The Media Lied On 9/11 - Here Is Proof

reply to post by philjwolf


The fact that the North Tower was on fire has absolutely nothing to do with the missing plane in the FOX5 shot...

It's a big deal because about 2 and 5 seconds before the "plane" hit the South Tower, it was NOT in the shot, when it definitely should have been. It's also a big deal because after the third(last) zoom in, the "plane" comes in on the very next frame. That's a highly unlikely coincidence, wouldn't you agree?

I'm assuming you mean Evan Fairbanks' video by "the footage of the guy on the ground". Well there's a lot of things wrong with that video too.

For starters, it's not even the original video. Mr. Fairbanks has admitted the FBI took his original and "made a dub". Even he did not view the original before the FBI took him "to a safe place". What we see is a copy.

"When I told them what I had on videotaped, they brought me to their command center. They have the original, which has five minutes of audio. This is a copy. Sorry there's no sound."

Quoted from a New York Times article by Sarah Boxer on November 22, 2001. Since then, it seem as if they removed the last part of her article.

query.nytimes.com...
www.plaguepuppy.net...

Second, it contradicts other videos. In the Fairbanks video we see white wings on the "plane", but in others the "same plane" has black or gray wings.

Third, the "plane" melts into the building. Often referred to as a "butter plane". It violates the Laws of Motion. There is absolutely no buckling or deceleration upon impact. As Mr. Fairbanks has said, "it disappeared like a bad special effect", which is exactly what it is.

Fourth, the guy in the video does not look up until the "plane" is fully inside and the explosion starts. Did he not hear the roar of two 767 engines, which are about 1000 feet away from him? Did he not hear a 200 ton plane crashing into a building at 500+ mph?

No, because the plane wasn't there.

Wondering why the September Clues series were numbered differently (1-9 and A-H) I found this.

Parts A-H include more anomalies and make a better point than 1-9. The updated version can also be downloaded in high quality, which is now in my opinion the only way to enjoy September Clues.

Here's the link for anyone interested in enjoying September Clues in much better quality than YouTube:

www.thesocialservice.it...

Has there been any discussion on the trajectory of the 'object' that hit the south tower? The part I'm referring to specifically is 1:30-3:45 of video 3. It seems that there is a clear discrepancy in flight trajectories unless we're being bamboozled by the video's author.

Edit: I'll link to the video I was watching since this video could be chopped up a million different ways on youtube.

ie.youtube.com...


[edit on 18-10-2008 by flybynight]