Another nist FOIA LOBBY Exlosion witnesses video

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Thank you for your response. I can see that Battery Park and Robert F Wagner Jr Park are quite close to the WTC site but that only confuses me more about the lack of atmospheric dust and the evidently casual attitudes of passersby in the video.

The latter park was, as far as I can see, dominated by the Towers and I cannot believe that people were casually walking about in it just after they collapsed.

So far as Battery Park is concerned, it is a green spot between all the high rises of lower Manhattan and the water. The video shows a large open green area with high rises in the distance. Are these over the river ?

As I said before, I am not out and out calling it a fake but I have my concerns.

"But this video looks entirely phoney to me."

"As I said before, I am not out and out calling it a fake but I have my concerns."

This video looks entirely phony to me, but I am not out and out calling it fake. Keep backpedaling - you're almost there.

Here is a wide view of the interview area after collapse. Do you see an enormous amount of dust in the area?

www.flickr.com...#/photos/theatrum-belli/4425187985/lightbox/

The interview was conducted near the gazebo in the lower center of the picture. As I stated previously and you obviously overlooked (or possibly ignored), the dust in the area is limited because of the prevailing winds blowing in the opposite direction and the surrounding apartment buildings protecting the area.

Here is a closer view of the gazebo on the top right of the photo

www.flickr.com...#/photos/theatrum-belli/4425189017/lightbox/

Below is a video of the same reporter for Channel 7 Eyewitness News earlier at the base of the WTC



Why don't you do yourself a favor and contact him and ask him if his interview was a hoax. While you're at it, maybe you can also ask him if the collapse of the buildings was also a hoax.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Nice pics these are what was needed to help show proof of things that others say they don't see.There may not be alot of dust where the interview took place but you can see it around them on the ground.Thank you again hopefully it will shut the door on those few that seemingly cannot see that their argument is not even valid when shown the proof.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Thank you for the pics. That is just what I was hoping for. I withdraw my criticisms of the vid.

reply to post by impressme


Really? Drug smugglers take off and fly around inside US airspace?
Or do they arrive from outside US borders, from Columbia, Canada, Mexico, Gulf of Mexico?

You know, I also have that same article in front of me, here is what else they say:

And it is primarily the Air National Guard which is tasked with continental American air defense--standing on alert and waiting to intercept unknown aircraft or tracks aimed at our continent. These squadrons, flying F-15s or F-16s from places like Portland, Ore.; Atlantic City, N.J.; Key West, Fla.; and Fresno, Calif., are integral in supporting NORAD's air sovereignty mission and its charter to provide air defense should deterrence fail. Active-duty units perform these missions in Alaska, and Canadian Forces serve the same function in their country.

web.archive.org...://www.af.mil/news/airman/0196/border.htm

You see impressme? You always like to leave out the IMPORTANT parts that put the whole topic in context. Intercepts were for aircraft ENTERING our airspace. Not from within. The golfer was the ONE instance of fighters being scrambled prior to 9/11/2001. I even said that. But it STILL took fighters over an HOUR to find the plane. One hour! Can you find me any more instances of aircraft that were intercepted inside our borders after taking off inside our border? Notice what it says for NORAD's mission:

One ongoing mission of the Battle Management Center is to coordinate "air sovereignty" efforts, monitoring every aircraft that enters U.S. or Canadian airspace

Impressme, I have researched this, very well. For some reason, you claim to have done so mush research, and yet you constantly leave out the most important parts, or ignore them. Like just now. You forgot to post the part about the intercept missions that are aimed at aircraft ENTERING our airspace. How can you forget that part? You are being dishonest when trying to pull such nonsense.

reply to post by GenRadek

Impressme, I have researched this, very well. For some reason, you claim to have done so mush research, and yet you constantly leave out the most important parts, or ignore them. Like just now. You forgot to post the part about the intercept missions that are aimed at aircraft ENTERING our airspace. How can you forget that part? You are being dishonest when trying to pull such nonsense.

What kind of game are you playing in here GenRadek? (Deny the evidence without given any evidence?) My facts speak for themselves; something you cannot hide is the Truth. Yes GenRadek, our government does monitor our airspace in our boarders. You been shown by me and many other posters on here, credible evidence that our military watches everything outside and inside our boarders. Perhaps you to should just consider the OS of 911 your truth.