Truck Bomb

Confirmation that vehicle with WTC attack mural was "stopped" on 9/11

http://culhavoc.blogsome.com/2006/05/03/confirming-the-exploding-mural-van-coverup

As transcribed by Culhavoc:

"officer: “I got a message on that uh plane, it’s a big truck with a mural painted of a of a airplane diving into New York City and exploding [inaudible] know what’s in the truck, the truck is in between 6th and 7th on King Street“

officer: [inaudible] are you holding those two guys [inaudible] (kay?)

multiple voices/commotion: [inaudible] fucking beat the shit out of him.

[..]

multiple voices/commotion: [inaudible] fucking shit out of him [inaudible]

officer: all right listen you need any [inaudible] on those two guys over there? you all right over there kay?

officer: “we got both suspects under kay, we have the suspects who drive…drove in the van and that exploded we have both of them under kay let’s get some help over here”

In February of 2006, the Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy Studies (MTI) published their report entitled: “Saving City Lifelines: Lessons Learned in the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks”.

If a truck bomb explodes and the media don't report it, does it make a sound?

Of all the events of 9/11 "omitted" by the Commission Report, is this one the most potentially explosive?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_fg7eashn0&feature=related#

If this audio is authentic, then there exist multiple eyewitnesses to the fact that on the morning of 9/11 FDNY personnel summoned the "bomb squad" to King Street, where a "big truck" (also described as a "van")--painted with a mural of planes crashing into Manhattan--was fled by two men and then "exploded". The two men were detained and roughed-up on the scene. And then...?

The mural depicting the aerial attacks connects the truck bombers with the WTC events, and was clearly meant to advertise that connection. Possibly they planned to park the vehicle at their intended target and escape, but were forced to abort their attack and detonate the bomb prematurely.

And still there's this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt7r_fMPhzk

Is it wise and safe to ignore these "anomalies" in the public record of "the day that changed the world", or should they rather be shoved in the face of every government and media apologist for the OCT and the ongoing murderous farce called the "war on terror"?