Would Snowy, Fallious or any other staunch anti NPT-er care to explain to me the anomaly as highlighted in the frames centering on the 5.19 timeslot. It appears that footage was broadcast showing an intact nose-cone of a plane exiting the South Tower (4.33) from a Fox TV helicopter shot.
While the idea of holograms in the sky is IMO ludicrous, I have read more on conjuring tricks pulled on the public and know that deceptions are possible.
Remember Bush's compulsion to say he 'saw' the first plane hit the tower? Maybe he protesteth too much?
It also may explain why the floors hit were re-inforced computer areas. Because something was required to create the blast pyrotechnics and apparent building damage. Could 911 have been Hollywood?
Did not someone on this forum (perhaps more than one person) know an eye witness in NY who saw the second plane? Who was it?
Would Snowy, Fallious or any other staunch anti NPT-er care to explain to me the anomaly as highlighted in the frames centering on the 5.19 timeslot. It appears that footage was broadcast showing an intact nose-cone of a plane exiting the South Tower (4.33) from a Fox TV helicopter shot.
just been reading this thread in which september clues is discussed to death:
for CGI, and unless the you tube clip is a forgery, then the September Clues video is at best misguided when it claims the nose-cone appearing at the opposite side of the South Tower was due to a CGI anomaly. Does make one wonder whether the nose-cone was not perhaps specially re-inforced to aid penetration... _________________ Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:38 pm Post subject:
rodin wrote:
Does make one wonder whether the nose-cone was not perhaps specially re-inforced to aid penetration...
Not only that, but they also modelled 'it' on something akin to the Bugs Bunny version of a generic Douglas DC series rather than anything like a B767.
Un homage from one cartoon artist to another, perhaps?
As subsequent frames show, it's most likely a hi-speed plume of debris surrounding the engine, with multi-generation over-compression giving it a solid look for about 4 frames only. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
for CGI, and unless the you tube clip is a forgery, then the September Clues video is at best misguided when it claims the nose-cone appearing at the opposite side of the South Tower was due to a CGI anomaly. Does make one wonder whether the nose-cone was not perhaps specially re-inforced to aid penetration...
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:39 pm Post subject:
mason-free party wrote:
so where was the nose cone in the street below where it came out?...nowhere because it was just a tv image i suspect
Your missing the extremely valid point MFP
IF the "nose out" footage from the East side was a CGI mistake, as claimed in NPT (and never followed through as the engine continues towards the ground), WHY would the "nose out" from the west side shown in "september clues" ALSO be a CGI mistake? "They" are so incompetant they fooked it up twice?
OR: A REAL world event being tragically spun and misrepresented by the NPT stable?
Guess which one adds up?
Quote:
Not only that, but they also modelled 'it' on something akin to the Bugs Bunny version of a generic Douglas DC series rather than anything like a B767.
Un homage from one cartoon artist to another, perhaps?
Chek calls it: When are we going to get to peer review this data, as offered in "september Clues"? And how do we find "Social Service" to get this aparently empirical data?
More con-jobbing to hook the gullable _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
maybe so, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that the people pimping this kind of nonsense all over the internet are deliberately spreading disinfo. I watched this superb critique of the BBC's conspiracy files programme on 9/11 today....
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:02 pm Post subject:
gruts wrote:
John White wrote:
More con-jobbing to hook the gullable
maybe so, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that the people pimping this kind of nonsense all over the internet are deliberately spreading disinfo. I watched this superb critique of the BBC's conspiracy files programme on 9/11 today....
....and it struck me just how many powerful arguments for an inside job disappear once you've joined the no planes/space beams cult.
coincidence?
When you put it like that and see what's left - whaddawe got?
Rodriguez with his pre-impact explosions is a liar.
Jones and his molten iron is a plant.
The thermite flow immediately prior to collapse is a fake.
There were no hi-jackers.
There was no NORAD stand down....
Are we even sure there was any criminal activity that day?
Well yeah - Fred the office clerk for all we know and ..er.... "researcher" can "prove" TV fakery, and the big bad mil-ind complex is "hiding" black tech that's never been seen, yet is "known" to exist.... by a group with apparently zero technical expertise and seemingly little general knowledge calling themselves "researchers".
What are the penalties for using space beams without a permit and not sticking to scheduled programming, anyway?
You might have a damn good point that makes a lot of sense gruts _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
the more I think about it the more obvious it becomes that pushing the NPT/space beams angle systematically undermines the strongest arguments for 9/11 being an inside job....
I mean it's not like the perps very quickly and secretively removed the steel from ground zero is it? they must have been pretending to remove fake steel because a beam from outer space "dustified" it so it was never really there! we know this because judy wood looked at a few photos and reckons it's true so it must be - right? is it coincidental that this particular fairy tale neatly lets the perps off the hook by replacing a real smoking gun with a science fiction story?
and all that evidence about the CIA funding the pakistani ISI and the pakistani ISI funding al qaeda is also irrelevant because there were no hijackers and no planes! so why bother investigating that?
and as for all those links between the bush and bin laden families, able danger, siebel edmonds, john o'neill etc etc....
who cares? no planes!
explosions at the WTC? nah - no point investigating that either - it was a space beam stupid! and william rodriguez must be a liar (just like the OCT supporters say he is)....
and who cares about thermite and why they didn't investigate if it was used (as it's mandatory for crime scenes involving fire)? it's irrelevant because a space beam did it and steven e jones must be a liar too (just as the OCT supporters say he is)!
and there's no point speculating about the apparent ease with which the hijackers took control of the planes and the fact that none of them were vey good pilots and how they managed to find their targets without any assistance from air traffic control - because there were no planes!
and operation northwoods didn't mention space beams so it's irrelevant and probably fake too!
and all the evidence that drills of the scenarios that happened on 9/11 were practiced before 9/11 and that control over NORAD was taken away from the military and given to dick cheney in june 2001 and the "coincidence" of multiple wargames/hijacking simulations taking place on 9/11 is also irrelevant because there were no planes!
September Clues was the first "no-plane" material I checked out and has made me dig deeper. Have collected some material at http://100777.com/911/tv_fakery and am downloading some high-resolution 911 clips to check it out myself (Internet Archive only has low-resolution clips now?)
Here's a rather interetesting little clip that shows bluescreen/chroma gone wrong, that I made a GIF animation of:
for example - watch the first 2 sections of part 1 of "september clues" - which make bold claims about carefully edited clips of the news coverage shown on CNN and CBS - and then watch the unedited footage that these clips were created from.
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
