OMG! HUGE Cache of New 911 footage released !!!

reply to post by Rahjian


I also know someone that was lost that day on one of the planes, but that fact does not prove nor disprove that a plane or no plane hit the towers. The planes we believe that hit the towers could have been taken absolutely anywhere. You seem very emotional when people try and debunk the plane theory and this will get you nowhere in this discussion. What harm is there for people to try and get to the bottom of this sham? Personally, I am all for people investigating this new footage as should you. Too many things about that horrible day do not add up IMO.

very interesting videos, thanks OP, it obviously was some what of an inside job, between the complete structure failure of one of the biggest/best built buildings in the world for its time even built to withstand planes flying into it (per the insurance plan, too ironic lol), and the fact that no one in power or the government acknowledges any holes in the story is all we should need to bring people into question and see who's covering for who

all this other info is just overkill, lets get it on with the subpoenas and questioning already

when will the national security of the people of this country become more important then just the security of the people that rule it (I would say run this country but rule seems more fitting)

reply to post by Conluceo
The International Center for 9/11 Studies has secured the release of tens of thousands of photographs, and hundreds of hours of video footage, from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) under the Freedom of Information Act. You can download the entire NIST Cumulus Video Database (86GB) here:
911datasets.org...

reply to post by nepafogo


I agree it should be investigated. I believe it was all a sham as well. However, the theory that it wasn't a plane is a little too much. I know the government / shadow government can pull off some crazy stunts like the Golf of Tonkin for example, but a holograph plane? Really? You guys give them too much credit. I'm sure they get off to driving conspiracy theorists crazy. Literally .

reply to post by Rahjian


I agree, the holograph theory is bull, there are more simple ways than to use that sort of technology (which as far as we know is not even that advance as to pull this off). However it is indeed interesting that there are four different videos from four different cameras which show a wing of the plane just disappearing. Not breaking and falling, just disappearing into thin air.

The jet flying around WTC is not F-18 but F-15..

Originally posted by scott,aussie
if their was a f-18 in the air at the time before the second plane hit why didnt it blow it out of the sky

This was already explained years ago in the 9/11 commission report. Did you read it?

FYI that wasn't an F-18. It was one of the F-15s scrambled from a base in Massachussetts. How do I know this? Read the 9/11 commission report and you'll know why too.

reply to post by Radiobuzz


Oh, brother! People keep saying things like this:

....cameras which show a wing of the plane just disappearing.

Baloney! One word: PIXELS

You're seeing a combination of inadequate image resolution, because of the cameras' limitations....and the "blending" into the background whent he wing is superimposed over the building itself, just prior to impact.

Gawd, take a look at the numerous OTHER images (and still photos) and stop with the "wing disappearing" nonsense.

I'm not making a poke at anyone, but I just can't fathom that there's "never before seen" footage of the 9/11 attacks that happened nearly a decade ago?

How is it possible to have never before seen footage of this event?

Originally posted by Radiobuzz
reply to post by Rahjian

 

I agree, the holograph theory is bull, there are more simple ways than to use that sort of technology (which as far as we know is not even that advance as to pull this off). However it is indeed interesting that there are four different videos from four different cameras which show a wing of the plane just disappearing. Not breaking and falling, just disappearing into thin air.

I am just waiting for a split-screen, synchronized slow-mo freeze-frame video so I can sit back and watch the debunkers heads explode on this one. They are creative at times, but I hope they have a better explanation than "there was swamp gas reflecting the sky in the way, ldo"

reply to post by weedwhacker


No, sorry, if this had happen in just one of the videos I too would think it's the camera's fault, however it happened with four different cameras all with different filters. Please watch the videos posted by WanderingThe3rd on the first page in full screen, frame by frame and then show me another video which shows the same thing. I'm not ignorant on video glitches (not an expert either) so I have considered that point of view, however I'm not entirely convinced.

reply to post by ugie1028


In the first video does anyone have an explanation about all the flashes that are coming from the building starting at about 1:50 (when they pan out, far left)into the video? It continues until the the end of the video but not in a flashing strobe type of order, and I don't think you would see camera flashes from that distance. Whatever is creating the flashes is pretty high powered.

And the plane in the first video is not an F-18 it is an F-15.

Originally posted by Radiobuzz
I'm not really into these 9/11 conspiracies and forum but I got to this by a Facebook link and I would very much like to know how is it possible for the wing of a plane to disappear. It doesn't appear to be breaking, it just vanished on thin air. There are four videos confirming this. We have very smart people here so I honestly want to know how is that possible.

Easy- every OTHER footage of the plane impacting the towers showed a very completely winged aircraft, which means the confusion isn't being introduced by strange things happening to the aircraft. The confusion is being introduced by the particular video you're analyzing.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Radiobuzz

 

Oh, brother! People keep saying things like this:

....cameras which show a wing of the plane just disappearing.

Baloney! One word: PIXELS

You're seeing a combination of inadequate image resolution, because of the cameras' limitations....and the "blending" into the background whent he wing is superimposed over the building itself, just prior to impact.

Gawd, take a look at the numerous OTHER images (and still photos) and stop with the "wing disappearing" nonsense.

How does your explanation work on a contrast-high, baby-blue sky in the background though?

Thanks to all who identified the jet as being an F-15 and not an F-18.

Apologies for getting that wrong.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Easy- every OTHER footage of the plane impacting the towers showed a very completely winged aircraft, which means the confusion isn't being introduced by strange things happening to the aircraft. The confusion is being introduced by the particular video you're analyzing.

LOL we have 4 separate videos from different cameras. I guess they all messed up at exactly the same time and they all made the wing disappear in exactly the same way...

Synchronized camera glitches! What excuse will they come up with next?

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Problem being that, as I have stated on that very same quote, there are four videos, not just one. Unfortunately I don't have much time, I gotta go to work, however I'll watch them again tonight because (and don't quote me on this until I analyze them) I'm fairly sure that the wing is disappearing just at the same time in all four videos (I mean at the same amount of seconds before collapsing in the tower).

Originally posted by LV426
Hi, was trolling thru the videos there and noticed this, Looks to me like the plane was guided in by laser? Paint the target so to speak! www.youtube.com... what do you people think?

excellent find! and if you look at about 3 seconds in you can see the laser illuminate the smoke for a split second. its coming from up and left of the building. smoking gun anyone?

Originally posted by Conluceo
reply to post by WanderingThe3rd

 

Here I've embedded them in for you.

OMG!!!

This Video is very very weird!!!

If you look at the 2nd plane as it comes in the Wing disappears just before it strikes..... As if it was vid edited incorrectly.

The wing just dissolves just before the strike.... at about second 5-6.

What do you guys make of that??? I am wondering if this footage is all the rejected footage that didn't make the grade for the official story??

This vid has me going nuts...

Korg.

well you debunkers are going to be kept busy aren't you as i have found several discrepencies in the vids already to what the OS has said but i will post as i collate them...also just to point out in the op first vid....the second strike...notice how there is not one but two aircraft in the air...before the second strike..which just in that alone you never saw in original footage...there is one that passes the building before the second strike then one coming along the cloud of smoke from the first strike....also contradictory to there not being fighters in the area several of the vids show fighters in the area....
so debunkers get ready to try to defend the OS once again...cause there is so much footage here and testimony it is just the beginning.
the OS has always been full of BS and we so called truthers know and knew one day it will all come out...and this will just be the beginning of it.
so you will have two choices...and yes some will get blown out of proportion...but lots of it will show that the OS is even more full of holes....
thanks for the posting OP now the examination starts...also people please get copies of all the vids you can as ...you know they will start to disappear.
no matter what it just shows that the Orgiginal footage of 9yrs ago WAS held back...it WAS edited...as that first vide alone shows the same footage from fox news on the day...and the was no other planes in the sky in that footage.

I will do a side by side...cheers