Seriously, I have to confess where I was wrong about the WTC

[JackRiddler]

Until now, I've thought simply that it made no sense for anyone who had arranged to take down the towers by explosive demolition on 9/11/01 to stage "foreplay explosions" at the WTC complex in advance of the actual demolitions.

I figured the reports of pre-collapse explosions were due to fuel, transformers, fire, the sound of bodies crashing to the ground, and so forth. (This in no way conflicts with the possibility that the Towers were, in fact, demolished by explosives.)

But with the release of the firefighter tapes, I have to say there are so many reports of explosions before the main collapse events - many of them accumulated at this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x51793

that I have to back off from my old certainty.

Still, what's the point of advance explosions? If the whole thing is about to be brought down, why bother blowing up small parts of it in advance?

I also note how many people saw bright flashes through the windows at the beginning of the South Tower collapse, such as bombs would make.

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. Maybe to weaken

key parts of the structure before bringing the whole building down, in order to not be so obvious? Kind of like taking down a tent so it collapses easily. Take out all the pegs first and the tent can still stand, then you just have to pop the poles out.

[JackRiddler]

2. but in the oral reports

the advance explosions do not appear to be so systematic. And if they're hitting structural elements, it risks toppling the buildings earlier than planned and in an uncontrolled fashion (and possibly leaving massive amounts of unexploded ordnance in place to be discovered later).

One possibility is to destroy specific targets in advance, such as the FBI offices and files allegedly on North Tower floors 22-23, but again: isn't the main event going to do that for you?

Another possibility is to scare the shit out of people and get them moving out of there.

I wonder how many of the firefighters are going to say they believe equally today that what they experienced in advance of the tower falls were in fact explosions of the pre-planted variety?

[philb]

3. Perhaps some go off due to unexpected reasons; but most seem

to have been just before or during the "collapse" sequence

And its clear a lot of them saw the same things.

the newly released NY Police statements had similar reports of explosions, some well before the collapse.

http://www.flcv.com/nypolice.html

Its unlikely a plane with jet fuel would be enough to bring down a big steel framed building. That was the conventional wisdom before 9/11, so there may have been several methods used to expand the damage.
And it appears that the buildings didn't come as straight down as some assume or believe. The tops seem to have fallen on neighboring buildings and streets. There were reports of explosions, tilting top sections, before the collapse in both buildings. And it appeared that the explosions affected the tops first. Except that there also were ground level explosions reported by many, both earlier and just before the "collapse".


But the building core appears to have saved several firefighters and occupants who were towards the bottom of Stairway B in the Core when WTC1 collapsed.

[Rich Hunt]

4. couldn't that just be...

Because, like, megaskyscrapers have lots of wiring and stuff?

Nah, it couldn't be because of anything like that. It must be because a bunch of totally unnecessary bombs were placed in a building that would eventually come down on its own anyway.

Its unlikely a plane with jet fuel would be enough to bring down a big steel framed building.

What curious language. No - not if the plane just happens to be sitting there, minding its own business, as if it had just stopped over for tea.

And who on earth expects any building that's coming down to "come straight down". That's a paraphrasing. I don't think anyone argued that junk wasn't coming down all over the place. Straw man.

[Kevin Fenton]

5. If you ask me...

There weren't any advance explosions at the bases of the towers. I still explain them away as the mistaken impressions of eyewitnesses and explosions due to things other than bombs, like problems with the wiring.

If there were advance explosions, then I attribute it to the bombers having such a short time to reprogramme the firing sequences - I doubt they were expecting to start on the 80th floor of the South Tower.

[philb]

10. See related on the firemen statement thread ; these are 2

there were lots of reports that WTC1 lobby was ok at first, devasted at end; with windows out before WTC2 collapsed so dust came in from there. Here are 2 examples of several.


