CGI collapse footage

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

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby simonshack on February 5th, 2016, 5:45 am

*

Dear Cluesforum members and readers,

Yes, we have long demonstrated - beyond reasonable doubt & in countless methods & manners - that the entire pool of extant 9/11 imagery is entirely phony and that the 9/11 hoax / "magic trick" was pulled off primarily thanks to the prefabricated "Made-for-TV-Hollywood-movie" (sold to this world's population) as "real / authentic news broadcasts". However, it appears that the debate is still raging (around the "truther interwebs"), what with many folks having (quite understandable) problems understanding HOW exactly this was achieved. Most people try to make sense out of the imagery which, itself, makes no sense at all - and that's why we see very little progress in waking up our fellow earthlings to the Grand 9/11 Hoax.

Now, please know that I was myself extremely skeptical of - and even irritated by - the early imagery analyses making the rounds on the internets regarding the WTC collapses. I thought they were just silly. Especially those which claimed that "evil faces had been drawn in the smokeplumes". I reasoned that (as most rational people would 'reason'): with enough fantasy, your mind can make out ANY pattern you like within a given / random smokeplume - much like anyone can "see" elephant-shapes (or whatnot) in cloud formations and such. Well, knowing what I know now - as to the psychopathic nature of the Nutwork ("our ruling class") I'm not so sure anymore about that. Here's something "my mind imagined" while looking again at a fairly high-resolution animation (released only in 2010) of the "WTC1 collapse"- Please understand that all I have done here ("photoshopping-wise") is to slightly alter / or 'pinkify' the color levels of some pixels contained in these frames - and little else. I will ask you all to make your minds up for yourselves - as to the possible (or not) 'random nature' of this drifting "WTC1 smokeplume":

Image
source: https://youtu.be/Jil7sDgVEUU?t=479

Image
As you can see, the 'laughing rabbi' makes his appearance for the Grand Finale of 9/11's morning events - i.e. the very last few seconds of the WTC1 collapse - as shown on TV (and in later "HD" imagery released... in 2010!). I can almost hear him snigger as he hums "the joo-oke's on you-hooo!"

You are quite free to believe that I have gone mad - and that I'm just "seeing things" - due to my 'overly-vivid, artistic imagination'. It really is up to YOU. But if I ever meet you face-to-face, you'll have to explain to me WHY you think that - for instance - those 'teeth, noses and eyes' we can see in the above "WTC1 smokeplume" are just a matter of coincidental happenstance.

From time to time I enjoy sitting down with friends and review the old 9/11 imagery - as aired on TV - (and as successively uploaded on the internets by supposed "amateur videomakers / photographers"). I can assure you that it makes for some quite entertaining evenings - and we laugh a lot at the most dreadful / hilarious blunders and absurdities contained within the 9/11 media reports and assorted imagery. Now, being only one (normal) guy - graced with a limited amount of time on this earth - I cannot possibly keep posting / illustrating / explaining ALL of the innumerable clues which point to the fact that the 9/11 broadcasts were ALL fake - and were just part of what can only be called a "prefabricated, Hollywood-grade special fx movie". Whoever cannot see this by now (in 2016), simply hasn't seriously looked into it (but of course, that's only my humble, personal opinion. Uh, ok - it's as humble as it gets, given my years of dedication to the 'cause'!).

Having said that, I can still comprehend and 'sympathize' with persons who find it hard to wrap their heads around this. Some will need "scientific proof" - and others will need all sorts of other proof. Yet, I think we've pretty much covered all areas of proof & evidence here on this forum - in the seven years of its existence. I'm quite aware that the sheer amount of research material posted at Cluesforum is a daunting affair for anyone to sift through - but, if you think about it, that is also true for ANY encyclopedia of any kind !

Since today is my birthday - and I'm in a merry and feasty mood - I feel compelled to share with everyone another two findings of mine highlighting the fact that NONE of the existing imagery of the WTC tower collapses is real - and that ALL TV broadcasts of September 11 2001 were fake (i.e. created in a studio). Methinks you'll enjoy this - if you're a REAL person, that is! ^_^


THE MICHELLE CHARLESWORTH 9/11 ABC CLIP
Image
http://www.skincancer.org/true-stories/ ... kiest-year (yep, Michelle is promoting 'cancer research'...) :rolleyes:


Let's start with the (in)famous ABC newsclip featuring Michelle Charlesworth "reporting from Westside Highway".

Please watch this short ABC clip featuring Michelle Charlesworth:
https://youtu.be/a90mn-k-54A?t=273

Note that: Michelle is meant to be standing there on Westside Highway at around 9:55 am - on September 11. 2001. She says she's been there since 30 minutes (just hanging around?). She also says that "about 45 minutes ago the city shut down the southbound lanes of Westside Highway, so that emergency crews only, firetrucks, NYPD trucks, could get down here".

At 5:10 into the clip, she also says that "people have been walking around here with their hands over their mouths [WHA-A-ATT? WHY SO? BECAUSE OF THAT SMOKE GUSHING OUT OF THE TOP FLOORS OF THE WTC???] - and screaming each other [sic] to try and borrow their cellphones, but there's no way to get away from here - because the bridges and tunnels have been closed... and they've been asking me whether or not the Hudson... or whether there was any way to get out of the city... and of course there's some concern as to what could be IN the smoke... that's the question most people have been asking me...WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE IN THE SMOKE? "... etc etc.

Michelle's utterly senseless script is patently absurd - all by itself. Now, let's have a look at "Michelle's 9/11 imagery".

Michelle is obviously standing in a studio (as her audio's room-reverb / ambient quality indicates) in front of a 'greenscreen' projecting some pre-recorded Westside Highway imagery (with smoking WTC in the background). Now, you may ask - HOW can this be proved, scientifically?

Here's how: at some stage in Michelle's clip, two young guys walk by. Their shadows are far longer than themselves (by 60%):

Image

The sun never lies. As it is (scientific fact!), on any September 11 morning (at 9:55am) in New York, the sun angle is at ca. 45°of elevation - meaning that ANY shadow of ANY object should only be as long / tall / large as the object itself. Please verify this for yourself. And YES, this is firm, scientific proof of the fakeness of the 9/11 broadcasts. Don't let the word 'scientific' put you off: REAL science - by REAL folks - is your friend. The sun is also your friend - and it NEVER lies.

Image



***********************************


MIKE HEATH - the "heroic medic who survived the WTC1 collapse - diving behind a car"

Image

We then have the ridiculous video-tale featuring one "Mike Heath" - an alleged paramedic (and "amateur videographer") who supposedly filmed the WTC1 collapse at VERY close range - while calmly 'rationalizing' about his dire situation (as heard in 'his' video's audio track):

"I hope I'll live. I hope I'll live."

You really need to watch this short "MIKE HEATH" video to experience the sheer absurdity / silliness of it all :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8mz09VQQ2M

To be sure, "Mike Heath" is supposed to be diving behind that car approximately 28secs after the start of the WTC1 collapse.
Image

The thing is: "Mark Heath's" story is flatly contradicted by another alleged amateur 9/11 video, credited to one "Jim Kosior". You can view it (if you can bear watching another so-called 'crisis actor') here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFie7O02BWk

Now, here's the 'problem' : as WTC1 is seen collapsing in the KOSIOR video, we can clearly see the monstrous smokeplume completely engulfing - WITHIN 18 SECONDS - the location (below the Verizon building) where "Mark Heath" was supposed to be filming his own video:
Image

If you grasp the points I've been making here - I'll be glad. If you don't, I won't worry too much. I'm getting used to it.

It should be evident (to anyone TRULY AND HONESTLY pursuing the truth of 9/11) that the video-tales of Mark Heath, Jim Kosior and Michelle Charlesworth are pure bullshit. Now, I don't know if "pure bullshit" is a proper English expression - but I hope that you get my drift. I will now solemnly appeal to my freedom of speech to call anyone defending the 9/11 imagery (as being true and legit) by the name of 'bullshitters'.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby pov603 on February 5th, 2016, 10:25 am

Many happy returns Simon!
Thanks for rekindling the absurdities of it all!
pov603
Member
 
Posts: 731
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:02 pm

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby Farcevalue on February 5th, 2016, 4:17 pm

Grattis på födelsedagen, Herr Shack!

Cent anni!
Farcevalue
Member
 
Posts: 380
Joined: August 27th, 2011, 12:21 pm

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby Critical Mass on February 5th, 2016, 5:45 pm

"The sun never lies"

Let me be the first to predict the next DBA strategy...

"The sights, the sounds, the smells of the tewwowist attack of 9/11 were all real however the sun was going into a square Earth transition phase due to 'spectral thermal intermodulation' technology provided by the uber-empathic Space Lizards of Sigma Draco as predicted in the Mayan apocalypso tablets..."

... blah, blah, blah.


Excellent work as usual Simon... as for "Bullshit" it may be a more appropriate term than one might imagine.

As to earlier etymology the Oxford English Dictionary cites bull with the meaning "trivial, insincere, untruthful talk or writing, nonsense". It describes this usage as being of unknown origin, but notes that in Old French, the word could mean "boul, boule, bole fraud, deceit, trickery
Mod. Icel bull 'nonsense'
ME bull BUL 'falsehood', and BULL verb, to befool, mock, cheat."[4]
Critical Mass
Member
 
Posts: 544
Joined: July 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby abirato on February 5th, 2016, 6:13 pm

Since today is my birthday - and I'm in a merry and feasty mood - I feel compelled to share with everyone another two findings of mine highlighting the fact that NONE of the existing imagery of the WTC tower collapses is real - and that ALL TV broadcasts of September 11 2001 were fake (i.e. created in a studio). Methinks you'll enjoy this - if you're a REAL person, that is! ^_^


Thanks for all the hard work you've done - and of course, many happy returns on your birthday. Those rabbis turn up in the strangest of places.
abirato
Member
 
Posts: 59
Joined: August 10th, 2012, 1:49 am

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby brianv on February 5th, 2016, 6:31 pm

Simon, in your previous posting on the matter you asked "which of these resemble photo realistic images" - well my answer was "neither".
And again here. Totally unrealistic cartoon-ish and washed out, flat, badly coloured, incorrectly lit, stretched images purporting to be footage taken by a hi-quality camera. It's anything but. Those "shadows" actually look drawn by hand. Frankenstein footage, assembled by hand.
Last edited by brianv on February 5th, 2016, 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3914
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby simonshack on February 5th, 2016, 8:13 pm

Dearest pov603, Farcevalue, CM, Abirato ...

Thanks so much for your well-wishing and kind words - and yes, Farcevalue, "cent'anni" is my objective! Hopefullly by age 98/ 99 I'll be able to witness some tangible, 'world-enhancing' effects of our combined, tireless efforts here on this forum ! :P

Dear Brianv, to be precise, in my "Armageddon movie-versus-9/11 movie" comparison, I didn't actually ask "which of these resemble photo realistic images?". I only asked which one of the two Manhattan views looks MORE photo-realistic than the other. My personal opinion is that whoever was in charge of the Armagedoon movie's CGI dept. - was a far better artist than whoever managed the CGI dept. for the 9/11 movie. That's all.

Off to a tiny trattoria up in the Roman hills now with some friends - for some delicious home-made lasagna! :) (happy!)

Lots of luv to all.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby brianv on February 5th, 2016, 8:17 pm

simonshack wrote:Dearest pov603, Farcevalue, CM, Abirato ...

Thanks so much for your well-wishing and kind words - and yes, Farcevalue, "cent'anni" is my objective! Hopefullly by age 98/ 99 I'll be able to witness some tangible, 'world-enhancing' effects of our combined, tireless efforts here on this forum ! :P

Dear Brianv, to be precise, in my "Armageddon movie-versus 9/11 movie" comparison, I didn't actually ask "which of these resemble photo realistic images?". I only asked which one of the two Manhattan views looks MORE photo-realistic than the other. My personal opinion is that whoever was in charge of the Armagedoon movie's CGI dept. - was a far better artist than whoever managed the CGI dept. for the 9/11 movie. That's all.

Off to a tiny trattoria up in the Roman hills now with some friends - for some delicious home-made lasagna! :) (happy!)

Lots of luv to all.


I stand corrected. But lest there be any misunderstanding my gripe is with the alleged "footage" and "images" and not your comments birthday boy!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3914
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby fbenario on February 6th, 2016, 2:01 am

simonshack wrote:nd yes, Farcevalue, "cent'anni" is my objective! Hopefullly by age 98/ 99 I'll be able to witness some tangible, 'world-enhancing' effects of our combined, tireless efforts here on this forum !

And we will, at that time, be one of the longest-lived forums/blogs on the entire internet ... and I hope I'm still around in 48 years!

Happy Birthday, Simon.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2179
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby simonshack on February 6th, 2016, 5:18 am

fbenario wrote:And we will, at that time, be one of the longest-lived forums/blogs on the entire internet ... and I hope I'm still around in 48 years!
Happy Birthday, Simon.


That's right, Fbenario: the longest-lived - and hopefully the longest-loved. I strongly believe that this forum is all about love and TLC (Tender Loving Care) towards every single individual graced with life on this awesome / absolutely wonderful world of ours.

All we need to do is some gardening chores - i.e. to weed out the bad crops and seeds which currently spoil this planet's perfection.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby Kham on February 6th, 2016, 8:28 am

To my friend, Simon Shack,

Happy birthday to you! I wish I could be there with you.

I believe that hard work and success should be recognized so thank you Simon Shack for September Clues. Thank you because September Clues was the tipping point on account of the overwhelming evidence you provided that showed the days events on September 11 2001 was in reality, a filmed-in-advance movie which first aired on September 11, 2001. Aha! Yes!!! A movie, just a movie! One can simulate all sorts of ridiculous events in a movie. That was the only thing that fit all the different facts I had been collecting, and I had been collecting facts for a long time. Thank you Simon!

9/11 was just a friggin movie, it's ridiculous when you think about it and so damn arrogant to presume that in addition to New Yorker's, most of the world would believe in the official/alternative movie series. They have fallen for the 9/11 world wide franchise. Perhaps we could explore the why's of why people believed such a farcical movie in the first place, is there already a thread for that?

Blessings and Happiness to you and your family,

K
Kham
Member
 
Posts: 72
Joined: June 25th, 2015, 10:30 am

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby simonshack on February 22nd, 2016, 6:25 pm

*

"HERE'S HOW WE DID IT!"

It never ceases to amaze me how arrogantly & shamelessly the 9/11 movie-for-TV creators keep releasing further evidence to the fact that the ENTIRE events aired on TV (including the very Manhattan skyline scenery) were a prefabricated digital construct - as I correctly theorized way back in 2007 / 2008 in my September Clues documentary (see relevant SC section dealing with geo-referenced imagery here ).

Here's an animated gif of a short film sequence I happened to bump into today - extracted from an umpteenth 9/11 "truther" documentary I'd never seen before ("From Dust Til' Dawn"), uploaded in February 2015 by one Anteye La Vey. As you can see, the clip switches from alleged "real 9/11 imagery of the WTC collapse" - to a fully digital / autocad-type Manhattan '3d' model - and back again to purported "real imagery of 9/11" (featuring Judy Wood's 'toasted / burning cars') :

Image
source: https://youtu.be/OXVeaZXUnZo?t=3354
A casual viewer will probably surmise that some crafty "9/11 truther" went to the trouble of making this slickly composited clip for illustrative purposes... I say : no, the 9/11 movie creators are actually telling us: "HERE'S HOW WE DID IT".

"From Dust Til' Dawn" basically supports and rehashes the half-baked Ace Baker theories - and Judy Wood's "über-baked" thesis (what with her 'thousands of mysteriously roasted cars' and the "towers' dustification"...). We all know here on this forum that Baker and Wood are 'high-end' gatekeeping agents tasked with muddying the waters / poisoning the well of our longstanding 9/11 research which - by now - has firmly established the massive / pervasive use of 'Hollywood-grade' techniques to sell the 9/11 hoax to the world. Now, I have no reason to suspect that this Anteye La Vey is another such military-funded cointelpro spook - so I have kindly invited him to Cluesforum to read this present post of mine. Here's an exchange between Anteye La Vey and one of his YT viewers ("Silver Bull") who justly writes :

Silver Bull wrote:"Have you played a new video game recently? They can make anything they want look real using a computer and a image of the towers. It's that simple."


Anteye La Vey wrote:I wasn't arguing the fake planes though, but your statement that the "collapse" itself was CGI. I thought I made that clear but my mistake if I didn't. And sure, they can make things look pretty fucking real but rarely am I fooled by a movie or a videogame that what I'm looking at is ACTUALLY real when it isn't. It's one thing to make convincing CGI, it would be completely another thing for that destruction of the WTC to be CGI ... I just don't buy that. It doesn't strike me as realistic and I completely buy that there were no real planes on 9/11. But for THAT particular claim I'd need a little more than your conjecture. 


Dear Anteye, I suggest you spend some time patiently perusing the many pages of this "CGI COLLAPSE FOOTAGE" thread - which has by now exposed in every imaginable manner and beyond reasonable doubt - that ALL of the existing WTC collapse 'footage' was created in a studio. The Ace Baker clown (who once idiotically faked his suicide live on Jim Fetzer's radio show) was rolled out soon after my first 2007-release of September Clues and was assigned the damage-control task of 'downplaying' the use of CGI in the 9/11 imagery - contending that ONLY the planes were inserted over REAL Manhattan imagery, thus leading to the silly 'hologram' theory clearly meant to absolve / white-wash the TV Networks which, under this theory, would have captured REAL footage of the day - and been themselves duped by the supposed 'holograms'. Similarly, Judy Wood's theories - entirely based on the absurd / science-fiction imagery of the 'pyroclastic, top-down WTC collapses', clearly seeks to legitimate the extant 9/11 imagery and to make some sort of 'scientific sense' out of it.

To orientate yourself around this forum and its vast 9/11 research material, here's our TOUR GUIDE. I hope you will check it out:
"TOUR GUIDE" to the September Clues research : viewtopic.php?f=17&t=477
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby Apache on February 23rd, 2016, 8:36 am

simonshack wrote:'toasted / burning cars'


There is a particular testimony in the Task Force Interviews, from a participant on 9/11, that he set fire to his own vehicle. Sometimes the simplest explanations are the best explanations. ;)
Apache
Member
 
Posts: 168
Joined: October 22nd, 2015, 12:02 pm

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby simonshack on March 8th, 2016, 6:22 pm

*

YET MORE "NEVER-BEFORE-SEEN-IMAGERY OF 9/11" ...
Reinhard Karger was there! Shooting daily pictures of the unfolding 9/11 drama from the deck of brother's yacht!

I remember - when over ten years ago now (yet 4 or 5 years after "The Event that Changed Our World") I started researching 9/11 - the extreme & absurd difficulty in finding pictures which weren't credited to some media outlet - but instead uploaded by some private citizen on their own websites / blogs / online photo archives /or forums. It was rather weird / in fact almost eerie - as it really seemed as if NO one in the whole wide world had bothered uploading ANY of their own snapshots of this most momentous & 'memorable' day of world history! I can safely say (yet you'll just have to take my word for it) that there was, back then, NOT A SINGLE image (still or video) to be found meant to depict the tower collapses - which weren't just frames obviously extracted from the few, all-too-familiar / ultra-low-resolution-"videos" aired on TV by the MSM.

This all changed somewhere around 2008 / 2009 - when a continuous stream of quite sharp (!) "never-before-seen private" imagery of 9/11 started trickling out all over the interwebs, a flow culminating of course with the sudden, infamous 2010 'NIST/FOIA' release of untold gigas of high-res (!) stills and videos which, as the (asinine) story went, they had been sitting on ('for investigation purposes') for all of nine friggin' years - but had now been "forced" to release due to a FOIA act filed by none other than - get this - ABC Television!... :rolleyes:

You can read some details about that ridiculous "FOIA" tale here - in an old post of mine from 2012:
"BARE-FACED LIES" : viewtopic.php?p=2365938#p2365938

Today, of course, we have heaps of (phony) imagery supposedly depicting the "top-down tower collapses" credited to purported private individuals - which we have been duly / methodically been exposing (in every imaginable fashion) on this forum for what they are - i.e. just multiple re-rendered CGI variations of a fairly large, digital composite-gallery evidently manufactured in later years (and certainly AFTER my first September Clues release in June 2007) by the 9/11 perps themselves.

(For those new to this forum, please read my standing hypothesis as to how they pulled down the towers in "bright daylight" - and why no legit imagery exists of the purported, physically impossible 'top-down collapse": viewtopic.php?p=2391828#p2391828 )

Just yesterday, someone mailed me a link to this umpteenth 'new entry' of alleged 'amateur 9/11 photographers, Mr Reinhard Karger from Germany - who claims he snapped the below images from his brother's yacht as it was docked for several days in a marina with a splendid view of the WTC. I have had some fun trying to imagine how Mr Karger would possibly be commenting on 'his own 9/11 photo gallery' - so the blue type below is just... pure fiction. Excuse me for trying to be funny - but I won't apologize for putting words in Mr Karger's mouth :

Link to "Mr Karger's pictures of 9/11 (and before and beyond)": https://www.flickr.com/photos/september ... 5845804396

"So I waz on my brother's yacht on September 10 - and just thought I'd snap a picture of the World Trade Center. Why, you ask? Vell, vell, mein freund: becoz it waz there! Now, just imagine if those terrorizts had chosen to fly into the WTC on cloudy September 10! These vere very, very lucky bastards!"
Image

"Ze next morning I woke up very early - as we Germans like to do. Zat sunrise was sooo very special, zo I snapped and snapped away. I am a real sucker for sunrises, you see? Anyhow, as I was resting on the sunchair upon the deck of my brother's yacht waiting for breakfast to be served, I snapped these wunderbare bilder of that very ominous days' sunrise over Manhattan. Little did I know..."
Image
Image

"But zen, all of a sudden... Gottverdammung! The towerz vere on fire! I frowned and mumbled to myself: Mein lieber Gott, was gescheht? To my horror, I learned later from TV that airplanes had flown into both of them! And there I was - having breakfast (Weissbier and apfelstrudel) inside my brother's yacht - and missing all the action of two wide-body airliners striking the towers - and a couple of Pulitzer prizes! Donnerwetter!"
Image

"But vell, vell : at least I waz lucky and persistent enough to capture the first tower just as it pulverized in front of my eyes. I mumbled to myself: zese Americans don't build very strong buildings, do they? They need more German architects!"
Image

"Half-an-hour later - and to my delight - I waz able to alzo capture the second tower just as it pulverized in a few seconds in front of my eyes. Again I mumbled to myself: 'dieser Amerikaner sind unfähige Baumeister!' Poor, sloppy builders! Why on Earth do they build skyscrapers with papier-maché ? "
Image

"As ve vere just sitting there all day long on the deck of my brother's yacht drinking Weissbier (after all it was too dangerous to undock and go assist the armada of ships who were evacuating those poor devils stuck in Lower Manhattan) I just kept snapping and snapping away at the kolossal dust cloud which kept growing and growing. I mumbled to myself : "in Germany, you won't find ANY building with so much dust inside it! Dieser schmutzige Amerikaner need more German cleaning-ladies!"
Image

"In the late afternoon, the dust had not settled yet. Or was it smoke - caused by the still burning aviation kerosene? I mumbled to myself : these Amerikan airliners carry far, far too much fuel! But then I thought: it must be all that furniture inside the office towers still burning - and the flesh of all these poor office workers too. Mein Gott!"
Image

"Two days later, the wind had turned - but the smoke/dust cloud was still there. I mumbled to myself: " these Amerikans need more German firefighters! In Germany, they actually extinguish fires - within a matter of hours!"
Image

"Three days later (yes, I was very much enjoying my stay on my brother's yacht- his cook makes some spectacular, außergewöhnlich sauerkraut!) I thought I'd snap this picture - again from the very same vantage point of my sunchair on the yacht... (Sorry if I didn't bother getting up from my sunchair to snap a slightly different angle of my Manhattan skyline view)" :
Image

"Four days later, smoke was still billowing from the WTC area. I mumbled to myself: "these Amerikaner need no terrorizts to fuck up their lives - if they are not even capable to put out a building fire in FOUR days!"
Image

"Five days later, the smoke was still there. By that time, I had had so much Weissbier and sauerkraut that I simply couldn't lift myself from the sunchair. So again, I apologize for being such a lazy German tourist / amateur photographer. After all, I was vacationing on my brother's yacht, for Gott's sake. Why should I have been moving my ass around - just because some freak incident occured across the river? Oh, wait a minute: you're one of these horrible conspiracy theorists, ja?"
Image

***********************

Here's Reinhard Karger exhibiting his alleged "9/11 amateur pictures" at the PATTON foundation (click on link and read about the Patton Foundation):

Image
http://www.republicain-lorrain.fr/actua ... -de-ma-vie

Patton Foundation...You get the picture... :rolleyes:


****
It appears that Reinhard Karger is a spokesman for the German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence - and is at the forefront of the Verbmobil Project:

"The Verbmobil project was funded by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) and additionally financed by the industrial partners. Until the year 2000, 116 million DM were allocated to the project. In addition the industrial partners brought in 53 million DM (see Table 1). Universities and research centers received a full 100% funding, while industrial partners contributed 60% of their costs.
The project was controlled by the German Aerospace Research Establishment (DLR), Berlin."
http://verbmobil.dfki.de/facts.html


Figures. <_<
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: CGI collapse footage

Postby Apache on March 9th, 2016, 11:29 am

I did research on 9/11 imagery on Flickr a few years ago and those pictures weren't there. In fact, they weren't there last September as I did another search for tower photos and only came across "Brian Boyd", who had also not posted any images before.

Mr Karger is a member of 4 groups, the oldest of which he only joined a year ago, yet he didn't show up when I did a search last September. His join date is September 2011 yet he doesn't post anything? His photostream is extremely suspicious and consists of nothing other than those 9/11 images. I've been on Flickr for years and years and I'm only an amateur photographer, never mind a professional one. Why didn't he have a presence on Flickr prior to 2011 if he truly is a "professional"?

Also, why are there no comments on his photos?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/september ... 917277253/

The crumbling tower photo above has had 424 views but no comments.

When I did my research into Flickr 9/11 images I found exactly the same thing; lots of views but no comments.

september-2001.net has a creation date of July 2011. The Registrant is a German company called 1API gmbh, but the address is not in Germany but belongs to an obscure Wakefield WHOIS registrant called WHOIStrustee.com Limited. WHOIStrustee.com Limited registration date at Companies House is August 2015, so they can't have been the registered address for september-1001.net in 2011. WHOIStrustee.com is a dormant company (i.e not trading). Current (and only) officer is listed as:

Jens Wagner, Flurweg 24, Neunkirchen-Kohlhof, Saarland, Germany, 66539.

So, we have a German who lives in Germany but runs a dormant internet name registration company in Wakefield. Prior name (never traded) was Hexonet Ltd. The address is more than likely simply a p.o box address and there is no-one at Riverside View, Wakefield.

http://www.whoistrustee.com/services.php

Domain name registrations requires contact information be provided for storage and display in the international WHOIS database. This means that anyone in the world can view the name, address, phone number, and email without restriction. Publicly making this information available puts domain owners at a risk for spam and potential identity theft. WhoisTrustee and WhoisTrustee Lite securely replaces some or all of this information with data provided by WhoisTrustee.com to protect domain registrants.


Seeing as Mr Reinhard Karger uses his own name why would he wish to obscure his name and email address which he readily provides? :P
Apache
Member
 
Posts: 168
Joined: October 22nd, 2015, 12:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to SEPTEMBER CLUES: the 9/11 psyop exposed: the media aired a "Made-for-TV Hollywood movie"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests