Hi, ya'll. I was there. Here's the deal

they made them into collectible "9/11 dollar" coins you can buy on QVC.

God bless america.

Originally posted by WolfofWar
Ofcourse, now, if it was a government black-ops project, using hired terrorists to do things at very specific times (like we did with the original 9/11 bombing.) Well, you wouldnt WANT to kill alot of civilians. You would want it to be a false flag terror event. There would need to be just enough casualties to strengthen your fingerpointing, but you dont want to endanger too many lives.
[edit on 2-15-2007 by WolfofWar]

My reasoning is similar to this,though I take it that one step further and say,there was no need then for explosives to down the towers,the shock value of two passenger jet liners flown into an American Icon killing many,would have been enough for them to have the excuse to declare a war on terror.

To make this statement true imo
"There would need to be just enough casualties to strengthen your fingerpointing"

Originally posted by Cthulwho
What happens when you take out all the load bearing walls in a building? Don't forget that the structure of the WTC was a lot different to other skyscrapers, the exoskeleton basically held up the whole building. I'm totally convinced that the people who planned these attacks were aware of this design flaw.

Why is that a design flaw? The 47 massive central columns and the design of the facade was many times stronger than any regular building that used load bearing walls.

Even if the planes had completely severed the central clore columns, which they obvioulsy could not have done, the towers would still not have fallen to their foundations with no sign of resistance at all, while ejecting it's facade up to 600 ft. away.

Just an understanding of basic high school physics should be enough to tell you that...

Originally posted by gps777
My reasoning is similar to this,though I take it that one step further and say,there was no need then for explosives to down the towers,the shock value of two passenger jet liners flown into an American Icon killing many,would have been enough for them to have the excuse to declare a war on terror.

Lets not forget the major asbestos problems the towers had. It would have cost hundreds of millions to fix.

I personally dont believe the attack would have been 'sufficient' without the demolition. The demolitions served several purposes imo:
1. body count
2. shock value
3. symbolism
4. insurance money - Lucky for Silverstein, he had an "in case of complete destruction from a terrorist attack" clause in his insurance policy!
5. destruction of evidence (especially in the case of building 7)
6. Hide the fact that massive amounts of gold were stolen from the WTC on 9/11
7. Cause "it would be cool to blow up those towers" - George H.W. Bush

Originally posted by hummarstra
.

1. Can you explain why the buildings burned so long before they collasped?

To maximize the number of people watching the collapses on television??

Worldofwar, your tree falling analogy is just ridiculous. A large building like WTC falling over like a tree? I thought you understood physics. I realized after reading your post that I've wondered into a hornets nest of converts to a belief system that I nor any eye witness will ever change. So, that wasn't Osamma in the video nor the MANY other videos he made taking credit for 911? And you didn't answer my question as to why the buildings burnt so long before "they" set off the "controlled demolition." But, I'm sure you have a reason. Speaking of Osamma, this place is like a devout muslim country that will rationalize every thing to conform to their religion. I'm done here.

Why is it ridiculous?If the towers did indeed fall due to fire,shouldn't they have fallen to the side the planes hit?And just the floors from the impact zone up?Just like cutting down a tree,it falls to the side with the v cut in it.I believe the south tower started to do this but then turned to dust in mid air.This is what Anok has been questioning for some time now,with no answer.

Originally posted by hummarstra
Worldofwar

Its Wolf of War, thanks.

your tree falling analogy is just ridiculous. A large building like WTC falling over like a tree? I thought you understood physics.

And you have anything to back up your brushing off my claim? You realize how building demolitions work, right? Why do you think they put a squib on every structural support and rig it to blow at the same time? Just for fun? Its to make the weight distribute itself, and not to just one side, so it comes completely down and then into the basement. Heres what it looks like when a demolition fails, and the weight is unevenly distributed.

Failed demolition

See how its about to fall? It didnt just fall straight down. Its called the basic laws of gravity, look it up sometime.

This one is where they were trying to cut a building down like a tree.

Lets see what happens.

Building falls down

I realized after reading your post that I've wondered into a hornets nest of converts to a belief system that I nor any eye witness will ever change.

I'm sorry, I forgot that you witnessing it on the ground made you an instant expert of all things revolving around the 9/11 attacks.

So, that wasn't Osamma in the video nor the MANY other videos he made taking credit for 911?

Theres only two videos out there where Osama Bin Laden even mentions 9/11, and in one of them, we have the skinny Osama bin laden, with no wedding ring, saying he didnt do it, and then we have the fat Osama tape, saying he did it, but wearing a wedding band and writing with his wrong hand.

And you didn't answer my question as to why the buildings burnt so long before "they" set off the "controlled demolition."

Well, logically, a building takes over 8 hours of constant high heat to even see steel weaken. It would be alittle suspicious, wouldnt it? to just make it fall right away?

