MORE "New" IMAGES (released in 2010!)

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
MrBatsh$t

Unread post by MrBatsh$t » Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:07 pm

WPIX Dub 4 09 This file is a must view, it’s hard to imagine anyone faking this clip, even with an advanced simulator. It looks to real and the panning around the sky makes it that much harder to fake. I'll post this clip up so people can see if there is any fakery I've missed, or can explain the complexity in the images.

MrBatsh$t

Unread post by MrBatsh$t » Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:20 pm

The Video still processing on Youtube, should be a min or two: Link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiuH8kNgsxE

fakers911
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fakers911 » Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:35 pm

simonshack 4 Oct 4 2010, 08:25 PM wrote:
fakers911 4 Oct 4 2010, 05:38 PM wrote:
You actually can see "PAT" flying in the Rick Siegel video at about 2:52. It is coming from within the cloud. After that, at 3:00 exactly you can see it again for a fraction of a second. :)
Fakers 911,

I frankly hoped my point would be clear enough - but it seems you didn't get it. Yes, "PAT" is seen on both videos as the WTC2 collapse initiates flying north-eastwards. After which the WPIX video shows it making what looks like a 180? turn and RETURN on its path. On the SIEGEL video it simply vanishes. "PAT" is NOT seen flying back southwest as we see on the WPIX video. And no, it can not be attributed to any issue of "perspective" or "video compression". PAT is simply missing on the SIEGEL video when it should be clearly visible.

See, when I get comments such as yours, I sometimes wonder if my English is unclear or if the person responding is intentionally playing stupid. Which one is it?
Well.. I guess none of both options. Relax dude... I am not here to try and debunk your video's. I am also not here to try ridicule you and your claims and I am certainly not here to try to spread disinfo or whatsoever.

I guess I had not read your post thoroughly enough. My bad...
Now I see what you mean and yes, the chopper is not there in the Rick Siegel video.

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

Unread post by nonhocapito » Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:02 pm

MrBatsht @ Oct 4 2010, 09:07 PM wrote: WPIX Dub 4 09 This file is a must view, it’s hard to imagine anyone faking this clip, even with an advanced simulator. It looks to real and the panning around the sky makes it that much harder to fake. I'll post this clip up so people can see if there is any fakery I've missed, or can explain the complexity in the images.
How is this hard to fake again? A bigger model of the city? a larger composition? More Melinda fake conversations over intercom? Or the fact that the panning of the camera can spot another heli very far away without hesitation?
You are so enthusiast about these videos it's like you made them yourself...

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

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:07 am

It's amazing to me sometimes.

Simon makes it very easy to understand the concept of fake video. He points out that software must be used to compose those videos. It is evident that software has been used to produce all of them.

Then, more videos come out - that resemble the limited variety of video types seen on 9/11 which were deliberately and falsely labeled 'news broadcasts' or 'amateur video' and people decide - oh, oh wait.

THIS one must be real. RIGHT?

No no this one must be real ...

Oh maybe this one is real ...

No? No?

Well - well - maybe ... uh ... this one? Oh that looks the same as the others doesn't it?

Gee - where can I find some real looking video of 9/11? None of it seems to be around.


Duh.... :rolleyes:

Wake up folks. Quantity doesn't equal quality. It really is all fake.

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Unread post by Dcopymope » Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:18 am

hoi.polloi 4 Oct 5 2010, 04:07 AM wrote: It's amazing to me sometimes.

Simon makes it very easy to understand the concept of fake video. He points out that software must be used to compose those videos. It is evident that software has been used to produce all of them.

Then, more videos come out - that resemble the limited variety of video types seen on 9/11 which were deliberately and falsely labeled 'news broadcasts' or 'amateur video' and people decide - oh, oh wait.

THIS one must be real. RIGHT?

No no this one must be real ...

Oh maybe this one is real ...

No? No?

Well - well - maybe ... uh ... this one? Oh that looks the same as the others doesn't it?

Gee - where can I find some real looking video of 9/11? None of it seems to be around.


Duh.... :rolleyes:

Wake up folks. Quantity doesn't equal quality. It really is all fake.
I would say that quantity doesn't equal credibility, something that the thick skinned miscreants don't understand. "Oh, how could all the hundreds upon hundreds of amateur footage be fake?" A pure pseudo argument, its not founded in any real logic.

fakers911
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fakers911 » Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:36 pm

I just made a .gif file from a clip coming from the NIST Cumulus database. It is a small sequence from "Jim Huibregtse clip_6B.avi"

Image

Check out the reflection in the window. Another wobbling building and impossible perspective. That smoke in the window.. what angle is it coming from? :D

Feel free to use it to your likings :)

EDIT: Oh.. and I noticed this:

Image

Oh.. and here, the complete mechanism to lift stuff up the WTC 7 has vanished completely:

Image

TruthNow
Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:26 am
Contact:

Unread post by TruthNow » Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:14 pm


fakers911
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fakers911 » Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:21 pm

TruthNow @ Oct 5 2010, 11:14 PM wrote: http://www.youtube.com/user/11september ... jvfwK_bQ-Y
They had 9 years to do it right this time. Probably nice inserted background + plane, but I can't distinguish this one from a legit video.

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

Unread post by simonshack » Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:48 pm

They just loooved their "reflections". Too bad they looked so bad.
And WTC7 was NOT grey! Repeat: NOT grey!

Image

And here's a real picture of WTC7. Notice any...subtle differences?:lol:

Image
http://www.septemberclues.info

fakers911
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fakers911 » Tue Oct 05, 2010 10:02 pm

@Simon:

No, I don't see it ;)

Hehe.. these guys failed dramaticly. It only took me +/- 9 years to come to that conclusion. I was always looking in the wrong direction and discussing the WTC7 collapse over and over again. Now that's rather pointless to me!

EDIT: Anyway.. reflections is stuff people can and will argue about, but a dissapearing lift meganism at building WTC 7 will make them look foolish, if they try to argue that.

Hahaha.

Here you go, the video's made by the alleged Jim Huibregts.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=FA4HB6Y4

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RB5TM7Z5

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

Unread post by simonshack » Tue Oct 05, 2010 10:08 pm

*
Believe it or not: THESE WTC7 drawings were shown on TV on 9/11 !!!

ImageImage

And on a more recent History channel documentary:
Image

It does NOT matter how many more 'realistic-looking' video they release year after year as their 'skills' and technology improve. They have failed. Period.
http://www.septemberclues.info

fakers911
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fakers911 » Tue Oct 05, 2010 10:12 pm

simonshack 4 Oct 6 2010, 12:08 AM wrote: Believe it or not: THESE WTC7 drawings were shown on TV on 9/11 !
Hahaha.. how painfull.

:lol:

Check the WTC 7 in my screenshot a few posts above this one.... what's up with the strange short black bar?

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

Unread post by brianv » Tue Oct 05, 2010 10:20 pm

fakers911 4 Oct 5 2010, 11:12 PM wrote:
simonshack 4 Oct 6 2010, 12:08 AM wrote: Believe it or not: THESE WTC7 drawings were shown on TV on 9/11 !
Hahaha.. how painfull.

:lol:

Check the WTC 7 in my screenshot a few posts above this one.... what's up with the strange short black bar?
It's the window washer thingy! Edit/ Which isn't in the photo immediately underneath!

fakers911
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fakers911 » Tue Oct 05, 2010 10:32 pm

brianv 4 Oct 6 2010, 12:20 AM wrote:
fakers911 4 Oct 5 2010, 11:12 PM wrote:
simonshack 4 Oct 6 2010, 12:08 AM wrote: Believe it or not: THESE WTC7 drawings were shown on TV on 9/11 !
Hahaha.. how painfull.

:lol:

Check the WTC 7 in my screenshot a few posts above this one.... what's up with the strange short black bar?
It's the window washer thingy! Edit/ Which isn't in the photo immediately underneath!
My main language isn't English, so I couldn't come up with a word for it. And yes.. it's gone completely.

Post Reply