If you think that 911 terror attacks were as the government and corporate embedded media has described them to us, you are ignorant.
Sure.. aircraft debris was found. But it was wrong paint, parts magically moved, fell out of covered scaffolding, debris was planted.
TO THIS DAY NOT A SINGLE SERIAL NUMBER was published.
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2007/08/planted-aircraft-debris-evidence.html
http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2008/08/911-holographic-projection-onto-drones.html
SEPTEMBER CLUES -- MUST SEE
download avi!
(not DVD or mpg mpeg vob mp4 mp3 quicktime mov qt divx xvid mkv -- no subtitles, not in german, italian, french, chinese, spanish)
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4358054
Simon's latest hi-quality version of September Clues is a MUST SEE!
http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2008/08/september-clues-911-was-snuff-movie-and.html
it has quite a few downloading already....
September Clues .. the latest version is fantastic. While there still are false claims (moving bridge, simon, do the math!).. nearly all information is well presented and tangible. It proves TV fakery conclusively (and that alone should cause the immediate onset of the revolution :-)
When Simon gets his head around hologrammes, September Clues "final cut" will be perfect IMHO.
Another argument in favour of dynamic holography.
There are a handful of "final approach" videos that show identical details on the UA175 (-illusion).
Just imagine the effort and that would have had to go into faking the picture of MANY videos to show the SAME nose-out, the same attitude, the same amputee wings, the same airframe distortions...
How would one actually produce the courchesne video and make the wing disappear at the same moment than the other amputee wing videos (hllava etc)
http://u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com/2008/01/luc-courchesne-911-ua-175-hologram.html
Though the computer-real-time generated hologram (if that is the correct name) cannot have been perfectly THE SAME for every viewing angle there were features that -- if "really" in the air -- had to be the same for all cameras. Just take the nose-out as the perfect example.
The missile (unexpectedly) WENT THROUGH the tower and the PROJECTION-SCREEN vapour was still dispersed, the laser (from a distant ABL? A non-visible wavelength laser from another skyscraper? {woolworth structure?}) was not switched off in time.
Many people saw a missile, that's a fact. Some people however saw some sort of airplane, or didn't they. Some cameras recorded a semi-realistic looking boeing. SOME DID NOT (e.g. Bob and Bri) because their viewing angle revealed the missile.
(see variable visibility hologram theory - VVHT
http://u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com/2007/10/911-hologram-theory.html )
Simon Shack's SeptClues tries to persuade that ALL footage must have been faked. While I agree that MUCH has. I believe that some footage is authentic and only the sound has been faked. The reason for faking the sound is obvious. A missile makes a tell-tale sound. Every military person in the world would know immediately.
So please, KT, Simon, WF .. please do not rule out hologrammes. Once you have agreed that they were possibly employed and re-evaluate your vast knowledge of 911 in this light you will agree that nothing excludes their use.
Or is there something? Do tell.
IMHO there even is a photo that shows the illuminating laser:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2007/08/david-thom-pictures.html
September Clues is a documentary film by independent audio/video researcher Simon Shack which was released on livevideo.com in June 2007. The film presents a conspiracy theory relating to September 11 2001. In the film it is suggested that no airplanes hit the World Trade Center towers, and that all footage shown on the television news broadcasts, as well as the 36 known amateur clips that appeared afterwards, have been forged to create the impression of planes hitting the buildings.
Part of the suggestion of the film is that missiles hit the World Trade Center, much in the same vein as other theories claim missiles hit the Pentagon and the Shanksville field. The main assertion is that the 5 major tv networks ran digitalized imagery ( or hybrid techniques including real images ) to insert computer-generated airplane animations. It is pointed out that all local tv stations were blacked out as the first tower (with TV antenna) was hit.
The film stresses that only simple, bi-dimensional silhouettes of planes were shown on the live broadcasts. It also points out that the 5 networks only showed a plane in motion yet not its actual impact in the tower - on live tv. All the other subsequent clips that emerged later were credited to a string of alleged authors, all linked to the newsmedia industry. These subsequently released videos, it is claimed, were designed to conclusively imprint in the public belief the idea that real airplanes hit the towers. However, SEPTEMBER CLUES demonstrates that all these videos betray significant discrepancies in speed, trajectories, pitch and yaw of the plane silhouettes.
Some clips show the plane clearly disappearing into the steel-frame tower without any apparent breakage of the wings or even the aft assembly. This is claimed to violate Newton's 3° law of motion as well as basic laws of structural interaction (aluminum vs steel) applied in mechanical engineering.
One WNYW/Fox shot features a helicopter camera's view of a plane silhouette appearing in the bottom right of the screen, disappearing into the tower and re-emerging on the other side ( with its undamaged front cockpit section ). The claim of the author is that no aluminum plane can impact on a steel-frame building, thrust through its entire length, and emerge with its nosecone intact. The ensuing conclusion is that the plane silhouette must have been a 2D computer generated image (CGI) which was edited into the shot without accounting for the backdrop scenery's sideway drift.
The film also shows a fly-over plane over Manhattan at the exact moment of impact, suggesting this could have been deployed as a decoy to induce many bystanders to report the presence of a real airliner.
By the end of the film, which mostly features official TV archive high-resolution footage, two screenshots from NBC and CBS are compared. Both show a panoramic view of Manhattan, with the Empire State building in the immediate foreground. In one, the Empire State is on the left of the image while in the other it is on the right. Yet, the relative distance and perspective of all buildings in both backgrounds, are identical. Inversely, in other shots, the New York Verrazzano bridge (in the background) appears to be moving by several miles in spite of only slight shifts of the camera's viewing angles. This is claimed to challenge the laws of perspective, supporting the underlying thesis that the live footage was actually a multiple-layer video composite.
In support of the latter claim, the film compares pairs of synchronized footage. On several occasions, helicopters appear to be flying over the towers on only one of the two broadcasts, suggesting the broadcasts were not truthful representations of the real-life events in Manhattan that day. Those helicopters, which in fact only appear to fly by at sustained speed from either side of the screen, are claimed to be CGI (computer generated imagery) overlays to make up for the digital masking needed to obscure/control the skyline to conceal what in reality hit the WTC.
The film, which is in 9 parts (A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H+epilogue), can be downloaded in high-quality in nine separate parts,in two 45min sections or in its single full 90min version : http://www.thesocialservice.it
It can be viewed in streaming quality here : http://www.youtube.com/user/simonshack http://www.livevideo.com/socialservice
The author expressly authorizes downloaders to print out CD's(for PC/MAC viewing) or DVD's for free, non-profit diffusion of his research.
The amazing disappearing wing... aka amputee wings. Holograms do that.
1 comment:
wow. aren't we dumb. this guy has figured it all out......
what a joke. i've heard more believable theories in a michael moore film.
Post a Comment