0
2

[–] gAvenger 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Not only do the two towers invoke the Masonic pillars, but WTC had an unambiguous Masonic third pillar on the grounds. The symbolism of the pillars as the gate to the new world is unequivocal. Frightening really. The implication was that the towers were design with the intent that someday they would be brought down. Makes me wonder if the engineering was selected for controlled demolition in the first place- i.e.: strategic weak points built into the structure. These fuckers.

0
0

[–] Votescam ago 

No -- reports are the WTC towers were going to have to be brought down as they were put up -- with scaffolding which would have cost a huge amount of money. There's precedent for this as one of the NYC towers has been brought down this way. Unfortunately, I no longer have the info on that and couldn't turn it up in a search so probably difficult for you to believe -- but true. But, the WTC towers were to be brought down because of Asbestos problems -- they were also White Elephants which weren't renting. Heating and cooling the buildings were an immense problem. Demolition wasn't to be permitted.

The WTC towers were built to withstand not just one commercial jetliner flying into it but a number of them.

Notice that they've scrubbed references to "built to withstand a number of jets flying into them." And that's true as the designers made clear after 9/11 -- describing it as "flies flying into a screen door." WTC Towers Designed to Withstand Impact of Loaded Boeing 707
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fQlC2AIWrY http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html

0
0

[–] gAvenger ago 

I mean, they were secretly designed with a weak spot. I'm certain that the towers fell because of explosives internally at these weak spots.

0
0

[–] THE_LIES_OH_THE_LIES ago 

According to the Russian officer, they were intended to be brought down with nukes, when they were built. That's why it worked so well. It was the designed method.