German researcher HerrKoenig recently discovered a forgery within the NIST CUMULUS Data-release, in the case of the WTC 1 collapse sound.
Listen yourself: This one was taken from the Naudet documentary DVD, by extrating the sequence to WAV and converting it into MP3-Layer3, 320kbps, 48.000 Hz with AVS Audio Converter 7.1.
This is from the NIST-release:
As reported in the New York Post for Saturday, 4/25:
On March 12, an employee of the Department of Health in New York City discovered that a stack of blank birth certificates, all bearing the agency's stamp (104 total), had been stolen from the department's offices, near City Hall. One city investigator says that such a theft--which hadn't occurred at the department over the preceding ten years--is, 'like hitting the Lotto for terrorists,' since forged birth certificates are a crucial first step towards forging other documents, and all such forgery constitutes 'one of the primary concerns of Homeland Security.'
Full article is here:
Reporter may be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org
By Jason Leopold
August 21, 2008
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has asked current and former White House aides and ex-CIA officials to respond to questions about an alleged scheme to create a bogus letter in late 2003 linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda.
Bestselling journalist Ron Suskind has revealed that the White House ordered the CIA to forge and backdate a document falsely linking Iraq with Muslim terrorists and 9/11 . . . and that the CIA complied with those instructions and in fact created the forgery, which was then used to justify war against Iraq.
Suskind also revealed that "Bush administration had information from a top Iraqi intelligence official 'that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – intelligence they received in plenty of time to stop an invasion.' ”
This is a stunning revelation in its own right. But what does it say about the government's claims that 9/11 was an attack by Muslim extremists which the U.S. government could not have anticipated?
Video and photographic evidence is an important part of the 9/11 evidence kit. From the Naudet’s capturing of the first explosions at WTC to the collapse of WTC7 late in the day to the aftermath at ground zero, the pentagon and Shanksville, the video and photographic images of the day have been instrumental in creating much of our understanding of the events of 9/11. Many have presented various images in support of their positions, yet the authenticity of many of these images has never been established.
I would like to address two questions: 1) Which images can we trust? 2) How can we assess the authenticity of a particular image?
Considering the technologies available to anyone with a computer, prudence dictates a healthy skepticism regarding the authenticity of much of the video and photographic “evidence” presented by all parties. Whether through the insertion of objects or the masking/blurring/removal of others, the forgers have manipulated much of the available imagery. Trust must be earned. If we are to include video and photographic images in our evidence kit we must first establish, to the best of our ability, their authenticity.
The most telling clue of forgery in images is anomalies in “light and shadows”. It is extremely difficult to accurately create the appropriate lighting/shading/shadow throughout a “doctored” image. Many forgers rely on the viewer’s attention being focused only upon certain key elements and not on "less important” elements. It is often these minor elements which reveal the forgery. Additionally, the forger often creates anomalous “shadows” over large areas in an attempt to ‘resolve’ these issues. Careful examination of the lighting, shading and shadows of an image is quite useful in establishing its authenticity.