See other 9/11 Articles
Title: What We Saw [video]
Source:
Google Videos
URL Source: http://video.google.com/videoplay?d ... 6024#docid=5474006551011489413
Published: Sep 30, 2010
Author: N/A
Post Date: 2010-09-30 06:22:32 by Eric Stratton
Keywords: None
Views: 520
Comments: 33
Poster Comment: Note the "hiccup" in the film footage at about the 11:45 mark, the time of the hit of the second tower. Otherwise a very interesting perspective that I'd not seen.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Eric Stratton, titorite, GreyLmist, randge, *9-11* (#0)
(Edited)
The part where we would have seen the alleged plane flying towards the tower has been conveniently edited out. Coincidence? I think not. Not looking good for the planers.
Thanks for the ping. Yep, I too think that "convenient hiccup" was not a coincidence. There were art students with construction passes in residence at the WTC for months until 9/11. They did a stunt of taking out a window and putting a small balcony there. A helicopter showed up with a high level NYC official in it to see their "daredevilish art show". That was reported in the NYT. Maybe it was a dress rehearsal of sorts. I've wondered if any of the helicopters flying close to the buildings might have been there to pick them up. I've also wondered if maybe they aren't the ones who locked the doors to the roof so no one would see them get picked up there.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
12:12 - "Oh my God! It was a military plane!"
I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. Thank you. - Roman Moroni
What are we talkin' here. I do not get the point.
~~~~~~~ deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
I hate that part. ;-)
It might be interesting to play with Voice Stress Analysis Freeware to see what it tells us about 911 audio and video. Don't have time right now to fool with it. What do you think of this?? 8=]
I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. Thank you. - Roman Moroni
If that was supposed to be a link, could you please repost it so that it's activated? I'd be very interested in your 9/11 audio and video analytical findings.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
That link is indeed permanently broken. Here are some others:
I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. Thank you. - Roman Moroni
Thanks. Would that lie-detection research be ethical as evidence, though, or at least ok for informal discussion purposes? I'm asking because Jeff Hill's alleged pumpitout.com phone interviews were eventually compared to illegal wiretapping. It didn't occur to me that was what he was doing and I haven't seen any court complaints filed from those he supposedly contacted for spontaneous questioning regarding 9/11 so that was probably all a staged-op. I'm not a lawyer and don't know what the protocols might be for voice analysis of criminal suspects who haven't been charged as yet for prosecution but might be at some point. Rense has posted some reverse-speech analysis articles of public figures and that's not been legally problematic.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I don't think that analyzing speech published in the public domain is any way as privileged as that recorded during a phone call. You should consult a lawyer if this makes your knees knock together. But I wouldn't worry about it myself.
I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. Thank you. - Roman Moroni
Just wanted to be cautious. Your assessment sounds lawyerly enough for me.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
The "Oh my God! It was a military plane!" would certainly be more convincing if they hadn't conveniently cut out the part where it would have been seen flying towards the tower. How would she have recognized it as a military plane? This whole 9/11 thing just gets weirder and weirder.
@ 12:40: "They're attacking the World Trade Center, not us." And why would they be so sure that only the WTC was the attack target there? Weird spaceship-like noises early on in the video. Also, maybe it's just me but the firetruck sirens around the first 5 mins. sound almost like a synthesized voice saying, "I think that..." randge, can you do anything to analyze that by slowing it down or running it through voice software or something? Wouldn't surprise me if they even inserted a backwards subliminal message. The pre-strike footage (of unknown date and time but an identical angle) in this video is kinda weird in that, like a commenter suggested, it could explain what streaming video Bush was allegedly viewing when he claimed to see the supposed first plane hit but then it would be even weirder that CNN ran ABC film of WTC 1 burning "post-impact" and not their own. 911 CNN footage before planes hit
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Can't do much today. I'm busy, sorry to say. I wondered if the owner of the female voice that said it was a "military plane" could have seen a plane from the assumed trajectory of the object that hit the South Tower. I did find this video, which you might find interesting too.
I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. Thank you. - Roman Moroni
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
does it really matter if planes hit or not? given the fact that the 'no planes' position would sound even weirder & more incredible to the average person who needs to learn that it was an inside job, i think they need to be schooled on false flags etc & tyranny, & liberty, more than delving into a river that leads nowhere.
"if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing." 1 Cor 12:31—13:13 I understand, but, be it right or wrong, I don't care too much what the average person thinks. Discovering the truth of the matter is more important than giving a sugar coated half truth to appease the masses. Like Ron Paul. You know we both lost respect for him when he denied 9/1 was an inside job. Same principle applies to every other situation imo. Most average people are incapable of believing the truth anyway. There is an abundance of evidence indicating that no planes and nukes (or some sort of exotic weapons) were used. That most people don't get that is troubling.
No planes: There is no such thing as a lie detector. Even if it accurately detects elevated stress what you have is an elevated stress detector which can be caused by several things. The polygraph as we know it is a "mechanical Charlie McCarthy" and the govt in general and the FBI in particular cling to the unscientific technology for one simple reason; they can use it to eliminate pain in the ass applicants and those they just don't like. People like Richard Nixon were refused (By Hoover himself) because Nixon had that Five O'Clock Shadow by 10AM, and Hoover preferred a certain non-swarthy type as agents. (fair haired Mormons for instance) Also, whenever buttheads show up who claim that they've never told a lie or stolen anything in their lives they are automatically dumped. The FBI wants "team players" not fanatics who actually believe in moral absolutes. Those types are likely to turn whistleblower when they see how the FBI lab, agents, lawyers etc.,. actually handle evidence, or how they destroy enemies like Martin Luther King. If you read some of the letters to the govt by people who were devastated because they supposedly failed a polygraph exam it's easy to see why some were weeded out. Some actually believed that if they did everything right (as they did in elementary school) then they can stand up to the govt starting with the examiner who failed them. No govt agency wants that type of moralistic, anal retentive asshole trying to change things from the inside, any more than the shadow govt wants an honest American with no dirty laundry as president. The dirty little secret of polygraph is the control question, and those anal types can't be tricked into playing the control question game so an examiner doesn't have "an intentionally manipulated untruthful response" for comparison to other (presumably truthful) responses and that irritates examiners. Not because the applicant told the truth but because he/she wouldn't allow the examiner to feel clever for having manipulated them. So, they fail people who really do believe they have nothing to hide or who won't lie even if it's obvious that it's expected of them. For example, the examiner may say, "Before we begin you need to know that the FBI will not hire anyone who ever consumed alcohol as a minor", knowing that nearly everyone has, forcing most people to lie and to show stress that can be measured against honest replies. It's easy to see why goody two shoes and teachers' pets upset the whole process and why they are dumped. In short, honesty is no defense against a malicious, egotistical, drunk-with-power-polygraph-examiner-hatchetman, and those applicants who insist they are right and the FBI is wrong may never understand; that is the very reason they failed the exam. They go through life devastated by govt's rejection and praying for vindication (the restoration of their halos) that will never come. Why? Because they're assholes who believe in absolute truth and they have no place in the US govt. It takes longer to complete barber school than polygraph training, and polygraph is based on voodoo science and people's ignorance, not a provable method for lie detection. All of the nuclear spies who worked for govt (and the screwups at Livermore labs) passed their polygraphs which is positive proof that it's a scam. If you read this you need never fear polygraph, and if you want to disqualify yourself from testing all you have to do is let on that you know the "dirty little secret" about the "control question". The examiner will be enraged like a crook roulette dealer whose secret stop pedal was exposed and you will automatically disqualify yourself as "govt material", but the more people learn the truth the sooner the govt will stop ruining people for reasons that have nothing to do with the test.
It should matter to everyone concerned about 9/11 Truth and Justice. That sounds rather condescending, Artisan, like: "They can't handle the Truth!" It is the weirdly incredible Fantastic Four Planes props that have been muddying the waters all these years regarding 9/11 as an inside job false flag op. The No Planes position removes all doubt about it so that it should be easier for people see that it was an inside job false flag op. They can learn about that, tyranny, and liberty faster and better when not spellbound by the 9/11 Illusionists. Far from leading nowhere, the No Planes path leads where many fear to tread: the Black Market of dual use plane parts, which Boeing has been involved in over 100 times. It leads directly to other mafiosos in the media and elsewhere. Other than that, it's basically mundane criminal investigations of insurance and 9/11 Fund scamming, that sort of thing in order to charge the perps in those phases of the attacks as well so that they don't escape undetected. What's the real motive for "planers" who insist like criminal accomplices that no one should look at any of that seriously? Overthrow of the Constitution and more war, probably, in addition to aiding and abetting the escape of suspects and their accessories by obstructing Justice.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
There is an abundance of evidence indicating that no planes and nukes (or some sort of exotic weapons) were used. That most people don't get that is troubling. I don't think it's so much that they are incapable of believing the truth as they believed what they thought they saw and what they were told by those they trusted. I don't even think it's so much that they don't want to admit to themselves that they were mistaken as it is a "karma-thing" of sorts for many. Not that I believe there's any such thing as "karma" -- too much evidence against that with evil flourishing at the expense of the innocent and goodhearted -- but many have worked extensively to make the No Planes sector an object of derision so they'd rather not find themselves there, at least not openly where they might have to endure what they've dished out. If they just quit being derisive and obstuctive that would be a big improvement.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Thanks for the informative post, HOUNDDAWG. I checked the linked sites and read some of the stories. It's not much of a comparison but I was reminded of a computer exam where nearly the entire class supposedly failed, A level students included. No doubt that was a big money bonus for the company administering the exam who was contracted to readminister it, whereupon everybody passed, iirc. Quite a racket, I thought. I do suspect the polygraph has been used so, as well as to fabricate clearances for spies like Aldrich Ames and Wen Ho Lee and others working against America, and also to prevent good people from serving this country and their communities well. At the very least it's a big moneymaking industry and special interest group tending towards a reign of terror with no policing of it -- kind of like the Fed Res -- and this is a disturbing example, imo: The polygraph community recently pressured the governor of California into vetoing a bill passed by the state assembly and senate that would have required all polygraph examinations to be videotaped. How many professions exist with such power to affect one's life where the way the job is conducted is free from external scrutiny?
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
If you're still busy, could you recommend an application or some equipment to check those firetruck siren noises for voice synthesizing? They also sound oddly stationary to me for a supposed emergency vehicle on its way to the WTC disaster. What do you think about the downward trajectory and coloring of the smoke in that film compared to news footage like this: I think that's one I have tried to study before but, again, the trajectory of the smoke over the plane in the very beginning of the film is contradictory to the angle of the smoke in news footage of a plane image approach over the water. "Parallax View" just doesn't explain such a flight path variation to me and I find it astounding that what we're expected to focus on instead of that obvious discrepancy is a bunch of speed variation estimates and what not. Rather than trying to be useful in analyzing the different camera angles, I think that research is being used to obscure the fakery issues and mislead. I'm not singling out the maker of that video in particular. There are others bending over backwards to do that. P.S. Where did they even get the altitude data for that film? Transponders off = no altitude transmissions, afaik, unless there was some special Military tracking involved.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Great stuff!! Thank you, Eric. There are several things about the Bob and Bri video that are strangely suspicous, besides the dubious sound effects and smoke discrepancies that I mentioned in my previous posts. One is the oddly shaped corner near the bottom of WTC 1. Doesn't look like it was built that way, doesn't look like it was marred by debris, and it "heals" just before WTC 2 collapses. A firetruck looks like it's leaving the area instead of arriving. No fire is seen in the gash on WTC 1 for some time, not even flickering light like a fire is the cause of so much smoke, and when it does appear around the outer edges, it's minimal compared to the collapse-by-fire excuses. There is very little explosion damage seen on the right side of the building at first and then it starts to widen firelessly later in the film. When fire is seen there, it's like an afterthought and on a small scale. Here are some videos of flashes at WTC 1 and WTC 6 noticed by others:
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
for you to attribute a desire for war & tyranny to truthers who don't hold the no plane position is unfair & innacurate. i look at things in the public influence realm always keeping in mind the basic sad reality: people ARE dumb, gullible, & too busy scraping by to give a shit less about 9/11 any more than they'd consider jfk murder as relevant to their daily lives. if i can even foment a shred of interest in this issue with the average person i consider it a great triumph. i don't believe the perps of 911 will be punished on earth, unfortunately. my goal on 911 is to educate individuals so that they can have what's called a properly informed conscience. they thus will not support the myriad of evils promoted under the guise of 9/11/01. i have no problem with you promoting your version of events, which is a deeper level of a specific topic: how the criminals actually pulled it off.
"if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing." 1 Cor 12:31—13:13 Related 4um topic cross-reference:
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I don't attribute motives to overthrow the Constitution and for more war to genuine truthers. I attribute those motives to those I suspect are plants to "drive the getaway cars", so to speak, for the perps and themselves by insisting like criminal accomplices that no one should look at the No Planes research seriously. Good luck to you. Try to keep in mind, though, that many may have loved ones involved in the resultant wars and it's an especially difficult task for them to see 9/11 as an inside job and their loved ones endangered because of that. Thanks for saying so. God Bless you and your efforts.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
thanks. when i have time, ill watch some of the no planer videos. it is interesting & i wouldn't put anything past anyone. plus, if wud believes it, it can't be all bad. :-)
"if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing." 1 Cor 12:31—13:13 a few years ago i got to yell at hilary clinton as she walked into some ballroom in beverly hills. all her idiot fans were clapping for her & i shouted 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB, WE KNOW YOU CLINTON! YOU AND YOUR BILDERBERG HUSBAND! YOUR NEW WORLD ORDER WILL FAIL, YOU ARE GOING DOWN! i didnt have my videocam with me but to my absolute glee, (lol) it - the first line of my rant, anyway, was picked up by the goofy gossip tv show tmz. it aired on fox. hillarys secret service guy is seen looking back at me on camera. its not much, but its telling 'truth to power' which felt good, lol.
"if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing." 1 Cor 12:31—13:13 Hahaha Thank you :-)
Very insightful. :) Here's a video called "Holmgren Typewriter": This is a video of a No Planes pioneer, Gerard Holmgren, who was also quite a good guitarist: ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Wow. I'd like to see that news clip. Standing ovation for you! :)
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Note the "hiccup" in the film footage at about the 11:45 mark, the time of the hit of the second tower. Otherwise a very interesting perspective that I'd not seen.
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#2. To: wudidiz (#1)
(Edited)
#3. To: wudidiz (#1)
Note the "hiccup"
#4. To: Eric Stratton (#0)
OneDollarDVDProject.com
#5. To: wakeup (#4)
#6. To: randge (#3)
12:12 - "Oh my God! It was a military plane!"
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#7. To: wudidiz (#6)
#8. To: randge (#7)
Voice Stress Analysis Freeware
#9. To: GreyLmist (#8)
#10. To: randge (#9)
#11. To: GreyLmist (#10)
#12. To: randge (#11)
#13. To: GreyLmist, randge (#12)
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#14. To: wudidiz, randge, Eric Stratton, all (#13)
(Edited)
How would she have recognized it as a military plane?
This whole 9/11 thing just gets weirder and weirder.
#15. To: GreyLmist (#14)
#16. To: GreyLmist (#14)
#17. To: wudidiz (#13)
This whole 9/11 thing just gets weirder
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#18. To: Artisan (#17)
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#19. To: Artisan (#17)
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#20. To: GreyLmist (#10)
Thanks. Would that lie-detection research be ethical as evidence, though, or at least ok for informal discussion purposes?
#21. To: Artisan (#17)
(Edited)
does it really matter if planes hit or not?
given the fact that the 'no planes' position would sound even weirder & more incredible to the average person who needs to learn that it was an inside job, i think they need to be schooled on false flags etc & tyranny, & liberty, more than delving into a river that leads nowhere.
#22. To: wudidiz (#18)
Most average people are incapable of believing the truth anyway.
#23. To: HOUNDDAWG (#20)
#24. To: randge (#15)
(Edited)
Can't do much today. I'm busy, sorry to say.
I wondered if the owner of the female voice that said it was a "military plane" could have seen a plane from the assumed trajectory of the object that hit the South Tower.
I did find this video, which you might find interesting too.
#25. To: Eric Stratton (#16)
Wow!
#26. To: GreyLmist (#21)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#27. To: HOUNDDAWG (#20)
#28. To: Artisan (#26)
(Edited)
for you to attribute a desire for war & tyranny to truthers who don't hold the no plane position is unfair & innacurate.
i look at things in the public influence realm always keeping in mind the basic sad reality: people ARE dumb, gullible, & too busy scraping by to give a shit less about 9/11 any more than they'd consider jfk murder as relevant to their daily lives. if i can even foment a shred of interest in this issue with the average person i consider it a great triumph.
i don't believe the perps of 911 will be punished on earth, unfortunately. my goal on 911 is to educate individuals so that they can have what's called a properly informed conscience. they thus will not support the myriad of evils promoted under the guise of 9/11/01. i have no problem with you promoting your version of events, which is a deeper level of a specific topic: how the criminals actually pulled it off.
#29. To: GreyLmist, wudidiz (#28)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#30. To: GreyLmist, wudidiz, hounddawg (#28)
God bless you and your efforts
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#31. To: Artisan (#29)
....if wud believes it, it can't be all bad. :-)
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#32. To: Artisan, wudidiz (#29)
(Edited)
when i have time, ill watch some of the no planer videos. it is interesting & i wouldn't put anything past anyone. plus, if wud believes it, it can't be all bad. :-)
Swingblues in Sydney
Uploaded by GerardHolmgren. - Explore more music videos.
#33. To: Artisan (#30)
a few years ago i got to yell at hilary clinton as she walked into some ballroom in beverly hills. all her idiot fans were clapping for her & i shouted 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB, WE KNOW YOU CLINTON! YOU AND YOUR BILDERBERG HUSBAND! YOUR NEW WORLD ORDER WILL FAIL, YOU ARE GOING DOWN! i didnt have my videocam with me but to my absolute glee, (lol) it - the first line of my rant, anyway, was picked up by the goofy gossip tv show tmz. it aired on fox. hillarys secret service guy is seen looking back at me on camera. its not much, but its telling 'truth to power' which felt good, lol.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest