Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"'Cause No One Wants To Blow Up Jersey..."

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   
This is a very interesting highly redacted interview of EMT Patricia Ondrovic who was on site on 9-11 and barely escaped alive.

graphics8.nytimes.com...

Here's a link to the entire NY Times archive of interviews. I've read most of them but this is one of the few that is so blacked out. One has to wonder why... In any event, this is history and there's a lot here that never made it into the Ommission Report.

graphics8.nytimes.com...



As I was running up here, two or three more cars exploded on me. They weren't near any buildings at that point, they were just parked on the street. The traffic guys hadn't gotten a chance to tow anything yet, cause this was all during the first hour I guess of this thing happening. So there were still cars parked on the street that were completely independent of that. Three cars blew up on me, stuff was being thrown. I went home all bruised that day. Thank God it was only bruises. I just ran into this park along with a bunch of other people, and stuff was still blowing up, I don't think I looked back, but you couldn't see anything, everything was just black. I was running and I was falling over people, cause people were crawling on the ground cause they couldn't see anymore. I just kept on running north. I could smell water, so I just kept on running towards the water, cause I knew that my coat was on fire, and I figured well, if I can see a boat over the water, I'm just gonna jump onto the boat and take that thing to Jersey, cause no one wants to blow up Jersey. Stuff is still blowing up behind me, as I'm running. I can hear stuff exploding. I could hear rumbling, the street under me was moving like I was in an earthquake. I've been in those, so I know what they feel like. It felt like an earthquake.




I saw something in the sky, it was a plane, but it was way out. It looked like it was over Jersey or something, then it wasn't there anymore. I saw a small fireball, and it was gone. I saw two other planes. One came in one way, and the other came in the other way, and there was a plane in the middle that was way far off in the distance. Then the plane in the middle just disappeared into a little fire ball. It looked like the size of a golf ball from where I could see it. And the other two planes veered off into opposite directions.




posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
WTH?! Well, it's true....I'm from jersey. Nothing here to give a crap about....but wait....what was up with the disappearing plane???? That was interesting!!!! He's saying a plane was blown up?? Odd..... TY for posting OP...VERY INTERESTING!



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Look her up and come back with your findings.

No images, no videos, not 1 youtube video.

Look her up with nytimes or Reuters, etc, nothing.

Its a very Interesting story, but absolutely nothing to back it up. Not even on an Ats search.



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by WeBrooklyn
 


I found this....

www.google.com...:en-US
fficial&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by baddmove
 


Sure, I saw that too, I mean a site other than a blog. A site a little more mainstream....


Can you find an image of her then? Im still looking....

Edit to add, Im starting to believe her story, It seems that she may have moved and has just been living a private life...

What a traumatic experience
edit on 6-6-2013 by WeBrooklyn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 06:05 PM
link   
It was right out of the NY Times archives, interviews that were done immediately after the fact. I don't know how you would verify some private citizen otherwise. There's a good chance she's ill or gone now considering what she was exposed to, that air was some of the most toxic ever, and there's the radiation exposure (yes, I believe the towers were taken down with mini-nukes. Nothing else fits the evidence.



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by signalfire
 


Very interesting find. Since so much effort was spent in vilifying and declaring Dr.Judy Wood insane despite her qualifications and her beam theory, I can't help but think this poor woman didn't stand a chance. I hope she is in hiding.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by signalfire
(yes, I believe the towers were taken down with mini-nukes. Nothing else fits the evidence.


Where are you when everyone else is mocking 'debunkers' for trying to suggest people actually believe in this. I actually think this is pretty good now. We have signalfire who believes in micro-nukes and Another_Nut who believes in some sort of exotic beam weaponry.

They are of course both ridiculous guesses that don't match up at all but at least you can prove that your beliefs are not something people like me just make up.

Seriously though, any nuclear detonation would have been far more noticeable than any other solution for demolishing the towers. What evidence specifically makes you think it was 'micronukes'?



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by aboutface
reply to post by signalfire
 


Very interesting find. Since so much effort was spent in vilifying and declaring Dr.Judy Wood insane despite her qualifications and her beam theory, I can't help but think this poor woman didn't stand a chance. I hope she is in hiding.


