It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Security Footage Of Synagogue Collapse & 'Strange Airplane' Allegedly Behind It

page: 1
50
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+21 more 
posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 02:27 AM
link   
I thought I'd share this - for a couple of reasons...

First... You may not be aware of this, but a building at the Synagogue Church of All Nations collapsed on Friday, 12 September 2014, in Lagos, in the Federal Republic of Nigeria. If "the Church of All Nations" sounds unfamiliar, then perhaps "Prophet" T.B. Joshua will ring a bell. Reports are still patchy but apparently at least 67 were killed in the collapse.

More

Tragic and unnecessary loss of life.

Which brings me to the security footage of the collapse. (It will make its way to ATS eventually - so rather sooner than later.)



As you can see from the video, it is claimed that the "strange plane" had something to do with the collapse. Absurd, I agree with you. What is a "strange plane"? Is it even the same plane? How do we know there isn't an airport close by and it's not just regular air traffic?

But, the plot thickens a bit... Remember Boko Haram? Rings a bell? Remember the #bringbackourgirls you sent to all your Twitter friends? You forgot all about them, didn't you? Well Boko Haram was responsible for the kidnappings.
With all eyes on ISIS/IS/ISIL (or pick a name already) the world failed to notice that 'Boko Haram militants have reportedly surrounded the Borno State capital of Maiduguri, where residents expect an attack on what could be the group's largest and most symbolic seizure yet'. Source. And also that the Boko Haram commander (Amir - that arrogant guy from the kidnapping video) was killed during a clash with Nigerian forces. Source.

Well, all that said, news from Nigeria are just like e-mails from Nigeria... Sketchy - to be kind.

So to complete the circle - some folks (at the Synagogue Church of All Nations) are claiming that the building collapse was caused by Boko Haram (whom apparently managed this by simply flying over the building in a Cessna?) Right...

Also, those interested in 9/11 conspiracies may find the building collapse interesting - for comparison, if nothing else.
edit on 17/9/2014 by Gemwolf because: Missing word




posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 02:42 AM
link   
I was all about ready to close the window and brush it off as a poorly built piece of crap, but it really does look like a controlled demolition.

If it's absolutely not a controlled demolition, I'm at as much of a loss as anyone, because it doesn't look like it just fell apart.

The flying thing just makes it even weirder.

Good post.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Is there something like a "demolition drone?"

Sure looks suspicious.


+2 more 
posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 03:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gemwolf
Is it even the same plane? How do we know there isn't an airport close by and it's not just regular air traffic?


A quick look at a map and you see that the Murtala Muhammed International Airport is a few miles from the building that collapsed, and by looking at the video it looks like you are just seeing aircraft taking off from there.

It was not the church that collapsed, but hostel accommodation at the Synagogue Church of All Nations.


Rescuers say the church's hostel - which housed Nigerian and foreign followers of preacher and televangelist TB Joshua - had been overburdened by the construction of additional floors.

www.iol.co.za...
edit on 17-9-2014 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Not sure about the flying object, without checking if there is indeed an airport or something similar near the area I'm not sure what it could have to do with it.

As for the building it certainly didn't look like it just collapsed to me, I'm no expert but anytime I've seen a video clip of a controlled demolition it looked just like that. The strange thing is though, if this was some kind of terrorist attack then why the controlled explosion? Don't they normally go for maximum damage and flair?



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

The building looks like it implodes which is rather like a 'controlled' incident rather than the building exploded.

Also if that was a strange aeroplane, why didn'[t anyone look up at it, it does seem perhaps to be the flight path for an airport.

Was the building hit insured with the same insurers as the WTC?

I am sorry for the poor people minding their own business at worship, destroying churches - whatever denomination is cowardly especially when people are inside.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

Looks like a bird to me and the video is looped. I can see what looks like Birds Wings in flying motion. flapping up and down and its most likely a controlled explosion as they are doing a demolition and rebuilding.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 07:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

It is impossible to tell where the aircraft are in relation to the building. If they are the size of even a small private plane they are nowhere near the building, simply in line of sight. Since the flight path appears identical and is regularly spaced, these are probably commercial aircraft taking off from an airport, as suggested above. The claim that the "strange aircraft" does not reappear is spurious. One would need to view security footage from after the collapse to reach that conclusion, yet that necessary footage has been edited out.

Note that the building collapses inwards, as though central supports were buckling. This is consistent with the explanation that the building was carrying more weight than it was originally designed for. There is no indication of "controlled demolition." In fact, if the object were terrorism, the less controlled the destruction, the better.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

Well I agree that the plane(s) are just on a flight path, their suggestion of it being involved somehow confuses me, do they think it dropped a bomb on the building?

Here's an article from South Africa saying three other church sites have had something happen to them, also has better quality footage.


citizen.co.za...


edit on 17-9-2014 by AlphaHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

The video in the article above is clearer, and you can see light planes banking "over" the building, of course it doesn't mean it was actually over, but at least we know it's planes and not birds.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

its actually 50 minutes later....so if it was the aircraft it took 50 minutes to do its thing. The plane moves kind of funny...almost like a bird but from that distance there is no way it could be a bird as it would be huge...but it did move kind of funny to me. Very odd and interesting video. Maybe they are using some of tesla's ideas or something!
edit on 17-9-2014 by rockpaperhammock because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 09:06 AM
link   
This is the same way building 7 fell on 911.

Airport is nearby where this controlled demolition happened.
edit on 17-9-2014 by Fylgje because: to clairify



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7
Can't necessarily go by what people look at, they are oblivious most of the time.

I remember marching in formation in the military and seeing two gigantic fireballs falling from the sky. I was like isn't anyone else seeing this???

Then again, maybe I was just hallucinating...Not..

Jaden



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I too think this looks like regular air traffic. I like how they state that it is the same plane and that it returns multiple times, yet this cannot be determined from the video. And we do not see any planes going the other way, like it circled back. If it supposedly only took it two minutes to pass, circle, and pass again, I am willing to bet that we would have seen it in the footage. Even if it circled on the left of the camera we probably would have seen something. Two minutes is not a lot of time to make a really far circle, although small planes can usually bank and turn somewhat faster than larger prop planes. I cannot say for certain that it would have been in view of the camera, but it is something to consider.

Regarding the collapse itself, it appears that the supports at ground level somehow gave way. It appears that the structure buckled not in a corner, but rather inward from the right side. This was followed closely by the collapse of the right side, with a cascading effect towards the left side of the building. Either the left part collapsed because the right had already done so, which would explain the lag, or the people that pulled it did not have their explosives go off simultaneously.

Here is what I think: given that the building appeared to give way more towards the center first, I think this was a collapse without explosives. If there were explosives used, the building likely was not brought down by experienced demolitions experts, rather there was probably a single explosion that destroyed part of the building's structural strength, which placed too much stress on the supporting elements, which caused the remaining parts to fall in sequence. Obviously it would be extremely easy to determine the cause of this collapse since the building is not very large. There is less to go through. Plus, eyewitnesses may or may not have heard explosive charges or a single explosion. If they heard an explosion then this was probably done on purpose.

So while I cannot determine for certain whether the building was brought down by terrorism or explosives, I am quite confident that the aircraft had nothing to do with it. The building failed at the bottom, towards the right hand side. How is an airplane going to cause a building to fail at such a location, when the airplane never strikes the building? It could drop explosives, but if that were the case we would have seen the explosion since it would have been on the exterior of the building. And it would have taken more explosives to bring a building down from the outside as opposed to the explosives being on the inside near structural supports, which would have taken less explosives. So I'm not seeing it.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 09:17 PM
link   

BasementWarriorKryptonite
it really does look like a controlled demolition.


longy9999
anytime I've seen a video clip of a controlled demolition it looked just like that.


Shiloh7
The building looks like it implodes which is rather like a 'controlled' incident rather than the building exploded.


Fylgje
Airport is nearby where this controlled demolition happened.

Have any of you watched a building collapse spontaneously, so as to be able to tell the difference?



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

Someone said there is an airport near, if so then it would be common to have airplanes flying by and over. Much more likely then a strange aircraft going in circles over a building 4 times for no reason. Generally planes or helicopters do not circle over building over nothing, so if there is an airport near it would make sense. But it would make sense that if there was an airport near that planes would continue to fly over the building even after it collapsed. The video says that after that the so called "strange aircraft" is seen no more, but that's when the video ends.

So really whatever camera that is, it seems to be overlooking that area, if they can film more aircraft flying over the area then its routine and normal, possibly from the nearby airport. If not? Then it is pretty suspicious why an aircraft would fly over in circles over a building over and over. But whats even more suspicious is that a building like that would collapse on itself all because they were adding more floors and the weight of more people in it. It must have been some pretty shoddy work held up by super glue and duck tape for something to collapse like that. And last I checked you would need some space age technology to fly a plane over a building and make it collapse, if these boko haram guys had that kind of tech they would likely be multi billionaires and not in the terrorist business. Or they could have set the whole thing up months and weeks ahead. But you know you would think somebody would notice something like that.

The whole short story on this buildings collapse is just bizarre, I mean it could happen because of shoddy contraction...But then again. Its just as likely that there is some sort of mass ritual sacrifice going on involving mass murders being scapegoated as building disasters, that would be just as likely as that the building collapsed because they added more floors then the structure could handle. It is bizarre to say the least.
edit on 9pmWednesdaypm172014f3pmWed, 17 Sep 2014 21:26:16 -0500 by galadofwarthethird because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 06:22 AM
link   
As was said, there's an airport neaby. Stands to reason the 'strange aircraft', were in fact several aircraft on approach to that airport. All on the same flight path. They seem to make a left turn towards a runway after flying over the building. And do we know they were actually 'over' the building? Could be they were larger commercial planes, several miles away. Size with distance are deceptive.

The building dropped 50 min. after the last plane. The 'strange aircraft' didn't return because the airport changed the flight path because of the collapse. And/or, the several flights were just the morning rush, and there was a lull in air traffic. Or, whoever made/narrated the video was purposely deceiving us.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: galadofwarthethird

As for a single plane flying by over and over again. I've seen quite often, and in many places, military aircraft training on 'touch and go' landings. They touch down on a runway, power up and take off again. Only to fly in a large circle to do it over and over. They're practicing approach and landings. Sometimes coming in steep and fast, like how they have to fly into Bagram Air Base, Afganistan.

I've seen everything from fighter jets doing this, to B-52s. Not saying that's the case in the video, but just saying.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

Have any of you watched a building collapse spontaneously, so as to be able to tell the difference?


Good one.

Scientific and obvious proof of demolition is that building collapsed at "free fall speed" and into its own "footprint".



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


Scientific and obvious proof of demolition is that building collapsed at "free fall speed" and into its own "footprint".

I suppose that's what all those posters were thinking. It's completely untrue, of course.




top topics



 
50
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join