9/11 and SEPTEMBER CLUES

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

Postby hoi.polloi on May 13th, 2010, 5:58 pm

antipodean 4 May 13 2010, 06:17 AM wrote:
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.




I would like to hear Simon's response on this, as well.

My feeling is that we have really under-estimated the power of the disabling device, which short-circuits or somehow disrupts everything they want to disrupt and that the imagery generated to replace the destroyed or prevented imagery has to be *more* diverse than the kind of imagery that would result from an event (or even a "non-event") that was not as controlled.

There has to be imagery like this, which both confirms the "flying paper" distraction (which may or may not be a cover for some kind of obscuration weapon) and which also depicts people in the incredibly unsafe areas near the towers, which most likely would have been evacuated.

Also, although this does not resemble the outrageous and unrealistic news imagery, the inevitable comparison would protect this picture and make it seem as if this picture is relatively acceptable.

The news asks us for 7 lollipops, then this picture says, okay well how about just 1 then?

It's a classic childish deception tactic.

The more stories that are inserted into an over-arching story, the more it will seem to be unsuspicious. They could release "new" 9/11 evidence for years and nobody would ever suspect that all of it is fake because ... "how could it all be fake?!?!"

Well, the Simpsons keeps coming up with new seasons, doesn't it?

Having said that, I have a friend who claims to have taken photos of the moment of the second tower's detonation with an SLR and those rolls disappeared and he doesn't know how he 'misplaced' them. Why would something like that happen unless it were extremely important to the perps to control all imagery? (Or unless my friend was lying to me, in which case his testimony of existing photos would have to be completely dismissed, anyway!)

I think the above picture would fall under the category of 'suspiciously realistic' but ultimately false by proxy to every other false picture out of 9/11. Rare evidence requires incredible proof of its incorruptibility.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4810
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby Surcouf on May 13th, 2010, 6:33 pm

9/11 : A BRIEF SUMMARY OF EVENTS

by Simon Shack, may 2010


... No black boxes or registered airplane parts were ever recovered. ...




Apart from few non consistent a/c parts, nothing was shown ... No professional enquiry was ever conducted by the NTSB authorities ...


http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2001/010913.htm

"The FBI lead investigative agency" was not very successful ... :huh:

Let's just compare what looks like the reconstruction of wreckage for TWA 800 and Panam 103, activity which is the only visible part of the iceberg for an aircraft investigation !!

Image

TWA 800

Image

Panam 103
Everything might not be faked ...
Surcouf
Member
 
Posts: 22
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 1:48 pm

Postby hoi.polloi on May 13th, 2010, 6:38 pm

Furthermore, here is the other picture that "psychic" (hollywoodpsychic@hotmail.com) took:

Image
which just happens to be have been taken on 9/9/01

What is going on with the shadows? The people cast blurry shadows, but not the giant building in front of them, which looks like the sun is inside it? Not the suspiciously symbolic centrally-framed pyramid statue? Come on! What is going on here?

Here is their story on IMDB:

Minneapolis native who moved to Los Angeles to pursue a film career. Currently directing two projects: a documentary and an experimental film called The Crowned Prince

which links to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1314650/ - a broken link.

Get real, antipodean! It's another anonymous, incomplete perp account with signature semiotics.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4810
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby SmokingGunII on May 14th, 2010, 10:03 pm

Hoi - I have two questions regarding your last post:

1. Is it normal for somebody to set up a tripod in an Hotel room for two days? ;)

2. Why do so many leads take us to the IDMB site? Not withstanding the well known cast of 9/11 linked to the film industry, I have found searches on victims names also taking me to actors or characters in old films.

Was this one of the databases used for the vicsim list?
SmokingGunII
Member
 
Posts: 557
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 10:34 am

Postby hoi.polloi on May 14th, 2010, 10:17 pm

haha!

I think you know the answer to number 1.

And I think we should all start to get familiar with number 2 ... just why do we keep bumping into IMDB (Internet Movie Database) as the dead-end of our trail while tracing vicsims? Good point!
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4810
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby antipodean on May 14th, 2010, 11:16 pm

SmokingGunII @ May 14 2010, 10:03 PM wrote: Hoi - I have two questions regarding your last post:

1. Is it normal for somebody to set up a tripod in an Hotel room for two days? ;)

2. Why do so many leads take us to the IDMB site? Not withstanding the well known cast of 9/11 linked to the film industry, I have found searches on victims names also taking me to actors or characters in old films.

Was this one of the databases used for the vicsim list?


1. Are you saying that the 2 photos look as though they have been taken from exactly the same position within the Hotel Room, which is why a tripod must have been used, or the standard of the photos suggests the use of a tripod.
The content in the bottom left fields are different.

2.I actually came across those photos when I was reading up on the "Man on a Wire" movie, to see if any techniques used had 911 similarities.
Most of the leads taking me to the IMDb site, would be from the Mark Humphrey related stuff, & shills etc with known connections to the industry.
One search of a screen name used by a 911 actress took me to a porn site, where I came across a woman who was a dead ringer for another 9/11 actress.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 575
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby proloft on May 14th, 2010, 11:25 pm

antipodean 4 May 14 2010, 10:16 PM wrote:1) The content in the bottom left fields are different.

2)...I came across a woman who was a dead ringer for another 9/11 actress.


1) Zoom & crop?

2) Can you provide links, or at the very least, say which actress this woman looks like?

Thanks.
proloft
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 10:58 pm

Postby antipodean on May 15th, 2010, 2:32 am

2) Can you provide links, or at the very least, say which actress this woman looks like?



Image
Actress masquerading as Carol Ashley, mother of vicsim Janice Ashley.

Image
Actress masquerading as Carol Ashley, mother of vicsim Janice Ashley.

Image
The Carol Ashley actress look a like, or the Carol Ashley actress herself.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 575
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby D.Duck on May 15th, 2010, 10:33 am

antipodean 4 May 15 2010, 01:32 AM wrote:

Image
The Carol Ashley actress look a like, or the Carol Ashley actress herself.


Dean,

It looks very much like Carol Ashley. Do you have more on this women?


D.Duck
D.Duck
Member
 
Posts: 295
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:08 pm

Postby hoi.polloi on May 15th, 2010, 10:38 am

Oh yeah, I remember you finding this a while back. Good stuff. What is this actress' name - she got a IMDB profile?
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4810
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby antipodean on May 15th, 2010, 11:10 am

It looks very much like Carol Ashley. Do you have more on this women?



I never managed to find out her name, if I did I would have looked it up on the IMDb site.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 575
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby Realism911 on May 17th, 2010, 10:55 am

simonshack @ May 12 2010, 11:46 AM wrote:

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.



I must admit those collapses do look very strange!!!

I would like too learn more on this as I honestly feel a bit clueless on it. I have seen the study on WTC 7 you have done and how the side building expands as it collapses. I have also noticed the smoke duplication mirror clones which have been posted up on Reality Shack previously.. And that is well done...

So by when we say WTC1 and WTC 2 were computer animations. Did the perps manage too syncronise ALL these digital animations with accuracy?

Are there any obvious visual flaws between the different collaspes "SHOTS" of the Twin Towers? :)
Realism911
Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: January 3rd, 2010, 3:45 am

Postby simonshack on May 17th, 2010, 5:54 pm

Realism,

Please go this page:

http://www.septemberclues.info/wtc_collapses.htm

It does take some time to upload, so please be patient and check it all out.

The synchronization of the collapses was done beforehand. That was no problem at all, since they showed a prefabricated animation movie (instead of LIVE broadcasts) from a centralized studio. They had various rotated 3D animations already ready to show. Is this hard to understand?

Let me know what remains unclear for you. I appreciate any questions you may still have after watching the link above.
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6375
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby Realism911 on May 19th, 2010, 4:08 pm

simonshack 4 May 17 2010, 05:54 PM wrote: Is this hard to understand?




After viewing the link here is what I understand.

Manhatten Pollution???
Image

"With Parents who are Yanks and who live in MA, and have being too New York and Ground Zero alot...
I can say this is not a real shot of Manhatten on T.V. or anywhere in the U.S.A.
I explain what I see when I look at a photo a year before 9/11 from year 2000."


Image

I constantly rub my eyes when I look at the NBC collaspe shot... are we looking at Beijing on a smogy cloudy Day?? NO we are looking at crude animation!!!!

slowly but surely...............................
Image

You have clearly shown the colaspe on the CNN "live shot" went for 18 seconds and NIST insists that was 11 seconds??? (I am starting too really believe that they should learn Science from you Mr Shack :lol: )

Identical Triplets???
Image ImageImage

"When I walk and sight see through Manhatten I just LOVE standing in the single same spot like these shots.. ( thats just how I roll :lol:) "

Us aussies have a bit of a rep of using slang of the English Language and I am about too do it now... " OI MATE, Bloody heck can you change that flaming Camera angle??"

Simon, do you think anyone on this planet... gets so sick and tired of looking at the same camera angle (International Shot) on 9/11 like we do??? .... YES Even ANCHORS Diana and Charlie on 9/11 @ ABC DID They did a hour or so before the collaspe, just after the first plane hit...
Not once but twice Diana AND Charlie said and quote "The camera angle is deceptive"
But Im gonna Realsim it a bit further..
CBS 9/11 TV archives= http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109110831-0912
* AT 19.57 mins ( 8.51 am) The International Shot Starts.
* AT 28.43 mins (9.03 am )The International Shot changes angle for a record 133 seconds!! But alas it only want's too go back too the origonal angle!!
* AT 41.10 mins (9.12 am ) The Internatinal Shot "Straffs" again ....

So for the first 22 minutes of the "Inernational Shot" ABC only managed a slight degree of angle change of 133 (give or take) seconds??
Wern't They in a Helicopter??????????????


Maybe we should call it the "Stalker Shot" because For a start Fantastic ABC seems to be obssesed on viewing 9/11 from on one angle!! :lol:

Just As you demonstrate Over a hour later on ABC!!!!!

Image Image

Notice the collaspe shot is same (give or take) from the 8.51 am helicopter shot... just on the ground this time!!! At Least once could they have not taken a shot from Staten Island or Hudson River Somewhere???

And that reminded me of those shots from over the Hudson River in some Dudes apartment But I just scrolled down the link you gave and you give a great explain it by showing that the Sun does Not LIE!!!!!
Image


It's at this point I say NO!!! The 9/11 collaspe Imagery is a big lie and I don't buy it!!


Cheers
Realism :ph43r:
Realism911
Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: January 3rd, 2010, 3:45 am

Postby ozzybinoswald on May 20th, 2010, 11:44 am

This is probably as good a time and place as any to bring up something I've been noticing. It seems that components of the simulated smoke have been recycled, reappearing (with some slight variation) at different times throughout the broadcasts. Usually from the same or similar observer perspectives.

As always, my premise is that any given smoke area includes a set of images/shapes in which the individual components of a set sometimes recede and sometimes come to the fore. So, in any instance of a set manifesting, a component shape may be larger or smaller - perhaps so small that it is crowded out by the surrounding components as they come to the fore. In conjunction with this recessive-dominant component variability, the aspect ratio may also vary, distending the shape. And extra image layers may have been applied further obscuring immediate recognition.

Confused? Don't worry about it. It's just like funhouse mirrors. The originating source image may be distorted but the individual can still be recognized from one mirror to another. Take some time, examine the subtle details.

Do you see what to me resembles a boar's head in profile remaining above the tower? Is it reasonable to expect these distinctive shapes to just hang around? :huh:

Image

Not sure how best to communicate this one. Now that I'm looking at it again I think the top black rectangle in the pic at right should be shifted over to the right. This is the kind of thing that holds me up from posting these comparisons - it's not a direct correlation. It's frustrating, as intended. No matter. Look at the 'eyes' in the hole (circled). Like a raccoon face in caricature. That's the first thing I saw and it's importance gets clearer in the last comparison.
Image

Image

On the right below is yet another still compared. See those same 'eyes' in the hole? I didn't bother designating them with a box because I think it's easy enough to see unaided.
Image

See what I'm saying?
Image

Here's the 3 views used:
Image
ImageImage

I'm throwing this one in because I just noticed it. I hope this is accessible and I'm not being too obscure.
Image
ozzybinoswald
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 12:52 pm

PreviousNext

Return to September Clues - the movie

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest