9/11 - WTC: New Eyewitness Video

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted on YT a couple of days ago, this is apparently new footage of the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. I don't recall seeing it before anyway.

I'm sure this will be studied closely by researchers for any new evidence. It's interesting they believe bombs are responsible, and miss the second impact. It should be remembered that 'explosions' in both towers independent of the plane strikes were reported by many witnesses. And one is audible in the video, at approx. 7.16, the sound of something like an explosion.

Warning: does contain disturbing scenes (people falling/jumping from the towers).

vQxsvTIfMII

[Delight]

Warning: does contain disturbing scenes (people falling/jumping from the towers).

vQxsvTIfMII

That was so upsetting... be prepared. When the camcorder is turned away, the second building explodes in flame. No one mentions a plane.

[Arcturian108]

For the past few years, whenever I have seen video of this taken from nearby buildings by just ordinary citizens, I never see evidence of planes. I think that is telling. Also, notice how black the smoke from the fires are, which indicates a cold fire, not hot enough to melt steel, or bring any buildings down.

I have followed Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth over the past 19 years, but recently felt that they are controlled opposition, as they seem to lack creative approaches to getting public attention, and are constantly asking for money.

[indigopete]

I have followed Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth over the past 19 years, but recently felt that they are controlled opposition, as they seem to lack creative approaches to getting public attention, and are constantly asking for money.

I must say I've never felt that about them. I think they do very good work and don't see them as controlled opposition at all. What exactly do you mean by "creative" ? They're a professional body which is going a professional route. Somebody needs do it. They got that Huxley study done which was immense. They've woken up a lot of people in the industry.

[DaveToo]

For the past few years, whenever I have seen video of this taken from nearby buildings by just ordinary citizens, I never see evidence of planes. I think that is telling. Also, notice how black the smoke from the fires are, which indicates a cold fire, not hot enough to melt steel, or bring any buildings down.

I have followed Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth over the past 19 years, but recently felt that they are controlled opposition, as they seem to lack creative approaches to getting public attention, and are constantly asking for money.

First of all A&E for 9/11 Truth hadn't been formed 19 years ago.

Second of all, depending on your vantage point, you may not be able to see the plane approaching.

I have mixed feelings about A&E.
A lot of the stuff they do is good.
But they have focused almost all of their energy on WTC7 and
they have not been able to figure out that nukes brought all three towers down.

[TargeT]

I've seen this footage before.

This shows nothing IMO.. evidence of nothing, terrible camera work.

[DaveToo]

I've seen this footage before.

This shows nothing IMO.. evidence of nothing, terrible camera work.

Yes the camera work is very spotty. It's a pity. They missed the impact which would have shown the plane.

[TargeT]

I've seen this footage before.

This shows nothing IMO.. evidence of nothing, terrible camera work.

Yes the camera work is very spotty. It's a pity. They missed the impact which would have shown the plane.

I was so hopping for that.

I want to see something fresh with "impact"

[Justplain]

I remember seeing a live helicopter feed from several miles away of the twin towers. The first 'impact' had occurred, with smoke billowing out of the first tower. Off to the right, an arial object could be seen moving toward the towers, and it was not a plane. Likely a cruise missile, loaded with haulographic projectors. These creeps had high tech to pull this magic trick off.

[Satori]

I've seen this footage before.

This shows nothing IMO.. evidence of nothing, terrible camera work.

Yes the camera work is very spotty. It's a pity. They missed the impact which would have shown the plane.

Or would have shown no plane. Too bad the camera panned away at that moment. I do find it circumstantially important that no one on the roof top and who was near the person taking the video said anything at all about a plane: not having heard one, or something roaring like one, and not having seen one.

[janette]

My heart feels such sorrow for the souls that died that day ..whoever the perpetrators are they are as far away from the divine as they possibly can be 😢

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I remember seeing a live helicopter feed from several miles away of the twin towers. The first 'impact' had occurred, with smoke billowing out of the first tower. Off to the right, an arial object could be seen moving toward the towers, and it was not a plane. Likely a cruise missile, loaded with haulographic projectors. These creeps had high tech to pull this magic trick off.

I think you're talking about the NBC chopper footage, high over the Hudson that captured the approach of UA175, the second plane.

Probably this one seen at 2min 14sec

fwbTxQfB4Dg

This footage started the infamous 'orb' theory, which I think is what you're referring to. It captured what appeared to be a metallic, spherical object appearing out of the top right of the screen. That is what it looks like at first glance. But you have to analyse before you can theorize. And under analysis it didn't hold up at all. This footage has been thoroughly picked apart. This was 6 or 7 years ago now. I enhanced it myself, and pretty easily. It was poor quality video though, and that was the problem. That's what created the orb. But I believe I was able to prove with analysis and stabilization it was a plane. I posted it somewhere but can't seem to find it now.

But here's a link to my enhanced Gif of the 'orb'. It was clearly a plane, with a wingspan quite consistent with a Boeing 767.

https://imgur.com/a/AazRlIM#rPjvQoX

Below is an enhanced piece of footage of the same plane, at the same moment but from a different angle, hitting the south tower. Not an orb, not a drone, not a missile.

12.20
lVPYOsQCWXY

There are multiple threads in the 9/11 sub-forum where discussion and analysis, again over many years, has probed every kind of theory and anomaly you can think of, in fact almost every detail of this event. Well worth digging into.

[Satori]

I remember seeing a live helicopter feed from several miles away of the twin towers. The first 'impact' had occurred, with smoke billowing out of the first tower. Off to the right, an arial object could be seen moving toward the towers, and it was not a plane. Likely a cruise missile, loaded with haulographic projectors. These creeps had high tech to pull this magic trick off.

I saw this video too. It was not an orb. It was a missle-type object that came from left to right relative to the helicopter and passed at high speed in front of it. I remember the copter being closer than a few miles. Say a few hundred yards.

[norman]

I know nothing about holograms, but don't holograms have to be projected in darkness or in low light with a black background ?

My mind boggles to think of a successful holographic deception in full blue sky daylight. Not saying it can't be done, it just boggles my mind.

[chancy]

Hello Everyone:
I have found it completely interesting that with all the video. All the experts. All the common sense thinking people trying to figure out what happened that dreadful day that only a handfull have come out and said it was an inside job!

After researching 9/11 almost 2 decades I believe it was an inside job. Did you all hear that? I believe or it's my opinion 9/11 was an inside job
( Now I am probably being put on a "no fly list" as we speak!)

No worries though....This topic has come up over the years and just like covid 19. No one is willing to just tell the truth. The lies and deception regarding 9/11 make nausea the least of my feelings about all those innocent and precious people being murdered.

Don't anyone of you believe for a split second that any of the so called hijackers could fly those aircraft and they couldn't even fly a cessna 150 or 172. It is shameful that we all have just agreed with the base story that it was hijackers that killed all those innocent people.

The evidence has already been brought out many times but there's so much of it that it takes days and days of reading and watching video to realize we have all been blinded by theatre and nice speeches when in reality those that actually did this obtrocity should pay and pay dearly instead of sitting in a resort drinking burbon on the rocks.

It's a pity our world doesn't hunt the perpetrations of this evil act down and serve them with the justice they deserve!

chancy

[East Sun]

Bombs did go off IMO and the opinion of some who were there.

David Ickes Book The Trigger spells it out clearly. You have to read it
to really get the gist of what he is saying. Might be surprising
to many.

You don't have to read the whole book. It is enlightening as David's
books are always.

[DaveToo]

I've seen this footage before.

This shows nothing IMO.. evidence of nothing, terrible camera work.

Yes the camera work is very spotty. It's a pity. They missed the impact which would have shown the plane.

Or would have shown no plane. Too bad the camera panned away at that moment. I do find it circumstantially important that no one on the roof top and who was near the person taking the video said anything at all about a plane: not having heard one, or something roaring like one, and not having seen one.

Oh sure there is always that possibility. But you know what?
With some 30+ videos from independent sources all showing a plane impacting/approaching WTC2
I would bet a handsome amount of money that had he not panned away, we would have seen the plane.

Over the years I went through every theory in the book, including the 'no planes' theory.
Meaning, I was a certified 'no-planer'. But that didn't last very long at all.

Among a stack of evidence showing that planes hit the towers, my two favorite are:

1. A precious video by a layman shooting from the street a few blocks away from the towers where you clearly hear the plane approaching, then the loud boom, then you hear the guy shooting video telling his friends to duck, as the
engine came flying away from the tower to land on Church St., then you hear the engine making a thud as it bounces/lands.
The timing of all the sounds are perfect, when you measure the speed the engine was traveling at, the distance it traveled etc.

2. The swaying of the tower upon impact.


Just to be clear. Planes did hit the towers, but not Flt. 11 and 175.
And there were no hijackers on board nor passengers.

[DaveToo]

My heart feels such sorrow for the souls that died that day ..whoever the perpetrators are they are as far away from the divine as they possibly can be 😢

Yes my heart feels sorrow for those too.
But you know what?

My heart feels 1,000's of time more sorrow for the millions of INNOCENT humans who have died NEEDLESSLY in the middle east as a direct result of the false flag attacks on 9/11.

[DaveToo]

Bombs did go off IMO and the opinion of some who were there.

David Ickes Book The Trigger spells it out clearly. You have to read it
to really get the gist of what he is saying. Might be surprising
to many.

You don't have to read the whole book. It is enlightening as David's
books are always.

Bombs were going off all day!
Before the towers were hit, when WTC1/2 were blown up, before
WTC7 came down and when it came down.

After all the towers were down the bombs finally stopped.

We're talking a mixed type of bombs being used.

[DaveToo]

Hello Everyone:
I have found it completely interesting that with all the video. All the experts. All the common sense thinking people trying to figure out what happened that dreadful day that only a handfull have come out and said it was an inside job!

After researching 9/11 almost 2 decades I believe it was an inside job. Did you all hear that? I believe or it's my opinion 9/11 was an inside job
( Now I am probably being put on a "no fly list" as we speak!)

No worries though....This topic has come up over the years and just like covid 19. No one is willing to just tell the truth. The lies and deception regarding 9/11 make nausea the least of my feelings about all those innocent and precious people being murdered.

Don't anyone of you believe for a split second that any of the so called hijackers could fly those aircraft and they couldn't even fly a cessna 150 or 172. It is shameful that we all have just agreed with the base story that it was hijackers that killed all those innocent people.

The evidence has already been brought out many times but there's so much of it that it takes days and days of reading and watching video to realize we have all been blinded by theatre and nice speeches when in reality those that actually did this obtrocity should pay and pay dearly instead of sitting in a resort drinking burbon on the rocks.

It's a pity our world doesn't hunt the perpetrations of this evil act down and serve them with the justice they deserve!

chancy

From my experience it has been quite different.
I would expect most Avaloners to agree 9/11 was an inside job.

Most have differing opinions of various details that occurred on that day, but that's not really important
in the overall scheme of things.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

All the experts. All the common sense thinking people trying to figure out what happened that dreadful day that only a handfull have come out and said it was an inside job!

That's pretty crazy chancy. I've been involved in many, many 9/11 threads that have absolutely dissected every possible angle of the 9/11 story, every detail, every aspect, and engaged with dozens of other Avalonians over the last 9 years on the board. I cannot think of a single one who thinks it was a bunch of terrorists with boxcutters. The who, the what, the why, somewhat varies in opinion. But it's unanimous, it's decisive: inside job, inside and out, all day long. That was settled long ago (for me since a few weeks after 9/11).

[spuddie]

As the guy was walking round the streets, it struck me that it happened in the pre-cameraphone age. Had it happened, say, in 2011, he would have captured a sea of phones held aloft. The towers would have been shot from every conceivable viewpoint and angle. Evidence of what exactly happened, second by second, would have been available and analysed to death and the 'inside job' conclusion would likely have been reached and widely known within a couple of weeks. Of course, had they planned the atrocity to occur in 2011, they would have had to take massed citizen videography into account and would have had to plan the attack differently. Perhaps at night rather than day?

[DaveToo]

As the guy was walking round the streets, it struck me that it happened in the pre-cameraphone age. Had it happened, say, in 2011, he would have captured a sea of phones held aloft. The towers would have been shot from every conceivable viewpoint and angle. Evidence of what exactly happened, second by second, would have been available and analysed to death and the 'inside job' conclusion would likely have been reached and widely known within a couple of weeks. Of course, had they planned the atrocity to occur in 2011, they would have had to take massed citizen videography into account and would have had to plan the attack differently. Perhaps at night rather than day?

Absolutely!
The cover would have been blown in a matter of days.

Three things would have killed it.

1. Cell phone cameras. Instead of just 30+ videos we have of the WTC2 plane strike, we'd have thousands.
2. Youtube (by the time it was created a few years later, the event was already a fait accompli).
3. Advanced internet and social media sharing.

[onawah]

9/11 Scene from 'One by One' Rik Mayall's last film release before his sudden death
87,915 views•Feb 20, 2017
Neil Jones
244 subscribers

"I decided to share this on YouTube as it appears the films no longer 'officially' available to view or purchase anywhere; People need to see this clip before it shares a similar fate!
09/06/2017 Update: Great news, this film is now available on eBay!
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/One-by-One-Rik-Mayall-Last-Major-UK-Feature-Film-/352079207553?hash=item51f98e5c81:g:3jYAAOSwIQdZNTKJ
MW-oXuJTdjI

[Blastolabs]

At 10:40 seconds into the video you can see " something" flying towards the building just before it blows.

[Journeyman]

9/11 Scene from 'One by One' Rik Mayall's last film release before his sudden death
87,915 views•Feb 20, 2017
Neil Jones
244 subscribers

"I decided to share this on YouTube as it appears the films no longer 'officially' available to view or purchase anywhere; People need to see this clip before it shares a similar fate!
09/06/2017 Update: Great news, this film is now available on eBay!
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/One-by-One-Rik-Mayall-Last-Major-UK-Feature-Film-/352079207553?hash=item51f98e5c81:g:3jYAAOSwIQdZNTKJ
MW-oXuJTdjI


I never knew of this film's existence before and I was a Rik Mayall fan. Don't recall seeing it mentioned when he died.

[-cathyd]

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C Clarke

[JackMcThorn]

Maybe I missed it in the forums but there are a few details left unanswered. WTC7 in the video I've seen seems to come down in the conventional demolition style, centre and lower and collapsing on it's own footprint. Agencies might wish their building be wired for sound in the event of an emergency. I've watched many conventional demolition videos and the general idea is centre and lower, you can see flashes of the charges before the buildings come all the way down. There is also large plumes of dust in conventional demolition. I did not see flashes in the video of wtc7.

The towers seem to collapse from the top down, in a sort of reverse demolition style. I've noticed it is more difficult to source videos of the collapsing towers. Many of the documentaries focus on the towers standing with the gaping openings. While the towers appear to be reverse demolition, i.e. top down instead of bottom up, there are no flashes. Just crumbling concrete and massive plumes of concrete dust.

I do not think a small team of engineers could wire these huge towers without being noticed. I've realised that wtc7 is the most bizarre aspect and the towers seem to not be as mysterious.

Another mystery is the Saudis supposedly responsible. Saudi Arabia is a pretty important american ally in the Middle East. Could the cia have planted the seed in these student pilots in a manner consistent with targeted individuals and mind influences? Were they selected as a matter of convenience; i.e. there was not enough Iranians or Iraqis studying aviation in the u.s.? RF does reach the skies, if more than planting a seed is responsible. I don't recall any retribution on the part of Saudi Arabia for these actions of a few.

No one seems to mention the mind control possibilities regarding these events, I find that the topic of targeted individuals and mind influences is a very rare and obscure topic. Many of the incidents in america regarding firearms or explosives seem to reek of mind influences.

[Tintin]

9/11 Scene from 'One by One' Rik Mayall's last film release before his sudden death
87,915 views•Feb 20, 2017
Neil Jones
244 subscribers

"I decided to share this on YouTube as it appears the films no longer 'officially' available to view or purchase anywhere; People need to see this clip before it shares a similar fate!
09/06/2017 Update: Great news, this film is now available on eBay!
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/One-by-One-Rik-Mayall-Last-Major-UK-Feature-Film-/352079207553?hash=item51f98e5c81:g:3jYAAOSwIQdZNTKJ
MW-oXuJTdjI


I never knew of this film's existence before and I was a Rik Mayall fan. Don't recall seeing it mentioned when he died.

Good call on this :thumbsup:

I've just downloaded the clip. and the whole film would also be great to see, somehow, somewhere.

[Bill Ryan]

Another new video, never before published.

Kevin Westley has posted a historical artifact that captures the moment the second plane crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001. Given that video cameras were not as ubiquitous then as they are now, there have been no recordings of the impact from anything other than from news helicopters on the scene following the first crash into the north tower.

It's unclear why the video has emerged after more than 20 years since the attacks. According to Westley, he'd uploaded the video years ago but left it categorized as private and thus not viewable to the general public.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6t31R4tI10

[Hermoor]

the whole film would also be great to see, somehow, somewhere.

Here we go.

HSh39FhaWB4j/

The final scene is within touching distance of where we are now.

Mayall's wife was highly sceptical about his death, reported to be from a sudden heart attack. It's murky, upsetting business to look in to and plenty of sources are still out there.

Playing characters like Alan B'Stard and Adonis Cnut would have put his learning trajectory well ahead of the curve. Mayall was in the thick of the showbiz establishment, these people tend to be extremely well connected and informed.

He was at the pinnacle of the BBC's comedy department for a generation and then opted for a role in a controversial film on a shoestring budget with an obscure rookie director? Hmmm.

He also left us with this memorable outtake by way of a cryptic warning?

gyKjMSY82ym2/

[DaveToo]

Another new video, never before published.

Kevin Westley has posted a historical artifact that captures the moment the second plane crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001. Given that video cameras were not as ubiquitous then as they are now, there have been no recordings of the impact from anything other than from news helicopters on the scene following the first crash into the north tower.

