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

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
it comes across as a bit patronizing.

Firstly anyone who's ever dabbled in video production knows that producing a professional end product is no easy task, nor is it cheap. If after all the recording is done, you realize that the narrator speaks a little slowly, etc, the option of going back and re-recording is going to be an unnecessary expense. But in the end what matters here is the message, not how it is delivered IMHO.

I edited the rest out. But the whole message was so right on. I thank you for that.

It is so sad to see many people with their eyes welded shut, but on the other I am glad this work has provided information since 2001. If I had known sooner I would have made the quality video available sooner. No one told me until the Researchers came emailing back in 2004.

I cannot apologize for what is on the video, I merely pushed the camera button and stood there watching. I didn’t even want to narrate. It helps many other friends I have that are eyewitnesses too, like Mr. Rodriguez who testified to the explosions but had no help getting the visual audio proof from mass media.

All the camera crews in NY during 911 knew the rate for footage was $38 per second on offer at the time. I had about 40 minutes. I was so disgusted with the loss of freedom I soon left the country not wanting to cash in on the tragedy. I never knew anything was special about this tape, so I tossed it in a box with 5000 hours of other tapes in my archives. The encoded files stayed up on my site onlinetv.com. Stealth Communications confiscated 3 personal computers where they were hosted in Feb 04. The DOD had heavily invested Stealth Communications after 911 (I did not know as I had not been in the USA anymore). So much bad has happened since then to keep me from getting anything done, making a living or getting any of the information I have out.

I just want to thank you for a very good post about it. Clarifying things on the files that I cannot comment on (those sounds I don’t have anything unusual on the DVD or my original tape). I appreciate anything nice these days.


Rick Siegel

911 Eyewitness

Originally posted by zappafan1
I'd like to download it, but the website design for finding things is the absolute worst. I gave up, and I've been on the web since 1990.

We went through a lot of trouble to get the salient points online before the DVD went out and they are in easy to view files here:
www.911eyewitness.com...

Also there is a film preview at:

www.truecastdesign.net...

I dont know what is on that file on torrent really, I am taking flack for it and never did it or claim to it. I know this stuff and you only need the samples, you can mail them to friends from there and mount them in your websites.

If you like the work you can always support us. But the stuff is much easier to get in chunks that you like rather than sift through the 2 hours. You dont have to see me bitching then either.

But if you are doing analysis, please get the DVD for that or contact me for first generations.

For some of the best in physics try

forum.physorg.com...

they have a forum for 911 and it is really good, but you better learn some physics and terms before you go. I dont think I saw anyone take the pancake/etc thing serious there. Mostly it is about the heat and energy and that only explosives could create the energy needed. But I am NOT a scientist, I am just another idiot. I am a lurker there and learning the best I can.

Hope that helped

Rick Siegel | 911 EyeWitness News

Originally posted by 911Eyewitness
it is so sad to see many people with their eyes welded shut, but on the other I am glad this work has provided information since 2001. If I had known sooner I would have made the quality video available sooner. No one told me until the Researchers came emailing back in 2004.

Not everybody has there eyes welded shut, perish the thought,
I would like to thank you for making this film available, and the timeing couldn't be better, you've added yet more food for thought regarding the attack's on the American people on 9/11, I think some of the debunkers think we take this subject lightly, i dont think they understand the conciquences, looking at the collapse sequences, I ponder with bewilderment how others come to the view of being 100% sure there was nothing odd about the way the 3 buildings fell, and i just cant come to terms with this ignorence.

Thanks again


All the best... ian

What gets me is the apperence of cutter like charges image wise, but I don't know if that would be caused by the pancake collapse.

Originally posted by ihatescifi
What gets me is the apperence of cutter like charges image wise, but I don't know if that would be caused by the pancake collapse.

I just think it would be really strange for the entire floor to collapse evenly and at the same time, floor after floor. Chaos theory would apply, it seems to me. Each floor would fall differently and it would become a mess real quick, not an even, levelled compaction. as is shown in the photo.

