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

Discussion in '9/11' started by 7forever, Dec 1, 2011.

?

Who altered this footage?

  1. Manos Megagiannis

    1 vote(s)
    25.0%
  2. A TV network like CNN

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. A law enforcement agency

    3 vote(s)
    75.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    http://www.911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit.html

    The orb circled the building just as many witnesses had stated and that is corroborated by 4 live broadcasts showing the orb do just that from the north view. It's logical with so much footage being released that something from the south would show the orb's goofy bee-bop behind the towers.

    We don't get the orb here but a fake plane exacting it as it circled the Towers. It is most logical that Manos Megagiannis turned his footage over to law enforcement and got it back this way. This man clearly captured the orb circling the buildings which is exactly why that whole part was edited out by starting the fake plane just as the orb passes east of Tower 1.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    41. Here is the story behind my videos: The distance is about 6 miles, (according to Google Earth), recorded using a Sony PC1. After I got a call from a friend of mine about the first plane, I started filming from inside my apartment. To get a bit better view I went to the roof of the building, and the moment I pointed the camera to the WTC and started recording, without even realizing it I captured the second plane hitting the tower. Actually if you see the original tape you will notice that I move the camera so I can confirm with my own eyes the explosion that I saw through the viewfinder. The rest is just very basic digital zoom (very amateurish I admit). The woman's voice, was some tenant in the same building.

    The videos have NOT being edited to make the plane disappear or anything like that (as some claim). One of these days, if I find some free time I may go back to the master and re-master the video.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZG25MRnPy1o&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=62&feature=plpp_video"]Slow Motion/Close-Up View Of 2nd Plane Impact - YouTube[/ame]
     
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why do you say it's fake? It shows the plane hitting the tower. I don't see anything strange in the videos at all. You seem to be trying to make people think that truthers are wacky.

    Planes did hit the towers. They just weren't the same planes that took off from the airports.
    Click on this link and watch "Painful Deceptions" and "9/11 Mysteries".
    http://www.question911.com/linksall.htm

    This one's important too.
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8989407671184881047#

    There's more here.
    http://able2know.org/topic/177268-1#post-4782975

    I hope nobody takes this guy seriously. Real truthers don't believe in the "No plane" theory. That theory was thought up by the government to make truthers look silly.
     
  3. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,645
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    This forum always makes me smile.

    Why is the no planes thing wacky, but a plane switcheroo is perfectly logical?
     
  4. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,248
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The no plane theory is wacky because everybody saw the planes hit the towers. Please tell us why the plane switch theory is not feasible.
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC9KZ2Yy5g4"]Inside 9/11 - Who controlled the planes? - YouTube[/ame]
     
  5. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It shows the fake plane heading straight for tower 1, turning right, but never showing that it had to turn right again (facing south:omg:) before it bee-bopped across tower 2. It's impossible but there is footage of some white thing doing just that with the fake plane image showing up for fake impact.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You are changing the subject. This thread is about an impossibility that no one can explain. It's headed straight for tower 1 at 500 mph and turns right.:-D Ignoring reality is your only defense.:ignore:

    [​IMG]
     
  7. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    This south view was apparently different from the others. The orb circled the building and that's a fact. The only other possible aircraft that could have circled is a chopper. Certainly not a plane even going 100 mph could have done it with the footage provided. Of course it's illogical and saying a goofy crime like this should be logical is illogical. Crimes are rarely logical since they are by design hurting other people.
     
  8. DDave

    DDave New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Involves way too many people.
    Why hijack planes and not use them?

    And that video is another load of crap. It says that the planes turned off their transponders precisely when they were in a radar coverage gap but their own graphic contradicts this and shows that THIS WAS NOT THE CASE for Flight 77.

    Do you people even pay attention when you watch this crap??
     
  9. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Citizen docs are usually annoying but this was done real well. Flight 77 could not have taken down 5 light poles because the witnesses had it north of the Citgo, not south. I highly recommend watching all 80 minutes.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=125&feature=plpp_video"]NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK - YouTube[/ame]
     
  10. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  11. candycorn

    candycorn New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,633
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you believe the planes were switched, you have to believe that the perpetrators wanted to kill people in the buildings but had no desire to kill passengers; as if they drew a line between the two.

    The theory is so bizarrely stupid that it borders on the insane.
     
  12. Impressme

    Impressme New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  13. Impressme

    Impressme New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry for the double post.
     
  14. DDave

    DDave New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You still need to work on how to quote a post. You did much better last time -- only one orphan tag -- but you need a bit more practice.:mrgreen:

    I don't know. You tell me. With every "plausible scenario" the number gets larger. Must be in the thousands by now.

    Why doesn't that answer surprise me?

    That's what the video claimed. And he even used this catchy graphic to illustrate the point.

    [​IMG]

    Yellow indicates radar coverage, red dots indicate where the transponder was turned off. Only 2 of the red dots are in areas of weak coverage. (Actually only one, really.) The 4th plane isn't even shown. Why? My guess is the location where the transponder was turned off doesn't fit his theory. But he already contradicted himself anyway so it doesn't really matter.

    Always. As soon as something outside of the official story makes sense, I'll be the first to acknowledge it.

    Just AA77 or all 4 of them? It would be idiotic to go to all of that trouble and involve that many extra people.

    What happened on 9/11 was a terrible tragedy. I don't know why you people can't accept the fact that there really are people in foreign countries that are willing and capable of pulling something like that off.

    You can accept that fact and still hate Bush and Republicans and the government, if it makes you feel better.
     
  15. Impressme

    Impressme New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  16. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Saudi Arabia is a third world country?


    Source this please. Show us where they were stolen. We'll start there.
     
  17. DDave

    DDave New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And how about sourcing this as well?

    Post some of those reliable sources mentioned in your intro post.

    WTF are you talking about? Oh yeah, I suppose the CIA faked that video of Bin Laden talking about it. How convenient it is for you when you can claim all of the evidence that does not support your theory was faked in part of some giant conspiracy.
     
  18. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    ACARS CONFIRMED - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE LONG AFTER CRASH
    UNITED 175
    IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA

    (PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa.

    ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier?

    Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred.

    Acars Confirmed - 9/11 Aircraft Airborne Long After Crash - Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum
     
  19. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hilarious. Welcome back to 2006.

    The ACARS messages involving UA175 were messages to the plane, not from the plane. Having records of messages being sent to (or via) Ground Radio in Pennsylvania is no proof of the plane actually being in Pennsylvania at that time, unless it can be proven that the ACARS ground system received an acknowledgment from the plane that it had received the message. Do you have evidence of such an acknowledgement?
     
  20. FearandLoathing

    FearandLoathing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    4,416
    Likes Received:
    502
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Well maybe it is true. But someone is going to have to give me a reasonable explanation of what happened to the passengers of the original planes.

    And where did the original planes go? Where did they land, or where they blown out of the sky? If the later how come no debris, not witnesses.

    What about the "let's roll" cell phone call? Staged? Pretty elaborate.

    And finally, why switch the planes. If the original passengers were to be killed anyway, why bother taking the chance of something going wrong?

    None of the theory has any logic what-so-ever.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page