Analysis of the New York Times FDNY Interviews. Who SAW and HEARD Planes?

Hot off the presses, a new article by Andrew Johnson:

"Going in Search of Planes in NYC"

For the first time, the WTC Task Force interviews of FDNY/EMS personnel undergo a full analysis to determine how many saw and/or heard planes, and where they were. The collection of data is scientific, and is admissible in a Court of Law.

Bellow are the first three paragraphs of the report. See the link for the full document:
www.checktheevidence.co.uk...


Content From External Source:
====================================
As we continue to delve into what happened on Sept 11 2001, we seem to be uncovering more evidence that some very strange things were happening near and at the World Trade Center in New York City when the towers were destroyed.

A re-examination of videos of the plane crashes and both the actual destruction of the towers and the aftermath seems to strongly suggest or even prove that (a) unconventional weaponry destroyed the towers and (b) the stories of large planes hitting the towers are bogus. For (a) one can simply ask “Where did the building go?” (and no, it wasn’t “into the basements”). For (b) one can simply ask “How can a hollow tube made of light materials cut through multiple steel girders, with little or no deceleration?”

A repeated pondering of the answers to questions (a) and (b) can lead on to a re-examination of other data about 9/11. Such a re-examination of existing data was proposed by Attorney Jerry Leaphart, in September 2007. Jerry brought to our attention the accounts / “oral histories” as given by over 500 Emergency Service “First Responders” to the 9/11 Tragedy, as posted on the New York Times Website, at the link given below.

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


Your theory refutes itself.

If your going to say there is NO PLANES, then one can say there was NO WTC. The towers were done in by energy beams the night before and holograms were put there instead when everyone was hypnotized and brainwashed so as not to notice.

The theory of no planes has a logical conclusion. That 9/11 never happened! That is the road you are on.

Let's see, we take away the planes, then we take away the towers, then we take away everything.

Now of course you will claim there were real towers there that day.

But really no-one should believe you. Since according to your logic We are All brainwashed---So what exactly are you trying to prove? You can't prove there wasn't planes because in so doing the theory self-refutes itself. Your logical conclusion will be there was no 9/11.


Again.....WHERE ARE THE LARGE NUMBERS OF NEW YORKERS yelling as loud as they do in Yankee Stadium claiming there were NO PLANES???

We should see this right after the events.
We should see numerous entries online.
calls to Radio Shows the week of 9/11.

So if your going to sit back and say there were no planes, then deal with the people who will come along and say.....

Guess what CB_Brooklyn is just AI. He is just a program. Even if you see him/her in the flesh, guess what he is a droid.

Then you will get the people who will agree with you that no planes were used, then they will come out and say'....9/11 wasn't real either!

Its ridiculous. With such widespread claims of conspiracy to the point every single camera man is in on it and every single media outlet as well as all of New York being quiet, this theory has no life.


So to the person sitting on the fence watching all of this. Challenge people like CB.

Ask him to put up videos that are *NOT ON YOUTUBE* and point to the original source archive.

Then also remember since he believes you are brainwashed to doubt what he says, because he could be part of the brainwashing! Then while your at it ask him how did the military control so many amateur cameras that day? With such control of the media, ask him why they have no control over him??




[edit on 3-10-2007 by talisman]

Originally posted by talisman
Again.....WHERE ARE THE LARGE NUMBERS OF NEW YORKERS yelling as loud as they do in Yankee Stadium claiming there were NO PLANES.

We should see this right after the events.
We should see numerous entries online.
Numerious calls to Radio Shows that week.

My God you are unbelievable! Where are the millions of Americans demanding justice right now? How come CNN's Larry King Live isn't being flooded with hundreds of calls every minute during airtime of the show?

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


CB_Brooklyn

Its not unbelievable. You are not being controlled and are allowed to speak. The military apparently is in so much control and yet I see people like killtown making his rounds and putting up blogs and so forth.

Therefore There is no logical reason as to why I am not seeing an incredible amount of New Yorkers speaking and going ballistic about how the media faked the planes.

I don't understand the whole no plane theory. I really wish I could get more information on it and come to understand all sides of it. But still, how can people claim that there were no planes? I saw people falling from the towers. How could holograms project these imense images, from all angles? I just can't believe it to be possible. Please prove the no planes theory so that I can understand further.

I think this subject has been settled in a different thread here on ATS. The footage in this thread clearly depict the airplane hitting the second tower and a piece of the plane killing a individual on the street below.

What more evidence is needed but your own ears and eyes.

TangoDown

There are two distinct theories that have surfaced. One that states a realistic hologram was used with timed explosives.

The other is that the media displayed fake images and CGI type effects, some claim it was a military feed that took over the news footage.

The first claim of the hologram takes into consideration the large numbers of New Yorkers that would have seen what really happened since everyone was looking after everyones attention was drawn toward the towers because of the first strike.

The second theory ignores the populace of NEW YORK.

I don't believe either theory.

Andrew Johnson appeared on Jim Fetzer's radio show on Oct 3, 2007 to discuss the report.

An MP3 (commercials/music edited out) is available here.

All:

I saw the second plane hit from Newport/Pavonia pier.

maps.google.com...,+jersey+city+07310&sll=40.730999,-74.031372&sspn=0.057496,0.116 73&ie=UTF8&ll=40.727779,-74.033775&spn=0.007187,0.014591&t=k&z=16&om=1

Zoom out to see the view to the WTC and south Jersey from the end of the building on the south side of Pavonia avenue.

I just got coffee from a deli in 111 Pavonia (now replaced with another deli). I heard that the first tower was on fire and walk down to see... it didn't look too bad when the second plane came from the south out of NJ over the Hudsun. It was a plane. My father worked for Loral Electronics and I am a huge airplane buff. Unless the government has a missile that looks just like a passenger jet that I don't know about... it was a plane.

The most puzzling issue I have is I don't remember seeing any airline markings per se. I seem to remember the plane being gray. Also to add fuel to the fire, so to speak, it was not diving to gain speed... it came in quite level and did a sweeping turn at level flight over the Hudson. It was completely controlled and constant in speed.

There were planes... no holograms.... no BS... Planes of some kind.

reply to post by drakeman



I was not in NY on september eleventh. I did not see any planes in person but I did watch TV and I noticed something was wrong from the very begining when live images of the middle east were shown to the public. These images aired around noon. The problem for me was that the "live" images from the unspecified Middle east area were in Broad Daylight. So I thought to myself how does the sun shine on two sides of the planet at the same time? It doesn't. The media is guilty of prepetuating the 911 scam as well.

When I watched september clues I realized that the TV fakery went well beyond what I originaly thought. At first I doubted the vids claims but I dutifuly got out my copy of the days events and compared what they pointed out to my own Video. Suprise suprise the things they pointed out was on my video. Multiple flight approach angles, bad pixilization, the nose in nose out footage...TO expand on that for one moment if you're unaware the nose cone of your average comercial bus is made out of fiberglass not metal. It is the weakest part of the plane. Anyways. I never thought I would be in the No plane camp myself. But after reviewing thier vid and compareing the points they made to my own vid I gotta admit..the planes are just fake imagery. CGI cartoons and nothing more. The explosions the atrocity everything else (excluding most all the CNN footage) was real. But not those planes.

Originally posted by titorite
reply to post by drakeman

 

CGI cartoons and nothing more. The explosions the atrocity everything else (excluding most all the CNN footage) was real. But not those planes.

CGI?

I remember the days following and the wakes i attended, hearing the stories of the people who were in the surrounding buildings while we were greaving our deceased family members and friends.

"Me and my co-workers were in the Merrill Lynch Building (i think thats the one, but it was RIGHT there nevertheless). We were looking up at the smoking building and seeing people jumping out of the building. Then we heard the loudest screaching noise you can ever imagine saw a huge plane fly into the second building and then a huge explosion. It was at that time that we decided we have to get the hell out of there."

Makes sense... the Merrill Building (one of two occupied in WFC by ML) is across the west side highway from where the hotel and WTC were...

I was not in NY on september eleventh. I did not see any planes in person but I did watch TV and I noticed something was wrong from the very begining when live images of the middle east were shown to the public. These images aired around noon. The problem for me was that the "live" images from the unspecified Middle east area were in Broad Daylight.

Why in the world would the world's media need to falsify images from the Middle East instead of using their news teams out there? This is insane.

Anyway it would have been daylight in the Middle East at the time....

reply to post by talisman


Thank you very much for enlightening me

Originally posted by TangoDown
I don't understand the whole no plane theory. I really wish I could get more information on it and come to understand all sides of it. But still, how can people claim that there were no planes? I saw people falling from the towers. How could holograms project these imense images, from all angles? I just can't believe it to be possible. Please prove the no planes theory so that I can understand further.

Errrm. Ummmm. There is a link above. It takes you to my website. It takes you to an ANALYSIS of WHAT WITNESSES AT THE WTC ACTUALLY SAID about planes. THE STORIES CONFLICT. Including to the extent of this:

Account of FIREFIGHTER DAVID SANDVIK - File No. 9110375

Page 4: We start heading down the block and we get down to I guess about Church Street and the second plane hit, and I remember just being underneath. I never heard the motor of the plane, the sound of the engines. We just heard the explosion, you felt the explosion, and looking straight up and seeing that fireball that you see on the news, but we're underneath looking up now at it.


This is called "referenced information". As regards other referenced information on the "No planes at WTC", there is plenty. You can find some here: www.nomoregames.net... and here www.acebaker.com.... Analyses are done on evidence and the asssumption that in the case of physical evidence, or the behaviour of known physical objects, they will adhere to the known laws of physics. The evidence for planes at the WTC does not exclusively adhere to known laws of physics (e.g. aluminium wing struts cut through steel girders and Boeing plane is alleged to be travelling approximately 100 mph above the top speed at that altitude).

Only 8 witness of those identified as being in or near the WTC (a total of 117) said they SAW and HEARD the plane.

So, let's argue points of evidence rather than just make vague and largely meaningless statements.

Publish and reference your own research rather than simply trading insults and "that's stupid" type remarks.

And yes, it's me Andrew Johnson - this is the only board where I signed up with a different name (it was ages ago).

Can we start a new board called "Above Debunkery" or "Serious, referenced discussion based on evidence" - perhaps the former is more snappy.

Andrew Johnson

When you consider the thousands of witnesses who saw and heard the aircraft, the wreckage ejected (ie engine and landing gear), damage to the towers, radar, FAA and NORAD confirmation, flight manifests, missing passengers - where did they go - along with the plane?, witnesses smelling jet fuel etc, the kindest thing I can say is that some people may be spreading misinformation.
Even if there were no planes, one needs some pretty damning evidence to convince the overwhelming majority of the population (both skeptics and conspiracy theorists alike) that no plane hit the WTC's. I have yet to see that evidence.

[edit on 10-10-2007 by cams]

Originally posted by cams
When you consider the thousands of witnesses who saw and heard the aircraft,

My God this is so sickening. How the hell can so many people be so brainwashed??? There is NO EVIDENCE that "thousands of witnesses" saw and heard aircraft! I said this about a thousand times myself in this forum alone. People seem to be under mind control: assuming facts not in evidence.

You have confused the Techno Viking, I am not pleased.

How can 3d computer CGI be a "cartoon"? This I do not know. Can you tell me? Cartoons are 2d drawings.

No one controls the mind of the Techno Viking but the Techo Viking. You seem to say that jets did not hit the World Trade Center? Is this true?

And you find the audacity to belittle others? I find you petty, you do not please me.

When did it become normal to say outlandish things, with no evidence, and become angry toward those who don't believe you?

The Techno Viking does not enjoy your theory.

reply to post by CB_Brooklyn


Well I'm sorry but if you don't believe that thousands of people actually saw and heard planes (from near and afar), then I feel sorry for you and especially the victims who were on those aircraft. That is my opinion and you have not convinced me or the vast majority of people to the contrary.
If you can show solid evidence that no planes hit the towers, not just speculation, assumptions and a few possible anomalies in videos etc then you may have a case. Otherwise, you will remain in the minority.

reply to post by cams



Look at my other posts for the proof. I need not type it out again. And I need not defend the theories against those who assume facts not in evidence. I feel sorry for you.