I'm no scientist, but I'm really pretty smart and logical. There is no logic to the official story.

Originally posted by ihatescifi
What gets me is the apperence of cutter like charges image wise, but I don't know if that would be caused by the pancake collapse.

When you watch the video it is pretty clear that it is caused by the air being forced out along that floor. What cracks me up though is you see the same effect along the area directly hit by the aircraft and yet people still seem to try and argue it's caused by explosives - miracle explosives that don't have detonators or wires damaged, don't go off when goingt through the shock of being hit by the aircraft and also somehow stay in place where everything else has been destroyed. Not forgetting of course that they managed to place these explosvies at the exact level the aircraft hit.
I know, maybe the trapped people put them there..

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I just think it would be really strange for the entire floor to collapse evenly and at the same time, floor after floor. Chaos theory would apply, it seems to me. Each floor would fall differently and it would become a mess real quick, not an even, levelled compaction. as is shown in the photo.

Without seeing what was going on in there it is difficult to speculate to be honest, the problem is that there is nothing else to compare the disaster to. I've seen people trying to compare the WTC event to other collapses, fires, etc but they are all incredibly different. Different materials, construction, size, circumstances, etc. People keep complaining that we've never seen enough like it and they are right - there is a good reason for that.

People also like to compare it to demolition videos which are in abundance due to the planned nature of the event, but there is a sever shortage of building collapse videos because no-one happens to be filming at the time. Just because they share similar characteristics does not mean that they are the same.

I've also noticed people use the argument that the firefighters said there were only 2 small pockets of fire. What they seem to forget is that the firefighters had just reached the first floor of damage which obviously spanned many. Trying to say that there were only 2 small pockets of fire in the entire building as some people try to imply is just about the stupidest thing I have ever heard and sadly reflects on the reasoning ability and intelligence of the people that flaunt it around like it's some sort of evidence.

I fail to understand how or why people chose to keep ignoring or forgetting about the statements made by people involved in the construction of the WTC, regarding the change to inferior fireproofing during the construction due to a change in regulations I believe. I also fail to understand why they chose to ignore the statement that the buildings ability to withstand airliner impacts was never shown and apparantly based on an aircraft travelling at slow speed with no fuel on board.

I fail to understand why people find it hard to comprehend that the building would collapse after the impacts due to the weakening caused by the impacts and the fire afterwards. Look at all the buildings around the world that just collapse without a trigger event. Near where I live a new carpark is shut because it's falling apart, concrete is falling away and bolts are literally coming loose and falling out. I expect on paper it's boasted to withstand fires and all sorts but in reality it can't withstand it's own existance.

One of the other big hoots I have heard is the way some people think that if one or two floors gave way, that the floors above would just collapse and stay in place or just crumble and fall away like rain hitting an umbrella. Surely it's not difficult to realise that even though the building was designed to take it's own immense weight, the sudden impact of the floors above collapsing down one floor would start a collapse sequence. It's very similar to hanging a weight on a wire and then lifting the weight slightly and letting it drop - the wire snaps.

The steel beams would also have significantly lost their ability to take the load they were designed for if they were damaged, lost their strength due to heat and also became buckled due to the non-uniform distribution of the fires. It really isn't hard to imagine a floor giving way is it? And once that happens what do people really, really expect to happen when the dozen or so floors above suddenly drop several meters onto the floor below?

Can anyone seriously and honestly say that a progressive collapse would not initiate from the weight of several storeys suddenly collapsing on the floors below? What exactly would you expect to happen?

[edit on 17-12-2005 by AgentSmith]

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Near where I live a new carpark is shut because it's falling apart, concrete is falling away and bolts are literally coming loose and falling out. I expect on paper it's boasted to withstand fires and all sorts but in reality it can't withstand it's own existance.

But its didnt suddenly just collapse to the ground, did it?

