It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 First Responder Heard WTC 7 Demolition Countdown(Video added)

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:42 AM
link   
why do you people buy this crap have u nothing better to do?




posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 03:52 AM
link   
The post above deserves no dignified response other than the one I just gave it in this sentence.

Captain: I disagree with your straw picking at william rodriguez and looking at that thread so did about 90% of the people who replied. Your "evidence" just didn't seem to be strong enough. Even if he for some reason had a reason to lie, there's still MANY testimonies of flashes and explosions that fit what he has described... before some of those testimonies came out, so, I think you're still ignoring facts here. There were other witnesses to very powerful explosions in the basement (testimonies you either haven't read/seen or have just ignored) and all you have to do is search for them. I would expect that someone supporting the official theory probably would do no such thing, so, I'm not surprised.





Explosions

Several individuals reported that they witnessed an explosion just before one of the towers collapsed. Battalion Chief John Sudnik said: “we heard . . . what sounded like a loud explosion and looked up and I saw tower two start coming down” (NYT, Sudnick, p. 4).

Several people reported multiple explosions. Paramedic Kevin Darnowski said: "I heard three explosions, and then . . . tower two started to come down” (NYT, Darnowski, p. 8).

Firefighter Thomas Turilli said, “it almost sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight" (NYT, Turilli, p. 4).

Craig Carlsen said that he and other firefighters “heard explosions coming from . . . the south tower. . . . There were about ten explosions. . . . We then realized the building started to come down” (NYT, Carlsen, pp. 5-6).

Firefighter Joseph Meola said, “it looked like the building was blowing out on all four sides. We actually heard the pops" (NYT, Meola, p. 5).

Paramedic Daniel Rivera also mentioned “pops.” Asked how he knew that the south tower was coming down, he said:

It was a frigging noise. At first I thought it was---do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'? . . . I thought it was that. (NYT, Rivera, p. 9)


Collapse Beginning below the Strike Zone and Fire

According to the official account, the “pancaking” began when the floors above the hole caused by the airplane fell on the floors below. Some witnesses reported, however, that the collapse of the south tower began somewhat lower.

Timothy Burke said that “the building popped, lower than the fire. . . . I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion” (NYT, Burke, pp. 8-9).

Firefighter Edward Cachia said: “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . . [W]e originally had thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down” (NYT, Cachia, p. 5).

The importance of these observations is reinforced by the fact that the authors of the NIST Report, after having released a draft to the public, felt the need to add the following statement to the Executive Summary:

NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. . . . Instead, photos and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward.

Firefighters Burke and Cachia presumably now need to ask themselves: What are you going to believe, your own eyes or an official government report?



[edit on 21-9-2007 by KnowledgeisPower1]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 03:58 AM
link   
There are so many things showing that 9/11 was a inside job, but some people will rather die than believe their government did this to them.

Some suitable Hitler quotes:

- “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
- “How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.”
- “It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge.”



[edit on 21-9-2007 by Copernicus]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 04:12 AM
link   
Yeah, Hitler taught us a few things. By the time Germany knew what was going on, it was already a police state.

Some more testimonies that kill the official report.



Flashes and Demolition Rings

Some of the witnesses spoke of flashes and of phenomena suggestive of demolition rings. Assistant Commissioner Stephen Gregory said: “I thought . . . before . . . No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. . . . I . . . saw a flash flash flash . . . [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?” (NYT, Gregory, pp. 14-16).

Captain Karin Deshore said: “Somewhere around the middle . . . there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. . . . [W]ith each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building" (NYT, Deshore, p. 15).

Firefighter Richard Banaciski said: “[T]here was just an explosion. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions” (NYT, Banaciski, pp. 3-4).

Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick said: “It looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building. . . . My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV" (NYT, Fitzpatrick, pp. 13-14).



Horizontal Ejections

A few witnesses spoke of horizontal ejections. Chief Frank Cruthers said: “There was what appeared to be . . . an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse” (NYT, Cruthers, p. 4).

This testimony is important, because the official theory holds that the ejections were produced by the floors collapsing. So listen to firefighter James Curran, who said: “I looked back and . . . I heard like every floor went chu-chu-chu. I looked back and from the pressure everything was getting blown out of the floors before it actually collapsed" (NYT, Curran, pp. 10-11).

Battalion Chief Brian Dixon said, “the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because . . . everything blew out on the one floor" (NYT, Dixon, p. 15).[44]



Synchronized Explosions

Some witnesses said that the explosions seemed to be synchronized. For example, firefighter Kenneth Rogers said, “there was an explosion in the south tower. . . . I kept watching. Floor after floor after floor. One floor under another after another . . . [I]t looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing" (NYT, Rogers, pp. 3-4).[45]


Why Does the Public Not Know of These Reports?

If all these firefighters and medical workers witnessed all these phenomena suggestive of controlled demolition, it might be wondered why the public does not know this. Part of the answer is provided by Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman Paul Isaac. Having said that “there were definitely bombs in those buildings,” Isaac added that “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact” (Lavello, n.d.). Another part of the answer is that when a few people, like Isaac and William Rodriguez, have spoken out, the mainstream press has failed to report their statements.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 05:02 AM
link   
For those of you wondering what the hell that "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom" is that they're all talking about...

www.youtube.com...

The audio from the clip is real. I have the documentary "Inside the Twin Towers" from Discovery Channel and those booms are loud and clear... Not to mention VERY sobering on a surround system.



One man's independent research into the "explosion" claims where he takes a very fair and open-minded approach to the topic. Very interesting.

www.youtube.com...

So buddy... I'm assuming that you were not standing next to the friggin' towers when they came down. Well, these people were. There WERE explosions. Are you saying that these firemen and all these other people are just like (how you claim him to be) William Rodriguez (who turned down money to be silenced) and are liars? That they didn't hear what they heard, or saw what they saw? Cause... you weren't there. They were.

Still feel like you have anything whatsoever to defend your case in light of this evidence?

By the way, here's a little clip of two rapid and successive blasts coming from the foot of WTC7. Their chief says, "You gotta get back! Seven's exploding!" Priceless.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 21-9-2007 by KnowledgeisPower1]


six

posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by KnowledgeisPower1
 

I watched and listened to the video about 6 or 7 times. The one thing that sticks out to me is the explosions are so prononced as compared to the rest of the background noises. All the background noises seemed to be muffled/muted. Even when the tower is collapsing, you still hear the explosions way above the noise of the tower collapsing. It just doesnt seem real to me. Explosions that pronounced, above the noise of a collapsing building, would leave a very large signature that just isnt seen.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   
And we're supposed to believe this first responder because??????
he says so?



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 06:10 PM
link   
You're supposed to believe the first responder because he was there and you weren't. And his description matches other's. That was my point. It did leave a large signature: 175+ or so testimonies describing it

Again, the audio is real. It's even on a Discovery Channel mainstream documentary. The pops are still there.

BTW, did you even notice the puffs coming out of the wall of the building WAY below the demolition wave? The puff on the bottom comes out a millisecond before the one above it does.

Did you watch the "Seven is Exploding" clip? Where did the two explosions in that clip come from? It hasn't been explained officially. That's for sure.

[edit on 21-9-2007 by KnowledgeisPower1]

[edit on 21-9-2007 by KnowledgeisPower1]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 07:22 PM
link   
9/11 commission report states the planes were not a cause of the collapse.

www.9-11commission.gov...

The Twin Towers didn't collapse because of the impact of the jets crashing into them. The intense heat of the burning jet fuel snuffed out the buildings' fire control systems before they could do any good, and then the structural steel melted.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 12:48 AM
link   
... Are you stating that as fact?



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by KnowledgeisPower1
... Are you stating that as fact?


Well its the only thing we have to go on.

We do not have the FBI and NTSB crime scene reports.

Thats why i am doing more research to trfy to find out what reaslly happened that day instead fo just going by what the media has told us.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious


Redge777

If you were on the inside and you had a man on the ground, would you put him in a black cloak and a Darth Vader Helmet? No you would give him a uniform from the red cross, or a construction worker outfit, or a medical worker's clothing .


exactly this could be very true! I have also been thinking this for sometime. I recall hearing reports that a fireman (or someone dressed as a fireman) knew well ahead of time and was asking people to leave which initially raised my suspicion.


even more credible when considering the recent story about Police dressing up as thugs at that protest in Montebello and trying to incite a riot by attacking their fellow police officers.

