Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:54 am Post subject: The rabbit hole gets deeper....
Wtf? Has anybody else seen this amateur clip of the north tower supposedly being struck by a 'plane'? I thought there was only the Naudet Brothers who shot it. Look, I dont know what this guy is doing filming here but he is and 'accidentally' films the first impact. Can anybody see a plane in this clip?
How could he "not realise he had captured the 'impact' until a few weeks later"? _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:31 am Post subject:
This is a clip that is loused up with manipulative editing. Notice the cameraman on the left of the screen and his delayed reaction, he only stands upright after the building explodes. He obviously doesnt seem to notice any plane. There is a crafty sequencing of the female screaming which they sample just prior to the explosion. For more effect the clip is strangely dubbed with the dialogue of a fireman explaining that he " saw what millions of people saw", This is blatant media manipulation and very much part of the psy-op.
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
HOLY SH*T! Maybe it was one of these that crashed into the towers... check it out, it's wings keep disapearing and it even fades in and out of view.. WTF!!!!!!!!!!
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:18 am Post subject:
Only a shill would sink so low! _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
HOLY SH*T! Maybe it was one of these that crashed into the towers... check it out, it's wings keep disapearing and it even fades in and out of view.. WTF!!!!!!!!!!
Brilliant! I want one. Do they sell them in Argos yet? _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:41 pm Post subject: Re: The rabbit hole gets deeper....
prole art threat wrote:
Wtf? Has anybody else seen this amateur clip of the north tower supposedly being struck by a 'plane'? I thought there was only the Naudet Brothers who shot it. Look, I dont know what this guy is doing filming here but he is and 'accidentally' films the first impact. Can anybody see a plane in this clip?
How could he "not realise he had captured the 'impact' until a few weeks later"?
I was hoping for some feedback by now. Anyone? _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:48 pm Post subject:
prole art threat wrote:
This is a clip that is loused up with manipulative editing. Notice the cameraman on the left of the screen and his delayed reaction, he only stands upright after the building explodes. He obviously doesnt seem to notice any plane. There is a crafty sequencing of the female screaming which they sample just prior to the explosion. For more effect the clip is strangely dubbed with the dialogue of a fireman explaining that he " saw what millions of people saw", This is blatant media manipulation and very much part of the psy-op.
Come on, Tele, give us your opinion of this one. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:52 pm Post subject: Re: The rabbit hole gets deeper....
prole art threat wants
Quote:
feedback
How do you KNOW the guy on the left can actually see the aircraft?
My wife has such bad eyesight, even with glasses she can't read a number plate at 50ft. If she was in the position the guy on the left was on the day - there is absolutely zero chance of her seeing an aircraft at that distance.
Prove conclusively the guy on the left has 20/20 vision. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:22 pm Post subject: Re: The rabbit hole gets deeper....
telecasterisation wrote:
How do you KNOW the guy on the left can actually see the aircraft?
My wife has such bad eyesight, even with glasses she can't read a number plate at 50ft. If she was in the position the guy on the left was on the day - there is absolutely zero chance of her seeing an aircraft at that distance.
Prove conclusively the guy on the left has 20/20 vision.
What was he doing there, come on, Tele, the chance of him being there at that time, aiming his camera at the toowers, in that position? I dunno 1 in 2.3 trillion? It's even less remote than the Naudet Brothers securing themselves the best seat in the 9/11 cinema.
Coincidence? Isnt that the food the critics regurgitate time and time again when presented with something they have no answer for? Come on, Tele. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
He's sat in traffic fckin around with his video camera. Its not that unusual son. You can still buy copies of "M25 The Movie", some bloke driving the full circuit of the M25 with his camcordert on the dashboard.
Year after that was realesed as a joke yet made thousands of pounds, they released the sequel, same journey, just in the opposite direction.
What conspiratorial reason could there be? That He was involved with the plot to disguise the lack of planes? Another CIA operative I take it?
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:28 pm Post subject: Re: The rabbit hole gets deeper....
prole art threat wrote:
telecasterisation wrote:
How do you KNOW the guy on the left can actually see the aircraft?
My wife has such bad eyesight, even with glasses she can't read a number plate at 50ft. If she was in the position the guy on the left was on the day - there is absolutely zero chance of her seeing an aircraft at that distance.
Prove conclusively the guy on the left has 20/20 vision.
What was he doing there, come on, Tele, the chance of him being there at that time, aiming his camera is about, I dunno 1 in 2.3 trillion? It's even less remote than the Naudet Brothers securing themselves the best seat in the 9/11 cinema.
Coincidence? Isnt that the food the critics regurgitate time and time again when presented with something they have no answer for? Come on, Tele.
So, you think it's strange to see a person pointing a camera at the most famous landmarks in the world, in the center of manhattan, which are on fire and billowing tonnes of thick black smoke?
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject:
kc wrote:
He's sat in traffic fckin around with his video camera. Its not that unusual son. You can still buy copies of "M25 The Movie", some bloke driving the full circuit of the M25 with his camcordert on the dashboard.
Year after that was realesed as a joke yet made thousands of pounds, they released the sequel, same journey, just in the opposite direction.
What conspiratorial reason could there be? That He was involved with the plot to disguise the lack of planes? Another CIA operative I take it?
The point I am making is not disputing that he is filming, but filming at that particular moment? * me, Ive heard of naivety but you lot expouse it more often than you breathe out carbon dioxide. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
You want me to upload the footage I personally filmed from LAX to San Bernardino? About 40 minutes of it.
Not everyone saves camcorders for Birthdays and weddings. I've got some great footage from my house to a local amusement park as I forgot the camera was on and left it on the parcel shelf if you need to see that.
There were millions and MILLIONS of poeple within eye line of WTC, you think only one of them ownded a camera?
BTW, how come this guys tapes werent stolen by the MIB's to insert the CGI plane, or were they?
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:38 pm Post subject:
kc wrote:
You want me to upload the footage I personally filmed from LAX to San Bernardino? About 40 minutes of it.
Not everyone saves camcorders for Birthdays and weddings. I've got some great footage from my house to a local amusement park as I forgot the camera was on and left it on the parcel shelf if you need to see that.
There were millions and MILLIONS of poeple within eye line of WTC, you think only one of them ownded a camera?
BTW, how come this guys tapes werent stolen by the MIB's to insert the CGI plane, or were they?
Not the first hit of the North tower, you dooofus! _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:38 pm Post subject: Re: The rabbit hole gets deeper....
prole,
I don't get the coincidence aspect. There are tourists taking pictures, what is the coincidence?
If I were in his position on the day, given the circumstances, I would expect aircraft to potentially flypast the burning WTC. At that distance there was no real way of knowing that the plane wasn't simply going to fly past the tower and the world knew nothing of the terrorism aspect until after the second plane hit.
He may well have seen the aircraft and never anticipated it was going to steam into a building. Hence no reaction - after all, the entire episode caught the world wrong footed. Is he expected to jump up and down prior to the plane impacting - it may then have taken a few seconds to sink in what he had witnessed.
You do seem to wiggle about when asked specific questions and you never come back and agree that in this instance, he may well just have poor eyesight - it is as likely an explanation as any other.
Obviously we cannot say with any certainty why the geezer on the left did not react in 'keeping' with the situation or the quality of his eyesight. To say it is odd that he is filming at that very moment - perhaps he had been taking pictures for 30 minutes prior as well and we have just seen the edited section?
Again, this is more jiggery-pokery that substantiates nothing. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:45 pm Post subject:
What about the hysterical woman, is she actually there because they dont even react to her, either? It looks like there are three seperate events taking place magically moulded together to brainwash jolly good citizens like yourself, Tele. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
What about the hysterical woman, is she actually there because they dont even react to her, either? It looks like there are three seperate events taking place magically moulded together to brainwash jolly good citizens like yourself, Tele.
Do I conclude that the condescending card has been played in response to you not liking my reply? I am always suspicious of the use of emoticons, they seem to always be used when the poster is unable to fully make the point sufficiently with words.
We now switch to the woman, ok.
People react in differing ways to every scenario.
I recently read a book written by someone in a concentration camp, how some people screamed and fought not to be shot, whilst others just accepted it. A woman screaming whilst the geezer with glasses doesn't get agitated only endorses my point. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:04 pm Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
prole art threat wrote:
What about the hysterical woman, is she actually there because they dont even react to her, either? It looks like there are three seperate events taking place magically moulded together to brainwash jolly good citizens like yourself, Tele.
Do I conclude that the condescending card has been played in response to you not liking my reply? I am always suspicious of the use of emoticons, they seem to always be used when the poster is unable to fully make the point sufficiently with words.
We now switch to the woman, ok.
People react in differing ways to every scenario.
I recently read a book written by someone in a concentration camp, how some people screamed and fought not to be shot, whilst others just accepted it. A woman screaming whilst the geezer with glasses doesn't get agitated only endorses my point.
It is not the woman's hysteria that troubles me it is the lack of reaction from the blokes with the cameras. She's not there. Now please refer to the narration comprising of dialoguge fron a fireman. Why?? Listen carefully to what the fireman is verbally conveying.
Oh and I promise not to use another emoticon on you ever again. (Whoops) _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
(Whoops)