9/11 SIMCITY

It has taken less than 10 years to pry open the can of worms enshrouding the pathetic 9/11 scam. The central role of the major newsmedia corporations to pull off this sordid "terror" simulation has now been comprehensively exposed. Before joining this forum, please get familiar with the research at: http://www.septemberclues.info
Post Reply
Gary-Welz
Banned
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:21 am

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by Gary-Welz » Wed May 04, 2011 6:43 pm

-Building "Z" seem to be missing in the first 3 pictures.
-Builiding "Y" seems to be missing the pyramid like shape on the left in picture 4. (I hope you understand what I mean by that :blink: )

Plus ofcourse the distance between "Z" and "Y" but you already highlighted that.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Wed May 04, 2011 8:02 pm

Good eyes, Gary!

Now, tell me:

Image

And to those who think I have manipulated these frames myself, here are the sources of these videos:

FRAME2: "The Falling Man" (a 9/11 propaganda video to be found on Youtube)
FRAME3: The official Swedish TV archives of 9/11 (as retrieved directly from Swedish TV by our forum member 'Tufa')

******************************************************************************************************************************************************
I'd say we could call it a day: the 9/11 imagery was computer-generated. Full stop. (hmm, some of you might have sensed this long ago! :P )

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Tue May 17, 2011 7:16 pm

*

PENTAGON LAYERS OF DECEPTION

The 9/11 simcity imagery wasn't just confined to Manhattan - it extended all the way to D.C. ! Now please tell me, folks:

Image

AND WHAT ABOUT THIS?
Image

AND THIS? (what on Earth is this firefighter UP TO, anyway??? Watering the Pentagon lawn? ) :huh:
Image

AND THIS?( Did a stray plane part set this office on fire (fire???) - hundreds of yards away from the "impact hole"?
Image

Hundreds of yards? HELL, YES !!
Image

*************************************************************************************************************************************************
FIND THE ERRORS:
Aaand now, here's the latest "Find the Errors" social game - as brought to you by September Clues.
I have numbered from 1 to 7 the lampposts in this wide view of the burning Pentagon:
Image
(Suggestion: Open the above wide view in another window, and place it alongside this one.)

Sit down with family & friends and try to find/match the lampposts in each of the A-B-C-D-E-F-G views below. Always look out for the size/height of the lampposts, the big freeway ROADSIGN and its position in relation to the ANGLE of the collapsed Pentagon façade. Have fun!
Image

And 2 more:
Image
Image

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Wed May 18, 2011 8:25 am

*

UNDERSTANDING THE TV FAKERY


Most people will probably agree that 'Hollywood' studios can (and have been able for years) to manufacture virtually any sort of realistic-looking imagery; yet, the problems most have with this - and understandably so - are:

1- How can such visual trickery be used for a real world event? Is it pre-recorded? Is it manufactured in real time?

2- What about the on-site witnesses? Won't they eventually expose any inconsistencies with what they later see on TV?

Image

Let's take the Pentagon event as an example and see how it could be done: if you are going to stage a terror attack there (on an empty section of the building 'under renovation') you will place plenty of smoke bombs there, so that from a distance, people will see smoke billowing from the Pentagon (which is - need I say? - a military area, so controlling its immediate surroundings should not be much of a problem.) You'll have a bunch of actors/USA-today journos/military personnel ready to 'witness' that they saw an American Airlines plane skydiving at speed into the Pentagon wall.

You may have a dedicated camera filming ONLY the section of the façade which you are to bring down. This, in order to capture on film the real façade collapse - to be integrated into readymade/pre-recorded foreground layers (which you can rotate at will to convey the impression of several cameras filming the event). Extra smoke can be added for drama, even enveloping the entire Pentagon, if you wish. Note: we are talking now only about the shots to be aired ON LIVE TV: these composited images with foreground layers will not include, for instance, the real morning traffic on the Interstate 395 (or route 27) passing in front of the Pentagon. You will deal with that later, showing stationary cars with windshields 'smashed by lamp posts knocked down by the airliner'... In reality, you will divert the traffic slightly BEFORE the event - but officially, you will say it was diverted just AFTER the event. Ok, so now is the time to air the 'money shot' on LIVE TV: the Pentagon façade collapsing!

Here's the first shot you will offer to the TV audience (of course, you don't want to take any chances and show the entire collapse LIVE - in case something goes horribly wrong !!):

Image

Ok, it didn't look too bad (even though that cut was pretty ridiculous...). You have now checked that your demolition job went as planned, and you may safely send the full sequence of it (but still with some controlled foreground imagery - again, for safety's sake):

Image

That'll do fine. No TV viewers will notice the sheer inanity of this shot anyway (cameraman starting with a close-up and zooming away JUST as the Pentagon façade collapses - and foreground-layered people walking by without a hint of a human reaction to the collapse!) : in the chaos of the day, everyone will be much too shocked to even connect their brains and senses !

So, by using a combination of pre-recorded and live imagery (of the actual façade collapse) we have nicely pulled off the trickery on LIVE TV. We can now send the footage with (either pre-recorded or live interviews) all our phony, lying witnesses - which will all happily share a slice of our 2.3 trillion dollar black-operation cheesecake... Well done, folks - great job !

Boris Lozac
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 19, 2011 9:10 pm

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by Boris Lozac » Fri May 20, 2011 1:09 am

Ok guys you lost me like in the CGI thread. Can someone in a simple matter explain then what happened. People on the streets running away etc - fake, buildings falling down - fake. Then WHAT happened there, was the whole NYC emptied and all the residents payed in order to keep quiet? You are loosing youre credibility big time with all this. What exactly happened with the buildings then according to you, where did they go?

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Fri May 20, 2011 1:28 am

Boris Lozac wrote:Ok guys you lost me like in the CGI thread. Can someone in a simple matter explain then what happened. People on the streets running away etc - fake, buildings falling down - fake. Then WHAT happened there, was the whole NYC emptied and all the residents payed in order to keep quiet? :D You are loosing youre credibility big time with all this. What exactly happened with the buildings then according to you, where did they go? :blink:
The buildings were destroyed safely. We've already gone over this. About a million times. Since you weren't paying attention, you've lost any credibility you may have had just by joining the forum to ask this question. Bye.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Fri May 20, 2011 8:58 am

Boris Lozac wrote:Ok guys you lost me like in the CGI thread.
(...)
You are loosing youre credibility big time with all this.
Well put, Boris. In fact, our goal is to loosen up the stuck brains of this world - big time.

Or perhaps you meant to say that "FOX TV is gaining cred by the day ?"... :lol: :lol: :lol:

Image

SmokingGunII
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by SmokingGunII » Sat May 21, 2011 7:07 pm

Boris. Of cousre not, This is mere speculation. What actually happened was that a man with a long beard and a dodgy CRT TV co-ordinated a most audacious plan consisting of 19 tiny arabs to hijack 4 commercial aircraft manned by ex-military pilots and fly them, unchallenged, into two of the world's tallest buildings, the most guarded building in the world and a scrapyard in some backwater in Pennslvannyia.

I would like to apologise on behalf of this forum for being so dumb. B)

luminous1
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:20 pm

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by luminous1 » Fri Jun 03, 2011 3:04 pm

My god i'm new to this forum and i feel like i just fell into the Matrix.

A non-fiction Matrix. Simon thank you my eyes are now wide open.

The only drawback is the ridicule i will have to endure in the future.

Sooo many will not believe the real truth.

PLEASE$ keep this forum active.

Thank you.
Luminous1....

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:41 am

*
4 "AMATEUR" WTC-VIEWS

QUESTION:
Could it be that these "amateur videos" - allegedly captured by people from buildings in the proximity of the WTC, are nothing but a series of digital animation templates - crafted with "Hollywood-grade" technology? As I shall now demonstrate, this was most likely the case.

The so-called "Bob & Bri" video (released only in 2006 -i.e. all of 5 years later!) is a well-known clip to start with. Those familiar with it will remember that the "Bob & Bri" video features a clear cut JUST as the "hjacked airliner" would have supposedly smashed into the WTC... This was a smart move by the video forgers, as it provided a perfect red herring for the "conspiracy crowd" to latch on to: this "suspicious cut" was most likely purposely made in order to buttress the (all-important) notion that these were authentic images shot by real eyewitnesses. Besides, it removed the need for them to also digitally animate the "incoming airliner" - something that (if not perfectly composited) might have looked overly artificial / fake - not that any of the available "close-up 9/11 eyewitness imagery" looks legit in any way - what with its many bizarre characteristics highlighted over the years by our collective research here at Cluesforum.

Here we compare the main WTC-view in the "Bob & Bri" video with another WTC-view aired on the History Channel:

Image Version 1 & view 2

Here is yet another WTC-view - also aired on a History Channel doucumentary ("102 Minutes that Changed America")
ImageVersion 3

And here we have yet another WTC-view, this time from Steven Rosenbaum's "Camera Planet Archive"...
Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=IT&v=4L90AfKYu2U
Image Version 4

And here's "the icing on the cake" - courtesy of the New York Times...

Image

According to the New York Times, the image at left is by Patricia Mc Donough, "a pro-photographer with a fisheye lens who made this picture from her apartment's living room within minutes of the first airliner's impact." Whereas the image at right is extracted from a video credited to one "Peter Strid" - who allegedly captured the "planecrash" ... while filming from the ground / at street level !... :rolleyes:

Anyone with a basic understanding of modern CGI technology will realize that all the above tower shots are nothing else than an assembly line of a single 'matrix' - just slightly rotated, animated and colored at leisure.

It is up for everyone to believe in the purported authentic nature of any/or all of the above "WTC shots". Are all of them just coincidentally so very similar?
Far more likely, these images were crafted with Hollywood techniques readily available in 2001 - just think of the movies "Independence Day" (1996) and "Armageddon" (1998): viewtopic.php?p=2399146#p2399146

************************************************************************************************************************************************
Tip: World Trade Center 7 is depicted as a pale/greyish building in all 4 shots. In fact, so it is in virtually ALL the available imagery of September 11 2001. This fact alone is, of course, absurd:

Big picture: Extracted from a 9/11 video_________________________Small picture: A pre-9/11 photo
Image

To conclude : is it plausible that most or ALL of the available 9/11 imagery was crafted in a studio? Does such technology exist?

Image

UPDATE (2014): So now you will ask: "what about REAL bystanders' photos and videos of that morning? Did no one film / shoot anything at all?"
Yes, of course: there must exist some legit images of 9/11 - but they only show the WTC area (from afar) enveloped in thick smoke:

THE 9/11 SMOKESCREEN: viewtopic.php?p=2391828#p2391828

luminous1
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:20 pm

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by luminous1 » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:36 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/0 ... 32268.html


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w465MHsvYpg

Is this "sim city" your thoughts thanks.

luminous1
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:20 pm

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by luminous1 » Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:15 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzJf3SBYKlY
Is 'nt this the infamous fireman in the Naudet video checking for gas. Check it out its very early on in the vid.

luminous1
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:20 pm

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by luminous1 » Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:28 pm

After watching this video, I believe Simon is wrong. Sorry.

proloft
Member
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:58 pm
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by proloft » Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:43 am

Wrong about what, newbie?

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2252
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by fbenario » Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:56 am

luminous1 wrote:After watching this video, I believe Simon is wrong. Sorry.
You've already been warned once. Vague skepticism just wastes everyone's time. If you think Simon wrong on anything at all, PROVE IT.

Otherwise go away.

Post Reply