One of the other big hoots I have heard is the way some people think that if one or two floors gave way, that the floors above would just collapse and stay in place or just crumble and fall away like rain hitting an umbrella. Surely it's not difficult to realise that even though the building was designed to take it's own immense weight, the sudden impact of the floors above collapsing down one floor would start a collapse sequence. It's very similar to hanging a weight on a wire and then lifting the weight slightly and letting it drop - the wire snaps.

Its interesting that the floor should give way at the same time all the way around, is that normal when buildings collapse?

The steel beams would also have significantly lost their ability to take the load they were designed for if they were damaged, lost their strength due to heat and also became buckled due to the non-uniform distribution of the fires. It really isn't hard to imagine a floor giving way is it? And once that happens what do people really, really expect to happen when the dozen or so floors above suddenly drop several meters?

[edit on 17-12-2005 by AgentSmith]

I find it very hard to imagine it giving way at all, never mind the way it appears from the outside.
Assuming there was a 'sudden' drop, i wouldnt expect it to blow out the rest of the tower all the way to the ground. Its just nonsensical

Originally posted by AdamJ
But its didnt suddenly just collapse to the ground, did it?

Not yet, but it doesn't mean it won't. The point is things can take their time and then just give. I guess this chinese mall that collapsed was done with explosives too:

archives.cnn.com...

Its interesting that the floor should give way at the same time all the way around, is that normal when buildings collapse?

And how exactly do you suggest it happened? Miracle explosives that don't get disturbed by plane impacts?

I find it very hard to imagine it giving way at all, never mind the way it appears from the outside.
Assuming there was a 'sudden' drop, i wouldnt expect it to blow out the rest of the tower all the way to the ground. Its just nonsensical

As I said - what do you expect it to do then? Come on let's have a laugh - are you one of the people that thinks it would come to rest, or do you think it would fall off?

You lot can't even get your stories straight and they contradict each other.

You say there are explosives in the basement to make the towers fall, but we all know they fell from the top down. 'Severe the core columns you say', yet we see one still standing before collapsing after the rest of the building collapsed - so how does that work?
If the core columns were severed from the bottom then how come there were survivours on the 20th floor or so in one after? Thats essentially what this video tries to imply - that there were explosions at the base which I would assume are supposed to have a significant effect on the structural integrity of the tower. I've seen people writing about thermite and nukes in the base but the fact that the core column was still standing at the bottom kind of throws doubt on such a theory don't you think?
Then we are supposed to believe that these explosives were placed along the whole length of this immense structure without anyone noticing and that none of this was disturbed by the impacts of the aircraft. I really don't think that some people realise how IMMENSE the strutures were and exactly what would be entailed in putting in explosives.

I love the way people will argue that explosives were used so the buildings fell in their own footprint. Then when someone puts forward the argument that the weight of the building collapsing could have caused it the same people will quickly talk about how 80% or so fell outside the footprint - which is it guys? The fact is that crap was flying everywhere from the shear force of the collapse causing materials to strain, buckle and fly off. For crying out loud most of your arguments are embarrisingly inconsistant and make little sense. I find it incredible how much faith you put into the strength of these structures - I guess you have the mentality that if you can't bend something with your hands then it's unbreakable?
What's also so hard to understand that the force of something collapsing suddenly will impose a far greater force than the structure below is designed to support? I don't know the fancy formula for working it out but I would have thought it would be pretty obvious. Try standing on a strong plank of wood suspended between two columns - it will bow slightly but will take the weight. Now try jumping a foot or so in the air and back down onto it - try not to impale yourselves when it snaps and gives way. But that's the same sort of effect.

On the NIST website there are dozens of photographs showing various pieces of steel that formed different parts of the structure - why not have a look for some tell tale signs on there?
From what I see few people have a structured opinon of what happened, a lot of people seem so sadly desperate to actually WANT to find something wrong that they will clutch at just about anything that comes their way, regardless of it contradicting even their own views!

