Those two towers were shot at and set on fire during the siege of Sarajevo in Bosnian war

Those two towers were shot at and set on fire during the siege of Sarajevo in Bosnian war.

How come they still stand to this day, but WTC towers collapsed immediately?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_767#Specifications
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Because they weren't lined with thermite and a tactical nuke didn't explode in their basement.

Tough question.
Wish I had an answer for you, user.

Jet fuel cant melt steel beams

american airlines were hauling extra peanuts that day.

IT WAS DA JOOS!!!

Obviously there was no jet fuel used in the destruction of those slavstacks.

Because they were of a different design, and they didn't have the same design flaw. When the one floor collapsed on the towers, the floors above it slammed down. It was like a giant Jack hammer.

they are much lower

there was no tactical nuke. you fell for some disinfo

Jet fuel

ASBESTOS YOU IDIOT

t. chemical engineer

When you go back and look at what the US did to the Serbs over Kosovo--really a gang of Jews like Albright, Cohen, Clark-- they must have, rightly, been celebrating 9/11.

We used to have a few cool serbs on here, but now the only one I've seen in a while is either a cuck or using a proxy.

Oy vey! Magic wonders made them collapse.

yugo engineering best engineering

Because despite what you shitposters and tinfoilhatted retards mindlessly spout, jetfuel actually does melt steel beams and buildings in Manhattan, such as the WTC towers, were designed to implode in such an emergency rather than topple over like dominos and take out half the island.

Now quote this post and shitpost away.

>T WAS DA JOOS!!
I suppose you think that's a joke-- have you ever actually looked at the evidence of Jewish involvement in 9/11?

And no, I don't mean Alex jones type insanity. I mean actual networks confirming ISrael had over 200 spies in the US at the time. I'd be happy to link you to the Fox news report from Oct., 2001.

It only survived bc it was copied off their website, they were made to stop running it after the first part when the jews panicked and made them stop airing it.

It's fire intensity that counts, I doubt those towers in your picture were doused in highly flammable and explosive jet fuel.

9/11 is a cover-up and World Trade Center 7 collapse is the smoking gun. Why is that so?? WTC-7 fully collapsed in a manner that resembles a controlled demolition and this building was not hit by any airplanes. For 2.25 seconds it collapsed at freefall and National Institute of Standards and Technology now admits this. In order for it to freefall for 2.25 seconds you need a uniform gap of approx. 80ft free of any physical impediments (equivalent of blowing out 7 floors almost instantaneously). Fire is not magic and cannot do that and only can be precisely done through human intervention. The owner of building 7 were Jewish.

‘Building 7' was a brilliant textbook demolition job. How many top Architects & Civil-Engineers for 9/11 Truth have since been involved in mysterious fatal accidents and suicides. The 4th airplane that crashed into the field was slated to crash into building 7 and something went wrong or maybe it got shot down. A small section of a building can't crush a much bigger lower section. In the process of crushing. energy is used up for the deformation, so the movement must slow down. Instead the downward movement accelerated constantly. So explosives removed (nearly) all the resistance or David Copperfield added energy to the downward movement by magic. Thats why building 7 was wired for demolition. They planned to crash that 4th plane into building 7 and then take it down 20-30 minutes later just like they did the Twin Towers. The plane didnt make it there…so they went to plan B. Hell..they even did a countdown right before they ” pulled it” as LARRY SILVERSTEIN (JEW) told a pbs reporter.
Only but the most naive, deluded, willfully ignorant and those immersed so deeply into their own Cognitive Dissonance that would willingly accept the myopic and narrow minded official government narrative surrounding 9/11 and especially WTC 7. What a pathetic joke these people are.

As for WTC1 and WTC2 a plane cannot bring down a building that is designed not to be brought down by a plane. further more if the plane was responsible for the building collapse it would have fallen sideways and not in a controlled demolition. 99% of the Jet fuel burned as massive fire balls outside of the buildings. You must be retarded if you think that some burning furniture can soften steel.

Well it was a joke and not really.
I do think that there is something behind the collapse of those towers, but is it the jews ?
Saudi arabia? the governement? I really dont know since there are some solid evidence for all of them

Someone called?

Not saying there wasn't something sinister going on, but the twin towers were made with an exoskeleton type design, whereas most other buildings use support beams evenly throughout the structure, not just on the outside.

t. dead of asbestosis

JET FUEL

Nah. You right.

Because they weren't rigged with termite steel cutting charges.

Look up on YouTube "Architects for 9/11."
It's credentialled professional after professional, architects, engineers, firefighters, introducing themselves to the camera, mentioning buildings they have designed or worked on that you can actually visit. Talking about how every office building fire in the world is exanined to understand how to prevent or minimize future fires. And all saying, yeah, this story does not add up.

I haven't agreed with a Norwegian post in a while.

A couple of these sure didn’t help

NIGEL DID 9/11

Dat order of adjectives.

must you really ask?

must you really want to listen to the same arguments?

Now get i to post this

>be working goyim in wtc heading downstairs out of the wtc after jet impact
>told everything was alright and to return back to your posts.
>Thinking "awwww shieeet they lied to me" as I collapsed with the towers.

I never said I disagree with you, just that your order of adjectives set off my autism.

youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA
Those buildings never got two 747 boeings to the face at full ramming speed

Should have used russian "built like tanks" airplanes not sissy western aluminum soda cans.

because a heavy plane going on full speed is a lot of kinetic energy that is gonna turn into heat in case of an inelastic collision
basic physics

So basically

"Blah blah blah; I'm gay"

Did I get everything?

Jews did 9/11

don't you have a Sharia street patrol to get to Ahmet?

No one did that though, we aren't Muslim.

...

Shut up, Mohammed.

...

Nor did the twin towers you mong.

The amount of people who think that 747s hit them is staggering.

>"Blah blah blah; I'm a russian kike"

fix'd 4 jew

Muhammad's a pedo faggot too. Fuck jews fuck muslims. You aren't gonna turn fellow whites against me schlomo.

tyvm

...

You realize jet fuel is just high octane gas right? High octane gas is actually less flamable than regular gas

>. I mean actual networks confirming ISrael had over 200 spies in the US at the time
And how many spies do you think USA has in Israel?

...

Good good goy you are doing Moshe's work sliding this board hehehehe.

No one believes that a 747 hit the towers. This is a 747

>I call you a mudslime,
>You call me a Jew
Let me just spin the meme wheel...

Go lose to an Emu abbo faggot

Not enough to stop Mossad pulling of 9/11, if the US ever had any intention to stop 9/11 from happening anyway.

Spoiler alert: they didn't.

>> you fell for disinfo
Kek

Jet Fuel cant melt steel beams.

There have been countless accident involving skyscrapers in history, where fire NEVER put such a building to the ground, and absolutely not in a matter of seconds!!

Every skyscraper is designed specifically NOT to fall apart fire, and have been this way since 1930s. Because fire high up in a level should not affect the whole building.

>As for WTC1 and WTC2 a plane cannot bring down a building that is designed not to be brought down by a plane
Stop living up to the stereotype, WTC1 and WTC2 were designed to handle small personal aircraft's. They were not designed to withstand an impact from an object that has a weight of over 55 000 kg.

That was my point and yet I still see people post that it was 747s. I guess it's just because its such a well known plane but it's still retarded.

I think you might want to give that wheel another spin you blind fucking spastic, getting shitfaced at 11am is it mate? Sort your fuckin life out.

completely wrong, the head designer of wtc said they designed to take a hit from a 747 in a documentary about the towers, search youtube

Don't listen to all this termite bullshit ITT. It's simply a matter of building more or less chealy and getting structural strength for the money. For example the Empire State Building also wouldn't have collapsed.

It's a fact that the WTC was built very cheaply. Weight was carried by the core and the fassade. damage the fassade and soften the beams between the fassade and the core through fire, and the whole thing will give.

Oh look a Chav

Nope you're right. 9/11 being a controlled demolition is misinformation, the real issue is that the government knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it.

Link me

I dont know, were they shot at with 2 100 ton, 200 feet bullets?

FPBP

It was the vast rooms of paper archives that burned the hottest.

>mfw an american tells me he honestly believes his government would never plan an attack against its own citizens

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

LMAO

YANKS ARE DELUDED

fire didn't have enough time to weaken the steel used

Minimum 16 hours, and that's a raging inferno type of fire before the steel begins to weaken.

WTC is such an obvious false flag it's amazing people honestly believe the official story

The buildings survived hurricane speed winds for decades.

what makes you think a shabby aluminum passenger jet would take it down?

...

kys yid.

For the first time i believe that they werent imploded with explosives.

But we obviously let them crash the planes imto the TT so we could go to war.

They also stopped fireproofing the structure past the 37th floors to save money. The building had no tolerance for damage, it barely supported itself, but it was built for less than contemporary buildings.

The whole thing could have been toppled by a guy with a sledge hammer breaking the supports over the course of a weekend in the underground parking structure. It was not a safe building.

It was insured for several billion though.

HEIFT cant melt steel beams!!!

55 000 kg going at 950 km/h

i don't think it's especially controversial to assert that Israel were involved in 9 eleven in some capacity, though stuff about staged demolitions is debunked nonsense

Jet fuel cant melt steel beams

>It was insured for several billion though.
Point me towards a skyscraper that isn't, especially one that was the target of a terrorist attack before.

Except that they both did survive the impacts. It was the resulting fires that supposedly brought them down.

Because it has 100 tons and impacts at speed of 800 km/h while being full of fuel.

>fire didn't have enough time to weaken the steel used
One hour continued exposure is quite enough.

It's not the same thing.

How do you know they weighed 55,000?

did you weigh them or something?

boy the shills are out in full force, as usual.


how much is JIDF paying to shill anyways?

Dont forget the steel doesnt need to fucking melt, if it gets hot enough its bends easily, especially with 9001 stories pushing down on it.

I know, and WTC1 and 2 might have been designed to withstand the impact and the weight of a small personal aircraft. But not a airbuss

It's like design a fence to withstand a car, only to then have a truck hit it instead.

What I would like to know is how after 15 years people still think that a large passenger plane could not take down a tower.

After seeing how large those are. After seeing how fast they are.

Those planes are like gigantic missiles. The main reason they aren't used in the military to blow up enemies is because they are so expensive to make compared to regular missiles.

>I can't respond to argument and I don't understand basic physics, better call him JIDF

No, it really isn't.

to be desu I dont think those towers were made to withstand jewish tricks

I looked it up, the plane alone is over 55 000 kg. Now imagine how much is must have weight with passengers, luggage, fuel and other material.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_767#Specifications

>wasting time debating with mount nigger

no one takes you fucks seriously either

What's funny is that they could still argue it's a conspiracy even though planes did it. But they are too dumb to consider different angles. It's like anti-vaccine people, normie conspiracies. The less someone knows the more he's inclined to see conspiracies everywhere.

They weren't hit by 767s flying at the speed of a .45 handgun bullet.

You would think the fact that a Cheney founded thinktank of NeoCons published a report which stated "Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a
new Pearl Harbor." would have been enough to wake people up. But 15 years later and it's still PURE COINCIDENCE.

And then there is the physics involved, some people were pointing out that the towers started to act like a blast furnace when it got hit.

>ad hominem