Skip to content or view screen version

Video Exposing Blunders of 9/11 Commission Report Airs on New Zealand Television

Debbie Lewis | 23.12.2006 18:14 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | World

Controversial September 11th documentary exposing inconsistencies and contradictions in the 9/11 Commission Report erupts onto New Zealand television. This recent national airing of "In Plane Site" on New Zealand television represents a historic turning point in the global collective consciousness regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11.

Columbia MO December 23, 2006 -- On December 16, 2006, while most Americans slept, Television 3 New Zealand debuted the provocative documentary "911 In Plane Site" on national television. The film presents photographs and video footage from that fateful day, as well as computer-aided analysis focusing on the Pentagon and World Trade Center buildings One, Two and Seven. Also examined are dozens of independent and mainstream media news reports from the morning of September 11 that highlights inconsistencies and contradictions in the "official" account.
Saturday night's national airing of "In Plane Site" on New Zealand television represents a historic turning point in the global collective consciousness regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11. After all, it was only months after the second national airing of "In Plane Site" on Australia's Network 10, which kicked off a firestorm of debate leading to Federal Labor politician Michael Danby's demand that the programming director of Network 10 be fired for airing the program. Mr. Danby said that September 11 victims had been killed twice - once by the terrorists and once by Ten. However, Mr. Danby's highly publicized comments did not seem to dissuade worldwide public interest, as a spokesman for Network 10 stated that a unified public reaction to the film had generated a massive wave of phone calls to station operators praising the network for its airing of the program.
Producer Dave vonKleist says that support for the documentary remains a global phenomenon. The international news program Out There Television was the first syndication to take the controversial film into thirty-one countries in a single airing. The internationally available Namaste Magazine has made the documentary available to those in Europe since it's release in mid-2004. Nexus Magazine, also internationally available, has been a continued advocate, as well as other organizations in North and South America, Europe and Asia.
Shining the torch of truth to Spanish speaking nations is outspoken World Trade Center survivor, William Rodriguez. Rodriguez was the last person to escape the World Trade Center buildings before they collapsed and was witness to a deafening and massive explosion, which seemed to emanate from between sub-basement B2 and B3 of Two World Trade Center moments before UAL Flight 175 struck the tower. He believes to this day that explosives were utilized in the demolition-style, pancake collapse of both World Trade Center towers.
Commenting on some of the video evidence, which is contained in “911 In Plane Site,” NASA engineers Jim LeGarde and Dale Carros, in a recent interview at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., called into question the integrity of the 9/11 Commission Report by drawing attention to the fact that World Trade Center Towers One and Two collapsed into themselves much faster than basic physics will allow, when taking into account the physical resistance forces that are present with any building collapse. Adding confirmation to this heated controversy, Van Romero, an explosives expert and former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at New Mexico Tech, said on September 11, 2001 "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." Mr. Romero's comments have been widely censored in the U.S. press.
The curiosity surrounding the video and photographic images seen and discussed in the documentary has led to its mass airing in both public and private venues in the United States. It has also led to scathing criticism and rebuttal from U.S. mainstream media sources, including FOX News journalist Geraldo Rivera, syndicated talk show host Glenn Beck, CNN's Anderson Cooper and Popular Mechanics magazine. To date, no U.S. based news program has aired the documentary in its entirety.
For more information relating to the groundbreaking footage contained in this film, please visit the producer's website: www.911inplanesite.com

Debbie Lewis
- e-mail: pressbox@bridgestonemediagroup.com
- Homepage: http://www.911inplanesite.com

Comments

Hide the following 5 comments

aww will you just quit it already

23.12.2006 19:34

i have had enough of this crap..bla. ..bla.. bla there is a time for politics and that an obsurd insuization
now you are ether with us or you are with the tourists.
if another attack happens and its martial law and you have to join a work camp to put food on your familly then will you beleve that it was the evil a-rabs.

george w bush
mail e-mail: nothingtoseehere.com


More misrepresentations and half truths from the 911 "Truth" movement

23.12.2006 19:35

Yet more conspiraloon rubbish. All effectively debunked many, many times over already including

www.911myths.com

www.debunking911.com

Amused


Investigate 911

24.12.2006 10:29

Yes Amused, according to the article 'conspiraloonacy' is now a global condition, which will only be cured by a full, open and independant inquiry into the events of 11th September 2001.
The 'debunks' you refer to rely on the 'coincidence' theory. Lets put the conspiracy v coincidence theories to the test. May the truth win.

INVESTIGATE 9/11

cassandra
mail e-mail: cmh@uk2.net


Crossing Cassandra

24.12.2006 14:37

Well Cassandra, perhaps you can tell me how all the structural engineers in the whole wide world (except Charlie Pegelow) were persuaded to keep quiet? Even the ones in countries opposed to the US?

How Edinburgh and Sheffied Universities were both persuaded to produce academic papers supporting the "fire" theory?

How all the architects were persuaded to keep quiet? Even the ones opposed to the US?

Where the mistakes in Frank Greening's collapse calculations are?

How all the fire engineers were persuaded to keep quiet? Even the ones opposed to the US?

Why Loose Change lies numerous times, in all its versions?

How all the demolition specialists were persuaded to keep quiet? Even the ones opposed to the US?


Amused


for amused

26.12.2006 09:49

Your list of why engineers, demolitions experts, fire service crew, architects, etc were forced to keep quiet is a red herring: many people are stepping forward to call upon governments and international investigators to revisit the 9/11 event. There are a body of civil engineers, architects (even the architect of the WTC claimed so before he was killed ... under suspicious circumstances, I might add) that the WTC was built to withstand the direct impact of a number of airplanes; the firecrews who responded on the day are recorded discussing the use of squibs "boom boom boom, just like that, like explosions bringing the place down" and another rejoins "yeah, boom boom boom, like a demolition job". Academics are easily bought: contracts, tenure, publications, memberships of august committees and having two universities in the UK agree with the US is no big deal. One would expect some degree of polarity in such debates.

Y'see the thing that just makes this issue refuse to go away is the same thing that made the JFK assissination remain unresolved: there are just too many things that don't stack up, that contradict other supposed facts, and then there is always the question of who benefits: well, all of those off fighting resource wars can tell you who benefits. The world has shifted - the west is becoming increasingly draconian and right wing, the shift is toward gearing up for the "long war" for resources and sinking the US into the deepest debt it has ever ever experienced, and this time without a gold standard to support its massive debt.

But, nevertheless, there will still be those who believe that from a cave in Afghanistan a sinister plot was hatched that required untrained and inexperienced pilot trainees take over passenger airliners and engage in some surprising aerobatic maneouvers to bring about a direct hit at the tops of the WTC which then brought these massive buildings down cleanly and neatly ... and took out WTC7 as an added bonus even though the fires that supposedly raged through that building have been shown to have been inconsequential. But WTC7 came down in its own footprint also. 3 buildings doing so "spontaneously" for the first-time in history. If that is the natural behaviour of buildings in collapse, I guess that controlled demolition teams are just out of work these days: the laws of physics have obviously changed since Newton's day. Must've been some crafty scheme hatched by the hijackers.

Hey, but carry on with your blinkers on: you probably still believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK and all by himself at that. Ooops - don't want to keep you any longer "Amused" - I'm sure there must be some TV news for you to watch to keep on top of things.

Not so clear cut