The Woolworth Building & 9/11

[Cavynaut]

There is a mention of this in the locked 9/11 thread, but I can't find it. Either that, or I'm useless at using the search engine...which is probably nearer the mark.

Anyway, I just wondered if anyone was aware of this site...

http://www.orbwar.com/woolworth/

 

[Bigfoot73]

I knew this would happen. Sooner or later somebody was bound to unlock Pandora's Box/break the Seventh Seal/whatever and reignite the 9/11 debate.
So we have missiles being fired from the Woolworth building while at the same time something is being fired at it.
Could this flash/orb thing have been a laser guiding missiles to their target?
Bright white flashes were seen above the North tower just before it collapsed.

Near the bottom of the page is a sighting of a stealth fighter hovering and then turning into an orb. What sort of stealth fighter hovers, and how did it turn into an orb? The orb buzzing around the Woolworths building did not seem to be acting in a fighter-like fashion, but the author seems to be suggesting that cloaking technology is responsible. Sounds even weirder than that !?
Is this orb just a beam, or a weapon, or a cloaking, shapeshifting black project ?
Raises an awful lot more questions than it answers.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

My bet's on it being a time travelling rubber necker, gawping at the carnage, from the safety of his flying saucer.

 

[Cavynaut]

I knew this would happen. Sooner or later somebody was bound to unlock Pandora's Box/break the Seventh Seal/whatever and reignite the 9/11 debate.

I know, I know, and I do sincerely apologise.

Look, it wasn't really my fault. Somebody on a local forum that I use brought the subject up, and I spent a couple of days debunking his 911 conspiracy theory beliefs. And then I began to look into a subject that I hadn't really taken seriously for a good few years. And I was surprised to find new stuff. The third airliner over Manhattan, flashes of light appearing to reflect from the towers before the aircraft hit, odd looking appendages on the underside of the aircraft...and then flashes of light around the Woolworth Building.

Since 911, I've gone from CT believer to an outright sceptic, and now from an outright sceptic to a ...well, I don't know. Something not quite consistent with the official story went on that day....I think. :?

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Missiles, cloaked stealth fighters, lasers and holograms... :madeyes:

Then there's the theory that some of these stories are disinformation, intended to muddy the water and discredit those who have genuine doubts about the official version of events.

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html

 

[Cavynaut]

Look P_M, will you not do this? I 've got exams in a couple of weeks, and cannot afford to waste time reading this highly interesting stuff.

Holograms...Shayler and Machon...does this technology really exist? I've watched a few Youtube videos which supposedely show this, but eh? I'm prepared to be educated, and sod the exams.

 

[Bigfoot73]

Not at all, Cavynaut, you are obviously one of the more open minded and reasonable commentators on the issue - apart from me of course.
A more down to earth spanner in the works of the official explanation can be found at Pilots for 9.11 Truth.com, where people have been decoding the Flight 77 Flight Data Recorder. It seems that the flight deck/passenger cabin door did not open so much as once during the whole flight. The door sensor checked door status every 4 seconds, and it has been established that it was working properly.
How did the hijackers manage to storm the cockpit , eject the crew from the flight deck and everything else without opening that door ?
The FDR already has it's ID number missing, a first, the cockpit voice recorder data was apparently unusable, another first, and now it would seem the hijackers were superhuman ninja acrobats.
Information already made available by the NTSB has shown that the plane was too high to have descended and hit the Pentagon, and that it didn't even fly over the lamp posts it was supposed to have knocked the tops off (even though they had been unbolted and laid on their sides by somebody anyway)
I think it is safe to say that the black boxes scrutinised by the 9.11 commission were not from a plane which had flown into the Pentagon.

Added to all this, a few weeks ago WikiLeaks published pager traffic on 9.11 :- nobody mentioned an airliner flying into the Pentagon. Most reports talk of an explosion on the helicopter pad or a light aircraft crashing nearby.
Then there's all the reports of burning buildings on Washington Mall, a plane crashing into the 14th Street bridge in Washington, and even a second plane flying towards the Pentagon, detected just after 11a.m. - a good hour and 20 minutes after the grounding of all civilian flights, with F16s scrambled to intercept it.
Where did all those stories come from? Why have they never been explained?
Apart from the long established glaring dissimilarities between the small white object filmed hitting the Pentagon and a Boeing 757, now we have this. It's taken 8 years but the official account of Flight 77 is falling apart at the seams.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Look P_M, will you not do this? I 've got exams in a couple of weeks, and cannot afford to waste time reading this highly interesting stuff.

...

Ah! Ha! Classic avoidance behaviour, which I recognise from personal experience. Exams coming up? Need to study? Suddenly anything else looks more interesting, instead. Distractions abound! Anything, from Conspiracy Theory material on the internet, to, 'Homes under The Hammer' and 'The Teletubbies', looks more interesting and imbued with extra significance. I bet you're even watching, 'Murder She Wrote', every afternoon.

Don't fritter and footer your time away, Cavynaut, get back to studying! :lol:

...

Holograms...Shayler and Machon...does this technology really exist? I've watched a few Youtube videos which supposedely show this, but eh? I'm prepared to be educated, and sod the exams.

:imo:
Most of it os the stuff of science fiction. I certainly know of no evidence for the likes of the holographic projection technology, or invisibility cloaking devices, proposed in some of these theories, outside the likes of, 'Star Trek' on TV.

 

[stu neville]

Exams coming up? Need to study? Suddenly anything else looks more interesting, instead. Distractions abound! Anything, from Conspiracy Theory material on the internet, to, 'Homes under The Hammer' and 'The Teletubbies', looks more interesting and imbued with extra significance. I bet you're even watching, 'Murder She Wrote', every afternoon.

If it's any consolation, exactly the same syndrome affects teachers and lecturers who are supposed to be doing lesson plans, marking stuff, etc at home, esp when bad weather gives them impromptu days off.

I wonder if you can mow the lawn in the snow...

 

[Bigfoot73]

The hologram projection technology is called AH35

 

[Cavynaut]

Ah! Ha! Classic avoidance behaviour, which I recognise from personal experience. Exams coming up? Need to study? Suddenly anything else looks more interesting, instead. Distractions abound! Anything, from Conspiracy Theory material on the internet, to, 'Homes under The Hammer' and 'The Teletubbies', looks more interesting and imbued with extra significance. I bet you're even watching, 'Murder She Wrote', every afternoon.

Much, much worse than that........Jeremy Kyle.

 

[Cavynaut]

A piece on the Flight 77 black box flight data recorder.

http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/po ... 9/flt77fdr

Pilots for 9/11 Truth has reported that the data stream from the flight data recorder (FDR) for American Airlines flight 77, which allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11, shows that the cockpit door never opened during the entire 90 minute flight. The data was provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which has refused to comment.

 

[Cavynaut]

The hologram projection technology is called AH35

This is all I can find on AH35.

http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y200 ... 02712A.pdf

Do you reckon we're ploughing a lone furrow here Bigfoot? :lol:

 

[Bigfoot73]

That's all I've found on AH35 too, apart from passing mentions here and there.
I was expecting the usual suspects from the monstrous regiment of sceptics to turn up. i would like to think that's because we're on to something, but perhaps they are as blissfully unaware of all this as most other people seem to be.

 

[Spookdaddy]

...I was expecting the usual suspects from the monstrous regiment of sceptics to turn up. i would like to think that's because we're on to something, but perhaps they are as blissfully unaware of all this as most other people seem to be.

Tap, tap, tap. We're behiiind you! Whoooooooooo!!!

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

...I was expecting the usual suspects from the monstrous regiment of sceptics to turn up. i would like to think that's because we're on to something, but perhaps they are as blissfully unaware of all this as most other people seem to be.

Tap, tap, tap. We're behiiind you! Whoooooooooo!!!

Cavynaut was genuinely looking for an interesting source of pre-exam studies distraction, when he started this Thread. So do your best to come up with some decent, evidence based, arguments for and against.

Flaming and descending to the kind of, 'Point and Laugh' rhetoric, that sometimes turns up on skeptic forums, simply won't do.

There is plenty of weird stuff surrounding 9/11, most if it is almost bound to bunk, but some of it is genuinely stuff of Fortean interest.

Play nice please.

P_M

 

[Spookdaddy]

Mea culpa.

Was that really enough to be classified as a flame though? Strikes me that it was about as harmless as:

My bet's on it being a time travelling rubber necker, gawping at the carnage, from the safety of his flying saucer.

As for pre exam distraction activity: lists, lots and lots of lists - and when the time comes to do something it says on your list, write another one.

 

[Analis]

Missiles, cloaked stealth fighters, lasers and holograms... :madeyes:

Then there's the theory that some of these stories are disinformation, intended to muddy the water and discredit those who have genuine doubts about the official version of events.

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/patriots_question/index.html

Like, for example, taking a video of a plane crashing in a tower, editing it so that the wing becomes blurry and seems to vanish, then circulating it and shouting « Hologram ! Hologram ! » ?
I'm not saying that's what happened with these videos. Maybe it amounts only to bad copy and poor editing. Or maybe this is genuine disinformation. If a clever disinformer wished to use the trick, the result would not be different. The pod people would fall enthusiastically into the trap.

 

[Dr_Baltar]

It seems that there are not only "zombie theories" that are killed off only to rise again, but there are also "Frankenstein theories" where pieces of previously debunked theories are stitched together with newly discovered (or invented) material to create an even more hideous monster.

Despite finding virtually every alternative theory laughable, I have to say, I admire the resilience and inventiveness on display.

Member of the "monstrous regiment" and proud.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Mea culpa.

Was that really enough to be classified as a flame though? Strikes me that it was about as harmless as:

My bet's on it being a time travelling rubber necker, gawping at the carnage, from the safety of his flying saucer.

...

Your last Post certainly wasn't a flame.

I'm just reminding everyone to debate the the various theories and evidence and to avoid the personal attacks which this topic has sometimes descended to, in the past. Which you certainly weren't making.

P_M

 

[Bigfoot73]

Dr B :- I don't think The Woolworth Building witness statements have been aired before, nor has the Pilots for 9/11 Truth or WikiLeaks material.
There are no theories being touted above, this is evidence.
Given the other evidence about Flight 77, nearly all from official sources, I don't see anything zombie-ish or Frankenstein-ish at all.

 

[Timble2]

Well the Website is copyright 2006, and there's a discussion in above top secret, from November 2005 citing the statements, so your basic premise that these haven't been mentioned before is wrong....

 

[Bigfoot73]

Well, to be more precise, I haven't seen them before.
Any comments on the actual import of what I was on about?

 

[wembley9]

The hologram projection technology is called AH35

This is all I can find on AH35.

http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y200 ... 02712A.pdf

Do you reckon we're ploughing a lone furrow here Bigfoot?

That's part of a tactical US army project which was under development in 2000 - - hard to see the relevance. There's been plwenty of military work with holograms - http://www.noahshachtman.com/archives/002975.html - but they're a long way from having a "hologram projector." How would this even work?

Project AH35 is now H35; their budget is still the same, and they're not going to make anyone disappear soon -

http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y200 ... 02712A.pdf

 

[Bigfoot73]

Perhaps AH35 was not the technology used, perhaps no hologram technology was used. Analis seems to know more about this than any of us and it would be very enlightening to hear more about this from him.
It still leaves all these strange lights to be accounted for, and all the witness reports of a missile fired from the Woolworth Building, and all the new evidence re: Flight 77.
So far the counter arguments here have consisted of a damning expose of what I knew about the Woolworth building witnesses and when I knew it, and the improbability of a particular item of shady military kit being used for Flight 175 ( and there could be plenty more in the Pentagon black ops arsenal that could have been responsible).
Cavynaut and me really are having an easy time of it this time round !

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Added to all this, a few weeks ago WikiLeaks published pager traffic on 9.11 :- nobody mentioned an airliner flying into the Pentagon. Most reports talk of an explosion on the helicopter pad or a light aircraft crashing nearby.

Which presumably demonstrate the unreliability of reports. Where is the scorched helicopter pad?

Apart from the long established glaring dissimilarities between the small white object filmed hitting the Pentagon and a Boeing 757, now we have this. It's taken 8 years but the official account of Flight 77 is falling apart at the seams.

A small white object far bigger than a truck, bigger than any missile which anyone has ever been able to name.

 

[Bigfoot73]

Ted ! I suspected the last line of my previous post might cause you to manifest yourself !
Perhaps it does indeed demonstrate the unreliability of reports, perhaps the originators of those reports had sinister motivations. There may have been no explosion at the helicopter pad, but it's the helicopter pad at the Pentagon.
So you are conceding that it wasn't a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon ? Really Ted, I'm surprised at you. :?:

 

[Cavynaut]

I'm beginning to feel like that bloke in The Fast Show who agrees with everything anyone says, even if it's in direct opposition to the last thing he said.

Having read the report into the collapse of the towers in Implosionworld, and thinking that it all seemed plausible, I then read this...

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2 ... llapse.pdf

....and think that it all seems plausible. :?

As for the lights around the Woolworth Building, does anyone know of any other footage of them, as I suppose that they could be a prime example of the sort of CGI'ed disinformation which P_M talked about.

I do think the Flight 77 data recorder evidence is worthy of investigation however...I mean, if it failed to record the flight deck doors opening, then surely there are only two possible conclusions. Either it was faulty, which would be convenient to say the least, or the hijackers managed to pass through a solid object to reach the pilots.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Ted ! I suspected the last line of my previous post might cause you to manifest yourself !
Perhaps it does indeed demonstrate the unreliability of reports, perhaps the originators of those reports had sinister motivations. There may have been no explosion at the helicopter pad, but it's the helicopter pad at the Pentagon.
So you are conceding that it wasn't a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon ? Really Ted, I'm surprised at you. :?:

No. I don't know how it could even be possible to infer that.

Simply pointing out that citing multiple diverse reports weakens the case against the official version when we can clearly see that most of them have to be inaccurate.

The fact that it's the helicopter pad at the pentagon is of no consequence if there was no explosion at it.

 

[Zilch5]

Where is the scorched helicopter pad?

Well, that IS the question, isn't it? As you can see from the picture at the url below, the helipad isn't scorched at all although a 757 (with landing gear up, mind you) just went centimetres above and then crashed into the building a few metres away.

http://members.shaw.ca/freedomseven/pentagon-path-marker.jpg