Community | October 07, 2010 | 15 comments

Videos: 9/11 Firefighters Reveal Huge Explosions Before Towers Collapsed

source: http://www.infowars.com/video-911-firefighters-reveal-huge-explosions-before-towers-collapsed/

rodstradamus
Newly obtained video that was reluctantly released by NIST after a lawsuit by the International Center for 9/11 Studies shows two firefighters on 9/11 discussing how secondary explosions occurred immediately before the collapse of the twin towers, providing damning new evidence that explosive devices were used to bring down the buildings.

Debunkers have repeatedly claimed that low-temperature burning jet fuel could weaken steel support columns enough to cause the pancake-style collapse of the twin towers, ignoring the plethora of eyewitness testimony to incendiary devices having caused the implosion of the World Trade Center structure.

The new tape is as clear cut as it comes – the firefighters, who were inside the lobby of one of the towers, unequivocally state that secondary explosions which occurred after the planes hit were responsible for causing the towers to collapse.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
October 6, 2010

There are 13 videos linked to this artice + more information
  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   The White Rose,   InfoWars,   2 more
  2. tags:
    NYC,  War on Terror,  9/11,  Terror,  6 more
  3.     
    |

15 comments // Videos: 9/11 Firefighters Reveal Huge Explosions Before Towers Collapsed // Video

  • musics
  • Truthaddict
    • 0
      Truthaddict  

    • Hey musics, maybe you should stick with only commenting on music. I looked at your comment list to see if you have ever made an intelligent comment. You have not. So your opinion to me means nothing. And i see you have used the move out of your mothers basement comment before also. Do yourself a favor, and spend some time actually looking into what is being discussed. Your words are wasting space on a page that could have meaningfull discussion.

    • 1 year ago
  • musics
  • Mark701
    • 0
      Mark701  

    • Hmm, the one thing I didn't hear them say was "explosion". They talked about molten steel. Title should accurately reflect what's being said.

    • 1 year ago
  • rodstradamus
    • 0
      rodstradamus  
    • Mark701:

      Hmmm...If you looked at the end of the article, you would have seen:
      "There are 13 videos linked to this artice + more information"
      But you didn't link to the article and so your naivety persists...

    • 1 year ago
  • Truthaddict
    • +1
      Truthaddict  

    • No doubt about it, 9/11 was an inside job. And to the idiots who believe the jet fuel bs omg are you that stupid. Jet fuel is extremely flammable and will not sit and burn like a normal fire. Theres no way it could have metled anything, and to the hardly in touch with reality users like corndog67 below me.... you explain then to me how the third building that was not hit by anything fell? From fire, what fire, it was so far away from these buildings its impossible. All owned by one man, who took a massive insurance policy out on these building for "terrorist" activity one month before the attack. Explain that? Yeah i didnt think so ... go back to your 9-5 and leave the thinking up to the truthaddicts of the world.

    • 1 year ago
  • corndog67
    • -1
      corndog67  

    • You guys just keep yourself amused with the paranoid bullshit conspiracies. Don't you have jobs to go to, or go collect welfare or something? It's pretty obvious that you don't have too much to do, other than spread this shit.

    • 1 year ago
  • cool0ne
  • daveinLA
    • -1
      daveinLA  
    • Image

    • This has already been debunked.
      The firemen themselves have said they heard loud noises and although they used the word "explosions", they did NOT mean incendiary devices.. Why don't you also mention that ?
      B U L L S H I T . . P O S T .

    • 1 year ago
  • rodstradamus
    • +1
      rodstradamus  
    • daveinLA:

      "All the so-called "evidence" accusing USA of 9-11 has been thoroughly debunked."

      The NIST report doesn't even mention Building 7, a 47-story steel structure that collapsed in controlled demolition speed. Nor does it mention the molten metal or how about the only 2 missing black boxes in the history of aviation? I'd like to know where you got your information that so thoroughly debunked. Mythbusters doesn't count.

      Btw, it wasn't the "USA" who did 9/11. Its a little more complex than that. Post as many cute and funny pics as you want. No "Bullshitometer" is gonna save you from the Truth.
      http://firefightersfor911truth.org/
      http://www.ae911.org

    • 1 year ago
  • daveinLA
    • 0
      daveinLA  
    • rodstradamus:

      Dear Rod ;
      I would be very interested in any evidence of wrong-doing. Everything I've seen so far points to Bin Laden.

