FBI, the mob, and 9/11

[Jack White]

Jack were’ve been through all this crap before. You have pictures showing both towers still standing and no evidence of an explosion in WTC 6 and you have a CNN video still taken after the south tower collapsed with a dust cloud near WTC. What you are identifying as WTC 2 is the dust plume that resulted from its collapse. The images were taken from similar but different angles as can be seen by the differing position of WFC 3 compared to WTC 1.

The weirdest study you produced is the one where you show smoke coming from between WFC 3 and WFC 4 as being from the explosion of WTC 6 about 500 feet away. (post 202)

A couple of simple questions:

Are you willing to acknowledge that the WTC 6 hole photo you produced was taken AFTER solar noon (12:52 PM) because the west faces of WFC 3, WTC 7 and the Verizon building are in the sunlight? If not why?

Did you send Fetzer a replacement photo showing a damage free south façade of WTC 7 after the collapse of WTC 1 or did he make that up? If it’s true why haven’t you posted it yet?

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Jack

[Matthew Lewis]

Why would they be talking to Tom Clancy at 9:04 with the heading "America Under Attack" (which if you look through the archive is not used until around 10:58) just a minute after the second plane hit? Do you really believe that in one minute they realized that it was an attack, and in the confusion somebody decided to call Tom Clancy and they got him on the phone?

You say the south tower is still standing but it is clear in the archived video that this is not so. As the cloud you say is from the "explosion" of building 6 get larger, the area where the south tower WAS gets lighter. We see light appear THROUGH it. The building (south tower) has collapsed. Don't take my word for it though. I encourage anyone to review the archived video for themselves. The entrie video covers 11:34 AM to 12:16 PM. They start talking to Clancy around 17:20 in the video (would be approximately 11:51 AM). The video on screen is reviews of different angles of the collapses. The one in question starts at about 19:05 (approximately 11:53 AM). It does not say anything about 9:04 and simply says "earlier". It is evident when watching the video that the building (south tower) is collapsing.

Again, review the archive for 9:04,

http://www.archive.org/details/cnn200109110848-0929

They initially think the explosion from the second impact is an additional explosion from the first impact (partly because the second tower is behind the first in their view and partly because they are talking to a reporter on the street, again not Tom Clancy, and the anchor was not watching the video feed). It is not until 9:04 and into 9:05 that they realize that a second plane even hit. It is not until 9:06 that they reshow the second impact. Why can't you just admit that you are wrong about that still that you purport shows an cloud from an explosion in building 6 from the CNN video that was mislabled as 9:04?

What proof is there that the still you have is from 9:04?

Edited July 13, 2008 by Matthew Lewis

[Len Colby]

Sorry Jack but the people and traffic lights are clearly in between WFC 3 and WFC 4 about 500 feet from West Street, note that even in this carefully cropped portion of the photo the right (south) traffic light is clearly closer to the camera than the entrance to WFC 3

I do not know why I respond to such misinformation...except that people might actually believe it

if not shown to be wrong.

Jack

Sorry Jack there are traffic lights and traffic cams like that through out the city. I could take a photo from Brooklyn or Harlem and draw lines claiming they were the corner of West and Vesey. But there is no need to go so far, because such lights can be found on Vesey St halfway between West St. and North End Av

The light on the right in both images below is clearly in front of WFC 3. The one on the right appears to be the same size - actually slightly larger because it is closer to the camera. It appears slightly higher in both photos for the same reason, IF it were hundreds of feet away on West St. it would appear to be much smaller and would be lower down in the image due to perspective

2 questions remained unanswered:

1) Was Fetzer being truthful when he said you sent him a replacement for the "Calder" photo?

2) Do you acknowledge that in the image above "The time is clearly PM, since the sunshine is on the WEST faces of the buildings"?

EDIT - TYPOS FIXED

Edited July 13, 2008 by Len Colby

[David G. Healy]

[...]

It is not until 9:04 and into 9:05 that they realize that a second plane even hit. It is not until 9:06 that they reshow the second impact. Why can't you just admit that you are wrong about that still that you purport shows an cloud from an explosion in building 6 from the CNN video that was mislabled as 9:04?

What proof is there that the still you have is from 9:04?

not to be picky but, mislabled (sic)? Can you provide verification/cite CNN mislabeled any graphics or lower third supers? Are you aware as to how international news organizations time-stamp their tv feeds and what free running time-code means? Are you on active duty, Mr. Lewis? Just curious.

[Len Colby]

*****

If you are correct in your analysis, then what was in building six that was so important for the plotters to destroy? Could the goal have been to create chaos in the securities and financial markets by destroying tons of files and documents relating to, or having bearing with, covert activities? Building 7 also housed thousands of financial records. It gets stranger, the more you think about it. Strange isn't even an adequate word.

It was NOT just Building 6 or 7...BUT THE ENTIRE WTC COMPLEX, which was insured for

billions of dollars. Consider...SEVEN buildings were totally destroyed on 9-11. A few others

were damaged, BUT the only ones completely destroyed were ALL part of the WTC complex.

Now what were the chances of that?

Jack

Did it ever occur to you that PROXIMITY and size has something to do with it. WFC's 3 - 6 were much shorter than the other building in the immediate vicinity and were the building closest to the towers. Thus they were more likely to bit on the facades and roofs by falling debris. St. Nicholas Church was also destroyed, perhaps the Greek Orthodox Church was "in on it" too. The Bankers Trust building was heavily damaged and is being dismantled because it can't be safely demolished. True WTC 7 was tall and a similar distance as other buildings but The Verizon building and Post Office were slightly furthur away and of very different construction.

This map is from chapter 7 of the ASCE/FEMA report

[Len Colby]

[...]

It is not until 9:04 and into 9:05 that they realize that a second plane even hit. It is not until 9:06 that they reshow the second impact. Why can't you just admit that you are wrong about that still that you purport shows an cloud from an explosion in building 6 from the CNN video that was mislabled as 9:04?

What proof is there that the still you have is from 9:04?

not to be picky but, mislabled (sic)? Can you provide verification/cite CNN mislabeled any graphics or lower third supers? Are you aware as to how international news organizations time-stamp their tv feeds and what free running time-code means? Are you on active duty, Mr. Lewis? Just curious.

David you need to pay closer attention the 9:04 time stamp comes from your buddy Jack White. There is no time stamp in the original.

[Matthew Lewis]

[...]

It is not until 9:04 and into 9:05 that they realize that a second plane even hit. It is not until 9:06 that they reshow the second impact. Why can't you just admit that you are wrong about that still that you purport shows an cloud from an explosion in building 6 from the CNN video that was mislabled as 9:04?

What proof is there that the still you have is from 9:04?

not to be picky but, mislabled (sic)? Can you provide verification/cite CNN mislabeled any graphics or lower third supers? Are you aware as to how international news organizations time-stamp their tv feeds and what free running time-code means? Are you on active duty, Mr. Lewis? Just curious.

I apologize for the spelling error. My spelling often suffers when I type which is the primary reason many of my posts are later edited.

I do not say and have not tried to imply that CNN mislabled the video. As shown in the archive, (have you watched it?) the video does NOT have 9:04 on it. The still from it that Jack claims shows an explosion at building 6 does. I contend that the video was NOT from 9:04 and rather was from the first collapse as it shows the first collapse. I contend also that someone else (unknown) added the 9:04 time to it to push their theory of an explosion in building 6. It is sometime after that in which Jack obtained the picture to push the building 6 explosion theory. I know that I have seen the theory of an explosion in building 6 elsewhere originating before Jack put it into his studies. I do not believe the idea originated with him. I do not believe that he added the time stamp either (I could be wrong) but merely accepted it as gospel.

I am always considered Active Duty as opposed to being Guard or Reserve. I am however NOT ON DUTY which is I believe what you meant. Are you trying to suggest that my posting here is related to my work? I have stated multiple times before that my posting here has nothing to do with my job. I resent the implication that it does. For your information, this forum as well as most others are blocked on the network at work as posting on most web forums is against the terms of service. I only ever post from home when I am OFF DUTY. I believe that I have endured more than enough insinuations from Jack and others that my posting here is job related or that I am somehow paid to post. If it continues I will make a formal complaint.

