conspiracy theorist to come by here by a long shot, and you have yet to bring anything that hasn’t been brought up and debunked many times before.
Easy answer to that. The planes were mis-direction. Anything that happened after the planes hit didn’t really matter.
Even if explosives in the strike area went off too soon or not at all, it didn’t really matter, because the rest of the building was wired anyway.
I think I can say for sure the basements were wired in both buildings, just from eyewitness accounts, including NYFD.
You’re wrong.
For I think the third time: how did they know none of the explosive equipment would be damaged by the plane crash and the fires? And since your comment about “large parts of the building being under construction” was wrong, how did all of this stuff get into two of the biggest office towers in the world with nobody noticing?
Really? Because if you plan to detonate explosives at a set location, having them hit with a hundreds-of-tons molotov cocktail isn’t a way to keep them intact.
Except that such charges (which are entirely your fantasy) would have stuck out like a sore thumb when detonated.
Once again, you are wrong, and the FDNY does not agree with your assessment.
Please give actual links to these eyewitness accounts.
If the basements were wired with explosives, why didn’t the collapse start at the basement level? Furthermore, what were those explosives even for? Both towers were observed to start collapsing at the impact point, and once the mass above the impact point started moving downwards any explosives in the rest of the building would be irrelevant and unnecessary. It’s not as if once the collapse begins, the buildings are going to stop mid-collapse because the basements weren’t wired with explosives.
The bomb-sniffing dogs in particular, one of which was still on duty in the basement when the towers fell.
That requires a cite
CAPT