SEPTEMBER CLUES C

The SEPTEMBER CLUES website: http://www.septemberclues.info

The SEPTEMBER CLUES forum: http://www.cluesforum.info

On 9/11, the US TV networks used computer generated sceneries of Manhattan. Multiple techniques of image manipulation were employed to simulate "airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center". We now have conclusive evidence that the TV networks were proactively complicit in staging this false-flag operation needed to gather public consensus to wage immensely profitable, illegal wars.

The forensic analysis of the live images leave no room for doubt : they do not depict authentic imagery nor real airplane crashes but turn out to be entirely doctored video sequences which effectively fooled the worldwide TV audience. Thus, the live broadcasts now stored in the major TV networks' archives, constitute the most solid, verifiable and repeatable proof to expose the falseness of the official version of the 9/11 tragedy.

The subsequently released, so-called "amateur" videos were more sophisticated video composites yet all have now been exposed for what they are : total forgeries. Most likely, electromagnetic technology (commonly used in war zones (to jam electronic circuitries) prevented any private footage being recorded at the time of the tower strikes. Scores of testimonies confirm that cellphones or firefighters' walkie-talkies did not function properly in NYC that day.

Most on-the-scene witnesses reported a SMALL aircraft of some sort : Arguably, what they saw was a winged missile. The 4 purported hijacked flights, as well as the related passenger lists, turn out to have several problems as far as their authenticity is concerned : a long list of documentation (or lack of it) reveal serious discrepancies regarding NTSB, BTS and FAA data. All of the above facts, taken together, suggest that none of the official descriptions of the events are credible.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• 9/11
• 911
• television
• news
• september
• clues
• 11
• tv
• fakery
• cnn
• fox
• cbs
• nbc
• abc
• bbc
• wtc
• bush
• shoes
• crime
• crash
• hate
• love
• scam
• war
• iraq
• victims
• no
• planes
• hoax
• fake
• dogs
• cats
• boys
• girls
• commercial
• free

[bennyboyjones]

How do you explain the 9/11 victims phone calls and subsequent dissappearance?

[simonshack]

@bennyboyjones

Everything was staged - from A to Z. To fabricate phone calls would have been one of the easiest part of all.

There were no victims. Please go to:

tinyurl . com / MEMSCAMS (remove all spaces)

[simonshack]

@chillyrooster No. To 'look at the collapses', as you say, won't give you any clues as to what explosives were employed - since those images were only a part of the 9/11 made-for-TV movie. Please watch:

SEPTEMBER CLUES ADDENDUM watch?v=UGyW-0MeBOU

Then go to this page of my website: tinyurl . com / collapseanimations (remove all spaces)

The role of Judy Wood (& co) is to provide 'a possible explanation' for the ridiculous, Hollywoodish images showing towers crumbling from top down.

[SouthernCross33]

@thelister4910 See the documentry at yt username IWOP2 channel, it's called 911 Ripple Effect. you will see well known respected pilots, areo engineers, combat fighter pilots and others who will tell you that pod is off a military plane and has no place on a commercial airliner. don't believe the 911 lie, it's all total lies, you need to do some research, find the truth it's all there

[thelister4910]

@SouthernCross33 I'm pretty sure that "pod" thing has been thoroughly debunked as just being part of the wing that looks weird at times due to poor video quality. If they were to use drone planes they would just have the remote components inside the plane so they weren't seen in video.

[SouthernCross33]

@thelister4910 Yeah i'm with you on not taking virtually anything to do with 911 at face value. I've also seen footage of what many call a pod (or AWAC i think in the pilot/military speak which is in laymans terms a remote controlled device for flying an airliner0 under 1 of the planes and this seems to me to be the credible version of 911

[SouthernCross33]

Oh man the sound track @ 8:00 mins is laughable, it even contains the sound of breaking glass, yet the camera is miles away and the impact way up in the sky, yet over the jet noise, the impact and subsequent loud explosion you can hear glass breaking? yeah sure you would. Theres so many holes in this whole 911 lie, that it makes me think that the perps don't care less about it being exposed as a fraud. So if they don't care less why is that?

[thelister4910]

@thelister4910 When considering my replies, keep in mind I am highly suspicious of all elements of 9/11, and it appears to me that most of Anders Breivik's images from google are CGI. When you are talking to me you are dealing with someone who believes CGI images and video are used in the media and represented as real people for some reason. Your claims of this in this video however not only make no sense, they don't appear to be accurate.

[thelister4910]

@thelister4910 Now this is getting ridiculous, with people claiming all sorts of things about 9/11. I'm not saying it is impossible that the planes were CGI, ad I also hate people who call everyone who doesn't agree with them a "disinfo agent" but with such terrible quality compressed images, is it really beyond your reasoning that blotches appearing on the screen over someone's face are artifacts and not proof of CGI? Can you show me a CGI person exhibiting these artifacts?

[thelister4910]

I would say that we are most likely looking at normal footage. Let me also say that you're claim that some of the people walking around in this clip are CGI is about the most ridiculous thing anyone could say. You really think that guy is not real because of some pixilization on his face? If you wanted to portray people doing something would you

1. Dress donkeys up as people and teach them to do things

2. Make CGI people do things

3. Spend 2 minutes having real people do things?

[simonshack]

@facebookprogrammer

Thank you so much! It is refreshing to have a constructive dialogue over these small Youtube comment boxes. Do you also notice that the WTC7 is grey - in this video? The WTC7 was not grey: it was reddish-brown. Now, this video has a decent RGB balance ( look at the red/orange fireball) yet, the WTC7 is totally GREY. Do you see what I'm getting at?

[facebookprogrammer]

@thelister4910, I agree. I judged too quickly.

[simonshack]

@thelister4910 Forget the angles for a minute, ok? Please pause the video just between 4:14 and 4:15. Observe the buildings at bottom left. Would you say we are looking at real/authentic video footage? If so (and if you'd like to contend that such heavy distorsions are normal video artifacts - or any known quality-loss caused by compression/conversion) please provide a link to any video featuring similar distorsions/artifacts - and 'pastel painting' textures. Thanks! .