Video: 9/11, as it happened Update: Amateur video added

posted at 6:40 pm on September 11, 2006 by Allahpundit

I culled about 27 minutes of footage from the first six and a half hours of CNN’s coverage that day. I’ll post them here in three parts. The actual attacks themselves end about halfway through part two, but watch them all. Part three is arguably the most important, as it includes a phone conversation with pilot Tim Timmerman — who saw Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon with his own two eyes. I’m going to cut his clip separately later along with a clip of another woman who saw the plane hit and a report from CNN correspondent Jamie McIntyre on the scene and upload them separately. For my pals, the Truthers.

Kudos once again to CNN for making this video available today. Parts two and three are coming as updates. Stay tuned.

Update: Part two.

Update: And finally, part three. Pay close attention to Jamie McIntyre’s report towards the end, especially when he’s asked if Flight 77 might have bounced in front of the Pentagon. No, says McIntyre; there’s no evidence of a plane crashing near the Pentagon. Rather, the evidence indicates a direct hit. The reason that’s noteworthy is because the slackjawed lying imbeciles in the Truther movement like to pull that line about there being no evidence of a plane hitting near the building out of context and use it as “proof” that there was no evidence of a plane at all. On the contrary: as you’ll see, McIntyre himself reports having seen plenty of aircraft debris.

Update: Charles e-mailed me earlier to say that this clip is incredible. He’s right.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

My God. The guy is speculating that navigation equipment is causing airplanes to crash into the WTC.

Perchant on September 11, 2006 at 6:59 PM

Did y’all hear that guy say they were “efforting” to get further information?? “Efforting”? Are you kidding me?

tickleddragon on September 11, 2006 at 7:01 PM

You know, I should be nice, since this was the only moment in it’s glorious history, that CNN wasn’t biased.

tickleddragon on September 11, 2006 at 7:02 PM

Many Muslims will never forget what we did to them on 9/11. Where are Western leaders apologizing for this day of infamy?

Niko on September 11, 2006 at 7:12 PM

Perchant, I have to say that I thought the same thing at first. I had no cable access at the time and was going by radio reports. It just seemed so sureal at the time, that, and I just couldn’t believe what was happening.

Kevin on September 11, 2006 at 7:24 PM

FOXNews.com also has clips from the channel’s news cast that day at various points (hearing about the first plane during Fox & Friends, speculating whether it could have happened by accident as the second plane hits, the confused report as the Pentagon is hit, etc.).

frankj on September 11, 2006 at 7:34 PM

Actually, having watched that, there seems to be a big difference in how quickly the two anchors concluded it was a terrorist attack. I remember when I heard of the first plane, I like most people assumed it was an accident but immediately gave that up when the second plane hit. CNN seemed to be a bit slower to conclude it was an attack, but then again FOX was talking to an aviation expert (who was skeptical the first could have been accidental) as the second hit which made them quicker to declare it was a terrorist attack.

Man, this takes a lot out of you to watch… especially knowing what’s about to happen.

frankj on September 11, 2006 at 7:44 PM

Many Muslims will never forget what we did to them on 9/11. Where are Western leaders apologizing for this day of infamy?

Niko on September 11, 2006 at 7:12 PM

Go back to the DUmmie UNderground you troll. You’re not even a muslim.

rightside on September 11, 2006 at 9:50 PM

Yeah, this one’s hard to watch…but I remember listening to reports online. News sites were hard to get to, and only a few had streaming live video. I wasn’t sure what was happening. Only later that night when I was watching Fox News did I actually see all the video from the day…I think that’s when it really hit me…the unbelievable scope of what had happened. It’s hard to watch, but I have to. My daughter watched the videos with me tonight so she would never forget.

DakRoland on September 11, 2006 at 10:13 PM

Hey does anyone know where one can find the FOX NEWS broadcast as it happened? Shep Smith did a fantastic job. I only saw it once – as it happened – never taped it or anything, but I remember him pulling us through it.

I still recall him commenting on the Statue of Liberty. He said something like this:

“And if you look to the corner of your screen, you can see Lady Liberty. And she’s still standing. I think that is symbolic here. You see the burning towers, but you can also see the Statue of Liberty. And she is standing. We’re going to get through this, folks.”

He really reported from the heart and he did a great job. I would really like if someone can find the FOX News video from that day.

Thanks,

Billy Kess

BillyKess on September 11, 2006 at 10:15 PM

I just came across these.

They are heart-wrenching.

Lehuster on September 12, 2006 at 1:12 AM

Of all the places I could have been on 9/11/01, it was at the Fox News studios to finally see Fox and Friends in person. (I had parked at Shea Stadium and took the subway the rest of the way in. I wouldn’t re-unite with my car until around 9:30 that night, subways being shut down and all.)

