*Ø* New 911 fillum raises new questions
Thank you Almaniac Star Light (USA) for alerting the Almanac to 911 In Plane Site. I haven't seen the fillum but it does sound interesting. It certainly has been troubling me that an airliner should crash into the Pentagon, leave only a hole the size of my toilet, then vaporise into the atmosphere over the Eastern Seabord.
The fillum does sound a bit too conspiratorial for my taste, but if I get a chance, I'll watch it. Here are some quotes from its website.
"Why weren't America and the world shown the video and photographs of the Pentagon, before the outer wall had collapsed? The Pentagon's outer wall did not collapse for a full 35 minutes after the initial impact. See these astounding photographs for the first time.
"Given that the outer wall of the Pentagon had not yet collapsed, how does a plane over 44 feet tall and 125 ft. wide, fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. in diameter, as shown in the crystal-clear photographic evidence from the Pentagon? Can physics explain this?
"In the aftermath, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 ft. crater was plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash. Why does photographic evidence overwhelmingly show that this was not the case?
"How does a Boeing 757, constructed from lightweight aluminum, penetrate over 9 ft. of steel reinforced concrete? Recently discovered photographs shed light on this unexplained feat of physics.
"Contrary to the pictures shown to the American public, why does photographic evidence taken only a few moments after the Pentagon event, show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon? Where is the plane? What happened to the passengers? Examine this new evidence for yourself.
"At the World Trade Center, why did firefighters, reporters and other on the scene eyewitnesses describe a demolition-like, pancake collapse of buildings One, Two & Seven? Outrageous admissions by the building lease owner recorded on video, plus shocking new video evidence helps to answer important questions.
"What is the bright flash on the right side of the Boeing 767, seen just before impact on both the North Tower & the South Tower, captured on video by 5 separate cameramen including CNN and ABC? Slow motion analysis reveals startling verification of this extraordinary event and begs the question [sic], 'What is it?'
Find out what former military personnel think this could be.
"Why were there numerous reports of bombs & explosions going off in and around the WTC before any buildings had collapsed? Hear & see the testimony of the reporters, rescue teams and eyewitnesses who tell a different story than what we have all been lead to believe.
"Why did a FOX News employee, who witnessed the second tower attack, report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner?"
911 In Plane Site website
One reviewer writes:
"One particular interview that brought gasps from the audience and many looking around with shock etched on their faces was an interview conducted – live at the time – by FOX News. This intense interview with Mark Burnback, an employee of FOX News, contains the following narrative, paraphrased: Burnback was close to the path of the second plane and had a good long look at what he describes was not a commercial airliner. The plane that hit the second tower had no windows, Burnback was very clear about that. The plane had some kind of blue logo on the front near the nose and looked like a cargo plane."
Source
More
And more
Varied views
Submit your reviews of this film for publication in Wilson's Almanac.
Thank you Almaniac Star Light (USA) for alerting the Almanac to 911 In Plane Site. I haven't seen the fillum but it does sound interesting. It certainly has been troubling me that an airliner should crash into the Pentagon, leave only a hole the size of my toilet, then vaporise into the atmosphere over the Eastern Seabord.
The fillum does sound a bit too conspiratorial for my taste, but if I get a chance, I'll watch it. Here are some quotes from its website.
"Why weren't America and the world shown the video and photographs of the Pentagon, before the outer wall had collapsed? The Pentagon's outer wall did not collapse for a full 35 minutes after the initial impact. See these astounding photographs for the first time.
"Given that the outer wall of the Pentagon had not yet collapsed, how does a plane over 44 feet tall and 125 ft. wide, fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. in diameter, as shown in the crystal-clear photographic evidence from the Pentagon? Can physics explain this?
"In the aftermath, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 ft. crater was plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash. Why does photographic evidence overwhelmingly show that this was not the case?
"How does a Boeing 757, constructed from lightweight aluminum, penetrate over 9 ft. of steel reinforced concrete? Recently discovered photographs shed light on this unexplained feat of physics.
"Contrary to the pictures shown to the American public, why does photographic evidence taken only a few moments after the Pentagon event, show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon? Where is the plane? What happened to the passengers? Examine this new evidence for yourself.
"At the World Trade Center, why did firefighters, reporters and other on the scene eyewitnesses describe a demolition-like, pancake collapse of buildings One, Two & Seven? Outrageous admissions by the building lease owner recorded on video, plus shocking new video evidence helps to answer important questions.
"What is the bright flash on the right side of the Boeing 767, seen just before impact on both the North Tower & the South Tower, captured on video by 5 separate cameramen including CNN and ABC? Slow motion analysis reveals startling verification of this extraordinary event and begs the question [sic], 'What is it?'
Find out what former military personnel think this could be.
"Why were there numerous reports of bombs & explosions going off in and around the WTC before any buildings had collapsed? Hear & see the testimony of the reporters, rescue teams and eyewitnesses who tell a different story than what we have all been lead to believe.
"Why did a FOX News employee, who witnessed the second tower attack, report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner?"
911 In Plane Site website
One reviewer writes:
"One particular interview that brought gasps from the audience and many looking around with shock etched on their faces was an interview conducted – live at the time – by FOX News. This intense interview with Mark Burnback, an employee of FOX News, contains the following narrative, paraphrased: Burnback was close to the path of the second plane and had a good long look at what he describes was not a commercial airliner. The plane that hit the second tower had no windows, Burnback was very clear about that. The plane had some kind of blue logo on the front near the nose and looked like a cargo plane."
Source
More
And more
Varied views
Submit your reviews of this film for publication in Wilson's Almanac.
Pip Wilson posted item above at 11:03 AM | Permalink
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home