On the New Belgian Video, and the Strange Smoke of WTC1, and other Anomalies

By The Anonymous Physicist



This new video (see imbed at bottom), from a Belgian site, garagetv.be was uploaded by “bartvanbelle.” Now when you click on that name, this one video (“unseen footage 9/11”) comes up, and it is said to be of “13:51” duration. But when you get it to start playing, it then says it has a duration of “12:43.” What happened to the missing one minute and eight seconds? What was taken out?


Then listen carefully to the whoosh of the alleged “second plane hit.” It sounds like one can still hear the whoosh after we hear what sounds like the impact. But we should not hear any more “whoosh” after the impact, unless the plane or missile was a flyby; or the whole thing is doctored. Then when that "Radio Dispatched Manhattan Demolition" truck goes by, the video is clearly then playing in slow motion to facilitate the reading of what’s on this painted-over garbage truck, as one reader here described it.


But perhaps the most fascinating anomaly on this video is the smoke emanating from WTC1, after the alleged first “plane hit.” This video has good close-ups of the “plane hit” side and also of the adjacent side. Note, on this video, the people falling to the ground seem to be mostly or solely from the adjacent side, and not from the “plane hit” side. Now my key point is that the smoke emanating from the “plane hit” side appears to be going straight to the side (from all the floors from which the smoke is emanating from), due East (from the position of the tower and the street. Note how this smoke from this side has little or no upward vector component— it just goes straight east and then southeast— for a great distance away. Now contrast this with the smoke emanating from the adjacent side, from which people are falling or jumping. Here the smoke rises straight up, without any apparent sideways vector component whatsoever. This smoke acts as if it is hot, while the “plane hit” side smoke acts as if it is produced at ambient temperature, and stays that way. Note that neither is it “cold,” else it would float down. Even its density was well controlled. For if it were more or less dense than surrounding air it would have had downward or upward vector components, which again is not seen. Looking closely when the video allows, even indicates something inside may be blowing the smoke out. But we cannot be sure because hydrodynamic flow is a complicated matter; here involving wind shear, turbulence and other factors. This side having ambient temperature smoke, of course, fits in with hypotheses of smaller shape charges having made the ludicrous [pristine] plane outline shaped “hole.” As indicated above, the troubling flow of the smoke from the “plane hit” side indicates its physical properties, namely that it appears to be of ambient temperature and density. This is highly unlikely if this smoke were produced from actual conventional fires. Smoke from fires is hot just like the burning material it is derived from. Air hotter than it’s surroundings rises (unless other variables are involved.) This is seen at the adjacent side. So likely there is something untoward going on here; i.e. indications of artificially contrived smoke at the “plane hit” side.


Furthermore, the fact that there is no rising of the smoke from the "plane hit" side indicates that there was NO MIXING whatsoever of the sources of the "plane hit" smoke and the hot smoke going out the adjacent side. Thus we likely had separate explosions near the outer structure, and not the ludicrous scenario say from Purdue U. that shows a pristine plane barreling all the way through the outer structure and the interior floors, and an inside fireball doing the same. It is also untenable that any hot smoke from inside the building would totally cool off to ambient temperature in the short distance and time it has to reach an outer window. Indeed the fact that it would move toward such an opening indicates it is driven by a temperature gradient; i.e. if it were not hotter than the surrounding air it wouldn't move towards cooler air. And we have all seen the smoke from fires rise hundreds and sometimes thousands of feet until it is no longer hotter than ambient air. This entire smoke issue is even more anomalous when you realize that the ambient temperature smoke is coming out of the area which was allegedly impacted by the alleged plane with its thousands of gallons of allegedly exploding fuel. If any side should have had hot smoke, this would be the side-- as also indicated by the Naudet video. The latter, of course, may now further lose any notion of validity by this examination of the properties of the smoke.


Now only the perps know why they did each element of their scenario. But in my— and the Finnish military expert’s-- theory of the nuking of the WTC on 9/11, conventional charges (and possibly micro-nukes as well [my theory]) were employed leading up to the final nuclear demolition of the towers. This took some time. Certainly one crucial need for continuous smoke would be to make sure that not all smoke went out before the “big one,” as nearly happened with one tower. If that happened, the ludicrous [pristine] planes/fuel/gravity/[pristine] pancakes scenario would be even more untenable. In the final analysis, what is seen [the unique smoke from the “plane hit” side of WTC1] and heard [the seeming whooshes and explosion] on this tape, require further video and audio analyses.