911 Exclusive videos

[feelfree222]

Now, for the first time ever, DOZENS of live video references to the multiple internal explosions that brought down the Twin Tower and World Trade Center 7.

www.brasschecktv.com/page/91.html


www.brasschecktv.com/page/92.html

Sorry Gillianren i know you cannot see that on your computer

[gillianren]

Not cannot. Will not. Would you like to sum up?

[feelfree222]

gillianren said:

Not cannot. Will not. Would you like to sum up?

First video link
Boom!!!

Second video link
The Video Google Censored

[scooter]

Speculation, fear and panic were rampant that morning. And the talking heads constant, inaccurate use of the word "explosion" was just, well, typical.
That, and the dramatic music in the second video makes it hard to hear what the people are saying.
First video, I saw that one some time ago...

[gillianren]

In other words, we're going with "look at the picture" arguments again. Ho-hum. Nothing new to see here; there never will be.

[feelfree222]

gillianren said:

In other words, we're going with "look at the picture" arguments again. Ho-hum. Nothing new to see here; there never will be.

You choose not watching the videos so how you can comment?

[nomuse]

Emotion is carried on videos.

Logical is carried by words.

Unless all you have is calls to emotion, you should be able to make an argument in words that can be typed.

[feelfree222]

nomuse said:

Emotion is carried on videos.

You mean that the explosion you can heard at the beginning of the video have produce some emotion of evidence beyond simple words!

www.brasschecktv.com/page/91.html

[nomuse]

Yes.

[PhantomWolf]

Actually we've been discussing this very clip over at JREF. It's doctored. Analysis of the audio track showed that the sound doesn't match up with the rest of the audio, and only one person reacts in any way at the time of it. The cameraman, the first policeman and the two firemen show no reaction to the "blast" itself in fact the firemen talk over (under?) the explosion like nothing happened, even the reaction of the guy on the phone is more like someone yelled at him than a big explosion occured nearby.

Add to that there is no way to tell when the footage was taken, though from the dust and debris it was after at least one of the towers come down, even if the explosion hadn't been faked,it still wouldn't prove anything about bombs in the WTC towers.

Link to JREF discussion

[PhantomWolf]

Actually it's not the only doctored video available. Compare This One with The Original. There are other examples too, such as the liberty church footage, but I can't be fragged hunting it out right now.

[feelfree222]

Thanks for the links but nobody from JERF or elswhere have put his hand on the original video for a comparison.

The news coverage from different TV stations talk about -a secondary explosion happening 25 minutes after the plane hit the tower. That coverage seem related with the explosion we heard at the beginning of the video.What do you think of it?

[PhantomWolf]

Thanks for the links but nobody from JERF or elswhere have put his hand on the original video for a comparison.

There tends to be a lot of video to get through to find it, and not all video is on the net unfortunately. The original or a 1st generation copy would certainly put the matter to rest one way or the other.

The news coverage from different TV stations talk about -a secondary explosion happening 25 minutes after the plane hit the tower that coverage seem related with the explosion we heard at the beginning of the videos.What do you think of it?

The scene in the video is clearly after at least one of the towers has come down, if not both. Most CT's I have seen try and link it to WTC 7, but there isn't any evidence that it's that late in the day either. I'd place it as likely to be shortly after the collaspe of 2 or 1, probably 2, so there would be little reason for such an explosion to occur, which is backed up by the lack of reaction from most of the people in the video and the suspect audio, including the lack of echoes.

[lenbrazil]

feelfree222 said:

Thanks for the links but nobody from JERF or elswhere have put his hand on the original video for a comparison.

The news coverage from different TV stations talk about -a secondary explosion happening 25 minutes after the plane hit the tower. That coverage seem related with the explosion we heard at the beginning of the video.What do you think of it?

I don't rember anyone in any of the clips saying when reports of the 2ndary explosions were made but it's been a while since I saw the whole thing, perhaps you could tell us how much time into the clip such reports occur. As we have tried to explain to you there were lots of things that could have and did explode in the towers. 2ndary explosions are part of the "offical story."

The NIST report is only 298 pages long, not counting the introduction, list of contibutors, table of contents etc etc it's probably around 200. You should be able to read it in a few hours, it would be a good idea. You would cease to waste our time and yours trying to "prove" things that aren't disputed.

[feelfree222]

lenbrazil said:

feelfree222 said:

Thanks for the links but nobody from JERF or elswhere have put his hand on the original video for a comparison.

The news coverage from different TV stations talk about -a secondary explosion happening 25 minutes after the plane hit the tower. That coverage seem related with the explosion we heard at the beginning of the video.What do you think of it?

I don't rember anyone in any of the clips saying when reports of the 2ndary explosions were made but it's been a while since I saw the whole thing, perhaps you could tell us how much time into the clip such reports occur.

It occur very early in the video also there are other reports about the finding of a explosive device discovered.

www.brasschecktv.com/page/91.html