you still don't talk about the people inside the towers... don't tell me they were fake because it is impossible that no single soul showed to work just that day... PEOPLE DIED! maybe not in aircrafts but they DID DIE!
@msRabbit1984 If it makes you feel better to believe so, go ahead. The fact is that the WTC was entirely emptied of its historical tenants after the first alleged "AlQuaeda" bombing in 1993 - and subsequently repopulated with a few companies - all in on the 9/11 hoax. There is now overwhelming evidence that the "victims" were created in the virtual domain. Do a google search for "Why are 3000 9/11 victims missing from federal death registry" To get started, watch?v=HckSSIGt50Q
@msRabbit1984 Next (if you are interested in the issue of the fake victims) you may enter my website septemberclues.info and read these two articles of mine: "The MEMORIAL SCAMS" and "DECONSTRUCTING 9/11". For an in-depth analysis of the 9/11 online memorials, there is also the 80-page PDF by my fellow researcher 'Hoi Polloi' - called "THE VICSIM REPORT". Happy reading! :O)
Is anyone doing anything with all of this information? All of this has been quite incredible to go through and watch, thanks to you and all the people who helped research and analyze all of the 9/11 footage, and it really makes you wonder about other things throughout history... It's actually extremely depressing haha. Wonder if it'll ever end...
About the angles you show at the end of this amazing document: the difference between degrees are caused due to the different angle of the footage, not because a fake. September Clues was a real MARVEL, but I can not catch the idea of this doc you've present us.
A lot more of the 9/11 "footage" has been analyzed and dissected on our research forum. It has emerged that the underlying thesis of "SC Addenfdum" is basically correct. One of the proprietary bugs of the digital software used to craft the 9/11 imagery was its algorithms handling the relative 3D perspectives. Just google "Cluesforum SIMCITY" and you wil find one of the many relevant discussion topics - with more in-depth analyses than those contained in this episode.
@simonshack Thanks for your data, my friend. But it´s a matter of angles, not erased background. I work in 3D designs and films projects. The problem mentioned is not that problem you argue, it's simply the different location of the anchor point of the cam.
@simonshack I just watched your movie on the website Septemberclues.info and i must say it was pretty good. i just wanted to say that the major clue for me in this was when the Pentagon got hit. Im not sure about the WTC but the Pentagon had to be bullshit. Your telling me that they have NO DEFENSE like the White House has against incoming Missiles/Airplaines? lol And The spot it his is convenient none the less.
not sure if i'm right or not but at 5:16 of the video if you look at PAT on the left side, it seems behind the tower but near the top right corner, it looks like PAT is in the front of the tower
The "CGI" theory has to be one of the most ridicolous theories out there, i just can't believe they are serious about it. What if it was raining in NY city that day and pre-rendered CGI footage was done for a clear day.. what would they do then? lol. You freaks couldn't be more disrespectfull. I can believe in inside job theory, i can believe that they knew it would happen and didn't stop it etc, but CGI, Actors? ROFL.
And on top of that they ban anyone who disagrees with them on their forum.
@gigaonline77 It was a beautiful clear blue sky day on 9/11 yet the videos show all manner of strangely hued and greyed out skies. What if it rained? Simply add some rain effect overlays. The real answer to your question is that these little discrepancies would not and did not matter to the majority. People like yourself would believe the videos were real no matter what, because it is simply too disturbing for you to weigh the implications otherwise.
How can I do a faraday-shield for my camera to record another terrorist attack? If I let only the lens out from the aluminiums papers it's possible yet to record? If I use a non-digital camera (the old ones), it will take a pic during the EMP/HERF? And with that big recorders/ film cameras (old ones).. ?
@punishalltrolls Yes, I have indeed. Among the things I've been told (condensed for brevity): A - "I was out on the street just North of the WTC at 8:46AM and just heard a bang. NO airplane flew over me". B - "I was just North of the WTC and my video camera would simply not function. I was violently shoved away by police officers. Back home, the camera worked fine again." C: "I was planning to take the Path subway to the WTC that morning, but it was shut down - allegedly due to a union strike."
@simonshack Hello, i have watched all of your videos but i am finding them hard to believe. I am on neither side but do disagree with one of the things you said.
You said, on this comments section, that nobody died on 9/11.
Sure, maybe not in the planes like you say, but how can you deny video proof of people jumping to their deaths from the tower? What were they, robots?
Also, explain how people inside of the tower - on the floor of the impact - survived to tell the tale? Please, reply to me?
The jumper images have been analyzed in every imaginable way and have all been incontrovertibly exposed as digital animations. Here are 2 links to the relevant information:
tinyurl . com / THEJUMPERS
tinyurl . com / FALLINGMANcf
(copy/paste links in your browser and remove all spaces)
One question is still unanswered: why would the TV stations bother to fake pictures after the plane crashs? Are you saying the WTC collapses didn't happen and were only computer animations? Once the impacts had happened, everything later could be watched and filmed by thousands and thousands. What was "covered up" after the impacts of the planes???
@professortiki The collapses did happen - no doubt about it, my friend. However, the visuals of the collapses are also proven computer animations. May I ask you to take vision of this page? (Warning: it is a heavy page with lots of gif files : Please allow some time for all to upload)
septemberclues .info / wtc_collapses. htm
(paste in your browser & close all spaces)
After which, you may wish to read other articles on my website, such as :
@professortiki Why they faked the tower collapse imagery - is that your question? I assume it is. So: Imagine if you wished to bring down an old building complex with demolition charges and blame it on some foreign enemy. Would you be comfortable to show the real event on LIVE TV to the entire world? Of course not. If you had the opportunity to broadcast a simulation of the real thing, would that not be your smartest option? Of course it would. Hope this helps for now. More on my website.
@simonshack No it would not be smart. Because everybody could easily compare the computer animations with the real video footage later. Once the first tower was hit, you could not assume that thousands of cameras would film the events, you could take it for granted. How could one even believe that would work. Sorry, I was tempted to consider your theory for a short while, but that is just to unlikely.
@simonshack Simoan, that's really not a lot of proof. Besides the facts that there is indeed footage and photography of the collapses, the risk of only one take slipping through the electromagnetic storm is simply to high to be taken in consideration, when planning such an event in the missle of the most populated area of the western world. What's with non-electronic camera equipment? What's with tele-lenses?
You say, "the chances for anyone capturing a clear image of an unexpected, sky-diving 550mph+ object are extremely slim." But we are talking about the collapses of the towers. The chances of taking just one picture that would prove a difference from your supposedly digitally made-up material broadcasted all over the world is extremely high.
Like I said, even if this could work, nobody with a clear mind would take it in consideration to make it part of a plan. If you had sticked to your missile-cover-up-story, fine. One could at least discuss it. But your addendum is just plain confusing. BTW: some of your facts about the nature of certain anomalies in the video material are false. Edges around buildings don't neccessarily mean, there was digital manipulation. Some recordings were just very low quality.
Also you seem to be unaware that shots with long focal distances automatically let objects in the distance seem much bigger. In some sequences that show that brif´dge moving in the back, you can clearly see the forground moving also, so the camera itself was moving (helicopter). So those facts also don't count for your theory. All in all you'd have done much better with less such "facts".
Dear professor, let me suggest you look up our ongoing research at our forum ( cluesforum . info )This is not the right place for debating the many aspects of the 9/11 hoax which relied primarily on computerized imagery: to be sure, this fact has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Since the addendum was published, a steady flow of 9/11 imagery has been exposed as incontrovertibly fake. Now, don't take my word for it but do check out ALL the available evidence.Thanks.
