Sound travels slower than movement, So when the ground shakes, that is the moment of impact, the the sound of the explosion comes after the actual impact.
@Diego19827 If you say the first shake and the first sound came from the plane, it means the plane would have been faster than sound (which it obviously wasn't). Either way, there were bombs, no matter who put them there...
This isn't evidence of anything except that sound waves travel slower than light, AND that they used some type of modern scalar missile. The sound is nothing like a jet. Listen to cruise missile attack sounds vs. jet engine sounds and you'll see you have something here nonetheless.
I HAVE NO OPINION ON THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY WHETHER ITS TRUE OR NOT.... IT IS A HILARIOUS ASSUMPTION TO SAY THAT A SLIGHT MALFUNCTION IN A CAMERA POINTED AT SOME GUYS SHOES IS THE RESULT OF A BOMB....HOW ABOUT ITS THE RESULT OF SOMEONE ACCIDENTALLY BUMPING INTO IT, WHILE THEY SWIFTLY LOOK UP TO SEE WHAT THAT LOUD NOISE IS....IF YOU INTEND TO PRESENT 9/11 AS AN INSIDE JOB, YOU OUGHT TO PRESENT YOUR CASE IN A MUCH MORE RATIONAL MANNER THAN THIS
You people really are mad as a bag of frogs ! Oh of course the planes were fake, the people on them fake, everyone that saw the planes crash were actors and every single person with a camcorder/mobile phone showing the planes, were in on it. idiots.
There was NO EXPLOSION before the first plane hit.
The World Trade Center was built on BEDROCK. Sound travels much faster through steel and rock than it does through the air.
The vibration from the plane's impact travelled through the building and the ground much faster than the sound of the impact that was transmitted through the air.
So obviously the camera is going to record a space of time between what it felt through the ground and the sound it recorded through its microphone.
@firecloud77 you sound wild mr.scientist, because the witnessed said when they got outside then the top floors exploded (first plane hit) which they did not see the first plane hit, just saw the explosion.
@firecloud77 - think i concur on this 1 - should have noticed 2x shocks (1x for explosion & 1x for plane crash) if indeed there was an explosion just then. Though does anybody know of the timing of the 'explosions' in the Basement (near the Elevators - where things can fall great heights from above) given in other peoples testimony ?
@austinpelkey yes this is true compare this to other videos and you will find that the sound of the blast is delayed, sound does not travel the speed of light.
Do you take into account the fact that the guy in the camera frame looks seconds after the sounds? I'm willing to be the audio has been screwed with or why else would his reaction be delayed?
@Heatseeker14345 ...or it could be due to the fact that sound travels faster through solids than gasses. They were pretty far away from the WTC. It took a while for the kinetic energy in the ground traveled much faster than the audible sound in the air.
There is no underground explosion in this vid, this news broadcast is from WNYW, whose live camera feeds were transmitted from the radio tower on top of 1 WTC, the ripple is actually the moment flight 11 made contact with 1 WTC, they are about 3 blocks away thats why you hear the explosion seconds latter.
SOMEONE HIT THE CAMERA. the timing was crazy, but the fucking cameraman bumped the camera (or wires) with his foot. i mean be fucking REASONABLE, don't be stupid.
the sound was so muted and low frequency, but mainly it sounded digital/technical. like bumping a microphone (or unplugging/plugging in speaker cables)
even if a camera was sitting on the ground and there was a quick seismic jolt from some distance away - i doubt it would affect the video feed or cause video loss.
And lastly....sound vibrations, though not directional, would not allow you nor the camera to feel the "bump" from the top of a building. Those sound vibrations were traveling down the length of the building vertically and when they reached ground level, what was left of them would continue to go directionally downward and not horizontally. The waves that went horizontally (since sound is non-directional)....came to you through the air. Therefore...no bump should occur at all.
(cont)...They would use that to determine the difference of time that *should* occur and see if the tape measures with that. This is what I did, and come to find out, your statement is false. There was over a 100% margin of error in the physics of the timing. It should have taken just under one second from the time you heard the plane to the time when you see the bump. It took a full two seconds. You may think 1 second is not a big difference, but in the world of math, that is a 100% error.
"There is no underground explosion in this vid...."
A biased person would make this statement without backing it up with sound physics. An unbiased person would do the math of figuring out the speed of sound through the air, the speed of sound through concrete, the distance sound would travel through the air, and the distance sound vibrations would travel down the building and horizontally across the concrete. They would use all of that information to determine the difference in time...cont
Wtf are you ? 10 ? I'm 15, and even I know that SOUND TRAVELS SLOW. If you look at footage of the second plane hitting the south tower, you see the plain hit, the building explodes, THEN you hear the initial impact. This video does not show the plane entering the North Tower, but I can tell you that the portion of this video that goes 'fuzzy' for a split second, is actually the plain going into the building !! And then you hear the 'boom!' A few seconds later because remember sound travels slow!
Jet fuel setting office furniture in fire and felling that thing in 9 seconds, at free-fall speed? :D Don't care if it was the US govt or Al Qaeda, you see dozens of ppl on the scene reporting explosions, so gimme a frigging break... Taken down with explosives, end of story.
I have no doubt that the people who set up the "conspiracy" has been able to keep thousands of people from leaking the "truth" for almost a decade now. Everytime I see some of this crap (conpsiracy theory) on 9/11, I marvle at the stupidity of some of the people on the net. Thank God those people live in the basements of thier parent's house and are not in the world where they could hurt themselves or others.
@satelng I am with you. It's the same bunch still trying to convince themselves that "they" got JFK. Some of the really funny and WAY off-the-wall idiots are frankly almost sad to listen to: the Bush "remote control" demolition switch was the most absurd, also the "MOSSAD" (Israel Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations) did it, and how we "framed" Bin Laden -- I know one SEAL sure as hell framed him quite well.. Good post sateing :-)
The bump that the camera had half a second before the plane crashed, the bump was actually the explosion vibration of the plane crashing into the world trade center. You have to remember, sound travels a little slow. When the camera bumped before the plane hit, that infact was actually the explosion of the plane hitting the world trade center, the sound traveling to the camera was synchronized with the explosion, why? Because sound travels slow.
I believe 9/11 was an inside job, but this video isn't the proof that convinced me. I believe that they used planes, they could have been remotely flown (drones). I think that all the secondary explosions that were reported by firefighters and witnesses were the columns being blown out so they could demolish the building. If you look at pics of the steel columns(during the cleanup), you'll see that they are cut in a perfect diagonal, like a demolition would have done.
Am i the only one who thinks that the 1st bang was the plane impacting the building, and the 2nd louder bang was the plane exploding inside the building?? Look at any plane crash video, it takes about a second after impact for the plane to explode causing the fireball you see...This makes sence!
I'm sorry but this video proves fuck all! Even if the ripple in the camera is caused by a distrubance/explosion at WTC, how can you possibly decipher whether it's from a plane hitting or from a bomb? The reason the ripple occurs before the sound is because they were a couple of blocks away.
I do find it odd that something this bad could happen, then the terrorist groups that were supposedly involved just go quiet (not sure if the london bombings were the same group), like.. if I were part of a terrorist group that hated western society, I wouldn't stop at 2 events (if london bombings were the same group).
Look at yellowstone national park, it's a giant volcano, putting a very large bomb or a nuclear bomb on it would definitely set it off.. Get that and there goes western culture...
I guess people have never heard or seen fireworks from a distance before, since it takes a while for the sound to travel to your ear AFTER the firework has already been seen in the sky.
Why is this guys camera just pointed at the ground for a while in the beginning?? Like he didn't wanna film the plane actually crashing but make it seem like something else crashed into it??
Well... If you would look at the pedestrians in this video then the reactions comes as soon as the explosion happens... NO one responds on the loud sound of the airplane except for the woman wich stand still behind the leg in front...
Listen to the audio! To my understanding there is no audio velocity wich means that they could even talked right to the camera due to turning heads while talking.
All they did was fabricate this whole stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They drive these planes inside those towers, they demolish the towers with bombs (which were installed secretly in advance) there is a lot of evidence pointing at this (such as melted iron, lots of mercury residues from explosive material, and the fact that a special company worked on the towers days before "repairing" certain things in the towers) Then, they suddenly find out that it was people form iraq who did this lets go to war!
This story goes deeper than what people realize!! This was an inside job YES but please just stop talking about the so called terrorist from the middle east that too was fabricated in order to go to war. Don't you realize that these airplanes were not actual commercial airplanes with normal people inside? These airplanes where controlled with computer tech. just like a drome airplane. YOu do know that the military has such technology and even beyond that. There were no highjaker and all that bs.
@carlos25154 Good comment. I truly believe Israel was behind it. Since Sharon the PM stated, let me make this very clear we run the US not the other way around. Oct. 65, I believe. A statement from another jewish person, now the US will know what it is like to be bombed daily. They forget they bomb Palestine daily. We send them Billions of $'s and all the latest weaponry. Now the US is in rough shape, how about helping us out?
The plane is coming over all loud and noisy... But during that time you don't see anyone responding to that socalled plane. No one gives a reaction untill the plane hits and goes boom!
(gives me reason to think that no planes were involved)
AWESOME VIDEO! This totally proves William Rodriguez's story that their was an explosion in the basement prior to the plane hitting. Listen closely, you can still hear the plane(missile) flying in the air during the first muffled explosion! Then you hear the plane hitting the building!
the camera picks up a ground vibration? yet not even the feet of the man in front of the camera nor anyone walking react to it until after they hear the explosion.....look at it logically and realize the cameraman was not underneath the north tower so it took a brief time for the sound to catch up to the human ear and microphone after the impact and what you're logically seeing is the interference from the north tower's antenna which carried numerous signals for NYorkers including WNYW.
@bananabrule you are just like every other brainwashed sheep that believes what the movement tells you to believe, try questioning the conspiracy theory movement about explaining what those explosions people reported hearing, they can't, and they also never mention that the towers even made any noise, my videos explain what those explosions were, like the damage to the lobby of the north tower and the one on the jenny karr audio, that was an engine falling down an elevator shaft sheepy.
altering the video the way you did does not even assume there was an explosion especially when you can't even hear an explosion when you edited this video, you just see where you interupted the power of the video in your editing and an explosion wouldn't do that, you suck at faking the truth, your attempt only further hurts the lying movement, try commenting on my video "911 engines down elevator shafts" i can't be proven wrong because it is what really happened.
@weizman123 do you believe there were explosives planted? why? because people said they heard noises? those noises are all unidentified and the conspiracy theorists never admit that the towers themselves made any noise, that is called covering up evidence, you believe what they tell you without evidence or proof, you are believing hearsay, opinions, rumors, and speculation. you are what we call a sheep, you follow like a mindless drone, you would believe that the world is flat huh?
@weizman123 check out my 2 newest videos one is titled "sept 11th smoking gun" and the other one is "jesse is easy to fool" both videos like most of my videos can not be proven wrong unlike you sheep who spill the same bull whioch is told to you by conspiracy theorists and you believe what you hear like a sheep you believe hearsay, rumors, opinions, and speculation, the movement has no proof or real evidence, ever notice that? who made who look stupid?
There is no underground explosion in this vid, this news broadcast is from WNYW, whose live camera feeds were transmitted from the radio tower on top of 1 WTC, the ripple is actually the moment flight 11 made contact with 1 WTC, they are about 3 blocks away thats why you hear the explosion seconds latter.
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
- denser than air. We hear the same impact through the air when it reaches our ears a couple of seconds later. There is no bomb in the basement.
Another fact that keeps bothering me is when the "experts" talk about the melting point of steel, and claim fuel cannot melt steel.Ok, it can't. But what about all the other "fuel" in the building: Furniture, carpet, paper, plastics (these are all petroleum products). Think of lighter fluid on a bbq. And, this is a confined space. These are high temps!
sound is a wave/vibration through material. The speed at which it travels depends on the material characteristics of the medium. Ie: density. Someone will have to verify this, but I'm pretty sure that wave speed is directly proportional to material density. Therefore, when we hear the sound of the plane, still flying, it has already hit the building. The vibration we see when the camera shakes is the result of the waves travelling through the denser ground, ...(continued in next post..)
@xcgfhfdg bahahahahaha holy shit! "no deceleration"! See how the plane didn't come out the other side? Hahahahaha...that's DECELERATION! in this case we call it "stopping". hahahah oh dear, did you ever take a basic physics lesson...or in fact, pay attention to the world around you when you were growing up?
BTW, fly a plane travelling at 700 odd km/h into your nearest building and tell me what happens. What do you want it to do, bounce off?
The fact remains: This video is sub-standard, and damages both the no-plane movement, and, the 9/11 truth movement in general. It also damages the reputability of 91177info's channel, and I would strongly advise you to delete it.
@Simboiss You sound like a mindless repeater. Yes, every good little truther says that the no-plane movement is a decoy, it is a ridiculous theory, swallowed by unquestioning partial-truther sheep. It is obvious that the planes were faked. Not to mention that no-planers do not refute the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Go back to sleep.
"...that's because of the status quo set by "truthers" like you..."
"...even though you know the truth ...you are trying distract people away from it..."
Excuse me? Both of these accusations are just way off. You are basing your wild assertions about me on... what, exactly? Just a few comments. I have left plenty more pro-"no-plane" comments on videos, and I also question Alex Jones, and others, where appropriate, which is to say: often.
There is no need for a 'planes' versus 'no planes' debate, it is a trivial detail, an excuse for people to argue on the internet, and, a complete waste of time.
It is the weakest link in a whole chain of conclusive evidence, so why is it such a point of contention within the truth movement?
I partially agree. The faked footage *is* probably the most obvious evidence of 9/11, but only once you have taken a look at September Clues, or any other existing analysis of a similarly high standard. On paper, as-in, to a beginner, it is the most ludicrous-sounding theory, and I personally found it the hardest to process. So, perhaps it is not the same for everyone.
@AIexKidd don't you have any faith in your brothers and sisters to discern the truth...?
....any 6th grader whose current on his Isaac Newton studies ....can see that an aluminum wing tip cannot go through a wall of steel girders and concrete...
watch?v=ct2l-SNAs9c
".... to a beginner, it is the most ludicrous-sounding theory..."
...that's because of the status quo set by "truthers" like you.....
..even though you know the truth ...you are trying distract people away from it...
"...that's because of the status quo set by "truthers" like you..."
"...even though you know the truth ...you are trying distract people away from it..."
Excuse me? Both of these accusations are just way off. You are basing your wild assertions about me on just a few comments... I have left plenty more pro- no-plane comments on videos, and I also question Alex Jones, and others, where appropriate, which is to say, often.
The other issue is, planes versus no planes is probably the single-greatest source of division within the truth movement. It is what I call an "advanced topic", because most people, at least, the ones I have talked to, personally, find no planes the hardest part to believe, that is, besides that good old, "why would the government ever harm its own citizens?"-ridiculous response.
"the ones I have talked to, personally, find no planes the hardest part to believe," that might be the case when u have no idea what exactly the no planes theory consists.
just to say "uh dude, u know some crazy ppl say there was no planes,lolroflmao " does not convinve ppl to take a look at the evidence.
they never heared pilots say that a 767 can not fly that fast at sealevel,they never heared physicists state that hollow aluminum tubes can not cut through steel and concrete etc.
@horror11 Your example is ridiculous, and does not apply to me, but I see your point. The fact of the matter is, most people are unable to truly think for themselves, and 'truthers' are no exception.
You just have to show others the footage of the plane entering the building, the wings melting into the side of the building, like hot butter into a knife, and if they cannot wake up to what is in right front of their very eyes, then, good riddance.
@AIexKidd in fact it is NOT only the videos wich show clearly that the plane is fake, all data availlable shows clear evidence for no planes.
no passengers lists, fake cell phone calls exposed in moussaouie trial,impossible speeds.
strangely lot ppl have no problem to believe there was no plane at pentagon (of course there was not:)) even though at pentagon u have also wittnesses who reported a plane:)
ppl saw something but in case of pentagon and new york most likely bunkerbuster missiles
@horror11 Christ sake dude, they used military plans to hit the towers, yes, the calls were fake, yes there were suspicious and faked passenger lists, yes there were no arab names on the flight manifest, yes they got rid of the people who should have been on "the planes", but to say no planes hit the towers is really not agreeing with the evidence, there were so many people there, including firefighters who instantly reported after seeing the plane, aslo a plane is seen hitting in EVERY video.
@AIexKidd "....why is it (TV Fakery) such a point of contention within the truth movement?..."
...first off....the "truth movement" you're referring to is just a bunch of corporate-owned talking heads...
..these personalities, like Alex Jones or the like...are in no way helping to spread truth or fight back against "the system"...
...the "truth movement" functions as a sort of stress-relief-valve for anyone who might be mildly concerned about 9/11...it's real goal is to hide truths
@AIexKidd "...There is no need for a 'planes' versus 'no planes' debate, it is a trivial detail...."
...so if you believe that no planes hit the towers ..... aren't you upset that all the leaders in the movement are telling lies to their listeners about TV Fakery...and telling lies about 9/11 "..why is it such a point of contention..."
...that's a really good question !!!...the video is obviously fake...so why don't the 10's of thousands of truthers acknowledge TV Fakery ??...
"aren't you upset that all the leaders in the movement are telling lies to their listeners about TV Fakery..."
Yes, yes I am upset, and so I guess I am reaching the inevitable conclusion that the "truth movement" is very much a partial-truth movement, and is clearly controlled from the some of the leading figures.
I guess it all comes down to what you want to achieve: wake up as many newbies as you possible can? Or, further wake up the so-called "awake"?
@AIexKidd - I agree. I'm tired of looking at/arguing about fake footage like this. It's like Trekkies arguing about the Klingon cloaking device.
.
Trekkies - at least they can organize huge conventions. What have WE done in all these years? Absolutely nothing. Where's our outrage? Our crime reports? Our class-action suits?
There is little or no real *movement* against the 'powers that be'.
There is a vague, reactionary fart against Zionism, and an equally wishy washy, overarching "truth" movement, and both seem limited, controlled and impotent.
It was electrical interference....sounds like a bus went by at the same time. Or maybe Elvis walked by and kicked it ! Anyone who believes in this conspiracy crap should get a life. What's so hard to believe about 2 planes being flown into a skyscraper ?
I remember seeing some footage of an elderly gentleman who lived near the Shanksville crash site saying he experienced a similar thing,ie radio/tv interference.
@HiPointMan The TV signal antenna was on the north tower, the plane impacted affecting nearby camera's the ground doesn't shake, then the sound of the impact comes a second later cos sound travels slower.. its obv.. ur over thinking it
the ground shaking is from the point the plane hit causing tv signals to get distorted, the sound of the impact is delayed by a second because sound travels slower.
@PJPs911 a plane hitting the WTC would not have any effect on the information being written to TAPE by the camera. The transmit antenna on the WTC would have nothing to do with that, if that's what you're implying. I might have misunderstood your comment.
@marce11o the shake of the camera is the exact point the plane impacted it was a huge explosion so would have caused nearby things to shake, windows nearby broke because of the force, the sound of the impact is delayed by a second as sound travels slower.
@91177info So aluminium planes melted into steel buildings, did they? I don't think so. No planes, piloted or remote controlled on that day. Video fakery on TV to fool us all.
@sorrowfulsun So are there any eyewitnesses saying missiles hit the towers?
Once the North Tower had been hit tens of thousands of people would be looking.
So you are saying a plane didn't even hit the South Tower don't you think there would be hundreds of people maybe a thousand + people would say it wasn't a plane?
They were remote controlled planes and Joe Stack who crashed his plane earlier this year was aware as to how they did it and who was behind it.
@91177info I dont think they were remote controlled. Im going out on a limb and I say there was a homing device inside the buildings, on the floors controlled by Marsh & McLennan Companies and I think FIJI Bank for the other Tower.
If you seen the hot flash on the building right before the plane hits hit, I think that might have been a reflection of the "guiding light".
Pretty much the same concept, but this would explain the 2nd plane auto correcting itself at the last moment and the flash.
@EricIndiana That probably is 100% correct dude...i have been saying the same ever since i first saw those flashes...it would also explain the incredible feats of flying by untrained pilots...
The pieces of the puzzle are slowly starting to fit.
KROLL was providing security on the WTC during 9/11 right?
A company called Convar found evidence of massive credit card fraud on that day taking place on the CPUs inside the WTC Towers with this new blue laser technology.
What does KROLL, the "CIA of Wall Street", do?
They buy out Convars leading competitor ONTRACK.
Now its KROLL-ONTRACK, and guess who will be doing all the "Inside Job" data recovery duty in the future?
@91177info I prefer to think Simon Shack in September Clues has more of the right story.And also Judy Wood. And yes, there were witnesses who reported seeing or hearing missiles, but the story the media portrayed was faked from top to bottom.
@sorrowfulsun I reported Judy Wood earlier this year with evidence of the spire turning to dust and maybe the use of a new weapon.
A month later I found out that explosives were built into the towers as a safety precaution.
If you wanted to create an event such as 9/11 would you use remote control planes or would you rely on 2001 CGI to fake the event knowing it would be analysed in the future?
Metaphorically the planes were just a match for the explosives in the building.
@91177info There were certainly explosions in the buildings, but real planes with passengers there were not. Perhaps they used a variety of methods to destroy the towers, but fakery on TV was undoubtedly used to great effect. Witnesses were paid trolls, eg the guy who told us all it was the jet fuel. CGI was used by the media on the day. Watch September Clues.
@91177info well the point is that a plane could not cut through the building and thats the main reason why they needed to fake the planes and use cgis.
the main reason why all availlable videos of the second plane contradict in many parts to each other is that they couldnt get the trajectory from the different angles 100% to match.
thats why u have some footage showing a plane way off of other trajectories in other videos.
its simple, 767 cannot fly that fast at sealevel and cut through steel.
@horror11 what about all the witnesses who saw the planes hit live in new york, they saw planes, if it was CGI'ed they would not have seen planes at all, the only evidence that there were not planes are the crazies who want it to be a government conspiracy, you are a retard.
try proving me wrong on my videos, i bet you won't and that proves that you do not know the truth because my videos tell the truth and you can't prove the truth wrong. good luck though stupid.
@loosechangeexposed what can i say?i dont know anybody personal claiming he saw a plane and i wouldnt trust him anyway unless he would pass a polygraphtest.i believe this whole "how about the millions wittnesses" argument is just a cheap psychological trick.
u just need a few ppl who will tell in live tv they saw a plane and the tv shows a plane and then alot sensationalist ppl will say they saw it too and some will say they missed it.
u cant trust witnesses,humans lie all day, trust physics :)
@horror11 by the time the plane hit the south tower tv's all around the world were focused on the WTC, thousands of people were watching it happen in person live from new york and new jersey maybe even millions, lots of people could see the towers from where they worked and lived, litterally BILLIONS of people saw it happen on t.v.
how could the gov't pull off no plane and not have thousands of people who saw it live come forward and say they saw no plane?
@loosechangeexposed thats the point the world saw it on tv and i saw it too live on TV but thats it, cgi in tv is easy as 1, 2, 3 and thats why it looks so bad in the professional media broadcasts.
do u know how many "planeshots" was aired live when it happened? only 3 and one of it from a helicopter didnt show any plane but only an explosion and another helishot showed the nose of the plane comming out the other side.
its tv fakery they made small mistakes when they aired it
@horror11 in order to prove the planes were cgi'd you need to find some of the people who saw it happen at the scene, no one ever said they saw the buildings explode without seeing a plane, even in the first video where the fire department saw the plane hit the north tower none of those firefighters ever said there was no plane, they went into the towers and lost 343 firefighters, if it was a conspiracy they would have said something, you have nothing but a case of the crazies.
@91177info who said holograms ??? ...real time computer-animation or CGI can be easily being inserted into live TV footage... ...photos of scattered flesh and parts can be easily simulated with a trip to the butcher shop, a car junkyard... and a disposable camera....
...as for this video.... 0:44 - 0:48 "....it's the trade center...trade center..." listen for the click..as the microphone "opens"... and the microphone"closes"
@xcgfhfdg The JASSM missile is a very good line of enquiry. The footage at 2:00 on this link watch?v=kJi2K8mKTRM shows a similar scene as the plane going through the towers with no resistance.
With an event planned as 9/11, meticulously planned so not to go wrong it wouldn't take long for someone to say "Lets use the explosive technology as in the JASSM but put it in a plane"
At the end of the day a plane became a missile.
Since NORAD was at ease they could take their time guiding it.
@91177info "..Lets use the explosive technology as in the JASSM but put it in a plane. At the end of the day a plane became a missile...." ...in the 9/11 footage...the aluminum wings and the wing-tips on the "plane"...slice through the steel and concrete wall of the World Trade Center....
...how can aluminum ...wing-tips ... slice through a steel and concrete wall...like a hot knife through a tower of butter ?? see vids below ->
@91177info ....one of your own videos... shows this specific type of TV fakery along with other types of video fakery.... being used in the Turkey / Israel Humanitarian flotilla incident
....skip ahead to 2:06 and 2:33 in the link below --->
watch?v=Rg6TZ8FvIOY
...Is it too far-fetched to think that the same kinds of TV fakery were used in the 9/11 footage ?....