But talking about taking so long. You realize it was less then an hour? the entire buildings fell alittle less then an hour after they were hit, and yet we have the Madrid building in Spain with 75% of the building on fire for 14 hours, and its still standing, and even strong enough to hold a large crane. The buildings did not take long to go down, by any means, they went down way too quickly, as if someone dropped it thinking it wouldbe the right time.

But, I'm sure you have a reason.

And I'm sure you have an excuse for why I'm wrong. Well, actually, speaking from experience of your previous posts, you'll just troll my post, poking fun at me, myself, and not any of the facts I bring up.

Speaking of Osamma, this place is like a devout muslim country that will rationalize every thing to conform to their religion. I'm done here.

You won't be missed.

Originally posted by Cthulwho
What happens when you take out all the load bearing walls in a building? Don't forget that the structure of the WTC was a lot different to other skyscrapers, the exoskeleton basically held up the whole building.

Basically no it didn't. The outer columns took their portion of the gravity loads but most of it was carried the core structure, made up of 47 massive columns within the building that were all linked together into a rather independent structure. The outer columns and trusses acted as a buffer to lateral forces, thus the towers could've taken hurricane-force winds and suffered no damage.

The towers were also not hollow, if you also believe that, or just a bunch of floors stacked one-onto-another.

Originally posted by hummarstra
We were standing one block away from the south Tower looking up at it when it began to collaspe. There were no explosions!

“There has just been a huge explosion. We can see a cascade of sparks and fire and now this. It looks almost like a mushroom cloud explosion. And I can’t, I’ll tell you that I can’t see that second building.”- Aaron Brown, anchor CNN NewsNight describing the demolition of the South Tower as he watches it live during live CNN broadcast on 9/11/01. (CNN Tribute, America Remembers: The Events of September 11 and America’s Response [Commemorative Edition] [DVD]) cnn.com...

“As more and more and more and more and more emergency vehicles descended on the World Trade Center, I hear a second explosion in WTC 2, then a loud, low- frequency that precipitates the unthinkable – a collapse of all the floors above the point of explosion. First the top surface, containing the helipad, tips sideways in full view. Then the upper floors fall straight down in a demolition-style implosion, taking all lower floors with it, even those below the point of the explosion.” – Neil deGrasse Tyson, Director of the Hayden Planetarium of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City and Vice President of The Planetary Society, commenting on the demolition of the South Tower as he witnessed it from his apartment six blocks away. (An Eyewitness Account of the World Trade Center Attacks from Neil deGrasse Tyson, The Planetary Society, September 12th 2001; online at www.planetary.org... )

“There was an explosion – I didn’t think it was an explosion – but the base of the building shook. I felt it shake …then when we were outside, the second explosion happened and then there was a series of explosions…We can only wonder at the kind of damage – the kind of human damage – that was caused by those explosions – those series of explosions.” – Steve Evans, BBC employee commenting on the demolition of the South Tower. (Eyewitnesses Tell of Horror, BBC, September 11th 2001; online at news.bbc.co.uk... )

“We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the second trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.” – Louie Cacchioli, 20 year veteran of the New York Fire Department, Engine 47, describing explosions in the South Tower before it’s collapse. (Unsigned. “Our Heroes/United in Courage” People.com [People Magazine] 9/12/01; archived online at propagandamatrix.com... and People Weekly 9/24/01)

“[WABC-TV reporter N.J. Burkett] said he wanted to do a stand-up. He motioned, “ Me, the firefighters and tilt up to the building.” I asked for another one [a second take, as I always do, because you never know, there could be crease in the tape or whatever. As I tilted up, the density of the sound in the area changed. It became thick. As I tilted up, I could feel it, but I could really tell you that I knew what I was seeing. I was seeing the building blow up.
I kept tilting and heard him [Burkett] say that the building was exploding.” – Marty Glembotzy, cameraman for WABC-TV, describing the demolition of the South Tower. (Ibid.: 93)

‘Breaking News: Third Explosion Shatters World Trade Center in New York.’ – video banner broadcast on TV screens across America and around the world during instant replay of the demolition of the South Tower on CNN on 9/11/01. This can be seen in the DVD “In Plane Site” available from www.thepowerhour.com...

So who's lying?

[edit on 19/2/2007 by ANOK]

“We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the second trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.” – Louie Cacchioli, 20 year veteran of the New York Fire Department, Engine 47, describing explosions in the South Tower before it’s collapse. (Unsigned. “Our Heroes/United in Courage” People.com [People Magazine] 9/12/01;

One problem, People misquoted him and he has spent the last five years dealing with morons that THINK he said he definitely knew bombs were there.

Originally posted by hummarstra
I'll get you a picture of exactly where I was standing. It's on a floppy and my new comp doesn't have a floppy. But I'll figure out a way to show it to you if you guys want.

