told it wasn't a bomb and why wasn't the footage of the North Tower's moment of impact passed to the newsrooms until, as the guy points out in his video, midnight that evening? Wouldn't the authorities on the ground tasked with dealing with this major emergency have had at least some interest in looking at that footage, to confirm whether or not it seemed deliberate? I know 10 minutes or so later the task force leader viewing it would be getting something else to worry about than what he was actually seeing in the Naudet's film, but the Naudet's seem to have been very selfish with their scoop from where I'm sat, and didn't even give anyone that opportunity. Indeed, good points. Also, while on the subject of the naudets, why is their film of the 2nd 'hit' cut in 3 places ? Did they even get asked why, when they knew what they had recorded, they didn't ensure a copy got to those who needed it before they carried on filming their exciting new project? Do photo-journalists get a pass on withholding evidence when they get caught up in the heat of the moment? It's almost as if they wanted the world to get a good repeated viewing of the second tower attack before they released their own. That's what Holmgren mentioned - the power of suggestion. The first news casts about the first strike stated they didn't know what caused it, but after the second strike was shown