THE 9/!! TV (and press) ARCHIVES

[simonshack]

*



THE 9/11 TV ARCHIVES


Amy Goodman presents the 9/11 TV archives - with Rick Prelinger and Brewster Kahle:
"Anchors struggled to make sense of the shocking images streaming in from the WTC and Pentagon..."


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRJ6L3iTJbI

http://archive.org/details/911

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

Dear Cluesforum readers,

This may well be the single most important page of this forum, in that it contains the core 'mission statement' of the wider September Clues research: to inform the world's TV viewers that the imagery aired on the morning of September 11, 2001 on the 6 major US/UK networks (ABC,CNN,CBS,NBC,FOX,BBC) was nothing but a prefabricated "Hollywood" production - designed to replace the real world events with a scripted, entirely artificial visual narrative. Precisely HOW this was achieved - is what Cluesforum has set out to do ever since its inception.

Over almost half a decade (September Clues 1.0 was released on June 5, 2007) of methodical analyses/dissections of the 9/11 TV ARCHIVE material (and the purported 9/11 "amateur footage"), our research has determined beyond reasonable doubt that the entire pool of available 9/11 imagery was manufactured by a single, central entity ( henceforth, "THE 9/11 FAKERY FACTORY" ).

The "9/11 FAKERY FACTORY" was entrusted with the creation of a database of CGI (Computer-Generated Imagery) designed to convey to the world's TV viewers the outlandish "Binladen terror-attack" narrative we are all familiar with. Much like the average, special fx-ridden Hollywood movie production, its 102-minute running time would include dramatic imagery of crashing airplanes, crowds fleeing for their lives, people jumping to their deaths - and skyscrapers collapsing in gigantic clouds of dust. In reality, the (fully evacuated) WTC towers were most probably brought down behind a smokescreen - with safe, conventional explosives. The WTC towers were, of course, just a redundant pair of asbestos-laced buildings which, notoriously, had long been scheduled for demolition. ("THE WTC'S DECLINE AND EXODUS")

If you have just joined this forum, please spend some time at our INTRODUCTORY GUIDE for an overview of our longstanding research.

Welcome to the Cluesforum - and enjoy the soothing return to reality it provides.

Simon Shack


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

IMPORTANT NOTICE: This thread is dedicated to the 9/11 TV ARCHIVES. All commenters are asked to stay on topic - posts submitted here SHOULD ONLY CONTAIN RELEVANT INFO concerning the 9/11 TV Archives. In the above video, we are told that the 9/11 archives are available for public download - and that there exist DVD-quality tapes of the TV networks broadcasts (ever since the year 2000), yet the archives only offer low-resolution .flv format files. We should DEMAND that these DVD-quality 9/11 broadcasts be released to the public.

[Equinox]

Cheers Simon,

I quite often go through the archives,
I just thought I would mention if any member wants to download the archives. To analyse or even one may want to verify, some of the September clues.
There is a tool, which is a firefox browser add on… It is called… Video Download Helper.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... oadhelper/

It is free to download, Once the tool is in your browser tool list. Then all you have to is click open the streaming formatted video you want to download. And then wait until it is acknowlegded by the colored Icon in your tools.

And then left click on the Icon, Left Click the Current video name, and Right click to download and convert.
( I recommend converting to WMV… Windows media player. format )



Once, its is converted to WMV.

You now have that particular time framed file of the archives. On your hard drive. From there you can fast fowared and rewind through, the footage, and also go through frame by frame. Zoom in, and many other tools that one could simply not do watching them online.

Above all have fun

[Equinox]

The tones from different shots, We're far from real life color tones look through any ordinary camera. On a clear Blues day. But Not only that, They weren’t Different shots! All the rival networks were using the same camera feeds.


Wait a second, I know what your thinking. Did he just say that supposedly competing networks were using the SAME footage feed! And none of their own footage?

Yes Exactly that. Here is where ALL 4 Networks show the EXACT SAME FEED. And the EXACT Place in time.


