What do you guys think of this 911 clip

[FKAri]

It's very hard to fake reality, especially in live news coverage. I'm trying to focus on one little part, else people get lost. But here's one more video. Part 1.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tiow7rx2q7...01%29.mp4?dl=1

This one is something that you can verify yourself by using 3D models and the exact dimensions of the buildings, and the angle of the cameras.

I'm still not seeing any inconsistencies. There are several claims in the videos which are ambiguous but the narrator claims as obvious. A ball? Maybe. Maybe not. Same camera angles? Definitely not. The claims are too flimsy to launch an argument from. You can make all kinds of claims from low quality analog tape. There are so many artifacts.

Considering it logically, why would someone strike one of the towers, wait some time to allow everyone to point a camera at it and THEN strike the next one(with something other than a plane or maybe set off an explosion?). And force all live shots to incorporate a CGI component(and also confiscate all "uncontrolled" footage somehow and either alter it or destroy it?). There are also eye witness accounts from people across the Hudson River. And what happened to the people on that flight? They were killed earlier so a different method could be used to strike the building? What's the point of that? Of all the things from the official account this has to be one of the least contentious.

[Doomsday Dallas]

That is embarrassingly weak evidence There's probably close to 50 different videos of that plane hitting the building from both news stations and civilians. So unless you believe random people filming it are doctering their footage and in on the conspiracy too, that's an incredibly flimsy argument

https://freevoice.io/blog/2021/08/28...-plane-videos/

[Ass Dan]

I thought you retards graduated to anti-vax.

20 years later and the Russians, Chinese, various islamoterror groups all mum about the cover up.

SHUT

THE

****

UP

YOU

SICK

****S

[Jasper]

It's very hard to fake reality, especially in live news coverage. I'm trying to focus on one little part, else people get lost. But here's one more video. Part 1.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tiow7rx2q7...01%29.mp4?dl=1

This one is something that you can verify yourself by using 3D models and the exact dimensions of the buildings, and the angle of the cameras.



This is what I mean about this being a logic exercise. Instead of the person wondering, considering how something so odd could happen, they proceed with emotions instead of considering. Completely dismiss it. Literally spend less then a second considering the abnormalities.

doesn't take me a second to figure out your stupid agenda

[Doomsday Dallas]

I always thought this one was interesting, luckily crisis actors only operate in Iraq.



https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena...raqi-car-bomb/














https://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...-idUSKBN12U0JY

October 30, 2016 8:59 AM

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A car bomb parked in a shopping street of a Shi’ite district of Baghdad killed at least eight people and wounded more than 30 others on Sunday, police and medical staff said.

The bombing, which hit the Hurriya district, came as Iraqi security forces are engaged in an offensive to take back Mosul, Islamic State’s last major city stronghold in Iraq.

It wasn’t clear if there was a suicide driver in the car.

[Draz]

Reminds me I gotta go to the 911 museum

[Bronbron23]

I edited out of a documentary, to focus on just this one thing, and I put it in my dropbox.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16546y65lx...dited.avi?dl=0

To me it's like a logic exercise. Some people see it and completely dismiss it, and I wonder if maybe I'm the one who's going crazy.

I don't put anything past our government and as far as contiracies go there are things about 9/11 that's fishy but faking big ass planes hitting big ass buildings in front of a big ass city with thousands of on lookers is a stretch. Not to mention a shit ton of people would have to be in on it.

[Wally450]

[FKAri]

I'm still not seeing any inconsistencies. There are several claims in the videos which are ambiguous but the narrator claims as obvious. A ball? Maybe. Maybe not. Same camera angles? Definitely not. The claims are too flimsy to launch an argument from. You can make all kinds of claims from low quality analog tape. There are so many artifacts.

Considering it logically, why would someone strike one of the towers, wait some time to allow everyone to point a camera at it and THEN strike the next one(with something other than a plane or maybe set off an explosion?). And force all live shots to incorporate a CGI component(and also confiscate all "uncontrolled" footage somehow and either alter it or destroy it?). There are also eye witness accounts from people across the Hudson River. And what happened to the people on that flight? They were killed earlier so a different method could be used to strike the building? What's the point of that? Of all the things from the official account this has to be one of the least contentious.

I'm genuinely curious OP. Let me know.

[warriorfan]

I'm genuinely curious OP. Let me know.

No one gave a f.uck the first time.

[jstern]

I'm genuinely curious OP. Let me know.

He calls it a ball, that's obviously out of a lack of a better word. That's his issue. He's trying to figure out what it is and is making a guess. I care more about the angles, and the idea that with computers and math the trajectories and speed can all be reproduced. That's the point of the video. That anyone can do it.

You would think that after the planes hit and the building was burning, that we would get hundreds of people pointing their DV and hi8 cameras towards the towers. Instead what we have is something like 15 videos. And breaking, "Never before seen videos," many years later.

It's a complicated subject. Unless you're in sync with how basically the media is controlled and feeds narratives. Or just my logic behind it, then you're just not going to understand it. Thus the lack of motivation to respond.

I remember September 11, 2011, they released never before seen video of the planes hitting one of the towers, filmed by a person who was doing a documentary on some fire fighters. They were promoting it as never before seen video. It's a legit video, but again, another fade to black. It really caught my eye, because I've seen it so many times in other footage of the planes hitting. And this was never before seen footage, ten years later.

That's one of the biggest mysteries that I've never looked into. All these videos fading to black. I've Googled it before, but nothing, so lost interest.

-----

I finally found the documentary, by Googling with a date range. Here it goes.

https://youtu.be/seOwa0trNEQ?t=2034

Now I remembered. In this video of the second plane hitting, what would have been Fade-to-Black in other videos was completely cut out. Ten years later.

A person like yourself might say that this is silly, if something was up, then why would they cut out the frames? Why not replace them with something else if they already went through all the effort to fake the whole thing. Why would the filmmaker go along with it? And so on.

While I would simply not dismiss it. It would stay in the back of my mind that it's very strange. It doesn't add up. And simply not dismiss it as being impossible.

Why would the filmmaker go along with it? Aren't they afraid that he will speak? That's probably the most common thought that people have. Somebody would have whistle blown, and so it wasn't an inside job. And so on.

They're seeing the people behind these things as normal, everyday people, who would not have any problems killing and maiming millions of people and their children, if they could.

[FKAri]

He calls it a ball, that's obviously out of a lack of a better word. That's his issue. He's trying to figure out what it is and is making a guess. I care more about the angles, and the idea that with computers and math the trajectories and speed can all be reproduced. That's the point of the video. That anyone can do it.

You would think that after the planes hit and the building was burning, that we would get hundreds of people pointing their DV and hi8 cameras towards the towers. Instead what we have is something like 15 videos. And breaking, "Never before seen videos," many years later.

It's a complicated subject. Unless you're in sync with how basically the media is controlled and feeds narratives. Or just my logic behind it, then you're just not going to understand it. Thus the lack of motivation to respond.

I remember September 11, 2011, they released never before seen video of the planes hitting one of the towers, filmed by a person who was doing a documentary on some fire fighters. They were promoting it as never before seen video. It's a legit video, but again, another fade to black. It really caught my eye, because I've seen it so many times in other footage of the planes hitting. And this was never before seen footage, ten years later.

That's one of the biggest mysteries that I've never looked into. All these videos fading to black. I've Googled it before, but nothing, so lost interest.

-----

I finally found the documentary, by Googling with a date range. Here it goes.

https://youtu.be/seOwa0trNEQ?t=2034

Now I remembered. In this video of the second plane hitting, what would have been Fade-to-Black in other videos was completely cut out. Ten years later.

A person like yourself might say that this is silly, if something was up, then why would they cut out the frames? Why not replace them with something else if they already went through all the effort to fake the whole thing. Why would the filmmaker go along with it? And so on.

While I would simply not dismiss it. It would stay in the back of my mind that it's very strange. It doesn't add up. And simply not dismiss it as being impossible.

Why would the filmmaker go along with it? Aren't they afraid that he will speak? That's probably the most common thought that people have. Somebody would have whistle blown, and so it wasn't an inside job. And so on.

This one doesn't cut out:

They're seeing the people behind these things as normal, everyday people, who would not have any problems killing and maiming millions of people and their children, if they could.

Normal people have no problem killing millions? That doesn't sound right. Maybe you're trying to say the opposite. Regardless people don't always act the way one would assume in situations involving panic, fear or confusion.

[jstern]

This one doesn't cut out:





Normal people have no problem killing millions? That doesn't sound right. Maybe you're trying to say the opposite. Regardless people don't always act the way one would assume in situations involving panic, fear or confusion.

I was saying the opposite.

But this is what I mean. Something odd happens. I do not dismiss that reality. But most people see it, but then everything is ok because in this other completely different video, it doesn't cut out. And then that's the end of it. No why does this one and that one cut out, but not the other one.

You have the live shot (in the OP) with the nose coming out. I understand why they would fade to black in that particular video. It would be devastating to see the plane come out intact on the other side. My guess as to why it cuts out in this documentary is because the cameraman moved the camera so violently (thus much harder to insert the bigger plane), while with the other tourist videos that show the impact, the cameras are more static.

But yeah, you should not discount the first video just because there's another video. You should question why. The point wasn't that reality cut out, and thus this other video proves that it did not.