What could this Be?? 911 - Second Strike Footage... Wing Disapears

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Hi there,

I was schmoozing over at this thread OMG! HUGE Cache of New 911 footage released !!! and spotted a major discrepancy in one of the new vids...

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???

This vid has me going nuts...

Korg.

Its starscream transforming and flying away after striking the towers.

9/11 was an Deceptecon job.

God, havent you guys watched Megan Fox's hot body fixing cars, err i mean Transformers?

reply to post by getreadyalready


Well I guess we remember what stuck out in our minds that morning but I definitely remember not knowing if a missile or an itsy bitsy plane hit the second tower that morning due to what the MSM was reporting.

I lived in Albany NY and being the state capital, we were scared chitless. So there was lots of attention being paid to that second plane in my household and what the news casters were reporting.

In fact, it wasn't until several hours before it was officially (lied) reported that they were flights 175 and 11 because one of them supposedly landed in Cleveland around 10AM-ish.
Ha!

Edit to correct. Flight 93 (Shanksville) landed in Cleveland not 11. Correction made above

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by Anttyk47
GUYS I'M WRITING IN CAPS BECAUSE THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR DEBUNKING

Please check

This video clearly shows a different angle and different video all together.
Look between 0:02 and 0:03

AWSOME FIND!!!

You are quite right and this footage validates my original premise and flies in the eyes of those that say it's an optical illusion or camera glitch.

Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by Anttyk47

 

I believe that's called panning out in the film world. I don't see two different angles at all.

No way! This is clearly two separate pieces of footage. They are in slightly different locations. Look at the foreground buildings....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/56affc01015d.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/56affc01015d.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/57eb7933a50e.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/822d9c042324.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/62c06a8bec49.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a0f5fc83a692.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/90617e4d78d1.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/edc1c2bca987.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fc6bcfa5f261.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6384952dd4ab.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0a7444c3269f.jpg[/atsimg]

So we now have two pieces of footage taken in similar locations corolating with each other perfectly....

of course the debunkers and anti-truthers will come up with something to attempt to disproove what is right in front of their eyes...

This is it guys... something is Definitely up with the 2nd strike. Ohhh What a Can of Worms!!

Korg.

edit on 25-10-2010 by Korg Trinity because: Korg is a DUDE

Oh yea and there is a third video here witch has a different foreground and the same happens at 2 seconds in to the video www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by brizellious

Oh yea and there is a third video here witch has a different foreground and the same happens at 2 seconds in to the video www.youtube.com...

Nope that one is the same footage as the first, just it has time-code data as it appears to be part of a news report edit.

Korg.

Originally posted by Varemia
This footage actually makes sense, somewhat. In every video of the second plane hitting in which a person is not seeing it silhouetted against the sky, just before the plane hits, it tilts and the right wing lights up bright white from the sun.

Ironically, a video I found that allows you to see the lighting change very clearly is also one that claims it was a hologram. :p Oh well, just focus on the lighting and compare the part that gets lit up to the part of the plane that disappears in the OP's video:

Interesting how the "Holograms'" wings damage the building on impact... Just saying...

Oh and please tell me what my avatar tells about me.. PLEASE.. U2U me asap.

Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

Oh and please tell me what my avatar tells about me.. PLEASE.. U2U me asap.

Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

Originally posted by Kilber


Interesting how the "Holograms'" wings damage the building on impact... Just saying...

check this....



Korg...

Originally posted by demonseed

Oh and please tell me what my avatar tells about me.. PLEASE.. U2U me asap.

Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

And it's also easy to see which members of ATS think they are the smartest....

You don't underestimate either players or audience in any circumstances.
-- Peter Maxwell Davies

Korg.

reply to post by getreadyalready

I vaguely remember some story about the transponder codes, but I don't remember the details. Pilots are taught to change the transponder codes for a number of reasons like radio outtage or hijacking.

Yes, there are three specific codes that refer to what you described. 7500 is the "hijack" squawk (it is NOT necessary to use that code in all cases, though. Before 9/11, there was a "common strategy" that included using the xponder code 7500 as a covert method to inform ATC....only IF you could not "speak in the clear". That is, if the hijacker had gained access, and was listening to your radio transmissions. It was also a part of the "common strategy" that any hijacker would be AFRAID of dying, and therefore would not harm the pilots. Now, that is no longer assumed to be the case).

In the very unlikely event of total (most cases all three VHF communications radios) failing, and IF the transponder still works, then code 7600 is appropriate. But, when you are "NORDO" (no radio) on an IFR flight plan, the procedures are well outlined as to what to do, and ATC knows what to expect, and will anticipate.

The code 7700 is for ALL emergencies....but again, really, is a bit obsolete nowadays. In fact, it changes the data block display on the ATC radar screens, and the controllers would have you change it away form the "emergency" code, anyway, so they won't be distracted by it.

When and to what did the transponder code change? Or provide a link...

9/11 timeline, from "HistoryCommons" (link below):

Seconds later, Flight 11 also enters the area Bottiglia is monitoring and its target appears on his radar screen. The controller sitting next to Bottiglia gets up and points to the radar blip. He says: “You see this target here? This is American 11. Boston Center thinks it’s a hijack.” Bottiglia will later recall that his initial thought about Flight 11, based on this information, is that the hijackers “were probably going to Cuba.” As its transponder has been turned off (see (Between 8:13 a.m. and 8:21 a.m.) September 11, 2001), he has no altitude information for Flight 11, but can tell from the radar scope that it appears to be descending. According to author Lynn Spencer: “Even without a transponder, controller radars calculate ground speed for all radar targets, and when a plane is descending, the ground speed decreases. The flight had been ‘grounding’ 600 knots, and now it has decreased to 320.” Bottiglia follows Flight 11’s target on his radar screen until it disappears over New York City. Because he is focused on Flight 11, Bottiglia will not notice when Flight 175’s transponder code changes at 8:47 (see 8:46 a.m.- 8:47 a.m.)

Further down the page:

The first “operational evidence” that something is wrong is at 8:47, when Flight 175’s transponder code changes twice within a minute (see 8:46 a.m.-8:47 a.m. September 11, 2001).

They elaborate:

Flight 175 stops transmitting its transponder signal. It is currently flying near the New Jersey-Pennsylvania border. [Guardian, 10/17/2001; Newsday, 9/10/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, the transponder is turned off for only about 30 seconds, and then comes back on as a signal that is not designated for any plane on this day. Then, within the space of a minute, it is changed to another new code. But New York Center air traffic computers do not correlate either of these new transponder codes with Flight 175. Consequently, according to an early FAA report, “the secondary radar return (transponder) indicating aircraft speed, altitude, and flight information began to coast and was no longer associated with the primary radar return.”

www.historycommons.org.../11=ua175

8:47 At almost the same time American 11 crashed into the North Tower, United 175's transponder code changed several times. The changes were not noticed for several minutes as the controller tried to locate American 11.

www.npr.org...

At 08:47, the plane's transponder signal changed once, and a second time within a minute, and the aircraft began deviating from its assigned course. But, the air traffic controller in charge of the flight did not notice until minutes later at 08:51. Unlike Flight 11, which had turned its transponder off, Flight 175's flight data could still be properly monitored. Also, at 08:51, Flight 175 changed altitude.

en.wikipedia.org...


You should also devote the time to watching the Google video I posted, with actual ATC personnel recounting their experiences. It is less than one hour long, as it was originally aired in a one-hour time slot, with commercials.

You will find a great deal of factual information, once stepping away from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites, which are devoid of any facts whatsoever, in majority of cases.

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by Kilber


Interesting how the "Holograms'" wings damage the building on impact... Just saying...

check this....

Korg...

Yeah, great. So was it just the plan and hole that were CGI? Or was the explosion, fire and aftermath also CGI? How did they slow the missle so much? Why does it sound like a commercial JE==jet?

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by demonseed

Oh and please tell me what my avatar tells about me.. PLEASE.. U2U me asap.

Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

And it's also easy to see which members of ATS think they are the smartest....

You don't underestimate either players or audience in any circumstances.
-- Peter Maxwell Davies

Korg.

edit on 25-10-2010 by Korg Trinity because: I rock!!

Theres this cool youtube video analyzing this stuff:
www.youtube.com.../a/u/0/ruTlsf7IXMc

3 parts..

I've been saying UFOs/Aliens attacked us on 9/11 for a while but no1 took me seriously.

I just came across a 'live' blog forum from Sept 11th 2001. It is very interesting to read what people were posting while they were being fed the news. You can sense the intensity in their posts as the events were unfolding.

Interesting side note: It was reported 6 people died after the first plane hit? I don't remember that but even still, how did they know who died so early on? Just thought that was strange.

Take a look see. This, is as innocent as it was before the media-corruption really took a stranglehold on us all.




To: Oldeconomybuyer
I'm watchin. It looks pretty bad.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Plane HITS World Trade CENTER!!!
Turn on TV bump.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Some guy is freakin out on the local NBC station. It looks like a whole bunch of floors are messed up

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Fox News: 737 hits Tower One taking out 3 floors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Oldeconomybuyer
A commercial airline or a private plane. (Big or small plane?)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(more)
www.freerepublic.com...

Originally posted by demonseed

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by demonseed

Oh and please tell me what my avatar tells about me.. PLEASE.. U2U me asap.

Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

And it's also easy to see which members of ATS think they are the smartest....

You don't underestimate either players or audience in any circumstances.
-- Peter Maxwell Davies

Korg.

edit on 25-10-2010 by Korg Trinity because: I rock!!

Theres this cool youtube video analyzing this stuff:
www.youtube.com.../a/u/0/ruTlsf7IXMc

3 parts..

I've been saying UFOs/Aliens attacked us on 9/11 for a while but no1 took me seriously.

Laugh.. Go on Laugh...

You are attempting to de-rail the thread with this kind of nonesense.

You will fail!.

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


The imaginative (and wholly incorrect) video "Let's fake an airplane" would be laughable, if the topic weren't so serious.

During the recovery effort at the World Trade Center site, workers recovered and identified remains from Flight 175 victims (see chapter Aftermath, below), but many other body fragments could not be identified.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by demonseed


No one took you seriously because that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life.

This is an interesting thread. Two things, though.

First, why is it that so many explanations by skeptics trying to debunk something are more out there and difficult to believe than the thing they're debunking.

Second, while I have no doubt that the official story of 9-11 is a joke, I still have a hard time believing that a plane didn't make contact (before the controlled demolition). I would need to see more evidence for this, ie. witness statements, etc.

Cheers.

Originally posted by Kilber

Yeah, great. So was it just the plan and hole that were CGI? Or was the explosion, fire and aftermath also CGI? How did they slow the missle so much? Why does it sound like a commercial JE==jet?

Nope you misunderstand where I am coming from. The event was real enough, but the truth about exactly what happened was covered by clever live compositing.

I think one thing everyone can be very sure on.... All the videos that are around.... none of them actual looks like a commercial plane. And as was shown earlier many thought it was a small plane or missile.

Too many things don't add up for the OS to be believed and this is just the strike.... With all the other anomalies.... All the pieces are there.

Korg.

Originally posted by thektotheg
reply to post by demonseed

 

No one took you seriously because that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life.

This is an interesting thread. Two things, though.

First, why is it that so many explanations by skeptics trying to debunk something are more out there and difficult to believe than the thing they're debunking.

Second, while I have no doubt that the official story of 9-11 is a joke, I still have a hard time believing that a plane didn't make contact (before the controlled demolition). I would need to see more evidence for this, ie. witness statements, etc.

Cheers.

Planes did hit the world trade, just they were more likely computer controlled drones that then had computer generated imagery over layed for TV and video footage.

and I agree, the debunkers are getting desperate and it becomes laughable when the attempts at discrediting the evidence becomes so obvious it's pathetic.



Korg.

Originally posted by cluckerspud

I think what I saw that morning was a big old passenger plane.
Or was my brain hacked?!

I'm calling BS on this.

Please provide proof that you were there and witnessed it first hand. And Prove what you say you saw was what happened....

korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


You're obviously not blind, so can rule that out.

Are you being obstinate on purpose, then?? With statements like this:

All the videos that are around.... none of them actual looks like a commercial plane.

....crediblity goes to zero. There is a sort of blindness at work here, perhaps....blind to reality.

You still want to write, with a straight face, that NONE of the videos show a commercial plnae?? What is in this still frame grab, from a VIDEO??:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fb2d7a62d1d6.jpg[/atsimg]