And that my friend, is why you got my way above vote.

Am i mistaken, didn't i hear an explosion's prier to each of the wtc 1, wts 2 and wtc 3 pancake effect collapses?
or am i just being misled by sound effect's, perposly put there to misinform us?

Am I mistaken in hearing explosions in one video filmed from 2 miles away when none of the up close recordings, of which there are many, neglected to record these sounds for some bizzare unknown reason?

People who say that tapes have had the explosions edited out are just trying to justify there claims without proof.

That is what I dislike about the conspiracy supporters, they base thier claims on flawed evidence and clasp at meaningless straws whenever they can leading to a patheticly weak argument. You ever wonder why if anyone ever gets an interview on mainstream media they are shunned? It's not because 'America Can't Accept The Truth'. It's because the argument is so unsubstantiated, taking evidence and twisting it to fit the argument which is then slowly picked apart and debunked.

[edit on 17-12-2005 by ihatescifi]

Originally posted by FallenOne
This sounds interesting at the least. Unfortunatly, I have a Macintosh, and the only torents that are compatible require that I do some coding through Unix, of which I am very unfamiliar...

If someone can put it into .mov or .mpeg format, I'm sure alot of people without torrent programs will muchly appreciate it!

Question. How were bombs placed in the buildings without noticing?
I heard a rumour that days before, the power was shut off to put in new 'internet' lines. Don't remember where I heard that. But I guess that's how it could have been done?

Actually there are witnesses to this event as well.

The head of building maintenance for one, Mr. Rodriguez is such a witness. But the best are the "neighbors" one of who testified that the constant military vehicles kept her up all weekend long as they went in and out of the complex. The buildings were closed to put in "fiber optic" upgrades.

So many nice things in place it would be a great "mission impossible" film. The Mercenaries that carried this out must feel top grade and I am sure some of the recent trillions missing from the US DOD are in their pockets and being spent well.

If we get enough support to do the next DVD you will have that evidence too.

By the way, at the www.911eyewitness.com... site you can get every important point in the DVD in mov format with a nice page you can send to friends, mount on web sites and support us at the same time.

Originally posted by ihatescifi
Am I mistaken in hearing explosions in one video filmed from 2 miles away when none of the up close recordings, of which there are many, neglected to record these sounds for some bizzare unknown reason?

People who say that tapes have had the explosions edited out are just trying to justify there claims without proof.

That is what I dislike about the conspiracy supporters, they base thier claims on flawed evidence and clasp at meaningless straws whenever they can leading to a patheticly weak argument. You ever wonder why if anyone ever gets an interview on mainstream media they are shunned? It's not because 'America Can't Accept The Truth'. It's because the argument is so unsubstantiated, taking evidence and twisting it to fit the argument which is then slowly picked apart and debunked.

[edit on 17-12-2005 by ihatescifi]

Because we could sell those tapes to the news media immediately after for $38 a second, control is easily made through the reward system. There was only one asswipe I know who did not do it, and he is typing here.

I agree the bogus conspiracies supplied by the government are just so full of holes I cant believe any rational being would still fall for them.

Additionally the only other recording of value was the NJ based Russian TV network, who was bought out and tapes destroyed. My tape clearly has all the explosions and is the evidence for the other witnesses to verify their own live testimony from inside the building. That would include the Bush honored hero Mr. Rodriguez.

Listen to the eyewitness report right after building 7 was demolished from the radio. Amazing stuff. I think that "disbelievers" at this point are either lost or paid protaganists.

Ignore the debunkers, they are loose in the head with their logic. Buildings panacake for 100's of floors in symytry, tons of metal fly outward instead of down because mothers cake is finished, buildings powder up becuase they are made bad. Like anyone would go in a high rise anymore? When such idiocy comes out, it is not idiocy, these are paid morons. They are not worth arguing. Just keep on showing the truth, those that see will join and we will overcome this diversity. Remember who these people are, we will need to put them with their handlers when the time comes.

