Originally posted by bsregistration
So the supposed video evidence of plane crashes on 9/11 is totally fake of course. It began about 4 hours after the 9/11 event started, and the
supposed plane crash video was nothing more than STILL PHOTOS from an anonymous source. There's no evidence for a plane crash at all. You've been
brainwashed. Snap out of it!
They aired fake videos of a plane crash so they could have an explanation of how Osama could have pulled it off. Loose change is LYING TO YOU.
Your questions at the end:
"Where did CNN get this "video"?
Who made it?
Why didn't they show it when they first got it?
How did it turn from photos to video?"
Where did CNN get this "video"?
CNN answered the first question when they were showing the still images, and they answered it again when they were showing the actual video. Both came
from amateur video they had received earlier that day.
Who made it?
Im not sure that the "Amateur Videographer" was ever made known. Not that that in and of itself is necessarily cause for concern, NOR is it in any
way Proof that it's fake, altered, or otherwise.
Why didn't they show it when they first got it?
Uhm ... perhaps a result of Processing time. (?) I've had to pull clips off of videos from various events for use in TV advertisements. The station
in question required them to be in Beta format, as they weren't capable of Broadcasting Raw DV tape. While I sent them the clips on a DV tape, they
still had to convert them to Beta format prior to being used for the commercials. When you upload a video to YouTube, is it available Immediately? No,
it requires processing time to be converted to the supported format for their player. I would have to say that the time between them showing the
"stills" and actual "video" is a result of just that, Required processing time. If you look at the two (the stills and the actual video), I think
it's quite clear that there is a distinct difference between the clarity and quality of both. Something that is Not uncommon when pulling "Still
Frames" from a digital video file. The video file will Always be better with regards to quality and clarity than the "Stills", simply due to the
compression and artifacts which accompany "frames" having been isolated.
How did it turn from photos to video?
Again, see the above. Most likely due to required processing time.
While I'm sure they made every effort to get the actual video up as soon as possible, I also have to give thought to how chaotic the events of that
day were. On their end there was data, videos, and information coming from Many sources and locations. I think you have to realize there is a
difference between their reporters (who would be linked with a direct channel via satelite) and that of a tape they received from amateur video taken
on the street, to include the difference in time necessary to make such available for their feeds.
While the following videos are from different angles and perspectives, they CLEARLY show aircraft flying directly into and thru the South Tower.
The fact that they are Videos is in no way "proof" that they are fake, altered, or part of a military broadcast of hijacked airwaves.
Draw your own conclusions.
Planes - vs - No Planes. (?)
[edit: to add]
Can anyone translate what is being said in the last video?
[edit on 4-6-2007 by 12m8keall2c]
] 
) 