She didn't stand a chance, she is a dentist jumping to assumptions about a technique promoted by a charlatan whos evidence is based entirely around looking at pictures and guessing.

I'm sorry but there's never been any validity to her research, she lost all credibility when she dismissed energy requirements of her theory as not being very important.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Agreed. IMO, the nukes theory is at best very far fetched, and has no evidence.

I go along with the majority view inasmuch that a deliberate series of demolition charges brought all three towers down on 9/11, but why would terrorists (whether they are domestic posing as elected or appointed officials or otherwise) re-invent the wheel to bring down large buildings?

Why would particle beams or mini-nukes be required, when the best tool for bringing buildings down was what was actually discovered in the dust and residues on the remaining steel beams that were tested - namely Thermate.

Military grade, nano-thermite generates lots of Sulphur residue and nano particles of Iron rich spherules and unburnt nano-Thermite particulates...which is exactly what was discovered in recovered dust and beam samples tested.

The towers, all three of them were demolished using military grade Thermite, Thermate.

The aircraft were used as a cover for this, well at least on two of the WTC towers they were.

The question in my mind is not how the destruction was achieved, the case and evidence for how is pretty solid, but why.

For Thermate to have worked, the buildings had to be rigged with strategically placed cutting and vapourising charges in advance.

Most theories concerned over when this happened center on periods just weeks before 9/11 when 'upgrades and remodelling' was supposedly being carried out to the towers, entire floors and whole sections of the buildings were closed off to tennants and staff.

Unmarked vans, in convoy were seen leaving after staff had left and before cleaning staff arrives for the morning shifts.

There was ample opportunity to have teams plant the charges and remote detonators, so exactly when is open to discussion, as any one of those periods could have been when.

But...is it possible there is another, secret reason for when the explosives were planted? A reason that would also go some way to explaining the Government acting as suspiciously as they have done over the entire 9/11 episode, including odd and inexplicable things like NIST reports that make absolutely no sense in the physical reality we live in, or FBI rushing around grabbing every piece of CCTV footage, cell phone footage and mall security camera they could find, including 60 or so CCTV cameras covering every inch of the airspace around the Pentagon...which still haven't been released despite the time that has passed, and that 9/11 is considered a closed case -Terrorists did it, and that's the end of it type of deal, would ordinarily be thought of as a cloised case...so where are the recordings from all these cameras?

What could this secret reason be?

Why would it cause the Government to act as it has done, and to endorse a report that doesn't make sense to professionals who say the report is nuts and full of holes?

Perhaps, it's becuase the Government, like many other's around the world all share a secret that 99.99% of people have absolutely NO idea about, and it was hoped they never would know.

Explosives are planted in every important government, scientific, financial and large private sector constuctions around the country, probably around most Western countries, even believe it or not even in neutral Switzerland, under residential streets...right under peoples feet in everyday streets and in public and large private buildings.

Very true, and very verifiable folks.

A cold war relic of burning the boats, destroying major infrastructure to deny an invading enemy usage of those facilities.

The public would go nuts if they knew their children are playing over huge explosives and caches of demolition charges that would bring a building down on them if it looked as though an enemy was going to overrun the US.

As good a reason to put a lid on as any.

If this is so, and it looks as though it might be, it in no way means there wasn't a conspiracy involving government and security services elements planning to bring the buildings down, but it does go some way to explaining some of the more strange elements of the OS and seeming coyness shown by Pres Bush and Cheney, for example only agreeing to testify in a closed door session, and only then if they can hold hands and be questioned together.

A US president, not able to answer questions by himself? And only in secret, despite the topic concerning every US citizen alive? Very strange.

What would it have meant to have had to admit to planting cold war era demo charges in major buildings throughout the US (and elsewhere)?

For a start, it would mean admitting to endangering the lives of people that used those building daily, second it would allow future attackers to factor such information into potential attack plans, using the hidden explosives against the US and lastly, would mean billions spent on removing them from all over the USA.

