Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Flight 11 -- 911blogger postings

Vote Fraud documentary -- American Blackout

Download link on http://u2r2h.blogspot.com


American Blackout, directed by Guerrilla News Network’s Ian Inaba uses a stunning mix of never before seen archive and firsthand interviews.

Download link on http://u2r2h.blogspot.com


Flight 11

aa11 | flight 11 | impact | north tower | wtc



a flying object hit the WTC North Tower (Wtc1)

According to the airline BTS database Flight 11 never flew on 9/11.
http://www.osamawasframed.com/flight11.html <<>

The plane designated flight 11 when airborne took off from Gate 32, wheels off 8:00am
Flight 11 passengers were seen boarding a plane from Gate 26, wheels off @ 8:10am

WHAT THE @!#$%^& !!!!

you mean they don't know?

Has any of you truthers phoned up and asked?

Flight: http://www.team8plus.org/news.php?item.32

discussion BTS flight numbers
THIEVES stole Flight 11


Double post...

I'll delete the first one.

No Wings

I like the fact that Blobs 11 has no wings when it reaches the tower!

But I'm sure it's more of that video "compression" phenomenon. ;-)

It also hits dead center in the building and as with Phantom 175, no part of the plane extends beyond the sides of the buildings. Both were direct hits.

more blurry pictures please,

more blurry pictures please, i think youve almost convinced me

Could you be a little more opaque?

It seems like you're trying to make some kind of argument here, but I can't figure it out.

it's not as important that

it's not as important that he displays anything coherant as it is that he misdirects

hey he is not misdirecting!

hey he is not misdirecting! he has presented the very few facts about aa11 - chiefly, that a search of the BTS data for 9/11/01 reveals that flight11 was not even on the schedule for that day - neither was flight77 for that matter - the "wheels off" time has to be nonsense in light of the BTS data.

in addition he has presented photos from the only video of alleged aa11 - if they are too blurry for you then you should take this issue up with the naudets who just happened to be in the right place ahead of time with their professional movie camera set-up. how ironic is it that pro movie makers with a pro set-up can't manage to get a clear focus shot of blob11 while what is alleged to be ua175 was 'captured' plain as day by numerous low quality camcorders.

don't be slandering u2r2h with labels of misdirection. he is trying to get to the bottom of things - just like a lot of us are. some of you find it more expedient to look the other way regarding the alleged 4 9/11 boeings but that is a mistake in my opinion.
2 countries are now depleted uranium hellholes and 100's of 1000's of muslims have/are dying because the american govt/media has insisted that 19 arabs highjacked 4 boeings and flew them into 3 landmark buildings.
not 1 of these 4 alleged boeings has been verified.

"a flying object"

"a flying object"

your blog links to similar

your blog links to similar blurry stills as evidence of a missile or othewise

collaborate much?

Okay, thanks

Thanks, James, that is quite interesting about the BTS data.

My opinion about the Naudet film is that it is suspect not for what it shows, but for the fact that it was made at all. LOTS of coincidences got them in the perfect spot to document the crime -- as if someone wanted a nice video momento of their handiwork.

BTW, u2r2h is not a guy. Interest in 9/11 is not the exclusive province of the Y-chromosome-endowed.

amazing. amazingly blurry. I

amazing. amazingly blurry. I mean, come on!!
what was the point here??
I like those 'result (with / no interpolation)' pics.
the only thing this proves is that blurry pics are useless in analyzing this situation.


Why did they make a CGI flash ???

NPT fanatics new theory is here: It´s called NBBB "no bang before the boom".

casseia thanx for the heads

casseia thanx for the heads up on u2r2h' gender -
zerrox you might find it beneficial to just try and relax - the world will not cease to revolve because some people point out the fact that there are many many anomalies re: the alleged boeings - if any real evidence of the culpability of said boeings in the events of 9/11 actually emerges i will be the very first to admit that i was wrong - isn't that fair enough? until then i will not play along with any plane-hugger nonsense.

I´m relexed all the time

I´m relexed all the time :D
It´s simple question, I don´t want to offend someone.
I´m just curious to know why they added the flash, thas´s all.

NPT fanatics new theory is here: It´s called NBBB "no bang before the boom".

yes, there are anomalies

yes, there are anomalies regarding their flightpaths.
i totally agree. however, i have not yet seen anything that would suggest the no-planes theory is even remotely likely. remote controlled planes seems just a thousand times more plausible. its as simple as that. "plane hugger nonsense" ?? hm well, ye, then..
its just amazing. i mean, theres facts about 911 that are understandable within a few minutes, well, not understandable, but, one can easily see something is dodgy. those need to get out. as boring as they get, after all the years. its sad to see these ego fights about planes or no planes. i think in the end we all have to agree that - in the first place - it doesnt matter if it was planes or not. note, i said in the first place.
and we are not yet there, at that 'first place'.

sorry zerrox i didn't

sorry zerrox i didn't realize you'd asked a question - i was too busy assuming that you were just attacking no-planers - why would they make a flash if it was cgi? that's a very good question that doesn't get addressed very often probably because no one has an answer - both wtc planes made a flash.

i have not yet seen anything that would suggest the no-planes theory is even remotely likely. remote controlled planes seems just a thousand times more plausible.

911tvfakery doesn't necessarily mean no-planes.
maybe there really were planes hitting the wtcs but the images of alleged ua175 are ridiculous looking.
here is the one and only "live" shot of alleged ua175:
tell me that isn't ridiculous. all the rest of the images of ua175 were done after the fact and they look equally foolish.
click my name to see analyses of these.

well, everything in that

well, everything in that movie looks dodgy. did you look at the sky?? looks fake too me. im sure its a fake sky. tv fakery. yah. ok sorry. but anyway, if that was the only video of that plane then yes,i would doubt it too. but it is not the only one. not even to mention all the eyewitnesses. sigh...

here's my favorite part:

here's my favorite part: edna cintron is standing right where the wing would join the body of blob11.
notice how blob11 must have kicked that tangled wad of perimeter columns back into the opening behind itself before disappearing entirely without a trace.

call me crazy but it looks

call me crazy but it looks like there are plenty of perimeter collumns that got knocked in. Why the author of the site supposes that the very column she is standing behind needs to be bend inward is beyond me.

the point is not whether 1

the point is not whether 1 column bends inward or outwards - the point is that blob11 disappeared without any of it falling to the street below yet there are still a wad of columns blocking part of the hole - you can pretend all you want that this phenomena is not out of the ordinary but it is out of the ordinary.


The people's US Congress has set legal interrogation techniques and amnesty!


This prisoner was later killed under legal circumstances.

The people of the USA plead necessity to defend the home of the brave, the land of the free.... The greatest nation on earth, armed and ready to defend human rights and democracy ... all over the globe from 600 military bases. To live in peace with every nation and to deter any evil attack on democratic nations.


Brave US Soldiers honourbly sacrifice their lives. Maming and killing thousands is the sacrifice we Americans are willing to make on the altar of a world free from fear and economic strangulation.


Petroleum prices has nothing to do with it. We may laugh and enjoy our wealth, but we suffer for the freedom of the underdeveloped, always ready to bring our aid and staunch compassion, even to those that will not understand all the good that we do.

Vocabulary Builders
serious adj.extreme, as in allowable infliction of lawful “serious pain,” defined as “bodily injury which causes extreme physical pain” - U.S. Congress, 9/28/06

Yet, some nations do not understand this seriousness, they are poking sick jokes at our reveered leaders.



A physicist's lucid PopMech debunk..

Scholars For Truth | steel | wtc | WTC collapse


"As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings, NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact) softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat, pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer columns."

Debunking: For anyone who as actually watched the WTC video's carefully, you will note that the south tower was struck near the corner, almost insuring it sustained NO damage to the central core columns. It also had by far the largest fireball produced, indicating a substantially larger portion of the fuel was burned in the initial impact and for the most part outside the building. Oddly, it was the south tower which fell first after burning for only 55 minutes, and at a point when the fires had greatly diminished.

In addition, as given by Kevin Ryan who was responsible for the thermal testing of the WTC Steel when it was certified, the samples tested for the WTC were certified to withstand a temperature of 2,000 deg for 6 hours without failing their rated load characteristics. And that is without insulation. The WTC beams were insulated. Jet fuel burns at only 1200-1300 degrees with an ideal oxygen mixture, something not indicated by the black smoke that issued from the fires. There was nothing contained within the buildings that could have raised this figure, and those that use the example of ancient furnaces that tempered steel as a argument, again, do not understand the principles involved. I suggest that if you want the truth, and wish to actually act like a journalist for a change, you broach this subject with a real expert, Mr. Ryan. I can put you in touch with him upon request.