Lt. NEIL BROSNAN FDNY WTC1 Explosion in lower level

SO I WENT BACK OUT TOWARDS THE WEST STREET SIDE OF WORLD TRADE CENTER 1 AT THIS TIME I ENCOUNTERED 238 AT AN LIVAT BANK AND THEY WERE ASKING The SECURITY GUARD WAS IT FIRE DEPARTMENT MANNED ELEVATOR AND HAD JUST TOLD THEM THAT WE ARE NOT ASSIGNED TO WTC1. FOLLOW ME AND WE WILL PROCEED DEEPER IN THE BUILDING AND WELL PICK UP THE HALLWAYS. THAT WILL GET US ACROSS BACK TO WTC2.
AT THIS TIME CAUGHT THE EXPLOSION COMING COMING OUT FROM MY LEFT SIDE SEEN THE CEILING COMING DOWN AND WE ALL GOT LOW AND BACKED DOWN DEAD END HALLWAY. ME AND THE OFFICER FROM 238 AND THE SECURITY GUARDS AND BELIEVE TWO OF HIS MEMBERS GOT LOW AND BACK DOWN AND ALL RECALL IS FOR ME IT WAS THE RIGHT WALL THAT WOULD BE MY WALL BACK OUT TO WEST STREET.

WHEN CRAWLED OUT WE BECAME ENTANGLED WITH CIVILIANS OUR MASKS GOT ENTANGLED BELIEVE ON TURNSTILES COMING OUT OF THEIR SECURITY POSTS AND WITH CIVILIANS PUSHING US Out. LOST MY MASK AT THIS POINT AT THIS POINT TRIED TO GO BACK TOWARDS MY MEMBERS BUT WE HAD 20, PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN UPWARDS OF 30 CIVILIANS PUSHING US OUT THIS WAY AND IT BECAME THE BEST OPTION FOR ME ME AND 238 CRAWLED BACK OUT TO WEST STREET.

WE WERE BLOWN DOWN THE HALLWAY MY LEFT EYE WAS BLINDED BY DEBRIS OUR MOUTHS WERE STUFFED WITH THE CONCRETE DEBRIS FROM THE EXPLOSION AND AT THIS TIME WHEN I WAS GETTING BLOWN DOWN THOUGHT THIS WAS THE THIRD PLANE ESU WAS TALKING ABOUT.

ACTUALLY THE EXPLOSION CAME IN THROUGH THOSE DOORS AND CAME UP BEHIND THE WAY WE HAD COME IN AND THAT THAT THE EXPLOSION CAME FROM THE WAY HAD JUST LEFT.
DID YOU KNOW WHAT THE EXPLOSION WAS?
NO. WE NEVER HEARD THROUGH THIS WHOLE EVENT THROUGH THE COLLAPSE OF OTHER THAN, WELL WORLD TRADE CENTER 1 I HAPPENED TO BE THERE. I SEEN THAT COLLAPSE

A. I went in a good 200 yards, right short of the Path station. Retreated back when I seen 238 coming in the hallway I had just come in. I had just hooked up with 238 at the elevator bank.

They observed the explosion and the hallway disappeared. They thought the hallway blew up where I had come from. They thought they seen debris coming down and said, “The Lieutenant’s dead.” My senior guy regroups the company. He yells out, “Regroup”. They’re under light debris also.
But actually on their third search in they encountered a heavy rubble and heavy fire field in that concourse level, which they didn’t know what it was. They just knew that—they actually stretched the house line and there was no water. They said, “Okay, time to leave"


FIREFIGHTER PAUL HYLAND

WTC1
We went in, busted through one of the windows, opened up, made like a door. The maintenance guy said I think the elevators are working, or it was the Chief said it. The Chief went around and says take a look at some of the elevators. I think we had a
maintenance guy with us at the time. He said these low-rise are working, it will get you up to 16. So we went up to 16, which was great because, walking 16 flights, we wouldn't be able to operate.

Now I'm about 20 to 25 feet from the windows and the building starts to shake, and I look out and I'm just seeing all the
steel from the south tower coming down right in front of my face, just all the steel, I mean, everything.
Then someone gave a Mayday to get out of the building. So it took us quite a bit of time to hit the lobby and it was just destroyed. I mean, it looked like -- it wasn't the same lobby 15 minutes ago. It was just completely gone, every window was shattered, all the ceiling tile, the elevator banks had let go it seemed, the floor was all crushed down.

[philb]

18. I agree there were no definative fireman statements about lobby blast; but

the firemen weren't going into basement and there is no discussion of events in the basements by them. But there were reports by janitors, building engineers, policemen, etc. of ground level or basedment explosions. See Tarpley and etc. and


(pa-police-reports01.pdf pages 10-11)
Lieutenant Michael Murphy
Handwritten report.
Pages 3&4


“…We came upon the NYPD Chief of Detectives with a couple of his men. They appeared to be appraising the situation. We proceeded past them and were within a block of WTC when a couple of loud explosions occurred in front of us.”


(pa-police-reports01.pdf pages 17, 24)
Alan T. DeVona
Page 2, Chronological Report of the WTC Radio Transmissions on 9/11/01

“0853 4-1 radios WTC Police Desk reporting an explosion on the lower level.
0853 WTC Desk replies there was an explosion on the upper floors.”


(and the firemen report something other than the WTC2 collapse affected lobby area of WTC1)

[philb]

25. Firefighter reports first floor explosion when WTC2 fell

FIREFIGHTER PATRICK MARTIN
WTC2
My lieutenant said he looked down at the first floor, and he could see the first floor of the south tower like exploding out. I looked up. I looked up, and the sky was filled with that debris cloud.

[philb]

26. Floor level or Lower level Explosions reported by N.Y. Police

Floor level or Lower level Explosions reported by N.Y. Police

(pa-police-reports01.pdf pages 17, 24) Alan T. DeVona Page 2, Chronological Report of the WTC Radio Transmissions on 9/11/01
“0853 4-1 radios WTC Police Desk reporting an explosion on the lower level.

(pa-police-reports02.pdf page 88) Sergeant Michael McGarry Chronicle of Response and Rescue Efforts – September 11, 2001 Page 1
“Within a short period of time (approximately ¾ of an hour) one of the buildings to the World Trade Center collapsed. During this time period there were numerous explosions, causing us to leave and re-enter the incident area.”

[medienanalyse]

6. yawn. Please rethink ....

dear friend -

and imagine to be a firefighter. let us say in the ground or in the staircase 300 feet above. The lelvators already had come down, the whole building is full of screaminf people who are to be led out.

And now you hear through the hollow elevator-cases an explosion hollering like hell. Why should you not talk about an explosion ? It is the "bang" sound that you heard. you cannot see it - ot is hundreds of feet away.

It is so simple.

Imagine 100 square feet of concrete falling 8 feet on another platform of concrete. What sound do you expect? Whisper ?

The "pancakes" were not so nice to fall all in the 12 seconds of the "implosion" of the WTC. Every platform - see the photos" was built by dozens of single "pancakes". The steel cramps were weak here in that time, broke there in another time, got shifted out there in another time too. So that one by one the intact platforms beyond the place of impact wre loaded more and more with the above ones.
Which makes "explosions".
Which leads to the final breakdown after a certain pack of load.

Where is the problem ?

Besides of the hundreds of stupid implications that are implied with an "explosion" theory ....

Are you testing us ? I do not understand what is going on with your questions.

[pox americana]

9. What are you trying to say?

I can't figure out which collapse theory you're defending.

[medienanalyse]

11. why not ?

It is no theory.

It is the simple "pancake" fact.

tons of concrete falling on tons of concrete make "bang". Sounds like an exüöpsion hollering through hundreds of meters of hollow staircases and elevator cases.

See the photos. Compare the WTC with a pack of hundred chessboards hanging in a outside girder but every field in a grid too. And after the impact one field after the other falls out of the grid. at first only in the pffices which were directly hit by the planes.

Or if you want to take the game "memory", and every card in a grid. And hundred grids stuck in the outside girder. That is the elegant and flexible and storm-proof construction of the WTC. Nothing new but consequently ignored by the conspiracy idiots.

You need a critical mass of single platforms falling out of their cramos to produce the weight for the then suddenly coming pancake implosion of the WTC towers. Where is the problem ? It is so simple.

