Sept.13 2001...20 photo's taken by Ed. rare pictures

[DemInDistress]

the first time I seen these.
These photos were taken at Ground Zero, the World Trade Center site in New York, on September 13, 2001.

They were taken by someone named "Ed" who was allowed into the area by a member of the emergency response crew, at a time when all civilians -- including most journalists -- were forbidden to enter the area. As a result, these photos are just about the only close-ups ever taken of the World Trade Center site so soon after the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.zombietime.com/wtc_9-13-2001/

its late, goodnight !!

[reprehensor]

1. Thank you.

Can anyone identify Building 5 in the shots?

[DemInDistress]

3. try this....WT6 on the left WT5 on the right.. both severly

damaged but didn't collapse yet behind both WT7 is DOWN COMPLETELY. wow, How'd they do that?

[hack89]

5. I thought that WT7 had a unique design ..

using cantilevered trusses - perhaps it was an inherently weaker design? I do know that it was radically different then the other buildings.

[reprehensor]

6. Thanks.

I was trying to spot the "Flight 175 Wreckage".



http://www.explosive911analysis.com/planted.htm

Can anybody spot it? No Photoshopping!

[simonm]

2. Evidence of explosive force is supported

Great photos. We should archive everything as evidence.

Look at the buildings across the street. Can you believe some folks don't consider this as proof of an explosive force? Something heavy was also ejected and crushed everything in its path.

"NY, September 18, 2001 -- Ohio Task Force workers anchored this 600,000-pound beam from the World Trade Center lodged in a nearby building.Photo by Michael Rieger/ FEMA News Photo"
http://www.911da.org/crr/images/CRRDB/data/documents/3424.htm



More closeup photos
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzap6.html

[salvorhardin]

4. 600,000 pounds seems like a typo

That would be 300 tons. Even if that beam was 300 feet long, I can't see it weighing a ton a foot or 167 pounds per inch.

You have the wrong photo with that caption anyway.
Title: Ohio Task Force workers anchored this 600,000-pound beam from the World Trade Center lodged in a nearby building.
Description: NY, September 18, 2001 -- Ohio Task Force workers anchored this 600,000-pound beam from the World Trade Center lodged in a nearby building.Photo by Michael Rieger/ FEMA News Photo
Photographer: Rieger, Michael
http://www.911da.org/crr/images/CRRDB/data/documents/3424.htm


60,000 pounds might be the real number.

[simonm]

10. Picture doesn't show complete damage. Here are more photos.

Here are more photos of the same area with different angles. Estimated trajectory is highlighted in red.













Edit: added 1 more.

[libertypirate]

7. Ok these were two days after 9-11?

How long did it take them to dig through the pile?

Because if these are two days after the collapse there is something missing....

Where are the 110 floors? that's a lot of material considering the size of these piles...

However their date there is one strange pattern that stands out in this photo:



The standing remains of each structure are identical patterns facing different directions, and mirroring each other.

The surrounding piles are likewise identical, except where one lies above the other. That seems to not be the bulk of where the rubble landed, the bulk by what these pictures describe is directly over their foundations.

[mirandapriestly]

8. weird , duplicate remains..nt

[Harald Ragnarsson]

9. Obvious building collapse

WTF ever. I'm sure a building collapsing ends up in a little pile of twisted shit in its' own footprint naturally. This whole site has awesome pictures. http://www.parrhesia.com/wtc/

That building above in the thread with the beam sticking it out of it? That looks like the same type of damage WTC 7 was alleged to have sustained, ie corner of building ripped out etc, yet that building still seems to be standing strong.

Also, in other pictures on sites listed in this thread, it is plain that the buildings fell virtually in their own footprint. In several shots, less than a half a block from the rubble pile there is no debris to be seen, traffic is moving. If you couldn't see the ridiculous pile of scrap that used to be two 110 story steel skyscrapers in the pic, you'd think it was just a picture of everyday life in the big city.

This shit's getting beyond ridiculous. When you can't even discuss it on OUR side, well, WTF are you supposed to do?

I'm taking pic out, it's too big. Here's the link to the pic

.html

[file83]

11. I couldn't agree with you more. For instance, look at that picture

you posted: .html
Look at this one too:

What's strange about that? I want people to think about it for a second. Think.

If the exterior lattice work can withstand the collapse of the entire building (both buildings left identical exterior lattice work remains), tell me, why aren't there any signs of the 47 interior (center) structural columns still standing in the foot print of EITHER building? The interior columns were the main structural support work for the WTC towers, and there is no sign of them anywhere (I see maybe 1 short piece leaning over), yet an entire section of the weaker, exterior, lattice work remains standing?

In other words, if the exterior is so strong, then why don't we see the stronger interior columns still standing? Hmmm....

The point should be obvious, but I'll state it for those than don't get it. The center columns are GONE, fallen, because they were cut every 30 ft by shape charges. That's the only way the columns could START to fall, and it's the only way the interior columns could CONTINUE to fall ALL THE WAY TO THE GROUND. The exterior lattice work is still standing near the ground because it wasn't compromised by shape charges.

Draw your own conclusions, but that is mine and no one, nothing, will ever convince me otherwise.