Danny Jowenko is Dead, 3 Days After Sabrosky Interview Implicates CIA/Mossad in 911

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Yeah, it was just a small fire. Probably could have been put out with a few buckets of water.

wtc7fire1.jpg

WTC7Smoke2.jpg

WTC7_Smoke.jpg

WTC7Smoke3.jpg


Still hoping that before we reach the 10-year mark since this happened, that a single Truther can give me a better reason for WTC7 being 'demolished' with no sound or visible demolitions charges, other than destroying files or helping Silverstein make some money.

Strange conspiracy, in which they evacuate a building hours prior, tell everyone it's going to collapse, and then it does. I guess the NY Fire Department was in on it, along with several news agencies. It makes sense though, because when you're trying to pull off a giant magic trick like 9/11, you want to involve as many people and agencies as possible, to make sure there are plenty of ways to get caught, or people to come forward afterward and spill the beans. A plan like that should be as needlessly complex as possible, and involve a multitude of secret conspirators. :doh:


Btodd
 
Upvote 0

stelow

Legend
Sep 16, 2005
11,896
9,287
HEAVEN!!!
✟49,649.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Yeah, it was just a small fire. Probably could have been put out with a few buckets of water.

wtc7fire1.jpg

WTC7Smoke2.jpg

WTC7_Smoke.jpg

WTC7Smoke3.jpg


Still hoping that before we reach the 10-year mark since this happened, that a single Truther can give me a better reason for WTC7 being 'demolished' with no sound or visible demolitions charges, other than destroying files or helping Silverstein make some money.

Strange conspiracy, in which they evacuate a building hours prior, tell everyone it's going to collapse, and then it does. I guess the NY Fire Department was in on it, along with several news agencies. It makes sense though, because when you're trying to pull off a giant magic trick like 9/11, you want to involve as many people and agencies as possible, to make sure there are plenty of ways to get caught, or people to come forward afterward and spill the beans. A plan like that should be as needlessly complex as possible, and involve a multitude of secret conspirators. :doh:


Btodd

Your right Btodd, this was not a false flag operation by a very powerful occult group, who wants to bring about the NWO, that would be insane.

Bush Sr. called for a NWO, in a speech to Congress, exactly eleven years before the 911 event took place. The number eleven seems to be a very important symbol in the occult.

Now we have another event with the number 11 signature, on 7-22-11 which will be used to establish stronger anti-terrorist legislation, for the purpose of crushing more obstacles to the NWO.

Who will be sacrificed next, a few hundred more thousand Muslims, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and of course Iran is not cooperating with their agenda, then you have all those darn white people in America, who have all those weapons.

Just ignore me, this is just fiction, you can't really take what I'm saying seriously... :kiss:
 
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Your right Btodd, this was not a false flag operation by a very powerful occult group, who wants to bring about the NWO, that would be insane.

Bush Sr. called for a NWO, in a speech to Congress, exactly eleven years before the 911 event took place. The number eleven seems to be a very important symbol in the occult.

Now we have another event with the number 11 signature, on 7-22-11 which will be used to establish stronger anti-terrorist legislation, for the purpose of crushing more obstacles to the NWO.

Who will be sacrificed next, a few hundred more thousand Muslims, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and of course Iran is not cooperating with their agenda, then you have all those darn white people in America, who have all those weapons.

Just ignore me, this is just fiction, you can't really take what I'm saying seriously... :kiss:

Oh, cool! Now we've mixed the occult in with 9/11 conspiracies, to make the conspiracy even larger. Very convincing. ;)


Btodd
 
Upvote 0
M

ManFromUncle

Guest
Which video would that be?



Btodd

Again playing dumb, there is firefighter John Schroeder's testimony of multiple explosions going off while he was in North Towers and the core "disintegrating" from within, and ample evidence like this (from direction of WTC7. ) Disinfo blows smoke saying this was a "boiler". Anyone can decide, is this a boiler going, or an explosion?

Schroeder says he does not believe planes and fires alone took down the buildings ("and I don't care what anyone thinks" he adds at one point.)

‪9/11: Explosion #1 W/ Download Link‬‏ - YouTube

‪HIGHLIGHTS : Interview with John Schroeder 911 FIREMAN‬‏ - YouTube


Senator Mike Gravel
Citizens 9/11 Commission

more info on 911:
911: Shock and Awe Master Deed. Prosecute Giuliani.
 
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Not as insane as people ignoring the video of several explosions in 7 just before it collapsed.

Again playing dumb, there is firefighter John Schroeder's testimony of multiple explosions going off while he was in North Towers and the core "disintegrating" from within, and ample evidence like this (from direction of WTC7. ) Disinfo blows smoke saying this was a "boiler". Anyone can decide, is this a boiler going, or an explosion?

I posted RealDeal's statement, which I was responding to, at the top for clarification.

He says 'video of several explosions' and 'just before it collapsed'. I want to know what he's referring to, because it isn't the video you're referring to, or else he's severely mistaken. At best, it's 'audio' of an 'explosion', in the general sense of the word, and we don't know where it's coming from at all. Nor is it 'just before' the collapse of WTC7, as my link makes clear...WTC7 fell some 7 hours after the Twin Towers, and the footage in that video is not even close to 7 hours after the Twin Towers collapsed.

A WTC7 explosion video - 911myths



ManFromUncle said:
Schroeder says he does not believe planes and fires alone took down the buildings ("and I don't care what anyone thinks" he adds at one point.)

Once again, you're back to appealing to a person's opinion about what happened as if it were evidence, and cannot produce any actual evidence of what happened. How long are you going to play the appeal-to-authority game, in lieu of actual evidence? You can watch WTC7 collapse on video; it happened on live television. Please point out where the explosions occur, both visually, and audibly. You can indicate the time signature of when you see and hear these explosions.


Btodd
 
Upvote 0

oldbetang

Senior Veteran
Jul 21, 2005
7,361
461
✟17,487.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I posted RealDeal's statement, which I was responding to, at the top for clarification.

He says 'video of several explosions' and 'just before it collapsed'. I want to know what he's referring to, because it isn't the video you're referring to, or else he's severely mistaken. At best, it's 'audio' of an 'explosion', in the general sense of the word, and we don't know where it's coming from at all. Nor is it 'just before' the collapse of WTC7, as my link makes clear...WTC7 fell some 7 hours after the Twin Towers, and the footage in that video is not even close to 7 hours after the Twin Towers collapsed.

A WTC7 explosion video - 911myths

Once again, you're back to appealing to a person's opinion about what happened as if it were evidence, and cannot produce any actual evidence of what happened. How long are you going to play the appeal-to-authority game, in lieu of actual evidence? You can watch WTC7 collapse on video; it happened on live television. Please point out where the explosions occur, both visually, and audibly. You can indicate the time signature of when you see and hear these explosions.


Btodd


Have you watched the John Schroeder video? It's rather confusing. Try watching it and see if you can't make sense of what he's saying on it. He seems to say that he ascended in the North Tower and that he was in that tower when it collapsed. At another point in the video he says that he was outside the tower when it collapsed and that he almost jumped in the river to get away from it. Then he says that he watched the other tower collapse after that. Could you confirm that my mind isn't playing tricks on me here?
 
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Have you watched the John Schroeder video? It's rather confusing. Try watching it and see if you can't make sense of what he's saying on it. He seems to say that he ascended in the North Tower and that he was in that tower when it collapsed. At another point in the video he says that he was outside the tower when it collapsed and that he almost jumped in the river to get away from it. Then he says that he watched the other tower collapse after that. Could you confirm that my mind isn't playing tricks on me here?


Okay.

Around the 3:00 mark, he says that they went back down from the 24th floor to the 3rd floor, and the stairway collapsed. He actually says that while they were on the 3rd floor, "...we got down to the 3rd floor, and that's when the stairwell collapsed on us. We had to dig our way out, now the building's coming down, we can't see nothing...".

At around 4:39, he's saying, "I was standing on the ledge (of the river), watching the building come down; I was diving in the river to Jersey...".

At 4:50, he says, '...and what happened was, uh...after that, we ran down North End Avenue, and there came the other tower. We were like, 'something's very wrong here'."


So yes, I agree with you...it doesn't make sense. He first says he's on the 3rd floor when the building is coming down, and then 1:39 later, he says he was at the edge of the river watching the building come down. So he got from the 3rd floor to the edge of the river before the building finished collapsing? How does this support a controlled demolition instead of a natural collapse, exactly?

Not to call the man a liar, but in a crazy event like that, I don't fault him for having a confusing, contradictory account. I would imagine that if I had gone through something like that, my account would be even more confusing.

The only thing that makes any sense of this is what the people who were with him confirm...that the first tower collapsed when he was on the 24th floor. That explains the enormous sound he heard, the shaking of the building, and why the basement level 'looked like a bomb went off' when they made their way back down....because debris from the collapse of the other tower had done this damage. The Twin Towers collapsed from the TOP DOWN, so there would be no need to set off a charge in the basement in the first place!