Wasting time on them will cut out more time you can spend getting rational beings aware. If you have to argue more than 4 minutes, give it up and move on. There are half a billion Americans to talk to.

Originally posted by AgentSmith

People also like to compare it to demolition videos which are in abundance due to the planned nature of the event, but there is a sever shortage of building collapse videos because no-one happens to be filming at the time. Just because they share similar characteristics does not mean that they are the same.

Because a building randomly crashing does not do such in symetry. You are so far from your expertise, yet pontificate as a scientist. Your bull# has been wiped from this ass a long time ago brother, there was no pancake, the only discussion is how much explosives. I suggest you learn more physics and go spend time at forum.physorg.com... learning from people who know these things. Stop spreading your tainted opinion as fact.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I've also noticed people use the argument that the firefighters said there were only 2 small pockets of fire. What they seem to forget is that the firefighters had just reached the first floor of damage which obviously spanned many. Trying to say that there were only 2 small pockets of fire in the entire building as some people try to imply is just about the stupidest thing I have ever heard and sadly reflects on the reasoning ability and intelligence of the people that flaunt it around like it's some sort of evidence.

Yes, who would listen to trained firefighters as witness when you are a much better source of truth and ??? The radio said people were already moving up to the upper floors too! And then explosions. Poor Mr. Rodreguiez was knocked off his feet, windows in the lobby blew out and all the marble within fell from the walls. The building still did not start falling. But yeah, do go on

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I fail to understand how or why people chose to keep ignoring or forgetting about the statements made by people involved in the construction of the WTC, regarding the change to inferior fireproofing during the construction due to a change in regulations I believe. I also fail to understand why they chose to ignore the statement that the buildings ability to withstand airliner impacts was never shown and apparantly based on an aircraft travelling at slow speed with no fuel on board.

Can you post these alledged evidences? I think they are in your mind and certainly not in the blueprints. That center core was huge, anyone going there today can see a couple pieces and wonder what hell kind of office furniture could melt all those down? We have the building company on the DVD stating plainly the buildings could take multiple jet hits, and with fuel. I think your statements are false and based on your own illusions. Get the facts jack.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I fail to understand why people find it hard to comprehend that the building would collapse after the impacts due to the weakening caused by the impacts and the fire afterwards. Look at all the buildings around the world that just collapse without a trigger event. Near where I live a new carpark is shut because it's falling apart, concrete is falling away and bolts are literally coming loose and falling out. I expect on paper it's boasted to withstand fires and all sorts but in reality it can't withstand it's own existance.

Because it is such blatant bull# only a complete ignoramous or one sold into the payroll of the system could see otherwise. The Iranians just rammed a big military jet into a small building for us to see how little damage can be done with one of these and how much bull# we eat. It clearly shows lots of airplane should be left, fuel that magically burns only one time before it disappears, vs the towers fuel which by some miracle could burn 3 and 4 times over. Once in a fire ball, second come back to a liquid, drip down without burning to 100 floors to a basement, start to burn again and melt steel that has never been made as thick since. Yeah, that sounds like a good story.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
The steel beams would also have significantly lost their ability to take the load they were designed for if they were damaged, lost their strength due to heat and also became buckled due to the non-uniform distribution of the fires.

This is way out of your league, go to the physics site, you are so wrong it make me laugh.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Can anyone seriously and honestly say that a progressive collapse would not initiate from the weight of several storeys suddenly collapsing on the floors below? What exactly would you expect to happen?

I would, the mathmatical probablity is too large to write out and impossible is a better expression. Specially x3 in one day. We have gone beyond winning the big Christmas lottery odds and entered the twilight zone.

With the Powers in control their millions of minions are spread around the world, most on some corporate payroll, spreading the myths you purport are truisms. If these little bits I have given you and my recent DVD have not shown you some kind of logic, then you are with them and we have no more reason to talk.

People, there is no reason for argument like this, we must move our energies to those willing to open their eyes and leave the extremists behind. Do we want the freedoms back? Do we want to have our Republic restored to us? Time to stand up, stand up for your rights. Lost cause arguments are just that, spend time on the ones that are ready and we will be rewarded by our country back again.

It is the conspiracy theory supported by the government or logical explanations backed with real physics, which is it? No matter what a conspiracy exists and still does. It is a thing to actually believe your government would do something illegal or wrong for profit. Now where in history can we find such a strange occurrence?

I agree the bogus conspiracies supplied by the government are just so full of holes I cant believe any rational being would still fall for them.

Did you knwo these bogus conspiracies are what started the whole thing? People used to rely thier evidence on flashes and pods, now they've been debunked they've moved onto the supposed demolitions.


Additionally the only other recording of value was the NJ based Russian TV network, who was bought out and tapes destroyed.

It would be nice to post proof of these tape destructions.


My tape clearly has all the explosions and is the evidence for the other witnesses to verify their own live testimony from inside the building. That would include the Bush honored hero Mr. Rodriguez.

And how about all those who don't hear exlosions? Remember this building is failing the odd noise here and there can be expected. You have to remember it was absolute chaos it's kind of expected things like this would be reported. And again it's just your video that has the explosions which I find it hard to understand. You say that other sold thier tapes which were then destroyed... then why weren't the tapes filmed from the streets by bystanders not destroyed when bought... did they just have some kind of pic n mix on which ones to burn and which ones to edit?


Listen to the eyewitness report right after building 7 was demolished from the radio. Amazing stuff. I think that "disbelievers" at this point are either lost or paid protaganists.

I think your the one thats lost because you WANT to believe so much that you let minoroties of flawed evidence convince you.

Ignore the debunkers, they are loose in the head with their logic. Buildings panacake for 100's of floors in symytry, tons of metal fly outward instead of down because mothers cake is finished, buildings powder up becuase they are made bad.

These debunkers have far much more evidence than you little tape with a couple of noises. Please if you will explain to me why the building couldn't have fallen like it. Also in far from perfect symmetry.


I just also want to add your tape contains alot of evidence about explosionns at the BASE of the tower before it collapses. Yet when the building collapses it falls from the top down, what prey tell were these aparent explosions for because they surely didn't effect the fall of the building.


[edit on 17-12-2005 by ihatescifi]

EDIT

This is what caused your smoke at the base of the tower btw:
www.flurl.com...

Fallen debris. But I bet you wont take that evidence out of your DVD.

[edit on 17-12-2005 by ihatescifi]

Our arguments are based on education, computer simulations and a fairly consistant common theory. Yours consist of vague ramblings, conflicting viewpoints as long as they don't agree with anything 'official' and flawed logic.

I will stick to mine thank you and you can have yours

I remember sitting on a chair at school with a slightly cracked leg (due to previous tampering) .My weight (which was not much I might add) sitting down suddenly cracked the leg off and caused a 'progressive collapse' after a few seconds.If I had sat on the chair normally then it would have bared the weight and nothing would happened.

I did think up until now that the previous damage inflicted on the structure had caused a flaw sever enough to give under after what would have been an insignificant enough weight. However I impacted the structure at enough velocity to cause it to damage the structure to a point where it collapsed a few seconds after.

Of course now I know the truth - that the NWO-Illumanti actually fired missiles into it while ramming it with planes - before wiring it up with explosives a week earlier - detonated mini-nukes in the basement and also killed a goat while screaming "mallawallamalla".

This is way out of your league, go to the physics site, you are so wrong it make me laugh.

When I was at school, mate, we did experiments properly - not your crappy theoretical computer simulations taught to you by people with no real experience. I have something you arn't allowed anymore - the ability to experience and visualise things properly. I apologise if this isn't the case - but why don't you pay attention?

[edit on 17-12-2005 by AgentSmith]

911eyewitness.

Do your recall the following image from the film?




