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.

 

International Center for 9/11 Studies Secures Release of Thousands of Photos and Videos from NIST

page: 1
30
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Hey everyone,

911blogger.com...

looks like about 10 new videos of 9/11, you will have to excuse me, only just found the link and the details are on the site, in the rush to put up the link I've not looked at all the videos, it looks like there is a lot there to analyze and I am only a layman in the subject but lots on 7, lots of sounds of explosions and some 'other stuff' too.

This looks like a very important set of videos to go through.

So everyone, please keep it civil



PS MODS guessing this info will be duplicated so removed if its already up guy.




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy
 


And this proves what after 9 years ? I saw the first video in your link; some poor devil waving from the Tower on the edge of horror. This proves an "inside job" ?



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Thanks for the reply and yeah I agree, I'm not an expert, but there are many videos on the link, some stuff I've never seen. Maybe you and me can't see anything but someone else will?

Now I know a little about statistical probability but its remarkable that a 'debunker' type would be the first to respond to this thread but you must be like me, time on my hands


Pre-emptive edit as was about to take my own thread off topic



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy
 


You got that right. I do have time on my hands today and I am slightly ashamed of myself.




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
interesting that collapse initiation, penthouse collapse, and some sounds have been edited away in the videos.

Why is that?

we already have enough video documentation, so they shoot themselves in the foot by editing the videos before releasing them via FOIA.

The editing of the videos is so transparent and curious alone, that it must raise an eyebrow on the most hardcore OS believer!!!

The so-called "debunkers" who copy-paste from 911myths websites etc will have to regroup to explain this so tranparent editing

[edit on 1-9-2010 by conar]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


I am not sure where you are coming from. Isn't 9/11 Blogger a truther site ? Why do "OS" believers have to explain anything ?



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy
 


Okay , I watched all of the vids , most of them several times .

And no offence but , I still failed to see anything that convinced me of controlled demolition .

The vids that were titled 'explosions at WTC 2' , did absolutely nothing to convince me of controlled demo . The one explosion that clearly ejects some object from the tower , could have been what ? That could have been a number of things I suppose . I will refrain from even hazarding a guess as it would only be just that .

It certainly does nothing in the way of presenting evidence of some type of planted explosive . My opinion is that if it had been a bomb , then it would have taken out more than just a single window . Same opinion , if it were some other type of planted explosive , more than a single window would have blown .

I can't for the life of me , understand how and why so many people proclaim "EXPLOSIONS" as the towers collapse . Just what the heck does a tower of 110 floors supposed to sound like as it collapses ?

And please don't take any of this personally , as none of it is directed at you personally .

From watching the first video of the WTC7 collapse , it is clear to me that the building did not collapse in a symmetrical manner . It is very obvious that one end of the building collapsed first , causing subsequent failure in a progressive fashion towards the other end of the building .

Anyway , that's just what I observed from all the videos .

Star and flag for posting material I hadn't seen before .

ETA: One other thing I noticed was that once the top of the tower started leaning and the collapse was initiated , the top of the tower DID NOT correct itself . It continued to lean , all the way down , as should be expected . And the only reason I mention this is because I have seen too many posts on here that claim it somehow miraculously uprighted itself on the way down .

I don't take any pleasure in saying this but , some of the videos posted actually shoot holes in more than one of the theories coming from the TM .

Then again , it'll be shift change shortly and there will be hordes of the opposing team in here to tell me how wrong I am . Oh well , comes with the territory .

[edit on 1-9-2010 by okbmd]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


Aaahhh , but who edited the videos ?

Can you say for certain ? Certainly wouldn't be the first time omission was used in an attempt to discredit the opposing team .



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by okbmd
And no offence but , I still failed to see anything that convinced me of controlled demolition .

You've got to be kidding me? In the 4th video entitled "Explosions During North Tower Collapse", you hear distinct detonations exactly as are heard in controlled demolitions. The sound is very low in the video, but if you can get the volume up, you definitely hear detonations and those detonations corroborate the witness and first responders that heard them also.


And just so we're clear on which video I'm talking about:





You've got the sounds, you got the witnesses, you've got the visuals in the form of ejections. Controlled demolition proven.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
okbmd just beat me to it!

Who could have edited the videos? Well from my personal experience, and dealing with this stuff for the last two-three years, 99.999999% of the time any video was edited, it was done by a person on the TM side. Be it clipping the video, shortening, leaving important parts out, adding in faked sounds, speeding or slowing down videos.

Also this is in no way any disrespect to the OP, and I do give you credit for some new footage, especially the WTC7 burning with Mr. Hess in the window. Havent seen that yet, so thank you for that!



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
any video was edited, it was done by a person on the TM side. Be it clipping the video, shortening, leaving important parts out, adding in faked sounds, speeding or slowing down videos.

I asked you this once before and you never obliged (probably because you had no proof), so I'll ask you yet again: Can you provide proof of your claims that the truth movement is purposely adding in fake sounds or otherwise deliberately falsifying a video?

And I'm not talking about Sofia's ordeal with "9/11 Mysteries" and "9/11 Eyewitness". She is one person and does not represent the entire 9/11 truth movement. And she also added the sound for effect. Just like tv stations add sounds for "effect" to many other videos shown on tv.

Furthermore, these videos are from NIST. If you or anyone doubt the authenticity or wish to "catch a truther deliberately altering video", then I suggest you contact the International Center for 9/11 Studies or NIST and get your own copies to compare.

If you have no proof of your allegations, then you're spinning nothing but misinformation. But, that's all you can do because you can't defeat the evidence, plain and simple.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by okbmd
ETA: One other thing I noticed was that once the top of the tower started leaning and the collapse was initiated , the top of the tower DID NOT correct itself . It continued to lean , all the way down , as should be expected . And the only reason I mention this is because I have seen too many posts on here that claim it somehow miraculously uprighted itself on the way down .


A lot of statements have been made, attempting to describe what appear to be oddities observed during the "collapse" of the WTC buildings. I've seen some of these statements.

For the record, I don't believe that any of the buildings collapsed into their own footprint or that the tops of the towers were sucked back into the wake of the rest of the collapsing towers. I still believe that they were brought down in controlled demolitions.

In the case of the South Tower, as it's "collapse" initiates you can see the top lean over and begin to pivot around a support point provided by the rest of the tower below.

But the tower doesn't rotate through the complete arc that one would expect. It's pivotal movement is arrested by the collapse beneath it of the pivot point in the lower portion of the tower. At that point the whole top begins to drop vertically.

That's what people are noticing and calling a "correction". It can be seen clearly in this video.





[edit on 1-9-2010 by ipsedixit]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Why does Sophia not qualify? She was a truther, and many fell for her garbage.

Well what about Sept. Clues?
In Plane Site?
Webfairy?

How about these:







Ah yes the "mono sound" video with the "stereo" explosion. Not very suspicous eh?

Then we can go on to all the eyewitness accounts that have been cherry-picked, edited, twisted, quote-mined, taken out of context and used in videos to promote "explosives" used at the WTC, by cutting out any mere mention of something going boom as proof of inside job!

now what about our dear ol "Dr." Jones? He wouldnt lie to you would he? Not in his presentation? What about this doozy?

original:


Also, are these videos realy truely going to be released from NIST? Granted, some of the footage I have not seen before, but then agin, most of this I have years ago. Also, just how many videos will the IC9/11 release that show no evidence of anything "suspect"? Or are they just going to focus on the few videos that barely show something that could be taken as something sinister? Will they put up ALL the videos, or are they going to just cherry-pick the "juciest" ones for us? Sorry but I dont really trust an organization that claims to be independent and then works with A&E4T, Sfor9/11TJ. My money is riding on them NOT releasing ALL the videos and pictures from NIST when delivered. But hey, I can be wrong. What if they do release all of it, and it all pretty much torpedoes the TM right there?



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


No sir , I wasn't kidding anybody .

What does a 110-story building supposed to sound like while it is collapsing ?



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   
Thanks for the heads up OP, these are indeed new videos, at least I have never seen them. This is proof positive that after all these years, there are still tons of evidence that is totally unknown to the public.


You may want to warn people, one of those videos was by far one of the most disturbing things I've ever heard on a 9/11 video(that is if I'm correct).

