'911 in Plane Site' - Has Anyone Seen It?

The CNN footage with Aaron Brown seems to be well after the south tower started its collapse. CNN was showing the Pentagon at the time, and Brown was likely not looking at the towers while talking about the Pentagon. It was probably called to his attention at the time of collapse, at which time the camera switched back to the WTC. Brown declared he could not see what was behind the smoke because there was no building any longer.

The below site shows different angles of the south tower�s collapse. There is no 70 foot plume of smoke or dust arising from below the area of impact. Most interesting is the 3rd video, the Close up start, which gives evidence to the building�s structure giving way at the point of impact., resulting in collapse. This seems to counter explosion theories.

The Multiple Views as provided from ABC will show you the collapse and give insight into what Brown say as he turned his attention back to the site.

911research.wtc7.net...

Here are some stills from yet another angle, CBS. No cloud rising from below the point of entry.
www.wtc-terrorattack.com...

The supposed missile remnant exiting the building is more than likely this engine part:
www.911review.org...

Granted, Building 7�s collapse looks just a bit too controlled when viewed from these three sources;
www.wtc7.net...

The reason why Building 7 looks like it was a controlled demoition is beacause i think it prob was. The owner of building 7 has admitted that the decision to "pull" the building was made with NYFD, "pulling a building" is the term that domolition experts use to decribe a controlled explosion.
The footage of the plume of smoke was taken when the reporter was discussing the Event with Tom Clancy and as far as i can tell the camera was on the Towers the whole time, before the collapse of any of the buildings. Unfortunataly the film is not time stamped but the absence of the hugh cloud of debris and smoke when the first Tower collapsed would bear this up. As for Missile theory i personally dont subscribe to it but it is an interesting one none the less.

I just wonder why didn't the US gov't show any more footage about the Pentagon crash? It reminds me of the "plane without any windows". This could be a good reason to keep it away from the public...

But where are the real planes? And the passengers?!

THE ATLANTIC OCEAN!!! OOOOOOO

I forgot who claimed that but it was just too funny. Like no airtraffic controller saw 4 planes suddenly change course and then ram into the atlantic. You conspiracy theorists are too funny.

9-11, THE EXPLOSIVE TRUTH REVEALED
A lead engineer who worked on the WTC expressed shock that the towers collapsed from plane crashes. Lee Robertson, the tower's structural engineer, addressed the problem of terrorism in the plans for the building, claiming he �designed it for a (Boeing) 707 to hit it.�


Evidence of Controlled Demolition
by: Geronimo Jones

9-11, THE EXPLOSIVE TRUTH REVEALED
The shock was overwhelming. My first thoughts was that it was a terrorist attack. This was confirmed by the news reports of Al Qaeda. But one thing the reporters left out was something I witnessed first hand. A very important omission at that!
Seconds before the South Tower crumbled to its doom, I heard/felt a series of explosions. Same with the North Tower. There was no denying it, I could FEEL the vibrations of them like a small earthquake. Yet when I turned on the news none of the other eyewitnesses commented on this.
Indeed, in the days that followed, like many Americans, I remained glued to the news networks to keep myself informed of any developments and confirm what I had witnessed. But despite the numerous eyewitness accounts, there was still no mention of the explosions.
more

New York Firefighters Telling of 911 Controlled Demolition , Save this video and pass it to as many people as possible www.letsroll911.org...

WOw RP, you really have this covered, don't you? Well, don't worry, I've got you covered. The transponders in all 4 "hijacked" planes were turned off, therefore, the planes stopped transmitting identification codes to control towers and radar stations. I happened to have gone to high school with a guy is now an air traffic controller and I've seen the radar screens while up in the towers. They basically look like a bunch of dots just flying around the screen and without id, how would they know that flight from some business jet or commuter plane, well they wouldn't.

Oh yeah, who controls the FAA?

Oh yeah, who failed to scramble planes in a timely manner from the closest staions to the incidents?

So even if something was on the radar, you think people were allowed to talk about it?

