New video showing explosions in WTC 7

[p51-mustangcaptain of 1,000]

Any thoughts on this? The video certainly looks real. If it is real it is certainly convincing evidence for an inside job during the 911 attacks:

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

Not that I am attacking the 9/11 truth premise...

But this is pretty poor - someone filmed the collapse and explosions in building 7 and then just forgot about it for ten years and then suddenly find it on their old camera?

Highly improbable.

I also thought those explosions did not look right, again I'm not saying the video is faked, but it looked fake to me.

[p51-mustangcaptain of 1,000]

Yep its fake. It looks pretty real though. Hard to tell whats fake and whats real these days.

[7cylon7captain of 1,000]

This guy is in for a real shock some day. (Lord, can i be there when he finally is revealed the truth, I want to see his face when that moment happens.) I would argue that a program far more advanced than adobe after affects was used on 9/11 LIVE to show that commercial planes hit the two towers. I content that two Tomahawk missiles hit the buildings and video affects where used LIVE to show it as a commercial plan. ALL, ALL other footage was alter to show this altered reality. Also the pentagon was hit by a missile as well as the so called Pennsylvania plane whole was a missile was well.

No effect were used on building 7, it was demolished on purpose.



and it can be painted to look like an airliner. Many EYE witnesses say it was a SMALL "plane" one lady said "that was no commercial airplane"



people are so easily fooled, I include myself. Deceiving and loving to make a lie is someone else s specialty not mine.

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

This guy is in for a real shock some day. (Lord, can i be there when he finally is revealed the truth, I want to see his face when that moment happens.) I would argue that a program far more advanced than adobe after affects was used on 9/11 LIVE to show that commercial planes hit the two towers. I content that two Tomahawk missiles hit the buildings and video affects where used LIVE to show it as a commercial plan. ALL, ALL other footage was alter to show this altered reality. Also the pentagon was hit by a missile as well as the so called Pennsylvania plane whole was a missile was well.

No effect were used on building 7, it was demolished on purpose.



and it can be painted to look like an airliner. Many EYE witnesses say it was a SMALL "plane" one lady said "that was no commercial airplane"



people are so easily fooled, I include myself. Deceiving and loving to make a lie is someone else s specialty not mine.

Cylon, you need to fix some spelling and grammatical errors in your post above and no, there was no deception with the planes being computer-generated with missiles having caused the explosions in the towers. The planes were the cover for the buildings' demolitions, 'plane' and simple. It's difficult to ascertain what really hit the Pentagon, but when you learn who was killed and what was destroyed there (Accountants and Auditors investigating $2.3 trillion that had gone 'missing'), it's easy to see the motive. Flight 93 was shot down since the passengers compromised its mission and it was probably meant for building 7 in New York to act as the cover for its demolition as well and the hole in the ground in the Pennsylvania field was caused by a chunk of the plane hitting there as it most certainly was not a fully in-tact Boeing 757. Building 7 was demo'd in order to cover-up thousands of SEC case files involving massive financial crimes that had taken place between Washington, the banks and Wall Street and many of these were pending disclosure to the public which could have brought down the entire establishment as over 90% of the tenants in building 7 were either government, insurance or financial entities.

The twin towers were demo'd because the buildings were worthless since it was going to cost more in asbestos removal than what the structures were worth, so our good buddy Mr. Silverstein took the lease off the Port Authority's hands in the spring of 2001 (who wasn't even in the highest bidder for them), took out a massive insurance policy against 'terrorist attack' and when the buildings were destroyed on 9/11 with nano-thermate and regular thermite, his $2 billion liability was gone and he made $4.5 billion in insurance payouts. Pretty slick operation ay? Billions in costs disappeared, billions in insurance payouts were made, trillions in stolen money at the Pentagon and massive crimes were covered up and the military-industrial complex got its new 'Pearl Harbor' event that allowed the empire building and wartime profiterring to begin in earnest, all while giving our 'government' the excuse to begin eroding our freedoms in the name of 'security' and transforming the U.S. into a gigantic fascist police state! They killed 6 birds with one stone on 9/11.

[mchlwisecaptain of 100]

Every time I hear/see the "missile hit the ________" theory, I have to go back to the most basic, logical argument:

There were planes and there were people on them. They all had to be "disposed" of in some way. Wouldn't the easiest way to get rid of the planes and kill the people be to simply fly them into the buildings?

I have very little doubt that the planes flew into the buildings. I have no idea who was actually controlling them.

The Building 7 video looks fake to me as well... but I have little doubt that it probably accurately portrays what really happened.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

There were planes and there were people on them. They all had to be "disposed" of in some way. Wouldn't the easiest way to get rid of the planes and kill the people be to simply fly them into the buildings?

One theory is that just prior to the airliners' transponders being turned off, each plane's path was crossed by another gov't plane -radio controlled drone -roughly the size of the airliners...and it was these drones which were packed with explosives and hit the towers (Pentagon hit was more likely a CIA Lear jet firing a missile/ or a Tomahawk cruise missile). Agreed Flight 93 was probably shot down.

The theory continues that the other 3 airliners were likely flown out over the Atlantic (remote control?) and either blown up or shot down 100+ miles out to sea, where the currents would quickly scatter the debris (like KAL 007 off Sakhalin). Even though USAF fighter planes were scrambled out over the Atlantic as part of the "drill", with the airliners' transponders turned off, no one would be looking for them, and the fighters could have been vectored far away from the airliners, out of visibility range.

[durangoutcaptain of 1,000]

This guy is in for a real shock some day. (Lord, can i be there when he finally is revealed the truth, I want to see his face when that moment happens.) I would argue that a program far more advanced than adobe after affects was used on 9/11 LIVE to show that commercial planes hit the two towers. I content that two Tomahawk missiles hit the buildings and video affects where used LIVE to show it as a commercial plan. ALL, ALL other footage was alter to show this altered reality. Also the pentagon was hit by a missile as well as the so called Pennsylvania plane whole was a missile was well.

No effect were used on building 7, it was demolished on purpose.



and it can be painted to look like an airliner. Many EYE witnesses say it was a SMALL "plane" one lady said "that was no commercial airplane"



people are so easily fooled, I include myself. Deceiving and loving to make a lie is someone else s specialty not mine.

Cylon, you need to fix some spelling and grammatical errors in your post above and no, there was no deception with the planes being computer-generated with missiles having caused the explosions in the towers. The planes were the cover for the buildings' demolitions, 'plane' and simple. It's difficult to ascertain what really hit the Pentagon, but when you learn who was killed and what was destroyed there (Accountants and Auditors investigating $2.3 trillion that had gone 'missing'), it's easy to see the motive. Flight 93 was shot down since the passengers compromised its mission and it was probably meant for building 7 in New York to act as the cover for its demolition as well and the hole in the ground in the Pennsylvania field was caused by a chunk of the plane hitting there as it most certainly was not a fully in-tact Boeing 757. Building 7 was demo'd in order to cover-up thousands of SEC case files involving massive financial crimes that had taken place between Washington, the banks and Wall Street and many of these were pending disclosure to the public which could have brought down the entire establishment as over 90% of the tenants in building 7 were either government, insurance or financial entities.

The twin towers were demo'd because the buildings were worthless since it was going to cost more in asbestos removal than what the structures were worth, so our good buddy Mr. Silverstein took the lease off the Port Authority's hands in the spring of 2001 (who wasn't even in the highest bidder for them), took out a massive insurance policy against 'terrorist attack' and when the buildings were destroyed on 9/11 with nano-thermate and regular thermite, his $2 billion liability was gone and he made $4.5 billion in insurance payouts. Pretty slick operation ay? Billions in costs disappeared, billions in insurance payouts were made, trillions in stolen money at the Pentagon and massive crimes were covered up and the military-industrial complex got its new 'Pearl Harbor' event that allowed the empire building and wartime profiterring to begin in earnest, all while giving our 'government' the excuse to begin eroding our freedoms in the name of 'security' and transforming the U.S. into a gigantic fascist police state! They killed 6 birds with one stone on 9/11.

Why bust 7cylon7's chops. His/her explanation of the events on 9/11 are just as valid as yours.

[mchlwisecaptain of 100]

There were planes and there were people on them. They all had to be "disposed" of in some way. Wouldn't the easiest way to get rid of the planes and kill the people be to simply fly them into the buildings?

One theory is that just prior to the airliners' transponders being turned off, each plane's path was crossed by another gov't plane -radio controlled drone -roughly the size of the airliners...and it was these drones which were packed with explosives and hit the towers (Pentagon hit was more likely a CIA Lear jet firing a missile/ or a Tomahawk cruise missile). Agreed Flight 93 was probably shot down.

The theory continues that the other 3 airliners were likely flown out over the Atlantic (remote control?) and either blown up or shot down 100+ miles out to sea, where the currents would quickly scatter the debris (like KAL 007 off Sakhalin). Even though USAF fighter planes were scrambled out over the Atlantic as part of the "drill", with the airliners' transponders turned off, no one would be looking for them, and the fighters could have been vectored far away from the airliners, out of visibility range.

Wouldn't drones packed with explosives have made a much larger initial blast and taken the buildings down immediately rather than hours later?

[Col. Flaggcaptain of 10,000]

Why bust 7cylon7's chops. His/her explanation of the events on 9/11 are just as valid as yours.

The 'no planes', but rather 'computer-generated images' is sheer lunacy.