What is worth considering? What are you trying to say?
THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 1244
- Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
The hypothesis in the video.Flabbergasted wrote: ↑Mon Sep 06, 2021 7:23 pmWhat is worth considering? What are you trying to say?
Simon Shack.I'll leave it at that for now. Everyone is welcome to submit their thoughts as to what exactly this "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" affair is / was all about.
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
He's asking you to describe for us why we should take the time to watch some video you found.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 7341
- Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
- Location: italy
- Contact:
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
*
Allow me to put this little controversy to rest, folks...
I've seen a number of ludicrous theories circulating on the internets as to how exactly that infamous clip ("Airlift-from-Kabul-Airport-with-Afghan-runners") was created.
Such as:
- "The military plane was in fact a big, inflatable movie prop!" (and was therefore easily pulled along the airstrip by the Afghan runners)...
or...
- "Those Afghan runners were recruited to run along the slow-moving plane which, in reality, never took off" (i.e. it was all staged by a REAL camera-crew)...
or...
- "The military plane, with its engines switched off, was actually pulled by sheer manpower along the airstrip"...
I must say that I find it astonishing (and, by now, rather dismaying) that whenever some strange-looking newsclip gets aired on TV, many "truthseekers" go out of their way to imagine fantasy scenarios of how that clip might have been "A REAL EVENT FILMED BY REAL CAMERAS IN THE REAL WORLD". Are people at large really still unaware of CGI technology - as used in virtually EVERY SINGLE Hollywood action movie? I mean, they even used it 20 years ago to simulate a spectacular event where airplanes apparently smashed into two skyscrapers in Manhattan! For chrissakes.
I'd guess that it would have taken max. 30minutes for some CGI 'artist' to put together that silly "Airlift-from-Kabul-Airport-with-Afghan-runners" clip. All he needed to do was to blend some street-scene of a running Afghan crowd (extracted from whatever 'stock-archive' material) with another stock-archive video of that military plane taking off from some airstrip.
Now, why am I saying that the plane is "taking off"? Here's why:
As you can see, the very last couple of frames of this clip (which are in fact the very last frames of that infamous clip - as shown on TV!), the front of the plane is clearly starting to tilt upwards - just like planes usually do when they take off from the ground!
Needless to say (well, hopefully so!) the speed of that stock-footage (of military plane taking off) was simply slowed down by the CGI artist.
Allow me to put this little controversy to rest, folks...
I've seen a number of ludicrous theories circulating on the internets as to how exactly that infamous clip ("Airlift-from-Kabul-Airport-with-Afghan-runners") was created.
Such as:
- "The military plane was in fact a big, inflatable movie prop!" (and was therefore easily pulled along the airstrip by the Afghan runners)...
or...
- "Those Afghan runners were recruited to run along the slow-moving plane which, in reality, never took off" (i.e. it was all staged by a REAL camera-crew)...
or...
- "The military plane, with its engines switched off, was actually pulled by sheer manpower along the airstrip"...
I must say that I find it astonishing (and, by now, rather dismaying) that whenever some strange-looking newsclip gets aired on TV, many "truthseekers" go out of their way to imagine fantasy scenarios of how that clip might have been "A REAL EVENT FILMED BY REAL CAMERAS IN THE REAL WORLD". Are people at large really still unaware of CGI technology - as used in virtually EVERY SINGLE Hollywood action movie? I mean, they even used it 20 years ago to simulate a spectacular event where airplanes apparently smashed into two skyscrapers in Manhattan! For chrissakes.
I'd guess that it would have taken max. 30minutes for some CGI 'artist' to put together that silly "Airlift-from-Kabul-Airport-with-Afghan-runners" clip. All he needed to do was to blend some street-scene of a running Afghan crowd (extracted from whatever 'stock-archive' material) with another stock-archive video of that military plane taking off from some airstrip.
Now, why am I saying that the plane is "taking off"? Here's why:
As you can see, the very last couple of frames of this clip (which are in fact the very last frames of that infamous clip - as shown on TV!), the front of the plane is clearly starting to tilt upwards - just like planes usually do when they take off from the ground!
Needless to say (well, hopefully so!) the speed of that stock-footage (of military plane taking off) was simply slowed down by the CGI artist.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 1244
- Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
It looks to me like the entire image is tilted (or twisted) counterclockwise at this point. In the second picture below, the man´s head should be in a much lower position if the plane was actually tilting upwards.simonshack wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:12 amAs you can see, the very last couple of frames of this clip (which are in fact the very last frames of that infamous clip - as shown on TV!), the front of the plane is clearly starting to tilt upwards - just like planes usually do when they take off from the ground.
-
- Member
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:15 pm
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
After looking at video clips of the alleged war chest left behind by the USA in Afghanistan ......
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLLFhW1aKtA
The question is are they real military vehicles? or are the production team replicating technology that has been used in the past to deceive, for example WW11 and the ghost army.....
Ghost Army: The Inflatable Tanks That Fooled Hitler
The Allies saved thousands of lives by embracing the artistry of war.
By Megan Garber
'All of which went to serve the Allies' ultimate illusion: that their military force was bigger and more powerful than it actually was. (Part of the effectiveness of the Ghost Army came from the fact that it would employ real tanks and artillery pieces along with the fake ones, to make the dummies in the distance seem to blend in with the others.'
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... er/276137/
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwnMAet72Zc
Any other benefits of having fake tanks in Afghan besides deceiving the enemy?
Obviously cost.....
A Look at Russia's Army of Inflatable Weapons
Blow-up fighter jets and tanks can make a military seem bigger than it really is.
Rusbal, a Russian toy company started in 1993 by a hot air balloon enthusiast, originally made hot air balloons, inflatable children's play sets, and inflatable costumes. Eventually the company began making inflatable jets, tanks, and surface-to-air missile batteries as part of a Russian tactic known as maskirovka—warfare by deception.
a single inflatable Russian T-80 tank costs $16,000, can be built up from two duffel bags, and inflated in about five minutes. That means an entire battalion of 31 fake tanks costs just $496,000 and takes just two and a half hours to set up. To complete the ruse, the company even sells a device to make fake tank tracks in the dirt. After all, a tank that suddenly springs up in a grassy field is sort of suspicious.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... e-weapons/
Contrast that with a supposedly actually real US tank, for example an M1A2 SEP (USA)
The latest version of the Abrams is the M1A2 SEP. This model weighs over 69 tons thanks in large part to its advanced armor which consists of composites with depleted uranium and graphite costs $8.5 million to build
https://www.therichest.com/the-biggest/ ... tle-tanks/
And a battalion of real tanks (if my math correct)
8.500000 * 31 = $263,500,000
Certainly a big saving $496,000 as opposed to $263,500,000 and that's not accounting for transportation costs, I'd imagine 2 duffel bags a lot cheaper to ship all the way to Afghan than a 69 ton tank. Maybe they (PTB) realise that too and are employing the maskirovka tactic—warfare by deception only they cannot let on for national security reasons
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLLFhW1aKtA
The question is are they real military vehicles? or are the production team replicating technology that has been used in the past to deceive, for example WW11 and the ghost army.....
Ghost Army: The Inflatable Tanks That Fooled Hitler
The Allies saved thousands of lives by embracing the artistry of war.
By Megan Garber
'All of which went to serve the Allies' ultimate illusion: that their military force was bigger and more powerful than it actually was. (Part of the effectiveness of the Ghost Army came from the fact that it would employ real tanks and artillery pieces along with the fake ones, to make the dummies in the distance seem to blend in with the others.'
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... er/276137/
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwnMAet72Zc
Any other benefits of having fake tanks in Afghan besides deceiving the enemy?
Obviously cost.....
A Look at Russia's Army of Inflatable Weapons
Blow-up fighter jets and tanks can make a military seem bigger than it really is.
Rusbal, a Russian toy company started in 1993 by a hot air balloon enthusiast, originally made hot air balloons, inflatable children's play sets, and inflatable costumes. Eventually the company began making inflatable jets, tanks, and surface-to-air missile batteries as part of a Russian tactic known as maskirovka—warfare by deception.
a single inflatable Russian T-80 tank costs $16,000, can be built up from two duffel bags, and inflated in about five minutes. That means an entire battalion of 31 fake tanks costs just $496,000 and takes just two and a half hours to set up. To complete the ruse, the company even sells a device to make fake tank tracks in the dirt. After all, a tank that suddenly springs up in a grassy field is sort of suspicious.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... e-weapons/
Contrast that with a supposedly actually real US tank, for example an M1A2 SEP (USA)
The latest version of the Abrams is the M1A2 SEP. This model weighs over 69 tons thanks in large part to its advanced armor which consists of composites with depleted uranium and graphite costs $8.5 million to build
https://www.therichest.com/the-biggest/ ... tle-tanks/
And a battalion of real tanks (if my math correct)
8.500000 * 31 = $263,500,000
Certainly a big saving $496,000 as opposed to $263,500,000 and that's not accounting for transportation costs, I'd imagine 2 duffel bags a lot cheaper to ship all the way to Afghan than a 69 ton tank. Maybe they (PTB) realise that too and are employing the maskirovka tactic—warfare by deception only they cannot let on for national security reasons
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 7341
- Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
- Location: italy
- Contact:
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
Dear Flabbergasted, I can see your point - so perhaps the plane wasn't starting to lift in those frames after all.Flabbergasted wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 11:17 am
It looks to me like the entire image is tilted (or twisted) counterclockwise at this point. In the second picture below, the man´s head should be in a much lower position if the plane was actually tilting upwards.
Anyhow, my point was primarily about the ostensible blending of this random scene of running Afghan men with the military plane clip.
So allow me to highlight another clue in support of this. Notice that man in white dress entering from righthand side of the screen, running in the opposite direction of the crowd and 'smashing' (in the middle of the screen) into another guy. Well, here are my thoughts:
Why on Earth would he have made such a totally senseless and dangerous move - in this circumstance?
And wouldn't such a head-on crash be far more brutal than what we see?
To be sure, the crowd appears to run at a pretty good rate of speed. Imagine running head-on ...into THIS !
Last - but not least: those men apparently sitting or crawling (or even texting on their cellphone) on the bottom of the plane. Just 'priceless'...
The bottom line of my line of reasoning being: CGI (Computer-Generated Imagery) is by FAR the easiest, fastest and cheapest way to produce such "dramatic imagery" (of fictitious events) destined for televised mass deception.
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
The moment I saw the clip of the airplane I sensed there was something off. The background, the people so close, the numbers etc. Of course, after finding out almost everything is lied about, you're more inclined to spot a fake but at the same time there is the risk of tunnel vision. A friend of a friend is a active pilot in the US Airforce and I was curious on his opinion. I prefaced it to my friend by saying that I was wondering how these people could walk so close to running engines without covering their airs or being sucked in/blown away and included a link to the St. Maarten video.
Within the hour he replied; 'unfortunately 100 % real!'
I find it interesting that he used 100 % because it's impossible to be 100 % sure these days. The clip could even be real but with CGI inserted Afghans for example. Anyway, his quick and much to sure reaction showed me how easy it is to develop tunnel vision. I try to be aware of mine but I guess for many people it's not even something they think about.
Within the hour he replied; 'unfortunately 100 % real!'
I find it interesting that he used 100 % because it's impossible to be 100 % sure these days. The clip could even be real but with CGI inserted Afghans for example. Anyway, his quick and much to sure reaction showed me how easy it is to develop tunnel vision. I try to be aware of mine but I guess for many people it's not even something they think about.
Re: THE "LIBERATION OF AFGHANISTAN" -August 15, 2021
Yes it appears they are running at good speed , but check out the guy entering the scene at left foreground. Does his gait look like he is running fast?simonshack wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 10:26 am To be sure, the crowd appears to run at a pretty good rate of speed. Imagine running head-on ...into THIS !
No, his leg movement suggests he's about to come to a standstill yet he easily makes it to center screen despite the camera panning quite rapidly from left to right and backwards.
With a camera moving in the direction of the runners, this usually means keeping the runners at a certain spot on screen, but here the runners and the plane act as if the camera was at a fixed position and they are passing it by.
Everything considered and especially what Simon has pointed out above, this is 100% CGI
Another thing is the dust cloud behind the plane, there's clearly a dust cloud obscuring the horizon behind the plane yet below that dust there's a fairly stark contrast black line supposedly suggestive of a large crowd following behind the revving plane engines - it's too ridiculous.