Flight 175 (rare video)wing goes behind a building

[Serpo]

great clip here......wing goes behind a building




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL-rU3CCPkc#t=82http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL-rU3CCPkc#t=82

[Serpo]

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/Tramp2-%28R%29.jpg

[gunDriller]

i don't agree with him.

that's what it looks like when a passenger airline size plane flies into a much stronger building.

the plane disintegrates, there is some smoke.


Israel wanted to create a horrific terror event. flying an airplane, allegedly full of people, into a landmark building, and then demolishing the building some time later, then blaming the whole thing on Scary Muslims.


if i was the military/ false flag terror project manager working for Israel on 9-11, and one of my crew members wanted to simulate it instead of actually flying an airplane into the building, i'd either fire them or re-assign them.

flying an airplane into a building is simple. it works, it creates the desired effect. that it kills a bunch of Gentiles is of no concern to the Israeli project manager.


and thanks to them, we have the DHS and the TSA.

not to mention people 'commemorating' 9-11 today.

[Serpo]

Its about the wing going behind a distant building in the distance

[slvrbugjim]

Its about the wing going behind a distant building in the distance

After seeing the fakery at Sandy Hook and then in Boston, I revisited this on September Clues site and I am now convinced that
these planes were CGI, faked, and done so in fact quite poorly.

[midnight rambler]

After seeing the fakery at Sandy Hook and then in Boston, I revisited this on September Clues site and I am now convinced that
these planes were CGI, faked, and done so in fact quite poorly.

What about the eyewitnesses who saw either airliner impact either tower?

[Serpo]

how does a wing go behind a distant building

[ximmy]

how does a wing go behind a distant building

Are you telling us a joke? ... Ok... I'll bite... How does a wing go behind a distant building?

[Serpo]

are you telling us a joke? ... Ok... I'll bite... How does a wing go behind a distant building?

cgi

[slvrbugjim]

What about the eyewitnesses who saw either airliner impact either tower?All the witnesses interviewed, all of them were media that "saw" the plane, there only several videos of this all media, not one single private video of the second plane not one.

Lots of actors like in Sandy Hook and Boston, but since this happened in 2001 I was just not going to by into the "fakery" angle but now it looks like there is a common theme here

Go to the September Clues sight, the evidence is pretty amazing

http://www.cluesforum.info/index.php?sid=501ed8803dd07681fbc68cc4514ca85f



(http://www.cluesforum.info/index.php?sid=501ed8803dd07681fbc68cc4514ca85f)Why they didn't use planes (http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=467#p2321581)


A very relevant article on this matter - Fake video dramatically alters eyewitness accounts http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents ... amatically (http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/pressreleases/fake_video_dramatically)


Closing paragraph of the article:
Dr Wade said: “Over the previous decade we have seen rapid advances in digital-manipulation technology. As a result, almost anyone can create convincing, yet fake, images or video footage. Our research shows that if fake footage is extremely compelling, it can induce people to testify about something they never witnessed.”




(http://www.cluesforum.info/index.php?sid=501ed8803dd07681fbc68cc4514ca85f)

[Norweger]

What about the eyewitnesses who saw either airliner impact either tower?

Actors?

[midnight rambler]

Actors?

Perhaps. I always allow for the possibility which includes the possibility of CGI, however I remain skeptical. I don't think the Japanese tourist video was fake/CGI.

[slvrbugjim]

Perhaps. I always allow for the possibility which includes the possibility of CGI, however I remain skeptical. I don't think the Japanese tourist video was fake/CGI.

The Japanese tourist video shows what looks like some type of blob or orb, not a plane

in this slow motion of that vid it looks like what Art Bell used to identify as Rods, these flying stick like object, but it did not hit the towers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzpxz5ZPHds

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

The sound of a plane flying that low, that fast would have been so loud that everyone would have been looking up to see what the hell was going on. Most witnesses talk about the explosion and many of them talk about things inside blowing outward like chairs and papers.