[pox americana]

13. Simple, yes. Plausible, no.

You left out the chess pieces--287 steel columns keeping the "chessboards" from banging into each other.

[pox americana]

14. Another problem

The floors weren't really like "chessboards," TV animations to the contrary. They were more like cooling fins on the outside of a transformer, relatively narrow strips ringing the structural cores, which were substantial (87 x 137 feet according to FEMA).

[medienanalyse]

15. and what are you going to tell us?

that steel cannot break or weaken or just be shifted away or what? Do you expect an account for every single cramp ?

[janedoe]

16. Why would the steel "break or weaken or just be shifted away?"

If you will not consider the possibility that humans deliberately used explosives to blow up the WTC towers, there are few possibilities left. The next most likely explanation would be that non-humans (e.g. martians) "shifted" the supports "away."

[medienanalyse]

20. are you telling us that

a plane with a thrust of hundreds of cars and a velocity of about one third of a gun bullet just fired is

UNABLE

to shift cramps and steel columns ?

Even in the more idiotic threads about the pentagon which never ever no way could have been hit by a big plane, only by a small one or a whatever - even in that absurd theory people cannot deny that an even smaller ghostplane was able to break through
Outer wall 1
steel columns,
inner wall1
outer wall1

and then next ring:
outer wall 1
inner wall 1
outer wall1

and at least in the third ring
outer wall 1


And you are doubting the shift of steel? The weakening of steel ?

Have you ever had a car srash ? Ever seen how steel bends and breaks even without any temperature ? Or do Marsians drive your car`...

[janedoe]

21. Why would the steel "break or weaken or just be shifted away?"

I thought I would ask this question, again.
Perhaps you missed it in my previous post, as your response to it didn't address the question.

So, why would the steel "break or weaken or just be shifted away?"

[pox americana]

22. Exactly. Steel is flexible, ductile, durable, strong and conductive.

Structural steel is very hard to "break," especially with a weak force like gravity or the momentum of a plane collision. The metal in planes is completely different because they have to be light enough to fly.

The sad thing is that if the Bush administration hadn't seen fit to destroy them, the Twin Towers probably would have stood for several centuries.

[vincent_vega_lives]

30. It's also smooth and shiny when polished

It also doesn't need to break to fail in it's purpose.

Gravity gets pretty powerful when you add significant mass. Accelerate a 100,000ton, 20 story building to 8 m/s and tell me how weak the force generated is.

[vincent_vega_lives]

29. this is just silly

So, why would the steel "break or weaken or just be shifted away?"

Can you clarify your "question"? I seem to be reading it as if you think steel is indestructible or something.

[Kevin Fenton]

27. Pentagon

You mention seven walls in the Pentagon that the plane allegedly passed through. Actually there were only two, see here: http://www.911review.com/errors/pentagon/punchout.html

Did you get the seven walls from a site that doesn't check its facts, or did you make it up yourself?

Is your car made of steel? Or do you just crash it into steel things?

[medienanalyse]

28. counting

I said already: shal I give an account of any single cramp?

Now you begin to count. here: concerning the Pentagon.

Quote:"Thus it would be possible for an aircraft part that breached the facade to travel through this area on the ground floor, miss the columns"

"would be possible " ... Yes. I did not count the columns and not the cramps. I admit that I did not take into acount the open area on grond level. I just saw some holes in outside walls in different rings at regions which are obviously not combined ba a common grond level. Any office has normally the struchture of having a bootom, a ceiling and some walls. Hell: by luck the plane went into curves missing nearly all inside walls. I am not going to argue that. You do it, go on, be happy.

About the columns: there is a quote accurate account of steel columns which were NOT missed. Widely published, even on my site.

About my car: it is made of steel and plastic and whatever. What do you want to know? I said: see a car accident. Steel bends and crumbles and breaks and gets shifted. Smaller parts are more affected, heeavier parts less. That is all. Completely irrelevant what is the "partner" in a crash. Completely irrelevant that you obviously try toi turn my argument into a comparison between car and plane (which uses different material)

I said: steel bends and breaks and gets shifted, and it is a every day experience. And that you do not need melting temperatures. That is all.
And the E,D and C-Ring of the wedge had to be reconstructed. That is obvious too.

