posted 10-20-2003 06:28 PM            

Yep...Its called the NORTHWOODS DOCUMENT

Look it up Wolfie.

A pretext for war overseas and a police state in America.

For Oil (unocal pipeline)

For control of the opium supply in Afganistan

For RECORD defense spending

For Carlyle group contracts

posted 10-20-2003 06:40 PM            

Someone else here Reported on NORTHWOODS.

posted 10-20-2003 08:37 PM            

Operation Mockingbird
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mockingbird.htm

You claim Shatoga and Mech are bending techical data to suite their political agendas.

What are you doing then? All I see on both sides is speculation on whether or not demolitions were placed. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Want to know the real truth?

It doesn't matter either way. Other than if Bushco or rogue elements in the military-industrial complex were involved, then the perps should be tried.

Since nobody was tried, and the US military invaded 2 countries, and killed thousands of innocent lives, WITH MY F**KING MONEY, then right there Due Process was abandoned.

Since everyone is speculating, let's hear your views on how great things are going for this country since Lord Bush was couped into power.

With a full spectrum of information, going back to 1947 until now, can you only see the full picture. You seem to be determined to prove speculators of the demolition theory wrong, and you'll never accomplish that.

Some debunkers who came to CTC to prove us researchers wrong, tried doing it by personal attacks, which is a more crude version of the method you are attempting to do.

So again, here's the scenerios and theories off the top of my head:

1) Crazed Arabs hijacked 4 planes and flew them into buildings because of their hatred of American freedom.

2) Crazed Arabs hijacked 4 planes and flew them into buildings because of their hatred of American Imperialism

3) Remote controlled planes were flown into buildings

4) UFO knocked down buildings

5) Missle was lauched from F-16

6) Demolitions were placed in various locations in WTC

7) Center core was melted by plasma generator

8) Jet fuel reached high enough temperature to weaken center core, which collapsed and pancaked floors on top of one another

9) Extra bomb was attached to bottom of airliners.

10) Arabs were trained by CIA's Bin Laden to carry out act, as part of a large psy-op.

11) 9/11 was part of God vs Satan war

posted 10-20-2003 09:33 PM            

In this one the engineer supports your theory that the fires were not that intense, but he makes a very compelling argument that the collapse was caused in large part by the impact damage.
http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/wtc/select/clifton/p1.htm

One the other hand, here is someone who disagrees with that position about the building vulnerability to fire. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993354

obviously there are still some questions about the collapse mechanism, but no where in any of the discussions does anyone even remotely suggest a "controlled Demolition."

posted 10-20-2003 09:34 PM            

June 5, 2003 -- LONDON - A vulnerability in the structure of the World Trade Center towers may have contributed to their collapse after the Sept. 11 attacks, a leading structural engineer said yesterday.

A combination of events, including the collision of the aircraft into the buildings, a weakening of the structure by the physical impact, the thickness of fire-proofing insulation and the fires, have been blamed for the catastrophe.

But Dr. Asif Usmani, a structural engineer at the University of Edinburgh's School of Engineering and Electronics, told an engineering conference the Twin Towers seem to have been "unusually vulnerable" to a major fire.

"There was a vulnerability in the design of the structural system. It is not materials. It is not about fire protection. It is about the design of the structure," he told Reuters.

In a computer-based analysis of the buildings, Usmani studied the structure of the towers that collapsed after they were hit by two hijacked planes in attacks by Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terror network.

"We are not analyzing the event. We are saying, 'Let's look at the structure itself and see if it has anything unusual that makes it more vulnerable to fire than other structures,' " he explained.

Usmani said the towers' exterior and internal columns, which make up the core of the building, were joined by a very long and thin expanse of floor. Supporting the floors were lightweight trusses which, when exposed to fire, expand.

But because of the way the towers were built, the trusses did not have anywhere to expand without buckling.

"This was good for constructing a building very quickly, and they were strong enough to carry all the loading that was put on them. But when there is a fire underneath the trusses and the steel gets hot . . . it expands quite a lot - and those expansion forces can be quite high if the restraints to expansion are high," he added.

