New 9/11 witness and ground zero worker tells his story

reply to post by Vardoger

You are right when you say sounds of explosions don't automatically equate to explosives.

Got that right!

However, when one finds commercial explosive remnants in the dust....

Unfortunately "one" hasn't.

....and has eye witness testimony

Uh, that's "ear" witness testimony. And isn't that funny? All these supposedly hundreds of folks "hear" explosion but we have no one that says I saw this explosion on floor blah, blah at approximately this time and it looked like this. Pretty strange, huh? Looks like your trying to put together 0 + -1 to get 8.

Originally posted by Alfie1
...but it is well documented that this was the result of aviation fuel travelling down elevator shafts and igniting.

Interesting how you say it's well documented. When you get a moment, can you provide said information PROVING the blast was a result of Jet fuel leaking down the shafts. I'm talking real proof that is so overwhelmingly obvious that it makes someone as detail oriented as yourself refuse to consider other possible scenarios.

I hope your proof takes into account the fact that the shafts were sealed, didn't reach the lobby, and the fuel slammed the building at 500 miles+ per hour. And if you could also in laymen's terms explain how the fuel was able to find these small shaft holes and pour into them, considering said shafts occupied such a miniscule percentage of available area for the fuel/wreckage to land on, let alone funnel into.

Originally posted by Soapusmaximus
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Because if the lobby, and lower supports had not have been weakened first, the resistance to collapse would be to great (buildings were very strong) and possibly only the top of the building would tip and fall,

They needed to make sure it was all dust, to avoid people like us having anything "solid" to go on.

Please point out the destruction and explosions pre-collapse that happened in this video:



I would appreciate it if you or anyone can point out the explosions in the lobby.

Also are you remotely aware of the way the WTC towers were built?

reply to post by Wizayne

The shafts were unsealed by the large airplanes crashing into them. And each tower had at least one shaft that ran the entire building.

dam never saw this guy...AMAZING testimony

reply to post by Wizayne

I hope your proof takes into account the fact that the shafts were sealed, didn't reach the lobby, and the fuel slammed the building at 500 miles+ per hour. And if you could also in laymen's terms explain how the fuel was able to find these small shaft holes and pour into them, considering said shafts occupied such a miniscule percentage of available area for the fuel/wreckage to land on, let alone funnel into.

Sorry to puncture your delusions....

There were several freight/passenger elevators which ran entire lenght of the towers

There were seven freight elevators, only one of which served all floors

Car 50 served every floor.

2 passenger elevators ran lenght of towers (actually to 106/107 floors servicing Windows on World in North Tower
observation deck in South Tower)

There were two express elevators (#6 and #7) to Windows on the World (and related conference rooms and banquet facilities) in WTC 1 and two to the observation deck in WTC 2.

Here is link describing elevator layout in WTC

sites.google.com...

The aircraft struck North Tower dead center which meant its path through building would go right through the
elevator/stairwells

The elevator shaft/stairwells were lined only with sheet rock - not lot of resistance to jet aircraft at 500mph

This has been fixed inn new WTC where elevator shaft/stairways are now encased in 2 1/2 feet of high strenght
concrete

Also the airctraft held over 9,000 gallons of jet fuel - plenty of fuel to be projected into elevator shafts

Numerous witnesses report smelling Kerosene (jet fuel) in the lobby, seeing fire shooting out of the shafts,
There were numerous people severely, even fatally burned in the lobby. Notice all the injuries are burns
No blast/shrapnel injuries which would expect from a high explosive

Can read accounts from witnesses in the lobby

sites.google.com...

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Wizayne

 

The shafts were unsealed by the large airplanes crashing into them. And each tower had at least one shaft that ran the entire building.

Wow, sounds like a SOLID defense.
2nd line. solid.

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Wizayne

Sorry to puncture your delusions....

Your response is weak and has proved nothing but the fact that YOU are allowed to speculate what MAY have happened while not letting others do the same.

Here is link describing elevator layout in WTC
sites.google.com...

Look at the pictures on that page, look at floor 93 and eliminate all the red squares but one. That represents Your one shaft. Now compare That little red square to the WHITE that represents the entire rest of the area that ISNT a shaft. thats like .3% of total floor space? Explain why any of the fuel would gravitate to that little red square, let alone fill sufficiently enough to reach 1000 feet down without also SOAKING into those sheet rock walls or stopping at an elevator car.

The aircraft struck North Tower dead center which meant its path through building would go right through the elevator/stairwells

Hmmm. Also effectively blocking the shafts with debris. NEXT. This debunking stuff is easy, i learned it from you.

This has been fixed inn new WTC where elevator shaft/stairways are now encased in 2 1/2 feet of high strength concrete

Completely meaningless.

Also the aircraft held over 9,000 gallons of jet fuel - plenty of fuel to be projected into elevator shafts

Really solid argument. Dont forget the fuel that didnt enter the building because it was stopped. Also the fuel that went through the building and out the other side. And it was atomized, account for that. Oh, and a whole lot of it created the nice big fireball we saw. And the rest covered the area that wasnt shaft

Numerous witnesses report smelling Kerosene (jet fuel) in the lobby...

Do you think its possible the jet fuel that didnt make it into the building and/or the fuel that came out the other side could maybe have fallen to the ground maintaining its odor?
Do you think more fuel dripped down the shaft, or more ran down the outside of the building?

...seeing fire shooting out of the shafts,

Which shaft? Because I already know that the shafts fire came out of are not the same ONE shaft you say ran to the bottom. Making your point more unrealistic.

There were numerous people severely, even fatally burned in the lobby. Notice all the injuries are burns
No blast/shrapnel injuries which would expect from a high explosive

Are you gonna make me post the videos of witnesses that counter your speculations. For example, the big bouncer looking rescue worker who said he knew of people that lost limbs and were killed by the BASEMENT EXPLOSIONS. Not familiar with that one, you better do more research then before trying to convince others of ideas youre not even sure of yourself.


I'm sorry you think I'm delusional. But you havent provided any PROOF at all that the plane caused the mayhem in the lobby and BELOW the lobby. Just speculation, the same speculation you jump all over others for sharing.

Have a great day being sure of nothing.

reply to post by Wizayne


Even truther hero William Rodriguez, back in 2002 when he seemed to be sticking to the facts, described injuries caused by a fireball down the freight elevator. He said " and that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance."

en.wikipedia.org...

The injured man was Felipe David. Perhaps you can find him and explain to him how he wasn't burned by a fireball down the elevator.

I can't imagine why you are so incredulous about aviation fuel finding it's way to lower levels. Liquid will obey gravity and isn't it notorious for finding a way. Ask anyone who has had a bath overflow.

reply to post by Wizayne


Apparently have problem with eye sight and reading comprehension....

The yellow area indicates the large #6 and #7 elevators, which led to Windows on the World in the north tower (WTC 1) and to the observation deck in the south tower (WTC 2). This shaft is continuous from the impact zones to sublevel B4, where several people within the core area were injured by the jet fuel blast, and where building engineer Edward McCabe said the blast came "about 30 seconds" after he felt the building shift. [/ex

Yellow area are the 2 passenger elevators (Car # 6 & 7), Blue is freight elevator (Car #50)

The blue area in the floor plans below indicates the #50 freight elevator shaft, which is continuous from the impact zones to the lowest basement level, B6. In the north tower, with elevator operator Arturo Griffith and carpenter Marlene Cruz aboard, the #50 elevator was hit by a blast, dropped several floors, and stopped below the B1 landing. A large fireball came through the shaft just after Griffith and Cruz were pulled from smoky elevator.

Operative phrase " A large fireball came through the shaft..."



"

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by freedom12

 

Nope. I am saying that there was a lot of rumors flowing around that day, not all of them based in fact. And to this DAY, NO ONE has produced any evidence of bombs/demolition materials.........super duper nano thermite dust doesnt count.

Viper I see your non-sense on every 9/11 thread. Your are getting ridiculous. This is not 1984. Up is up and down is down. 2 + 2 = 4 not 5. Simple.

So you say find evidence of explosives....but "super duper nano-thermite" doesnt count. I like how you can condescend over the interweb...its a nice shill skill. Well if nano-thermite does not count than what the hell does. This shows that no matter what evidence is brought you will just act like a kid on the playground thats finally caught while playing tag and says oh well that don't count.

Defying simple physics 3 times in a day must not count either.

Also peer-reviewed studies must not count. What the hell while we are at it, why don't we just say that anything someone says that doesn't believe the official fable doesn't count. Yes that makes it much easier.

www.benthamscience.com...

See this guy is rational, calm, and not insulting anyone. Just doing a simple expirement in his backyard with some extra time and cash. Now imagine what a group of people could do with a budget the average person can puke over and all the time in the world.

www.youtube.com...

You are inferior and you constantly slap the same BS theories on everyone who questions the official story, even if they don't believe in that particular theory. As if its either your a truther or a believer of the OS with no middle ground.

Tell me this?? Why doesn't 9/11 myths.com say anything about Anthony Shaffer of the able danger team and the evidence that was deliberately destroyed? They seem to mention it but the do omit alot of evidence.

Oh and then a smear campaign against him. But that must not count.

www.youtube.com...

The hundreds of witnesses must all be lying as well. So that doesn't count.

It's very hypocritical when you claim that becuase you say the same thing to the tone that truthers believe everyone was instantly a truther on that day and even the firemen were in on it.

reply to post by godfather420


The thermite doesn't count because all of the research supposedly done, was predestined to find "explosives". Never once was any other answer considered, not to mention, thermite would have been a piss poor choice to bring down a building. But the "thermite" believers will never address that.

Then to my nonsense. If you feel pointing out facts and showing where "truth" theories are flawed is nonsense........I feel sorry for you.

The person in the video being interviewed by Luke is absolutely right in what he is saying. The USGS survey of the dust in lower Manhattan tells the tail of a highly toxic environment there that the criminal Bush administration and their stooges and willing servants have never fully acknowledged. He is also right when he says that the USGS survey doesn't tell the whole story.

When he says that the medical establishment in New York is trying to avoid the 9/11 issue in the way they are dealing with patients, he is also describing a typical esablishment reaction to an official attitude filtering down from the upper levels of the US government.

He is right about the notion of a huge morbidity study being done on US citizens by its cruel, unfeeling and predatory government. Personally, I think this might have something to do with preparations being made in the United States for WW3.

This interview is a classic eye opener also to how far out of the ball game the press in the United States has drifted. Under any other circumstances, this man's revelations would be front page news and spur a massive press inquiry into what is going on.

Not in post 9/11 America.

Bottom line: When you look at the USGS survey of the 9/11 dust, you find too much uranium in the dust to be caused by disintegrated building materials.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Yes of course they were looking for explosives. They had strong claims that supported the theory of demolitions used to bring down the buildings. Eye witnesses, knowledge of basic physics etc etc etc. So what were they supposed to look for in the dust?? Ipod remnance? Computer parts?

No. They look for explosives.

Just think of it like this. If I were a cop and I suspected someone of drug-dealing, what would my investigation be looking for? I would be looking for signs of a drug deal taking place, paper bags, money exchanges. I wouldn't look at the local toys'r'us all day waiting for something to go down or the guy just to show up. You follow the evidence.

So I finally catch the guy red handed selling a kilo of coke, but because I was investigating him for drug dealing because there was evidence to suggest that it was in fact taking place, I can't charge him? Cmon man give me a break. The evidence sticks.

Your comment about thermite being a crappy way to take down the buildings, is an opinion that has absolutely no merit. It is also a very distorted opinion because how would a material that cuts through steal be of little use in taking down a building?

Originally posted by hooper
Uh, that's "ear" witness testimony. And isn't that funny? All these supposedly hundreds of folks "hear" explosion but we have no one that says I saw this explosion on floor

Thousands of people in the towers, many folks hear explosions, no one see's them.

Exactly what you would expect if they were attached to the steel support columns which are hidden from public view by design.

reply to post by godfather420


Right, they were looking for explosives, and ignored every other explanation. Some of their "smoking guns" that supposedly "proves" thermite.....were byproducts of the construction of the towers. Not to mention, there has still been absolutely no evidence of the materials needed to trigger explosives. None, nada, zilch, zip, a big, fat zero.

Thank you for posting this thread.,,, We are experiencing the slow progress of understanding the dynamic of "info_awareness" the internet has provided for the general public at large.

Over the last ten years, anyone bothering to investigate this event (using the internet) has to come to the conclusion that 9/11 was a sophisticated covert operation involving criminal elements of multiple governments...


Yes, we are talking about the ugly "C" word... CONSPIRACY...

The only surprising thing in this video and thread is that there are still sceptics and debunkers about 9/11....
Go back to sleep friends :-)

PS: Yes hundreds of people heard the explosions, you can even hear them yourself on several genuine youtube videos - how come so many here haven't yet seen these videos?

reply to post by vipertech0596


Okay obviously your stuck on that fairy tale. Its okay your just discrediting yourself.

So now address the deliberately destroyed evidence from able danger. Tell me any and every possible motive they would have for destroying the evidence from able danger.

reply to post by godfather420


Why? Oh that's an easy one. We had thirty years of bureaucrats doing what they thought was RIGHT, when all they actually did, was weaken our security. On the day of 9/11, members of my unit were talking, and we knew that if anyone looked hard enough, they would find every scrap of information that would have been necessary to prevent that day.....was already in our possession. The only problem was, because of the insane rules/laws/procedures put into place by the aforementioned bureaucrats, meant that no one person or department had enough of the information to have a clear picture nor could they legally share it with anyone else.

Why was able danger evidence destroyed? To cover bureaucratic ass. Of course, the response of the bureaucrats was to create the intelligence czar....then they could tell the American people "we did something"

All they did, was create another layer of bureaucracy that will work to cover their asses next time we get hit.