New 2nd Hit Video-- #55 or so
A pretty good view from the west-- better than other known shots from the west (it gets better after the first 10 seconds and is quite clear for the plane hit):
There's certainly some funny business here-- the odd blue tint, the strange filter, lighting, digitaization and focus problems at the beginning, the precise, mechanical camera movements, the positioning of the frame with an extended view south of the towers as if expecting the plane. There's also the almost complete lack of sound, not even a reaction from the operator after the plane hit. There's also a helicopter that appears early on that disappears in the clouds, and that never appears again. There is also some apparent editing after the helicopter disappears before the plane appears. There's also no sign of the helicopter that flies out from the west of the north tower shortly after the 2nd hit in this video. Finally, the video is labeled "September 11th 2001 Second Plane Crash WNBC Dub9_01", but does not look like a TV station video! The "dub" designation is interesting too, given the association of dubbing with editing.
This video is part of a HUGE cache of 9/11 videos recently released in fragments by WPIX and uploaded by "911Crasting". I've only looked at a small fraction of the videos, not sure if there is much really interesting here, and some numbers seem to be missing as if there was selective release. This "collapse" video, found by AP is quite striking (see comments), also bears the WNBC Dub label.
Also, interesting how 911CRasting has 33 subscribers, including someone named Brownacid33. The person says they are from Tokelau, probably a joke.
Finally, a note to Steve Warran, who finds the things falling from the tower noteworthy. I think the first thing he sees is some cladding, not a person. The second unusual falling thing, he says seems to be pole-vaulting away from the tower is most likely a bird flying in front of the tower.
There's certainly some funny business here-- the odd blue tint, the strange filter, lighting, digitaization and focus problems at the beginning, the precise, mechanical camera movements, the positioning of the frame with an extended view south of the towers as if expecting the plane. There's also the almost complete lack of sound, not even a reaction from the operator after the plane hit. There's also a helicopter that appears early on that disappears in the clouds, and that never appears again. There is also some apparent editing after the helicopter disappears before the plane appears. There's also no sign of the helicopter that flies out from the west of the north tower shortly after the 2nd hit in this video. Finally, the video is labeled "September 11th 2001 Second Plane Crash WNBC Dub9_01", but does not look like a TV station video! The "dub" designation is interesting too, given the association of dubbing with editing.
This video is part of a HUGE cache of 9/11 videos recently released in fragments by WPIX and uploaded by "911Crasting". I've only looked at a small fraction of the videos, not sure if there is much really interesting here, and some numbers seem to be missing as if there was selective release. This "collapse" video, found by AP is quite striking (see comments), also bears the WNBC Dub label.
Also, interesting how 911CRasting has 33 subscribers, including someone named Brownacid33. The person says they are from Tokelau, probably a joke.
Finally, a note to Steve Warran, who finds the things falling from the tower noteworthy. I think the first thing he sees is some cladding, not a person. The second unusual falling thing, he says seems to be pole-vaulting away from the tower is most likely a bird flying in front of the tower.
posted by spooked at 8:35 AM
25 Comments:
S/he has a very interesting "collapse" video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb8kbroiZkA&NR=1
I recommend freeze framing.
At times, the dark gray smoke gets lit up. Indicating perhaps episodic energy release from "something."
Anonymous Physicist
Thanks-- that is a great clip. I've seen it before but it clearly shows the south wall of the south tower just exploding downwards, extremely rapidly.
There is a well known PsyOp of claiming there were no "jumpers" by numerous bogus 911truthers.
This article should be reprinted here in its entirety periodically.
http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/11/eyewitness-testimony-of-firefighters.html
Among many very remarkable sworn eyewitness testimonies, is an NYFD Lt. (and photographer) detailing how he saw at least one person being forced out a window.
If he is from Tokelau, he is (according to Wiki) the
1433rd person living there (naturally).
A.P.
But why was this piece posted at 8:33?
I seem to be dogged by 33! The 8:33 is a coincidence for me-- unless someone at blogger set that.
OK then.
I also note that--assuming it is random--there is a one out of 60 chance=.01666...
just to leave no doubt, I changed the post time to 8:35
You changed time...
"Sworn" eyewitness testimonies? If the oral histories of the fire department and medics was sworn testimony, then the world would have tilted off its axis by the weight of the combined perjury and imbecility.
Really spook and A.P., the devil is in the details.
And why the agenda guys?
Those were sworn testimonies. Why do claim that they weren't?
The devil is at your website. And you are the one who so obviously has had, and has an agenda. Or several. Such as to obfuscate and make meaningless 911truth, to blame Jews, etc. To make crap out of all these matters. To claim that someone jumping or being pushed out of the tower was a mannequin or whatever.
While there was and is much lying about 911 events, the matter of jumpers or those pushed doesn't seem to be one of them.
I will go with the NYFD Lt. since none of the bogus 911truthers picked up on that piece. (They all had, and have, an agenda.)
Like you, with the desperate and meaningless insertion of "Israel" into the matter of what the US regime has done to Iraqis in the piece above. All standard intel M.O.
I don't know just why you are even cited here by anyone.
And now for the insertion of a little physics.
The speed of the fall of jumpers can have different rates during the interval involved. This is due to air resistance factors such as shape, clothing and what the person was doing with their extremities (and clothing). Look up terminal velocity factors next time.
This is not like 911 truth. The people falling are not in a vacuum.
People writing metaphorical crap and claiming it is definitive of anything other than what is in their own minds, only shows just what is in their minds.
Read every one of the 503 oral histories--- http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html ---and you'll see they were all casual affairs (except where third parties are seated during interviews, as intimidation) meant only for special scholar's eyes, fifty years down the road. They are definitively NOT "sworn" "testimony."
But your anonymous failure to grasp simple facts is as skewed as your political affiliations. This is your growing delusion.
For your information, put any of hundreds of relevant search terms into Google and my work will return at number one---or at least in the top five, lest you strain your scrolling wrist. Aligned PTB can marginalize me only for so long. I am the coming day, so prepare for it. That is why I am cited here by some.
So tell me, I'm on tinder hooks. How slow does a mummy fall outside a vacuum, Mr. Physics Inserter?
And if Mummy flailed, wouldn't she go even SLOWER according to your analysis? Or could you flap your wings and force yourself down even FASTER?
Go look up the apple in Newtonian physics yourself.
Puff...smoking gun...as if I needed proof.
More metaphorical crap, go home to your Mummy.
The point was you wrote that all the falling jumpers (or mannequins in your own mind) should fall at the same rate, and this is false as I pointed out, based on shape, clothing, not just flailing of extremities.
And RE eywitness testimonies, all the redactions made by the regime show me that some important truths were told by some.
Your "I am the coming day..." says it all.
IMO, the "mummy" is a piece of cladding. An aluminum sheet, hence the way is floats down.
There were very few, if any, real victims on 9/11. There may have been some incidental, accidental deaths, relating to the plot to bring down skyscrapers, but they would have been almost exclusively co-conspirators to the action.
In the world of "us against them," you can't plot to kill the "us" part, otherwise not everyone would join you in the exercise of superiority and exceptionalism, which defines American manifest destiny. They'd be thinking, "is my turn next?"
In that spirit, nothing signifies 9/11 was a plot more than the fact that no one was punished for any lapses and failures that led up to it. Stupidly, not even as faked fall guys.
Why anyone would hold onto the macabre snuff-film aspects of an overwritten, made-for-TV movie like the jumpers, as being actual reality, is only a state of willful, childish denial.
I should think you'd be pleased by a theory that lessens the horror, at least on our side. You all are trying too hard, it's all in one direction, and that's called gatekeeping.
"There were very few, if any, real victims on 9/11."
That's total bullshit.
"In the world of "us against them," you can't plot to kill the "us" part, otherwise not everyone would join you in the exercise of superiority and exceptionalism, which defines American manifest destiny. They'd be thinking, "is my turn next?""
That makes no sense.
Saying there were jumpers is hardly gatekeeping. I have even seen a pic of smashed body on the ground. Don't have the link handy-- you'll have to take my word for it.
I am really not a fan of the everything is fake about 9/11 theory. That sort of ridiculous over-reach seems designed precisely to give a bad name to 9/11 researchers.
