The Empty Towers

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
12 Angry Men
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 3:27 pm

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by 12 Angry Men » Wed May 18, 2011 6:03 pm

This is my first and maybe my only post on this forum.

Having spent a day reading various threads and looking at the faked photos and videos of street scenes and the collapses I have to admit that Simon makes the most plausible and logical explanation of what we saw on 911.

Am I right in thinking that the reason why the footage of the collapses had to be faked was because the buildings were empty with nobody in them and if they allowed the various tv cameras and the amateur film makers to scan up and down the buildings it would soon become apparent that they were totally devoid of life.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by simonshack » Wed May 18, 2011 7:49 pm

12 Angry Men wrote:This is my first and maybe my only post on this forum.

Having spent a day reading various threads and looking at the faked photos and videos of street scenes and the collapses I have to admit that Simon makes the most plausible and logical explanation of what we saw on 911.

Am I right in thinking that the reason why the footage of the collapses had to be faked was because the buildings were empty with nobody in them and if they allowed the various tv cameras and the amateur film makers to scan up and down the buildings it would soon become apparent that they were totally devoid of life.
Yes - that would of course be one of the many reasons to impede image capture that morning - although the area was most likely cordoned off: there would have been very little chance for anyone to be close enough to the WTC to film anything of relevance; smoke screens would have ensured a 100% cloaking of the visuals of the controlled demolition charges. So what about the sounds typical of a controlled demolition? Well, there are SCORES of testimonies to serial explosions. This would have been an insurmountable problem for the perps to hide so, accordingly, they allowed for SCORES of people to report, even on the mainstream media, that they heard BOOM-BOOM-BOOM-BOOMS! Have all those testimonies ever spurred a REAL 9/11 investigation?

No. :angry:

Tufa
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:13 pm
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by Tufa » Sat May 21, 2011 2:32 am

12 Angry Men wrote:Am I right in thinking that the reason why the footage of the collapses had to be faked was because the buildings were empty with nobody in them and if they allowed the various tv cameras and the amateur film makers to scan up and down the buildings it would soon become apparent that they were totally devoid of life.
My thought on this is simply, that the demolition video MUST BE fake:
  • Simply, if the 9/11 was not a clear-sky day, but a cloud-sky day, than ALL the video/pictures must be fake. The "real" is much different compared to the "fake".
  • If any go wrong with the real demolition, you can more easily repair, if no one see what you do!
  • If the REAL demolition is different: (bottom-up; both towers at the same time; other time of demolition than the official; taking down WTC7 at the same time) you cannot show any real video. (or, the real video was not shown.)
  • If the REAL demolition isn't that spectacular, really, then the psychological impact would be lower.
  • If you have the entire 9/11 event on tape; including studio comments, you can test-run on a test audience and check the psychological impact; if they buy into the story, if the fakes are properly hidden. I have a thought that this is a normal procedure for fictional movies?
  • If the Towers was empty or not, is a typical no-issue; it won't make any difference. OK, a body-part in the middle of the rubble would be disgusting and nasty; the workers would not like it. Best if the towers are empty.
  • The witnesses stories are typically idiotic, and my mind go to the Witness who "saw" the "plane" coming towards him, and hid under his office desk. :D
  • The impulse from an incoming plane (we assume, for a while, that it happened!) would move the Tower with about 2 m/s, momentarily, so no one could stand up during the impact, people sitting on chairs should topple over or drift around on the office floor. When your eye-reference of floors, ceiling, furniture, and walls move at the same time, it if very hard to stand up. No witness say they had fallen, and talk of this, so I conclude, that (official) witnesses don't support the official story. :D Should be a vibration, also.
  • The co-operation of office workers, demolition workers, police, or any other group that you may need, essentially require that no one are to be physically killed during the morning show.
  • The "vic-sims" pictures and stories are mostly ridiculous at best.
  • There are psychological threatening hidden pictures painted in the video material. This don't happen by itself. Such video must be produced in advance. (This imply that the second "plane" fire-ball is completely rendered, or mixed from a smaller model-fake.)
  • The idea that people should "jump" from the Towers is a clear indication that there was no one in them. How about the window width? 40"-(perimeter column)14"-(window fitting)4"=22" or 56cm. This is an estimation. You don't kind-a fall out by mistake. In a fire-panic situation, most people underestimate the danger of the smoke and become unconscious. Most causalities in a fire are due to smoke and not "window-jumping".
  • If you empty the Towers of all the people, you may just as well bring the furniture, computers, phones, and everything else.
  • The accusation of Crimes: Insurance fraud, Insider trading, Strange president behaviour in some school; this is most likely simply a part of the plot. A next-step consequence is that a proper permit for demolition of the buildings, could have been obtained (approved) in advance. Just a thought I have!
I don't know, really, any of the condition of the Towers or how or when they did come down.
But I do know that the TV video was a fake.

