It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


September Clues -video

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 06:04 PM
Don't know if this google video, entitled 'September Clues' has been widely seen by people on here, or not. According the the video page, it has only had about 5,000 viewings.

I gave up long ago trying to decipher whether 911 was an inside job or not, and the prospect of contemplating that the planes hitting the towers was somehow a 'photoshop' mock-up seems a bit of a stretch to me, so I laid the subject to rest, in my mind.

But I just watched this video, which has once again opened up the whole 'can of worms' for me, so I thought I'd post it here and see if I get any feedback.

It's very interesting, to say the least, in my mind.

posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 06:18 PM
...My fellow, with due respect, these types of claims are extremely unhelpful. Occam's Razor hardly allows for every peice of amatuer and professional video shot of the airliner impacts to have been edited in such a short span of time, and there would remain thre questions, 'What, then, happened to the aircraft that did not hit the buildings? Why didn't air traffic control notice them simply vanishing into thin air? How did all of the aircraft components get planted in Shanksville, at the WTC site and at a Pentagon?'

This video is no less rediculous than the claim that fire alone caused a symmetrical, global failure of three modern, steel superstructure skyscrapers.

posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 06:24 PM
I watched the first few minutes of that video and, aside from the misleading text, there is one humungous lie.

The video that they are calling the Fox broadcast was actually NY1 footage. The footage is (or was) available on YouTube, and it's also available at NY1's website. In the actual footage, there is no momentary "fade to black" after the plane hit the south tower.

The video you linked, Old Man, is complete rubbish, imo.

EDIT: I take that back. The video if from Good Day New York, the morning show of the Fox affliate. Stand by....

EDIT: Okay, here's the Good Day New York footage, and I must eat a little crow. I didn't remember that happening at the time, but there is a momentary black screen just as the plane hits the tower at 9:03 (very end of this video).

So, um... nevermind. Mmmmmmm, crow...

[edit on 31-7-2007 by Tuning Spork]

[edit on 31-7-2007 by Tuning Spork]

posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 07:32 PM

I was watching TV on the morning or afternoon of the first WTC attack in '93. The first evidence that something was wrong was when several New York stations (including the one I was watching) suddenly went dark.

The reason was that those stations use the World Trade Center's antenna as their broadcast tower. The stations that didn't go black were the ones that either used the Empire State Building's antenna, or a tower across the river in New Jersey.

Perhaps the momentary "fade to black" (which was not a "fade") was due to the plane's impact on the south tower momentarily effecting the north tower's antenna.

This, of course, then begs the question: Then why didn't the feed go black when the north tower began to collapse? Perhaps Fox and whoever else was using the WTC for it's broadcast at the time, knowing that their live broadcast was dependent on having continuous coverage, simply switched over to another antenna during the intervening time.

posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 11:39 PM
There is disinformation out there about 9-11..

catch my drift?

[edit on 31-7-2007 by ready4truth]

posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 12:44 AM
This stuff has been argued over for months now, if not longer, so I'm not going to try to contribute on the analysis of the minutiae, important as it is.

The thought that occurred to me is that if missles were used to hit the towers and the missiles were supplemented with aircraft fly bys as visual cues, then that would be uniform with the scenario suggested by the video The Pentacon where it is suggested that an airplane fly by was used to disguise a missle strike or detonation of explosives. The MO would be the same all over.

I thought the film was great. The big issue in all of this for me has always been the issue of provenance of the images. They do cite a source for their videos but the issues discussed are beyond my areas of competence.

The compilers of these clips seem sincere to me. On the subject of sincerity, how about the news guy who saw the American Airlines jet fold like an accordion and disappear into the Pentagon. Wasn't he sincere sounding, and such a beautifully modulated voice.

[edit on 1-8-2007 by ipsedixit]

posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 05:48 AM
I just stumbled on this video and found this thread cause I was doing a search so not to post something that has already been discussed. I find the video very interesting and honestly do not know what to make of it. I NEVER heard any discussion of a missile hitting the towers until I heard the audio on this video. It is an interesting theory, but I am not too sure I buy it.

I think there is something to the audio tracks. I have never noticed them before, but hearing this video it might be something to look into further.

posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 07:23 AM
you can compare Here with the originals from fox, cbs,abc, nbc, and bbc

top topics


log in