It's unclear why the video has emerged after more than 20 years since the attacks. According to Westley, he'd uploaded the video years ago but left it categorized as private and thus not viewable to the general public.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6t31R4tI10

That sure didn't look like a hologram to me nor to the 100+ people who were standing there witnessing it.
I recall the video you made with Kerry Cassidy interviewing John Lear where he was convinced that holograms were used instead of planes. :)

Bill I assume those are your words above?

If those were your words, are you not aware that there are at least 30 different videos showing the plane that hit WTC2, the majority not shot from news helicopters?






From Bill:
Copied from Zero Hedge, here (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2022-03-01/watch-witness-posts-video-911-impact-never-seen).
It didn't feel quite right when I posted it.
:)

[DaveToo]

Maybe I missed it in the forums but there are a few details left unanswered. WTC7 in the video I've seen seems to come down in the conventional demolition style, centre and lower and collapsing on it's own footprint. Agencies might wish their building be wired for sound in the event of an emergency. I've watched many conventional demolition videos and the general idea is centre and lower, you can see flashes of the charges before the buildings come all the way down. There is also large plumes of dust in conventional demolition. I did not see flashes in the video of wtc7.

The towers seem to collapse from the top down, in a sort of reverse demolition style. I've noticed it is more difficult to source videos of the collapsing towers. Many of the documentaries focus on the towers standing with the gaping openings. While the towers appear to be reverse demolition, i.e. top down instead of bottom up, there are no flashes. Just crumbling concrete and massive plumes of concrete dust.

I do not think a small team of engineers could wire these huge towers without being noticed. I've realised that wtc7 is the most bizarre aspect and the towers seem to not be as mysterious.

Another mystery is the Saudis supposedly responsible. Saudi Arabia is a pretty important american ally in the Middle East. Could the cia have planted the seed in these student pilots in a manner consistent with targeted individuals and mind influences? Were they selected as a matter of convenience; i.e. there was not enough Iranians or Iraqis studying aviation in the u.s.? RF does reach the skies, if more than planting a seed is responsible. I don't recall any retribution on the part of Saudi Arabia for these actions of a few.

No one seems to mention the mind control possibilities regarding these events, I find that the topic of targeted individuals and mind influences is a very rare and obscure topic. Many of the incidents in america regarding firearms or explosives seem to reek of mind influences.


Most people believe that conventional explosives + thermite were used to bring down all three towers.
WTC7 certainly looks like a conventional demolition.

These were my beliefs too until I discovered Hans Pommer.
He's a nuclear physicist who studied the tower collapses in detail for many years.
He has also written articles, a book and made many videos documenting his theories
about what made the towers come down.

I studied his work for quite some time, even engaging in a dialogue with him asking him specific questions.

I, like him, am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the three towers (yes even WTC7)
were all brought down by special nuclear devices (not conventional nuclear bombs).

There are 10 pieces of evidence that bear the fingerprints of a nuclear device.

The most in-your-face piece of evidence are the pyroclastic clouds, seen on this planet only when there
is a volcanic eruption or a nuclear explosion.

Pommer posits that WTC7 was wired for conventional demolition as a back-up.
Something seems to have gone wrong with the nuclear detonation in WTC7.
So they pulled the building, but as it came down, Pommer believes the building 'vented'
and the nuke took over. The pyroclastic clouds from WTC7 were just as big as from the other two
towers. A standard 'collapse' could never have created dust clouds like that.

The collapse from the top that you mention is in line with how the nuclear device Pommer describes
would work.

There was a window of a week or so where crews were working on the towers at night before 9/11, so they
did have an opportunity to get in there unnoticed. This was a time when the thermite could have been
installed.

The nuclear devices needed next to no time to be placed in the sub-basements.

The Saudi involvement and 19 'hijackers' were pure fabrication. The planes were drones/remote-controlled
with no passengers.

[Tintin]

the whole film would also be great to see, somehow, somewhere.

Here we go.

HSh39FhaWB4j/

The final scene is within touching distance of where we are now.

Mayall's wife was highly sceptical about his death, reported to be from a sudden heart attack. It's murky, upsetting business to look in to and plenty of sources are still out there.

Playing characters like Alan B'Stard and Adonis Cnut would have put his learning trajectory well ahead of the curve. Mayall was in the thick of the showbiz establishment, these people tend to be extremely well connected and informed.

He was at the pinnacle of the BBC's comedy department for a generation and then opted for a role in a controversial film on a shoestring budget with an obscure rookie director? Hmmm.

He also left us with this memorable outtake by way of a cryptic warning?

gyKjMSY82ym2/

Ah, great catch. Well I got it eventually too, the whole film, in the Avalon Library a few months back. Here it is:

https://avalonlibrary.net/One_By_One_%282014%29_w_Rik_Mayall.mp4

[Satori]

I’ve never been a “no planes” advocate. This video, in my view, supports the assertion that planes were involved. As does the video of the first tower being hit. But, planes or no planes, 9/11 was an inside (and outside) job and explosives had been placed in these buildings, including WTC 7, long before 9/11/2001. Planes were part of the cover story for what really brought the buildings down—explosive devices. That’s a fact.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

A valuable piece of footage, great find. It's a match to the Michael Hezarkhani footage -- in fact it looks like they must have been standing in very close proximity.

0P3cy3Ssdq4

edit: the 'hologram theory' went the way of flat earth nonsense years ago. They were physical planes, probably military-grade and disguised as passenger liners.

[norman]

A valuable piece of footage, great find. It's a match to the Michael Hezarkhani footage -- in fact it looks like they must have been standing in very close proximity.

0P3cy3Ssdq4

edit: the 'hologram theory' went the way of flat earth nonsense years ago. They were physical planes, probably military-grade and disguised as passenger liners.


Did It !?

Another eye witness video.

https://t.me/Royboy17th/5473 [video clip at link]


They never thought people who filmed the attacks on 9/11 with their JVC handycam would post it to social media years later.

There were never any planes, share the heck out of this.


I guess we have to choose between holograms and CGI home movies then.

I agree fake movies are easier than holograms to believe in, but I'm confused.


In 2022 it's a lot easier to believe the TV footage was high tech fakery, than it was at the time.

[DaveToo]

Did It !?

Another eye witness video.

https://t.me/Royboy17th/5473 [video clip at link]


They never thought people who filmed the attacks on 9/11 with their JVC handycam would post it to social media years later.

There were never any planes, share the heck out of this.


I guess we have to choose between holograms and CGI home movies then.

I agree fake movies are easier than holograms to believe in, but I'm confused.


In 2022 it's a lot easier to believe the TV footage was high tech fakery, than it was at the time.

Norman I don't know how much time you have invested in researching 9/11?

I have spent years doing heavy duty research, leaving no stone unturned.

This Royboy had more than 20 years to play around with that video and figure out how
to edit it to remove the plane.

There are more than 30 independent amateur videos of the plane striking WTC2.
There is one identical to the one this Royboy has produced.
The difference being, the plane was not edited out in it.

But if you want to believe no planes hit the towers, by all means, be my guest!

[Patient]

Many people get into arguing these points, but rarely do people discuss that lack of "air defence".

If they had a thought that planes were hitting buildings, why would they not scramble jets?

They had plenty of time.

Add that in and how can you argue that it wasn't a multi-level planned event?

[DaveToo]

Many people get into arguing these points, but rarely do people discuss that lack of "air defence".

If they had a thought that planes were hitting buildings, why would they not scramble jets?

They had plenty of time.

Add that in and how can you argue that it wasn't a multi-level planned event?

9/11 was extremely complex.

You are introducing just one, of dozens/hundreds of different elements that made up the operation.

Of course the standing down of jets was a crucial element to the success of the operation.
The planners made darn sure that no scrambled jets would mess things up.

[Johnnycomelately]

Norman I don't know how much time you have invested in researching 9/11?

I have spent years doing heavy duty research, leaving no stone unturned.

This Royboy had more than 20 years to play around with that video and figure out how to edit it to remove the plane.

There are more than 30 independent amateur videos of the plane striking WTC2.
There is one identical to the one this Royboy has produced.
The difference being, the plane was not edited out in it.

But if you want to believe no planes hit the towers, by all means, be my guest!

I am with you Dave. Long before I found “911 Pilots” youtube I saw commentary about possible remote control of those planes.

I think the truth will come out, but it will require a change in a majority of the people. Every day, at my times, I radiate as best I can the hope that we people will all get along. Our personal and local ‘divides’ are what enables those at the top to enact the big divides, wars — hot or not.

Dave I guess you know all this, but for new folks I’ll put the relevant tidbit. Cheers.

Here is Captain Dan Hanley’s videos page of his chan:


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmccFLj0_5XNZfzxc8vfhqA/videos?app=desktop

And here is his latest vid, interviewed by a Dr. Emanuel Pastreich:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmccFLj0_5XNZfzxc8vfhqA/videos?app=desktop

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

A valuable piece of footage, great find. It's a match to the Michael Hezarkhani footage -- in fact it looks like they must have been standing in very close proximity.

0P3cy3Ssdq4

edit: the 'hologram theory' went the way of flat earth nonsense years ago. They were physical planes, probably military-grade and disguised as passenger liners.


Did It !?

Another eye witness video.

https://t.me/Royboy17th/5473 [video clip at link]

You can see the giant hole in the north tower, so we know which angle the other came in at to hit the south tower. From this view, it was on the reverse side. With both towers actually blocking that view, we can deduce the plane was simply not visible anyway.

The thing to take into account is the angle. You'd think, viewing the tower from that angle, the plane should be coming down, out of the sky, and should at some point be visible. Not necessarily. Angles are funny things...

Please give this a watch. It's an excellent analysis and only lasts 30 mins.

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=233&part=3&gen=3

Here, every video of the attack (I think 26 of them) was analysed and overlaid with a 3D model of lower Manhattan. This was to plot an accurate radar track of the (second) plane's trajectory. Because that's the thing. For years, people claimed the 'official' flight path just did not line up with what the videos showed (the curious angles the plane comes in at from one video to the next). This analysis aimed to get to the bottom of that question, once and for all. And it does.

[DaveToo]

A valuable piece of footage, great find. It's a match to the Michael Hezarkhani footage -- in fact it looks like they must have been standing in very close proximity.

0P3cy3Ssdq4

edit: the 'hologram theory' went the way of flat earth nonsense years ago. They were physical planes, probably military-grade and disguised as passenger liners.


Did It !?

Another eye witness video.

https://t.me/Royboy17th/5473 [video clip at link]

You can see the giant hole in the north tower, so we know which angle the other came in at to hit the south tower. From this view, it was on the reverse side. With both towers actually blocking that view, we can deduce the plane was simply not visible anyway.

The thing to take into account is the angle. You'd think, viewing the tower from that angle, the plane should be coming down, out of the sky, and should at some point be visible. Not necessarily. Angles are funny things...

With all due respect Mark, that is simply sloppy analysis!

You've got your sides of the towers mixed up!

This is WTC Towers 101 (course).
The giant hole you are referring to (in the Royboy video) is NOT the major hole made from the initial impact into WTC1.
The WTC1 hole we see in his video is on the EAST side!

Look at this video at 6:06. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=814rcm4KC5w)

This is the video clip that Royboy has edited.

Same angle. Same brown building in the foreground to the right as he pans the camera towards to towers.
Same shaky camera. Same sound. Same birds flying.

Everything is the same as Royboy's video, except that in this original clip, you can see the plane coming in to strike the tower.




Please give this a watch. It's an excellent analysis and only lasts 30 mins.

https://www.richplanet.net/richp_genre.php?ref=233&part=3&gen=3

Here, every video of the attack (I think 26 of them) was analysed and overlaid with a 3D model of lower Manhattan. This was to plot an accurate radar track of the (second) plane's trajectory. Because that's the thing. For years, people claimed the 'official' flight path just did not line up with what the videos showed (the curious angles the plane comes in at from one video to the next). This analysis aimed to get to the bottom of that question, once and for all. And it does.

He gets the analysis of the path of the plane correct.
However the rest of his analysis is questionable, to say the least. :(

He suspects a cloaked missile was used. But he doesn't go into any detail explaining how the 'cloaking' would have worked.

How would he account for us seeing the full plane cutout on the building, including wings at precisely the width of the plane?
No details/theory on that.

He's also a die-hard Dr. Wood disciple/preacher. 'Nuf said. :(

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

With all due respect Mark, that is simply sloppy analysis!

You've got your sides of the towers mixed up!

This is WTC Towers 101 (course).
The giant hole you are referring to (in the Royboy video) is NOT the major hole made from the initial impact into WTC1.
The WTC1 hole we see in his video is on the EAST side!

Look at this video at 6:06. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=814rcm4KC5w)

You're absolutely right, that was indeed sloppy of me. The telegram clip is poor quality. I should have searched for a better version of the clip before making any declarations. Instead, I rushed to assume we were seeing the north face of the north tower (with the hole in it). I have done a ton of analysis on 9/11 but it's been a lot of years. So I firmly place the blame on laziness and being away from these videos for so long! :)

Correct. The royboy telegram clip has had the plane removed. It's obvious, and pretty easy to prove as the original clip, with the plane present, long, long, predates it.

Side by side this is how the two clips appear at pretty much the same frame.

48909



He gets the analysis of the path of the plane correct.
However the rest of his analysis is questionable, to say the least. :(


I should have stipulated, the only part of the analysis we were interested in here was the radar track, and clearing up the confusion over angles. This he accomplished, and very well. The rest of his projections and 'theories' are only that: projections and theories (which I do not at all share).

[RatRodRob...RRR]

IMHO Planes hit both those buildings, bombs/squibs brought all three buildings down at freefall speed, a perfect demolition job x 3.

Some say that the work required to wire up and place explosives in place sometime before the incident actually occurred would have been near impossible without people (who work in the buildings) seeing a lot of traffic (people who do not work in the buildings) in the buildings, lots of blokes crawling into manholes and stuff to put those explosives in, and wire them up, it would have taken weeks and would have been noticed by many that there were alot of strange men in overalls hanging around.
.
Remember that not long before the towers went down the owner took out insurance on both buildings against a "terrorist" attack, since both buildings were brought down by "terrorists" , the owner was paid out twice.
.
I also think it is highly possible that the wiring, bombs, squibs etc were put in place during the buildings construction, sooo much easier that way, you know, forward planning.
.
It were reported that there were quite a few maintenance workers spotted in the buildings not long before the towers fell, some of these workers were said to be doing lift maintenance, i believe a portion of the buildings Lifts were shut down for a few days or more, this is when i think that the wiring, bombs and squibs were hooked up, by simply removing building panels and connecting **** up, easy really.
.
I vividly remember seeing firefighters just after the first building come down, talking amongst themselves and saying they heard the boom boom boom boom as the building come down, i believe these many booms were the squibs goin off one after the other.

Building 7, well you know, you would seriously be deluded if you think a half dozen office fires brought that building down.
.
There is way more i would like to add but has prolly all ready been said here in this and other threads.
.
.
RRR

[Johnnycomelately]

Hey Rob. This article includes talk about how nanothermite can be sprayed on as an industrial coating.The personnel applying it need not know what it is, might have been told it was for fire-proofing or something. Fusing it all up, whether by wires or by by EM signal, probably wouldn’t take long.

I followed a few of the reference links (none live here), and found them real and relevant.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/the-top-ten-connections-between-nist-and-nano-thermites/




.

Some say that the work required to wire up and place explosives in place sometime before the incident actually occurred would have been near impossible without people (who work in the buildings) seeing a lot of traffic (people who do not work in the buildings) in the buildings, lots of blokes crawling into manholes and stuff to put those explosives in, and wire them up, it would have taken weeks and would have been noticed by many that there were alot of strange men in overalls hanging around.
.

[RatRodRob...RRR]

Hey Rob. This article includes talk about how nanothermite can be sprayed on as an industrial coating.The personnel applying it need not know what it is, might have been told it was for fire-proofing or something. Fusing it all up, whether by wires or by by EM signal, probably wouldn’t take long.

I followed a few of the reference links (none live here), and found them real and relevant.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/the-top-ten-connections-between-nist-and-nano-thermites/




.

Some say that the work required to wire up and place explosives in place sometime before the incident actually occurred would have been near impossible without people (who work in the buildings) seeing a lot of traffic (people who do not work in the buildings) in the buildings, lots of blokes crawling into manholes and stuff to put those explosives in, and wire them up, it would have taken weeks and would have been noticed by many that there were alot of strange men in overalls hanging around.
.



Cheers Johnny, now Thermite im totally aware of, but spray on, wow thats new to me.
I tried that link you provided but got a "http error 500", whatever that means lol, but i think i will check that **** out, so the EM signal would be to "ignite" the sprayed on thermite...?, wow imagine what you could do with that.

[Johnnycomelately]

I maybe should have mentioned, when I tested that link right after posting the page showed nothing/blank, but I refreshed the page and it came up full. I never noticed what the address bar said on the initial try, but it does include “not secure” every time it does work. I don’t know what that means, but I’ve never had a problem afterwards.

Been a while since I last read it, but regarding spraying, they talk about putting it into or making it into a gel or an aerogel.

The EM signal, as part of the fusing, is my idea. I envisaged EM receivers with associated pyro/blasting caps, as a possible alternative to running wires. I don’t know enough, about either the buildings or the state of tech (back in 2001, OR now), to properly argue that idea. The operation, to my eye, needed precise control over the timing of many different ignitions.



Hey Rob. This article includes talk about how nanothermite can be sprayed on as an industrial coating.The personnel applying it need not know what it is, might have been told it was for fire-proofing or something. Fusing it all up, whether by wires or by by EM signal, probably wouldn’t take long.

I followed a few of the reference links (none live here), and found them real and relevant.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/the-top-ten-connections-between-nist-and-nano-thermites/




.

Some say that the work required to wire up and place explosives in place sometime before the incident actually occurred would have been near impossible without people (who work in the buildings) seeing a lot of traffic (people who do not work in the buildings) in the buildings, lots of blokes crawling into manholes and stuff to put those explosives in, and wire them up, it would have taken weeks and would have been noticed by many that there were alot of strange men in overalls hanging around.
.



Cheers Johnny, now Thermite im totally aware of, but spray on, wow thats new to me.
I tried that link you provided but got a "http error 500", whatever that means lol, but i think i will check that **** out, so the EM signal would be to "ignite" the sprayed on thermite...?, wow imagine what you could do with that.

[Paul D.]

This video has just been posted. It claims to be previously unreleased .I've not watched it yet but have flicked through it . Second explosion filmed .Speaker later on discusses'"bomb ,no plane "& right at the very end The guy is adamant that he saw the second building blow up "it was a bomb" & saw no plane .He couldn't say about the first . What I've seen is really something . Looks authentic to me but I'm no expert .Don't know why it's only come out now but definately worth seeing no question.
About 30 mins.

This video shows the moment when the towers exploded. There was no plane in this footage and even the people who were recording and seeing it were saying there was no plane. You can see people falling from the buildings, it's truly heart breaking.

•Jet fuel burns at 1500°F
•While Steel Beams melt at 2750°F

This was a clear controlled demolition made by the Zionist Israeli pigs!!!

pw8z9jmZ21d7

[Satori]

Unfortunately, the camera was not pointed at the tower at the moment of the explosion, or impact/explosion. This video is inconclusive on the question of whether a plane hit the second tower. However, plane or no plane, there were explosives of some type, or some form of energy directed at the towers, or both, that caused these buildings to essentially dustify.

[Alecs]

I think not to be overlooked, the camera does confirm a very clear sky--relatively free of particles and water vapor.

[Raskolnikov]

Unfortunately, the camera was not pointed at the tower at the moment of the explosion, or impact/explosion. This video is inconclusive on the question of whether a plane hit the second tower. However, plane or no plane, there were explosives of some type, or some form of energy directed at the towers, or both, that caused these buildings to essentially dustify.

This one was definitely new to me. Start at 1:50. If true, it's pretty conclusive that it wasn't a plane.

MZ3oTIVASGyk

[Satori]

Unfortunately, the camera was not pointed at the tower at the moment of the explosion, or impact/explosion. This video is inconclusive on the question of whether a plane hit the second tower. However, plane or no plane, there were explosives of some type, or some form of energy directed at the towers, or both, that caused these buildings to essentially dustify.

This one was definitely new to me. Start at 1:50. If true, it's pretty conclusive that it wasn't a plane.

MZ3oTIVASGyk

Thanks for sharing.

How do you reconcile what we see at the 1:50 mark with what we see at the 14:30 mark?

The plane no plane issue has become, and was likely intended to be, a divide and conquer tactic and a diversion. It is used to distract from the crucial issues of who did it and how we hold them criminally and civilly responsible.

The how it was done could, however, lead to the who did it. But many of those responsible are long gone, or nearly so.

I really hate this and regret having to say it, but they pulled it off. They skated on by. Like so many times before and since. It’s a terrible shame and miscarriage of Justice, to say the least.

[Raskolnikov]

How do you reconcile what we see at the 1:50 mark with what we see at the 14:30 mark?

The plane no plane issue has become, and was likely intended to be, a divide and conquer tactic and a diversion. It is used to distract from the crucial issues of who did it and how we hold them criminally and civilly responsible.

The how it was done could, however, lead to the who did it. But many of those responsible are long gone, or nearly so.

I really hate this and regret having to say it, but they pulled it off. They skated on by. Like so many times before and since. It’s a terrible shame and miscarriage of Justice, to say the least.

Agreed, they just keep forcing their agenda through with no regard for life. I can't reconcile a thing. I feel like I've been thrown into a game of Tron and I'm just trying to find my way out again.

[Johnnycomelately]

Unfortunately, the camera was not pointed at the tower at the moment of the explosion, or impact/explosion. This video is inconclusive on the question of whether a plane hit the second tower. However, plane or no plane, there were explosives of some type, or some form of energy directed at the towers, or both, that caused these buildings to essentially dustify.

This one was definitely new to me. Start at 1:50. If true, it's pretty conclusive that it wasn't a plane.

MZ3oTIVASGyk

The planes topic doesn’t end until 3:58.

At 3:01 he puts another POV set of clips up, showing that that other building is in the foreground.

At the end (near 3:58), he implies that the no-planes idea using the jeweller’s clip is some is some intentional mis/disinformation by the perpetrators, to raise spurious objections. I rather think it’s just dumbassery in the critical-observer community, to not see or think effectively.

I admit I gave some credence to (entertained) the wing-wrong-therefore-planes-fake interpretation of the jewler’s clip, for some years, but saw my error recently when viewing this other POV on some other channel.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The video (in OP) was released in 2020 and has been posted before. Will merge with previous thread.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

At 3:01 he puts another POV set of clips up, showing that that other building is in the foreground.


Definitely. This is old chestnut plied some considerable force behind the no planes narrative.

All one need do is look a little closer. The building is clearly in the foreground. Had it been in the background it would've been taller than the North tower.

51827

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I had never seen this before. More new footage.

Technically, it's a compilation of images by Wolfgang Staehle. It captures the first plane impacting the north tower. The images were recorded on a 24/7 webcam pointed at Lower Manhattan, taking 2 images every 4-6 seconds.

To my knowledge, this is the third capture of the first plane and its impact.

Unfortunately, embedding is disabled, you'll have to follow the link below. But this is what it shows..

53896

9/11/2001 - Rare first plane angle captured by Wolfgang Staehle 8:46am -8:48am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmUI9roGd1g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmUI9roGd1g)

[Tintin]

I had never seen this before. More new footage.

Technically, it's a compilation of images by Wolfgang Staehle. It captures the first plane impacting the north tower. The images were recorded on a 24/7 webcam pointed at Lower Manhattan, taking 2 images every 4-6 seconds.

