The WTC was Pre-Rigged with Explosives as a Safety Precaution

This video makes a good case and shows some rare footage which also shows flashes and areas that appeared to be weakened to allow a controlled collapse. I didnt make it but cool none the less aside from the stupid music at the beginning.

Why if the top of the towers leaned over continued to fall through the most of the floors to the ground? It should of toppled over.






[edit on 22-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]

reply to post by GenRadek



Once you prove a theory you dont have to disprove everything else in the universe. OS theory has not been proven by a longshot.

I like your elvis theory, its better than most.

Like the OS for example.

What I'd like to know is, why is it that there was NO, repeat, NO steel found during the cleanup of ground zero that showed any of the blatant signs of demolitions? If bombs genuinely destroy the support columbs it'd leave blatantly blatant evidence behind. There were many, many photos taken of the site during the cleanup and if even ONE photo existed of steel shattered by explosives you conspiracy people would be all over it like Rosie O'Donnel on a chocolate cake.

Unless you want to accuse the steel workers, NYPD, and NYFD at ground zero of either a) being as thoroughly as stupid as a bag of hammers who wouldn't recognize the blatant signs of sabotage everywhere, and/or b)being involved in the conspiracy and coverup themselves...and I don't think even you conspiracy people have the cojones to go there...you're barking up the wrong tree here. You constantly accuse the 9/11 commission report of having inconsistancies and yet you introduce all these goofy alternative claims which have even more inconsistancies.

Would you mind terribly explaining yourselves?

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by GenRadek

 

Once you prove a theory you dont have to disprove everything else in the universe. OS theory has not been proven by a longshot.

Too bad there will never be any proof. Even if al-quaida swears on the koran and to allah that they were responsible that won't prove anything. People will still believe that the towers were demolished.

Even after teams and teams of engineering professors do independant investigation after independant investigation and all say that it was POSSIBLE that the twin towers collapsed the way that they did because of airplanes and fire (teams of engineering professors like the ones at MIT, Northwestern, and Perdu) people (including physics professors) will still say it was IMPOSSIBLE for the buildings to have collapsed the way that they did because of airplanes and fire.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

A repost from the tail end of the WTC fires thread: DIAGONAL BEAM CUT See, The problem is, of course, all evidence is debatable and can be supported from both sides. Government supporting story would be that the supporting column (one of the 47 that the 9/11 Commission Report claims doesn't exist) was cut by iron workers clearing debri. Could be supported by: -testimony from steel worker who cut it (none known) -testimony from eyewitnesses who saw him cut it or gave the order to cut (none known) -looks similar to molten slag from a blow torch cut -Photographer testifying that it was done after iron workers got started cutting steel (not known) Our story claims it was cut by thermate charges to relieve the strength of the supporting columns. Could be supported by: -Shows classic dripping slag from thermate melting -the perfectly angled cut is a classic characteristic of a demolition application to relieve the central support columns -there are piles of rubble everywhere, the metal smiths would not likely be hacking at an undamaged beam to rescue people -any metal smith can tell you that slag does not drip like shown since most slag is blown away and only a ribbon of slag remains above and below the cut typically with maybe a short drip or 2.. -any metal smith can also tell you that any cut would have been traced completely around the outside of the column, torch cutting does not leave slag on the outside of a cut, only on the backside. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE SLAG dripping on the outside. This proves it was not torch cut and that it was Thermate, with no air pressure behind it which is why there is slag "running" down the inside and outside. -any metal cutter would also question why the rear cut is not a straight line, or why the cuts are not straight or horizontal all the way around. The thermate theory can explain that more concentration in that one spot in the back for some reason would melt more steel away, like the edge of a candle melting more than the rest. -additional supporting evidence includes molten steel found in the rubble for 12 weeks after 9/11. To date, only thermate explains this, the government provides no explanation for this, which makes this valid supporting evidence for us

worcester.indymedia.org...

All of the metal was desposed of as quickly as possible, it couldn't be investigated, cause they got rid of it, wich is very strange in itself.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


What I want to know is why you think there was no evidence of bombs on 911 when many eyewitnesses and first responders reported them and at least 2 agencies were investigating them.

To answer your question, most of the steel that was removed was removed by heavy equipment and not recorded visually for forensics. On top of that, according to FEMA numbers all of the steel is not accounted for, citing between 15-50 tons of missing steel, depending on what source you use for the original ammount.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Grrrr, still can't get embedding to work.

FDNY Firefighters:

"It's like they had detonators up there, boom, boom ,boom, boom!"

www.youtube.com...



[edit on 22-6-2010 by Point of No Return]

Originally posted by Point of No Return
A repost from the tail end of the WTC fires thread: DIAGONAL BEAM CUT See, The problem is, of course, all evidence is debatable and can be supported from both sides. Government supporting story would be that the supporting column (one of the 47 that the 9/11 Commission Report claims doesn't exist) was cut by iron workers clearing debri. Could be supported by: -testimony from steel worker who cut it (none known) -testimony from eyewitnesses who saw him cut it or gave the order to cut (none known)

You people really need to stop going to those damned fool conspiracy web sites for your information. Joel Meyerowitz is a NYC photographer who was allowed to document the cleanup process of ground zero, and he both photographed and interviewed the workers at the site. His photos and interviews were published in his book, "Aftermath", and it specifically shows AND discusses the workers cutting the steel with torches. It likewise shows what the steel looks like in it's pre-removed state. The photo you're posting is almost certainly his, you're just posting the one specific photo out of context to give your claim a false veneer of credibility.

What thoroughly disgusts me is that there were hundreds of steel workers, fire fighters, police, etc etc etc at the site processing this mountain of debris, and you seem to think they were all thoroughly as stupid as a bag of hammers drooling on themselves and going DUHHH while standing around these sabotaged beams without thinking it's remotely suspicious in the least. Your sitting in your chair and insisting you know more than the professionals who were actually there entirely becuase of one or two photos you found on some conspiracy web site is the unrepentent height of arrogance, if you ask me.

Either the ground crews were criminally incompetent, or they were active participants in the conspiracy/coverup, or there wasn't any conspiracy to begin with. You can't have it any other way.

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

FDNY Firefighters:

"It's like they had detonators up there, boom, boom ,boom, boom!"

Debunkers like to say that either the booms were sonic booms from fighters, aerosol cans or flashbacks from 60's drug use. What a joke.

Of course there were explosions heard. Most the the explosions were concealed at the time of plane impacts and carried on periodically not to arouse suspicion but the "boom boom boom boom boom" was heard by many during collapse.



[edit on 22-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]

reply to post by Six Sigma
This is standard in some cases, such as the use of exposive bolts, that can be blown should the need arise.

Originally posted by jprophet420
What I want to know is why you think there was no evidence of bombs on 911 when many eyewitnesses and first responders reported them and at least 2 agencies were investigating them.

You need to double check your sources. They didn't report bombs. they reported explosions, and the towers were chock full of flammable objects (Electrical transformers, pressurized pipes, fire extinguishers, fuel tanks for the emergency generators, heavy machinery, etc) that would go BOOM when on fire. United flight 175 crashed and dumped thousands of gallons of burning aviation fuel immediately above a mechanical floor that contained all of these things, so of course people would have heard explosions. How could they not hear explosions?

To answer your question, most of the steel that was removed was removed by heavy equipment and not recorded visually for forensics. On top of that, according to FEMA numbers all of the steel is not accounted for, citing between 15-50 tons of missing steel, depending on what source you use for the original ammount.

All the debris from ground zero...every scrap of it, the steel, the wreckage, the smashed vehicles, everything...was brought to a site in Staten Island. This is where the debris was sifted for human remains and this is where NIST collected their samples of the WTC steel for their analysis. Moreover, the steel that was in the location where the planes impacted are still in a hanger out at JFK even now. Your assertion is in error.

"Bang bang bang bang bang..... followed by 3 tremendous explosions...."

Touching video.

Debunkers like to say that either the booms were sonic booms from fighters, aerosol cans, fire extinguishers, machinery etc or flashbacks from 60's drug use. What a joke.


Here is a longer version. God bless these survivors.


[edit on 22-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Information has come down the wire that the World Trade Center complex were pre-rigged and maintained with explosives. The plan was implemented shortly after the WTC bombing in 1993.

The plan was implemented as a safety precaution incase another attack were to occur. If the structural integrity were to be compromised again there would be maintained explosives and measures to ensure the buildings collapse can be predicted and controlled. Without these safety precautions in place it would endanger many other building and thousands of more lives.

That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've read on ATS!

So they brought the buildings down with thousands of people still inside/nearby...?!

Inner city buildings aren't rigged with live explosives for self-destruct for two main reasons: 1) it would be an invitation for terrorism 2) an accident would be catastrophic

Nice try. Thanks for the giggle and the comedy thread.

The things somany people heard that were like gun shot, that what those squibs sound like the deotonators before the bombs explode.

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Information has come down the wire that the World Trade Center complex were pre-rigged and maintained with explosives. The plan was implemented shortly after the WTC bombing in 1993.

The plan was implemented as a safety precaution incase another attack were to occur. If the structural integrity were to be compromised again there would be maintained explosives and measures to ensure the buildings collapse can be predicted and controlled. Without these safety precautions in place it would endanger many other building and thousands of more lives.

That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've read on ATS!

Hi, I find your comment quite hilarious considering that your past three threads that you have started are titled "NSA Psychic Spying On Foreign Targets Blocked By "Unknown Extraterrestrial Source" , "It's Simple - A Private Individual Needs To Capture A UFO/UAP" , "Yoo-Fo, Yoo-Eph-Fo, or Yoo-Ay-Pee?"..... Maybe you should stick to UFO's and aliens as your talking points.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Information has come down the wire that the World Trade Center complex were pre-rigged and maintained with explosives. The plan was implemented shortly after the WTC bombing in 1993.

