 Some people only believe whatever conspiracy theory their govt tells them!
| ||
 | UPDATED Doubt- Buster page |
|
Frame 21 is evidence
Does something about
the 1st WTC impact
look fishy to you, too?
of a conspiracy not
adequately explained by
"guys with boxcutters"
|
WHERE DID THESE IMAGES COME FROM? The above images were extracted, unaltered but cropped, from a QuickTime movie found on the internet. Having compared these frames to those from one of the first broadcasts (without NR), by Univision, we now feel we can vouch for the authenticity of the images in the QT movie being discussed here -- they do appear to be a valid portrayal of the critical part of what is known as the French Fireman Video or Gamma Press Video (scroll down; look under 'The Attacks'). (more sources) This is the only known video of the 1st WTC tower plane crash, and it first became available on September 12th, the day after 9/11! Until then, we had all seen endless replays of a 767 crashing into the 2nd WTC tower, and we'd also seen a huge gaping hole in the side of the 1st tower. And by then we all (were so sure we) knew what that (had) meant...
SO WHAT'S THE POINT? There are two, actually: 1)no one saw this video on TV on the morning of 9/11, and 2)there is something fishy about the 1st WTC plane crash. We're going to cover the 2nd point first. We're saving the 1st point for later (followed by links and a brief quiz).
WHAT DO THESE IMAGES SHOW? If someone had shown us this video on or before September 10th, 2001, we're not sure what we would have made of it. But following 9/11, we all know (or at least think we do) what happens -- and what it looks like -- when a Boeing 767 flies into a WTC tower. It's spooky how, from far enough away, it appears almost peaceful the instant the airplane enters the building. We've heard it described as like a bird returning to its nest. From a distance, for that instant, it's as if the tower just swallowed the airplane whole. Contrast that with the unexplained unusual explosive impact we see above:
note: the video frames at the top of this page should be looping if the images have finished loading OK. If so, click the display's STOP button to gain frame-by-frame control of the loop by then clicking the adjacent buttons. If the frames are not looping well, make sure your web browser's cache or "temporary internet files" setting -- when to check for newer version of files -- is not set to "every 'visit'". If necessary, try setting it to "never" and/or restarting your web browser. Frames 1-3: Some eyewitnesses reported that they'd seen a smaller, non-jumbo-jet plane strike the 1st tower. We recall thinking what idiots such witnesses must've been -- why, just look at the size of that hole in the 1st tower! The gaping hole, of course, was well-televised, after the plane had disappeared forever (though what was visible through that gaping hole -- and the hole's size and shape -- remains of interest). But in the first 3 frames, the fuzzy outline of the plane seems to show a smallish plane, with a smallish wing without an engine! Remember, a 767 has a rather large engine in each wing.
Frames 14-20: It's excruciating. Click by click, frame by frame, the plane approaches the 1st tower, until you can see the shadow of the plane on the face of the tower. It will only be another frame or two before the plane and its shadow converge on the face of the tower...
Frame 21: What the *&#@^!? Just as the plane is about to strike the 1st tower, it appears there is some kind of explosion, which must have been inside the tower in order to force the wall outward. Did the plane fire some weapon at the tower just before it flew into it? We don't know. We do know that we have always noticed a very unusual kind of syncopation to the 1st impact every time we've seen the video. It appears quite unlike the smooth entry of a 767 into the 2nd tower. This discrepancy needs to be explained. (Perhaps Republican Senator Arlen Specter can whip up a magic airplane theory or a magic skyscraper wall theory this time.)
This bright flash of light comes and goes so unnaturally quickly (~ 15 msec) that its energy source is certainly not chemical/conventional. Frame 22 (plane enters 1st tower): While there is possibly still some visible evidence of the mysterious frame 21 event, this frame is approximately what one would expect to see had frame 21 not been so highly anomalous. It's as if a mystery explosion took place just before/as the plane entered the building, and the plane is momentarily pushing/carrying much of the explosion's initial impulse back into the tower.
Frame 23 (left wing visible, about to reach tower)
Frame 24 (left wing reaches tower?)
Frame 25 Left wing disappears. No large gaping hole appears, yet. Plane is perhaps halfway into the 1st tower, and explosion gases, which cast a shadow on the face of the tower, are again expanding outward. How very different from the 2nd, well-televised tower impact (ie, the one that was intended to be seen, endlessly replayed, and reviewable)!
Frames 26-27 Now it appears the explosion gases are exiting along what will soon be a large, gaping hole in the tower's exterior wall corresponding to a jumbo jet's left wing.
Frame 28 Now we finally begin to see similar evidence of a right wing.
Frames 29-30 The explosion gases begin to emerge from an expanding area corresponding to a jumbo jet's right wing. Why didn't both wings appear to make their apparent large gaping holes at the same instant?
Frames 31-end The explosion gases are expanding outward from the tower along what will soon be a large, gaping hole in the tower's exterior wall. They are casting quite a shadow on the face of the tower. The other walls have still not yet been breached. This is the exact opposite of what we have been shown it looks like when a flying 767 first enters a passive WTC tower.
Perhaps someday the US federal government's 9/11 Commission will examine it. Perhaps it will (attempt to) explain it away. And perhaps it never will. (Send an email to the 9/11 commission! Write your US Rep. and Contact your Senators and demand that the 9/11 Commission concentrate on the obvious visible discrepancies between The Official Government Fable Of 9/11 and what observably happened on 9/11, and cease its diversionary, faith-based 'investigation' into what did not happen prior to "it") (UPDATE: Bush to testify, in private, and not alone!) Meanwhile, as long as everyone's entire way of thinking is based (and much of the U.S. federal government reorganized and changed to include diminished individual rights and freedoms) upon what happened on 9/11, the "terrorists" -- the bad guys -- will have won. And that would be true even if we knew with certainty exactly what 9/11 was, which we do not.
|
|
Now here's where the conspiracy stuff gets really creepy! (video video) (another, analysis)
Quite apart from the visual evidence of a suspicious impact in the video is the question of its availability. It only became available -- the world only became aware of its existence! -- on September 12th, the day after the deadly attacks. (And it remained the only known video until 2003, when an amateur video, not showing the actual impact, surfaced.) So HOW could Fearless Leader GW Bush have seen the 1st plane hit the 1st tower in (near-)real-time on the morning of the attacks??? No, we're not kidding. The truth really is out there; assuming you want it, and think you can handle it, you just have to know where to look for it. And we're about to show you: http://911blimp.net/aud_BushImplicatesBush.shtml is a good place to start. It not only has a good audio file of (so you can hear with your own ears) Bush saying he saw the first plane hit the first tower on the morning of the attacks, and a phrase-by-phrase analysis of what Bush said, but it also has links to the official transcript at www.WhiteHouse.gov. Listen to the audio. In his own inimitable bushistic fashion, Bush makes it clear he saw the first plane hit the first tower before he entered that Florida classroom (at around 9 am) on 9/11. And if there's one thing Bush knows, it's watching TV! We know what you're thinking: half the time, Bush has no clue what's coming out of his own mouth. Surely we can't believe Bush was "in the loop" on the 9/11 attacks just because he says he saw it happen on TV, even though it wasn't on (any regular/civilian) TV at the time (not even the day!) Bush says he saw it. But Bush has made this claim on at least two separate, fully documented, occasions! In addition to the time Bush told this to young Jordan at a "Town Hall Meeting" with displaced workers in Florida on December 4th 2001 ("I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -[of an of a T you know]- the TV was obviously on."), he did it again in a "Town Hall Forum" in California on January 5th 2002: "first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on.". So, do you think maybe Defendant Bush saw a plane fly into the first building, or not???
What channel/network/satellite/planet do you think Bush was tuned to? None of the commercial networks had video of the 1st impact that morning -- they weren't expecting it; they did not have cameras trained on the WTC waiting for secret attack(s) to begin... Remember, the first known video of the first plane flying into the first WTC tower surfaced the day after it happened. SO HOW THE HELL DID BUSH SEE IT HAPPEN IN REAL-TIME FROM 1000+ MILES AWAY? Or, to put it another way, what did Bush know, when did he know it, how did he know it, and did he know that he knew it?
Do you think maybe the 43rd* President of the United States of America has some explaining to do, or what? (Bush then) (Bush now)
|
Discovery consists of seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought.
A Trick Question:
Which of the 9/11 crashes was the most highly anomalous?
