(MUST SEE) The WTC Demolition explained - How they could have rigged the towers

[Mulder]

This video answers how they could have rigged the towers easily why jetfuel and external damage can ever in a million years of jetfuel fire cause even a partial collapse let alone an implosion.

AE911truth - Experts Speak out explain it with actual science. Any "expert" that supports the official theory is either afraid for his life or career or believes that by supporting the government story he might be approached by shadow government agents and get paid for his "services".

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3EQV223Y-M

[Paul]

I changed this thread's title, from:

(MUST SEE) The WTC Demolition finally explained - How did they rig the towers?

to:

(MUST SEE) The WTC Demolition explained - How they could have rigged the towers

I certainly agree with the video that the official story is bunkum, and that some sort of non-conventional explosive means was required to "dustify" (Judy Wood's term) the buildings that fast, into such fine dust.

Whether it was done entirely, or partially, by the means presented in the video, explosive boxes (perhaps even with nukes in them) planted every other floor ... that's conjecture in my view. This video does not conclusively demonstrate what was the actual means used.

[Arrowwind]

Nor does it account for why hundreds of cars parked on streets around the towesr had a meltdown of their door handles, their trunks popped open and their engines missing. Im still waiting for someone to explain this to me.

here is a youtube video that had been removed but someone had stored it.. It has info on some of the cars. All these melted cars but no melted people on the street?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3fTCD4hFq8

There are other film clips where reporters are noting what happened to the cars.. I may have seen it on some of Judy Woods videos. She says she doen't know what happened but she insinutates that it was some kind of enegy weapon... I cant rule out that perhaps conventional and an enegy weapon were used at the same time.

Im always astounded on how brain dead most Americans are on this issue.

[bearcow]

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pL0M5ST8jY

[Mulder]

I've only found these melted cars in the basement carpark. I didn't know there were cars parked on the street that had melted too. I wonder why this wasn't reported more widely, as their owners must have claimed insurance?[COLOR="red"]

¤=[Post Update]=¤



Thank you for the video of Steven Jones's presentation. He's a physicist from Brigham Young University & very competent.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Paul (here)
I changed this thread's title, from:

(MUST SEE) The WTC Demolition finally explained - How did they rig the towers?

to:

(MUST SEE) The WTC Demolition explained - How they could have rigged the towers

I certainly agree with the video that the official story is bunkum, and that some sort of non-conventional explosive means was required to "dustify" (Judy Wood's term) the buildings that fast, into such fine dust.

Whether it was done entirely, or partially, by the means presented in the video, explosive boxes (perhaps even with nukes in them) planted every other floor ... that's conjecture in my view. This video does not conclusively demonstrate what was the actual means used.

Thank you for your input. I personally like the moderators actually moderating when there's been typos, errors, or they are "getting the facts straight"

[MR Mojo]

The further you go down this rabbit hole the curiouser and curiouser it gets.

There are a lot of ways the towers "could have" come down but the hijacked plane story is about the only one that DOESN'T hold water.

Very clever cover stories but the PTB main defense is if you start to honestly question anything , people's eyes glaze over and immediately you know they're thinking you're a conspiracy nut.

Diversity is welcomed only if you agree with the mainstream sheeple.

[Mulder]

Here is another 9/11 video about the fuel in the building - indication a plane "really hit." I didn't want to start a new thread:

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmTIZG-MvzA