These people are creative.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 09:45 AM
link   
OMG! I think if you all want to talk about conspiracy theories then do your homework. Research where the Red Cross originated from and get back to me. Every fire-engine, ambulance and policecar sports the symbols of Illuminati control. The cross, the star etc. Also I would like to point out that blocks in the city going uptown/downtown are NOT that big so people could be in harm's way even if they were a block away. I would not even want to be 10 blocks away from that when it was happening. The smell afterward was very weird-like burnt electronics and persisted for several weeks afterward. Fortunately I was upstate in Buffalo, NY and had left the day before. My husband walked into Manhattan over the Brooklyn Bridge and saw people covered in white dust and blood. Places that had nothing to do with 9/11 were under "supervision" by plainclothes "agents" asking for I.D. My husband had even quoted another person several weeks after that our own govt. did this. It had bothered me ever since then.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Where did you come up with the idea that people think the towers collapsed from the impact of the planes? LOL. Have you actually read any OTHER reports about this? There WAS NOT enough heat generated for a long enough time to melt steal girders to cause this. I studied metallurgy in college. I have worked in a forge. Do you understand how much heat is needed to even weaken the girders to the point of collapsing? Obviously not as your statement reveals this clearly. True patriots want the real truth not the FOX TV generated version thereof...



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Phase_diag_iron_carbon-color_temp.png (409 × 379 pixel, file size: 7 KB, MIME type: image/png)

Steel is an alloy consisting mostly of iron, with a carbon content between 0.02% and 1.7 or 2.04% by weight (C:1000–10,8.67Fe), depending on grade. Carbon is the most cost-effective alloying material for iron, but various other alloying elements are used such as manganese and tungsten.[1] Carbon and other elements act as a hardening agent, preventing dislocations in the iron atom crystal lattice from sliding past one another. Varying the amount of alloying elements and form of their presence in the steel (solute elements, precipitated phase) controls qualities such as the hardness, ductility, and tensile strength of the resulting steel. Steel with increased carbon content can be made harder and stronger than iron, but is also more brittle. The maximum solubility of carbon in iron (in austenite region) is 2.14% by weight, occurring at 1149 °C; higher concentrations of carbon or lower temperatures will produce cementite. Alloys with higher carbon content than this are known as cast iron because of their lower melting point.[1] Steel is also to be distinguished from wrought iron containing only a very small amount of other elements, but containing 1–3% by weight of slag in the form of particles elongated in one direction, giving the iron a characteristic grain. It is more rust-resistant than steel and welds more easily. But at present time this term is rarely used in steel industry. It is common today to talk about 'the iron and steel industry' as if it were a single entity, but historically they were separate products.

PLEASE EVERYBODY RESEARCH PHYSICISTS SPEAKING ABOUT 9/11 and the structural capabilites of the building. They speak out AGAINST the possibility that the girders melted.

[edit on 22-9-2007 by varickwt]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by onthefence81
 


and what does THAT mean? You are here too, so I guess you have nothing better to do either.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by varickwt
[
Where did you come up with the idea that people think the towers collapsed from the impact of the planes? LOL. Have you actually read any OTHER reports about this? There WAS NOT enough heat generated for a long enough time to melt steal girders to cause this. I studied metallurgy in college. I have worked in a forge. Do you understand how much heat is needed to even weaken the girders to the point of collapsing? Obviously not as your statement reveals this clearly. True patriots want the real truth not the FOX TV generated version thereof...


I have been debating with people that beleive the official story and that the planes impacts helped cause the collapse of the towers, even though all the reports have stated they did not.

I also have stated from all the rpeorts that show the fires did not last long enough or get hot enough to wekean the steel. But you have a hard time getting this across to people that believe what they see on TV or hear in the media.

The 9/11 commission report states that the fires melted the steel in the towers.

www.9-11commission.gov...

The Twin Towers didn't collapse because of the impact of the jets crashing into them. The intense heat of the burning jet fuel snuffed out the buildings' fire control systems before they could do any good, and then the structural steel melted. We need new Federal standards for building materials and design.




[edit on 22-9-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
www.9-11commission.gov...

The Twin Towers didn't collapse because of the impact of the jets crashing into them. The intense heat of the burning jet fuel snuffed out the buildings' fire control systems before they could do any good, and then the structural steel melted. We need new Federal standards for building materials and design.



Enter NIST. Funny how, so far, all they've changed in the building codes is easier access (stairways) and such. I wonder why they haven't changed any codes dealing with steel if the steel melted?

p.s. I know the steel didn't melt.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
[Enter NIST. Funny how, so far, all they've changed in the building codes is easier access (stairways) and such. I wonder why they haven't changed any codes dealing with steel if the steel melted?

p.s. I know the steel didn't melt.


Funny how NIST keeps changing thier reports too.

I was just showing how the 9/11 official story is so full of left out or missing information. It also keeps contridicting itself.



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I was just showing how the 9/11 official story is so full of left out or missing information. It also keeps contridicting itself.


I've actually kept up with the conversation and know what you are getting at. I still want to know how angle clips can shear box columns in 2 places. But, that's another thread.




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join