The fact that they broadcast transparently fake video cartoons of the South Tower hit is what suggests that no plane (at least not Flight 175) hit the Tower.
Broadcast of fake/doctored video by CNN purporting to show a Boeing commercial jet striking the South Tower:
This is a close-up of the video originally broadcast by CNN on 9/11
Watch it and make up your own mind.
Planes are made mostly of lightweight aluminum ... light enough so they can be lifted into flight.
A jet plane is essentially an aluminum can.
Ever crushed an aluminum beer can in your hands ?
Watch the "plane" in the CNN video "melt" seamlessly into the concrete and steel of the South Tower ...
http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/noplane2 /
Look Ma' .... NO IMPACT !!!
Here is the original “live network news” video broadcast by CNN on the morning of 9/11:
http://www.911hoax.com/gZoomCNN.asp?intPage=14&PageNum=14And here is how it was done ....
http://www.reopen911.org/bluescreen.htm And here are the skilled professionals who made it all happen ...
right before our very eyes ..
http://www.counterpunch.org/cnnpsyops.html http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/06/02/28_psyops.htmlhttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/30/95642/8018http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1748http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/cnn.htmhttp://www.geocities.com/saufor/unsorted/cnnpsyops.htmlhttp://atangledweb.typepad.com/weblog/2004/12/most_trusted_am.htmlNow.... guess who got PSY-0P’ed on 9/11 .... ??
Want a hint.
Take a look in the mirror.
Why would CNN broadcast obvious fake video, if they actually had a convincing video of Flight 175 hitting the Tower ?
Same thing with the Pentagon...
Why wouldn't the FBI provide clear and convincing video evidence (from the Sheraton and service-station videos) at the Pentagon, instead of some highly dubious art frames ?
For that matter, why wouldn't the FBI have broadcast security cam videos from Logan, Newark and Dulles airports that would unambiguously show the alleged hijackers actually boarding the commerical flights that they are alleged to have hijacked ?
After all, major airports like Logan, Newark and Dulles have security cams all over the place.
Instead, all they produced was a foggy video of someone (alleged to be Mohammed Atta) boarding a connecting flight in Portland, Maine.
What "trained and dedicated hijacker" would rely on a connecting flight to get him to Logan on time for his planned hijacking ??? !!!!
In all likelihood, no such video "evidence" exists at all.
Which suggests that there were no real hijackers.
And, in all likelihood, no real planes were needed to fake the events of 9/11.
After all, the American public has demonstrated (over and over again) that it is more than willing to swallow transparently fake video like
1) "Fat" bin Laden versus "skinny" bin Laden
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/phony_bin_laden_tape.html2) Nick Berg - beheaded on video - but, miraculously, NO BLOOD !
http://www.topplerummy.org/berg/3) Staged events like the toppling of the Saddam statue in Baghdad..
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2842.htmetc., etc., etc.
Events can be staged, partially or wholly.
It's easy enough to actually produce fake video.
Some of the fakery is so obvious that it insults the intelligence.
Here is just one example ...
http://911closeup.com/nico/But then again ... that's one thing no Pentagon or corporate psy-op specialist ever has to worry about when it comes to suckering the American booboisie ....
Their intellignce is congenitally incapable of being "insulted".
No matter how ridiculous or implausible or absurd.
"No one ever went broke under-estimating the intelligence of the American electorate..." - H.L. Mencken
(that quote may not be precise ... someone look it up and correct if necessary)
============================================