UA 175: Who created this fake footage from this rare south view?

I took the work from September Clues and made it into something real instead of a rambling mess. Dick Oliver called the orb a remote controlled drone. He was on the ground and saw it floating just like it did in 4 live broadcasts.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB-rwWeL7Sg&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=126&feature=plpp_video]Dick Oliver Says Plane Was Remote Control Drone - YouTube[/ame]

 

Hmm, still looks like a rambling mess.

I would hate to have seen it before you "improved" it.

 

This is a great copy of the north tower drone. You can see it has no wings before it makes impact. The clowns who shot this were only several blocks north of the towers. If flight 11 had really crashed in NY it would have looked much like this plane landing.




[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MP5eFR97OX0&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=127&feature=plpp_video"]1st Plane Impact on 9/11, full version, slow - YouTube[/ame]

 

Mark, cryptically laughs at the end of his description, further proving that he was describing the slow moving drone, and falling short of confirming that it really wasn't a plane. It's no different than Jean Hill saying she saw the secret service shooting back, but falling short of fingering the driver. Of course it didn't belong in the area because it was a drone and not the boeing 767 it was supposed to be.

Eyewitness on 9/11 Mark Burnback was able to get a good view of the plane that hit the World Trade Center, because he said that the plane was flying very low. He explained to FOX News that the plane had no windows, a blue logo, and did not look like a commercial plane.

Fox NewsCaster: "Mark Burnback, a Fox employee, is on the phone with us. Mark witnessed this... Mark were you close enough to see any markings on the airplane?"

Mark Burnback: "Hi gentlemen. Yeah there was definitely a blue, circular logo on the front of the plane towards the front. It definitely did not look like a commercial plane. I did not see any windows on the side. It was definitely very low...

"Mark, if what you say is true, those could be cargo planes or something like that. You said you did not see any windows on the side?"

Mark Burnback: "I did not see any windows on the side. I saw the plane was flying low. I was probably a block away from the sub-way in Brooklyn and that plane came down very low, and again it was not a normal flight that I have ever seen at an airport. It was a plane with a blue logo on the front and it just looked like it did not belong in this area."

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYUs9u1YwV0"]Eyewitness Describes First Plane: No Windows, Blue Logo - YouTube[/ame]

 

wreckage from the planes found on top of neighboring buildings dispute the lie that there were 'no windows in the planes....

 

One of the sweetest vids you'll ever see.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfk0uMLhXqY&feature=related"]Dancing in the dark ( 88 live ) bruce springsteen - YouTube[/ame]

 

Some of you may or may not have seen this excellent citizen doc about the Pentagon. I promise that your 80 minutes will be well spent. I'll give you a hint...Flight 77 had to be south of the Citgo. Oh, and the cab driver find is freaking classic sleuthing.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o&feature=player_embedded"]NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK - YouTube[/ame]

 

No one saw a plane unless you can show a real one in news footage. You cannot do this because none exists. A small floating object impacted the south tower that came from the west, not south.

 

The orb never turned north which means only two things could have happened.

It either crashed into the west side of T2 or it circled the building like the witnesses reported, including Matt Lauer. The orb did exactly what Manos' footage shows with his faked footage that exactly mirrored what the orb did behind and between the rear of the towers. It is slowed down but notice the lapse of time between when it's out of sight and its first fire.

 

Moving right along....

 

Here's some cool footage which shows the fake image losing its right wing before impact.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q3ma5KstAA&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=129&feature=plpp_video"]Seen This Before 911 or Seen This After? - YouTube[/ame]

 

it didn't 'lose a wing' the jet kicked the right wing up before impact and it was lost in the s*****excuse for video compression you use

 

There are two types of denialists wanting to cover up the truth that an orb really caused the small hole in T2 and created Hollywood explosions, which left little damage compared to T1. The first has been coined the untruther which is a poser that says the orb is fake because one clip showed the orb blurred out (not visible), most likely by the perps because they considered trying to hide it, but it was broadcast live, therefore wouldn't be possible to not have the original footage showing up because of all the vcr's recording after the first explosion. The perps adding a ball instead of fake imagery is idiotic. The others are government goons who don't believe the ball is a plane but say it is because it destroys the official 911 myth.

So, the only thing they (media and government) could do was call it the plane, which of course is bat (*)(*)(*)(*) crazy. No honest thinking person looking at all the footage would believe that lie because it was a slow floating ball with no wings or propeller. The media acknowledged the orb by calling it the plane and backed themselves into a corner of fantasy and fiction. No honest researcher would ever claim it was fake because the media crazies told an outright lie about what the orb could never be, a plane. That admission gives it the utmost credibility, proving that it was real and caused the superficial damage to the south tower. The untruthers are playing for the same team as the goons, essentially.

This live footage is perfectly clear, showing the orb and its shadow behind the towers. The second is the same footage but blurred, with the orb disappearing and no visible shadow after it gets behind the towers.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_caQ9ZsGycY&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=95&feature=plpp_video"]9/11 footage Chopper 4 HQ - YouTube[/ame]


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw1fy-rsqA8&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=131&feature=plpp_video"]New Raw 911 Footage From Another Helicopter 'Back Off' instructions After Explosion 911Matrix.avi - YouTube[/ame]

 

there is no 'orb'...there is NO CGI 'plane'two planew physically flew into the WTC towers,this orb spam BS is getting old...

 

there is no 'plane'...there was CGI 'planes' that were/are totally obvious.

 

I originally posted the enhanced version of NY1 because it wasn't that noticeable (in the live broadcast) but this nice youtuber zoomed on the floating snowball. This idiot news anchor didn't see the orb when it aired but later called it the plane.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo7saZNJUmc&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=130&feature=plpp_video"]9/11 South Tower Strike - 25 Seconds Of Decent And Approach (NY1 Live 9:02am) - YouTube[/ame]

 

So now it's a snowball. Can't wait to see what it is tomorrow.

I wager "pine cone".

 

It certainly wasn't a plane and that's the point. The existence of an orb and it being missed by three news stations and later called a plane, raises reasonable doubt.

 

Yeah, what a moron. Actually calling a plane a plane.

Ridiculous.

 

C'mon, Dave. It's not a plane and you admitting it won't change the world. Even if millions knew they called a ball a plane, it wouldn't change much.

 

The orb is corroborated by the witnesses and the live broadcasts corroborate the news anchors who either didn't see it or mistook it for a chopper. "I believe that could be a police helicopter" and then she changes her story to the lie that it was a plane. She got trapped in the twilight zone.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obt-1d9POXM&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=121&feature=plpp_video"]2nd hit WB11 W*P*I*X LIVE Dr. Ebbetts - YouTube[/ame]

 

Well, actually, I can't ADMIT it is not a plane because it is -- er, was -- before it slammed into the tower at 500+ mph.

But by the same token, you continuing to claim that the plane was actually an orb or a ball or whatever won't change much either, will it.

Must be frustrating.

 

Since Dave is a defeated troll who cannot discuss details and certain irrefutable evidence such as this, he won't answer this simple question. Did the orb impact the west side of tower 2 or circle the Towers like the fake plane does in Manos' footage?

The orb never turned north which means only two things could have happened.

It either crashed into the west side of T2 or it circled the buildings like the witnesses reported, including Matt Lauer. The orb did exactly what Manos' footage shows in his faked footage which exactly mirrors what the orb did behind and between the rear of the towers.

 

once again,there is NO 'ORB', they are artirfacts from crappy video compression, and there WAS a 767 that hit each of the towers, and was seen by thousands, WITH THEIR OWN EYES, and was not som CGI construct
7forevers premise is TOTALLY fabricated from whole cloth, and NONE of is the truth,and he has NO business calling his posts 'irrefutable'

 

Hmm, this is the first time you've ASKED me to answer that question.

The answer is neither. Because there WAS NO ORB. You don't have any evidence, much less irrefutable evidence. All you have are crappy animated GIFs.

Why don't you ask your Mom to bump up your allowance so that you can afford some decent video and graphics editing software?

And by the way, being called a troll by a raving lunatic doesn't really sting much.