You can watch all the original major coverage of the attacks on archive.org and one of the things you will notice as the reports start trickling in is the news starts getting confirmation of an airplane from powerful people such as network CEOs and the like.

http://archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive

[Celtic Rogue]

Could this be a red herring? A video made after the attack using real footage and cgi applied to make the wing tip appear to go in back of the building? What better way to discredit the 911 truthers than to hopefully get this vid to sway a bunch of people to what is yet another deception of the real truth... Only to be discredited at a later date. There are rabbit holes in rabbit holes!

[willie pete]

The Japanese tourist video shows what looks like some type of blob or orb, not a plane

in this slow motion of that vid it looks like what Art Bell used to identify as Rods, these flying stick like object, but it did not hit the towers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzpxz5ZPHds


Looks like a bird flying by to me.....

[PatColo]

Could this be a red herring? A video made after the attack using real footage and cgi applied to make the wing tip appear to go in back of the building? What better way to discredit the 911 truthers than to hopefully get this vid to sway a bunch of people to what is yet another deception of the real truth... Only to be discredited at a later date. There are rabbit holes in rabbit holes!

Bingo. As I wrote to John Friend & friends, in part,




[...]
I believe the "No Planes @ WTC" (NP@WTC) theory is, as far as our 'movement' is concerned, a red herring at best. And at worst, it 'accomplishes' 2 destructive ends:

1. It temps/baits 911 Truthers into expending our energies into a "dogs chasing our tails" infighting ditch, over a speculative & irrelevant (as far as the forward movement of our 'movement' is concerned) question of HOW the 911 psyop was technically done. Not our job to completely resolve that question-- let's not dwell on the "technicals of the smoking gun", and instead focus all that same energy on waking up NEW people outside our 'choir', and on identifying & prosecuting the perps (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?23130-The-quot-Israel-did-9-11-quot-Thread).

2. Given that the NP@WTC theory is, IMHO, practically tailor-made for targeting by our opponents with their powerful disinfo gambit of 'ridicule' (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050116064744556) (and I say this as a ~10 year Truther who diplomatically "allows for the possibility" that NP@WTC is in fact correct, though I don't presently subscribe to that belief!); it therefore turns OFF not ON potential newcomers to 'our movement'. That is, IF those in our movement who misguidedly 'take the bait' outlined in #1 above, have any energy left over for actual outreach to noobs!

[...]

Surely the NP@WTC advocates would graciously 'allow for the possibility', that the very "video evidence" you cite as "proof positive of video fakery", could itself be video fakery? Produced and interjected into 'our movement' by the same Hollywood/CIA-Dept-Of-Fake-Osama-Videos™ cabal which has a bottomlessly-funded vested interest in sowing dissent/infighting into our movement rendering us ineffective in "moving anywhere", and in dissuading J6P-911-True-Believers OUT of further investigating our main message? (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?23130-The-quot-Israel-did-9-11-quot-Thread)

[...]



Thread: Critical of JFetzer & JFriend's No Planes @ WTC campaign (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?71312-Critical-of-JFetzer-amp-JFriend-s-No-Planes-WTC-campaign)

[Hatha Sunahara]

I've posted my belief that there were no real planes on 911, and that the only planes people saw were on television. Everyone saw the 'planes' on TV. Nobody saw them in real life. If you were there and saw no planes, you have this tide of conformity of belief to overcome from all the people who saw those planes on TV. If you say you actually saw the planes, you have fallen for that conditioning by repietition trick the media used--playing the videos of the planes over and over hundreds, thousands of times on TV, so your mind 'filled' in some planes in your memory just to conform to what everyone else believes. I too never noticed the misplaced wing in the CGI for TV. What destroyed the illusion for me was the aluminum plane flying into the steel building. You would expect a heap of compressed aluminum plane to fall off the face of the building onto the sidewalk, but instead, it disappeared into the building, just like it does in Microsoft Flight Simulator. I wondered why Microsoft changed that program to remove the WTC towers so quickly after 911. So people wouldn't notice the similarities when they crashed jets into the buildings themselves.

I also believe that the buildings were pulverized by nuclear demolition bombs placed underneath the three WTC towers that came down. There is nothing else that had the power to pulverize those buildings instantaneously. If there was, we would know about it. Thermite is not a possibility.