Between five and ten minutes before 9am while the F & F were inside interviewing Rob Thomas’ wife, Marisol, I believe, outside a technician changed the channel on a TV monitor to another station.

That station was CNN where they already had live video of the smoking WTC tower #1 on the air. So yes, I hate to admit it, but they got the scoop on Fox, though only by minutes.

DuffBeer on September 12, 2006 at 12:13 PM

Niko is just a liberal terrorist appeaser

Starblazer on September 12, 2006 at 12:57 PM

Never forget.

Kini on September 12, 2006 at 1:35 PM

pilot Tim Timmerman — who saw Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon with his own two eyes.

Don’t you know that he and the hundreds of “eyewitnesses” are in on it? They’re paid off and brainwashed by the Bush administration, like the thousands of other people needed to pull off such a humongous conspiracy.

By the way, what is with the anchor saying that you would speculate or guess that there is something wrong with navigational equipment after seeing two planes hit the towers. Everyone, including those at Fox said immediately “this is no accident”.

I suppose it’s the pre-9/11 mindset, that we were “safe”, and it could be hindsight but his desperate attempt to find an “innocent” explanation is pretty annoying.

RightWinged on September 12, 2006 at 2:55 PM

At the risk of being called “slack-jawwed”, I have always wondered about the Pentagon attack. What is odd to me is the skill level that would be required to position the plane to be going that fast at that altitude and control the crash–crash into the Pentagon, not over or under shoot it. Maybe I don’t understand aviation or maybe the “pilot” of that plane was more highly skilled than I know.

What struck me about the CNN/Today Show retrospectives was how calm everyone was–my recollection of the Kennedy assassination or even the atttempt on Reagan is that the reporting was a lot more chaotic and frenzied.

honora on September 12, 2006 at 2:56 PM

I have always wondered about the Pentagon attack.

Well, you are one of the resident liberals… Take a look at this and put your mind at ease (also, you could just consider all the eyewitnesses who watched it fly over their heads):
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

Anyone else having trouble with the last video, I guess it’s the amateur one?

RightWinged on September 12, 2006 at 3:28 PM

Honora — “At the risk of being called “slack-jawwed”, I have always wondered about the Pentagon attack. What is odd to me is the skill level that would be required to position the plane to be going that fast at that altitude and control the crash–crash into the Pentagon, not over or under shoot it. Maybe I don’t understand aviation or maybe the “pilot” of that plane was more highly skilled than I know.”

Perhaps you just don’t believe anyone could land a large high speed aircraft on an aircraft carrier deck in the middle of 20 ft seas either. Our nuggets don’t like doing that either. But many have tried and made it. And flying a 757 or 767 is like driving a bus. It doesn’t necessarily move around (waggle its wings, do flips, etc…) quickly, but it sure as Hell can be flown straight and fast, and that’s what it was doing at the Pentagon.

So allow yourself to believe that one determined pilot, even with a few hours in simulators, can manage to fly straight and low right into the side of a building. Stranger things have happened. Like not believing it was all a government conspiracy to kill thousands of Americans to start a war for oil which we don’t have and have to buy from terrorists anyway. That’s logical!

Nah, forget what your eyes and brain tell you to be the Truth and instead believe it was all a conspiracy requiring the support and assistance of thousands of government employees to covertly pull off this atrocity without detection or a single one of these persons leaking or providing any evidence to support that assertion. It had to be Bush’s fault. Right?

“Slack jawed” wouldn’t be the word I would use to describe that premise.

Subsunk

Subsunk on September 12, 2006 at 5:02 PM

Whoa, updated my Quicktime and was able to view that amateur video now. Stunned. I do however have to say I fear the Truthers getting hold of it and exploiting the “it was a military plane” part. We have plenty of other video and know it wasn’t, but obviously in the heat of the moment things are confusing. Not to mention that it was probably unfathomable to think a passenger jet had been hijacked full of people and flown in to a building. They probably thought that a plane flying in to a building would have been only manned by a pilot, therefored when they saw a “huge” plane, the assumption was that it was military. Regardless, the point is we know it wasn’t military, but the Truthers will love that line.

RightWinged on September 12, 2006 at 5:27 PM

An amazing video. But the Truthers will not be happy about it, in spite of the ‘military plane’ line, because they have an excellent view of the north tower coming down, and there are no controlled demolition flashes visible at all, none. And they are so vital to there theory.

Of course, Rove has had 5 years to photoshop them out…

Mr. Bingley on September 12, 2006 at 7:27 PM

An amazing video. But the Truthers will not be happy about it, in spite of the ‘military plane’ line, because they have an excellent view of the north tower coming down, and there are no controlled demolition flashes visible at all, none. And they are so vital to there theory.

I would agree, but you know these Michael Moore Jrs. are dishonest POSs. They would play just the line of her saying “military plane” and nothing else. Just like they quote so many others out of context. They ignore dozens of eyewitnesses who saw and identified to a T what plane hit the Pentagon, and focus on one or two who say “it looked like a missile”, which turned out to be a way that a person was describing it’s actions, while fully acknowledging it was a passenger plane. I don’t know if that example is 100% accurate, but it’s more of an example to show what they do. They cherrypick what they like out of everything, so they’ll have no problem taking that “military plane” line and dropping the rest.

RightWinged on September 12, 2006 at 9:50 PM

What is odd to me is the skill level that would be required to position the plane to be going that fast at that altitude and control the crash–crash into the Pentagon, not over or under shoot it.

Have you ever seen the Pentagon? It’s large. It is also in a gigantic wide-open space right next to something easily identifiable from far away (the river). The White House, in contrast, would have been a lot harder – it is surrounded by trees and other buildings.

I go to the Pentagon every day. In fact, that’s where I was on “the day”. Never been any doubt in my mind that a plane did it.

Lehuster on September 13, 2006 at 4:50 AM

PS I meant “have you seen it in person”. I don’t think you can really appreciate how huge the Pentagon is just from pictures (which are always taken from far away).

Lehuster on September 13, 2006 at 4:52 AM

On Web Forums, on 9-11-2001, only the old senior people mentioned terrorism within seconds of the attacks.

Age and Experience.

The CNN pacifist, aka reporter, should claim terrorism immediately the next time a big black cloud is above DC, LA or NYK.

Don’t forget Italy had a reign of terror in the 70′s, American tourists in the Middle East in the 70′s and 80′s were hunted in the desert and killed.

The problem of evil – Man is in a fallen state.

ar_basin on September 13, 2006 at 10:16 AM

Honora — “At the risk of being called “slack-jawwed”, I have always wondered about the Pentagon attack. What is odd to me is the skill level that would be required to position the plane to be going that fast at that altitude and control the crash–crash into the Pentagon, not over or under shoot it. Maybe I don’t understand aviation or maybe the “pilot” of that plane was more highly skilled than I know.”

Perhaps you just don’t believe anyone could land a large high speed aircraft on an aircraft carrier deck in the middle of 20 ft seas either. Our nuggets don’t like doing that either. But many have tried and made it. And flying a 757 or 767 is like driving a bus. It doesn’t necessarily move around (waggle its wings, do flips, etc…) quickly, but it sure as Hell can be flown straight and fast, and that’s what it was doing at the Pentagon.

So allow yourself to believe that one determined pilot, even with a few hours in simulators, can manage to fly straight and low right into the side of a building. Stranger things have happened. Like not believing it was all a government conspiracy to kill thousands of Americans to start a war for oil which we don’t have and have to buy from terrorists anyway. That’s logical!

Nah, forget what your eyes and brain tell you to be the Truth and instead believe it was all a conspiracy requiring the support and assistance of thousands of government employees to covertly pull off this atrocity without detection or a single one of these persons leaking or providing any evidence to support that assertion. It had to be Bush’s fault. Right?

“Slack jawed” wouldn’t be the word I would use to describe that premise.

Subsunk

Subsunk on September 12, 2006 at 5:02 PM

Judas Priest!! You people could start a fight alone in a phonebooth!! I certainly don’t share the crazy notion that this was anything other than what all sane people know it was, part of the 9/11 attack.

My question was that this seemed to require a level of skill that would exceed what we know about the training the “pilots” had. Your comparison to the pilots who land on aircraft carriers proves my point. Talk about kneejerk.

honora on September 13, 2006 at 11:15 AM

PS I meant “have you seen it in person”. I don’t think you can really appreciate how huge the Pentagon is just from pictures (which are always taken from far away).

Lehuster on September 13, 2006 at 4:52 AM

I have been to the Pentagon on a couple occasions. I understand what you are saying, what I am saying is that if you look at the planes that struck the towers, they is about a 100′ delta in terms of the vertical axis of the contact points. Variation of that sort re the Pentagon attack means you miss you mark at least on the minus side. I don’t think this is especially meaningful, just this pilot was better than one would have thought or just very lucky.

honora on September 13, 2006 at 11:19 AM

as I said honora, setting aside any other comments, this is all you need for a full debunking of the Pentagon specific part of conspiracy theories
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

RightWinged on September 13, 2006 at 12:40 PM

as I said honora, setting aside any other comments, this is all you need for a full debunking of the Pentagon specific part of conspiracy theories
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

RightWinged on September 13, 2006 at 12:40 PM

..and as I said, apparently to myself only, was that I do not subscribe to any or the conspiracy theory stuff.

Never mind.

honora on September 13, 2006 at 2:07 PM