Okay then. I will have to say my morning wasn't wasted. It was rather bizarre watching it all over again, especially from the British point of view of
For a little over two hours of watching just this video I not only got the answer about the smoke poof, but a few other things of interest came up
that I'm going to share with you as well.
First lets get the smoke issue at the Monument out of the way. The video was not hacked. The scene was legit. After viewing it a couple times though
I do feel the congratulations were in order and I did find it to be a flag on the Whitehouse. I did the best I could trying to catch a screen shot,
but it goes so quick it was hard to get a clear shot. I think with what I did manage to get though, you can get a better idea of it being the flag.
Quite frankly I'm happy to be wrong on this and thank you to our member "cardinalfan0596" for pointing this out. I forgot to add this can be seen at
the 1:53:21 minute mark.
Now a couple other things I thought Id add since they come up while I was watching if you are interested.
At the 21.24 Mark of the video this picture below popped up. It barely showed for two seconds and then it was gone. Have no idea what it was, but just
a couple minutes later the news cut to the first mention of an explosion happening at the pentagon. For quite awhile they kept saying a plane crashed
into a helicopter landing pad. They eventually changed the story but it took quite awhile before they did.
The picture that popped up:
The 1:00:30 Mark: They are doing an interview, 9 seconds later there is a very loud explosion.
The 1:03:17 Mark: They interview another guy that was in the basement of one of the towers. He had some very interesting things to say. A bit grizzly,
but worth the listen.
The 1:35:20 Mark: They are panning live shots around different areas near the pentagon and they show another plane flying over. It appeared to be
flying rather low and the size of a jet liner. May just not have landed yet for all the grounding of the planes, but seems odd it would be in that
The 1:57:10 Mark: Has a pretty good viewing of the pentagon still standing, or before the roof collapse. One pretty good visual of the hole that was
The 1:57:36 Mark: Here they show and then announce another hijacked plane also heading towards Washington. They actually announce it around
I'm glad we solved the smoke problem at least. We can put that one to bed. I hope you find some of the other things I marked out worth the look. I
for one refuse to forget what happened that day and will continue to dig. I think I'm going to start watching a lot of these full coverage videos from
that day with fresh eyes to see what I may stumble across.
The video in the OP just fuels my frustration with regard to questioning the OS of 9/11. The quality of the footage is dismal and the overlay/underlay
text in Disney font (of all things!) feels purposely designed to confuse and overwhelm the vision. It's actors like that who put their absurd
theories, explanations and videos all over YouTube and other sites that corrupt and drown out those rational people who challenge the OS.
You could spent many many hours, days, weeks, months wading through the muck to find decent videos and it's very slim pickings I can tell you.
I am glad OP started this thread, and glad we've had clarification the "smoke" was a flag. Before reading through the thread I was thinking that what
the "smoke" was wasn't coming from the Monument because it appeared to be quite a ways in front of it. Not like the powerful squibs we saw at WTC.
In response to things that happened that day, I wrote in my journal updates that I heard on the radio and TV from that day (night for us) and through
the subsequent 24 hours. I was at a writing camp in the mountains when it happened. My point is, I still have that journal floating around somewhere
and I do recall writing there were concerns about the Washington Bridge (a white van/truck bomb) and a few other tidbits. If I find it and remember -
I'll post it here.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.