More on TV Fakery

[Andy Tyme]

When you consider that New York City has been, for more than sixty years(!), the most competitive TV-news market in the world, with both network and local-station camera crews scouring the city (and the high-profile borough of Manhattan in particular) at all hours, searching for "scoops" via fresh/new "action" footage of "breaking" events -- their coverage of the WTC "plane" crashes and resultant fires was so uncharacteristically LETHARGIC as to be HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS from the get-go!

Yet long before 2001, literally EVERY TV-news operation in the city had become well-equipped with what constituted, collectively, an entire FLEET of live-remote capable minivans, lorries, and SUV's, always filled with petrol and ready to speed to the site of any calamatous event as soon as its location could be determined from chatter first monitored on emergency-services' two-way radio traffic.

But on the morning of 9/11, as can be plainly seen in the archived video of the real-time program streams, there is NO on-the-scene, street-level television reporting for a painfully long time. Instead, all the viewer is presented with is a narrow selection of alternating studio shots of chatting morning-show hosts, some alleged telephoto long shots of the towers as seen from the air, and telephone-patched audio of various big-time media employees who just happened to be "off duty" but were nevertheless quite well situated to recite verbal desecriptions of the morning's ghastly, "terrorist-caused" events.

As Simon Shack and others have documented, what the viewing public was initially presented with that morning (at least until the "impromptu" presidential response from Florida aired) was not genuine, live TV-news coverage at all, but rather a prefabricated, 103-minute, CGI-crafted, psyop-MOVIE, designed to implant in the nation's collective consciousness a strategically falsified version of how the towers were destroyed.

[Andy Tyme]

Chuck, although at first glance there might seem to be a genuinely wide variety of 9/11 crash-and-collapse imagery, the dedicated (yes, even obsessive!) researchers who have filled the CluesForum and Let'sRoll websites with their discoveries and comparisons over the past several years have, by now, compellingly demonstrated that there was actually great deal of credit-shifted COPYING going on -- when the stills and videos first began appearing in the mass media.

Time and again the VERY SAME camera angles and compositions would appear, but credited to DIFFERENT photographers at supposedly DIFFERENT locations, and (to add to the confusion) frequently published with deceptively different levels of resolution and color balance.  It can take quite a long time to read through and carefully study the most damning (to the official story) 9/11 threads on these two (rival) message boards, and you unfortunately have to repeatedly dodge the inevitable flame wars, flights of fantasy, declarations of delusion, and "Sunstinian Cognitive Infiltration" that (despite the efforts of moderators) can still get in the way of your search. 

But there is highly relevant and astonishing material to be found on both forums -- which ultimately discredits a great deal (perhaps even all...) of both the professional AND supposedly amateur 9/11 pictures/video "taken" during the 103 minutes of "synthetic terror" (Dr. Tarpley's so-apt term) on that Tuesday morning, a dozen years ago.

And then there is the highly suspicious, parallel issue of the many SIMULATED VICTIMS, listed on the early-arriving "memorial websites" whose portraits display absolutely glaring artifacts of Photoshop-fakery and whose tragically sentimental bios (mostly uncorroborated by the Social Security Death Index) are peppered with novelettish "coincidence" elements largely impossible to verify.

[Chuck Boldwyn]

Andy, please post the complete links to the "video fakery" evidence & research you are pointing out as I have not had it brought to my attention, although I have viewed "September Clues" several times.
Still, no less than mini nukes type energy could have brought those Twin Towers down based on energy calculated requirements requiring the melting, vaporization & re-condensing of the steel & concrete related materials into iron spheres and silicate spheres, by the billions as found in the dust by even Govt, associated agencies, Insurance Companies, & the Chemist from Copenhagen, Video fakery or not,
will not change those facts. If the demolitions were video faked, they did a piss poor job of doing it as it was so, so, so, easy to see and identify that they were super obvious explosive demolitions being utilized. Why did they not make it look like a normal collapse, ESP when viewing "Loose Change" and all the other supposedly video faked demolition videos.
Chuck Boldwyn

[Andy Tyme]

Chuck, have you actually studied "September Clues"?  And have you read the extensive research the "fakery theorists" have done into the provable identities and professional backgrounds of the handful of "civilian videographers" and the provenance/chain-of-possession of their imagery?  Things are not as simple as the mass media would have us believe in this respect as well.

[Chuck Boldwyn]

Were all of the videos collected from local civilians also faked, dozens of them, the demolitions parts?
The many videos seem to beck each other up, the demolitions sequences. Inserting airplanes is another story.

We're all of the YouTube videos demolitions faked?
Backgrounds could be inserted, so could airplanes be inserted and make collisions timed with the demolitions, but could all of the demolitions videos be faked?