Full Video: Explosions Before Both WTC Collapses and before WTC7 Collapse - You Will Believe

Originally posted by LeftBehind

Lyte Trizzle that first picture you posted has had some serious editing done to it. The actual unedited pic shows none of the "blobs" of thermite.

uhhhhh.

right.


then why didn't you post the original to prove it?

as if anyone should take your word for it when it was referenced by professor jones in his very public paper that is up for peer review AND specifically sourced as taken by Rob Miller, photojournalist with the New York Post .


but "leftbehind" in a conspiracy forum says it's fake so it must be.





of course if those thermite blobs are in the original (as you have shown no reason to think otherwise) it is EXTREMELY compelling evidence that matches with the flashes and explains why although clearly most of them go off in the core.......you can also see some in the ejected debris as visible in the photo.......


ohhh nooo!! look out for the cans of hairspray!!!!!

Howdy...

It can be found here...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's that pic again, from the link posted by Jedi-Master:



Not quite so spectacular when you don't turn the contrast up by an extra 50% or so is it

I keep asking myself, these people that present this ground breaking, stomach churning new evidence - why do they always insist on 'enhancing' it to 'make it clearer'. I thought it was 'obvious' and 'spoke for itself'.

it is EXTREMELY compelling evidence that matches with the flashes and explains why although clearly most of them go off in the core.......

Here is the same video of the one that you are talking about is taken from, however this one doesn't show any flashes ( from the link I posted as well, it's the second vid that WCIP posted )...

terrorize.dk...

HAHA!!

you guys utterly crack me up!

first; the original photo still clearly shows visible white thermite charges even without the contrast turned up.

second; the other version of that video footage that is less close up still has visible flashes!

hmmm.....gosh.....i wonder why they are more visible in a less compressed higher resolutiuon close up version??

i have the original dvd (on which there is ZERO mention of the flashes) yet i saw them the first time i watched it and rewound it a bunch of times completely perplexed by them.

you can see a TON of them on the original dvd.

these compressed versions for the internet do not do the raw footage justice.

rick made the 2nd version closer up so the flashes on the original dvd could be more visible in an internet version of the clip.

AND.......you guys made me notice something VERY important right now.

look closely on second number 57 in the video you just referenced that supposedly "doesn't" have the flashes (although it clearly does).

look at the debris that falls towards building 7 at that moment.

THAT CLIP CATCHES THE THERMITE REATIONS IN THE SPIRE PIECE THAT WE SEE IN THE PICTURE!!!

it's incredible.

you can see it in rick's footage AND in that incredible picture from that dude
at the new york post.

100% corroborated from independent sources.

there is NOTHING fake about those visible charges.

no wonder you cornballs are scrambling so hard.

wow.

Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle
no wonder you cornballs are scrambling so hard.

It's possible to engage in mature debate without insults. We've seen hundreds of people do it.

Please adopt a more mature tone or your account will be terminated.

Emm, so you decided to skip the part where I showed the same effect clearly being caused by falling debris when the first tower collapsed, and the bit where I explained that the debris is further from the tower than we imagine, so it is caught by the sunlight as demonstrated when you look at the light hitting the debris cloud?
You also missed the bit where I showed and explained about some of the 'detonation flashes' being outside of the area occupied by the tower, though the piece of footage that shows it best was cut out of the newly circulating clip?
Yeah yeah, I know, it's doesn't matter how you get there as long as the motivation is honourable.
Who's the real Shady? You are...

Originally posted by Lyte Tizzle
rick made the 2nd version closer up so the flashes on the original dvd could be more visible in an internet version of the clip.

AND.......you guys made me notice something VERY important right now.

look closely on second number 57 in the video you just referenced that supposedly "doesn't" have the flashes (although it clearly does).

look at the debris that falls towards building 7 at that moment.

THAT CLIP CATCHES THE THERMITE REATIONS IN THE SPIRE PIECE THAT WE SEE IN THE PICTURE!!!

it's incredible.

you can see it in rick's footage AND in that incredible picture from that dude
at the new york post.

100% corroborated from independent sources.

there is NOTHING fake about those visible charges.

no wonder you cornballs are scrambling so hard.

wow.

Emm, but looking at Rick's 'second version' talked about by you above:

'rick made the 2nd version closer up so the flashes on the original dvd could be more visible in an internet version of the clip.'

That you posted before:

Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle

www.911eyewitness.com...

At around 8 seconds you cannot see these obvious 'thermite reactions' that you say can be seen in the rather nasty, compressed, contrast turned up version.

Which one do you want to run with then? Or is this a conspiracy Pick 'n Mix?



[edit on 21-1-2006 by AgentSmith]

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Emm, so you decided to skip the part where I showed the same effect clearly being caused by falling debris when the first tower collapsed, and the bit where I explained that the debris is further from the tower than we imagine, so it is caught by the sunlight as demonstrated when you look at the light hitting the debris cloud?
You also missed the bit where I showed and explained about some of the 'detonation flashes' being outside of the area occupied by the tower, though the piece of footage that shows it best was cut out of the newly circulating clip?

it's not the same effect at all.

i have seen flashes from sunlight off the decorative aluminum panels in many pics taken the next day etc.

in the video....most of the flashes clearly happen in the core.....

some ejected debris was falling as cutting charges were taking place within it as the picture clearly shows.

are you trying to claim that the bright white globs of flashes in the picture are also merely reflections?

they clearly are not.

the video corroborates that the globs in the picture are authentic and the picture corroborates that the globs are NOT reflections from the aluminum panels.




i apologize for calling names.

it's so ironic to me that people who fight the 9/11 truth movement call themselves "skeptics" when he swallow the official story hook line and sinker despite all of the glaring contradictions and anomalies.

Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle
in the video....most of the flashes clearly happen in the core.....

Wow Superman, sorry you'll have to excuse us mere mortals, none of us could see the core becasue of the dust and debris obscuring it.

some ejected debris was falling as cutting charges were taking place within it as the picture clearly shows.

Yes of course it does..

are you trying to claim that the bright white globs of flashes in the picture are also merely reflections?

When you have it turned down, it could be.. But looking at teh video that part may have been a more central piece of the building as it fell quite late when the core was still standing and may have been from the damaged area. It may have had burning debris attached to it. That is one possible explanation.

it's so ironic to me that people who fight the 9/11 truth movement call themselves "skeptics" when he swallow the official story hook line and sinker despite all of the glaring contradictions and anomalies.

No one here is fighting the 9/11 truth movement, we're just fighting ignorance and poor education.

and as i said....

you CAN see flashes in both versions.

they are more clear in the closer up version and even more clear in the original.

go figure!

if you ask me which one you should look at i would say the original.

why?

because obviously if you think rick altered one internet clip and not the other.......these alterations would not be in the original.

ESPECIALLY since the original makes no mention of these flashes.

oh but they are there.

and they are clearly not reflections but yet yave a stroooooooooooong resemblence to thermite reactions as pointed out by a professor of physics which i am assuming you are not.

Wow Superman, sorry you'll have to excuse us mere mortals, none of us could see the core becasue of the dust and debris obscuring it.

superman? wouldn't that be considered sarcarstic immature name calling? get 'im overlord! and do you not realize the core is in the center of the building? news flash: the core was in the center of the building and wast he bulk of the building support. and yep...low and behold.....most of the visible cutting charges happen there.

When you have it turned down, it could be.. But looking at teh video that part may have been a more central piece of the building as it fell quite late when the core was still standing and may have been from the damaged area. It may have had burning debris attached to it. That is one possible explanation.

ahhhhhhh so you CAN see the core! hmmmm. why did you just lie and say that you can't? right though.....it was the other side of the spire that was still left standing for a few seconds before it disintegrates before our eyes. so the core was literally turning to dust and falling apart as these visible charges went off like mad. said charges are now corroborated from two sources and two different media....video and photograph. this would have to be compelling to any true skeptic.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
What some people are failing to appreciate is that the refelections are caused by material ejected outwards, due to the fact the camera is looking straight on at the tower it gives the illusion that the flashes are occuring in or on the perimeter of the building when they are infact closer to the camera and out of the building's shadow.

I'm not disputing that some pieces would have reflected light, but there is absolutely nothing to suggest that this is the case here for all of these flashes. They all occur in the same area of video, and most all of that region is shaded, and thus sunlight is obscured, whether you like it or not.



It's almost like night and day between the right and left, and those flashes are all popping out on the dark side through clouds.

Where are similar flashes from the light side? You know, where all the sunlight is shining directly onto the falling debris?

One would expect even more from there, if it were truly sunlight, unless the mass of aluminum falling on the side facing the light somehow managed to discriminate and not reflect light upon Hoboken. Either that, or a tremendous coincidence that none of them reflected, or else you have to accept that NONE of the flashes were reflections of sunlight.

If these flashes are genuine, then your reflected sunlight doesn't add up, Smith. You're going to stick to it anyway, of course, but it still doesn't make any sense.

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Clutching at straws would be saying that it's impossible for light to reflect off objects buddy.

It is impossible, when the objects are in the shade.

So I guess we finally agree on something.

The most implausible answer would be tiny peices of thermite placed throughout the building with no one noticeing.

Says you, but I'll just go for explosives in general. It's not necessarily thermite. Thermite doesn't explode, so it's slower than whatever was used to cause those waves of destruction rushing down the towers in a sequence, as can be seen in videos taken from below the collapse. In short, there had to have been different types of explosives. I wouldn't pin this on thermite or anything in particular unless there's supporting evidence.

So far, all that can be drawn from logic is that whatever those flashes were, they were putting off intense white light, were coming from areas backdropped by (a) the core structure, and (b) by shade, and no such flashes came from the debris falling to the side of the core, which was also in direct sunlight.

