It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why Are the NIST FOIA Videos Cut and Tampered With?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 03:06 PM
I just uploaded this wpix dub5 30 download from the NIST Cumulus. As you can see like most of the videos they have and released are missing key moments and usually begin after the collapse of the Penthouse or the audio is cut all together.

edit on 11-7-2015 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-7-2015 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 05:04 PM
Thank you Shadow Herder for posting Truth. I have known this for a few years. I have to believe the CIA had their dirty hands on most of these videos. If the CIA did not tamper with these videos the truth would be knowing all over the world, that it was demolitions that were taking place when these building fell. Editing these videos had to be done in order to make the OS fly. When doing a False Flag operation, one must cover up the evidence that would expose the real criminals.

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 05:09 PM
a reply to: hellobruce

Were you there? You can refute the dozens of eye witnesses in what way!

(post by YouPeople removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 05:40 PM
a reply to: Shadow Herder

If it is your claim that the NIST edited out sections of the videos you posted then why did they not edit them all?

There are plenty of NIST FOIA videos that show the WHOLE collapse, in fact 15 or 20 min before right up until after the collapse.
You have some of these videos on your YT channel.

This theory that the NIST edited some videos but not all of them makes no sense.
Here is one from your YT account.

There are more but you get the point.

Then there are all these angles.

Pretty ineffective cover up by whoever 'edited' those videos.
To me it is a silly thing to focus on.

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 05:46 PM
Hey Shadow Herder I've studied the NIST FOIA archives too and can concur that many videos not only wtc7 but many others that contain vital frames and sounds have either been edited or removed from this public NIST release. Huge portions of the original library have clearly been omitted, you can see that from the video numbering and folder structure hierarchy in some cases. Why? Too graphic for public, the NIST FOIAs releases had to be censored... all of them.

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 05:48 PM
a reply to: Shadow Herder

Right on Shadow!!! I commend You for this Thread!!

There are some here refuting what is obvious tampering in some of these videos.

But even at that, The Truth will Still Shine!!!

Nice Job Here!!
edit on 11-7-2015 by SyxPak because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 06:04 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 06:26 PM
a reply to: Chadwickus

How can someone make such accusations as layed out in the OP when he hasn't even got the originals to compare the alleged tampered videos with? Sloppy.

What is sloppy is your inability to recognise that the fact that these vids are being cut mid collapse shows that they have been edited by someone.

I would say that there are several comments made by you in this thread that could be considered sloppy.

Sloppy is a word that you are allowed to use........

(post by YouPeople removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 10:44 PM
a reply to: YouPeople

I just don't understand what the debate is on the videos. If you deny that important information has been cut out of them IMO you are wilfully ignorant or far worse.

Good presentation of the information.

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:38 AM

originally posted by: Rocker2013
a reply to: Shadow Herder

After more than ten years of this rubbish absolutely no one in the conspiracy world has been able to offer any proof of anything they propose happened, nothing at all has been proven to contradict what millions of people actually saw and experienced on that day.

lol, "millions of people actually saw"!?

Are we back to class 9/11 101?

Do you mean that millions of people "actually saw it" or maybe they just watched a low def TV broadcast?

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 02:42 AM
My question is: What will any of these often blurry, raucous videos prove? That people in and around such large scale dramas hear and see many things; some factual, some a product of stress and some just blatant lies?

The thing is, unless a 'smoking gun' is produced - say, for example, a discernible video of what hit the Pentagon - governments will not be pressured into even acknowledging peoples' concerns beyond it being bunkum, let alone taking any earnest action towards allaying concerns as to the voracity of the official reports.

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 04:30 AM
There's so much nonsense about 9/11 from both sides BUT like it or not the official version fails to add up on numerous levels, and many of these proven official so called facts are based upon lies, deception and misdirection. The all important NIST formula often quoted by believers of the official story to prove the towers fell in a logical way, well the issue with that is that the formula is classified TOP SECRET and won't be released so no one can look at the data involved that proves it.

And could the believers please provide ON THE DAY GENUINE security footage from any of the air ports the hijackers used to do the deeds, there's none despite security camera's ALL OVER the various parts that the hijackers would have used and the one or two bits that have been seen have issues, no datestamp seen, edited out and the one that is often used is not standard footage as all the security camera's use timed delay tapes otherwise they would need incredible amounts of both storage and its also pointless as because of the nature of airports and the slowness its not needed to have real time tapes yet the one that shows two of them clearly is REAL TIME...

The point being that if you use logic and do as someone did with 3 hour long video's on Youtube where he took only points that were important to the case and used official records and manufacturer data to prove that the report was full of flaws and lies.

Hopefully someone will post a link to these video's, 3 hours is a long sit but its broken up into segments and its a real good watch, the so called facts that are in the report are simply ripped apart using official data from places like the CIA etc to show the report is a fraud, a deception and as much as anything actually proves so little its a waste of what little they spent on it.

What is the truth, who knows but its not the version that is in the Official report, we know that for sure..Of course people can claim the data used is fake but as it comes direct from the sources and contradicts the report, they can say its counter misinformation etc etc..

It matters not...There's a cover up one way or another..

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 05:23 AM
Oh and the 3 hour long video's are called

September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version

Should find them on Youtube very easily, they have been featured already on ATS.

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 06:41 AM
Apologies in advance for a post that can be considered off topic or thread drift. Sha'n't happen again......promise.

originally posted by: HumberWarrior

That's what the OP is saying. Show us the original uncut/ unedited/ untampered/ raw footage as the NIST footage so obviously cut/ edited/ tampered and cooked.

That way it can be compared.
You're asking the OP to do something nobody but the holders of the original footage can do...............But then you know that.
You are either mistaken with your belief of what is possible/impossible (and for that you shall be forgiven) or are being intentionally obstructive in an attempt to derail the thread.

If you wholeheartedly believe the OS why post so many times in this thread? Why does it matter so much if others don't. Sure.....Deny Ignorance'n'all that......but don't make YOURSELF look stoopid in the process.
edit on Sat Jul 11 2015 by DontTreadOnMe because: Community Announcement re: Decorum

I'd like to apologise for suggesting that a poster who I shall not name was in 'one of those moods' (Sigh).

The staff member was completely correct in ###SNIPPING## that text out as it so obviously breaches this:
re: Decorum:


posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 07:59 PM


I feel like we've said this on multiple threads, particularly regarding the current events in the middle east so instead of repeating myself a dozen times a single thread will do. 

ATS is a community forum on which people debate topics which sometimes get heated. 

This community was built up to the size it is now because of something that set it apart from other similar communities - civil discourse. 

If you demonstrate an inability to have intelligent conversation about these topics and resort to calling other members offensive names or imply that they are "paid shills" or have less of a right to be here than you do, your account will be terminated. That applies whether you have been here 2 days or 12 years. 

This is a privately owned community with rules. Yes our Terms and Conditions can appear to be a bit lengthy but in a nutshell the part covering member interaction is really simple. You will behave in a respectful manner towards other members. That's all there is to it. 

I've been seeing members calling each other shills, claiming one another are paid to be posting here, calling each other savages, using this issue to insult entire ethnic groups... 

Is ATS a place where members will call each other Nazis or terrorists? Where people will use current events as a platform to spread hate? Do we really need to see members calling all Muslims terrorists? Calling all Jews murderers? 

Those behaviors run contrary to our core beliefs and will not be tolerated. If a member can not argue a point without resorting to vile insults against other members they will be removed from this community. 

We do not want to close threads on entire topics. The community deserves to be able to talk about these topics that are so important in the world today. So we're not going to do that. The topics will remain open. The individuals ruining them with their poor behavior will be removed. 

Civil discourse and decorum will win on ATS. This announcement is closed to replies. If you see a member posting in a way that violates the above, click the alert button and the staff will deal with it

Sorry to the effected member more so if they actually had to click the alert button. A thousand apologies to the staff member who had to deal with my poor behaviour. I have thoroughly learned my lesson on how ATS works. I should have resorted to goading/baiting and being irritating in an attempt to derail a thread as that carries far more decorum and is much more conducive to civil discourse.

.....and to all those that starred my post.......

edit on 12-7-2015 by HumberWarrior because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-7-2015 by HumberWarrior because: to apologise for going off topic.

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 09:25 AM
I am open to the OP's observations. Some things just don't add up for me and others. Many more people than not just WANT to believe the OS because, I think, the alternatives are very ugly. I think one should always follow the data wherever it leads us and then try to come to some rational summary of events. Can't do that with missing footage from these videos or from the Pentagon. That was not mentioned in this thread yet but was a very compelling set of circumstances for my tastes. That is one we can all say is strange when the other planes made such huge holes, supposedly in the towers, this one didn't. Maybe that airplane that was taken down by heroic passengers CAN fall in a field and be buried in a big hole like the claim but that seemed like a first on hard land but of course not in FL swamp as the wetness of the land would make it possible.
edit on 12-7-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 12:04 PM
Despite their best efforts there are videos out there that they haven`t got to. Videos that everyone has seen that show multiple rapid fire explosions right before collapse. And while they`ve done a commendable job destroying evidence,one that would make any hoodlum proud-they couldn`t get to all of it. By now of course these incriminating videos that haven't been altered have been downloaded by thousands of people and believe me there`s enough there to prove controlled demolition.

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 03:31 PM
a reply to: Mclaneinc

No security camera footage of hijackers ...??

Dulles airport;_ylt=AwrBT4MkzaJVOfwAci5XNyoA;_ylu=X3o'___'EyODRjcmJxBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjAzNDFfMQRzZWMDc2M-?p=Se curity+Camera+Fottage+Hijacker+9+11&fr=yfp-t-328#id=1&vid=9a686eca1eb33488ee90d989448782ae&action=view

Took me 30 seconds to find

posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 03:33 PM
a reply to: firerescue

Try that again;_ylt=A2KLqIXhzqJVZ2MA3PH7w8QF;_ylu=X3o'___'EwOW1sbzJlBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDQjA0OTEEZ3BvcwMy?p=security +Camera+Footage+Atta+9+11&vid=9a686eca1eb33488ee90d989448782ae& 1%26h%3D200%26w%3D300%26c%3D7%26rs%3D1& =300&l=385&sigr=11b77mjmv&sigt=110sd1ke1&sigi=12mb0m8ep&age=1223061593&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av&fr=yfp-t-328&tt=b

new topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in