- Thread starter
- #81
Why is it wrong because it not what the media told you.they only see what they want to see so he wont watch it.same as how they wont watch videos of proof that explosives brought the twin towers down.Watch the vid it has clear pics then no more of your idiotic replies.I watched your video. It's footage with an annoying voice over using a shitty mic. The guy picks out three people on the edge of a group of seriously wounded victims and proclaims they are faking it because they don't have any visible injuries. He completely ignores the blood on the sidewalk multiple times. The blood stained hands of those around the injured that are trying to staunch the bleeding. If it isn't visible from the narrator's conveniently chosen camera angle it does not exist."They don't start running until the smoke rolls in." Smoke typically means fire. Of course they run away from the smoke. People standing around a campfire move away from it. Shock, PTSD, or whatever you want to call it and adrenaline can make people unaware of significant injuries. The family members in question probably were not aware of their injuries until they reached an aid station or took a minute to think about what had just happened. The narrator is oblivious to the clear limp of the daughter while he is saying she doesn't have a dislocated ankle. Ever stop to think about the number of people involved to pull this off? It would have to be in the hundreds, more likely, thousands. Do you honestly believe that many people can keep a secret of this magnitude? So after watching that utterly ridiculous video (12 minutes I can never get back) that amounted to a profanity laced rant about a family's fake injuries using grainy still zooms from chosen angles; I would still believe Ernie's claim over yours. Even without his proof. That's just how crazy your "evidence" really is.
Already DID watch it. It is wrong. Simple as that.