911 facts even Alex Jones doesn't discuss...

Originally posted by EmbryonicEssence
Hey, sounds like another, "we can't send signals to the moon... and beyond" thread.

I so agree... there is just no talking to some.

The arrival of digital TV to the New York market, and the impending FCC deadline to get DTV construction permits on the air, made for a busy summer up there, 1400 feet above lower Manhattan. In July, WNBC-DT and WABC-DT had been the first of the Trade Center DTVs to sign on, quickly followed by the other digital TV signals that were sharing a new panel antenna on the huge mast that crowned the north tower, WPIX-DT, WNET-DT and WWOR-DT. (The last two Trade Center DTV signals, WPXN-DT and WNJU-DT, had yet to sign on.)

Millions of dollars had been invested in refitting the transmitter rooms to accomodate the additional equipment for the DTV conversion in the nation's biggest TV market, providing for the extra power and cooling the new transmitters needed.

By that mid-September morning, most of the work had been completed. But there was always someone in most of the big transmitter rooms, even early in the morning, and on that particular day six engineers were settling in for their daily routines in their transmitter rooms: Isaias Riveras and Bob Pattison in the 110th floor space of WCBS-TV (which was analog-only from WTC; its DTV facilities were up at Empire), William Steckman down on 104 at WNBC/WNBC-DT, Donald DiFranco at WABC-TV/DT on 110, Steve Jacobson down the hall at WPIX-TV/DT, and Rod Coppola watching the transmitters of WNET-TV/DT nearby.

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
I so agree... there is just no talking to some.

im just going to agree, i don't know what to but i agree

Hi I just thought I'd point out that the people posting "theories" here seem to have no idea what they're talking about.

They seem to not be able to distinguish between offices and communication devices. They seem not to be able to understand the way New York City communications function via the tops of many skyscrapers. They seem to have never visited the buildings they claim to know the floor plans of by heart even though their measurements are beyond bizarre. It is truly amazing how any of you have the balls to tell us what was on which floor in the WTC based on your bull# website links that contradict each other. Was W.O.W. on the 106th, 107th, 110th? No one seems to know. But you all seem to know for damn sure that CNN had an office on the very top floor right? Right? Wrong. I won't call you a liar because you simply don't understand the mechanics of what you're talking about. All of the stations listed for 110 didn't have offices there. They didn't have a nice fancy space with a bunch of secretaries and cubicles and carpeting and conference rooms. Wrong. The TV stations that had antennas on the roof required certain amounts of space to keep their stuff working. YES THEY LEASED SPACE. NO THEY DID NOT KEEP OFFICES THERE. There was equipment, there were closets, there were technicians. Some of whom died.

The entire point you were trying to make about CNN having a big ole office on top of the World Trade Center that was supposed to have lots of people and somehow conspired to keep those people away is A LIE caused by a lack of knowledge and information. There is no way around that.

My apologies to those that this statement offends but: Please please please stop setting yourselves up as authorities when you know nothing about the topic other than a god damn google search. It is not right to you, to the membership of this site, and to anyone who takes researching more seriously than a lazy-ass click of a mouse.

Edit - FYI, KillerD, one of the techs you listed, Steve Jacobson was a neighbor of mine.

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Djarums]

Djarums you've won my post of the day

I agree, Djarums I'm a communications technician and deal with similar transmitter rooms like the WTC. The 110th floor was clearly a transmitter room end of story. The technicians that were killed were involved with the DTV conversion that I listed in my previous posts.

Originally posted by Djarums YES THEY LEASED SPACE. NO THEY DID NOT KEEP OFFICES THERE. There was equipment, there were closets, there were technicians. Some of whom died.
It is not right to you, to the membership of this site, and to anyone who takes researching more seriously than a lazy-ass click of a mouse.
[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Djarums]

Right on all points.

IIRC, CNN's NYC headquarters is in the AOL/Time Warner building in midtown. It's studios are also in midtown. I had been to them once to do an interview.(it was never aired) I think it was on Penn Plaza.

I have been up to WOW a few times. (One being a b-day dinner for my mother.) I don't remember the exact floor WOW was on, but the bar and restaurant area had a great view and expensive drinks.

Sorry about the loss of your neighbor. I knew some people in the towers too.

.

Djarums, ya beat me to it! After wading thorugh more post on this subject than I cared too, it became painfully obvious that the antenna were not on the 110th floor which IS NOT the roof btw, but the repeater equipment was. CNN probably did lease space to provide their service to the local stations who also had communication devices up there. This would serve, not only to allow CNN to get their feed to the stations but to allow the reversal of information flow as well since NY is a news maker 24/7.

They would, in tern contract with the smaller stations for servicing of this equipment as well as the local news reporters to file breaking stories as well. This way, they had no staff but all the resources. If anyone can check, I'd say their total costs consisted of the lease, power, and phone/modem lines. A quick check with the FCC will also yeild whether they had their own antenna or simulcast on the locals which is what I suspect.

The thing that still bothers me is why was this tidbit stricken from SO's screen shot? It proves nothing extraordinary and the intentional exclusion of this 200sf throws up more of a red flag than if they had just explained it this way.

Originally posted by mepatriot How can an antennae be on a floor?? What, do they poke them up through the ceiling tiles?? Obviously the antennaes would be on the roof, not Floor 110...duh!?!

Transmission and satellite equipment that sends signals to, and receives signals from the antennas.

Originally posted by mepatriot With regard to the HQ thing, there was no mistake there on my part either, Bangin. I never said it was the national headquarters did I?

As I've pointed out before, please reference this thread you posted: www.abovetopsecret.com... Where you said...

Originally posted by mepatriot The 110th floor of the North Tower housed the CNN headquarters.

You made this statement prior to be called to task about it. Your disinformationist style to promote your agenda of false conspiracies is what got you into trouble when you attempted to run against Michael Michaud for the Maine State Senate. We know your type.

Originally posted by astrocreep
The thing that still bothers me is why was this tidbit stricken from SO's screen shot? It proves nothing extraordinary and the intentional exclusion of this 200sf throws up more of a red flag than if they had just explained it this way.

yes, that is one red flag for sure, and so is the fact that the planes sent up by norad flew at about 1/3 their top speed. I had some mods jump me in that thread earlier, but as far as i know no one came up with any good 'theory'. (one 'person' even went so far as to suggest the planes were low on fuel!) Lmao.
Im getting the feeling that there are people here that dont want to spread awareness.

Does anyone have footage that they themselves recorded on 911? If so compare it with the footage in the second link in my signature.
Unexplained anomaly?
Did somebody doctor the video?

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
You made this statement prior to be called to task about it. Your disinformationist style to promote your agenda of false conspiracies is what got you into trouble when you attempted to run against Michael Michaud for the Maine State Senate.

We know your type.

I could not agree anymore.

I feel vindicated after being called a lesser person for sticking to the known facts.

Thankyou.


.

I was away for a couple of hours looking for some business with a scanner in town...sorry, no luck. I tried 3 places.

It looks like everyone is still fixated on only one of the three points from my original thread.

1> parrhesia: Thanks for this very helpful stuff. The link to the number of employees was interesting. Interesting also that they omitted the number of employees who worked for CNN. Could of course mean one of two things:

a. they didn't have any.
b. they don't want to disclose how many they may have had.

2> Elevatedone: You haven't caught me in anything but saying the CNN headquarters were up there. Do you really think the readers of ATS and I do not know the National HQ is in Atlanta??? Did I ever say this was the national HQ?

Give it a rest....this dead horse has been beaten to death.

3> KillerD: Interesting post..thanks for adding it to the discussion. Interesting also that CNN is omitted entirely from the article.

4> Djarums: I have been arguing right along that there was leased space for all these companies on an enclosed Floor 110. Many here have been trying to tell me that Floor 110 IS THE ROOF. I've been saying "bull" for the past few hours.

These small technical/maintenance offices for these other TV stations may have been just as you describe them...I do not doubt that at all. Still, we have no proof (website downloads dated 9/01) of how many feet CNN actually leased, nor how many employees they may or may not have had up there, nor, if they indeed had only 200SF, of who was leasing the rest of that floor and for what purposes...maybe it was all observation deck, I just don't know.

I'd like to talk about my other two original post topics at some point folks, if you don't mind. Yes, I am willing to admit that CNN may not have had a huge office with lots of employees at this point (based on new information I've received here today), but I still don't know that was not the case with 100% certainty. The jury is still out, IMO, on the curious omission of CNN floorspace figures in most of the tenancy threads and also on the omission of the number of CNN employees on parrhesia's thread.

[Edited on 21-4-2004 by mepatriot]

Originally posted by mepatriot


Give it a rest....this dead horse has been beaten to death.

Could say that about this whole talk. OVER AND OVER

Originally posted by aware The thing that still bothers me is why was this tidbit stricken from SO's screen shot?

Different lists, different sources. 200 square feet (as we now know) is hardly a tenancy in a building such as the WTC. Perhaps the list I found only showed tenants who had occupants, and not just leased space. We're talking about a 10foot x 20foot room, hardly even a medium-sized bedroom. One could easily argue that this is not even an office for CNN. This conspiracy disinformationist started his spew by attempting to tell us this space was the CNN Headquarters... when called to task, he modified his statement to the CNN NYC Headquarters... and now it's clear that there is no possible way this could even be an office. This is the style and method of operation of today's popular conspiracy disinformationist. They make up stories based on very loose information, and attempt to peddle their lies in exchange for attention online. This person has a history of this, we are not the first to experience his maniacal stories. mepatriot ... We know you. We know your type. You have been caught in lies. I suggest you review this website's terms and conditions (link in my sig) and consider our stance against those who purposefully post incorrect information and carefully word you apology to this community.

SO: And so, just like that, your contention that CNN had no tenancy on the 110th floor goes completely down the memory hole?!? REMEMBER YOU WERE PROVEN COMPLETELY, 100% WRONG ABOUT THAT.

You can buy the 200 SF information completely at this point if you like, I choose to remain skeptical about that.

You better stop calling me a liar unless you can provide any evidence of a single lie in any of my statements. CNN's NY HQ could still very well have been up there. What I had to work from was one list that showed tiny SFs for these minor TV stations and CNN w/o a SF figure for them, and another list that listed CNN as the primary occupant of that 40,000 SF space without listing an actual SF figure for any occupants of any of the floors. What unreasonable assumption did I leap to that you wouldn't have, given that information??

You may be willing to say the case is closed on CNN having a large office up there, but that is a typical rush to judgement on your part.

P.S. I see you keep stealing my ATS points without even giving me a reason--how laughable. Take them all--I don't want them.

[Edited on 21-4-2004 by mepatriot]

Originally posted by mepatriot

2> Elevatedone: You haven't caught me in anything but saying the CNN headquarters were up there. Do you really think the readers of ATS and I do not know the National HQ is in Atlanta??? Did I ever say this was the national HQ?



[Edited on 21-4-2004 by mepatriot]

You might not have said National HQ, but on average how many HQ's do companies have.... I'll tell you ONE !!

you did say Headquarters and I showed it to you !

Elevatedone: Hundreds of companies have regional HQs in large cities...how pathetic....your arguments just keep ringing hollower and hallower, and you don't even get it.

Hrm a few thoughts, beyond the obvious one that its always a bummer when someone else beats you to the punch (djarums ).

Firstly, as far as your points being deducted mepatriot, that was by me. Primarily because the points you were earning you were earning by posting and reposting this exact thread over and over. Doubling up on this post.

A further annoyance is the way you have begun to allude to some sort of coverup with relation to your posts. Even though the very posts that were being closed/trashed were doubles of this exact thread, and were being trashed for that very reason.

As far as points raised, I especially liked the way that mepatriot tried to infer that 'if no evidence of this is found, that strengthens my case'. Thats right up there for audacity at least.

Another interesting one was this:

Originally posted by mepatriot
My assumption on that matter could very well be false. But this 200 SF claim could mean 1 of 2 things:

1. They had no major office there, or...
2. The link is post 9/11, and contains planted information.

I would certainly be willing to concede that both are equally plausible.

Thats very generous, to concede that the proposition that
A: CNN rented 200SF of space for equipment related to broadcasting from the top of the tower.
Is just as likely as
B: CNN really did have a secret major headquarters there, in a hard to get to floor that is used by all other leasers for transmission purposes. Also that after the attacks happened, 'they' have managed to remove every single reference to (and memory of) this HQ and make it appear to have never existed.

Interesting things to be considered 'just as likely' as each other. I believe Occam might have a little razor work to do around here.

Originally posted by mepatriot

You better stop calling me a liar unless you can provide any evidence of a single lie in any of my statements. CNN's NY HQ could still very well have been up there.

You may be willing to say the case is closed on CNN having a large office up there, but that is a typical rush to judgement on your part.
[Edited on 21-4-2004 by mepatriot]

How many companies HQ's do you know of with only 200 sf of office space...

it has been more than proven to you that THERE WAS NO CNN OFFICE THERE..... only leased space for transmiters or whatever it was, i'm not going back and looking up the specific term.....

As a matter of fact in the one link a few posts back ( not by you mepatriot ) I didn't even see CNN mentioned as having transmiters there....



[Edited on 21-4-2004 by elevatedone]