New 9/11(NY) footage, taken by Steve Vigilante, released last month(Warning Graphic Language)

just to make a point

squibs are white and thrust outward

smoke is black and flows upward as soon as it's
out the window with lil air pressure resistance.

please show me black squibs
on ANY building demolition video???
thanks

I'm a truther myself
but I have to say this video
doesn't help our cause
at all from what I've seen.

reply to post by Three_moons


I am no video expert, the beginning of the video just looks odd. Personal opinion.
I appreciate your opinion, and I am sure others thought of the building falling, I just personally never imagined such. Just another fire, I thought, although the cause was shocking.
Secondly, if he is lying about having been a YT member since way back, I can't believe anything he shares. Reason is, if you have the connecs to get a channel with false stats, you are working for the disinfo crowd. No one does that by being a hacker,. you have to be in the system. Therefore, false claims of longevity = disinfo by those PTB !
We had long discussions about this over there, so I may have a prejudicial view of channel manipulation.Judge for yourself.
Thanks for sharing. Peace.

No matter what, we can always speculate about all and everything.
But some things we listen in it are not normal at all...
I just give this 2 perfect exemples:

- Too soon for sure for some one experiencing this horror in real time, to start thinking about if the building must be imploded or demolished!

- Unless the guy have mental issues, and gets exited in the presence of high degree cataclysms like a Psychopath, the "IT'S TERRORISTS, TERRORIST, TERRORIST" part is very very weird indeed!!
Not natural at all!

If you ask me, IMHO this can be just another of many possible ways to the "Ones in power", to try to "soft" the public opinion again, about the 11/09 episode. Due to the bigger and bigger organized wave that is rising slowly by so many people that can't just belive in the official facts and have no proper explanation why some things in that day was conducted in that way, with so many holes and flaws never explained decently untill today.

Originally posted by 1curious1
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

I rarely followed the news back then... but that was exactly my first thought... after the first plane hit. "My God, it was terrorist". And not only that, I remember saying "Osama Bin Laden" within the first five minutes.

Have you or anyone else thought that the reason many were so quick to think that and to follow the official story was because of the bomb attempt on the world trade back in 93, where Osama Bin Laden was reported to be the instigator?

What if the original 1993 bomb plot at the world trade was in fact a psyop to make you think just what you thought on 911 and so validate and strengthen the official story in your mind??

All the best,

Korg.

Originally posted by PersonalChoice
Since everyone has been talking about it, I just wanted to post this video, where the guy has a FOX TV shot of the north tower(zoomed exactly like Vigilante video, except the quality is terrible compared to his). Here we can see the smoke being ejected from a little wider shot. Thought I'd add it to the discussion.

edit on 15-9-2010 by PersonalChoice because: Did I say FOX...I meant NBC

I want to mention three good reasons why there must have been charges set of in the first building as the other plain hit.

1. A shock wave wouldn't hit the other building until the blast has passed through the building.

2. Since the plain hit the edge of the second building, most of the building would deflect the shock wave from hitting the first building.

3. The plain hit the other building way under where the first tower was hit. The smoke should have been ejected upwards, even the smoke already coming out from the building. Instead you see smoke shooting out then you see the shock wave hit the tower as the flames come up.

A sound wave would do the same to the smoke on the out side as it would do to the smoke on the inside of the building. Meaning the sound wave should have effected the smoke already outside the building before it effected the smoke from inside the building. And we should have been able to see it.

I think the debunkers would like everyone to just forget about all those squibs we see exploding around the second WTC, when the plane slammed into the tower. Just pretend your eyes are playing tricks on you, they are your imagination, they are not important, ignore what you have seen.

It’s obvious the timing was perfect for the second WTC to explode while everyone attention was on the other WTC. The real criminals were not counting on so many cameras, and video shots to catch all these strange anomalies that should not have been there. I agree, hopefully scientist will study these squibs and figure out why this would happen from the inside of the WTC while the other one was being hit.

reply to post by CestLaVie

Originally posted by CestLaVie

 

...if he is lying about having been a YT member since way back, I can't believe anything he shares. Reason is, if you have the connecs to get a channel with false stats, you are working for the disinfo crowd. No one does that by being a hacker,. you have to be in the system. Therefore, false claims of longevity = disinfo by those PTB !

Very good points that somehow bypassed my logic that I consider to be good. I'm usually pretty skeptical, especially regarding videos, but there's something I can't put my finger on that gives me the feeling of no foul play with this video. Also, I haven't heard about the YT account/date issues, so that's food for though for me, although I have heard about those issues here about ATS accounts from, I believe, the same time frame.

Peace CestLaVie


reply to post by Umbra Sideralis

In as much as I don't consider myself normal, I'm not "normal" either according to your opinion of the narration. Just sayin'...

The object moving from the top right of the tower to the lower left it was what really hit the 2nd tower, does that look like a plane to you people? Are you guys really that stupid?

Notice right before that object gets to the end of the 1st tower the video clip cuts out. And repeats the video earlier but zoomed in to make it look like there was a 20 second delay.

Well, there was no 20 second delay, that object you see moving from the top right to the bottom left IS WHAT HIT THE TOWER. DOES THAT LOOK LIKE A 747???

Man, I really hope you people start raising your IQ and stop listening to every explanation that is fed to you like your a retard who cant think for yourself.

By the way, ATS has already been compromised. Its not safe to post here anymore, they sold out.

THERE WERE NO PLANES, THEY WERE ADDED IN. DO SOME #ING RESEARCH

I'm very happy that someone made a thread about this new footage. I also have questions about it. Some are just your average curiosities, others are more suspicious.

1) The big question we all have...why NOW to release this important footage? The cameraman says he felt compelled to release it now after all this time? Really? You're an 'award winning' cameraman and you held on to this very WELL shot footage until September of 2010? Really? Okay

2) You're an award winning cameraman with probably the clearest footage I've seen to date. Between the edits, where is the other footage? Or did you shoot it all in one 'edit as you go' take? Because cameramen don't do that. There is stock footage that you should possess. If you deleted it or threw it away, you're an A-HOLE. If you refuse to release THAT footage...you're an A-HOLE again.

3) Why does his shot seem to come from a vantage point that is identical to other video shots? Did many of you great cameramen who got rare shots of the backside of the buildings all live in some commune together? All sharing condos or apartments near or on the same block? Were you all at a "Camera Man" BBQ event and decided to bring your cameras along?

4) I noticed you got down to the same level and same angle seen in the Naudet Brothers famous footage, almost the same exact line of sight and location. Why was this intersection so popular at the time, was it the only one with a good view?

5) Again, you are an "award winning cameraman", yet you felt that your footage of the biggest event on American soil in recent history was relevant only NOW, in 2010?

Really?

Watch this, get smart.

reply to post by PersonalChoice


Thanks for bringing this footage to our attention...

However, watching that footage has turned my stomach into knots and I'm about to explode with frustration, anger, and sadness right now... it's all driving me insane - as someone else said it was like watching it for the first time all over again.

The guy replied on youtube saying he didn't realize that what he thought was debris falling from the building(s) was actually people jumping... how horrible of a way to die. Your fight or flight instinct is so screwed up at that point you are unable to think clearly but fortunately enough some people were able to end their lives quicker than having to sit there burning to death (and I know it sounds wrong saying 'fortunately' when it comes to death and especially 9/11 but I know you all understand what I mean by this).

Right now I don't really feel like getting into the whole 9/11 debate; after watching that footage all I know is that I hope the truth comes out in full now more than ever. How can something like this happen, how can something this HUGE happen to our people, to human beings, by other human beings, and it be OK in the eyes of some? How can this be OK to let happen and not fully investigate?

Why are we not fighting harder to get the truth? What are we not doing correctly? What do I have to do personally to help? I will fight tooth and nail until my death to find out as much as I can...

Sorry for the questions... just sort of talking out loud I guess...

Peace, Love & Light to you all and to those lost on that day.

reply to post by Three_moons


Just to be clear here, your first photo still below is from a different cameraman you had saved on file?



And the following photo is a still taken from this latest released video by "Steve Vigilante"?



Is that correct?

Originally posted by boondock-saint
just to make a point

squibs are white and thrust outward

smoke is black and flows upward as soon as it's
out the window with lil air pressure resistance.

please show me black squibs
on ANY building demolition video???
thanks

I'm a truther myself
but I have to say this video
doesn't help our cause
at all from what I've seen.

A building that is being brought down with explosives are usually not on fire while it is being brought down. So why should you see black smoke coming from them?

The squibs show up in many diverse videos and photographs and are clearly visible in this

particular video as well.

To date, I have not seen one video or photo without them!

This photographer has filmed a pristine view of the North Tower and I don't find anything

unusual about the camera-man or the commentary!


S&F

Well while you guys argue about "squibs" (Puffs generated by a vacuum or blast wave in a building only a few hundred feet away) can I get someone to confirm the two photos I posted are from stated different camera footage?

Thanks

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
This footage to me anyway adds more proof to a cover-up. This footage has been edited and raises some rather shocking questions…
My questions.

1. Why has this footage not been seen until very recently?

2. Why is it such high quality with crystal clear clarity?

3. There are several cuts in the film.... why?

4. We don't actually see the 2nd tower strike as the camera conveniently zooms into first tower... why didn't the spot the incomming plane??

5. The sound of the 2nd strike doesn't sound like a plane to me, shouldn't there have been a drone of the plane clearly herd for some time before the strike?

6. After the 2nd strike did anyone else notice the uniform damage, looks like it is onlt 2 or 3 floors that are blown out in a line, very unlike the jagged edges of the first strike.

7. at 7:12 there is footage of two men, one of which clearly says a plane came in... The man stating he saw a plane is very suspect to me, and the way the footage is edited prior to this is a lead up to this statement. It is clasic profensional directing and editing.

Just a few of the many questions about this footage.

Who were these men and why only release this footage now??

Korg.

edit on 14-9-2010 by Korg Trinity because: added point 7.

I can't believe you're actually questioning whether or not a second plane hit the south tower! Haven't you seen the other videos showing this? Or have I simply misinterpreted what you're questioning here?

The "profensional directing and editing"? Those are real people reacting to a real event, and by the way there's no such word as "profensional". I know, I know, it's a typo but it doesn't look very "professional" when people don't check for spelling mistakes before posting.

Don't take this as me bashing you, I believe there is something very fishy about this tragic event, but I don't see anything more than good quality footage of the damaged north tower and the exploson resulting from the second plane hitting the south tower and the public reaction to it.

Originally posted by Section31
Look at the church in front of the towers. There is some sort of black outline.

Hmmm you know you are right!!

The more I look at it the more I feel it is superimposed over the actual footage. It doesn't match the same quality of the towers and it just looks wrong. I can't explain why it looks wrong, just that it does.

Who else thinks this?

Korg.

reply to post by anonymo26
Can you specify a bit? I assume you're referring to what some believe is a helicopter around the 1:30 mark but I'm not sure. After watching the video you posted I assume you're implying that the 1:30 is the "ball" mentioned in the video. If that's the case it appears wrong. The angle of the "ball" in the video you posted appears to be above the towers coming down at an angle with the "live" footage being shot from a higher location than the original video posted here. The video posted here was shot from a lower location and the object isn't flying at a very steep angle. Also, according to 3D analysis around the 10:39 mark, he shows the path of the "ball" which doesn't even go behind WTC 1. Care to clarify?

Originally posted by anonymo26
Are you guys really that stupid?

Man, I really hope you people start raising your IQ and stop listening to every explanation that is fed to you like your a retard who cant think for yourself.

Oh, yeah, thanks for the great comments. They always makes people want to listen to others.

I don't like being spoon fed explanations without thinking for myself so please clarify my issues and questions with the information and comments you made.


reply to post by Prove_It_NOW
Incorrect. Both pictures that you re-posted were from somewhere else. The first picture here is a screen capture from the current, new video. I'm curious where you're going with this.

No, what I am asking is if the TWO PHOTOS that I POSTED (Your photo 2 and 3) are from different sources.
Your photos 2 and 3, my photos 1 and 2 ( a copy of yours)

Are they from DIFFERENT sources? Where am I going with this? Ummm, it's a Line of Sight issue with the camera.




ETA: Okay I see, your 1rst photo is from the new video , and the next two down, your 2 and 3 are from another source....sorry I misunderstood

reply to post by Prove_It_NOW

To possible clarify further, none of the pictures are from the same source that I'm aware of. They're just randomly found pictures.