My heartfelt sympathies go out to the families and friends of the 347 real Cantor Fitzgerald victims listed on their Tribute site, and the countless other real victims of this tragedy. I hope they all can find peace and closure.
I support the HERF theory. My friend's wife, on her way to work in the towers that morning, stated in a phone call to her husband that she felt something was not right as she approached the towers. Seems to corroborate the feeling of "dread" that HERF is said to induce.
@markofwits Your "friend's wife" made a phone call "on her way to work in the towers"? Was that on a cell phone? And what was her job at the towers exactly?
@markofwits Are you being funny or not paying attention? Since the TV & "amateur" films are all faked, so are the "helicopters". Why would they need to control any detonations from a helicopter anyway? You don't look for reality in CGI, the TV fakery IS the evidence. Only the perps know or saw WHAT they used to demolish them. Best to stick to logical hypotheses based on known facts, physics & empirical evidence rather than wild speculations (too much already from loons & fake "truthers")
@TrinityReload It was merely conjecture. Simply because some objects were "doctored" does not mean the entire frame is a fake. The helicopter looked more realistic than the "plane".
@markofwits Of course it's easier to make a tiny tadpole shaped pixel blip of a 'helicopter' look "more realistic" than a "plane", but it's still fake. The entire cityscapes & smoking towers were CGI layered simulations, w/ plenty of rendering & perspective mistakes to give it away! Now please explain how your "friend's wife" (who "worked for" the perps' most infamous vicsim sham, CF) could use her cell phone when HERF jammed. Can't wait to hear the full story, what happened next?
@TrinityReload I have no idea how she was able to still use her cell phone. She may have just been approaching the fringe of the field. Perhaps the field hadn't been widened yet to cover the intended area? Below is the local news story. She never returned home from work, along with hundreds of others. Has she secretly been detained somewhere for 9 years? I would think not.
@TrinityReload I'm referring to a video showing a large clearly defined helicopter with rotor spinning in the upper right of the frame (not a pixel-sized blip).
@markofwits Even video games have "realistic" looking cgi choppers lol. So, you claim "Mr Scibetta, a mason for the Transport Authority" is a friend of yours? Ever met him or his "wife" in real life? Funny you forgot the story detail that her alleged cell call was made at about 7:35 (before any jamming would have been necessary). You do know the difference between legally admissible evidence (proof) & hearsay, right? Contrived back-stories & "memorial" lists of fictitious names prove nothing.
@TrinityReload Yes, I met him. I had not met his wife. Listen, I'm "all for" the No-Plane/CGI/Thermite/Directed Energy Weapon/HERF theories. But you can't convince me that NO ONE was lost in those collapses. My friend lost his wife, and his children lost their mother. Can I elucidate her exact fate? No, I cannot. I only know she disappeared. I don't know where you get your "vicsim sham" "facts" from, but they're obviously not based on reality. I'm finished entertaining your nonsense.
@markofwits So we only have your hearsay claim about an alleged friend's hearsay, which you believe. If you can accept that 9-11 was a military-media hoax to hide the demo of buildings as an excuse for war to control the M E, then it logcally follows: why risk REAL victims when it was so easily faked w/ Media complicity & psyops? You've obviously not seen the research info re memorial scams & actor/agents playing "family" members: tinyurl . com /MEMSCAMS
@TrinityReload I'm not buying that phony photoshop story. There are several pictures of this woman online, and the expressions are different. In addiiton, she is searchable by her maiden name in the Intelius directory, and her record is associated with her husband's family name.
@markofwits The photoshops of vicSims is blatantly obvious on many, less so on some. But the memorial "tributes" & cloned comments are what clinch it as fake on all. e.g. Funny how those extra pics of "Adriane" weren't even added till 3 years later by the "sister in law" - the ONLY "family member" to ever leave guestbook entries since '01! In the typical style of all other 9-11 vicsim guest notes from 'family' &/or 'friends', written in 1st person, regular each year + vicsim's birthdays etc.
Do you believe that the people that were recorded on video and audio were actors that were pretending to see an American Airlines plane (military plane, etc, whatever gets you to believe it wasn't something other than some type of plane)? I believe they are actors and most of the voice recordings, unfortunately for the government, do not even sound legit when you hear their cries. Thanks for your time. Please relay information to me that you may feel will further justify my beliefs of no plan
Again, don't attempt to pass off a falsified statement/video to add to the credibility of an inside job when the numerous videos speak for themselves. Understand that if even one of your theories is proven wrong, then it jeopardizes your whole case. It applies the same, however, to those that attempt to convince the public of the "real events" that took place that day. Most of their "proof" has been acknowledged as fakery so it can all be discredited. And lastly, do you believe that the peop
They are clearly the same image presented in every "explosion" clip. The nose in, nose out theory can be seen from many different angles.. Was this done on purpose, knowing that there was an error there? Also, when the man said, "We understand that the second tower collapsed there" (in addition to the first collapse, however the second was still standing at the time), I believe he implied the fact that the second tower would collapse inevitably, regardless. The accent and poor English was mis
In some cases, I believe that the "proof" of some of the given evidence can be disproved due to natural human instincts that accept what we are seeing. Based on instincts. (Not saying I believe there were planes but people fabricated the idea to persuade us to see in their light even though it was true in the first place). Also, amazing how the smoke and fireballs from the explosions create numerous amounts of "faces". I discredit anyone who implies that these images are self-created. They are
At 2:21 in one of your videos (to name just one) it is apparent that the face of a man can clearly be seen. I won't agree with anyone that tells me, "It's just what your mind wants you to see." Another question; Could some of the anomalies that you insist are fact could actually be the combination of poor video quality combined with a low res background? And that begs the question, why are so many cameras filming in low resolution? Please help me with these questions.
Hey, I enjoyed your videos and really understand the truth that you are trying to convey. I am a "no planer" theorist but I wish to ask you a few questions that may better help me understand a couple things that I'm still confused about.. First, do you agree or disagree that the images that we were shown of the damage caused by the supposed planes were computer generated? I do. Do you see an abnormal amount of "faces" in the smoke of this destruction? At 2:21 in one of your videos, it is appar
@sxmadrid yeah i got that but maybe i missed something, i will admit that i did not go through all of the info on the .info site.
but what i meant was WHY demo the buildings at the wtc site and why a need to cover it up?
i saw the buildings go down from about 40 miles away while i was on Fire Island all i could see was smoke from the tops of them (maybe the top half). i didnt get to see all live clips becuase there was no tv in the house we had rented that week.
@prowlerjesse because the fuckers didn't want to broadcast the demolition of the building, so they covered it up. Real footage would contain clues, wouldn't it?
@MrPierrePhilippe I also remember hearing this information from somewhere. If the footage does still exist (unlikely as they were deported, and thier dual citizenship revoked) it likely is unedited.
@futurecatholic - Why mess with planes when you can fake it on a computer? Much less risk than unpredictable real plane crashes. The wreckage? Well, you need a pick-up, some plane parts and a small crew for staging it. Maybe photoshopping could illustrate the point you want to make without any work at all.
SO there are some shots which show the chopper, and some which apparently don't. Could there be a simple explanation?, (distances from towers, variations in camera positions, camera settings, lighting conditions, generational degradation through copying, various kinds of digital compression, etc)? No. EVERYTHING WAS FAKE.
That is why I recommend everyone to kindly read all the articles at my website (septemberclues.info) so as to get a full picture of the research - and the daily progress being made (not least at the Reality Shack forum - see link on my channel). Thanks for your good advice - I do my best not to speculate without adequate evidence, yet there are areas of this massive hoax which require some level of guess work.
The point is that PAT is not seen (on the high-qualty NBC clip) flying north-westwards as WTC2 collapses. And of course, PAT should certainly be seen - as my "debunkers" kindly helped pointing out ! :O)
It is very hard to say what is true and what is false at this point. All I can say is that from DAY ONE many people questioned the official story. Almost ten years have past and 9/11 has all the trappings of a cover up.
At 4:51 look all the way to the left. This time the scaaary demon is grinning. Right before this, starting at 4:20 look for the skull (almost perfect) right below this image.
How interesting that the videos from the choppers from Israeli TV has _never_ been available to the rest of us in all the 9 years I have been looking for 911 footage.
is there any proof of no cameras working because of EMP? I mean has any1 come forward and said their camera wasn't working? or any other electrical equipment stopped working in the area?
@ZORGtheALIEN Yes, people in a building 3 blocks from the site on William St., indicated many electronic devices in their office experienced operational interruptions.
also: WHY or WHAT would they possibly gain by editing which direction the tower falls? and WHY would they edit which direction "PAT" flies? and WHY would they edit him out? It's a sloppy job.. it's like they got too excited with the editing and said: Hey lets make the tower drop in all directions to make it plausible. Well, idiots, the towers fell without you (tv-stations) having to edit it. Same goes with foreground editing, the point of it is.. why? Pointless.
cracktober - you have many questions, that's very wise and healthy ! Please go to septembercluesDOTinfo, enter the site and read the many articles relevant to your questions.
its a bit like asking why did the robbers choose a yellow car, why did they forget to change the color on both the fake videos.. there does not have to be answers to ALL the blunders, there has to be _adequate_ answers to _relevant_ questions. All they needed was accuracy enough to create an illusion good _enough_ . It never had to be perfect. They pointed in one direction AFTER the fact and everyone LOOKED. It's the SIMPLEST trick in the goddam BOOK
why would the gov or the television stations make such awful jobs, when they obviously have billion budgets? they can hire anyone, and its NOT that hard to edit, a 15 year old with photoshop and some videoprogram can do it, then I bet a 40 year old 25-year veteran of digital effects can do it, and a WELL job, not this crude low-budget editing that the stations have done.
Nothing was 'edited from it'. All the collapse-clips are 3D animations. The real collapses were the last thing the perps wished to show on LIVE TV - given the many things that could go wrong. In reality, a thick smokescreen impeded the view of the WTC area. The collapse animations were made to match as much as possible a cloud of smoke and dust. We have, in fact, NO eyewitnesses describing any visual details of the'pyroclastic collapse'.
I doubt anybody on this planet - not even George Lucas - would know how to CGI 'a natural collapse' - or knew beforehand how such an unprecedented demolition would look like. So they probably decided they might as well make it as spectacular-looking as possible for 'shock-and-awe effect : undeniably, it worked pretty well on people's psyches...It also helped trigger a zillion (improbable) theories of HOW they fell - which also was the aim of the perpetrators. Smart, I must say...
"At the urging of victims' families (FAMILIES!FAMILIES!), he finds witnesses who claim the towers were brought down by explosives, the missing black box flight recorders were actually recovered (PLANES!PLANES!) and ground control knew the hijackers were in the cockpits before the jets took off. (HIJACKERS!!HIJACKERS!!)"
(Words in brackets are mine) It is all too clear that Jesse pushes the existence of planes, hijackers and victims.
But is Jesse using this half ass theory to get the show on television? Whereas the full truth complete with no plane facts would be a thing that no one would allow to be televised. Granted, if the complete truth about 9/11 was ever to become common knowledge, our news media would lose it's integrity with most people and the perpetrators would lose the control they have over the American people, which is a propaganda device.
I put my old TV up on my roof with the words ALL LIES painted on it.
Once the media role is completely exposed the whole crime syndicate will fall like a house of cards since all that is justified by 911 is completely dependent on the media's ability to mold and maintain public perception.
BillyBoysing : the video you linked was released on Youtube by an "anonymous couple" ("Bob and Bri") in 2006. It is nothing else than an umpteenth 3D animation video. It is 100% fake. If you have trouble understanding how we may prove that these videos are total fabrications, please go to my website which explains it in more detail :
I agree I should have illustrated this more accurately - and in slower fashion. However, the point is that the chopper at 2:01 really does disappear from one frame to the next for no apparent reason. It might be debatable whether it is due to camera zooming out + video compression issues, but your flaming outrage for me pointing it out is frankly undue.
fasTRapid : "... but what did NYPD do there at that moment?? "
Well, depending on which source you watch (amateur videos / or LIVE TV), the NYPD chopper 'PAT' was there...or wasn't there. That makes your question a rather tricky one ! ...;O)
The bottom line is that no 9/11 videos can be trusted.
I know, but I have the theory that in PAT they had the control for the explosives planted in WTC Towers thats why they had to go there and on TV they erased PAT because of that...
Excellent as usual, Simon! I've seen this before (or at least a prior version), but it is always fun to watch them again. I sorta missed the man walking backwards the first time. I've been doing my best to spread the (video) Gospel of Simon to the unenlightened. Was that Zappa at the beginning? I love that piece, whatever it is. Your choice of music makes your videos all that more enjoyable! I have NO idea what IrreversibleCurse is talking about! Keep up the great work!
It's so obvious now that you point it out Simon. What better way for the perps to control the environment than to show completely manufactured scenes? I look forward to your next segment.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The fact that this is the only video that Simohn Shack made that has less than 4 stars shows just have ridiculous it is. Even his own subscribers isn't buying this fake collaspe BS.
I understand the ridiculously absurd anomalies, contradictions, etc. that resulted from ineptitude, It's just extra mind boggling that they'd present the towers collapsing at free fall speed and think this wouldn't raise a huge flag sooner or *later. Do you think any of this was considered at all, that they simply and arrogantly underestimated the intelligence of the global public completely? Or a planned scapegoat scheme?
" I keep asking you to spell out at least one complaint you have about SC."
Should I instead wait for your final version? There appears to be a long list of unanswered 'complaints' about SC you seem to be ignoring. I'm just trying to be courteous.
and out of plain curiosiy(i know misspelled)... did u realise that if the media can lead us to false truths that concidering this info that alex jones and the truthers are giving us false......stuff you know what i mean..,info etc etc
yes, CGI of the towers. Anyone who can show that the collapses are all consistent with each other should do a video proving this contention. It's about time for the 'debunker crew' to come up with a demonstration that ALL the collapse videos show the very same event.
Sorry, I guess I'll never understand this. I wish I could but I don't understand why these are faked planes. ;-(
Why did they fake them? What was the real purpose? I get so many different conflicting points of view.
I understand Northwoods and all that, but, who planted the bombs in the WTC if it wasn't the Arabs in hijacked planes? If I could get a straight answer maybe I'd be more open to TV CGI fakery.
Its obvious you don't have the same goal as Simon. You debunkers come in different dresses and you are getting more and more stupid posing yourself as Mr. know it all about compression techniques.
I tell you right now that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Has it ever crossed your mind that the videos are fake???????
Until next time try to make some videos yourself debunking " The Official Story"
At 3:50 of this video you will see that white choppers were always visible on the TV footage even at great distance. The fact that "PAT" is not visible at all on CNN, NBC and MSNBC (as he would/should be moving along north of the towers in direct sunlight) cannot be explained by any sort of compression artifact.
A flock of easter bunnies was here throwing eggs over all the better comments, posting denigratory ones and voting each other's drivel up like rabbits.
This bunny-gang is mostly parked at the "pumpitout" forum which apparently now organizes concerted, juvenile debunking raids like this one.
Should these immature antics become their future modus operandi I will not hesitate to block the bunnies one by one.
you still don't talk about the people inside the towers... don't tell me they were fake because it is impossible that no single soul showed to work just that day... PEOPLE DIED! maybe not in aircrafts but they DID DIE!
msRabbit1984 2 weeks ago 2
@msRabbit1984 If it makes you feel better to believe so, go ahead. The fact is that the WTC was entirely emptied of its historical tenants after the first alleged "AlQuaeda" bombing in 1993 - and subsequently repopulated with a few companies - all in on the 9/11 hoax. There is now overwhelming evidence that the "victims" were created in the virtual domain. Do a google search for "Why are 3000 9/11 victims missing from federal death registry" To get started, watch?v=HckSSIGt50Q
simonshack 2 weeks ago
@msRabbit1984 Next (if you are interested in the issue of the fake victims) you may enter my website septemberclues.info and read these two articles of mine: "The MEMORIAL SCAMS" and "DECONSTRUCTING 9/11". For an in-depth analysis of the 9/11 online memorials, there is also the 80-page PDF by my fellow researcher 'Hoi Polloi' - called "THE VICSIM REPORT". Happy reading! :O)
simonshack 2 weeks ago
Is anyone doing anything with all of this information? All of this has been quite incredible to go through and watch, thanks to you and all the people who helped research and analyze all of the 9/11 footage, and it really makes you wonder about other things throughout history... It's actually extremely depressing haha. Wonder if it'll ever end...
VIIxKnives 1 month ago 2
About the angles you show at the end of this amazing document: the difference between degrees are caused due to the different angle of the footage, not because a fake. September Clues was a real MARVEL, but I can not catch the idea of this doc you've present us.
WTFtheyhide 3 months ago
@WTFtheyhide
A lot more of the 9/11 "footage" has been analyzed and dissected on our research forum. It has emerged that the underlying thesis of "SC Addenfdum" is basically correct. One of the proprietary bugs of the digital software used to craft the 9/11 imagery was its algorithms handling the relative 3D perspectives. Just google "Cluesforum SIMCITY" and you wil find one of the many relevant discussion topics - with more in-depth analyses than those contained in this episode.
simonshack 3 months ago
@simonshack Thanks for your data, my friend. But it´s a matter of angles, not erased background. I work in 3D designs and films projects. The problem mentioned is not that problem you argue, it's simply the different location of the anchor point of the cam.
WTFtheyhide 2 months ago
@simonshack I just watched your movie on the website Septemberclues.info and i must say it was pretty good. i just wanted to say that the major clue for me in this was when the Pentagon got hit. Im not sure about the WTC but the Pentagon had to be bullshit. Your telling me that they have NO DEFENSE like the White House has against incoming Missiles/Airplaines? lol And The spot it his is convenient none the less.
BigDH28 3 months ago
not sure if i'm right or not but at 5:16 of the video if you look at PAT on the left side, it seems behind the tower but near the top right corner, it looks like PAT is in the front of the tower
DemonicPride666 3 months ago
you should make a 3d animation to show the difference of the falling building(s)
mahe4 4 months ago
8:04 FLASH in tower 2 after the collapse: explosives.
AmicoDiFebui 4 months ago in playlist Altri video di simonshack
The "CGI" theory has to be one of the most ridicolous theories out there, i just can't believe they are serious about it. What if it was raining in NY city that day and pre-rendered CGI footage was done for a clear day.. what would they do then? lol. You freaks couldn't be more disrespectfull. I can believe in inside job theory, i can believe that they knew it would happen and didn't stop it etc, but CGI, Actors? ROFL.
And on top of that they ban anyone who disagrees with them on their forum.
gigaonline77 4 months ago
@gigaonline77 It was a beautiful clear blue sky day on 9/11 yet the videos show all manner of strangely hued and greyed out skies. What if it rained? Simply add some rain effect overlays. The real answer to your question is that these little discrepancies would not and did not matter to the majority. People like yourself would believe the videos were real no matter what, because it is simply too disturbing for you to weigh the implications otherwise.
LifePsyop 3 months ago
@leonjohansen
Apparently not, dear leonjohansen, apparently not.
Please watch "WHERE ARE THE 9/11 VICTIMS" watch?v=vjlkF9DlImI
Then, if you need more info on how this was done, please go to :
tinyurl . com / MEMSCAMS (remove spaces)
If it makes you feel better to think that people were killed on 9/11, you are free to think so.
The problem is, there appears to be no evidence for the reported "3000 victims" existence.
simonshack 5 months ago
i got private footage. n i am part of no amerikkkan con spiracy
dtrmn2wn 6 months ago
@dtrmn2wn Oh yeah, well then upload it then you fucking liar.
Ghenghy 3 months ago
I had the all the info and cud never prove it thank god I found u and ur great videos so much easier now directing all here
chillyrooster 7 months ago 2
Thank God you took the time to do this.... God help us all...
yarbi1 8 months ago 5
@ 5:50 she said "Its exploding"
munk237 10 months ago
Comment removed
joroma77 11 months ago
How can I do a faraday-shield for my camera to record another terrorist attack? If I let only the lens out from the aluminiums papers it's possible yet to record? If I use a non-digital camera (the old ones), it will take a pic during the EMP/HERF? And with that big recorders/ film cameras (old ones).. ?
Luckzzz 1 year ago
have you talked to any new yorkers who saw this in person?
punishalltrolls 1 year ago
@punishalltrolls Yes, I have indeed. Among the things I've been told (condensed for brevity): A - "I was out on the street just North of the WTC at 8:46AM and just heard a bang. NO airplane flew over me". B - "I was just North of the WTC and my video camera would simply not function. I was violently shoved away by police officers. Back home, the camera worked fine again." C: "I was planning to take the Path subway to the WTC that morning, but it was shut down - allegedly due to a union strike."
simonshack 1 year ago 27
@simonshack Hello, i have watched all of your videos but i am finding them hard to believe. I am on neither side but do disagree with one of the things you said.
You said, on this comments section, that nobody died on 9/11.
Sure, maybe not in the planes like you say, but how can you deny video proof of people jumping to their deaths from the tower? What were they, robots?
Also, explain how people inside of the tower - on the floor of the impact - survived to tell the tale? Please, reply to me?
crazikyle762 3 months ago
@crazikyle762
The jumper images have been analyzed in every imaginable way and have all been incontrovertibly exposed as digital animations. Here are 2 links to the relevant information:
tinyurl . com / THEJUMPERS
tinyurl . com / FALLINGMANcf
(copy/paste links in your browser and remove all spaces)
simonshack 3 months ago 3
One question is still unanswered: why would the TV stations bother to fake pictures after the plane crashs? Are you saying the WTC collapses didn't happen and were only computer animations? Once the impacts had happened, everything later could be watched and filmed by thousands and thousands. What was "covered up" after the impacts of the planes???
professortiki 1 year ago
@professortiki The collapses did happen - no doubt about it, my friend. However, the visuals of the collapses are also proven computer animations. May I ask you to take vision of this page? (Warning: it is a heavy page with lots of gif files : Please allow some time for all to upload)
septemberclues .info / wtc_collapses. htm
(paste in your browser & close all spaces)
After which, you may wish to read other articles on my website, such as :
septemberclues .info/visual_control. htm
simonshack 1 year ago
@simonshack But why, oh, why?
professortiki 1 year ago
@professortiki Why they faked the tower collapse imagery - is that your question? I assume it is. So: Imagine if you wished to bring down an old building complex with demolition charges and blame it on some foreign enemy. Would you be comfortable to show the real event on LIVE TV to the entire world? Of course not. If you had the opportunity to broadcast a simulation of the real thing, would that not be your smartest option? Of course it would. Hope this helps for now. More on my website.
simonshack 1 year ago
@simonshack No it would not be smart. Because everybody could easily compare the computer animations with the real video footage later. Once the first tower was hit, you could not assume that thousands of cameras would film the events, you could take it for granted. How could one even believe that would work. Sorry, I was tempted to consider your theory for a short while, but that is just to unlikely.
professortiki 1 year ago
@professortiki
There was no "real footage later" as you mention. I guess you have not checked out the relevant link I posted for you. Anyways, here we go again:
septemberclues .info/visual_control. htm
You are, by all means entitled to your beliefs - however, I'm just hoping you will take the time to evaluate all the facts currently at hand.
simonshack 1 year ago
@simonshack Simoan, that's really not a lot of proof. Besides the facts that there is indeed footage and photography of the collapses, the risk of only one take slipping through the electromagnetic storm is simply to high to be taken in consideration, when planning such an event in the missle of the most populated area of the western world. What's with non-electronic camera equipment? What's with tele-lenses?
professortiki 1 year ago
You say, "the chances for anyone capturing a clear image of an unexpected, sky-diving 550mph+ object are extremely slim." But we are talking about the collapses of the towers. The chances of taking just one picture that would prove a difference from your supposedly digitally made-up material broadcasted all over the world is extremely high.
professortiki 1 year ago
Like I said, even if this could work, nobody with a clear mind would take it in consideration to make it part of a plan. If you had sticked to your missile-cover-up-story, fine. One could at least discuss it. But your addendum is just plain confusing. BTW: some of your facts about the nature of certain anomalies in the video material are false. Edges around buildings don't neccessarily mean, there was digital manipulation. Some recordings were just very low quality.
professortiki 1 year ago
Also you seem to be unaware that shots with long focal distances automatically let objects in the distance seem much bigger. In some sequences that show that brif´dge moving in the back, you can clearly see the forground moving also, so the camera itself was moving (helicopter). So those facts also don't count for your theory. All in all you'd have done much better with less such "facts".
professortiki 1 year ago
@professortiki
Dear professor, let me suggest you look up our ongoing research at our forum ( cluesforum . info )This is not the right place for debating the many aspects of the 9/11 hoax which relied primarily on computerized imagery: to be sure, this fact has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Since the addendum was published, a steady flow of 9/11 imagery has been exposed as incontrovertibly fake. Now, don't take my word for it but do check out ALL the available evidence.Thanks.
simonshack 1 year ago 2
the woman interviewed at the 5.10-5.20 says i can see flames coming from both towers its an incredible "SET" or "SETUP" she does not say "sight".
myzteron 1 year ago
Comment removed
markofwits 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
My heartfelt sympathies go out to the families and friends of the 347 real Cantor Fitzgerald victims listed on their Tribute site, and the countless other real victims of this tragedy. I hope they all can find peace and closure.
markofwits 1 year ago
Comment removed
markofwits 1 year ago
Comment removed
markofwits 1 year ago
I support the HERF theory. My friend's wife, on her way to work in the towers that morning, stated in a phone call to her husband that she felt something was not right as she approached the towers. Seems to corroborate the feeling of "dread" that HERF is said to induce.
markofwits 1 year ago
@markofwits Your "friend's wife" made a phone call "on her way to work in the towers"? Was that on a cell phone? And what was her job at the towers exactly?
TrinityReload 1 year ago
@TrinityReload The call was made from a cell phone in the street, on the way to work at the towers. She was an accountant for Cantor Fitzgerald.
markofwits 1 year ago
Perhaps "PAT" in the helicopter was remotely controlling the detonation of the thermite bombs which caused the collapse. Seems plausible.
markofwits 1 year ago
@markofwits Are you being funny or not paying attention? Since the TV & "amateur" films are all faked, so are the "helicopters". Why would they need to control any detonations from a helicopter anyway? You don't look for reality in CGI, the TV fakery IS the evidence. Only the perps know or saw WHAT they used to demolish them. Best to stick to logical hypotheses based on known facts, physics & empirical evidence rather than wild speculations (too much already from loons & fake "truthers")
TrinityReload 1 year ago
@TrinityReload It was merely conjecture. Simply because some objects were "doctored" does not mean the entire frame is a fake. The helicopter looked more realistic than the "plane".
markofwits 1 year ago
@markofwits Of course it's easier to make a tiny tadpole shaped pixel blip of a 'helicopter' look "more realistic" than a "plane", but it's still fake. The entire cityscapes & smoking towers were CGI layered simulations, w/ plenty of rendering & perspective mistakes to give it away! Now please explain how your "friend's wife" (who "worked for" the perps' most infamous vicsim sham, CF) could use her cell phone when HERF jammed. Can't wait to hear the full story, what happened next?
TrinityReload 1 year ago
@TrinityReload I have no idea how she was able to still use her cell phone. She may have just been approaching the fringe of the field. Perhaps the field hadn't been widened yet to cover the intended area? Below is the local news story. She never returned home from work, along with hundreds of others. Has she secretly been detained somewhere for 9 years? I would think not.
silive . com/september11/lr/index.ssf?/september11/lr/scibetta.html
markofwits 1 year ago
@TrinityReload I'm referring to a video showing a large clearly defined helicopter with rotor spinning in the upper right of the frame (not a pixel-sized blip).
markofwits 1 year ago
@markofwits Even video games have "realistic" looking cgi choppers lol. So, you claim "Mr Scibetta, a mason for the Transport Authority" is a friend of yours? Ever met him or his "wife" in real life? Funny you forgot the story detail that her alleged cell call was made at about 7:35 (before any jamming would have been necessary). You do know the difference between legally admissible evidence (proof) & hearsay, right? Contrived back-stories & "memorial" lists of fictitious names prove nothing.
TrinityReload 1 year ago
@TrinityReload Yes, I met him. I had not met his wife. Listen, I'm "all for" the No-Plane/CGI/Thermite/Directed Energy Weapon/HERF theories. But you can't convince me that NO ONE was lost in those collapses. My friend lost his wife, and his children lost their mother. Can I elucidate her exact fate? No, I cannot. I only know she disappeared. I don't know where you get your "vicsim sham" "facts" from, but they're obviously not based on reality. I'm finished entertaining your nonsense.
markofwits 1 year ago
@markofwits So we only have your hearsay claim about an alleged friend's hearsay, which you believe. If you can accept that 9-11 was a military-media hoax to hide the demo of buildings as an excuse for war to control the M E, then it logcally follows: why risk REAL victims when it was so easily faked w/ Media complicity & psyops? You've obviously not seen the research info re memorial scams & actor/agents playing "family" members: tinyurl . com /MEMSCAMS
& watch: "911 Actors"
TrinityReload 1 year ago
@TrinityReload I'm not buying that phony photoshop story. There are several pictures of this woman online, and the expressions are different. In addiiton, she is searchable by her maiden name in the Intelius directory, and her record is associated with her husband's family name.
markofwits 1 year ago
@markofwits The photoshops of vicSims is blatantly obvious on many, less so on some. But the memorial "tributes" & cloned comments are what clinch it as fake on all. e.g. Funny how those extra pics of "Adriane" weren't even added till 3 years later by the "sister in law" - the ONLY "family member" to ever leave guestbook entries since '01! In the typical style of all other 9-11 vicsim guest notes from 'family' &/or 'friends', written in 1st person, regular each year + vicsim's birthdays etc.
TrinityReload 1 year ago
Do you believe that the people that were recorded on video and audio were actors that were pretending to see an American Airlines plane (military plane, etc, whatever gets you to believe it wasn't something other than some type of plane)? I believe they are actors and most of the voice recordings, unfortunately for the government, do not even sound legit when you hear their cries. Thanks for your time. Please relay information to me that you may feel will further justify my beliefs of no plan
BrutalMind1984 1 year ago
Again, don't attempt to pass off a falsified statement/video to add to the credibility of an inside job when the numerous videos speak for themselves. Understand that if even one of your theories is proven wrong, then it jeopardizes your whole case. It applies the same, however, to those that attempt to convince the public of the "real events" that took place that day. Most of their "proof" has been acknowledged as fakery so it can all be discredited. And lastly, do you believe that the peop
BrutalMind1984 1 year ago
They are clearly the same image presented in every "explosion" clip. The nose in, nose out theory can be seen from many different angles.. Was this done on purpose, knowing that there was an error there? Also, when the man said, "We understand that the second tower collapsed there" (in addition to the first collapse, however the second was still standing at the time), I believe he implied the fact that the second tower would collapse inevitably, regardless. The accent and poor English was mis
BrutalMind1984 1 year ago
In some cases, I believe that the "proof" of some of the given evidence can be disproved due to natural human instincts that accept what we are seeing. Based on instincts. (Not saying I believe there were planes but people fabricated the idea to persuade us to see in their light even though it was true in the first place). Also, amazing how the smoke and fireballs from the explosions create numerous amounts of "faces". I discredit anyone who implies that these images are self-created. They are
BrutalMind1984 1 year ago
At 2:21 in one of your videos (to name just one) it is apparent that the face of a man can clearly be seen. I won't agree with anyone that tells me, "It's just what your mind wants you to see." Another question; Could some of the anomalies that you insist are fact could actually be the combination of poor video quality combined with a low res background? And that begs the question, why are so many cameras filming in low resolution? Please help me with these questions.
BrutalMind1984 1 year ago
Hey, I enjoyed your videos and really understand the truth that you are trying to convey. I am a "no planer" theorist but I wish to ask you a few questions that may better help me understand a couple things that I'm still confused about.. First, do you agree or disagree that the images that we were shown of the damage caused by the supposed planes were computer generated? I do. Do you see an abnormal amount of "faces" in the smoke of this destruction? At 2:21 in one of your videos, it is appar
BrutalMind1984 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
its just a stupid helicopter
peanutbuttersticky 1 year ago
Google "9/11 Nukes - Radiation-induced cancers"
WTCnucleardemolition 1 year ago
the EMP/HERF would also stop any audio recordings being made of the massive explosions that many fire-fighters reported hearing and seeing.
jamesha175 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
how can the helicopter be that close if their was a 5 mile airspace barrier set up
dmcc95 1 year ago
how can the helicopter be that close if their was a 5 mile airspace barrier set up
dmcc95 1 year ago
@sxmadrid yeah i got that but maybe i missed something, i will admit that i did not go through all of the info on the .info site.
but what i meant was WHY demo the buildings at the wtc site and why a need to cover it up?
i saw the buildings go down from about 40 miles away while i was on Fire Island all i could see was smoke from the tops of them (maybe the top half). i didnt get to see all live clips becuase there was no tv in the house we had rented that week.
prowlerjesse 1 year ago
Great work and some real eye opening info!
I guess my only question would be WHY?
I need a motive for all this to make sense.
prowlerjesse 1 year ago
@prowlerjesse because the fuckers didn't want to broadcast the demolition of the building, so they covered it up. Real footage would contain clues, wouldn't it?
sxmadrid 1 year ago
Mossad agent where arrested filming .
The confiscated footage must show the "real thing" as strikes 1 and 2.
Most be somewhere ...
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
@MrPierrePhilippe I also remember hearing this information from somewhere. If the footage does still exist (unlikely as they were deported, and thier dual citizenship revoked) it likely is unedited.
b0neneedle420 1 year ago
False planes made sense; to hide the truth,and blame it on arabs.
But this,I meen why ? In case it would look too obvious maybe ?
And jamming video...It would not affect over a certain distance.
And good old photographic emulsion ?
Probably, they wanted to hide the big pieces going too fast and the surfaces.
Too much smoke for there not to be a "smoking gun" !
Very good research Mr Shack. Very rigourous and impartial(factual)
ThankYou(anything on healing buildings)
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
@futurecatholic - Why mess with planes when you can fake it on a computer? Much less risk than unpredictable real plane crashes. The wreckage? Well, you need a pick-up, some plane parts and a small crew for staging it. Maybe photoshopping could illustrate the point you want to make without any work at all.
elbuggo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=823734902101057550#
Google: September Clues Busted
purldiver 1 year ago
@purldiver cant view that video anymore
complicatedaimee 4 months ago
SO there are some shots which show the chopper, and some which apparently don't. Could there be a simple explanation?, (distances from towers, variations in camera positions, camera settings, lighting conditions, generational degradation through copying, various kinds of digital compression, etc)? No. EVERYTHING WAS FAKE.
existenceisfake 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
drinkmusik 1 year ago
@drinkmusik
That is why I recommend everyone to kindly read all the articles at my website (septemberclues.info) so as to get a full picture of the research - and the daily progress being made (not least at the Reality Shack forum - see link on my channel). Thanks for your good advice - I do my best not to speculate without adequate evidence, yet there are areas of this massive hoax which require some level of guess work.
simonshack 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
drinkmusik 1 year ago
@LithuanianGuitar
The point is that PAT is not seen (on the high-qualty NBC clip) flying north-westwards as WTC2 collapses. And of course, PAT should certainly be seen - as my "debunkers" kindly helped pointing out ! :O)
simonshack 1 year ago
@simonshack uh hu...
cptstartrek03 1 year ago
forget about the helicopter at 1:33 and as the tape reverses watch for flashes and tiny explosions from the south tower. unreal.
mrwizard319 1 year ago
at 1:40 and especially as it reverses watch the south tower for flashes and squibs popping off. unreal.
mrwizard319 1 year ago
Anchor " don't know if this is the "correct" tape...". 9/11 was a dual purpose satanic ritual.
TheIndoctriNATION 1 year ago
good work again my friend
fishingforbricks 1 year ago
I think the videos are 100% fake composites.
agentzippo 1 year ago 5
It is very hard to say what is true and what is false at this point. All I can say is that from DAY ONE many people questioned the official story. Almost ten years have past and 9/11 has all the trappings of a cover up.
pantoum 1 year ago
At 4:51 look all the way to the left. This time the scaaary demon is grinning. Right before this, starting at 4:20 look for the skull (almost perfect) right below this image.
beastshawnee 1 year ago
How interesting that the videos from the choppers from Israeli TV has _never_ been available to the rest of us in all the 9 years I have been looking for 911 footage.
gunthaarz 1 year ago
is there any proof of no cameras working because of EMP? I mean has any1 come forward and said their camera wasn't working? or any other electrical equipment stopped working in the area?
