Hollywood Special F/X Explosions: Recycled Video Footage, Plus Another Look at WTC 7
Here is a clip that shows Hollywood Special F/X explosions in action. It also shows how the same video can be recycled and used in different instances.
The two clips are from Terminator 2: Judgement Day & Militia.
T2: Judgement Day was released in 1991, while Militia was released nine years later in 2000.
You will be able to see that both of these movies use the same set of video sequences, merely edited in slightly different order.
You may just get a feeling of Deja 'view' after seeing these video clips.
Watch the clip HERE. (large file: 57 megs)
Notice how the huge explosion quickly dissipates and leaves only very small fires on the peripheries of the area affected. Compare this footage to the explosion from the second 'impact' (link from a previous post) at the WTC South Tower and the similarities seem to be uncanny, especially considering that both events were supposedly so different in nature.
The explosion from the movies, is done in a very controlled manner, as to ensure the safety of the actors, film crew and the set on which it is being filmed. The explosion is tightly contained to make certain that it will not blossom into an out of control inferno. The way that movie explosions are so well controlled is from the type of 'explosive' used to create these giant fireballs. It is generally done with some type of 'flash powder'.
The explosion at the WTC South Tower would not have any safety concerns addressed if it were really caused by a hijacked airliner smashing into the building, yet oddly it seems to behave as though it was merely 'an attention grabber' and doing little collateral damage through the 'ensuing blazing inferno' that would be the result of several thousand gallons of hydrocarbon based fuel burning there following the crash of a real airliner.
-----
I am quite sure that this next section of my post is likely to be bitterly attacked, as it has to the potential to impair the 'livelihood' of some people in the alternative media. So be it, as I have nothing to hide about my views about 9/11, nor am I going to try to profit from presenting these views to others. So go ahead and 'release the hounds'.
-----
I am going to 'debunk' one of the myths about WTC 7 that has been perpetuated by many in the '9/11 Truth' movement. The myriad of videos about 9/11 that make claims about only 'small fires on the lower levels' of this building are False, at least from my perspective. These videos usually show the same pictures to reinforce this inaccurate information as being true. They only ever show the sides of the building not facing the WTC plaza and it seems for good reason.
Here are a couple of examples:
Picture 1
Picture 2
The reason is not that there is no video showing the front of the WTC 7 building, the reason is that they are trying to sell a line of Bullshit. That WTC 7 had 'very little damage' and therefore the building MUST have been destroyed by a controlled demolition (it is easier to sell this idea to John & Jane sixpack) or else they are just lazy researchers and never bothered to look for evidence that may refute their claims.
If they showed a heavily damaged building, few people from the population at large would buy the idea that it was a controlled demolition, as most people would just assume that it collapsed due to the damage that it had sustained. In either case, this is a dishonest tactic that is being used by these 'Makeshift Paytriots' that are making a living by $elling these videos.
WTC 7 video showing heavy damage to its South side.
If I, an unknown, near anonymous blogger, with only search engines & some patience can debunk this notion, what the hell do you think the M$M (Mainstream Media) is going to be able to do to discredit their assertions (if the need to do so were to ever arise)?
I personally believe that WTC 7 was in fact destroyed due to controlled demolition, but not for the same reasons as those professing that it was 'not damaged' on 9/11. It was destroyed by controlled demolition as it was indeed heavily damaged by the demolition of the North Tower, thus making it very unsafe to leave it standing in that condition.
The two clips are from Terminator 2: Judgement Day & Militia.
T2: Judgement Day was released in 1991, while Militia was released nine years later in 2000.
You will be able to see that both of these movies use the same set of video sequences, merely edited in slightly different order.
You may just get a feeling of Deja 'view' after seeing these video clips.
Watch the clip HERE. (large file: 57 megs)
Notice how the huge explosion quickly dissipates and leaves only very small fires on the peripheries of the area affected. Compare this footage to the explosion from the second 'impact' (link from a previous post) at the WTC South Tower and the similarities seem to be uncanny, especially considering that both events were supposedly so different in nature.
The explosion from the movies, is done in a very controlled manner, as to ensure the safety of the actors, film crew and the set on which it is being filmed. The explosion is tightly contained to make certain that it will not blossom into an out of control inferno. The way that movie explosions are so well controlled is from the type of 'explosive' used to create these giant fireballs. It is generally done with some type of 'flash powder'.
The explosion at the WTC South Tower would not have any safety concerns addressed if it were really caused by a hijacked airliner smashing into the building, yet oddly it seems to behave as though it was merely 'an attention grabber' and doing little collateral damage through the 'ensuing blazing inferno' that would be the result of several thousand gallons of hydrocarbon based fuel burning there following the crash of a real airliner.
-----
I am quite sure that this next section of my post is likely to be bitterly attacked, as it has to the potential to impair the 'livelihood' of some people in the alternative media. So be it, as I have nothing to hide about my views about 9/11, nor am I going to try to profit from presenting these views to others. So go ahead and 'release the hounds'.
-----
I am going to 'debunk' one of the myths about WTC 7 that has been perpetuated by many in the '9/11 Truth' movement. The myriad of videos about 9/11 that make claims about only 'small fires on the lower levels' of this building are False, at least from my perspective. These videos usually show the same pictures to reinforce this inaccurate information as being true. They only ever show the sides of the building not facing the WTC plaza and it seems for good reason.
Here are a couple of examples:
Picture 1
Picture 2
The reason is not that there is no video showing the front of the WTC 7 building, the reason is that they are trying to sell a line of Bullshit. That WTC 7 had 'very little damage' and therefore the building MUST have been destroyed by a controlled demolition (it is easier to sell this idea to John & Jane sixpack) or else they are just lazy researchers and never bothered to look for evidence that may refute their claims.
If they showed a heavily damaged building, few people from the population at large would buy the idea that it was a controlled demolition, as most people would just assume that it collapsed due to the damage that it had sustained. In either case, this is a dishonest tactic that is being used by these 'Makeshift Paytriots' that are making a living by $elling these videos.
WTC 7 video showing heavy damage to its South side.
If I, an unknown, near anonymous blogger, with only search engines & some patience can debunk this notion, what the hell do you think the M$M (Mainstream Media) is going to be able to do to discredit their assertions (if the need to do so were to ever arise)?
I personally believe that WTC 7 was in fact destroyed due to controlled demolition, but not for the same reasons as those professing that it was 'not damaged' on 9/11. It was destroyed by controlled demolition as it was indeed heavily damaged by the demolition of the North Tower, thus making it very unsafe to leave it standing in that condition.
posted by PerpetualYnquisitive at 11/22/2005 03:51:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home