OPINMYND81
Jedi
I'm surprised no one else has talked about this given the huge implications behind it as a potential smoking gun. Then again it is not very well known in the 9/11 truth circuit so I guess now is a good time as ever to talk about it.
Here are some links that talk about the incident on King St. that took place with the mural van in question.
_http://infowars.net/articles/april2007/230407vans.htm (don't worry it's not Alex Jones who's doing the writing).
_http://culhavoc.blogsome.com/2006/02/12/eee-in-lower-manhattan/ (this is the last part AFAIK in several posts that deal with the topic)
_http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3672.shtml
There are a lot of reports of multiple truck bombs both at the WTC and in the surrounding area but I want to focus on the mural van itself since it's arguably the most bizarre case.
The first mention is in a report from the Mineta Transportation Institute found here: _http://transweb.sjsu.edu/mtiportal/research/publications/documents/Sept11.book.htm (do CTRL + F for "truck bomb")
I'll quote the whole paragraph here:
Right off the bat you gotta wonder what the authors were thinking when they put this in. How on Earth can a truck with a painting of a plane flying into the WTC, found on the day that TWO planes fly into the WTC, possibly be "innocent"? This is bizarre but by itself, aside from the "WTF" moment it gives the reader, they might not think that much of it since there's nothing to really put the incident into context.
However, as it turns out there is another source that cross-references and mentions this truck and gives more details. This time its an actual transmission from the NYPD which not only mentions the truck put provides more interesting details.
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL-g_kKgDgE (the important parts are subtitled).
So now the truck has a remote controlled plane diving into New York and exploding. Not only that but the truck ITSELF explodes after the two "middle eastern" men get out. Whether the two men resist arrest or not I'm not sure but its clear they are stopped by the police.
So what can we make of this? First off, since it's highly unlikely that people will randomly decide to paint bizarre scenes of mass murder on the side of rented trucks, we'd have to conclude that the artistic inspiration for the artists came from actual detailed foreknowledge of the attacks and who were most likely invovled in the attacks themselves. We could assume that they weren't Arab since if they were Arab they would just call them Arabs (since as I'm sure you've all noticed, Arabs don't fall under PC protection in the media). When the media refers to someone as "Middle Eastern" its to make the viewer think that the person is Arabic without actually having to tell them specifically they're Arabic when it is more likely that they are Israel (who are obviously "Middle Eastern"). As for the truck itself my guess would be that it was responsible for directing at least one of the planes to reach their target since the truck was located some distance away from the WTC but with a very clear shot of the WTC. Once the deed was done the truck was rigged to blow to destroy all the evidence inside it. Now why they would bother painting that mural on their truck I have no idea but the fact is that it's there. Personally, I think it's the closest we'll get for getting damning evidence to support the theory behind the remote controlled planes theory.
Here are some links that talk about the incident on King St. that took place with the mural van in question.
_http://infowars.net/articles/april2007/230407vans.htm (don't worry it's not Alex Jones who's doing the writing).
_http://culhavoc.blogsome.com/2006/02/12/eee-in-lower-manhattan/ (this is the last part AFAIK in several posts that deal with the topic)
_http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3672.shtml
There are a lot of reports of multiple truck bombs both at the WTC and in the surrounding area but I want to focus on the mural van itself since it's arguably the most bizarre case.
The first mention is in a report from the Mineta Transportation Institute found here: _http://transweb.sjsu.edu/mtiportal/research/publications/documents/Sept11.book.htm (do CTRL + F for "truck bomb")
I'll quote the whole paragraph here:
MTI Report said:
Right off the bat you gotta wonder what the authors were thinking when they put this in. How on Earth can a truck with a painting of a plane flying into the WTC, found on the day that TWO planes fly into the WTC, possibly be "innocent"? This is bizarre but by itself, aside from the "WTF" moment it gives the reader, they might not think that much of it since there's nothing to really put the incident into context.
However, as it turns out there is another source that cross-references and mentions this truck and gives more details. This time its an actual transmission from the NYPD which not only mentions the truck put provides more interesting details.
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL-g_kKgDgE (the important parts are subtitled).
So now the truck has a remote controlled plane diving into New York and exploding. Not only that but the truck ITSELF explodes after the two "middle eastern" men get out. Whether the two men resist arrest or not I'm not sure but its clear they are stopped by the police.
So what can we make of this? First off, since it's highly unlikely that people will randomly decide to paint bizarre scenes of mass murder on the side of rented trucks, we'd have to conclude that the artistic inspiration for the artists came from actual detailed foreknowledge of the attacks and who were most likely invovled in the attacks themselves. We could assume that they weren't Arab since if they were Arab they would just call them Arabs (since as I'm sure you've all noticed, Arabs don't fall under PC protection in the media). When the media refers to someone as "Middle Eastern" its to make the viewer think that the person is Arabic without actually having to tell them specifically they're Arabic when it is more likely that they are Israel (who are obviously "Middle Eastern"). As for the truck itself my guess would be that it was responsible for directing at least one of the planes to reach their target since the truck was located some distance away from the WTC but with a very clear shot of the WTC. Once the deed was done the truck was rigged to blow to destroy all the evidence inside it. Now why they would bother painting that mural on their truck I have no idea but the fact is that it's there. Personally, I think it's the closest we'll get for getting damning evidence to support the theory behind the remote controlled planes theory.
