Ground Zero Footage

All,

What struck me after watching the entire video was the clean people in the mix.

You have all these dust covered responders running around and civilians being pulled out choking from the dust and gagging...

Then low and behold here are nicely dressed folks calmly walking through the building without a speck of dust on them acting all calm and collected....at one point conversing if everyone was out of the building... And the secret service guy in his garb and what ever that was he had over his head...it all looked way to clean..

It just seemed odd to see that down there with all the destruction and others who were as disheveled as they were.

Anyone else find that odd?

a reply to: _BoneZ_

Not sure why it fell like it did, you'd think it would have given out first at the point of impact. But I will say that with the way it fell it most likely save a lot of other people. If it upper half tipped over like many think it should have the amount of people the could have been hurt or killed would have gone way up.

Just on a side note at the photo what are the two little gray jets coming out just below the impact on the right side of the building? Is that a camera glitch?

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: 8675309jenny
Wow, your really upset. Can you tell me what aspect a mechanical engineer would have building a sky scraper? Tell you what, next big job I get I'll call you when I want someone to tell me how to pump the water. K buds

The only one I see getting upset is you. In quite an embarrassing, uninformed, and ignorant manner I might add. Maybe that kid in your picture can teach you how to be more mature.

originally posted by: Hendrick99

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: 8675309jenny
Wow, your really upset. Can you tell me what aspect a mechanical engineer would have building a sky scraper? Tell you what, next big job I get I'll call you when I want someone to tell me how to pump the water. K buds

The only one I see getting upset is you. In quite an embarrassing, uninformed, and ignorant manner I might add. Maybe that kid in your picture can teach you how to be more mature.

That "kid" in my avatar is my son and I appreciate you not pitting him against me as a form of insult.

Why is it that those that swallow the official story without question get so bent out of shape when someone challenges it? Nothing but insults. If you are so sure that the MSM tells the truth, then what are you even doing here?

What a perfect demolition for a "spontaneous pull"..

a reply to: MALBOSIA



This IS NOT A TWO MASS collision that the truth movement believers think, you can't look at the Twin Towers collapse as mass (A) BEING LESS THAN MASS (B).

The floor area is 42,000 sq feet when material fell the part of the structure that would be impacted most would be THE FLOOR SLABS! , that is painfully obvious to anyone with any common sennse, the pancaking did NOT cause the collapse the collapse was initiated by the structural damage and the effects of the fire here is a picture showing the wall BOWING before the collapse.

Bowing Wall

When any mass from above falls on the FLOOR SLAB below ONLY the connections of that slab can try to absorb the DYNAMIC LOAD, the weight of concrete alone on each floor slab would be 800 TONS + , the trusses were supported at both ends by a piece of steel angle seen in this picture below. Those connections were the same for every floor apart from the service floors (3 irrc)

Floor Supports

Some people on here seem to think that if these floors fall some from 1300+ there should be a nice neat pile at the bottom, the concrete was only 4.5 inches thick even neatly stacked 110 x 4.5 inches is only 41.25 feet.

The walls were damaged by the impact so was the core, the walls were designed to take the wind loads , most of the dead load by the cores, the damage and the heat from the fires cause a reduction in load capcity the walls bowed the collapse happened, the the bulk of the load FELL through the floorslab's as each slab was impacted it failed, that reduced the restarint provided to the walls an they peeled away.

If you think a PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE can't happen well here is another example.

Progreesive Collapse

Shortly after lunch, some workers observed slab deflections of about 6 inches to 2 feet (150 to 600 mm) for both the 23rd floor slab and the freshly placed 24th floor slab. The freshly placed section of the 24th floor slab then fell onto the 23rd floor slab, starting a collapse that continued all the way to the foundation

The building’s collapse removed the edge support from the parking garage, and falling debris triggered the failure of the garage

Each floor was to be 9 ft (3m) from top of slab to top of slab

That 9ft is less than the floor heights for the twin towers the mass is far smaller yet it still fell all the way the the bottom of the structure.

The only thing that stopped the whole structure from falling was each building had a dividing wall and there own floor slabs.

Now think about that!!!

