Easy. They are keeping it at Area 51, and using the passangers and crew to create Alien-Human Hybrids for our Illuminati masters. Area 51 is also where they faked the moon landing and the JFK assasination, all as Nostrodamous predicted must happen before the Freemasons find the Holy grail.
I couldn’t figure out how to get Atlantis and the Halocaust in there, but give me time.
Elvis! You forgot Elvis!
When you watch this SWF, the first thing that should have sounded the bullshit alarm loudly was the statement about “before the mind control machine had time to go into actionr”. This is a tinfoil hat production, done by one or more conspiracy theorists who have way too much spare time on their hands and don’t take their meds on a regular basis.
It is still very well made ;-).
Anyway, would a FOIA request be able to uncover the videos that were confiscated that filmed the plane during it’s flight path? Frankly, the arguments that we don’t show real deaths on TV is bull.
FWIW, a friend of mine was one of the first firefighters on the scene that day. His truck was helping some EMS guys on a call when they saw the plane headed toward the Pentagon. It was an airliner.
Here is the video and pictures of the Pentagon security camera:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen.pentagon.pictures/index.html
Just a quibble, but I remember watching, on non-live TV, people leaping to their deaths from the WTC.
I remember watching, on non-live TV, the two planes crasing again, and again and again into the WTC.
I remember watching the towers burn, and I remember TV documentaries and even one movie, all of which were eerie in the ammount of detail they showed.
So… the events of that day were certainly telivisied in some graphic detail.
As I said, there is a reluctance to show it on TV, not an outright ban.
…but they’re not repeated now. You won’t ever see the actual footage of the planes crashing on mainstream TV again (you’ll see it freeze just before impact, or some such ‘tactful’ edit). The TV companies now acknowledge that broadcasting those scenes repeatedly, from every possible angle, was not the most appropriate way to deal with an unfolding mass-murder.
And yes, if there’d been footage available that day of the Pentagon crash, that’d have been replayed constantly, too. But it wasn’t. Note that Broomstick said that “tapes and evidence from ANY plane crash are not normally paraded on TV in the United States”. Sept 11 2001 wasn’t normality. But since then, we’ve returned to normality, and normal treatment of such tapes that may be available.
[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
The questions were posed above and I’m not going to repeat them.
[QUOTE]
This looks like a prank post to me.
4 planes full of people disappear. People who had relatives waiting for them. Where do you think they went?
Planes are nothing but thin tubes of aluminum. When you hit a reinforced building… poof. Didn’t you watch the 2 hitting the WTC? Nothing but confetti out the other end.
You asked why they covered the engines. Parts are covered when they have bodies/and or parts sticking out of them. Engines hitting buildings full of people tend to suck them up before they stop.
What do I win for playing along?
Come on, we’re not talking about people jumping out of a burning building here; we’re talking about a plane flying low over a corner store and an highway.
We are not even talking about a plane crashing into the pentagon; that, we already have from a video surveillance that was released months after 9/11 and shown on CNN.
Indeed…did the conspiracy shoot down the airliner, then launch the missile strike? Did they hijack the plane, fly it to some secret base, then murder the passengers and dismantle the plane?
Why do all that if they already were crashing airliners into the WTC? Even if it was an evil CIA conspiracy behind the attacks, why not just use the same attack on the Pentagon that they’d already launched on New York? Why risk getting caught using military weaponry?
To give you an idea of the complexity of attempting to model the crash in question, here is an experiment that used only 3,601 plastic chairs, all identically programmed, to see how they might behave if you stacked them up and knocked them over.
Considering that the debris likely consisted of millions of pieces of varying sizes and composition, and that it wasn’t just knocked over, but struck a building made of varying materials at what was probably not a precise 90 degree angle, possibly even hitting the ground first, and you can imagine the complexity of even attempting to recreate it. Even if you put in the enormous amounts of time required, a single mistake made in the multitude of parameters given could throw your simulation off completely.
Oh, we landed on the moon, too.
But such footage almost certainly doesn’t exist, not footage like that of the WTC attacks. There, there were millions of people within sight of the towers, many of whom had access to video cameras. And they was time between the two crashed for many of them to fetch those cameras. There’s only one piece of footage of the first crash which I’ve come across - IIRC it was taken by a tourist from somewhere near the towers, and they swing the camera up and around just in time.
You explain the point yourself - a judicious few frames from one camera were released, no doubt after great deliberation of whether even this move was appropriate. (The tinfoil hatters no doubt can find concrete evidence of that footage being fake :dubious: …)
Well, you haven’t watched the OP’s animation and it shows. It’s only redeeming quality is reporting that surveillance cams videos were confiscated by the FBI from a small shop and the highway surveillance shortly after the plane crashed… Which seems quite plausible. The only question is why these videos have not been released after 3 years. If your and Broomstick explanation that it has not been shown is that this would shock America, I think that argument is total bullshit (same as this conspiracy theory BTW).
Excuse me - I did NOT say it would “shock” America, I stated that it is a cultural custom not to show actual death and dismemberment on TV. Rather like we say someone “passed away” rather than a blunt “he died” or “he was murdered by having a knife run through his ribs”
Of course, sometimes that “rule” is broken - such as on the day of the attacks. Given the extraordinary situation, I don’t think that was a problem. However, six months or two years after the attacks no, I don’t think we need to broadcast more footage of the carnage without a compelling reason to do so.
My opinion - yours may differ, of course.
Wait, it’s all so clear. The sand and gravel poured on the Pentagon lawn was there to cover the bounce mark that didn’t exist!
Those monsters!
Add in the Internet and you have the ultimate combination for anyone gullible enough to believe anything.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
The questions were posed above and I’m not going to repeat them.
Could folks please give this a rest?
From my laymans point of view it looked ‘odd’, just like to someone who doesn’t know physics, twirling a bucket of water in a circle and having the water not spill seems ‘odd’.
I never said it wasn’t a plane.
I never said it was a government plot.
I never said the Illuminati aided by Jack the Ripper crashed the plane.
I just didn’t understand how the officially reported evidence would jive with the crash.
Seriously, you all want someone to debate against?
I’m not the guy.
I was just asking questions.
Errrr…but I have.
It certainly seems plausible that the videos were voluntarily handed over on request - as is perfectly normal when gathering evidence of a crime. I’ve seen no evidence that they were ‘confiscated’.
Perhaps because they’re being held as potential evidence for trials connected with the attacks? The hijackers may be dead, but their planners and support network are still out there, and the FBI (and just about everyone else) is looking for them. Putting evidence into the public domain would jeopardise sch trials.