Quote Originally Posted by MrDark71
I'm no pyrotechnical scholar ......but isn't it a touch risky to build a large skyscraper with explosives pre installed and allow it to sit for 25+ years? .....I understand the theory ....but I doubt the feasibility of it. It's just as easy to shut down sections of the building every now and then and install what ever is needed. It explains the power downs ....the relatively recent computer security electronics rewiring inder taken by Securacom a few years before ....and the random dust that would form over night in some offices that has been not only documented but video taped by one office. Great video .....but I just don't see how a structure that large and public can be constructed with explosives installed and nobody notice or accidentally weld a shaped charge whilst fixing that annoying loose handrail.
The key to the uniformity and fine breakage seen here is placement and distribution. Such placement and distribution are actully not practical in a contracted controlled demolition, they might not even be possible. C4 is very safe, if terrorists are not trying to blow it up with high explosives. I actually have no problem with it in a building that is not a target for such.

The powerdown and securacom aspect/ links had their purpose but it was the detonation systems rather than the explosives themselves.

Americans are religiously disabled from understanding what is possible with the unconscious mind. Unconscious is better than secret. And there were leaks, they were just insignificant after 33 years.

The C4 was in very descrete places and security controlled the work around them absolutely. This was a significant part of the 1990 documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers".