9/11 and SEPTEMBER CLUES

Updates & comments about the movie that exposed the 9/11 scam

Postby Terence.drew on April 23rd, 2010, 12:30 pm

simonshack 4 Apr 22 2010, 10:14 PM wrote:

This is certainly not seen in the 9/11 WTC impact images. The 9/11 video animators just totally forgot about it.



Do you think Simon its possible to put right whats wrong? i.e. to fashion a realistic looking 911 video of one the planes crashing into the WTC which has the following Newtons laws of motion elements-

- an impact , a debris cloud and bits of metal flying in ever direction like in an F1 crash
- 90% of whats left of the plane falling down the side of the building as you would expect
- the smoke is pushed down and swirls as interactions with the wake occur
- no plane shaped hole in the building; some large dents and maybe small holes where the engines impact.
- the plane approaches slower at a more realistic looking speed (200 miles per hour slower)
- none of the plane exits the other side!!

It could then be posted on Youtube as a real-ity version of events. We could then have the 2 videos sitting next to each other and ask people if they may have brainwashed.

(This is beyond my video skills presently but maybe you or someone have the goods!!)
Terence.drew
Member
 
Posts: 248
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:55 pm

Postby simonshack on April 23rd, 2010, 3:47 pm

Terence.drew 4 Apr 23 2010, 11:30 AM wrote:
Do you think Simon its possible to put right whats wrong? i.e. to fashion a realistic looking 911 video of one the planes crashing into the WTC which has the following Newtons laws of motion elements-

- an impact , a debris cloud and bits of metal flying in ever direction like in an F1 crash

-(etc...)


A very good idea, Terence...

Believe me, I've always thought I'd like to do that.
However, just think about what only the first line of your 'wish-list' would entail :

- an impact , a debris cloud and bits of metal flying in ever direction like in an F1 crash

This would entail animating, say, 500 pieces of debris flying in all directions, all of which with their own specific descent trajectory towards the ground.

Sure, let's give it a try, one fine day...But there's one more problem: We have at least 5 videoclips showing the "planecrash" enter the south face of WTC2. Hezarkhani, Courchesne, Fairbanks, Jennifer Spell, Scott Myers... So we would have to make these 500 pieces of debris and their respective trajectories MATCH UP perfectly in the simulated 3-dimensional space, according to the viewing angle of each one of the 5 shots.... B) A freaking nightmare, dear Terence...

The perps, you might argue, enjoy nightmares. But not for themselves. As you may know, September Clues part F features a timid, poor attempt of mine to reproduce the Fairbanks shot (at least I used a blue 767 Boeing with correct UA livery...) :

Image
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6408
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby ozzybinoswald on April 23rd, 2010, 4:15 pm

simonshack @ Apr 23 2010, 03:47 PM wrote: This would entail animating, say, 500 pieces of debris flying in all directions, all of which with their own specific descent trajectory towards the ground.

Sure, let's give it a try, one fine day...But there's one more problem: We have at least 5 videoclips showing the "planecrash" enter the south face of WTC2. Hezarkhani, Courchesne, Fairbanks, Jennifer Spell, Scott Myers... So we would have to make these 500 pieces of debris and their respective trajectories MATCH UP perfectly in the simulated 3-dimensional space, according to the viewing angle of each one of the 5 shots.... B) A freaking nightmare, dear Terence...


The same dilemma confronted the moon hoaxers when they decided it best to neglect representing the stars.

Screw the Jews...NASA did 9/11.
ozzybinoswald
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 12:52 pm

Postby SmokingGunII on April 23rd, 2010, 7:07 pm

This is the kind of carnage I would have expected at the Pentagon.

There's probably some other good stuff in this batch that disproves the existence of any aircraft on 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7S_QgE5 ... re=related
SmokingGunII
Member
 
Posts: 557
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 10:34 am

Postby antipodean on April 24th, 2010, 2:49 am

The same dilemma confronted the moon hoaxers when they decided it best to neglect representing the stars.

Screw the Jews...NASA did 9/11.



Quite interesting considering the only thought provoking piece on Loosechange, were reports of UA93, & another flight (Delta Airlines I think) making an emergency landing at Cleveland Airport, & the passengers being herded into a NASA building.

I've just spent the last hour without luck trying to find the footage of British Astronomer Patrick Moore, interviewing Michael Collins being pissed off at not seeing any stars.

I came across this interesting link which reminded me of the 'Nose out' debacle.
The web site looks a bit iffy but the info could well be true.


The residents of Honeysuckle Creek, Australia, actually saw a different broadcast to the rest of the World. Just shortly before Armstrong stepped onto the Moons surface, a change could be seen where the picture goes from a stark black to a brighter picture. Honeysuckle Creek stayed with the picture and although the voice transmissions were broadcast from Goldstone, the actual film footage was broadcast from Australia. As Una watched Armstrong walking on the surface of the Moon she spotted a Coke bottle that was kicked in the right hand side of the picture. This was in the early hours of the morning and she phoned her friends to see if they had seen the same thing, unfortunately they had missed it but were going to watch the rebroadcast the next day. Needless to say, the footage had been edited and the offending Coke bottle had been cut out of the film. But several other viewers had seen the bottle and many articles appeared in The West Australian newspaper.

Western Australia received their coverage in a different way to the rest of the World. They were the only Country where there wasn't a delay to the 'live' transmission. Bill Kaysing says 'NASA and other connected agencies couldn't get to the Moon and back and so went to ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency) in Massachusetts and asked them how they could simulate the actual landing and space walks. We have to remember that all communications with Apollo were run and monitored by NASA, and therefore journalists who thought they were hearing men on the Moon could have easily been misled. All NASA footage was actually filmed off TV screens at Houston Mission Control for the TV coverage... No one in the media were given the raw footage.'



http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

Edit : just realised that with the time zone differences, Australians would not have seen the live appollo 11 broadcast in the early hours of the morning.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 578
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby Realism911 on April 24th, 2010, 7:53 am

hoi.polloi 4 Apr 21 2010, 01:18 PM wrote:

This is truly one of the weakest and most unfortunate triumphs of the 9/11 lie. How did people fall for this?




Hoi,
With the weakness of the Shanksville story. I have deleted the origonal post. And rebsubmiting a new one with what I would say is a more indepth reasearch on it.

"Clipped Wings" V- 2.0

MSNBC Footage of Shanksville crash site.
Image
Image

Despite the lack of wreckage and debris, one could state...
“A Boeing 757 has crashed there. There is a crater where the Fuselage has impacted. There are wingspan indents made from the resulting crash."

For verification Realism did contct USGPS staff and they did send "below black and white" image to me before.

Shanksville, Sommerville 1994.

Image

(The Terra'forma indent on the far left is "UA 93" Crash site. The FBI shot is shown in relation to geographical crash site of "UA 93") Source -USGPS. --- http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/aerial.html#satellite


So if the wing scars that are seen In the 2001 MSNBC Footage. Is a pre existing trench that was apparent in 1994. All the that is left is a mainly empty impact crater. ( Did some one say Missile?)

According too the official story "UA 93" hit the ground nose first belly up.

As illustrated bellow.

Image


Image
(I get a laugh everytime i look at the above picture, I mean seriously... The perps must really think we are dumb or something! :D)


According to NIST "80 percent of the plane" was in the crater.


"THESE JPEGS" are chosen by Realism, as the site is still smoking. Therefore it is safe too assume the crews wouldnt have moved any of the wreckage yet.

"UA 93" smoking.
Image
Image

So if 80 pecent of the plane was in or beneath crater. I have been looking for it for 2 years now and no sign of it.

The below challenge for everyone who beleieves the official story...
"Please show with "ANY" photographic evidence that 80% "UA 93" is in or beneath the Shanksville crater"


..... Good luck!!! B)
Realism911
Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: January 3rd, 2010, 3:45 am

Postby Terence.drew on April 24th, 2010, 12:24 pm

simonshack 4 Apr 23 2010, 03:47 PM wrote:


- an impact , a debris cloud and bits of metal flying in ever direction like in an F1 crash

This would entail animating, say, 500 pieces of debris flying in all directions, all of which with their own specific descent trajectory towards the ground.

Sure, let's give it a try, one fine day...But there's one more problem....




Well lets not crave Walnut when Pistachio will do B)

-Here is a real crash with all the physical elements intact


Image


-Here is how realistic that crash looks when put through a 911 filter



Image


- Something like this would do.....B)


Image
Terence.drew
Member
 
Posts: 248
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:55 pm

Postby hoi.polloi on April 24th, 2010, 12:28 pm

Careful, Realism. If you post this in the wrong place, (like Democratic Underground) your scientific reasoning may be called 'shill tactics' :lol:

Killtown set the bar for explaining how nonsensical the official Shanksville story is. You have done a decent job yourself. Now that it's been thoroughly established, though, we might move on to more important matters. Thanks, though, Realism.

ps - I didn't mean to suggest your argument was weak. I only meant that Shanksville is a specifically very weak part of the official story and it doesn't take much for anyone to see it is a fraud.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4857
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby MartinL on April 25th, 2010, 11:29 am

Simon or anyone else, is it possible to get a more thorough explanation of this .gif?


"JUMPING JACKET FLASH"

This is from a "running crowd" scene in the Naudet brothers' feature film "9/11". Here we see another glitch typical of masking problems encountered in digital animation composites. Such fleeting glitches are likely to escape the attention of its very creators - unless much time is spent double-checking the 'final product'.




Image

Thanks in advance!
MartinL
Member
 
Posts: 319
Joined: October 19th, 2009, 11:08 am

Postby simonshack on April 25th, 2010, 7:32 pm

MartinL 4 Apr 25 2010, 10:29 AM wrote: Simon or anyone else, is it possible to get a more thorough explanation of this .gif?





Martin,

If your question about that clip from the Naudet movie "911" is :
"Please explain exactly how this glitch occured / or what sort of software could be responsible for such anomalies" - I would have to say sorry - I don't know. At best, I could invite you to watch this video to get an idea of how crowd elements are managed in some productions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTUs7hDq2PA

I hope you'll agree and appreciate that, since the very aim of special fx in cinema is to make the viewer think he's watching something real, it is only by the small glitches and mistakes that one can point out the trickery. Fortunately, this is also all that one needs to do when wishing to expose it. I frankly don't feel the need to explain - or much less pretend to know - exactly why the many anomalies that can be seen in the 9/11 imagery occured. The Naudet movie has plenty of them. Do we know exactly why they occured? No. Do we need to know exactly why they occured in order to have a point ? No. The bottom line is that they could not occur in a real, authentic video shoot.

More anomalies from the Naudet movie:

Image

Image

Can we say these dancing buildings are abnormal? Yes.
Can the Naudet's say they are perfectly normal? No.
Can we explain this phenomena? No.
Can the Naudet's explain this phenomena? Sure - but only under torture. :P
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6408
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby MartinL on May 7th, 2010, 11:35 am

Realism911 @ May 7 2010, 10:45 AM wrote: Police exerts from the radio transcripts.

An excerpt:
World Trade Center police channel 07:
Male: “The first one they think was a guy shooting the missiles off the Woolworth Building. And the second one they think is an airplane that was circling to watch it, and hit the World Trade?.”

“The Woolworth Building! The Woolworth Building! They’re shooting at the Trade Center from the Woolworth Building!” a police officer screams.

“There’s f#cking explosions going off on Vesey street!” another officer yells.

"Can you send somebody over to the Woolworth Building to check the roof?" a Port Authority police officer asked. "There's a possible ... they said it was ... we just had a second explosion, possibly a missile from the roof of the Woolworth Building."

"The Woolworth Building?" replied a police operator.

"`Yeah, on ... on Broadway," the officer said.

Transcripts created from tapes of Port Authority emergency calls and radio transmissions???????. .


Source for the transcripts please?
MartinL
Member
 
Posts: 319
Joined: October 19th, 2009, 11:08 am

Postby simonshack on May 12th, 2010, 11:46 am

*

9/11 : A BRIEF SUMMARY OF EVENTS

by Simon Shack, may 2010


A- On Tuesday, September 11, 2001 the entire World Trade Center Complex was destroyed or terminally damaged (9 buildings in all). Powerful explosives were employed to achieve this purpose. The area was most likely fully evacuated to avoid casualties. The demolition work started at around 10AM behind a thick smokescreen which was raised to keep it safely out of view from NewYorkers. The 9 buildings destroyed were: WTC1, WTC2, WTC3, WTC4, WTC5, WTC6, WTC7, The Deutsche Bank and the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox church.