Edited July 14, 2008 by Matthew Lewis

[Josiah Thompson]

I visited this intersection within the last two weeks. What Len said about the placement of traffic lights, etc. is correct and will be seen to be correct by anyone who takes the trouble to visit the scene. Will you never admit you are wrong, Jack?

Sorry Jack but the people and traffic lights are clearly in between WFC 3 and WFC 4 about 500 feet from West Street, note that even in this carefully cropped portion of the photo the right (south) traffic light is clearly closer to the camera than the entrance to WFC 3

I do not know why I respond to such misinformation...except that people might actually believe it

if not shown to be wrong.

Jack

Sorry Jack there are traffic lights and traffic cams like that through out the city. I could take a photo from Brooklyn or Harlem and draw lines claiming they were the corner of West and Vesey. But there is no need to go so far, because such lights can be found on Vesey St halfway between West St. and North End Av

The light on the right in both images below is clearly in front of WFC 3. The one on the right appears to be the same size - actually slightly larger because it is closer to the camera. It appears slightly higher in both photos for the same reason, IF it were hundreds of feet away on West St. it would appear to be much smaller and would be lower down in the image due to perspective

2 questions remained unanswered:

1) Was Fetzer being truthful when he said you sent him a replacement for the "Calder" photo?

2) Do you acknowledge that in the image above "The time is clearly PM, since the sunshine is on the WEST faces of the buildings"?

EDIT - TYPOS FIXED

[Josiah Thompson]

David writes, "Are you on active duty, Mr. Lewis? Just curious."

This stinks, David. With brilliance, Matt Lewis has demonstated that Jack White erroneously advertised the still as taken at 9:04 AM when it was taken at 9:59 AM. The dust cloud shown which Jack claims is an explosion in WTC6 is really from the collapse of the South Tower. Nothing could be clearer. It doesn't matter if Matt Lewis turned out the be the Director of the CIA. His point is true independent of who he is or whatever else he believes or who he works for. It simply stinks for you to attempt to smudge his reputation by innuendo. Fetzer tried the same with me some time ago and got his ass kicked by the community at large. You should be enough a person to recognize that what you did is ignoble and apologize for it. Otherwise, you end up appearing to be a punk! Is that how you want to appear?

[...]

It is not until 9:04 and into 9:05 that they realize that a second plane even hit. It is not until 9:06 that they reshow the second impact. Why can't you just admit that you are wrong about that still that you purport shows an cloud from an explosion in building 6 from the CNN video that was mislabled as 9:04?

What proof is there that the still you have is from 9:04?

not to be picky but, mislabled (sic)? Can you provide verification/cite CNN mislabeled any graphics or lower third supers? Are you aware as to how international news organizations time-stamp their tv feeds and what free running time-code means? Are you on active duty, Mr. Lewis? Just curious.

[Jack White]

Seems like nobody wants to address this.

Jack

[Matthew Lewis]

Seems like nobody wants to address this.

Jack

It is foolish to claim that two different images taken at two different times, from two different cameras at two different angles should show the same exact thing. It is foolish to claim that the south tower is still standing when one can see light shining through the smoke and dust in its location. It is foolish to continue to believe that the still on the left comes from 9:04 when there is no evidence to show that it does and plenty of evidence to show that it comes from the collapse video. Have you even looked at the archived video footage? If so, how can you possibly claim that the south tower is not collapsing?

Seems like you don't want to address this:

Why would they be talking to Tom Clancy at 9:04 with the heading "America Under Attack" (which if you look through the archive is not used until around 10:58 AM) just a minute after the second plane hit? Do you really believe that in one minute they realized that it was an attack, and in the confusion somebody decided to call Tom Clancy and they got him on the phone?

Edited July 14, 2008 by Matthew Lewis

[Jack White]

Remember Star-Wars?

Directed Energy Weapons?

I have just spent an hour reading Google websites regarding DEW weaponry,

which goes back to the 70s. Billions of dollars have been spent developing

this top secret weaponry, yet the internet is full of info about the weapons,

many of them by the US govt and its suppliers. There is even a big convention

going on showing the latest in "death rays".

This airplane is shown and described on one "foreign" website as the USAF

delivery platform for DEW weaponry.

A white plane like this was seen over NYC, Pennsylvania and Washington

during the 9-11 attacks. Don't scoff. Google DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS.

One of the chief weapons is a microwave ray gun which will shoot down

an aircraft without leaving a trace of what happened by DISRUPTING ALL

ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT in the target plane. (Wellstone, JFKjr, TWA800)

There are other microwave ray guns which cause heart attacks or mental

aberrations or crippling pain sensations. And their manufacturers brag about

these accomplishments proudly.

Jack

Edited July 14, 2008 by Jack White

[Matthew Lewis]

Remember Star-Wars?

Directed Energy Weapons?

I have just spent an hour reading Google websites regarding DEW weaponry,

which goes back to the 70s. Billions of dollars have been spent developing

this top secret weaponry, yet the internet is full of info about the weapons,

many of them by the US govt and its suppliers. There is even a big convention

going on showing the latest in "death rays".

This airplane is shown and described on one "foreign" website as the USAF

delivery platform for DEW weaponry.

A white plane like this was seen over NYC, Pennsylvania and Washington

during the 9-11 attacks. Don't scoff. Google DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS.

One of the chief weapons is a microwave ray gun which will shoot down

an aircraft without leaving a trace of what happened by DISRUPTING ALL

ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT in the target plane. (Wellstone, JFKjr, TWA800)

There are other microwave ray guns which cause heart attacks or mental

aberrations or crippling pain sensations. And their manufacturers brag about

these accomplishments proudly.

Jack

Ineresting theory. I had not heard that the white plane was seen over NYC or Pennsylvania. Everything I've seen said it was seen over Washington. Not surprising as it was shown to be the E-4B NAOC aircraft which while based in Offut has a secondary base at Andrews.

The plane you posted is the prototype for the airborne laser. It is very highly unlikely that this plane was seen anywhere on the East coast on 911 as the airframe without the laser was only first flown in 2002. The laser was finally installed just last year (plauged by budget cutbacks as is the rest of the Air Force). It is boubted by some that the system will ever become operational. Even so, it uses a megawatt class laser. While much more powerful than a laser pointer, it still does not burn through its targets. It is said that it will weaken the skin of a missle in flight and cause it to break up due to atmospheric stress. Highly doubtful that this laser could have brought the towers down, especially from this airframe which wasn't even flying at the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_laser

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/abl/

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/abl.htm

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/

[Jack White]

Seems like nobody wants to address this.

Jack

Jack, I believe you once posted a lightened-up version of the 'before with explosive cloud near WTC6' photo once - where both towers can be seen. Perhaps it is time to repost it. Anyone looking at images of the collapse of the first tower, however will, IMO, be hard pressed to say that it is happening or has just happened in that photo. That cloud near WTC6 is, IMO, another event at another point in time. The very fact this is hard to pin down - l like mercury blobs on the floor reminds me of so much that happened at Dallas and I believe for the same reasons. Those who believe the official version find it innocent confusion or confusion in the minds of those who challenge the official version. Others find it a tad more sinister as to who is trying to confuse whom [here I'm not referring to anyone on the Forum but for example BBCs 'explanation' of the 20 min before-the-fact piece on WTC7 collapse - things like that. I don't know about the time stamp and would NOT trust CNN to give a straight and true answer - but one can find the answer independantly, I'm sure].

Explosion at WTC Complex

Despite the fact that the horrible events of Sept. 11 occurred in broad daylight and were widely photographed, significant aspects of the attacks have been completely suppressed by a media blackout.

Exclusive to American Free Press

By Christopher Bollyn

A massive explosion, witnessed by millions of television viewers on CNN, evidently devastated World Trade Center 6, the eight-story U.S. Customs building, although no national newspaper, other than American Free Press, has written a word about it.

Before the smoke had cleared from around the stricken South Tower, a mysterious explosion shot 550 feet into the air above the U.S. Customs House at WTC 6.

The unexplained blast occurred between the burning North Tower and the 47-story Salomon Brothers Building, known as WTC 7, immediately after United Airlines Flight 175 smashed into the South Tower, at about 9:03 a.m.

The explosion at WTC 6 was shown afterward on CNN. But because it was not broadcast as it happened there has been some confusion about when it actually occurred.

The large amount of smoke seen cascading around the South Tower in the video led some observers to mistake the blast for a dust cloud from the subsequent collapse of the tower.

TIMING CONFIRMED

American Free Press contacted CNN to determine exactly when the footage was filmed.

CNN’s Public Affairs Department confirmed that the explosion shown in the footage occurred immediately after the second plane had crashed into the South Tower. When asked if the footage was taken at 9:04 a.m., the CNN archivist said “that’s correct.”

When asked if CNN could offer any explanation about what might have caused the blast that soared higher than the 47-story WTC 7 in the foreground, the archivist said: “We can’t figure it out.”

The affected space between WTC 7 and the North Tower was occupied by the Customs House building, also known as WTC 6. The building housed the offices of 760 employees of the Customs Service, a part of Treasury. Other federal

agencies had offices in the building, including the Departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Labor, and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. They did not return calls to AFP about the matter.

A spokesman for the Export-Import Bank of the United States, which had an office with four employees on the sixth floor of the Customs House, confirmed the time of the explosion and told AFP that the employees had survived and been relocated. One private company, Eastco Building Services, Inc., reportedly leased space in the building.

Some 800 workers from WTC 6 were safely evacuated within 12 minutes of the first plane hitting the North Tower at about 8:46 a.m., according to a Sept. 18 Washington Post article by Stephen Barr.

The Barr piece is the only known article published about WTC 6. However, Barr failed to mention the explosion that apparently devastated the building just minutes after the workers had escaped with their lives.

AVOIDING THE SUBJECT

Although the Customs House apparently exploded at 9:04 a.m., the government-sponsored investigation was steered away from looking into what had actually happened.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency funded an investigation by the American Society of Civil Engineers. However, investigators were reportedly blocked from the building by an order from the New York City’s Department.

of Design and Construction .

Kenneth Holden is commissioner of the DDC, having been appointed by the former mayor, Rudolph Giuliani on Dec. 7, 1999.

Regarding the investigation of WTC 4, 5, and 6, FEMA’s “Building Performance” report says, “WTC 5 was the only building accessible for observation.” But, it adds, “the observations, findings, and recommendations are assumed to be applicable to all three buildings.”

A spokesman for FEMA told AFP that because the building was considered by DDC to be “very dangerous,” there was “no data collection” from WTC 6.

Dr. Gene Corley, one of the engineers who led the investigation, told AFP that concerns about loose gold bullion and cash prevented investigators from entering WTC 4.

The FEMA report says, “The buildings [4,5,6] responded as expected to the impact loadings.” Although the report says, “most of the central part of WTC 6 suffered collapse on all floors,” it adds, “damage was consistent with the observed impact load.”

The Customs House had a huge crater in its center. Corley told AFP that he had not seen the CNN photos before and called them “interesting.”

Corley, like other experts, thought the damage at WTC 6 was caused by the collapse of the North Tower. However, not one of the experts could recall seeing the CNN footage before.

A spokesman for the Customs Service told AFP, “It did not blow up. When the tower collapsed it caved in.”

Corley said he had not seen the photos of the extremely high-speed missile-like object seen streaking toward WTC 6 from behind the North Tower as the second plane hit the South Tower.

He noted that parts of the plane’s landing gear and an engine passed through the South Tower, and landed several blocks away.

These objects, however, had a distinctly different trajectory from the streaking missile-like object. Another investigator, Jonathan Barnett, told AFP, “The debris from Tower 2 hit Building 5, not 6.”

This may be the photo Peter is thinking of.

Jack

[Jack White]

The CNN dustcloud overlaid over Hudson skyline view, to scale.

Jack