911 - in Plane Site


Please note that 100777.com does not have the time to investigate the details of the 911 event. I´ve gathered various articles on the topic, and many may contain false information, even information designed to discredit the whole 911-truth movement.

The more important thing is to see the whole picture, and that we have been enslaved by the filthy rich elite/illuminati.

The Only Way to defeat the satanic New World Order, the elite who are behind the 911 event, is The Plan; http://jahtruth.net/plan.htm


"A honey pot, in intelligence jargon, is a tempting source of information or 'dangle' that is set out to lure intended victims into a trap. Ultimately the honey pot is violently and maliciously discredited so as to destroy the credibility of anything stuck to it by association." (Michael Ruppert, "Crossing the Rubicon," p. 184)

also see




From Dave vonKleist, co-host of The Power Hour radio program & writer/producer of the album Will Someone Listen, and William Lewis, producer & director of American Freedom News, TruNews and Police State comes a full length documentary presented in a modern, stylish TV newsmagazine format. "In Plane Site" uses news footage from all of the major news sources in an in-depth analysis which shows that what was originally reported on the morning of September 11, 2001 is not what has become the official story of that day. Eyewitness accounts and live video feeds told the real story of 911 and they are presented now for the first time as evidence of the largest cover-up in modern day history. With the pounding force of a sledgehammer you will find yourself horrified and astonished at the shear scope of the largest transgressions ever carried out against the people of the United States and indeed... of the entire world. Powerful and convincing footage, shown only once, and never seen again. . . Until Now

More information here

Download and watch the first segment of this video on your computer.

View Realmedia clip here

Download high res movie with Bittorrent here



The Power Hour Presents
“911 In Plane Site”

The FIRST 911 Expose' to Present VIDEO EVIDENCE - Not Theories


How does a plane over 44 feet tall, fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. in diameter, as shown in the crystal-clear photographic evidence taken at the Pentagon? See the astonishing evidence for the first time.


Why does photographic evidence taken moments after the event, show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon?


Why weren't America & the world shown the video & photos of the Pentagon, before the outer wall collapsed?


Why is there a “pod” attached to the bottom of “Flight 175” and what purpose did it serve in the attacks? Full screen television blow-up reveals all of the details.


What is the bright flash seen right before impact on both the North Tower& the South Tower, captured on video by 5 independent cameramen? Slow motion analysis reveals startling answers.


Why did a FOX News employee report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner?


Why were there numerous reports of bombs & explosions going off in and around the World Trade Center before any buildings collapsed? Hear and see the testimony of the reporters and rescue teams.


Why did firefighters, reporters and other on the scene eyewitnesses describe a demolition-like, pancake collapse of buildings One, Two & Seven? Shocking new video evidence answers this important question.

Shown Only Once On Live T.V. & Never Shown Again (Until Now)


"Dave vonKleist weaves several key moments of live, un-retouched film footage regarding the events of Sept. 11 into a crystal clear picture of official deception."
***Don Harkins, The Idaho Observer


"Shocking - Thought provoking - Raises serious questions about the government's honesty in conducting the 9-11 investigation"
***Tom Flocco, www.tomflocco.com


“The 911 Film Michael Moore should have made.”
***David Icke - www.davidicke.com


"Absolutely awesome. This is the one September 11 video that everyone should see."
***Lou Epton - The Lou Epton Show

Buckle your seatbelts, this plane is taking off…
VIEW Clips from the film: http://www.911inplanesite.com
Digitally Mastered - Available on DVD & VHS
Get Your Copy Today & Learn The Truth About 911

All Requests for Media Review Copies Should be Submitted Via Fax on Company Letterhead to: 911 Review Copies (573) 378-5998

All Questions and Interview Requests Should be Directed to Dave vonKleist (573) 378-6049



"9-11 In Plane Site" Video Shocks Sacramento Citizens

( Download and watch the video )

August 13, 2004

From: NewsWithViews.com

A new 9-11 video was screened last night in Sacramento, California, leaving the audience stunned. '911 in Plane Site' is basically presented in two parts. The first segment is 52 minutes and designed for showing on television with the balance of a one hour time slot reserved for commercials. Part II continues with more film and analysis. This video is digitally mastered making details sharp and clear.

'911 in Plane Site' presents actual film from that fateful day and careful analysis focusing on the Pentagon and the two World Trade Center buildings. By slowing down the actual news feeds that day from networks like CNN, FOX, the BBC and others, what you see is quite different from what most people saw in "real time" that day. Live footage from the Pentagon and what was missed by most because of the smoke and confusion was captured up close by the media. Following the showing, a retired vet remarked, "How did we miss this all this time? I've seen media clips of the front of that building [the Pentagon] many times, but I wasn't really seeing what was there. I feel sick."