And of course the Final Flight sequence of the plane is faker than fake…

As I recall, Simon (originally) and I ( much later were pondering and theorizing what we like to call
The 16 second magic sequence.
http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f= ... 0#p2351589
There has been much speculation on this. ( such as NY1 supposed live shot,) and all sorts of spanners thrown into what should be a not so complicated, Very valid point to be made.

I will explain it as easy as it really is….

The beep/beep is heard on the ABC Network loud and clear… If you go to the TV ARCHIVES…..

And listen to it. For yourself… there is also… sound cues heard on all of the other channels as well.

Here is the Beep Beep being heard on ABC TV 17 seconds Before the Explosion in the nth tower….

LINK---- http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109110831-0912

TIME—31.30


BEEP, BEEP,
Then Starts the final flight path.



"This is the 16-second sequence of the "second airplane approach" These four clips are the ONLY LIVE IMAGES (of the alleged "Flight 175") still to be found on the official 9/11 TV archives. I have put them together sequentially to highlight this 'curious coincidence': Is it plausible that 4 cameramen just happened to film a 'slice' of the full airplane approach, all 4 'slices' then combining into a seamless, full 'airplane approach sequence'? Or is this - more plausibly perhaps - a prefabricated sequence of computer-animated imagery? "

Indeed, these 4 seamless "plane-shots" never overlap each other, as if each of the 4 "cameramen" were assigned to capture only their own, exclusive chunk of the "plane-approach" ! Now, what are the odds of THAT occurring in the real world? More likely, what I call the "16-SECOND MAGIC SEQUENCE was a prefabricated animation, cut in 4 pieces and distributed on the various phony TV broadcasts."



A beep beep, (on all networks) is heard and then straight away a 16 second seamless, full 'airplane approach sequence' none over lapping each other. Appears COINCIDENTALLY straight after the beep beep is heard.

That’s faker than fake.

[simonshack]

*

Here's a conference by Brewster Kahle - a top 9/11 TV archivist.




However boring it may seem - I strongly recommend everyone to watch it...it's hilarious! The guy makes a complete fool of himself !!!

http://archive.org/details/911conferenceBrewsterKahle

[Viterbi]

There's a very interesting thing about the 9/11 Television Archive related to the 9/11 TV Fakery.

When the first 9/11 archive went online, in October 2001, there was a fragment of the TV recordings that the public, historians and scholars couldn't see in the site:

http://televisionarchive.org/sept11.html

Look if you can find ABC News 4:51 PM - 5:33 PM. That was the only 9/11 fragment that was not in the archive. So, the archive, actually, was incomplete.

The first 9/11 archive was shutdown without any explanation in late 2003 and didn't go back online until March 2007.

http://archive.org/details/sept_11_tv_archive

Here is the explanation of "Brewster" (maybe Brewster Kahle?) in the forum about the "rebirth" of the site:

Many people worked very hard in the month following September 11th, 2001 to make a historic collection of TVnews available. This was lauched at the First Amendment Center outside of Washington DC on October 11th, 2001. Unfortunately 2 years later it was taken down in a datacenter move.

The Internet Archive, working pro-bono for the Television Archive, has brought much of it back up here.

Some of these material is not available anywhere else.

Please comment on how you have been able to make use of this resource, and what would help you further, so that future collections can become better able to aid research and education.

-brewster

And these are the questions in the forum of one of the visitors ("Epimanes") in August 2007:

Does anybody know where the reports of Middle Eastern men in a white van first appear? I remember a lot of talk about this on the local radio here in the DC area, but I'm finding it very difficult to follow up on.

Also, does anybody know why the 9/11 16:51 to 17:33 ABC 7 segment is missing?

No answer.

In October 2010, another visitor, "Larkero", also asks about the missing file:

Has anyone noticed that there is NO ABC archive for Sept 11 between 4:50 and 5:33 pm ?

Is it the Archive or the link that is missing ?

Thanks much for any infos.

No answer whatsoever.

But finally, in August 2011, nearly 10 years after 9/11, the archive is complete. The missing ABC file, that was nearly a decade inacessible to the public, historians and scholars, went online in the new remodeled site "Understanding 9/11".

