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.

 

9/11 PRESS RELEASE: World Trade Center Occupancy FOIA PANYNJ * 1972-2001

page: 5
62
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 03:42 AM
link   
Sorry Phil the comment above regarding the hoax seems more than a bit far fetched. I always appreciate researchers that are willing to go the extra mile and devote hard work and effort to revealing the truth. However you assertion that because you have raised legitimate questions surrounding 3 or 4 deaths means that ALL, or even a major portion of the deaths, were faked without any supporting evidence is well...absurd. Also I would need to see the original FOIA request and letters of supporting documentation to confirm your present allegations. Could you post a link or the actual documents please? Not just the spreadsheet but all of your communications pertaining to the documents.

I don't know if you are just overly enthusiastic or...? But it is beginning to sound like "no planes", and now we have "no deaths"? Is this what you are asking me to believe? No one died on 911?? Cmon Phil.




posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 






We were told after 9/11 that two different members of Alans family, thousands of miles apart, had visions at about 10AM on 9/11/2001 of Alan Beaven singing at the top of his lungs while he wrestled with people in a cockpit. And of course, even though no plane was recovered from Shanksville, they were able to still find Alan Beavens ring inside the cockpit where he was singing and wrestling Arabs. The whole Alan Beaven story is so thick you can spot it as fake simply by the overkill.

We were told that Alan Beaven was a former Scotland Yard prosecutor via USA Today and other news sources. We sent in a FOIA to Scotland Yard, and Alan Beaven was never a prosecutor for Scotland Yard. That was a lie.

We have also discovered fake victims at the Pentagon. You will recall seeing no body bags being pulled out of the Pentagon or carried away. You will not recall seeing any footage of ambulance after ambulance taking away the Pentagon dead.

We have discovered roughly 48 victims at the Pentagon that can be shown to be proven frauds through the digital data embedded on their memorial pictures. We are still working on some files but are going to be releasing these soon.

The fact of the matter is this; Nobody can verify a single death on 9/11. On a day which claimed thousands, what death did you see? Where? I am not claiming that nobody died. I am simply stating the facts, None of us saw any death on 9/11, even the "jumper footage" being released after 911, as best as I have seen.

We have to rely on a few bottlenecks to tell us the truth, chiefly the Chief Medical Examiners office in New York City. Frankly whatever it is they told us can be discarded because none of the other pieces fit.

The stark reality is that e have to take this source or that source at face value and as honest and credible, on whether people died on 9/11. Because none of us can independently verify a single death occurred.

Ask yourself this. Did Rudolph Guiliani conspire to murder thousands, 2800 of his fellow rich New York Banker friends? Did Rudi Guiliani, for a few bucks conspire to commit mass murder against 2800 people, many of which he would have known and probably been friends with?

Did Larry Silverstein & Frank Lowie conspire to commit mass murder against many of his banker friends which no doubt would have inhabited the buildings? For a few billion dollars we are to believe that Silverstein and Lowie were part of a plan for financial fraud and mass murder so they could make a few billion bucks?

Silverstein, Frank Lowie, Rudi Guiliani would no doubt have been friends with many of those people, those rich investment bankers at WTC.

Or is it more likely that they were part of a grand hoax? Whats easier, to plan a 30 year conspiracy like 911 and murder 3000 people? Or to plan a 30 year conspiracy where only the illusion of 3000 deaths would occur?

Question 1. How do you get tons of people to participate in a 30 year old conspiracy to commit 3000 murders?

Question 2. How do you get tons of people to participate in a 30 year conspiracy fake 3000 murders?

The answer to the first question is that you cannot get large numbers of people to participate in a 30 year conspiracy to murder 3000 people.

The answer to the second question is the " the 7 billion dollar victims compensation fund."

Question 1. How do you get large numbers of Corporations to participate in a 9/11 hoax?

Would normal corporations ever participate in such a grand hoax such as 9/11? The answer is a simple no. The answer lies in the fact that all of the major corporations above the impact zones are CIA proprietary corporations. Now ask yourself this. Would a bunch of CIA companies participate in a grand scale sized hoax such as 9/11?

And with that answer lies your solution to many perplexing issues of 9/11.

The victims compensation fund was initially set at 7 billion dollars. Many people are unaware of the fact that there was another, larger fund set up. The Business compensation fund. (BCF) It was a fund and an amount agreed upon and settled through government and Insurance companies to "offset the great losses" these companies suffered. The Business compensation fund (BCF) was 38.4 billion dollars!



Strauss,

I quoted what you were referring to so others know and so I don't have to write any of it again. I am not saying that there were no deaths. I do not know how many people died vs, how many were fakes. I have stated this. But investigations require conjecture, they cannot move one step without it.

And to be honest here, want people to answer the questions asked above. Do you actually think Rudi Guiliani, Frank Lowie and Larry Silverstein conspired to commit mass murder of 2800 fellow New Yorkers, many of which they were likely friends with, for money? For another 4 years as Mayor?

I want you guys to answer these questions. Because that's the claim of the entire "truther" movement. If 9/11 happened the way they told us, and I lost a family member, and then found the truth about it being an inside job, all I can say is people like Rudi Guiliani would have had to look over their shoulder everywhere they go for the rest of their lives... Someone would pop Guliani, a family member who lost someone, and found out Rudi conspired to murder their family member, or Silverstein, same thing.

I guarantee that if all those people were murdered in cold blood as we were told, that one of the family members would surely take out revenge on Silverstein and Guliani and many others. You can count on it.

We have proven many many fakes, and have more then we have made public awaiting release. 33% of the Pentagon victims can be proven false by the digital data on their pictures alone. 33%!!

We have proven probably about 35 fake passengers, not all of them released. And we have discovered many fake victims at the world trade center.

Were they all fake victims? I don't know. But after finding so many is it wrong for me to believe that perhaps this is the case? Isn't this what investigators do? I think the Fireman have also been shown to have serious credibility issues with their alleged deaths. Too many red flags and too many things wrong. The story begs investigation. And there was 45 billion dollars to go around to pay people off, pilfer and make the day go as planned, 30 years before or better. Fourty five billion dollars! That would sure provide a lot of incentive for people to be a part of something where perhaps even the death was an illusion.

But now, consider that the Towers were empty for nearly their entire lives. Then all of a sudden, right before 911, they became 95% occupied. And we are now discovering all sorts of problems with the alleged victims, and finding that the companies above the impact zones are all CIA proprietary corporations.


PRESS RELEASE: World Trade Center Occupancy FOIA PANYNJ * 1972-2001


Cheers-
Phil



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I really do not see the point of lying about victims. I also don't see your "six degrees of separation" adage as a valid point in this case either. I haven't seen any of the people I went to school with either in the past 20 years and I live in the same town. And besides, maybe you have but the subject never came up or you don't get out much. Either way, I see nothing to gain by lying about victims. People did die on that day and because there was a photograph with some questionable exif data =/= that victim did not die. I would leave the subject of victims well alone if I were you, if you want to be taken seriously, that is. There is enough data here to throw some serious doubt on the whole official story. Pick your battles and all that.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I really do not see the point of lying about victims.


The point of "Operation Northwoods" victims is simple.

Real victims often have family members who, when presented with ample evidence that something was not right with the story they have been told about their loved one's demise, would fight tooth and nail to the end of time for a remedy.

Unfortunately the 9/11 "families" have acted just as the Government would like them to.

There have been lawsuits which were highly publicized, then allowed to fade away. This gives the illusion that some of them are fighting for the truth, without giving up any truth.

Many of the families have concentrated on stopping terror, as if hijackers were involved, again doing the Guvmint's bidding.

The 9/11 family organizations have been the PTB's lapdogs, and have never ever caused one shred of truth to come forward.



If it was your mother/brother/sister/father/friend, you would want answers, not a bunch of medals and flag waving adoration. That stuff is for actors, not grievers.





)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Personally I don't get into speculating on the whodunnit. I am interested in facts supported by evidence. If enough facts are presented by credible sources there is a chance for a real investigation.

Could you supply links to the documentation for the FOIA request and responses??



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Personally I don't get into speculating on the whodunnit. I am interested in facts supported by evidence. If enough facts are presented by credible sources there is a chance for a real investigation.

Could you supply links to the documentation for the FOIA request and responses??


This doesn't have anything to do with "whodunnit" but it does have everything to do with what happened on 9/11 and how they accomplished their goals.

I would be happy to provide all the documentation, copies of the email screenshots and the original spreadsheet we received, but cannot do so no because I have no way of blacking out the personal email information on the screen shot. So if your able to do this, let me know, and I'll send it to you to edit out and black out that information.

Sound like a plan?

Thanks,
Phil


PRESS RELEASE: World Trade Center Occupancy FOIA PANYNJ * 1972-2001

And if your still hoping for an investigation then I am not sure what to tell you. There is no controlling legal authority in America. Period. You guys think that you can see there was bombs in the Towers, but the FBI is blind to this? WAKE UP!!
edit on 17-1-2011 by Phil Jayhan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
We believe it is changing the entire 911 paradigm and will change it completely.

Which 9/11 paradigm is that? It must be the one that exists only at "Let's Roll". Tell me, Phil, which legitimate 9/11 research organization supports anything that comes from your board? Which 9/11 research organization supports "pods", "fake victims", "no planes at the WTC", "low WTC occupancy"?

I don't see any factual, verifiable evidence for any of the above, nor do I see any of the following organizations promoting or supporting the above:

- Scientists for 9/11 Truth
- Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
- Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
- Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice
- 9/11 Blogger
- Journal of 9/11 Studies
- International Center for 9/11 Studies

When can we see your "work" at "Let's Roll' being promoted at the above legitimate research sites?



Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
All of the work becomes self evident once you start to see any aspect of the fraud.

Oh, we've seen the "work" be exposed as a fraud for many years. The "pod" has been debunked and shown as fraudulent, "no-planes" has been debunked and shown as fraudulent, "fake victims" has been debunked and shown as fraudulent.

Now, the "low occupancy at the WTC" fraud has been debunked and shown as fraudulent in this very thread, and you helped prove that yourself by admitting to one mistake, but not admitting to the others.


Real researchers take their information from multiple sources to create a picture and then present that picture in the form of facts or hypotheses. Not take a single source and profess it to be the almighty's word and that anything else that conflicts with it is wrong, and anyone that disagrees is "delusional".








edit on 17-1-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: because because because because because



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Apparently, we should all sit back and let "legitimate research sites" approved by Bonez only, do the researching and thinking for us.

Perhaps we can let them continue to chase the same old evidence round and round in circles, like they have in reality for the last few years.

We should sit and wait for a certain group to get a "new investigation", and stay out of it.

Here's a clue. Any "new investigation" will be done by a committee appointed by the same criminals who appointed the last Commission, and it will be chock full of patsies and cronies, with their hands tied behind their backs, just like the first one was.

Maybe we should just be content with the findings of the "old investigation", if we're going to be that naive.



Anyone who falls into the trap that the perps will ever investigate themselves, should also advocate that we disband the police department, and let all murderers investigate themselves.


Unfortunately, this is exactly what many of the "approved research sites" are about; rehash old evidence only, and only "approved" evidence, and ask for a new investigation.


Sounds more like gatekeeping to me.


Those open minded to research will not let themselves be herded into one of these cattle pens, by any of the assigned gatekeepers, and there are many.



So, by all means, consider only the info from an "approved research site", and you might as well believe the OS.





)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Interesting stuff regarding Barbara Arestegui, Phil. You say that lots of people rang the number and spoke to the Pentagon. Did you record any of those calls?

Bet you didn't.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Interesting stuff regarding Barbara Arestegui, Phil. You say that lots of people rang the number and spoke to the Pentagon. Did you record any of those calls?

Bet you didn't.


Recording Interstate telephone calls violates some State's Statutes. Individual States vary.



I personally made the call. It was just as advertised. I called after hours, however, and got the recording.




)


edit on 17-1-2011 by do2read because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by do2read
Those open minded to research will not let themselves be herded into one of these cattle pens, by any of the assigned gatekeepers, and there are many.

There's a very big difference between "research" and "misinformation/disinformation".

Research relies on fact-checking with multiple sources and verifying information before publishing that information. Every single available source on the net proves that the claims coming from your forum about low occupancy in the towers is false. Yet Mr. Jayhan waves his little FOIA document around like it's the word of the almighty and that it supersedes anything else claimed by any other source. All while admitting that there's at least one mistake in the FOIA document and not realizing that that brings the whole entire FOIA document under close scrutiny for other errors. And then Mr. Jayhan professes to call others "delusional" for not agreeing with his "interpretation" of the information.

That, my friend, is not research. Not in the least.



Originally posted by do2read
So, by all means, consider only the info from an "approved research site", and you might as well believe the OS.

And on the other side of that coin: according to you and Jayhan, everyone should only accept info from "Let's Roll Forums" and what's contained in the FOIA document because it is the only real proof of occupancy of the towers, and that all other sources claiming occupancy percentages are incorrect.

Yeah, I've got a problem with that part. Especially when every other source proves your claims wrong. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 



There's a very big difference between "research" and "misinformation/disinformation".


Your quite correct. We do legitimate research and all you do is misinform people.I know this is gunna come as a bug huge shock Bonzey, but we are all capable of thinking much better without you trying to give permission into what we can and cannot investigate.

Nobody needs your stinking permission to investigate anything. Where have all your pre-approved 911 people brought us to? Nowhere! Running in circles. Your right, they are the leaders, and they can also be rightly blamed for the entire mess of the 911 community. They are running it, "leading it" in circles! Never ending circles...

It's funny, the more you whine against something bonzey, the more the people here embrace it and accept it.

Care for some cheese with your whine?


Cheers-
Phil



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Yo Phil, seen the pod lately?

Having had a look at your board i'm now beginning to understand what your agenda is.


edit on 17-1-2011 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2011 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Yo Phil, seen the pod lately?

Having had a look at your board i'm now beginning to understand what your agenda is.


edit on 17-1-2011 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2011 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)



I think it is fairly obvious to all the readers and lurkers here what is happening. You guys can't really slam this like you would like or debunk it, so many are trying to simply shoot the messenger. I'll be honest here guys, this worked well for 9 years, shouting down people and all that. Worked like a charm

But magic time is over. And people everywhere are damned tired of people like you guys telling them what they can and can't believe. There's no reason for such tactics on anything, because people are smart enough to judge for themselves. And they want answers. And while thermite might solve 1% of the days issues, people everywhere want the other 99% of the truth.

We have obtained a legal document which shows that the world trade center was a literal paper tiger. A legend in our own minds. Barely occupied the entire life of the tower, and then end stacked with a miraculous 95% occupancy rating just prior to 911.

Mix this together with the fact that all the companies above the impact zone are CIA proprietary corporations, and this equates to both motive and opportunity.

Shooting at the messenger isn't gong to make this go away guys! We have legal proof. Legal documents. And they show the tower was empty nearly all of it's life, until right before 911.





PRESS RELEASE: World Trade Center Occupancy FOIA PANYNJ * 1972-2001


Cheers-
Phil



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
We do legitimate research and all you do is misinform people.

How is it legitimate research and not misinforming people when you profess that a "pod" is on Flight 175 when all available videos (42+) show no "pod" on the fuselage? Especially when that "pod" only turned out to be a wing fairing highlighted by the sun and shadows?

How is it legitimate research and not misinforming people when your forum promotes the "no planes at the WTC" hoax when all available witnesses and videos show that there were planes at the WTC?

How is it legitimate research and not misinforming people when you profess that many or most of the victims are "fake" when you have zero supporting, verifiable, factual evidence?

How is it legitimate research and not misinforming people when you profess that the towers were mostly vacant until not too long before 9/11 when all available sources contradict your claims, and while you fully admit to an error in your FOIA document, but won't admit to the possibility of other errors?



Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
all your pre-approved 911 people

Those "pre-approved 9/11 people" are Ph.D's, scientists, scholars, engineers, firefighters, politicians, and military personnel that number in the hundreds or even thousands. They are all professionals using the scientific standards and methods while remaining professional. They don't jump to conclusions and put forth something that goes against all other available sources, nor call someone names like "delusional" or a "whiner" when someone disagrees with their work.



Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
You guys can't really slam this like you would like or debunk it

It was already debunked here, here, and here.



Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
We have obtained a legal document which shows that the world trade center was a literal paper tiger. Barely occupied the entire life of the tower

Only in your opinion. Seeings how your "legal" document has admittedly one mistake, that brings the credibility of the rest of the document into question. Oh, and not to mention all of the other sources that prove your claims otherwise here, here, and here.



Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
We have legal proof. Legal documents. And they show the tower was empty nearly all of it's life, until right before 911.

And again, only your opinion which is based off of a document that has admitted mistakes in it.



Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
magic time is over.

Yes, yes it is.







edit on 17-1-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: typo



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   


And again, only your opinion which is based off of a document that has admitted mistakes in it.



First of all, opinions are based on things, not off of them.


Secondly these Professionals which you have put in charge of the truth (even sounds wierd doesn't it?) are not a lot different than the group of Professionals, with equal credentials I might add, who tell us the Official Story is true without a doubt.

That is some really poor logic. Again It's so because someone said, is useless no matter how many someones there are.


As for the previous rabbit holes which were left so that "experts" could argue about them forever, like pods, space beam weapons, etc., they are just that. Rabbit trails.


You failed to address any of my above questions about why the PA would present such a ficticious document, as you claim it to be.



For some reason, it really seems to bother someone that they gave us this information, regardless of its correctness. If someone at A&E had received it, would you still be chasing this poor logic?


Worst of all, you're missing the point, but it will require a little thinking.


Why would someone make such a request of the Port Authority? If one suspected something was not right with the tenants and contents, one might ask for something which would put the answerer on the spot. One might ask someone to produce records which would come easy and be accurate if they're real, and possibly otherwise if they're not. See, a little thinking, other than someone told me to think it.

The Thread at LRF contains posts where I immediately point out that there are clear conflicts between photos released in a recent NIST FOIA (also from LRF) showing placards on Floor 47 are drastically different than what the PA was telling us. That even illustrates a conflict betwen FOIAs! So no one is claiming the report to be accurate except the Port Authority, as they provided it as a legal document.


So you see, your attacks are missing the point.

Again, since you didn't respond above, why couldn't/wouldn't the PA have/give the accurate info as you see it?

Why would they provide this document you call lies, as a legal document?


I know, I know LRF is bad, that's all you got apparently. Guess you'll have to repeat it again now.




)
edit on 17-1-2011 by do2read because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Phil, take an advice from a professional pilot.
That pod contains the center tank and the landing gear, but of course someone have already told you that.

I've flown the B777, an owersized 767 and done the walkaround every day. The pod you're talking about is there too. Exept its not a pod that hide secret stuff, its just there to cover the usual stuff like landing gear and other stuff that do no good out there in the airstream.

Ivar over and out.


edit on 17-1-2011 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by do2read
You failed to address any of my above questions about why the PA would present such a ficticious document, as you claim it to be.

Do I look like the Port Authority? You should've asked them about the discrepancies before blurting out conspiracies.



Originally posted by do2read
If someone at A&E had received it, would you still be chasing this poor logic?

Absolutely. False information is false information no matter who publishes it. The 9/11 truth movement is about seeking the truth, not about protecting our assets.

Professing that it's a fact that Sandler O'Neill and Partners did not occupy or have a lease in the South Tower when all other sources say they did, is not the truth. It's false.

Professing that the towers were nearly empty for most of their lives when all other sources say otherwise, is not the truth. It's false.


Get the picture now?






edit on 17-1-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Wondering if there is anything to the story of the Mossad agents who where living in the buildings?
Remember the photo's with the room full of boxes? must be a thread around here somewhere that detailed what floor they had.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by do2read
You failed to address any of my above questions about why the PA would present such a ficticious document, as you claim it to be.

Professing that the towers were nearly empty for most of their lives when all other sources say otherwise, is not the truth. It's false.


Get the picture now?






edit on 17-1-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)


This is no different than saying; CNN, FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, PBS, ETC., all say Muslim
Hijackers did it, so it must be true, all the "sources" say so.

Again, very poor logic.



As far as the Gelatin B thing, they took lots of pictures of an empty floor 91, where there were supposed to be 6 tenants on 911.





)



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join