18 Comment
18 Ratings:

Flight 175 (rare video)


18 comments

  • Jimmydanton#

    Jimmydanton September 13, 2013 11:33:10 PM CEST

    "... a building that's clearly behind the south WTC tower".
    False. That building, known as The Downtown Club, is at 20 West street, south of WT2, not north.
    The maker of the video couldn't be bothered to spent a few minutes looking at google earth for the facts.
    And that's the whole 9//11 was a false flag operation in a nutshell.

  • Rasputin.....#

    Rasputin..... September 13, 2013 3:15:48 AM CEST

    fake

  • philkitch#

    philkitch September 12, 2013 9:07:42 PM CEST

    Building clearly in front...

  • Germanpils#

    Germanpils September 12, 2013 8:08:19 PM CEST

    if that building was behind the wtcs then it would have been higher than both tower which doesnt work out.

  • Earthmuffin33#

    Earthmuffin33 September 12, 2013 7:47:44 PM CEST

    Amazing catch! on YouTube on a video listed as "9/11 WTC 175 second hit slow motion 200 fps" someone tries to make the argument that maybe the plane went behind that building before hitting WTC. But flight 175 is the second plane and flying in front of WTC that is already on fire. which means the planes wing would have to be about 300 hundred feet long. And I wwent on Goggle images to see where the building is and how tall it is. And I couldn't find it anywhere! It's a fairly distinctive looking building with a white water tank near it. And I can't find it. If someone else can please let me know. It would also have to be pretty tall if the wing went behind it (which I think we can all agree is not the case) but just to cover the bases I tried to place it in relation to WTC hit by flight 175. And I'll be damned if I can find it at all. there are plenty of images of WTC before and after the attack. Can YOU find the building? because I cannot.
    Great post! Great find!

  • properREDeye#

    properREDeye September 12, 2013 7:10:03 PM CEST

    There is no dispute planes hit the building but there are massive gaping holes in the story and the physics models given. Like, how does Jet fuel that burns at 1500 degrees melt steel that has a melting point of 3000+? Or, how do 2 massive buildings fall in freefall (no vertical resistance) without having the underpinning structure blown out? Or how do 2 planes destroy 3 buildings? Why was thermite residue (a chemical compound restricted to the millitary) found on surrounding rooftops? Why were there waterfalls of molten steel? Many very good and should be easy to answer questions that are simply not addressed by any investigations and that screams out LIE. Are all debunkers blind to these facts or do you just see the truth you want to see?

  • voorlex#

    voorlex September 12, 2013 1:52:47 PM CEST

    besides that building being in front of the twins there are thousands of people who saw this airplane dive in.

  • DarkHeart#online

    DarkHeart September 12, 2013 9:53:35 AM CEST

    Another diversion from the fact that the laws of physics took a day off on 9/11
    There is one person who has looked at this correctly, that is looked at the facts, not come up with a theory & then found "facts"to to fit it.
    That person is Dr Judy Woods, if you have not read her book "Where did the towers go?" then you need to.

  • Sol34now#

    Sol34now September 12, 2013 4:27:46 AM CEST

    there's one very simple thing impossible to debunk and stick to for life, the video of WTC7 falling. Even attempting to debunk that makes you look like you don't have 2 brain cells to rub together (or cointel), very safe. This video on the other hand, not so safe, the building can very well be in front like others have said. Too bad most politicians, public figures and mainstream media are just towing the company line, out of fear, boohoo! chicken shits really!

  • abimaelidrogodelgado#

    abimaelidrogodelgado September 12, 2013 3:10:33 AM CEST

    12 años ...... y las cosas aún parecen no estar bien claras :(



 
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook