The "There were thousands of witnesses" myth

[SmokingGunII]

The recent closure of the Shack gave me the opportunity to re-visit some of my old videos. I feel it is important that we re-visit much of the ORIGINAL material that was released during and immediately after the event as I believe the powers that be thought that this would be enough to convince the world that 19 evil doers flew commercial planes into the WTC towers. However, I also believe that they underestimated the depth of research that the genuine truth movement would undertake to uncover the truth of the lie - something they are now desperately trying to contain with the release of new "footage" and infiltration. The original footage holds the key to solving the hoax.

I wanted to expand on the following research in more detail, but work commitments will not allow me the time to post numerous detailed posts - I hope some of you will have the time to add further information.

One of the biggest misconceptions of the 9/11 hoax was that it was one of the most filmed event in history. The fact that so many telephone callers and "amateur" videographers were linked to the Mainstream media/Hollywood or CGI industries has already been established, but if so many people have footage of the event one would think that by now it would have been released to the waiting world?

Watching the beginning of "9/11 In Memoriam" I discovered much more "amateur" footage associated to names I hadn't seen any research on - could these be the type of genuine everyday New Yorkers that might confirm the veracity of the official narrative? Here are the amater videographers as chronologically shown in the said film:

Naudet Brothers
Jules and Gideon need no introduction to 9/11 researchers other than that they are smack bang in the middle of the hoax.

Kevin Segalla
(Chambers St) Runs film tax credit company links to De Niro and ABC

Kim Abramson
Worth St (possible pharmaceutical connections, haven't had time to delve any deeper)

Mi-Kyung Heller
Franklin St - I don't believe this is a real person. A telephone conversation in the background suggests it could have been a missile that hit the WTC. Red herring (see Rumsfeld's slip at the Pentagon)

Jim Huibregtse
West Side Highway (professional photographer) http://www.jimhuibregtse.com/#p=-1&a=0&at=0

Pilots Walsh & Hayes

Mohammed Awad – (Reuters)
West St - Friend of Clinton
http://wn.com/Mohammed_Awad

Angelo Martin – photojournalist WABC – West St
Hard to ascertain if this guy exists or not. Like many others involved in 9/11 the name appears in the IMDB – there was also an "Angelo Martin" involved in an art show 11 sept 2010.

Park Foreman – Brooklyn Heights (well known to researchers)

Scott Myers – John St (also well known to researchers)– Navy & ABC connections.

Evan Fairbanks – Needs no introduction although, interestingly, according to IMDB, he has had no work from 2001-2010 apart from one episode of TV makeover show! What does he live on?

Michael Kovalenko – King St –
Another one with an IMDB profile. Someone of the same name is an Ass VP Credit Suisse NY (I can’t find his purported location on streetview?)

Ronald S Pordy – (professional photographer) Removed Pordyworks site with footage.

Michael Toole – Desbrosses St – (Again, I can’t find location on streetview?) Another manufactured person from the IDMB?

Lesli Klainberg – Lafayette st (viewing position appears extremely elevated) Film Producer – worked for ABC Disney
Using my newly created 3d model of the WTC and crosschecking where she could film the towers from such an elevated height - I discovered the only building within the sightlines of any height is the 179m high 26 Federal Plaza, home of the FBI. Lesli does work for the anti defamation League and gay community.

Luigi Cazzaniga – Park Place (haven't found anything to date - could be another fake id, seems like a generic Italian name)

Bruno Levy – Church St http://www.brunolevy.com/about.html This name also appears in IDMB.

Devin Clark – 34th St (well known to researchers)

Steve Spak – WTC after collapse (FDNY & EMS photographer)
http://www.stevespak.com/index.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02hf7eBQTi8 Caught out at Ground Zero!


Etienne Sauret – Director/documentary maker, many connected to 9/11 after the event. See IMDB profile.

LIVE witnesses: (Viacom owns CBS)

Other notable witnesses:
Mark Obenhaus - Film Producer/Director - worked with Peter Jennings on JFK "hit" piece.
Stewart Nurick – CBS early Show intern, coordinator on Colbert Report Comedy Central
Theresa Renaud – wife of CBS Early Show producer, jack Renaud.
Mary Cozza – http://www.telecommarketnews.com/2008/0 ... nounc.html

Sid Bedingfield – (promoted February 2002)
Bedingfield has held key positions on both the international and domestic networks at CNN over the past 19 years. He helped launch CNN International as a separate network with its own original programming and served as CNNI's senior executive producer of live programming for five years. During that time, he served in the field as senior producer on such major news events as the election of Nelson Mandela in South Africa, the U.S. occupation of Haiti, the elections of Boris Yeltsin in Russia and the British handover of Hong Kong to China.

Later, Bedingfield served as executive vice president and general manager of the CNN/US network, overseeing all programming and personnel issues. He oversaw the network's coverage of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and their aftermath. In his most recent position, Bedingfield oversaw CNN Productions, a documentary and long-form unit that produced and acquired about 50 hours of programming each year for CNN/US and CNN International.


So where are all the everyday witnesses?

[hoi.polloi]

Perhaps the day was hazy and no footage could be recorded. New Yorkers live in a certain amount of daily city haze that they might assume is a normal sky - especially New Yorkers who have never left NYC. The problem - of course - would be the distant views of the towers - were they possibly even more hazy if there was a haze? The distance would allow for a better view of the towers, say from New Jersey.

Notice how all the confirmed propaganda introductions such as Naudets begin by saying it is such a "clear" blue day - easy to see everything for miles! Yow, what a day! Etc. etc.

This does seem a rather suspicious thing to emphasize constantly. Was it really all that clear? Might there have been an actual hurricane? Just what could people see?

Does anyone know how to add the WTC to Google Earth? We could start to figure out the height that smoke would have to reach to obscure street view of the towers.

I don't think it's all that important to prove what happened on 9/11. However, it would be interesting to note whether there are many places within New York to see the towers.

[ThemDarnBats]

Inneresting.....

Synchronicity happening.

I took a walk yesterday down to the piers in Jersey City, just a few blocks down from my apartment. It got me thinking about how many people in west Brooklyn, Jersey City and Hoboken must have had the fortuitous opportunity to view both "live" footage and real life events simultaneously from their homes or workplaces.

What I thought would be interesting would be to see how many people used the television to give them up-to-date information on the unfolding events as the actual view they had was obscured. Does anyone know of any such accounts?

I have 3 witnesses (one of them a life time family friend) who claim to have been in midtown Manhattan when the towers fell and seeing it clearly. I need to ascertain exactly where they were watching from and whether or not they are applying selective memory based on the follow-up media coverage and "eye witness accounts". Did they just see a shit load of smoke and noise? Does the constant after-the-fact images make them believe the chaotic scene they witnessed was in fact 2 neatly self-engulfing mega skyscrapers?

[hoi.polloi]

Confirmed eye-witness testimony is precisely what this research needs. Yet, I don't believe eye-witnesses from New York are reliable since I have talked to several who claim to have seen airplanes -- only later to admit that they saw it on television and actually didn't see any real planes with their eyeballs.

To them, the TV and reality are inseparable.

Even if you can present an extremely persuasive story in one direction or another, we will never even have a guess about how true it is. I am not sure how useful it is to have you talk about witnesses. Feel free to give your spiel though.

Can you imagine how tired we are of hearing stories from people who turn out to be perps? Just keep that in mind if we aren't exactly jumping up and down for your 'real' testimonies. One thing we would ask is that if someone is going to tell a story here, they actually be online and registered instead of talking through you as if you are channeling/interviewing/taking dictation from them. If you have a real witness, get them registered so they can talk about it in their own words and we can do our own attempts at confirming their identity instead of taking more anonymous word.

[ThemDarnBats]

One thing we would ask is that if someone is going to tell a story here, they actually be online and registered instead of talking through you as if you are channeling/interviewing/taking dictation from them. If you have a real witness, get them registered so they can talk about it in their own words and we can do our own attempts at confirming their identity instead of taking more anonymous word.

Agreed

[Tufa]

I have had, for some time, the opinion that smoke (smoke generators) with psychological effects control the real witnesses into believing the TV version. If they also took photos or film, it may be of low quality, and reasonably match the TV version. On way to achieve this is to change the time scale. You could run a separate TV version for New York, that start with the "Towers" only after 9:03. You could simply close one or two broadcast feeds a while. So no one in N.Y. know any, except possibly if some one calls in from the outside. (You can also cut the phones.)

Then, when the time is right, you turn on smoke generators in both towers at the same time. (Smoke is very cheap and simple.) Then, suddenly, all N.Y. citizen can look out their window, take film and photos and watch TV! It will take a super strong mind to distil the real from the TV based upon that "just a while ago" the WTC1 was still OK, so the TV must be a fake!!
(This was a speculation or a hypothesis.)

The problem is basically:

A real witness will typically have only a small piece of information.

He/She will typically still believe the "official" version. I have found intelligent people who don't believe into "a conspiracy" to the degree that they find the "19 Arabs" issue unbelievable!

[hoi.polloi]

Not only is New York smelly as heck (it basically smells of death and sewage every other block) such that if some part of it were on fire, I am sure it would smell simply awful, please keep in mind that the "burning bodies" smell reported by some people can be attributed to a couple other things:

1. Imagination (during the War of the Worlds hoax, people smelled burning flesh - and some shot guns at their own town's water tower - thinking it was an alien invasion vessel and forgetting for the moment that they had a water tower in that spot).

and

2. Smell synthesis - http://www.hauntedprops.com/product-p/s ... ditive.htm (Note that the first selection is "BURNT FLESH")

And there are more chemically realistic options as well. The people connected to MITRE/RAND are in every industry - including and especially chemical scientists who are connected to the defense department.

[Tufa]

So where are all the everyday witnesses?

I just think that it would be possible to find one reliable witness ?

[Heiwa]

So where are all the everyday witnesses?

I just think that it would be possible to find one reliable witness ?

Here are three witnesses:

http://www.youtube.com/v/FGGP20137SA?fs=1&hl=sv_SE

In order to destroy WTC1&2 you have to start with the bottom = ground floor = lobby. NYFD fire fighters are reliable witnesses.

[D.Duck]

Here are three witnesses:

http://www.youtube.com/v/FGGP20137SA?fs=1&hl=sv_SE

In order to destroy WTC1&2 you have to start with the bottom = ground floor = lobby. NYFD fire fighters are reliable witnesses.

Yea Heiwa, NYFD fire fighters are the best and most reliable witnesses cos the third one you are referring to, saw a big plane hit the south tower, whoooooopie.

Still trying are we? or still just stupid? Just pick one Heiwa


Best
D.Duck

[simonshack]

Dduck,

I believe Heiwa was just being sarcastic. I don't think anyone over 9 years of age can fail to see the crass acting of those "firefighters".

[Heiwa]

Welome back, D. Duck. Your input I like.

The third fire fighter having seen a plane sneaking up from south hitting WC2 is admittedly quite funny. I assume he was trying to extinguish a fire in WTC1 but you never know .... He looks fresh from the shower ? The second fire fighter is the one I like. He describes explosions at ground level in the lobby (of what building?) or something and so on. Then the first one with a bleeding nose trying to phone mother that he is fine. You wonder how he got nose bleed. Anyway - the only people allowed inside what later became GZ at that time were fire fighters and I assume they have something to say, e.g. the buildings were empty, and so on. As I always say - you can fly any number of planes into tops of skyscrapers ... and nothing happens to the skyscraper below where plane hit. http://heiwaco.tripod.com/tower.htm !

[hoi.polloi]

Come on, Heiwa.

You're buying the obviously planted "controlled demo" stories? If these are all actors covering for one another, which seems to be the case, you'd have to assume the "controlled demo" firefighter actors are whistle-blowing - or being allowed to whistle-blow - while the others are covering the "I lost 300 fake friends" scenario. Your argument that you have a real witness is really weak.

[Questron]

From the comments in this discussion, I'm not sure where you all are going with these "firefighters"... I don't understand why there would be "planted" controlled demo stories. These buildings came down regardless of whether footage was fake and/or just altered. The most probable means was a demolition approach, unless you can imagine some other means... So, there really would be bombs going off throughout the buildings before they collapsed. If there was anyone close or even in the buildings at all they would have heard these. That is definitely one of the pieces to this puzzle... are the news reports of bombs going off before the collapse "fake"? Why would they be? I can't imagine a good reason for the perps to fake news broadcasts which lend credence to the very thing they are trying to hide. Those are most likely real events being reported by real witnesses, so that area could not have been completely shut-down until later. Fake news reports of witnesses hearing bombs would only be useful if the demo used some other means ("scalar weapons"), but what does it matter so long as people know that people on the inside must be involved?

As far as the guy who mentions the plane, notice he says "large Black plane". Well, no commercial airplane is black, but a cruise missile could be or very dark gray. But how would they even see it if they were in the "staging area"?

[hoi.polloi]

I can't imagine a good reason for the perps to fake news broadcasts which lend credence to the very thing they are trying to hide.

Then you have a failure of imagination problem, friend.

The reason perps will admit what they have done or admit close to what they have done is to maintain a shred of credibility. When you are still listening to them, and watching the shiny object they are dangling, you are going to be led right into some other theory. This doesn't work on all people - perhaps it doesn't work on you, which is great - but everyone can be fooled. That is why we simply must be skeptical of all witnesses until a proper investigation of them can be done. If you have any sort of belief in a witness, present it in this thread and let's see if we can't help one another to be reasonable about that alleged witness, shall we? Ask questions that might determine whether that one is "real" or not.

How many firefighter-looking characters are saying there were bombs while also maintaining that they lost 300 phony phirephighter phriends?

If you feel creeped out by the idea that the recorded witnesses have been manipulated in some way, consider that it's even more astonishing that no "real" video or photo has appeared to contradict the perps' stories. Don't you think if they are interested in controlling all the imagery that they would be even more interested in controlling all the witnesses with much more information than a mere picture or video?