By all means, if I am wrong please correct me, but I don't think my ears deceived me.

Anyways, on the Hess video where he's hanging out of the building asking for help. At, starting around 2:38 I think I hear a man falling from very high above(the north tower?), screaming, followed by that terrible noise we have all heard in the Nauduet videos of people hitting the ground. If so you may want to warn about it in the OP.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Are you serious GenRadek?

You are saying that individual videos edited by individual people on youtube is comparable to edited videos released by NIST via FOIA? Videos released by NIST that are missing key sequences, like the penthouse disapperaing long before the building collapses, just like a controlled demolition would be like.

Curiously some of the videos can be found unedited on youtube with the missing sequence. ...lol

Why does NIST even bother to edit the videos... The speed that the 3 buildings collapse with are imposible without an accelerant. An accelerant has been found in the dust. Further investigation and hearings are warranted, but TPTB controls the courts, the police etc so they go free. The guilty will never sit in a court, as long as TPTB are in control im afraid.

[edit on 2-9-2010 by conar]



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
you hear distinct detonations exactly as are heard in controlled demolitions.






I don't. I hear loud, low rumbling noises as the tower falls.

It's nothing like a CD. In those there are a series of sharp cracks a short time before the collapse.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
I can totally understand that people who still believe the official story, will not be swayed. It's not really about evidence, for some people. It's more about just being right. Like a debate club. This is why the most hardcore "debunkers" have larger-than-life egos.



This was my favorite from a first perusal. At around 2 minutes 15 seconds in, you can clearly see a glowing gel-like liquid start dripping profusely around the corner facing the camera. It can be seen falling a short distance, hitting the building and creating sparks upon impact. Jet fuel doesn't do that. Jet fuel doesn't glow bright orange/red, flow with high viscosity, and spark when encountering metal!!


[edit on 2-9-2010 by Son of Will]



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


So wait, even though I can show you maybe three-four videos that have the full collapse, you are going to get hung up on one or two (which may be the same video) of one where the penthouse initial collapse is missing? Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, the guy who was filming the building, maybe had taken a break and turned the camera off because noting was happening, only to have it a few seconds, or minutes, later start collapse, and he then turns the camera back on as its collapsing? Isnt THAT a possibility? Its not as if anyone knew exactly which second it was going to fall. All they heard was its going to collapse, and then it did.

Second thing, do you honestly believe that NISt did not use any of the "unedited" videos that were just released the other day? I mean really? Did you read the final NIST report on WTC7? What was their collapse time again? Doesnt that mean that they had the full collapse from start to end? Or maybe is this because the "fine folks" at IC9/11 only released the cherry-picked ones for you to get all huffy about, while leaving out the rest? I mean it wouldnt be the first time a truther site or organization has used deception, twists, lies and purposeful omissions to sucker the people.

An accelerant? What you mean, like rocket engines attached to the debris pointing down?
How long is a building suppose to fall down from structural failure? Does it matter how its designed? Are you taking into account the fires? The damage? The design of the WTC7? You cannot just go and make the claim that or insinuate that all buildings must behave exactly the same way, design and construction differences be damned. Recall the Minneapolis Bridge collapse a few years back. That sure as hell looked like a controlled demolition to me. But we all know it wasnt. It was structural failure. Are you going to claim that that bridge was also demoed because it fell so fast?



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I did not watch all these videos, but to me Building 7 is the key to the conspiracy.

There is not one good explanation for why building 7 fell like a controlled demoliton, other that it WAS a controlled demolition.

My personal opinion is that this act of terrorism was 1) a perfect excuse to take down some buildings that needed very expensive retrofitting, more than or as costly as they were worth, 2) shake up a country and pass laws we would never have agreed to otherwise 3) go to war for something we wanted out of Iraq(like revenge) 4) make money from war 5)make halliburton and company kings of the world financially 6) pick your reason-there are more.

Deny Ignorance.


Edit: Meant to say Iraq not Iran


[edit on 2-9-2010 by SunnyDee]

[edit on 2-9-2010 by SunnyDee]



new topics

top topics



 
30
<<   2 >>

log in

join