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: MALBOSIA



This IS NOT A TWO MASS collision that the truth movement believers think, you can't look at the Twin Towers collapse as mass (A) BEING LESS THAN MASS (B).

The floor area is 42,000 sq feet when material fell the part of the structure that would be impacted most would be THE FLOOR SLABS! , that is painfully obvious to anyone with any common sennse, the pancaking did NOT cause the collapse the collapse was initiated by the structural damage and the effects of the fire here is a picture showing the wall BOWING before the collapse.

Bowing Wall

When any mass from above falls on the FLOOR SLAB below ONLY the connections of that slab can try to absorb the DYNAMIC LOAD, the weight of concrete alone on each floor slab would be 800 TONS + , the trusses were supported at both ends by a piece of steel angle seen in this picture below. Those connections were the same for every floor apart from the service floors (3 irrc)

Floor Supports

Some people on here seem to think that if these floors fall some from 1300+ there should be a nice neat pile at the bottom, the concrete was only 4.5 inches thick even neatly stacked 110 x 4.5 inches is only 41.25 feet.

The walls were damaged by the impact so was the core, the walls were designed to take the wind loads , most of the dead load by the cores, the damage and the heat from the fires cause a reduction in load capcity the walls bowed the collapse happened, the the bulk of the load FELL through the floorslab's as each slab was impacted it failed, that reduced the restarint provided to the walls an they peeled away.

If you think a PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE can't happen well here is another example.

Progreesive Collapse

Shortly after lunch, some workers observed slab deflections of about 6 inches to 2 feet (150 to 600 mm) for both the 23rd floor slab and the freshly placed 24th floor slab. The freshly placed section of the 24th floor slab then fell onto the 23rd floor slab, starting a collapse that continued all the way to the foundation

The building’s collapse removed the edge support from the parking garage, and falling debris triggered the failure of the garage

Each floor was to be 9 ft (3m) from top of slab to top of slab

That 9ft is less than the floor heights for the twin towers the mass is far smaller yet it still fell all the way the the bottom of the structure.

The only thing that stopped the whole structure from falling was each building had a dividing wall and there own floor slabs.

Now think about that!!!

I am not arguing if what you say is possible but what you say didn't really happen as far as I can tell. For one those towers were blowing black smoke, and people were seen standing near the impacted sections trying to get air. Unless the heat your are talking about was somehow localized to the perimeter angle iron and core columns, the fires did not seem to be burning hot at all. But maybe it was somehow hot enough up there since there was molten metal found deep in the debris surviving with very little oxygen. That's weird unless it was a chemical reaction or something.

That picture you have of the building that pancaked... is there a video of that we can all see? I would love pull out my stop-watch on that golden egg.

a reply to: wmd_2008
Oh please.
Posting wonderful pictures will get you nowhere on a conspiracy site.

The bowing wall must have been an optical refraction from the heat.

And the floor connection plates were made from unobtainium and could not have failed.
Plus the floor trusses were made from bend proof anti-aircraft steel.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: MALBOSIA



This IS NOT A TWO MASS collision that the truth movement believers think, you can't look at the Twin Towers collapse as mass (A) BEING LESS THAN MASS (B).

The floor area is 42,000 sq feet when material fell the part of the structure that would be impacted most would be THE FLOOR SLABS! , that is painfully obvious to anyone with any common sennse, the pancaking did NOT cause the collapse the collapse was initiated by the structural damage and the effects of the fire here is a picture showing the wall BOWING before the collapse.

Bowing Wall

When any mass from above falls on the FLOOR SLAB below ONLY the connections of that slab can try to absorb the DYNAMIC LOAD, the weight of concrete alone on each floor slab would be 800 TONS + , the trusses were supported at both ends by a piece of steel angle seen in this picture below. Those connections were the same for every floor apart from the service floors (3 irrc)

Floor Supports

Some people on here seem to think that if these floors fall some from 1300+ there should be a nice neat pile at the bottom, the concrete was only 4.5 inches thick even neatly stacked 110 x 4.5 inches is only 41.25 feet.

The walls were damaged by the impact so was the core, the walls were designed to take the wind loads , most of the dead load by the cores, the damage and the heat from the fires cause a reduction in load capcity the walls bowed the collapse happened, the the bulk of the load FELL through the floorslab's as each slab was impacted it failed, that reduced the restarint provided to the walls an they peeled away.

