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: 6
62
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
I'm reading through this excellent thread and asking myself what is with this guy BONEZ.

Dude I feel very sorry for you. You either have an agenda or are seriously closed minded.

C'mon, how can a document like this FOIA of leases from the WTC (1972-2001) not be significant?

You continue to mock the relevance of this with asinine arguments.

From a new member's perspective it's extremely annoying.




posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever
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.


I beg your pardon. I will take and rip apart every single aspect regarding the events of 9-11 and....won't stop until things start making sense to me. Call me a rebel with a cause!!

If one area is known to be fabricated then, that gives me total license to question every single minutia of detail on that day.

So then tell me 'Mr-don't-question-the-victims' .....why aren't they ALL in the social security death index then? I loss a spouse, a mother, grandparents, friends and neighbors and they are ALL in that index. Not so with the victims on that day though.

You might choose to look the other way when faced with issues bigger than you can handle but I on the other hand, stand up and challenge everything when it doesn't bode well with me.

So don't tell me who will take me seriously or not. And those who don't...I don't need them on my side anyway. This isn't a popularity contest. It's going after the truth and unfortunately, I will lose some people along the way who don't agree in my plight!

I don't ever profess to know what's what with any certainty but I certainly have a LOT of reasonable doubt to question everything on that day that happened to change ALL OF OUR LIVES forever!



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


This is a little off topic but I need someone to please explain this to me and you seem like the right person to ask. So if you don't mind


How did the government get all these videos that are just now, being released? Were they confiscated? Did people voluntarily turn them over? If the latter why haven't I heard anyone say "the Feds took my tape and won't give it back?"years ago?

I've been asking this for months and no one seems to address this.

Thanks Phil!



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


This is a little off topic but I need someone to please explain this to me and you seem like the right person to ask. So if you don't mind


How did the government get all these videos that are just now, being released? Were they confiscated? Did people voluntarily turn them over? If the latter why haven't I heard anyone say "the Feds took my tape and won't give it back?"years ago?

I've been asking this for months and no one seems to address this.

Thanks Phil!



Camera planet told people to send in their video footage on 9/11/01. This is what happened to the footage IMO. The news sources asked for it, then confiscated it and would not return the footage.

Some were confiscated IMO. But most were willingly sent in to the WRONG people who then took the footage and buried it. Does this answer make sense or help any?

Cheers-
phil



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
This is ground breaking research. Outstanding work Phil!

It is becoming more and more clear that 9/11 was a huge staged Hollywood-type event:

• NO plane at the Pentagon
• NO plane at Shanksville
• WTC 1 & 2 demolished with explosives
• WTC 7 demolished with explosives
• WTC 6 demolished by unknown means
• UNKNOWN planes at WTC 1 & 2
• FAKE passengers and suspect crew members on the flights
• SUSPECT victims at the Pentagon
• SUSPECT and MISSING victims in New York
• SUSPECT and MISSING firefighters

Now add SUSPECT and MISSING tenants in WTC 1 & 2!

Where is the supposed 95% occupancy for the Towers?

There is a huge financial scam for victim and business payouts that is being revealed.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by do2read

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)


So let me get this straight. You think the government is up to its neck in a fraud so massive it has led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and the misappropriation of billions of dollars, but you're not prepared to break a small law created by that corrupt government?

I suppose that your extraordinary timidity means we'll just have to take your word for it. How convenient.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Did I touch a nerve?

Face it, you can say you phoned a number as many times as you like, but you've zero evidence that you did.

And from what is a pretty extraordinary post I'd say it's not me who sounds like he's whining.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:28 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


Thanks, Phil, for showing your true colors. Do you think people will take your "work" seriously when you sit there and call them names? You have shown you can't handle the criticism.

That's one of the many reasons why you and your forum have had ZERO credibility in the 9/11 truth movement.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan



Camera planet told people to send in their video footage on 9/11/01. This is what happened to the footage IMO. The news sources asked for it, then confiscated it and would not return the footage.

Some were confiscated IMO. But most were willingly sent in to the WRONG people who then took the footage and buried it. Does this answer make sense or help any?

