I agree with Borat, that the video snapshot was not frequent enough to capture a fast approaching airplane. Unfortunately, sometimes people throw in too many things that are slightly suspicious, but are quite explannable.
The biggest question marks for me are: a) how could all three buildings collaspe straight down with all signatures of a controlled demolition but none of a pure “pancaking” collapse due to some structural damage and gravity? Note that demolition requires well placed engergy sources to blow things up — what was how those WTCs went down. What provided that energy? not jetfuel ’cause they were burned quickly (the initial fireballs). Even if the jetfuel provided some energy, the mix (fuel + Oxygen) was random (Oxygen was lacking as seen from black smoke) and concentrated at the impact site, not evenly distributed as it happened. b) why would there be smolten steel with residue of high-temperature demolition material? These facts require scientific investigation.
Another sign that makes the official story very suspicious was that they want to avoid these scientific investigation as much as possible. The formal report from National Institution of Standard (I think) stopped at explaining why the buildings collapse the way they did. In another word, it basically said that the planes likely made the structures weak and that led to collapse. Then it stopped there. If these weren’t controlled demolitions, then the government should organize the best scientists/engineers trying to figure it out why and how. But a formal report that didn’t even touch on why the buildings collapsed the way they did?