Hatha

[slvrbugjim]

I've posted my belief that there were no real planes on 911, and that the only planes people saw were on television. Everyone saw the 'planes' on TV. Nobody saw them in real life. If you were there and saw no planes, you have this tide of conformity of belief to overcome from all the people who saw those planes on TV. If you say you actually saw the planes, you have fallen for that conditioning by repietition trick the media used--playing the videos of the planes over and over hundreds, thousands of times on TV, so your mind 'filled' in some planes in your memory just to conform to what everyone else believes. I too never noticed the misplaced wing in the CGI for TV. What destroyed the illusion for me was the aluminum plane flying into the steel building. You would expect a heap of compressed aluminum to fall off the face of the building onto the sidewalk, but instead, it disappeared into the building, just like it does in Microsoft Flight Simulator. I wondered why Microsoft changed that program to remove the WTC towers so quickly after 911. So people wouldn't notice the similarities when they crashed jets into the buildings themselves.

I also believe that the buildings were pulverized by nuclear demolition bombs placed underneath the three WTC towers that came down. There is nothing else that had the power to pulverize those buildings instantaneously. If there was, we would know about it. Thermite is not a possibility.


Hatha

All of this seems to be fact, once again remember the thousands of times we have seen the CGI planes over and over and over. This was programing to such a degree that no one would ever think that this is not fact that they were real planes it was just programed into our consciousness to such a degree that no one would question this.

Remember there was not an airline that hit the pentagon, there was no plane in Shanksville, so it is not much of a stretch that there were no planes at the WTC. Every single video, every one, without exception of the second plane hitting the towers were all from the MSM, there was not a single private video of that event, not one. Every single witness of the planes hitting was a reporter, every single one, without exception.


I believe the "No Planes @ WTC" (NP@WTC) theory is, as far as our 'movement' is concerned, a red herring at best. And at worst, it 'accomplishes' 2 destructive ends:


It is true that if you go there on this issue with most people they will roll their eyes and just walk off, but the fact that now it seems so unbelievable does not make it not possible. We have seen the CGI stuff in Sandy Hook and Boston with the crisis actors. Now looking back you can easily see the same actors and CGI fakery in 911.

It is obvious that Pat has not looked at the evidence at the September Clues site. You and we all need to. The power of the media to visually program a false reality is the issue here, it is real and it is powerful and we need to be aware of it.

Watch this video closely and remember that there are weapons developed that we know nothing about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXr_sGrUFO4

[Hatha Sunahara]

If there are weapons that release enormous amounts of energy in the wink of an eye other than nuclear bombs they would not be a secret, and we would know about them--especially if they were used on 911. What we saw on 911 was an unfamiliar application of a known technology. With nuclear weapons, most of us visualize an atmospheric detonation with a mushroom cloud. What we saw on 911 was an underground detonation--the force of which was directed upward. This is at odds with our reference point for a nuclear bomb, so we dismiss that possibility. But you would not dismiss it so casually if you look at pictures of other underground detonations, like Sedan Storax:

5351


Hatha

[slvrbugjim]

If there are weapons that release enormous amounts of energy in the wink of an eye other than nuclear bombs they would not be a secret

I do not agree with this completely this one is interesting though
Tesla Howitzer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWzEzpMWkyQ

[Bigjon]

One problem with the video is the distant building is in the foreground and is not distant at all.

[PatColo]

As I wrote to John Friend & friends, in part,
[...]



Thread: Critical of JFetzer & JFriend's No Planes @ WTC campaign (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?71312-Critical-of-JFetzer-amp-JFriend-s-No-Planes-WTC-campaign)

Incidentally, JFriend has responded somewhat angrily to my critique (http://www.john-friend.net/2013/09/the-realist-report-with-john-friend_11.html?showComment=1378964878268#c76564378 33959127815). First paragraph there is all about the extraneous items I threw into the "Critical of..." thread above; and his 2nd paragraph is a bunch of "you can't handle the TRUTH!" noise.

