Bombs in the Building: World Trade Center 'Conspiracy Theory' is a Conspiracy Fact

page: 47
12
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

and Local Law 5 (1973).


Sorry to go off topic here. Does anyone know who did the local law 11 inspections for the towers? My company does alot of local law 11 inspections in NYC and I'm basically just currious.

You can't find anything on the Department of Buildings website for NYC about the towers so I am just curious.

This is curious because I have found WTC 7 on the DOB website and there is a complaint on 12/07/2001.

a810-bisweb.nyc.gov...

Could be nothing because it is a complaint about scafolding but it's interesting to say the least.

[edit on 10/20/2006 by Griff]




posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I'm wrong...I am finding things now on WTC1 at least. Still digging. I'll let you all know what I can find.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
I found that there are only 4 permits listed for WTC1.

1. 5/18/92 For minor partition changes on part of 39th floor

2. 9/10/02 For temporary stage structure & tent

3. 4/18/01 Sidewalk shed

4. 11/21/01 Sidewalk shed

Now, the strange thing is that there are no permits listed from 5/92 through 4/18/01. Are they saying that there was no work done on the buildings during those times? I thought the sprinklers were installed after the 93 bombing? BTW, sprinkler permits are usually listed. more to come.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
OK...this is also strange. The owner of record is named as Tom Downing for the last LL11 inspection (back in 98...98 is speculation based on the previous LL11 reports I have looked at for NYC...there's no date mentioned) but it also says that no report was filed? First, I thought the Port Authority owned the building until Silverstein bought it? Second, why wasn't there a report filed?



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
More....

There are no elevator records listed.

There are no illuminated signs permits listed.

There are no plumbing inspections listed.

There are no Marquee Annual permits listed.

There are no boiler records listed.

There are no DEP boiler information listed.

What is going on here?

Now on to WTC2....I'll try and keep it to one post.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   
WTC2

No elevator records listed.

They list a bunch of electrical applications ranging from '85 to 4/2001. I'm not an electrician so they don't mean much to me.

No permits are listed. No work on WTC2 since it's conception?

No illuminated signs permits listed.

No plumbing inspections listed.

No plumbing jobs listed.

It lists the same for the facades as the WTC1 did....Tom Downing as owner etc.

No marquee annual permits listed.

No boiler records listed.

No DEP boiler information listed.

Both WTC1 & 2 have no Certificates of Occupancy listed. This could be due to them not existing anymore.

WTC 7.

There was a LL11 inspection in 2000. John Delores is named as owner.

Pretty much the same as WTC1 & 2...pretty much no records listed.

I don't know if any of this stuff is important but it's interesting none the less. Anyone remember when I was trying to find this information out a couple of months ago and couldn't find anything? Did they read my posts and decide to put stuff up on their website? Or is it just a coincidence?



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

5. I'm starting to believe that Mary Baldizzi DID ride the freight elevator from the 104th floor of WTC 2 down to safety BEFORE that building was impacted. I state this because in every article/report I've found on survivors from above the impact zone escaping POST-impact, not one of them list her and the other occupants escaping via elevator. All accounts list 16 (going from memory there, but I think that number is correct) survivors above the impact zone escaping, and all of them are reported to have taken Stairwell A. Again, this is a point where you have to say - that doesn't prove she didn't ride the elevator down after impact, but it does mean you have to take into account the opposite possibility.

Maybe we should try to locate Ms. Baldizzi and interview her. huh?

[edit on 10-20-2006 by Valhall]


I have investigated this incident fully to my satisfaction. I actually found good information at the debunking site (I seem to recall it was debunking911.com).

Mary Baldizzi had to have been at WTC2, not WTC1 as was erroneously reported by the news tvstation. Follow the trail and learn for yourself, or just take my word for it. Doesn't matter as the record is clear on this simple confusion of the facts.

Believe me, I know controlled demolition was done at the WTC, and I am out to discredit the dee bunkers where ever and when ever I can.

But this is not one of those times.

I spend a lot of time over at PhysOrgForum challenging the shills of the government left and right (and they are on the defensive now).

Regards,
Craig T. Furlong

-------

Plane Impact Times – Indicting New Evidence of 9/11 Coverup & Involvement

“Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II)”
Link: worldtradecentertruth.com...
By Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross
Scholars for 9/11 Truth: www.st911.org...

Summary:

One World Trade, September 11th, 2001
American Airlines Flight 11
8:46:40 UTC - FAA last primary radar contact [aircrash]
8:46:30 UTC - LDEO/NIST [seismic event {originally presumed aircrash}]
Both times: real, accurate to the second

Q- What caused the 8:46:30 seismic event ~10 seconds before the aircrash?
A- The only possibility...huge explosion(s).

Q- Who caused these explosions?

Notes:
Ginny Carr audiotape ~9.2 second gap between initial explosion and aircrash.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the time of the initial seismic event.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the many witnesses who testified of explosions in the basements before the plane crashed, and NIST avoided the witnesses as well.
NIST avoided the 9/11 Commission’s time of the aircrash.

Demand a new 9/11 investigation now, THIS TIME ONE WITH TEETH.

Justice waits.
[There is no Statute of Limitation on murder.]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 06:00 PM
link   
I have never joined physorg forums, but I have read quite a lot over there. It's a decent place to find paths to go down.

Thanks for your post.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Both Mike Pecorio and William Rodriguez indicated thatthere were people severly burned that were in the freight elevator.



and you are cherry picking half of their testimony as valid.
the part about the explosions from underneath(which were called in and dispatched by official 911 emergency services, "collapse on B4 sublevel, possible trapped people"), before the plane hit, which they also heard?

that is two completely seperate sources of the same info.

you know this, howard.

sad.

[edit on 23-10-2006 by billybob]



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by quicknthedead

Summary:

One World Trade, September 11th, 2001
American Airlines Flight 11
8:46:40 UTC - FAA last primary radar contact [aircrash]
8:46:30 UTC - LDEO/NIST [seismic event {originally presumed aircrash}]
Both times: real, accurate to the second

Q- What caused the 8:46:30 seismic event ~10 seconds before the aircrash?
A- The only possibility...huge explosion(s).

Q- Who caused these explosions?

Notes:
Ginny Carr audiotape ~9.2 second gap between initial explosion and aircrash.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the time of the initial seismic event.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the many witnesses who testified of explosions in the basements before the plane crashed, and NIST avoided the witnesses as well.
NIST avoided the 9/11 Commission’s time of the aircrash.

Demand a new 9/11 investigation now, THIS TIME ONE WITH TEETH.

Justice waits.
[There is no Statute of Limitation on murder.]



According to the sceintists who took the seismic readings, there were not multiple events to suggest what you are saying. And the explosions in the basement have been explained over and over again. The quotes from police do not mean that what they said was the case. It's just what they reported might have happened. There were lots of bomb calls and things like that, but that does not mean there were actual bombs. Just like there are calls for bombs at airports all the time. But that just means it's suspected. It was a chaotic day and no one knew what was going on and no one wanted to take a chance.

Also, how does an audio tape capture an aircrash? How were the people in the basement able to see the plane above them crash if they were in the basement? All these arguments you bring up have been discussed 1000s of times on this forum. Yet no matter how many times they are discussed they are brought up as if they are some kind of unanswered issues. Why is that?

Could it be that some people simply want only to find one thing? If all you look for is one thing, that's all you are going to find.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy
And the explosions in the basement have been explained over and over again.


They were? What did they end up being?



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:47 AM
link   
www.911myths.com...

www.911myths.com...

www.911myths.com...

The explosions in the basement have been linked to jet fuel travelling down the elevator shafts. The rest is explained in the above links.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The explosions in the basement have been linked to jet fuel travelling down the elevator shafts. The rest is explained in the above links.


So, even though there was a BURNING FIRE, the plane breached the single shaft that went to the basement (freight elevator), the liquid, UNIGNITED BY THE BLAZE kerosene traveled down the shaft and exploded in the basement?

Or are you saying the "shock wave" and "fireball" went into the basement via this same critical path and built up enough pressure to explode whilst NOT exploding on ANY OTHER HIGER FLOOR?

This defys logic.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by snoopy

Originally posted by quicknthedead

Summary:

One World Trade, September 11th, 2001
American Airlines Flight 11
8:46:40 UTC - FAA last primary radar contact [aircrash]
8:46:30 UTC - LDEO/NIST [seismic event {originally presumed aircrash}]
Both times: real, accurate to the second

Q- What caused the 8:46:30 seismic event ~10 seconds before the aircrash?
A- The only possibility...huge explosion(s).

Q- Who caused these explosions?

Notes:
Ginny Carr audiotape ~9.2 second gap between initial explosion and aircrash.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the time of the initial seismic event.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the many witnesses who testified of explosions in the basements before the plane crashed, and NIST avoided the witnesses as well.
NIST avoided the 9/11 Commission’s time of the aircrash.

Demand a new 9/11 investigation now, THIS TIME ONE WITH TEETH.

Justice waits.
[There is no Statute of Limitation on murder.]




According to the sceintists who took the seismic readings, there were not multiple events to suggest what you are saying.

You are 100% mistaken in this statement.

Please provide your source that you base this on.


And the explosions in the basement have been explained over and over again.


No explanations have been given to anyone's satisfaction. If you have a factual explanation, please provide it. Your hand-waving is unacceptable.




Also, how does an audio tape capture an aircrash?


