firsthitflashframe/Web Fairy!@

Comment

Comment by sandy rose on June 21, 2009 at 7:47am

hi, i just went back and found the leslie raphael article, 'jules
naudet 9/11 film was staged'. anyone who hasn't seen it yet can
find it by searching that. i'm having twubble sending the article,
plus it's pretty lonnnnng, but that person was onto em long ago!

Comment by sandy rose on June 21, 2009 at 7:45am

hi Julie, thanks for your post. so you think the first hit tower video is fake, also?
yeah, they certainly have puzzled a lot of us with that one. i definitely agree that
the second hit videos are fake, after having seen them picked apart frame by frame,
but i think the first hit one is somewhat real, if not blurred on the way down. if they
were going to fake that one why not make it look a wee bit more like an airliner
than a blurry blob on the way down that comes out looking like a scramjet (to me)
in front of the building? it's just one of those things that ten people will look at
and have ten different opinions about what it is. video fakery from them wouldn't
surprise me a bit at this point but i still think that one is at least in part real and
that if they wanted to fake it they coulda at least made it LOOK like an airliner.
and if they faked it, why put in that flash, or do you think that flash was real?
there are flashes on both wtc hits and i tend to think those were real, too, as
in the beginning of the detonation of explosives or whatever. mind you i am far
from being scientific and don't claim to be and i'm willing to admit if my
opinion is off but i still say scramjet. and i posted pics of them because i
would say most people are not even aware that they exist. most people know
that we senselessly kill people around the world with drones, and once in a
while we see a people killing drone, but how often do we ever see scramjets
and why try to hide something so unique if they're using it for good? (yeh, right.)
i value Rosalee's opinion greatly and i guess i should go back and read some
of that uav stuff again cause i just am not seeing what she's seeing and i'm
wondering how she came to that conclusion, she sounds convinced, and if
she has other proof that makes her sure about that, guess i have to give that
another look. but no, my opinion that shot was not completely fake. nobody
was ready for that to happen, well, except bash and chainey and jewels and
gideup, etc. who were very much there on purpose. by the way, bill was
mentioning about julesie being there right at the right moment or something,
someone made a fascinating study of all the reasons that he couldn't have
just happened to have been there, Rosalee was the name leslie raphael or close?
if you have the link handy for that can you send it?
been a while and that's just off the top of my head but very interesting. and
why go to all that trouble if the thing was just a fake video anyway?
thanks for your comment!

Comment by sandy rose on June 20, 2009 at 2:14pm

why would Jim think you were spamming???

yeah, i noticed the cute little rectangles, but i've seen it all before on
web fairy site so i didn't bother clicking on em. did it really take 100 pics
to show whatever you were trying to show? or were you just trying to use
up a whole bunch of valuable photo space...

and you forgot to answer my question, are you blocking my messages?
and if so, what is your wondrous reasoning behind that? and you're moderating
SOMEONE ELSE'S group? are you blocking it from the rest of us, bill, or
just from yourself?

so, since i am not sure by what you have said so far, how have you come
to be a 9/11 truther....................or am i jumping the gun on that one? are
you a 9/11 truther?
and if so, what exactly is your take on planes/no planes? i'm a wee bit
confused by what you've said/not said so far.....do you think planes hit or not?
like i said before, lather, rinse, repeat, i don't mind everyone having their own
opinions and reasons for having them....yours are as yet still a bit unclear.....


like i said to a friend of mine, you are like one of those kids who comes
to the sandbox in full body armor with sword flailing, while the rest of us are
in shorts and t-shirts!!

i see you are in texas, are you friends with wubba?

Comment by sandy rose on June 20, 2009 at 11:19am

bill, are you blocking my messages???
maybe the others can help me understand, what was the purpose of
those million photos you posted? i didn't find any sense in them.
moderate this!
.

Comment by sandy rose on June 20, 2009 at 10:40am

hi Rosalee, delighted you are here! i have heard/seen you mention before flocks
of uav's and i think i read some of that stuff long ago, i consider you brilliant, often
more brilliant than some of the rest of us, but i am still puzzled about that idea
and have so far not seen anything that looks to me like a flock of anything. ???
you are referring to the first tower hit which to me looks just like a scramjet???
can you show any pics that might enlighten the less brilliant amongst us? (me)

Comment by Curtis Sherwood on June 20, 2009 at 12:55am

Rosalee, pleased to meet you.

"Reflections make plane wings disappear in Flight Simulator: if you filter out the sky color, it takes parts of wings that are reflecting the same color with it.
The brightness was not adjusted in the Flash Frame in any way. The original frames I enlarged in small increments using various programs and compression schemes in batch mode, and the reanimated them."

Can we see a side by side comparison of this one frame? Before your adjustments vs. after? With or without enlargement.

Comment by Rosalee Grable on June 19, 2009 at 6:43pm

Great to see my stuff up on Blip.TV!

What we are seeing is a flock of small to tiny UAV craft flying toward the building in close formation.
http://webfairy.org/uav
describes the menace of these tiny craft in detail. The article is pre-911.
They separate and create "dustpimples" that I believe are "NanoThermite".
http://webfairy.org/thermite
because of the "nuclear yellow" fireball. I believe this nano-thermite is a chemical catalyst for a beam weapon attack. Dr. Judy Wood mentions "lathering" happening before beam weapon attacks, including the Twin Cities Bridge that supposedly failed in all supports simultaneously because of bird poop.

http://webfairy.org/haarp/beamweapon.htm
A pre-911 description of a secret weapon used at the Murrah Building.
The author of the article tried to contact me early on, but I was scared of him for being such an insider, and hadn't caught on enough to take advantage.

Absolutely Naudet got out of the impact frame on purpose!
http://911foreknowledge.com

They used Secret Weapons.
The power they tapped would be better off bringing us into a post-nuclear world where we obtain our energy directly from the Great Neutral Force, The Aether, Chi, Reichian Energy, Tesla power, in biblical days, The Fundament, before Archimedes math was lost.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6622663022450689923

Anything I did to the Missilegate Frames, beyond the initial enlargement, is clearly marked.
All existing fields of all existing frames are different from one another.
The second hit cartoons have too few frames.

Reflections make plane wings disappear in Flight Simulator: if you filter out the sky color, it takes parts of wings that are reflecting the same color with it.
The brightness was not adjusted in the Flash Frame in any way. The original frames I enlarged in small increments using various programs and compression schemes in batch mode, and the reanimated them.

Find the Plane:
http://missilegate.com
http://missilegate.com/blob11
.
I am happy to provide the footage from the Naudet DVD to anyone who needs it to replicate my work, tho I advise buying the Naudet 911 Directors Cut DVD from Amazon or Ebay, so I won't be accused of doctoring it.

Comment by Curtis Sherwood on June 19, 2009 at 1:05pm

This capture can only be completely analized in conjunction with the (video) camera it was captured with. All else is speculation, imho. The correct amount of light reflection e.g. would render the wings invisible. This is the case in this photo. The brightness was adjusted to emphasize the flash.

Comment by sandy rose on June 19, 2009 at 12:48pm

i think speculating is of great value, myself.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page