Mysterious "ball" hit the towers?

[anart]

Hi New Orleans, please search the forum for 'no plane theory' and read up on it.  You'll see that this theory is merely another distraction.  Have you read 9/11 The Ultimate Truth yet?

[Jakesully]

I saw this video a long time ago, back when I was a regular on another certain forum. I concluded pretty quickly that, as Perceval mentioned, the angle of the path of whatever the object was, was completely wrong for it to have hit the tower. Also, the guy who was promoting the documentary when I first saw it came off seeming very hard-sell in his approach, as if he was more trying to ram the idea down people's throats than contribute to a well-reasoned discussion.

[NewOrleans]

Thanks Anart, No I haven't but I will. Thanks for the recommendation. 

[Mr Walker]

Theres a movie out on you tube out there (seen it didnt bookmark it...could find it) which shows how the main TV channels were operated from a single desk for 9 / 11 with a short (2 to 3 second) editing delay for issues. He proves this via special signals and checks they had in place to sync the broadcasts. But they made a mistake. The nose of the 2D plane (yes 2D transposed  on the footage) came out the other side of the tower. The first shot shows the nose coming thru all that building intact. Its a fact. Its quite a sight. It blows the whole thing apart. Some one saved that footage. So they had a problem. In the repeat next they covered the nose with a logo name of the channel.effectively blocking it till they could re edit the problem

This ties in with the "there was no plane theory". Wait there's more. Incredibly the so called street witnesses who filmed it ALL, yes all, worked for the PTB in some role or other. One was an executive of a major TV channel. Some were so called ordinary people who on research worked for the media and the like. Plus the exact same womens scream (matched on software) was found in several of these so called spontaneous films. And yes they were filmed in different places.

Point is they were pre fabricated according to the researcher. Plus there are many shadow flaws in the film proving heavy editing.

So when I saw this I thought if they were superimposed 2D images of the planes beamed out on several channels at once and the whole thing was done without planes. What did the damage? This ball?

[venusian]

Hi Mr Walker,

Welcome to our forum. 

I see this is your first post here.

We recommend all new members to post an introduction in the Newbies section telling us a bit about themselves, how they found the cass material, and how much of the work here they have read.

You can have a look through that board to see how others have done it.

[Mr Walker]

OK sure.  Will go there now. BTW heres link that covers much of the material I mentioned above. It mentions a 17 sec delay.  I mistakenly remembered (was a few yeras back) a shorter delay 

_http://www.911nwo.com/911MediaHoax.html

[iloveyellow]

Looking at this from Richard Hall (Mysterious Ball Object Seen Flying Over WTC on 9/11 Part 1 - New Uncovered Footage )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShbY0Oa-6v8

at around 3:08 there seems to be a plane moving across the sky from right to left, seconds after the explosion from said ball appears at the left of the building.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this plane, but it seems obvious that the ball was delivered from it, when considered the timing and all.  I am not of course saying it did but, if one was to view these things together, one would straight away assume that that explosion came from that plane.

Any other perspectives or thoughts on this plane?

[anart]

Any other perspectives or thoughts on this plane?

Did you get a chance to read the previous posts on this thread?

[iloveyellow]

Hello Anart,

of course I read the other posts on this thread.  I didn't see any mention of this plane.

Did you see the plane I was referring to?

[anart]

Hello Anart,

of course I read the other posts on this thread.  I didn't see any mention of this plane.

Did you see the plane I was referring to?

Yes.  I didn't come to the same conclusion you reached on that.

[iloveyellow]

You are saying yes, you see the plane?

It seems obvious, from a timing point of view, that the sphere-thing could have come from the plane, but I make no conclusions.

Please correct me if I am wrong, I don't see where anyone has mentioned this plane, and I am interested in other perspectives.

[bltay]

You are saying yes, you see the plane?

It seems obvious, from a timing point of view, that the sphere-thing could have come from the plane, but I make no conclusions.

Please correct me if I am wrong, I don't see where anyone has mentioned this plane, and I am interested in other perspectives.

Hi iloveyellow,

From my understanding of the discussion here, it involves the 'no-plane' theory. Laura has previously stated that she does not subscribe to that theory and does not want it discussed here. She stated in another thread:

Let me repeat myself:

Let me make something clear here: this forum does NOT belong to you.  You are a guest in "our house."  This house has a very specific and carefully chosen "decor" and the gathering that meets here is for a particular purpose that is well-defined.  If I permitted a guest in my house to come in and try to propagate what is clearly nonsense without letting all the other guests know that I do NOT subscribe to those ideas, everyone would think that I do, as well as the other guests who also do not subscribe to those beliefs.  It is MY responsibility to make sure that the environment of MY house continues to function as it was designed to.  You are NOT allowed to move your furniture into my house, repaint the walls, and direct the gathering.

You will NOT propagate that "no planes hit the WTC" nonsense in MY house as though it had equal value as the many reasonable and fact based theories of 911.

PERIOD.

I admire and respect the wonderful work being done here, however, on this particular subject the jury is still out in my opinion. I see a lot of unanswered evidence/questions about this. Out of respect for Laura's wishes, I go elsewhere if I want to discuss this issue. I do not believe you are going to get much of a response here if your questions concern the "no planes hit the WTC" theory.

[usualsuspekt]

I just watched this interesting film (22min) about what supposedly hit the WTC. My apologies if that has been posted before, but I haven't seen it.

"Richard D. Hall carries out new analysis on the video footage from the 9/11 attacks. This compelling films provides more evidence that 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by American and Israli intelligence agencies. We analyze and make conclusions about the mysterious ball seen on NBCs live news. New 9/11 computer analysis provided by Richard D. Hall sheds light on what most likely caused the damage to the World Trade Centre towers. This 22 minute film provides answers to many questions."

_http://www.richplanet.net/911.php

website is slap full of disinfo and distractions. seems like a total shill

want a simple answer to 9/11 that debunks all wild disinfo claims and explains all loose ends? i'll give it too you

All 4 planes were hijacked by remote control and it really was the planes that hit. this explains what happened to the planes, the people, and they have openly displayed the ability to fly planes via remote control on the history channel. the show depicted them flying airliners and crashing them intentionally into the ground for "crash data"

this debunks all wild claims of "no planes" "it was missles" "they were holograms"  ...blah, blah, blah 

of course some will say, what about the photos of the pentagon and the one that went astray. there was no debris.

TRUE - but you do not think this could have reverse psychology effect on 9/11 truth seekers to make them actually start believing the wild claims of no planes and it was missles?

DING DING DING  doctored photos and reverse psychology can do ALOT of damage!