Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Planes/No Planes and "Video Fakery"

“9/11 Fake: Media Make Believe”


The serious question that has to arise at this point, of course, is “Why?” Would it not have been far simpler just to fly a real plane into the North Tower and another into the South?Where the answer turns out to be, “No”. Pilots for 9/11 Truth discovered that it is extremely difficult to hit an edifice 208′ across at more than 500 mph. After 20 or more tried it repeatedly, only one was able to hit it once. In addition, a real plane could not enter all the way into the building before it would explode.

But that was a requirement of the mission, since otherwise there would have been no pseudo-explanation for the subsequent “collapse” of the buildings due to fire. And equally important, the explosions that were planned for the subbasements to drain the towers’ sprinkler systems of water so they could not extinguish the relatively modest fires that would remain after the pre-positioned jet fuel was consumed in those spectacular fireballs. The plan was to explain them away effects of jet fuel falling through the elevator shafts–a flawed theory, but good enough for a gullible public.



“The Theory of a Ghostplane”


                         “Proof Plane that Hit was Hologram”

The mission required something that looked like a real plane but could perform feats that no real plane could perform by entering the building before it would explode, which would have  been impossible with a real plane. And that had to be timed to coincide with explosions in the subbasements that, even with the most meticulous planning, would inadvertently take place 14 and 17 seconds before the planes officially hit the buildings.

It was an audacious plan, brilliant in design, and nearly perfect in execution.  But those who were working this out did not realize that they were also creating the image of a plane that would turn out to be traveling faster than a Boeing 767, violating Newton’s laws, and passing through its own length into the building in the same number of frames it passed through its own length it air.

As in the case of the Pentagon, they thereby violated laws of aerodynamics and of physics that gave their game away.  And those blemishes, subtle as they may have been, have provided the opportunity to expose a fantastic fraud, which has been used to justify wars of aggression and constraints upon civil rights that our nation continues to endure to this day.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.

9 comments:

  1. Jim,
    I think you need to update your paper after watching this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_nE0aPb13A
    This seems to be proof of cgi for the plane hitting the north tower. A wing cannot magically disappear behind a building.

    Also, please listen to Rebekah Roth and/or interview her on you radio show. She explains the BTS is NOT the flight schedules but, rather, a voluntary submission of statistics, after the fact, of planes with their on-time data. This is for marketing purposes. You are not the only one misrepresenting the BTS as flight schedules when it is not the case. Most people don't know the difference, especially people not in the airline business. You can find Rebekah Roth on youtube.

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would "Bureau of Transportation Statistics" be a marketing tool? I find that at least faintly absurd. The proof of crash fakery is extensive and compelling. But the "wing disappearing behind the building" does not appear to be bona fide, because the building appears to be further in the foreground that that video implies. I have read Rebecca's book and have certain reservations, which I plan to write in the near future. But thanks for these comments.

      Delete
    2. Do you have any reason to believe that Flights 11 and 77 were in the air that day? Because there is a lot of evidence that they were not, including:

      Elias Davidsson, "There is no evidence that Muslims committed the crime
      of 9/11" http://www.opednews.com/articles/There-is-no-evidence-that-by-Elias-Davidsson-100811-366.html

      David Ray Griffin, "Phone Calls from the 9/11 Airliners"
      http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16924

      Col. George Nelson, USAF (ret.), “Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True”
      http://physics911.net/georgenelson/

      Leslie Raphael, "Jules Naudet's 9/11 Film was Staged"
      http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm

      If you want to make an argument, you need proof. So if you have any, kindly produce it.

      Delete
    3. Mr. Fetzer,
      That poster is agreeing with the no-plane theory, and the video analysis that he/she posted also proves the no-plane theory.
      That person is trying to say that the bureau of statistics is not showing pre-approved schedules, but rather statistics after the fact, submitted by the airlines. The no-plane theory is valid, but this piece of evidence is inaccurate.

      Delete
  2. Jim, I'm the guy who posted the video indicating the time of the firehouse HD film. However, I deleted that video within a few days and with only about 1000 views. Something was quite right, and I realized that the tool I was using had a serious flaw. I contacted the creator, and he was aware but had no near term solution. I went looking for another online tool, and eventually found SunEarthTools, a vastly more powerful tool, and one I have confidence in. The time of the HD film is 11:10am, but the premise of my earlier video is the same - the show hasn't started, hence the circling. I'm currently in the finishing stages of a YT video teaching people how to conduct their own sun shadow analysis, and using the Sandy Hook Fraud. My apologies to you and YT community, in a game like SH it is important to combat lies with truth. Please don't refer to the time of 9:15am again, it's not accurate. Within the next week I will be releasing the video on YT channel BlackOpsAgent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a Sandy Hook issue, so I am puzzled that you would post this comment here. While I published on the time of the Shannon Hicks' photo(s) elsewhere, that it was not taken on 14 December 2012 follows from the absence of frost on the ground and of any signs of breathing (on a 28*F morning). I know the problems with doing sun dial analysis and discuss them in articles on Sandy Hook that Gordon Duff, the Senior Editor of Veterans Today, deleted when he removed all 150 of my articles there since 5 July 2011, which was both stunning and revealing.

      Delete
  3. You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
    Abraham Lincoln
    In America some of the people has so far been adequate. And the consequences have been disastrous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This article, for example, first published at Veterans Today on 20 February 2012, was followed by many others on the faking of the crash sites, the manner in which the Twin Towers were blow apart, and other significant aspects of 9/11 (JFK, Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing and more). It was deleted along with 149 other articles of mine that appeared there beginning on 5 July 2011 by Gordon Duff, its Senior Editor. Ask yourself why anyone would remove those studies from public access. VT does not appear to be devoted to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths but something closer to the opposite.

      Delete
  4. Hey Jim,

    I'm surprised you didn't include this video when discussing the Shanksville crash site:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQTNy6Jb26A

    Or this one when discussing the WTC crash sites:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiLa_CyFAIM

    Sincerely,

    Steve De'ak

    ReplyDelete