It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First North Tower Explosion Confirmed On CNN?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   
The archive.org collection of 9/11 television coverage is very interesting. I wish I had more time to glean through all the recorded programming there. I'm sure there are a lot of undiscovered gems.

In fact I think I found one in the first segment of archived CNN coverage. There is an interview, shortly after the North Tower impact, in which a woman named Jeanne Yurman refers to hearing a "sonic boom" in her apartment in Battery Park City followed by momentary loss of her TV signal. She gets up and goes to the window only to see an explosion as the side of the North Tower blows out.

It seems probable that the "sonic boom" she heard and felt was in fact the first explosion referred to by Willie Rodriguez in the sub-basement of the tower.

I hadn't seen a reference to this before on ATS so I thought I would pass it along.

www.archive.org...

The conversation with Jeanne Yurman starts at 7:58 of the segment.


[edit on 8-6-2008 by ipsedixit]




posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


Willie heard nothing of the sort. He has been proven a liar by many. Changes his story more than his underware.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit


refers to hearing a "sonic boom" in her apartment in Battery Park City followed by momentary loss of her TV signal. She gets up and goes to the window only to see an explosion as the side of the North Tower blows out.

It seems probable that the "sonic boom" she heard and felt was in fact the first explosion referred to by Willie Rodriguez in the sub-basement of the tower.www.archive.org...

The conversation with Jeanne Yurman starts at 7:58 of the segment.


[edit on 8-6-2008 by ipsedixit]


Here is the clip that confirms before or during the plane impacts all tvs lost transmission for 2 seconds.




[edit on 8-6-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:55 AM
link   
It is interesting to compare the following audio tracks of the events at the North Tower. In both of them you can hear a whining sound of some sort followed by a loud report of some sort (called an "explosion" by the FBI agent in the second recording) and followed again after a few seconds by a second loud noise of some sort.

To my ears the first crashing sound in each recording is louder and more focused than the second. Are the two loud sounds the explosion in the sub basement followed by the airplane impact? What is the whining sound? In the Carr recording it sounds as if it could be the passing airplane. In the FBI recording it sounds like it could be machinery in the street. Are the two whines the same noise?

I certainly don't claim to know exactly what is going on here but it seems beyond question that there were two loud reports within seconds of one another at the time the North Tower was hit.

It looks an awful lot like Yurman, Rodriguez, the FBI recording and the Ginny Carr recording all reference the same occurrences.

9/11: North Tower Plane Impact Audio (Ginny Carr)




9/11: FBI audio of both WTC plane crashes (WNBC)



Interestingly, however, the audio track of the Naudet brothers film doesn't record the first explosion, or does it?

If you listen carefully, in the Naudet brothers' film, the audio portion of the film seems to be turned down in volume after the plane goes overhead. The noise of it's engines suddenly diminishes and as the plane hits, you can dimly hear a crashing sound of some sort. Taking time for the delay caused by distance, you then hear a loud report corresponding to the sound of the plan's impact.

To my ears it almost sounds as if the explosive noise of the first sound from the other recordings was used to create the sound of the impact in the Naudet brothers' film. Is this big studio FX licence at work? Evidence of audio track manipulation? Maybe. In any case I believe they did record two explosive or crash like sounds but suppressed the first one.

WTC1 North Tower Plane Impact on 9/11 - Naudet



And then afterward, the FBI (not the guy working the bribery sting) made sure that firemen had their confusions straightened out officially.




posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
in which a woman named Jeanne Yurman refers to hearing a "sonic boom" in her apartment in Battery Park City followed by momentary loss of her TV signal. She gets up and goes to the window only to see an explosion as the side of the North Tower blows out.


That’s the type of sound I’d expect when a Plane slams into a Building.

Sonic boom sound and then an explosion sound, I mean – what else would a plane slamming into a building sound like?

Mikey



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Mikey84
 


The point of the Yurman testimony is that she heard the "sonic boom" and then got up from her chair because she thought the Concorde was back in service. She goes to the window, looking for the Concorde and sees an explosion as the side of the tower blows out, an event which would have taken place already, before she got to the window, if the "sonic boom" were actually the sound of the plane's impact.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


Well I think the fact that she thinks Concord makes “sonic boom” sounds over land shows she doesn’t know much. The Concord’s sonic boom was done once it’s over the ocean. So I’m curious as to why she would of thought the Concord was back in service, it’s not like it normaly did “Sonic booms” while arriving or departing New York.

The plane flying at that speed about to slam into the building would of made a loud noise, which is what this witness probably heard as her “sonic boom” sound. By the time she got up and looked, they plane would of slammed into the building, causing the big explosion she seen.

Mikey



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Mikey84
 


Well, despite your attack on her knowledge, I think that what she says is a very straight forward and simple account of what she heard, what she did and what she saw. The gap between hearing the so called "sonic boom" and her sight of the side of the tower exploding and debris beginning to fall is too long for the boom to have caused the explosion she witnessed.

I don't think this can be impeached.

www.archive.org...


"I can tell you that I was watching TV and there was this sonic boom and the TV went out and I thought maybe that the Concorde was back in service cuz I've heard about those sonic booms and I got up to my window and I live in Battery Park City right next to the twin towers and I looked up and the side of the World Trade Center exploded right when I looked up and at that point debris started falling and I couldn't believe what I was watching."


Edit for clarity.

[edit on 10-6-2008 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

The gap between hearing the so called "sonic boom" and her sight of the side of the tower exploding and debris beginning to fall is too long for the boom to have caused the explosion she witnessed.


So now you’re saying that the sound she heard had nothing to do with the explosion? There was no Sonic boom sound? So she made it up? Or if it has nothing to do with your “explosion theory” why bring it up?

I’m saying the sound she heard that she thinks was a sonic boom was actually the sound of the plane BEFORE it hit, you know, the sound the plane makes at high speed!

Then it hit the building, then she seen the explosion.

It’s pretty clear that explosives were not used.

Mikey



[edit on 10/6/2008 by Mikey84]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mikey84

Originally posted by ipsedixit

The gap between hearing the so called "sonic boom" and her sight of the side of the tower exploding and debris beginning to fall is too long for the boom to have caused the explosion she witnessed.


So now you’re saying that the sound she heard had nothing to do with the explosion?


Mikey I've been saying the same thing throughout, but I'm not going to keep saying it again and again. Your responses give a strong impression that you might not really get the point of what Yurman experienced.

If you really want further clarification maybe someone else can pick up the torch. I don't think I have the skills required. Or, you could always re-read the posts more carefully.

Edit: It just occurred to me that you might be confused by her use of the term "sonic boom". Everyone is aware that the plane was not going fast enough to create a real sonic boom. One plane, two booms, no can do.


[edit on 10-6-2008 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Edit: It just occurred to me that you might be confused by her use of the term "sonic boom". Everyone is aware that the plane was not going fast enough to create a real sonic boom. One plane, two booms, no can do.
[edit on 10-6-2008 by ipsedixit]


I don’t think the witness actually heard a Sonic boom, I mean she thinks’ concord makes a sonic boom sound when landing? So she obviously has no idea what a sonic boom sounds like.

So, she didn’t hear any sonic boom.

She heard 2 sounds, 1 was the sound of the plane, and the 2nd was the sound of the explosion from the plane hitting the building.

It’s pretty simple.

Mikey



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Edit: It just occurred to me that you might be confused by her use of the term "sonic boom". Everyone is aware that the plane was not going fast enough to create a real sonic boom. One plane, two booms, no can do.


I think you did a well enough job here. The speed of sound is 770 mph I believe. The plane was traveling almost 300 mph less than this. A loud whoosh maybe but no sonic boom.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 

For me the interesting thing about the Yurman testimony is that it came very early in the process, minutes after the North Tower incident. It corroberates what is heard on recordings and what Rodriguez said. Also, at the time the testimony was given, no-one understood it's significance. It passed completely without comment.

I wonder how many other such revealing accounts exist within the archived broadcast material of the day. Obviously it would take a lot of time to listen to it all carefully, but it would be great if people were to take time now and then to get through chunks of it.

Yurman's testimony for me is almost as interesting as the recordings of the police radio chatter dealing with the explosion of the truck on the street, etc. I don't know if the 9/11 commission report deals with that incident, but it seems to have fallen off the radar screen.

Who were those guys? Do they represent a chink in the armor of the whole fairytale? Maybe someone in ATS-land knows more about that incident.

I think even if we never get practical judicial resolution of 9/11, it's still incumbent on the "academics" to nail down the truth of the story.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join