by FourthBase » Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:09 am
You know, I was thinking...<br><br>What if the official theory posited that Al Qaeda sponsored terrorists had not only flown planes into the towers, but <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>also</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> planted massive bombs in parked vans beneath the ground floor of the towers, a la 1993?<br><br>In that case, it would <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>HARDLY</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> be "far-fetched" to theorize about bombs in the basement helping to trigger a collapse, right? Wouldn't it seem like a perfectly natural theory completely free of "conspiracy theory" stigmata?<br><br>This is the same kind of angle as pretending that the official theory posited that Al Qaeda sponsored terrorists not only hijacked the planes, but <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>also</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> hacked into some DoD or FAA computer system and ensured the plan's success by flying the planes remote control or GPS programming the planes' course into the WTC and Pentagon.<br><br>This is how I would recommend to 9/11-Truthers, use this angle (what if Al Qaeda did it?) to get past the political bullshit and focus on the logistics.<br><br>It would require abandoning for the moment any kind of "unorthodox" technology for bringing down the towers, i.e., lasers or EMP or whatever. And it would require that 9/11-Truthers utterly stop the "neat" and "fell-in-their-footprints" bullshit, and also really put the "controlled demolition" talk on hold (excepting WTC7). Because there's no fucking <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>way</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> the towers came down via <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>controlled</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> demolition, and there's no <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>point</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> in speculating about futuristic technology that we have absolutely no evidence for to back us up.<br><br>Think of ways that the towers collapse could have been facilitated via technology that could be blamed on the terrorists. In other words, if there's evidence of thermite reactions, posit that maybe the thermite was loaded by terrorists in baggage on board the planes or that a thermite reaction was accidentally triggered by the molten aluminum interacting with the WTC metals (which I still have not received a good answer for). If there's evidence of basement explosions, posit that the explosions were caused by the same people and materials as 1993.<br><br>The catch is that while positing that Al Qaeda is behind these anomalies lets the discussion fly under the radar, ultimately the fact that the authorities and their official theories <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>never</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> acknowledged the evidence and possibilities of remote control or additional WTC explosives and actually attempted to suppress them...well, that can only mean that it was an inside job. Right?<br><br>Or does anyone think that the government might co-opt that angle and start suddenly acknowledging the basement explosions etc...so long as Al Qaeda is blamed for them?<br><br>I can't figure it out.<br>But there's got to be <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>something</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> useful in that angle.<br><br>edit: You know, on second thought...About the thermite:<br>Is one of the scenarios that whoever was in the building during the power down planted thermite? How much would they have needed to plant and where? Would they have known where the planes would hit, or would they have been covering their bases?<br><br>edit2: I'm interested in what damage the 1993 bombing caused. I remember reading something that said the damage was far more extensive than publicly perceived, and that the tower's structural integrity had been put in jeopardy. Can't find that now by googling, and would appreciate any help.<br><br>edit3: I'll post whatever I can find on the '93 damage:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.fdnewyork.com/wtc.asp">www.fdnewyork.com/wtc.asp</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The blast was centered on the B2 level. It was so intense that it caused the collapse of the steel reinforced concrete floor to the floor below (B3 level), which in turn caused more collapses. Tons of debris were piled onto the B6 level floor. A steel fire door that opens to the B2 level from a stairway from the B1 level was blown off it's hinges and embedded into a wall 35 feet away.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://webpages.shepherd.edu/RARMST01/Attack1%20Info.htm">webpages.shepherd.edu/RAR...20Info.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>After assessment of the explosive damage to the complex, it was very clear that the structural integrity of World Trade Center Tower Number One was at risk. It also appeared that the Vista Hotel would probably collapse within days if structural steel support was not in place as soon as possible. However, structural problems were not the only safety hazard.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fourthbase>FourthBase</A> at: 8/27/06 2:08 pm<br></i>