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

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by SmokingGunII » Sat May 21, 2011 6:55 pm

Tufa -may I respectfully add that most of the "jumpers" were able to take a 30 yard run up and outjump Bob Beamon into the clear blue...........errr, I mean, fuzzy, yellow, purple, green manhattan sky. ;)

Tufa
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:13 pm
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by Tufa » Sun May 22, 2011 11:32 am

The "9/11" event; official account, is much different from other similar fake/improved events.
It is simply not physically possible and this on most important parts of the official story.
Ohh, well, you can hi-jack an air-plane .... from then on you are beyond physical reality.

The Tower-Jumpers (syncro-jumping, holding hands, ...) compare with the "eye"-witness report in the "911 Hotel" where "Amy Ting" :( try to explain that she heard the sound ... and cannot speak of it ...

nonhocapito
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by nonhocapito » Sun May 22, 2011 8:53 pm

We have discussed Martina Geccelli pictures already, but I would like to go back to that for a moment.

Geccelli's pictures, as we all know, show empty office suites supposedly of the WTC, such as this one:

Image

On some forums (David Icke, letsroll), you can also find this poem attributed to her:
There were no planes,
and no jumpers.
There were no victims,
innocent or otherwise.
No bucket brigades either,
since debris was lacking,
for reasons unknown.
And the "pit" became the "pile."
Searching at Fresh Kills was staged
for the cameras and the overtime.
The heroism was a joke,
and any suffering a lie.
A managed farce,
where nobody worked,
just nobly posed about in images.
The whole story is a mess,
badly told in the media,
by monsters accustomed to
having the upper hand.
Their burns would prove to be minor,
and self-inflicted anyway.
Even the dogs looked confused
and it's no wonder.
It is a nice poem. I for once like it. And if it was Geccelli's, it would be even more amazing. Yet I could not find any source for this, only in the end I think i figured (i could be mistaken) that the poem is in fact by StevenWarRan, as it first appeared on the post were Warran first (to my knowledge) introduced (in december 2010) Geccelli's work on his blog (in a sense, Geccelli is Warran's creation: so the confusion on the origins of the poem seem to be fitting in the scenario).

Anyway:
On one hand, Martina Geccelli's pictures fit perfectly with what we have been figuring out about the towers being very likely emptied out of offices and people on 9/11, and possibly months or years before.
On the other hand, they are just a handful of pictures, that by no mean numerically document the state of the WTC's office suites in the year 2000.
Where are the other pictures? Do they even exist?

The more I look at them the more I think they very easily could be CGI. Especially because they are so few (CGI is tedious). They really look like the CGI interiors that a colleague of mine at the university years ago (roughly seven or eight) used to create with Lightwave and Photoshop.
This "hunch" go together with other little things that add to the uneasy feeling about Geccelli.

1) The pictures released via her website are just seven. Obviously not the whole body of her work about WTC. Why? There is no publication by Geccelli where these pictures "make money". Just check Amazon. The only publication that carries her WTC work is Site Matters (2004), that documents the artistic projects staged in the WTC sponsored by the LMCC. I might be proven otherwise, but my bet is that this publication features the same seven pictures by Geccelli we already know (give or take: StevenWarRan's post, that takes her pictures from the book rather then the website, shows only one that Geccelli's website does not have -- yes the one above, that incidentally is a perfect 180° of another rendering- er, picture featured on the website).
2) Even though her website shows work from apparently more recent years (although it is all awfully consistent, and seem to be created at the same moment), her biography, from the same website, seem to be focusing only on her experience in 2000. The rest of the work is barely mentioned in time, as if in all these years it spawned no exhibits, no publications, no happenings.
3) "Geccelli", believe it or not, is not an italian surname. It only "sounds" italian.
4) Many forums have started broadcasting her imagery as proof of things. Before Warran post, nobody seemed to be aware of her work, that just "sat" there, telling things about the WTC, ignored by all, for years. Is this possible? How old is Geccelli's website really?

Whois says that "maritna geccelli" (sic) created it in march 2010... barely months before StevenWarran post :o

What am I trying to say here? That the towers were not empty, not gutted-out etc? Nothing of the sort. It still seems to be the most likely scenario (for the little we can tell since the actual demolition of the towers -- and removal of the debris-- happened far from everyone's eyes). Besides what would be the purpose of spreading fake pictures that seem to agree with a scenario that should better be hidden? (Well... here's an idea: focusing on the gutted-out towers can eventually lead to trust the fake images of the rubble, because they are so absurdly barren of furniture and other such elements that they must be documenting the truth of the gutted-out towers... sorry too convoluted :blink: ).

Bottom line, all I'm trying to say -- there is something strange about Martina Geccelli and her work.

bostonterrierowner
Member
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by bostonterrierowner » Sun May 22, 2011 9:52 pm

What would be the purpose of spreading fake pictures that seem to agree with a scenario that should better be hidden?
Controlled demolition maybe? They are putting some "controversial" material regarding occupancy issues on the market. Once this fact becomes more evident there will always be something to discredit it for. Just thinking. Important question in here is SW's agenda. Is he 100% legit? Why does he circulate fake pictures then? So far his research is positive again its only my opinion.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by simonshack » Sun May 22, 2011 10:18 pm

I just sent this message to Marina Geccelli on her website mailbox:
Hi Martina!

I am a 9/11 researcher and my website is http://www.septemberclues.info

I have a short - but very important - question regarding your World Trade Center pictures.
Would you consider giving me a Skype call one of these days? My Skype username is:
simon.shack

Alternatively, just contact me via e-mail:

simonshack@libero.it

Kind regards

Simon Shack

bostonterrierowner
Member
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by bostonterrierowner » Tue May 24, 2011 9:15 pm

I was just trying to find another , preferably official source to confirm FOIA WTC OCCUPANCY lIST. I couldnt find it anywhere. The primary source always is Lets Roll Forums. Maybe you can guys help?

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by simonshack » Tue May 24, 2011 9:25 pm

I received this response from Martina Geccelli in my personal mail today:
Dear Simon,

I am not interested to contribute to your research in any form.
That also includes you do not get any rights to use my images under no circumstances.

Thank you for your interest.
Martina Geccelli
Just for the record. <_<

brianv
Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by brianv » Tue May 24, 2011 9:41 pm

simonshack wrote:I received this response from Martina Geccelli in my personal mail today:
Dear Simon,

I am not interested to contribute to your research in any form.
That also includes you do not get any rights to use my images under no circumstances.

Thank you for your interest.
Martina Geccelli
Just for the record. <_<
Since she lives in London, I guess English isn't her first language!

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Tue May 24, 2011 10:16 pm

That also includes you do not get any rights to use my images under no circumstances.
It's a good thing there aren't any circumstances where you can't use those images; you heard it from Signora Martina herself! Right? ;)

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by fbenario » Wed May 25, 2011 12:39 am

hoi.polloi wrote:It's a good thing there aren't any circumstances where you can't use those images;
You're absolutely right. Nice double-negative, which equates to a positive. Use 'em, Simon!

nonhocapito
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by nonhocapito » Wed May 25, 2011 5:16 am

simonshack wrote:I received this response from Martina Geccelli in my personal mail today:
Dear Simon,

I am not interested to contribute to your research in any form.
That also includes you do not get any rights to use my images under no circumstances.

Thank you for your interest.
Martina Geccelli
Just for the record. <_<
The images are published on her website anyhow... On this forum all we do is to "embed" them in a thread when we discuss them, so there are no copyright issues anyway. We did not make scans of the Site Matters book like Warran did.

It is strange that she felt adding that clause about using the images since you made no mention about this. It feels as if the phrase has been used only to add reality to something that, er, isn't real, same with the grammar.

But, who knows. Maybe she is real and fed up with all these 9/11 researchers asking her about the WTC pictures. You gotta wonder why the pictures are still on her website at all then.

nonhocapito
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: The Empty Towers

Unread post by nonhocapito » Wed May 25, 2011 5:22 am

bostonterrierowner wrote:I was just trying to find another , preferably official source to confirm FOIA WTC OCCUPANCY lIST. I couldnt find it anywhere. The primary source always is Lets Roll Forums. Maybe you can guys help?
I think the source of that FOIA is the letsroll forum, at least this is what I infer from this post: http://letsrollforums.com/press-release ... 24256.html

Otherwise look up StevenWarran website, there might be other sources there. Actually it matters so little, since all these FOIA things popping up on the internet can be so easily filled with fake material (cf. the NIST videos collection)...

Post Reply