Video Evidence There Was Controlled Demolitions.

From what Forbes says it was not the complete complex that power went down on

Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
by Victor Thorn - April 23, 2004

Forbes stated that Fiduciary Trust was one of the WTC’s first occupants after it was erected, and that a “power-down” had never been initiated prior to this occasion. He also stated that his company put forth a huge investment in time and resources to take down their computer systems due to the deliberate power outage. This process, Forbes recalled, began early Saturday morning (September 8th) and continued until mid-Sunday afternoon (September 9th) – approximately 30 hours. As a result of having its electricity cut, the WTC’s security cameras were rendered inoperative, as were its I.D. systems, and elevators to the upper floors.

~~

In addition, Forbes says there were other peculiarities revolving around this unreported event, including:

1) Fiduciary employees trapped between the 90-97th floors of the South Tower told family members (via cell-phone calls) that they were hearing “bomb-like explosions” throughout the towers.

2) Video cameras positioned atop the World Trade Center which were used to feed daily images to local television stations were inexplicably inoperative that morning.

3) A Fiduciary employee who was on one of the lower floors and escaped immediately after the first (North) tower was struck, reported that he was amazed by the large number of FBI agents that were already on the streets surrounding the WTC complex only minutes after the initial strike.

4) Last but not least, Ann Tatlock, CEO of Fiduciary Trust and now a board member of Franklin Templeton, had just arrived at a conference hosted by Warren Buffet at the Offutt Air Force Base (home of the U.S. Strategic Command Headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska) when the 9-11 attacks took place. Coincidentally, later that day President George W. Bush flew into this very same base on Air Force One for “security reasons.” Even more chilling are the Offutt AFB ties to the CIA’s MK ULTRA experiments, Project Monarch, the Franklin Cover-Up, and the diabolical practices of Michael Aquino. (Type any of these words into a search engine for more information.)

69.28.73.17...

Even George Bush said there where explosives used on the Towers
Snip from the White House web site.

Press Conference of the President

The Rose Garden

Sept. 15, 2006. White House photo by Eric Draper
~~

For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. 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.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Okay the POTUS said they used explosive, so how did they get the bombs in the building?


[edit on 16/6/2007 by Sauron]

Originally posted by Sauron
Okay the POTUS said they used explosive, so how did they get the bombs in the building?
[edit on 16/6/2007 by Sauron]

That's the million dollar question I guess Sauron, here's my take on the 'how' of it...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Let me get this straight. ONE tennant out of literally HUNDREDS said their was a power down for what, 32 hours? First of all, why havent ANY other tennants spoke of this? I heard this story from Mr. Forbes and to tell you the truth there isn't any proof of this.

Now...how am I supposed to prove something DIDN'T happen? The only way I can is by... lack of evidence. ANd there is plenty of that..no one else but Mr. Forbes has spoke of the power down.
IF there was a power down...it was only on ONE building. What I would like to know is..what would take 32 hours to have the power off for? I have NEVER EVER heard of this happening. Even if there were new conductors or buss installed, it would not take that long to do a tie over. IMO this power down is a farce and there is not any proof to back it up. ESPECIALLY in the entire WTC complex.

I found an interview with Scott Forbes, who is STILL the only person to report the power down that I have found. And this power down was ONLY from the 50th floor up.

**What I found odd was that Mr. Forbes was quoted as saying all the security cameras were off due to the power down.

Sorry Mr. Forbes. Most security systems in large buildings or highly secured building have UPS systems for phones and security.

** Mr Forbes ALSO stated the time of the power down was 26 hours.

Hmmm 26 hours to plant explosives to bring down a 110 story building?

SF: All systems were shutdown on Saturday morning and the power down condition was in effect from approximately 12 noon on Saturday September 8, 2001.

GW: When did it end?

SF: Approximately 2PM on Sunday 9/9

georgewashington.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Let me get this straight...

Get this straight, this was on the news. At the time, it was all over the news...
Guys, most of what we 'wild conspiracy theorists' are telling you about 9-11 was reported on the news, and in print. It's all been reported. Do you think we all just sit around imaging and cooking up subversive things to say? We're not pulling this stuff from wild conspiracy sites, or from our own arses. Most of what we are telling you is public information from media sources.
Do your homework, alot of you guys running around with your proove it this and proove it that, and I don't remember seeing that on the news, are talking out of your bums and offering little to DISPROVE anything.
If you've ever taken debate class, the 'burden of proof' bit that gets flaunted around here so much is laughable considering the statement has been made, in this case, "There was controlled demolitions", you disagree with it. If you diagree with something, the burden of proof is on you. You can't just walk into a formal debate and just sit there saying proove it, you would get laughed out of the competition, regardless of your position on the issue.

Twitchy.... I will GIVE you the 26 hour power down... Even though there is only ONE PERSON from that entire building that has mentioned it.

Ok...26 hours...WHAT can you tell ME gets accomplished in 26 hours.

Here is some FACTS on CD... I doubt you will read it.

For the J.L. Hudson Department Store in Detroit, Michigan this is what it took to take down that building....only 33 levels including the basment:

In 24 days, CDI's 12 person loading crew placed 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on 9 levels of the structure. Over 36,000 ft. of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay devices were installed in CDI's implosion initiation system. As the implosion required the detonation of a total of 2,728 lb. of explosives, CDI implemented 36 "primary delays" and an additional 216 “micro-delays" in the implosion initiation sequence in an attempt to keep detonation overpressure to a minimum.
www.controlled-demolition.com...

I have done my research and there is only one person that has said there was a power down at the WTC. Still...this man can only state that the power on HIS floor was effected...No where in his E-mail or his interview does he state for a FACT that the power was down on any other floors but his.

Originally posted by twitchy

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Let me get this straight...

Get this straight, this was on the news. At the time, it was all over the news...
Guys, most of what we 'wild conspiracy theorists' are telling you about 9-11 was reported on the news, and in print. It's all been reported. Do you think we all just sit around imaging and cooking up subversive things to say? We're not pulling this stuff from wild conspiracy sites, or from our own arses. Most of what we are telling you is public information from media sources.
Do your homework, alot of you guys running around with your proove it this and proove it that, and I don't remember seeing that on the news, are talking out of your bums and offering little to DISPROVE anything.
If you've ever taken debate class, the 'burden of proof' bit that gets flaunted around here so much is laughable considering the statement has been made, in this case, "There was controlled demolitions", you disagree with it. If you diagree with something, the burden of proof is on you. You can't just walk into a formal debate and just sit there saying proove it, you would get laughed out of the competition, regardless of your position on the issue.

I may not agree with you on a number of issues, but you are correct in what you say here.. imo of course.

[edit on 16-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

From Twitchy

We're not pulling this stuff from wild conspiracy sites, or from our own arses. Most of what we are telling you is public information from media sources

Hmmm, i would like to know where you pulled the "explosive" concrete theory from? Not from a 1960's TV show i hope.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Ok...26 hours...WHAT can you tell ME gets accomplished in 26 hours.

First off, great post. Much better.
Second off, your talking about hours and yeah it would be virtually impossible to engineer a CD in that amount of time, but consider this...
What if we're talking about years...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
the last twenty six hours being needed to finalize. How long does it take to wire primer cord, or set radio detonators if the explosives have been in place already? 26 hours seems entirely plausible then.

As to why there is only one person reporting the power down, maybe that's something you should ask your news media. I don't have a source for it at the moment, but I was under the impression that the Port Authority, or Silverstien or some such had confirmed the power down, I could be wrong but I think that was in the NYT... If so there are other sources of that information.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
I can not remember what video it was, but there definatly is one out there where a WTC worker talks about the dust and noises in the building the week prior to 9/11. I seem to recall it was well presented, so its most likely a documentary.. as to which one

I'm pretty sure it is in "9/11 Mysteries". Hope that helps.

Originally posted by UziXxX
I am starting to not know what to beleive. I think that there were infact charges placed in the WTC, but I also beleive that it was an act of terrorism. I beleive it was terrorism becuase why would the government do this?

Who's to say they did. Who Signed Sakher Hammad's
WTC Basement Level Pass?

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

It was a tenant that signed for him. How many other people had suspect "passes" that could have been operatives to who knows how many countries. Israel being one. Please read that whole page. It goes into detail about real attorneys that have been found guilty of falsafying documents for the known highjackers. In conclusion: It could have been other countries involved also.

My belief is that the US just got caught with it's pants down and is covering up for it's inadequacies. They know they can't protect us always. But, they also know that would scare people to death (litterally).

I believe some factions of the US gov. could be guilty of complicancy though. But, to say "Bush did it" etc. is not correct IMO. If anything, it stems back to after Reagan. Again, my opinion.

Originally posted by Sauron
Okay the POTUS said they used explosive, so how did they get the bombs in the building?


[edit on 16/6/2007 by Sauron]

See my above posted link to what really happened. It goes into detail about a lot of things.

nothing new. same old stuff thats been debunked 1million times before. look i've learned that you can't reason with 9-11 truth. they belive what they want and no sort of science or rational explaination will change that.

I just say forget about them and stop argueing because you will do nothing exept tire yourself out, and waste your time.

Originally posted by Spawwwn
same old stuff thats been debunked 1million times before.... you can't reason with 9-11 truth

Folks, only in Modern America could the word truth be spun to become a derogatory term.
Same old stuff that has been debunked? Like what and by whom?

Originally posted by twitchy
Folks, only in Modern America could the word truth be spun to become a derogatory term.
Same old stuff that has been debunked? Like what and by whom?

Well only in America would idiots still claim something as "truth" when it's been scientifically proven as NOT truth.

There's only so many videos and theorys you can present and have debunked, untill you just run around in circles. Why do you think people are saying absoutley insane things like "there was no planes that hit the buildings". Becuase every other peice of evidence has been debunked, that's why.

For those of us who understand math and science, and understand things that go on around the world..we know that the USA government did not commit 9-11.

So yes..it's the same old ----.

You keep saying something has been debunked, using words like science and math as though they were adjectives. Let's see what you've got in the way of evidence, hell I'd settle for relevant discussion if you have any.

Twitchy... please tell me what you think happened on 911 and why. Tell me what you think happened at the WTC .... thanks

Twitchy... please tell me what you think happened on 911 and why. Tell me what you think happened at the WTC .... thanks

I think we don't know what happened on 9-11. I know what I saw on the news, I know what I've read in the media, and I know what I've researched on my own, but as to some kind of omnipotent all encompassing timeline describing the events of and those leading up to 9-11, I haven't the foggiest. But I'm willing to say I don't know, unlike some our less than open minded skeptics here.
I have however put alot of time and effort into studying the subject, and have put most that into one thread. So to answer this question, without rehashing six years worth of information again, this is some of the things I think happened on 9-11.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Twitchy,

I have read most of that post and it deals with the typical conspiracy theories. I too was a CT'er about three years ago. I am know a truther...meaning i seek the truth YET I am a skeptic. There is a difference.
A REAL truther will look at ALL the evidence to draw his/ her own conclusion.

A 'truther' in the CT sence TYPICALLY ignores the facts that are placed in front of them.

Twitchy, have you read the 911 report? Have you read the NIST report? If you did...what part of it did you not agree with of have questions about. I'm not a cure all.. i dont have all the answers, but I can try to find them for you.

Thanks