ZORGtheALIEN 1 year ago
@ZORGtheALIEN
Please go to septemberclues(DOT)info
Enter the site and look for (in the righthand scrollbar) the article called "VISUAL CONTROL OF 9/11". Thanks.
simonshack 1 year ago
@ZORGtheALIEN The fire crews and the cops had problems communicating on their radios,
iconoclast911 1 year ago
@ZORGtheALIEN Yes, people in a building 3 blocks from the site on William St., indicated many electronic devices in their office experienced operational interruptions.
markofwits 1 year ago
also: WHY or WHAT would they possibly gain by editing which direction the tower falls? and WHY would they edit which direction "PAT" flies? and WHY would they edit him out? It's a sloppy job.. it's like they got too excited with the editing and said: Hey lets make the tower drop in all directions to make it plausible. Well, idiots, the towers fell without you (tv-stations) having to edit it. Same goes with foreground editing, the point of it is.. why? Pointless.
cracktober 1 year ago
cracktober - you have many questions, that's very wise and healthy ! Please go to septembercluesDOTinfo, enter the site and read the many articles relevant to your questions.
simonshack 1 year ago
its a bit like asking why did the robbers choose a yellow car, why did they forget to change the color on both the fake videos.. there does not have to be answers to ALL the blunders, there has to be _adequate_ answers to _relevant_ questions. All they needed was accuracy enough to create an illusion good _enough_ . It never had to be perfect. They pointed in one direction AFTER the fact and everyone LOOKED. It's the SIMPLEST trick in the goddam BOOK
gunthaarz 1 year ago 22
why would the gov or the television stations make such awful jobs, when they obviously have billion budgets? they can hire anyone, and its NOT that hard to edit, a 15 year old with photoshop and some videoprogram can do it, then I bet a 40 year old 25-year veteran of digital effects can do it, and a WELL job, not this crude low-budget editing that the stations have done.
cracktober 1 year ago
cracktober - two things:
1: Billion budgets do not always buy talent and perfection.
2: I do not think the stations did the sloppy job - more likely a black-op center not necessarily managed by George Lucas or Roland Emmerich...
simonshack 1 year ago 8
The missing helicopter implies that the collapse was CGI, I don't understand why the collapse was CGI what was edited from it?
JZJYRWO 2 years ago
@JZJYRWO
Nothing was 'edited from it'. All the collapse-clips are 3D animations. The real collapses were the last thing the perps wished to show on LIVE TV - given the many things that could go wrong. In reality, a thick smokescreen impeded the view of the WTC area. The collapse animations were made to match as much as possible a cloud of smoke and dust. We have, in fact, NO eyewitnesses describing any visual details of the'pyroclastic collapse'.
more info here :
septembercluesDOTinfo
simonshack 2 years ago
I can accept that thank you
JZJYRWO 2 years ago
Why didn't they make the collapse look more natural then not as many people would suspect that there was a controlled demolition.
JZJYRWO 2 years ago
@JZJYRWO
I doubt anybody on this planet - not even George Lucas - would know how to CGI 'a natural collapse' - or knew beforehand how such an unprecedented demolition would look like. So they probably decided they might as well make it as spectacular-looking as possible for 'shock-and-awe effect : undeniably, it worked pretty well on people's psyches...It also helped trigger a zillion (improbable) theories of HOW they fell - which also was the aim of the perpetrators. Smart, I must say...
simonshack 2 years ago
WOW! More and more I'm amazed by what you have discovered. Nice effort! The arguments alone leave little room for debate. Regards, izzy
izzysykopth 1 year ago 3
At 4.08:- Background voice, quote: "I don'y know if this is the correct tape!".
zen4men 2 years ago 4
then this means that the naudate film of the first strike was fake?
anyway good job
TheBigT89 2 years ago
@TheBigT89
The Naudet first strike (just as ALL other "planestrike" videos) is most definitely fake. It is analyzed here:
"911 AMATEUR part2"
watch?v=yjQmxS-DpyM
and here :
"THE PLANE FACTS"
watch?v=wkZKOqYMbXo
There is NO authentic footage of the crucial timewindows of that morning.
To understand how this was achieved, please go to :
septembercluesDOTinfo
simonshack 2 years ago
Love the Brand-X soundtrack at the start, John Goodsall rules!
i811st 2 years ago
awesome! you should have hooked up with jesse ventura for conspiracy theory, because this needs aired!
mickles21486 2 years ago
Sorry to burst your 'Ventura bubble' : Jesse is just another 'Alex Jones'-style gatekeeper posing as a real deal...
simonshack 2 years ago
really? so you dont trust him? i thought it was very ballsy of him trying to air a show like that. seems like a straight talking kinda guy
mickles21486 2 years ago
Here's how Jesse's show was presented:
"At the urging of victims' families (FAMILIES!FAMILIES!), he finds witnesses who claim the towers were brought down by explosives, the missing black box flight recorders were actually recovered (PLANES!PLANES!) and ground control knew the hijackers were in the cockpits before the jets took off. (HIJACKERS!!HIJACKERS!!)"
(Words in brackets are mine) It is all too clear that Jesse pushes the existence of planes, hijackers and victims.
simonshack 2 years ago
But is Jesse using this half ass theory to get the show on television? Whereas the full truth complete with no plane facts would be a thing that no one would allow to be televised. Granted, if the complete truth about 9/11 was ever to become common knowledge, our news media would lose it's integrity with most people and the perpetrators would lose the control they have over the American people, which is a propaganda device.
I put my old TV up on my roof with the words ALL LIES painted on it.
JZJYRWO 2 years ago 4
Once the media role is completely exposed the whole crime syndicate will fall like a house of cards since all that is justified by 911 is completely dependent on the media's ability to mold and maintain public perception.
izzysykopth 1 year ago 4
LOL
i cant believe that there was 2 cameras that filmed WTC first plane crash by pure chance......
Actually.....That make the conspiracy........___ more easy to find the truth
mike05005 2 years ago
If I understand this correctly, it means that all the official "scenery" available from 9/11-01 is faked in different ways?
Scary if that's true.
Someone mentioned burning cars around the towers - very interesting. I've never heard of that before.
I post a link which NOT shows any burning cars, partly just around the towers. Any comment on that?
watch?v=nJ0D9PUpDOg&feature=related
Thank you for your work.
BillyBoysing 2 years ago
BillyBoysing : the video you linked was released on Youtube by an "anonymous couple" ("Bob and Bri") in 2006. It is nothing else than an umpteenth 3D animation video. It is 100% fake. If you have trouble understanding how we may prove that these videos are total fabrications, please go to my website which explains it in more detail :
septembercluesDOTinfo
Thanks !
simonshack 2 years ago
and the guys who filmed the videos swearing never to reveal the truth just got suckered into it... now they must feel a bit shitty.
as for 'pat', yea, probably more effects...
i find the buildings and virtual reality part very interesting (in your other work).
aeolismensae 2 years ago
So wait. I was lied too this whole? No plane crashes? Then what was it? Missiles? Inside explosion? Bush?
vakuf8 2 years ago
You should go to simon's website and check out the Victims Reports and VIctims List as well as other fully documented goodies!
Fight0Tyranny 2 years ago
September 11,2009
New SEPTEMBER CLUES website now online: SeptemberCluesDOTinfo
Please distribute !
simonshack 2 years ago
You can see flashes before down WTC: 8:06
sherimoon31 2 years ago 2
pat friended with bob !!!
KertonLabs 2 years ago
hehe...
To anyone not familiar with this research :
Kertonlabs is referring to...
FOXED OUT part2
watch?v=b9LURV-joLI&fmt=18
"BOB and JIM" is how I named two choppers in that pretty hot FOX archive analysis...
simonshack 2 years ago
I find it odd how Dylan Avery gets on national television and none of the no planers do. Can you say shill?
thetmack47 2 years ago 23
when is chapter 2 coming out!!?? i can make a 9/11 movie in 1 day lol! it can't take that long!
cptstartrek02 2 years ago
2:01 -- "gone!"
LOL. The suggestion that video fakery caused the chopper to disappear is irresponsible and dishonest.
I had to comment while I linked this video to a post at pumpitout in Jim Fetzer's new thread.
911conspiracyTV 2 years ago
I agree I should have illustrated this more accurately - and in slower fashion. However, the point is that the chopper at 2:01 really does disappear from one frame to the next for no apparent reason. It might be debatable whether it is due to camera zooming out + video compression issues, but your flaming outrage for me pointing it out is frankly undue.
simonshack 2 years ago
Sorry. I'm not beyond reproach, either.
911conspiracyTV 2 years ago
1:38 to 1:42 you can see flashes seconds before free fall collapse. on the top portion of the buildings
saltydog78 2 years ago
That is fucked up.
murderface74 2 years ago
Congratulations - your ability to think thru the lies we've been presented with makes the rest of us look like we thinking
in slo mo.
Atrocious, treasonous story here and thank you for trying to let us know what really happened and what is really going on.
Brooksavenue 2 years ago 4
another 'smoking gun'.... PAT!!!
timingfunk 2 years ago 2
I gotta say simonshack...you've got alot of courage man.
thorrin70 2 years ago 2
I firmly belive 911 was an inside job,but why would they bother faking a helicopter????
1THETRUTH10 2 years ago 2
simonshack check out 9/11 false flags (documentary) on youtube its pretty cool check it if already havent.
gekko101 2 years ago
The bottom line is that no 9/11 videos can be trusted..............PERIOD!!!!!!!
IeatRAWmeatAllWeek 2 years ago 24
Loved the video Simon, always great seeing your fantastic work. Anymore September Clues on the way?
Zack
zack11993 2 years ago 8
You're great guy Simon! You're Videos 're the best I've seen about 9/11! And I like Pat... but what did NYPD do there at that moment??
fasTRapid 2 years ago 2
fasTRapid : "... but what did NYPD do there at that moment?? "
Well, depending on which source you watch (amateur videos / or LIVE TV), the NYPD chopper 'PAT' was there...or wasn't there. That makes your question a rather tricky one ! ...;O)
The bottom line is that no 9/11 videos can be trusted.
simonshack 2 years ago
I know, but I have the theory that in PAT they had the control for the explosives planted in WTC Towers thats why they had to go there and on TV they erased PAT because of that...
fasTRapid 2 years ago
Interesting - but I doubt they would have needed a helicopter to hover above the towers to trigger the explosives...
simonshack 2 years ago
great vid
smoketweed09 2 years ago 4
i like pat
YoshiFan501 2 years ago 2
Excellent as usual, Simon! I've seen this before (or at least a prior version), but it is always fun to watch them again. I sorta missed the man walking backwards the first time. I've been doing my best to spread the (video) Gospel of Simon to the unenlightened. Was that Zappa at the beginning? I love that piece, whatever it is. Your choice of music makes your videos all that more enjoyable! I have NO idea what IrreversibleCurse is talking about! Keep up the great work!
Bongofury361 2 years ago 3
It's so obvious now that you point it out Simon. What better way for the perps to control the environment than to show completely manufactured scenes? I look forward to your next segment.
NoPlaneZen 2 years ago 2
PUMPITOUT ARE SCUM!!!!!
cptstartrek02 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
lol. yeh lets fake videos 2 make it look like a conrolled demolition. haha. simon u need a girl m8.
Dynamicdj 2 years ago
DJ :
Nah, one is enough, thanks. She's pretty lovely too. Thanks for caring, anyway !
simonshack 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The fact that this is the only video that Simohn Shack made that has less than 4 stars shows just have ridiculous it is. Even his own subscribers isn't buying this fake collaspe BS.
IrreversibleCurse 2 years ago
I understand the ridiculously absurd anomalies, contradictions, etc. that resulted from ineptitude, It's just extra mind boggling that they'd present the towers collapsing at free fall speed and think this wouldn't raise a huge flag sooner or *later. Do you think any of this was considered at all, that they simply and arrogantly underestimated the intelligence of the global public completely? Or a planned scapegoat scheme?
andastroz 2 years ago
andastroz, you ask :
(quote) : " Do you think that
-A. They simply and arrogantly underestimated the intelligence of the global public completely?
- B. Or a planned scapegoat scheme?"
I'll pick A.
simonshack 2 years ago
" I keep asking you to spell out at least one complaint you have about SC."
Should I instead wait for your final version? There appears to be a long list of unanswered 'complaints' about SC you seem to be ignoring. I'm just trying to be courteous.
pointlessbang2 2 years ago
so simon this is only ch1 when will the rest come? cuz u r a master...
antasaur 2 years ago 4
Thanks, antasaur.
Currently working on Chapter 2....
simonshack 2 years ago
thats gd yo hear cuz love this stuff
and out of plain curiosiy(i know misspelled)... did u realise that if the media can lead us to false truths that concidering this info that alex jones and the truthers are giving us false......stuff you know what i mean..,info etc etc
antasaur 2 years ago
bangPL
Joined: April 21, 2009
Last Sign In: 34 minutes ago
Videos Watched: 1
Subscribers: 0
Channel Views: 2
Country: Djibouti
Ghost accounts set up for the sole reason of spamming drivel on this channel are automatically detected by my troll-sniffing nose. Beat it.
simonshack 2 years ago
hey simon who directed this lucas or spielberg?
Frenchforever2009 2 years ago
Roland Emmerich, perhaps ? Maybe he just sold the perps some old reels with discarded, crappy shots meant for "Independence Day"? :O)
simonshack 2 years ago
CGI of the towers?
911Shaman 2 years ago
911 Shaman :
yes, CGI of the towers. Anyone who can show that the collapses are all consistent with each other should do a video proving this contention. It's about time for the 'debunker crew' to come up with a demonstration that ALL the collapse videos show the very same event.
Good luck to them :O)
simonshack 2 years ago
Hi Simon,
Sorry, I guess I'll never understand this. I wish I could but I don't understand why these are faked planes. ;-(
Why did they fake them? What was the real purpose? I get so many different conflicting points of view.
I understand Northwoods and all that, but, who planted the bombs in the WTC if it wasn't the Arabs in hijacked planes? If I could get a straight answer maybe I'd be more open to TV CGI fakery.
911Shaman 2 years ago
lol wut?. the arabs planted bombs from the planes? you are confused
genghis6l99 2 years ago
genghis,
Now I know you're not serious.
Confused?
I asked Who planted the bombs or thermite in the towers to bring them down?
And who put the "cartoon planes" on video? If this is supposedly all faked including the towers disintegrating?
And why was it done? To blame the Jews?
911Shaman 2 years ago
Slackr Slayer:
Its obvious you don't have the same goal as Simon. You debunkers come in different dresses and you are getting more and more stupid posing yourself as Mr. know it all about compression techniques.
I tell you right now that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Has it ever crossed your mind that the videos are fake???????
Until next time try to make some videos yourself debunking " The Official Story"
esharpf 2 years ago 3
At 3:50 of this video you will see that white choppers were always visible on the TV footage even at great distance. The fact that "PAT" is not visible at all on CNN, NBC and MSNBC (as he would/should be moving along north of the towers in direct sunlight) cannot be explained by any sort of compression artifact.
simonshack 2 years ago
Good one. soundtrack is balm to my ears. Thank you.
MegsHead 2 years ago
For the record: 13 April 2009
A flock of easter bunnies was here throwing eggs over all the better comments, posting denigratory ones and voting each other's drivel up like rabbits.
This bunny-gang is mostly parked at the "pumpitout" forum which apparently now organizes concerted, juvenile debunking raids like this one.
Should these immature antics become their future modus operandi I will not hesitate to block the bunnies one by one.
simonshack 2 years ago
In other words, anyone that can see through your lies has to be blocked.
Thats all you can do Simon is block and hide behind your cronies at movement.
If you were so sure about the stuff your spreading, why not come to pumpitout and defend it??? Are you scared of the truth???
pumpitout 2 years ago
Pearls before swine.
NeanderthalUFO 2 years ago
"pumpitout" :
What am I supposed to defend? Which part of this video has been questioned ? Please be specific and I'll respond to you right here.
simonshack 2 years ago