Explosions underneath the WTC Towers b4 they collapsed

Check out the link for the story.

Seismic graphs dont lie.


www.indymedia.org...


The seizmograph of the WTC is very wierd. A spike measuring an earthquake of 2.1 and 2.3 were made just b4 the two different towers went down.

These spikes are thigns that are able to let scientists know that a nuclear bomb has gone off underground...usually. But well it seems that some kind of explosion went off under the towers just b4 they went down....b4 any debris hit the ground...

btw...the towers actually rose intot he air just a moment b4 they went down (a helicoptor caught it)

So explosions at the base were made.

The towers WERE bought down intentionally...and not jsut by terrorists...

[edit on 8-5-2006 by Springer]

Shh, don't tell anybody, the WTC (where the terrorists were said to be people of middle-eastern dissent) was the United States of America's version of the Reichstag "terrorist attack" (where the terrorists were said to be the jews by Adolf Hitler himself, kinda funny that our great President Bush's family had ties with the infamous Furor Hitlah) in Germany.

Oh wait, but we're the USA, there is no corruption in our government, despite the overwhelming proof of it in many presidencies...



Even if there is corruption, just let it be! We're too afraid to do anything about it, since under Patriot Act 2 we will be classified as domestic terrorists, and will be exterminated or locked away forever, with out citizenship rights revoked.

Either way, most Americans are satisfied ignoring politics and just living their life working and providing for their family as slaves within the economy (hey you gotta pay taxes!! what better way to enslave your citizens without them even knowing it).

[Edited on 3-8-2003 by Attero Auctorita]

So... perhaps you might want to explain why the firemen and French film crew in the lobby of the North Tower didn't experience an explosion before the South Tower collapsed.

The entire, sequential event was caught on tape and broadcast several times... a low rumble as the South Tower started to fall, increasing to catastrophic volume as debris hit the ground.


Also, while it may be hard to find at this point, seismograph charts were published in local papers here (NYC) a few days after the event... showing the huge effect of the towers falling. No such pre-collapse event was seen.

I'm curious as to whether this whole thing is originating from the same yahoo who claimed that the seismic record showed two explosions at the Alfred P. Murrah building and then went on to foment a theory that there was no way a truck bomb could have caused the specific damage?

In how many threads will this link be posted?
Really.

It might lend more credence to this guy's theory if, I dunno, he included a graphic that one could actually READ? That seismograph is so tiny and blurry that it doesn't show me anything.

A "spike" isn't always indicitive of a bomb, let alone a nuclear one. In this case, I do theorize that if such a "spike" occured at such a time immediately before the visualized collapse of the towers, (and since that graphic is utter crap, I can only assume that's what it says), that the shock recorded on the seismo is a result of the steel support structure for a 110 story building giving way.
After all, the steel will transmit shock waves to its underground supports if something that big gives higher up.

-B.

if there explsions in the basement of the WTC then the sub structures would look totaly blown to hell. look at the pictures of ground zero when it's cleaned up. there is nothing there that could indicate that a bomb went off in there.

Well that.. And the towers fell from the top , They didnt colapse at the bottom.

Hi!

Will those of you there in person that day please raise your hands?

Oh ok that's what I thought.
I was.
There was no mysterious wacky earthquakes. There was creaking, there was bending steel, there was items falling, cracking, dropping, banging. All sorts of movement that would be expected with such stresses on the frame of 110 story buildings.

Give the needle graphs and papers a rest please. So tired of having these things rehashed again and again with the same thing. No, aliens didn't swallow the WTC, no, satan's face wasn't visible in it in person (unless you're a reporter for the Weekly World News), and No, mysterious underground detonations did not take place before they fell. Perhaps what you are confusing it with is structural movement and damage.

Let it be already.

[Edited on 8-4-2003 by Djarums]

-raising hand-

One side note.

A girl in our account office has a father who was working on the 91st floor of the North Tower when it was hit. Luckily, he was in the men's bathroom on the opposite side of the impact. It was a tough time in our office until we knew he was okay (not until 3PM). He stopped by two days later when we opened back up to thank everyone (his daugher needed comfort). He said he knew the building would eventually fall as soon as it was hit. He felt the building sway and vibrate so much, he thought it was going to fall then and there. (This account has been duplicated by several people.) He immediately ran out of the mens room, and ran down the stairs... about half the people on his floor didn't survive.

I'm glad to see some reason still resides here. Any instrument in place at the time of collapse could have picked up any number of vibrations from the structure.

As someone who deals with geotechnical instrumentation and also has a primary degree in the construction area, I can understand why such readings might have been present ( if they actually were). The function of a any large structure is the transmitting of the load to the ground. When those floors began to pancake down upon each other, the impact (which is just a very static load being applied with the help of gravity) was transmitted through the structure, to the footing and its piles, (whether they are bearing on rock or friction piles). This process coupled with the instensly consolidated soils and glacial till of that area would provide numerous ground shocks and floor after massive floor began to fall one to the next.

Now, as for the building rising up, I'd have to say footage from a helicopter is not conclusive enough because guess what also has the ability rise and fall in altitude. To determine this would take much more scientific means than someone in a hovering craft. My guess is the blast from the collapse affected the helicopter's control causing this. I'm not, however experienced with demolition but even I would question in a building rigged to be demolished, would the explosions not be latteral taking out main supports beams and in a building of such height and magnatude, is it possible by any means to actually cause its' top to rise? It all sounds very questionable.

Exactly like William said. Talk to anyone who was there and you'll find out the same thing. People who weren't there and have nothing better to do can always come up with fantastic stories about little green men with tin foil hats sabotaging the wtc.

Originally posted by DaRAGE

The towers WERE bought down intentionally...and not jsut by terrorists...

Come on

Anyone with two brain cells frictioning together knows that.

It was brought down in controlled demolition. Even the leading expert said that but later changed his mind.

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
if there explsions in the basement of the WTC then the sub structures would look totaly blown to hell.

I guess mR Conery doesnt know # about controled shape charged demolitions.

You dont need to nuke the whole block, all you need is 50g of explosives by supporting bars in several strategic places that make a nice and quiet detonation

come oN! .. what he means by controlled demolition is not that they actually took it down meaning to make it perfect, he means that it was planned, come on, you are not going to put explosives in strategic places in the building and make it collapse beautifully and then say it was... A TERRORIST ATTACK...



-realityfactor

Originally posted by realityfactor

come on, you are not going to put explosives in strategic places in the building and make it collapse beautifully and then say it was... A TERRORIST ATTACK

...

With Bush as our president and this government...I wouldn;t put ANYTHING past them. But I have heard from a few people that escaped the towers that most felt the building would collapse right then and there. I honestly dont think there were any big explosions though.

Originally posted by Djarums
Exactly like William said. Talk to anyone who was there and you'll find out the same thing. People who weren't there and have nothing better to do can always come up with fantastic stories about little green men with tin foil hats sabotaging the wtc.

So, you aren't counting these witnesses then?

www.americanfreepress.net...


Here is another interesting link:

www.serendipity.li...


And this link contains mountains of information:

thewebfairy.com...

What gets me is the length some people will go to in trying to blame the US for an attack committes against it.

Do you people realize that an entire decade before 9-11, AlQeada threatened to attack and did make several attempts..claiming responsibility for all of them.

During 9-11, Alqeada bragged and took credit for it..we even have tapes of Bin Laden praising the attackers and calling for more.

When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, smacks you in the face and says "hey dumba$$, I'm a duck!!" You can lay some credibility on the thought that just maybe its a damn duck!

Peace, for me to reply to that would be a disgrace to the fact that I volunteer as an emergency responder and was there.

I don't give a damn what "eyewitness account" a website posts. I am me. I was there. Period.

Those people need to go fold some 20 dollar bills, and maybe read a Ouija Board. Sorry... no takers here.

By the way, there was a small stockpile of federal controlled weapons (including some minor explosives) stored in one of the buildings. Do me a favor, don't ask me which building, and don't ask me what agency had them. That's not happening. Anyways, that should account for the pops. As for the claim that "they fell too straight" the concerns are moronic. Things are designed a certain way for a reason.

I am so tired of hearing garbage like this from people who know nothing and have no connection to any of this. Enough already. I don't give a damn who did it. All I know is 2 Planes wacked buildings in my neighborhood and they fell down because of it. I don't want to hear crap like "the government did it, or it was blown up by bombs inside etc"


[Edited on 8-8-2003 by Djarums]

Originally posted by Djarums
Enough already. I don't give a damn who did it. All I know is 2 Planes wacked buildings in my neighborhood and they fell down because of it.
[Edited on 8-8-2003 by Djarums]

Bizarre.

You want others to show empathy for you in that you were there to see what happened.

But you show no empathy for the families of people who died or citizens with an interest in their own security, who are compelled to know the truth of the matter.

Relative to the scale of other recent investigations (fatal incidents, sexual habits of ex Presidents), the resourcing provided to bring this matter to a close has been negligible. It is just a criminal cover-up, and it will not go away, for you or anyone else.

I fail to see how my not wanting to buy into conspiracy theories of what happened is a lack of sympathy for the familes of the people i went there to save, but um... interesting point i guess.

My point here is not to take away from what happened, it was to try and understand how people who weren't there can read articles written by people who weren't there, containining interviews with people who weren't there, and can suddenly consider themselves authorities on the matter. I personally do not care what university architects from colorado have to say about this occurance.

And do me a little favor... considering the fact that you don't know me, don't speak of my sympathy for myself. Thanks.