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.

 

911-A question to ask...about the cameraman, who saw the first plane??

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
OK, thanks for the player...I got it/saw it...that guy/cameraman was looking at traffic it seems...quite a LONG LONG away from the incident...BUT...he/she looks up at the opportune (sp?) 'right' time, any ideas why? Think they HEARD the jet? Seems like NY would have a bunch of jets flying overhead...who was the camera-person here? ABC news? Lots of questions, I have (sorry for sounding like Yoda:@@

Why has not this video been seen before, I wonder????

OT still seeking!!!!

From what I remember of the news story, this was just a tourist to NYC who was stuck in traffic and just decided to start filming things like the towers. They wouldn't have heard the jet that far away, especially with all the ground noise and him being in his car.

This video was on every major news station at the time, but only shown once or twice as it's not a very good video. It just posted to show that it existed.



Originally posted by OldThinker
Nice signature link there...btw, it is not viewable????
ATS does that to all images. That 404 page is an ATS page. The picture is just to honor Captain Sullenberger and his amazing flying skills on that day.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by _BoneZ_]




posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston
Since George Dubya Bush saw the 1st plane hit the North Tower (and Dubya would never lie would he?), it is obvious that Dubya had a live feed into his limousine on the way to his hideout (Booker Elementary School in Florida). So Dubya being an excellent judge of expertise, informed the world that the guy steering the 1st plane was a bad pilot, even though he was just following orders. (Dubya's or Tricky Dick's orders?)

Dubya decided to be gracious to his victims (the American people) and ordered the release of a degraded version of the video which the Naudet Bros were given credit for. Perhaps there were multiple angle live feeds into multiple monitors in the pResidential limo and the Naudet version was the lousiest. (next to those garbage videos from the Pentagon parking lot of course) Regardless, maybe our descendents a hundred or so years from now have some better 9-11 videos to look forward to.



SPreston, I read (FEEL) your emotion man...how long have you benn looking into/investigating this?

When exactly was the first attack video released? Was it that day? I can't remember ?


This will be an important fact, I think?

OT



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


OK, then what was the name of the video-er?

They are not, atleast my from take, IN THEIR car/vehicle...why would one get out and video....??? WHY? Have they not seen traffic before....this is a stretch....reported...in my mind!!!


I'm gonna need more info here...any ideas?




posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_



Originally posted by OldThinker
Nice signature link there...btw, it is not viewable????



ATS does that to all images. That 404 page is an ATS page. The picture is just to honor Captain Sullenberger and his amazing flying skills on that day.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by _BoneZ_]



OFF TOPIC....God bless that man!!!!! Freakin incredible!!!!!



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston
...........(next to those garbage videos from the Pentagon parking lot of course) ...........


SPreston, ver very very GOOD point here!!!!!!!


The most important bldg in the world for DEFENSE only had one video of the event to show? Please????


I just can't figure out why....certainly a plane hit it right? If not where are those dozens of passengers? They have not been seen since....?

And the phone callls???? Surely they were not mfg-ed, huh?

OT

ISSUE!!!! Why are there not more footage? Reasonable question, I suspect....



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
ISSUE!!!! Why are there not more footage? Reasonable question, I suspect....

Here's 3 cameras right on the impact side that could have gotten something, but notice the camera right near the impact? Why they wouldn't release the videos from those cameras is beyond all of us:




posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
I want to ask a question. The alleged Flight AA11 allegedly impacted WTC 1 at 8:46:40.

What time was the Naudet video FIRST shown on ANY TV network news? I don't have access to the news footage, which is why I am asking.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
I want to ask a question. The alleged Flight AA11 allegedly impacted WTC 1 at 8:46:40.

What time was the Naudet video FIRST shown on ANY TV network news? I don't have access to the news footage, which is why I am asking.



tezzajw,

Me too, bro!!!!


Good question....


Surely there's an answer?????


OT



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Most people tend to think it wasn't shown until the next day, 9/12, but I somehow thought I remembered seeing it on 9/11, but later in the afternoon or evening. Best way to tell is go to the TV archives and watch the news from those days.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Video from WNYW - Channel 5 out of New York



Shown later that day - it was from a camera crew setting up to do
man-in-the-street interviews about the primary election for mayor
that day. While cant see plane (cameraman had camera pointed down)
can clearly hear engines. Cameraman pans camera toward WTC and
can see smoke pouring from building after impact.

Location is north of WTC complex near City Hall



The Naudet brothers were making documentary film about rookie FDNY
fireman Tony Benetatos. The younger brother Jules was filming street
scene during routine gas leak call when heard plane flying low over
Manhattan - planes dont fly over Manhattan. Can see the confusion
as firemen start searching for source of noise. Jules pans camera
just in time to catch plane flying into North Tower.

Location was Church and Lispenard Streets about 1/2 mile north of WTC complex.

Jules was riding with Battalion chief Joseph Pfeifer, one of the first people
on the scene. Cheif Pfeifer younger brother Kevin, a LT in the FDNY
with Engine 33 was killed in collapse of North Tower.

This answer your questions?


Mod edit: Embedded videos.

[edit on 2/2/2009 by Hal9000]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 



Thank you for the response and the links...the second one was helpful, the first didn't work.

The cameraman interview with Charlie rose was interesting...he looked as if he was completely honest and kinda sad this happened to him....I still would like to see the chain of events of how his company got him there, etc.

The fumbling of the fireman seemed odd, for sure...sad day all around....

OT



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Can view the first video if copy the link and then run

Try this

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Yeah, that worked...it seems ever so random, in my mind

The other has some holes in it...???

OT



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

I've spent alot of time debunking 9/11 hoaxes or disinfo as it's called, like the "pod" or "laser" at the WTC, or no planes at the WTC. All debunked for years, but a few people still cling to these things.


_BoneZ_,

Got a second here...


I asked this of some others but got no answers....any thoughts/answers for these questions? And do you think it could lead to something? Think CIA, etc...already been down this road?

= = = = =

Concerning the cameraman...

1) Who hired him?
2) How did they get ahold of his company?
3) What was his schedule? For the day?
4) Does he have an itinery for the day? Outlook record?
5) Phone records?
6) Where'd he stay the night before?
7) Have conversations with any hotel employees the night before? speak of the reason for his stay?
8) Speak to the folks he was 'filming' at the time?
9) Reason for filming? Record of the request?


OT



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   
I don't think anyone is really interested in the answers to those questions, that's why nobody has answered them yet.



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
Concerning the cameraman...

1) Who hired him?
2) How did they get ahold of his company?
3) What was his schedule? For the day?
4) Does he have an itinery for the day? Outlook record?
5) Phone records?
6) Where'd he stay the night before?
7) Have conversations with any hotel employees the night before? speak of the reason for his stay?
8) Speak to the folks he was 'filming' at the time?
9) Reason for filming? Record of the request?


We don't get professionals very often on ATS. Are you a real gumshoe private eye? You sound like it based on those questions.

I've got a link for you that'll help you out. Most of your questions are answered in the film I've linked to. Of course these forums are infested with people who won't take a film maker's word for anything. They're into something called verification. You sound like that kind of guy too, with all your questions, but anyway, here's the link.

www.dailymotion.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Of course these forums are infested with people who won't take a film maker's word for anything. They're into something called verification.

Your post comes off sounding like you don't like people who don't take other peoples' words for anything. You should never take anyone's word for anything unless you have it verified. Real researchers and investigators always verifiy. Unlike most of the debunkers on these forums who just tirelessly copy/paste from debunk websites without actually doing any of their own research or verifying the information.

Science is riddled with tirelessly verifying to make sure you get the same results every time.



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Your post comes off sounding like you don't like people who don't take other peoples' words for anything.


Gumshoe private eyes don't talk like garden flowers. They use hard boiled language. If you were a gumshoe private eye or read Raymond Chandler, you'd know that. It's got nothing to do with our feelings. We don't have feelings. We lost those a long time ago when our girl double-crossed us.

You sound like you don't get out much . . . and don't come back telling me you're a forest ranger.


Science is riddled with tirelessly verifying to make sure you get the same results every time.


That's where you're wrong. Science is riddled with skewed statistics and fraud. I wish it were riddled with verification.

Scientists are not interested in the truth, they are interested in tenure and government grants. They will tell anyone anything they want to hear as long as they want to fund study after study to hear it over and over again.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Originally posted by OldThinker
Concerning the cameraman...

1) Who hired him?
2) How did they get ahold of his company?
3) What was his schedule? For the day?
4) Does he have an itinery for the day? Outlook record?
5) Phone records?
6) Where'd he stay the night before?
7) Have conversations with any hotel employees the night before? speak of the reason for his stay?
8) Speak to the folks he was 'filming' at the time?
9) Reason for filming? Record of the request?


We don't get professionals very often on ATS. Are you a real gumshoe private eye? You sound like it based on those questions.




Nah, just a thinker....kinda of a process-guy, so I do a lot of ROOT CAUSE Analysis...


I'll check out video, hopefully I see some answers...


Thanks for contributing here!

OT



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
I don't think anyone is really interested in the answers to those questions, that's why nobody has answered them yet.



Thanks BoneZ....for sure!

'interested' may not be the best word...maybe 'willing' would be better?

OT



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join