What exactly is your basis for directly corelating seismic energy into Kinetic Energy?

How is that directly related? Last time I checked it didn't.

Did you even look up this stuff before putting it into your video?

With that, and the misleading gravity-debris comparison, I am starting to wonder if anything in that video is presented factually.


I also wonder if you have any proof about the so-called cabling upgrade.
As far as I can tell the Scott Forbes story is a hoax, and that no has been able to confirm his existence let alone his story.

911review.com...


Oh I see.

If we get enough support to do the next DVD you will have that evidence too.

Are you going to tell us about this evidence? Or will we have to shell out $19.95 for more nonsense.

www.911eyewitness.com...

[edit on 17-12-2005 by LeftBehind]

Originally posted by ihatescifi


Additionally the only other recording of value was the NJ based Russian TV network, who was bought out and tapes destroyed.

It would be nice to post proof of these tape destructions.

These tapes were part of their archives, as shown the day of the event. They were the reason claimed for censorship as they were showing close-ups of the jumpers. This is all part of what we get when we do broadcast. That was my business; I get the downlinks and give my feeds all the time.

When the researchers asked me about it, we found the company, it had been bought and the tapes were "no longer" available.

Perhaps you can get them then?

Originally posted by ihatescifi
My tape clearly has all the explosions and is the evidence for the other witnesses to verify their own live testimony from inside the building. That would include the Bush honored hero Mr. Rodriguez.

And how about all those who don't hear exlosions?

And they were? All reports on the day, and all reports given at the time as "eyewitness" were there on the radio that day, live, as heard on that tape as well. Then again, that description of the demolition of building 7 was amazing. Do you think the conspiracy theory guys paid someone to go back in time to plant that? Tell him to talk about the big bang, the shudder that everyone seems to have video of?

Now, much research video was gotten from NBC and other archives. This is after they had them and edited them, not from the day by turning on a VCR. Funny how the day of the event there were no tags anywhere on the screen, but now there are. This is because most of the feed came from NJ the only place with live cameras anymore as the Trade Center antenna were no longer functioning. Only 2 stations I think had backup or were at the Empire State Building and they also continued to feed. When networks pull live from the feeds from the share they are not allowed to put their tags on the shared works (all feeds are shared with this caveat) later on rebroadcast you can add them and edit. Many of the original broadcasts are never to be seen again. MSN with the drone Tucker Carlson recently took great pains to not show evidence they clearly were told the "cannot show" as he said himself in his own strange way. The owners of media are actually part of the subjugation program anyway. Their job is to fill the void with beer, sports and trivia for sales and commerce and keep the subjects from getting out of hand. Anyone that still thinks we have a "free" press has to have his head examined.

Originally posted by ihatescifi
You have to remember it was absolute chaos

There is no chaos in a digital recording of it. That is the beauty. Who would notice a 40 story tall explosion when you already ran a mile from the explosions of those buildings as objects hit them? A camera would. Lots of people would forget. But a digital recording will remember, digitally so to speak and without prejudice. Last good buddy, I was an eyewitness. So, your speculation for me to "remember it was absolute chaos" as if you actually were there and knew what that would mean is supposed to mean something is a wild stretch of thought. You now tell me to remember, but you were not there, you only watched someones feed more than 3 minutes after the facts. There was a 3 minute censor on all feeds you know? I don't know what you saw, but I am an eyewitness. Do you feel the need to tell me how to change my story to so I can fit it in with your horse pucks?

Originally posted by ihatescifi


Listen to the eyewitness report right after building 7 was demolished from the radio. Amazing stuff. I think that "disbelievers" at this point are either lost or paid protagonists.

I think your the one thats lost because you WANT to believe so much that you let minoroties of flawed evidence convince you.

So the owner Larry gets on TV and admits he pulled the building, there is no real physics expert that will attest to any fire doing a freefall demolition of a building, so here you just want to drop any logic argument and go to the, ahh you want to believe. What a complete joker.

[
[edit on 17-12-2005 by ihatescifi]

EDIT

This is what caused your smoke at the base of the tower btw:
www.flurl.com...

Fallen debris. But I bet you wont take that evidence out of your DVD.

[edit on 17-12-2005 by ihatescifi]

For this lie? So I could say "An hour after the planes hit, you can see all of a sudden a 40 story cloud appear from the debris? Pay no attention to the noise; it is just the debris falling from the plane an hour ago? Take out video and audio evidence because of a bogus picture claim? Yeah! That works! HOO Hah! Then no one would believe us. Sorry, we can’t pass bullocks; we try to do the right thing. Can’t you see? If we were bogus we would be rich! We took nothing out of the video, not for you or anyone else, the evidence is there.

But you might find comfort here, when we offered it to Hillary Clinton, she must have felt as you, and did not even want to get her copy. Of course, no one in the government took up our offer to look at it, and they never printed Mr. Rodriguez's testimony or other eyewitness's who were taken to Washington DC to testify. This single piece actually verifies what he told the commission and they omitted it. But, then who you want to believe? The last guy out of the building to live or the Intelligence Agency reports along with this ruling elite conspiracy theory that a bunch of lunatic Arabs hated our freedom and did all this with no help? He says bombs, the tape and sounds say bombs, and everyone who was NOT there says it was something else. Who you gonna call?

It is a hard choice for blind mice or drones. I feel for you buddy, I do. But the time has come. Tell your handlers. There is a new show in town.

Originally posted by LeftBehind
911eyewitness.

Do your recall the following image from the film?

What exactly is your basis for directly corelating seismic energy into Kinetic Energy?

How is that directly related? Last time I checked it didn't.

Did you even look up this stuff before putting it into your video?

With that, and the misleading gravity-debris comparison, I am starting to wonder if anything in that video is presented factually.


I also wonder if you have any proof about the so-called cabling upgrade.
As far as I can tell the Scott Forbes story is a hoax, and that no has been able to confirm his existence let alone his story.

911review.com...


Oh I see.

If we get enough support to do the next DVD you will have that evidence too.

Are you going to tell us about this evidence? Or will we have to shell out $19.95 for more nonsense.

www.911eyewitness.com...

[edit on 17-12-2005 by LeftBehind]

Please do shell out the money. It might show you care to find out. Or you can get compressed files from the website for free.

You point to a page with formulas and go “HAH!” but you say nothing, what gives? Do you need formulas? Do you understand physics? Do you want some help? I can give you help.

Here is your Hall of Science. In there you will find all you need to know. They are discussing it all now, waiting for someone just like you. As I am not qualified to give that kind of lesson to you, these people will be happy to. They will take you on a ride you will certainly regret while others will love.

Have a nice time! And please buy the DVD, you can get a line item for it. If you want to hear it on your big home theater with those amazing basses it will be that much better. Yummy. Big screen is better. Then copy it and give it to all your friends. Let them have fun too!

Enjoy, but tell your handlers, we want them to have it too.

Originally posted by 911Eyewitness
Here is your Hall of Science. In there you will find all you need to know. They are discussing it all now, waiting for someone just like you. As I am not qualified to give that kind of lesson to you, these people will be happy to. They will take you on a ride you will certainly regret while others will love.

If your not qualified to answer that, then why are you qualified to put it in your video. Please stop advertising for a different board, if I wanted answers from them, I would post there not here.

If you can't explain the reasoning behind your evidence, then why should we listen to anything you have to say?

You falsely claim that a seismic event with the same magnitude as a couple tons of TNT is directly equal to the KE of the caps.

There is no direct relationship, and since your not qualified to explain it, maybe you should take that part out of your video, and stop claiming it as evidence of anything.


Is there anything you are qualified to explain about your video? If so, where did you get the information in it. Was it given to you by your handlers? Or did you perhaps make it all up in a scheme to get someone to shell out $19.95 for your video.