One particular interview that brought gasps from the audience and many looking around with shock etched on their faces was an interview conducted - live at the time - by FOX News. This intense interview with Mark Burnback, an employee of FOX News, contains the following narrative, paraphrased: Burnback was close to the path of the second plane and had a good long look at what he describes was not a commercial airliner. The plane that hit the second tower had no windows, Burnback was very clear about that. The plane had some kind of blue logo on the front near the nose and looked like a cargo plane. This point was driven to the viewer several times along with the comment from this FOX employee that "this plane wasn't from around here or anything you'd see take off from the airport."

Other footage includes several women who had a very clear view watching the second plane hit were yelling, "That wasn't American Airlines....It wasn't American Airlines going into the building." These interviews were played that morning once on FOX News, never to be replayed again, despite the massive saturation and repetition by the media for many days to come.

Other extremely disturbing segments of this video are the clear, slow motion shots of the second plane going into the towers which show a flash right before the nose of the plane hits the building and a pod attached to the bottom of the plane. This strange flash is clearly recorded from four different angles from four different cameras. While there is only one known piece of film showing the first plane hitting the first tower, in slow motion one can clearly see - as with the second plane - a flash from the nose section right before impact. What caused this?

This video raises extremely disturbing questions about the planes that hit the Pentagon and the World Trade Centers, but no conclusions or accusations are made by the commentator. To date, only one piece of film has been released by DoD of the front of the Pentagon. The question raised in the video is where is all the other film footage from the Pentagon? The heart beat of America's military and security, with a building and perimeter loaded with cameras, but no film for the public to view of events as they unfolded except from one camera?

According to the producers, the purpose of '911 in Plane Site' is to demonstrate that Americans saw one thing that morning that was so shocking, so horrific and so massive, the finer details weren't really being picked up. The producer reinforces to the viewer that after one broadcast of many very controversial interviews live on the spot, these particular interviews were never broadcast again, i.e. firefighters on the spot talking about the explosions and bombs inside the towers. Since 9-11, it has been reported that "Building Seven" collapsed because of the two World Trade Center towers collapsing. However, the footage on this video tells a different story and raises more questions.

'911 in Plane Site,' distributed by Power Hour Productions (866-773-9469), leaves one with many questions as demonstrated by a very upset senior citizen who requested her last name be withheld. Mary asked, "If these weren't commercial airliners, where are those flights? Where are the passengers? My, God what really happened that day?" Indeed, this seemed to be the biggest question expressed by viewers after the lights came back on, but for which there were no answers. Some viewers were visibly upset, angry and "want damn answers" from the Bush Administration. Others just walked out the door in silence. One upset man commented on the way out of the viewing, "It's time to get this on PBS and every investigative news program on TV. We need answers."

For more information on this video or to purchase a full copy of both part I and part II on VHS or DVD ( Total Length: DVD: Approx. 75 min. | VHS: Approx. 65 min. ), please visit http://www.policestate21.com

Download and watch the first segment of this video on your computer.


Copied from the LetsRoll911.org Forums [edited/fixed 7.10]

911 In Plane Site

Produced and Written by Dave VonKleist

It starts off with the following disclaimer:

“Please be advised that the information you are about to view is overwhelmingly significant. We offer no conclusions, but simply present the evidence and let you the viewing audience draw your own conclusions.

It is vital that we also mention that the footage you are about to view comes from many of the largest news agencies in the United States who covered the events which unfolded on September 11, 2001. Efforts were made to contact the news agencies and obtain releases for the footage to which we draw attention, however, most of our attempts were unsuccessful as we were informed that no licenses would be granted.

Our initial reaction was to pause and to re-think our position on releasing this documentary, but after careful thought we could not let this information be kept from the American people and indeed from the global community as it affects both NATIONAL SECURITY and GLOBAL SECURITY respectfully.”

“September 11 changed the world.”

“This documentary will change September 11.”

vonKleist “It’s been said that all truth passes through 3 stages. The first stage being denial. The second stage being violent opposition. And the 3rd stage being widespread acceptance as common knowledge. Well as you view this documentary keep in mind that people watching will probably fall into one of those 3 categories. One group of people will absolutely deny that what they’re seeing could possibly be true. The second group of people will be violently opposed to this kind of information being released, and they’ll do everything that they can to discredit the messenger, rather than pay attention to the message. And yet there will probably be a third group of people who will sit back in their easy chairs and say, “I’m not surprised, I knew it all along.

With this in mind, let’s begin by playing a little word association. I’ll say a word, and you think of the first word that comes to mind. Conspiracy–(pause) Theory, is what most people think of. We’ve all been conditioned to associate the word theory with the word conspiracy because after all, no conspiracies could possibly be true, they’re all just “theories” aren’t they. Well in the phrase conspiracy theory there are two words, the first word conspiracy, the second word is the active word–theory. By definition, a theory is a supposition, an idea, a concept, a hypothesis. Let me give you an example. In theory, if I purchase a raffle ticket I could win a prize. Now as long as I don’t purchase a raffle ticket, my win is theoretical. But once you purchase a raffle ticket, the win is no longer a theory, it becomes a possibility. And the more raffle tickets you purchase, the more possible, and eventually–probable, the win becomes. Such is the case with a conspiracy theory. As long as there is no evidence, it is a conspiracy theory. But once you have a piece of evidence, no matter how flimsy or circumstantial it may be, it becomes a possibility. And the more evidence that is gathered, the more possible and eventually probable the conspiracy is.

You’ll be looking at evidence in this documentary. And it will be up to you to decide if this is a conspiracy theory, or indeed a conspiracy.”

Sound file of George Bush plays: “Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty.”

vonKleist: “On September 11th, 2001, 4 events occurred within an hour and fifteen minutes of one another. The first event occurred at 8:45 eastern standard time when American Airlines flight 11 hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center. And then 18 minutes later at 9:03 eastern time United Airlines flight 175 slammed into the South Tower of the world trade center. And then at 9:43 it was reported that American Airlines flight 77 had hit the pentagon. And then finally, at 10:00 eastern time, United Airlines flight 93 crashed in Shanksville Pennsylvania.

Now unless this is one incredible coincidence, is it not safe to assume that all four of these events are inescapably married to one another? And is it not also safe to assume, that if you find one person involved, or a party involved in one of these events they’re probably involved in all of them? Well following this train of thought, since there was no credible claim of responsibility, is it not safe to assume that those involved, those parties involved, or agencies or groups that were involved in the events of 9-11, would do anything that they can to obfuscate, distract, distort or cover up any information that might lead to their discovery? And if that’s true, is it not also safe to assume that if you find somebody, a group, agency, a party, that is involved in the obfuscation, distraction, distortion, or cover up of any information involved in ANY of the events of 9-11, does it not indicate possible involvement and even guilt in the events of 9-11?

Keep this in mind as we look at the video evidence of September 11th.”

Voice of a witness of the pentagon crash: “I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings, that went right there, and slammed right into the pentagon. Huge explosion, great ball of fire, smoke started....”

VonKleist: Shortly after September 11th, as what usually happens many conspiracy theories began to emerge as to what really happened on September 11th, of 2001. Because many of these theories were not grounded with evidence, we didn’t really pay too much attention to them. However in February of 2002 my attention was drawn to the following website, entitled “Hunt The Boeing, test your perceptions.” Now the original website was completely in french, and was released by the french and drew some very serious questions as to what had really happened at the Pentagon. I mean after all we had all seen the big hole that was created by the 757 that had slammed into the pentagon at 9:43 on September 11th. But some of the photographs that were shown on this website raised very serious questions as to whether or not that’s exactly what happened. Some of these photographs showed a smaller hole, and in some cases showed that there was no way that a 757 could have created this damage. So we began our own investigation, and that started by taking a look at some of the magazines that we all saw at the supermarket checkout stands shortly after the events of September 11th. As I began pouring through the photographs I had one goal in mind, and that was to prove the French wrong with their website “Hunt The Boeing.” After all there must’ve been some photographic evidence that showed that a 757 had hit the pentagon. But as we went through all these photographs we could find no pictures whatsoever showing a tail, a nose, fuselage, wings, engine, wheels, luggage, seats, nothing. There were no photographs showing any recognizable wreckage from a 757. Furthermore, when you look at the size of the hole of the pentagon, it was approximately 65 feet across, and the height of the pentagon is approximately 73 feet. From wing tip to wing tip, a 757 is 124 feet, 10 inches. From nose to tail, a 757 is 155 feet and 3 inches in length. And the height is 44 feet, 6 inches. However when you look at the hole in the pentagon, you find that it’s only approximately 65 feet across. How does a plane of those dimensions fit into a hole only 65 feet across?

Upon further inspection, we found that the damage to the pentagon was completely and totally inconsistent with the damage of the planes that had hit the world trade center. I mean after all, the planes that had hit the trade center created a fire so intense, that it fatigued the steel and collapsed the building, or so that’s what we were told. And yet when you look at the left side of the pentagon, you’ll note that there is very little if any smoke damage or heat damage at all. On the 3rd floor it’s very plain to see a file cabinet with a computer monitor. Neither of them are damaged. On the second floor you can see a wooden desk, it hasn’t burned. And on the first floor, a very curious sight indeed, a wooden stool with a book that is laying open. The pages aren’t even singed. Now each of the planes involved in the September 11th attacks had embarked upon transcontinental flights which means that they had a majority of their fuel left over when they hit their respective targets. That means approximately 8600 remaining gallons of fuel would’ve been ignited on the 757 that had hit the pentagon. Again we look at the photograph, and ask ourselves, “Is the smoke and heat damage consistent with that amount of fuel being ignited?”

