9/11 Scholars Forum

Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths

Responding to Dr. Fetzer's Video-Fakery Question

Dr. Fetzer rhetorically asked:

"Why in the world would anyone fake videos that show the official account of their collapse cannot be correct?"

Here's why, Jim.

A really effective psy-op needs a strong and long lasting EMOTIONAL PUNCH!!!

Network television's endlessly repeated, astonishing, CGI-fabricated videos of the top-down, descending-and-dissolving "Tower Volcanoes" (great term!) were intended to be far more spectacular, shocking and gut-wrenchingly memorable than would have been some genuinely live, close shots of the way each tower actually fell, mostly cloaked behind a massive smokescreen -- as the result of an actual, bottom-upwards, controlled demolition. (And how could the public, even as gullible as they proved to be, ever accept a bottom-up collapse being caused by a fire at the top?)

The decision to eventually assign NIST to "explain" the towers" collapse may or may not have been part of the original plan -- but hey, no matter!

What those much-credentialled, "scientific' experts were then confronted with was their "patriotic duty" to come up with a highly technical-sounding EXCUSE for the towers' inability to survive the very kind of damage they were purportedly designed to withstand.

And since attributing the buildings' collapses to violent, internal forces generated by ANY kind of pre-planted explosive devices would have been an IMPERMISSIBLE, even UNTHINKABLE HERESY, those NIST boffins were "boxed in" to a seemingly inescapable quandry.

So, after "dragging their feet" through a long series of delays, they finally decided to ignore BOTH the spectacularly false videos AND the institute's mandate to use them as "evidence" in explaining the destruction. Instead, those cowards-in-white-coats "punted," releasing a convoluted, tortuous and lengthy critique of the towers' alleged construction-design flaws -- a "study" that ends its timeline just as each collapse is about to begin its television-depicted, IMPOSSIBLE, free-fall descent.

And since the controlled media would, of course, brook NO serious questioning of NIST's suspicious avoidance of explaining the (occultically symbolic) 9- and 11-second "volcanic" freefalls, the perps could sleep well, knowing they got away with it.

Views: 53

Comment

You need to be a member of 9/11 Scholars Forum to add comments!

Join 9/11 Scholars Forum

Comment by Chuck Boldwyn on April 9, 2014 at 12:35pm

Andy (100% Video Fakery) Tyme,

This explanation does not help to convince me or possibly others much at all. You need to be much, much more convincing. How do you explain the fuming, complete lengths of the buildings as video fakery, when it was so easily logical to see that the fuming was simple pre-demolition prep in diminishing the thicknesses of the vertical columns or even severing, at least some or many of them. Why video fake that? Most people havn't a clue as to what all that fuming was about, including Jewdy Wood openly admitting that in her book...

Your video fakery arguments are fruitless and so, so unconvincing, at least to this credentialed Physical Scientist.

Your ability to convince me or possibly us at this site is very much lacking in substance and explanatory power.

You may need to attend some better and enriched school classes on "The Power of Convincing Others"

Best of Luck

Chuck Boldwyn

Physics & Chemistry Instructor, Retired

© 2019   Created by James H. Fetzer.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service