Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Car Bomb at Pentagon on 9/11

2456789

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Sixtus


    I think someone has switched around the keys on your keyboard :D

    Try again.

    Ps your biased ranting about the forum should be more polite emits up a particular shrill tone of hyprocrisy on this thread


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Why are you asking me about some "conspiracy narrative"?
    To highlight the fact you are rejecting the official version "because it doesn't add up" while you gloss over the fact that the conspiracy version does not add up.

    You can't think of a valid explanation for the questions I asked, therefore you should reject the conspiracy explanation just as much as you do with the official version.
    But you don't.
    His actions don't add up. Do you disagree? It would be like Atta flying past the WTC doing a U turn to hit the back side of the building for no apparent reason.

    UNLESS there was a specific reason to do so. I can't think of one. His actions seriously jeopardised his mission for zero gain. The only thing I can think of is that he lost his bottle and then regained his focus.
    And this is an argument from incredulity. Simply because you can't think of a reason it does not follow that one does not exist.
    For example, it could be that since the pentagon is not readily visible from a distance and a height like the twin towers are, a pilot would need to fly near it to see where precisely it was. And flying near to it gives you less time to turn, resulting in a long loop.
    Further you are falsely assuming that such a turn adds risk. This is simply not true. They would likely have needed to circle for a couple dozen of minutes before they were at risk of being shot down as there weren't missile batteries on the pentagon, and it would have take a while for fighters to get there.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Sixtus wrote: »
    what street? .
    King Street
    Sixtus wrote: »
    Whch officer reported it?
    An unamed NYPD Officer,
    Sixtus wrote: »
    What FNDYY units attended the scene.
    NYPD
    Bomb Squad
    ESU http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department_Emergency_Service_Unit


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Sixtus


    No. This isn't merely an "eyewitness account" it is a real time description of a qualified professional, an NYPD Officer, an expert witness at the scene who simply cannot be mistaken about a) suspects fleeing b) A van exploding c) suspects apprehended and arrested.
    Which NYPD arrestted suspects fleeing a exploding van?


    What station sid he take them to? What where they charged with?

    I like how your fictious NYPD officet is a expert witness now. Tell me what other lurid details will you give this maginary offcer next? will he be a few days short f retirement? A tough as nails veteran who breaks the rules to get the job done? Teamed up with a sassy rookie?

    Let your imagination run riot old bean


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    b) A van exploding

    There is confusion about this.

    Given that you can provide absolutely no other corroborating evidence that any van exploded it is a much more likely explanation that the officers in the recording are misreporting something they heard second or third hand.

    There's nothing in the recording that identifies the officers who say the van exploded as the ones who actually apprehended the guys. In fact the first voice who mentions the van and the arrests somehow fails to mention any explosion, as does all of the other chatter.

    So is it a possibility that there was simply a cock up in the line of communication that lead some officers to report an explosion when none actually happened?


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    To highlight the fact you are rejecting the official version "because it doesn't add up" while you gloss over the fact that the conspiracy version does not add up.
    Where have I rejected anything? I am discussing a specific event. What is the conspiracy version and what has it do with me?
    King Mob wrote: »
    ou can't think of a valid explanation for the questions I asked, therefore you should reject the conspiracy explanation just as much as you do with the official version.
    But you don't.
    How can I reject or accept something that only you are aware of?
    King Mob wrote: »
    And this is an argument from incredulity. Simply because you can't think of a reason it does not follow that one does not exist. .
    Agreed, but it makes it more likely.

    King Mob wrote: »
    For example, it could be that since the pentagon is not readily visible from a distance and a height like the twin towers are, a pilot would need to fly near it to see where precisely it was. And flying near to it gives you less time to turn, resulting in a long loop.
    The Pentagon is massive.
    King Mob wrote: »
    Further you are falsely assuming that such a turn adds risk. This is simply not true. They would likely have needed to circle for a couple dozen of minutes before they were at risk of being shot down as there weren't missile batteries on the pentagon, and it would have take a while for fighters to get there.
    And how could the hijackers have known this?

    And of course it adds extra risk an inexperienced and lowly skilled pilot carrying out a high speed top gun turn at high speeds, cutting daisies on the way in is obviously more risky than flying into the middle of a large target in a straight line.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Sixtus wrote: »
    Which NYPD arrestted suspects fleeing a exploding van?


    What station sid he take them to? What where they charged with?

    I like how your fictious NYPD officet is a expert witness now. Tell me what other lurid details will you give this maginary offcer next? will he be a few days short f retirement? A tough as nails veteran who breaks the rules to get the job done? Teamed up with a sassy rookie?

    Let your imagination run riot old bean

    Lurid? :pac:


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    There is confusion about this.

    Given that you can provide absolutely no other corroborating evidence that any van exploded it is a much more likely explanation that the officers in the recording are misreporting something they heard second or third hand.

    There's nothing in the recording that identifies the officers who say the van exploded as the ones who actually apprehended the guys. In fact the first voice who mentions the van and the arrests somehow fails to mention any explosion, as does all of the other chatter.

    So is it a possibility that there was simply a cock up in the line of communication that lead some officers to report an explosion when none actually happened?

    Do you accept that there has been either a) a massive misunderstanding or b) a massive coverup?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Sixtus


    King Street

    In the village are you sure?

    [Quote An unamed NYPD Officer,

    [/quote]

    So lets be coear your ONLY evidence that a van with a mural on it blew up is a alledged recording of aomeone who says theyre a NYPD officer but you havw no idea what unit they‘re with?

    and lets just ignore that

    THERE IS NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE THAT A BOMB EXPLODED ON KING ST

    NO EVIDNCE ANYONE WAS ARRESTED

    AND IN THE 12 YEARS SINCE THIS SUPPOSEDLY HAPPENED THERE IS NOTHIBF. I REPEAT NOTHING. TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM A TRUCK BOMB BLEW UP ON KING STREET ASUDE FROM ONE ANONYMOUS RECORDING OF A UNAMED “NYPD OFFICER“.


    No BB thats the unit that SHOULD have been called IF there was a bomb on King St. Where is your evidence that they WERE CALLED


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Sixtus wrote: »
    In the village are you sure?


    So lets be coear your ONLY evidence that a van with a mural on it blew up is a alledged recording of aomeone who says theyre a NYPD officer but you havw no idea what unit they‘re with?

    and lets just ignore that

    THERE IS NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE THAT A BOMB EXPLODED ON KING ST

    NO EVIDNCE ANYONE WAS ARRESTED

    AND IN THE 12 YEARS SINCE THIS SUPPOSEDLY HAPPENED THERE IS NOTHIBF. I REPEAT NOTHING. TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM A TRUCK BOMB BLEW UP ON KING STREET ASUDE FROM ONE ANONYMOUS RECORDING OF A UNAMED “NYPD OFFICER“.


    No BB thats the unit that SHOULD have been called IF there was a bomb on King St. Where is your evidence that they WERE CALLED
    Remember you said the bolded part. No listen to the Police radio yourself and it will answer your questions.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Where have I rejected anything? I am discussing a specific event. What is the conspiracy version and what has it do with me?
    So you do believe that the official version is plausible and more likely then?
    How can I reject or accept something that only you are aware of?
    So why do you believe that lacking an explanation for something is only a problem for the official explanation.
    Agreed, but it makes it more likely.
    No it doesn't. And it doesn't make it a valid argument, especially since you seem to think that it only applies to certain things.
    The Pentagon is massive.
    But it is also very flat and surrounded by obscuring buildings and terrain.
    And how could the hijackers have known this?
    Basic research of the area that will tell them that there was an airport across the free-way from the pentagon meaning that a plane flying near or over it would not be immediately blow out of the sky, even if it came from a funny direction.
    And of course it adds extra risk an inexperienced and lowly skilled pilot carrying out a high speed top gun turn at high speeds, cutting daisies on the way in is obviously more risky than flying into the middle of a large target in a straight line.
    But what if they flew in a straight line towards the pentagon, but on nearing it found that they were off course (cause they weren't super amazing pilots) and needed to turn to correct? However, since they might not have seen the pentagon until they were relatively close, they need to make a turn. But then because they were going so fast, and couldn't just turn on a handbrake, they needed to make a wide loop to hit their target.

    So again, why didn't they just fly straight at the section they were supposed to hit?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Sixtus


    Do you accept that there has been either a) a massive misunderstanding or b) a massive coverup?


    There has been at best a minor misunserstanding fueled by idiot 911 truthers.

    Look at the Silverstein “pull it“ nonsense.

    For this to be proof of an inside job, two things have to be true

    1. Larry Silverstein was part of a plot to kill thousands of people.

    2. And he confessed to that crime in a tekevvision interview.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Do you accept that there has been either a) a massive misunderstanding or b) a massive coverup?
    No. there just needs to be a small misunderstanding over a radio during a massively busy, confusing and stressful event with a ton of radio chatter going on the entire time.

    All it needs is for one cop to mishear something to think there was an explosion and repeat that over the radio.
    And considering right before it there was repeated references to what was reported to be a mural with a plane flying into New York and exploding that might have been the source of the confusion.

    So yea given the options of a plausible and understandable miscommunication and a vast implausible, nonsensical cover-up....


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    So you do believe that the official version is plausible and more likely then?
    Perhaps marginally. Though I believe we are far from knowing the full truth.
    King Mob wrote: »
    So why do you believe that lacking an explanation for something is only a problem for the official explanation.
    I don't. However there is a multitude of unsatisfactory explanations hence the cumalitive doubt.
    King Mob wrote: »
    No it doesn't. And it doesn't make it a valid argument, especially since you seem to think that it only applies to certain things.
    Lets be clear. I said I cannot think of a good reason to carry risky maneuver to hit a different part of the same building. I am however open to suggestion. That's where you come in.
    King Mob wrote: »
    But it is also very flat and surrounded by obscuring buildings and terrain.
    Come on! It dwarves everything it surrounds and is one of the single most recognisable buildings in the sky.

    King Mob wrote: »
    Basic research of the area that will tell them that there was an airport across the free-way from the pentagon meaning that a plane flying near or over it would not be immediately blow out of the sky, even if it came from a funny direction.
    However, common sense would tell them that by now four planes would be know to have been hijacked by terrorists intent on using them as missiles and therefore they are likely to be blown out of the sky at any moment.

    King Mob wrote: »
    But what if they flew in a straight line towards the pentagon, but on nearing it found that they were off course (cause they weren't super amazing pilots) and needed to turn to correct? However, since they might not have seen the pentagon until they were relatively close, they need to make a turn. But then because they were going so fast, and couldn't just turn on a handbrake, they needed to make a wide loop to hit their target.
    He had a single mission to hit the giant and distinctive structure of the Pentagon. It's absurd to think he could miss it by so much in a straight line then recover with expert skills.
    King Mob wrote: »
    So again, why didn't they just fly straight at the section they were supposed to hit?
    That's what I am asking you. What do you think?


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    No. there just needs to be a small misunderstanding over a radio during a massively busy, confusing and stressful event with a ton of radio chatter going on the entire time.

    All it needs is for one cop to mishear something to think there was an explosion and repeat that over the radio.
    And considering right before it there was repeated references to what was reported to be a mural with a plane flying into New York and exploding that might have been the source of the confusion.

    So yea given the options of a plausible and understandable miscommunication and a vast implausible, nonsensical cover-up....
    There is no indication of any "misunderstanding" on the radio though. At the very least two men were arrested on 911 in New York having run from police with reports of their van exploding and their van having a mural with planes exploding into the twin towers.

    Show me a single news article on this if the idea of a coverup is "vast implausible, nonsensical" etc


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Perhaps marginally. Though I believe we are far from knowing the full truth.

    I don't. However there is a multitude of unsatisfactory explanations hence the cumalitive doubt.

    Lets be clear. I said I cannot think of a good reason to carry risky maneuver to hit a different part of the same building. I am however open to suggestion. That's where you come in.
    So then you are equally dissatisfied with the conspiracy explanation as you are likewise unable to think of any explanations for the inconsistencies for the conspiracy explanation, correct?
    Come on! It dwarves everything it surrounds and is one of the single most recognisable buildings in the sky.
    No it's only 5 stories high. From far away and high up it is not going to be as readily apparent as the twin towers.
    So they would need to get fairly close to make it out clearly, which means they can't just make a slight turn from further away.

    And then of course, this is just for the basic explanation I offered.
    They could have always planned to make such a large turn, perhaps planning to follow the river until they saw it then turned to fly into it. Or perhaps wanted to do a flyby to ensure they were on target.
    However, common sense would tell them that by now four planes would be know to have been hijacked by terrorists intent on using them as missiles and therefore they are likely to be blown out of the sky at any moment.
    You are basing this common sense on hindsight.
    They knew that there was something up for less than an hour before the plane hit. That is simply not enough time to set up missiles, nevermind order them to be set up given the confusion. And then there's the fact that they'd have no idea whether or not the plane nearing the Pentagon was hijacked or not until it was second away from impact.
    He had a single mission to hit the giant and distinctive structure of the Pentagon. It's absurd to think he could miss it by so much in a straight line then recover with expert skills.
    But they didn't miss it by that much did they? They were off by a few degrees can could indeed correct quite rapidly.
    They couldn't have seen the pentagon from miles and miles away when they gained control of the plane, so must have been flying on instruments. A few degrees off is not an absurd amount.

    Further you seem to be asserting that the turn require "expert skills" without any support.
    That's what I am asking you. What do you think?
    I cannot think of any that make sense are plausible or don't then also apply to the much more likely explanation.
    This is why I am asking.
    The problem arises when no one is able to provide one at all.
    Not even an attempt is made, yet this is ignored.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There is no indication of any "misunderstanding" on the radio though.
    And what would an indication of this be? Because it stops before an clarification, or lack of chatter referring to an explosion and dispatch of bombsquads would be heard. Conveniently.
    At the very least two men were arrested on 911 in New York having run from police
    But we have no context for this, what happened during or after.
    And unless you are going to argue that police never ever make false arrests...
    with reports of their van exploding
    We do not have reports of the van exploding. We have exactly one person mentioning an explosion, but zero confirmation that they actually saw it explode.
    Yet somehow you've turned this into reports, plural. funny how miscommunications can arise like that.
    and their van having a mural with planes exploding into the twin towers.
    But we don't have anything to confirm that there was a mural depicting anything untoward. (Never mind how that such a thing does not make a lick of sense in a conspiracy narrative.)
    Also again notice how you say "exploding into the twin towers". The audio you're basing this all an says no such thing. It says "a mural with a plane flying into New York and exploding". Yet again, you've changed this in only a second hand report.
    Really you are just demonstrating my point perfectly.
    Show me a single news article on this if the idea of a coverup is "vast implausible, nonsensical" etc
    But the only thing we can say happened with any confidence is that two people were falsely arrested.
    Assuming that there was nothing to the van and it was an honest mistake, why would this make the news on 9/11 or else when?

    If there is a coverup why was this audio which blows the entire thing, allowed to slip through and be allowed to continue to circulate?
    How if it was able to slip through was there no other evidence? No photos of the van or the aftermath of the explosion, no one coming forward to talk about the extra bomb.. nothing...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,478 ✭✭✭✭gnfnrhead



    Come on! It dwarves everything it surrounds and is one of the single most recognisable buildings in the sky.

    ....

    He had a single mission to hit the giant and distinctive structure of the Pentagon. It's absurd to think he could miss it by so much in a straight line then recover with expert skills.

    http://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/aerial-view-of-the-pentagon-building-kenneth-garrett.jpg

    Look at the surrounding area, it's almost like it was designed not to stand out too much.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭weisses


    Sixtus wrote: »
    And photos, and the testimony of dozens of firefighters confirm that it was fully inflamed.

    Proof !! Show me photos the building was fully engulfed in flames
    Sixtus wrote: »
    The firefighters weiss by the way, all maintain that they saw a building fully involved in fire, and about to collapse. How many of them have changed or retracted their postions? Zero.


    They must feel awfully stupid now considering it was only a couple of floors that were on fire (at least on one side)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭weisses


    King Mob wrote: »
    But we don't have anything to confirm that there was a mural depicting anything untoward. (Never mind how that such a thing does not make a lick of sense in a conspiracy narrative.)
    Also again notice how you say "exploding into the twin towers". The audio you're basing this all an says no such thing. It says "a mural with a plane flying into New York and exploding". Yet again, you've changed this in only a second hand report.
    Really you are just demonstrating my point perfectly.

    The official MTI report states

    A panel truck with a painting of a plane flying into the World Trade Center was stopped near the temporary command post


    You wanna go down that route again ???


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    weisses wrote: »
    The official MTI report states

    A panel truck with a painting of a plane flying into the World Trade Center was stopped near the temporary command post


    You wanna go down that route again ???
    Not particularly as you have no interest in discussing it. And experience tells me you will be unable to attempt as such like an adult.

    The MTI report says one thing. The cops on the ground say something else. They both can't be right.
    The simplest way to explain this is that it is a miscommunication about a misinterpreted mural or advertisement.
    There is no explanation that indicates a conspiracy.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Sixtus


    weisses wrote: »
    Proof !! Show me photos the building was fully engulfed in flames

    WTC7_Smoke.jpg
    They must feel awfully stupid now considering it was only a couple of floors that were on fire (at least on one side)

    So lets be clear you're accusing all these people of either being lying or just wrong.
    1. We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert Larocco

    2. ...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

    3. I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up – and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run. –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/visconti.html

    4. All morning I was watching 7 World Trade burn, which we couldn't do anything about because it was so much chaos looking for missing members. –Firefighter Marcel Klaes

    5. When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
    –FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers (Smith, Dennis, 2002. Report From Ground Zero: The Heroic Story of the Rescuers at the World Trade Center. New York: Penguin Putnam. p. 160)

    6. The concern there again, it was later in the afternoon, 2, 2:30, like I said. The fear then was Seven. Seven was free burning. Search had been made of 7 already from what they said so they had us back up to that point where we were waiting for 7 to come down to operate from the north back down. –Captain Robert Sohmer http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110472.PDF

    7. Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.

    8. At this point Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down. –Firefighter Vincent Massa

    9. Chief Cruthers told me that they had formed another command post up on Chambers Street. At this point there were a couple of floors burning on Seven World Trade Center. Chief McNally wanted to try and put that fire out, and he was trying to coordinate with the command post up on Chambers Street. This is after searching for a while. He had me running back and forth trying to get companies to go into Seven World Trade Center. His radio didn't seem to be working right either because he had me relaying information back and forth and Chief Cruthers had me --

    Q. So everything was face-to-face? Nothing was by radio?

    A. Yeah, and it was really in disarray. It really was in complete disarray. We never really got an operation going at Seven World Trade Center. –FDNY Captain Michael Donovan

    10. Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable. –PAPD P.O. Edward McQuade http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports02.pdf page 48.
    11. At Vesey St. and West St., I could see that 7 WTC was ablaze and damaged, along with other buildings. –M. DeFilippis, PAPD P.O. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports03.pdf page 49

    [Note: the fires in 7 were probably not mainly due to damage from the south tower, but from the north.]
    12. So yeah then we just stayed on Vesey until building Seven came down. There was nothing we could do. The flames were coming out of every window of that building from the explosion of the south tower. So then building Seven came down. When that started coming down you heard that pancaking sound again everyone jumped up and starts.

    Q: Why was building Seven on fire? Was that flaming debris from tower two, from tower two that fell onto that building and lit it on fire?

    A: Correct. Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of tower two [sic: he probably means tower one] in building Seven and the corners of the building missing and what-not. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block. –Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy

    13. "We were down about a block from the base of the World Trade Center towers about an hour ago. And there was a great deal of concern at that time, the firemen said building number 7 was going to collapse, building number five was in danger of collapsing. And there's so little they can do to try to fight the fires in these buildings, because the fires are so massive. And so much of the buildings continues to fall into the street. When you're down there, Dan, you hear smaller secondary explosions going off every 15 or 20 minutes, and so it's an extremely dangerous place to be."
    –CBS-TV News Reporter Vince DeMentri http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.secondary.explosions.wmv

    14. Well, they said that's (7) fully involved at this time. This was a fully involved building. I said, all right, they're not coming for us for a while. Now you're trapped in this rubble, and you're trying to get a grasp of an idea of what's going on there. I heard on the handy talky that we are now fighting a 40-story building fully involved.

    Now you're trapped in the rubble and the guys who are there are fighting the worst high-rise fire in the history of New York or history of the world, probably, I don't know, 40, story building fully involved, I guess that was probably the worst.

    I was, needless to say, scared to death that something else was going to fall on us, that this building was going to come down and we were all going to die, after surviving the worst of it. [Note: I deleted the link this account, and searching the net for the text doesn’t turn up anything. This sounds like an account from north tower stairwell B survivor. Anyone who knows for sure, let me know.]

    15. And 7 World Trade was burning up at the time. We could see it. ... the fire at 7 World Trade was working its way from the front of the building northbound to the back of the building. There was no way there could be water put on it, because there was no water in the area. –Firefighter Eugene Kelty Jr.

    16. The time was approximately 11a.m. Both of the WTC towers were collapsed and the streets were covered with debris. Building #7 was still standing but burning. ...We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside. –PAPD P.O. William Connors http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports04.pdf page 69

    17. "There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker." We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse.

    We're kind of caught in traffic and people and things, and everything's going on. We hear over the fire portable, "Everybody evacuate the site. It's going to collapse." Mark Steffens starts yelling, "Get out of here! Get out of here! Get out of here! We've got to go! We've got to go! It's going to collapse." I turned around, and I piped up real loud and said, "Stay in the frigging car. Roll the windows up. It's pancake collapsing. We'll be fine. The debris will quit and the cloud will come through. Just stay in the car." We pulled the car over, turned around and just watched it pancake. We had a dust cloud but nothing like it was before. –Paramedic Louis Cook
    (Building 7 fire makes rescuer of NT stairwell victim’s route impassable, just before collapse):
    I remember it was bad and I'm going to get to a point where we came back that way on the way up. We couldn't even go that way, that's how bad the fire was, but by the time I was coming back it was rolling, more than a couple of floors, just fully involved, rolling.

    ...So now it's us 4 and we are walking towards it and I remember it would have at one point been an easier path to go towards our right, but being building 7 -- that must have been building 7 I'm guessing with that fire, we decided to stay away from that because things were just crackling, falling and whatnot. So as I’m going back, that fire that was on my right is now on my left. I’m backtracking and that fire is really going and on the hike towards there, we put down our masks, which at this point started to realize maybe it would have been good thing if we had this mask on the way back, but then again between the fire and about halfway when I was on the way back, I got a radio call from the guys that we left and it was Johnny Colon the chauffeur of 43, who was effecting a different rescue. He was carrying somebody out.
    He had called me and said “Hey Jerry don’t try and get back out the way you went in which was big heads up move because he said that building was rolling on top of the building that we were passing. That building was on fire and likely to collapse more too.
    Between Picciotto asking me are you sure we can get out this way because it really didn’t look good with that fire and my guy telling me that you better not because of the area we crawled in was unattainable now too. ...we started going back the other way.
    Q: Would that be towards West Street?
    A: That would have been back towards what I know is the Winter Garden....[west]
    –Firefighter Gerard Suden

    18. I remember Chief Hayden saying to me, "We have a six-story building over there, a seven-story building, fully involved." At that time he said, "7 has got fire on several floors." He said, "We've got a ten-story over there, another ten-story over there, a six-story over there, a 13-story over there." He just looked at me and said, "**** 'em all. Let 'em burn." He said, "Just tell the guys to keep looking for guys. Just keep looking for the brothers. We've got people trapped. We've got to get them out." –Lieutenant William Ryan

    19. I walked around the building to get back to the command post and that's when they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down. ...They had three floors of fire on three separate floors, probably 10, 11 and 15 it looked like, just burning merrily. It was pretty amazing, you know, it's the afternoon in lower Manhattan, a major high-rise is burning, and they said 'we know.' –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy

    20. We were champing at the bit," says WCBS-TV reporter Vince DeMentri of his decision to sneak behind police barricades and report from 7 World Trade Center a half-hour before it collapsed. "I knew the story was in there." But after he and his cameraman slipped past officers, they lost all sense of direction. "From outside this zone, you could figure out where everything was," he says. "But inside, it was all destruction and blown-out buildings, and we had no clue. I walked into one building, but I had no idea where I was. The windows were all blown out. Computers, desks, furniture, and people's possessions were strewn all over." He found a picture of a little girl lying in the rubble. Then he realized that No. 7, aflame, was about fifteen to twenty feet ahead of him. "I looked up Barclay Street," he says. "There was nobody out. No bodies, no injured. Nobody. There were mounds of burning debris. It was like opening a broiler." http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/5183/index.html

    21. They are worried that number 7 is burning and they are talking about not ceasing operations.
    –Deputy Commissioner Frank Gribbon

    22. There were hundreds of firefighters waiting to -- they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down as it was on fire. It was too dangerous to go in and fight the fire. –Assistant Commissioner James Drury

    23. We assisted some FDNY personnel who were beginning to attempt to fight the fire at 7 WTC. We assisted in dragging hose they needed to bring water into the building. –Kenneth Kohlmann PAPD P.O. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports04.pdf page 26

    24. My first thoughts when I came down a little further into the site, south of Chambers Street, was, "Where am I?" I didn't recognize it. Obviously, the towers were gone. The only thing that remained standing was a section of the Vista Hotel. Building 7 was on fire. That was ready to come down. –Charlie Vitchers, Ground Zero Superintendent http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/profiles/profiles_vitchers_t.html

    25. The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower, and there was fire on every floor." – Fire Captain Brenda Berkman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 213)
    26. At that point, Seven World Trade had 12 stories of fire in it. They were afraid it was going to collapse on us, so they pulled everybody out. We couldn't do anything. – Firefighter Maureen McArdle-Schulman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 17)
    27. The 7 World Trade Center was roaring. All we could think is we were an Engine Company, we have got to get them some water. We need some water you know. With that, we positioned the rig, I don't know, 3 quarters of a block away maybe. A fire boat was going to relay water to us. I don't know if I have things in the right order, whatever, if we were getting water out of a hydrant first. Jesus Christ --
    Q. Captain said you were getting water. You were draining a vacuum?
    A. It was draining away from us. Right. We had to be augmented. I think that's when the fire boat came. I think the fire boats supplied us. Of course you don't see that. You just see the (inaudible) way and you know, we are hooking up and we wound up supplying the Tower Ladder there. I just remember feeling like helpless, like everybody there was doomed and there is -- I just felt like there was absolutely nothing we could do. I want to just go back a little bit.–Firefighter Kevin Howe

    28. "When I got out and onto a clear pile, I see that 7 World Trade Center and the customs house have serious fire. Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site. –Captain Jay Jonas, Ladder 6. (Dennis Smith. Report From Ground Zero. New York: Viking Penguin, 2002. P. 103)

    29. Firefighter TJ Mundy: "The other building, #7, was fully involved, and he was worried about the next collapse."
    (Dennis Smith. Report From Ground Zero. New York: Viking Penguin, 2002.)
    30. 7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable. –Firefighter Steve Modica http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/modica.html
    31. So I attempted to get in through the Barkley Street ramp which is on Barkley (sic) and West Broadway, but I was being held back by the fire department, because 7 World Trade, which is above the ramp, was now fully engulfed.
    –PAPD K-9 Sergeant David Lim http://www.911report.com/media/davidlim.pdf

    32. We could hear fires crackling. We didn’t know it at the time, but No. 7 World Trade Center and No. 5 World Trade Center were immediately adjacent to us and they were roaring, they were on fire. Those were the sounds that we were hearing. ...At the same time, No. 5 World Trade Center, No. 6 World Trade Center and No. 7 World Trade Center were roaring. They were on fire. And they were right next to us. So we have all that smoke that we’re dealing with.
    –FDNY Capt. Jay Jonas http://archive.recordonline.com/adayinseptember/jonas.htm
    1. The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. –FDNY Chief Frank Fellini

    2. At that time, other firefighters started showing up, Deputy Battalion Chief Paul Ferran of the 41 Battalion, and James Savastano of the First Division assigned to the Second Battalion showed up and we attempted to search and extinguish, at the time which was small pockets of fire in 7 World Trade Center. We were unaware of the damage in the front of 7, because we were entering from the northeast entrance. We weren't aware of the magnitude of the damage in the front of the building. – FDNY Captain Anthony Varriale http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110313.PDF

    3. [Shortly after the tower collapses] I don’t know how long this was going on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. I looked up at the building and I saw smoke in it, but I really didn't see any fire at that time. Deputy ––Chief Nick Visconti http://tinyurl.com/paqux

    4. A few minutes after that a police officer came up to me and told me that the façade in front of Seven World Trade Center was gone and they thought there was an imminent collapse of Seven World Trade Center. –FDNY Lieutenant William Melarango http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110045.PDF

    5. I think they said they had seven to ten floors that were freestanding and they weren't going to send anyone in. –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110055.PDF

    6. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good. But they had a hose line operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too.

    Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

    So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandeis came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
    Firehouse Magazine: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
    Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
    Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
    Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. – Capt. Chris Boyle http://tinyurl.com/e7bzp

    7. After the initial blast, Housing Authority worker Barry Jennings, 46, reported to a command center on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center. He was with Michael Hess, the city's corporation counsel, when they felt and heard another explosion [the collapse of the north tower]. First calling for help, they scrambled downstairs to the lobby, or what was left of it. "I looked around, the lobby was gone. It looked like hell," Jennings said. http://www.record-eagle.com/2001/sep/11scene.htm

    8. Anyway, I was looking at WTC7 and I noticed that it wasn’t looking like it was straight. It was really weird. The closest corner to me (the SE corner) was kind of out of whack with the SW corner. It was impossible to tell whether that corner (the SW) was leaning over more or even if it was leaning the other way. With all of the smoke and the debris pile, I couldn’t exactly tell what was going on, but I sure could see the building was leaning over in a way it certainly should not be. I asked another guy looking with me and he said “That building is going to come down, we better get out of here.” So we did. –M.J., Employed at 45 Broadway, in a letter to me.

    9. So we left 7 World Trade Center, back down to the street, where I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did. – FDNY Lieutenant Rudolph Weindler http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110462.PDF

    10. Just moments before the south tower collapsed and, you know, when it happened we didn't know it was the south tower. We thought it was the north tower. There was a reporter of some sort, female with blond hair and her cameraman, an oriental fellow. They were setting up outside 7 World Trade Center, just east of the pedestrian bridge. I told them it would probably be better off to be set up under the bridge. At least it was protected. I was just about to enter a dialogue with her when I heard a sound I never heard before. I looked up and saw this huge cloud. I told him run. I grabbed the female, I threw her through the revolving doors of number 7.

    We were proceeding inside. She fell to the ground. I helped her out, I pushed her towards the direction of where we were all in the south corner and there was a little doorway behind that desk which led into the loading bays. Everybody started to run through that. Never made it to that door. The next thing that I remember was that I was covered in some glass and some debris. Everything came crashing through the front of number 7. It was totally pitch black.

    Q. Were you injured?

    A. Yes, I saw some stuff had fallen on me. I didn't believe that I was injured at that time. I discovered later on I was injured. I had some shards of glass impaled in my head, but once I was able to get all this debris and rubble off of me and cover my face with my jacket so that I could breathe, it was very thick dust, you couldn't see. We heard some sounds. We reached out and felt our way around. I managed to find some other people in this lower lobby. We crawled over towards the direction where we thought the door was and as we approached it the door cracked open a little, so we had the lights from the loading bay. We made our way over there. The loading bay doors were 3-fourths of the way shut when this happened, so they took a lot of dust in there, but everyone in those bays was safe and secure. We had face to face contact with Chief Maggio and Captain Nahmod. They told me – I said do whatever you need to do, get these people out of here. Go, go towards the water. –EMS Division Chief Jon Peruggia
    http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110160.PDF

    11. You could see the damage at 7 World Trade Center, the damage into the AT&T building.
    –FDNY Firefighter Vincent Palmieri http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110258.PDF

    12. At this point, 7, which is right there on Vesey, the whole corner of the building was missing. I was thinking to myself we are in a bad place, because it was the corner facing us. –Fred Marsilla, FDNY
    http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110399.PDF

    13. The way we got into the loading dock [of WTC 7] was not the way we were getting out. It was obstructed.

    Q. The door was blocked?

    A. Yeah, and we found our way -- we walked across the loading dock area, and we found there was another door. We went in that door, and from there we were directed to -- I really guess it was like a basement area of the building, but we were directed to an opposite door. –Dr. Michael Guttenberg , NYC Office of Medical Affairs http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110005.PDF

    14. We eventually ended up meeting after the second explosion, three of us met up here, but I didn't see a lot of the people that were with me until two, three days later. I got word that they were okay. For instance, Dr. Guttenberg and Dr. Asaeda, who were at 7 World Trade Center, they got trapped in there and had to like climb in and out and get out because that building also became very damaged supposedly and they were there. We thought they were dead. I guess he was in an area where Commissioner Tierney might have been, I believe. I think she was in 7 also. –Paramedic Manuel Delgado http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110004.PDF

    (After collapse of south tower)
    15. The decision was either to go left or right and we ended up going right, between the two buildings, in the alleyway on the north, which turned out to be the right direction because apparently there was a lot of debris and part of 7 down already. Also, I did notice as I was making my exit the sound of the firefighters' alarms indicating that they were down. I did remember that as well but just could not see anything. –Dr. Glenn Asaeda http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/sept11_fdny_transcripts/9110062.PDF

    16. I saw the firefighter. There were people screaming out of one of these two buildings over here saying they couldn't get out, and my partner took one straggler fireman, the one that we had with us, and was trying to break the door because the door obviously had shifted or something. They couldn't get the door open.

