9-11: NSA, GCHQ know who placed 6 Tons of explosives inside WTC

2.3 Richter reading is well over 3 Tons TNT-equivalent

The American National Security Agency and Britain's Government Communications Headquarters have information on the communications prior to Sept 2001 clearly identifying the personnel who placed the explosives inside the World Trade Center buildings.


Using rough math, we judge there were at least 6 tons of TNT-equivalent explosives placed in WTC1/2/7 prior to Sept 2001. Using various combinations of team size, we can then backtrack in time to guess the approximate time, and communications required to support this installation.

"It suddenly occurred to me looking at the Richter reading of the WTC towers -- we did the same thing in Korea: Convert the Richter reading into an estimate of how many tones of fuel, and concluded the explosion was a NoDong missile during refueling operations," said Constant. [ Here is the analysis linking the earthquake readings with the kerosene inside the NoDong missile Click ]

NSA would have intercepted these discussions. However, given we have no information, we judge NSA is keeping quiet about the information because the US Government is fully involved -- and has told government personnel to be quiet about the Sept 2001 classified exercises.

But the issue with the WTC explosions is far more curious. If you look at the footage, you'll clearly see squibs going off, clear signs of explosive material placed inside the building.

American government personnel -- there is no statute of limitations on a conspiracy of murder. You cannot credibly be bound to a secrecy oath when that promise is to keep quiet about crimes against the American people.

* * *

Indeed, 4 tons of TNT -- for a 2.3 on the Richter -- is about 1 Ton of C4. [Ref] Putting aside the issue of "was it really TNT or C4" or how much, someone had to have time to place that amount of C4 in the building.

It doesn't matter how much or whether there were or were not explosives. The issue is how long in advance of Sept 2001 did it take to wire and plant the explosives in three buildings, coordinate, and report they were ready, and waiting?

NSA would have picked up all the non-classified-but-related-communications by the people involved. When they went "offnet" there would be gaps in the intercepts; yet they are also claiming they're doing something to get paid. That makes no sense.

* * *

Recall this discussion on NSA, six months before the NYT story on the domestic spying scandal broke: [ Click ]

* * *

Here's sample seismic reading [Click to enlarge] [ Source ]:



The issues become:

1. What is an approximate tonnage of equivalent-explosive that would create the Richter readings;

2. How long would it take to install this material;

3. Where are the NSA intercepts of the required communication to install the explosives prior to 9-11; and

4. Who would be in a position to know -- or should have known -- what was going on inside WTC well before Sept 2001?

* * *

It remains to be understood how many American law enforcement personnel know which data files have archived copies of this information. After the 1994 telecommunications act was passed, NSA contractors began work on integrating domestic intercepts with AMerican law enforcement. These systems were well in place and used prior to Sept 2001, leaving no doubt that someone would have to know what was going on. [Ref ]Bolton has openly bragged about reviewing NSA intercepts on Americans.

Let's consider the ipmlications: Despite the NSA capability, we're being asked "nobody knew" and "nobody noticed" what was going on with these explosives despite the Timothy McVeigh alters after Oaklahoma City BOmbing. No way.

Following the Oklamhoma City, NSA and law enforcement were well primed to moitor communcations related to illegal activity. NSA had clear indicators. Their intercept capabilites would have not only identified this activity, but directed law enforcement to investigate.

This is not what happened. Rather, despite the Oklahoma City-like indicators, a group inside both NSA and law enforcement would have to inter alia :

A. Recignoze the activity; then

B. Shut down the NSA monitoring; and then

C. Say, "Despite all that we are collecting, we're going to do nothing."

That's malfeasance.

* * *

White House and NSA are on the same page

Everything points back to the NSA, DoD, and the White House.

Then, if you add on top of that the "secrecy oaths" about the diversionary-exercises on 11 Sept 2001 -- that are arguably unenforceable given they are linked with suppressing information about illegal murder -- we're left with some startling conclusions:

1. The US government fully knows who was discussing the placement of explosives prior to Sept 2001;

2. This information has been suppressed; and

3. Personnel inside the NSA know full well who was in a position to place, detonate, and destroy the evidence.

Everything is turning back to the WTC 7 tower, where the CIA and other government personnel were apparently coordinating the entire scenario.

* * *

Sample Communications

Here are sample cell phone messages which planners would have had to communicate before Sept 2001. [ Click ] These communications would have to coordinate the following:

1. Progress on the installation;

2. That things [ were or were not ] ready just prior to Sept 2001; and

3. That they were ready to go, standing by.

* * *

Scope of the activity

Let's use crude math. Again, the issue isn't how much was placed, but that a group of people had to work together prior to Sept 2001 to install a fairly specific amount of explosives. A common objective, with more than three people involved is a conspiracy.

Let's talk magnitude of equivalent-TNT-tonnage that would have to be across all three buildings. A 2.1 to 2.3 Richter reading Click would equate to specific tonnage of explosives.

We can then calculate the time required installing these explosives, then looking for the entry, maintenance, and GCHQ intercepts of planning prior to Sept 2001.

One chart

[ CLick ] Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC

This shows that a 2.5 would be 4.6 Metric Tons Ref [Click ]

The issues are:

What type of explosives did they place

How big was the team

Where are they now

How long did this team take to install the explosives

What kind of coordination was involved

Where are the transcripts of the electronic transmissions related to any of the planning activity

What unlawful promises have they been given to remain silent

Do they understand that they are unlawfully being told to remain silent about a conspiracy of murder against Americans

* * *

Comparison: Richter readings translate into activity prior to Sept 2001

The initial Richter readings -- before the collapse ended -- was above 2.4:

According to seismologists, or earthquake scientists, at Columbia University at the opposite end of the island of Manhattan in New York, the tower collapses were powerful enough to outregister Manhattan's last small earthquake (January 17, 2001) at slightly greater than 2.4 on the Richter scale.Ref

* * *

Red herrings distract attention from activity before Sept 2001

The arguments against this are just red herrings. You're arguing over the amount, not whether someone would or would not have to do something prior to Sept 2001.

This argument misses the point:

But the issue is: Supposing the Tonnage was 3 Tons, that's for each explosion. There were two. So there had to be at least 6 tons across both towers, and this does not include the tonnage inside WTC 7.

Adjustments: Even if you take 50% of the Richter reading off, and ignore it, there is still 3 Tons-equivalent that someone had to place. That doesn't just show up. Someone had to coordinate this. We know the NSA sweeps up everything and would have this information.

Then the issue becomes:

1. How much time would it take to install this?

2. How much of the Richter reading would have to be adjusted to account for the sheer size of the rubble?

3. How much of the "assumed Richter adjustment" would have to be added back, given that the rubble had not actually collapsed at the time of the initial reading?