Miss Terese Anye (sp) a certified environmental specialist, and a member of the Environmental Assessment Association sent us the following letter after a brief conversation we had on the telephone. She had said to us, “that the amount of fuel that would’ve been left in the aircraft that hit the pentagon would basically have reduced that section of the pentagon to rubble, and would have burned for days.” And that “8600 gallons of fuel had a BTU rate of 86 million.” She also stated that, “looking at the total weight of this aircraft in conjunction with it’s velocity, the pentagon should’ve been reduced to the thickness of a pancake. Also the fuel spill of 8600 gallons would have posed a very large soil removal and disposal project; since the contaminated soil would be considered HAZARDOUS WASTE under Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Also looking at the total heat value of the Jet 8 jet fuel @ 86,000,000 BTU’s the temperature of the fire at the Pentagon, would have been in excess of 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit. You could expect this size of involvement to last for days and it would be visible for miles.”

Another interesting question that is raised is in the photographs of the collapsed area of the Pentagon, if you’ll note the upper floor and roof area, it appears that that area simply collapsed and does not show any impact damage from a tail section that was over 43 feet in height. How could a 757 slam into the Pentagon, and not have an impact area where the tail section would’ve hit the upper floors?

Shortly after these questions were raised and the topic was open for discussion on our radio show, the Power Hour, these 5 frames were released from a security camera at the Pentagon. The only problem, is that the release of these 5 photographs, seemed to raise more questions than they answered. First of all, why was the date incorrect on the lower left corner of the screen? Second of all, they really didn’t show that there was a 757 that had hit the Pentagon. And thirdly, many people ask, “Is this the only security camera that was on at the Pentagon?” The Pentagon. This is the nerve center for the United States military. Supposedly the most secure building in the country. And this was the only video footage that was available of the most heinous attack ever recorded at the pentagon? Where were all the other security cameras aimed? What about the security cameras in the hallways of the pentagon? Every inch of the Pentagon is under video surveillance! Where are those video cameras?

We also had a report about a gas station, whose video camera was pointed in the exact direction where the 757 would’ve hit the Pentagon. Shortly after the event, it was reported that officials showed up at that gas station, and confiscated that footage.

In addition to all the magazines that hit the newsstands and the supermarket checkouts, there was a flurry of book releases that hit the local bookstores, and in some cases the book section of your local grocery store. One book, is “America Attacked” which was released by university press of California and was edited by, Sarah Jess, Gabriel Beck, and R. Joseph. In reference to the attack on the Pentagon, on page 194 it states, “The jet had plowed a crater 100 feet wide that ripped away the walls of all 5 stories of the building, collapsing the outermost rings, which encircle the Pentagon.”

In this picture we ask, “Do you see a crater 100 feet wide? Or 50 feet wide?” How about in this picture, or this picture? It doesn’t appear that there was any crater at all. They went on to say that it had “ripped away the walls of the 5 story building, collapsing the outermost rings, which encircle the Pentagon.” Now there should be no question that the outer rings of the pentagon have indeed collapsed. We’ve seen pictures from one angle, from another angle, and America has seen these pictures. We all assumed that was the damage caused from the 757 hitting the pentagon. But shortly after the release of the article, “From deception to revelation” we were sent some photographs that were taken apparently right after the event, and BEFORE the outer walls had collapsed.

When examining these photographs we can clearly see that the area in question had not collapsed. In fact, there is very little evidence of a hole big enough to accommodate a 757. The hole that we do see is approximately 14 to 16 feet across. Question–How does a 757 fit into a 16 foot hole and leave no damage, or wreckage on the outside of the pentagon? These are questions that deserve serious scrutiny.

Let’s take a look at some of the photographs that were taken BEFORE the outer wall of the pentagon collapsed.

In this first photograph we can see the firefighters pulling the hoses away from the firetruck. In the foreground we can see wirespools that were left in the front lawn of the Pentagon, after all, this section of the Pentagon was under renovation. We’ll use these wirespools as reference points.

Also to the right of those wirespools and on the face of the Pentagon we can see that some concrete facing has broken away. We’ll also use this as a reference point as we examine these photographs. Now to the left of that area where the facing has broken off we can clearly see that the pentagon has NOT YET COLLAPSED. There are some flaming areas, and that area appears to be the only section where there is a hole approximately 14 to 16 feet. Question–How does a 757 fit into a 16 foot hole, and leave no wreckage in the front of the building?

We can also see that the roof of the building does show fatigue, but has not yet collapsed.

In this photograph an astonished onlooker sees exactly what we’re seeing. The pentagon had not yet collapsed. And again, there is no sign of any wreckage whatsoever, no tail, no fuselage, no wings, no wheels, no engines, no seats, no luggage, nothing on the outside of the Pentagon. Pentagon roof line is clearly visible and again it is under fatigue, but it had not yet collapsed.

As we examine this next photograph let’s take a good close look at the lower left hand corner you’ll see engine 331 of the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority, and we contacted the fire chief from this engine company. Chief Plower agreed to come on our radio show along with 2 of his firefighters. But 1 hour before air time, they cancelled. We were told that the firefighters had been placed on indefinite leave.