Hand that info over to pancake theorists and they come back with exploding computer monitors and reflections of sunlight through shade. It would do NIST proud.

[edit on 21-1-2006 by bsbray11]

GENERAL NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS

Please keep the tone of your discussions mature, to the point, and without insult or other derogatory comments.

This applies to EVERYONE.

Thank you.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by AgentSmith
What some people are failing to appreciate is that the refelections are caused by material ejected outwards, due to the fact the camera is looking straight on at the tower it gives the illusion that the flashes are occuring in or on the perimeter of the building when they are infact closer to the camera and out of the building's shadow.

I'm not disputing that some pieces would have reflected light, but there is absolutely nothing to suggest that this is the case here for all of these flashes. They all occur in the same area of video, and most all of that region is shaded, and thus sunlight is obscured, whether you like it or not.

After studying both videos, you can see the flashes in both videos, so I think the Hi res version has not been edited to show the flashes.

The third video posted by WCIP, while grainy provides a close up shot from a different angle which shows what really caused those flashes.

terrorize.dk...

What is clear in the above video is the presence of smaller debris falling behind the smoke. It's hard to get a good still from it due to the fact that the debris keeps flashing in and out as it hits the sunlight.


I think Agentsmith is correct in saying that the flashes in the shade could actually be small bits of debris shot out far enough to hit the sunlight.




Now if they are explosives, what kind of explosive is so quiet? Why were they still going off when the building was almost down?

If this was a top down demolition as has been proposed, then it makes no sence to have more bombs going off at top after the sequence of floors had been blown all the way down.

thermite reactions are not explosions.

it literally cuts though steel.

the explosives were in the base of the towers and went off just before the collapse to weaken the structure and the thermite reactions are what caused the core to disintegrate.

Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle

thermite reactions are not explosions.

it literally cuts though steel.

the explosives were in the base of the towers and went off just before the collapse to weaken the structure and the thermite reactions are what caused the core to disintegrate.

Yes of course they did, that's why the building fell form the top down, not only that but in at least one of the towers the bottom of the core was still standing with survivors in it. It must have been Superman, Batman and the Amazing Spiderman because somehow they survived these 'explosives'.

Sixteen people survived inside the collapse of the World Trade Center, and they were all in Stairwell B of the North Tower, in the center of the building. The survivors were spread out between floors 22 and 1.
[...]
That was when the wind started, even before the noise. “No one realizes about the wind,” says Komorowski.

The building was pancaking down from the top and, in the process, blasting air down the stairwell. The wind lifted Komorowski off his feet. “I was taking a staircase at a time,” he says, “It was a combination of me running and getting blown down.” Lim says Komorowski flew over him. Eight seconds later—that’s how long it took the building to come down—Komorowski landed three floors lower, in standing position, buried to his knees in pulverized Sheetrock and cement.
www.newyorkmetro.com...

[edit on 23-1-2006 by AgentSmith]

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Here's that pic again, from the link posted by Jedi-Master:

It looks spectacular. Did you take picture? I went to site you talk about in front pages and see a lotof good video

www.911eyewitness.com...

gives a different view of these same pictures, like that terrorize.dk one, but more detail.

I see same sparks, more fireworks inside this one though and they look like a sequence in the video.

This is part of some new thing they are doing, I didnt get it all.

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle

www.911eyewitness.com...

At around 8 seconds you cannot see these obvious 'thermite reactions' that you say can be seen in the rather nasty, compressed, contrast turned up version.

I see them in there! You cant see them? Did you download it so you can go frame by frame. That man did a great job!

Are you serious? You can't see them? Come now? They are all over the edges from the core. They run in sequences all over. Maybe someone can map them on that hi resolution one? I will ask in their forum about it.

I order that DVD and wait now. I will look.

How can man look and not see? It is crazy.

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
If you were a fence-sitter in regards to whether or not WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition before, you won't be after you watch this video from 911EyeWitness, by Rick Siegel.

This video includes multiple explosions recorded on video from directly across the river just before the collapses of WTC1 and WTC2 AND just before the collapse of WTC Building 7. It also includes news broadcasts recorded live and unedited on the day as the events were occurring - reports of explosions at the bases of the buildings, a FEMA official admitting on tape that FEMA arrived to deal with the disaster ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, a military helicopter close to the explosion at the Pentagon, and more.

You can find the Torrent file for the full video (679Mb) here: Click to go there.

If you don't have the Torrent software, do a google search for "torrent client" and go to the first link that comes up, you can download it from there.

An absolute must see.

[edit on 2005-12-8 by wecomeinpeace]

I take your word for it, and saw many others on these pages talking about it too. I went and orderd it because the link to the download does not work. I hope that DVD will get here soon. I started reading this thread from the first message and after a few pages realized I knew nothing and had to get this. Thank you all for this information.

How come no one investigates the murders of the 2000 people in NYC that day?

Originally posted by ChapaevII

How come no one investigates the murders of the 2000 people in NYC that day?

they think it's case closed.

they say they already know who did it.

liars.