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.

 

Visual evidence for explosives @ WTC1 - De-bunk this !!!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Bob and Bri - What We Saw 9-11-01

video.google.com...

- Start at 19 min. 17 sec. :

You see WTC1 before the collapse. Then something VERY BIG happens, the video is censored for some seconds. After the "missing" part you see smoke coming from the ground filling the street in the west and raising to the air.. The female voice in the video tells something like "Thats a bo.." BOMB? I couldn't understand completely

-19 min. 40 sec. :

20 SECONDS after this OBVIOUS ground level EXPLOSION, the North tower collapses.







[edit on 21-10-2006 by ephrin]

[edit on 21-10-2006 by ephrin]




posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   
The woman says "Thats a..." She doesn't even utter the letter "b". The fact the video is edited at all is suspicious and therefore shouldn't be trusted as proof of anything.



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
It is edited yes, BUT IN FAVOR OF THE OFFICIAL STORY !! Maybe she doesnt say Bomb...OK

There is something we should not see, thats why they removed it.

However, there is a huge explosion on the ground 20 seconds before the collapse !! Thats UNDENIABLE !

LOOOL freedom_for_sum. Do you really wanna make me believe that they inserted the HUGE SMOKE CLOUDS ON THE STREET into the movie ??!! thats ridiculous..



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 11:18 PM
link   
1. The camera is paused and then starts filming again once the tower starts falling.

The camera woman has obviously paused the camera and started it again.

2. The smoke you see is a result of WTC2 collapsing.

3. The fact that the building still hasn't completley fallen after 20:07 disproves the theory of controlled demolition. Look closley. The tower is still partially standing.

Evidence of a PANCAKE COLLAPSE

[edit on 21/10/2006 by doctorfungi]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 12:14 AM
link   
The fact that it's clearly edited is a major downside for this movie. Interesting? Very, but not solid proof, as much as I wish it was.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Frankly, I don't even see the point of debating this anymore.

Whether you truly in your heart believe there were no explosives, or that there were, or that it was a technological dupe with questionable technology....the fact remains that the administration were warned, this is longer argued against in a serious manner. It's gone from "Oh I wasn't there" to "well yeah I was there but it wasn't anything special" to "well yeah but it's Clinton's fault".

Direct destructive role, ineptitude, or selective ignorance...still doesn't change who's sitting at the top.

I sometimes wonder how many of us still feel the pain of a couple thousand dead every time they watch these videos, or if we're too busy examining splash distances and making refereces to volcanic eruptions to realize that yes, people died.



[edit on 22-10-2006 by Astygia]


137

posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 03:55 AM
link   
Watch @ 7:52 for flashes + sound some stories below impact level. Also note comment about a military plane just like other eyewitnesses, to bad they edited the plane out..
But tbh i find this stupid to be still trying to convince some people about what happened. They tried to do this operation as clean and destructive possible, something wich couldnt happen if it was a real terror attack (NORAD/laws of physics anyone?). But building 7 was the main fault in there operation (yes it really was demolished) just like its neighbouring buildings.

[edit on 22-10-2006 by 137]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 04:28 AM
link   
Still watching but I must say at 12:15 she clearly states that it was a military plane.

I found this quite surprising as she had such a close vantage point for a clear view.

I'd think she would have been able to recognize a commercial passenger jet from that distance and elevated vantage point.


Edit:

Absolutely frightening footage.

I hope for the sake, and memory, of those who lost their lives that day that those responsible for these events are made to pay accordingly and are brought to justice.

[edit on 10/22/06 by redmage]


137

posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 04:52 AM
link   
And the point is she was not the only person to note this, the first things eyewitnesses told the press was that the plane was no regular airliner.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 06:56 AM
link   
doctorfungi,

i really respect you, but you just repeat the same things, even if you see new undeniable evidence...

"1. The camera is paused and then starts filming again once the tower starts falling. " The camera woman has obviously paused the camera and started it again.

The camera is NOT PAUSED! If you watch the full movie you will see that all important scenes are missing (2nd plane impact, explosion before WTC2 collapse, explosion before wtc1 collapse) The rest of the movie is original and un-edited for sure

"2. The smoke you see is a result of WTC2 collapsing. "

This is only stupid and IGNORANCE

Just COMPARE the smoke in the street BEFORE and AFTER the pause / explosion !!
NEW HEAVY SMOKE is raising to the air that wasn't there before.

The reaction of the filming people shows cleary that something extraordinary (compared to the plane hitting the towers) has happenened.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Why would they say its a millitary plane. From that angle they couldn't even see the plane hit! as the second tower is directly behind the first that got hit. And the first hit wasn't even on the video.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 11:52 AM
link   
the EVIDENCE IS NOT what the people in the video are talking!

this movie is full of evidence that there were explosives at the WTC.
Just watch @ 7 min. 50 sec. You can SEE AND HEAR two explosions above the second skylobby.

video.google.com...



about the military plane:

"Why would they say its a millitary plane. From that angle they couldn't even see the plane hit! as the second tower is directly behind the first that got hit."

Why should they see the second plane impact to notice that its a military plane? they see the plane all the way heading towards the south tower. thats plenty of time.

"And the first hit wasn't even on the video."

LOL, the only footage of the first hit is from the Naudet 9/11 firefighter movie! they were "lucky" and filmed the Northtower at 8.4g a.m. in a STRANGE coincidence.





[edit on 22-10-2006 by ephrin]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
You should really go back to the archived LIVE footage videos, they and only a couple of home vids have the attack in clarity.

I remember watching the second plane impact, as that was just after I woke up. My mother woke me up after the first impact was reported, and I was glued to the TV for months after. As the towers fell I pointed out to my mother the squibs and explained the controlled techniques of a demo implosion.

There was not just "one" bomb, there were many sequenced bombs.
C4 tied into thermite. C4 is a steel cutting charge, nickle sized thermite will burn through a engine "big" block in 5seconds or less, and keep burining into the ground. Also used in shotguns AKA "dragons breath" it will catch a desert on fire, turning the sand to glass.

Do some studing, it will be made clear.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
hi advisor,

what youre saying may be true... but its remains speculation. what is needed is a piece of evidence thats one can see and hear and which cannot be denied or called speculation, conspiracy etc...

thats why i point to this movie. just go to 7 min. 50 sec. of this video and you can see the explosions above the second skylobby of the north tower. its far below the plane impact and has no connection to it. It's so clear and easy to see. there were many explosions like this until the tower finally "collapsed"



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ephrin
thats why i point to this movie. just go to 7 min. 50 sec. of this video and you can see the explosions above the second skylobby of the north tower. its far below the plane impact and has no connection to it. It's so clear and easy to see. there were many explosions like this until the tower finally "collapsed"


Clear as day. Pop, pop. Smoking gun of explosives...maybe, but it's definately proof of explosions. I'm sure though people will say it was hairspray bottles or a transformer or something.

[edit on 10/22/2006 by Griff]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I've watched this video several times looking for what is claimed to be "bombs" at 7:52 sec. to be exact. These are not bombs. Clearly its is something to do with the camera. Please watch it over and over. There is no "new smoke" from the bottom of the WTC. It is whats left over from the prior tower. As far as the "squibs" go. Watch them a few times and notice the way they get stronger as the collapse gets closer. I dont claim to be a professional at all, but explosions start STRONG and diminish. The so called squibs act in the opposite. They start out small and increase as the building collapses.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Can someone post a screenshot of these visible explosions?

All I see are flashes off the window, and the grainy quality makes it hard to tell if it's anything at all.

Those pops could be anything.

This is definitely not conclusive proof.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
I've watched this video several times looking for what is claimed to be "bombs" at 7:52 sec. to be exact. These are not bombs. Clearly its is something to do with the camera.


Can you explain what this annomily could possibly be with the camera? I'm not a video camera expert and would like to hear what this could be.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Please let me add that the woman NOT holding the camera said it was a military plane, the woman with the camera was just repeating it to the person she is talking to on the phone. There are several videos that show clear shots of both planes and neither appear to be that of militarty planes. ( again I am not a professional)



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astygia

I sometimes wonder how many of us still feel the pain of a couple thousand dead every time they watch these videos, or if we're too busy examining splash distances and making refereces to volcanic eruptions to realize that yes, people died.


[edit on 22-10-2006 by Astygia]



If some people died due to some agenda i say don't stop trying to find out what really happened, they desurve the truth, the whole world desurves the truth.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join