WTC ground supports had explosives? : LUSENET : Grassroots Information Coordination Center (GICC) : One Thread

September 11, 2001

Explosives Planted In Towers, N.M. Tech Expert Says

By Olivier Uyttebrouck Journal Staff Writer Televised images of the attacks on the World Trade Center suggest that explosives devices caused the collapse of both towers, a New Mexico Tech explosion expert said Tuesday. The collapse of the buildings appears "too methodical" to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures, said Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said. Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures. Romero said he based his opinion on video aired on national television broadcasts. Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures. "It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that," Romero said in a phone interview from Washington, D.C. Romero said he and another Tech administrator were on a Washington-area subway when an airplane struck the Pentagon. He said he and Denny Peterson, vice president for administration and finance, were en route to an office building near the Pentagon to discuss defense-funded research programs at Tech. If explosions did cause the towers to collapse, the detonations could have been caused by a small amount of explosive, he said. "It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points," Romero said. The explosives likely would have been put in more than two points in each of the towers, he said. The detonation of bombs within the towers is consistent with a common terrorist strategy, Romero said. "One of the things terrorist events are noted for is a diversionary attack and secondary device," Romero said. Attackers detonate an initial, diversionary explosion that attracts emergency personnel to the scene, then detonate a second explosion, he said. Romero said that if his scenario is correct, the diversionary attack would have been the collision of the planes into the towers. Tech President Dan Lopez said Tuesday that Tech had not been asked to take part in the investigation into the attacks. Tech often assists in forensic investigations into terrorist attacks, often by setting off similar explosions and studying the effects.

-- meg davis (, September 13, 2001


That's the first time I've heard this explanation, but it does make sense.

-- Loner (, September 13, 2001.

Anyone with eyes who watched the video coverage could clearly see the towers start collapsing from the top. Following the buckling of red- hot metal, the momentum and potential energy of the upper floors crushed what was below.

Had there been an explosion at the bottom of the building, (a)the building would not have collapsed from the top and (b) PEOPLE WOULD HAVE HEARD IT!!! You don't bring down a building like that with a firecracker. Did even *ONE* person at street level say they heard an explosion below? No.

I'm usually quite happy to read conspiracy theories but anyone who believes the government or anyone else had a bomb in the basement is, I'm afraid, a babbling idiot.

-- Methinks (thou@art.wrong), September 13, 2001.

There's an earlier message on this board that describes the "shock" from the designer of these towers who watched in disbelief as they both collapsed.

Buildings are designed from the top down. Each lover level is designed to hold the one above it. Therefore, the bottom level is designed to hold the weight of the entire structure above it. There was relatively little additional weight added to the building.

Perhaps this is the best explanation concerning the collapse of these buildings we have had to date. It certainly is a breath of fresh air to hear an alternate viewpoint.

Thank you meg.

-- Ken (, September 13, 2001.

Here's that other article I referred to:

Headline: Towers' collapse shocks engineers Source: United Press International, Tuesday, 11 September 2001

[Sorry, I don't have an URL -- this news item is reposted from Paul Milne's board]]

A lead engineer who worked on New York's World Trade Center Towers expressed shock Tuesday that the 110-story landmarks in Lower Manhattan collapsed after each tower was struck by a hijacked passenger jetliner.

Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer, addressed the problem of terrorism on high-rises at a conference in Frankfurt, Germany, last week, Chicago engineer Joseph Burns told the Chicago Tribune.

Burns said Robertson told the conference, "I designed it for a (Boeing) 707 to hit it."

-- Ken (, September 13, 2001.

Please see the other thread I started on this issue here on GICC.

*None* of this speculation about extra bombs makes sense to me based on the videotapes and the various eyewitness accounts.

-- Andre Weltman (, September 13, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