FAKING THE RUBBLE

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 hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 27, 2010 2:03 pm

Since after the rubble was removed from "ground zero", the whole block showed itself as being entirely under the level of the street for many feet. How would that be possible, if it was not already basically voided of structures during the demolition of the towers?



Copperfield is a great explanation for something we don't understand. A trick is a trick because we don't know how it's done, so there is no reason to exclude the term now just because we don't think the man himself was involved. (Wow, everyone is turning into literalists these days! Our job is going well. :P )

If I were using my own default logic, however, I would agree with you. I see no other explanation at this time except a combination of expedient removal, posing of propaganda elements (real or digital) and a large amount of debris going into the holes. There was - after all - a subway connecting employees to the WTC. Can something better be suggested than what you say yet? I don't know.

How was the thing shipped? In the Naudet film - which we might only believe because it would be hard to hide - they had construction cranes there for lifting to ships.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5057
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread postby nonhocapito on Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:29 pm

reel.deal 4 Oct 27 2010, 11:08 AM wrote: Image
Image


The contradiction between the two pictures is striking... anyway there could be the following logic:

The shot with the photoshopped firemen is proposed as an "earlier" picture, judging by the larger quantity of possibly photoshopped smoke. Maybe from the evening of 9/11. The picture with the car is proposed as a "later" shot, maybe of the morning after, when the first excavators have started making way by moving the larger pieces of rubble to the sides of church and cortland street (including the cars and other big chunks of metal).

Maybe, just maybe, this is supposed to be the same car, shown in cortland street before being piled up with other rubble:

Image

Never forget that to be useful in providing clues, the imagery should be clearly positioned in time, and when it comes to the rubble, the time can span across many days.

But maybe my assumptions are totally wrong. reel.deal, what is the source for the pictures? Are those screenshots from a documentary or something?
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby simonshack on Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:07 pm

nonhocapito 4 Oct 27 2010, 03:29 PM wrote:Maybe, just maybe, this is supposed to be the same car, shown in cortland street before being piled up with other rubble:

Never forget that to be useful in providing clues, the imagery should be clearly positioned in time, and when it comes to the rubble, the time can span across many days.




By Jove, Watson! You're darn right! That's most probably (meant to be) the very same police car.
Hmmm, so let's see....this is what must have happened:

Dialogue between firefighters/demolition-cleaners Bob and John:

Bob: "Hey, that police car looks too clean. Let's set it on fire and flip it on its roof!"

John: "Cool idea, Bob! Let's do it !"

Bob: "Ok, and now d'you see that white-spotted, leaning black building?"

John: "Yeah?"

Bob: "Let's set it on fire too - those chalky white spots are just silly ! "

Image

Never forget, Watson..."Step one: Eliminate the impossible" - or, in this case, "the utterly preposterous"... <_<
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6687
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Unread postby nonhocapito on Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:28 pm

simonshack 4 Oct 27 2010, 07:07 PM wrote:Never forget, Watson..."Step one: Eliminate the impossible". (or, in this case, "the utterly preposterous"...) <_<


You're right, it makes no sense. My bad.
And in this picture at the same scenery, we have the firemen and the "civilian" car, but no police car on top of it.

Image
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Unread postby simonshack on Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:55 pm

nonhocapito @ Oct 27 2010, 06:28 PM wrote:
And in this picture at the same scenery, we have the firemen and the "civilian" car, but no police car on top of it.



Yes, nonhocapito, "we have firemen" in this last version you posted.

Firemen. Firemen all over the place. Idle, absurdly and ridiculously inactive firemen - just STANDING around doing nothing. The recently released, high-quality "Rubble Imagery" is sprinkled with these uniforms - and so was the old, horrid, low-resolution, aquarell-colored 9/11 imagery which I have become intimately familiar with over the years. In fact, we (imagery researchers) were all EXPECTING that they would release wonderfully crisp, high-resolution imagery at some stage. That's precisely what they have done - gradually - and now in 2010 we are offered superbly sharp imagery...

A frame from an older History Channel documentary:
Image

It's all a flamin' joke. :angry:
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6687
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:58 pm

What could be the reason for a big player like History Channel to use such atrocious quality unless they were trying to cover up their CGI technology?
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5057
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread postby Terence.drew on Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:34 am

Rubble in the Jungle. ReALIty versus ...?

Here is an account of post 911 Manhattan from the point of view of the impact it had on a business.

The story of a gym.

"Then, on Sept. 11, things went from bad to worse.

Few businesses in the U.S. were unaffected by the tragedy of September 11, and none were affected more than those located in the shadow of where the Twin Towers once stood. Tribeca is one of those areas. Authorities shut down lower Manhattan, which looked as though martial law had been declared. All businesses not related to the financial markets were essentially closed because employees and customers could not get to their locations.

"It took us weeks to get back down there," says Wilson. "At one point, when we were trying to get our contracting crew down there, they wouldn't let them in without some sort of letter because the area was heavily patrolled. We couldn't get any trucks in. It was just very restricted."

Meanwhile, losses at 24/7-Tribeca would amount to almost 3,000 a day while the doors remained shut in the aftermath of the tragedy. At least 20% of the gym's prepaid members worked at the World Trade Center. To help offset the losses, Washington and Wilson had stopped drawing full salaries by the end of September. "As far as sales were concerned, that was the end of it," Wilson laments. Though there was no damage to the Tribeca location structurally, the damage to the business was dramatic. "We put in an application to the Downtown Alliance and we did get a grant from them for 25,000. They also gave us a 25,000 loan."

NEW BEGINNINGS

Tribeca would finally become more accessible in December, and 24/7-Tribeca would open its doors on January 2, 2002, one year after it was purchased, six months behind schedule, and 150,000 over projected costs."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... ntent;col1

Martial Law. Papers please - or no entry. Only 'business' people allowed access to lower Man. Not until December before the situation eases. How difficult would it be to hide Godzilla under such circumstances never mind a realistic rubble pile? It seems a little corner of North Korea migrated to NY and settled merrily down there for some Autumnal session Sun King Kim loving.

(caveat on above post 911 account - "At least 20% of the gym's prepaid members worked at the World Trade Center. " ? maybe they were booked in but never turned up. This peppers this account somewhat. Anymore accounts of post 911 lock down?)

This photo looks real but is credited to FEMA! ? Yous lads eyes are more honed than mine.
Anyway the sides of the buildings facing the site are completely covered in enormous red curtains? Are there a few fellows working in here? These are on display in a number of photos. Officially to 'protect' these facades or something, but unofficially to 'shield' prying eyes? This picture looks real to me but the date of October 4th I would say is rubbish.


Image

And another dated October 15th?


Image


911 like the moon missions and nuke weapons is above all simply an illusion. The grip on the people is so tenuous and so abstract the illusion becomes necessary to balloon the tiny minority and balloon their power base. The hint of things 'missing' from the rubble ,office stuff etc. actually comes from the firefighters in the Naud brothers flimsy( c.f. the 'brotherhood') as does the boom boom boom controlled demolition part of the narrative. These are taken up seamlessly by the 'truther' movement. The desired result? Advanced technologies. To mesmerize. Manoeuvrings and high powered know how thermite firmware 2.2 from the Government. Wow
impressive and scary. Everything just turned to dust. Wow. A small dusty debris pile.

When in fact it probably took 3 months to get it down to this level and a million angle grinder rings.

The moon, 911, nukes, sames tricks different pony.

And then we come to this image. All paths lead back to Kubrick. The master and (evil?) genius of illusion.

The last Beam.

Image


A Discovery


Image


A monolith


Image
Terence.drew
Member
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Unread postby idschmyd on Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:15 pm

Terence.drew 4 Oct 28 2010, 01:34 AM wrote:Rubble in the Jungle. ReALIty versus ...?


Perhaps it was the joke that knocked everyone out? Interesting post, showing the smoking flatland that was GZ. Red curtains seem not to have been issued to all buildings with view of the site, but perhaps there wasn't really much to hide from viewers in the buildings, assuming explosive residue would have been invisible, and missing bodies, plane parts and rubble not noticed or questioned. The Manhattan lock-down seems clear enough, but looking for more info. First hand account, anyone?

"Lower Manhattan, south of 14th Street, was off-limits, except for rescue and recovery workers.[24]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_and ... 11_attacks

Still not clear why the lock-down, except to keep people out of GZ itself.
idschmyd
Member
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:33 pm

Unread postby simonshack on Sun Oct 31, 2010 7:18 pm

*
For years, I 'knew' that only ONE photographer had access to Ground Zero.
I thought it was time to remind everybody about this dude...

JOEL MEYEROWITZ

" the only photographer allowed unrestricted access to ground zero immediately following the attack":


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Meyerowitz

ImageImageImage
http://www.phaidon.com/aftermath/



From the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum
Photograph by Joel Meyerowitz captioned:
"11 MILLION DOLLARS"

Image

http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/exhibits/2002-after_911/

Also check out the other lovely pics such as "Gardener in the Garden of the Dead" and that ripped American flag...
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6687
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Unread postby Terence.drew on Wed Nov 03, 2010 2:28 pm

Can't beat a bit of Ballet ..O the high culture of it all!


reel.deal 4 Nov 3 2010, 12:47 PM wrote:

Image





Product placement and little joke at our expense. Look in the mirror.

Image

The Medusa was also present in NY on that day. Lots of stone statues walk around B)

Image

Image
Terence.drew
Member
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:55 pm

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:30 pm

Nice spotting, terence. Dang!

Look away! Look away! Don't study these pictures too hard ... absorb and move on. Absorb and move on.

naivE indeed!
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5057
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread postby brianv on Wed Nov 03, 2010 6:27 pm

Brilliant! Inciteful!

Naive - classic!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Unread postby simonshack on Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:28 pm

Don't you just love tough-feeted women.?...Ouch!

Image
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6687
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: FAKING THE RUBBLE

Unread postby Tufa on Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:04 pm

This is clearly a real picture from the 911 event:

Image

To see why the picture is real, and understand what it tell us, we look at the cross section of the WTC perimeter
beam at the yellow arrow.

Image

The WTC beams was thicker at the base and thinner as we move upwards the tower.
This drawing show the details at an intermediate position:

Image

We calculate the steel cross section by:
(Length)x(Thickness) =( 368.3 + 342.9 + 342.9 + 317.5)mm x(12.7mm) = 1371.6*12.7 mm2 = 17419.32 mm2

The joint between the perimeter beams consisted of four one inch bolts, or a cross section of 4x506.7mm2=2027m2.
The beams where also welded. The welding of the beams is argued as follows:

1) On a windy day, if the beams (using only bolts) move due to wind force, the chief engineer will go to history as the man who built the screaming towers of N.Y.
2) Comparing the steel cross sections, it makes sense.
3) The additional construction costs are approx two full-time welders on each tower. This is not very expensive.
4) Archive photo exists that show welding in progress; see "Building the WTC".

On these grounds we add (342.9 + 342.9 + 368.3)x(12.7) = 13387m2 for a total of 15413mm2.


We now look carefully at the end of the beam, shown by a green arrow:

Image

At the green arrow, at the joint, we have 15413mm2 of steel and the beam itself is 17419mm2. We conclude the
the joint is approximately as strong as the beam, so if a force of some kind twist or rip apart the beam,
we would see serious structural failure at the joint (Green arrow). The beam at the green arrow looks straight
and undamaged; then should also the adjacent beam still be attached. Cutting the beam with a shape-charge,
during demolition or afterwards, cannot produce an unconnected beam and is never done in straight angle
relative to the beam. In passing we also add that the strength of the bolts usually is a bit higher for each square mm
compared to the ordinary steel.

The conclusion is that the beam on the picture was never bolted and welded with any other beam
when the tower was demolished. It has been put on the rubble pile afterwards.

The main point is that this hold true independent of demolition mechanism. The most probable (in my personal opinion the
only possible) scenario is an intentional controlled demolition by shape-charges. If you fancy the official
licorice-steel-and-fire scenario (completely impossible and also absurd) the picture is still in error.
Look at the picture, at the green arrow, and see how idiotic it really is! If you fancy some UFO style directed energy weapons
demolition (ha!), the picture is still wrong. It still don't go.

So we can conclude that the picture is not from the WTC crash site,
so it was taken at some other site! This hold for all possible,
impossible, or your own favourite demolition scenario!


This is also why the "Planes" simply don't go. If you wish to stretch the entire beam as required to make a dent
into the tower, the stress in the steel during a plastic deformation would be approx 550N/mm2. The trick is that
17419mm2*550N/mm2 = 9.5MN or 976 tons. Approx 10% of this force (the force vector) would be directed against the
"plane". The beam is only 36 cm wide, and the fuselage, or a wing, cannot concentrate 100 tons of force to only 36 cm
width to cut the beam. (Only the engine of the "plane" can do this.)

The WTC towers had a perimeter beam (36cm) for each meter of the tower wall (36cm/100cm). Whenever you see a picture
(video, photo) of the "hole" in the WTC tower, you know the picture is a fake. A plane cannot go through.
Aluminium is a much softer metal compared to steel.

* * * *

We now apply what we have learned on the WTC crash-site photos. Here is a typical photo:

Image

We first check the beams, that we see clearly on the photo. We then proceed with an association technique: We learn to recognise the appearance
of the orange beams with a white border, and from now on, when we see them we KNOW that it is not the WTC crash site that we look at.
It is some other site set up for photography and video.

Image

It is easy to see that we have the orange beams, or orange/brown beams, also on this picture. The steel thickness of the beams also look
peculiar, they look very thin, and possibly the beams are made of board/wood!?

Image

This picture might be a bit more tricky, but you see the orange beams in the back. There is also
a beam of the typical flat-end type, if you enlarge a hi-resolution version of the picture.
The man on the right; see his brand new helmet :), looks like he only need a price tag to go
on display as a dummy in a shop window.

Image

Some objects are very characteristic. Look carefully at the house or some debris, or the "remaining" WTC façade.
Learn what these items looks like, so you can spot the duplicate crash side from a distance.

We recognise the orange beams; you can also check the minute details and see that the ends of the beams
are like on the fake crash site. Note that there is also "documentary film" taken from the fake site.

Image

The picture of N.Y. is of course a real picture! The crash site; we now know that THIS crash site was
not the real one. It has been glued into the picture. My personal thought is that the WTC towers was present
when this N.Y. picture was taken, and the towers have been washed away, but I can find no clear evidence for
this. Another alternative would be that only the crash site has been replaced.
Photos from "public_images_WTC Photos.zip.torrent"
Tufa
Member
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:13 pm

Re: FAKING THE RUBBLE

Unread postby Heiwa on Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:48 pm

@Tufa

You make sense, Tufa. As all 'live on TV' pictures sent on 9-11 were just a bad movie running on all 5 major US TV channels with its amateurish animations and simulations of plane crashes into towers and strange 'collapses' of WTC1/2 from top down, while the real towers were destroyed from bottom up using standard explosives (like WTC7), it is logical that also all pictures of the rubble are fake.
As in all probability the towers were destroyed at ground level (NYFD fire fighters testifying about explosives going off in the lobbies, etc) and then came down by gravity as per usual controlled demolition of steel structures (floors on top of each other, exterior wall panels buckled, core columns cut off at regular intervals and standing beside each other in the rubble, etc), all rubble also had to be faked = a mess of wall panels and some columns as shown. The perps didn't know what to do with the floors so they were left out completely. The result became the strange pictures of rubble that have flooded the net. Good work!
Heiwa
Banned
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 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