If it were truly a 'demolitions charge', as people are trying to portray...that's the final step in a demolition, and the whole structure falls at once, starting from the bottom. You don't set off the final charge at the basement, and THEN have the building come down later. If that truly had happened, he would have never escaped the building alive...it would have come straight down. Not only that, but there would have been several, very loud explosions in sequence that preceded the final one.

THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. I challenge anyone who says it did to post a clip of the video, and point out the sequence of explosions.

Anyone that wants to pursue the issue should be prepared to read a great deal, including the accounts of people who were with Mr. Schroeder, and confirm that the collapse of the first tower occurred while they were on the 23rd-24th floor, and that's exactly why the basement level looked like it did when they made their way back down. This is supported by the people around him at the time, the physical evidence, and all video and audio sources of the events.

Here's an incredibly good summary of reports of the events surrounding John Schroeder, from people who were with him, and around him during that time. It's a LOT of reading, so be prepared (you have to keep clicking the link at the bottom of the page to move on to the next series of accounts, but it's worth it for anyone who truly wants to understand). This is an especially good primer for the amount of confusion that occurs in such a tragic, chaotic event, and why Truthers who try to capitalize on that moment in time to further their theories make me want to throw up.

johnschroederofengine10:a911chronology–r - 911stories


Btodd
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
M

ManFromUncle

Guest
THERE WAS NO "RAGING INFERNO"

VIDEO, radio transmissions firefighters 10 minutes before collapse. Every American must watch this, their last words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT-po-tmJRc

Thermal imaging of the South Tower fires, 15 minutes after impact, shows temperatures no higher than 100C, in this video by a thermographic photographer who happened to work in the neighborhood, Carol Ciemiengo:

‪New 911 Footage - Infrared FLIR Video of WTC Burning‬‏ - YouTube



"Any fool can look at those films and see the buildings aren't falling down, they're blowing up!" - Paul Craig Roberts, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal, Contributing Editor of National Review.

WTC1+nuke.jpg
 
Upvote 0

RealDealNeverstop

Is Prayer Your First or Last Action?
Sep 15, 2007
15,003
1,290
53
✟36,318.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
That video about where are the fires are deserves its own thread. It should be explained how it was possible for rescue crews to move freely without being impeded by fire. It is simply impossible they could be on the 79th floor while at the same time the fires were supposed to be burning hot enough to weaken the structure in to complete collapse.
 
Upvote 0

oldbetang

Senior Veteran
Jul 21, 2005
7,361
461
✟17,487.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That video about where are the fires are deserves its own thread. It should be explained how it was possible for rescue crews to move freely without being impeded by fire. It is simply impossible they could be on the 79th floor while at the same time the fires were supposed to be burning hot enough to weaken the structure in to complete collapse.

Impossible for anyone to be on the 79th or 78th floor? NOPE!
10. Why were people seen in the gaps left by the plane impacts if the heat from the fires behind them was so excessive?

NIST believes that the persons seen were away from any strong heat source and most likely in an area that at the time was a point where the air for combustion was being drawn into the building to support the fires. Note that people were observed only in the openings in WTC 1.

According to the International Standard ISO/TS 13571, people will be in severe pain within seconds if they are near the radiant heat level generated by a large fire. Thus, it is not surprising that none of the photographs show a person standing in those gaps where there also was a sizable fire.
The fire behavior following the aircraft impacts is described in NIST NCSTAR 1-5A. In general, there was little sustained fire near the area where the aircraft hit the towers. Immediately upon impact of the aircraft, large fireballs from the atomized jet fuel consumed all the local oxygen. (This in itself would have made those locations rapidly unlivable.) The fireballs receded quickly and were followed by fires that grew inside the tower where there was a combination of combustible material, air and an ignition source. Little combustible material remained near the aircraft entry gashes since the aircraft "bulldozed" much of it toward the interior of the building. Also, some of the contents fell through the breaks in the floor to the stories below.

Therefore, the people observed in these openings must have survived the aircraft impact and moved—once the fireballs had dissipated—to the openings where the temperatures were cooler and the air was clearer than in the building interior.
 
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I notice that not a single Truther cared to point out where these 'explosions' took place, either visibly or audibly, in any video. It's now been skipped over to concentrate on the amount of fires that were burning, as if the goal is to say, 'If there weren't enough fires, then the explosions for a controlled demolition must have occurred, even though nobody can point out a single one of them'.

Regarding the video ManFromUncle posted, the first major falsehood occurs at about 1:10, when Mr. Shinn says, 'Firemen were working throughout the building'. Good grief, that's about as ridiculously false as claims get. They never went past the 79th floor! I'm not surprised, because it's a film made by Richard Gage. The very claim relies on everything below the impact point and area of failure, thereby avoiding the entire issue in favor of a strawman argument.

RealDeal makes another false claim in his post:

RealDealNeverStop said:
It is simply impossible they could be on the 79th floor while at the same time the fires were supposed to be burning hot enough to weaken the structure in to complete collapse.

Not if someone actually understands how they collapsed. The damage from impact was from floors 78-94 in the South Tower, with the left wingtip being the lowest impact point (the left wing end did not sever critical columns, it only destroyed the facade). The tower collapsed when the fires above floor 79 caused the steel to fail (after the damage caused by impact compromised the structure in the first place), and the upper block came crashing down on the lower block, creating a top-down collapse in which the mass continues to grow and accelerate downward, crushing everything below. RealDeal's statement makes it sound as if the entire structure collapsed at once; therefore the whole building would have to be a giant raging fire. NO. Watch the video. Nothing is 'falling' below the point of collapse, and this continues all the way down the building. The upper portion continues to crush the stationary portions below it, after failing at the most compromised portion of the building's impact zone, and fires weakened the steel to failure. THIS, AGAIN, IS WHY THE SOUTH TOWER COLLAPSED FIRST, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS HIT LAST. It had more floors (mass) pressing down on the impact point.

Anyone that wants to argue otherwise, that it was a 'demolition', can simply point out where the explosions are occurring, and show how the structure is falling all at once after they occur. Point them out, please. It's interesting how quickly rebuttals to the explosions hypothesis were just skipped over, and nobody can be bothered to point out what is supposed to be obvious from the 9/11 Truth camp's perspective.


Btodd
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
M

ManFromUncle

Guest
I notice that not a single Truther cared to point out where these 'explosions' took place, either visibly or audibly, in any video. It's now been skipped over to concentrate on the amount of fires that were burning, as if the goal is to say, 'If there weren't enough fires, then the explosions for a controlled demolition must have occurred, even though nobody can point out a single one of them'.

Regarding the video ManFromUncle posted, the first major falsehood occurs at about 1:10, when Mr. Shinn says, 'Firemen were working throughout the building'. Good grief, that's about as ridiculously false as claims get. They never went past the 79th floor! I'm not surprised, because it's a film made by Richard Gage. The very claim relies on everything below the impact point and area of failure, thereby avoiding the entire issue in favor of a strawman argument.

RealDeal makes another false claim in his post:



Not if someone actually understands how they collapsed. The damage from impact was from floors 78-94 in the South Tower, with the left wingtip being the lowest impact point (the left wing end did not sever critical columns, it only destroyed the facade). The tower collapsed when the fires above floor 79 caused the steel to fail (after the damage caused by impact compromised the structure in the first place), and the upper block came crashing down on the lower block, creating a top-down collapse in which the mass continues to grow and accelerate downward, crushing everything below. RealDeal's statement makes it sound as if the entire structure collapsed at once; therefore the whole building would have to be a giant raging fire. NO. Watch the video. Nothing is 'falling' below the point of collapse, and this continues all the way down the building. The upper portion continues to crush the stationary portions below it, after failing at the most compromised portion of the building's impact zone, and fires weakened the steel to failure. THIS, AGAIN, IS WHY THE SOUTH TOWER COLLAPSED FIRST, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS HIT LAST. It had more floors (mass) pressing down on the impact point.

Anyone that wants to argue otherwise, that it was a 'demolition', can simply point out where the explosions are occurring, and show how the structure is falling all at once after they occur. Point them out, please. It's interesting how quickly rebuttals to the explosions hypothesis were just skipped over, and nobody can be bothered to point out what is supposed to be obvious from the 9/11 Truth camp's perspective.


Btodd

You are right, they were not working above the 79th floor. That makes 75% of the floors on which they observed no "raging inferno." The fires they saw, they said could be "knocked down with 2 lines."

Explosions, compare known demolition and South Tower, listen side-by side:

Castaways (traditional bottom-up):
‪Castaways Implosion Demolition‬‏ - YouTube

South Tower explosion sequence:
‪911 truth: Demolition Pops at South Tower‬‏ - YouTube


the broad masses of a nation...more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation...a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world... - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
292
✟20,354.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You are right, they were not working above the 79th floor. That makes 75% of the floors on which they observed no "raging inferno." The fires they saw, they said could be "knocked down with 2 lines."

Exactly! And since the collapse started above those points, and proceeded from the top down, it's irrelevant whether or not the rest of the building was on fire. The rest of the building remained stationary until it was gradually crushed by all the mass above it once failure occurred at the impact points. This is AGAIN why the South Tower collapsed first. More mass pushing down on the point of failure.

You still genuinely don't understand the collapses, do you? I don't mean just that you don't accept them, but your statements reveal that you don't even have a basic understanding about what you're arguing against.

Watch video of the collapse, and keep your eyes focused on the floors below the falling mass. They are not moving. There have been no explosions, and no structural failures. They literally get crushed by the upper block, and growing mass as it continues to crush everything below it.

Nor can you point out a single audible or visible explosion in any of the collapses. I don't know what else I can do for you, man. Nothing below the impact points needs to be on fire, so this whole argument is completely irrelevant. *shrug*


Btodd
 
Upvote 0
M

ManFromUncle

Guest
Another question for you btodd since you think you can keep people chasing their tails with fantasy physics, a few slabs of concrete crushing 80 floors and whatnot. What was Mossad doing filming the burning towers? How did the know to set up the camera before the attacks? What were they doing driving around with a van full of explosives? Why did Bush whisk them out of the country?

What about the buried story of the "Dancing Israelis" who turned out to be Mossad agents who were high-fiving and flicking cigarette lighters in front of the burning towers? They had set up a camera on a tripod prior to the attacks. Based on police transmissions their van, which was full of explosives, had a mural on it showing the towers being hit by a plane.

When the media got wind of it, the Bush administration rounded up around a thousand Arabs in New York on minor immigration violations, to bury the Dancing Israeli story, and they had them released over the objections of the local FBI.

From WhatReallyHappened.com (with links to news sources)
A Mossad surveillance team made quite a public spectacle of themselves on 9-11.

The New York Times reported Thursday that a group of five men had set up video cameras aimed at the Twin Towers prior to the attack on Tuesday, and were seen congratulating one another afterwards. (1)

Police received several calls from angry New Jersey residents claiming "middle-eastern" men with a white van were videotaping the disaster with shouts of joy and mockery. (2)


"They were like happy, you know … They didn't look shocked to me" said a witness. (3)

[T]hey were seen by New Jersey residents on Sept. 11 making fun of the World Trade Center ruins and going to extreme lengths to photograph themselves in front of the wreckage. (4)

Witnesses saw them jumping for joy in Liberty State Park after the initial impact (5). 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. (6)

"It looked like they're hooked in with this. It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park." (7)



From HistoryCommons.org

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a846israelishighfive#a846israelishighfive
Shortly After 8:46 a.m. September 11, 2001: Neighbor Sees Suspicious Men Documenting First WTC Attack and Cheering, Calls Police


A homemaker living near Liberty State Park, Jersey City, New Jersey sees three men behaving strangely on a nearby roof and alerts the authorities. This homemaker, who has given only her first name Maria, is called by a neighbor shortly after the first plane has hit the WTC and is told about the impact. She has a view of the WTC from her apartment building so she gets her binoculars and watches the disaster. However, she also notices three young men kneeling on the roof of a white van in the parking lot of her apartment building. Maria will later recall, “They seemed to be taking a movie.” They are taking video or photos of themselves with the WTC burning in the background. But what strikes Maria is their expressions: “They were like happy, you know… They didn’t look shocked to me. I thought it was very strange.” She writes down the license plate number of the van and calls the police.
ABC News, 6/21/2002

The lawyer for the five men will later note that one photograph developed by the FBI shows one of the men, Sivan Kurzberg, holding a lighted lighter in the foreground, with the burning WTC in the background. [New York Times, 11/21/2001


CLICK VIDEO: "Dancing Israelis" on Israeli talk show, Oded Ellner says: "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 was going to be an event?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X63CQ-dXkwU

Rendition of mural on "Urban Moving Systems" van based on police radio transmission
mm6dlz.jpg


Police transmission
9/11 Police Radio - King Street Mural Van - YouTube

Police transmission confirmed here in Norman Mineta report




Man_jumped_from_North_Tower.JPG
 
Upvote 0

RealDealNeverstop

Is Prayer Your First or Last Action?
Sep 15, 2007
15,003
1,290
53
✟36,318.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
That is the first I've seen of the van and the fact it is confirmed by two different sources is pretty tough to ignore. Hey, magbe our octa buddies can just claim the police didn't know what they were actually looking at when it was all going down.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
M

ManFromUncle

Guest
That is the first I've seen of the van and the fact it is confirmed by two different sources is pretty tough to ignore. Hey, magbe our octa buddies can just claim the police didn't know what they were actually looking at when it was all going down.
Here is an interview of one of the cops who stopped the van, at about 4 minutes 20 seconds in. Also audio of the police transmission, just amazing how they buried the story by rounding up a 1000 random Muslims to push it off the front page.

911 ISRAELIS DANCED FOR JOY WHEN THEY SAW US ATTACKED ON 911 - 1 - YouTube
 
Upvote 0