Then "Tom in CT" (the podcast guest) responds (http://www.john-friend.net/2013/09/the-realist-report-with-john-friend_11.html?showComment=1378992267775#c84410727 70385237562) with a similar tone; more 'because it CAN be true, therefore it IS THE TWOOF! SHERLOCK!!' noise.

I have a busy day in real world so can't properly respond atm.

But I'll say, my question to the NP@WTC crowd:


Surely the NP@WTC advocates would graciously 'allow for the possibility', that the very "video evidence" you cite as "proof positive of video fakery", could itself be video fakery? Produced and interjected into 'our movement' by the same Hollywood/CIA-Dept-Of-Fake-Osama-Videos™ cabal which has a bottomlessly-funded vested interest in sowing dissent/infighting into our movement rendering us ineffective in "moving anywhere", and in dissuading J6P-911-True-Believers OUT of further investigating our main message? (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?23130-The-quot-Israel-did-9-11-quot-Thread)



....has apparently been cryptonite to them thus far.... none of them have touched it. o)(~

[slvrbugjim]

Surely the NP@WTC advocates would graciously 'allow for the possibility', that the very "video evidence" you cite as "proof positive of video fakery", could itself be video fakery? Produced and interjected into 'our movement' by the same Hollywood/CIA-Dept-Of-Fake-Osama-Videos™ cabal which has a bottomlessly-funded vested interest in sowing dissent/infighting into our movement rendering us ineffective in "moving anywhere", and in dissuading J6P-911-True-Believers OUT of further investigating our main message? (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?23130-The-quot-Israel-did-9-11-quot-Thread)



Ok could be, but now we have the fakery with regards to what false flags now to choose from where video was altered, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston, Norway, the video fakery in these is without question. Crisis actors can now easily be pointed at on 911 as with the other false flags. Simply to toss this out of hand Pat without looking at the evidence that they present makes you weaker.

I have been very much against the NP theory because it was an easy way to make the person making the assessment a target esp in the MSM but this changed with me when I saw Sandy Hook and Boston. To think that now it is possible that not one person was hurt in either of those two events now becomes very plausible.


The NP theory will never ever catch on, even if it is true and I think now that it is, until people become aware of how the Media has been programing our very reality and video fakery is quite an easy way to pull that off.

by the way I have nothing to do with the SC site, not even a member and I am by no means a fan of Fetzer and the space beam cult.

[PatColo]

... Simply to toss this out of hand Pat without looking at the evidence that they present makes you weaker. ...

2. Given that the NP@WTC theory is, IMHO, practically tailor-made for targeting by our opponents with their powerful disinfo gambit of 'ridicule' (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050116064744556) (and I say this as a ~10 year Truther who diplomatically "allows for the possibility" that NP@WTC is in fact correct, though I don't presently subscribe to that belief!); it therefore turns OFF not ON potential newcomers to 'our movement'.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?71312-Critical-of-JFetzer-amp-JFriend-s-No-Planes-WTC-campaign&p=648846&viewfull=1#post648846

[slvrbugjim]

2. Given that the NP@WTC theory is, IMHO, practically tailor-made for targeting by our opponents with their powerful disinfo gambit of 'ridicule' (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050116064744556) (and I say this as a ~10 year Truther who diplomatically "allows for the possibility" that NP@WTC is in fact correct, though I don't presently subscribe to that belief!); it therefore turns OFF not ON potential newcomers to 'our movement'.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?71312-Critical-of-JFetzer-amp-JFriend-s-No-Planes-WTC-campaign&p=648846&viewfull=1#post648846

I agree with you there, in fact you will never get anyone interested in the info by going full blown NP in the beginning. The childishness is the same as before with these guys saying no one died at WTC ect, and yes if we all started spouting NP stuff everywhere we would be a laughing stock. I still believe it is a fact none the less.

It really does not matter in the grand cause other than getting people to understand how the Gov and the MSM is crafting our perceived realities out of whole cloth and few understand this is now more critical than ever, I am not working for a cause I am finding the truth for the cause even if it is uncomfortable.

[BrewTech]

Surely the NP@WTC advocates would graciously 'allow for the possibility', that the very "video evidence" you cite as "proof positive of video fakery", could itself be video fakery?

This^ ^ ^