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
@xcgfhfdg do you think the engines and landing gear are attached to alluminum wings?
the vibration from the engines would crack the aluminum wings, and the landing gear would rip through the wings upon landing, there is a thick steel beam that goes the entire width of the wings, it is also to support the weight of the fuel in the wings, 10,000 gallons weighs 70,000 lbs, that steel beam along with the wings full of fuel is what cut through the buildings. people need to question the movement.
@loosechangeexposed ".....the vibration from the engines would crack the aluminum wings, and the landing gear would rip through the wings upon landing....."
...... if you admit that mere vibrations and rubber tires can crack aluminum wings....then you must agree that a wall of steel girders and concrete...would crumple an aluminum wing like a beer can against a frat boy's forehead...!!!
@xcgfhfdg now you are twisting what i said because you don't know how else to prove what i really said wrong, i said the landing gear and engines were attached to a thick steel beam that went the entire width of the wings which also was there to support the weight of the fuel in the wings and that is what caused all the damage to the tower along with the fuel in the wings that made the wings stronger, smacking a frat boy in the head with FULL beer would knock him out.
@xcgfhfdg They didn't mean an actual cruise missle. The planes were used as missles by the terrorist. And I'm pretty sure a plane hit the WTC. Missles don't normally have a cockpit, Jet engines, landing gear, wings, jet turbines, tails, windows, and people inside. And a plane flying at 500 miles perhour wouldn't bounce off something it was cut up by the steel beams which acted like a knife.
@91177info - Pfffffft! So after all the lies and misdirection which have been outed, you are still inclined to believe anonymous, random people posting on the internet?
Or are you talking about the "witnesses" who later turned out to be somehow themselves, or related to someone who was, affiliated with the media?
Maybe you meant "witnesses" like the Harley Guy, or Gary Welz? ;-))
@loosechangeexposed ......I understand you're better at making personal verbal attacks....than you are at presenting sound arguments in regards to physics...
....but you still didn't have to drag santa into this...
Nice Shoes.
salvatore619JoEy 15 hours ago
Sound travels slower than movement, So when the ground shakes, that is the moment of impact, the the sound of the explosion comes after the actual impact.
I still think it is a conspiracy though
Diego19827 2 months ago
@Diego19827 If you say the first shake and the first sound came from the plane, it means the plane would have been faster than sound (which it obviously wasn't). Either way, there were bombs, no matter who put them there...
calderonie 1 week ago
uhhh ive seen the original and this is actually a rare angle and audio of the first tower hit.
TailsBit 3 months ago
This isn't evidence of anything except that sound waves travel slower than light, AND that they used some type of modern scalar missile. The sound is nothing like a jet. Listen to cruise missile attack sounds vs. jet engine sounds and you'll see you have something here nonetheless.
MeTubeification 3 months ago
That's from the sound from the jet dumb ass...the engine made the ground shake cuz it is so close u fuck
MCCDCTHRILLAKILLA 3 months ago
I HAVE NO OPINION ON THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY WHETHER ITS TRUE OR NOT.... IT IS A HILARIOUS ASSUMPTION TO SAY THAT A SLIGHT MALFUNCTION IN A CAMERA POINTED AT SOME GUYS SHOES IS THE RESULT OF A BOMB....HOW ABOUT ITS THE RESULT OF SOMEONE ACCIDENTALLY BUMPING INTO IT, WHILE THEY SWIFTLY LOOK UP TO SEE WHAT THAT LOUD NOISE IS....IF YOU INTEND TO PRESENT 9/11 AS AN INSIDE JOB, YOU OUGHT TO PRESENT YOUR CASE IN A MUCH MORE RATIONAL MANNER THAN THIS
bigdt87 3 months ago
Comment removed
CallASpadeASpade2U 4 months ago
You people really are mad as a bag of frogs ! Oh of course the planes were fake, the people on them fake, everyone that saw the planes crash were actors and every single person with a camcorder/mobile phone showing the planes, were in on it. idiots.
BangTheBomb 4 months ago
now if you can't see that is an explosion my friends ,YOUR IN DENial.
In other words"YOU CAn't Handle the tRuth". (they were right)
illuminatedgirl 4 months ago
.
There was NO EXPLOSION before the first plane hit.
The World Trade Center was built on BEDROCK. Sound travels much faster through steel and rock than it does through the air.
The vibration from the plane's impact travelled through the building and the ground much faster than the sound of the impact that was transmitted through the air.
So obviously the camera is going to record a space of time between what it felt through the ground and the sound it recorded through its microphone.
.
firecloud77 5 months ago
@firecloud77 you sound wild mr.scientist, because the witnessed said when they got outside then the top floors exploded (first plane hit) which they did not see the first plane hit, just saw the explosion.
Macmittens411 4 months ago
@firecloud77 - think i concur on this 1 - should have noticed 2x shocks (1x for explosion & 1x for plane crash) if indeed there was an explosion just then. Though does anybody know of the timing of the 'explosions' in the Basement (near the Elevators - where things can fall great heights from above) given in other peoples testimony ?
PhilbyDorro 3 months ago
more like evidence that the speed of ground shock is faster than the speed of sound..
DingleMusic 5 months ago
Comment removed
DeeZanic 5 months ago
Your an idiot
jimmys351 5 months ago 2
Sonic boom. Done.
therockacrossthepond 5 months ago
thats because it takes awhile for sound to travel that far. when the camera shook that is when it hit and the sound was just a few seconds behind it
austinpelkey 5 months ago
@austinpelkey yes this is true compare this to other videos and you will find that the sound of the blast is delayed, sound does not travel the speed of light.
pepsigoodman99 5 months ago
He was a good distance away from the WTC. Must have been a hell of an explosion, or something else.
cassius969 5 months ago
Do you take into account the fact that the guy in the camera frame looks seconds after the sounds? I'm willing to be the audio has been screwed with or why else would his reaction be delayed?
Sp33dyD3m0n 5 months ago
ZERO evidence here of an underground explosion. Sorry.
Heatseeker14345 6 months ago
@Heatseeker14345 ...or it could be due to the fact that sound travels faster through solids than gasses. They were pretty far away from the WTC. It took a while for the kinetic energy in the ground traveled much faster than the audible sound in the air.
nehringt 5 months ago
@nehringt Exactly. You felt the boom of the impact well before you heard it.
Heatseeker14345 5 months ago
the plane hit so hard it probly shook the ground
ridinhonda4life 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no underground explosion in this vid, this news broadcast is from WNYW, whose live camera feeds were transmitted from the radio tower on top of 1 WTC, the ripple is actually the moment flight 11 made contact with 1 WTC, they are about 3 blocks away thats why you hear the explosion seconds latter.
LuisJimenez92 7 months ago
haha what the hell was that
roiibot 7 months ago
SOMEONE HIT THE CAMERA. the timing was crazy, but the fucking cameraman bumped the camera (or wires) with his foot. i mean be fucking REASONABLE, don't be stupid.
the sound was so muted and low frequency, but mainly it sounded digital/technical. like bumping a microphone (or unplugging/plugging in speaker cables)
even if a camera was sitting on the ground and there was a quick seismic jolt from some distance away - i doubt it would affect the video feed or cause video loss.
vaidisuh 7 months ago
i think this is because sound travells faster in solids(ground or buildings) than in air.
50cent329 7 months ago
And lastly....sound vibrations, though not directional, would not allow you nor the camera to feel the "bump" from the top of a building. Those sound vibrations were traveling down the length of the building vertically and when they reached ground level, what was left of them would continue to go directionally downward and not horizontally. The waves that went horizontally (since sound is non-directional)....came to you through the air. Therefore...no bump should occur at all.
TheCountic16 7 months ago
(cont)...They would use that to determine the difference of time that *should* occur and see if the tape measures with that. This is what I did, and come to find out, your statement is false. There was over a 100% margin of error in the physics of the timing. It should have taken just under one second from the time you heard the plane to the time when you see the bump. It took a full two seconds. You may think 1 second is not a big difference, but in the world of math, that is a 100% error.
TheCountic16 7 months ago
"There is no underground explosion in this vid...."
A biased person would make this statement without backing it up with sound physics. An unbiased person would do the math of figuring out the speed of sound through the air, the speed of sound through concrete, the distance sound would travel through the air, and the distance sound vibrations would travel down the building and horizontally across the concrete. They would use all of that information to determine the difference in time...cont
TheCountic16 7 months ago
Wtf are you ? 10 ? I'm 15, and even I know that SOUND TRAVELS SLOW. If you look at footage of the second plane hitting the south tower, you see the plain hit, the building explodes, THEN you hear the initial impact. This video does not show the plane entering the North Tower, but I can tell you that the portion of this video that goes 'fuzzy' for a split second, is actually the plain going into the building !! And then you hear the 'boom!' A few seconds later because remember sound travels slow!
FromDreamz2Reality 7 months ago
Jet fuel setting office furniture in fire and felling that thing in 9 seconds, at free-fall speed? :D Don't care if it was the US govt or Al Qaeda, you see dozens of ppl on the scene reporting explosions, so gimme a frigging break... Taken down with explosives, end of story.
calderonie 8 months ago
the camera actually moves a little the first time
SuperNasty1985 8 months ago
I have no doubt that the people who set up the "conspiracy" has been able to keep thousands of people from leaking the "truth" for almost a decade now. Everytime I see some of this crap (conpsiracy theory) on 9/11, I marvle at the stupidity of some of the people on the net. Thank God those people live in the basements of thier parent's house and are not in the world where they could hurt themselves or others.
satelng 8 months ago
@satelng I am with you. It's the same bunch still trying to convince themselves that "they" got JFK. Some of the really funny and WAY off-the-wall idiots are frankly almost sad to listen to: the Bush "remote control" demolition switch was the most absurd, also the "MOSSAD" (Israel Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations) did it, and how we "framed" Bin Laden -- I know one SEAL sure as hell framed him quite well.. Good post sateing :-)
ChristopherSaindon 8 months ago
The bump that the camera had half a second before the plane crashed, the bump was actually the explosion vibration of the plane crashing into the world trade center. You have to remember, sound travels a little slow. When the camera bumped before the plane hit, that infact was actually the explosion of the plane hitting the world trade center, the sound traveling to the camera was synchronized with the explosion, why? Because sound travels slow.
xunkownx499 8 months ago
Two words "Stand down".. google it.
JDSabre 8 months ago
I believe 9/11 was an inside job, but this video isn't the proof that convinced me. I believe that they used planes, they could have been remotely flown (drones). I think that all the secondary explosions that were reported by firefighters and witnesses were the columns being blown out so they could demolish the building. If you look at pics of the steel columns(during the cleanup), you'll see that they are cut in a perfect diagonal, like a demolition would have done.
ilovegnomeland 8 months ago
Am i the only one who thinks that the 1st bang was the plane impacting the building, and the 2nd louder bang was the plane exploding inside the building?? Look at any plane crash video, it takes about a second after impact for the plane to explode causing the fireball you see...This makes sence!
sophybp 9 months ago
he said "sounds like a plane crash"
MsPaparatz 9 months ago
I'm sorry but this video proves fuck all! Even if the ripple in the camera is caused by a distrubance/explosion at WTC, how can you possibly decipher whether it's from a plane hitting or from a bomb? The reason the ripple occurs before the sound is because they were a couple of blocks away.
mdr279 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
one more time... 9/11 was an inside job!!
trumpetmariachi75 9 months ago
nah.. it's just that the sound travels slower in the air than it does in the ground as a shock-wave thus giving the illusion of two explosions .
kousoulides 11 months ago 2
I do find it odd that something this bad could happen, then the terrorist groups that were supposedly involved just go quiet (not sure if the london bombings were the same group), like.. if I were part of a terrorist group that hated western society, I wouldn't stop at 2 events (if london bombings were the same group).
Look at yellowstone national park, it's a giant volcano, putting a very large bomb or a nuclear bomb on it would definitely set it off.. Get that and there goes western culture...
HUNT0O 11 months ago
@HUNT0O there were more than 2 bombings. most people forget to include the bombings in bali in 2002 and 2005, plus spain and india later on.
1991MRjesse 9 months ago
I guess people have never heard or seen fireworks from a distance before, since it takes a while for the sound to travel to your ear AFTER the firework has already been seen in the sky.
kittievx9 11 months ago
Why is this guys camera just pointed at the ground for a while in the beginning?? Like he didn't wanna film the plane actually crashing but make it seem like something else crashed into it??
kittievx9 11 months ago
@kittievx9
Well... If you would look at the pedestrians in this video then the reactions comes as soon as the explosion happens... NO one responds on the loud sound of the airplane except for the woman wich stand still behind the leg in front...
Listen to the audio! To my understanding there is no audio velocity wich means that they could even talked right to the camera due to turning heads while talking.
This video is soooo fake!
zumobster 11 months ago
All they did was fabricate this whole stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They drive these planes inside those towers, they demolish the towers with bombs (which were installed secretly in advance) there is a lot of evidence pointing at this (such as melted iron, lots of mercury residues from explosive material, and the fact that a special company worked on the towers days before "repairing" certain things in the towers) Then, they suddenly find out that it was people form iraq who did this lets go to war!
carlos25154 11 months ago
This story goes deeper than what people realize!! This was an inside job YES but please just stop talking about the so called terrorist from the middle east that too was fabricated in order to go to war. Don't you realize that these airplanes were not actual commercial airplanes with normal people inside? These airplanes where controlled with computer tech. just like a drome airplane. YOu do know that the military has such technology and even beyond that. There were no highjaker and all that bs.
carlos25154 11 months ago
@carlos25154 Good comment. I truly believe Israel was behind it. Since Sharon the PM stated, let me make this very clear we run the US not the other way around. Oct. 65, I believe. A statement from another jewish person, now the US will know what it is like to be bombed daily. They forget they bomb Palestine daily. We send them Billions of $'s and all the latest weaponry. Now the US is in rough shape, how about helping us out?
dayzedukez 11 months ago
Strangly enough...
The plane is coming over all loud and noisy... But during that time you don't see anyone responding to that socalled plane. No one gives a reaction untill the plane hits and goes boom!
(gives me reason to think that no planes were involved)
zumobster 1 year ago
@zumobster watch other videos, people say WOW that plane is flying low.
kittievx9 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kittievx9
"watch other videos, people say WOW that plane is flying low."
Amaze me!
zumobster 11 months ago
This is pretty daming evidence. Great job.
NaturalGroundation 1 year ago
AWESOME VIDEO! This totally proves William Rodriguez's story that their was an explosion in the basement prior to the plane hitting. Listen closely, you can still hear the plane(missile) flying in the air during the first muffled explosion! Then you hear the plane hitting the building!
vic3003 1 year ago
how else would those towers fall straight down? with an impact at the top?
mickymacky02 1 year ago
the camera picks up a ground vibration? yet not even the feet of the man in front of the camera nor anyone walking react to it until after they hear the explosion.....look at it logically and realize the cameraman was not underneath the north tower so it took a brief time for the sound to catch up to the human ear and microphone after the impact and what you're logically seeing is the interference from the north tower's antenna which carried numerous signals for NYorkers including WNYW.
OhLookItsJonBoy 1 year ago
Disrespectful
TwoDudeReviews 1 year ago
@bananabrule you are just like every other brainwashed sheep that believes what the movement tells you to believe, try questioning the conspiracy theory movement about explaining what those explosions people reported hearing, they can't, and they also never mention that the towers even made any noise, my videos explain what those explosions were, like the damage to the lobby of the north tower and the one on the jenny karr audio, that was an engine falling down an elevator shaft sheepy.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
altering the video the way you did does not even assume there was an explosion especially when you can't even hear an explosion when you edited this video, you just see where you interupted the power of the video in your editing and an explosion wouldn't do that, you suck at faking the truth, your attempt only further hurts the lying movement, try commenting on my video "911 engines down elevator shafts" i can't be proven wrong because it is what really happened.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
but there was no FIRST PLANE u fags
its fake
fuckers
weizman123 1 year ago
@weizman123 do you believe there were explosives planted? why? because people said they heard noises? those noises are all unidentified and the conspiracy theorists never admit that the towers themselves made any noise, that is called covering up evidence, you believe what they tell you without evidence or proof, you are believing hearsay, opinions, rumors, and speculation. you are what we call a sheep, you follow like a mindless drone, you would believe that the world is flat huh?
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@loosechangeexposed
go look up youtube your self idiot
theres a new video came out not long time ago 10 months or so
this case is closed
just search it
ull see
i watched it all
weizman123 1 year ago
@weizman123 check out my 2 newest videos one is titled "sept 11th smoking gun" and the other one is "jesse is easy to fool" both videos like most of my videos can not be proven wrong unlike you sheep who spill the same bull whioch is told to you by conspiracy theorists and you believe what you hear like a sheep you believe hearsay, rumors, opinions, and speculation, the movement has no proof or real evidence, ever notice that? who made who look stupid?
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
I AM
SUB
4
SUBBING
ON MY CHANNEL
larryqa 1 year ago
There is no underground explosion in this vid, this news broadcast is from WNYW, whose live camera feeds were transmitted from the radio tower on top of 1 WTC, the ripple is actually the moment flight 11 made contact with 1 WTC, they are about 3 blocks away thats why you hear the explosion seconds latter.
seahawks2043 1 year ago 7
@seahawks2043 EXACTLY!!! Sound travels much faster through a solid than a gas. This is what caused the delay.
nehringt 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
So lets examine that data.
TheCountic16 1 year ago
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
So lets examine that data.
TheCountic16 1 year ago
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
So lets examine that data.
TheCountic16 1 year ago
- denser than air. We hear the same impact through the air when it reaches our ears a couple of seconds later. There is no bomb in the basement.
Another fact that keeps bothering me is when the "experts" talk about the melting point of steel, and claim fuel cannot melt steel.Ok, it can't. But what about all the other "fuel" in the building: Furniture, carpet, paper, plastics (these are all petroleum products). Think of lighter fluid on a bbq. And, this is a confined space. These are high temps!
zemf2005 1 year ago
sound is a wave/vibration through material. The speed at which it travels depends on the material characteristics of the medium. Ie: density. Someone will have to verify this, but I'm pretty sure that wave speed is directly proportional to material density. Therefore, when we hear the sound of the plane, still flying, it has already hit the building. The vibration we see when the camera shakes is the result of the waves travelling through the denser ground, ...(continued in next post..)
zemf2005 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xcgfhfdg bahahahahaha holy shit! "no deceleration"! See how the plane didn't come out the other side? Hahahahaha...that's DECELERATION! in this case we call it "stopping". hahahah oh dear, did you ever take a basic physics lesson...or in fact, pay attention to the world around you when you were growing up?
BTW, fly a plane travelling at 700 odd km/h into your nearest building and tell me what happens. What do you want it to do, bounce off?
"no deceleration", ahh, thanks for the laugh!
imaginaryvigil 1 year ago
Comment removed
imaginaryvigil 1 year ago
Ur a moron. That's the sound waves traveling twards the groud and finaly hitting the cammera.
Westg1484 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Your a retarded conspiracy theorist...
ElXando1993 1 year ago
The actuall thump from the plane hitting travels faster them the sound.
NubyOnRs 1 year ago
the muffled "thump" easily distinguished from engine roar and elevated impact. these journalists and camera-men haven't raised a greater stink?
zeuqzavaj 1 year ago
you guys are wrong. there was no bomb. the speed of sound is slower than the speed of light.
xxxsoccerstar98xxx 1 year ago
bomb in basement / lobby
conspiracymedia 1 year ago
The fact remains: This video is sub-standard, and damages both the no-plane movement, and, the 9/11 truth movement in general. It also damages the reputability of 91177info's channel, and I would strongly advise you to delete it.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd The no-plane movement is a decoy to confuse the public about the real reasons WTC exploded...
Simboiss 1 year ago
@Simboiss You sound like a mindless repeater. Yes, every good little truther says that the no-plane movement is a decoy, it is a ridiculous theory, swallowed by unquestioning partial-truther sheep. It is obvious that the planes were faked. Not to mention that no-planers do not refute the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Go back to sleep.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd Erm, what you say doesn't make sense at all...
The planes were faked? WTF?
Simboiss 1 year ago
@xcgfhfdg ...
"...that's because of the status quo set by "truthers" like you..."
"...even though you know the truth ...you are trying distract people away from it..."
Excuse me? Both of these accusations are just way off. You are basing your wild assertions about me on... what, exactly? Just a few comments. I have left plenty more pro-"no-plane" comments on videos, and I also question Alex Jones, and others, where appropriate, which is to say: often.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
Audio can be faked, so that is out the window...
Visually, a camera lying on the ground can be kicked, poked, bumped, moved, to cause the exact same effect.
This video proves nothing, it is damaging to 9/11 truth to call this "evidence" at all.
It is a sub-standard video, a smear on an otherwise quality channel, and it should be removed.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
Seeing is not believing.
There is no conclusive evidence that planes hit the Twin Towers.
Here is what we do have, conclusively:
1. Faked 'plane' footage which defies physics.
2. Planted evidence, of both the 'hijackers' (the passports etc.) and, pieces of the 'plane' (planted engine, landing gear, etc.).
3. Physical and chemical evidence of controlled demolition.
4. Evidence of conspiracy and foreknowledge.
5. Motive.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd ...
There is no need for a 'planes' versus 'no planes' debate, it is a trivial detail, an excuse for people to argue on the internet, and, a complete waste of time.
It is the weakest link in a whole chain of conclusive evidence, so why is it such a point of contention within the truth movement?
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd "...It is the weakest link in a whole chain of conclusive evidence..."
..if there was a video of O.J. Simpson killing his ex-wife..there would have never been any debate...
...if someone hadn't videotaped Rodney king getting beaten by the Los Angeles Police...there wouldn't have been riots in Los Angeles...
....any footage from 9/11....can be used as evidence to prove CGI was added to the 9/11 footage....
...TV Fakery is the easiest part of 9/11 to prove...
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 7
@xcgfhfdg ...
I partially agree. The faked footage *is* probably the most obvious evidence of 9/11, but only once you have taken a look at September Clues, or any other existing analysis of a similarly high standard. On paper, as-in, to a beginner, it is the most ludicrous-sounding theory, and I personally found it the hardest to process. So, perhaps it is not the same for everyone.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd don't you have any faith in your brothers and sisters to discern the truth...?
....any 6th grader whose current on his Isaac Newton studies ....can see that an aluminum wing tip cannot go through a wall of steel girders and concrete...
watch?v=ct2l-SNAs9c
".... to a beginner, it is the most ludicrous-sounding theory..."
...that's because of the status quo set by "truthers" like you.....
..even though you know the truth ...you are trying distract people away from it...
...
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 5
@xcgfhfdg ...
"don't you have any faith in your brothers and sisters to discern the truth...?"
I take it on a case-by-case basis, but, no, not generally, I guess I am losing faith in 'humanity'. ~ _ ~
AIexKidd 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xcgfhfdg ...
"...that's because of the status quo set by "truthers" like you..."
"...even though you know the truth ...you are trying distract people away from it..."
Excuse me? Both of these accusations are just way off. You are basing your wild assertions about me on just a few comments... I have left plenty more pro- no-plane comments on videos, and I also question Alex Jones, and others, where appropriate, which is to say, often.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@xcgfhfdg ...
The other issue is, planes versus no planes is probably the single-greatest source of division within the truth movement. It is what I call an "advanced topic", because most people, at least, the ones I have talked to, personally, find no planes the hardest part to believe, that is, besides that good old, "why would the government ever harm its own citizens?"-ridiculous response.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd
"the ones I have talked to, personally, find no planes the hardest part to believe," that might be the case when u have no idea what exactly the no planes theory consists.
just to say "uh dude, u know some crazy ppl say there was no planes,lolroflmao " does not convinve ppl to take a look at the evidence.
they never heared pilots say that a 767 can not fly that fast at sealevel,they never heared physicists state that hollow aluminum tubes can not cut through steel and concrete etc.
horror11 1 year ago
@horror11 Your example is ridiculous, and does not apply to me, but I see your point. The fact of the matter is, most people are unable to truly think for themselves, and 'truthers' are no exception.
You just have to show others the footage of the plane entering the building, the wings melting into the side of the building, like hot butter into a knife, and if they cannot wake up to what is in right front of their very eyes, then, good riddance.
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd in fact it is NOT only the videos wich show clearly that the plane is fake, all data availlable shows clear evidence for no planes.
no passengers lists, fake cell phone calls exposed in moussaouie trial,impossible speeds.
strangely lot ppl have no problem to believe there was no plane at pentagon (of course there was not:)) even though at pentagon u have also wittnesses who reported a plane:)
ppl saw something but in case of pentagon and new york most likely bunkerbuster missiles
horror11 1 year ago 6
@horror11 Christ sake dude, they used military plans to hit the towers, yes, the calls were fake, yes there were suspicious and faked passenger lists, yes there were no arab names on the flight manifest, yes they got rid of the people who should have been on "the planes", but to say no planes hit the towers is really not agreeing with the evidence, there were so many people there, including firefighters who instantly reported after seeing the plane, aslo a plane is seen hitting in EVERY video.
Xendrius 10 months ago
@horror11 What they faked the sound of the plane?
mdr279 9 months ago
@horror11 So no people on the flights died??? Give me a break yes there were planes and yes they hit the towers.
Crixaal 5 months ago
@horror11 ... Get a brain asshole
jokercardmachinima 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AIexKidd "....why is it (TV Fakery) such a point of contention within the truth movement?..."
...first off....the "truth movement" you're referring to is just a bunch of corporate-owned talking heads...
..these personalities, like Alex Jones or the like...are in no way helping to spread truth or fight back against "the system"...
...the "truth movement" functions as a sort of stress-relief-valve for anyone who might be mildly concerned about 9/11...it's real goal is to hide truths
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 8
Comment removed
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago
@AIexKidd "...There is no need for a 'planes' versus 'no planes' debate, it is a trivial detail...."
...so if you believe that no planes hit the towers ..... aren't you upset that all the leaders in the movement are telling lies to their listeners about TV Fakery...and telling lies about 9/11 "..why is it such a point of contention..."
...that's a really good question !!!...the video is obviously fake...so why don't the 10's of thousands of truthers acknowledge TV Fakery ??...
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 6
@xcgfhfdg ...
"aren't you upset that all the leaders in the movement are telling lies to their listeners about TV Fakery..."
Yes, yes I am upset, and so I guess I am reaching the inevitable conclusion that the "truth movement" is very much a partial-truth movement, and is clearly controlled from the some of the leading figures.
I guess it all comes down to what you want to achieve: wake up as many newbies as you possible can? Or, further wake up the so-called "awake"?
AIexKidd 1 year ago
@AIexKidd - I agree. I'm tired of looking at/arguing about fake footage like this. It's like Trekkies arguing about the Klingon cloaking device.
.
Trekkies - at least they can organize huge conventions. What have WE done in all these years? Absolutely nothing. Where's our outrage? Our crime reports? Our class-action suits?
nameofthepen 1 year ago
@nameofthepen ...
Your analogy with Trekkies is a good one.
There is little or no real *movement* against the 'powers that be'.
There is a vague, reactionary fart against Zionism, and an equally wishy washy, overarching "truth" movement, and both seem limited, controlled and impotent.
But, what is we gonna do about it, Nom? ^ _ ^
UnitedStatesAtlantis 1 year ago
its prob just the subway
popstarzxxx 1 year ago
you who commited this orcheastrated attack will fucking die and burn in hell eternally.
scheming8rythem 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Complete 9/11 History...
sabbah. biz/mt/archives/2010/05/06/how-ehud-barak-pulled-off-9-11/
whale.to/b/bollyn.html
tinyu rl. com/JewsPretendToBeExtremeMuslims
scribd. com/doc/27800186/ZIonist-False-Flag-Terror-and-Deceptions
takeourworldback. com/itwasntmuslims.htm
91 1mis singlin ks . com/ watch- movie
takeourworldback. com/zionistcrimes.htm
tvnewslies. org/tvnl/index.php/news/911-related/13473-full-el-al-flight-took-off-on-911-from-jfk-to-tel-aviv.html
whale. to/b/bollyn_ 911_ a. html
halcyon0830 1 year ago
It was electrical interference....sounds like a bus went by at the same time. Or maybe Elvis walked by and kicked it ! Anyone who believes in this conspiracy crap should get a life. What's so hard to believe about 2 planes being flown into a skyscraper ?
That's what happened...move on.
chipper0059 1 year ago
shockwaves travel faster through solids that soundwaves do through air, this explains the delay.
shatminer 1 year ago
WTC hit with 2 Army Boeing Oil Tankers Filled with Oil and Explosive.
All News Reports say that NO WINDOWS could be seen on the planes that hit the WTC on 9/11.
halcyon0830 1 year ago
the pentagon was hit by a predator drone filled with explosives
AgothInnCloth 1 year ago
Could that be an electronic pulse..??
I remember seeing some footage of an elderly gentleman who lived near the Shanksville crash site saying he experienced a similar thing,ie radio/tv interference.
cappucinokid100 1 year ago
A foot kicked the tripod right before the plane hit...nice conspiracy....NOT
Yes, 911 was an inside job.....look at WTC 7 and listen to Silverstein or Silverman,
"we decided to pull the building because there had been too much loss of life."
Temple420org 1 year ago
Yeah.. I dunno.
TerminalMontage 1 year ago
@HiPointMan The TV signal antenna was on the north tower, the plane impacted affecting nearby camera's the ground doesn't shake, then the sound of the impact comes a second later cos sound travels slower.. its obv.. ur over thinking it
PJPs911 1 year ago
its a sound that lates
usmceflips 1 year ago
its clear man thanks
Gilliatt83 1 year ago
good to see some people are still shouting for a new investigation
ReinhardvonHolst 1 year ago
the ground shaking is from the point the plane hit causing tv signals to get distorted, the sound of the impact is delayed by a second because sound travels slower.
PJPs911 1 year ago
@PJPs911 a plane hitting the WTC would not have any effect on the information being written to TAPE by the camera. The transmit antenna on the WTC would have nothing to do with that, if that's what you're implying. I might have misunderstood your comment.
marce11o 1 year ago
@marce11o the shake of the camera is the exact point the plane impacted it was a huge explosion so would have caused nearby things to shake, windows nearby broke because of the force, the sound of the impact is delayed by a second as sound travels slower.
PJPs911 1 year ago
Watch
911 WTC Nuclear Demolition
by Dimitri Khalezov
CENSORED BY YOUTUBE
but find it on torrent
jackp6 1 year ago
fake audio, this is dubbed in, the sound of plane and conversation is fake and sounds like in a room.
horror11 1 year ago 19
I have found the original it sounds like they are in a room because they are relaying to the studio-
/watch?v=cVEmAWaKoYQ
91177info 1 year ago
@91177info
this plane sound is fake, ginny carr catched the sound on a meeting on a audiotape in her office while the obj flew over her office into the wtc.
it sounds exactly like a missile and you can hear 2 explosions one after another.
it seems the first was the impact of the missile and the second the explosion wich made the plane shaped hole.
search for ginny carr or look : watch?v=Uenb_XpVNB0&feature=related
all this is disinfo to hide the bigger truth,media was part of it,no planes
horror11 1 year ago 7
@horror11 A missile hit the Pentagon. Remote controlled planes hit the towers.
I have seen photos of plane parts and pieces of human flesh scattered over half a mile away.
From my research the hologram theory and missile theory regarding the towers is disinfo.
91177info 1 year ago
@91177info So aluminium planes melted into steel buildings, did they? I don't think so. No planes, piloted or remote controlled on that day. Video fakery on TV to fool us all.
sorrowfulsun 1 year ago
@sorrowfulsun So are there any eyewitnesses saying missiles hit the towers?
Once the North Tower had been hit tens of thousands of people would be looking.
So you are saying a plane didn't even hit the South Tower don't you think there would be hundreds of people maybe a thousand + people would say it wasn't a plane?
They were remote controlled planes and Joe Stack who crashed his plane earlier this year was aware as to how they did it and who was behind it.
91177info 1 year ago
@91177info I dont think they were remote controlled. Im going out on a limb and I say there was a homing device inside the buildings, on the floors controlled by Marsh & McLennan Companies and I think FIJI Bank for the other Tower.
If you seen the hot flash on the building right before the plane hits hit, I think that might have been a reflection of the "guiding light".
Pretty much the same concept, but this would explain the 2nd plane auto correcting itself at the last moment and the flash.
EricIndiana 1 year ago
@EricIndiana Absolutely!
cryptome . org/info/wtc-punch/wtc-punch. htm
See the photos at the bottom of the page.
91177info 1 year ago
@EricIndiana That probably is 100% correct dude...i have been saying the same ever since i first saw those flashes...it would also explain the incredible feats of flying by untrained pilots...
The pieces of the puzzle are slowly starting to fit.
cappucinokid100 1 year ago
@cappucinokid100 If you guys liked that check this out...
KROLL was providing security on the WTC during 9/11 right?
A company called Convar found evidence of massive credit card fraud on that day taking place on the CPUs inside the WTC Towers with this new blue laser technology.
What does KROLL, the "CIA of Wall Street", do?
They buy out Convars leading competitor ONTRACK.
Now its KROLL-ONTRACK, and guess who will be doing all the "Inside Job" data recovery duty in the future?
A: Not Convar.
EricIndiana 1 year ago
@EricIndiana Thanks man...
cappucinokid100 1 year ago
@91177info I prefer to think Simon Shack in September Clues has more of the right story.And also Judy Wood. And yes, there were witnesses who reported seeing or hearing missiles, but the story the media portrayed was faked from top to bottom.
sorrowfulsun 1 year ago 2
@sorrowfulsun I reported Judy Wood earlier this year with evidence of the spire turning to dust and maybe the use of a new weapon.
A month later I found out that explosives were built into the towers as a safety precaution.
If you wanted to create an event such as 9/11 would you use remote control planes or would you rely on 2001 CGI to fake the event knowing it would be analysed in the future?
Metaphorically the planes were just a match for the explosives in the building.
No need for CGI
91177info 1 year ago
@91177info There were certainly explosions in the buildings, but real planes with passengers there were not. Perhaps they used a variety of methods to destroy the towers, but fakery on TV was undoubtedly used to great effect. Witnesses were paid trolls, eg the guy who told us all it was the jet fuel. CGI was used by the media on the day. Watch September Clues.
sorrowfulsun 1 year ago
@91177info well the point is that a plane could not cut through the building and thats the main reason why they needed to fake the planes and use cgis.
the main reason why all availlable videos of the second plane contradict in many parts to each other is that they couldnt get the trajectory from the different angles 100% to match.
thats why u have some footage showing a plane way off of other trajectories in other videos.
its simple, 767 cannot fly that fast at sealevel and cut through steel.
horror11 1 year ago
@horror11 what about all the witnesses who saw the planes hit live in new york, they saw planes, if it was CGI'ed they would not have seen planes at all, the only evidence that there were not planes are the crazies who want it to be a government conspiracy, you are a retard.
try proving me wrong on my videos, i bet you won't and that proves that you do not know the truth because my videos tell the truth and you can't prove the truth wrong. good luck though stupid.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@loosechangeexposed what can i say?i dont know anybody personal claiming he saw a plane and i wouldnt trust him anyway unless he would pass a polygraphtest.i believe this whole "how about the millions wittnesses" argument is just a cheap psychological trick.
u just need a few ppl who will tell in live tv they saw a plane and the tv shows a plane and then alot sensationalist ppl will say they saw it too and some will say they missed it.
u cant trust witnesses,humans lie all day, trust physics :)
horror11 1 year ago
@horror11 by the time the plane hit the south tower tv's all around the world were focused on the WTC, thousands of people were watching it happen in person live from new york and new jersey maybe even millions, lots of people could see the towers from where they worked and lived, litterally BILLIONS of people saw it happen on t.v.
how could the gov't pull off no plane and not have thousands of people who saw it live come forward and say they saw no plane?
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@loosechangeexposed thats the point the world saw it on tv and i saw it too live on TV but thats it, cgi in tv is easy as 1, 2, 3 and thats why it looks so bad in the professional media broadcasts.
do u know how many "planeshots" was aired live when it happened? only 3 and one of it from a helicopter didnt show any plane but only an explosion and another helishot showed the nose of the plane comming out the other side.
its tv fakery they made small mistakes when they aired it
horror11 1 year ago
@horror11 in order to prove the planes were cgi'd you need to find some of the people who saw it happen at the scene, no one ever said they saw the buildings explode without seeing a plane, even in the first video where the fire department saw the plane hit the north tower none of those firefighters ever said there was no plane, they went into the towers and lost 343 firefighters, if it was a conspiracy they would have said something, you have nothing but a case of the crazies.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@91177info who said holograms ??? ...real time computer-animation or CGI can be easily being inserted into live TV footage... ...photos of scattered flesh and parts can be easily simulated with a trip to the butcher shop, a car junkyard... and a disposable camera....
...as for this video.... 0:44 - 0:48 "....it's the trade center...trade center..." listen for the click..as the microphone "opens"... and the microphone"closes"
0:50 - 0:56 you can hear his microphone click
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 14
@xcgfhfdg So how did people who were actually there on the day looking up at the towers see CGI? I guess the public were in on it as well.
91177info 1 year ago
@91177info ....I'm certainly not disputing that people saw a winged projectile hit the building....
the 9/11 WTC witnesses saw a cruise missile with wings...a "Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile" produced by Lockheed Martin....a "JASSM "
...on the below video click the link...then skip to 2:48 watch?v=5BvmdWAIs14
...how else could a "plane"...slide it's entire length....through a wall of steel and concrete...with no deceleration at all ?? see link below
watch?v=cJhGlohdWhY
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 13
@xcgfhfdg The JASSM missile is a very good line of enquiry. The footage at 2:00 on this link watch?v=kJi2K8mKTRM shows a similar scene as the plane going through the towers with no resistance.
With an event planned as 9/11, meticulously planned so not to go wrong it wouldn't take long for someone to say "Lets use the explosive technology as in the JASSM but put it in a plane"
At the end of the day a plane became a missile.
Since NORAD was at ease they could take their time guiding it.
91177info 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@91177info "..Lets use the explosive technology as in the JASSM but put it in a plane. At the end of the day a plane became a missile...." ...in the 9/11 footage...the aluminum wings and the wing-tips on the "plane"...slice through the steel and concrete wall of the World Trade Center....
...how can aluminum ...wing-tips ... slice through a steel and concrete wall...like a hot knife through a tower of butter ?? see vids below ->
watch?v=ct2l-SNAs9c
watch?v=X3pEStLJyYY
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 9
@91177info ....one of your own videos... shows this specific type of TV fakery along with other types of video fakery.... being used in the Turkey / Israel Humanitarian flotilla incident
....skip ahead to 2:06 and 2:33 in the link below --->
watch?v=Rg6TZ8FvIOY
...Is it too far-fetched to think that the same kinds of TV fakery were used in the 9/11 footage ?....
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
To those who argue that the seismic waves arrived at different times than the sound of the explosion (like how lightning and thunder arrive at different times) are arguing a truthful statement and hypothesis. Unfortunately, they allow their bias of "just give me some excuse to believe so I don't have to be forced to know it was a separate explosion" to completely override what *should be* their scientific nature of examining the data to that hypothesis.
So lets examine that data.
TheCountic16 1 year ago
@xcgfhfdg do you think the engines and landing gear are attached to alluminum wings?
the vibration from the engines would crack the aluminum wings, and the landing gear would rip through the wings upon landing, there is a thick steel beam that goes the entire width of the wings, it is also to support the weight of the fuel in the wings, 10,000 gallons weighs 70,000 lbs, that steel beam along with the wings full of fuel is what cut through the buildings. people need to question the movement.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@loosechangeexposed ".....the vibration from the engines would crack the aluminum wings, and the landing gear would rip through the wings upon landing....."
...... if you admit that mere vibrations and rubber tires can crack aluminum wings....then you must agree that a wall of steel girders and concrete...would crumple an aluminum wing like a beer can against a frat boy's forehead...!!!
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 7
@xcgfhfdg now you are twisting what i said because you don't know how else to prove what i really said wrong, i said the landing gear and engines were attached to a thick steel beam that went the entire width of the wings which also was there to support the weight of the fuel in the wings and that is what caused all the damage to the tower along with the fuel in the wings that made the wings stronger, smacking a frat boy in the head with FULL beer would knock him out.
you don't have a clue.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@xcgfhfdg They didn't mean an actual cruise missle. The planes were used as missles by the terrorist. And I'm pretty sure a plane hit the WTC. Missles don't normally have a cockpit, Jet engines, landing gear, wings, jet turbines, tails, windows, and people inside. And a plane flying at 500 miles perhour wouldn't bounce off something it was cut up by the steel beams which acted like a knife.
RBAWilcox 1 year ago
@91177info - Pfffffft! So after all the lies and misdirection which have been outed, you are still inclined to believe anonymous, random people posting on the internet?
Or are you talking about the "witnesses" who later turned out to be somehow themselves, or related to someone who was, affiliated with the media?
Maybe you meant "witnesses" like the Harley Guy, or Gary Welz? ;-))
nameofthepen 1 year ago
@xcgfhfdg do you watch the X-files all the time?
you coo coo clock.
love santa claus.
loosechangeexposed 1 year ago
@loosechangeexposed ......I understand you're better at making personal verbal attacks....than you are at presenting sound arguments in regards to physics...
....but you still didn't have to drag santa into this...
xcgfhfdg 1 year ago 5