    Q: That was 7 World Trade Center?

    A: I believe it was 7. Maybe it was 5. It was at the back end of it because I do remember the telephone company [which is next to building 7]. So I think it was the back end of 7, I think right over here at that point, and they couldn't get out. Then I had ran down the block and I flagged a ladder company and they brought the ladder, which they had like a vestibule that you couldn't like really reach the people because the ladder wouldn't reach. So they went and got other resources, they went inside the building, and I told my partner that it wasn't safe and that we need to go because everything around us was like falling apart. –EMT Nicole Ferrell http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110304.PDF

    17. The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower. – Fire Captain Brenda Berkman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 213)

    18. At that point, they said that Seven World Trade had no face and it was ready to collapse. – EMT Mercedes Rivera: (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 29)

    19. You see the white smoke, you see the thing leaning like this? It's definitely going. There's no way to stop it. 'Cause you have to go up in there to put it out, and it's already, the structural integrity is not there. –Unidentified firefighter in this video.

    20. As far as I was concerned, we were still trapped. I was hopeful. things were looking a whole lot better now than they were just a few minutes earlier, but we were a long way from safe and sound. Five World Trade Center was fully involved, Six World Trade Center was roaring pretty good, and behind them Seven World Trade Center was teetering on collapse.
    The buildings just behind him and to his left were looking like they too might collapse at any time, and there were whole chunks of concrete falling to both sides. Flames dancing everywhere. The small-arms detonations were kicking up a notch or two, and it sounded like this poor guy was being fired at, by snipers or unseen terrorists, at close range. (Last Man Down by Richard Picciotto, FDNY Battalion Commander Penguin Books, 2002. page 191)


    https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭weisses


    Where are the photos that shows the building fully engulfed in flames ??


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 291 ✭✭Sixtus


    weisses wrote: »
    Where are the photos that shows the building fully engulfed in flames ??

    The smoke coming from every floor. Seeing as smoke is lighter than air, it means fires creating the smoke must be on every floor there is smoke.

    Weisss, what do you think of the EXTENSIVE eye witness testimony from named members of the FDNY (which makes them alot more credible than BB's imaginary NYPD officer), who state the building was fully involved in fire. Are they lying or are they wrong, in your opinion?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭weisses


    King Mob wrote: »
    Not particularly as you have no interest in discussing it. And experience tells me you will be unable to attempt as such like an adult.

    The MTI report says one thing. The cops on the ground say something else. They both can't be right.
    The simplest way to explain this is that it is a miscommunication about a misinterpreted mural or advertisement.
    There is no explanation that indicates a conspiracy.


    I discussed it with you and since you agreed with the report and the description of the mural as stated is from the report i am glad we finally agree


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭weisses


    Sixtus wrote: »
    The smoke coming from every floor. Seeing as smoke is lighter than air, it means fires creating the smoke must be on every floor there is smoke.

    Weisss, what do you think of the EXTENSIVE eye witness testimony from named members of the FDNY (which makes them alot more credible than BB's imaginary NYPD officer), who state the building was fully involved in fire. Are they lying or are they wrong, in your opinion?


    I'm still waiting for the photographic evidence which you claimed there is of the building fully engulfed in flames

    They are wrong as i showed you in video's from different angles of the collapse ..building 7 was never fully engulfed in flames ... I think the biggest skeptic here would agree with me


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,734 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    weisses wrote: »
    I'm still waiting for the photographic evidence which you claimed there is of the building fully engulfed in flames

    They are wrong as i showed you in video's from different angles of the collapse ..building 7 was never fully engulfed in flames ... I think the biggest skeptic here would agree with me

    Is it not obvious from a photograph that shows all the floors of the building wreathed in smoke, that all those floors have fires on them?

    You can perhaps argue that not every single floor is on fire, but to deny that the majority are suggests deliberate obtuseness and a determination to ignore evidence that contradicts your opinion.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    weisses wrote: »
    I discussed it with you and since you agreed with the report and the description of the mural as stated is from the report i am glad we finally agree
    lol. That's not what I agreed at all. You must have a terrible memory.
    Either that or a very selective memory.

    I remembered you being unable to provide any coherent explanation for any of the facts which indicated a conspiracy.
    And I remember you being unable to explain how my explanation was impossible or unlikely.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭weisses


    Hoop66 wrote: »
    Is it not obvious from a photograph that shows all the floors of the building wreathed in smoke, that all those floors have fires on them?

    You can perhaps argue that not every single floor is on fire, but to deny that the majority are suggests deliberate obtuseness and a determination to ignore evidence that contradicts your opinion.

    Its not being obtuse all i ask for is evidence that shows building 7 being fully engulfed in flames as claimed here

    Same question for you ..which evidence am i ignoring ? .. I was the one showing evidence building 7 was never fully engulfed in flames (different thread)

    And FYI fully engulfed does mean every single floor is on fire


Advertisement