It's possible.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX
Why would particle beams or mini-nukes be required, when the best tool for bringing buildings down was what was actually discovered in the dust and residues on the remaining steel beams that were tested - namely Thermate.

The best tool? Really? I think normal shaped charges is a better tool. In fact as there's no verified evidence of any building ever being taken down by Thermate then this is really an odd claim to make.


Military grade, nano-thermite generates lots of Sulphur residue and nano particles of Iron rich spherules and unburnt nano-Thermite particulates...which is exactly what was discovered in recovered dust and beam samples tested.

The towers, all three of them were demolished using military grade Thermite, Thermate.

Military grade thermite is not 'nano thermite' or 'nano thermate'. This points to a misunderstanding of reality, which is pretty typical if you get all of your information on this from conspiracy sources.


For Thermate to have worked, the buildings had to be rigged with strategically placed cutting and vapourising charges in advance.

No such thing as a 'vapourising charge'


Unmarked vans, in convoy were seen leaving after staff had left and before cleaning staff arrives for the morning shifts.

After staff had left? The towers were 24/7. They didn't close, nor were they in shifts. Again more misunderstanding entirely based on conspiracy theories.


including 60 or so CCTV cameras covering every inch of the airspace around the Pentagon...which still haven't been released despite the time that has passed

Nope, the actual number (85) of tapes and the details of what they contain are well known. The CCTV cameras you're talking about were released like 9 years ago.


Why would it cause the Government to act as it has done, and to endorse a report that doesn't make sense to professionals who say the report is nuts and full of holes?

This is just nonsense. A few engineers do have issue with the report, but there's pretty much no published criticisms in the literature. There are in fact many confirmations and even groups like CTBUH endorse NIST. Once again it seems you are only reading conspiracy sites.


Explosives are planted in every important government, scientific, financial and large private sector constuctions around the country, probably around most Western countries, even believe it or not even in neutral Switzerland, under residential streets...right under peoples feet in everyday streets and in public and large private buildings.

Very true, and very verifiable folks.

A cold war relic of burning the boats, destroying major infrastructure to deny an invading enemy usage of those facilities.

Then the explosives would have gone off, in the sense that they decay over time and 40 years is more than enough.


It's possible.

When you hear hooves, think horses.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Judy Woods is NOT a dentist, so there goes any insight an above poster might have otherwise. Talk about poor research skills, it took me all of 3 seconds to debunk that. That's really scary, y'know? How clueless IS everyone, after 12 years? What, have you got her confused with that Orly character and the Obama birth certificate kerfluffle?

I've done over 1000 hours on this topic, reading, pouring over the finally released 9-11 tapes both FAA and EMT responders, etc. The evidence is overwhelming that while thermite may have been used to cut some of the heavier beams especially in the lower floors, it COULD NOT POSSIBLY have produced the effects seen. There is no such thing in my research a 'disintegrating charges' in thermite. It's a cutting charge and not enough of an explosive to produce that much damage in ~10 seconds flat. Even thousands of pounds of the stuff couldn't do it. The buildings would have looked like magnesium-bright torches and that's not what we saw.

Here's the gist of my research and I'll not answer any more questions. To my mind (and that's all that counts to me because I'm not responsible for the rest of you and your cognitive dissonance issues or lack of research skills), nukes are the only weapon currently available that produces the effects seen. I'm not discussing 'super secret military weapons or space based wowie-zowie weapons' because I have no information on them and neither does Judy Woods. She's simply speculating but some of her research, especially the photos of toasted cars, is germane and highly educational.

It's already been stated by many other people that no office contents of any kind were found in the rubble. Look at the pictures; not only is there no 'pancaked floors' seen, which any kind of gravity collapse would produce, but there are literally NO desks, room dividers, telephones, chairs, vending machines or toilets in the rubble; there should have been 10s of thousands of each. There was ONE filing cabinet found in a sub basement and the paper in it was still legible although the metal was highly warped. Then there's the 'horseshoe beam' and the 'meteorite'; thermite does not explain them. The cement floors were turned instantaneously into dust by way of the residual water content in them boiling and exploding. Thermite doesn't do that.

The final straw is the sustained heat in the basement. Thermite reacts and then that's it. In a few seconds, it's over. Whereas with any nuke, there's residual fission for weeks-months afterwards and that is the only (known) explanation for the sustained high heat in the lower levels. It cannot be explained by extremely low oxygen office content fires, especially not when millions of gallons of water was being thrown on it. Fission will continue apace in the presence of water. Regular fires will not and they certainly don't get up to blast furnace heat levels in a low oxygen environment. Ask a foundry worker. There was an increased reading of radiation in the days afterwards but you have to really hunt down that information. For obvious reasons the EPA wanted everyone to think the 'air was safe to breathe' and this was just one lie of many.

Here's my 20 second explanation: Look at a picture of the towers in mid-collapse. The outside aluminum cladding and heavy beams are exploding outwards hundreds of feet with tremendous force calculated at more than 50 mph. The interior building contents including floor pans, desks and people are being turned into dust instantaneously. And that black smoke you see rising from the center is the massive steel core beams being molecularly disintegrated. It's a mushroom cloud, just not the kind we're used to seeing. Mini-nukes, probably every other floor, detonated by remote control in sequence. It was a live snuff film to produce a 'revenge' mentality in people and was not done by hijackers or people living on the other side of the world in caves. That's ludicrous and a child can see it.

Ed Ward's blog has a very highly researched article about the topic of nukes and 9-11, feel free to read it if you're truly interested in the topic and not just here to debunk in service to the govt or your own issues.

edwardmd.wordpress.com...



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by signalfire
Judy Woods is NOT a dentist, so there goes any insight an above poster might have otherwise. Talk about poor research skills, it took me all of 3 seconds to debunk that.


You should have spent more time than 3 seconds.

Google: judy wood dentist
edit on 7-6-2013 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


Apparently some of her research was in materials science, which may have had dental applications. That's a far cry from 'dentist'.

Here's the entire bio from her website, three seconds away:

Brief Biographical Sketch for
Judy D. Wood, Ph.D.

Website: drjudywood.com...
email: lisajudy [at] nctv.com


Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photomechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry in forensic science. She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers and journal publications in her areas of expertise.

In the time since 9/11/01, she has applied her expertise in materials science, image analysis and interferometry, to a forensic study of over 40,000 images, hundreds of video clips, a large volume of witness testimony, analyses of dust samples, seismic data, and the analysis of other environmental evidence pertaining to the destruction of the World Trade Center complex. Dr. Wood has conducted a comprehensive forensic investigation of what physically happened to the World Trade Center site on 9/11. And, based on her analysis of the evidence she gathered, in 2007, she filed a federal Qui Tam case for science fraud against the contractors who contributed to the official National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report about the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. This case was filed in the US Supreme Court in Dec 2009. To this day, Dr. Wood's investigation and body of evidence as compiled in her book is the only comprehensive forensic investigation in the public domain. WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? is not a book of poetry, yet it has some beautiful prose. It is not a novel yet it tells a complete story. It is not a photography book, yet the pictures will grab you. It is not just a text book, yet its data is empirical and it teaches critical thinking. It is not the Bible yet it will be one of the most important books you will ever read.
Is this what Eisenhower warned us of?

Figure 1. My intellectual integrity prevents me from calling this a collapse. This is why I have chosen to stand up. My conscience leaves me no other choice.

Dr. Wood received her

B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),
M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and
Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.
Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bimaterial joints. She has taught courses including
Experimental Stress Analysis,
Engineering Mechanics,
Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials)
Strength of Materials Testing
Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division, and has served on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division.
From 1999 to 2006 Dr. Wood has been an assistant professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Clemson University in Clemson, South Carolina. Before moving to Clemson she spent three years as a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Tech.

One of Dr. Wood's research interests is biomimicry, or applying the mechanical structures of biological materials to engineering design using engineering materials. Other recent research has investigated the deformation behavior of materials and structures with complex geometries and complex material properties, such as fiber-reinforced composite materials and biological materials. Dr. Wood is an expert in the use of moiré interferometry, a full-field optical method that is used in stress analysis, as well as materials characterization and other types of interference. In recent years, Dr. Wood and her students have developed optical systems with various wavelengths and waveguides. Dr. Wood has over 60 technical publications in refereed journals, conference proceedings, and edited monographs and special technical reports.

edit on 7-6-2013 by signalfire because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
There is a Judy Wood who is a dental hygienist and I suppose if you look long enough you may even find a dentist with the same name, but it's a pretty common name. I'd go with Judy Wood's own website as to her education, training and credentials, as well as what she spends her day doing. It doesn't appear to be filling cavities.

Really people, is this so hard? My OP wasn't about Wood, in any event.



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 08:30 AM
link   
It could mean something - or nothing: missing on the list - and on the server - are the Files Nos. 9110096, 9110276, 9110324, 9110358 and 9110481.
edit on 8-6-2013 by Akareyon because: my mistake



posted on Jun, 11 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by signalfire
 


That was NOT a nytimes archive, you saw nytimes on the link, but I think if you look a little deeper, you'll see it's not.



posted on Jun, 11 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeBrooklyn
reply to post by signalfire
 


That was NOT a nytimes archive, you saw nytimes on the link, but I think if you look a little deeper, you'll see it's not.


It's true, the NYT just published them. These are transcripts of in-person interviews with most first responders ASAP after the event.

Still, there's no doubting their credibility.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by signalfire
 


Nukes
No pancaked floors
Dr Judy Wood


Nukes no radiation , no EMP , no heat blast means NO NUKES.

Dr Judy (Death ray ) Wood enough said


Pancaked Floors Pictures 2 and 3 on this link below


www.stevespak.com...

You can see truss steel, deck steel cables etc.

What brought the towers down , impact damage, fires, an unfortunate floor design and their own mass.

Do you honestly think tens of thousand of tons of falling concrete and steel is not a problem you should try this then which I have posted on another thread.

Lets see if you want to look at a 10KG weight falling?

(WARNING DON'T EVEN TRY IT)

If you had to stop the 10kg weight falling 3.3 mtrs (WTC floor height) within a 10cm or 0.1mtr distance then again in a 1cm or 0.01 mtr distance what would be the avg impact force.

I will give you some choices if stopped in 10cm or 0.1 mtr is the avg force

10kg 100kg or more

if stopped in 1cm or 0.01 mtrs is the avg force

100 kg 1000kg or more.

Now many of the angle cleats that the floor trusses rested on were sheared and were about 25mm thick or 0.025 mtrs many of the bolts were sheared they were about 16mm dia or about 0.016mtrs, all solid metal and many of them for each floor slab and they didn't stop the mass falling.

So post your answers and lets see


I will then give you the results and how to work them out yourself.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


There was 110 floors times two buildings (we'll leave building 7 out of it for now).

Where's the rest if those are pancaked floors? You should be able to count 110 floors, with tens of thousands of desks, computers, chairs and over 1000 missing bodies in between. They're not there. A large portion of the buildings are missing.

And there was ample evidence of multiple EMPs that day, including the car engines (not gas tanks) bursting into flames and the odd way some cars were burnt on one side and pristine on the other. I found evidence for it and I'm sure you will also, if you bother. Remember that nukes can be built in any size, yield and radiation signature. The EMP effect would have been extremely localized in nukes that were designed to just take out a few floors at a time. These are weapons in use by the military far more than anyone wants to admit; this is not an isolated incidence, in other words.

They knew how much steel they took out of the rubble because it was sold by weight. At least a third of the building was simply missing; it was turned into those 'iron spheres' you find in the dust. To get that result, you need to both melt the steel as well as turn it instantaneously into an airborne liquid. Calculate the energy required to achieve that, it's not kinetic (gravity) and it's not from the fire up at the top, either.

Fission is the only answer for all the effects seen and there are no anomalies that are not explained by fission. Thermite fails that test except as I already stated, being used to cut larger beams in the lower floors, and fire plus gravity is utterly ludicrous as a cause. If you're that worried about fire 'weakening' steel after less than an hour, be careful the next time you fire up your barbecue.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join