Haha! Well, let's be clear that nobody here is a media "expert" - just the opposite, which is why we are having such a hard time getting the word out.
But your points are all well taken. Fbenario, you may be right. Perhaps it's your sense of the American audience. It will probably be a Sunday morning when many church-goers are having their eggs and coffee or are at church already. It's a bohemian hour. Good audience, I think.
Plus, Simon has been writing and re-writing that stuff for some time, to bring the communication to a perfection of clarity, of sorts. So we should take advantage of his writings and just read it fairly verbatim.
And anyway, I didn't do all the research so it makes much more sense that I would say, "Hello, I am announcing to the world that September Clues has solved the 9/11 mystery. Here is what my friend Simon found, and which I confirmed through my own independent research into his findings." Or something, perhaps not in that alarmist vein.
I agree - no call-ins, unless Simon were to be able to call in for the last 15 minutes to the station and we could shoot the breeze. (But no swearing Simon! The American censors are
very particular on that point.) Just kidding, that would probably not be the best idea. But it is fun to think about. Simon and Hoi - LIVE ON AIR!
It's like Simon is played as the "researcher" and I am played as the "journalist" - though of course the roles are much more blurry, there is no need to clarify much more than that. Does that make more sense, fbenario?
Also, I noticed that your suggestions:
1 - Read the entire page The Power Of Imagery, the initial Main Article on septemberclues.org.
2 - Read the first two paragraphs from each of the next three articles listed - Deconstructing 9/11, Who Did 9/11?, Imagery Analyses (choosing one of the four main imagery groups to emphasize).
3 - End with The Memorial Scams page, with an in-depth discussion of the vicsim image-fakery techniques, focusing on Wainio.
... are sometimes extremely image-heavy. I don't want to overload our servers by having a thousand people checking our pages at once, ruining the radio show and a good opportunity to make oral points. It has to be basically non-image based. This is the problem. It is also a strength.
For instance, the first paragraphs of The Power of Imagery work without imagery:
Television is - and has always been - a Weapon of Mass Distraction.
The power of TV-imagery was the driving force behind the 9/11 deception.
Whenever a major news event is reported by the mainstream media, it will invariably be illustrated with photographs or videos in order to convey to the public some visual impressions of the event. Undeniably, the imagery connected with any given news story enhances our emotional relation to it. The way we relate to news imagery has an almost hypnotic effect on our psyche: we have come to consider the visuals of any given news story as proof of that news story’s authenticity. This is truly a ‘weak spot’ of our brains’ readiness for critical-thinking. Thus follows, unfortunately, that to challenge the authenticity of a catastrophic event shown on Live TV is way beyond what most people are willing to contemplate. However, the time has come for everyone to call television by its most appropriate, military-sounding name: "Weapon of Mass Distraction".
The 9/11 psyop relied foremostly on that ‘weak spot’ of ours. We all fell for the images we saw on TV at the time – understandably so, as the sheer horror of the proposed imagery generated a wall of outrage and fear – thick enough to discourage any critical review of it. In hindsight, we can only wonder why so few questioned the absurd TV coverage proposed by all the major networks.
... skipping the image reference ... as reworking as a description might be confusing and odd.
The 9/11 TV imagery (of the crucial morning events) was just a computer-animated, pre-fabricated movie. It featured for the most part what were meant to be “chopper shots” of the smoking towers - and very little else. The sum total of “Action Shots” (“Planecrash” and “Tower collapses”) amounted to little over 30secs of the entire morning's TV broadcasts ! Needless to say, much as the rest of the animation movie, none of these “Action Shots” depicted any sort of reality. Now, it may be difficult for many to understand why the 9/11 plotters needed to fake even the tower collapses; yet this was undoubtedly the most crucial aspect of the entire operation - and needs to be fully understood in its plain logic: The unprecedented WTC demolition job was far too risky an affair to be shown on LIVE TV - (or to let any amateur cameraman capture it on film). The 9/11 conspirators had no intention whatsoever to offer such a "pyrotechnical" spectacle to world scrutiny - just imagine how unspeakably foolish this would have been. Thus, in all probability, the oldest trick in the manuals of covert military ops was used: smokescreens. More recent technology deactivated temporarily all cameras within sight of the area. In reality, the towers were most likely enveloped in thick smoke (military obscurants) as they collapsed - and no real footage exists of that brief event. Thankfully - for all normal people of this world - the 9/11 planners hired a poorly skilled animation crew : in their efforts to simulate reality, their crass 'artistry' and countless mistakes provide ample and repeatable proof of the trickery - forever engraved in the TV archives.
... then the bottom of the page ...
WHY FAKE THE NEWS BROADCASTS ? The 9/11 TV broadcasts were designed to ‘sell’ a fictitious terror attack to the world– by replacing the real-life events of the day (the WTC demolitions) with fake imagery. The official story was quite surreal - as were the TV images of the day and the preposterous tale of 19 kids roundly outfoxing the US Air Defense. It is essential to judge with one's own eyes the broadcasts actually aired by ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC and CNN.
WHAT ABOUT THE "AMATEUR" VIDEOS ? All the other videos (endlessly replayed on TV) were released only later. They have all been extensively analyzed by scores of video analysts; each and every video snippet of "amateur imagery" has been methodically dissected and compared - and empirically proved to be nothing else than computer-generated fabrications.
HOW WERE PRIVATE VIDEOS IMPEDED ? In order for the 9/11 TV-deception to succeed, full visual control of the Manhattan area had to be in place. The existence of EMP/HERF technology is undisputable: only the hypothesis of it being used on 9/11 remains unverifiable. It is, however, a reasonable postulation supported by a series of electronic blackouts which occurred in NYC that morning. In any event, the logic of using EMP/HERF holds water and effectively explains the ruse with disarming simplicity: NO private photography of the real-life events was allowed: thus, the imagery aired by the TV networks feared no comparison and was passed off as reality.
This will actually take some time to read, since "radio announcement voice" is slower and pronounces things clearly. It will take time to read this. Perhaps, I can then follow with:
WHO?
No single study of the 9/11 lie can have the pretense to pinpoint each and every accomplice of such a gigantic scam. Nevertheless, the evidence presented in this research establishes beyond any reasonable doubt the pro-active complicity of the news industry - to an extent previously considered unthinkable. The realization that the news media would play along with that [...] gang of megalomaniacs improperly called "the world elite" takes many people by surprise. Some will object: “Wait a minute, wasn’t journalism's original duty precisely that of checking each and every move of politicians and governing bodies?” In principle, yes. Yet, today, anyone still believing this old fairy tale must be - with no offense intended - daydreaming persons of the very naïve kind. Whatever idealism may have existed in journalism’s heydays has slumped into blind subservience to the rogue warmongers of this world.
and
WHY?
Why 9/11? Remarkably, there are still people wondering what motivations could possibly be behind the largest embezzlement scheme in world history. So, here are a few points to get the ‘why’ question out of the way: Do we all remember that 9/11 started two still ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Who profits from them? The invaders or the invaded? Who profits from the reconstruction contracts? Who cashed-in on the special WTC buildings' terrorist-insurance? Who capitalized on the massive viewer-ratings of the spectacular and longlasting TV coverage of the event? Who speculated and scored on mysterious put options placed prior to 9/11? Who remembers the post 9/11 billion-dollar federal bailouts which saved many airlines from bankruptcy? And how many recall Donald Rumsfeld's announcement - on Sept.10 2001 - that $2.3 trillion worth of Pentagon transactions were unaccounted for? The list goes on and on. By now, it should be clear to anyone that 9/11 was a big bonanza for everyone involved - just a grand, sick, money-making machine.
Fortunately, a little solace may be found in the latest findings of this research : it is gradually emerging (see the Vicsim Report) that the list of 9/11 victims (approx. 2,928) is a mostly forged database of fictitious identities and forged/morphed photographs. The 9/11 perpetrators are of course close chums with the bankers who hired space in the WTC towers - a 'genocide' of their own employees never was an envisaged proposition. Another comforting aspect of this research is that the relentlessly-publicized "War on Terror" is a hoax. All we have to do is clean up our own act - for our own good. No world-threatening 'foreign terror-cells' exist - the existing ones have no potential whatsoever to threaten our "Western way of life". The privileged Western individuals we have allowed to govern our lives are dangerous - but they are very few and highly vulnerable. Their plan to make the "War on Terror" a constant torment of our lives has now failed.
...and...
HOW MANY WERE INVOLVED?
How many? Presumably just as many as were needed. Since the TV images would have effectively deceived most unwitting, low-ranking operatives of the scheme, the numbers of those fully ‘in the know’ would not need to be staggering. Having said this, the vast resources available to this multi-billion dollar operation would have attracted – and allowed for - a substantial number of participants (briefed on a strict need-to-know basis). Any risks of leaks and whistleblowing would be securely controlled with cold cash and personal threats. Historically, such methods have been routinely employed by far smaller crime rings: In Sicily, for instance, thousands of people in any given Mafia-infested town know exactly where and who the Mafia-bosses are – yet all mouths are kept nicely shut. This is plain, common knowledge.
... this is already a mouthful and I can't seem to read it any faster than 8 to 10 minutes with it still making much sense. Including intro and segue info, this could be the first 15 minute segment. I will of course revise this, and please forgive me if MY posts - for this topic alone - take up a great deal of space, as I feel this wording that could potentially go on air is important.