It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MaxBlack
This video footage from the future is what was used to fill in the major areas needed to sell the illusion. Only in such a manner would what the actual on the ground witnesses see one thing, report what they saw and then become confused with was being broadcast as footage of the planes hitting the towers.
America saw footage from the future. As such it is accurate only for that future in which it was recorded. Therein lies the clue to this whole mystery of how it was done and whether CGI was used after the fact is still a possibility, but for the moment consider that there is the witness account of what happened and the television account. Since they differ and since seeing is believing, it is this concern that made me realize that the only way such an illusion could be pulled off is if they show us the truth, but a visual truth from a future that was recorded in the past of the future event that was yet to become the future event called 911.
I realize this may be difficult to grasp, but if you consider it for a while I am certain you and others will be able to discern your own truths of what I just posted to contribute to explaining why video coverage of planes hitting the towers are so different from eye witness accounts.
Since no CGI took place of the future time travel video of 911, what we are seeing in the 911 Twin Tower plane attacks are actual time line differences in all those little things that drive the experts insane with questions and doubt. Whenever anyone studies the video coverage it always runs into problems with eye witness accounts and thus the confusion spreads the conspiracy into a direction intended to mislead and deceive yet again the public. I just think it is time to consider that the footage was factual, but from a recorded future time line which we did not match exactly when 911 occurred.
Hope this has offered some food for thought. Thanks for the posting
Originally posted by paradigm619
When 9/11 happened I was living in Boston. A good friend of mine, whom I played high school volleyball with, lost his father on 9/11. He was a passenger on Flight 11 that crashed into the first tower. This plane actually took off from Boston but never landed in Los Angeles. So if no planes ever existed, where the hell did that plane go? A physical plane took off (with my friend's father on board) and now both the plane and his father are gone. They had to go somewhere, they didn't just magically disappear.
The "no planer" subset of 9/11 truthers (I've always hated these labels that go along with 9/11) is the most baffling to me. It's interesting that I've never heard any families of victims ever claim that no planes were involved on 9/11. Maybe there's a reason. Occam's Razor people... that's all I have to say.
[edit on 17-3-2010 by paradigm619]