If you think a PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE can't happen well here is another example.

Progreesive Collapse

Shortly after lunch, some workers observed slab deflections of about 6 inches to 2 feet (150 to 600 mm) for both the 23rd floor slab and the freshly placed 24th floor slab. The freshly placed section of the 24th floor slab then fell onto the 23rd floor slab, starting a collapse that continued all the way to the foundation

The building’s collapse removed the edge support from the parking garage, and falling debris triggered the failure of the garage

Each floor was to be 9 ft (3m) from top of slab to top of slab

That 9ft is less than the floor heights for the twin towers the mass is far smaller yet it still fell all the way the the bottom of the structure.

The only thing that stopped the whole structure from falling was each building had a dividing wall and there own floor slabs.

Now think about that!!!

I am not arguing if what you say is possible but what you say didn't really happen as far as I can tell. For one those towers were blowing black smoke, and people were seen standing near the impacted sections trying to get air. Unless the heat your are talking about was somehow localized to the perimeter angle iron and core columns, the fires did not seem to be burning hot at all. But maybe it was somehow hot enough up there since there was molten metal found deep in the debris surviving with very little oxygen. That's weird unless it was a chemical reaction or something.

That picture you have of the building that pancaked... is there a video of that we can all see? I would love pull out my stop-watch on that golden egg.

Dude..what a load of waffle. Go light a candle, that's could be 700 degrees. A single candle. I've stood opposite a large fire as an old building burnt down. I was about 30 metres away and I could feel it. That was outside where the heat had a vertical escape. It didnt have one here.

Did you read the debunking 9/11 link I posted a few pages back? Read the free fall fallacy in that. It'll answer and solve your confusion.

Also, molten steel in the remains would have nothing to do with the collapse. You're looking for two different events.

a reply to: ShadowLink

This guy identifies himself as Agent Bennette of the Secret Service. He is wearing a vest that has Secret Service Police on it. When the cameraman asks him his name and title, Bennette says that he is Secret Service and works in the OST. OST is Office of Secure Transportation. Look at this pdf which describes the duties of such an agent.

The Federal Agent, Nuclear Materials Courier Program The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is responsible, under law, for safeguarding and transporting nuclear weapons, components, and other sensitive nuclear materials between authorized destinations. In fulfilling that responsibility, the NNSA, through the Office of Secure Transportation (OST), employs, trains, and administers a work force of Federal Agents (Nuclear Material Couriers) whose primary responsibility is the safe and secure transport of such materials. Since 1974, OST has been assigned responsibility to develop, operate, and manage a system for the safe and secure transportation of all government-owned, NNSA- controlled special nuclear materials in “strategic” or “significant” quantities. Shipments are trans ported in specially designed equipment and are escorted by armed Agents. The NNSA/OST is looking for highly capable individuals who qualify for Federal Agent positions.

fmt.kcp.com...

That's interesting... the World Trade Center twin towers were an authorized destination for such material? Notice the weird "beekeeper" garment he is wearing? There's a yellow handbag type thing hanging from his shoulder that has the letters VRU on it. I researched what that thing is. VRU stands for Victim Rescue Unit. Here's a photo and link to Essex Industries who manufactures the ridiculous looking contraption.

www.officer.com...
www.essexindustries.com...

a reply to: Mikeultra

Here's a crazy thought. In his every day world of work he doesn't walk around with bags of uranium or imaginary micro nukes. He's a planner. Who works in an office. He plans how they move stuff. I noticed in that film a couple of trees. Trees have been known to fall over and crush little buildings. Just saying likes....

a reply to: scottyirnbru
You're right, that was a crazy thought! Have a dose of reality concerning Agent Bennette.

