OOOPS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rewind that and let's work on it a little....

[theSaiGirl]

Not quite ready for prime-time, yet ...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8OoD5BA9cnc&search=twin%20towers%20plane

[LARED]

1. Is there a point you are trying to make? n/t

[mirandapriestly]

2. I've seen that before and I didn't understand where it came from.

Do you know?

[LARED]

3. What don't you understand? (n/t)

[mirandapriestly]

5. I don't know if someone made or edited it to demonstrate

something or if it was actually used as authentic footage

[LARED]

13. authentic footage???

of what?

[mirandapriestly]

17. well not "authentic" obviously, wrong word

I just got a good laugh out of that plane driving out the other side like that,I'm kind of laughing right now. I meant that it was an accident that the networks showed or something that was supposed to be authentic, not really authentic. Or is it a spoof to prove some point?

[HornBuckler]

4. I'm not sure what your meaning is/what this video is

Are you suggesting that no planes hit the towers? If that is what you're hinting at, I find that highly suspect - given the shear number of New Yorkers that witnessed the collisions.

[mirandapriestly]

6. Actually, HB, if you think about it

Did that many people really witness the impact? I don't think anyone has ever said they saw the first one (other than Naudet & co). Or if so, very few. Then, think about the second one. People were at the Wtc during the second impact and they did not see the plane, just the explosion. How many witness statements have you read that said "I just saw or hear the explosion,not the plane". You would have to be looking directly at that spot and the buildings were very close together and very tall, it's like in a miniature mountain range. So even if you were there, your view was probably obfuscated. There are web sites with photos up from people who were there at the 2nd impact and didn't see the plane. Their photos are of everything else. Even Judith Miller said she saw the explosion, and not plane. (Hey, Judith Miller's a no planer! (just kidding, that's not what she meant)) Either that or they were very far away, like the vid above where you can't see anything.
Then there was that CNN (or other cable or network) reporter who was watching the towers and talking to the anchor who is on the air. The reporter on air is describing the plane hitting the tower and the reporter at the scene is all flustered because he is LOOKING at the scene and can not see the plane, but the on air anchor is telling him, "yes there is a plane, I am showing it on tv!" How surreal is that? (I've seen the video, I don't have it handy, though)

I'm not saying there was "no plane" but I think that because we see the plane hit over and over on tv and in photos, we think, millions of people must have seen it in person, when in actuality it is very unlikely that that many people were able to see that particular spot at that exact time, because of all the angles height & size of buildings...

[RedSock]

7. any wtc or pentagon footage is suspect

at this point -- almost 5 years after the attacks (!) -- every single "newly released" or "uploaded" video of anything 9/11-related should be presumed to be manipulated.

if it can't be authoritatively sourced back to actual footage shot THAT DAY, any rational person should brand it as fake.

[wildbilln864]

8. Absolutely correct in my view.

If I hadn't known better, I could have believed that King Kong was actually real and rampaging the streets of NYC. With today's technology they can fake anything to the public. That's probably why they're taking so long to release any more videos of that tragic day. They want to make sure they have them just right!

Though I still must say I do believe planes were used. At least until someone shows definitely otherwise.

[Bolo Boffin]

9. Excuse me?

You're telling me that with five years of video faking technology like the shots in King Kong, that the recent release of Pentagon video was the best they can do?

Ye gods...

[Grateful for Hope]

10. Miranda

If a low-flying plane goes overhead, it is very loud, and, it would make people look up. I do believe planes struck both buildings only because there really can be no doubt if one hears the plane approaching.

This is not to say that I believe the OCT.

[mirandapriestly]

11. Hope, you're probably right, but

my point is that not that many people witnesses saw the planes and as for hearing them did you ever see the video of the guy standing right under the plane as it hits the second tower? He doesn't even notice it although it is right over his head. Then the explosion and he looks up. Similarly on the Naudet video they are not really that distracted by the noise. I don't think there were a lot of plane noise witnesses either, probably because the explosion was so much more memorable.

[Grateful for Hope]

12. Maybe

because the first hit was so traumatic, people might not have paid attention to the second strike as much as they would have if it had been unique on that day.

I think this is a good point.

[theSaiGirl]

14. How they did it on 9/11 .... and how they continue to do it ...

===========================
Broadcast of fake/doctored video by CNN purporting to show a Boeing commercial jet striking the South Tower:
This is a close-up of the video originally broadcast by CNN on 9/11
Watch it and make up your own mind.

Planes are made mostly of lightweight aluminum ... light enough so they can be lifted into flight.
A jet plane is essentially an aluminum can.

Ever crushed an aluminum beer can in your hands ?

Watch the "plane" in the CNN video "melt" seamlessly into the concrete and steel of the South Tower ...

http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/noplane2 /

Look Ma' .... NO IMPACT !!!

Here is the original “live network news” video broadcast by CNN on the morning of 9/11:
http://www.911hoax.com/gZoomCNN.asp?intPage=14&PageNum=14

And here is how it was done ....
http://www.reopen911.org/bluescreen.htm

And here are the skilled professionals who made it all happen ...
right before our very eyes ..
http://www.counterpunch.org/cnnpsyops.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/06/02/28_psyops.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/30/95642/8018
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1748
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/cnn.htm
http://www.geocities.com/saufor/unsorted/cnnpsyops.html
http://atangledweb.typepad.com/weblog/2004/12/most_trusted_am.html

Now.... guess who got PSY-0P’ed on 9/11 .... ??
Want a hint.
Take a look in the mirror.

============================================

[mirandapriestly]

15. Showing the "impact" over and over again

definitely had a psychological effect even on those who think they are immune to that kind of thing. I've seen people post that "millions" of people saw the plane hit IN PERSON, as if everyone in lower manhattan had a view of that specific area as it was hit. You could not see the wtc's from everywhere in Manhattan, and when you could get a clear view it was too far away. Because of the height of the buildings, the angles, the need to be just in the right place to see it is very unlikely that people did see it. But we think that "everyone" saw it because of the number of times we have seen the footage aired.
Unfortunately there is a huge campaign to shut this topic off because it sounds too "kooky", in fact any minute now we are going to get attacked. So I tend to stay away from it, cuz I don't want to be more of a pariah than I already am. Also, I don't really understand video technology or bluescreen technology. But I will say that:
1. Less people then we think actually saw the "impact"
2. At least some of the footage seems to be faked (that is to me, who doesn't understand much about vid. tech.)
3. A reporter who was watching the towers had to be told by the anchor that a plane was hitting the wtc although the reporter on location couldn't see it himself! The anchor had to tell him, in so many words: yeah you can I can see it on my screen! It has to be real it's on tv!

[vincent_vega_lives]

20. Try this little experiment

Take a FULL aluminum can and have some one pitch it at your head as hard as they can...simulating the wing fuel tanks.

[crickets]

16. Link says: "This video has been removed by the user."

What was it?

[Dubiosus]

18. don't really know

but imo one thing should be clear!

It doesn't matter if these video pics have been manipulated or not.

To discover this scam you just have to open your eyes and take the pain which

of course will enter your stomach and head, you have to see that tyranny is at work

and nearly every scandal which comes up these days is to make you bark up the wrong tree.

Even the a.coulter assault to the widows can be another mislead to the 9/11 setup.

Just read their response and see that none of these women is talking about

real unanswered questions. See it?

To many laws of physics have been out of order on that day!

NOBODY has answered the "building 7" questions and nobody can explain this photo ot me!!!


http://www.editio-defacto.de/editio-defacto/HTML/BILDERFOLGE/Bilder11September/Bild1.html


And don't forget!!! These men are chessplayer who will do everything even two step backword

to camouflage their third and fourth step right into your naive looking and dying face of freedom.


Good luck with Iran! It has to fall for your oily hunger....


The only way to make this mankind a better race could be the whisdom and knowledge of our

ancestors like Victor Schauberger (who wasn't a nazi if anybody say so!! He had to show his genius

to Hitler but didn't want to) who have been forced, in 1954 I think, to leave all his researches in

Amerika just to be allowed to leave the country. And died of grief when he returned to Europe.

Or Tesla who was capable to obtain a so called "free" energy source, which nowadays would lead us

out of the hands of these moneymonsters who want us to be dependent on them.

Be sure! If they would depend on a healthy environment, they would take care. And to me it seems

possible that these "people" have their hands on technology which enables them to leave when work is

done and we are of no use any more.... :nuke:

[vincent_vega_lives]

19. Few points

To discover this scam you just have to open your eyes and take the pain which of course will enter your stomach and head, you have to see that tyranny is at work

Yep my stomach is always involved in my important analysis...like when to have lunch!

To many laws of physics have been out of order on that day!

Typical talking point. Say it enought times it takes on a certain amount of lazy truth.

NOBODY has answered the "building 7" questions and nobody can explain this photo ot me!!!

Actually, the answers have been presented here countless times but the problem is no one likes the answers. And that Photo is easy to explain. Good view of the fuselage hole 20' high and 15' wide, with some debris hanging down. The wing hole is totaly obscured by the foam spray.

My eyes glazed over at the rest of your post, so forgive me for not commenting on it.

[petgoat]

21. "the answers have been presented "

Baloney. NIST's final report on WTC7 is six months overdue.

The studies of the "evaporated" steel were never continued,
and NIST pretends those samples don't exist.

The FEMA report ignored the mututally contradictory reports of
structural damage and concluded that fire brought WTC7 down--
but they couldn't explain how.

We have photos of the North, East, and West side of WTC7--
small fires, and a peculiar photo showing some corner nibbling.

How come nobody took any pictures of the massive damage to the
South side that is claimed?

The answers have NOT been presented.