New video showing the second Tower impact

reply to post by Varemia


I've seen lots of videos of 9/11 but this one takes some beating please explain how a plane can fly into a building with only one wing so yes i believe it was a hologram we all know it was blown up for the money
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by ckitch
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

Hi, I'm saying it's another fake video, because its content smacks of falseness... 1. Why were they filming the top of the tower just as it was hit? 2. Why did they go quiet after the second hit... After all their jabbering prior to, there is no way you'd watch what they seemingly watched and say nothing. Also, it seems the reason they were silent was because the sound was interfered with.

I personally haven't a clue if they were real planes or not. The video showing the 'hologram' plane does make you wonder. I suppose if I were to bet on it, I'd say real planes but military planes not commercial - I've seen too many videos of these planes and they are decal free and seem to have ignited on the nose cone on impact etc. You also have to question how a planes nose cone could pass right though the tower?? It's a mega mystery, and the more they flood the media with different clips the muddier the water gets.

Regardless of this particular video posted by the OP, the event was definately an inside job. I think if you stand back from all the video clips and info available, and ask yourself... What have I seen to convince me this was a real terrorist attack, and then ask what have I seen to convince me it wasn't, and I think if you put pen to paper and listed those points, you'd have one blank sheet and one very long list on the other!

Hey!


I think we're on the same page!
But I am still confused as to WHY would these guys want to or have a need to fake this video?

Were they part of the cabal?
Were they just punks who modified their video after-the-fact to fool YouTube?


I don't understand THEIR stake in it all.


I think I need the "Why did they do this" question to be answered in order to see a bigger picture. Because I agree, this video does look suspicious however, it looks suspicious after reading other people's interjections.

I mean, if I just saw this on my own I would think 'wow, this guy actually captured the first plane" but when I read it in a forum like ATS, the seed gets planted and I no longer look at it as objectively as I would, by myself.

So it's hard to evaluate a video on a conspiracy site and not be influenced.


But please (didn't mean to go off in a tangent) answer me this: Why would they want or need to fake this? What was their purpose or ultimate goal?
That is the one major question I am not understanding (seeing I believe/know two planes were involved that morning in NYC)

Thanks

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by thepresenttense
Does anyone have any idea what the intense buzzing sound is that starts just after the plane hits the tower in this video? I've never noticed that in any other video I've seen of the second plane strike.

The buzzing noise heard in the Naudet's brother footage were the 'lost' firemen alarm detectors going off. They are automatically set off when there is no movement from the person wearing it so others can locate them.

The noise in this film is odd because it all seems to stop at once. So, very hard to say. I thought maybe car alarms but why would they all sound off at once and then, stop?

"Naudet's brother footage were the 'lost' firemen alarm detectors going off."

What do you mean? I was wondering the same.. what the hell is that sound? It starts as soon as the plane hits.

Originally posted by Varemia
If you skip to 1:40, you'll see the second plane hit from an angle that's insane.

Yeah, those guys really had to put it into a pretty hard bank to hit the tower. Had they been going a little bit faster, they would have probably blown right past it and maybe went into the river.

But that's another timeline.

Originally posted by Teebs
reply to post by LestatG

 

I would guess either an alarm, or some sort of high-voltage electricity.

After a second listen it sounds electrical. Maybe he was standing near a transformer; maybe there was some power fluctuation or redistribution caused by the impact.

That's what I'm thinking too however, who shut off the juice after a few seconds? Was Con-Ed right there?



As far as the other posters question as to why the 'seconds' skipped. It looked like he was holding his cell phone horizontally and when he adjusted it, he might've just hit pause by mistake. I don't see that being a huge red herring personally.

reply to post by Varemia


Very impressive. The sound of the jets power is captured here in the audio. Sounds like the pilot pushed it all the way to the stop as soon as he was sure of the strike. You can see how fast he is moving.

Tornados drive straw into telephone poles and that is at half this speed. NO wonder the ensuing damage, fireball, and resulting collapse.

BOOOOOM!

The plan those guys wrought to take down the towers was brilliant. Of course the Truthers will still deny the pure physics of the thing because they refuse to believe that anyone hates us this much.

My view is that 767s did not impact the Towers. It was a smaller plane loaded with explosives, remote controlled, or a missile, aimed at hitting more explosives planted in the buildings.

If that were in a video then any footage would be confiscated and a 767 superimposed over the offending 'missile'.

The footage belonging to some people was never returned and likely showed the TRUTH!

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
This is the so-called Paval video.

webfairy.org... will tell you the whole story and that it is supposedly filmed from a fire truck.....because of the red reflection in the rear window glass of the car ahead!

Any time missing might be while under the bridge, but the same time registers in each for the crash into the 2nd tower.

The actual first plane was filmed, barely visible, white in the video that was made to explain Pavel's ...or was it Pavel? There is a Mike in this one too! and the announcer is far more calm that the riders in the Truck/SUV.

edit on 30-9-2011 by canadiansenior70 because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-9-2011 by canadiansenior70 because: (no reason given)

First, most of those links don't work anymore. I am very interested in this, so is this discussed in detail on any other website (whose links are still active?)

Secondly, SAY WHAT? They were in a firetruck because of the red reflection in the car's window?
Wow!
What is THAT supposed to suggest? That they KNEW there was going to be an explosion and wanted to get there before the others?

No offense to you but this crap really is a disservice to people like me who want to get to the truth of the matter which STILL hasn't been told!
And all this 'firetruck, hologram, media fakery' has NOT helped one bit!

Two planes crashed into two towers which brought down three skyscrapers that day!
So far those are the ONLY facts to the Manhattan mystery.

Don't even get me started on the Pentagon and Shanksville lies!

Originally posted by rwfresh

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by thepresenttense
Does anyone have any idea what the intense buzzing sound is that starts just after the plane hits the tower in this video? I've never noticed that in any other video I've seen of the second plane strike.

The buzzing noise heard in the Naudet's brother footage were the 'lost' firemen alarm detectors going off. They are automatically set off when there is no movement from the person wearing it so others can locate them.

The noise in this film is odd because it all seems to stop at once. So, very hard to say. I thought maybe car alarms but why would they all sound off at once and then, stop?

"Naudet's brother footage were the 'lost' firemen alarm detectors going off."

What do you mean? I was wondering the same.. what the hell is that sound? It starts as soon as the plane hits.

Sorry if my reply was confusing.

What I was trying to say is.....the buzzing noise heard at the 2-minute mark in this video (after the buildings collapsed) was the sound of the lost (aka: dead) firemens' alarms sounding off. I didn't want to use the word 'dead' because it's still rather sad to know our government kill their own people!

But THAT noise/buzzing is sorta reminiscent of the buzzing noise in OP's video. Not exactly but similar!




www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by intrptr

The plan those guys wrought to take down the towers was brilliant..

What's even MORE brilliant is how at least seven of those 'guys' are alive and deny involvement.
Now that's not only brilliant that borderlines on miraculous.

But I know, another thread-another time for that debate

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
My view is that 767s did not impact the Towers. It was a smaller plane loaded with explosives, remote controlled, or a missile, aimed at hitting more explosives planted in the buildings.

If that were in a video then any footage would be confiscated and a 767 superimposed over the offending 'missile'.

The footage belonging to some people was never returned and likely showed the TRUTH!

Could very well be but you think no one would've spoken up by now?

I'm sure Alex Jones would gladly pay a million dollars for a story like that. Is there anywhere on the Internet that's kept track of people claiming their tapes were confiscated and never returned? I don't think they would get in trouble for saying that much. After all, the FBI confiscated the Pentagon tapes and were almost boastful about it!

But I agree to a certain extent. I don't believe these were the 'hijacked' planes we were led to believe.


The found 'passport' really did it for me. Why in the hell would a passenger/hijacker carry a passport on a non-international flight? Besides, the 'passport' was traced back to a person whose alive and well. So it couldn't have been used for ID to board the plane because the face wouldn't have matched the name.

