9/11 Photos, etc.

[Dennis Leahy]

I wonder how many of the "assets" used in the 9/11 operation have been snuffed out. That's the only way they could make sure of no leaks with insider/asset information. Mossad agents that placed explosives are probably still alive, I'd bet, but the guy that composited the videos is likely 6 feet under.

[Michel Leclerc]

Posted by norman (here)

The strongest case for 'No Planes', in my view, is that experts agree that the planes could not have cut through the very strong steel frame of the building and leave those almost comical plane-profile shaped cuts in the structure.

(...)

There's the problem.

I would like to add to your point, Norman, that I read on several occasions at the time that the air turbulence created by a city landscape that basically was like a deep ravine with hundreds of gigantic concrete stalagmites rising from the ravine floor would have been such that it would have torn aluminum hulls flying and making turns at those speeds to shreds long before they reached the towers. Additionally this is also the argument for it being a missile that hit the Pentagon.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
Real footage of a real jet hitting a real building would have shown the jet breaking to pieces as it hit, as well as the building surface distorting.

I don't think we know that though. Even structural engineers with PhDs can't say they know that, not for absolute certain. That would require high resolution data, obtained only by an exact recreation of these collision events, and to scale (which would be next to impossible to do).

All we can do is formulate hypotheses from data available. The data available tells us those two planes, weighing 100+ tons each, and travelling north of 450mph and with a kinetic impact force of 3.5billion joules, hit a stationary structure, essentially an oblong tube of mostly fresh air, protected only by a narrow rank of medium-grade steel columns, all of them hollow, and all of them designed solely to withstand vertical loads and stresses, not lateral. And it made mincemeat of them.

I know where others stand and that's fine. This is only my opinion.

When you consider a torpedo, no bigger than me or you, can plough into a 50,000 ton double-hulled battleship, tearing it open like a can of soup, it makes reasonable sense (to me anyway) that two high-velocity planes loaded with fuel punched through the flimsy facade of steel 9.5mm thick (the rest of the facade being just glass) like a fist through a Japanese partition. Had they been seen to crumple and bounce away like paper aeroplanes -- then would I call it fake.

Not even the mighty fakestream media can put out CGI composites in a live broadcast. And I just don't know what would possess them to do so anyway, knowing it would not possibly tally up with the thousands upon thousands who are seeing the same event with their own eyes, and filming it with their own camcorders.

I maintain this whole no planes narrative is a counter-intelligence magic trick, inserted as 'chapter one' of the conspiracy theory to discredit chapter 2, 3, 4 etc, and discourage people looking into it that far. With the anti-conspiracy normies it worked well. Those later chapters contain the real meat and potatoes. 1) were the planes piloted or flown remotely, 2) what caused the explosions in the basements, 3) what severed the core columns found later in the 'pile', 4) what brought down tower 7, 5) ergo, what really brought all those towers down, and 6) what hit the pentagon, and 7) what crashed at Shanksville... and 8) why were military jets unarmed that day, 9) ...because they were involved in a drill?... so 10), why were the military holding a drill, involving terrorist attacks, that day? .... and the list goes on and on.

[Dennis Leahy]

Mark, I strongly disagree with the logical fallacy of deferring to authority. You don't need credentials to see what I'm referring to. There is absolutely no distortion of the jet or the building's surface as the two images "collide".

I'm not betting my life on "no planes", but I'm 100% certain that these videos are composites, not objects colliding.

Even if the projectile was traveling 3x faster and made of depleted uranium, the building surface would show deformation. Look at some slow motion videos of bullets or arrows hitting various objects. There's also at least one slow motion video I've seen of a test plane being rammed into a wall at high speed, and predictably, there is massive crumpling distortion starting with the tip of the jet immediately beginning upon impact. Think about your comment of "mostly air" (which was thick glass, not air), and then realize that the jet isn't slowed, distorted, crumpling, or breaking apart no matter whether it hit "air" or steel. Some other people point out that the nose of the (hollow, thin-skinned) aluminum jet also seems to have survived its trip through all the steel columns and peeks out the other side - again, totally impossible, not just implausible, physics.

I don't proclaim "no planes" to any of the (very few) people that would bother to listen to me. In fact, I can't remember the last time I tried to talk to anyone outside of Project Avalon about 9/11. (preaching to the choir) I agree that "no planes" is an easy way for the perpetrators to ridicule 9/11 researchers. The free-fall acceleration speed collapse of Building 7 and the near free-fall acceleration speed of WTC 1 & 2 - all of which is impossible without explosives taking away 100% of the resistive forces of the building below - is, in my opinion, a better way to help a sincere person catch on that 9/11 wasn't at all what the US government said it was. But the forensic evidence of the video showing a jet and a building intersecting without distorting either one is definitely a video composite, not a physical collision.

[JackMcThorn]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
I'm not betting my life on "no planes", but I'm 100% certain that these videos are composites, not objects colliding.

After the first plane hit, many people then filmed the aftermath using camcorders and inadvertently filmed the second collision. The media used some of this footage and it is available online. So I don't understand how you can be 1oo% certain.

[Dennis Leahy]

Posted by JackMcThorn (here)

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
I'm not betting my life on "no planes", but I'm 100% certain that these videos are composites, not objects colliding.

After the first plane hit, many people then filmed the aftermath using camcorders and inadvertently filmed the second collision. The media used some of this footage and it is available online. So I don't understand how you can be 1oo% certain.

Because of the lack of physics of collision of objects in the main video they showed us (Hezarkhani.) I'll say again, I'm not 100% convinced of "no planes", as they may well have used drone jets to do the deed, and still substituted the pre-prepared composited video footage credited to Hezarkhani. The Hezarkhani video clearly shows no signs of distortion or collision between the jet and building - the building simply appears to swallow the jet whole.

It jumps into conjecture for me to speculate, but my speculation is that they needed to make sure, before the event, that they would have shocking footage, so they made it. If I'm wrong, and the footage is not doctored, then the "jet" is indeed a hologram, because the video does not show real physical objects colliding. In any case, the video is not that of a collision of a physical jet and a physical building.

I'd say, believe your eyes, not what you were told to believe. You don't need to have taken a couple of semesters of computer animation, or owned and spent a lot of hours playing with the new collision physics features of the animation software to notice that the Hezarkhani credited video shows no objects colliding. The software I used could also do video compositing, but with video compositing, there was no physics when you intersected video objects - just like the video credited to Hezarkhani.

[Arcturian108]

Over the past 20 years I have seen numerous amateur videos of the initial explosions of both towers that show no indication of any planes. I remember one of these done from a nearby apartment building, where the person shooting the scene live says nothing about planes, as we witness his film showing only explosions, but then his companion in the same apartment immediately says that he saw a plane hitting the towers on his television screen, as an explanation of what was going on. More than 10 years ago the late John Lear said there were no planes involved in hitting the towers. At the time I thought that was kooky, but now I believe the whole plane thing was fabricated.

[Blastolabs]

Just found this HUGE stash of high quality photos and a few low quality movies from ground zero on 9/11.

I have never seen any of these before, and I have spent a long time looking at this kind of thing.
They seem to be from an NIST FOIA request.

42A0003 - 1of3/
42A0003 - 2of3/
42A0003 - 3of3/ < --- HIGH quality photos

https://ia801306.us.archive.org/27/i...4/Release%204/

Why is the car on fire in the image below? Can anyone confirm that both towers are still standing, right behind the car? I could be wrong but this seems a bit odd...

[norman]

Reasoning things through relies on a solid (mental) pivot somewhere in the schema.

The solid mental pivot we all started out with was that the MSM wasn't so crooked as to be running totally fake footage during such a tragedy.

22 years later, I don't know about you, but I don't have that solid mental pivot to reason with any more.

[Arcturian108]

Posted by Blastolabs (here)
Just found this HUGE stash of high quality photos and a few low quality movies from ground zero on 9/11.

I have never seen any of these before, and I have spent a long time looking at this kind of thing.
They seem to be from an NIST FOIA request.

42A0003 - 1of3/
42A0003 - 2of3/
42A0003 - 3of3/ < --- HIGH quality photos

https://ia801306.us.archive.org/27/i...4/Release%204/

Why is the car on fire in the image below? Can anyone confirm that both towers are still standing, right behind the car? I could be wrong but this seems a bit odd...

I believe the photo that you interpret as a car burning, is actually showing a fire inside the lower levels of the building, which if I remember correctly was reported by witnesses on 9/11/01. I believe a janitor reported bombs going off first in the basement before he heard explosions higher up.

[Michel Leclerc]

Since that very day I have had and will have until I die (and/or beyond) the following certainties:

* [as I was being driven by a taxi to the residence for the elderly where my mother was living, the driver and I heard the news of he planes and the towers over the radio; ten minutes later we reached our destination, I entered my mother’s little apartment, we kissed and hugged and explaining the situation to her I lit the Tv; the "film" was playing]

[“film“ because I immediately felt that I was watching a feature film, not a document – this impression was later brilliantly confirmed by German master composer Karlheinz Stockhausen, who defiantly called the whole thing “a magnificent work of art”]

: soon the moment came when the tower with the antenna collapsed: I clearly saw the antenna falling first, swallowed up by the building as it were, and only seconds later the top floors started to fall in its wake: I remembered my 1989 visit to New York and knew immediately that this meant that the elevator core had been taken away under the antenna and hence that no planes could have done this;

* a few hours (half a day?) later I heard the preposterous and triumphantly blathered out “news” that “one of the hijackers’ passport had been found in the rubble” and of course it was an Arabic passport: gooks before, Arabs then, Russians now – and all “news” brought since in that delusional cloud is certain to be false; at least that is how I reasoned and reason.

Later on came the statements made by pilots – that it was impossible to fly those planes the way they had been flown. And obviously – something I had not realised first – building 7, a thriftier replay of its two elder companions’ fate.

These realisations hammered into my mind the following. The classical, eternally repeated, "wisdom" says that “one cannot trust one’s senses” – “because it has been proven that in a courtroom various witnesses to a crime remember it differently“. Yes, caution is wise. But when consensual “reality“ is – as per Popper‘s hypothesis falsification principle – entirely and demonstrably false because it is fabricated and ingurgitated into all too eager throats, then there is no need for this caution.

Because the cool-headed recollection of what one’s own senses in a heightened awareness state have registered, is the only possible yardstick to go by.

This realisation in itself is a life’s lesson. It readies one for the fabricated realities of the future. (We have not been disappointed since.)

And then, of course, it is extremely soothing for the soul, the spirit and the body (given that we all psychosomatise) to discover that one is not alone in knowing what is really “real” for sure.

[norman]

https://t.me/MissFreedomSeeker/10815

[Tintin]

Not from September 11th but this is a photo of Cantor Fitzgerald employees at work on one of the North Tower floors, believed photographed around that time, most probably during the summer of 2001. As the description attests, these offices were pretty packed with workers, and office paraphernalia typical of many offices of their time, and still to this day:



Description:

Cantor Fitzgerald, a prominent financial services firm and investment bank, lost 658 employees on September 11, 2001.

This was the largest loss of life for any single organization in the World Trade Center attacks.

Their headquarters occupied floors 101 through 105 of the North Tower, positioned directly above the impact zone.

Another 50 contractors and visitors at Cantor Fitzgerald died that day, alongside 61 colleagues from Euro Brokers.

The photo below shows what CF looked looked like around the time. Low ceilings, close quarters.

I can't imagine what kind of chaotic hellscape that turned into after the plane hit the tower right below them, between the 93 and 99th floors.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

A great picture. The "cartoon physics" people should really take a look at it. In their minds, a pair of fully loaded wide-bodied Boeing 767s, some 200 tons in weight and travelling at almost 500mph, should, on contacting the frail outer façade of those towers, made of glass and hollow steel tubing clad with aluminium, crumple like a balled up piece of paper and fall to the street below. Not a chance. They are going slam right through it, and through those offices, as if they weren't even there. Which is exactly what happened, and exactly what we saw.

Translation:
The sight of passenger planes being sucked into buildings and seemingly disappearing during the 9/11 simultaneous terrorist attacks is due to the fact that, as the aircraft destroyed the outer perimeter columns, the fuselage itself was shredded to pieces like being sliced by a slicer, allowing it to permeate into the interior. (Some parts of the aircraft debris penetrated through to the opposite side.)

https://x.com/bemusuta/status/1791326654243229701

[Tintin]

I had gone out to lunch at around 1pm GMT, from memory, and had taken the full hour. Back at my desk, Thomas - a colleague - who worked on the floor above, came running in and said "Planes have hit the towers in New York". This had all happened while I was out enjoying lunch so I was largely oblivious up until that point.

Our organisation had arranged to set up a TV in the "Member's Room" on the ground floor, and it was there we witnessed the towers' collapse, as we thought at the time, although disintegration/vapourisation would be more accurate given what we've subsequently deduced over years of research.

I then made my way down to the coffee machine in our basement level and bumped into an American colleague passing by, and clearly remember saying, verbatim: "What have they gone and done now?" We exchanged a knowing look.

I along with many others were caught up in the emotion of the event, and still processing those terrible scenes; I then remember a few days later going with a friend to sign the book of condolences at the then US Embassy. I don't recall exactly when it was on the day itself but I clearly remember seeing Danny Lombardi on TV, a volunteer fireman, being interviewed on-site at the WTC and remarking to my then landlady: "Wow, that's the guy who stayed at our apartment a couple of nights when we were in New York." (That was late-April/early May 2001). He said he lost a "brother", presumably a fire department or ladder colleague.

About a day or so later on, I think - it could have been later that week - I started making calls to folks I'd met on my previous visits to NYC who were all thankfully safe and well.

I'd never been to the World Trade Centre although I do remember one very early Sunday morning, approx 6am, being somewhat tipsy after an all-nighter near Greenwich Village during that Spring 2001 trip, and clearly recall seeing the towers looming ever nearer, then realising I had headed the wrong way onto Greenwich Street, not Greenwich Avenue. The buildings even being viewed a good mile or so away were mighty impressive.

One had no idea that'd be very nearly the last I would see of them. I do have photos of the towers that were taken from atop the Empire State building but I do not seem to have digitised them, yet.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Worth another look at this digitally cleaned up footage of Flight 11 hitting the North Tower. This is from the Naudet Brothers firefighters documentary they were filming in Manhattan at the time.

https://x.com/Francin28577060/status...60577984848039

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The important take away from this clip, in which you don't actually see the second impact, is the sound it makes, the concussive thump of 200 tons of steel, plastic, fuel and people ploughing headlong into the side of the south tower. Accompanying it, a slight camera shake caused by the expanding shockwave of the impact. No hologram did this.

https://x.com/TheOlChippy/status/2098216453942165929

[Tintin]

Photograph from (an) Ed Kotski who survived the attacks that day, photographed on the 74th floor, WTC1 North Tower approximately 4 minutes after impact on the tower. That's some 20 storeys below the impact level: