Naudet Original Broadcast

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

Unread postby brianv on Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:57 am

When the "airplane" "flies" across the face of the tower, just before "impact", why isn't it visible? Do only moving objects suffer disappearance from compression?

This is one or two frames prior to "impact", where is the airplane?

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

Unread postby nonhocapito on Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:12 pm

brianv @ Oct 28 2010, 12:57 PM wrote: When the "airplane" "flies" across the face of the tower, just before "impact", why isn't it visible? Do only moving objects suffer disappearance from compression?

This is one or two frames prior to "impact", where is the airplane?


Many other things are not visible, many details are lost in the compression. It is not entirely impossible for the plane to disappear, since it is a pretty small part of the picture.

More importantly, this whole thing is virtual reality (made by the same people who did that snoop dogg video I guess :D ), so why would they create a version without the plane? And if they did, to "create confusion", why should we care?
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:49 pm

nonhocapito 4 Oct 28 2010, 06:00 AM wrote:
hoi.polloi 4 Oct 27 2010, 08:57 PM wrote: Does anyone have a high-quality version of the Gamma Press "first hit" that was featured on Sept. 11? It was aired on CNN I believe. There is some small 320x240 thing on YouTube.


Can you elaborate on this? What is the Gamma Press first hit? Can you share the youtube link? Maybe there is a good version of it in the NIST cumulus.


Here is the only existing version I found, by some user with an angry-looking user name and Israel propaganda:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpONEX8tme8
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread postby brianv on Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:49 pm

hoi.polloi 4 Oct 28 2010, 04:49 PM wrote:
nonhocapito 4 Oct 28 2010, 06:00 AM wrote:
hoi.polloi 4 Oct 27 2010, 08:57 PM wrote: Does anyone have a high-quality version of the Gamma Press "first hit" that was featured on Sept. 11? It was aired on CNN I believe. There is some small 320x240 thing on YouTube.


Can you elaborate on this? What is the Gamma Press first hit? Can you share the youtube link? Maybe there is a good version of it in the NIST cumulus.


Here is the only existing version I found, by some user with an angry-looking user name and Israel propaganda:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpONEX8tme8


I don't know what you guys are on but roll me one! That's the same video! There is no airplane!

One frame before the outward bulge appears on the tower wall.

Image

Next frame..

Image

It's compression, it's hiding behind the pixels, it's hiding between the frames - No! There is no plane in the original Naudet!

"It is not entirely impossible for the plane to disappear, since it is a pretty small part of the picture." :rolleyes:
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:52 pm

It certainly looks that way to me. I think we may be thinking about this wrong.

It's not that the new versions have better quality, it's that the quality of the airplane in the new versions is deliberately awful as an explanation for this video where there is no plane!
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread postby Maat on Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:39 am

simonshack 4 Oct 28 2010, 02:18 AM wrote: As shown on BBC
Image

As shown on FOX... :P
Image

And here - side by side with the "Sean Adair" shot (compare North face lighting...)
Image


Aah, so that's where that 'wingless' black toon plane was first aired! No wonder Fox covered it up with a banner :lol:

Here's a Youtuber's recent upload of it with zoom slow-mo to show the cgi f#^kery in all its infamous 'glory':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfwQWox2cDw
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ? George Orwell
Maat
Member
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am

Unread postby nonhocapito on Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:45 am

hoi.polloi 4 Oct 29 2010, 12:52 AM wrote: It certainly looks that way to me. I think we may be thinking about this wrong.

It's not that the new versions have better quality, it's that the quality of the airplane in the new versions is deliberately awful as an explanation for this video where there is no plane!


Well, all right, but the low quality of the BBC stream is essentially a technological limit of 2001, when streaming video was a new thing, everyone used RealPlayer, and people still had 56k modems. All streaming videos of those years tended to look like that as far as I can remember.

Yes brianv I thought it was perfectly possible for the pixels to "eat up" that plane in a 208x120 video.

Anyway: this video was showed on TV the day after 9/11 and the plane was perfectly visible. I confess my inability to imagine why they should have produced a video for the web without the plane, when in the same days via TV the movie was showed in higher quality *with* the plane: and only a few months later they distributed the Naudet movie again *with* the plane. And are we implying the plane was not there in the web version, not because of compression but because such version depicts reality? If so, I don't get it...
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby brianv on Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:00 am

No special gift required. All that I suggest is that you use your eyes, and not listen to what the media liars who are commentating on the pictures are saying!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Unread postby nonhocapito on Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:07 am

brianv 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:00 AM wrote: All that I suggest is that you use your eyes and not listen to what the media liars who are commentating on the pictures are saying!


What media liars? Of what lie exactly are we talking about?
Is there a lie that the web streaming version is NOT telling, that the TV version of those days was instead telling?
Did they, for some reason, fed in the immediate aftermath over the internet a "true" video while broadcasting on TV a false one? hmm...
Does this also mean that the Naudet brothers on 9/11 were really at that intersection taping some sort of explosion in the tower? Their video is not virtual reality then? I am confused.

My understanding is that this is the same video we all saw on TV on the days following 9/11.
It shows a fake plane, fake explosion, fake everything.

The only reason for this, on the web, to be showing something of such a low quality, is only because in those days video streaming over the web served as a reminder of what we saw on TV. Everybody had seen the plane on TV in the same video. It mattered little if the plane was not clearly visible in the little "reminder" on the web.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby brianv on Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:16 am

nonhocapito 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:07 AM wrote:
brianv 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:00 AM wrote: All that I suggest is that you use your eyes and not listen to what the media liars who are commentating on the pictures are saying!


What media liars? Of what lie exactly are we talking about?
Is there a lie that the web streaming version is NOT telling, that the TV version of those days was instead telling?
Is the lie that "there was a plane"? So, for some reason, in the immediate aftermath, they fed over the internet a "true" video while broadcasting on TV a false one? hmm...
Does this also mean that the Naudet brothers on 9/11 were really at that intersection taping some sort of explosion in the tower? Their video is not virtual reality then? I am confused.

My understanding is that this is the same video we all saw on TV on the days following 9/11.
It shows a fake plane, fake explosion, fake everything.

The only reason for this, on the web, to be showing something of such a low quality, is only because in those days the video streaming over the web served only as a reminder of what we saw on TV. Everybody saw the plane on TV in the same video. It mattered little if the plane was not clearly visible in the little "reminder" on the web.



Where is the FAKE PLANE in this video?
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Unread postby nonhocapito on Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:23 am

brianv 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:16 AM wrote: Where is the FAKE PLANE in this video?


?
I answered you already, that most likely the plane disappeared in the compression of a 208x125 streaming video. This is no big deal because the video on the web was not a document in itself but only served as a reminder for the public who had seen the plane in the Naudet video on TV in those days.

Again: 208x125. Try to picture that. Never mind the enlarged size you see in youtube. These 2001 streaming videos are incredibly smaller.

But if you don't want to answer any of my questions I don't really see the benefit of this discussion.
Why would they show the planes on TV but not on the web? And if you think they didn't show planes anywhere, what all this fakery theater was all about then?
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby brianv on Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:30 am

nonhocapito 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:23 AM wrote:
brianv 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:16 AM wrote: Where is the FAKE PLANE in this video?


?
I answered you already, that I believe the plane could disappear in a 208x125 streaming video. This is no big deal because the video on the web was not a document in itself but only served as a reminder for the public who had seen the plane in the Naudet video on TV in those days.

But if you don't want to answer any of my questions I don't really see the benefit of this discussion.
Why would they show the planes on TV but not on the web? And if you think they didn't show planes anywhere, what all this fakery theater was all about then?


I'm talking about the CNN Gamma Press video ffs. There is NO airplane. It's got nothing to do with streaming or pixels or compression.

Image

Here is the news from the BBC. "An airplane has crashed into the World Trade Center, unfortunately, in the images we show you you can't see the airplane because it's too small and because of the current bad streaming and it's hiding behind the pixels too. It's really there we promise!"
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Unread postby nonhocapito on Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:37 am

brianv 4 Oct 29 2010, 11:30 AM wrote: I'm talking about the CNN Gamma Press video ffs. There is NO airplane. It's got nothing to do with streaming or pixels or compression.


At first you were talking about the BBC video so I guess I missed the transition...

Anyway, question: is it possible that originally the CNN video was similar to the BBC video? very small, compressed version for the web, subsequently enlarged in youtube? [EDIT: indeed it was. see below]

But let's say the video was really originally produced without a plane. Can I ask you what is your theory, if you have one? Why no plane? <-- please answer this...?

** EDIT: to have an idea of the original size of the "gamma press" CNN 1st hit video, just browse to this page:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/us/2001/09 ... p.med.html
as you see the name of the file contains "gp" for "gamma press": this indeed was the gamma press video.

Now, the video won't load: but it still will show the original size the video was in.
Image
can I roughly estimate that in 240x200? (a look at the source of the page will actually indicate 240x195). In short the video was shrunken for streaming to 240 pixels, and then enlarged by youtube to 640 pixels.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby brianv on Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:13 pm

Tell you what - reproduce the disappearing object by compressing a video and making it small! No further comments until I see the results of the phenomenon you describe!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:04 pm

Great idea.

I'll include that exploration in the Naudet comparison I'm making now.

Not only will all the "first plane" shots be compared, I'll try shrinking them to under 30% and compressing them and seeing if the fake airplane disappears completely.

One thing is already for certain: the shots are retouched and retouched with each "new" release. I am not sure why they would do that as it would serve to debunk the idea of "one original miraculous first plane shot" but there we have it.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 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 1 guest