William Rodriguez the magician's assistant

[plane son on 911]

Something is puzzling me about William Rodriguez.

The bombs in the basement bit.

According to his story the bombs were going off in the basement well before the twin towers came down.

If indeed bombs were used to bring the twin towers down then why were the bombs (explosives etc) not all set off at the same time as they are with normal controlled demolitions?

Can anybody enlighten me on this?

[spiv]

Why don't you ask William direct at one of his talks in his forthcoming June/July Uk & European tour??

[Stefan]

In normal demolitions all the work is not done in one go, they involve weakening a building over weeks before the final demolition occurs. In this case they had an hour.

Simple logic would lead me to speculate that if all the explosions went off just before the collapse it would be so loud that it would be heard from miles away, and it would be more discreet to spread out the work over an hour of choas where anyone talking about them could be put down as "in shock" and they would not be so obvious that there would be complete corroboration of all witnesses.

William's testimony is far from the only source for basement explosions. Smoke rising up from the ground before either tower fell was filmed from several angles, numerous news sources reported the blasts, and most of all at least two people were caught in the explosions themselves.

Besides the very obvious speculative reasons, Gordon Ross will be dealing with the technical issues of how a pattern of explosives could have facilitated the collapse we saw in his upcoming talk.

The simple fact is you are not a demolition expert, and neither am I, and even if we both were, what happened to the twin towers is so different to standard controlled demolitions we would still be on loose footing to pretend we understood how it was acheived. No buildings that tall had ever been demolished before, and it was neccesary for the demolition to start from the top down, making it a completley unique event.

You may not WANT there to have been explosives there, maybe you would prefer a beam weapon theory which requires you dispensing with some of the strongest evidence we have - pre collapse explosions, squibs, and the molten metal coming from the side of the south tower - but the truth is the MOST corroborated part of the events that day besides the towers falling was multiple explosions before they fell.

[plane son on 911]

Stefan said

"In normal demolitions all the work is not done in one go, they involve weakening a building over weeks before the final demolition occurs. In this case they had an hour"

I thought that in normal demolitions that the explosives charges were placed in the appropriate place, followed by detonation and that was it.

Can you please back up your statement with some evidence?

[plane son on 911]

[Stefan]

Plane,
I'm surprised you haven't looked up the basics of controlled demolition as a someone with a supposed interest in 9/11.

A controlled demolition team will weaken a building over an extended period, not usually by explosions, but in a short space of time this could have been improvised. Look it up.

As I said above, since neither of us have any footing as experts in this subject your "I don't understand why..." style questions are not any kind of argument againts WR's testimony, simply a realistic reflection of the general status of the majority of truthers:

We don't understand.

We don't know the first thing about the science or engineering that would be involved in bringing down these towers. I know there are a group of laymen who like to call them selves "9/11 Researchers" and beleive that an interest in a subject magically transforms them into experts on it, please forgive us if those delusions do not spread by osmosis to those who they try and convince that is what they are.

Explosions in the basements are borne out by muliple testimoney, as I said before more than one person was actually seriously injured in these blasts. You have done nothing to refute that they happened other than an admission that, like the rest of us, you are not qualified to understand what role they played.

I recommend you come to the Gordon Ross lecture in London and hear an engineer theorise how he thought the explosions relate to what was happening in the building, drawing on actual knowledge rather than the usual layman guesswork.

[Stefan]

I have seen William Rodriguez speak twice, on both occasions he took questions.

Wisely he does not delve into what he thinks what he heard and saw could have been, recognising that he does not know, he simply sticks to relating his experiences without any speculation.

If he heard an explosion, that's what he says, he doesn't speculate on what substance caused the explosion or what purpose it served.

I think we could learn a few things from that approach.

[plane son on 911]

Stefan said

"A controlled demolition team will weaken a building over an extended period"

Can you please advise what they do to weaken the building or some link that provides this information?

[spiv]

[Annie]

Hi All

Willie does prefer not to do a formal question and answer from the stage at the end of the talk, usually becuase people will ask him to theorise and, as has been stated above, he prefers to relate what he and others experienced on the day than come up with speculation about the science of what exactly might have occurred. In his view speculating about subjects like NPT/controlled demolition etc is outside his area of expertise, and he has also seen the harm this theorising has done to the truth movment in the states.

However, he's always available for a quick word after the talks when he's signing DVDs. He prefers a quiet word with interested people after a draining talk.

Regards

Annie

[Evans_England]

Lets think about it.

How would the explosives be triggered anyway? > REMOTE OR TIMED.

Can u imagine the death rate if the towers collapsed at the precise point the planes struck....... then it would be obvious a little more that the planes werent the only things damaging the structure.

But would that be too harsh, it really is a mind boggleing mistery.

[plane son on 911]

[kc]

None of my mates in demolition have ever weakened a building cause they're usually unsound anyway!

[Stefan]

Plane son,
This claim comes from a debate I had some times ago with an official conspiracy theorist, who used this fact as an argument against controlled demolition at the WTC, he was able to provide sources for me showing that this happens, but I can't find where he got them from now.

The simple fact is it's irrelevant, you haven't provided any argument whatsoever as to why an explosion in the basements should be doubted, considering there are multiple witnesses and evidence to support that it did, you've just forwarded an a priori statement "why didn't...?" which is pretty much your sorry bunch ever do.

If there is evidence something happened, you need evidence to show it didn't. Not simply a desire for it not to have, as it would fit your preferred theory better.

[plane son on 911]

[quote="plane son on 911"]

[chek]

[quote="plane son on 911"]

[plane son on 911]

This makes very interesting reading, especially the bit about controlled demolition with special effect fireballs.


http://www.implosionworld.com/halfway.htm

[telecasterisation]

Question; If indeed bombs were used to bring the twin towers down then why were the bombs (explosives etc) not all set off at the same time as they are with normal controlled demolitions?

Answer; Why don't you ask William direct at one of his talks in his forthcoming June/July Uk & European tour??

Why would WR be able to answer this question?

He is neither an expert on demolition nor planting explosives - he was a janitor, supposedly there on the day - what special insight does this give him into answer such matters?

[chek]

[Stefan]

My suggestion was to ask Gordon Ross, who is an engineer and has put together a hypothesis which includes all of the elements of the body of evidence, including pre collapse explosions, squibs and so on.

He's speaking in London soon,plane son, why not come along?

The reason, of course, is you have decided in contrary to all available evidence, that any evidence of controlled demolition must be fake to make way for your own theory.

[telecasterisation]

[marky 54]

[telecasterisation]

[marky 54]

[rodin]

[Evans_England]

Normally, demolishions are put in parts of the structure where they will be more effective, BUT they are not triggered until all have been placed - if i was doing it, i would not want to weaken the structure AT ALL until i was outside the building, and once i was, i wouldnt be going back in if it was weakened....

WR is a special witness, he went into both towers, on that day, as it was happening and is one of many people who spent all the time inside the towers, he got out just before the collapse. Im sure if explosives were going off, no matter where they were, he would have felt, heard, or even seen them? Also the government have offered him millions, and even offered a place in politics.... he didnt turn that down because he thought they had nothing to do with 9/11.

The reason i think not all of the firefighters who were climbing the stairs got to the impact zone is because they were helping people who had been blown to pieces by 'other' explosions, on the radio they were constantly reporting explosions, and requesting meds for the people who were burnt/Blown apart.

And if all the explosions were set off at the same time... wouldnt that be 100% obvious it was a controlled demo? They had to leave time to back their story - that fooking office fires melted steel into pools of iron.... what the fook?

If the towers had simply collapsed at point of impacts, at the same time, or even a few minutes after impact it would be far to obvious and even them bullsh1tters would not be able to lie about it.
Looking at the size of the buildings, even when i was just leaving school and i saw it happen on tv, i then, even though i didnt understand the buildings at the time, did not understand why they collapsed. It was unreal.

If they had waited an hour, or an hour and a half like when each tower collapsed after impact and set off all the explosions at once....

in the middle of new york city, where millions not only on the street were watching but around the world on tv?

I think they did them one by one, or in small groups and gradually made it weaker and weaker until they made a big group of explosions, just before collapse, and during as it fell.... - Like we see different debre ejecting from the mechanical floors where the sky lobbies were, which were re-inforced compared with normal floors.... i wonder why...

Whatever happened on the demolishion side, i reckon they had to use ALOT of bombs or thermite or whatever to bring those enormous things down in 10 seconds flat - and after 10 seconds, not even 5 floors remained... not even 5 floors of core collumns.....

They wouldnt make enormous buildings like that, unless they knew they were strong.
On videos where you see smoke ejecting from the windows, it seems that the smoke is ejecting bang in the middle of each face of the building, on the same floor. Does this have something in common with the fact that the middle of the buildings core had inter-crossed hall ways like a + from ariel veiw? Then the part of the core which werent hall ways was either elevator shafts, stairwells, or of course enormous core collumns - where were the toilets?

So many things to think about.....

Hopefully someone will get there.