Something Blew Up at the Trade Center

[Wokeman]

Clues from the Washington Post

With the court-ordered release of the 911 transcripts by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey a large community of people united by the Internet is hurrying to verify their respective conspiracy theories of what really transpired that day. Personally, I am wondering if any part of the transcripts will confirm that any plane crashed in New York on September 11, 2001.

The Washington Post, known by many as subservient to power as Pravda was for Khrushchev, dropped some suggestive clues recently. Excerpting from the transcripts they twice referred prominently to rockets in two articles:

MALE: Listen, I'm okay. Just wanted to let you know, give you a call. Something blew up at the Trade Center.

FEMALE: [Gasps.]

MALE: Either . . . either a plane crashed into the Trade Center or a rocket hit the Trade Center. And uh, people are all over the place dead. (Washington Post, “Something Blew Up at the Trade Center", Friday, August 2)

Also:

”Confusion is epidemic. There are repeated rumors of rockets fired from the Woolworth Building . (Washington Post, 'They're Jumping Out of Building One', Newly Released Trade Center Transcripts Provide Real-Time Narrative to Sept. 11 Attacks , Joel Achenbach and Brooke A. Masters, August 29, 2003).

If this doesn’t raise conspiracy-minded eyebrows nothing should.


Confusion and Chaos Top

CNN, CBS and ABC produced some spectacular video that was shown continuously on September 11. Although the time between the North and South Towers getting hit was small (i.e., 8:46 a.m. and 9:03 a.m. respectively), these two New York-based networks managed to capture great footage themselves as well as collect similar work from amateurs within hours. Not bad for New York city during chaos.

Meanwhile, the differences between what the television audience and those in New York saw was often dramatic. For example, during ABC's live broadcast a man is describing the burning North Tower while we watch it. Suddenly we see the plane come from the right. The man sees nothing but the explosion. The anchors have to tell him that a plane hit; he saw only the fireball. What's the source for the disconnect?

[TimmyG]

nah.. i think planes the wtc. the video footage doesn't look fake.
they had it from so many angles. theres no way it could all be faked

and there were plenty of eye witness report of the planes

this is disinfo

[Ally]

Him Tim, welcome to the board. Were you lucky enough to catch Jimmy Walter's roadshow in Mancland last summer?

[TimmyG]

hey thanks and hello

i didn't see jimmy walters no.
are there any up coming 9/11 truth events in the north west coming up do you know? i haven't heard of any

[TimmyG]

i looked at the site

for the theory planes didn't hit the towers to be true, all the video footage would have to be faked prior to the attack and then distributed to all the news networks who would have all had to be in on the conspiracy.
and even if this did happen it doesn't explain all the personal amateur footage you can find on youtube and google video

[Ally]

Aye, 28 different hit shots exist, I'm certain some are fake that much for sure.

http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/04/28-videos-of-second-hit.h tml

[Ally]

Wow, Nico draws his line in the sand...
http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html

[paul wright]

It hardly matters for the main argument Ally, but a long held belief is that WTC 1 was hit by a drone, and WTC2 by a hologram.
It's not my main argument to the unconvinced but remains an interesting topic to those who know the real story
I always remember somebody posting on some board somewhere, on 9/11, that all the footage of the WTC2 hit looked like a cartoon.
And so it did, and so it still does
The demolition techniques are clearly visible in some footage, but other places reveal thick steel girders disintegrating into dust clouds before our eyes, which suggests nuclear or scalar techniques were also involved bringing down such huge edifices in concrete,steel and human dust clouds

[Annie]

Hi dh

Forgive my ignorance, but what are scalar techniques?!?

Annie

[numeral]

[paul wright]

Cheers Numeral. I was checking back over Google for information on interferometric technology used as weaponry and found a lot of my old posts to indymedia and Ellis Taylor's around the time of the Bali bombings, with linked pages that no longer seem to exist though on the evening of 911 there were some anonymous posters going with this. Agreed that Bearden is the main source of this
I have I would say an anorak's interest in the WTC footage and theories about the WTC attacks, and there are many anomalies in that footage
Always of interest is that shot, available on the mainstream news footage, but also repeated on 911 Eyewitness, where the central core girders of WTC2 are left swaying as a spire at the end of the demolition, and then on close examination of the footage do more than just fall, but appear to disintegrate into dust clouds. Siegal himself comments on this wierdness
It suggests that more than the energy required to demolish the building is going on when the demolition is complete
And further more as is suggested in that same film, are conventional high explosives enough to explain the long lasting pool of molten steel and the total disintegration of so many human occupants
There is so much in the various footages of the WTC incident, - a ufo passing by, various stationary orbs hovering, aeroplane wings flashing on and off,whole aeroplane flashing on and off, that upshot of the agent who's being interviewed who apparently doesnt hear the jet plane low over his head, doesn't hear the plane crashing into the building, and only responds when the explosive charge takes place
For interest sake, not scientific argument, Stefan Grossman's rant
http://cloakanddagger.de/media/Grossmann/Scalar_Weather_Wars.htm

Believe what you want folks
I always push the well-documented explosives demolition as the best alternative to, nay, demolition of the official story

[Sinclair]

Timmy G wrote