9.11.2001

[kenmurray]

"Those who can make you believe absurdities,can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire.Between The Lies:http://www.911docs.net/between_the_lies.php

[kenmurray]

9/11 Press For Truth:http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/9-11_video

[Bob]

http://judythbaker.blogspot.com/2011/02 ... -bush.html

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Dealey Joe wrote:Strong Evidence Of Fake Planes And A Media Hoax On 9/11by Pasquale DiFabrizio » Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:03 pm Gentlemen,I know you will find this very interesting and disturbing. I don't think this has been posted yet, but it's important because it's very strong evidence of media PARTICIPATION (not just complicity) in the 9/11 event that put the U.S. into military conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is something that has been puzzling me for a while. The video clip below shows various news clips of the supposed second plane that hit the south tower of the World Trade Center, which was was the second tower to be hit. It appears that some video faking is going on. For example, the smoke coming from the first tower to be hit..., the north tower, was basically traveling over the south tower. It seems that different TV news channels showed the same plane hitting the same tower from different directions. I'm very serious here. I'll put the link below and tell you what to look for.The smoke from the North Tower, that had already been hit, is your point of reference. It is always traveling or flowing in the direction of the South Tower. The smoke is your point of reference. Here we go!For example, at 14 seconds into the video, we see a video shot from ABC showing a plane striking the south tower coming from the right. The smoke coming from the north tower is, of course, traveling over the south tower which is obstructed from view by the north tower. So from this camera angle, the smoke is going away from the camera. In stark contrast to what I wrote above, at 1:36 (1 min., 36 sec.) into the video, they show a different TV network showing the same event from a different camera angle. The smoke from the north tower is now going to the right (over the south tower as usual), and the plane that hits the south tower is again coming fro the right. Already there appears to be a problem with the angle of approach of the plane. Then, at 3:40 into the video, or 3 min., 40 sec. into the video, another network shows the same event, only this time the smoke is going to left (over the south tower like before, just from a different camera angle), and the plane that hits it is coming from the right! Take a look for yourselves.How can the plane that supposedly hit the south tower of the WTC be shown on different networks coming from different directions? It's starting to look like the plane is a computer graphic image that was superimposed onto the videos. Again, at about 5:50, or 5 min. and 50 sec. into the video, they show the Fox News footage of the second plane hitting the south tower. The camera angle is different again. The smoke is going over the south tower and traveling AWAY from the camera. In fact, the south tower is completely obscured by the north tower, and THE PLANE AGAIN COMES FROM THE RIGHT of the screen. WTF?When you look at the footage from the different networks, just remember that the smoke from the first tower to be hit is always traveling over the south tower of the WTC. Keep that in mind as a reference point, and you will quickly see what I mean. This may be evidence of some media hoaxing going on with regard to what really happened that day.Just remember, the smoke from the north tower is always going over and in the direction of the south tower. That is your reference point. You should quickly see what I mean. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lKZqqSI9-sThe link below is from a Fox News special called "9/11 As It Happened." At 2:42 in the video, or 2 min. and 42 sec. into the video, the camera angle shows the south tower totally obscured by the north tower and the smoke is traveling AWAY from the camera and over the obscured south tower. The plane, that appears black, comes from the right to hit the south tower.In contrast to this, at about 7:13 or 7 sec. and 13 sec. into the video they show what is supposed to be the same event but from a different camera angle. In this clip the smoke is traveling to the left and, as usual, in the direction of and over the south tower. In this clip, the plane is coming AT the camera and not even straight. It is descending while coming at the camera to hit the south tower. http://video.foxnews.com/v/4335916/911- ... appenedThe link below is from http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2009/09/11/ ... cks/Scroll down to the video clip called "Raw Video: The South Tower Is Hit (Sept. 11, 2001)"The camera angle shows the smoke going to the left and over the south tower, and the plane comes from the LEFT to hit the south tower. Then, right after that, they show the same "event" with the smoke going to the left and the plane coming from the RIGHT! http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2009/09/11/ ... ttacks/The meaning of this appears to be quite clear. The media was not only complicit in 9/11. It appears that they were a PART of what went on that day. It's one thing for the media to go to sleep AFTER a crime has been committed. It's quite another for the media to actively take PART in a murderous event.Last edited by Pasquale DiFabrizio on Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total. Pasquale DiFabrizio"Think with your dipstick, Jimmy!!!"Video and audio faking and media deception regarding 9/11 are a reality. Why does the mainstream media NOT seem to talk about building 7 and other related issues? It seems that the audio was tampered with too in news footage and supposed amateur video. The SAME woman's voice appears in three different videos on 9/11. These videos were not taken in the same place. This tells me the audio on those videos was faked as well. The analysis is at 8:00 into the video or 8 minutes into the video presentation.http://youtu.be/KfacCQj_mlI

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Cartoon physics were used to explain the planes that were involved in 9/11 and the World Trade Center. Commercial jets like the 767 CAN NOT fly 500 mph near sea level in level flight. Also, aluminum wings and tail sections of the same kinds of planes just don't pierce steel and concrete buildings. They would break off!http://youtu.be/R4Hw8sJE3R0

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Two different networks, two different pictures of supposedly the same event...the second plane hitting the South Tower of the World Trade Center. In one network there's a plane, in the other, you can barely see it and the trajectory is very different. Also, the background (behind the buildings) is gone on one broadcast where the large plane has been inserted.This is not a joke. LOOK and LEARN.http://youtu.be/R4Hw8sJE3R0

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

This is what happens when a commercial jet, like a 767, hits WATER! Look at the pieces coming off of it and wings breaking off. http://youtu.be/sKC9C0HCNH8If a plane breaks apart when it crashes into WATER, why do people think that the same kind of plane would penetrate a steel and concrete framed building with NO damage on impact?

[kenmurray]

I wonder if Dale Myers was a part of this cartoon physics. He is with the JFK assassination.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

kenmurray wrote:I wonder if Dale Myers was a part of this cartoon physics. He is with the JFK assassination. Dale Myers might have been. Once you look at the 9/11 videos, they are as believable as Dale Myers' cartoons. LOL

[kenmurray]

Tonight 01/05/12 on BOR Len will interview Susan Lindauer who wrote the book "Extreme Prejudice". http://www.blackopradio.com/schedule.ht ... 1453642757