World Trade Center + Explosives

I can tell you how they got them in. Watch Loose Change 9/11. In there it states tehat a week or so before 9/11 there were random "security drills" and the bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the building that week.

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Or even better show us how exactly they planted these explosives through out two enormous buildings with no one noticeing.

People did notice. Just people like you choose to ignore their statements. Just like the 9/11 commission. Why is that?

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Or even better show us how exactly they planted these explosives through out two enormous buildings with no one noticeing.

People did notice. Just people like you choose to ignore their statements. Just like the 9/11 commission. Why is that?

They ignore it because they don't wan to believe its true. It's hard to believe the government that is meant to protect us would do something like that but here is a quote that is said many times.

"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few"

Really Griff?

You have some eye witnesses that say they saw people planting explosives on columns?

That is the first I have heard of such reports, you have any links to them?

Pepper,

Actually the bomb sniffing dogs were not removed, the amount of them was stepped down. There were still bomb sniffing bombs in the building.

www.911myths.com...

And how exactly do security drills equate to ripping out walls to plant explosives?


[edit on 18-10-2006 by LeftBehind]

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Really Griff?

You have some eye witnesses that say they saw people planting explosives on columns?

That is the first I have heard of such reports, you have any links to them?

Do you really think that the average citizen could be able to identify the difference between explosive charges and say new cable installations? No I don't have any links, but there a many people who claim that the buildings were shut down for long periods and other mysterious things before 9/11. Don't say that's not true because the only reason Mark what's his name is alive today is because he took 9/11 off to get the networks back in order after this unprecedented power down.

Furthermore, there would only be a few places needed to be detonated for the buildings to fall. So, the whole building didn't need to be "wired". Just a few key floors.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Really Griff?

You have some eye witnesses that say they saw people planting explosives on columns?

That is the first I have heard of such reports, you have any links to them?

Do you really think that the average citizen could be able to identify the difference between explosive charges and say new cable installations? No I don't have any links, but there a many people who claim that the buildings were shut down for long periods and other mysterious things before 9/11. Don't say that's not true because the only reason Mark what's his name is alive today is because he took 9/11 off to get the networks back in order after this unprecedented power down.

Furthermore, there would only be a few places needed to be detonated for the buildings to fall. So, the whole building didn't need to be "wired". Just a few key floors.

Do you really think that the engineers, architects, eletricians, etc. that managed and worked in the towers wouldn't notice bogus cable installations?

sorry posted in the wrong thread..

Carry on.

[edit on 10/19/2006 by ThichHeaded]

Originally posted by Griff
No I don't have any links, but there a many people who claim that the buildings were shut down for long periods and other mysterious things before 9/11.

So which is it, people noticed "mysterious" things, or they noticed people planting explosives?

After all, we were talking about people who noticed someone planting explosives, which you responded,
"People did notice. Just people like you choose to ignore their statements."

Which is a little harsh if the only thing you have to prove this is people noticing mysterious things. And one person who claims the power was shut down in one tower for a day or so.

And Scott Forbes isn't even believed by people who support the demolition theories.

911review.com...

After being posted on scores of websites for over a year, this story has failed to elicit any corroborating reports, even about the identity of 'Scott Forbes'. Aside from the fact that the sourcing of the story doesn't meet the most basic journalistic standards, its content is thoroughly implausible.

Question...since when do explosives not leave a seismic reading?.... Explosives make P waves, followed by S waves, from small explosives to nuclear bombs...

The only P waves recorded by the seismic stations, which recorded the whole event, was when the planes hit the towers... no other P waves were recorded..

Here is a small article about explosives and P waves.

bssa.geoscienceworld.org...

But i guess the "government came up with an explosive that makes no P-waves"....right?...

A little more about P waves generated by explosives/earthquakes.

hakone.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp...

Lets deny ignorance please...

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Question...since when do explosives not leave a seismic reading?.... Explosives make P waves, followed by S waves, from small explosives to nuclear bombs...

The only P waves recorded by the seismic stations, which recorded the whole event, was when the planes hit the towers... no other P waves were recorded..

Here is a small article about explosives and P waves.

bssa.geoscienceworld.org...

But i guess the "government came up with an explosive that makes no P-waves"....right?...

A little more about P waves generated by explosives/earthquakes.

hakone.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp...

Lets deny ignorance please...

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Muaddib]

Maybe the government decided to keep the seismic reports 'under wraps'.

Afterall, they can get their hands anywhere.

Originally posted by half_minded

Maybe the government decided to keep the seismic reports 'under wraps'.

Afterall, they can get their hands anywhere.

Errr...no.... There were several seismic stations which recorded what happened that day, they recorded the P waves produced by the plane crashes and then the S waves from both the crashes and the collapse of the towers.

We don't live in a dictatorship, despite some people trying to claim so....

All seismic stations are not "owned by the government"... some of them are, but not all... and several seismic stations recorded the events of that day.

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Errr...no.... There were several seismic stations which recorded what happened that day, they recorded the P waves produced by the plane crashes and then the S waves from both the crashes and the collapse of the towers.

We don't live in a dictatorship, despite some people trying to claim so....

All seismic stations are not "owned by the government"... some of them are, but not all... and several seismic stations recorded the events of that day.

Please research this topic again and you will see that several websites have reported that seismic activity was recorded for the explosions. I have included a couple of links on this topic and the first link is from BBC, a very credible source.

* Scientists released seismic recordings made at several monitoring stations situated in northeast America.....

The seismic signals generated by the collapsing north and south towers were much stronger than those from the two airliner impacts.

Please reacd through these and backup your claims with some research before you post false information to mislead the public.


news.bbc.co.uk...

www.911review.com...

911research.wtc7.net...

How were the terrorists able to get in a extremely secure building with explosives big enough to take a huge steel structure down?

[edit on 19-10-2006 by half_minded]

Also I must add one more piece of information.

* That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping....

link: www.whitehouse.gov...

The goverment changed its official story from no explosives to blaing the explosives on the terrorists. Obviously they take the public to be stupid and didn't think that people would notice the explosives. Since they were not able to cover it up and were not able to debunk the experts claiming it was explosives, they changed the official story.
This proves their dishonesty. And the official story is so vague anyways that It's hard not to consider that they had a hand in the attacks themselves.

Still there are people who belive anything that comes out of that man's mouth. amazing.

Half Minded,

The government NEVER said that explosives went off in the towers. Bush is describing a seperate incident that was planned by Sheik Mohammed but never went into operation.

Originally posted by doctorfungi
Half Minded,

The government NEVER said that explosives went off in the towers. Bush is describing a seperate incident that was planned by Sheik Mohammed but never went into operation.

Allegdly, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was among the people behind 9/11. The fact that Bush mentions explosives being used in that matter is a direct hint from him to say that the explosives could have been placed by terrorists to trap people on the top floors.

Another sad attempt by Bush at trying to twist theories so that if we get absolute proof of the explosivs he can calim they were placed by terrorists to trap people.

The seismic activities monitored by stations on 9/11 are direct hard evidences of explosives being in the towers combined with witnesses and their accounts.

Originally posted by Pepperslappy
I can tell you how they got them in. Watch Loose Change 9/11. In there it states tehat a week or so before 9/11 there were random "security drills" and the bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the building that week.

Here's one way, and it would have happened after they pulled the dogs.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Muaddib
Question...since when do explosives not leave a seismic reading?.... Explosives make P waves, followed by S waves, from small explosives to nuclear bombs...

The only P waves recorded by the seismic stations, which recorded the whole event, was when the planes hit the towers... no other P waves were recorded..

Here is a small article about explosives and P waves.

bssa.geoscienceworld.org...

But i guess the "government came up with an explosive that makes no P-waves"....right?...

A little more about P waves generated by explosives/earthquakes.

hakone.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp...

Lets deny ignorance please...

[edit on 19-10-2006 by Muaddib]

Question Mauddib. Does thermite/mate cause p waves? Since it doesn't explode, I would assume no.

Originally posted by LeftBehind
After all, we were talking about people who noticed someone planting explosives, which you responded,
"People did notice. Just people like you choose to ignore their statements."

Which is a little harsh if the only thing you have to prove this is people noticing mysterious things. And one person who claims the power was shut down in one tower for a day or so.

I guess I was being a little over zealous in stating that people did see explosives being planted.....I ment that people did see mysterious things.

And Scott Forbes isn't even believed by people who support the demolition theories.

911review.com...

After being posted on scores of websites for over a year, this story has failed to elicit any corroborating reports, even about the identity of 'Scott Forbes'. Aside from the fact that the sourcing of the story doesn't meet the most basic journalistic standards, its content is thoroughly implausible.

If Scott Forbes is who I was thinking about, then why is he still alive? What does he have to gain by lying? I'll look into if he is who I'm talking about.

Originally posted by LeftBehind
And Scott Forbes isn't even believed by people who support the demolition theories.

911review.com...

After being posted on scores of websites for over a year, this story has failed to elicit any corroborating reports, even about the identity of 'Scott Forbes'. Aside from the fact that the sourcing of the story doesn't meet the most basic journalistic standards, its content is thoroughly implausible.

I don't get this. Scott Forbes is known to have worked at the WTC. He has been interviewed. So how can they say "even about the identity of Scott Forbes"? Tell them to watch "9/11 Mysteries". He tells his story in front of the camera. How can his identity be in question? Unless you just want to discount him without listening to what he has to say?

Also, I can think of a theory why his story hasn't been corroborated. They say his story has been on websites. My question: which websites? Mostly CT sites. I bet not alot of people who worked in the WTC go to CT websites to see what he has to say.

Question LeftBehind. Have you watched "9/11 Mysteries"? At least the Scott Forbes part of it?

Edit to add: Scott Forbes lost all of his coworkers and would have lost his life himself had he not taken 9/11 off. What does he have to gain to lie about a power outage? I'm sure people are going to say "but he's getting paid to tell his 'story'". Yeah right.

[edit on 10/19/2006 by Griff]

I think someone suggested earlier in this thread that controlled demolitions do not start from the top down, rather destroying the base and working upwards. It can actually be performed in many different ways. I think top down destruction is considered more risky but does happen.