I also wonder if in the one video, we are seeing the shadow of the jumper, and not cladding, but it's a minor point.
And yes, there appears to be many witnesses of jumpers bodies or body parts (before "collapse.") And I don't mean the TV producer type of witness--who claimed they saw planes fly into the towers, sometimes from miles away.
SW reminds now of the DEW agents who said ALL firemen and all others are liars or such when they said they saw flowing molten metal and many other signs of great heat weeks and months later. And even disparaged photographic proof, such as the desperate "Cheeto" mockery of proof of molten metal weeks later. That was the DEWmeister claiming (without any proof) that a real photo was fake!! Let's not forget that PsyOp that SW may be mimicking now.
So in the final analysis, there is nothing here, which is why I wondered why even quote anything from this guy? And obviously the physics of falling bodies is not important to his "theories." He learned all he needed to know about everything in that bagel store.
He is "the coming day."
And BTW, his last post gives hints that he believes there were planes that hit the towers.
If I recall he either goes with the gravitational collapse or was it DEW or thermite? How about it??
The issue of jumpers or how many were real, or were some PUSHED as I have shown an FDNY LT stated, is secondary to the questions of
who did it
and the fact that nuclear bombs were used and the China Syndrome resulted.
A.P.
P.S. Is he now saying, just above, that (virtually) no one died that morning?
His first para: "There were very few, if any, real victims on 9/11. There may have been some incidental, accidental deaths, relating to the plot to bring down skyscrapers, but they would have been almost exclusively co-conspirators to the action."
See what I mean about why quote this guy?? Anyone who does seems to lose credibility, given the absurdities coming from him.
There's more from SW I see.
His "I should think you'd be pleased by a theory that lessens the horror," indicates that he is fabricating a theory to "lessen the horror." And he thinks someone who has basically proved that nukes were used and that the China Syndrome resulted would go with some absurdity about "reducing" the horror??
You can see the agents in tandem. Recently we have some idiotic intel assets trying to counter all the vaporization of tower material by claiming that the towers' contents were carted away surreptitiously in the days or weeks before 9/11! And maybe SW's Op is to now say there were no vaporized bodies, because no one was in the towers!?
The PTB do this tandem thing, like pushing the same number at the same time in news stories. Here we have the PsyOp that "nothing was vaporized because there was nothing in the towers."
All to hide the nukes and the CSA, which I have declared and shown is the main focus--post-9/11--of the British-American gestapo regime.
A.P.
O.K., so A.P. admits by default that the fireman's histories were not "sworn testimony."
Moving on, is he also the person who posted that I am "writing metaphorical crap," when I imagine he meant to say that I write "metaphysical crap?"
That, at least, is an argument others have made, which I can understand and disagree with. To float a hypothetical theory and then see how it fits with other facts one has previously fixed, is the process whereby I use both my imagination and my common sense. I then present my process transparently.
Apparently, you guys have incorrectly fixed certain facts, and in other cases can't even choose to use the write word! [sic]
I don't need to argue who is "intel" working a "pys-op" with two people who go by the names "spooked" and "Anonymous Physicist." Facts like these speak for themselves. If you want verification for anything that I'm about, you know how to find me.
If nuclear weapons can dissolve steel beams into a dark dust high up in the air amid white smoke, then nuclear weapons may be a component of the destruction of the WTC. Otherwise I go with an unrevealed type of DEW, which could dissolve (dustify), rather than blast or melt, steel.
You people have made little progress in this cause in the several years I have been following this blog. This reminds me of the "north of the Citgo" camp.
Spooked, thanks for your position hazarding that the first WPIX video depicts aluminum cladding. That is a valid counter-argument to what well may turn out to be my over-active imagination, but your explanation is made ridiculous by your fellow poster arguing "terminal velocity" between two different body types as causing differences as great as we see in the videos on my blog.
And A.P., it's the British-American-Israeli gestapo regime. Never forget that.
You first have to understand some physics to get to metaphysics, so that leaves you out.
As ever, you can only write with distortion. If I wrote metaphorical, I meant that, not metaphysical. You use language to distort. (Physics you leave out completely.)
And intel creature, it has been amply demonstrated that the Israeli regime is nothing but a bottom of the totem pole entity.
When I write about the Kennedy Assassination, I do NOT include the Mafia, because any such involvement was incidental and solely to have another limited hangout to divert from the those who really are in charge and ordered it, and did it and covered it up, and still do.
Anyone who wants to insert Israel as in charge of ANYTHING (including their own country, let alone the USA) is so blatantly obviously an intel agent or asset of them or of the secret societies--so desperate to divert away from themselves. Or someone duped by all those--like you--who have that Op of promulgating that crap.
Such assets so readily give themselves away with that. Playing up to racists and anti-Semites, all the more easily because of the Israeli regime's foul treatment of the Palestinian people--but again that too is ordered out of London and Rome.
Metaphorical meathead, only imbeciles or intel/secret society vermin try to tout the bottom of the totem pole as the top.
It's an easy giveaway.
As is most of what you write.
Like now:
1. Hardly anyone died in the destruction of the WTC. Can we please have a #? 1, 5, 10, a hundred, 500? Note the similarity to Holocaust deniers--"only a small # of Jews died in it"--despite vast proof and Eichmann's own admission at his trial of gleefully admitting to forcing 5 million to gas chambers himself!
2. DEW did the WTC
3. Planes went into the towers
4. No jumpers, just fakery or whatever.
Nothing of value or accuracy comes out of you. And I still stand by the fact that much truth was said by many of the responders in the 503 statements, and have highlighted what was remarkable proving nukes, EMP, jumpers being pushed etc. One can only wonder at what the regime needed to redact.
And your using your real name with impunity, only helps PROVE that YOU are with the PTB, and feel you have nothing to fear (unless a real revolution occurs and/or the Q'ers do their thing.)
Your own words hang you--you ADMIT above to wanting to create a theory that has few people dying on 9/11, just as many intel vermin want to claim that only a relatively small # of non-combatants died at the hands of the Nazis--when again some 13 million people of all "denominations" were exterminated, all ordered out of London and Rome ultimately.
Your Ops noted herein are clear.
As I have trouble forcing myself to read the detritus from this person, I did not give him enough "credit" for what I see now above.
Above SW wrote:
"...I go with an unrevealed type of DEW, which could dissolve (dustify), rather than blast or melt, steel.
"You people have made little progress in this cause in the several years I have been following this blog. This reminds me of the "north of the Citgo" camp."
Here is the essence of this disinformationalist.
His use of "unrevealed" jibberish speaks massively for itself. Only a disinfo agent would revel in a non-theory as theory. He still uses Wood's terminology--another giveaway of his controller.
Then to claim I have gotten nowhere, when my works have amply demonstrated the nuking of the WTC and the China Syndrome Aftermath. I have also highlighted with Physics and Math, all the bogus "science" from the govt's official papers, and also the other "theories" bogus science as well. (That's at another blog, or in my books.)
You are one fucking liar to deny all that. If it got to nothing, it is because no readers have taken it anywhere, and because all the larger conspiracy sites are populated with your ilk--they have reused to ever cite my articles.
I have even called for criminal charge to be brought against the regime's main "collapse" author, ZP Bazant, as I PROVED he lied RE the smallest dust particle size found, which all his bogus equations then depend on.
But nearly no one made a stink about that--though it is a slam dunk to convict him of fraud. But the regime is in charge of everything. And only intel agents waste or have time and money for civil lawsuits in the regime's courts.
And you foul creature, just use circular logic and state all this research has made no progress. It's been proven, and the other "theories" have been disproven--despite your continuing Op with "DEW."
What I have to do is force myself to ignore it if Spooked cites anything from you, as it is a waste of time, and gives you credence that you don't merit, and detracts from things here.
Everything you ever wrote is meant to divert from the truth.
Your
yes-to planes
yes-to "unrevealed DEW"
no-to thousands died
no-to nukes and CSA
no-to jumpers
Should be left in your own void.
How often does your work turn up in Google searches AP?
How often does your work START OFF at Google (CIA)?
Post a Comment
<< Home