When we look at this photograph we can see that the fire retardant foam is being sprayed on the front of the Pentagon, and again, the area in question had not yet collapsed. And you can see right in the center of the photograph, a big area where some of the concrete facing has broken away, and it appears as if this is the only major hole in the front of the pentagon. Again, is this hole big enough to accommodate a 757? And where is the wreckage?

In this photograph we again see engine 331 and fire retardant foam being sprayed on the front of the pentagon. Note clearly in the center of the photograph we see the upper floors of the pentagon again yet to collapse, but, also notice that there does not appear to be any damage to these upper floors. Question–If the height of the Boeing 757 was 44 feet 6 inches, there should’ve been some point of impact in these upper floors and yet when we look at these pictures, there doesn’t appear to be any impact whatsoever in the area where the tail, should have hit. And again, there is no wreckage visible on the front of the lawn. Now while these photographs were being taken videographers from several networks were on the scene to capture the firefighters in action as they battled the blazes at the front of the pentagon.

(Shows live footage of ABC news, actual footage of the Pentagon collapsing.)

vonKleist: What could’ve caused this type of damage? What could’ve caused a 14 to 16 foot hole and pierced 3 of the rings of the Pentagon? Keep in mind that each ring of the Pentagon has an outer and inner wall. Each wall approximately 18 inches thick of steel reinforced concrete. That means that each ring consisted of 36 inches or 3 feet of steel reinforced concrete, for a total of approximately 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete. Question–Could a 757 have pierced 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete, and left a 14 to 16 foot hole, and no wreckage? If not, what could have created that type of damage?

On our radio program, the power hour we have a lot of veterans and military experts that listen in. And many have called up and agreed that it could NOT have been a 757 that created that damage, but in fact, had to be something else all together. What could have caused that damage? Some call it a bunker buster, or a missile.

Now as this controversy percolated through 2002, in January of 2003 the entire issue was resurrected, when the American Society Of Civil Engineers, released a report entitled, “The Pentagon Building Performance Report.” The announcement was made on CNN, and they showed an animated video that illustrated how the 757 slammed into the Pentagon and took out 50 support columns. When we again look at these photographs, I ask, do you see support columns that have been destroyed? Which support columns were destroyed? How could it possibly be, that the American Society of Civil Engineers could release such a report, when the photographs, clearly show that the entire report is in question?

Audio clip of George Bush: “There’s an old saying in Tennessee I know it’s in Texas probably in Tennessee that says fool me once...shame on...shame on you...it fooled me--can’t get fooled again.”

VonKleist: You know there are those that see these pictures and hear this information for the first time and, they inevitably ask the question, “Well if the plane didn’t hit the Pentagon, where did it go?” The answer is, I don’t know where it went. For all I know it could be sitting in 200 feet of water in the Atlantic Ocean. But then again, I didn’t say that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. That was NBC, and CBS and ABC and CNN and FOX and all the other news agencies. The question should be, if flight 77 hit the Pentagon, then WHERE is it? And let’s keep in mind that if we do find someone a group or an agency that is involved with the obfuscation, distraction, distortion or cover up of ANY information about ANY of the events of September 11th, does that not indicate possible involvement and even guilt, in the events of September the 11th?

Now let’s move on to what happened in New York City on the morning of September the 11th.

These are just a few of the images that are indelibly etched in the minds of every man and woman on the face of this planet that happened to be near a television set on the morning of September 11th, 2001. Most of us will never forget where we were and what we were doing on that day.

Now right after September 11th many conspiracy theories began to arise to try to explain how and why the towers came down. Well this is no different from any other major event in history, from the assassination of John F. Kennedy to his brother Robert Kennedy. And from the assassinations of Martin Luther King and John Lennon, to the explosion in Oklahoma City that destroyed the Mura building in 1995 and the downing of TWA flight 800. All of these were followed by conspiracy theories to try to explain these events.

Well on September 11th, there was a lot of discussion about explosions that went on around the building and in the building. Some of these reports were televised...but only once. Let’s take a look at some of these reports and review what happened on September 11th.

(Clip of South tower crash and woman screaming “That was not American Airlines, that was not an American Airlines”)

(Clip of FOX news with a Fox employee Mark Burnback on the phone, answers the question if he was close enough to see any markings on the airplane.

Mark Burnback: Uh hi gentlemen, how are you doing. Yeah there was uh, there was definitely a blue logo, it was like a circular logo on the front of the plane. Uh towards the uh, yeah definitely towards the front. Um, it definitely did not look like a commercial plane, I didn’t see any windows on the side.”

Fox Anchorman: Mark, if what you say is true those could be cargo planes or..something like that you said you didn’t see any windows on the side?

Mark Burnback: I didn’t see any windows on the sides, I saw the plane flying low, I was probably like a block away from the subway in Brooklyn and that plane came down very low, and again, it was not a normal flight that I’ve ever seen at an airport, it was a plane that had a blue logo on the front and, it just did not look like it belonged in this area to be frank about it, I mean that was not an accident.)