Please read the paper instead of shooting from the hip with no knowledge of what you are talking about.



How were the people in the basement able to see the plane above them crash if they were in the basement?


Have you even read the paper at all? Did you listen to William Rodriguez's testimony that is linked in the paper?



All these arguments you bring up have been discussed 1000s of times on this forum.


Then your forum is driving blind through a blizzard of the truth. Please respond with facts instead of nothing. Until you do, I must ignore you in order to save time.

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
www.911myths.com...

www.911myths.com...

www.911myths.com...

The explosions in the basement have been linked to jet fuel travelling down the elevator shafts. The rest is explained in the above links.


Only 1 elevator went from the basement up to the floors where the plane crashed, and this elevator was occupied by Mr. Griffith, the operator. He lived, but he was not engulfed by any jet fuel fire. Please read his story. 911myths.com has many misleading and erroneous statements.

Here is the link for Griffith:
www.usatoday.com...

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The explosions in the basement have been linked to jet fuel travelling down the elevator shafts. The rest is explained in the above links.


So, even though there was a BURNING FIRE, the plane breached the single shaft that went to the basement (freight elevator), the liquid, UNIGNITED BY THE BLAZE kerosene traveled down the shaft and exploded in the basement?

Or are you saying the "shock wave" and "fireball" went into the basement via this same critical path and built up enough pressure to explode whilst NOT exploding on ANY OTHER HIGER FLOOR?

This defys logic.


Also, this supposed "magic fuel firestorm" traveling down to the basement caused the major damage in the sub-basement levels as testified by Mike Pecoraro.

www.911truth.org...

Engineer Mike Pecoraro, who was working in the sixth sub-basement of the north tower, said that after an explosion he and a co-worker went up to the C level, where there was a small machine shop. ?There was nothing there but rubble,? said Pecoraro. ?We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press--gone!? They then went to the parking garage, but found that it was also gone. Then on the B level, they found that a steel-and-concrete fire door, which weighed about 300 pounds, was wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil." Having seen similar things after the terrorist attack in 1993, Pecoraro was convinced that a bomb had gone off.


Hardly!



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by quicknthedead

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The explosions in the basement have been linked to jet fuel travelling down the elevator shafts. The rest is explained in the above links.


Only 1 elevator went from the basement up to the floors where the plane crashed, and this elevator was occupied by Mr. Griffith, the operator. He lived, but he was not engulfed by any jet fuel fire. Please read his story. 911myths.com has many misleading and erroneous statements.

Here is the link for Griffith:
www.usatoday.com...

Thanks.


This is the smoking gun that clearly nulifies the magic jet fuel theory. But, people ignore this and still say the bomb in the basement was magic jet fuel.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by quicknthedead

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The explosions in the basement have been linked to jet fuel travelling down the elevator shafts. The rest is explained in the above links.


Only 1 elevator went from the basement up to the floors where the plane crashed, and this elevator was occupied by Mr. Griffith, the operator. He lived, but he was not engulfed by any jet fuel fire. Please read his story. 911myths.com has many misleading and erroneous statements.

Here is the link for Griffith:
www.usatoday.com...

Thanks.


This is the smoking gun that clearly nulifies the magic jet fuel theory. But, people ignore this and still say the bomb in the basement was magic jet fuel.


You're right, Griff, except there are so many smoking guns now that this firefight has turned into a one-sided gunfight with the OCT's all out of ammo.

Again and again, the supporters of the official conspiracy theory (the Government's OCTs) simply will not face up to the hard facts that have come out now about what really happened that day.

And when they do respond, it is always with falsehoods (well, maybe 95% of the time when they respond).

What gets me is how they can be so dead-set against a REAL INVESTIGATION OF 9/11 in the light of all this information.

It only exemplifies their duplicity.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by quicknthedead
What gets me is how they can be so dead-set against a REAL INVESTIGATION OF 9/11 in the light of all this information.



In some circles, the NIST investigation is considered a REAL INVESTIGATION.

Since your mind is made up, would any investigation that disproved bombs or thermite or government involvement satisfy you?

Or by REAL INVESTIGATION do you mean one that supports demolition theories?

What kind of REAL INVESTIGATION would satisfy you if the conclusion was that no bombs were used?



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Originally posted by quicknthedead
What gets me is how they can be so dead-set against a REAL INVESTIGATION OF 9/11 in the light of all this information.



In some circles, the NIST investigation is considered a REAL INVESTIGATION.


Yes, but we don't engage in C*******F***s.



Since your mind is made up, would any investigation that disproved bombs or thermite or government involvement satisfy you?


My mind is not made up, and I don't have those requirements. I still think the NIST report is a C******F***.


[edit on 10-26-2006 by Valhall]






top topics



 
12
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join