9/11 no plane theories

Home Forums Derailing room 9/11 no plane theories

This topic contains 37 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  ab 5 years, 7 months ago.

Viewing 18 posts - 21 through 38 (of 38 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #6075
    farcevalue
    farcevalue
    Participant

    None of WTC media broadcast that day was live. No reason for it at all. All that was required was that what was happening in reality had some semblance (not much was necessary) of what was happening on TV. On the off chance that the few people that had the same vantage points as the “cameras”, were to actually witness something that was different than what was on TV, they would likely convince themselves what they saw was incorrect. Even they didn’t and were to try to expose the inconsistency, they would never be heard, or if they were, easily ridiculed.

    The so-called “live” video has been thoroughly debunked at Clues Forum in hundreds of ways. Just in the examples above, how is it possible for cameras to follow these “jumpers” with absolute precision, from a relatively short distance with cameras that pick up remarkable detail (of the building at least) when the wide shots of the WTC are fuzzy and out of focus and totally inconsistent with the way camera operators do their jobs, which is following the action. (I have filmed hundreds of
    events with broadcast cameras, a director would be having conniption fit if the camera ops were behaving this way. They would never work again).

    Try this analogy: You are selling a car for $10,000. A buyer arrives with a stack of one hundred $100 bills. You use your trusty counterfeit detection pen to mark the first one. It shows as fake. The second one shows as fake. Third one real. Fourth, fifth and sixth fake. Seventh real. How long do you keep going before you decide to just wait for the next buyer? Otherwise known as falsus in uno falsus in omnibus.

    #6077

    Anonymous

    None of WTC media broadcast that day was live.

    … how is it possible for cameras to follow these “jumpers” with absolute precision, from a relatively short distance with cameras that pick up remarkable detail (of the building at least) when the wide shots of the WTC are fuzzy and out of focus and totally inconsistent with the way camera operators do their jobs, which is following the action. (I have filmed hundreds of<br>
    events with broadcast cameras, a director would be having conniption fit if the camera ops were behaving this way. They would never work again).

    None? I think all of the claimed to be live media broadcast of the 9/11 attacks was live. I haven’t checked the jumpers in detail though. So my disclaimer is that some it may have been pre-edited.

    Do you mean even the fire and smoke in the WTC towers were fake? I find that hard to believe.

    #6087
    farcevalue
    farcevalue
    Participant

    As I said earlier, all of the so-called live footage has been thoroughly discredited at Clues Forum. It’s worth it to spend a bit of time there. A post was added today by Simon, under the CGI Collapse Footage thread which includes a sampling of the different network feeds broadcast that day that are in total contradiction to one another. If they were live they would have to agree. There is some speculation on why the discrepancies are so obvious (once you see them, I believed the official story for years) and whether they were intentional, but they certainly rule out “live” broadcasts.

    9/11 was a movie. There was likely some, or a lot of smoke enveloping the building, they could have set off some explosions as props, but the video was constructed well in advance. This event was a “made for TV” spectacle for the benefit of the TV viewing audience. It worked.

    #6092

    Anonymous

    … CGI Collapse Footage thread which includes a sampling of the different network feeds broadcast that day that are in total contradiction to one another.

    Is there any video or podcast about that? I feel a bit too lazy at the moment to dig into it by reading and stuff. 😐

    #6093

    Anonymous

    I have changed my mind about the 9/11 attacks many times. First I believed in the official story since I didn’t know much about conspiracy theories. Then I watched Loose Change and learned that the official story didn’t really add up. Then I watched September Clues. And then later I heard about the simulated victims. Then about hollow towers. So I could change my mind again. :mrgreen:

    #6097
    farcevalue
    farcevalue
    Participant

    The story of that progression is very familiar to most of us here, I think. It’s quite a bit to take in one bite. I went from OCT, to Loose Change and In Plane Site, to Ace Baker to Judy Wood and finally to September Clues. Gerard Holmgren had some great articles early on. Once you realize that the intention was to bring down the towers for financial and political purposes, then the question is only about the most reliable way to get it done: With conventional explosives that have been tested hundreds of times and videos constructed to sell the planes story.

    #6106

    ab
    Keymaster

    I’m thinking about the fireball explosions. Those were real I think. Tons of kerosene on those floors plus explosives. And they needed to make sure that all the amateur photos and videos that they didn’t control would be consistent in how the fireballs appeared, especially the second one since so many people were looking at the smoking tower.

    The idea that they could remotely disable all cameras is highly unlikely imo. Then they would have had to EMP the whole Manhattan making every electronic device disabled, like cell phones, walkie talkies, television screens, the electronics in cars and so on. I even doubt that it would have been possible to generate such big electromagnetic pulse.

    So to make sure there were no risks they had to record it live.

    Sorry, it’s quite the opposite. Magicians put up curtains when they want to deceive you. Blowing up things at the exact right time is just not a good idea for a worldwide audience. There would be no cameras pointed up if there were a real first hit, and very few on the south side of the south tower IF there was a real second hit.

    Either way, Anders, we’re way past debating the veracity of the footage. It makes far more sense that the whole event was a psyOp, with all the imagery being at least controlled.

    I prefer to spend my time looking at the greater concept of psy/info wars, how they are done, and perhaps even the power structure that is pulling the strings on this planet.

    #6107

    Anonymous

    Sorry, it’s quite the opposite. Magicians put up curtains when they want to deceive you. Blowing up things at the exact right time is just not a good idea for a worldwide audience. There would be no cameras pointed up if there were a real first hit, and very few on the south side of the south tower IF there was a real second hit.

    Either way, Anders, we’re way past debating the veracity of the footage. It makes far more sense that the whole event was a psyOp, with all the imagery being at least controlled.

    I prefer to spend my time looking at the greater concept of psy/info wars, how they are done, and perhaps even the power structure that is pulling the strings on this planet.

    Yes, I agree that it was a huge psyOp. The other part of my theory is that the U.S. government was NOT involved in the initial false flag attack. Instead one of the main purposes of the event was to force the U.S. government, big media and industry plus academia etc to do a massive coverup. To make the public power structure compromised and manipulable via for example blackmail.

    #6108
    knagjak
    knagjak
    Participant

    I as well believed the 9-11 story for years. I started my truth seeking a couple years ago with Alex Jones. It started when i saw Obama Deception and it started from there. I have since then quite left the Alex Jones cult and ive read and seen so much information its crazy but. I saw the documentary’s that netflix had to offer. I saw Judy Wood site and lectures but have not read her book. I listen to basically nothing but independent hip hop, rock, punk rock. so ofcourse when i hear Lowkey or Immortal Tech etc. say something i go and read all i can with the internet and make it a topic of conversation among the peers i know that dont mind talking about the subject. It seems very simple to me to say that this was done for political and $$money purposes. Evil. With all the information out there it is still crazy to me that the people that don’t take things for face value are such a minority. Time to at least demand answers as a Nation.

    #6180

    Anonymous

    I still believe that only the the planes were faked in the WTC footage. But I came to think about another interesting possibility. The hole in the Pentagon could be total fakery: http://truthandshadows.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/pentagon-inside-hole1.jpg

    That makes much more sense to me. What we saw live on television from the Pentagon was basically just a smoke grenade kind of, lol. As far as I know, the hole in the Pentagon wasn’t shown on television until much later.

    And my theory is that the Pentagon hole pictures were “Photoshopped” after the event! As a result of the U.S. government being forced to do a coverup. And in order to do a coverup for the WTC crash fakery, they needed to divert the whole U.S. defense apparatus, or else people in the military would start to question the lack of radar data/reporting and the NORAD “stand down”.

    #6283

    Anonymous

    Very few people were involved in the initial 9/11 attacks, such as those who rigged the WTC towers with explosives and a few key people in the big media companies.

    And they only faked the first live planes. The rest of the fakery and coverups they indirectly forced the U.S. power and authority structures to carry out, because the U.S. government couldn’t reveal that the 9/11 attacks were fake once the event had happened, for national security reasons.

    #6308

    Anonymous

    It seems fair to assume that if professional experts would examine the 9/11 footage they will immediately be able to determine that it’s fakery. That’s the easy part probably.

    More tricky is it to nail down who are responsible for the fakery. For example, amateur video maker Fairbanks is only indirectly responsible, since the only thing he did was to film the second WTC fireball explosion. He has kind of plausible deniability. And who did the actual digital editing of the video and inserted a fake plane etc can be difficult or even impossible to track down.

    So, to catch the initial 9/11 perpetrators may be very difficult or even impossible. I see that as a good thing, since I want a peaceful solution and let both the 9/11 perpetrators and those who did the coverup off the hook.

    Getting hold of people who are responsible for doing the coverup on the other hand may be quite easy. And here national security can be used as an excuse to remove the responsibility from those involved in the coverup.

    So the whole 9/11 attacks can be disclosed without anybody needed to be arrested. And the tricky part is instead to get the public to understand the situation without they going ballistic.

    #7303

    Anonymous

    These guys planned for ZERO risk, with three separate and precisely timed camera operators just for this shot:

    Notice that it’s not like what the video says, that these three video sequences are just different crops of the same video. They are three different videos taken from three different locations.

    #7361

    Anonymous

    This video clip shows fakery! Check out the guy who video films the fireball WTC impact live on the television set and then moves the camera view out of the window to the real fireball: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GujXIfqc23A&t=2m49s

    Where is the fakery in that short clip? In the timing. I think it’s a real live video recording. The problem is, regardless of whether it’s a genuine recording of a live event or video fakery, the timing is too instant. Television networks have a delay of 5 seconds for live video, such as:

    “The network was broadcasting on a five-second delay, but “severe human error” allowed the incident to reach viewers’ screens. How exactly do networks censor live television?” — http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/10/fox_news_live_suicide_how_do_you_censor_live_television_.html

    And in the YouTube clip of the WTC fireball, the delay is basically zero seconds! That’s what it looks like to me, although I could be wrong. Could be worth looking into anyway by experts who know the correct details about live television broadcasting.

    #7362

    Anonymous

    And in the YouTube clip of the WTC fireball, the delay is basically zero seconds!

    I want to clarify that I think the actual video recording of the live event, both on television and the real life footage of the WTC fireball is genuine. The fakery is in what the man is watching on his TV. It’s a real live video feed without the delay. Therefore it could be a special raw feed he is watching and even the “Live” and “4” logos on the screen may have been added just to make it look like it’s a real television broadcast.

    #7366
    psyopticon
    psyopticon
    Participant

    All the footage from 911 including the “plane crashes”, the “smoke”, the “fireballs”, the “jumpers”, the “tower collapses”, was all faked in a video studio!

    Anyone who’s watched September Clues – and understood the implications – will automatically come to that conclusion.

    That video above – promoted by the suicidal faker Ass Baker – is just another pathetic post-911 effort of some tragic goon. Some chancer who wants to get himself elevated up the youtube hall of fame!

    The fakery in the video is not even well executed. The supposed panning of the camera from the TV screen to the “window” is very crude. And it’s pretty obvious that he’s not actually looking through a window at all!

    And the biggie.. Think about this:

    If the events of 911 were unfolding FOR REAL outside your bedroom window in NYC, why the fuck would you be training your camcorder on the TV ?!

    An unbelievably crap effort. Not even worth discussing, Anders!

    #7391

    Anonymous

    All the footage from 911 including the “plane crashes”, the “smoke”, the “fireballs”, the “jumpers”, the “tower collapses”, was all faked in a video studio!

    My theory is that most of mainstream media was NOT a part of the initial 9/11 attacks. Only a few cabal members. And that minimal image fakery was used, which means only the planes added as computer graphics.

    The jumpers were plastic dummies dropped from the towers. The towers were mostly hollow and designed to collapse like that. The fireballs were done with planted kerosene and explosives inside the buildings. The “cookie cutter” plane impact holes done with explosives on the inside and shaped charges placed on the outside of the facade (small and camouflaged).

    #7401

    ab
    Keymaster

    Anders has worn out his welcome here. His name was oddly switched to anonymous. Since he’s the first to be banned, I am still learning how the forum software works. Note that this entire thread is in the derailing room.

Viewing 18 posts - 21 through 38 (of 38 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.