Now Playing Tracks

Something missing? This sort of thing has been going on for decades, but those who now realize this are the crazy ones believing in weird conspiracy theories.

This photo published in newspapers around the globe, couldn’t wake up the masses to what’s going on in the media / governments.

You’re all too distracted to see the obvious missing hand, or the planes that approach towers from a different angle, depending on which ‘video’ you’re watching. Your TV showed you a ‘video' of an aluminum plane going through two sides of a steel building, without the nose cone receiving a dent, before it vanished into nothing.

It’s all in front of you, but you either can’t see it, because you’re too distracted by reality TV, sport, celeb gossip, One Direction and the many clones before it or you refuse to see it. The truth is too scary; too much to handle.

The funny thing is, the phrase ‘conspiracy theory’ was coined by the CIA to make those who didn’t believe the official assassination of JFK look like a bunch of crazy people who you should ignore. It worked and decades later, it’s still working.

Most of you will ignore this and continue to think I’m some crazy ‘conspiracy theorist’ and then go about your lives in the same way, continue to believe the fake news and carry on watching the brainwashing television that you love so much.

The above image is from the ‘original no planer’ video here

It looks like the ‘building’ has been hit before the ‘plane’ touches it. Not only that, but the plane is already missing part of the right wing ;)

The shoddy, low budget movie effects convinced the world that planes hit the twin towers and the buildings fell down in dramatic Hollywood style. There’s so much evidence that proves it was computer animations and there’s no excuse to keep believing this hoax.

If this image has made you curious, then you can begin your research by visiting http://www.septemberclues.info

"Now we have articles about a storyline in a tv soap."

"Are these real people?"

"What happens in Eastenders is not news. It is a story. It is not real life. Wake up whoever added this….."

These comments can be found on a Huffington Post article about an upcoming storyline for a UK soap opera. I found it really funny and ironic considering most news is not real life, but stories with fictional characters.

If only these people knew the truth, that the news is as make believe as TV dramas.

Interview with Jeremy Bush. A fake news story about a sinkhole in Florida, 2013.

I’m posting this because I find it funny. Also, this guy is competing with Gene Rosen for the worst acting ever. As usual, note the fake crying and no tears.

I’m sure you know who Gene Rosen is, but if not, then watch the following video. Well, as much as you can tolerate anyway.

BBC Hard Talk, 6th of February 2014 - An interview with William Hague - Original at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTrXVMGf6q8

Stephen Sackur asks about British intervention in Syria. Hague replied, “Well that would be the case if the people thought-we all thought that intervention would solve the problem.”

I don’t know if this was said on purpose or not. The whole show looks scripted to me. This clip reveals the truth about politics and mainstream media.

9/11 Park Foreman Digital Animation Analyzed.

Description:

"Here’s an animated gif version of the Park Foreman FRAUD VIDEO SCREW UP: http://i.imgur.com/PgQni9b.gif (easy to use in message boards)

I don’t know how much more proof is needed that the media is criminal, and is showing the public layered videos. I hope this evidence leads ultimately to a trial, or civilian arrest of heads of media at CNN, ABC, NBC and any other media outlets found connected to showing the public fake images of our nation’s greatest tragedy.

If you don’t think these images are fake, please explain how a hand could be visible in all the “transitional frames” as the skyline drops and the foreground shifts- and how this exact angle of downtown Manhattan could be used in so many videos.”

9/11 NIST Tower 1 Collapse Animation

The following is an excellent post by Simon Shack at Clues Forum.

——

FOUR OF A KIND / the WTC1-collapse assembly line

Dear forum readers,

As you all know, the debate is still raging (uh well - at least outside of this forum!) regarding the question of JUST HOW MUCH of the 9/11 imagery was faked / staged / fabricated. I know full well just how hard it can be (and how much time must be spent) for anyone to formulate his / her personal opinion about what is (in my personal opinion) the foremost / crucial issue of the 9/11 psyop (along with the phony victims, of course). I also know that there are scores of well-intentioned, genuinely interested people out there only wishing to get a better understanding of it all. Therefore I try - from time to time and as best I can - to submit lines of reasoning and logic which may, hopefully, transcend the purely technical aspects of the available 9/11 imagery. So here we go. 