Did you ever figure out a way to get the picture from your computer? I think computers at Kinkos have floppy drives on them.

By the way, do you still live in NY?

It might have been a government conspiracy, but it could have also been something much easier to understand: a corporate conspiracy.

Who stood the most to gain from the buildings being totally smashed? The owners and operators of the WTC. They were already going to have to "de-asbestos" the buildings, an incredibly expensive undertaking. They would have had all the access they needed, without needing to fight for clearance. For the sake of argument, they could have rigged the building months in advance, and just waited for some oportunity to blow it. Hell, with the kind of money these men had anyway, it's entirely feasibly to think that they could have set the entire thing up just as easily as the government could have, and even an easier time getting to the actuall structural supports of the buildings.

So the buildings collapse, they get a hefty insurance check, and the City of New York gets to foot the clean-up bill.

Honestly, I'd like to think that it really was just a terrorist attack, but, amidst all the evidence either way, the one thing that really makes me doubt that, is the total devastation of the buildings. Both buildings collapsed into their own footprint. They didn't topple above the impact site, or break off and free-fall (as I would expect of a building structurally weakened somewhere in the middle), they just free-fell into their own footprint.

Its easier to believe that a behemoth like the US government could be cold and calculating enough to pull this off, but for corporate giants who have no problem outsourcing labour to countries where child-labour and near-slavery conditions are the norm, it takes no effort to see how the dollar sign weighs in more important than human life to these people.

Knowing of the practices, and policy-making at Bohemian Grove, perhaps it was a joint-venture. Bush got his war, while corporate giants got their fat insurance check.

Reading this post I saw where someone asked how explosives could be placed in a building without anyones knowledge.
I remember reading maybe ten years ago or more about a building in NYC that engineers discovered would not survive an east coast hurricane because the architect had not factored in the location of the building and the "canyon effect" of all the other tall building's in the way in NYC.
The owners of the building actually concocted and implemented a plan to reinforce the buildings internal structure without the tenants or publics knowledge.
Does anyone else remember this? I believe I read it in Readers Digest and there may have been a documentary on it also.
So the ability of workers going into a major building and doing work without peoples knowledge is possible.

Originally posted by calcoastseeker
Reading this post I saw where someone asked how explosives could be placed in a building without anyones knowledge.
I remember reading maybe ten years ago or more about a building in NYC that engineers discovered would not survive an east coast hurricane because the architect had not factored in the location of the building and the "canyon effect" of all the other tall building's in the way in NYC.
The owners of the building actually concocted and implemented a plan to reinforce the buildings internal structure without the tenants or publics knowledge.
Does anyone else remember this? I believe I read it in Readers Digest and there may have been a documentary on it also.
So the ability of workers going into a major building and doing work without peoples knowledge is possible.

I've heard of this building. My boss was telling me the story about it when we were in NY doing another project. I believe it is called the "Lipstick" building. It is on E 53rd and Lexington. Is this the building you were speaking of? I'm trying to get an address but here is the lat and long for Google Earth.

"Lipstick Building" lat=40.757713, lon=-73.969016

Let me know if this is the building. Thanks.

Explosive devices were also planted in the Murrah Federal Building before the Oklahoma City Bombing, and were removed by the military and documented in memos by the Army and FEMA, and in affidavits by eyewitnesses.


If you can't sneak charges into buildings without people noticing then how were they placed in the Murrah Federal Building without anyone noticing?

Originally posted by bsbray11
Explosive devices were also planted in the Murrah Federal Building before the Oklahoma City Bombing, and were removed by the military and documented in memos by the Army and FEMA, and in affidavits by eyewitnesses.


If you can't sneak charges into buildings without people noticing then how were they placed in the Murrah Federal Building without anyone noticing?

Bsbray,
I have looked for this claim that there were bombs or "cutter charges" planted in the Murrah Building. So far what I have read has been said to be inaccurate. Do you have any links as to where I can get the info?

OP. there were fire fighters that were there who were much closer then you and they'll tell you they heard explosions.

There's a video of it actually of a FF getting the call between collapse of 1 and before the 2nd collapse.

"...There's a bomb in the building start clearing out..."

"Another one!?!"

"...There's a bomb in the building start clearing out..."

That pretty much puts it to rest. Getting a call like that means on the other end of that radio FF's were standing infront of ordanance throughout the building. And on top of that how can a plane crash into a building, explode, then an hour later explode again bringing the building down. Just doesn't make sense.

Are these any good for you?:

DoD Atlantic Command memo:




FEMA situation report:




U.S. Forces Command Daily Log:





I didn't include two formal (legal) eyewitness statements because I figured private witnesses wouldn't really sway you.

Bsbray-

Thank you for posting those. How do we confirm the authenticity of these documents? I don't see any signatures on them. Typically doesn't one have to at least initial a memorandum ?

Thanks again.