A Secret Service agent was arraigned Tuesday on charges he stole five of the agency's cars recovered from the World Trade Center site. According to a complaint unsealed in Brooklyn Federal Court, William Bennette, 52, has admitted to the theft. He surrendered to federal authorities Tuesday morning and was later released on $$75,000 bond. Bennette, a retired police officer who has worked for the Secret Service since 1999, was ordered to make an inventory of what was left of the agency's fleet of 179 vehicles assigned to the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Instead, according to investigators, he combed an auto graveyard in Brooklyn for unscathed cars. Bennette allegedly used forged government documents and receipts to make it look like the cars were sold to an auto repair shop in Brooklyn. He kept one for himself and gave cars to his mother and sister, and an employee of the auto shop got the last two, authorities say. His lawyer said trauma from the World Trade Center attack may have played a factor in Bennette’s actions.

www.ny1.com...

When called in to the Brooklyn field office for questioning on April 2, Mr. Bennette, who joined the Secret Service in 1999 after retiring from the New York Police Department, said he had forged signatures of agency managers to transfer the titles of the cars, the complaint says. At his arraignment yesterday in front of federal Magistrate Steven M. Gold, Mr. Bennette, wearing a black raincoat and a glum expression, said little other than ''Yes, sir'' and ''That is correct, sir.'' He was released after his wife signed a $75,000 bond. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison. Outside the courthouse, Mr. Lieberman said that while his client was not trying to minimize the charges, ''There is a personal side to this story that will come out as the case proceeds.'' He did not go into detail but said that Mr. Bennette had spent much of Sept. 11 helping rescue people at 7 World Trade Center before it collapsed at 5:30 p.m. He said that it would be up to mental health professionals to determine what effect the experience had had on Mr. Bennette.

www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: Mikeultra
the World Trade Center twin towers were an authorized destination for such material?

He was not in the twin towers, he was in Building 7 where there were Secret Service offices (among other government offices).

He just works from the building, not transporting materials to or from the building.

a reply to: scottyirnbru

Dude

Are you suggesting that the molten iron for 3 months is the result of burning office furnishings? Are you saying that the damage observed was the result of office fires and a natural gravitational collapse?

originally posted by: ObjectZero
what are the two little gray jets coming out just below the impact on the right side of the building? Is that a camera glitch?

As you'll notice, I included an image of a controlled demolition along with the image of the WTC for a comparison. In a controlled demolition, those "jets" are the result of high-powered explosives being detonated, which ejects dust and material out laterally in the area where the explosive was located.

The "official" theory is that those "jets" are from the floors compressing and ejecting air out a few windows. However there's a problem with this theory: once the building started collapsing, the floors were no longer "sealed", and thus couldn't create the kind of pressure to localize that kind of "jet" of dust/material, even if the theory had merit.

On top of that, when two square objects impact each other, the pressure is distributed along the length of each side. You can test this by dropping a large book on a dusty road or alley. There will never be a localized pressure jet from two large square objects impacting each other.

Another thing that destroys the "official theory" is that there were some "jets" seen as many as 60-floors below the collapse front where no floors were even collapsing to cause a theoretical pressure jet.


Now having said that, what's not a theory is that those "jets" of dust/debris have only ever been seen in controlled demolitions because they are a direct result of high-powered explosives being detonated, as I stated above.

Add on top of that the first responders, survivors, and by-standers heard "boom-boom-boom" as both towers were collapsing, and several first responders reported seeing red/orange flashes going "up, down and around" the towers on the lower floors as the buildings were collapsing above.


It is my opinion as a 9/11 researcher that those "jets" are high-powered explosives being detonated, removing the resistance and allowing the towers to collapse straight down. Add that along with the "boom" sounds and flashes of light inside the towers as they were collapsing, and you have all of the signs of a controlled demolition.

a reply to: _BoneZ_
I know he was in building 7. Did I say he was working in building 1 or 2? Did I say the video of Bennette was taken inside building 1 or 2? I just provided proof that this federal agent is a criminal! Did I not? What else was stolen from Building 7? What other crimes was Bennette a part of that day? How far is building 1 and 2 from building 7?

thanks op for the link to the footage. brought me back to that day. that noise from the rescue workers, that noise i will never forget. when i saw 7 on the side of the building i got chills. looks perfectly fine.

the "clean" people did strike me as odd.

also, it looked like there werent any people coming out of the second building before it collapsed. did they get everyone out?

also why were people just going in and out of 7

the other thing that struck me as odd is the amount of dust there was.. could help but feel sorry for the people breathing it in.. not knowing then what we know now.

incredible footage though. why is this the first time i saw it, 13 years after.

to anyone who believes the OS. all i say to you is northwoods.

to the truthers.. what about the no planes theories. just asking. because if there was anything that i remember from that day it was when i saw the second plane hit the tower on tv and it faded to black.. i remember thinking to my self. how do you # up a shot like this. then some years back i saw Septembers clues. but i dont know what to believe anymore. all i know is that they lied!

originally posted by: scottyirnbru

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: scottyirnbru

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


Are you saying all the footage supports progressive collapse? You must have seen different footage because ALL of the witness testimony from that morning as well as the footage of the collapse supports explosives. And there are many engineers to have spoken out, check out all the threads on here.

You clearly haven't watched much footage.

Watch a video of any controlled demolition and then watch the close-up videos of the towers collapsing.

In a controlled demolition, the building seems to consume itself from the bottom up. This is done on purpose so the top floors stay intact as they come down, creating a smaller footprint.

The WTC towers collapsed from the top down, starting with the upper most sections above the damaged area coming down onto the floors beneath.

I am not falling for that one. I never stated "controlled demolition" I said explosives. Just because explosives were used does not automatically mean CD. It just means the building was blown up in away we may not have seen before. Stop trying to fit it in a CD models. In fact stop with your models all together. This is real life son.

So your evidence that explosives were used is the fireball being pushed out of the building by the rushing air of the collapse? You're gonna have to come up with something better than that... son (I really wish there was an eye roll smiley for idiotic remarks like yours). In the closeups of the damaged portion, you can see the structure give way just before the fireball is expelled from the building.

This is real life, boy. The theory that explosives were used to collapse the buildings is fantasy and there isn't a single shred of evidence that suggests otherwise. All the truthers have is opinion, speculation, and photos that are easily debunked. Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence.

I will just go with eye-ball witnesses and leave the rest out. Firefighters, police EMT's news anchors... everyone on the morning of 9/11 reported hearing explosions. How does progressive collapse answer to that inconvenient truth.

Hmmm. There were two towers collapsing. They have mass. The movement of said mass may have caused materials to destruct. Have you ever crushed a concrete cube in a lab? Sometimes quiet, usually very noise. Ever tested the tensile strength or compressive strength of steel? Usually noisy. To say everyone heard explosions is wrong. You have hundreds of people experiencing an unprecedented event and you expect them to understand fully what happens. Unlikely.

Then you go tell all the first responders and everyone that survived that what they heard was wrong. They are not going off memory since the testimony I am referring is from the footage on the ground on 9/11.

One quote I can remember from a senior fire fighter "It's like they planned to bring down the building, boom, boom, boom" I'm busy right now but the footage is easy to find if you care.

www.debunking911.com...

It's all about context.

This is just some BS blog. What evidence did it put forth? Observations and opinions. No different than anyone else. That blog wouldn't last a minute of scrutiny on this site. Nice try.

Okay Kiddies, for the umpteenth time, I'm going to post the Jeff Prager NUKED material for your edification; maybe the OS supporters will actually read it this time, I remain ever hopeful...

Prager NUKED pt 1

Prager NUKED pt 2

You'll see photos you've never seen before, many of them uber-zoomable. You'll have to learn a bit about nuclear physics but he walks you through it. You'll actually know what you're talking about regarding what we saw that day, what the aftermath was like, what the evidence unequivocally showed, and a whole lot more!

Cheerio!

originally posted by: signalfire
Okay Kiddies, for the umpteenth time, I'm going to post the Jeff Prager NUKED material for your edification; maybe the OS supporters will actually read it this time, I remain ever hopeful...

Prager NUKED pt 1

Prager NUKED pt 2

You'll see photos you've never seen before, many of them uber-zoomable. You'll have to learn a bit about nuclear physics but he walks you through it. You'll actually know what you're talking about regarding what we saw that day, what the aftermath was like, what the evidence unequivocally showed, and a whole lot more!

Cheerio!

As interested as I am in your material, a direct link to a download is not cool. Maybe it is my phone settings but I really don't like downloading something I was not warned about.