| Evidence points to multiple roaming backup teams with vans full of explosives Infowars.net Monday, April 23, 2007 |
Some evidence even suggests that some of these vehicles actually exploded, and at least one was reported by mainstream media sourcing the FBI as having been parked at the base of one of the towers when it exploded and aided the collapse of the tower.
At first it sounds outlandish, but were teams of "terrorists" with huge amounts of explosives roaming around on the ground in New York on September 11th ready to jump into action and attack whichever structures or buildings they were ordered to target?
The first, and most mysterious, piece of evidence to highlight comes from an actual transmission from audio from Channel 30 NYC, one of the emergency communications channels, on the morning of September 11 which makes reference to the discovery of a van full of explosives and two suspects located between 6th and 7th on King Street, some blocks away from the World Trade Center.
The bizarre thing about the transmission is that the responder makes reference to a mural painted on the side of the van depicting a "remote controlled plane" diving into New York City. A full transcript follows the audio:
Begin Transcript:
officer: [inaudible]
officer: 5 the message about the plane
officer: Sergeant [inaudible] seven five (Miller?)
officer: 5 [inaudible] about the, 10-5 the message about the plane
officer: 9414 hold up
officer: 5 the message about the remote-control plane
officer: [inaudible] on the air
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] Trinity and Liberty… all city wide task force units are to respond to Liberty Trinity Place
officer: 10-4 the message is the plane [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] task forces
c/o: [inaudible] and [inaudible] will be the mobilization point at this time [inaudible]
officer: 10-4 c/o central who is [inaudible]
officer: didn’t find any mention about the plane (alt: didn’t find any admission about the plane)
officer: central, we need the bomb squad and EAQ over at King and……background noise….click
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] units
officer: [inaudible] on the air
officer: 9415 you on?
officer: 85[inaudible] this is uhh operator
officer: [inaudible]
officer: negat[inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] giving up these [inaudible] (planes?)
officer: [inaudible] I got a message on that uh plane,
it’s a big truck with a mural painted of a of a airplane diving into New York City
and exploding [inaudible] know what’s in the truck, the truck is in between 6th and 7th on King Street
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] 10-5 10-5
officer: with a mural painted uh airplane diving into New York blowing up. Two men got outta the truck
ran away from it, we got those two [inaudible] under.
officer: kay great.
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] are you holding those to guys [inaudible] (kay?)
multiple voices/commotion: [inaudible] fucking beat the shit out of him.
officer: [gasps]
multiple voices/commotion: [inaudible] fucking shit out of him [inaudible]
officer: all right listen you need any [inaudible] on those two guys over there? you all right over there kay?
officer: we got both suspects under kay, we have the suspects who drive…drove in the van and that exploded
we have both of them under kay let’s get some help over here
officer: now I’m sending you [inaudible] I just want to make sure you and your guys all right over there kay, that’s all.
officer: what’s the location [inaudible]
officer: put em up, put em up
officer: you know we have both the [inaudible] driven that exploded. Is that correct?
officer: what location?
officer: location [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] location [inaudible]
officer: King Street between 6th and 7th
officer: King Street and 6th and 7th avenue, King Street and 6th and 7th avenue
officer: [inaudible] on the scene King 6 and 7, which unit are you kay?
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible]
officer: [inaudible] explosion
officer: which unit is on the scene at king street?
officer: truck to Manhattan
officer: [inaudible] 10 truck
officer: [inaudible] 10 truck is heading a team toward 14 Trinity Place
officer: all right you take care of that for me and get back to me
multiple voices: [inaudible]
officer: all right just check out that location let me know what you got
officer: [inaudible]4
officer: [inaudible] on the air
officer: on the air
officer: [inaudible]
officer: that fine with you?
officer: CIT Units on the air, CIT
officer: [inaudible] always available [inaudible] we’re talkin
The indication is that the suspects ran away when the van was stopped and were then apprehended following some sort of struggle. It is then stated that the van has actually exploded.
Naturally the strangeness of this audio clip has lead to questions concerning its authenticity, yet this was cleared up soon after the clip emerged sometime last year, when it was discovered that reference to the mural van was also made in the February 2006 Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy Studies (MTI) report entitled: “Saving City Lifelines: Lessons Learned in the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks”. The report states:
The Culhavoc blog site, which has covered this mystery in depth here, notes:
The MTI quote makes absolutely no mention of the truck exploding.
This report states that the truck was rented. Doesn’t the MTI find it interesting that middle eastern men rented a truck and painted it with a mural depicting an attack currently taking place blocks away? Why would someone paint a mural of WTC being attacked by planes on a rented van?
In addition if this was an "innocent delivery truck" why did the suspects attempt to run away?
We have two middle eastern men in a van with a mural on the side of New York being attacked by a plane diving into it on the same day as two planes are flown into the twin towers. Is this alone not suspicious enough to warrant a full explanation in the MTI report?
Something about the mural also must have caused the officer heard on the transmission to believe that it depicted a remote controlled airplane packed with explosives. The remote controlled plane comments are interesting when put into context side by side with Operation Northwoods, the now infamous 1962 plan by the Joint Chiefs to carry out terror attacks on American soil to be used as a pretext to invade Cuba.
What happened to these two men? Why was the apparent explosion of the vehicle never reported? And why was first responder audio stating the vehicle had exploded subsequently ignored by all the official investigations into 9/11?
More Roaming Explosive Vans in NY on 9/11
Another transcript of 9/11 police radio transmissions, originally obtained by memoryhole.org in 2005 through a Port Authority Freedom of Information Request, reveals a second separate mention of a van with “terrorists” and explosives:
CPD - Ch . 018 - Radio (Ch . W) LT Police
from page 148 of 1593 (in pdf pages)
http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-transcript027.pdf
MALE C: Attention all 880(?) police units . Stand by for the (Inaudible) the Holland Tunnel . (01 :18:57)
MALE D : (Inaudible) copy .
MALE C : (Inaudible) from the Holland Tunnel exit, a tan Ford alpha van . New York tags . delta (Inaudible), November 8970 . Information has it this van was seen with possible terrorists in it, with explosives . That’s from the Holland Tunnel desk, (Inaudible) 32nd . It’s heading eastbound towards Le Havre(?) at this time . but they haven’t caught it yet, and it may be coming towards this way . (01 :19:25)
The Holland Tunnel exit is a few blocks from King between 6th and 7th.
Could this be the same van that exploded on King St. as was reported on NYPD radio or is it a completely different van?
Certainly if the van had a mural painted on its side one would assume any sightings would include a description of this also. This is not the case here however, which suggests this may be an altogether different white van with 'terrorists" and explosives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let us help you reach a huge audience of potential customers. Help support the website and take advantage of low advertising rates. Click here for more info.
Find out the true story behind government sponsored terror, 7/7, Gladio and 9/11, get Terror Storm!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a separate transcript first broadcast by NBC news, another mention is made of a white van with explosives and "terrorists" heading for the Holland Tunnel.
Dispatcher: Jersey City police.
Caller: Yes, we have a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there, they look like Palestinians and going around a building.
Caller: There's a minivan heading toward the Holland tunnel, I see the guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh uniform.
Dispatcher: He has what?
Caller: He's dressed like an Arab.
Based on that phone call, police then issued a "Be-on-the-Lookout" alert for a white mini-van heading for the city's bridges and tunnels from New Jersey.
Is this yet another white van or is it again the same one? It is somewhat strange that the caller describes the man or men as "dressed like an arab". Certainly there was no mention of out of the ordinary dress when the two suspects from the King St. incident were apprehended.
Furthermore, why would any potential terrorist attract attention to themselves by dressing out of the ordinary? Why would any potential terrorist paint a mural of an attack they know is going to happen that day on their vehicle? Were these sightings hoaxes or deliberate distractions or were there actually people carrying out these actions, and if so on who's orders were they acting and why were they being so blatant?
These reports are very strange but they are in the record on 9/11.
In addition to these Holland Tunnel reports, The Jerusalem Post and others also reported that a white van with a bomb was stopped as it approached the George Washington Bridge:
American security services overnight stopped a car bomb on the George Washington Bridge. The van, packed with explosives, was stopped on an approach ramp to the bridge. Authorities suspect the terrorists intended to blow up the main crossing between New Jersey and New York, Army Radio reported.
It was reported that two or three men were arrested and the van contained tonnes of explosives.
CBS's Dan Rather also reported on this, a video of which appears below:
Could these two incidents at the Holland Tunnel and the George Washington Bridge have involved the same white van and the same group of "terrorists"? The George Washington Bridge is several miles north of the Holland Tunnel. It certainly becomes clear that the suspects detained at the GW Bridge were not the same suspects detained in King St. with the mural on their van.
The Five Dancing Israelis Arrested On 9-11
Another often documented instance of suspicious individuals seen in a white van on 9/11 is that of the so called "Five Dancing Israelis". It was reported by the New York Times any many other outlets that Police received several calls from angry New Jersey residents on and after 9/11 claiming that a group of five "middle-eastern" men with a white van were videotaping the disaster with shouts of joy and mockery.
The following details are taken from whatreallyhappened.com's excellent datapage on this aspect of the story.
Some witnesses stated they saw the men set up video cameras aimed at the Twin Towers prior to the attack and were seen congratulating one another afterwards.
Witnesses saw them jumping for joy in Liberty State Park after the initial impact. Later on, other witnesses saw them celebrating on a roof in Weehawken, and still more witnesses later saw them celebrating with high fives in a Jersey City parking lot.
In each case the white van was mentioned and a group of three to five described. Could these reports have all pertained to the same group of middle easterners or was there more than one group?
The police and FBI field agents became very suspicious when they found maps of the city with certain places highlighted, box cutters (the same items that the hijackers supposedly used), $4700 cash stuffed in a sock, and foreign passports. Police also told the Bergen Record that bomb sniffing dogs were brought to the van and that they reacted as if they had smelled explosives.
The Jewish weekly The Forward reported that the FBI finally concluded that at least two of the detained Israelis were agents working for the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and that Urban Moving Systems, the ostensible employer of the five Israelis, was a front operation. This was confirmed by two former CIA officers, and they noted that movers' vans are a common intelligence cover. The Israelis were held in custody for 71 days before being quietly released.
It was also determined that the Israeli owner of Urban Moving Systems, Dominick Suter, dropped his business a few days after 9/11 and fled the country for Israel. He was in such a hurry to flee America that some of Urban Moving System's customers were left with their furniture stranded in storage facilities. Suter was later placed on the same FBI suspect list as Mohammed Atta and the 19 hijackers.
Several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home. Said one of the men, denying that they were laughing or happy on the morning of Sept. 11, "The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event." How did they know there would be an event to document on 9/11? This is clear evidence of prior knowledge.
Below is a video of a report that includes footage of the afore mentioned Israeli chat show:
The fact that these men were exposed as Mossad agents raises the question, who were the other groups of middle eastern men spotted in white vans on 9/11 working for?
More Exploding Vans?
The following clip shows Jack Kelley a foreign war correspondent stating to USA today that the FBI believed that a truck full of explosives was parked beneath the buildings which exploded and weakened the structures aiding their complete collapse:
The next clip shows MSNBC news reporter Rick Sanchez stating that NYPD found suspicious devices and think a van with explosives was parked inside the WTC.
The next clip, which also contains the above two, shows many witnesses stating that they heard explosions inside and at the base of the buildings. It also contains MSNBC's Pat Dawson stating that the chief of safety for the New York City Fire Department had told him that they believed a secondary device had exploded somewhere inside one of the buildings:
So not only do we have reports of explosive vans from all over New York on 9/11, news reports also strongly suggest that the authorities believed that vans packed with explosives were used in the actual attack on the World Trade Center.
Another widely circulated report picked up by multiple mainstream outlets on 9/11 was the announcement by senior law officials within the State Department in Washington that a car bomb had exploded outside the their building.
The news anchors in the following British Channel 5 clip also make mention of a car bomb at the State Department and the bombing of a shopping mall in Washington DC.
These were not rumors generated as a result of "confusion" as is often the defense - the anchor cites a "senior U.S. law enforcement official" as the source. Why were these events reported and then never covered again?
It is commonly accepted that the breadth of the 9/11 attack was planned to be larger in scope because Flight 93 did not reach its target. Were the State Department and Washington Mall "bombings" intended to go ahead but for whatever reason failed or were called off? Was the media fed a script too early as in the case of Building 7, which was also reported to have collapsed by both the BBC and CNN up to 30 minutes before it actually fell?
By the evening of September 11, following a "perimeter walk around our building," the State Department publicly stated that no such bombing had taken place.
Why were senior State Department officials telling the media that there had been a bombing without even conducting a basic appraisal of the building's perimeter? Can this all be put down to "confusion" or were some elements of the 9/11 script changed according to how events were unfolding on the day?
Conclusion
There are reports from 9/11 of white vans with explosives and middle eastern suspects in at least eight different places in New York on that day:
- King Street
- nr. Holland Tunnel
- nr. George Washington Bridge
- nr. Lincoln Tunnel
- Liberty State Park
- Weehawken
- Jersey City
- World Trade Center
There were at least three different parties involved:
None of these groups were dressed in Arab garb so, if the documented call to police stating this was authentic, there may have been another group.
There are many more witness statements and reports of exploding vehicles in and around ground zero on 9/11, far too many to go into detail about.
Were all these reports and statements, including the NYPD transmissions inaccurate or false alarms? Or do they represent evidence of 9/11 being a much larger scale operation than we have been led to believe? Were all the mysterious suspects "backup" in case the planes never reached their targets? Were some involved in bringing the towers down?
We can only speculate on who these people were, what their roles were and who they were working for, but once again it is clear that the whole truth as to what happened on the day that changed the world is far from being told.
Note: More transcripts from 9/11 can be found here. Independent researchers may wish to look through them. There may be more references to suspicious vehicles contained within this myriad of documentation.
No comments:
Post a Comment