The four below shots are meant to have been captured by four different cameramen standing along Manhattan’s West Side Highway. They are extracted from the NIST-FOIA image pool released in 2010 - and are all sourced to the NIST-FOIA clips they belong to. Please spend a little time observing these four image loops - one by one. Once you’ve done that, I’ll propose a little thought exercise to all Cluesforum readers - new and old alike:

image

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW18Pj-3gHc (at start of clip)

image

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2KVQI_CG8M (at start of clip) ^This one includes an inexplicable cut/edit.

image

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81FVslXmIow (at 1:10)

image

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fg1jmr3n6w (at 5:07)

In order to believe that these four shots are what they are CLAIMED TO BE (i.e. REAL clips shot by REAL cameramen of the REAL WTC1 collapse), you would have to accept that - for these four “sister-clips” to exist - ALL of the following ‘real-world conditions’ were fulfilled (whether by matter of chance, happenstance or karmic serendipity…):

1 - All four cameramen were - for whatever reason - still roaming in the vicinity of the WTC complex at 10:28am (a full 29 minutes after the earlier WTC2 collapse at 9:59am). This, in spite of the officially reported ‘total evacuation’ of Lower Manhattan - which, reportedly, was kicked off soon after the alleged “plane crashes” - one hour or so earlier. 

2 - All four cameramen, no matter how far they were standing from each other / and from the WTC, were pretty much LATERALLY aligned with each other. The LATERAL perspectives of the four shots - although not perfectly identical - are quite remarkably similar.

3 - All four cameramen had their four camera-lenses coincidentally trained on the top floors of WTC1 - at a high zoom level (close-up view) - JUST as WTC1 started to fall. This, in spite of having no possible foreknowledge of the WTC1’s sudden collapse - and in spite of WTC2 having collapsed 29 minutes earlier. They all just hung around there for half-an-hour, a few hundred yards away from the WTC complex, filming away (undisturbed by the ongoing evacuation). 

4 - All four cameramen (quite coincidentally / by pure happenstance) decided to perform a manual or motorized zoom-out motion - within seconds of the WTC1 collapse inititation - and quite successfully so (all four zoom out motions being remarkably progressive and smooth - with minimal amounts of camera shake or motion blur). 

5 - All four cameramen had nerves of steel - and remained calm and composed while all around them, screaming people were running away from the scene in dire panic.


°°°°°°°°°°°

Our collective work here at Cluesforum submits a more plausible and logical explanation (and I hope no one minds me “speaking for all” on this occasion). What we are looking at is digitally fabricated imagery or, if you will, (fairly)’realistic-looking’ computer animations. There is certainly no question that such technology exists, since Hollywood movie productions use it everyday - and have been doing so way before 2001. To simulate a crumbling building - in reasonably realistic-looking manner - and to produce various “camera angles” of its collapse (from a main template crafted in a 3D environment) is well within the reach of ANY high-end movie studio. 

THE MIRACLE ZOOMS: http://www.septemberclues.info/miracle_zooms.shtml
As a former sports photographer / cameraman, I know from experience that the very last thing I would want to do - while in the midst of capturing a sudden and dramatic split-second event - is to perform a zoom-in or zoom-out motion. This, for a number of reasons which I trust anyone (who has ever handled a camera) can intuitively fathom. Instead, the 9/11 imagery is replete with such zoom ins/ zoom outs - almost to the point of being an absurd “trademark” of the various, crucial 9/11 ‘money shots’ (“plane approaches” / “tower collapses”). Several other such “MIRACLE ZOOM” examples can be viewed in the above link to my website.