B- On TV, a 102-minute film told the world a different story: The physical destruction of the WTC complex was blamed on two passenger jets. It was an entirely pre-fabricated “Hollywood” production created to substitute the real-life events in Manhattan that morning. The computer-animated footage featured repetitive aerial views (seemingly TV-helicopter images) of the smoking WTC towers. All the TV networks showed these dull images for the duration of the event. The world’s TV audience, led to believe they were watching real news footage from Manhattan, cursed the “foreign terrorists” which reportedly hijacked those planes.

C- The film included but a few moments of ‘spectacular footage’, most notably a 16-second approach of an apparent airplane (“FLIGHT175”). It was split in short sequences aired in seamless succession by the 5 major US TV networks. The most memorable sight for the world TV audience was the final, 2-second cut of “FLIGHT 175” striking WTC2, as aired by ABC and CNN. It showed a black airplane-silhouette disappearing behind WTC1 and, apparently, exploding inside the hiddenWTC2. (a crude piece of computer-animation).

D- Earlier on, WTC1 had reportedly been struck by another jet (a so-called “FLIGHT11”- never shown on TV that morning). However, the inexplicable lack of required airport logs and obligatory aviation data for both “FLIGHT11” and “FLIGHT175” suggests that they simply did not exist. No black boxes or registered airplane parts were ever recovered.

E- The tower collapses were also computer animations ? and an integral part of the 102min film. These were the most demanding digital film sequences yet an essential part of the hoax. The strange-looking tower collapses were just an over-the-top artistic license allowed to its creators for a desired shock & awe effect. The real-life WTC destruction took place behind a smokescreen and was never captured on film. The September Clues imagery analyses have methodically exposed the multiple signs of doctoring of all the existing imagery of the collapse videos.

F- Electromagnetic counter-measures ensured that no private cameras functioned that morning. The EMP/HERF technology is part of the most advanced military research in modern warfare. Its development has accounted for the Pentagon’s largest source of R&D funding for the last decades.

G- The only reality of the day was the convenient disposal of the obsolete, asbestos-filled WTC complex. There were no hijacked jets. Extensive research has failed to identify their alleged 266 passengers. An overwhelming body of evidence suggests that the twin towers were most likely empty and that the alleged 9/11 victims were fictitious identities generated through a computer database. In conclusion, 9/11 was but a psy-op designed to build a pretext for war and a window of opportunity to enact a number of hugely profitable financial scams.
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6408
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby hoi.polloi on May 12th, 2010, 4:48 pm

Yup. That's a well-written summary of the 9/11 footage.

In this plain and simple format, one can easily see how the entire thing was one small part in a scheme to replace as much of real life with these fake events as possible.

9/11 was more or less a success, so they moved on to the rest. And now we are slogging through BS news all day, every day for nigh on 10 years.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4857
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby fbenario on May 13th, 2010, 1:46 am

Well done, Simon.

9/11 was in fact a success - for a very few, very rich perps. And the emotional/intellectual victims of 9/11 number in the hundreds of millions worldwide, along with the millions of civilians in the Middle East/Muslim world that have paid with their lives.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2180
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby antipodean on May 13th, 2010, 7:17 am

A- On Tuesday, September 11, 2001 the entire World Trade Center Complex was destroyed or terminally damaged (9 buildings in all). Powerful explosives were employed to achieve this purpose. The area was most likely fully evacuated to avoid casualties. The demolition work started at around 10AM behind a thick smokescreen which was raised to keep it safely out of view from NewYorkers.



On the old forum I posted a link to this photo taken from a nearby hotel (Millenium Hilton), allegedly taken 2 mins after the first plane hit. I was taken aback by only seeing one person down there (the area had obviously already been evacuated).
Image



The person who took the photo goes on to explain seeing falling bodies, (I suspect he's lying, influenced by what was shown on TV) & how shortly afterwards the Hotel was evacuated.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1155592/boa ... #114958803

He also explains that he took the photo with his
My old pentax k-100:)


Could this sort of camera have taken the photo from a few floors up despite the presence of ?


F- Electromagnetic counter-measures ensured that no private cameras functioned that morning. The EMP/HERF technology is part of the most advanced military research in modern warfare. Its development has accounted for the Pentagon’s largest source of R&D funding for the last decades.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 578
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

PreviousNext

Return to September Clues - the movie

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests