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.


New video showing the second Tower impact

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:24 AM
reply to post by Varemia

Oh. Okay. Could very well be. I just couldn't make out any detail. I just saw it as a blur passing by.

Glad we have people on this forum that are versed in all the areas I am not. Sure makes the learning process a lot easier. Now, if only I can retain it!

Thanks m'friend!

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:34 AM
Here are two more angles of the 2nd plane hitting the the WTC

The commentary by the man speaking to Peter Jennings is interesting. He says he only saw the explosion.

In this video you can see the plane approach and catch a glimpse of it between the towers before it hits.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:38 AM

Originally posted by ARealandTrueAmerican

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Now I am not saying I know this to be actual but I do know it was debunked without hours! Why? Seems it might've hit a government nerve.

So people thinking its fake means its real?

It looks fake to me. Does that mean im paid disinfo?

Of course not. But why do you say it's fake? Probably due to whatever someone else said. Like the EXIF data or whatever.
First off, how do we know THAT information wasn't purposefully put there?

Maybe the photo is real, the government caught wind of it and tweaked it or whatever it is they're saying is fake?

We're working with a very corrupt government who did a horrible act (in one way or the other) on Sept 11, 2001. So it wouldn't be prudent now to put down our guards as to their capabilities.

All it takes is a good leader. And because we are pretty much nothing but lemmings when it comes to all the complexity involved in this ONE day, we've come to depend on others to show us the way. To point things out that we otherwise wouldn't know about.
So just because someone is saying something (the photo) about something else (is fake), doesn't make it true.

I want to know, why does that photo look fake to you? I guess I should've asked that first. Sorry.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:02 AM
reply to post by MathiasAndrew

Your right about that part at 0:15 he even says he didnt see a plane go in he just said the building just went in a explosion?
Again i am not agreeing with CGI i am just replying to what i am seeing and hearing in the video. Because i have seen plenty of the 9/11 videos.
edit on 1-10-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-10-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:38 AM
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

Maybe he wasn't looking at his monitor/screen, you can clearly see the other plane, his colleague even said he seen it.

10 years on and people are still going on about this lame conspiracy nonsense? It's heartbreaking watching them videos and thinking how many lives where extinguished both upon impact, and on collapse.

Everybody is seeing answers and clues where there is none! The only answer is on 11/9/2001 some disgruntled terrorists hijacked and flew planes into several buildings and murdered a lot of innocent people. For the sake of their memories I urge people to give it a rest and accept the truth.

Why didn't Bush react when told in the classroom? He didn't want to alarm the kids, and he had just been told that terrorists had flown planes into large buildings, how would you react? Shock, disbelief, just like the people who filmed the first video in the OP, you wouldn't know what to do straight away. When I watched it live on TV, when the second plane hit, I couldn't speak for 5 minutes whilst I tried to wrap my head around what was going on.

Could the USG have handled the situation better? Yes
Where they responsible? No, not at all, and the sooner people realise that, the better it will be for the memories of the victims of that tragic day!

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:43 AM
I think the cameraman's reaction in OP's video isn't normal. You film a tower that was just hit by a plane and when another plane comes above your head you wont stay there calmly and zoom out gently to film the whole action.

Let's say he didnt hear the second plane. Even in that scenario as soon as the plane appears in your point of view or in your camera's little window your first reaction is to move the camera on that fast moving object or shake it because you are scared or zoom in. Not to zoom out and stand like a tourist filming in the zoo.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:59 AM
reply to post by woogleuk

Booooooooo !!!!!!!

Why would you come to a place where you know people are discussing these issues and tell everybody to stop discussing it? If you really wanted it to rest in your own mind that fine.

Just avoid coming to these discussions. But don't come in here under those completely false pretenses, using some sympathy for the victims ploy. Don't come here and try to tell people what they should or should not be discussing.
edit on 1-10-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: add text

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:46 AM

Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
I wonder how many ATSers recall that day and how many are just now catching up? Because I lose sight on how 10 years makes a big difference when you're younger. Because someone could've been 6 years old then and now....a punky teenager (just kidding) but old enough to want to know what happened.

I was 46 when it happened, but I was totally separated from the world of TV and didn't see any of the coverage except a few short clips until years later. I have no idea how the coverage actually went down that day. It's one big reconstruction project for me.

But I'd rather spend my time wearing down the opposition where they seem to be more vulnerable. This stuff is a total rat's nest. I'm glad someone is trying to sort it out, though.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 03:16 AM
reply to post by l_e_cox

But I'd rather spend my time wearing down the opposition where they seem to be more vulnerable. This stuff is a total rat's nest. I'm glad someone is trying to sort it out, though.

This video below may help you sort some of it out.

It's a very long documentary so maybe watch it in parts.

It may take some time but definitely worth the 5 hours

From the mystery religions of ancient Egypt to the Zionist role in 9/11, "Ring of Power -- Empire of the City -- 4,000 Years of Suppressed History" puzzles together the missing pieces of our human story. Find out how an Illuminati network of international bankers and European royalty have turned the world's nations and citizens into their debt slaves.

Part 1: 9/11 The Untold Story
Half the world believes Muslims were responsible for 9/11. The other half believes it was Israeli Zionists. Who is right?

Part 2: Hidden Empire
The world's most powerful empire is not the USA. It is an empire that insiders call "Empire Of The City"

Part 3: Trail Of The Pharaohs
Did the Biblical Abraham really live to be 175? Did Moses really turn staffs into snakes and rivers into blood?

Part 4: God And The Queen
Genealogy charts show that British and French royalty are descendants of Mary Magdalene and Jesus. Is it true?

Part 5: All The Queen's Men
How rich and powerful is Queen Elizabeth II?

Part6: The Godfathers
They scammed control of the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve, then they found God-Gold, Oil and Drugs.

Part 7: Cheating At Monopoly
How many people would play a game of monopoly if the banker was cheating and fixing the rules? Over 6 billion.

Part 8: Asses Of Evil
The New World Order MAFIA are invisible rulers who make puppets out of politicians and heroes out of villains.

Part 9: King Of Hearts
The ultimate goal of "insiders" is to disarm the world and create one world empire under one world ruler. Who is he?

Part 10: Solutions
Protesting and writing letters to deaf politicians doesn't work. What does work? [/ex[

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:36 AM
To the misguided individuals who think all the 9/11 vids are fake, please show me one piece of Hollywood CGI that compares in realism. You can't, because the technology to digitally recreate that event in such stunning detail didn't exist a decade ago. In fact even top CGI studios would struggle to recreate it today. It's a truly ridiculous theory and frankly I'd be embarrassed to even contemplate it.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 07:13 AM
reply to post by mayabong

That silence was the reaction. In their heads they're probably thinking 'Christ, a plane just flew into that building'. Not everyone screams 'Oh. My. Gawd'.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 07:17 AM
Extraordinary claims, needs extraordinary evidence.
So to all those who accept hologram theory. Please give me a straight answer how this was made?
Where were the projectors? People saw plane miles from impact place. So there should be like a hundred of projectors on flight patch.And they would have to be placed in various angles to achieve this effect[cross the beams of light], so many buildings involved. How they were attached without notice? How holograms could be so sharp, given the distance from projectors, and effects from atmosphere?
It's even more ridiculous than the hundred of tons of termite in WTC.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 07:18 AM
ok .. I've argued over and over that the plane in this video that killed eckar, the widow of a 9/11 victim, was rigged and was too coincidental.. something I DID NOT know about the plane was, it had auto de-icing technology on it~!

check the vid @ 3:44 -> 4:33

So, if ice wasn't the issue, what exactly was?

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 07:54 AM

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by OldCorp

I still want to know what was in the pod underneath the plane.

That has never been answered to my satisfaction, and it appears in ALL of the videos of the second hit.

The "pods" that conspiracy idiots love to harp about are the fairings covering the landing gear when retracted

Its been explained before = just that "truthers" refuse to listen.....

Underside of a British Airways 767

Ameriican Airlines 767

Yeah, right. Nothing has been explained.

In all of the footage showing this, it does NOT match the proportions of the 767 that supposedly hit.

And there's still other odd anomaly's not explained on this plane.

