I would like to hear Simon's response on this, as well.antipodean 4 May 13 2010, 06:17 AM wrote:A- On Tuesday, September 11, 2001 the entire World Trade Center Complex was destroyed or terminally damaged (9 buildings in all). Powerful explosives were employed to achieve this purpose. The area was most likely fully evacuated to avoid casualties. The demolition work started at around 10AM behind a thick smokescreen which was raised to keep it safely out of view from NewYorkers.
On the old forum I posted a link to this photo taken from a nearby hotel (Millenium Hilton), allegedly taken 2 mins after the first plane hit. I was taken aback by only seeing one person down there (the area had obviously already been evacuated).
The person who took the photo goes on to explain seeing falling bodies, (I suspect he's lying, influenced by what was shown on TV) & how shortly afterwards the Hotel was evacuated.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1155592/boa ... #114958803
He also explains that he took the photo with hisCould this sort of camera have taken the photo from a few floors up despite the presence of ?My old pentax k-100:)
F- Electromagnetic counter-measures ensured that no private cameras functioned that morning. The EMP/HERF technology is part of the most advanced military research in modern warfare. Its development has accounted for the Pentagon’s largest source of R&D funding for the last decades.
My feeling is that we have really under-estimated the power of the disabling device, which short-circuits or somehow disrupts everything they want to disrupt and that the imagery generated to replace the destroyed or prevented imagery has to be *more* diverse than the kind of imagery that would result from an event (or even a "non-event") that was not as controlled.
There has to be imagery like this, which both confirms the "flying paper" distraction (which may or may not be a cover for some kind of obscuration weapon) and which also depicts people in the incredibly unsafe areas near the towers, which most likely would have been evacuated.
Also, although this does not resemble the outrageous and unrealistic news imagery, the inevitable comparison would protect this picture and make it seem as if this picture is relatively acceptable.
The news asks us for 7 lollipops, then this picture says, okay well how about just 1 then?
It's a classic childish deception tactic.
The more stories that are inserted into an over-arching story, the more it will seem to be unsuspicious. They could release "new" 9/11 evidence for years and nobody would ever suspect that all of it is fake because ... "how could it all be fake?!?!"
Well, the Simpsons keeps coming up with new seasons, doesn't it?
Having said that, I have a friend who claims to have taken photos of the moment of the second tower's detonation with an SLR and those rolls disappeared and he doesn't know how he 'misplaced' them. Why would something like that happen unless it were extremely important to the perps to control all imagery? (Or unless my friend was lying to me, in which case his testimony of existing photos would have to be completely dismissed, anyway!)
I think the above picture would fall under the category of 'suspiciously realistic' but ultimately false by proxy to every other false picture out of 9/11. Rare evidence requires incredible proof of its incorruptibility.