      Bldg. 7 ; Are you not familiar with "Streaking Object"
      If not go to streakingobject.com and discover the surprising but most plausible explanation.

      Have you watched "Loose Change" ?
      and the debunking film "Screw Loose Change" ?

    • 1 year ago
  • s_peak
    • +2
      s_peak  
    • Image
    • daveinLA:

      I'll tell you what's bullshit... "pancake theory". That holds ZERO water. There are several pictures of ground zero where you can clearly see that the main columns have 45 degree angled cuts in them with molten metal around the cut. This is how building demolition is done. Multiple Independent sources found traces of thermite AND thermate at these sites, and in the rubble. Thermate is a patented and proprietary substance used in building demolition only. I don't care who says they heard explosions or didn't. The fact is, they still can't explain how those giant towers collapsed EXACTLY like the model for demolition after being hit in the side with an airplane. I also dare you to try and prove this wrong:

      "In order to melt a mere 1 kg of steel that would take up a volume of only 0.127 liters, at least 1 MJ would be required. If 1/7.518 of the enthalpy (heat) in the products was directed at the kilogram of steel, the temperature rise would be reduced from 2,105 K to a little above 1,825 K which would result in a temperature of a little over 1,845 C and still potentially hot enough to melt some steel. But in real-world conditions, flame and upper layer hot gas temperatures are well below the AFT, typically barely reaching 1,000 C and certainly well below the melting point of steel. Heat radiates out in all directions, and would not be concentrated just at some particular 0.127 liter lump of steel. And the jet fuel fires in the WTC would have burnt out within a few minutes. The remaining combustible office material would have released lower quantities of heat per unit mass of fuel, and the associated AFTs would have been lower. Consequently, flame temperatures would have been lower for a given proportion of heat losses to the surroundings.

      Moreover, the oxygen-starved fuel-rich environment of the compartment fire would have reduced the temperature increase and the heat yielded per unit of fuel by a factor of about one-third. And a report, authored by a team of engineers commissioned by Silverstein Properties, concluded that fire temperatures in the WTC were even lower than typical fully-developed office fires. The fires were inhibited by dust and debris distributed by the impacts, and the study placed the temperatures at between 750 F and 1300 F (about 400 C to 700 C). Following collapse, low air exchange rates in the rubble pile would lead to low mass burning rates, poor combustion efficiency and low power output. A few smoldering pieces of wood and plastic could not create temperatures capable of melting steel."

      Also... see image. There are several more examples of these 45 degree cuts shown on every column in a row at the exact same location.

      http://www.fight4truth.com/911%2045DegreeCut.jpg

    • 1 year ago
  • s_peak
    • 0
      s_peak  
    • daveinLA:

      Further, you should realize that rulers throughout history have killed their own citizens in order to uphold a regime... and to ignore scientific probability in this case does not make you a patriot. In fact, I'd argue that it does the opposite. People who love thy neighbor, and love thy country seek to find the truth even if it hurts. PLEASE prove my last post wrong. If you have some counter-evidence, I will need to see that in order to make a more informed decision.

    • 1 year ago
  • s_peak
    • 0
      s_peak  
    • Image
    • daveinLA:

      The evidence points to Bin Laden? You mean that guy who's family is friends with the Bush family?

      That's weird.

      "With fewer than 50 ground troops surrounding the massive Tora Bora region in the mountains of Afghanistan where bin Laden was hiding, ground commanders pleaded for 800 more soldiers, according to Gary Berntsen, the CIA field commander whose book "Jawbreaker" goes into amazing detail about the botched paramilitary operation. Bernt-

      sen and other ground commanders said the U.S. let Osama bin Laden get away.

      Was this because of President George Bush's close ties to the bin Laden family?

      In 1978, Bush and Osama bin Laden's brother, Salem bin Laden, founded Arbusto Energy, an oil company based in Texas.

      Several bin Laden family members invested millions in The Carlyle Group, a private global equity firm based in Washington, DC. The company's senior advisor was Bush's father, former President George H.W. Bush. After news of the bin Laden-Bush connection became public, the elder Bush stepped down from Carlyle.

      Interestingly, on Sept. 11, 2001, members of the Carlyle Group - including Bush senior, and his former secretary of state, James Baker - were meeting at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C., along with Shafiq bin Laden, another one of Osama bin Laden's brothers."

      From:
      http://www.denverpost.com/rodriguez/ci_4319898

    • 1 year ago
  • cool0ne
more from Community:
from the community

top videos