Printable View
My buddy just dropped off 5 VHS tapes from the CNN broadcast on 9/11. I popped the first tape in and they're already interviewing William Rodriguez who was working in Tower 1 and heard explosions going off. I'm gonna take some notes and post them here.
I've been looking for live broadcasts for a long time and finally got them. Thanks to my buddy, although he's a putz.
Yes!
I'm looking forward to hearing from you on what was said during the events..... you know, before instructions on what to say were given!
It looks like tape I'm watching was from the afternoon, so everything has already occurred and they're recapping endlessly. It's hard to tell what time it actually is, but they have mentioned "this afternoon" a couple of times so it's not as early as I would like.
Anyway, they have done some interesting interviews, here's one from William Rodriguez who was a maintenance worker at the WTC. He had a bit of an accent so he was a little hard to decipher:
"I Work in building 1, the one that got hit the first time. I was in the basement, which is a --unclear-- for the maintenance company. We hear like a big rumble, not like an impact, like a rumble, like something uh like --unclear--, all of a sudden, we hear another rumble and a guy comes running, running into our office and all his skin was off his body. All his skin, we went crazy, we started screaming, we told him to get out. We took everyone out of the office outside to the loading dock area. And then I went back in, and when I went back in. And when I went back in, I saw people, I heard people that were stuck on an elevator, a freight elevator, because all the elevators went down. And water was going in and they were probably getting drowned. And we get a couple of pipes and open the elevator and we got the people out. I went back up and I saw one of the officers from the Port Authority Police, I've been working there for twenty years, so I knew him very well. My routine on the World Trade Center is in charge of the stair case, and there was no elevator service, I have the master key for all the stair cases. So I went up with the police officers and a group of firemen. As we went up, there was a lot of people coming down, and while we got- it was very difficult to get up.
We heard, when we were on the 33rd, I'm sorry, the 23rd floor because we stopped there with the fire department because the equipment was very heavy and they were breathing very hard, they took a break, cause they couldn't continue going up, so they wanted to take a break. And we have a person in a wheel chair that we were gonna bring down on a gurney and a lady who was having trouble with a heart attack. And um, some of the guys that were breathing hard and we went a couple of floors up while they were putting the person on the gurney, got up to the 39th floor and we heard on the radio that the 63rd floor collapsed."
This is the same guy that we have a video of in the Pentagon thread. Turns out he actually has an office at the Pentagon, and he was allowed back on the premises afterwards to find the painted piece of metal.
"A while ago, I walked right up to next to the building where the firefighters were still trying to put out the blaze, the fire by the way is still burning in some parts of the Pentagon and I took a look at the huge gaping hole that's in the side of the Pentagon in an area of the Pentagon that has been recently renovated part of a multi-billion dollar renovation program here at the Pentagon. I can see parts of the airplane that crashed into the building, very small pieces of the plane on the heliport the outside of the building. The biggest piece I saw was about three feet long, it was silver and had been painted green and red but I could not see any identifying markings on the plane, I also saw a large piece of shattered glass, it appeared to be cockpit window from the plane."
"We are hearing from Mola Omar (SP???) in the spiritual capital of Afghanistan. Mola Omar is the spiritual leader of the Taliban here, and has recently issued a short statement. In that statement he criticizes what he called the act of terrorism and he was very explicit, he said that Osama Bin Laden was not responsible for it, he says that all he wanted for his country was peace and peace for other countries in the world. He went on to say that he believed Osama Bin Laden could not have been responsible for such a complex act of terrorism, and he also said that Afghanistan was a poor country and there was no way Afghanistan could have been involved in such a complicated act of terrorism."
The spin begins:
Reporter: Do you know anything about the cause of the explosions that brought the two buildings down yet, were they caused by the planes or something else?
Giuliani: We believe that it was caused by the after affects of the planes hitting the buildings, we don't of additional explosives (looks behind at an advisor(???) who nods no)
oh my ... this is so captivating to read, in a very grewsome way. The maintainence worker's account is so graphic ... and so very heroic. He did that all without even thinking about it.
There had to be people in the city with camcorders at the time of the attacks. Some of those must have survived. I wonder if any private citizens are holding onto something.
It's amazing watching this, and you're right, that Rodriguez guy was heroic. His statements may be key, I've been talking to a fellow named Christopher on another board about Rodriguez, and then his interview is the first thing on these tapes.Quote:
Originally Posted by danceyogamom
Christopher pops in on these boards every now and then, calls people names, and then leaves. He's a good guy, just slightly insane. Even moreso than Gold.
has Christopher posted anything here? I've missed it if he has ...Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
more insane than Gold? goodness ... *lol*
I am consistently amazed at how people manage to interview and track down so much information. It is a real testament to how much one person can do to make change.
Hey, I'm only moderately insane.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
Yeah, a while ago, he called Gold a Miscreant or something like that. It was an accurate statement on his part.Quote:
Originally Posted by danceyogamom
And there's nothing wrong with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold9472
I don't think that was Christopher. That's why there's a "Christophera" here now...Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
Yo Somebigguy.
Thanks for the Sept. 11 accounts from those that were there.
It's important to get eyewitness accounts from the exact time. To discount the fabricated stuff.
How about the guy with his skin burned off? Right after Rodriguez hears the rumbles, a guy shows up with no skin? The plane hits the top floors, and Rodriguez sees a guy right after that noise (supposedly the plane) in the basement coming from 100 floors up with his skin burned off? Very weird. He must've been a fast runner (Or, how about, another explosion did this guy in?)..... of course, eyewitness accounts are always conflicting.... but I've heard a lot of accounts of multiple explosions within the buildings.... and then the building fall to the earth so perfectly. It's very confusing. Especially building 7. A building with minimal fire damage collapses in perfect implosion fashion, just like the owner of the building said it would (Larry Silverstein). So many questions.
People...... a quick message (a plea). Keep asking yourself about these occurrances. Don't become distracted by Survivor or American Idol or NCAA Basketball or Sitcoms.... those are great distractions.... but don't miss this chance to research about the most important event in your lifetime (up to now).
I must admit, I was intentionally *not* thinking about they poor guy with no skin. That has to be one of the most personally disturbing images I can congure ... but you do make a very good point. Why was he in that condition so close to the ground?Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Doctor HST
a miscreant? I've only heard that term used in reference to children ... and then only in jest.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
Really??? He was a troll???Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold9472
Hey HST, there's still 4 and a half more tapes to go. Unfortunately, I can't tell what time it is. I know when Guiliani is taking it's about 2:40 because there is a clock on the wall behind him. Based on that, I'm guessing the video I'm watching begins about 12:30.Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Doctor HST
Regarding the guy with his skin falling off, it gets stranger. There's another fellow they interviewed that saw Rodriguez on the way up as he was going down. He said he figured it was Rodriguez because he saw the lady in the wheelchair. Anyway, as he was going down, around the 40th floor, the smoke got really thick and made it difficult to go any further. So if he's going down and the smoke is getting worse, then the smoke must be coming from somewhere below wouldn't you think? Couple that with the guy's skin falling off in the basement and it really sounds like something was going on far below the impact area.
What I'll do is start at the beginning and time it, when I get to the scene with Giuliani talking, I'll be able to figure out the approximate time these statements were made. There's a couple other statements I wanna go back and get so I'll do that, including the guy walking down the stairs and running into Rodriguez.
Another thing, anyone seen the Naudet video? When they first walk into the first tower that got hit, there was a guy on the floor ON FIRE. They didn't film it, they mentioned it, but didn't put the camera on him for obvious reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by danceyogamom
Also, lots of the windows in the lobby, etc were blown out, they made the statement that the fire from the crash probably travelled down the elevator shaft to the lobby. Maybe that's what happened, however, I also heard the elevators were disjointed meaning they'd go up only 50 floors or so and then you'd get into another elevator to get up the next 50. That may or may not be true, just what I heard.
Definitely
The elevators didn't run straight from top to bottom.
Let's picture this...the plane hits and explodes in the tower. OK, I get that.
An elevator cart survives the destruction, fills with burning kerosene, makes it 78 floors down to the lobby, opens and said kerosene fire erupts from the compartment blasting out lobby windows. Can anyone visually imagine this scenario? To conjure up what it might have looked like is something Hollywood specialises in, not reality.
If I took a flamethrower and fired it at a plate glass window a few feet away, the pane would probably melt before it breaks.
High explosives going off in the sub levels would account for this.
That glass was exposed to an energy so strong, it shattered in place, from standing strong to pieces all over, in an instant.
As for the alleged burning corpse, I have to wonder...can a human being engulfed in flames live long enough to go down 78 floors and still have the life in them to stumble out of the elevator, dropping dead a few feet away?
Would someone on fire have the calm required to get in a closed-space elevator compartment, push the L button and wait it out?
Very convenient that the corpse wasn't shown. I wonder how many cameramen would have resisted the instinctual urge to "get the shot"
I mean, they enter the lobby unaware of the scenes to unfold before their eyes. I'm no camera guy but am I going out on a limb to suggest that the operator was seeing things through the lens? When you're looking through the viewfinder, you're locked in and unable to "look around" beyond the point of focus, right? That's why the handy-cams all have fold-out screens these days. It's much easier to get the shot looking with both eyes at a small screen. The pros still use the "scope" obviously and I believe Naudet was using something a bit better than consumer handy-cam offerings.
I find it very, very peculiar that a professional camera operator walking into a "war zone", film rolling and locked in to his view-finder, DIDN'T get the shot of the burning corpse.
Does the footage roll along un-cut in this alleged burning corpse moment?
If so, I am amazed that Naudet pulled off this editing-room censoring while filming the piece live and un-scripted. What camera jockey alive could match this achievement??
He's squinting through the lense, assumedly missing out on anything around him outside of his camera's focus. Not one inch of the said burning man appears in the footage. How did he go by it so non-chalantly?
Did he open his left eye for a second, see the burning corpse nearby, and judge it to be unsuitable and too graphic, and kept on filming what lied ahead? What camera jockey alive would do this or even be capable of this, I ask again? Not even a brief shot? Nothing? This is the stuff editing rooms were designed for!! This is the stuff that surfaces on the internet years later for all sickos to enjoy.
Isn't this the same guy that was casually filming some firemen going about their business, heard jet engines and turned his camera towards the direction the firemen's attention? The same guy that then "instinctively" framed the WTC towers and caught the alleged F 11 hitting the tower and exploding? This guy is "good" right?(so good that he zoomed in on the tower only when the explosion began to erupt, after the plane was safely inside)
This Naudet thing is psy-ops super-size, IMO.
You think so? Interesting, I don't know if the footage runs uncut or not, I'll have to give it another look. I noticed the Naudet video did edit out the firefighters discussing the bombs going off as the building collapsed, the scene sets up exactly with the firefighters gathering around and discussing the collapse and then it cuts away just as they would begin discussing the explosives.Quote:
Originally Posted by EmceeSoze
I've heard others mention it was psy-ops too, however, without that video we wouldn't have a video of the first impact which clearly shows the flash, or the video of the firefighters discussing the explosives.
I've just spent about 5 hours watching the first tape again. It's now about 5 PM, we all know that WTC 7 collapses around 5:20. The interesting thing is, THEY'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT SINCE 4:13. They have the cameras pointed right at WTC7 waiting for it to collapse.
WTC7 is currently smoldering pretty good, but there's no huge inferno.
Anyway, I have a pretty detailed timeline going that begins at 1:31 in the afternoon, not as early as I'd like, but better than nothing. I'll post the details in a new thread, and I'll go back for additional data later.
Great SBG
I've just found some great WTC7 photos...in particular #2606 and #3073 at this site...
http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thu...ID=3&picnum=97
Obviously, this small, isolated fire was enough to melt every support column in WTC7, leading to a perfect, uniform collapse right on top of itself.
BULLSH*T!!!
As for the Naudet doc, it may contain footage that cries INSIDE JOB to us, but to the denyists, it puts them into deeper illusion.
I for one, would be lost without the Naudet tape. It wasn't until I examined the first impact explosion carefully did I make the leap from Let It Happen On Purpose, to full-blown Gov't operation.
I worship that first impact explosion. It is vastly different than the second impact explosion, and should be the smoking gun it obviously is.
The plane penetrates and the fireball erupts IN THE EXACT OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE PLANE'S MOMENTUM!! Heeeellooooo!!
At WTC2, the jet screams in, penetrates and the massive fireball erupts out the side and right through the tower following, naturally, the plane's path.
Watch the Naudet clip! Plane in, and in miliseconds, the explosion begins to shoot right out the hole, and at the exact same time a MASSIVE blast pops right out the side of the tower. This side blast is quite interesting because it consists of pulverised concrete and particulate, and this very debris cloud is hurled quite some distance from the tower - again, not following the plane's momentum.
Then the real beauty...the fireball itself. Anyone watched Farenheit 9/11? My FAVORITE part was where they replay the Baghdad "Shock & Awe" first night bombings. There's a particular bomb hit where the camera zooms and gives a good showing of the explosion's behavoir. The second I saw it my mind produced..."holy fuck, that looked a lot like the Naudet explosion!!!"
At the WTC, watch the fireball's behavoir...it flashes with brilliant ferocity out of the hole made by the plane. As it dissipates and turns to smoke, note the colour of the rising smoke. Anyone see any soot-laden BLACK colour in this cloud, like the WTC2 explosion? Nothing close, nothing!! Tan/grey is what I see. No black soot...again, no black soot.
Then there's the wee puff of debris that shoots out the side of the tower at the same moment as the main explosion...ONLY THIS SECONDARY DEBRIS EJECTION HAPPENS TO BE GOING ON ABOUT TEN FLOORS ABOVE!!
I must stop, I could go on forever. I am an explosion junkie and without Naudet's first impact capture, I don't know where I'd be.
INSIDE JOB!! Say it again...INSIDE JOB!!
oops
My question would be... in relation to the picture I just posted, what side was the fire in WTC 7 taking place on, and what offices were on the floors of the fire in WTC7...
Those are the kinds of questions I would want answered re, the towers, etc...
Hey Emcee, also notice the explosion at the Pentagon? An airplane hits it at 500 mph or so and the explosion goes straight up.Quote:
Originally Posted by EmceeSoze
Anyway, regarding WTC7, the newscasts were told it was going to collapse well over an hour before it does.
Know what else is interesting in these reports? All the reporters are saying the same thing, that no pilot would fly the airplanes into the building and therefore the hijackers must have known how to fly. Kind of strange don't you think, when we think of terrorists hijacking a plane, we think of them holding a gun to the pilot's head and telling him where to fly. And yet on 9/11, every newscaster (at least on CNN) feels, in no uncertain terms, that the hijackers must have known how to fly a plane because no pilot would ever fly into the building.
Hey Jon, which one is 7 in those images?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold9472
All this info is very interesting reading, great job man=)
I've been glued to reading this thread, can't wait to see whats next.
- Frind
Just finishing up the first tape now, will have a detailed timeline shortly...Quote:
Originally Posted by frindevil
I second that.Quote:
Originally Posted by frindevil
Timeline is here:
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1025
Just some observational guessing here...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold9472
In the pics I mentioned, the photog is behind WTC7 and the towers stood in the "background"(south) - if there was considerable structural damage, it must have been on the other side of WTC7.
I have another shot of WTC7 that shows clearly, the fires burning within are the result of arson.
It looks to me that the largest inferno was engulfing the 7th or 8th floor. Here's the best part...in one of the pics I referenced above, it clearly shows the far side(north-east) of WTC7's 7th or 8th floor was engulfed and ablaze - windows long gone and flames shooting out #3073.
In another shot I have, the building is centered and the north face is shown. Strange thing is, right in the center of the building, fires are burning within, on what looks to be the 7th floor AS WELL as the 2nd floor some feet below. They are in their infancy as the glass has yet to pop out, that is obvious. I wish I knew how to post it!! In relation to the size of WTC7, this pic can't hide the fact that small, seperate fires are burning at points seperated by tons of steel, walls and distance.
Now if you factor in the visuals, there is no way these fires resulted from damage by the collapsing WTC towers.
I have to assume that the south side of WTC7 suffered the damage required to ignite/cause these fires. I have shots of the north-east and north sides which show NO signs of random, scattered damage that would result from falling debris. I'll even imagine the south side to be quite damaged - I'll give them that.
I'll ignore that in pic #3073, a good number of firefighters have gathered around the north-east, 7th floor fire, and are watching from below(as I look more closely it seems like the firefighters aren't too bothered by the blaze above, and look to have retreated back and are re-grouping. After witnessing the tower collapse, that isolated fire looks like child's play). If there was considerable damage and fires burning on the south side of WTC7, would the firefighters have pulled back this far?
I can't for the life of me, visualize falling debris hitting the south WTC7 facade leading to fires burning all the way on the other side of the building at different points some distance apart.
Pic #2606 shows that the fire is traveling north, towards the camera. OK. I can get that. It started on the damaged south side and is spreading north, popping out windows as it goes.
Yet in a different pic showing much of WTC7's north facade, there are two small fires burning - one on the same floor as above and another directly below on the 2nd, windows intact and smoke trapped within - dead center of the building. That was very nice of the fires to spread back in a tight line that left the surrounding offices intact. Amazing how they reached the north side of WTC7 to the point of being visible, and did so at the same time!
If I've lost you I understand. Without being able to see what I'm seeing, my descriptions are left to your imaginations.
In any case, having to express this mystery of WTC7 shouldn't be necessary. Random pockets of fire "may" produce the heat required for steel to soften and for support structures to fail, I'll give them that bullshit.
What random fires burning at various points can't do is melt/soften all the necessary support structures required to fail when a 47-storey, steel framed structure falls neatly right on top of itself. So perfect was the collapse, so smooth was its fall, just a few areas where support structures remained intact would have led to a much different result, yet none withstood the pockets of fire and damage from falling debris.
Whoever built WTC was either real good(built-in explosives) or real dumb(no sprinklers?)
The brown one...Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
Hey Emcee, regarding the fires in WTC7 being caused by falling debris, there is no mention of fire, or any sign of fire in WTC7 until an hour before the collapse. The towers fell between 10-10:30 AM and the fires didn't occur in WTC7 until late in the afternoon. Like I said, there was no mention of anything going on downtown after the collapses and they had the cameras trained on the site all day, nothing going on but dust from the collapses.Quote:
Originally Posted by EmceeSoze
Another note, several witnesses, including Giuliani, mentioned exiting the towers through another building which makes me think they were connected underground. Based on this, it wouldn't be too difficult for the necessary parties to get in and out of WTC7 undetected.
The CNN broadcast I've been watching was filmed from the roof of a building a few blocks away. I'm pretty sure they mentioned the building they were on which should help us to locate the location on the map you posted. From CNN's vantage point, there was no sign of fire, just lots of smoke and we had a clear shot of WTC7. Therefore, the fire had to be on the other side of the building. So, once we have all this information, you should be able to tell what side of the building the fire was on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gold9472
Thanks SBG. Just as I thought - WTC7 wasn't clearly damaged or showing signs of obvious bad predicament save for the multiple fires within. They give the damage from falling debris excuse because such damage wasn't captured by the media. The newsmen weren't gathered around WTC7 and covering its demise because no obvious signs of major damage attracted their hordes.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
Pocket fires burning for less than 2 hours felled a 47-storey steel framed structure?
again...WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
I have no doubt that WTC7 was command and control for the cock-suckers who pressed the demolition switches. They were in there listening to the firemen's radio chatter and waiting until the right moment. They were forced to alter their plans, IMHO.
Think about this folks - WTC2 goes down before WTC1?
The north tower was hit dead-center 18 minutes before the south tower was hit off-center, with much of it's ignited kerosene blasting out of WTC2's north-east facade, for maximum psy-ops effect of course.
Although WTC2 was hit lower and a greater mass remained above the damaged area, is this the reasonable explanation for WTC2 collapsing to dust before the earlier damaged WTC1? Are you kidding me?!!
WTC1 was hit dead center and looked to be suffering quite a blow from the fires within. They tell us that the fires in both towers reached the necessary temps required for the steel supports to soften(now in place of melted) leading to the collapse.
Somehow, with greater speed and effect, the ignited kerosene in WTC2, that didn't burn up outside, was plenty enough to bring down the very tower that had been hit 18 minutes after the first strike on WTC1. Not only that, WTC1 collapsed almost a half-hour later!!
Here's what I believe happened without a doubt...
As the perps listened in to the firefighters' communications, they clearly heard that firemen in the south tower had reached the damaged floors and were engaging the fires. Without the "raging infernos hot enough to melt steel supports" the whole cover-story would be fucked beyond explanation.
"Yeah confirm that...A company has reached the area and is engaging the fire..."
"Oh no, oh shit...they made it up...they're gonna put the fire out in no time!!! We gotta level it now!!"
"But sir, if we take down that tower first, people are going to ask a lot of questions!"(logical assumption even for the American public)
"Those fires can't be put out!!! Do it now, do it now...we'll figure something out later!!!"
Down goes WTC2 not a second later, bringing the world's shock to an all-time high. In the ensuing verbal exchanges and reasoning between those controlling the demolitions, almost a half hour passes before they collect themselves and bring down WTC1 - even by then, the firefighters inside had yet to make it up to the fires, so effective was the induced blockage of their access routes.
The boys then gather up their gear and initiate the arson procedures to produce the "infernos" needed to make WTC7 go away quietly. Back door? I'm thinkin connecting tunnels that no blue-prints featured, as SBG mentioned.
On top of the Command-and-Control bunker in WTC7 that needed immediate destruction, I've heard that the building also housed various gov't documents of interest which needed to be destroyed if National Security was to remain intact. National, of course, has nothing to do with our safety, speaking more for the scum who pulled 9/11 off on their own people.
The collapse sequence all ads up as logical only if one takes these possibilities into account.
or
If one is incapable of independent thought and buys without question, the lame, simplistic the second tower fell first because it had more mass above the damaged floors, you moron...god you people are fucked up!! excuse...er...explanation.
They fucked up this live presentation royaly and must be amazed at how their pre-9/11 estimation of the American public's collective smarts was well below their most lofty assumptions.
Shock & Awe has a long shelf life when seasoned with fear and hate during the aging process. Throw in the absurd colour-coded Terror Alert system on the side, and top it all of with a fine bottle of vintage Republican Rhetoric(good for an 8 year serving), and here we remain. Some of us have excused ourselves from the feast of fear, vomited violently soon after, and have vowed to never return. The majority remain gobbling up dish after dish, not wanting to hear anything discrediting the 5-star rating of their favorite eatery.
Mmmmmm, good.
Hey Emcee, I believe the WTC7 held the Enron files among others.
Another interesting story, the photographer that got the picture of the firefighters hoisting the flag onto the flagpole, he had just been at the site of the WTC7 and the firefighters told him to clear out it was gonna collapse.
Picture this, a photographer does not stay to take pictures of a burning inferno ready to collapse??? But instead walks away????