|
Post by gillianren on Oct 29, 2006 22:58:47 GMT -4
Witnesses inside the WTC also reported hearing explosions while the floor shook underneath them (Rodriguez et al) seconds before they heard the plane hit the building high above. How do they know? If they were, oh, in the basement, how do they know when the plane hit? How do they know that the noise they heard was the sound of the plane hitting the building? And, again, I'd really like an explanation of how--even at a guess--the building was wired with explosives without anyone noticing. If you can't provide even a reasonable, plausible guess (I've not seen one yet), shouldn't you consider that, just possibly, there isn't one?
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Oct 30, 2006 2:03:27 GMT -4
Witnesses inside the WTC also reported hearing explosions while the floor shook underneath them (Rodriguez et al) seconds before they heard the plane hit the building high above. How do they know? If they were, oh, in the basement, how do they know when the plane hit? How do they know that the noise they heard was the sound of the plane hitting the building? And, again, I'd really like an explanation of how--even at a guess--the building was wired with explosives without anyone noticing. If you can't provide even a reasonable, plausible guess (I've not seen one yet), shouldn't you consider that, just possibly, there isn't one? They didn't know it was the plane at that time. They heard a distant explosion coming from high above, and only found out later that this had been the sound of the plane hitting the tower. As to how the explosives could have been wired without anybody noticing, I described that earlier in post #72...... We do have accounts from workers inside the building that said there were power downs, entire floors made inaccessible to maintenance people, from which they heard sounds of heavy machinery being moved around. The towers were essentially unoccupied at night, consisting of normal day-to-day business offices. Only WTC security would or could prevent unimpeded access to the entire structure for several late-night hours on weekdays, and weekends. Bush's brother and cousin were principles in these security companies right up to 9/11. These security companies also had the contracts for Dulles Airport and United Airlines, right up to 9/11, all of which I also mentioned in my earlier post. There was a more than adequate window of opportunity to wire the towers during off-hours (ie:late night). Only the building security had to be compromised to succeed. And if the suspects just so happen to be directly linked to building security, that makes it entirely possible.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Oct 30, 2006 3:33:40 GMT -4
Ah, yes. In the case of the building I work at, the park rangers have keys -- so all it would take is one highly-placed person in the park service to wire my building. Of course they can do all their work overnight and hide all the evidence of it. And they'll never stumble across any of us that work unscheduled late hours. Or attract the attention of maintenance. And we know so well how easy it is to open up drywall and operate concrete drills without making any mess at all, right?
Oh, wait. Is this the "explosives on every floor" story, or the "Bomb in the basement" story....or maybe this is a variation of the "Thermite in the paint" story. Interesting how the explosives move around depending on which "observation" is intended to support them....
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Oct 30, 2006 9:27:07 GMT -4
These security companies also had the contracts for Dulles Airport and United Airlines, right up to 9/11, all of which I also mentioned in my earlier post. The above caught my attention. Sometimes little sound bytes like that may SOUND good, but upon further investigation really don't mean much at all. www.911myths.com/html/stratesec.html
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Oct 30, 2006 10:50:30 GMT -4
Do you think that the big financial firms that operated out of those towers just let construction go on in there offices at night without explanation? Moving furniture and computers, cutting open walls, planting explosives, patching the walls, and repainting and replacing moved furniture. All this over night for an extended number of nights. How many hours would that take vs the number of hours available. How many workers would this take. Remember in these types of companies some people work 12 hour days. Some people routinely arrive for work at 5AM some say to 9pm or 10pm regularly.
There are examples of this exact type of activity going on in New York high rises. After completion of construction and tenant move in, the Citigroup building was found to be structurally unsound. The engineers called Citicorp ( as they were known at the time) and advised them to hire contractors to fix the deficiency. The press got wind of it and Citigroup referred them to the engineer for comment. A New York press strike started before he returned the call, keeping it out of the paper.
Major construction like that has to be scheduled and tenants have to be notified of special times for office closures. Tenants want to know what is going on who will be in their offices and what precautions they need to take. This kind of operation is not as easy as you seem to think.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Oct 30, 2006 23:58:30 GMT -4
Do you think that the big financial firms that operated out of those towers just let construction go on in there offices at night without explanation? Moving furniture and computers, cutting open walls, planting explosives, patching the walls, and repainting and replacing moved furniture. Is it possible that the central core section which was housing the elevators was accessible more easely?If i was to try a -demolition assisted with explosives charge cutter-to be sure the towers go down I will put them for braking the central core in some key point sections knowing where the planes will hit the towers. -Just a wild guessing-
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Oct 31, 2006 2:03:46 GMT -4
Of course they can do all their work overnight and hide all the evidence of it. And they'll never stumble across any of us that work unscheduled late hours. Or attract the attention of maintenance. And we know so well how easy it is to open up drywall and operate concrete drills without making any mess at all, right? Oh, wait. Is this the "explosives on every floor" story, or the "Bomb in the basement" story....or maybe this is a variation of the "Thermite in the paint" story. Interesting how the explosives move around depending on which "observation" is intended to support them.... There was evidence of it, and it did attract the attention of at least one office worker and one maintenance person..... Maintenance worker William Rodriguez heard very loud noises coming from a floor that he could not access with his key, despite the fact that he was normally able to access every floor in the tower. He saw unidentified workers coming in and out of the building during this time period, just a few days before 9/11. Fiduciary Trust employee also heard loud noises coming from the floor above him that sounded like heavy machinery being moved. He said this activity from above had even made his floor shake. Forbes also noted that gray dust started to appear in large areas along the walls and cover the windows in the days before 9/11. He described the offices as having become "filthy everywhere" from this dust. He also said he had his co-workers had to evacuate the tower on the weekend before 9/11, as they cut off the power to the entire upper half of the building. It's not a "variation" of any story. It's simply what was occurring just prior to 9/11, as told through two first-hand eyewitness accounts. And before you counter with something like "You only have two accounts to support your theory?", the fact is that the vast majority of those within the towers tragically persihed. And what they may have witnessed will never be known. If you were a fraction as skeptical of the official 9/11 story, you'd find that you'd have a thousand-fold more material to punch holes in.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Oct 31, 2006 2:24:39 GMT -4
These security companies also had the contracts for Dulles Airport and United Airlines, right up to 9/11, all of which I also mentioned in my earlier post. The above caught my attention. Sometimes little sound bytes like that may SOUND good, but upon further investigation really don't mean much at all. www.911myths.com/html/stratesec.htmlYour link page actually does concur with what I said, in its concluding paragraph...... Fortunately for some people, Wirt Walker, another member of the Bush family, was President of the company through this time. So they still have something to point at. Of course being in charge of the company, and related to Bush doesn’t actually prove anything at all, but perhaps some actual, real, genuine evidence will emerge eventually. Despite the obvious slant in the author's article (ie: "Fortunately for some..."), he still has to concede that there was a link between the security company and the WTC. The author handwaves this fact by pointing out that "being in charge of the company, and related to Bush doesn’t actually prove anything at all". Nobody is saying it's proof of anything! By itself, it's exactly what I said - a possible piece of evidence that may indeed fit with other pieces of evidence, and eventually when every piece is combined together in one body of evidence, it may indeed prove something!
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Oct 31, 2006 2:36:50 GMT -4
Do you think that the big financial firms that operated out of those towers just let construction go on in there offices at night without explanation? Moving furniture and computers, cutting open walls, planting explosives, patching the walls, and repainting and replacing moved furniture. All this over night for an extended number of nights. How many hours would that take vs the number of hours available. How many workers would this take. Remember in these types of companies some people work 12 hour days. Some people routinely arrive for work at 5AM some say to 9pm or 10pm regularly. There are examples of this exact type of activity going on in New York high rises. After completion of construction and tenant move in, the Citigroup building was found to be structurally unsound. The engineers called Citicorp ( as they were known at the time) and advised them to hire contractors to fix the deficiency. The press got wind of it and Citigroup referred them to the engineer for comment. A New York press strike started before he returned the call, keeping it out of the paper. Major construction like that has to be scheduled and tenants have to be notified of special times for office closures. Tenants want to know what is going on who will be in their offices and what precautions they need to take. This kind of operation is not as easy as you seem to think. Well, as I said, we will (sadly) never have a substantial number of first-hand witness accounts for what occurred in the days and weeks prior to 9/11. All we have are a few accounts to go on. There may be others that can or have corroborated the accounts I mentioned, but I haven't looked into it to any degree. However, they can be considered as potential pieces of evidence - that nicely fit together with the fact that the WTC security company was linked to Bush. And so on...
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Oct 31, 2006 9:49:32 GMT -4
Do you think that the big financial firms that operated out of those towers just let construction go on in there offices at night without explanation? Moving furniture and computers, cutting open walls, planting explosives, patching the walls, and repainting and replacing moved furniture. All this over night for an extended number of nights. How many hours would that take vs the number of hours available. How many workers would this take. Remember in these types of companies some people work 12 hour days. Some people routinely arrive for work at 5AM some say to 9pm or 10pm regularly. There are examples of this exact type of activity going on in New York high rises. After completion of construction and tenant move in, the Citigroup building was found to be structurally unsound. The engineers called Citicorp ( as they were known at the time) and advised them to hire contractors to fix the deficiency. The press got wind of it and Citigroup referred them to the engineer for comment. A New York press strike started before he returned the call, keeping it out of the paper. Major construction like that has to be scheduled and tenants have to be notified of special times for office closures. Tenants want to know what is going on who will be in their offices and what precautions they need to take. This kind of operation is not as easy as you seem to think. Well, as I said, we will (sadly) never have a substantial number of first-hand witness accounts for what occurred in the days and weeks prior to 9/11. All we have are a few accounts to go on. There may be others that can or have corroborated the accounts I mentioned, but I haven't looked into it to any degree. However, they can be considered as potential pieces of evidence - that nicely fit together with the fact that the WTC security company was linked to Bush. And so on... So all we have to go on in the demolition theory is rumor and guilt by association?
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Oct 31, 2006 11:16:36 GMT -4
So all we have to go on in the demolition theory is rumor and guilt by association?
What, isn't that enough for you? How about firming up the theory with some wild arm-swinging conjecture, and then, (this is the topper!) why not just BEG THE QUESTION?
OMFG! It MUST be true, cuz I'm to uninformed to know better! Anything I can imagine to be true MUST BE TRUE!
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Oct 31, 2006 11:21:08 GMT -4
So all we have to go on in the demolition theory is rumor and guilt by association?What, isn't that enough for you? Well of course it is enough. I just wanted to make sure that was all there was before I committed. We wouldn’t want to introduce any messy facts that could be disputed into a good conspiracy would we?
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Oct 31, 2006 21:04:49 GMT -4
The above caught my attention. Sometimes little sound bytes like that may SOUND good, but upon further investigation really don't mean much at all. www.911myths.com/html/stratesec.html Your link page actually does concur with what I said, in its concluding paragraph...... Fortunately for some people, Wirt Walker, another member of the Bush family, was President of the company through this time. So they still have something to point at. Of course being in charge of the company, and related to Bush doesn’t actually prove anything at all, but perhaps some actual, real, genuine evidence will emerge eventually. Despite the obvious slant in the author's article (ie: "Fortunately for some..."), he still has to concede that there was a link between the security company and the WTC. The author handwaves this fact by pointing out that "being in charge of the company, and related to Bush doesn’t actually prove anything at all". Nobody is saying it's proof of anything! By itself, it's exactly what I said - a possible piece of evidence that may indeed fit with other pieces of evidence, and eventually when every piece is combined together in one body of evidence, it may indeed prove something! He is mistaken unfortunately, that's what you get for believeing anything the 9/11 revisionists say. There is no know relationship between Wirt Walker and the Bush family. As for your claim that employee s reported power downs to be accurate that should have in the singular only Scott Forbes reported this and the story doesn’t make any sense. Also there some discrepancies between his versions*. .He is also AKAIK the only person to talk about those noises. * 911myths.com/html/wtc_power_down.html Speaking of discrepancies did you see the CNN article where htey interviewed him 9/11? "We heard a loud rumble, then all of a sudden we heard another rumble like someone moving a whole lot of furniture,"* Nothing about an explosion from below or the walls cracking / ceiling falling. Contrast that with his later versions which seem to get embelished as he goes along. Funny in a later interview when the 1st expllosion had been upraged from a loud rumble to something that threw him up he said he heard an explosion on an upper floor that sounded like 'someone moving furniture' * archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/new.york.terror/ As for your contention that the WTC was largely empty at night do you have a citation? Do a Google image search for wtc +night and notice how inevitably numerous windows are lit up Len
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Nov 1, 2006 0:57:14 GMT -4
So all we have to go on in the demolition theory is rumor and guilt by association? No. We also have the laws of physics, videos and photographs, among other things.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Nov 1, 2006 1:41:05 GMT -4
We wouldn’t want to introduce any messy facts that could be disputed into a good conspiracy would we? Exactly. For the official conspiracy theory, that is. NIST's WTC investigation team must have incorporated these Laws and Principles into its mission statement.... Maier's Law: If the facts do not conform to the theory, they must be disposed of. Schumpeter's Observation of Scientific and Nonscientific Theories: Any theory can be made to fit any facts by means of appropriate additional assumptions. Law of Computability Applied to Social Science: If at first you don't succeed, transform your data set. Wyszowski's First Law: No experiment is reproducible. Gallois's Revelation:If you put tomfoolery into a computer, nothing comes out but tomfoolery. But this tomfoolery, having passed through a very expensive machine, is somehow ennobled, and no one dares to criticize it.
|
|