reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker questions the official explanation that a plane caused a building to explode. They point out that the building exploded after the alleged plane impact and express doubt about the accuracy of the information. They wonder how the other side of the building could have exploded as well.

The speaker claims a confiscated FBI video from 9/11 has surfaced, proving a scud missile, not a plane, hit the target. They allege that for twenty years, communities have suspected a missile strike, but witnesses were silenced, and the FBI concealed the video evidence. The speaker asserts the video clearly shows a scud missile, not a plane, and accuses a "deep steak cabal" of orchestrating the event and promoting a false narrative in the 9/11 report, which stated the plane disintegrated. They believe the missile targeted a specific marking, which was ignored, and that the public bought into the lie.

The speakers claim there were no planes on 9/11. One speaker says that people believe what they saw on TV, but there was no airplane at the Pentagon or World Trade Center. A credible witness stated the planes were remotely controlled. Another speaker says that remote controlling an airplane the size of a 767 is very difficult, and there was no wreckage from any airplane at the World Trade Center. Flights 11 and 77 didn't exist, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Flight 93 was allegedly spotted years later at O'Hare Airport. The crash site in Shanksville had no wreckage. Cell phone calls from the airliners would have been impossible due to technological limitations at the time. Pilots in a simulator couldn't hit the buildings at high speeds. An airplane can't fly above its maximum operating speed, and a hijacker wouldn't be able to fly with the "clacker" activated. At high speeds, the slightest pressure on the yoke will produce large changes in aircraft direction or structural failure. One speaker claims the planes passed through the buildings at uniform motion.

In this video, the speaker discusses the collapse of the North Tower during the 9/11 attacks. They explain that dropping 14 floors in the air would take about 9 or 10 seconds, similar to the actual collapse time. The speaker mentions the presence of numerous steel columns in the building's structure, designed to remain standing. They question how the building could collapse at free fall speed with all the steel in the way. Various individuals interviewed in the video suggest that the collapse appeared planned, comparing it to a controlled demolition. The speaker also mentions the analysis of conservation of energy and momentum, which suggests that the upper block should have stopped instead of falling straight down. They propose that explosives were used to remove the material below and achieve the observed collapse.

In the exchange, Speaker 0 questions whether the other is maintaining that there were no planes that hit the World Trade Center. Speaker 1 clarifies that this is not the claim they are making; rather, there is no significant wreckage from a large Boeing crash at any of the four events. This framing emphasizes a distinction between the presence of aircraft impact and the apparent absence of substantial debris. Speaker 0 then asks if Speaker 1 saw the videotape that others saw, prompting a response that encourages a frame-by-frame analysis of the South Tower. Speaker 1 asserts that what you will see is a “fake, a cartoon display,” arguing that an aluminum airplane cannot pass through a building like the South Tower as if it were thin air. In other words, Speaker 1 contends that the footage demonstrates a simulated or cartoon-like depiction rather than a real-time account of an aircraft penetrating the structure. Following this, Speaker 0 probes whether Speaker 1 is suggesting that the news media was involved in this fabrication, indicating a belief that media sources contributed to the apparent display. Speaker 1 affirms the suggestion by stating “Yes,” and notes that there was only one so-called real-time film, adding that “we don’t really understand how they did that.” This introduces a claim of media involvement and a mystery surrounding the production of the visible footage, implying manipulation or concealment of the true events. The dialogue ends with Speaker 1 mentioning that there are “video ex” (likely beginning to refer to video evidence or explanations) but the thought is cut off, leaving an incomplete reference to further material or evidence that would support the previous claims about the nature of the footage and the method by which it was produced.

The video discusses the mysterious disappearance of the World Trade Center towers after 9/11. Witnesses note the lack of debris, with buildings seemingly vaporized. Only minimal remnants were found, such as a lone file cabinet from an ice cream store. Despite the massive destruction, common office items like desks and toilets were notably absent from the rubble. The unprecedented level of destruction left experts puzzled, as even large quantities of glass, steel, and concrete seemingly turned into a cloud of powdered debris.

The speaker believes it's impossible for a plane alone to penetrate the World Trade Center towers, suggesting bombs exploded simultaneously with the plane impact. The speaker claims the building's unique construction, with steel on the outside, should have made it impenetrable. Another speaker describes seeing the plane impact Building Number 2 and an explosion erupting from the other side almost instantly. The first speaker reiterates the belief that the planes contained more than just fuel and were traveling at high speed, seemingly descending into the building to gain additional momentum. The speaker emphasizes the buildings' robust construction with heavy-caliber steel, asserting the destruction was caused by more than just the planes. The speaker concludes that the country has fundamentally changed.

A recently discovered video allegedly shows that the object that hit the World Trade Center on 9/11 was not a plane, but a Scud missile. The video was confiscated by the FBI, who concealed this information. The speaker accuses the government of being part of a cabal and claims that this video is the final piece of evidence contradicting the official 9/11 report. They mention a Swedish satellite that detected a different target, suggesting a cover-up. The speaker expresses frustration and accuses others of believing the lie.

In this rare slow-motion video, Flight 175, which struck the South World Trade Center tower on September 11, 2001, is examined. The video, allegedly filmed by Michael Herzakani, a diamond merchant from Los Angeles, reveals two impossibilities. Firstly, it challenges the belief that an airplane could effortlessly cut through a building with a steel facade, reinforced concrete flooring, and 47 steel support beams. The media promotes this narrative, and despite evidence to the contrary, many still accept it.

The speaker believes it's impossible for a plane alone to penetrate the World Trade Center towers, suggesting bombs exploded simultaneously with the plane impact. The speaker claims the building's unique construction, with steel on the outside, should have made it impenetrable. Another speaker describes seeing the plane impact Building Number 2 and an explosion erupting from the other side almost instantly. The first speaker reiterates the belief that the planes contained more than just fuel and were traveling at high speeds, seemingly descending into the building to gain additional momentum. The speaker emphasizes the buildings' robust steel construction and concludes that the destruction was caused by more than just the planes themselves. The speaker believes the event has fundamentally changed the country.

They claimed it was a plane, but the building exploded randomly. It's not a plane; that side just blew up after the first explosion. They don't know what they're saying. How could a plane have caused that? It happened too quickly. The building was fine before, then suddenly it exploded. How did that happen?

The video discusses the events of 9/11 and raises questions about the official narrative. Witnesses describe explosions and the collapse of the Twin Towers, with some suggesting that a bomb caused the second tower to collapse. The video also questions the Pentagon attack, with witnesses claiming there was no evidence of a plane crash. The government's explanation is criticized as a conspiracy theory, and the video concludes by suggesting that people should question what they see on TV. Overall, the video challenges the official account of 9/11 and encourages viewers to seek alternative perspectives.

The speaker questions the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks, focusing on the collapse of Building 7. They argue that the building's uniform collapse indicates controlled demolition rather than fire damage. Comparing it to a stack of cast iron stoves, they suggest that the intact structure below should have slowed the collapse. The speaker believes there is more to the story than just planes and fire.

The video discusses the events of 9/11 and raises questions about the official narrative. Witnesses describe explosions and the collapse of the Twin Towers. Some suggest that the planes were not real and that the media was involved in a cover-up. The collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 is also mentioned. Critics argue that the government's explanation is a conspiracy theory and question the lack of evidence at the Pentagon crash site. The video concludes by emphasizing the need to question the official narrative and consider alternative perspectives.

This video analyzes amateur footage from 9/11, suggesting CGI planes were added to the official narrative. The video highlights that witnesses in the amateur footage describe hearing explosions, not seeing planes. One witness recalls saying it was a bomb after seeing smoke and something falling. The video emphasizes that no one in the amateur footage mentions seeing a plane hit the towers. One person on the roof stated that it just blew up, and there's no way it was a plane. The amateur videographer is quoted saying the second tower "flat out blew up." The video also includes a clip of George H.W. Bush discussing how operatives were instructed to ensure that explosives went off at a high point to prevent people trapped above from escaping. The video concludes with footage of the aftermath of the tower collapses.

The video discusses the issue of cell phone calls made by passengers on the hijacked airplanes during the 9/11 attacks. It questions the feasibility of making cell phone calls from cruising altitudes and high speeds. The video presents evidence that suggests the calls were not made from the airplanes, including discrepancies in the timing of the calls and the lack of background noise. The possibility is raised that the passengers were forced to make the calls under duress, pretending to be on the plane while already being landed in another location. The video concludes by stating that someone needs to explain where these calls actually came from.

