Thread: Korean Airlines Flight 007 survivors and other alleged conspiracies

А на это у сторонников теории заговора есть "простой" ответ: взрывчатка была заложена в здания во время их строительства.

And they waited for 30 years to blow it up?
Not to mention that out of thousands of construction workers some would have noticed something suspicious.

As throbert said - "fake hijacking" 4 remote controlled cargo planes is a lot easier...

Originally Posted by nulle

And they waited for 30 years to blow it up?
Not to mention that out of thousands of construction workers some would have noticed something suspicious.

Я не помню деталей, кажется, утверждалось, что это секретное условие контракта, чтобы башни можно было быстро снести, когда на их месте захотят построить что-нибудь ещё более грандиозное. Заряды можно заложить в балки на заводе и уже в таком виде привезти на строительную площадку. Но дело не в этом. Если известно, что башни взорваны и во время эксплуатации их невозможно было заминировать, из этого логически следует, что их заминировали, когда строили. Не так ли?

Если известно, что башни взорваны и во время эксплуатации их невозможно было заминировать, из этого логически следует, что их заминировали, когда строили. Не так ли?

But what makes you think that it was a controlled demolition in the first place?
And I have never heard of such practice - to plant explosives during construction.
(except maybe in some kind of top secret military facilities which can self destruct in case of enemy attack)

Originally Posted by nulle

But what makes you think that it was a controlled demolition in the first place?
And I have never heard of such practice - to plant explosives during construction.
(except maybe in some kind of top secret military facilities which can self destruct in case of enemy attack)

Common sense?

So fire and fragments melted steel so that it crumbled on top of itself and the entire buildings all fall into the next floors like buildings which are fallen via demolition?!?

Ok.

Also, people laugh at conspiracy but they don't care about liars?!? The USA SAID THEY FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION in Iraq. Iraq had collaborated with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda allowing the terrorists to carry out the plan? All of this has been proven false. They are blatant lies. It shows you can't trust them. No on talks about this. They concentrate on other things and have no evidence to support the official story. Also, you look at Building Number 7.

People are so indoctrinated and conditioned to believe the official story but if you don't, you are obstracized and ridiculed as a crazy person and not part of the society. It is a great society where free thinkers are celebrated, surely.

Originally Posted by Pavelov

So fire and fragments melted steel so that it crumbled on top of itself and the entire buildings all fall into the next floors like buildings which are fallen via demolition?!?

Not so much "melted" as "softened", but otherwise -- yes, DUH.



(Going back to my comment above about the history of the American slang "duuuuh", pay close attention to 0:18 and 1:27 in this мультик from 1961. The "Abominable Snowman" is a parody of the "Lennie" character from the 1939 film Of Mice and Men.)

Originally Posted by Pavelov

People are so indoctrinated and conditioned to believe the official story but if you don't, you are ostracized and ridiculed as a crazy person and not part of the society.

Well, Pavelov, at least you can find some small comfort in knowing that you're in the company of Galileo and Voltaire...

I guess the obvious question to ask self-described "9/11 Skeptics" who believe there were explosives in the WTC buildings would be:

Assuming for the sake of argument that there were no explosives, and only the fire from the jet fuel, how do you think the towers ought to have collapsed? Did you expect them to fall over like a tree cut by a lumberjack? Or do you believe that they should have only half-collapsed, to the level of the "crash zone" floors, while the lower structure remained intact?