I was a Military Police soldier in the Army for 5 years and have protected every post I've been stationed at from at least some sort of disturbance, crazy soldiers in the arm's rooms, civilians fleeing police, drug dealers. I was at the WTO riots in DC in 2000, got a few bruises in that one. I've had friends injured and 2 die in Iraq. So, the last thing I would have ever believed was that the government would let it's citizens die while it stood by, much less murder them. But you know, I never had the highest security clearance, I wasn't at G-8 summits or ilderberger conferences, so I could never tell you why or even what our country does outside of public view and neither can you, so stop ridiculing.


www.americanfreepress.net...

And do your own reseraching, you can find these reports substantiated a little more if you dig.

Criticism is okay, in fact it's great, it helps people figure out their beliefs and the freedom of speech is supposedly what tis country was founded on, so criticize, but stop taking pot shots at people, it only makes you sound ignorant.

WTC Earthquake mpg

Possibly by bombs or underground expolsion, but it is right before the collapse. Very interesting... Each earthquake was followed by a collapse, after few seconds...

Your right led, sorry my last post wasnt anything constructive, for others who havent seen what i posted.. i did my own "HW" and posted on page 4 here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

didnt wanna double post...

Originally posted by Istvan
WTC Earthquake mpg

Possibly by bombs or underground expolsion, but it is right before the collapse. Very interesting... Each earthquake was followed by a collapse, after few seconds...

Just a question. Isn't it possible these "earthquakes" were picking up the rumblings of the first few floors collapsing before it became visible that the entire building was coming down? Also, if it was truly a conspiracy, why wouldn't the first tower that was hit be the first to be "pulled"?

Originally posted by crossfire
That the President of the USA knew of an attack on key landmarks in two cities that could cause thousands of deaths and deliberately did nothing so he could get a political advantage?

Is that what you REALLY think?

Have you ever watched this guy taking a press conference, drugged to the gills and barely coherent? It's almost as funny as the time he choked on a pretzil and passed out and fell out of his couch and banged his face. Yeaahh....

He had no idea the US was to be hit and he had no idea what to do when it was. He sat in his chair reading about a pet goat for seven minutes until an aide dragged him away, got him on an airliner and stuck him into an underground bunker in Nebraska.

George is waaaay out of his element, isolated, and delusional.

Dick Cheney is the president. George is just a marketing element.

I just saw the video and while some of it seemed interesting, like the pentagon and the never repeated audio of people saying it wasn't a civilian airliner, and it had no windows, etc - this bothered me:

Near the end they go onto the two french brother film and show the slow motion frames of the flash just before it hit sthe towers. Now I have an original copy of that DVD and straight after I watched it, and both me and my partner agreed in that while we could still see a sort of flash (though it looked more like a 'puff') it was no where near as clearly defined and bright as on the version they show on the 'Plane site' DVD and on the stills from the internet. And this is off the resource they claim to use - so while there still is an anomaly, it does not seem as dramatic as suggested. This starts to make you wonder what else is exaggerated for effect.

As it's a crucial piece of 'evidence', it is quite significant.

Originally posted by Janus

Originally posted by 1amc

Originally posted by Janus
I dont think your govenment was involved either. But something caused that flash.

Janus try this site.
www.letsroll911.org...

Respects,

WTF? What the Hell are the Pods under the plane? I dont recall seeing any commercial planes having that kind of Pod conviguration before. Im confused

I must have been asleep for the last few years, all these images that ive never seen before. The plane does look like it has no windows but they could have been photo shopped. I just dont know anymore. As i said before i havent looked at the footage before in any detail, this is very disturbing.

A while ago I started a thread about the second plane and posted a picture. Have a look at it again.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by dcgolf
Just a question. Isn't it possible these "earthquakes" were picking up the rumblings of the first few floors collapsing before it became visible that the entire building was coming down? Also, if it was truly a conspiracy, why wouldn't the first tower that was hit be the first to be "pulled"?

Do you see any earthquake during the collapse? I can see that only 4 seconds before the collapse, while the tower falls, there is no earthquake.

I have watched this video 3 times now.
There are quite a few things thats plain dont make any sense.
The video footage of the #7 with the ploom of smoke.Im not sure why it is there but it seems odd that it is there when nothing hit it.The footage seems to be just not long after the second plane.The way the smoke it billowing up seems like it just started and was made to be big.
Things seem 'calm' for the moment.The towers have just been hit and now we are waiting.What next.Lets get people to safety now.Then from nowhere building 7 goes up in smoke so to speak.A huge ploom of smoke that could only seem to come from either a big explosion,or something else like fire,a big fire.But what started this fire?
Also the fact that the guy said they decided to 'pull it'
Everyone knows in order to pull or bring down a building,it takes weeks of planing.I am sorry,but for one,you can not set up such a thing in a matter of hours.Not only that,but would anyone who does this type of work,go into this building that they say is to far gone to leave be,and set all this up?I dont think so.The thing is on fire somehow,it is weak so they say,and they want to create a conrolled pull?No.Way to dangerous and not enough time.

Building 7 was not effected by anything from the 2 towers.It was set up with controlled explosives weeks before and they have even said they had drills and people coming in and out of the place weeks before.

Watch the Firemans video and tell me what you think, these guys where there

New York Firefighters Telling of 911 Controlled Demolition , Save this video and pass it to as many people as possible www.letsroll911.org...

Thanks for the link.I did see that before.
I think they know what they are talking about seeing as they were there and seeing what was happening and hearing it as well.
This was ALL controlled.
People can say anything they want.But when a guy says they decided to 'pull it',pull it being a term to have a 'controlled' demo,that right there blows it.
I would challange any demo expert to tell me that in in the state that building was in and what was going on,would they have time to set up a 'pull'
It has been noted on film that they pulled it,so they say,so this means that someone set it up to do so.This is not us looking at a building and saying it looks to perfect.We were told this.That it was decided that it be pulled.So in that,I challange any demo expert to tell me that in that amount of time,a building of that size,can be pulled or taken down.

I thought 'pull it' only meant bring the building down to demolition people.
I thought 'pull it' to a firefighter meant 'pull everyone out and let it burn'.

If you think that the top part of the tower collapses onto itself it will smash each floor out in turn in an explosive manner. It's not going to just flop down quietly and gently like a house of cards. - it's going to be bloody loud and dramatic and sound like an explosion anyhow, isn't it?

The fireman says something along the lines of 'And it came down boom, boom boom like a demolition' and implies with his hands that's it's from the top down - which is consistant with the top of the building smashing down into itself. When you watch the video you can see its happening, as the top falls it sort of causes the rest of the building to splay out like when you peel banana almost.

I believe when you bring a building down you have charges going off from the bottom up, if you did it from the top up it would rain crap out in all directions and might cause large parts to fall sideways.

Here's a link to a demolition company's website with some videos of demolitions. I've only watched the one called Hackney (good bit in it where you see the view from a camera mounted on the roof of the building being knocked down!) and it seems that the charges go off pretty much simultaneously in the vertical aspect, maybe an ever so slight delay but if there is it's from the bottom up!

www.controlled-demolition.co.uk...

The only 'demolition' I can remember where it explodes out boom boom boom from the top is on ID4!

I thought the bit where bush says he saw the first plane hitting the tower on the TV at the school was good though, as like they said it was on the French brothers film and hadn't made it to the news people as yet.

I thought 'pull it' only meant bring the building down to demolition people.
I thought 'pull it' to a firefighter meant 'pull everyone out and let it burn'.

No no,the only person who said 'pull it' was the PBS guy.No firefighter said pull it at any time.
So what this is saying is he ordered it to be pulled (taken down) because the building was in bad shape.But the problem is,there was no way they could have done a controlled drop.It takes weeks of planning to do this.He could not have called in anyone to set up a controlled drop like that.It did fall in a fashion that is consitant with a demo.Thus feeding the notion that it was set up to fall weeks ahead.There is reports that people were going inand out of that building many times in the weeks before and that they also had drills.

So what is being said is,charges were set in place weeks before by 'someone' and it was 'pulled'

I heard that audio recording... and I think, there is a conspiracy behind that announcement. Who is that lease holder to be responsible for the demolition?! He is not an engineer, he has no right to make such statement, even if the wtc7 was intentionally and legally demolished. He is nobody!!!

Therefore, whatever he said, he did it under high command, with a great pressure on him...

This audio recording therefore is not credible.


Every time I watch that fireman video, it amazes me deeply... they say the truth, things they saw with their eyes.

[edit on 22-8-2004 by Istvan]