tv-fakery
Exploding the Airliner Crash Myth (By Morgan Reynolds and Rick Rajter)
9/11 TV-Fakery... Hunt the Boeing (WTC) 2: Pythagoras Exposes Phantom Flight UA175 as a Hoax (Analysis by StillDiggin)
Thursday, October 26, 2006
9/11 TV-Fakery... Hunt the Boeing (WTC) 2: Pythagoras Exposes Phantom Flight UA175 as a Hoax
Introduction
It appears that the newer source of the "Jim Friedl" audio has more to offer than meets the ear. In this newly released video, we are presented with an uninterrupted “live” video feed, which provides us with a reverse version of the magic trick "Now you see it... Now you don't."
At 7:38 of this video, the feed is switched to a different helicopter. A few seconds later, FOX commentator Jim Ryan describes the image from the video feed as "the picture from our chopper now arriving at the scene." This comment seems to validate that this is indeed the same video that was broadcast “live” by WNYW FOX5 on 9/11/01, since the picture correlates with the commentary. In what I referred to in my previous article as the "original source," the video feed never switches to this helicopter (this would have occurred approximately 2:44 into that video).
Although this matching commentary does not necessarily prove that this newly released video is exactly what was broadcast “live” by WNYW FOX5 on 9/11/01, it does seem to prove that this is the feed that Jim Ryan was looking at as he was commentating
Continued here...
Did The Digital Plane Image Decelerate At WTC 2? (Paper by Rick Rajter)
A Challenge To All Who Believe Real Boeings Hit the WTC
Don't contribute to 911Blogger until dz bans the disinformation spam artists who are making a mockery out of all 911 research
"Fool's gold exists because there is real gold." -13th century Persian poet Rumi
I'm requesting that everyone consider not contributing to this website until the site owner, dz, makes an effort to ban people who are spamming it relentlessly with theories about no planes, TV fakery, space beams, etc..
It's my opinion that 911Blogger.com has become a safe haven for such individuals, who are IMO purposely trying to destroy the credibility of all 9/11 research by promoting these controversial theories -- theories that the overwhelming majority of 9/11 researchers believe to be divisive, deceptive, destructive, etc..
I'm not advocating banning someone for occasionally presenting these theories, or other controversial theories, but we all know that it hasn't been an occasional occurrence here at 911Blogger.com. Instead it seems to be an every minute of the day occurrence.
So, until dz takes the appropriate steps to get rid of the 911Blogger.com spammers, please contribute elsewhere.
I want to make it clear that I'm not speaking for anyone but myself. However, I do encourage those who agree with what I've written in this blog to not contribute to this website in any way until dz improves the situation. If he decides not to, I respect that -- however, I request my membership at 911blogger.com be terminated if he chooses not to.