And what can we find in this ABC file that was nearly a decade "forgotten"?

We find the first world exclusive broadcast of the infamous Evan Fairbanks' video, the first "amateur video" with a "plane slamming into the tower" ever broadcast, the "Zapruder film of our time" according to The New York Times that even was exhibited in the New York Historical Society:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/22/arts/ ... nging.html

Mr. Fairbanks has made a Zapruder film for our time. His camera is there but always seems just a second or two behind the events. He doesn't know what he is photographing. How could he? And he certainly doesn't know what it will look like in retrospect. He has no idea of the things that people will know when they finally do watch it.

His videotape, 25 stunning, silent minutes being shown on an endless loop at The New-York Historical Society, is just one part of the exhibition ''New York Sept. 11'' by Magnum Photographers. As it happened a lot of photographers from the Magnum agency were in New York that day, including Paul Fusco, Thomas Hoepker, Steve McCurry, Susan Meiselas, Gilles Peress, Larry Towell and Alex Webb, because their annual meeting was the night before at the agency's office in Chelsea. The bulk of the exhibition at the historical society, on view until Feb. 25, is their photographs and written reminiscences of the disaster, as well as some pictures of the World Trade Center taken long before Sept. 11.

And we find also the first world exclusive interview with Fairbanks by Peter Jennings.

Wow, that was a very important missing file! And during such a long time!

But, in the recording, something strange occurs when Fairbanks is talking about his video (1:06 mark):


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNtejdbaFt0

He's talking about the "plane" ("It disappeared, it just disappeared..." ) and, all of sudden, a recap video of the 9/11 highlights interrupts his discourse. Live, in a historical moment, a pre-recorded video cuts an exclusive interview without adding any important information. Bizarre, at least.

But, did this really happen in the live broadcast of ABC that day?

Not according to the videos of the interview with Fairbanks that we can find in Youtube, the first uploaded in September 2006 by user "plaguepuppy":


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDu2V3yjS4

And what was Fairbanks about to say in the live interview in ABC that we can see in Youtube just in the moment (0:22) when the recap video cut his speech in the recording that the public, historians and scholars can see in the 9/11 archive in order to "Understand 9/11", in the ONLY file of the 9/11 broadcasts that was not in the archive during nearly 10 years?

"(It just disappeared) LIKE A BAD SPECIAL EFFECT".

[Equinox]

Studio recording of the prefabricated C*N*N LIVE morning broadcast without (most) news banner graphics.

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlA2NJo1lLI


The "Static" C*N*N camera at 5 Penn Plaza

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2feIl87qg-A


Smash through it!

Peace.

[Viterbi]

Dennis Swanson is a journalist and media executive with a long career in ABC, NBC (he was working as an executive in WNBC 4, introducing "Tony Arrigo" and "Ed Buda", in 9/11), and Fox.

He gave a speech in the presentation of the remodeled 9/11 Television Archive in August 2011.

From 2:20 to 3:30, as a powerful introduction to the audience, Swanson talks about the death of an engineer of WNBC 4, married and with children, who was trapped in the high floors of the building after "the plane hit". The engineer went to the roof and found death (as other five TV engineers) before any helicopter could evacuate him.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Muag4wjHmvs

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/a-d ... eep/210198

NEW YORK—Bill Steckman was working on Tuesday morning, Sept. 11, 2001, shortly before 9 o'clock. But unlike thousands of others in the North Tower of the World Trade Center, the WNBC-TV transmitter engineer was not just reporting to work. Instead, he had already finished his regular overnight shift and remained at his post a bit longer to help install some new digital equipment.

Minutes after the tower was hit by a commercial jetliner, Steckman was able to get word out by phone of the encroaching smoke on the 104th floor—half of which WNBC-TV shared with financial bond trader Cantor Fitzgerald.

Nota Bene: There's a charitable fund created to help the families of the "six dead TV engineers" in 9/11, as in the case of many others "victims":

"In the days immediately following the 9/11 attacks, the charitable arm of the Society of Broadcast Engineers created the Broadcast Engineer Relief Fund to help the families of the six men. Don DiFranco of WABC was an active SBE member.

"With donations from many members of SBE, and vendors and industry foundations, we were pleased to send checks of $42,500 each to every family… without any strings attached," said SBE President Vinny Lopez. "Every penny [raised] went directly to the families."

Also, the New York chapter of NABET-CWA, Local 16, had set up a Scholarship Fund in memory of DiFranco, which continues today. Donated funds are used for scholarships for offspring of Local 16 members to pursue technical degrees at Staten Island Community College."

The tale of Bill Steckman's death, the emotional story of a media worker who "sacrificed" his life in 9/11 in order to help the broadcasting of the event being done, was used by Swanson just before telling his catchphrase (3:40):

"The reality is that media did a great job on 9/11"

Also is interesting another great phrase of Swanson (4:40):

"The media cooperated with shared resources and forgot about whether we were competitors and not to get that job done".

Sure they did.

And at the end of the speech, Swanson gave Brewster Kahle two tapes with the infamous Fox 5 "9/11 live coverage", the medley of the pool of images used by others networks with the deletion of WNYW's "Nose-Out" and the infamous "Aziz Ellahan interview" as historical highlights.


***********************************************************
ADMIN NOTICE: More about the "SIX DEAD TV ENGINEERS" here: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=309

[simonshack]

*


THE CNN 9/11 BROADCASTS (first 2h and 43min)
Someone has uploaded on YT a great 2h43min chunk of the 9/11 LIVE broadcasts. Enjoy the movie!


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT9jkBGFlr0

Just today, I received a Youtube message by Mark from Nottingham (UK). He pointed out another very interesting moment of the CNN broadcasts (at exactly 9:07AM) - which I had missed for all those years! I've made a GIF loop of it - so here it is:



CNN banner pops up (and down) at the exact instant of the strike. Hmm... I wonder why... Is it a coverup?

Now, seriously: we cannot pretend to know EXACTLY why stuff such as this happened on LIVE TV that day. However, on the strength of our five-year long research - and the countless such 'happenstances /coincidences' featured in the 9/11 imagery across ALL the TV networks that morning, I believe we can rule out that they are just that: happenstances or coincidences. So I will presently propose my humble speculative scenario as to why these apparent 'panic moments' (fade-to-blacks/pop-up banners, etc...) occured on LIVE TV - and why they occured only in the most crucial instants of the entire day's TV broadcasts. .


THE HUMAN FACTOR

As you know, I believe ALL of the 9/11 imagery (a "Hollywood" movie of sorts) was prepared well in advance of the day - and managed / supervised from a single, centralized TV studio. So you may ask: "why would anything go wrong if they had it all planned?" Here's where the Human Factor comes into the equation - and I hope no one still thinks that the folks behind this massive hoax were so highly funded and professional as to be immune from committing human mistakes. As Steinbeck said, "the best laid schemes of mice and men oft go awry". Or more colloquialy: "Shit happens!"

So, imagine this: some time before 9/11, "Steve Supervisor" (the guy in charge of handling the actual "LIVE feed" on 9/11) gets to view the prefabricated 9/11 "Hollywood movie" - (which he himself had no hand in fabricating). He's initially impressed with it, and starts training his broadcasting crew at the mixing console. They probably decide to alter the color schemes of each video feed destined to represent the various networks' broadcasts, ABC,CNN,FOX, NBC,CBS. This, in order to help visually/mentally distinguish - on the fly - those feeds from each other - on their numerous control monitors. After all, all those feeds show very much the same, dull "3D" animation imagery of the smoking WTC towers - for 102, long, stress-packed minutes. Surely, to have ALL of these feeds with identical, correctly colored blue skies would have caused total confusion on D-Day! In any case, this is the most rational explanation I can offer for the psychedelic color palettes seen on the various TV networks on 9/11. To this day - no one has come forward with any sensible/ technically valid argument regarding this issue.

At one stage - and perhaps even on the night of September 10, 2001 - Steve realizes that those animated airplanes crashing through the towers (and emerging through the other side) is just too bloody daft of an idea to sell to the public. He's worried that the World TV audience just won't buy it - and that he might be exposed one day to public pillory. So - come the fateful morning, Steve Supervisor decides to do all that he possibly can - to patch over/obscure the most embarrassing frames of that damned Hollywood animation-movie. Perhaps, Steve even takes over the live mixing console himself, and frantically starts fading out/fading in the feeds - and popping up TV banners during key, compromising moments of the crappy Hollywood movie which he's been appointed to supervise and to broadcast to the entire World.

Poor Steve.

[brianv]

Simon could you have a closer look at that! Please tell me I am not seeing the tip of the tail for a split second after it has flown through the building and come out the other side? Quickly masked by an "explosion"?

ps I think it was Robbie Burns who wrote :

The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men
Gang aft agley
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain
For promis'd joy!

[SmokingGunII]

I see it as well, brianv!

Also, by coincidence, I was trawling through some of my old archives and re-watched the BBC coverage, which also had it's banner obscuring the plane! Of course, this could have been acceptable had they then removed the banner for the replays, but they didn't did they?

[kansasinnovember]

Simon could you have a closer look at that! Please tell me I am not seeing the tip of the tail for a split second after it has flown through the building and come out the other side? Quickly masked by an "explosion"?

ps I think it was Robbie Burns who wrote :

The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men
Gang aft agley
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain
For promis'd joy!

Yes,Brian...and even without the logo banner hiding this shocker i'm sure there will be many gullible fools who will believe it possible simply because it appeared on the news.

[Maat]

It's a blatant "cover-up" all right, Simon!

Beginning at time-start link 16:57 of the video, I found it most interesting that they have the banner up for the 'unexpected' 2nd 'plane':



but on replay they temporarily removed the banner just for the "plane" approach:



then deliberately faded it back in for the "hit" :



I didn't see a tail tip, Brian (maybe I'm looking in the wrong place) but you're correct about that Robbie Burns line being from his poem "To A Mouse" (1785). John Steinbeck took the title for his 1937 novel Of Mice and Men from the penultimate stanza you quoted.

[simonshack]

Simon could you have a closer look at that! Please tell me I am not seeing the tip of the tail for a split second after it has flown through the building and come out the other side? Quickly masked by an "explosion"?

Dearest Brian,

That is not the tip of the tail. That's just (a few pixels) of the stupid NOSE OUT.

Don' t get me wrong now, Brian: I owe you infinite thanks for your observation. It has motivated me to review my best-resolution files of 9/11, and to formulate a far stronger and solid explanation for the (in)famous NOSE OUT issue. I hasten to say that what follows will force me to eat some humble pie - as my 2007 speculation (as featured in September Clues) regarding just how the NOSE OUT shown on WNYW FOX5 TV occured, will now definitively go down the drain. Of course, I have long distanced myself from the idea that the NOSE OUT was caused by a REAL TV chopper drifting sideways (causing a real-time plane silhouette overlay to overshoot its mask layer), but I need to put this issue to rest once and for all.

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


THE NOSE OUT ISSUE - revised



The "NOSE OUT" - as aired on WNYW FOX5


Firstly, let me show you this frame from my top-resolution 9/11 CNN "Live Broadcast" file. As you can see, the actual WTC imagery is still horribly & absurdly blurry - yet the CNN banner is pretty nice and crisp (at this time, there can be absolutely no doubt that the video resolution of the "LIVE 9/11 broadcasts" was intentionally downgraded). Anyway, here goes :



Yes - as silly as it may seem - that pixel blob is actually (meant to be) the cockpit of "FLIGHT175" emerging from the other side of the hidden WTC2 - aka "THE NOSE OUT". Remember, a few TV anchors (like Dan Rather and Jim Ryan) promptly uttered comments to the tune of "the plane appeared to go right through the building - emerging on the other side!". I now believe this was scripted from the start - for shock-and-awe value. However, our "Steve Supervisor"(see my above post) in the central control room was none too happy with airing on LIVE TV this silliness - so he decided to indulge in some pre-emptive damage control. In fact, that would nicely explain why BOTH the TV feeds featuring the NOSE OUT (FOX and ABC) briefly blacked out(or FADED TO BLACK - for respectively 15 frames[FOX] and 8 frames[ABC]) - just as "FLIGHT175 impacted".


The thing is, the NOSE OUT pixels shown on FOX and ABC are extremely similar in shape - although they were supposedly shot by two TV choppers from entirely different viewing angles (approx 60 degrees apart!):



So, those arguing that the NOSE OUT is, in fact, only ejected dust which coincidentally took the shape of the plane's nosecone (in the WNYW FOX5 shot) will now have to argue that it also, coincidentally, took that shape from two extremely different viewing angles. Good luck with that one, Anthony Lawson!

Now, seriously: I would put down this atrocious blunder to a combination of two factors:

ANIMATION SOFTWARE FLAWS:
- The proprietary shortcomings of the 2001,"3D" imaging software used to create the prefabricated 9/11 movie caused this perspective aberration (and of course, many more such surreal perspectives and visuals - as illustrated in September Clues.)

HUMAN ERROR:
- The 'creative' creators of the 9/11 movie had poor notions of perspectives - or were just arrogant / over-confident.


Lastly, here's one for the statistics/probability experts - but I hope everyone will get my point here. What are the odds of THIS occuring: ABC and CNN both showing the NOSE OUT just above their banners - in spite of airing (inexplicably) differently cropped images of the event?

I rest my case: these "LIVE TV broadcasts" were all prefabricated - full stop.


(My point being: these banners appear to have been graphically applied by the same operator, or else we must accept that their identical relative heights over the 'broadcast feeds' - by ABC and CNN - is once again, purely coincidental...)

[Tufa]

The 911 story is not possible to implement in the real physical world, due to many and independent reasons. This also covers all important elements in the 911 story. Since the Story cannot be implemented, it hence has to be fake. So, we now know that the entire 911 video pool is Fake, though this doesn't cover how it was done.

There are many video errors in the 911 material. It is actually difficult to make anything, at all, to match up! How many errors you find is merely a function of how deep you dig.
It is clear, that a lot of video editing could have taken place in real time, such as inserting an air-plane-silhouette. But this doesn't include the many threat-pictures, that has been inserted into the smoke and the fireball. These pictures, that activate parts of the brain to warn for immediate danger, produce a psychological blocking that make the viewer scared and open for suggestion. If the pictures are too blurred, the brain will fail to see them, but if they are too clear, the viewer might understand that the video is fake. It could be tricky to edit this just right, so how do you arrange a test-run?

But assume, just as a hypothesis, that you also pre-record the studio-part of the video material, so you have a continuous tape. You can now show the material to a test-audience, and make adjustments afterwards. This also solves the problem of human mistakes; no risk that someone with a microphone might say something stupid.

So, this leaves us with the disturbing result, that the majority of all the strange pictures and video errors was actually deliberately inserted, and known/approved by the hoaxers. Surprisingly, this strengthens the Lie, as most people cannot comprehend, that the "Real" pictures they saw on TV, should be massively in error, so such a statement must simply be false. (Too much evidence)

The video pool was made to include material for a rich set of contradictory conspiracy theories. Examples could be a vibration when the one of the Towers are hit (a-bomb+explosives theory), the flying Orb (aliens in a flying saucer), some video where building has strange round marks (directive-energy-weapons-theory) (or a helicopter close to a building that falls), the "puffs" when a tower falls (controlled demolition theory), and the well-known missile theory.
The video is a fake, pre-recorded, and the "conspiracy" material was pre-inserted. This produces the conclusion that the many Conspiracy Theories were also thought up by the Hoaxers in advance.

[fbenario]

On Monday, a San Francisco nonprofit called the Internet Archive launched a free service that will let people sort through archives of every national news program in the U.S. The service, called TV News Search & Borrow, uses transcripts produced for closed captioning, designed for the deaf, to allow anyone to search its archives, pull up video and link to 30-second clips.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087 ... lenews_wsj