To my knowledge, this is the third capture of the first plane and its impact.

Unfortunately, embedding is disabled, you'll have to follow the link below. But this is what it shows..

53896

9/11/2001 - Rare first plane angle captured by Wolfgang Staehle 8:46am -8:48am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmUI9roGd1g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmUI9roGd1g)

Ah, yes, these images were also covered in what I at least deem to be an absolute must see documentary: 9/10 -The Final Hours which evocatively covers the goings on in Manhattan (and in the Towers) the day and nightime before from the perspectives of many. Staehle's images appear I think toward the end of the documentary. I do highly recommend this for anyone who may not have seen it.

Really, it is very good indeed :flower: It's been here in our library for really quite some time too: 9-10 - The Final Hours (https://avalonlibrary.net/911/9-10_The_Final_Hours.mp4)

:flower:

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Thanks for the link. Pretty certain I've seen that doc before, as I'm certain I've seen the Wolfgang Staehle images before (at some point I must have). It's a long time, 23 years, and when you've read, watched, and listened to the amount of 9/11 content we have - certainly a lot of us - it's easy to forget one or two things you may not have seen for a while.

[Tintin]

Thanks for the link. Pretty certain I've seen that doc before, as I'm certain I've seen the Wolfgang Staehle images before (at some point I must have). It's a long time, 23 years, and when you've read, watched, and listened to the amount of 9/11 content we have - certainly a lot of us - it's easy to forget one or two things you may not have seen for a while.

No worries. Easily done :handshake:

For anyone interested in watching this my librarian index notes for this read as follows:


"Director: Erik Nelson
Duration: 01:29:57

Taking an hour-by-hour look at the lives of many who worked at the Twin Towers and those who loved them creates as unique a perspective on things as the view from the 107th floor of Tower 1, at the iconic restaurant Windows on the World. September 10, 2001 was a typical Monday in New York. It began to rain and the local television news shows spent a lot of time on the usual traffic and weather reports that make up much of local coverage. People were commuting to work from early morning through the evening. On September 10, 2001, New York City voters were going to the polls to elect mayoral candidates and THE FINAL HOURS spends some time with Mark Green, who was believed by many to have the best chance of becoming the city’s next mayor. Also on that Monday, then-mayor Rudy Giuliani and the NYFD chaplain, Father Mychal Judge attended a ribbon cutting ceremony at a local firehouse and spoke to the assembled firefighters about their jobs as a calling to something that had a higher purpose.

Most poignant of all are the stories of two men, George Delgado, who worked at Windows On the World and who opens the program with a mixology demonstration, and Harley DiNardo, a musician and filmmaker whose sister was a top day trader at Cantor Fitzgerald, the firm that lost more than 600 employees when the first tower fell. Their stories of how they spent the evening prior to the attacks is one we can all relate to. One was plagued by car trouble that made him think he might have to stay overnight at work. The other described a birthday celebration at the restaurant, the bill for which was found in his sister’s wallet that survived the building collapse."


----------------

Concerning Staehle, and Naudet brothers:

Just to truly cement that the stills shown in your post from Staehle do indeed mirror what the Naudets appear to have filmed, for my own satisfaction I'm trying to ensure that, as best as possible they can be 'matched up'. Filmed/photographed from totally different vantage points of course. It's a me thing :) I'm simply highly suspicious of most 'official' film-footage released at the time, and after the event that have appeared in different documentaries over the years, that have been meddled with in some way, as well as other unofficial editions that have also been meddled with, and some not.

I think they do tie up okay, but I do just want to be sure.

Cnr. Lispenard and Church, Lower Manhattan
Anybody else interested in doing so as far as the Naudet footage is concerned can use 0:42 from this film which is the footage with which we are all most familiar: s15DMS3o5MI

...and then use this July 2022 Google map street view (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.720057,-74.003913,3a,75y,200.96h,85.97t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZV2kTVdCu0T5GWBjFOgsQw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D4.029 494579661915%26panoid%3DZV2kTVdCu0T5GWBjFOgsQw%26yaw%3D200.9566485522664!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAwMi4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D) to get a very good approximation of where they were, absent the towers of course..

and then having a close look at the Staehle shot for a (kind of) comparison. The good news is that at least the 'plane shaped object' captured here appears to be heading toward the correct side of WTC1. That was a momentary niggler.

A small point but perhaps a little too pedantic maybe: we never see the plane in Staehle's still shot impact the building - we simply do see a building smoking and appearing to have exploded.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Yes, unfortunately the approx. 5 second gap between frames missed the actual impact. But we have enough I think to confirm what we're seeing is legit.

The shapes of the explosions match up -- though, the Naudet footage has a higher contrast, and the angle in relation to the sun is different.

comparison of the initial explosion
53904

My position also is (or was, soon after the event) to be suspicious of the footage that day. But in 23 years, none have been adequately debunked. No sign of tampering, no sign of CGI, and no whistleblowers have come forward to claim that any of the now well-known video sequences are fraudulent. If any were, I would expect someone, somewhere, to do that by now (long before now).

I strongly believe what we see happen in these clips are accurate recordings of what happened. As far as the visual record is concerned, nothing conclusive or even very compelling has ever emerged to challenge their authenticity.

The only exception is the Pentagon impact footage, if you can even call it that. That is suspect for sure. Consider for a start where it came from: the Pentagon. Not an outside source, like CCTV from the highway, or a media outlet, or member of the public. But the Pentagon.

I believe claims of 'fake footage', centred on New York, is a counter-intelligence ploy, a psyop to have us searching for things which aren't there. It detracts from the one piece of footage that is genuinely problematic -- the (supposed) impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. As far as conspiracies are concerned, the WTC impacts hog the spotlight, and get far more coverage than the Pentagon.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/Mark/911_640px-Pentagon_security_video.gif

:sherlock:

[Denise/Dizi]

There was some talk back in the day about a light marker showing up just prior to the first plane impact.. Before the plane actually made contact ith the tower, and I could see this in the second tower video as well.. Did anyone ever figure out what that was?