Penttbom's Scott Bingham- New Videos From 911 Including Pentagon Footage

reply to post by Shocka


At 9.05 of the video when they are comparing the two it is two different angles. Look where to hole is on the tower already hit. It is at the bottom of the picture in the one with the orb. Look at where the hole is on the on the one with the plane, it is in the middle. Show me two exact same angles and then get back to me. Good video manipulation though. What a joke just watched the end. At 9.30 sec the video on the left is clearly in slow motion and video to the right is in real speed yet it claims they are both in real time. I have a magic pill that makes you bigger in the pants. Want to buy some.


[edit on 12-11-2008 by tide88]

Yes i watched your cheerleader movie, btw wich one were you? I find it interesting that you attempt to be clever with this comment "Let me guess. They lightened the video so they could alter some of these cheerleaders moves." I watched this video and in no way does it compare to the video of the impact, if you had watched the video and noticed the sudden brightness and hue changes before and after the impact that i mentioned you may be able to pass off some of your misguided witt. So you obviously either did not watch the tape and fully comprehend this momentous fact or you watched it, saw what i was talking about and then tried to give me a video example of something that has no relevance whatsoever to the topic.

Perhaps its simply because you don't understand the process in which you speak?

"Its a little complicated trying to explain logical thinking to people that are lacking in it. That is the problem with so many truthers. Logic and critical thinking are non-existent in some minds. Not much you can do about it.'

Seeking the truth or not in any case gives you absolutely no idea as to what my levels of cognition and or my critical thinking abilities are, is it that you are only bound by your inabilities to think for you're self that makes you assume you know such things about people you have never met? It would do you good to evaluate the way you go about venting by proxy, it only makes you look like the fool holding holding an unread book in the midst of a summary.

reply to post by Retikx


You're right. There was a huge cover up. And not only did they alter the video they did such a poor job of it that you can tell just by looking at it its altered. After all the US government doesnt have the technology to alter videos and make it look authentic.

The two things that strike me most about some of these newly realeased videos is one the total lack of quality in them, this happened in 2001 and the videos look as if they were taken on a video camera from 1983. The colours are wayyy off and it looks as if the images were "dumbed down" so to speek.

Quality of videos almost match exactly. And seeing you do not know what kind of video camera she used nor the condition of it I find it hilarious that you can come to the conclusion the video was altered in any way. That is unless you are a video expert and have the original VHS tape and recorder.


[edit on 12-11-2008 by tide88]

reply to post by tide88

Actually I was talking about a total different camera. So I apologize for that. I was in discussion about the one the lady was filming not the one with the tree branch. I see what you are saying, however it may be just the camera trying to focus. Would love to know where that shot came from. Looks like it is from a stationary camera somewhere. After the tower gets hit it really gets bright. This could be the camera trying to adjust to the lighting (the explosion). I personally think it is a simple case of overexposure. Still think if they tried to cover it up they would be able to do a way better job, especially seeing they had the tape for 7 years. If this was the only shot of the plane hitting the tower I would think you might be on to something but there are so many more out there..



[edit on 12-11-2008 by tide88]

Originally posted by Shocka
There's a few things about some of the videos that don't sit right.

The first video:

Notice the woman said "Oh my god I just got an explosion, it's exploding" but she never says anything about the plane, and thats a pretty big plane don't you think she woul've said a plane just hit it?

Then the third video on that page is filming the North Tower but just before the second "plane" hits the video goes black, the sound is still there but it's a blackout, just like on the news footage of the second explosion.

so i'm trying to understand the story about this video or clarify the a few areas and contention.

this is a newly released vid?
who released it? feds?
unknown photographer?

On one hand it is possible that she just didn't notice the plane coming in.

On the other, if this is released by the feds and not the photographer unknown, i'm more inclinded to believe she mentioned no plane cuz there wasn't one if it came from the feds.

maybe these points were discussed, but i didn't see a response in this thread (or did i miss it) to the questions above.

thanks all

reply to post by matrix911

They were confiscated videos. The FBI released them. I am still betting she just didnt see the plane. Either way this video proves nothing one way or the other. All it does is show a plane hitting. So all we can really say is a plane hit that tower. I cant even believe I am debating this. Planes obviously hit the tower. There are many videos and many witnesses.

Originally posted by tide88
reply to post by matrix911

 

They were confiscated videos. The FBI released them. I am still betting she just didnt see the plane. Either way this video proves nothing one way or the other. All it does is show a plane hitting. So all we can really say is a plane hit that tower. I cant even believe I am debating this. Planes obviously hit the tower. There are many videos and manywitnesses.

So lets put aside for one moment there's audio of a woman taking this video and its SILENT... then what can be deduced?

I know hypothesizing is pretty much shunned around here and i do agree probably not appropriate, but in this case for what its worth I want to submit what appears to be the primary "theories" and am curious how many or if anyone agrees on any below based on this thread and evidence so far regarding the south tower... i guess I'm just wondering if there's a general theory both sides might agree on. so hopefully i'm articulating this properly...

theory 1) all the video evidence in existence show "a plane" (many CT's and witnesses claim was not/couldn't have been ua175) hitting the south tower

or

theory 2) ALL the video evidence in existence (including THIS ONE) have been doctored (probably since it was in the hands of FEDS first) and the plane seen is a special effect IMAGE of a plane hitting the south tower to cover up an explosion either from a missle (jassf), or independent pre-timed explosion. OR both.


theory 3) [a black plane lacking windows etc etc... LOL] UA175 hit the south tower as the official story says. rofl.


are any of the first 2 more agreed up than others? are they close? or am i way off? Lol

reply to post by matrix911


I say it was a plane that hit and the plane that hit is was the plane the government says hit it.

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by tide88

 

Its a little complicated trying to explain logical thinking to people that are lacking in it. That is the problem with so many truthers. Logic and critical thinking are non-existent in some minds. Not much you can do about it.

You know darn well that 'truthers' use real logic. Its the pseudo skeptics/truthers you like to focus on that is the problem here.

Actually the truth is that 'truthers' know the truth and are at war against disinformationalists that work in teams to control information in forums like this . 'Truthers' want to share the truth and discuss information. The perps want to start up arguments while creating strawman theories in the name of truth.

One thing that gets glossed over is the fact that these debunkers actually work with the same people who start these ridiculous theories and somtimes are the same people. Their mission is to muddy the waters of truth. Releasing videos with missing frames, poor audio, etc. All ment to keep you from looking at the real evidence and the real question. Who did 911?

[edit on 23-11-2008 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by IvanZana

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by tide88

 

Its a little complicated trying to explain logical thinking to people that are lacking in it. That is the problem with so many truthers. Logic and critical thinking are non-existent in some minds. Not much you can do about it.

You know darn well that 'truthers' use real logic. Its the pseudo skeptics/truthers you like to focus on that is the problem here.

Actually the truth is that 'truthers' know the truth and are at war against disinformationalists that work in teams to control information in forums like this . 'Truthers' want to share the truth and discuss information. The perps want to start up arguments while creating strawman theories in the name of truth.

One thing that gets glossed over is the fact that these debunkers actually work with the same people who start these ridiculous theories and somtimes are the same people. Their mission is to muddy the waters of truth. Releasing videos with missing frames, poor audio, etc. All ment to keep you from looking at the real evidence and the real question. Who did 911?

If the question to you is, "Who did 9/11?" then you are in no position to claim that "truthers know the truth."

In fact, those who challenge you do so you present evidence for your claims. Just because you want to believe that the "government" is somehow magically responsible for 9/11, you are not exempt from providing evidence for your claims.

No one is muddying "your waters." You are just frustrated because you really can't come up with any evidence that 9/11 "was an inside job."

After seven full years of making unsupported claims.




[edit on 23-11-2008 by jthomas]

Originally posted by tide88
reply to post by matrix911

 

I say it was a plane that hit and the plane that hit is was the plane the government says hit it.

You are correct. But we knew it from the massive evidence and eyewitness testimony, the same evidence that the government relied on.

It really is silly that our Truther friends keep repeating the debunked canard that all of the evidence "came from the government."

Originally posted by jthomas

reply to post by tide88

 

No one is muddying "your waters." You are just frustrated because you really can't come up with any evidence that 9/11 "was an inside job."

After seven full years of making unsupported claims.




[edit on 23-11-2008 by jthomas]

Now your dreaming in technicolour. The official story has been officially debunked. The fbi does not have enough evidence to link bin laden to 911. The wargames of september 2001 were used as cover to execute the attack. Wtc 7. Israeli Mossads involvement, Pakistan's involvemnet. Atta's connection to George Tenent and the wire transfer to his account. The people pulled off the trail of bin laden before 911..... etc. There are hundreds more..... Brings me to my point....

If the official story was a bucket it would not hold any water. You know this, we all know this. I think its time for you and people like you to start being honest as to your intentions for being here on ATS. Pretending there is no evidence is your game and a losing one at that.


The game is to go around forums and attempt to halt or deteriorate any type of serious investigation or discussion while mixing in some pseudo skeptic theories such as missiles and holograms all in the name of 911 truth.

[edit on 23-11-2008 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by IvanZana


Now your dreaming in technicolour. The official story has been officially debunked.

How can you debunk something that doesn't exist?

Or did you forget that there is no "official story"?

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by IvanZana

 

IvanZana, I could not have said it better! What really bothers me the most, is people that are disinformationalists are traitors against the Americans people and should be arrested and tried as terrorist? They sold their freedom for the buck and that is a spit in the face of those that have died on 911, including our soldiers.

How utterly ridiculous, ugly, and insulting.

Did you forget that you are trying to prove the Government was behind 9/11? How can you possibly make an argument that assumes as its premise that which you are trying to prove?

And how dare you insult us Americans who are trying to educate you about the absurdity and irrationality of your claims, who have NOTHING to do with the government, who many of whom never voted for or even like Bush or his cronies, but who INSIST on fighting ignorance and stupidity when they see it.

You owe me one BIG apology for insulting me and everyone else who argue against you inanity.

You better apologize right now, buster, to me and every other decent American, and to those who have given their lives to protect your right to spew ignorance and idiocy to your hearts content.




[edit on 23-11-2008 by jthomas]

posted by IvanZana
Now your dreaming in technicolour. The official story has been officially debunked.

posted by jthomas
How can you debunk something that doesn't exist?

Or did you forget that there is no "official story"?

jthomas are you bailing the water out of your sinking boat with that bucket full of holes? No wonder you are getting nowhere and your boat is still sinking.

Nobody but you and your team of fellow deniers believe that nonsense that there is no "OFFICIAL STORY". You are not fooling anybody jthomas except maybe yourself.

posted by IvanZana
If the official story was a bucket it would not hold any water. You know this, we all know this. I think its time for you and people like you to start being honest as to your intentions for being here on ATS. Pretending there is no evidence is your game and a losing one at that.

jthomas I think you are included in this article (id est: "intense propaganda campaign to sell the official story") and ("The Official Story ... and Its Apologists"

Maintaining the Official Story in the Face of Glaring Contradictions

Ensuring the success of the official story of 9/11/01 despite the long sequence of highly improbable events it supposes required that people not pay too much attention to the details. This would be ensured by the "shock and awe" of the attack itself combined with an intense propaganda campaign to sell the official story. Ironically, the vast majority of those who created and promoted that propaganda probably did so innocently, never questioning the official version of events. The idea that the entire attack was an inside job was simply too unthinkable for most Americans to consider.

The use of disinformation and diversion to manipulate public opinion is a highly developed art. It is well understood not only by psychological operations experts in the national security establishment, but also by marketing and public relations wizards. With the engineering of public reaction to September 11, disinformation has been used with a sophistication and depth that is historically unprecedented. A key tool in this modern form of psychological warfare is the "meme" -- an idea that acts like an infectious agent to spread itself through a population. Through careful construction of memes, the perpetrators could depend on others to unwittingly promote their cover story and conceal the truth. Their disinformation strategy was twofold. First, they would sell the official story to the masses through the compliant mass media, relying on people's desire to believe the official story. Second, they would seed specious ideas in the community of "9/11 skeptics" in order to distract and discredit them.

The Official Story of September 11, and Its Apologists

On the day of the attack, details about the alleged perpetrators emerged with a rapidity that is remarkable given the assertions by high-ranking administration officials that no one had ever considered that an attacker could fly planes into buildings. Within hours the identities of several of the alleged hijackers were known, and Osama bin Laden was being presented as the prime suspect. Within three days the FBI published the identities of all the alleged hijackers. It was being presented as an open-and-shut case.

911research.wtc7.net...

jthomas how come so many people reject the "OFFICIAL STORY" that you pretend does not exist?

Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story

Only 16% now believe official fable according to New York Times/CBS News poll

A monumental new scientific opinion poll has emerged which declares that only 16% of people in America now believe the official government explanation of the September 11th 2001 terror attacks.

According to the new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks:

"Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?

Telling the truth 16%

Hiding something 53%

Mostly lying 28%

Not sure 3%"

The 84% figure mirrors other recent polls on the same issue. A Canadian Poll put the figure at 85%. A CNN poll had the figure at 89%. Over 80% supported the stance of Charlie Sheen when he went public with his opinions on 9/11 as an inside job.

A recent CNN poll found that the percentage of Americans who blame the Bush administration for the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington rose from almost a third to almost half over the past four years. This latest poll shows that that figure has again risen exponentially and now stands at well over three quarters of the population.

It took 35 plus years for the majority of Americans to wake up to the fact that the assassination of JFK was a government operation. It has only taken five years for MORE Americans to wake up to the fact that 9/11 was an inside job on behalf of the Neoconservative crime syndicate within the US.

Reference to past polls show that in the last five years there has been an explosion in numbers of those who do not buy the official line.

In 2004 a Zogby Poll showed that just over half of New Yorkers believed there was a cover up.

In May of this year another Zogby poll indicated that around half of ALL Americans did not buy the official story.

www.infowars.com...

[edit on 11/23/08 by SPreston]

Originally posted by SPreston
Nobody but you and your team of fellow deniers believe that nonsense that there is no "OFFICIAL STORY". You are not fooling anybody jthomas except maybe yourself.

www.infowars.com...

Posting "articles" from infowars in an attempt to make a point...

Hilarious.

Sorry, this "official story" as you call it does not exist. What do you call the eyewitnesses to the events? The government surely does not control the thousands of them in order to sell their "official story".

Originally posted by Soloist

Originally posted by SPreston
Nobody but you and your team of fellow deniers believe that nonsense that there is no "OFFICIAL STORY". You are not fooling anybody jthomas except maybe yourself.

Posting "articles" from infowars in an attempt to make a point...

Hilarious.

Sorry, this "official story" as you call it does not exist. What do you call the eyewitnesses to the events? The government surely does not control the thousands of them in order to sell their "official story".

Gee willikers. Another desperate denier fooling nobody but himself.

How many people believe 9/11 was an inside job? Below are results of 8 polls by Zogby, Scripps, Angus Reid, 911Inquiry.Org and some non-scientific polls also.

Scientific Polls:

CBS/Angus Reid, Oct 2006
58% say that gov't officials are "lying" in the 9/11 Commission Report - only 16% say they are telling the truth when asked the question "When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?"
(LIHOP theory)
Link: www.angus-reid.com...

ZOGBY, Feb 2006
49.3% of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act".
(LIHOP theory)
Link: www.zogby.com...

SCRIPPS/HOWARD, July 2006
36% of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."
(Covers both LIHOP and MIHOP theories)
Link: www.scrippsnews.com...

911INQUIRY.ORG, May 2004
63% of Canadians agreed that "Individuals within the U.S. Government including the White House had prior knowledge of the plans for the events of September 11th, and failed to take appropriate action to stop them". Additionally, 16% of Canadians believe that individuals within the U.S. Government were involved in the planning and execution of the events of September 11th. (47% LIHOP, 16% MIHOP, 63% combined)
Link: www.911inquiry.org...

Non-Scientific Polls:

MSNBC, Sept 2006 up to present (Oct 2007)
"Do you believe any of the conspiracy theories suggesting the U.S. government was somehow involved in 9/11?"
(Covers both LIHOP and MIHOP theories)
YES: 67%
link: www.msnbc.msn.com...

CNN, Nov 2004
"Do you believe there is a US government cover up surrouning 911?"
(Question is too vague to specify LIHOP or MIHOP - could be interpreted as a coverup of incompetence only)
YES: 89%
Link: www.infowars.com...

COLBERT NATION, June 2006
"Was 9/11 an inside job?" (MIHOP)
YES: 66%
Link: removed

AM 640 Radio Toronto, August 2006
"Was 9/11 an inside job?" (MIHOP)
YES: 85%

Didn’t the 911 Government story come from the 911 commission reports, and the FEMA reports, and the NIST reports that the Government hired to tell their lying story?
Yes! There is a Government story! That is where it all came from, other than that, there is no other story, except the truth however, the Government has failed to write that book.