A firefighter who was at the WTC told me he saw and heard the controlled demolition explosions

I would respectufly suggest to some of you here to adhearing to your Forum-Moderator's request to get back on topic, please and thank you.

After reviewing this thread I'm going to take this early opertuninty to remind the Members of this link below, and to also keep it mind before making future posts.

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY... ALL MEMBERS PLEASE READ

Any Member lowering themselves to name calling, no matter how innocuous, will have thier account actioned on the spot, no questions asked.

Any Member who, after receiving an action in this forum, commits another breach of the TAC will be post banned on the spot, no questions asked.

I would rather not go down this road so please no more name calling or insults there not needed nor called for and everyone is entitled to an opinion whether it be agreeable or not.

If anyone has any questions just pm me, or alerts please use the alart tab for a thread or under the member tab to the left of a post.

Sauron
Super-Moderator

Originally posted by Sauron
I would respectufly suggest to some of you here to adhearing to your Forum-Moderator's request to get back on topic, please and thank you.

Thanks, Sauron. When people go around making absurd accusations like "shills" it's just another way of saying "I can't refute anything you're saying so I'm going to make up a reason for why I shouldn't have to accept it". Such a position only serves to lower the credibility of the accuser, rather than the accused.

Shill or no shill, would someone kindly explain to me why a mechanical floor chock full of electrical transformers, generators, fuel tanks, pressurized pipes, motors, etc etc etc wouldn't have a catastrophic explosion or two after it suddenly gets flooded by thousands of gallons of burning aviation fuel? This is literally what happened in each of the buildings, and if even one of the explosions the firefighters heard were from flammable objects known to be in the building then logically we can assume all the explosions were from flammable objects known to be in the building...particularly when the explosions were random, rather than in any pattern or sequence.

I've made this point throughout a number of forums here and I have yet to see even one person explain why it's incorrect.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Sauron
I would respectufly suggest to some of you here to adhearing to your Forum-Moderator's request to get back on topic, please and thank you.

Thanks, Sauron. When people go around making absurd accusations like "shills" it's just another way of saying "I can't refute anything you're saying so I'm going to make up a reason for why I shouldn't have to accept it". Such a position only serves to lower the credibility of the accuser, rather than the accused.

Shill or no shill, would someone kindly explain to me why a mechanical floor chock full of electrical transformers, generators, fuel tanks, pressurized pipes, motors, etc etc etc wouldn't have a catastrophic explosion or two after it suddenly gets flooded by thousands of gallons of burning aviation fuel? This is literally what happened in each of the buildings, and if even one of the explosions the firefighters heard were from flammable objects known to be in the building then logically we can assume all the explosions were from flammable objects known to be in the building...particularly when the explosions were random, rather than in any pattern or sequence.

I've made this point throughout a number of forums here and I have yet to see even one person explain why it's incorrect.

Ok, so the mods are on your side, I kind of figured this. This isnt the only forum that discusses this subject on the whole internet, so if I do happen to get banned at some point then I'm sure I'll get over it.

To address your explosions theory, I'm confused at how explosions in the lobby were caused by these flammable objects?


Do you have any idea?

These objects you speak of, can you list what of each were on the floors that were affected by the impact/fire?
What fuel tanks are you referring to? It was powered by electric right?

Can you explain how these items could be considered 'catestrophic' if affected by fire?
'electrical transformers, generators, (fuel tanks??), pressurized pipes, motors.

As mentioned already, not sure what you mean by fuel tanks, surely there was no gas or other fuel in the towers, especially up at the impact points?

I cant see how the electrical transformers, electrical generators and motors could have exploded, and the only pipes that would have been pressurised would have been water pipes.

Can you provide some detailed info or links so I can understand what you are referring to pls?

Originally posted by 4hero

Ok, so the mods are on your side, I kind of figured this. This isnt the only forum that discusses this subject on the whole internet, so if I do happen to get banned at some point then I'm sure I'll get over it.

The mods aren't "on my side". The mods are on their own side. I have to follow the rules of ATS just as you have to because it's not my board. What you can't seem to accept is that your rights end where the rights of other people begin.

To address your explosions theory, I'm confused at how explosions in the lobby were caused by these flammable objects?
Do you have any idea?

Once you understand these "explosions" weren't explosives but really loud BANGS it becomes obvious- When the plane hit the north tower the burning fuel sent fireballs down the elevator shaft and created enough pressure to force the service elevator down numerous floors into the basement and severely burning the occupant. This is the victim William Rodriguez rescued, and in fact it's Rodriguez' testimony to NIST I'm referencing, as well as the Naudet video that recorded numerous witnesses in the lobby reporting sheets of fire coming from the elevator shafts.

When I'm hearing eyewitness reports of "fireballs", sheets of flame in the lobby", and "forcing elevators down numerous floors into the basement" all this is going to cause a hell of a lot of racket. Physics have to apply to your conspiracy theories just as they have to apply to everyone else.

These objects you speak of, can you list what of each were on the floors that were affected by the impact/fire? What fuel tanks are you referring to? It was powered by electric right?

I don't know and frankly I don't care. It's an established fact that in the south tower the plane hit on floors 78-85, and almost immediately below it on floors 75-76 was a mechanical floor that services the needs of that section of the building- the motors for the elevators, electrical transformers, pressurized pipes, backup generators, etc- and this floor had thousands of gallons of burning aviation fuel dumped into it and it can't NOT cause catastrophic damage in that area. I base this not on speculation but experience- in my last job, the electrical transformer in the building across the street from me overheated and literally exploded like a bomb. It shook my own building and set that building on fire, which forced us to evacuate our building, so it stands to reason that if even ONE flammable component in the building exploded from the fires, then we need to accept the possibility that all the explosions were from flammable components in the building exploding from the fires.

Like or not, you cannot get around the engraved in stone fact that the buildings stood reliably and silently for almost thirty years and weird things only began happening after the planes hit them.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


On to the next "anomaly"...

Here is a clue everyone missed, British false flag attacks in Saudi pre 9/11 to create a new terror group in order to dissuade the Saudis from funding Palestine to the tune of $1 billion dollars. The MI6 agents were however captured. Shortly after, 9/11 happened, draw your own conclusions.

www.abovetopsecret.com...