It belonged to her father, normally it would be rented out short term but she ended up living in it for a year.antipodean wrote:Gemma at the risk of sounding nosey, can you say exactly what sort of work Rachel was employed to do on the South Tower observation deck, and who were her employers ?
Nathan's at the observation deck food court. They were her direct employers
How could she afford to have a city apartment near Battery Park ?
REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
I would say until we got inside around 9:40 the top floors were visible and appeared to be belching smoke. Of course nobody was allowed too close so we really couldn't see the entire buildings. I can't speak for what happened over the 15-20 minutes until the first tower went down, we were inside. After that when we tried to get away you could hardly see a fucking thing, we got far enough away to just make out the north tower top 2 floors and antenna. Then it simply wasn't there anymore, for just a second or so it was right there then instantly the roof was just gone.fbenario wrote:Gemma, could describe exactly how much of the towers you could see distinctly? Was the whole area obscured by a thick curtain of black smoke, so you couldn't make out the buildings at all - and then just saw great clouds of debris/crap billowing out from the black curtain? Or could you actually see the buildings distinctly?hoi.polloi wrote:Are you saying there was enough clarity in the air to distinctly see the towers? And then you're saying the top "just disappeared" into the clouds?
This is extremely important.
EDIT: I'd like to add that we never saw a clear impact hole in the south tower, you couldn't see that for smoke which is funny because I have seen videos and photos that show most of it pretty clearly.
-
- Member
- Posts: 557
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
- Contact:
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
Gemma - I'd like to thank you for your input which is invaluable to researchers if true and I have no reason to doubt anything you have said to date. I've been saying for a long time that the key to solving the hoax is for more New Yorkers to give their testimony of what they witnessed NOT what they saw on TV.
Our building was several blocks south and there was no way we could have gone north along west street, it was completely blocked off and police officers stopping anyone even trying to get up there.
This is interesting as much of the footage that we are led to believe is genuine was filmed from this vantage point.
There is a school of thought, shared by many on here that the towers were, for the most part unoccupied. can you or Rachel confirm whether it seemed to you that 50,000 workers descended on WTC every morning and left every evening? This is vitally important. I visited the towers once and never made it past the lobby as I was wearing shorts and this wasn't permitted after 4;30 as the business community would be leaving. Strangely, the lobby was largely deserted apart from tourists. This is in contrast to any other large office building I have visited in the UK.
Our building was several blocks south and there was no way we could have gone north along west street, it was completely blocked off and police officers stopping anyone even trying to get up there.
This is interesting as much of the footage that we are led to believe is genuine was filmed from this vantage point.
There is a school of thought, shared by many on here that the towers were, for the most part unoccupied. can you or Rachel confirm whether it seemed to you that 50,000 workers descended on WTC every morning and left every evening? This is vitally important. I visited the towers once and never made it past the lobby as I was wearing shorts and this wasn't permitted after 4;30 as the business community would be leaving. Strangely, the lobby was largely deserted apart from tourists. This is in contrast to any other large office building I have visited in the UK.
-
- Member
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am
- Contact:
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
Gemma thanks for your straight up answers. It's interesting that 'Windows on the World' (the restaurant in WTC1) had several casualties on 9/11, not to mention the 80 odd vicsims attending the Risk Waters conference at Windows.
Yet Nathans the eatery in WTC2 where Rachel worked has no staff listed as victims, and was closed on 9/11. Presumably because of the viewing deck also being closed.
If Rachel was still living with you in the apartment, why had she no longer been working for Nathans at WTC2, since the end of August ?
Being someone keen to pursue a career in catering, had she ever thought about working in 'Windows on the World" ?
Yet Nathans the eatery in WTC2 where Rachel worked has no staff listed as victims, and was closed on 9/11. Presumably because of the viewing deck also being closed.
If Rachel was still living with you in the apartment, why had she no longer been working for Nathans at WTC2, since the end of August ?
Being someone keen to pursue a career in catering, had she ever thought about working in 'Windows on the World" ?
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
It was a temporary summer job, nothing more. She probably could have continued to work there and fit the hours around her course but to be honest she didn't like it there much, I get the impression she wasn't unusual in that respect. Windows wasn't such an attractive prospect after her short experience.antipodean wrote:Gemma thanks for your straight up answers. It's interesting that 'Windows on the World' (the restaurant in WTC1) had several casualties on 9/11, not to mention the 80 odd vicsims attending the Risk Waters conference at Windows.
Yet Nathans the eatery in WTC2 where Rachel worked has no staff listed as victims, and was closed on 9/11. Presumably because of the viewing deck also being closed.
If Rachel was still living with you in the apartment, why had she no longer been working for Nathans at WTC2, since the end of August ?
Being someone keen to pursue a career in catering, had she ever thought about working in 'Windows on the World" ?
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
...yeah, much appreciated Gemma. When i was in 'Top of the World' WTC-2 in '99,
they kicked us "all " (6 or 7 ?) out around 18:00, and closed early, cause it was so quiet.
There's a photo about of the 09:30 opening-hours board, when i find it again...
I myself took an outside photo of WTC-1, near-twilight - with NO lights on, in the top 1/3rd...
they kicked us "all " (6 or 7 ?) out around 18:00, and closed early, cause it was so quiet.
There's a photo about of the 09:30 opening-hours board, when i find it again...
I myself took an outside photo of WTC-1, near-twilight - with NO lights on, in the top 1/3rd...
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
The 50,000 figure is confusing, is this meant to be just the towers occupancy or the whole complex? I certainly can't confirm that figure for a number of reasons. You'd have to be very observant and probably in several places at once to confirm all these people supposedly coming in and out. Unless you stood in the lobby for a long time , which could possibly attract suspicion why someone would be standing around there for no apparent reason. I visited a few times primarily late morning to early afternoon, plenty of tourists around but few office workers. I'll have to ask Rachel to confirm what she did or didn't see during supposed rush hour times. She swings in the direction of a LIHOP theory, although she's also suspicious of the official explainations for the collapses. I trust her though, she's not the kind of person who lies and is terrible at it if she even tries.SmokingGunII wrote:Gemma - I'd like to thank you for your input which is invaluable to researchers if true and I have no reason to doubt anything you have said to date. I've been saying for a long time that the key to solving the hoax is for more New Yorkers to give their testimony of what they witnessed NOT what they saw on TV.
Our building was several blocks south and there was no way we could have gone north along west street, it was completely blocked off and police officers stopping anyone even trying to get up there.
This is interesting as much of the footage that we are led to believe is genuine was filmed from this vantage point.
There is a school of thought, shared by many on here that the towers were, for the most part unoccupied. can you or Rachel confirm whether it seemed to you that 50,000 workers descended on WTC every morning and left every evening? This is vitally important. I visited the towers once and never made it past the lobby as I was wearing shorts and this wasn't permitted after 4;30 as the business community would be leaving. Strangely, the lobby was largely deserted apart from tourists. This is in contrast to any other large office building I have visited in the UK.
-
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
Well - an interesting story! Thanks for your patient answers. It seems we aren't much closer to the truth but of course if we could somehow get everyone's narrative from that day we might be able to piece together something.
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
It would be interesting to piece together some testimony concerning people going around telling others about planes crashing. Some major chinese whispers spreading around that day. I did not come across ANYONE who actually said they saw a plane themselves, it was always "we heard or were told about it"hoi.polloi wrote:Well - an interesting story! Thanks for your patient answers. It seems we aren't much closer to the truth but of course if we could somehow get everyone's narrative from that day we might be able to piece together something.
Same goes for all the other crap being chucked around, like a third plane coming in (at the time we wondered if that had happened when we found out the south tower had come down).
Perhaps there was a lot of innocent speculation, being told two planes went in to the trade center opens the mind to all kinds of horrors. We heard the pentagon was hit and that was about the only thing that turned out to be "true"
Other examples we heard from people included rumours that planes would hit the Empire State Building and the UN, plus one hysterical woman who thought the Sears tower in Chicago got hit.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 7341
- Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
- Location: italy
- Contact:
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
I'll kindly oblige, reel deal:reel.deal wrote:...yeah, much appreciated Gemma. (...)
There's a photo about of the 09:30 opening-hours board, when i find it again...
Dear Gemma,
Thanks for your testimony. Whether true or not (no offense) it does help people conceptualize just how little anyone in the vicinity of the WTC would have been able to understand what was going on. Many years ago, I stayed at a friend's place for about two weeks on Houston street, roaming around the area as the eager young photographer I was. It took me a couple of days to even realize that the WTC towers were there - standing only a few blocks away from my friends apartment - no kidding. I also remember being struck (during an early morning stroll in Battery Park) by the 'small village' feel of the area and how very few people were around, only the odd jogging fitness-freak and a few old ladies walking their dogs for a morning pee.
-
- Member
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am
- Contact:
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
Found this on killtown's site. Apparantly a ticket bought on Sept.10th 2001.
It's a shame Rachel didn't work at the WTC2's viewing deck a few days longer, because the eatery there would of shut down, whilst they cleared out all the catering equipment in readiness for the demolition.
edit typo corrected as pointed out by brianv
Last edited by antipodean on Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
If all she saw was the top 2 floors, because the bottom 98 floors were obscured by a smokescreen so thick nothing at all behind it could be seen, it directly contradicts every single one of the images/videos in existence. Thus, it appears to be modest confirmation of 'our' theory that the entire operation was hidden behind a smokescreen, so NO ONE saw anything at all - 'proving' in yet another way that all the images/videos were faked.Gemma said:
After that when we tried to get away you could hardly see a fucking thing, we got far enough away to just make out the north tower top 2 floors and antenna. Then it simply wasn't there anymore, for just a second or so it was right there then instantly the roof was just gone.
If all she saw was the top two floors because they were the only floors visible over the roofs of nearby buildings, her testimony doesn't add much of anything to what we already (don't) know.
Gemma, as you must know by now, there is no evidence whatsoever that anything hit the Pentagon. Ever considered an internal bomb?21stcenturybreakdown wrote:Perhaps there was a lot of innocent speculation, being told two planes went in to the trade center opens the mind to all kinds of horrors. We heard the pentagon was hit and that was about the only thing that turned out to be "true"
EDIT: The more I think about it, the more I don't like her response. I asked VERY specifically whether a thick smoke cover completely blocked her view to the WTC:
and she chose not to answer my question with any specificity at all, neither confirming nor denying a smokescreen cover over the WTC. I don't think she's trustworthy.Gemma, could describe exactly how much of the towers you could see distinctly? Was the whole area obscured by a thick curtain of black smoke, so you couldn't make out the buildings at all - and then just saw great clouds of debris/crap billowing out from the black curtain? Or could you actually see the buildings distinctly?
This is extremely important.
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
2011? er.....uhm! I'll go for a typo!antipodean wrote:
Found this on killtown's site. Apparantly a ticket bought on Sept.10th 2011.
It's a shame Rachel didn't work at the WTC2's viewing deck a few days longer, because the eatery there would of shut down, whilst they cleared out all the catering equipment in readiness for the demolition.
I dont see any date on the ticket but thats not really the point! Do you think all the [explosives]* were planted between 6pm and 8am? I dont think anybody would be stupid enough to have a bunch of tourists wandering around in there with the place wired and ready to be fired...and so close to showtime! It would have locked down tighter than a camel's ass in a sandstorm!
*That is if they actually used explosives. The possibly empty towers theory and remaining outer steel walls could have been cut down and lowered by cranes -- which by the way, would mean that the ticket is a hoax! And, I'm still waiting to see one fragment of the 44 giant Lifts and several-hundred-ton-motors which had 1/4, maybe 1/2, maybe more, miles of steel cabling and cars attached to each one, which each building housed, in the presented debris shots!
-
- Member
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am
- Contact:
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
I think the date is written (reading across the ticket) under the "Roof Closed" stamp.
According to Gemma her cousin was working up there until less than 2 weeks before show time.
The explosives could have been planted/ wired up any time, & just the viewing deck open to give an impression the whole building was functional.
But I think your right the elevators etc. could have all been dismantled prior to the event. Leaving the express elevator to the viewing platform operational until the weekend before, or as late as feasibly possible.
According to Gemma her cousin was working up there until less than 2 weeks before show time.
The explosives could have been planted/ wired up any time, & just the viewing deck open to give an impression the whole building was functional.
But I think your right the elevators etc. could have all been dismantled prior to the event. Leaving the express elevator to the viewing platform operational until the weekend before, or as late as feasibly possible.
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself
I didn't come here expecting trust, the only people I trust are myself and those I've known my whole life so I understand that.fbenario wrote:If all she saw was the top 2 floors, because the bottom 98 floors were obscured by a smokescreen so thick nothing at all behind it could be seen, it directly contradicts every single one of the images/videos in existence. Thus, it appears to be modest confirmation of 'our' theory that the entire operation was hidden behind a smokescreen, so NO ONE saw anything at all - 'proving' in yet another way that all the images/videos were faked.Gemma said:
After that when we tried to get away you could hardly see a fucking thing, we got far enough away to just make out the north tower top 2 floors and antenna. Then it simply wasn't there anymore, for just a second or so it was right there then instantly the roof was just gone.
If all she saw was the top two floors because they were the only floors visible over the roofs of nearby buildings, her testimony doesn't add much of anything to what we already (don't) know.Gemma, as you must know by now, there is no evidence whatsoever that anything hit the Pentagon. Ever considered an internal bomb?21stcenturybreakdown wrote:Perhaps there was a lot of innocent speculation, being told two planes went in to the trade center opens the mind to all kinds of horrors. We heard the pentagon was hit and that was about the only thing that turned out to be "true"
EDIT, 21stcenturybreakdown:You misunderstood my statement. Yes I know nothing actually hit it, that's why I put the word true in quotation marks.
EDIT: The more I think about it, the more I don't like her response. I asked VERY specifically whether a thick smoke cover completely blocked her view to the WTC:and she chose not to answer my question with any specificity at all, neither confirming nor denying a smokescreen cover over the WTC. I don't think she's trustworthy.Gemma, could describe exactly how much of the towers you could see distinctly? Was the whole area obscured by a thick curtain of black smoke, so you couldn't make out the buildings at all - and then just saw great clouds of debris/crap billowing out from the black curtain? Or could you actually see the buildings distinctly?
This is extremely important.
I believe that the smokescreen most likely appeared shortly before 10am to hide the collapses. This would give the impression the south tower was disappearing when in fact the actual rapid demolition occured just after, safely behind the smoke. The rumbles, booms and shaking were not the bulk of the building hitting ground but the sublevel blasting, in my opinion.
Given my experiences I think enough visibility, and just enough apparent damage/smoke/fire was required to sell the planes story to witnesses. Nobody could get close to the buildings, the close up footage can NOT be real. West street was shut off 5-6 blocks to the south, we saw this. Nobody wanted us to look too closely, the lack of plane debris, body parts, smell of jet fuel or people evacuating the wtc had to be hidden.