But more important than the issue of the likelihood of the steel failure, is the FACT (not conjecture) that ALL THREE buildings collapsed into their own footprint at FREEFALL SPEED (i.e. the unimpeded acceleration of gravity). That means, drop a rock off the roof, at the moment of collapse, and the roof would hit the ground at the same time as the rock. This implies, (regardless of what happened at the fire zone) that the when the top section of the building began to fall it managed to plow through 70-80 odd floors of pristine and undamaged steel -- literally thousands of huge beams and concrete pads-- with absolutely NO RESISTANCE (i.e.. slowing of the rate of fall) WHATSOEVER. And this sir, is physically impossible and verging on the absurd, and I (a physicist), and anyone with a shred of knowledge of engineering, physics, or just plain common sense can understand that.

And there is a $1,000,000.00 cash challenge (to date unanswered) to anyone that can suggest a legitimate solution to this nagging little problem. And lastly, if the official pancake theory is correct, it lends no explanation whatsoever for why the central core of 47 HUGE beams, all connected together at numerous levels, would not be left standing like a spire as the floor connectors failed and the floors pancaked symmetrically around them. The less resistance to this collapse scenario exhibited by the building's design, the more likely the central core would remain virtually untouched. It is a paradox.

Watch the videos. Study the evidence. Talk to the experts and the scientists who simply can no longer tolerate an explanation so at odds with the physical evidence and the physical principles of the universe. And these experts I refer to are ready and willing to debate these issues with ANYONE you and your ilk choose, ANYTIME and ANYWHERE, as long as it can be videotaped for posterity.

I will not even get into the dozens of other patently absurd explanations that Popular Mechanics and other government shills and publicity hacks have posed to make the painfully obvious physical evidence at both the WTC and Pentagon fit the official fairy tale, while suppressing the numerous eyewitness accounts that disagree, but suffice to say that when "journalists" (and I use that term EXTREMELY loosely with you), continue to disparage those who simply demand the truth, and not propaganda; who examine the evidence with open minds and simply request that the investigation of this murder of 3,000 innocents be pursued with the same objectivity and forensic vigor that a common mugging would be given; they only contribute to the ignorance pervasive and growing in this country, reduce the once noble journalistic trade to nothing more than corporate propaganda machines, and deface the sacrifice of the 3000 who were murdered.




by Kevin Ryan who was responsible for the thermal testing???

I thought he did something with water...

911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Nice catch DHS... this

Nice catch DHS... this poster carefully tries to insert disinfo in almost every single blog post.

u2r2h, the Disinfo Woman.....

Thanks for the denunciation... and the fast judgement.

Its not my article. I just posted it here so yous can use it...

E.G. this guy needs to be convinced:


Your welcome, and the

Your welcome, and the judgment is over a period of several weeks since v2 of the site.

If you know the information is false, and you post it without a disclaimer, you wear the tag that is appropriate.

I think "disinfo" is a trifle harsh

I think she could have made the fact that she was reposting an entire article a little more clear, and yes, it would have been helpful if she'd made an "editor's note" that the Kevin Ryan thing is inaccurate.

I've ragged on u2 a few times recently for blogs that seem designed specifically to get blogger denizens all riled up, but in this case, I think she's posting something useful.

where is the American brain?

The simple reasoning skills of a child can see through this ridiculous and absurd fairytale. One has to conclude that America is totally asleep . . . this indeed is a sad day for America! How is it that we became so anesthetized and complacent? ALBEIT, I CANNOT COMPREHEND WHAT'S HAPPENING TO OUR COUNTRY!

Somnambulatory hypernationalism

Re: "How is it that we became so anesthetized and complacent?"

* Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)
* Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs)
* Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)
* Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs)
* Norepinephrine/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (NRIs aka NERIs/NARIs)
* Dopamine reuptake inhibitors (DRIs)
* Opioids
* Selective serotonin reuptake enhancers (SSREs)
* Novel antidepressants
* Tetracyclic antidepressants

And did I mention Big pHarma profits?


We're now at that delicate intermediate stage on the way to full blown raging imperialism. What we are suffering today can be labeled protoglobocorplutocracy.

I completely disagree.

Big Pharma is indeed over-marketing many of these drugs, but that doesn't contradict the fact that for many people, they represent the means to have a functional life. Go ahead and dis people who inject insulin or people who take those new-fangled pills called "antibiotics" while you're at it, eh?

big pharma .. like ANY big

big pharma .. like ANY big corporation... is NOT INTERESTED in the public good.

Hence, they should be regulated.

Regulation is good for competition, contrary to what they tell you.


Newsday reviews VonKleist DVD


The conspiracy theory of 9/11

NEWSDAY REPORTER Wednesday, October 11 2006

Five years after the horrific airplane bombings of New York’s World Trade Centre (WTC) twin towers, there are questions still unanswered, as science and common sense seem to point to different explanations of the events as they unfolded.

This is explored in the controversial documentary DVD, 911: In Plane Site, directed by William Lewis and narrated by talk-radio host Dave vonKleist.

The beginning text across the screen warning that “the information we’re about to view is overwhelmingly significant”, makes the viewer sit up fully alert and expecting shocking things. And these are delivered.

There is actual photographic evidence that seems to change the official version of September 11, 2001.

The narration and dramatic intro music painfully forces the viewer to remember the first scenes after the bombings, with questions such as “Did a plane hit the Pentagon?”, quickly answered by “Photographic evidence suggests not”, “Did explosives collapse the World Trade Centre?,” “Fire fighters tell the real story.” The docu-drama even suggests that US President George W Bush may have given the world distorted facts about the events.

Firefighters, reporters and eyewitnesses described a sequential, demolition-like collapse of buildings One, Two and Seven.

The producers, to their credit, do a good job of presenting the video evidence that proves WTC 7 was clearly brought down in a controlled demolition. There is a frame by frame look at the Boeing 767 Flight 11 (taken by five different cameramen), just before it flew into the north tower, showing a bright flash a mere second before impact.

And despite reports of commercial United Airlines Flight 175 being involved in the south tower crash, eyewitnesses claim they did not see windows on the aircraft.

What they saw were vehicles loaded with explosions in and around the WTC, and they heard bombs and explosions going off before 9 a.m.

Footage is shown of an exterior attachment at the bottom of Flight 175, questioning how could it have departed from a commercial airport.

The Pentagon footage shown claims that the outer wall collapsed a full 20 minutes after the initial impact. There are even close-up photos of a computer on a wooden desk, an open book on a stool and a filing cabinet. All these items are on the edge of the collapsed flooring, yet none of them seem to have been affected by fire or the explosion caused by the Boeing 757, reported to have crashed into the building.

The hub of America’s armed forces seem to have a suspicious lack of video surveillance cameras, or is it that the tapes were placed under stringent security?

The video also claims that the dimensions of the collapsed wall of the Pentagon building were impossible to match up with the dimensions of the jetliner.

Further to that, there was no damage to the upper floors, where the tail end of the aircraft should have hit. And according to VonKleist, there was no report of debris from the aircraft being found. While the world has seen most of the footage shown in the docu-drama hundreds of times, there is also footage which was mysteriously shown just once and never again, contradicting the stories we have all grown accustomed to believing.

Nothing new was divulged, and while the motive of the director is not clear, much is implied.

VonKleist even asks viewers to play a word association game, to give the first word they think about when he says “conspiracy”.

“Obviously and immediately, you think ‘theory’,” he added, purporting to be referring to the movie of the same name, but we understand exactly what he cannot openly say.

Without taking a stand one way or the other, and with the knowledge that technology allows for amazing cinematic creations, the viewer cannot help but agree there are aspects of this film that warrant our close attention.


UW Extension cut protested re: Barrett


Video proof of inside job (no less!)

Explosives | impact | wtc


VIDEO http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/wtc2-strike-2.avi

Watch this video.

Near the top floor, you see a guy waving a white shirt (at least it looks like this). He's in the upper right corner of the building that's facing the camera, just below the dark area, and just at the top of the uniformly gray part of the building. Just when WTC2 is hit, the pigeon in the foreground flies away. Right at that moment, a bunch of things happen.

You are looking at the North face of WTC1.

a) That little red flame on the right side of the West Face of WTC1 explodes out, then returns to "normal."

b) There is an explosion, a puff of smoke, that bursts out the window of the guy waving his shirt. After that, he is no longer waving his shirt.

c) There are multiple puffs of smoke that shoot out of the North face of WTC1, on many floors between the plane's hole and the top of the building.

d) Right after the fireball (and camera shake) it looks like 2 people jump out of the lower floors of the smoking region of the West face of WTC1. This is just above and to the right of that little red flame.

e) Then, there is a large puff of smoke that explodes out of a window, about half way up the uniformly gray region of the building, on the very right side, between the upper right plane hole and the dark top of the building.

f) Then, a few seconds later, here comes the chopper, flying around the back side of the towers. I think this chopper may have been there to set off these detonations, just as WTC2 was hit. Perhaps they assumed it would be less noticeable. After all, the explosions you heard were of the fuel exploding out of WTC2, right? ...sure...

g) Just when the chopper is midway across that blue patch of sky, notice all that huge amount of smoke shooting out of the left side of WTC1, from the roof and from the East face. The smoke keeps shooting out for the remainder of the video.

h) Just after the chopper is out of the picture, the guy's shirt falls out of that window.

There are plenty of other things, but these are enough for now. :-]

Here's what I think:
I believe there were huge explosions, during the time of this video, causing a lot of air pressure that pushes through the building. Perhaps it is the open windows that allow the venting. But, it's interesting that it doesn't shoot out of the hole where the plane went in. So, perhaps the explosions were in many of the floors above the hole, which were to prepare that top chunk to disintegrate, later. I'll bet those people jumped, thinking the building had just blown up. Their only chance for survival would be to jump clear of the exploding building.

Hey, notice the pigeon flies away *before* the big WTC2 explosion. i.e. The plane hit didn't jar the building much. The explosions shook the building. The plane didn't! I'm assuming the plane hit about the time the bird flew away. The bird would fly, sensing danger. He's going to fly away as the building is hit. Notice he glances over at WTC2, several times, waiting to see if he needs to leave. He sees the plane coming.

from http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/WTC2hit/wtc2Strike.html#hit2


Sorry, I just didn't find

Sorry, I just didn't find that to be clear cut proof of an inside job and I believe it was an inside job. One could argue that what occurs is a shockwave from the blast of the plane's impact as evident by the camera shake.

Explosions in THE OTHER

Explosions in THE OTHER TOWER are clear cut proof.

My theory is that the people fell because of the explosions making them loose their grip!


do you have any idea how much electricity was coursing through the 2 towers on that morning? Those two buildings alone were the equivalent of a small city.

as everyone knows electricity is a beast to control. that is all why we have power-surge protectors on our computers. even a lighting strike can cause a power surge throughout an entire neighborhood that could knock out people's electronics - and cause transformers to explode.

several years back one small episode in the northeast started a domino effect that knocked out the powergrid for the entire northeast of america and canada.

Transformers do indeed explode.

there is no way to know how the two towers responded - electrically - to something as catastrophic as a plane crash. but reports of explosions occuring throughout the buildings is not necessarily unusual.

so - your theory should include some factual information regarding HOW MUCH electricity surged through these buildings - how many transformers and relay stations were in the buildings -and what was their placement - etc etc.

and lastly - fires themselves can suddenly go from small - to explosive - in a moment. just opening a door could change the air flow to a relatively small fire - and cause an explosion. every fireman knows that. watch teh movie "backdraft"

it is good to constantly question and observe and debate stuff like this - but - i also think that the abundance of amateur opinions on stuff like this where people declare PROOF of an inside job is actually not so good for the movement.

This jibes perfectly with William Rodriguez's testimony.

Rodriguez states very clearly that as they heard the plane hit the South Tower, in the North Tower they simultaneously heard "pow-pow-pow-pow-pow". Now call me an amateur, but what that says to me is that certain explosions (probably the ones that would have been the biggest giveaways of the demolition charges) seem to have been timed to occur simultaneously with the planes' impacts so as to mask them with that sound, also the magician's trick of misdirection applies. I think this adequately explains one of the weirdest things about the impact of the planes, which is the flashes that seem to emanate from the impact zones almost instantaneously before the impacts. Physical evidence is EVERYTHING, folks. I always find it suspicious when people tell us it hurts the movement. The movement got off the ground because of the physical evidence, and the absence of it. Nonetheless, tehre have always been those, and I won't name names, who have suggested not calling attention to building 7 and the Pentagon, or controlled demolition even. They change their tune when they realize that that is what captures most peoples' imaginations, but only ever so slightly. Instead of discouraging people from focusing on those things, they change the subject to bit players like Pakistan, whose main crime it would seem was sending Mohammed Atta some money for his coke and T&A. What that has to do with the controlled demolition of the twin towers and building 7 I can't figure out, except that it seems to work to strengthen the false account of 19 hijackers with boxcutters. Speaking of, actually, I read a report that the Yankee pitcher's PASSPORT WAS FOUND IN THE STREET in NY after his plane crashed. Hmmmm.... Why did he have his passport for a flight around the city? Was he headed to Canada? And where are the photos of the plane's debris? Anyone? Bueller?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

Not conclusive evidence.

Give me a break! I watched this video clip multiple times and saw NOTHING that would suggest some type of high explosive(H.E.) event after the impact of the airplane.

This type of baseless presentation of bogus evidence is what gives all conspiracy theorist such a bad rep. I have done video and photo image analysis for many years both in the the private sector and for the government.

I have scanned and analyzed hundreds of photos and a huge number of video clips(like yours) and I haven't found a single conclusive peice of evidence that would indicate some type of internal H.E. demolition of either tower.

Oh, and building 7 clip, I have gone through that clip frame by frame and no one will ever convince me that the flashes of light as the building collapses are H.E. charges or primachord charge relays. I have seen those types of charges go off in rock quarries and the flashes are as intense as welders arch. Plus, the flashes would happen before the building begins to collapse not during or after the building begins to fall. The clip clearly shows the building collapsing and as the glass building shutters and falls you see sun light reflecting off of the windows of the shaking and collapsing building.

Finally, if H.E. was used to bring down the buildings where is the trace elements and residue of the explosives? I watched a demo crew bring down a steel gantry crane near my home it took 390 pounds of H.E. to bring down that crane and turn it into a pile of scrap. That crane wasn't even 1/1000th the size of WTC Tower 1. How much H.E. would it take to bring down all the buildings that collapsed at ground zero?

If H.E. is present all of the enviromental testing being done there would pick up trace elements of H.E. and yet not one molecule of explosives has been found.

Cased Closed

We can go home now.
“it is possible to fool all the people all the time—when government and press cooperate.” George Seldes - "legendary investigative reporter"

9:03 AM video


Thanks for the link. I hadn't seen that particular camera angle before.

I have to agree with the other commentators who don't quite see the evidence of controlled demolition in this video. I'd have to say that I find you to be perhaps reading too much into the scant information in this video.

1) The pigeon's actions are completely irrelevant.

2) There's no causality to possibly be determined between the
impact of UA 175 on 2 WTC and the fabric flag being dropped by the survivor in 1 WTC.

3) This video was shot at 9:03 AM, approximately 50 minutes before the collapse of 2 WTC. Any seeming explosions can be explained by a number of different possiblities such as the bursting of occupant provided canisters such as oxygen tanks, explosion of electrical transformers, collapse of suspended ceiling systems, etc.

I'd say that the most intriguing, though still unexplained phenomenon in the video is the camera shake occurring prior to the appearance of the fireball. It remains a distinct possibility that this corroborates William Rodriguez's testimony to a sub-basement explosion occuring in 1 WTC just prior to the impact of UA 175 on 2 WTC. The video evidence of extensive damage in the lobby of 1 WTC shot at about 9:00 AM in the Naudet Brothers film would tend to corroborate this explanation. Scroll down to see lobby damage in still photos captured from the Naudet film: http://www.explosive911analysis.com/

In conclusion, the Indymedia video in and of itself really doesn't prove much of anything. Better evidence for a controlled demolition explanation is to be found elsewhere.


Bookmark and Share
posted by u2r2h at 12:33 AM


Post a Comment

<< Home