22 minute warning of South Tower internal floor collapses reported

The South Tower fell at 9:59 a.m. Per the report released by the City of New York which is linked below,
someone called 9/11 22 minutes before then, at 9:37 a.m., from the 105th floor of WTC2 and reported
that "floors beneath him in the 90-something floor had collapsed." Here's the link and the quote appears
at page 46 of it.


How does this fit into pre-existing controlled demolition theories?

911 Truth Movement Musings (Watching the Watchers)

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say...

but there are many reports of internal (non critical supports) collapsing well before the buildings were brought down.

There are firefighters around the 40th floor reporting "areas that have completey collapsed".

Considering these "reported points of destruction" are well above and below where the planes impacted the towers, indicates even more so that they are unrelated to the plane impacts and subsequent fires.

Personally I believe that thermite/thermate based incendiary devices were placed sporadically on floors above the impact points to create smoke and hinder the firefighting activity.

You can find more oral testamonies

"David Ray Griffin reads dozens of oral histories where firefighters describe the controlled demolitions of the WTC towers. These histories were recorded immediately after 9/11, but the government would not release them until a Judicial Watch court case forced them too.

Link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moDr8eON2Hk

Kevin Cosgrove (RIP) was on the 105th floor NW Corner WTC2

with Doug Cherry (RIP), on the phone to the emergency services waiting to be saved.

Poor souls were getting smoked by the WTC2 fires as well as from WTC1.

This is one reason we need a "real" investigation, there are thousands more.


I'm guessing that thermite was used on the floor trusses to make them fail....

the fire alone would not have done the trick.

They would want the floors to fall inwards so they would have planted the thermite on the floor trusses 1/4 to 1/3 of the length of the truss away from the core so when they failed they would collapse inward towards the core.

they wouldn't have to do it to all the floors.... but they would do it to at least half to prepare for the final pull.
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Personally, I think it played less a role in the demolition.

Having studied the collapses for thousands of hours, I believe the following.

in WTC1 and WTC7 thermite/thermate was mainly used as an incendiary, explosives were mainly used for the actual demolition, i.e. RDX or similar.

in WTC2 thermite/thermate was used to eat away at the eastern face (around floor 80) and adjoining corners, it was also used as an incendiary, but the main demolition used high explosives i.e. RDX or similar.

Once again these are based on my opinion and studies I have carried out.

Only the perps truly know exactly what and how (bastards).

Good luck all

This does not

surprise me - or solve any of the problems with explaining the collapse.

The fact that individual upper floors were collapsing after the massive damage and subsequent fires caused by a large Boeing plane crashing into the tower should surpise no one (except the no-planers who believe the tooth fairy was involved).

The problem remains - how did the relatively isolated damage to the extreme upper floors of the tower (Floor 105 according to your report) somehow translate into energy and momentum sufficient enough to cause the spontaneous destruction of the 90-odd floors (each with 47 core columns intact and undamaged) beneath it.

According to the official story, the ONLY energy available was simply gravity, mass and momentum.

According to the critics of the official story, this is impossible to achieve at near free-fall speeds, since it assumes that the descending upper floors took the path of MOST resistance (as opposed to the path of least resitance)passing through the lower undamaged 90 floors & 47 core columns with the same ease and speed as passing through thin air.

Schoolboy science

No true science is ever going to explain the collapses within the official boundary, it cant be recreated no matter how encouraged. A schoolboy using a tooth paste tube carton containing a pencil could disprove what your told to believe.

A giant Monty Python foot is more plausible.

a real example of fog of war?

This information is in the 9/11 Commission Report. It doesn't add anything to the FEMA and NIST studies, which already provide 9/11 Truth with plenty of ammunition.

I don't see how anyone could see from the 105th floor to the 90-something floor if the buildings were engulfed in thick black smoke, and if NIST says the airplane impact removed only 6 of 47 columns (that is, it does not appear as though the plane completely demolished ten or more floors -- and left some place for this person to stand and observe the destruction).

Regardless, it's too vague to be meaningful.

I would respond to Angie:

1. Watch 911Eyewitness, where the camcorder's microphone picks up numerous explosions (from Hoboken NJ) that occur before the collapses occur. These explosions, and the evidence of smoke rising from ground level, must have had an effect.

2. The Naudet brothers film shows massive destruction in the Lobby, at ground level, where explosives destroyed the area 800 feet below the impacts of the planes.

3. Janitor William Rodriguez reports explosions in the sub basement levels which seriously injured coworkers. This was about the time of the plane impacts. He also reported other explosions higher in the building, yet nowhere near the impact floors.

4. NYFD commander Karin Deshore described orange flash explosions popping in patterns around the towers at lower floors and rising up and down the towers just before the collapses.

5. Numerous witnesses saw and heard explosions. One researcher counted 118 different fire department witnesses describing explosions.

6. The collapses don't make much sent from a physics/engineering standpoint. The top of one of the towers tilted 23 degrees. Why didn't it topple over? Falling away from a solid, undamaged steel structure (the undamaged floors below the impacts) would be easier than falling THROUGH those same floors.

These are highly suspicious factors that need to be addressed by honest investigators. We also have the NIST telling us that noe of the steel samples examined had gotten above 600 deg. C. That certainly does not explain a total structural collapse, symmetrical and at near free fall speed.

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

All information is vetted for accuracy. If you have a factual challenge to any of the information, email: johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.