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.

 

WTC Is this the smoking gun? A missile? Bomb? What is it?!!!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   
I was checking out a video tonight, and noticed a goofy headline for another called "WTC 2nd Hit Ghost Plane". Well, it sounded weird and I thought I'd have a laugh. Well, after watching it a couple times, my jaw almost dropped. If you remember all the speculation about a "supposed missile" attached to the undercarriage of the plane? Well, I focused my attention on that, and to my amazement, that particular area seemed to make some disturbing movement, just before the plane hit the building. I am totally shocked, and don't know what to make of it, but it looks authentic. From all the videos I've looked at of the same impact, they all show the same remarkable occurance. Is it a missile? A bomb? Or am I seeing things? Is this the smoking gun?

A link would help, sorry.


www.youtube.com...

[edit on 7-9-2006 by DbleTrble]

[edit on 7-9-2006 by DbleTrble]




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I definetly see what you are talking about. Right before the plane hits, there is some kind of movement.



It looks like a missile, but it might just be a flash of light or something.

Interesting nonetheless.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I would say very interesting. This is incredible, how could that be put on there and hijacked? This makes no sense.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I've always been a bit wary of this whole missile theory. Not so much that something may be shooting out from the underside of the jet, but why shoot a tiny missile into the building when the plane itself is a bigger and more potent missile...

I don't doubt something looks fishy there, but why even bother? What is the smaller missile supposed to be accomplishing?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheDoctor
I've always been a bit wary of this whole missile theory. Not so much that something may be shooting out from the underside of the jet, but why shoot a tiny missile into the building when the plane itself is a bigger and more potent missile...

I don't doubt something looks fishy there, but why even bother? What is the smaller missile supposed to be accomplishing?


I really have no clue. But, how can this be? Does anyone have any idea?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   
maybe the missile had a small atomic warhead. im talking like 1 kiloton or less, something that would decimate the building but not the whole city of new york. maybe thats why there are so many rescue workers having respiratory/cancer problems, from the radioactive dust. i dont believe what i just said here, its just a theory.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:47 PM
link   
The fact is something was on that plane, and engaged before the plane hit. I would surmise, you may be correct. Either that, or possibly some kind of chemical to penetrate down into the floors to wreak havoc below as well.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I don't see it at all. Any chance you could grab a still?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:50 PM
link   
I can't download the file, but I have the same footage on my computer, and they all show the same thing. I'll capture one. But, it looks pretty obvious to me....The video I linked to.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Can someone tell me how to insert the pictures here, step by step??



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Those are three images that I could capture real quick.

[edit on 7-9-2006 by DbleTrble]







[edit on 7-9-2006 by DbleTrble]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
I'm not seeing anything either.

Can someone outline in those frames what exactly I'm supposed to be seeing?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
I watched it 10 time and didn't see anything. And the images show up as just a blank page for me.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   
All I can say is wow! I can see it plain as day, and wasn't even looking for it. Sorry, I thought people may be analytical here.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
I'm not seeing anything either.

Can someone outline in those frames what exactly I'm supposed to be seeing?


Well, I have to say this is a poor quality video I have, but the three frames clearly shows a discrepency. The first frame looks intact at the suspicious area, which as I stated is the deformity on the right side undercarriage of the airliner. The second frame clearly shows a different look to it whether it be light or not. The third frame shows a gaseous/vaporous look to that same part of the airliner. Now, this is a personal video, and is not the same as the one from the link. But if you look at the video on the link, you can clearly see that thing igniting, moving, engaging, at least certainly changing it's appearance. I don't know what to say else. But, you should check that video, and any available of the particular impact. They all show the same and some are better, but I'll have to post the better ones some other time. It takes time.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DbleTrble
All I can say is wow! I can see it plain as day, and wasn't even looking for it. Sorry, I thought people may be analytical here.


Once again, I don't see it. Also, if it was there in consensus reality, I mean don't you think that if it was unquestionably visible off a grainy little pixelated piece of Internet video, someone might have noticed in the near 5 years that have passed since the event?

[edit on 7/9/06 by Implosion]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Implosion

Originally posted by DbleTrble
All I can say is wow! I can see it plain as day, and wasn't even looking for it. Sorry, I thought people may be analytical here.


Once again, I don't see it. Also, if it was there in consensus reality, don't you think that if it was unquestionably visible off a grainy little pixelated piece of Internet video, someone might have noticed in the near 5 years that have passed since the event?


I would definately think so. I just can't shake it, that that structure changes so much during the last few moments. Maybe it's a trick of the light, but It is so pronounced to me. It looks as though it was released just before it impacted the building. Anyway, I'm sorry. But, I will be scrutinizing alot of wideos to check that. I hope to find a high quality one that I can capture some stills..



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by charliegrs
maybe the missile had a small atomic warhead. im talking like 1 kiloton or less, something that would decimate the building but not the whole city of new york. maybe thats why there are so many rescue workers having respiratory/cancer problems, from the radioactive dust. i dont believe what i just said here, its just a theory.


Any warhead, the top half of the building would have been blown apart immediately. 1 kiloton is a destruction radius of something like 1 to 3 miles.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Yeah, if anything atomic was sent into that building, we would've known about it right away.

There are explosives that appear exactly as the explosions at the Towers did:



I can't remember what they're called, only saved the images (I save tons of images, video clips, etc. for potential future reference btw), but here's what this specific device looks like:



I'm not saying one of those things was attached, as a fuel-air explosion resulting from the impacts could very well have occurred by itself for all I know.

But if anything was attached, it would be something like the above, and definitely nothing nuclear. Anything nuclear going off that high up would probably knock out everything electrical within some distance, including media equipment. There would have to be something to absorb those kinds of emissions. Not to mention it would look nothing like the above.

[edit on 7-9-2006 by bsbray11]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   
I posted this in another thread today, but since it is here and there are replies generated, let me ask what I asked in the other thread:

Do missles have to immediately charge before immediately shot during the press of the launch button? If so, does it create an immediate small cloud out of the tail end of the missle carrier?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join