The Empty Towers

[idschmyd]

I know someone who used to work for Fiduciary Trust (at your peril) in Geneva. She visited their offices around the 90th floor of WTC2 in 1999 or 2000, which isn’t much help, I realise. She stayed in the Marriot. This connection may help to explain her interest in the official story. She cited her main suspicions as the ‘neat collapses’ and ‘amazing piloting skills’. She remembered the door security in the Tower, and that the Fid office seemed ‘quiet’ for the time of day (I don’t’ recall what time that was). So I believe Fidubious Tramps had offices in the Tower at some point between Jan 1999 and Dec 2000.

Anna also claims to have met Ed Abad. In my surprise I blurted something about Ghandi and Hitler. She says he visited the Geneva offices but can’t say when and has no specific memory of the event. Describes him as in his 50’s, short, balding, with round head.

Legacy image.

She didn’t recall a tash. Fid compiled a Memorial Book which Anna mentioned a few times. She understood my suspicion that her memory was cobbled together with images from a book and tales from the boss, whose knowledge of victims she continually referred as though she herself had little or no connection with US staff, but initially she remained convinced about Ed’s existence. During two half hour sessions she became less sure that she knew, had met or had seen him. Conclusion was that she would like to speak with former colleagues with whom she still has contact (including the boss) to find out more. I hope she does.

Impression of Ed being short with family. Enlarge and weep.

[Brutal Metal]

I thought during the 90's the Twin Towers and the businesses and institutions housed within was considered the Heart/Mother Brain of All the Worlds Financial markets with companies all over the world taking up office space there??

[antipodean]

I've recently been in touch with someone who graduated from Sussex University in the summer of 1997, the same time at which vicsim Karlie Rogers, The Risk Waters Divisional Sponsorship Manager, is alleged to have graduated from Sussex University.
This is her reply to me, after I asked if she can recall a fellow graduate named Karlie Rogers.

Just been looking through my old graduation booklet, showing the names of everyone who graduated during the summer term of 1997 and Karlie Rogers name does not appear at all.

Karlie Rogers was discussed in depth on the old Reality Shack forum.
http://z6.invisionfree.com/Reality_Shac ... t&p=442552

Sussex University is closely aligned to the Tavistock Institute, it wouldn't surprise me if they cooked up the whole Risk Waters Conference being held at the Windows on the World restaurant. Given the number of high profile vicsims, representing the perp companies present at the conference.
http://www.riskwaters.com/wtc/

[antipodean]

I've just found this on a website forum about skyscrapers. There are a stack of photos featuring the WTC (inside & outside), some as late as September 2001.http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthr ... 522&page=2
This 9/11 photo jumped out at me, seeing as the whole WTC outdoor area looks deserted.

[reel.deal]

well... the towers' actual company occupancy time-frames will probably never be proven conclusively,
no doubt SOME companies DID actually operate there - for whatever lengths of time..
CANTOR FITZGERALD...
http://timhawkings.com/gallery.php5?cat ... =Lobby.mov

"The trading floor panoramic is from the southwest corner of the building. You can tell this because you can see the South Tower from the windows. I am about 95% sure that this is a picture of the equities area on the 104th floor. If so, this is a picture of the area where the infamous fire was burning on 9/11." ...nicked off LR... http://letsrollforums.com/world-trade-c ... 17p16.html
...its chasing your tail trying to establish -or not- how many windows 97 monitors etc got rescued/relocated, pre-9/11...

BUT, what does that matter ? What difference does it make ? The ONLY thing that matters in regards to company tenancies,
in the EMPTY TOWERS... IS... How POPULATED were the towers, the morning of 9/11.

so, SO WHAT if these RODIN BRONZES EDITIONS WERE REALLY THERE... WHERE ARE THEY IN 'ANY' 'AFTERMATH' 'PHOTOS' ?
(...then 'roughed-up' a bit & 'found' later @ 'Fresh Kills'... ) As Brian points out... Where are ANY ELEVATORS/CABLES/MOTORS ?!?
These occupied WTC floors photos CONTRADICT "ALL" - THE GROUND-ZERO SHOTS...BOTH CANNOT BE TRUE...
"The biggest piece of debris we found was half a telephone key-pad..." ...wiring ? fittings ? carpets ? ...etc etc ?!?

The way i see it, FULLY OCCUPIED TOWERS, FILLED WITH REAL FULLY FUNCTIONING COMPANIES... IS IRRELEVANT.
ITS THIS SIMPLE.....

1.) Were the towers empty, and if so, how did they do it ?
2.) How long had the towers been empty ?
3.) How is it that nobody has come forward to tell us about the empty towers ?

1. YES... CLEARED OUT OF ALL NIGHT-STAFF/PEOPLE, SAY FROM 3 AM...
...CORDONED OFF & STRICTLY NO ADMITTANCE - EXCEPTING DEMO-CREW, THEREAFTER - "CLOSED FOR FIRE-DRILL"
2. 5 HOURS ? ...EMPTY OF PEOPLE, NOT BUSINESSES... ALL 'ACTUAL' COMPANY TENANCIES IRRELEVANT.
3. COME FORWARD ? THROUGH WHICH MEDIA ? CNN ? FOX ? NEW YORK TIMES ? QUEENSBORO DAILY POST ?...
...SUPRESSED, STIFLED, GAGGED...
...'VISIT' FROM DA FEDZ... LEANED-ON, 'HUSH MONEY', THREATS... SILENCED. "BOUGHT OFF"

If you think the TOWERS were populated - IN ANY WAY - DAY OF 9/11...
WHEN THE 'STRIKES', & 'COLLAPSES' OCCURED...
You need to demonstrate ANY proof of that...
Father Mychal Judge ? hit by debris ?
actor... no blood.
the 'jumpers' ?!?
OH YEAH ?
REALLY ?

9/11 - A STRAIGHT DEMOLITION = EVERYONE EVACUATED = NOBODY INSIDE... = NOBODY 'DIED'...

raven, heres a forum post the day after "London 7/7"...

Pretty elaborate tale for 'billmoowar' to cook up, dont you think ? less than 30 hours on...
WHY LIE ?!? ...The whole Northern Line, from Stockwell to Mordon, cordoned off ?
...Wonder why this wasnt splashed all over the front page... of 'THE TIMES' ? (Murdoch)


hmmm...

[brianv]

No need to try to climb over it, just shoot a few holes in it and peer through! I do continously! Only last week I was listening to an internet radio show, the guest who was talking about "9/11" was also taking questions from the chat box. You know what's coming don't you? "Did you know anyone who died on "9/11?"", I asked. "Yes, er, I knew one man, er, whose family er, I mean who died that day". "Can you tell me the man's name", I asked! "The family are devastated, I can't give you his name". "Why not, it's been 10 years and the victims names are public domain?". "It's too painful for the family"!

At that point I posted some links to the alleged memorial sites to show that the names are public and I then repeated the question! "What was the man's name? " The radio host interjected and let him slip off the hook and retreat into the depths of his own lies.

[reel.deal]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,,567641,00.html

I thought during the 90's the Twin Towers and the businesses and institutions housed within was considered the Heart/Mother Brain of All the Worlds Financial markets with companies all over the world taking up office space there??

Still makes much more sense ALL "WTC-COMPANIES" HAD ALREADY LEFT, & RELOCATED...
Who needs 600 REAL "WTC" 'CANTOR-FITZGERALD' EMPLOYEES - calling each other...
...to see WHO HAD SURVIVED, & WHO HAD DIED...
Too risky, too much a variable, too unpredictable... The 9/11 psyop team would DEFINITELY have accounted for this.
ALL REAL ACTUAL (NON-WTC/EX-WTC) CANTOR-FITZ, ETC, EMPLOYEES MIGHT FIND IT STRANGE,
NO-ONE SEEMED TO KNOW ANY OF THE WTC-1 CANTOR-FITZ VICSIMS,
BUT - in reality - WOULDNT REALLY GIVE IT A SECOND THOUGHT...

TWIN-TOWERS BY 9/11 WERE 'WHITE-ELEPHANTS' - CLEARED OUT, DESERTED, VACANT... "PREPPED" FOR DEMOLITION.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_elephant
A white elephant is an idiom for a valuable but burdonsome possession of which its owner cannot dispose and whose cost (particularly cost of upkeep) is out of proportion to its usefulness or worth. ...In modern usage, it is any an object, scheme, etc., considered to be without use or value.[1]
White elephant (disambiguation)
A white elephant is a supposedly valuable possession whose cost exceeds its usefulness.

[reel.deal]

PROOF !!! THE WTC WAS PACKED-OUT WITH 1000'S OF BUSY EMPLOYEES !!!




* * * * * * * *

"Photos by Martina Gelleci ...( ? )... who was an 'artist in residence' at the WTC
These are photos of the 40th and 82 floors (or around that area)... "

http://www.martinageccelli.co.uk/gallery_244084.html

...if we take the above 'Martina Gellici' LR forum "quote" at face value, for a moment,
then it could be argued all 6 pics are from WTC-1...WTC-7 visible on pic 3...

...according to above guardian WTC-TENANCY graphic...
floor 82: NY Metro Transportation Council, while
floor 40: Lehman Brothers ...floor 39 ? ...Tai Fook Securities ?!?
floors 41-43 seem more likely... building support services/storage... a mini-model of ground-zero

[Terence.drew]

Well done Raven for sticking your head above the parapet and voicing your cognitive misgivings. I think the answers to your questions have been clear and make sense.

Here is my major misgiving if anyone would like to answer it.

What is the reason that the TV footage of the 911 event is rendered so badly in terms of depicting a photo realistic disaster scenario. This is especially true of all the plane footage (with the slight exception of the semi-ok-ish CNN Battery Park/ace baker clip).

Years are spent leading up to something big and in the end the execution of the event is the execution of the event.

The Royal wedding. Everything is in place, blah la di blah, months of preparations, the couple walk up the aisle and there is no priest to greet them?

We know they had the means to create a photo realistic scene and they didn't. I don't buy the no debris on the ground scenario which Ozzy put to me here on this site before.

I have some ideas but would be interested in hearing anyone elses

Please note I am not saying that the footage is bad I am asking why is it so bad.

[fbenario]

What is the reason that the TV footage of the 911 event is rendered so badly in terms of depicting a photo realistic disaster scenario.

How 'bout a syllogism?

The perps think everyone automatically believes what their beloved authority figures, in both government and media, tell them.

As such, they see the world's population as constituting the world's largest herd of sheeple.

Thus, they hold the world's population in complete contempt, and don't care if anyone ever figures it out, since they know the messenger will be 'killed'.

They VERY nearly succeeded.

Together, we constitute the modern version of Cassandra telling the truth - and being thought insane, ignored.

In Greek mythology, Cassandra was the daughter of King Priam and Queen Hecuba of Troy. Her beauty caused Apollo to grant her the gift of prophecy.
...
However, when she did not return his love, Apollo placed a curse on her so that no one would ever believe her predictions. She is a figure both of the epic tradition and of tragedy, where her combination of deep understanding and powerlessness exemplify the tragic condition of humankind.
...
From Aeschylus' Agamemnon, it appears that she has made a promise to Apollo to become his consort, but broke it, thus incurring his wrath: though she has retained the power of foresight, no one will believe her predictions.

While Cassandra foresaw the destruction of Troy (she warned the Trojans about the Trojan Horse, the death of Agamemnon, and her own demise), she was unable to do anything to forestall these tragedies since no one believed her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra

[pshea38]

Well done Raven for sticking your head above the parapet and voicing your cognitive misgivings. I think the answers to your questions have been clear and make sense.

Here is my major misgiving if anyone would like to answer it.

What is the reason that the TV footage of the 911 event is rendered so badly in terms of depicting a photo realistic disaster scenario. This is especially true of all the plane footage (with the slight exception of the semi-ok-ish CNN Battery Park/ace baker clip).

Years are spent leading up to something big and in the end the execution of the event is the execution of the event.

The Royal wedding. Everything is in place, blah la di blah, months of preparations, the couple walk up the aisle and there is no priest to greet them?

We know they had the means to create a photo realistic scene and they didn't. I don't buy the no debris on the ground scenario which Ozzy put to me here on this site before.

I have some ideas but would be interested in hearing anyone elses

Please note I am not saying that the footage is bad I am asking why is it so bad.

All they needed to do was to fool most of the people, some of the time.
The rest was minutiae.
The means and the opportunity we know.
The overall motivational aspect remains obscure,
but what else can we here believe, but in a very dark, ultimate side.

Hidden in the open, within everything written in this forum, are the deep dark answers.

We are fully aware that, Inexorably, they will scheme on towards their contrived end,
even in spite of all our collective, unresolved determinations.
The implications of the cluesforum revelations are so all-encompassing, we understandably allow ourselves
to, most-times, lose sight of their bigger picture.
All we can do is pass our time and our thoughts, minute by minute, hour by hour.
How could we possibly match them, in their devotion to far-sightedness?

[nonhocapito]

What is the reason that the TV footage of the 911 event is rendered so badly in terms of depicting a photo realistic disaster scenario.

I have some ideas but would be interested in hearing anyone elses

This potentially is a time-waster angle because we don't know what kinds of problems the 9/11 fakery team had, what their timeline was and whatnot.

I don't necessarily agree on the fact that the technology at the end of the 90s allowed for photo-realistic video perfection, especially in the frame of TV broadcasting ...or in the generation of thousands of random identities.

It is possible that they wanted some people eventually to figure it out... or that they needed to be able to show to fellow members of the conspiracy how they were faking it.

There is also the possibility that after having spent decades faking events that were never revealed and proved fake in front of everyone (even though they raised a lot of questions or were proved fake among the few) they just got arrogant, forgetting they were stepping into a new age where people are generally a little more sensitive to artificial projections and propaganda than they were in the previous age. Not all aspects of life are 'under control', and we can allow for the idea that the role of the Internet itself got a little out of hand.

But bottom line, 9/11 is not only fake because of the footage and the vicsims. It is fake because it just couldn't happen. It is fake because of the context, because of the consequences it had and is still having. It is fake like saying Osama was the 'bad guy' is fake. A decent, honest historian, if there was one left on the planet, could figure out the age of fakery without even looking at the footage.

[bostonterrierowner]

Hi Everybody

I have a clue on what might be going on with all this empty towers stuff and a big number of leases starting throughout the 90ties. Browsing through the FOIA list i noticed very few companies with leases starting in 70ties and 80ties but I saw a lot strting in 94 , 95 , 96 , 98 etc. I didnt see any , I repeat any lease ending in 93 , 94.
Now , thats what i think happened:

Towers were much more havily occupied until 93 , when the first alleged attack happened. Lots of companies resigned , and nobody gave them hard time to avoid lawsiuts etc. Good riddence , sorry for the scary event of course your agreement is void to everone's satisfaction. That may be the reason why they are not on the PANYNJ list , because this thing doesnt include cancelled agreements , for the bureaucrats these agreements dont exist. There might be another list with cancelled agreements.

Be my guests and count leases signed not many years after 93 blast. Pretty big percentage.

Maybe the owners were not happy with all the asbestos or any other reason requiring of them some significant financial input , they couldnt just thell legitimate clients to move and demolish them. They had valid agreements so the compensations would be needed.Regular demolition would extremely costly as well.Law firms and other big players were involved so they were a tough crowd to deal with. The best way was to scare them off. Explosives going off in the basemnets are not good for business and life insurance policies so nobody argued.

That would explain lots of shell companies , fake offices and only a handful long time clients , then somebody came up with the plan to get rid of the problem plus make a killing out of all this 9/11 stuff.

Please share your thoughts

[hoi.polloi]

Yes, that does sound like a way a scam like 9/11 might unfold.

[bostonterrierowner]

Its me again

I compared FOIA list with Steve Warren's fake company list. Thats what I figured out. The first after 93 came banks , MSM and generally real entities with revolving door top management. What am I implying? These people knew that in the future towers will be used as a giant money making scam , maybe not that giant as actual 9/11 but they were ready. So fake office space were leased. Than they came up with BS companies such as MEIXIANG NEW YORK INC. withh leases starting in 1997 , 1999. Back than they knew what would happen so they packed the buildings on paper getting ready for VCF and BCF. That would explain a lot . What wee need now is another list , the one showing cancelled agreements . I cant ask for it as an alien but you guys can , than we will know everything. Lets do it until Freedom of Information Act still stands

regards