See other 9/11 Articles
Title: New 9/11 3D Analysis Suggests Top Secret Device Hit World Trade Center
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/0 ... device-hit-world-trade-center/
Published: Aug 12, 2010
Author: Johnny Punish
Post Date: 2010-08-21 05:36:30 by wudidiz
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 9333
Comments: 111
New 9/11 3D Analysis Suggests Top Secret Device Hit World Trade Center
Poster Comment: Credit to Itistoolate
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 48.
#1. To: wudidiz (#0)
Disclaimer: Veterans Today does NOT endorse the conclusions in the video posted below. The post merely presents the questions and asks for readers to participate. Almost 10 years on, with no clear explanation why Building 7 collapsed after not being hit by anything but underground media scrutiny, we all seem to feel that something does NOT fit. 9/11 just does NOT pass the smell test. In fact it stinks. Almost 10 years, we are still engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Neo-Con wars of the first decade are still with us crawling their way into history books. Whether the video analysis below is true or not, we have so many questions ie… Oh heck, watch this video and comment on the analysis below….
So that's what did it. LOL! Hmm, I think I will be a "Non-Commissioned Investigator" and see what screwball "theory" I can come up with. It will involve naked women, UFOs, Bigfoot, green paint, and a fly swatter. .
how strange! you somehow forgot to give your explanation of the object that was filmed. the object without wings or fuselage. probably just an oversight on your part. go ahead now, and provide your theory on what it was. i'm sure you have it all thought out.
you somehow forgot to give your explanation of the object that was filmed. the object without wings or fuselage. probably just an oversight on your part. go ahead now, and provide your theory on what it was. i'm sure you have it all thought out. Don't bug him, he's a busy man. Watch a 20 minute video? I don't think so. Think of all the niggers you could hate in 20 minutes.
And what is that supposed to mean? Is that some kind of canuckistani joke? You know what the problem with you people (canuckistanis) is, you're smug. You're smug with zero experience, and you have zero reason to be smug or arrogant about anything.
And what is that supposed to mean? Did you watch the video? It's 22 minutes long. Watch the whole thing then I'll tell you what I meant.
I watched this video again for the fourth time. Fascinating. It seems certain there were no planes hit the WTC. It's obvious the tv video was faked. Absolutely no doubt. Just when I thought I knew everything....
I would be careful in drawing a conclusion. As was pointed out this could simply be another computer generated video to further confuse and discredit. You could make a video of Bozo the Clown flying into the towers with the right equipment and budget.
OI, the videos of planes hitting the towers were faked. It's completely obvious. I watched this video 4 times. What hit the towers weren't airliners. I know you can't watch this video, but here's an image to illustrate only 1 of the points: Same camera shot, same distance, same angle, same time (notice smoke cloud), different background. The picture on the left had no airliner in it. The faked one on the right did. Where did the background go? Why was there no plane in the original video? (Only on NBC)
You're taking for granted that the video you think was edited was done by ... someone. It could also be edited by the person that presented this video as "proof". But, lets look at the pic. Here it is, magnified by me. They're not the same. That object I drew around, I don't know what the hell that is. Maybe it's just an artifact, or maybe it's evidence of tampering, or maybe it's something else. But that puff of smoke I put the arrow on is different from the other pic. It was not shot at the same time.
I posted that picture because OI is not able to watch videos. Yet. If you watch the video here At 4:40 it compares the two videos.
Nice try. You said, and I quote you directly, that this was the Same camera shot, same distance, same angle, same time (notice smoke cloud), different background. The picture on the left had no airliner in it. The faked one on the right did. Where did the background go? Why was there no plane in the original video? (Only on NBC) I've shown that this was not the same camera shot, you don't know what the distance was, the angle is only similar. You can account for the different background by using 2 different altitudes. If you are higher up, you point the camera down, getting a different background than if you were at the same altitude pointing the camera parallel to the horizon, or not pointing the camera down at as steep of an angle. The pic on the right looks like it was taken from a lower altitude since you see more of the roof area on the pic on the left. This would not show the same background. .
Did you watch the video?
Why would I? I already debunked your claims about that pic. What good would it do to do that for the entire video? It would be pointless. .
Oh, you're a debunker now are you? You did no such thing. Not even close. Just because I didn't get into it with you about the picture doesn't mean you win by default. Watch the video that this thread is about or don't bother commenting on it to me as though you have any clue wtf you're talking about. All this coming from someone who thinks airplanes make clouds. Don't you have some niggers to hate somewhere?
You did no such thing. Not even close. Just because I didn't get into it with you about the picture doesn't mean you win by default. Watch the video that this thread is about or don't bother commenting on it to me as though you have any clue wtf you're talking about. All this coming from someone who thinks airplanes make clouds. Don't you have some niggers to hate somewhere? And there we have it. I suppose it was just a matter of time before you blew up. You have no one to blame but yourself. You are the one that made the claims about the pic that YOU posted. So doesn't it stand to reason that the claims you make on the entire video are likewise bogus? YOu keep saying "watch the video watch the video". Why should I? DId you or didn't you cherry pick the best "proof" that the video had to offer? If you can refute what I said in response to you and your claims, then do so. Do it out in the open for all to see. .
The picture I posted to OI was to illustrate to him that the background was removed. I did that because OI can't watch videos. You can. If you were to take the small amount of time to watch the portion I told you about starting at 4:40, you would see that the two videos are taken from the same point. The difference between the two is that one is original and the other is edited. You don't need to get hung up on the photo. Look past the photo. Look past the niggers. I took the time to find where in the 22 minute video you could watch the original NBC clip and the faked one. The least you could do is watch it so you would be informed to comment.
There are no replies to Comment # 48. End Trace Mode for Comment # 48.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestAnalysis by Non-Commissioned Investigator Shows Plane Footage Doctored Up to Hide Clandestine Remote Controlled Anti-Gravity Ball Hitting World Trade Center Building 2
Yesterday Richard D. Hall posted his new 3-D video analysis of 9/11 showing that a top secret anti-gravity vehicle that hit World Trade Center Building 2.
#6. To: HAPPY2BME-4UM, WTF is this shit??? (#1)
Analysis by Non-Commissioned Investigator Shows Plane Footage Doctored Up to Hide Clandestine Remote Controlled Anti-Gravity Ball Hitting World Trade Center Building 2
#7. To: PSUSA (#6)
#14. To: gengis gandhi (#7)
how strange!
#21. To: wudidiz (#14)
Think of all the niggers you could hate in 20 minutes.
#24. To: Flintlock (#21)
Think of all the niggers you could hate in 20 minutes.
"Watch the video, Flintlock."
#25. To: Original_Intent, christine, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, James Deffenbach, Itistoolate, noone222, Eric Stratton, HOUNDDAWG, gengis gandhi, GreyLmist, abraxas, All, *9-11*, *Black Ops - Psyops* (#24)
#29. To: wudidiz (#25)
#31. To: Original_Intent, Eric Stratton, gengis gandhi (#29)
I would be careful in drawing a conclusion.
#35. To: wudidiz (#31)
#36. To: PSUSA, Original_Intent (#35)
#37. To: wudidiz (#36)
#38. To: PSUSA (#37)
#44. To: wudidiz (#38)
Did you watch the video?
#45. To: PSUSA (#44)
I already debunked your claims about that pic.
#47. To: wudidiz, all (#45)
Oh, you're a debunker now are you?
#48. To: PSUSA, Original_Intent (#47)
Replies to Comment # 48.