XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.bush, alt.religion.christian 
 XPost: alt.religion.christian.baptist, alt.religion.christian.roman- 
 catholic, 
 talk.politics.misc 
 XPost: uk.politics 
 From: iceman@hotmail.com 
  
 "alt"  wrote in message 
 news:pan.2005.07.17.03.53.09.631318@lazyeyez.net... 
 > On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:32:58 -0700, iceman wrote: 
 > 
 >> I've been reviewing the live footage of 9/11. 
 >> 
 >>  I'm thinking now that all of the screams from spectators were added in 
 >> on 
 >> 9/11 TV coverage.   We now know that the all the collapses were not live, 
 >> but run with delays of 45--90 seconds, and were silent of themselves. 
 >> But 
 >> you hear screams in the background.  The reaction of people I *actually 
 >> see* is quizzical, stunned, or running with determination--do people 
 >> scream at events happening at a safe distance, or when they are 
 >> threatened 
 >> in their immediate space?  I never actually see the face of anyone 
 >> screaming--only the sound.  I suspect that there was much, much Hollywood 
 >> on that day, and much, much editing. 
 > 
 > yeah. it's not like modern camcorders don't have integrated microphones or 
 > anything like that. 
 > 
  
 That the film is frist stripped of sound then, screams over-lay and 
 announcer's voice on top. 
  
 check this out: 
  
 When each of the towers went down, the explosions that preceded were 
 described as: 
 CRACK-CRACK-CRACK   BOOM-BOOM-BOOM 
  
 http://thewebfairy.com/911/video/canale/10_1-second.collapse.mpg 
  
  
 >> it sounds 
 >>like the same woman is screaming 5-6 times before the 
 >>top of the Tower is turned to dust, about 7 seconds 
 >>later. 
 >> 
 >>the announcer's voice sounds like he's in a studio. 
 >>At least, we don't hear the truck drive by in the 
 >>middle-ground.  we also don't hear the van door open 
 >>in the foreground. 
 >> 
 >> 
 > 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)