Electronic Jamming on 9/11

[hoi.polloi]

I think Fred is getting hacked. His posts are cogent when he checks them. It's just that there is some kind of disruption that seems to be copy-pasting his text in nonsensical ways. He has complained about this problem before.

Fred might be the kind of person who will have to re-read everything he wrote after every post he makes from now on just to make sure something like this didn't happen again. Annoying, but possible.

I agree with Fred that most people are too frightened to show their real video/photography if it even exists - and that there simply wasn't enough time to capture a projectile if there even was one.

I enjoy regex's demand for evidence and share it. I wish we had some kind of source of real evidence. All of it thusfar exposed to the public seems to be fake.

[fred]

Efficacy of HERF (disable cameras without damaging other electronic devices?)

While HERF is certainly part of the arsenal or bag of tricks, in my opinion, Tufa's right that you can't disable all cameras in a big area without completely frying a lot of electronics in smaller areas. Especially in an area with a lot of tall buildings it would be difficult to get adequate coverage everywhere without "overcooking" a lot of Manhattan and toasting sensitive electronic equipment.

My own experience: Cell phone disabled without HERF / EMP effects

Here's one data point: I had a Manhattan cell phone number that wasn't working on 9/11, and I wasn't in the immediate vicinity of any exploding buildings, so somebody was messing with the communications equipment further downstream at the Central Office or cell phone carriers (disabling area codes or prefixes or blocking calls).

Probable Existence of Real Amateur Photos and Videos

I'm certain (but cannot prove) that there are many people with genuine 9/11 photographs and videos, but that they "missed" most of the excitement like the "plane crash" that never happened. Most people probably cooperated with the authorities and handed over original footage without question. I'm sure some people sold footage to the networks, and were disappointed that their footage basically disappeared.

Real video lacks the excitement of fake video, and is therefore less "newsworthy"

It's understandable that CNN would run something exciting (and fake) like the Hezarkhani video instead of the real but less exciting video of a true amateur cameraman.

Truth is obscure; fakes are ubiquitous

Any "non conforming" video is easily shouted down by the bad guys as a forgery, a fake, or just the unfortunate failure of an amateur to capture the towers at just the right moment to see what the professional TV cameras supposedly captured.

[fred]

I don't know what's up with the garbled posts. It looked fine to me when I posted it but I see yes, it's a jumbled mess now.

I still have a hard time logging in here and getting messages to post. Maybe it is some minor harassment from the nice people in the Peer Block list. [NIST, NASA, MIT... etc.] Maybe it's just some annoying bug. Everything else seems to be working fine.

[regex]

So, there's still no evidence that cameras didn't work on 9/11 at all.

It's a pitty that fbenario didn't answer my post, since he claims to know "many reports of folks" whose cameras didn't work that day.

Well, considering that this is pretty much of a key to simons theories there's not much evidence that real amateurs couldn't have taken photographs/videos on 9/11

[hoi.polloi]

That's true.

It would be nice to see some non-fake video though.

[mlebek]

a very interesting article about clues that a nuclear bomb was used to generate an emp. several links to people that witnessed flashes, burning cars, stopped clocks.
Ok, there is still Dimitri Khalezov with his mindblowing story about nuclear bombs but maybe he was invented to hide facts about this emp and to mislead people just like the heads of ae911thruth.

http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/2008/05/summary-of-evidence-of-emps.html

if this emp took place at collapse as you can read here http://www.coffinman.co.uk/wtc_nuke.htm then there exists no videofootage of it.

i could imagine that an emp can safely destroy all battery powered devices and most of the ones connected to the power grid.

but that implies that all videos from cnn and others were pre-/post produced, but including witnesses who heard bombs.

911, nominated for 10, um sorry, 11 oscars!

[Tufa]

So, there's still no evidence that cameras didn't work on 9/11 at all.

Move slowly and carefully ... There are many ways a camera don't work ... an alternative scenario, with reference to ThemDarnBats » 18 Dec 2010 01:38 is that A it was not a sunny day with a clear sky B a large smoke screen obscured the view. So it is OK to take a picture, it will be all grey!
The psychological part shall not be underestimated. If you picture is a complete mess, and is of no real value, there is a chance that you are embarrassed by this and discard your pictures.

[Brutal Metal]

That's true.

It would be nice to see some non-fake video though.

This sentence right here speaks VOLUMES to the guy that's battling in this thread!! WHERE are the REAL photos and Videos then??
HELLO does ANYONE that was living in a high rise apartment complex around the twin towers on Sept 11 of that faithful year have anything for us besides the Obvious Fakes of the college girls freaking out or the little girl that says "daddy the tower is gone!"
They've been discredited like Fairbanks,Naudet's and so on.... The OP should be more concerned with that!!


(admin notice: "The OP" mentioned above would be our member "regex": his topic "Cameras/Cell Phones did not work on 9/11" has now been merged with the older "Electronic Jamming on 9/11" thread).

[simonshack]

ADMIN NOTICE: The threads "Electronic Jamming on 9/11" and "Cellphones/cameras did not work on 9/11" have been merged.

[simonshack]

So, there's still no evidence that cameras didn't work on 9/11 at all.(...)
Well, considering that this is pretty much of a key to simons theories there's not much evidence that real amateurs couldn't have taken photographs/videos on 9/11

Regex,

I hope you will agree that there's a substantial difference between "no evidence at all" - as opposed to"not much evidence". Surely, if there were no evidence at all this would be a totally useless debate, whereas if there is "not much evidence" it may still be worthwhile debating it, don't you think? I would appreciate if you were more careful in the future with your wording and logic; we all strive to keep the debates up to a certain standard of constructive attitude and intellectual honesty on this forum.

Naturally, some aspects of the gigantic 9/11 hoax require some level of speculation in order to provide possible answers to a series of nagging yet important questions. One of these is, undoubtedly: WHY don't we have any sort of genuine-looking private videos of the day? To be sure, in all these years I have personally not encountered one single 9/11 video graced with a feel of authenticity - as far as my own criteria and experience is concerned. You are free to believe otherwise and propose one or the other video which you yourself may deem legit and authentic.

As far as 'hard evidence' is concerned (to my thesis of some form of EMP/HERF technology being employed on 9/11), I will promptly concede that it is, at this time, limited and inconclusive. However, as far as I can gather, you are not familiar with this page of the SC website: http://www.septemberclues.info/visual_control.htm Please put aside a little time to read it all, including the provided links. Among other things, you'll find this testimony (admittedly, a second-hand testimony) by Quentin, a person with whom I have exchanged several e-mails and who, for various reasons - and for what it's worth - I am inclined to consider trustworthy:

"My cousin Stephen's PVDV401 Cam failed to turn on but assumed it was the battery; he blames Panasonic for "making unreliable shit". But it was in the charger for more than 4 hours the night before. The incident actually happened closer to the second hit - before 9 am. The camera simply wouldn't turn on. He released and re-seated the battery several times, and he noticed the power indicator flash on and off each time he put the battery in, one time it stayed on a few seconds - it just didn't give any juice to the camera. At this point he says one cop approached him aggressively because he wasn't moving fast enough or whatever (Interesting note : Stephen claims a rather swift evacuation was in effect minutes into the event, people being directed out of there in a jiffy - being pushed up Church St and Broadway). When he arrived at the apartment he casually put the camera away without a second thought testing it only after giving it another recharging session hours later. At first it stalled, powered-on-off, and then it worked fine! (which of course infuriated him). It should be noted that he had been bringing his new camera to work almost every day and never encountered a problem with the power or any of the cams functions."

You'll find another brief, similar account (by "Sassy Mami") on my website and I'd like to tell you - if you can take my word for it - that I do remember coming across a couple more comments to this tune on the internets: Alas, at the time I wasn't yet alert to the importance of this issue and failed to save/archive them. Anyhow, we may only hope for similar accounts to emerge in time - something which is bound to happen if the two we already have are not made-up, outright lies. I do have a problem believing that this is the case, as I cannot see why anyone (incl. the perps) would invent such stories.

Now, regarding the technology to disable video cameras - here's a home-made, 800Watt device (named "HERF003"):

the HERF 003
"Basically what I have built is an 800 Watt source of microwaves which are diffused in two directions with low gain. The device was designed to be as compact as possible and is probably the most compact continuous source of 2.458GHz microwaves (at this power) built by a HERF/EMP hobbyist. I have run two tests with the HERF so far and both seemed promising for future upgrades. I was able to disable a video camera at 5 meters without any kind of high gain antenna, only the diffuser module."


"Here is a series of frames captured with a 66.8mS pause in between. They demonstrate how HERF003 disables a video camera that is filming it. You are able to see from when the filiment heats up to when the camera is destroyed. The video cassette was then recovered and was undamaged as expected."





http://blockyourid.com/~gbpprorg/mil/he ... rf003.html

Hmmm...I wonder if the Pentagon has something more powerful/sophisticated than that?

*****************************************************************************************************************************************************

OTHER MEANS OF CONTROLLING PRIVATE VIDEOTAPING/PHOTOGRAPHY

Having said all of the above, I wish to stress once again that we cannot pretend to know exactly how private images of the 9/11 event were impeded, obscured or/and seized/confiscated. What we CAN do, however, is to imagine and list the many ways this could have been achieved - keeping in mind that unlimited police/military/technology resources must have been available and put to maximum use on the day.

HERE'S WHAT (APPARENTLY) HAPPENED TO SOMEONE FILMING FROM A ROOFTOP THE FLIGHT 3407 CRASH SCENE:
http://www.wivb.com/dpp/news/state_poli ... era_090217

HERE'S HOW SIMPLE LASER LIGHTS CAN KNOCK-OUT A CAMERA'S LIGHT SENSOR:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0TgaGePhJA

AND HERE ARE SOME MORE LINKS TO HERF-RELATED ARTICLES:
http://blockyourid.com/~gbpprorg/spyking/herf.html

[SmokingGunII]

So, there's still no evidence that cameras didn't work on 9/11 at all.

It's a pitty that fbenario didn't answer my post, since he claims to know "many reports of folks" whose cameras didn't work that day.

Well, considering that this is pretty much of a key to simons theories there's not much evidence that real amateurs couldn't have taken photographs/videos on 9/11

Dear Regex

I'm not sure why we should continue to humour you, but if you have a cache of "real amateurs", whatever that means, that took video footage, please post them on here. Alternatively, you can look at my "Thousands of witnesses myth" thread and explain why the only people that had video cameras on them that morning were linked to the news media.

Now, I have spent a great deal of time searching for genuine photography from the day and have found a blog which includes some imagery AFTER the 2nd hit. This blog also confirms that NOBODY could get a connection on their cell phones or, indeed, landlines. The blog author also describes being told by the military when exiting the subway (just after 9am) to "head North". Is it normal for the military to be on the streets of NY or are the National Guard based nearby? I should add that none of his photos include people waving at windows, jumpers or helicopters in the vicinity of the towers.

Given this information, the onus is on you to provide the evidence that supports your assertion that "real amateurs" could have taken video/photos DURING the "impacts".

I look forward to your CONTRIBUTIONS.

[Gary-Welz]

Here is some proof that camera's didn't work on 9/11. The video on youtube is named:911 Electronic Warfare / Jamming? NIST FOIA: CBS1_clip67.avi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9ZzmcdNUFM

I am new on this forum, can anyone tell me how to post a youtube video? This is what the person being interviewed said:

"The crazy thing was, I grabbed my camera and wanted to take some pictures of the plane coming in but the camera did not work, the camera did not work anymore. I couldn't believe it."

And aren't there accounts of firemen having problems with radio failures?

[simonshack]

Here is some proof that camera's didn't work on 9/11. The video on youtube is named:911 Electronic Warfare / Jamming? NIST FOIA: CBS1_clip67.avi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9ZzmcdNUFM

Yes, I remember that clip - it was first released by some Polish Youtube entity, well over a year ago. It's a bait we shouldn't bite at.

Unsurprisingly, they chose the elusive "CBS2" broadcast - which is not included in the 9/11 TV archives - to play this umpteenth move. http://www.archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive It's not a credible clip - let it be, folks.

Of course, it appears to back up my EMP/HERF thesis.
But unless CBS2 releases a full, official transcript of their 9/11 broadcasts, it is worth nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

[nonhocapito]

To be sure, in all these years I have personally not encountered one single 9/11 video graced with a feel of authenticity - as far as my own criteria and experience is concerned. You are free to believe otherwise and propose one or the other video which you yourself may deem legit and authentic.

Excellent digest of what this topic is about, Simon (as always). It is not up to us to fill all the holes of the story with our imagination, calling it "evidence". Sometimes it suffices to show the holes.

So, rather than asking: "how can we prove that private cameras didn't work?" we should just ask: "how come all videos are fake?"

Evidently there has been total control of imagery in place. Otherwise they wouldn't be all fakes.

Since the planning of 9/11 certainly went on for years, to the many problems we can see today, going back with our imagination to that "chaotic day", the perpetrators surely had found many solutions. That day I imagine was not so much "chaotic" from the inside, but rather prepared.
Pushing people away, requisitioning film, jamming digital equipment, sealing off Manhattan, raising curtains of smoke, etc.

Lastly: being, as the perpetrators evidently are, in total control of all the WORLD media, simplifies everything. This ultimate censorship has been in place for decades and it works perfectly. No story gets to be told unless it fits with all the other stories. The rest is persuasion...

[nonhocapito]

Of course, it appears to back up my EMP/HERF thesis.
But unless CBS2 releases a full, official transcript of their 9/11 broadcasts, it is worth nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

I think this video is a classic example of "being on top of it". Rather than letting people getting autonomously to certain conclusions, it is better from the very beginning to suggest those possibilities, so that everything, truths and lies, are equally laid in front of our eyes, nullifying each other (no "discoveries of truth" allowed).