I have not heard this mentioned anywhere. After researching refridgeration and the EPA fanaticism, as a kind of hobby, I stumbled upon the 1993 bombing of the WTC. That attack directly took out the HVAC system. As a result they put in a new system and of course changed the AC system from R12 to R134. This was exactly the time frame that this switched was being regulated and forced on people's houses and cars as many of you would recall or have dealt with. Well here is what is startling about that. R12 was developed by General Motors for cars to be a firesafe refridgerant. R134 is flammable. In addition to this, the 2001 attack was right around the time frame Asbestos was being removed. Imagine that. Both attacks happened at exactly the time frames to make those buildings much more vulnerable to fire.
This proposal would be debunked if the refrigerant was all contained safely during the attack. However also keep in mind the reports of explosions at lower floors of the buildings during the 911 attacks.
This raises more issues. I understand there were dancing Israelies and the insurance claims on the buildings. I understand Bush's ties with the house of Saud. I understand he is Skull and Bones. I've seen the arguments for thermite etc etc. This proposal does not negate any of those issues or involvements.
I'm just proposing what I have not seen talked about any where and that is the "envirnomentalist" involvement and how cultural jihad is using that as a weapon against us.
Please note the point at which R-134 burns is around the temperature that plane fuel burns. Also note that it really is "oxygen" that is burning. With the lower windows of the buildings blown out at streaming air going up the middle shafts of the buildings the core of the building would have been hollowed out in an inferno of heat with no asbestos to stop it and plenty of R-134 which burns like propane.
This brings up a much larger issue as the planning of the attacks were over many more years than expected and the manipulation of our US policy much broader in scope.
In a similiar fasion, what "enviromentalist" initiatives by Hussein O. did not cause major damage to our nations securtiy, safety or simply economy? Virtually all of them were a disaster and perhaps more purposeful sabotage. It's even argued that R134 is worse for so-called greenhouse gases than R12 was. I think his initiative to send his little terrorist friends to hijack roads here and run trucks into crowds in Europe was to get the West into driverless electric cars etc. That's a side tangent.
Please consider, because the Freedom Tower for example has flammable R-134 last I checked. Regardless of thermite hypothesis, why not have the phenomenol firesafe properties of R12 and Asbestos? Why have these firesafe products been lied about and demonized?