Cheers-
phil



That's what I thought happened or something along those lines but has anyone, to your knowledge, publicly complained about it when it happened (and is on record)?

I know you'll agree with this, but I remember thinking how little videos and vantage points we were being shown for the first few years. I kept thinking there were millions of people in and around Manhattan, NJ, Brooklyn and Staten Island so surely we'd see a slew of different videos.
But that never happened. We kept seeing the same media (and the Naudet Brothers) footage over and over again

Then little by little, a personal video would creep up on YouTube (still wondering to myself, where has THAT been all this time).
And now..................there are hundreds of videos released and all apparently under the FOIA.

Why would the government or whoever you cited: Camera planet want them?
After all, It was a slam dunk case, right?
19 Arabs
2 planes
3 buildings
Shock and awe.

So, what more was there to see (according to the Feds)?

If they took my video, I'd make so much noise....I'd probably be famous by now. So why didn't anyone else make a fuss?

Thanks


Oh....that frozen jumper? Weird, huh? I don't know what to make of it. Ah, just par for the course for that entire day anyway!



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Surgeon

Where is the supposed 95% occupancy for the Towers?



Not that I welcome yet another piece of the story not to fit cause LORD KNOWS we have enough inconsistencies as is but, where or who said the buildings were 95% occupied?

I think that FOIA document, showing the tenants moving in in late 90's is completely wrong. Because the Windows on the World is completely wrong. So if piece of data is wrong then why not the rest?

But putting that to the side for a moment, I'm not comprehending the point. What's the 'bigger' picture here that some of you are purporting happened?
Insurance fraud?
Opportunity to place the explosives?
Both?


I personally believe the WTCs and Sear Towers were built with explosives already in place for future demolition. Some Russian scientist brought that scenario forward and for me (anyway) it just stuck. It makes sense.
It wasn't told to the tenants for more 'curb-side appeal' so they'd rent out the space.

I think the intentional fires set off the explosive and well, the rest is history.

WTC 7? That almost certainly had pre-placed explosives IMO since it's inception.
Come on. They had to have a way of getting rid of highly classified records just in case they got into the wrong hands. So I have very little doubt that that building wasn't built that way too.

They're not admitting to it because it'll draw too much attention to the other towers demise.
So the truth stays buried and the lies continue status quo..... (to the point where half the world goes out of their mind because we see right through the bull)
Divide and conquer the minion. That method of controlling the masses, worked for millennium.
2001 was no difference. See: PNAC
edit on 18-1-2011 by Human_Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Phil Jayhan
 


It might be worth invoking the FOIA on the occupancy of similar buildings to see if they had similar overnight occupancies. If this was happening in other large office buildings it may show that it was a real estate boom.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Excuse you indeed. I am not telling you what to do. You lose credibility when you start to doubt people died on that day. It is really unnecessary as there is so much REAL evidence about that CAN be proved. You are trying to prove something that has no real relevance to the events of that day. Again, pick your battles.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Lebowski achiever
 


But in all due respect (because I really like you and your posts) if people are coming up 'alive' why wouldn't that be an area of concern?

I don't doubt for a moment people were killed that day. I do wonder however, if what we've been told is 100% true and there.....lays the problem.

Why would the government, in any aspect, for any reason.....lie to us? (See: previous knowledge of September 11th and WMD)

If the excuse is 'disinformation' or wrong information then I'd say, the government isn't doing a very good job and perhaps should find a better vocation. Like meter maid! Because that little 'faux pas' (of weapons of mass destruction) cost many MANY life's and a war that's STILL going on.

And September 11th brought into my world, the Patriot Act among other freedom-ending ramifications.

I would like the opportunity to do something wrong....just ONCE in my life, and be exonerated for 'not knowing better or having wrong information'.
That must be a wonderful trump card to have and to hold (and play with).


edit on 18-1-2011 by Human_Alien because: grammar



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by The Surgeon

Where is the supposed 95% occupancy for the Towers?



Not that I welcome yet another piece of the story not to fit cause LORD KNOWS we have enough inconsistencies as is but, where or who said the buildings were 95% occupied?

