| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 8:47 pm Post subject: Concrete Cores - is this how the towers were brought down? |
 |
|
Were the cores of the Twin Towers really made largely from concrete (contrary to official claims and the recently released blueprints) and were they preloaded with C4 explosives?
This radical theory is proposed by welder and blast technologist Christopher Brown on his site here: http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html
This is a link to a thread about Brown's theory on Break for News forum:
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2854
Interviews with Brown can be found here:
http://www.breakfornews.com/audio/NextLevel070628a.mp3
And here:
http://www.live365.com/stations/ronelar
Here is the blurb for that last interview from this page:
http://libertycalling.com
| Quote: | What if the Twin Towers were Built for Demolition?
Is it possible the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers were actually rigged for explosive demolition when they were designed and built three decades ago? That they were brought down by explosive demolition on 9/11?
Make your own decision. Listen to the live broadcasts and REPLAYS of physicist and talk show host Ron Larsen’s live interviews of land surveyor, welder, blasting technologist, 9/11 investigative journalist and author Christopher Brown on the Liberty Calling Beacon radio program, which is broadcast live from 9:00 until 10:00 AM CDT over the Liberty Calling Radio Network |
I have no idea what to make of this but the guy sounds genuine and clued up and it might well be true...
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Micpsi
Moderate Poster
Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Posts: 505
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm guessing you haven't visited the links, Micspi. Brown does not claim steel was not used in the core. He claims that concrete was.
I would be interested to know what you think of his analysis.
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
This idea isn't nearly wacky enough to catch on.
_________________
"Thought is faster than arrows, and truth is sharper than blades." - David Gemmell | RealityDown wiki |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallious wrote: | | This idea isn't nearly wacky enough to catch on. |
LOL - you're probably right. But sometimes the truth isn't perhaps as exotic or exciting as the Trekkie in us might like.
The claimed strength of Brown's case is that it explains the amount of concrete seen in the collapses and rubble and that so much of it was pulverised to very small sizes.
It also explains how the explosives could be wired so quickly as the job was largely done already and would only have needed finishing during, say, a power down or lift shaft overhaul, etc.
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