I know I'm going off topic. Sorry. Just so many damn questions and no one in the government will even pay us lip-service to our ligament questions let alone, conduct an impartial investigation! It's just frustrating, that's all.

Originally posted by Human_Alien
The hologram theory is friggin ridiculous and belongs in 4th grade. There were planes in lower Manhattan that morning. Maybe (and most probably) not the ones we thought they were but there WERE planes. And perhaps planes with missiles attached.

Agreed about there being planes. As for missiles, no idea. I know that a number of the transcripts allude to the hijackers having a bomb, but I haven't seen any explanation for what happened there. Maybe it was a fake bomb to prevent any passengers from considering fighting back (try to stop us, and we blow up the plane type deal).

Originally posted by Teebs
reply to post by LestatG

 

I would guess either an alarm, or some sort of high-voltage electricity.

After a second listen it sounds electrical. Maybe he was standing near a transformer; maybe there was some power fluctuation or redistribution caused by the impact.

Thanks, seems like a reasonable answer, having said that I have never heard what that sounds like. It does seem to sound electrical at some point.

I agree that the strangest thing about this video is that the cameraman and whomever was with him did not react in any way. Although this doesn't necessarily imply that they knew it was coming, it is strange nonetheless. Unless in their country they see planes hit skyscrapers all the time. I would like to know what language they are speaking so I can figure out where they are from, so I know what country I should avoid.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I agree that the strangest thing about this video is that the cameraman and whomever was with him did not react in any way. Although this doesn't necessarily imply that they knew it was coming, it is strange nonetheless. Unless in their country they see planes hit skyscrapers all the time. I would like to know what language they are speaking so I can figure out where they are from, so I know what country I should avoid.

The way he was talking to Mike ten-twenty seconds later, it seems like Mike wasn't watching, and was in the car or something. For all we know, the camerman was simply in shock. Some people express their shock loudly and others do it silently.

Such as, personally, I am the silent type unless there are people in danger in the area. If my yelling will stop them from being in danger, then I will yell. Otherwise, what purpose does it serve?

reply to post by JiggyPotamus

Pavel Hlava, who filmed the video, is Czech. He was on his way from NYC to Pennsylvania that day with his brother and their boss (Mike Cohen) at the time all this happened.

We don't have skyscrapers of such enormous size in this part of the world, people here are therefore not used to such things -- and no, after what people here went though in WWII and under the Soviet regime I can assure you that they take no delight in such awful events either. Czechs are a pretty peaceful bunch...

As far as I understand, there are two reasons that we don't hear his initial reactions. One is the interference you hear on the video, which makes it hard to pick up a lot. The other and more important, I think, is that he was probably too stunned to speak for a few moments. When he finally does speak, he says that he recorded it. A workmate asks him again if he got it and he says that he recorded it.

If you or anyone would like a translation (ie transcript into English) of what was said I'll do my best to write one up, but in a few places the voices are a bit hard to hear so I might need to make a best guess based on the context.

Mike

Originally posted by mayabong
Very strange that there was no reaction when the plane hit.

Thats what I thought.

reply to post by Varemia


holy mofo, those r czechs making that video thats kinda cool

2 JustMike: yop, u got it right about czechs and same bout what he said.

I didn't even realize this made MSM



www.youtube.com...



I think I am almost convinced this was just a plain ol' tourist taking what is said to be: a video post-card. Why he didn't react?....who knows. I personally think it's rather odd but that alone does not make this suspect.


What I don't understand (unless this is just ANOTHER friggin rumor is) why was this released after a FOIA was in place? Who had this? Second question would be; why did they (FBI?) have the need to have this?

reply to post by Human_Alien


I think the noise that began on the video as the plane struck was all the cars siittng there saw it and simultaneously leaned on their horns and held them on. Thats a good debunk for the digital faking of the planes impacting the buildings. No one would have thought of that beforehand and all the people sitting right there on that road that day all saw the impact at once.

MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPP! I would have done it too.