This video questions the authenticity of the footage showing Flight 175 hitting the South World Trade Center tower on 9/11. The speaker points out two impossibilities. Firstly, they claim that a real airplane couldn't have sliced through a building with a steel facade and reinforced concrete flooring. Secondly, they highlight a building that appears behind the tower in the video, suggesting a CGI glitch. The speaker concludes that this video, along with others, is a fake created by the news media.

This video discusses the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. It mentions the steel structure of the buildings and the lack of rubble left after their collapse. The speaker questions the official explanation that the steel was shipped off to China and suggests that it was actually pulverized. The seismic data is also discussed, with the speaker noting that the buildings did not create significant seismic signals. The video concludes by mentioning the presence of smoke and the lack of understanding regarding the fires.

This video discusses the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. It mentions the steel structure of the buildings, the lack of rubble, and the seismic data. The speaker questions the official explanation and suggests that the buildings were turned to dust rather than collapsing. They also mention the absence of seismic signals and the use of thermite. The video concludes by highlighting the suspicious omission of seismic data by architects and engineers. Overall, the video raises doubts about the official narrative of the events.

How could anyone fly a 60 ton, 125 foot wide, 44 foot tall plane through this obstacle course? The aircraft before striking the Pentagon reportedly executed a 270 degree downward spiral, and yet Hani Hanure was known as a terrible pilot who could not safely fly even a small plane. The official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane. From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. The videos from security cameras, which would show what really hit the Pentagon, were immediately confiscated by agents of the FBI.

In this video, the speaker discusses two impossibilities regarding the footage of flight 175 hitting the South World Trade Center tower on 9/11. Firstly, they claim that a real airplane couldn't have sliced through a building with a steel facade and reinforced concrete flooring. Secondly, they point out a building that appears behind the tower in the video, suggesting a CGI glitch and concluding that the video is fake. The speaker accuses the news media of promoting this hoax and producing numerous faked videos.

This video discusses the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. It mentions the steel structure of the buildings and the lack of rubble left after their collapse. The speaker questions where all the rubble went and suggests that it was pulverized and evaporated. The video also talks about the seismic data recorded during the collapse, noting that the buildings did not produce significant seismic signals. The use of thermite to cut the steel is mentioned, as well as the lack of seismic data related to the collapse. The video concludes by mentioning the presence of smoke and fires at the site.

An architect with 20 years of experience claims the official explanation for the World Trade Center collapses is false. The official reason is that the planes hit the buildings, causing explosions and fires, leading to structural weakening and collapse. However, fires have never caused a steel-frame high-rise to collapse. The speaker claims the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 exhibit 10 key features of controlled demolition. Building 7 collapsed straight down into its own footprint at free fall speed for the first 100 feet, despite 40,000 tons of structural steel. The speaker compares the collapse to controlled demolitions. The speaker states that 700 architects and engineers are demanding a new investigation. They believe the evidence suggests controlled demolitions. The speaker asserts that almost every architect and engineer who reviews the information agrees, but the implications are dark because it suggests someone besides Al Qaeda was involved, given the high security of the buildings.

The speaker questions how a 60-ton plane could navigate a difficult obstacle course. It's claimed the aircraft executed a 270-degree spiral before striking the Pentagon, despite the pilot's alleged incompetence. Doubts are raised about the official explanation that jet fuel vaporized the entire plane, including its Rolls Royce engines made of steel and titanium. Questions are posed about how bodies could be identified via fingerprints and DNA if the fire was hot enough to vaporize metal. One speaker states there was no evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon, with only small, hand-sized pieces remaining. It's claimed government agents removed debris and covered the lawn with dirt and gravel. Security camera videos were confiscated by the FBI and have not been released. The speaker suggests the government would release the videos if they proved a 757 hit the Pentagon.

The Pentagon is heavily defended and the pilot who crashed into it, Hani Hanjour, was considered the worst pilot by the 911 commission. Despite being unable to fly a single engine propeller plane, he supposedly maneuvered a commercial jetliner to hit the Pentagon. The building had surface to air missile defense at the time. The FBI confiscated around 80 to 90 videos of the incident but has not released them. This video is the only available evidence. The speaker believes that 9/11 is a major lie.