NIST’S NONSENSICAL “11 SECOND” CLAIM

Another empirical / incontrovertible fact that requires NO special photographic/ camera experience to appreciate is the following: ALL of the above clips show a building collapse which clearly appears to last for well over 11 seconds. In fact, if we just time these collapses, we may estimate the 11-second mark to occur at / or around the video (animation) frame illustrated below. For easy comparison with other WTC1 collapse animations, I have put an “x” on that massive ‘chunk of debris’ which is seen tumbling mid-air, still about halfway on its journey down to the ground (and almost level with the 47-story WTC7) :

image

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fg1jmr3n6w (at 2:13)

So what about those 11 seconds - you ask me? Well, here’s the problem. The official NIST report states:

"WTC2 collapsed in 9 seconds."_______ "WTC1 collapsed in 11 seconds".

I kid you not, dear reader: that is actually what NIST (the National Institute of Standards and Technology - no less!) officially claims in its million-dollar report which (taxpayers are told) is the result of a most accurate, painstaking and long-lasting scientific investigation. So what exactly - you may ask - does this mean? Has NIST never taken a look at the available 9/11 “footage”? Can Americans not even trust their own government-appointed agencies? Could NIST possibly be outright lying to the American people and even - Heavens forbid - taking them all for a ride ? How callously offensive would this be for the 9/11 victims’ families!… Oh wait, are there any victim’s families? We still haven’t heard from any of them, have we? Hmm - perhaps we should just be a little more patient. After all, only 5 years have passed since we first postulated that no one perished on 9/11… (***crickets***crickets***) 

Well, folks. This is all very sad for the American people. And the rest of the world of course. If US government agencies can get away with such crude ‘in-your-face’ mockery - like that “9 and 11 seconds” claim for the alleged collapse times of WTC2 and WTC1 - they can get away with absolutely anything. For now, it seems they are doing just that. We all need to stop buying into their dodgy data. 

Some will go ahead and buy it - and some won’t sell out their brain cells.

The Collapse Animations page at my SEPTEMBER CLUES info website: http://www.septemberclues.info/wtc_collapses.shtml

——

Check out Clues Forum for more information about media fakery.

This is QI. A BBC TV show in the UK where Stephen Fry flexes his brain muscles in front of a brainwashed audience who Idolize him. He plays the role of a teacher in a stupid game show; his pupils are 4 pointless ‘celebrities’.

My other half usually likes to fall asleep to the sound of the TV and I have to listen to the lies and propaganda while I work at my computer. My sound isn’t working at the moment, but I think I have linked to the episode that made me cringe.

This episode is about hoaxes; I think I heard 9/11 mentioned at some point, The part that really bothered me was about the moon landings. Oh, how they laughed at the ‘stupid conspiracy theorists’. Stephen Fry tells his audience that the moon landings were real. I can’t remember everything, but he mentions the flag waving, the lack of any impact from the moon lander and other crap.

One of the pupils mentioned being convinced by a friend that NASA faked some of the photos. I think that was laughed off by all. This is telling the audience that NASA may have faked some photos, but they really did land on the moon. If it really happened, then there’s no need to fake any pictures.

Fry is a genius, if you believe the crap the TV spews out, but he didn’t talk about anything scientific. He just attempted to debunk the common ‘theories’. We all can see the moon at night, we can all see how bright it is; imagine how much heat is on the surface of the moon, which has no protection from the sun.

According to this site, the temperature of the moon reaches 253 Fahrenheit (123 Celsius) during the day. If the astronauts were real, they’d be burnt to a crisp. NASA’s fake photographs feature a moon surface which looks like it was lit up with studio lighting and certainly not by the intense rays of the sun.

The picture below does not look like the bright moon which we see at night. This picture also points out the impossible lighting; why is the fake astronaut perfectly exposed while the wheels of that buggy are kept in the dark?

image

So, while Stephen Fry treats his audience like little children in a classroom and uses this contrived piece of crapaganda to tell them that man landed on the moon for real, I would bet my life that he knows the moon landings were a hoax and everything else to do with space exploration is fake also.

Want to know more? Visit Clues Forum for a more detailed analysis.

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union