What Happened at the Woolworth Building on 9/11?

[spooked911]

The Woolworth building is one of the tallest buildings close to where the WTC towers were. It is just Northeast of where the towers were.

The Untold Story of the Woolworth Building Incidents on 9-11-01

Quotes Relating to a Missile Firing Off the Roof of the Woolworth Building

"Someone had fired missiles at the World Trade Center's north tower from atop the nearby Woolworth Building."

WNBC News

"...we just had a second explosion, possibly a missile from the roof of the Woolworth Building."

Port Authority Police Officer
WNBC News

"They're shooting at the Trade Center from the Woolworth Building."

Radio Dispatch
NY Daily News

"The first one they think was a guy shooting the missiles off the Woolworth Building."

WTC Police Channel 07
Mercury News

"Woolworth Building! They're firing missiles from Woolworth Building!"

Police Channel
Portland Inymedia


"...there was a missile launch at the Woolworth building."

Police Officer, 09:18AM
Mailgate News

"...the police had a report that a missile had been fired at the World Trade Center from the Woolworth building."

Alan Reiss, WTC Police Desk
9-11 Commission Hearing

" There was a 'swooshing' sound, then an explosion, and it sounded really low. It was if someone, one or two floors above me, had launched a shoulder-fired missile."

Lance Cpl. Alan Reifenberg
Marine Corps News

As we pulled ‘round the corner, we stopped the rig, and a cop walked over to us and said, `I saw them shoot a missile launcher off that building, you guys better be careful up there.’

NYC Fireman
Mr.Bellers Neighborhood





more good stuff at the link:
http://orbwar.com/woolworth/

[philb]

1. Firefighters and Policemen at WTC reported seeing or hearing missiles

FIREFIGHTER KENNETH ESCOFFRY FDNY WTC2
incoming missile before collapse
“On the way out between tower one and six, we heard something like an incoming missile, and we started to run. That's when the second tower came down. I was knocked down.”


EMT JOHN ROTHMUND
WTC2
At that time we were looking at the top of the towers and all the rubble and people coming off, and all of a sudden you heard – it sounded like another airplane, or a missile.

P. Ashby -EMT thought he saw something like a missile shot at WTC1 from across the way.

(blanked out paragraph followed by)
SO THOUGHT SOMEBODY LAUNCHED MISSILE FROM THE EAST RIVER OR OVER THE HUDSON TO KNOCK IT DOWN I MEAN THATS WHAT IM THINKING IF THEY ARE IF THEY ARE STILL OUT THERE TO LAUNCH ANOTHER MISSILE I GOT TO GET THE HELL OUT OF THERE BECAUSE WE WERE IN WAR ZONE. RIGHT EXACTLY.

IM TRYING TO WALK TOWARDS NOT THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE BECAUSE I FIGURED THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER HISTORIC LOCATION FOR THEM TO ATTACK OR LAUNCH MISSILE I WAS TRYING TO HEAD TOWARDS THE MANHATTAN BRIDGE AND TAKE MY CHANCES THERE


Woolworth Building missiles at WTC1 building
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/09/297359.shtml
http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=4035
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/113055p-102094c.html

Video:
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/naudet/woolworth.php

http://www.flcv.com/nypolice.html

[screembloodymurder]

2. The entire airplane thing was a hologram.

The missiles hit the buildings to simulate the crash. If you watch the jets as they hit the building they simply disappear w/o a trace. Why no debris? I suspect there were as least two locations that fired missiles.

[spooked911]

3. Yes, I tend to think the airplanes were fake

though I'm not sure about holograms.

Could be video editing.

The plane EVERYONE saw on 9/11 was flight 175 hitting the south tower-- on TV.

[sabbat hunter]

4. people saw the plane

in person hit the south tower.

sheesh

it was a fragging plane that hit the south tower. a passenger plane!
it was a plane that hit the north tower too.


if not please tell me where all the passengers and crew that were on the flights that hit the towers and the pentagon went.

[philb]

16. I think there were planes at WTC, but not necessarily the ones

in the official story. There is a lot of evidence from Boston Logan airport that the passengers said to be on Flight 11 were not on the plane that was tracked from Boston Logan to N.Y. And the FAA concluded that a version of Flight 11 bypassed N Y and was headed towards D.C., and contacted NORAD to send jets to intercept it.
http://www.flcv.com/offcom11.html

And flight 175 had some strangeness as well, all of the planes took strange detours that brought them close to each other and to areas in areas with FAA ATC region overlaps and near airports. If this were a simple case of hijackers hijacking planes and flying them into famous targets the choices of planes and flight paths don't make much sense.

http://www.flcv.com/offco175.html

and strange reports by FAA,etc. such as the following could explain what happened to some of the passengers:

What was Flight X in Cleveland and why the secrecy about it?
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=685
http://256.com/gray/thoughts/2001/20010912/travel_story.html

there were others as well that remain unexplained.

[RayUbinger]

30. Cite one

Please quote one eyewitness interviewed that day who reported seeing a large passenger jet hit either tower.

As for the alleged passengers, isn't it true that some of them are listed as being on BOTH of the alleged WTC planes?


Ray Ubinger

[philb]

35. There was strangeness regarding the passenger lists; also

none of the alleged hijackers were on any of the boarding lists
half of those accused originally are known not to have been involved
and are still alive;

there seem to be some errors with regards to the lists;

but there were some who saw planes hit the towers; and some of those who saw the second plane said it looked like a passenger plane. and there were plane parts seen at WTC.
http://www.flcv.com/wtcplane.html

Of course there were also some who said they saw missiles;
one doesn't exclude the other.

[sabbat hunter]

10. spooked

if the airplanes were fake, then where are all the passengers that were on the planes? what about the people that were eyewitnesses on the streets of manhattan that saw the plane hit the south tower?

please explain.

[TomClash]

12. But I know at least two witnesses who saw the planes flying

at low altitude past their offices.

[sabbat hunter]

5. there is debris

the where f***ing planes. i know people that saw them hit in person!

they dont disappear without a trace!

if no planes then where are all the passengers and crew?

[seatnineb]

6. Did your "anonymouse friends" see this anomolouse object too?

Probably not.....but hey... who gives a flying fuck what your anonymouse friends saw..........

[sabbat hunter]

7. what is that supposed to be

looks like it is something going from the towers to a building out of the picture. not to mention how odd is it that there is an object streaking from teh WTC to some place that cannot be seen, but yet everything else in the picture is stationary.

i care what my friends saw.

if you dont think planes hit the WTC, et al. then please tell me where they are now.

[seatnineb]

8. That anomolouse object was seen from another angle............

[sabbat hunter]

9. once again

1) that "anomolouse" object is moving away from the WTC not towards it.
2) it is the only thing moving in the video clip. IMO it looks like a bad editing job by someone. notice how the explosion in the WTC nor the smoke is moving

clearly IMO a bad faked video

and what is suppsoed to be seen in the first image. i dont see anything in side that red square except maybe part of a building.

[seatnineb]

11. Wrong......that clip belongs to FOX........

A clip that was in wide circulation in the days that followed after 9/11.......

And every time they showed it.....this anomolouse object was seen:




I double fucking dare you to find this clip with the anomolouse object absent in it.

The same clip also contains UA 175....with only one wing!



Hardly surprising that FOX stopped using this clip in high rotation as the weeks,months and years have rolled by after 9/11

The object in this red box:



....is an object moving at high speed towards the ground.....

[sabbat hunter]

13. why do i feel like

why do i feel like i am repeating myself.

the object in the first picture is moving AWAY, repeat AWAY from the fires on the WTC and it is the only thing moving in that picture, please explain hwo that is something fired FROM the woolworth building?
care to explain why the object is moving away from the WTC? i dare you, i double fucking dare you.
also i dare you to explain to me why it is the only thing moving in the video? can you explain? i double dog dare you to explain why it is the only thing moving.

i cannot tell what that object is in the red box how can you?

didnt know that FAUX news was now a good source for the DUers :P


here is a different angle, clearly showing two wings on the passenger jet that hit the south tower

[seatnineb]

14. The image in the red box is taken from a video...........

.....and would appear to be the same object that is included in the FOX video.

You obviously have not seen the FOX video at regular speed....where the anomolouse object is moving at some speed.

Was it not the responsibility of the FBI and God knows whoelse to investigate such anomolies.....

[sabbat hunter]

15. why arent you

why arent you answering my questions
1) in the video why is the anonymous object the ONLY thing moving? if it is a true video then everything should be moving
2) how can you tell what is in that red box, i sure cant.
looks like i need to repeat my self yet again


"the object in the first picture is moving AWAY, repeat AWAY from the fires on the WTC and it is the only thing moving in that picture, please explain hwo that is something fired FROM the woolworth building?
care to explain why the object is moving away from the WTC? i dare you, i double fucking dare you.
also i dare you to explain to me why it is the only thing moving in the video? can you explain? i double dog dare you to explain why it is the only thing moving."

i cannot tell what that object is in the red box how can you?

since when do we rely on FAUX news for our sources?

why didnt you answer my questions?

[seatnineb]

18. The anomouse object is not the only thing moving in that video!

This clip:



...has been taken from a video shot by somebody(maybe freelance?) for FOX news.

This clip:



..... has been slowed down so we can analize the anomolouse object more closely.But it is not the only thing moving in this clip.
And you know that.

It is my assumption that the object in this red box which is also taken from a video*.



.....is the same anomolouse object that we see in this clip:



*You can see a part of this video here:

http://webfairy.org/2hit/witness911.htm

And I know that the object in question is moving away from the Woolworth building.

But the more pertinent question is:

1)What is this object.?

2)Where did it come from.?

3)Where did it go.?

[sabbat hunter]

19. what do you see moving

what else do you see moving in that video? i dont see the smoke or fire expanding. the only thing moving is the whole screen itself (shaking)



to me i think it is a hoax video that someone pulled over the eyes of people at FAUX news.


i have this question too
WHY would something be moving from the WTC to the woolworth building.

[seatnineb]

20. Thanks to your pal' LARED...you can see the video here:

http://home.comcast.net/~catqueen/WorldTradeCenterhomevideos.avi

It is the 3rd clip in.

[sabbat hunter]

23. clips

definately a better clip noticed a few things
1) the object actually appears to be coming from the south tower not the north one
2) appears to be a piece of debris as the angle is pretty much from the point of impact
3) is defiantely an airplane that hits the tower
4) the object moving away from the tower in the video that you just linked is at a different height than the one you keep posting. a lower height more in line with the south tower impact.

[seatnineb]

24. The trajectory of this object is coming from above the WTC complex

[philb]

37. Is this another similar version?

Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/naudet/911.wtc.2.woolworth.rocket.naudet.avi
-- 640 x 352 pixels, 25 fps, 0m09s, 1.208KB
DivX 5.2.1
9/11 - The Filmmakers' Commemorative Edition

[JHB]

39. It's likely the debris that landed three blocks north of the WTC site.

See my post #34 below.

[philb]

36. my computer says its takes over 2 hours to open that one

what does it show?

[Zynx]

22. Um, that clip is real bad quality. You can't fly a plane with one wing.

Or a missile, if that's what your suggesting. Look up basic aerodynamics. If UA 175 had somehow taken off or even been launched mid-air with one wing, it would have immediately spun out of control into the ground. Much less reached Manhatten, much less wound up "on target."

That image is clearly impossible.

Looks more like extremely poor quality video than anything else.

[seatnineb]

26. But the NYPD probably had a clip of superior quality.

I remember looking over again and I turned to Pat and I said Pat ….you gotta climb…you gotta climb…I said this plane is coming right at our window ….it’s the closest I’ve ever seen a plane come close to my helicopter by accident…and Pat began to climb and John and all the guys in the back…running back and forth watching looking for this aircraft …and all I remember seeing is the aircraft going underneath our aircraft …you could see him right through the (unintelligible)….he could have been maybe 200 feet underneath us …and I just remember following him …and just turning my head and watching him…watching him pull up…and watching him disappearing right into the south tower….

Timothy Hayes(co-pilot)
NYPD

Trouble is... thus far...they have not shown footage of ua175 hitting WTC2 to the public.

But this is what they have shown.

[Zynx]

27. I'm not sure what your point is

The video that shows the UFO and the plane is of such low qualtiy that the plane is depicted as having an aerodynamically impossible shape for anything that flies.

The logical conclusion is that the video is of such rotten quality that it isn't worth showing on TV because TV is about pretty images if they exist, and that it's no good for trying to see the UFO because it clearly has all sorts of artifacts in it already, such as the completely impossible one-winged plane.

[seatnineb]

32. You know what the point is.....there are many suspect videos.

Like this one:





UA 175's wings do have a nasty habit of partially disappearing.

[philb]

17. There are lots of pictures of the objects leaving WTC2 after the crash

with whole threads here with the videos and pictures of an object
with a smoke plume trailing it headed away from the tower. Some are better than these. Plus other objects. The plane appeared to hit a corner of the tower with most of the gasoline burning outside the building and the engine(s) and fuselage coming out of the east side of the building at the SE corner. Several such large objects were seen. Since most of the gas burned outside the building the fires in WTC2 were not very hot or extensive, as documented by fireman statements from within the building at the fire level.

But several witnesses also said they saw missiles hitting WTC2 about this time.

[Henny Penny]

33. As Indira Singh says....

"I'd like to know who's paying people to put this out!"

edited to add...

the hologram bit, I mean.

[Zynx]

21. Yeah, manpack missiles are going to do *so* much damage to WTC *roll eyes*

This dumb tinfoiler isn't even trying. You could fire a Tomahawk at the WTC towers and not leave more than a dent.

[zapperlot]

25. Video footage of the missile

This video (1,9MB) maybe shows a missile fired from Woolworth building.

http://wtc.achilles-os.de/video/woolworth_vcd.mpg

Or does anybody have another explanation what happened there on the WWB ?

Regards
Zapperlot

[spooked911]

28. welcome to DU!!!!

[Zynx]

29. Um, that's not a missile. Missiles have sustained rocket trails.

Whatever that is, it disappears immediately. Missiles can't do that. By their design, they keep burning until they run out of gas and/or hit something.

[rumpel]

31. Do you see 2 objects flying? The upper one seems to travel rather

straight, the lower one makes a strange turn? Do we know what the source of this footage is?

Could these be UAV's ?

[JHB]

38. Have you ever seen spotlights playing across clouds?

Those things you're referring to move a lot like that. Probably a light (or several) from the police helicopters that were buzzing around at the time.

[philb]

40. Doesn't someone know the better pictures from the prior DU thread on this?

[JHB]

34. Sorry, those look like spotlights to me...

...from the helicopters orbiting the area.

And the "anomalous object" often mentioned above is probably the wheel- or engine-debris that landed at Church & Murray Str.s, 3 blocks north of the WTC and in the right direction for that object.

[mirandapriestly]

41. another 911 unidentified object

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2hit11/911.wtc.2.hit.west.02.mpg

[philb]

42. The owner of the Woolworth Building was right wing political operative

whose business is covert operations. He's had a lot of interesting connections and past operations.

From the NY POST (08-29-03): "The Woolworth Building! The Woolworth Building! They're shooting at the Trade Center from the Woolworth Building!" a police officer screams. ... "There's fucking explosions going off on Vesey street!" another officer yells. "Can you send somebody over to the Woolworth Building to check the roof?" a Port Authority police officer asked. "There's a possible ... they said it was ... we just had a second explosion, possibly a missile from the roof of the Woolworth Building." "The Woolworth Building?" replied a police operator. "`Yeah, on ... on Broadway," the officer said. One still from this "explosion" probably came from the Euro News video---"which is now mysteriously missing". Tom Modern looked into the biography of Richard "Bo" Dietl, who runs the Woolworth Building for Beau Dietl & Associates. He found out, that Dietl has advised the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia on issues of personal and physical site security and supervised security services provided for high-ranking officials from the Peoples Republic of China. Bo Dietls partner is Steven Witkoff, the mega-developer of The Witkoff Group, which bought the building in June 1998 from the Woolworth chain for $155 million. I checked the website of Beau Dietl and found another disturbing, military profile of Michael R. Rocque, Senior Security Consultant: "...In February 2001, he became a member of Beau Dietl & Associates specializing in anti-terrorism From August 2000 until November 2000, he was coordinator with the Bush North Carolina Campaign Committee, prior to this job, he devised and coordinated a comprehensive evaluation program for the five active duty Special Forces Groups in the United States Army. From 1997- 1999, he was Commander of a Special Operations Squadron in the 1st SFOD-D (the Delta Force), the highest priority combat unit in the Department of the Army. From 1980 to 1984, he was Platoon Leader and Executive Officer of a 265 man Light Infantry Company with the primary mission of providing continuous security screening and defense for a Pershing Artillery Battalion (primary nuclear missile system for the European Theater)..." It would be interesting, to follow up on these Port Authority Tapes and other witnesses, who saw something fishy, coming from the Woolworth Building or somewhere else.

http://www.libertythink.com/2004/12/911-explosions-at-woolworth-building.html

http://www.total911.info/2004/12/woolworth-building-as-staging-area-for.html

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/02/281717.shtml

http://www.total411.info/2005/04/bo-dietl-911-and-jeff-gannons-gosch.html