SO DO NOT COME WITH SUCH IDIOTISMS THAT A CRASH of a plane has no effect and that you need additional explosions to shift, break or bend the steel cramps of the platforms. That is all. That is the only point of conspiracy nuts.

"would be possible "
"would be possible " Ha Ha hHAHAHA.

[medienanalyse]

31. I notice people do not like to be ridiculed

even if it necessary.

[Kevin Fenton]

32. What's a cramp?

"by luck the plane went into curves missing nearly all inside walls."
What curves? The plane carried straight on.
What inside walls? There aren't any.
How does steel "get shifted"? Using handling equipment?
Here's a picture of the column damage at the Pentagon:

Looks like it was caused by a plane to me.

I can't work out what you're arguing for and against. Do you think the WTC collapsed because of the aircraft impact and fires? Do you think American 77 hit the Pentagon?

[LARED]

7. Well now that you've confessed,

you believe there were explosions planted to detonate prior to the actual demoltion charges, my faith in mankind and reason is restored.

Thank you.

[staticstopper]

8. no, thank you

[JackRiddler]

12. No actually

I confess only that I don't know.

Illogical as it seems to have "foreplay explosions," we should show some respect for the many people who were there and said they saw them.

At least, there is no reason to sneer.

[libertypirate]

17. You mean you faith in sticking to what you saw on TV.

Sir,

I hope you find what your looking for your ignorance is astounding. Someone admits they might be wrong about something, and you belittle them; what a looser. You would make the president proud attacking people for thinking.

It's funny the only people who dissuade the truth are merely guilty of not looking to ask questions. The truth for most of us is not what we know about what we know. It's about learning what we know is wrong and correcting ourselves; you take pride in "staying the course" kind of like that infantile ego maniac who keeps trying to start wars in the name of terrorism.

I want you to know that I think you’re an absurd joke, a small-minded fool, and best of all ignorant to your own lies. It's funny watching you do circles around your own bull.

When you turn to belittlement to make a point you loose, this is a sign of the morally and intellectually inept.

[LARED]

19. Sir. madam?

Please acquire a dictionary and look up irony. Your post is oozing with it.

Then look up sarcasm.

I am pointing out that Mr. JackRiddler, a articulate intelligent person whom I believe has much to say and should be carefully considered, is taking a step deeper into the CT void by "talking out of his school" rather than stepping into the light of understanding. My comments were not to belittle him but rather to amusingly (I hope)point out that his new insight only makes his position less believable.

[mikelewis]

23. I don't think the advanced explosions were planned...

The first tower fell in 10 seconds and the second in 8 second. Now people have been argueing about how long they actually fell but the fact is the siesmic data confirms these times. WTC7 fell in 18 seconds. {At least that's when they stopped shaking the ground signifigantly} So the question is, how come the towers shook the ground in a "shorter" amount of time than WTC7 in spite of the fact the WTC7 was less than half the height.

I think they may have went a bit overboard on the charges in the towers. I think they may have been afraid of having another Oklahoma Incident where the bombs in the buildings failed to explode and bring the building down. The explosive devices were probably wireless and were triggered prematurely by interference or heat. I don't think this was planned.

[Kevin Fenton]

24. 15 seconds

Why do you keep repeating the 8 and 10 seconds figures?
Why do you think the seismic data confirms them?

"Seismic records of the Twin Tower collapses show a large signal for each collapse lasting just under 10 seconds. The durations of the large signals are widely equated with the durations of the collapses themselves. However, the signals may correspond to only parts of the collapse events, such as the rubble reaching the ground."
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html

"video evidence of the North Tower collapse suggests that it took close to 15 seconds for the destruction to reach the ground."
You can see from the north tower video that it takes longer than 10 seconds for the north tower to fall, so why do you keep denying this?