World Trade Center eyewitness distinctly describes bombs going off prior to collapse

This video came out recently from NIST via the FOIA. As if we needed more proof...

reply to post by ericsnow


Wow great video. Of course the debunkers will come on and say he was just under stress and didn't know what he saw. Where ya at Good Ole Dave? lol

Why is the man cut off in mid-sentence ? Anybody got the rest of it ?

reply to post by ericsnow


Very CLEAR description from the witness. Can't make that stuff up.
He wasn't confused in the least. Great video! Thanks for posting it!
S&F

He describes sound like firecracers going off as the buldings began coming down - exactly what you would expect to hear as floors start to pancake progressively down on top on one another.

Bear in mind that the collapse reaches speeds of 250mph by the time it reaches the bottom - so the compression effect caused by a floor pancaking down in a fraction of a second is enormous - why it's just like an explosion!

This is the obvious and yet not considered explanation to what hte witness describes,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,because OP is not remotely interested in the truth!


Further what conspirator in thier right mind would plant explosives on every single floor!?? - wouldn't one be enough?

It has been ten yrs now - and yet this tripe is being still promoted as 'evidence'

reply to post by JohhnyBGood


right on cue! thanks! Remember Nist didn't test for explosives because they said there were no eyewitness accounts or audible explosions on videos. I've personally seen about 10 videos recently of people talking about explosions that NIST had in their possession.

Who are you people really?

Originally posted by mayabong
reply to post by JohhnyBGood

 

right on cue! thanks

So - why did they wire up every single floor with explosives?

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

Originally posted by mayabong
reply to post by JohhnyBGood

 

right on cue! thanks

So - why did they wire up every single floor with explosives?

sorry I edited my post above and added more. I don't know why, all I know is the offical story stinks and you know it.

He is correct... You 911 folks will only see the one side.. No matter what. If this guy had stated he didnt remember hearing anything.. You would say he was freaked out and stressed out and didnt know what he heard...

I lost all faith in 911 truthers when they claimed a missile hit the Pentagon. I was there ... I saw it.. It was a jet air liner. PERIOD!!!!

Wow ok, so he saw somehow explosions from the corner going off 25 floors below the fires. Ok, sounds reasonable, but a couple questions: Was this WTC1 or WTC2? Was this well before the collapse? Where is the video of the collapses that show distinctly what he says? Or is he slightly off in his experience of what he saw?

I do not deny his account, so i dont want the TM to jump down my throat saying that I am calling him a liar. People's inital accounts will always vary in detail, due to stress, different angle or view, or in the excitement will describe the event which has never been experienced before into terms they are familiar with, ie in this case, "bombs going off" in describing the collapse. How many times have we heard a tornado shredding a house as a freight train roaring through their house? Or a large car accident or train derailment which sounded like a bomb exploded, or sounded like an explosion?

If what he said is true then we should have been seeing explosions in the same matter he described it. Shouldnt be too hard to find footage that correlates his story as the Towers were being taped from nearly 360 degress around them, and even from the air. But I know I know, using some common sense to rationally think things through is strictly verboten in the TM world.

I have now found and viewed various clips of Mr Lemos saying the same thing and they all terminate while he is saying "fire-crackers".

This patently isn't the end of the interview so what are we being denied ?

reply to post by mayabong


And every single charge went off on cue.
In all three buildings.
Despite the fires.
Despite the airplane crashing through.

Right. I want some of what you are smoking.

reply to post by JohhnyBGood


Is nist saying here that pancake theory is wrong? lol
wtc.nist.gov...

NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by mayabong

 

And every single charge went off on cue.
In all three buildings.
Despite the fires.
Despite the airplane crashing through.

Right. I want some of what you are smoking.

Like I said I dont know how it was all done.

I know pilots arch's and engineers and military personnel say it was an inside job. I know through my own research that something is way off. Especially the wars that have happened in the aftermath of these attacks.

People on the 911 commission have resigned saying it was a coverup. And you're gonna still believe what the Commission says?

Please give me what YOU are smoking.

reply to post by mayabong


You have to really catch up with the times and facts about the "pancake theory". The "PT" was originally thought of as the initiator of the collapses. But this was refined, and found to be false, when it was noticed that the exterior columns were bending inwards, being pulled in by the trusses sagging from the fires. This was tested and evaluated and found to be correct, as we see the initiation of the collapses begin when the exterior columns bend inward causing the building to start its collapse. Once the collapse was underway, the floors below lost connections to the exterior columns from the force of the huge mass of building already moving down on it, severing the floor-truss connections, and causing the floors to fall and "pancake" down onto each other. This was already discussed years ago, and yet why is it still being brought up as if its something new? NIST discovered that their original theory of why the building collapse started was wrong, and they corrected it. Why you find it to be suspect or whatever is beyond me.

Where else are the floors below suppose to go when they start falling down?

This is what a real high-rise cd looks and sounds like :-

www.youtube.com...

I doubt that this equates to Mr Lemos ' "firecrackers" and I am still unhappy that the man was cut off.

I haven't seen video of either tower to remotely match the above clip.

reply to post by GenRadek


i was just replying to the post where he said the floors pancaked. thats all.

People on the 911 commission have resigned saying it was a coverup.

Proof please?

This man is clearly stating that he saw the building exploding around the 75th floor just prior to collapse and even goes as far as to say it sounded like firecrackers; this is irrefutably an accurate depiction of his account. Normally, anyone with an IQ would take him at his word and consider the possibilities and ramifications of his eyewitness account and begin looking at evidence to see if it supports his claims. Of course that is not the case here, you jokers are trying to interpret what he is saying in order to change it or just outright dismissing him as wrong or a liar. What's more is some people did actually look at the evidence (Dr. Jones) and found that it did actually support the idea that there were explosions that created the almost uniform structural failure.

If you want to dispute this as a fact, then join the discussions between turbofan and pteridine because that is the correct place where the science is being debated by at least one competant member. Anyone who takes the time to look at those two threads can make easily make a determination as to whom is actually pursuing the truth and who is not. Here are the threads here and here, respectively.

Unfortunately, no matter how much visual, audio, or physical evidence anyone presents; regardless of the hundreds of eyewitness accounts, these idiots will stick to their imaginary guns and we will never get another investigation. Great find and OP by the way, star and flag.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
So - why did they wire up every single floor with explosives?

Do you think asking "why?" is some kind of rebuttal, if we can't also prove a motive to your satisfaction?

Forget it. There are hundreds of eyewitness accounts and other pieces of evidence in videos (where you can actually hear them and see people reacting to them happening), video testimony like above from everyone from civilians to firefighters to police, written testimony from the same, of explosions before and during the collapses, and for 10 years people like you have hand-waved it away because you somehow came to the conclusion that you already know better. With that kind of blatant evidence in your face and you still being able to dismiss it habitually, why should anyone try proving anything to you at all anymore?