Clearly the normal 767 did not hit that tower. Planes were likely switched. As outlined in the declassified Operation Northwoods document. The plot involved switching planes/using alternate planes etc. What a coincidence huh.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 07:56 AM
reply to post by piotrburz

Please, pay no attention to the no hologram people. These people are confused/shills (confused due to the fakery and doctored footage that is out there) and it's unfortunate, we need to focus on the real issues here.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:21 AM
reply to post by mayabong

You might expect it, doesn't mean it has to happen.

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:22 AM
reply to post by ProphetOfZeal

Why are 'no planers' 'shills', but people who think the Pentagon was hit by a missile 'truth movement'?

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:43 AM

Originally posted by ProphetOfZeal

Originally posted by TWILITE22

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by Teebs


I'm really not sure about the no plane theory but in this video why does the left wing looks like it disappears before hitting the tower?and the same wing doesn't hit the tower either
..I'm really confused here...whats up with this video?

Ok, here's the thing. People are so confused on this topic of fakery/planes/no planes. Let's clear some things up here. There is boat load of fakery/editing going on from the footage of that day, yes of course including this little gem of a video where the wing and half the plane nearly fades out/disappears. Also, this is not the only video where the entire wing disappears. So, for example if you pause at 4 seconds, you'll see just how blatantly fake this is. No wing holes at all, then 2 seconds later wing holes out of nowhere. It's solid as it enters the tower, then holes all of the sudden. All that after the wing disappears. Ok so we've established that there are many videos that have been edited/faked, but why? Well, it's the massive cover-up campaign for the real planes that hit, which were not the normal commercial airliners they told us. This can be corroborated by eye witness testimony of "military plane", "it had no windows", "that was not an american airlines", etc. Direct quotes from eye witnesses on that day near the towers (video is available out there).

Ok, so, back to the confusion. This has sparked massive confusion among truthers, and has helped shills/dis-info agents in their agenda to discredit the hunt for 9/11 truth. Has given them another tool in this mind war, and that's unfortunate. They tow the hologram/no plane theory and causes massive chaos. Also discourages OSers even more to have an open mind to things. INFO WAR. War on our minds. We need to stay focused, and separate fact from fiction here. Planes hit the towers, everyone there (eye witness accounts) saw some type of plane hit. The most likely scenario is that they were military controlled planes/drones of some type. Which is technology they have, this is a fact.

Video fakery, which IS present in most close up plane impact shots, is there to condition us to believe "airliners" is what hit. It's dramatic and mind warping. It's to cover up. It's part of the entire video cover up from that day. Sure there are genuine videos out there, but when it comes to "plane impact" videos, be weary.
edit on 30-9-2011 by ProphetOfZeal because: typo

edit on 30-9-2011 by ProphetOfZeal because: t

So what is with the fake video of the towers collapsing, the fake jumper images, the fake rubble
images, the fake computer generated victim entities, the fake witness testimony and exposed
9/11 was a hoax and a scam designed with many different benefits in mind. It was
fundamentally a demolition job carried out in private, out of sight and was planned long in advance.
Computer generated fake movie was pushed by the complicit MSM and the public were duped into
believing the fairystory that the real perpetrators spun and passed off as reality.
Is it really down to incredible chance that so many 'plane' witnesses (who began pushing the meme
immediately on air after the attacks) were intimately connected to the media? No! It is down to design
and was scripted that way. Every one of these media witnesses is doing very well now, thank you very much!
Outside of the (fake) video evidence and dubious and often contradictory eyewitness testimony (and
planted plane parts and other evidence), there is NO evidence that any plane crashed on 9/11.
Media fakery plays such a huge part in modern psyops and can be found to be part and
parcel of so many terrorist events, from 9/11 to 7/7, from the Madrid and Bali bombings to
the Mumbai and Tucson shootings all the way up to and including the recent 'attacks' by
simulated non-entity Anders Breivik in Norway.
We really should be more sophisticated observers, living as we are in such a technological age.
We are constantly being grossly deceived by villains using this, their most convenient method possible.
Media Fakery.
It's backwards we are going!

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:44 AM
reply to post by pshea38

I was hoping however that you could explain how a softer bodied projectile can penetrate a harder bodied facade

Plane = aluminum and steel
Building = aluminum and steel

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 09:21 AM
Another fake plane..... and another fake video... hmmm....

CIA/Mossad and other related Agencies: Stop spreading twin towers 9-11 fake video and please show The PENTAGON footages....!

new topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in