The practice of exercising our 1st Amendment right by exposing the blatant errors, distortions, and lies required for the official 9/11 government conspiracy theory to be valid.
Welcome to the blog that looks to expose the numerous fallacies, distortions, lies, misquotes, mistruths that the official conspiracy theory requires to be valid.
Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta was in the Presidential Emergency Operation Center with Vice President Cheney as Flight 77 approaced Washington, D.C. This plane was unidentified and flying in restricted airspace for over 45 mintues since the second tower was attacked and it was not intercepted by the Airforce. In fact, two fighters were launched but were sent out over the Atlantic searching for Russians.
On May 23, 2003 in front of the 9/11 Commission, Secretary Mineta testified: "During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Watch Mineta's Testimony To The 9/11 Commmission on CSPAN:
Further evidence from NORAD's Major General Larry Arnold's testimony to the 9/11 Commission confirms Norman Mineta's account of Cheney's words and actions that day as this analysis shows.
Vice President Cheney, the American people deserve to know what were the orders and why did they stand? -------------------------------------------- Do the orders still stand?
Time and time again, debunkers, pseudo-skeptics, and supporters of the official 9/11 conspiracy theory falsely claim that there were no explosives at the World Trade Center complex on 9/11 because no explosives were heard by eyewitnesses or found on audio tracks from video sources. The following videos using mainstream media accounts and eyewitness testimony prove without question that explosives were heard in and around the complex on 9/11. These explosives also affected the environment outside and inside the towers themselves as detailed by firefighters and survivors.
In fact mainstream media broadcasters were very concerned that the explosions were going to bring the buildings down!
The first piece of evidence is entitled Ultimate Con 9/11. Anyone can verify the content of the video because the news broadcasts were live during the day. So a true skeptic would only need to find the source data to confirm what is in this video.
This second video does an excellent job of comparing the huge explosive sound of WTC 7 to that of a conventional controlled demolition explosion. The similarities are beyond question.
Here is an excellent documentary that answers the question-were explosives used at the WTC Complex on 9/11. And the answer to that questions is yes!
This short clip exposes the sound of explosions going off during the collapse as well as the rapid squibs following the explosions. Supporters of the official story claim these squibs are jets of air only.
Here is a compilation of audio excerpts from the New York firefighter heroes who went into the towers to fight the small pockets of fire and rescue people. Many of these brave souls did not make it out of alive. A debunker MUST claim that these heroes are lying or are hearing a mundane source for the explosions they hear. Not only that, the surrounding environment and people are effected by the results of these explosions.
In this interview with New York Fire Fighter, John Schroeder, he discusses a massive explosion at ground level inside the WTC 2 Tower before the WTC 1 is hit.
In this segment, a USA Today reporter explains that the FBI thought there was a truck bomb...in the basement!
After viewing the videos above and reading the accounts of firefighters from the day, it is clear there was something other than gravity working as a force on those towers to bring them down. NIST claims there was no evidence of explosives being used on the WTC Towers therefore they did not complete forensic tests on the debris to check for explosive residue. I think the above evidence proves those tests should have been completed. This is just one more piece of evidence in a growing list of reasons why there needs to be a new independent investigation into the attacks of 9/11.
In a past post, I described how 9/11 Commission panel’s chairman, Tom Kean, famously stated that the main reason the 9/11 attacks were not prevented was that there had been a "failure of imagination" with regards to the attacks and how they were carried out.
I can say with 100% certainty that the above excuse is a lie. Thanks to the 9/11 Commissions NORAD Exercise Summary found in the National Archives as posted below. NORAD Exercises Hijack Summary
The US military conducted a training exercise in the five days before the September 11. These exercises included simulated aircraft hijackings by terrorists, according to a 9/11 Commission document. In one of the scenarios, implemented on September 9, terrorists hijacked a London to New York flight, planning to blow it up with explosives over New York.
In the September 9 simulation, the fictitious hijackers' goal appears to have been to kill citizens of New Yorker with falling debris after the plane's explosion in mid-air. As part of the military exercise, the passenger jet was intercepted and the plane was forced away from the city. When the hijackers realized they were not near New York, they blew up the plane "over land near the divert location," killing all on board. The military unit most involved in this scenario was NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), which also played a major part in the air defense response to the 9/11 attacks, two days after the scenario!
Numerous Hijacks Listed
Three days earlier, on September 6, 2001, NORAD simulated two hijackings as part of the same exercise, which was called "Vigilant Guardian." In one scenario, a fictitious terrorist organization called Mum Hykro hijacked a Boeing 747 from Tokyo to the US and made a "threat of harm to passengers and possibly large population within US or Canada." The terrorists intended to "rain terror from the skies onto a major US city unless the US declares withdrawal from Asian conflict." The plane is listed as being bound for Anchorage, Alaska, although the hijackers changed course for Vancouver in Canada, and then for San Francisco, California. Liaising with the FAA, NORAD provided "covert shadowing" of the hijacked plane.
In a second hijack scenario on the same day, ten members of another fictitious terrorist group, called Lin Po, hijacked another 747 to Anchorage, this time originating from Seoul, South Korea. The hijackers were armed with weapons thanks to ground crews work before takeoff. Keep in mind, the 9/11 hijackers also had weapons on board. Were they helped by ground crews much like this simulation? Gas containers were also smuggled on board and could be detonated on the plane. Two of the plane’s passengers were murdered, and the CIA and NSA warned that the group had the means to pull off an attack with chemical and biological weapons. In response to the hijack, NORAD's commander in chief ordered fighters from the Alaskan NORAD Region (ANR) to intercept and shadow the hijacked plane, and get into "position to shoot down aircraft."
NORAD's Southeast Air Defense Sector received training via another scenario included in the Vigilant Guardian exercise which was run the day before 9/11, although this followed the more traditional scenario of Cubans hijacking a flight from Havana and demanding to be taken to New York for political asylum in the US. The plane would end up landing at Dobbins Air Force Base in Georgia.
The document lists hijack exercises going as far back as 1998. Several of which had involved flights originating in the United States. In one hijacking scenario, a January 1999 exercise included the simulated takeover of a Miami to Oklahoma City flight and the hijacking of a San Diego to Anchorage flight the next day. This of course involved NORAD and contradicts General Richard Myer's testimony to the 9/11 Commission.
At the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July 2004, the panel’s chairman Tom Kean famously said that the main reason the 9/11 attacks were not prevented was that there had been a "failure of imagination." However, the hijack simulation planners proved Mr. Kean wrong. In one example, in a September 1999 exercise, hijackers on a 747 bound from Hong Kong to Canada had sarin gas on board, and threatened to blow up the plane releasing the gas into a population center below. An exercise the following month included the simulation of a terrorist group hijacking a plane with American and Canadian citizens on board. The plane was bound from France to Canada, and the terrorist group was said to have the "will and means to strike North America with WMD." Communications with the passenger plane were lost after the hijacking, but the flight crew battled the terrorists and regained control of the plane at the last second.
An exercise in October 1998 included terrorists hijacking a 747 with the intent of committing a "suicide run into [a] metropolitan area of" San Francisco. Does that sound familiar? And an October 2000 exercise included the simulated hijacking of a plane bound from London to Cairo. The scenario was that "100 religious fanatics will take over the aircraft," but the "aircraft will land at JFK [airport in New York] without incident and [the] FBI will escort [the] hijackers."
Hijacking Exercise on Day of 9/11
Although it is not listed in the document, there is evidence of a simulated plane hijacking scheduled to take place in the Northeast US on the day of 9/11! The schedule of this exercise overlapped with the real-world events causing confusion amongst air traffic controllers and NORAD personnel. According to Vanity Fair, "The day's exercise was designed to run a range of scenarios, including a 'traditional' simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum." Vigilant Guardian appears to have simulated attacks within the continental United States. NORAD personnel in Rome, New York who received first reports of hijackings within NORAD'S Northeastern sector, including Col. Robert K. Marr and Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, are reported to have asked if this was "real world or exercise." This implies that the scenarios for the wargames on September 11 were strikingly similar to the actual attacks that unfolded that morning.
When NEADS was informed of the first real-world hijacking on 9/11/2001, members of its staff thought that alert was part of the exercise. For example, Master Sergeant Maureen Dooley, the leader of the ID section, told the other members of her team: "We have a hijack going on. Get your checklists. The exercise is on." Major Kevin Nasypany, the mission crew commander, actually said out loud, "The hijack's not supposed to be for another hour."
Like the numerous hijacking scenarios described in the "NORAD EXERCISES" document, there was no mention of this simulated hijacking scheduled for the morning of September 11 in the 9/11 Commission Report.
Clearly, a need for a new investigation is required to verify and extrapolate further details revealed in the "NORAD EXERCISES" document, and in particular find out what else the September 2001 Vigilant Guardian exercise involved. The fact that this exercise included simulations of terrorists hijacking aircraft, and that New York City was central to some of its scenarios, should be a major concern to citizens around the world. Perhaps this is why NORAD lied to the 9/11 Commission.
This crucial piece of evidence also proves that NORAD radars and defenses do not just "look" outward for external threats. Indeed 6 out of the 28 of these NORAD hijack exercises originated in the United States and ended in the United States.
Testifying before the 9/11 Commission General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the commission in response to a question on NORAD’s failure to anticipate the 9/11 attacks, “I can’t answer the hypothetical. It’s more - it’s the way that we were directed to posture, looking outward.”
General Richard Myers lied to the 9/11 Commission and to the world.
And one final question to former Vice President, Dick Cheney, what were the orders and why did they stand?
NIST Finds Global Collapse Of Twin Towers From Gravity Alone Is Unexplainable
Instead of trying to model the global collapse of two buildings through their greatest path of resistance at nearly free fall speeds via gravity alone, NIST simply surrendered the problem instead of relying on physics because it was too chaotic. The computer models were too complex apparently. In the field of structural engineering, nearly every problem has a solution except this one because of chaos.
However, physics will tell you that a item can not fall through other objects that provide resistance as if it were falling through air with zero resistance.
That is interesting in itself, but if computers can't do it, shouldn't physics be able to do it? So I would challenge NIST to skip the computer models and provide us with the evidence and the calculations displaying the global collapse. But critics will argue that NIST wasn't tasked with this goal so it remains an open ended question. I'm not an engineer by any means but a 10,000 page report and millions of dollars and the recommendation is "more fireproofing"? Perhaps if NIST modeled the global collapse it could have actually assisted engineers in the construction of high rise steel buildings.
In a recent letter that can be read here to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."
A 10,000 page government funded scientific study can provide the public with theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC tower to fall through the path of greatest resistance at free fall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics. The problem with NIST is that they refuse to study the event through an explainable phenomenon that is commonly associated with terrorists attacks and satisfies the laws of physics. That excuse can be defined as explosive devices that assisted in the global collapse of WTC 1 and 2.
Kevin Ryan stated it best regarding the fastest news from NIST,
"NIST'S 10,000-page report purports to explain what it calls "collapse initiation" -- the loss of several floors' vertical support," writes Kevin Barrett of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. "In order to dream up this preposterous scenario, NIST had to ignore its own tests that showed that virtually none of the steel got hotter than 500 degrees f. It had to claim that somehow the planes took out many core columns, despite the fact that only a direct hit by an engine would have been likely to do so, and that the chances of this happening even once are fairly low. It had to preposterously allege that the plane that nicked the corner of the South Tower took out more core columns than the one that hit the North Tower almost dead center. It had to tweak all the parameters till they screamed bloody murder and say that the steel was far weaker than it actually was, the fire was far hotter than it actually was, the sagging was far greater than it actually was, and so on. And so NIST hallucinated a computer-generated fantasy scenario for "collapse initiation"--the failure of a few floors."
"But how do you get from the failure of a few floors to total collapse at free-fall speed of the entire structure? The short answer: You don't. Anyone with the slightest grasp of the laws of physics understands that even if all of the vertical supports on a few floors somehow failed catastrophically at exactly the same moment--a virtually impossible event, but one necessary to explain why the Towers would come straight down rather than toppling sideways--the top part of the building could not fall THROUGH the still-intact, highly robust lower part of the building, straight through the path of most resistance, just as fast as it would have fallen through thin air." "Thus total free-fall collapse, even given NIST's ridiculous "initiation" scenario, is utterly impossible. The probability of it happening is exactly equal to the probability of the whole building suddenly falling upward and landing on the moon," concludes Barrett.
I will not attempt the blame game with this premise. I am not a structural engineer or an explosives expert. I do have reasonable doubts about the official story. My research to this point on a personal level has been with a trained explosive expert in the U.S. military and with a construction engineer from Purdue University. I have read reports in support of the NIST (National Institute of Science and Technology)and rebuttals to the NIST report. I have also read the NIST report summary as posted online. The reason for this hypothesis is to consider what was responsible for the event that took place in the World Trade Center North Tower basement levels. The existence for this hypothesis is four-fold.
1. The NIST did not attempt to explain the reason for a global collapse nor consider the explosive device hypothesis because they saw no evidence. Does that make the existence of explosive devices(ED) invalid? No.
2. NIST provided no evidence to support their view that the collapse of upper floors led to a progressive collapse or more importantly a global collapse. We have no idea if the event in the basement assisted in the collapse of the North Tower.
3. The NIST made a conscience decision not to test for explosive residue at the WTC complex despite the overwhelming evidence that something occurred in the sub levels of WTC North Tower. This would have proven one way or another whether an explosive device was used in the sub levels of the North Tower, however, no test by any Federal Agency was conducted.
4. The historical record of terrorism against America is another valid reason to explore the ED hypothesis. I'm sure you are all aware of the 1993 WTC attack using a truck bomb in the subbasement at the WTC. If terrorists could use this tactic of placing an explosive device in their target once, isn’t it reasonable to suggest they might try that tactic again, especially when combined with the use of planes? The reasonable person would think so.
5. The FBI's original working hypothesis was a car or trucked packed full of explosives and detonated under the towers at the same time as the impact. I find that yet another reason to test for explosive residues, especially in the basement. You can view the USA Today news report about the FBI's theory here:
Please do not confuse the use of an explosive device with controlled demolition. As Implosion World stated the collapses did not have the same characteristics of a traditional controlled demolition. With that issue, I do agree to a point. The collapse did not start at the bottom as per a traditional demolition but the attack on the structure began with the plane impact and in the basement sub levels and centered around the core where the elevator shafts were located. There is some testimony supporting an explosion taking place in the basement prior to impact, however, the timing of the event is not the premise of this examination, only the fact that an explosive event did occur that can not be attributed to a fireball from jet fuel.
My first piece of evidence for arguing for an explosive device is the logical sequence of events that followed the explosive sound. Numerous things can sound like explosions. I do not dispute this. However, it is the reaction and change of the surroundings, the injuries to people, and their reactions and thoughts following the sound of the explosion which points to a device in the basement sub levels. All of the accounts below follow this logical sequence.
The second piece of evidence is the damage to the structure and victims surroundings. A few examples of structural damage include: walls that are cracked or destroyed, a parking garage is obliterated , a machine shop is destroyed, failing ceilings, as well as a multiple cave-ins 4 levels below the ground.
Numerous witnesses in the sub levels have stated on record regarding the damage in the substructure of WTC-North Tower. To avoid the accusation of cherry picking or quote mining, I have provided the relevant link after each account. Also with each witness I have tried to use their words verbatim in the description of events that they experienced.
The conclusion of the paper will show that it is impossible for a fireball from the first impact of the plane to have caused the type of personal and structural damage experienced and reported. Bsbray of studyof911.com has provided an excellent analysis refuting the fireball theory so I have no intention of reinventing the wheel.
A. Employees of WTC-North Tower Who Describe The Event In The North Tower Sub-levels
1.Mike Pecoraro, Stationary Engineer and unnamed Co-Worker a)Location: Sub-level C b) Sees 'lights flicker, the Asst. Engineer reports to him hearing a large explosion, c) Sees white smoke, and reports the smell of kerosene. d) The smell he thought coming from perhaps a burning car in the parking garage above them. e) Kerosene smell, not a kerosene fire. Burning Kerosene does not produce white smoke. f) Damage after the sound of an explosion: When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone. "There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press gone!" g) Location of damage-C-level h) The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. i) "There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said. j) Parking garage and walls are gone. k) As they ascended to the B Level they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds,wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. l)Comments, "They got us again referring to the WTC 93 bombing. He saw similar things after that bombing. m) He was convinced a bomb had went off in the building. n) Observes two victims, badly burned an injured. Brief summary of experience: An explosive sound heard, followed by white smoke with massive damage on multiple floors, a parking garage destroyed, with burned and injured victims. All of this damage reported by this witness but no mention of fire damage or one iota of a fireball. There is also no soot reported in the lobby from the fireball from the plane that supposedly caused the damage. Keep in mind as you continue to read the accounts, that a single fireball from the impact zone almost 80 floors above traveled down a single elevator shaft, failed to kill or even burn the elevator operator, Arturo Griffith, but causes all of this damage in the various levels of the basement. Source: Chief Engineer http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029
2. Jose Sanchez, Maintenance Worker & co-worker, Chino a)Location: Sub level 4 workshop. b) Hears the sound of an explosion,” It sounded like a bomb went off." c) Sees lights flicker. d) Fireball in the freight elevator. e) Singes hair and drops co-worker Chino to his knees. f) Room fills with smoke, "I believe it was a bomb that blew up inside the building." g) Chino's leg and knee apparently broken. He can't walk and gets assistance from Sanchez. h) Fireballs do not break legs, however, concussion force can and does. i) Exits at parking level lot on sub level 4 and sees many people fleeing. j) "It took about 15 or 20 minutes to get outside and for me it was like a bomb with huge smoke all around.” i) Comments he is lucky to be alive because he wasn't near the stairwell. Brief Summary: The sound of an explosion is heard, damage to a freight elevator takes place and the victim feels that a bomb caused the damage. He does experience a fireball, but it will be shown not to orginate from jet fuel at impact, but from at least the detonation of at least one explosive device. Source: Second Janitor Story
3. Phillip Morelli, construction worker, 7 year employee at WTC 1 a) Location-4th sub level, B-4 main freight car b) "That is when I got blown. The impact of the explosion or whatever happened threw me to the floor. And that’s when everything started happenin'. It knocked me right to the floor. You didn't know what it was, you just assumed something fell over in the loading dock. Something very heavy, something very big. You don't know what happened then all the sudden you just felt the floor movin' and you get up... the walls, you know now I'm hearing that the main freight car, the elevators, you know what I mean fell down so I was right near the main freight car so I assumed what that was. Then you heard that comin' towards ya. I was racing I was goin' towards the bathroom, all of the sudden I opened the door I didn't know it was the bathroom and then the big impact happened again and then all the ceiling tiles started falling down the light fixtures were falling swinging, swinging out of the ceiling. I came runnin'out of the door and everything,the walls were down and I started runnin' towards the parkin' lots." c) Nearly 100 floors below where the first plane hit. d) Thought a car or something exploded on B-1 or something big and heavy got delivered and fell over. e) Knew it was something big floor was moving underneath him f) Reports smoke and people screaming g) Got to parking lot and describes a lot of smoke, people screaming, and helping a person with a broken leg. h) He and others run up the ramp from 1 to 2, as you have to do that to get out of the subbasement, it happens all over again. And got thrown to the floor. But unaware of a second plane hit. i) Walls in the basement caved in. j) Knows people got killed, broken legs, and reconstructive surgery because the walls hit them in the face. k) No matter where you were in the building, you weren't safe. l) Reports no fireball as the official story proposes. Brief Summary: An explosion throws Phillip to the ground and causes the floor to move underneath him. The explosion destroys walls and a freight elevator that he was near. He runs to the bathroom and another explosion causes damage to the ceiling and lights and injured people are seen in parking garage. All of this damage people and the structure but not a single mention of the raging fireball that NIST states caused all of this damage. Phillip attempts to escape by going to Tower 2 exit and gets thrown to the ground for a second time! Source-NY1 News Watch Phillip's testimony here:
4. Marlene Cruz, Carpenter, employee for 15 years a) Location: elevator subbasement B, WTC 1 b) Hears an explosion that blows up the elevator, the elevator falls, and gets stuck at B level. c) Herself and the elevator operator are injured. d) She reports her body felt like it was run over by a truck and has a sprained leg. e) After hearing the explosion she states, "Here we go again another bomb" in reference to her experience with the 1993 truck bombing. f) States seeing her friend Arthur Delbianco who was fine after she got hurt. They hear screams. He was going around looking for other people, trying to break through doors to see who he found. She states Arthur got hurt after her. No description is given of how he was hurt. However, in Arthur's account a blast from behind them throws them 25-50 feet. g)In the interview with Matt Lauer, when asked based upon there location if there are people still alive, Marlene states she believes there are people still alive because that building is pretty strong and the first bombing did not bring that building down. This comment can be found in the video source of Hersley Lever's account below. Brief Summary: Marlene hears an explosion, elevator is blown up, stops at B-1 Marlene and the elevator worker suffer injuries. She gives no mention of burns from a raging fireball. She mentions no smoke or fire at all from a jet fuel. However, the explosion reminds her of the 1993 truck bomb and she thinks it is another bomb. Source: ABC News Special Report with Peter Jennings Watch Marlene's testimony here:
5. Arthur Delbianco- a. Location: Above the basement but below the impact zone and eventually subbasemen B,WTC 1 b. Aruthur after the impact, assists in taking people down to the lobby. He mentions no fire or fireball in his elevator or his elevator shaft. c. He then travels to sub level 1 and finds his friend Marlene Cruz and Hursley Lever, a mechanic. d. He sees sprinklers are spraying water and ceiling tiles collapsed after arriving in the basement. e. As the three are running through the chaos, when something occurs. f. "The blast came from behind us and just pushed us down. We just slid for 25 or 50 feet." g. He suffers personal injury in the form of a separated shoulder and broken knee. h. A fireman rescues him. Brief Summary: Here is a man that rescues several people below the impact zone and then travels to the sub level B. All this time, no fireball is experienced or secondary fighters reported. When he ends up in the sub level B, another explosion that reminded Marlene of the 1993 truck bombing takes place causing his personal injuries. Yet no mention of a fireball in the basement. Considering that the event that took place in the basement was so near the impact of the plane, when did a firefighter arrive a B level and why only one? Source: San Fransico Chronicle, September 14, 2001
6. Hursley Lever-ABM Employee Maintenance Worker a. Location-assigned to B-3 level but was in B-4 level sheet metal shop when the first explosion took place. b. He hears a bomb thinking it was probably a transformer again and continues to work. c. He starts towards the door again when he experiences a big blast and a big ball of fire and that is when he got hit and knocked down onto the ground. d. He realizes that his ankle is shattered. e. A guy was with him in the sheet metal shop is unhurt but crying. He convinces the man to help him out and to a closed door. f. The door opens and a secret service police man was right on B-4 level parking lot. g. The secret service police man wraps his ankle and he is helped into a van by another man and asked what to do. No ambulances were available. The man in the van drives Hursley out and asks him what he wants to do and that is when the second plane hits and he is left alone again. Brief summary-Hersley experiences two explosions. One he attributes to a possible transformer explosion and the second one is unclear. One might assume that it was a jet fuel fireball from the impact causing the second explosion, however, you will notice no mention and you will not see any burn marks on Mr. Lever in the interview. He is knocked down and his ankle is broken by a concussive force, not a jet fuel fire conflagration. Source: NBC Today Show's Matt Lauer Interview With Arthur Delbianco, Marlene Cruz, and Hursley Lever. View the interview below:
7. Felipe David, employee of Aramark Co. a. Location-office sub level 1 b. Explosion heard below sub level 1. c. The building started shaking. d. Dust was flying everywhere. e. It got real hot. f. Reports feeling burned. g. “I threw myself onto the floor, covered my face because I felt like I was burned." h. "I sat there for a couple of seconds on the floor and felt like I was going to die, saying to myself ‘God, please give me strength.” i. Severely burned on his face, arms and hands with skin hanging from his body. j. Reports to several others in an office that there was an explosion. k. Other state that it is good he is alive despite his appearance. Brief Summary: Explosion heard below him, feels heat and is burned severally, and reports an explosion. The event that caused personal damage was below him and reports no fireball. Source: Colombia television programming in Spanish on the Red Continental De Noticias (RNC) with Gurisatti a Colombian reporter as a part of an in-depth 9/11 documentary after the foreign station spent a month in New York in 2002 shooting the project. View the interview in Spanish below:
8. Salvatore Giambanco, a WTC office painter, just getting off of an elevator a. Location, sub-level 1 opposite side of Felipe David. b. Hears an explosion, reports smoke came from all over. c. "An incredible force of wind swept everything away." d. Standing with another man, he hears a screaming woman. e. As a reaction to the wind, Salavatore and the unidentified man jump back into the elevator. f. The elevator descends to between sub-level B-2 and B-3. g. Witnesses other people through the slot running and screaming. h. Water begins to enter the elevator apparently from the sprinkler system. i. Salvatore begins to fear for his life and is screaming. j. "God, please help us.’ At that point, I was resigned to the fact I was going to die". He then hears William Rodriguez ask, "How many people are down there?" k. Rodriguez rescues the two men. l. Rides in an ambulance to the hospital. m. “I remember riding in the ambulance that morning and looking back, thinking it had to be a bomb." n. Upon learning an airplane had hit the tower: “Later they told me it was an airplane that hit the towers, but how could it just be an airplane? I know all the newspapers were saying that,but it was just too incredible to believe if you heard and experienced what I did. It had to be a bomb.” Brief Summary: Salavatore hears an explosion, observes human damage from the explosion, and reacts to the environmental impact of the explosion, and believes it was a bomb. He mentions no fireball descending the elevator shaft that he jumped back into. Source: Colombia television programming in Spanish on the Red Continental De Noticias (RNC) with Gurisatti a Colombian reporter as a part of an in depth 9/11 documentary after the foreign station spent a month in New York in 2002 shooting the project.
9. Bobby Hall-ABM Engineering Employee Location: 50 feet underground apparently B-1, possibly B-2 walking from the garage into the building to the office. a. “We were going to our shop to make a call and find out what the first explosion was and the place just came apart on us,” “What we found out later was the hot wind was the number 50 freight car falling from the 88th floor and it just came into the area where we were and just blew us back out into the parking lot.” b. He is thrown into a steel door. c. Assists two other injured men after struggling to his feet. d. He suffers an injury to his hand, numbness in his hand, and has had surgery. Brief Summary: A key point to Bobby’s account strangely enough lacks a fireball traveling down the elevator shaft. He hears one explosion and is on the way to his office to find out what it was, and then the place came apart on us. The fact that he is told that wind from the elevator is what blew them back into the parking lot is strange. This elevator air does not match Arturo’s account of Number 50 freight car’s breaks stopping his elevator at floor 15 or 16. In People Magazine October 1,2001 the elevator finally comes to rest at the lobby. So it is highly doubtful it is air from an elevator that impacted Mr. Hall and his co-worker, as they were told. His account of a hot wind gust matches Salvatore Giambanco’s account of large amount of wind sweeping everything away after the explosion. In reality, in Bobby's case it appears it was the pressure force from an explosion in the sub-basement area that was separate from the plane impact that injured Bobby not wind from a elevator stopping 15 floors above. This involuntary action of being thrown to the ground matches Phillip Morelli account of being thrown to the ground by an explosion in the sub-levels as well. Bobby's account describes two explosions, possibly one from the plane and certainly one in the subbasement. Bobby could also be one of the male caller's in the PA transcripts calling from a cell phone to report injuries to victims and/or damage to the structure. Source: NY1 For You: Engineer Injured In WTC Attacks Still Needs Help With Surgery Costs In Life In Limbo After Layoffs-Chicago Tribune
10. Kenny Johannemann-ABM Janitorial Services a. Location: Awaiting the arrival of an elevator in the basement. b. "The lift door exploded open. there was a man inside half burnt. His skin was hanging off.(Felipe David?) "I dragged him out of the lift and somebody (William Rodriguez?)helped me get him out for the building." c. "Elevator blew up!" d. Reports no fireball exiting the elevator door when it opens or no fireball prior to the elevator arriving, and finally no fires remaining in or around the elevator. Source: People Magazine, September 24th Watch his testimony here:
11. William Rodriguez-WTC Janitor a. Location: Office Sub-level 1 b. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and it everything started shaking." c. Was huddled together with at least 14 other people in the office. d. States Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Co., was one of the people in the room who stands ready to verify his story. e. "Seconds after the first massive explosion below in the basement still rattled the floor, I hear another explosion from way above," said Rodriguez. f. "Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane hitting the tower, it occurred moments after the first explosion." g. He encounters Felipe David. h. Felipe David stormed into the basement office with severe burns on his face and arms, screaming for help and yelling "explosion! explosion! explosion!" i. "He (David)was burned terribly," said Rodriguez. "The skin was hanging off his hands and arms." j. "I don't care what the government says, what scientists say. I saw a man burned terribly from a fire that was caused from an explosion below." k. "I know there were explosives placed below the trade center. I helped a man to safety who is living proof, living proof the government story is a lie and a cover-up." l. "I have tried to tell my story to everybody, but nobody wants to listen. It is very strange what is going on here in supposedly the most democratic country in the world. In my home country of Puerto Rico and all the other Latin American countries, I have been allowed to tell my story uncensored. But here, I can't even say a word." Brief Summary: William hears an explosion below him, the floor vibrates, walls crack, and everything starts to shake. He encounters a victim who suffered the effects of the explosion, and concludes bombs were placed in the basement. Originally he testified to NIST that it was a fireball in 50 freight elevator. However, reading his account, he could not have witnessed a fireball from his location, which leads me to believe he was told what happened and then repeated this to NIST. After learning more information, William changed his mind and concluded an explosion in the basement caused the destruction. William's has received substantial personal attacks from supporters of the official story for changing his story despite being honored as a hero by President Bush. One has to wonder, why those who accept the official story as gospel would choose to attack this man's character, considering all of the testimony that collaborates the story he tells today regarding the detonation of an explosive device in the basement of World Trade Center: North Tower. Source: WTC Basement Blast and Injured Victim Blows Official 9/11 Story Sky High Watch his testimony here:
After reviewing the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST Report on the global collapse of the World Trade Center Towers, I find it very unlikely that the Twin Towers suffered a global collapse strictly due to gravity as the official story explains.
Why would I question that official explanation? Afterall they are professional engineers and I am not and we should trust their work. However, there would be no need to criticize, question, or debunk a report if it were a complete, error-free analysis, correct?
However, there have been many sites and engineers that have already begun to question the NIST Report. NIST Critique
New Civil Engineer Calls For Release Of Computer Models
Many people fail to realize the NIST did not explain how the initiation of collapse led to the global collapse of the building. They failed to examine their primary purpose! How could they do this? How can this help future engineers construct structures with first and foremost the safety of its occupants as a priority? Why would the NIST not release their computer models to the engineering community? Whose interests are they serving? Shouldn't the safety of current and future steel framed high rise buildings be of the utmost importance?
For the layman, ask yourself, how does gravity take this:
and turn it into this?
and this...oh and the top part of the Tower leaning to its side, didn't end up on the street. It turned to dust and debris on the way down! Gravity is really amazing.
Gravity did this too!
Ahh the power of gravity. It truly is one of the most destructive forces on Earth.
Perhaps if the NIST would have listened to the head structural engineer of the WTC Towers regarding explosives, Jeffery Skilling, they might have tested for this hypothesis and arrived at an explanation for the total collapse of the towers.
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there." "However," he added, "I'm not saying that properly applied explosives - shaped explosives - of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage." Although Skilling is not an explosives expert, he says there are people who do know enough about building demolition to bring a structure like the Trade Center down. "I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."
Apparently gravity became substantially more powerful after Mr. Skilling's death because the NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. ---- Do the orders still stand?
The Bush Administration offered up the 'failure to imagine' excuse for the response to 9/11. President Bush: "We knew he [Osama bin Laden] had designs on us, we knew he hated us. But there was nobody in our government, and I don't think [in] the prior government, that could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale," he said.
Pat, from Screwloosechange, of course parrots this excuse as well.
Well according to NORAD's own statements, Project Positive Force, a Special Operations unit tasked with thinking like a terrorist and how they might attack the United States, "imagined" that a hijacked plane would be crashed into the Pentagon.
Terry Ropes, the Special Operations officier, defended the idea, but Pacific Command thought it was too unrealistic. Numerous warnings in the late 1990's also included a possible plot to fly an explosive laden aircraft into an American city.
The information contained in the explosive report, also discusses NORAD's regular intercept exercises of hijack aircraft prior to 9/11!