(Various clips of reporters and police saying how they heard an explosion)

vonKleist: In the September 24th 2001 edition of People magazine, on page 24, an interview with Louis Cacchioli, a 51 year old firefighter, assigned with engine 47 of Harlem New York, had this to say, “We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.”

Well Louis Cacchioli wasn’t the only firefigher who claims that there were explosives or demolition charges going off in and around the world trade center.

(Clip of firefighters describing the incident. “It was like, floor by floor they kept pooping out, it was as if they had detonate, as if they had planned to take out the building...boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom...”)

vonKleist:Now we’ve seen numerous reports of explosions, bombs, possible demolition charges, a pancake collapse of the towers. But have we seen any footage, anything that might support these particular allegations. And these allegations come from firefighters and officials who were at the scene and were in a position to know. Well there is one very interesting piece of footage that was broadcast on CNN live, while they were interviewing Tom Clancy, and the amazing thing is this footage was shown once, and never seen again. Let’s take a look.

Now as we look at this footage, the first thing we want to note, is that both towers are still standing. The sun had just risen in New York it was 9:30 in the morning, so the camera is looking from the west towards the east and the smoke is being blown towards brooklyn or away from the camera to the southeast. This gives you a clear view of the left side or north side of the towers in the trade center area. If you follow the left tower, all the way down to the street level, you’ll notice that you can see all the way down to the buildings below.

[Please also see this link explaining this mystery explosion: http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/hoax.html - 100777.com]

Now the question is, if both towers are still standing, and the smoke is being blown away from the towers, what is this huge ploom of smoke approximately 50 to 60 stories high rising from the trade center area? This footage was shown once live, and never repeated as I said. Why were we never shown this video again, and why has this even never been brought to the attention of the American public or the world? This is a critical event, it was never discussed or examined, because it is INCONSISTENT with the simple attack of planes slamming into towers. How could this ploom of smoke be rising from the base of the towers if neither one of the towers had collapsed? There’s one more important point to make when viewing this piece of footage. And that is that the rising ploom of smoke appears to be occurring to the north and the west of the trade center area. Question–Is there any other photographic evidence that might show an explosion or a ploom of smoke that occurred to the north and west of the trade center towers before the collapse?

We’ve heard eyewitness accounts and testimony from fire officials that indicate there were bombs, explosives, possibly detonating charges that were utilized in the collapse of the world trade center buildings. Is there any reason to believe that detonating charges were utilized in the collapse of the north tower, the south tower, or building 7? One firefighter did say, “boom boom boom boom boom” that’s how it went down. And many television reporters reported that as the buildings collapsed both the north tower and the south tower and building 7, they all appeared to come down just like a controlled demolition.

Let’s listen to a clip from Larry Silverstein, he was the lease owner of the world trade center as he gave an interview on CBS.

(Clip of Larry Silverstein saying: I remember getting a call from the uh, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. And he said you know we’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull, then we watched the building...collapse.)

We’ve all seen controlled demolitions on television. Office buildings, sports stadiums, all brought down by controlled charges. And these charges and controlled demolitions take weeks of planning. They have to bring in experts, do structural analysis of the buildings, study which beams, which girders have to have charges placed on them. And then a team of experts has to come and set the charges, wire them all together in sequence. And then, finally after everything is clear, they let the building go, or “pull it.”

Are we to believe that 8 hours after a surprise attack in New York city, they were able to “pull” building 7? How is this possible, had it not been planned in advance? And if they did have planned detonation charges in place in building number 7, is it possible that there were charges in building 6? Or 5? Or 4? Or the north tower? Or the south tower?

(Clip of firefighters describing the incident. “It was like, floor by floor they kept pooping out, it was as if they had detonate, as if they had planned to take out the building...boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom...”)

vonKleist: Ladies and gentlemen, so far we’ve seen that we were deceived if not flat out lied to about many of the events of September 11th. From the controversy about whether or not flight 77 actually hit the pentagon, to whether or not there were bombs or explosives or detonating charges utilized in any of the buildings that collapsed in the WTC. And also Larry Silverstein making the admission that when it came to building 7 they made the decision to “pull it.” And now we come to the main events of September 11th, the north and south towers being hit by airliners, that were supposedly hijacked by terrorists. Let’s take a look at some of the clips that we’ve all seen over and over again.

(Clips of the planes crashing into North and South Towers)

On April 15th of 2004, we received a news release that alerted us to a web site that was entitled “www.letsroll911.org” Phil Jayhan, the webmaster for this website had taken the videoclips that you’ve just seen and slowed them down frame by frame and examined them and what he found was astounding. There are several different anomalies that need to be examined and questioned. First of all, what is attached to the bottom of the plane that hit the south tower? And second of all, what is that brief flash that occurs just as the plane makes impact? Now as we first looked at this video footage, I said to myself “Well this video footage could very well be manipulated.” So I wanted to check it out myself. Well we went and found the DVD that we had purchased shortly after September 11th entitled “America Remembers,” this was directly from CNN. We took this DVD and put it in our machine and examined the very clip that you’ve just seen. Let’s take a look at it.

(Clip of plane hitting south tower)

Let’s take another look at this clip in slow motion but before we do, keep in mind that sometimes the best place to hide something is in plain site. We’ve all seen this video clip, and there have been many publications that have taken frames from this video and published them in hundreds of magazines. Here’s an example, on page 3 a full size blow up of this picture. And in this magazine, it was published on page 4. And on the back of this book that we discussed earlier, it’s on the back cover. I suggest you all take a copy of your magazines and books and if you have the video footage, take a good hard look, we’ve all got this. Now let’s take a look at this in slow motion. As the plane approaches the south tower, notice carefully, the belly of the plane, there appears to be something attached, and just as it hits the building there’s a flash. Let’s take another look in super slow motion.

Now let’s take another good hard look at this video footage. As the plane approaches, it is irrefutable that there is something attached to the bottom of this plane, and a distinct flash as it makes contact. Now there are some that would say this is a trick of light, a reflection. Well let’s keep in mind that if you hold a mirror in your hand and reflect the suns rays, that reflection only goes where you aim that reflection. So a reflection should only be seen from one particular angle. Let’s take a look at this event, from another angle.

And now let’s take a look at it again from a 3rd angle.

And now let’s take a look at it again one more time from a 4th angle.

Ladies and gentlemen, you’ve just seen a very interesting event indeed. Not recorded by one, but by 4 different cameras from 4 different angles. There can be no doubt, that this is not the result of a reflection of any sort, but in fact was a flash caused by an explosion, a detonation, a missile, something happened that was not...a terrorist with a box cutter.

Let’s take another look at the object attached to the belly of this plane and ask yourself this question, could something this big go unnoticed by the passengers, the crew, the baggage handlers, the service personnel at a commercial airport? The obvious answer is no–it would’ve been noticed. Which raises the question, where did this plane take off from? And was it in fact a commercial airliner at all?

(Clip of South tower crash and woman screaming “That was not American Airlines, that was not an American Airlines”)

(Clip of FOX news with a Fox employee Mark Burnback on the phone, answers the question if he was close enough to see any markings on the airplane.

Mark Burnback: Uh hi gentlemen, how are you doing. Yeah there was uh, there was definitely a blue logo, it was like a circular logo on the front of the plane. Uh towards the uh, yeah definitely towards the front. Um, it definitely did not look like a commercial plane, I didn’t see any windows on the side.”

Fox Anchorman: Mark, if what you say is true those could be cargo planes or..something like that you said you didn’t see any windows on the side?

Mark Burnback: I didn’t see any windows on the sides, I saw the plane flying low, I was probably like a block away from the subway in Brooklyn and that plane came down very low, and again, it was not a normal flight that I’ve ever seen at an airport, it was a plane that had a blue logo on the front and, it just did not look like it belonged in this area to be frank about it, I mean that was not an accident.)

Now we’ve just heard testimony that refutes the official report that a commercial airliner hit the WTC. Well if it wasn’t a commercial airliner, it would have to be either a private or a military aircraft, and I think we can rule out private aircraft. Now if this was a military plane that would explain the possibility that there was something mounted on the belly of the plane. Now Phil Jayhan, webmaster of the website letsroll911.org and many other people have postulated that this indeed was a “pod” of some sort mounted to the belly of the plane. Many of our listeners are ex-military and have agreed that it is a distinct possibility. When you couple this with the mysterious “flash” that occurs on the side of the WTC just as the plane makes contact, I think that we can probably agree that there was some sort of incendiary or an explosive that would serve as a match that would ignite the enormous amount of fuel that would be dispersed as soon as the plane hit the building.

Let’s take another look at this one clip and you’ll notice that the flash is a separate event then the contact of the fuselage as it hits the building. Some folks have stated that the flash was the result of the fuselage making contact with the trade center building. But as you can see the flash is indeed to the right of the fuselage and in fact as the fuselage makes contact with the world trade tower you can see a reflection of the flash in the fuselage which further supports the contention that these are two separate events.

Admittedly what we’ve seen so far in this presentation is disturbing to say the least. To find that we were not necessarily told the truth about what happened at the Pentagon on September 11th, and now according to the clips that you’ve just seen and the testimony that you’ve just heard, that there was a whole lot more to the story when flight 175 hit the south tower. Well, I needed more information. I needed more evidence that showed there was something else going on on September 11th, and the only way to get more information was to go to the first plane, flight 11 the American Airliner that hit the north tower. The french filmakers the noday brothers were in New York City doing a documentary about the new york city firefighters, and this clip, is the only known footage of the first plane hitting the first tower.

Let’s take another look at this video clip, this time in slow motion. You’ll notice that as the plane approaches the tower, first of all, we’re too far away to get a clear shot of any detail of the plane. So therefore it’s hard to make out whether anything was attached to the bottom of this plane as was the case with flight 175. However, there is another similarity. Just as the plane makes impact, there is a flash. Let’s look at it again and keep in mind that as we watch this plane make impact this flash occurs just before the plane crashes into the north tower. This time as we watch this clip, note the shadow rising from the lower right of the trade center tower and keep in mind, that the shadow won’t reach the impact point before the plane and vice versa. This is very important because the flash occurs BEFORE the shadow and the plane meet.

This time let’s look at this clip in reverse. You’ll notice that as the plane slowly backs out of the north tower, it has cleared the tower, and then the flash occurs, indicating that the flash occurred before the plane made impact with the north tower.

One more time, this video clip showing the flash as the plane hit the north tower.

Now this video clip that we’ve just examined came again from the Naudet brothers documentary that was being filmed in the streets of new york city on the morning of September 11th. This documentary about the new york city firefighters was going to be assembled at a later date and was not televised and in fact there was no coverage at all, of flight 11 as it hit the north tower. After all it was a surprise attack. So if there was no live television coverage of the first plane hitting the first tower, how do we explain the following comment from George W. Bush?

(Audio clip: Student: What was the first thing that went through your head when you heard that a plane crashed into the first...

Bush: Well, I was sitting in a schoolhouse in Florida. I’d gone down to tell my little brother what to do, and uh..(laugh) You can go ahead and sit down. Just kidding Jeb! (Laughs) And uh, it’s the mother in me, uh anyway (laughs) I was sitting there and my chief of staff, well first of all when we walked in the classroom, I had seen this uh, plane fly into the first building, it was a tv set on, and uh...you know I thought it was pilot error.)

VonKleist: You know right off there will probably be some folks out there who will try to minimize or negate what we’ve discussed in this program, and turn it into some sort of political football. They’ll say we’re left wingers or “we’re democrat liberal types” and we’re Bush bashing. Well, nothing could be farther from the truth. Let’s not forget that it was under the Clinton administration that we launched a missel attack in Afghanistan and Sudan and destroyed what turned out to be an aspirin factory because they had bad intel that said they were manufacturing chemicals. It’s happening again folks. It has nothing to do with liberal vs. conservative, or democrat vs republican, or right vs. left. It has everything to do with RIGHT vs. WRONG.

In the beginning of this program we played word association if you recall, the term was conspiracy theory. Now you’ve seen enough evidence in this presentation to know that we are now dealing with a conspiracy. There is plenty of evidence to support it. A conspiracy theory in fact, is the idea that Osama Bin Laden had something to do with the attacks on September 11th. Let’s not forget that on September 23rd of 2001, Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor, ad stated that they had evidence that linked Bin Laden with the terrorist attacks, and that they would release that evidence in due time. Well America and the world are still waiting for that evidence. And in that time since September 11th, we’ve launched not 1, but 2 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq based upon NO EVIDENCE or....a conspiracy theory.

What we see on this video should give us all cause to stop and re-think everything we’ve been told about September 11th. The media and our government have relentlessly pounded into Americans minds, that it was terrorists weilding box cutters that were responsible for the attacks in America on September 11th. And now after seeing this video footage we realize that it couldn’t possibly have been a terrorist and a box cutter that created the flashes on both the north and south tower. Nor could it have been a terrorist with a box cutter that had that attachment to the bottom of flight 175. There is one truth that’s come out of this though, and that is that there is a war on freedom. But the war on freedom isn’t being waged by those that they say it is. After all, how many of your freedoms have been legislated away by Osama Bin Laden or the Taliban or Al Qaeda or Saddam Hussein? The answer is none. Your freedoms have been legislated away by the very people who take oaths to defend your freedoms. Republicans and democrats alike. Your congress. Your senate. Your president. There is a war on freedom. And now thanks to the Homeland Security Bill, the Patriot Act, the terrorist bill, the model states emergency health powers act, we have thumb scanners and retina scans, face recognition, metal detectors. At the airports we have body scans and body cavity searches. Yes there is a war on freedom. And let’s not forget what George Bush said about conspiracy theories.

(Sound file of George Bush plays: “Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty.”

Another sound file-Bush: “Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you’re with us...or you are with the terrorists.”)

(TV clip of C-SPAN2 of Rudolph Giuliani, a public hearing for September 11th Commission–It then has a woman crying out in the background screaming, “My son was murdered! Murdered!” Then another guy yells out, “Let’s ask some real questions! Let’s ask some real questions! Is that unfair? And what about the bunker, you didn’t ask about the bunker the office of emergency (inaudible) bunker, on fire!” At this point security began to try to get him to leave and he yells, “Remember this. Your government funded and trained Al Qaeda. Your government, FUNDED and TRAINED Al Qeada. Repeat it again. You’re government funded and trained Al Qaeda.”)

vonKleist:And now I ask all of America, and the people of the world...Where’s your line in the sand?


optimus-There is some bonus material which is equally stunning, containing clips of local news broadcast of the 1995 oklahoma city bombing that were seen only once, and then suppressed. We were lied to about that as well.

( categories: )