Your link pointed to the "Emmy Awards part 11 of 1981
" - where there is no Ratz to be seen whatsoever.
You surely meant to link to the "Emmy Awards part11 of 1984
" - where Ratz in fact makes a 2-secs 'peekaboo' appearance behind two clapping ladies...(correct link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLPSkg51eMw
- watch at 8.07) Please be more careful when posting links as it can be a pretty time-wasting affair to figure out the correct videos that you wish to show us.
It is interesting to note that the Youtube user "bobtwcatlanta" (who has uploaded as many as 387 videos of Emmy Awards and similar stuff) coincidentally uploaded his 1984 Emmy Awards videos
on October 1, 2010. That timeline just happens to match with the height of the raging Angell/Ratz debate we had on this forum ( MEMORIAL SCAMS thread: viewtopic.php?p=2245105#p2245105
)- Of course, that 'bitter' debate had lasted throughout the entire month of September 2010. As you can see a bit further down that thread, October1 2010 was also the day that the "Ozzybinoswald" character started calling me names.
Don't get me wrong : I am not insinuating anything sinister here - but I think it's fair & due to register this rather remarkable coincidence - for the record. However, for someone to upload the videos of a 26-year-old Emmy Award gala (featuring Angell and Ratzenberger) just as heated controversies about Angell and Ratzenberger had reached maximum temperatures on this forum
is, IMHO, a rather remarkable coincidence.
I honestly keep wondering what is so relevant about this Angell issue in the first place. Here's how I see it:
- If Angell was a real person who was abducted and killed in 2001 - he's an "airplane passenger" vicsim
- If Angell was a real person and started a new life in a tropical island - he's an "airplane passenger" vicsim
- If Angell was another fictitious "9/11 victim" just like most appear to be - he's an "airplane passenger" vicsim
As you rightly recalled, we've kept saying that different
techniques were employed to construct the fake 9/11 imagery. I have certainly no problem to apply the same paradigm to the vicsim creation. But you have been suggesting that "our research might lose credibility" if it falls short of revealing the exact ways each and everyone of the fake victims were generated. This is, IMHO, not the case - but you are most welcome to investigate in that direction.