The plan was implemented as a safety precaution incase another attack were to occur. If the structural integrity were to be compromised again there would be maintained explosives and measures to ensure the buildings collapse can be predicted and controlled. Without these safety precautions in place it would endanger many other building and thousands of more lives.

That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've read on ATS!

Hi, I find your comment quite hilarious considering that your past three threads that you have started are titled "NSA Psychic Spying On Foreign Targets Blocked By "Unknown Extraterrestrial Source" , "It's Simple - A Private Individual Needs To Capture A UFO/UAP" , "Yoo-Fo, Yoo-Eph-Fo, or Yoo-Ay-Pee?"..... Maybe you should stick to UFO's and aliens as your talking points.

None of my threads are as ridiculous as this one!

Also, what about the firefighters? Are you seriously suggesting they went into a building rigged with live explosives and they didn't know about it? Do you not think they would have been told about that minor detail...? You know "hey guys - don't bother going in to your certain deaths, we're pulling it down in a minute"...

reply to post by GoodOlDave

You people really need to stop going to those damned fool conspiracy web sites for your information. Joel Meyerowitz is a NYC photographer who was allowed to document the cleanup process of ground zero, and he both photographed and interviewed the workers at the site. His photos and interviews were published in his book, "Aftermath", and it specifically shows AND discusses the workers cutting the steel with torches. It likewise shows what the steel looks like in it's pre-removed state. The photo you're posting is almost certainly his, you're just posting the one specific photo out of context to give your claim a false veneer of credibility.

Please provide the testimony of the steel worker who did this and the date it happened.

Firefighters are obviously present there in the pic, and you think a guy has been cutting that beam in a characteristic angle, standing in the middle of that rubble, with the firefighters still around?

You didn't post the rest of my qoute where it explains the amount of residu on the beam could not have been caused by a blowtorch.

What thoroughly disgusts me is that there were hundreds of steel workers, fire fighters, police, etc etc etc at the site processing this mountain of debris, and you seem to think they were all thoroughly as stupid as a bag of hammers drooling on themselves and going DUHHH while standing around these sabotaged beams without thinking it's remotely suspicious in the least. Your sitting in your chair and insisting you know more than the professionals who were actually there entirely becuase of one or two photos you found on some conspiracy web site is the unrepentent height of arrogance, if you ask me.

There, there, you asked for evidence of demolition in the remains of the towers. I posted it for you, I don't think that's arrogance, the source even said the evidence is debatable.

Have you ever interviewed one of these steel workers or cops? Have they been given a venue to speak out?

I posted a vid of FDNY claiming there were detonators as a reply to you.

Did you take it serious? Would you take steel workers serious if they would say they saw signs of demolition?

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by jprophet420
What I want to know is why you think there was no evidence of bombs on 911 when many eyewitnesses and first responders reported them and at least 2 agencies were investigating them.

You need to double check your sources. They didn't report bombs. they reported explosions, and the towers were chock full of flammable objects (Electrical transformers, pressurized pipes, fire extinguishers, fuel tanks for the emergency generators, heavy machinery, etc) that would go BOOM when on fire. United flight 175 crashed and dumped thousands of gallons of burning aviation fuel immediately above a mechanical floor that contained all of these things, so of course people would have heard explosions. How could they not hear explosions?

To answer your question, most of the steel that was removed was removed by heavy equipment and not recorded visually for forensics. On top of that, according to FEMA numbers all of the steel is not accounted for, citing between 15-50 tons of missing steel, depending on what source you use for the original ammount.

All the debris from ground zero...every scrap of it, the steel, the wreckage, the smashed vehicles, everything...was brought to a site in Staten Island. This is where the debris was sifted for human remains and this is where NIST collected their samples of the WTC steel for their analysis. Moreover, the steel that was in the location where the planes impacted are still in a hanger out at JFK even now. Your assertion is in error.

MSNBC reported that the NYPD was investigating BOMBS at the WTC. Bombs were reported for 100% certain. I watched it unfold live.

The weight of the steel that was taken to staten island reported by FEMA was less than the amount in the buildings by 15-50 tons. I said the original amount, not all collected.

And also I am 100% certain that they did not collect it all as a lot of first responders kept a chunk or 2 for keepsakes. I have verified this firsthand.



[edit on 22-6-2010 by jprophet420]

Just what I thought.....

Those videos and evidence of explosions have rendered the delusional debunkers methods moot.

It is easy to see that the building were brought down in a controlled manner. What is sick is the audacity these official story sellers have to conjure up heaps of smelling theories to attempt to beguile what you already know.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Just what I thought.....

Those videos and evidence of explosions have rendered the delusional debunkers methods moot.

It is easy to see that the building were brought down in a controlled manner. What is sick is the audacity these official story sellers have to conjure up heaps of smelling theories to attempt to beguile what you already know.

In another thread here there is evidence of an explosion at the University of Delft before its partial collapse.

Was that blown up by Dick Cheney as well?