Reuters

posted 10-20-2003 09:36 PM            

February 23, 2002

First Tower to Fall Was Hit at Higher Speed, Study Finds

By ERIC LIPTON and JAMES GLANZ

Researchers trying to explain why the World Trade Center's south tower fell first, though struck second, are focusing on new calculations showing that the passenger jet that hit the south tower had been flying as fast as 586 miles an hour, about 100 miles an hour faster than the other hijacked plane.

The speed of the two planes at impact has been painstakingly estimated using a mix of video, radar and even the recorded sounds of the planes passing overhead.

Two sets of estimates, by government and private scientists, have surfaced, but both show that the plane that hit the south tower at 9:02 a.m., United Airlines Flight 175, approached the trade center at extremely high speed, much faster than American Airlines Flight 11, which hit the north tower at 8:46 a.m.

In fact, the United plane was moving so fast that it was at risk of breaking up in midair as it made a final turn toward the south tower, traveling at a speed far exceeding the 767-200 design limit for that altitude, a Boeing official said.

"These guys exceeded even the emergency dive speed," said Liz Verdier, a Boeing spokeswoman. "It's off the chart."

The speed of the planes is far from the only factor that will be important in explaining why the south tower, which was struck between the 78th and 84th floors, fell within 56 minutes and the north tower, which was hit between the 94th and 99th floors, stood for 102 minutes.

Ultimately, it was the combination of structural damage and the fires, fueled by thousands of gallons of jet fuel, that brought the buildings down. The south tower was also hit at a lower point, meaning there was more weight bearing down on the damaged floors.

But the difference in the towers' survival times, which translated into a difference in the amount of time tenants and rescue personnel had to get out, could be related in part to the planes' speeds, researchers said.

"Clearly one plane came in faster and had more energy," Dr. Jerome Connor, a professor of civil engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who is studying the collapses, said of the new calculations, in which he was not directly involved.

"If one building had more damage, it would take less for the heat to build up enough for it to come down," Dr. Connor said. "That would help explain why the building that was hit second, fell first."

The high speed of United Flight 175 may also have complicated the hijackers' mission, because it would have been more difficult to make accurate adjustments in the plane's direction, several pilots said. Loud and repeated alarms would also have been sounding in the cockpit.

"The faster you go, the less time and room you have for error," said Tim O'Toole, a former 767 pilot and staff engineer in safety department of the Air Line Pilots Association.

The flight data recorders from the two planes have not been found; Boeing officials said these so-called black boxes are not designed to survive the forces they encountered in the collapse.

But a researcher at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, by closely studying videos of the attack, has estimated the planes' speeds. The Federal Aviation Administration, in consultation with the National Transportation Safety Board, has come up with its own estimates, based on radar and video.

The M.I.T. analysis, by Eduardo Kausel, a professor of civil and environmental engineering, found that the United plane was traveling an estimated 537 m.p.h., while the American plane, the first to hit, was traveling 429 m.p.h.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation said the government's analysis put the speeds at 586 m.p.h. for the United flight and 494 m.p.h. for the American one.

In both cases, the planes were flying much faster than they should have been at that altitude: the aviation agency's limit below 10,000 feet is 287 m.p.h.

Investigators could not say for sure why one plane was traveling faster than the other; it may have been accidental choices of novice pilots, or perhaps the second group of hijackers feared being shot down. But what is clear is that at impact, this difference was important.

The energy of motion carried by any object, called the kinetic energy, varies as the square of its velocity, so even modest differences in speed can translate into large variations in what the building had to absorb.

That means that while the United jet was traveling only about a quarter faster than the American jet, it would have released about 50 percent more energy on impact.

"The difference is enormous," Dr. Kausel said of the energy created by the impact of the planes.

Even at a speed of only about 500 m.p.h., a partly loaded Boeing 767 weighing 132 tons would have created about three billion joules of energy at impact, the equivalent of three- quarters of a ton of T.N.T., according to another team of researchers at M.I.T.

Only about 6 percent of that energy would be used up in cutting more than 30 exterior steel columns, said Dr. Tomasz Wierzbicki, a professor of applied mechanics at M.I.T., who did his research with a student, Liang Xue. But some 25 percent would go into ripping up floor structures and 56 percent in damaging structural columns in the core.

The energy poured into the core at this speed would probably be enough to damage or break about 23 of the 47 columns in the core. At a higher speed, more may have been damaged.

Aviation experts have disagreed over just how difficult the mission was for the hijackers, who had limited flying experience and had probably never operated a real commercial jet. The high speeds added to the complexity of their task.

The typical cruise speed of a Boeing 767-200 at 35,000 feet is 530 m.p.h. The lower the plane goes, however, the thicker the air becomes, so the slower the plane must travel to avoid excessive stress.

Flying a Boeing 767 straight ahead at 1,000 to 1,500 feet would not be too difficult, even at more than 580 m.p.h., and it would most likely not threaten the structural integrity of the plane, a half a dozen pilots and a Boeing spokeswoman said.

But accurately turning the plane at that speed and maintaining the proper pitch, or up and down movement, is difficult, the pilots said, particularly for a novice pilot, and turning at that speed would have put excessive stress on the plane.

An automatic pilot device could have directed the hijacked planes to Manhattan, if the hijackers knew how to enter certain coordinates into the computerized flight management system. But as they approached the city, the hijackers almost certainly had to take manual control of the aircraft, because the automatic pilot in navigation mode is not accurate enough to target the center of building, pilots said.

Video of the approach of United Flight 175 to the south tower shows that it banked westward in the final moments, its right wing going up, its left wing down. That maneuver may have been intended to maximize damage to the building. But it has been interpreted by some pilots as a sign that the hijacker nearly missed the tower.

"It was unfortunate luck," said Richard Fariello, a retired T.W.A. captain who works as a consultant to NASA. "The way he was headed, he could have just clipped it perhaps with one wing. There is a good chance that would have been the case."

Structural engineers cannot yet say how important a role the planes' speed played in how quickly the towers collapsed. Aside from the fact that the second plane hit a lower floor, it also struck more to one side of the tower's face, presumably causing asymmetric damage that could have made it more difficult for the tower to reapportion its loads among surviving structural columns.

But determining the force and energy of impact is the starting point for any effort to understand what failures within the buildings eventually caused collapse, said Dr. Shyam Sunder, chief of the structures division at the building and fire research lab of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

"It's important to have the speed of the plane and the direction that it hit for any analysis that we do relating to aircraft impact on the structure," Dr. Sunder said.

If the plane that hit the south tower had been traveling slower, and the tower perhaps had stood longer, it is still unclear how many more people would have survived. Even though the south tower fell in only 56 minutes, fewer tenants died in it than in the north tower. In large part, that is because many of the people who worked in the upper floors had evacuated during the 16 minutes between the two attacks. But extra time might have meant that those trapped above the impact zone at the south tower would have found the one emergency exit stairwell that was still passable.

posted 10-20-2003 09:38 PM            

I continued on to the west side near my office. I was fairly near the windows talking with two or three people, including especially Bobby Coll. I was looking him in the eye having a conversation with him when at apparently 9:03 -- I didn't check my watch -- the second plane hit the south side of our building at approximately the 78th, 79th, and 80th floors. Our room fell apart at that moment, a complete destruction without an explosion -- very strange things. The lights went out, but we were near the window so there was daylight. Again, there was this sort of thump, this explosion without fire and flame, a very strange sensation.

"I just felt in my heart, Oh my gosh, we are going over."
There was a twist, if you like, to the building when it got hit, and therefore the plane's hitting explained some things to me later, like why the ceiling fell apart. The ceiling tiles and some of the brackets and so on fell; some air conditioning ducts, speakers, cables, and things like that that were in the ceiling fell. I seem to have a sense that some of the floor tiles even buckled a bit or were moved. Some of the walls, I recall vaguely, were actually torn in a jagged direction rather then up and down. Again perhaps explained by the torque, some of the door frames popped out of the wall and partially fell or fully fell.

For seven to ten seconds there was this enormous sway in the building. It was one way, and I just felt in my heart, Oh my gosh, we are going over. That's what it felt like. Now, on windy days prior to that there was a little bit of a sway to the building. You got used to it; you didn't notice it. The window blinds would go clack clack as they swung. As I said, for a good seven to ten seconds I thought it was over -- horrible feeling -- but then the building righted itself. It didn't sway back and forth; it just went one way, it seemed, and then back, and we were stable again.

Just think of the stress that torque motion must have put on the structure. It is unlikely that the original engineers ever envisioned the building having to withstand that.

posted 10-20-2003 10:19 PM            

A sort of pick and choose the combinations of all, to come up with a personel POV of the entire event.

posted 10-20-2003 10:27 PM            

To me it screams "TOW THE LINE"

I see these same "theories"..(the terrorists did it) OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

I SUGGEST

YOU READ PNAC DOCUMENT

I SUGGEST

YOU READ OPERATION NORTHWOODS

I SUGGEST

YOU STOP BELIVEING CIA CONTROLLED MEDIA (OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD)

I SUGGEST

YOU UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF PROBLEM-REACTION-SOLUTION AND GOVERNMENTS

posted 10-21-2003 02:11 AM            

*************

World Trade Center Wired for Internal Explosives?

by Sherman H. Skolnick

skolnick@ameritech.net
www.skolnicksreport.com

10/20/3

Sometimes certain events of a mystery are right under the noses of the monopoly press. Either because they are lazy, or their bosses will not let them write what they find, or whatever---parts of the strange happenings remain unexplained, sometimes for years and years.

A network reporter whispered into our ear, pressed to the ground. Not an unusual happening for us. If they find out something that is censored, and they cannot go with it, because of the higher-ups---well, they know where the independent loudmouths reside. And sometimes for various esoteric reasons, they owe us some favor. (Such as by digging up "dirt", we got their boss off their back.)

Before you consider some of the details, you have to consider the following:

[A] Some of what is contained hereafter as to certain persons in the World Trade Center may remain unexplained and not completely correct. So as to give those referred to the benefits of all doubts, that they may, in fact, be innocent of complicity in 9-11.

[B] BUT, possibly true and for the first time revealed, are the details that happened right under the view of the oil-soaked, spy-riddled American monopoly press.

BACKGROUND:

1. Various details analyzed and compiled by others, strongly support the view that the World Trade Center Twin Towers in New York City, on September 11, 2001, did not suddenly collapse shortly after something---an actual airplane, or a missile disguised with a hologram projection to simulate an airplane somehow hitting the Towers and each entire plane getting somehow swallowed up inside the buildings.

Yet, aviation and engineering experts seriously doubt that a huge airplane, wings and tail, could penetrate the buildings hitting heavy reinforced pillars and such. Some question: how come the huge wings and tail, from vibration and impact, did not fall off to the ground below? How come Fire Department experts, on their walkie-talkies, stated that they got high up in one of the buildings; that the fire they saw was not that bad; and that other firemen should bring up hoses because the fire could easily be brought under control. Yet, shortly after making such a report, the buildings got pulverized and collapsed all the way down.

2. The youngest son of George Herbert Walker Bush, namely Marvin Bush, is seldom mentioned in the monopoly press. Yet, there are detailed articles available in search engines [such as www.google.com MARVIN BUSH ] that Marvin was the director of a casualty insurance company with coverage of the World Trade Center, and that the coverage was stopped sometime before 9-11. Also Marvin Bush was a director of a firm that was involved with the security of the World Trade Center.

[For more details, review the known stories about FBI Deputy Director, John P. O'Neill, an expert on counter-terrorism, who about August, 2001, quit the Bureau because the Bush White House blocked him from further investigating Osama bin Laden. Why? Clearly, because O'Neill's probe would lead to the Bush Crime Family, the Carlyle Group, and related banks and entities tied to Osama. O'Neill became the head of Security at the World Trade Center, and about his first day of work was 9-11. He was outside one of the buildings but was somehow lured inside where he perished, CONVENIENTLY.]

3. Notice this strange series of events. A group of purported German and Austrian artists apparently smuggled their way into the World Trade Center. THEY LIVED FOR SOME TIME ON THE 91st FLOOR of one of the twin towers.

[What may or may not be relevant: the U.S. authorities tried their best to torpedo a criminal action in Germany, following 9-11, as to purported Moslem "terrorists" being implicated or in some way blameable for the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings. Yet, the head of the U.S. FBI and other top U.S. officials refused to show up to testify as requested. The apparent reason? German counter-intelligence was apparently pursuing an angle troubling to the U.S. Namely, that certain Saudis, living for a while prior to 9-11 in Germany, were part of a high-level U.S. government diversion to what really happened on September 11, 2001. That is, that Osama and his cohorts were NOT actually involved. And because of the data uncovered by German authorities, the supposed Moslem "terrorists" were merely on what is known in espionage, as a "parallel track", a trick to disguise the real events and make them like Lee Harvey Oswald, a patsy, falsely blamed.]

The German and Austrian purported artists were working on a book while living on the 91st floor of one of the Twin Towers, in an area that had been a warehouse, where they built a balcony.

"In short, the book belies the extravagance of the feat it seems to document: the covert installation, and brief use of a balcony on the 91st floor of the World Trade Center, 1,100 feet above the earth. Eight photographs---some grainy, all taken from a great distance--depict one tower's vast eastern facade, marred by a tiny molelike growth; a lone figure dressed in a white jacket, standing on a lectern-size box."

"Balcony Scene (Or Unseen) Atop the World; Episode at Trade Center Assumes Mythic Qualities", by Shaila K. Dewan, Metropolitan Desk, New York Times, Saturday, August 18, 2001 (1645 words to story).

More from the same article:

"Still, how did a balcony escape the notice of one of the most security-conscious office towers in the world? An examination of the security system revealed that it was focused on the ground floor and basement. Mr. Janka [one of the "artists"] said, adding, "There's no surveillance on the facade itself".

And more from the lengthy article:

"Yet, since the Sunday morning in March 2000, when the balcony was allegedly installed, and, 19 minutes later, dismantled, the affair has taken on the outlines of an urban myth, mutated by rumors and denials among the downtown cognoscenti."

Yet, more:

The four purported artists, "...the four, wearing harnesses, unscrewed the aluminum moldings that hold the window in place and used two large suction cups to remove the glass (air pressure adds about 300 pounds to the effort). As warm air streamed past, they outfitted the window with a cantilevered box, big enough for only one person at a time."

The World Trade Center security apparently at first denied to the New York Times and others that there was anyone living inside one of the Twin Towers on the 91st Floor.

4. So, questions remain:

===were the purported "artists", escaping notice of the WTC security and living on the 91st floor, a diversion for certain persons who wired up the towers for internal explosions, to concide with something striking the towers on 9-11? Did they know, or see anything, while living inside one of the towers, by which they could be witnesses to foul play? The "artists" may deny the whole thing as merely a "prank". And vigorously deny any complicity in any dirty business to bring down the towers. Until more facts are elicited, we must consider the possibility that they may be entirely innocent. To prove they lived in the building, the artists produced a bill proving a helicopter, paid for by them, was used by them to photograph their occupancy of the 91st floor, photos made from the outside through the window.

===the firm that got the contract to clear up the debris after the collapse of the towers was Controlled Demolition, Inc. Is it a mere coincidence that they are the same one specializing in taking down old hotels and such, by internal explosives causing such buildings to fall down on themselves. The firm was involved with what some contend was a cover up in the rapid way in which the FBI wanted to remove all evidence of what brought down the Federal Office Building, April 19, 1995, by multiple explosions in Oklahoma City. The building was quickly smashed down and the site covered up with cement, courtesy of the FBI and apparently with the demolition firm.

****

So let me repeat..I AM SICK OF the BS PRO-BUSH, PRO NWO, PRO WAR Propaganda that uses Sept 11th as an excuse for EVERYTHING!!!

But I'm a "LIBERAL" for questioning that.

I'M SICK OF IT!!!

What a crock!!! These NEO-CONS!!!

THE GOVT. DID THIS FOLKS...WAKE UP!!!!

THINGS ARE GETTING TOO WEIRD IN "HOMELAND" AMERICA

posted 10-21-2003 04:43 PM            

Love your heart and soul Mech and SG's great responses!

The firemen and survivors will tell their stories and others involved in peripheral agencies will tell theirs and all will come out in time!

Larson just repeats mantra and so be it! Without his catalyst the chemical voltage of this thread would have expired long ago! So thanks to Larson as the catalyst of truth!

Keep on keepin' on!

posted 10-21-2003 06:56 PM            

It's true because lord Sherman H. Skolnick said so

By the way swampturd, I still smell as good as ever

posted 10-21-2003 07:08 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Veteran's wife:By the way swampturd, I still smell as good as ever

---

Don't worry VW, you are already are the subject of "Council Warning to Veteran's Wife", and as I said, tick...tock...tick...tock

Since you supply absolutely nothing to Chemtrail Central but insults, your presence is likened to a gnat flying around one's head.

I tell you one thing, you have approximately the mental capacity of guntoter, the resident Goat-Roper and Redneck from another site.

BTW, you didn't give a very convincing argument for the Government/Mass Media version of 9/11.

posted 10-21-2003 07:26 PM            

Again, Mize might be a staunch Republican or will support the USA/CIA/NeoCon line no matter what they do.

And if he is a Democrat, he might be like a lot of others that think that these are "Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories".

Nice try, but.......Nope......Doesn't convince me.........It can be countered too easily..

posted 10-21-2003 07:27 PM            

Again, Mize might be a staunch Republican or will support the USA/CIA/NeoCon line no matter what they do.

And if he is a Democrat, he might be like a lot of others that think that these are "Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories".

Nice try, but.......Nope......Doesn't convince me.........It can be countered too easily..

posted 10-21-2003 08:35 PM            

What do you want to bet that no one there agrees that the WTC was demo'ed?

posted 10-21-2003 09:53 PM            

I searched on the site for awhile and found some firefighter stories!
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/

I read two and they mentioned hearing explosions. I'll have to read more later -- saved the link!

Thanks!

posted 10-22-2003 02:01 PM            

I once asked a man who was involved in the Warren Comission why he had come up with such an improbable explanation which obviously fit no eyewitness accounts nor any physical evidence.

Arlen replied he was a jr Attorney assigned to construct a possible explanation,
and he did so.

Just because he constructed a possible 9although highly improbable0 explanation.
Senator Spector will be forever tarred by the obvious lies of the warren Comission.
the infamous single bullet theory,
which required a bullet to wound two people, change direction in mid air and shatted bones while remaining in pristine
condition was not something he believed nor subscribed to.

Experts assigned to construct a possible (although improbable and in disagreement with both eyewitnesses and the photographic evidence)
theory to support the official version of
the sudden complete collapse of buildings designed specifically to withstand airplane impacts.

Same/ same.

Underlings acting on orders from higher up.
higher ups who can make or break them.

Gerald Ford was rewarded for his service on the Warren Comission by being appointed President.
Arlen Spector became a US Senator.

Follow the careers of any who knuckle under and watch them rise.

Or watch those who fight against the NWO,
and see them die in suspicious crashes or be tarred by media false allegations and malicious prosecutions.

Sure I'll believe experts who disagree with engineering, metallurgy, and physics.
Sure I'll believe firemen lied and people spoke on cellphones in 1800 degree heat.
Sure I'll believe a Firechief stood in a raging inferno and claimed he saw only two pockets of fire.

When pigs fly!

It comes down to two choices.
Believe Bush or believe the evidence.

posted 10-22-2003 03:58 PM            

This idea that it was all a government conspiracy is ridiculous.

posted 10-22-2003 04:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Reality Check:
For any of you to think that the fire service would cover up something like this is insane. You have NO understanding of the Brotherhood of firefighters. 343 of our BROTHERS DIED that day. We would NEVER let the government or ANYONE get away with murdering them.

---

Well,
having bought into the official fairy tale
is
exactly
letting someone get away with murdering those men and women who died that day.

I spent my years in the fire protection industry saving firemens' lives.

Explanation: a properly installed working automatic fire control system prevents loss of life and loss of structures.
Instead of entering a burning building at great risk, to rescue civilians;
Firemen need only verify the fire is out and call for a repair crew to put the fire control system back in service.

I've trained Fire Inspectors and worked with Fire Chiefs to establish fire codes to protect citizens and Fire Department personnel who respond to fires.

Firemen/ as used here/ refers to those men and women who risk their lives fighting fires and rescuing civilians.

Anyone who doubts the word of firefighters, is someone I strongly disagree with.

When Chief Palmer radioed from the 78th floor,...
Chief Palmer could see only two pockets of fire, and called for a pair of engine companies to fight them.
the impact zone, which ran from the 78th to the 84th floors.
source:
Lost Voices of Firefighters, Some on 78th Floor
New York Times, August 4, 2002
By JIM DWYER and FORD FESSENDEN
http://www.mishalov.com/wtc_lostvoicesfiredept.html

One of the first firefighters in the stricken second tower, Louie Cacchioli, 51, told People Weekly on Sept. 24: "I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building." http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=245
NYC fireman in clip:
"As if they had detonated...
...as if they were planning to take out a building"
source:
Videos of Eyewitness Recollections of Collapses
Firemen recall "detonations" in South Tower http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/index.html

Old buddies from high school being career firefighters, and staying close friends meanwhile;
30 years working with, partying with,
fire fighters, and still having retired firefighters among my closest friends and neighbors.
I do understand fire fighters.

posted 10-22-2003 04:58 PM            

Exclusive to American Free Press

By Christopher Bollyn

Since AFP first published a photograph from the 9-11 Pentagon crash site, there has been a great outpouring of interest—and disinfo.

When American Free Press published a hard-to-find photo from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FE MA) archive showing a small turbine disc from the Pentagon crash site, it was hoped that readers could help identify the object (Sept. 15 & 22). Since the photo and article were published there has been an outpouring of interest—and disinformation—about the unidentified jet engine part.

The photograph reveals a crucial piece of evidence, which if positively identified could help prove what kind of aircraft hit the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

“Is this the 9-11 smoking gun?” Fintan Dunne, editor of WagKingdom.com asks on a web page dedicated to the FEMA photographs. These photos could be the keys to unlock the cover-up, Dunne wrote on Oct. 7.

“Among all the arguments about 9-11: tower fires, WTC 7 collapse, etc., none seems as straightforward as that posed by the jet engine part,” Dunne said. If the Pentagon photos are authentic, he said, then either the turbine is from a Boeing 757, or it is not. The web site appeals to “aero engineers” for help in identifying the disc seen in the FEMA photos.

The photograph is one of many taken by Jocelyn Augustino, a FEMA photographer, at the Pentagon crash site on Sept. 13, 2001. In the FEMA on-line photo library, the best photos of the unidentified disc are numbered 4414 and 4415, archived at: www.photolibrary.fema.gov/ photolibrary/advancedsearch.do.

Several readers wrote to AFP suggesting that the unidentified disc was a piece from the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) mounted in the tail section of a Boeing 757. Honeywell makes the GTCP331-200 APU used on the 757 aircraft. No one suggested, however, that the small disc was a piece from one of the main engines of a 757-200.

AFP contacted Honeywell’s Aerospace division in Phoenix, Ariz., and sent high-resolution photos for their examination. “There’s no way that’s an APU wheel,” an expert at Honeywell told AFP. The expert, who cannot be named, added: “That turbine disc—there’s no way in the world that came out of an APU.”

American Free Press contacted Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce, manufacturers of the 757’s turbofan jet engines to try and identify the piece.

“If the aircraft that struck the Pentagon was a Boeing 757-200 owned by American Airlines, then it would have to be a Rolls Royce engine,” Mark Sullivan, spokesman for Pratt & Whitney, told AFP.

John W. Brown, spokesman for Rolls Royce (Indianapolis), had previously told AFP: “It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I’m familiar with, and certainly not the AE 3007H made here in Indy.”

The AE 3007 engines are used in small commuter jets such as the Cessna Citation; the AE 3007H is also used in the military’s unmanned aircraft, the Global Hawk. The Global Hawk is manufactured by Northrop Grumman’s subsidiary Ryan Aeronautical, which it acquired from Teledyne, Inc. in July 1999.

If the government version that an American Airlines 757-200 hit the Pentagon is accurate, then the object in the photo would have to be from a Rolls Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine.

When AFP told Brown that it must be a piece of a Rolls Royce engine, Brown balked and asked who at Pratt & Whitney had provided the information.

Asked again if the disc in the photo is a piece of a Rolls Royce RB211-535, or from the AE 3007 series, Brown said he could not answer.

AFP then asked Brown if he was actually familiar with the parts of an AE 3007H, which is made at the Indiana plant: “No,” Brown said. “I don’t build the engines. I am a spokesman for the company. I speak for the company.”

Rolls Royce produces the RB211-535 engines for American Airlines 757-200 aircraft at a plant in Derby, England. Martin Johnson, head of communications at Rolls Royce in Derby, said he had followed the story closely in American Free Press and had also been notified in advance by Rolls Royce offices in Seattle and Indianapolis.

However, rather than address the question of the unidentified disc, Johnson launched a verbal attack on this reporter for questioning the government version of events at the Pentagon on 9-11. “You are the only person in the world who does not believe that a 757 hit the Pentagon,” Johnson said. “The idea that we can have a reasonable conversation is beyond your wildest dreams,” Johnson said and hung up the phone.

Flug Revue, a German magazine about aviation equipment was more willing to discuss the disc. Karl Schwarz, a technical editor at the Bonn-based publication, examined the photo and technical drawings of the RB211-535 for AFP. “I think only an engineer who is involved in the design of the engine could identify the part,” Schwarz said.

While the front fan of the RB211-535 has a 74.5-inch diameter, compression discs inside the engine are much smaller. Schwarz said the inner discs are between 29 and 41 inches in diameter. “It could well be” an inner compression disc, Schwarz said. The discs from the inner stages are made of titanium, he added.

AFP asked Schwarz if this could be a disc from a smaller engine, such as the Global Hawk’s AE 3007H. “It could come from any jet engine,” Schwarz said.

If the disc in the photo can be matched with a Rolls Royce AE 3007H engine, some speculate that it would prove something like a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon.

The Global Hawk engine is hand built at the Rolls Royce plant in Indianapolis and has an opening diameter of 43.5 inches. Schwarz said he did not have a technical diagram of an AE 3007 engine to consult.

Because the disc in the photo appears very similar in size and shape to the front fan of a Global Hawk engine, AFP asked Schwarz in what position is the solid disc found behind the front fan of a turbofan engine. “Immediately,” Schwarz said.

An unnamed former cruise missile engineer for the engine manufacturer Teledyne Continental Motors-Turbine Engines added his opinion to the debate:

“Clearly, the part in the picture is larger than 24 inches in diameter. It also appears to have a nosepiece-like device on its front. This probably houses bearings, front oil sump and perhaps an alternator or starter.”

This engineer concluded with the intriguing comment, “This fan did not come from a cruise missile engine.”