NYT BOMBSHELL: Significantly MORE 9/11 NEGLIGENCE Than Has Been Disclosed

[freedom fighter jh]

291. Please name a "real expert" or two.

But why do I argue? Yes, of course there was a loss of structural integrity. Yes, it looks like there was buckling, at least in the towers, and it would make sense that that happened because of a loss of bracing -- after all, it's bracing that prevents buckling.

But what's this business about safety margins being meaningless? To prevent loss of structural integrity and ensuing collapse is what safety margins are *for*. Are you saying the design theory is flawed? What would be your basis for that?

There was, as you say, a loss of structural integrity. There had to be a cause for that. Fire doesn't begin to explain it, but there is lots of evidence of explosives, from observations of what looked like explosions from the outside to testimony of first responders saying there were massive explosions -- not vague booms in the distance but explosions that threw them across rooms.