I think that FOIA document, showing the tenants moving in in late 90's is completely wrong. Because the Windows on the World is completely wrong. So if piece of data is wrong then why not the rest?

But putting that to the side for a moment, I'm not comprehending the point. What's the 'bigger' picture here that some of you are purporting happened?
Insurance fraud?
Opportunity to place the explosives?
Both?


I personally believe the WTCs and Sear Towers were built with explosives already in place for future demolition. Some Russian scientist brought that scenario forward and for me (anyway) it just stuck. It makes sense.
It wasn't told to the tenants for more 'curb-side appeal' so they'd rent out the space.

I think the intentional fires set off the explosive and well, the rest is history.

WTC 7? That almost certainly had pre-placed explosives IMO since it's inception.
Come on. They had to have a way of getting rid of highly classified records just in case they got into the wrong hands. So I have very little doubt that that building wasn't built that way too.

They're not admitting to it because it'll draw too much attention to the other towers demise.
So the truth stays buried and the lies continue status quo..... (to the point where half the world goes out of their mind because we see right through the bull)
Divide and conquer the minion. That method of controlling the masses, worked for millennium.
2001 was no difference. See: PNAC
edit on 18-1-2011 by Human_Alien because: (no reason given)


Around 06:00
www.youtube.com...

This is also sick.....interview with Thomas-Scott Gordon.
arcticbeacon.com...

He talks about; Controlled Demolition inc, What happend to the original WTC 1&2 blueprints,
a company installed a new sprinkler system 'TWICE' in a row, they took 10 years to do that,
he explains how the airplane "possible" was done and he did a interview with a reporter
who was killed one week later!

I believe in this stuff.....i think it's-not-everybody-heard-it-on-the-web-stuff.


edit on 18-1-2011 by FemaF4Fotoshop because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by FemaF4Fotoshop
 


Thanks! I'm listening to the audio right now.

As for the YouTube, that's what I believe too although I have no idea who that person is.

I don't think the towers were were constructed with explosives for sinister reasons (rather, a quick way of taking down 1000-tall buildings when the time came when they were "old and in the way"----quoting Jerry Garcia there!).

I'll comment on the audio if something strikes me.
I appreciate you turning me onto this. Thanks again



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Excuse you indeed. I am not telling you what to do. You lose credibility when you start to doubt people died on that day. It is really unnecessary as there is so much REAL evidence about that CAN be proved. You are trying to prove something that has no real relevance to the events of that day. Again, pick your battles.


I'm still doubting whether Andy Kaufman (comedian) and Michael Jackson died so......it's just in my nature.

I'll direct you to a recently closed thread (because it was found fraudulent) after 21 pages when I pegged and came to the SAME conclusion after only 8 pages (and I didn't have the tools used that determined this guy was a troll)

So my point is, my hunches are usually very good. I'd say over 50 years my average of detecting and being aware of things that the average person isn't...is about 8.5 times out of 10!
So my feeling about September 11th is...............it was the biggest CON JOB second to Vietnam, third to Pearl Harbor.

I implore you to read up on Operation Northwood. It'll open your eyes and show exactly the extent our government will go to and is capable of!



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FemaF4Fotoshop
 



Thank you FemaF4Fotoshop. Interesting interview!!


Although the videos I enclose show the name "Manhattan Demolition" (opposed to Control Demolition Inc like the speaker said) I am almost totally on board with this guy!
I still believe the buildings were built with demolition capabilities but who knows....

The sight of a demolition truck in Manhattan while the two towers were burning is right up there with "Why was FEMA there on Sept 10th too?





@2;55



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
The sight of a demolition truck in Manhattan while the two towers were burning is right up there with "Why was FEMA there on Sept 10th too?

Actually, it's not. That Manhattan Demolition truck is just a trash truck, not a demolitions truck with explosives inside ready to be deployed.

There are construction projects every single day in many places in NYC. Manhattan Demolition doesn't even do many actual demolitions. They mostly clean up work sites, construction sites, and demolition sites, hence the trash truck. And they don't do demolitions with explosives. Mostly with just machinery.

How do I know? I called them and posted it at Loose Change forums. Others have called also.







edit on 18-1-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join