Loose Change - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well you missed my point once again. When it comes to my life I will do the choosing and you haven't given me a reason to feel otherwise. I have asked on here if there was anyone who could actually do something to help me or have contacts etc and I get nothing.
Click to expand...

Man I came to class late today, cut me some slack! What contacts are you in need of? I know alot of folk's. Good lawyers top of the pops, Swear!
 
T.A.M. said:
Sir Knight:

I agree, that IF they were told not to speak about what they saw to anyone, that there would be pressure not to speak, but (a) I have seen no proof that they were all told this, and (b) Whistleblowers under equal pressure come forward all the time, yet not one has come forward from that group of employees.
Click to expand...

There are whistleblowers that never make it to the podium I am afraid to tell you.

And if they were told that, would they say that? And I am afraid you should review the movie again and tell me you have never heard any claims of such things, then show me where it is proven what was in the movie wasn't true, the taped part as well as copies of articles.

And what we just discussed was in the movie, which we are suppose to be discussing, and I would like something somewhere to refute it.

Wow......
 
Sir Knight said:
LOL, I am not stupid enough to show it to everyone. I have said that but you don't pay attention it seems. I will not share it with someone just because they DEMAND.
Click to expand...
So, to summarize, your agrument goes something like this:
Sir Knight said:
I CAN PROVE 9/11 WAS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!

But I won't.
Click to expand...
We've had a hundreds just like you come on this forum claiming they could read people's minds or heal people or find water with a stick. Your behavior follows a formula that repeats over and over again. You act excactly like every other lunatic we deal with day in and day out. Doesn't that bother you?
 
Dog Town said:
Man I came to class late today, cut me some slack! What contacts are you in need of? I know alot of folk's. Good lawyers top of the pops, Swear!
Click to expand...


Well lawyers have done me in in more ways that I care to tell you. They do have a price, that I can tell you for sure.

I will send you a private note.

But before we continue do me a favor and try to go back and read my past posts, it will save me a lot of time if you are up to speed, seriously.

Sir Knight
 
I believe the authors of the movie say that the employees were told not to speak on it, but I do not believe they quote a source, or even show it as a quote. I am not going to take the word of those who create a movie they admit is full of errors, on such an important fact.

But I will go back to the film, and look once again at that specific point. Perhaps the "recut" version is different than the 2nd edition.
 
And if they were told that, would they say that? And I am afraid you should review the movie again and tell me you have never heard any claims of such things, then show me where it is proven what was in the movie wasn't true, the taped part as well as copies of articles.
Click to expand...

OK ...caught up! I know some major Heavy Hitt'en press. Wal St., Post, Times,both! Let's talk! If you got the goods, you will be more than safe! You could get a meeting if you got, what you seem to allude to.
 
Sir Knight said:
There are whistleblowers that never make it to the podium I am afraid to tell you.
Click to expand...
Yet here you are, on the podium. You have everyone's ear. Anyone who actually wanted to find you and kill you already could.

It's obvious you're a liar who enjoys getting attention by making up fairy tales. Your real life must be very sad.
 
Sir Knight said:
But before we continue do me a favor and try to go back and read my past posts, it will save me a lot of time if you are up to speed, seriously.
Click to expand...

Your previous posts, like this post, have been full of nothing but excuses. Stop claiming you have evidence you don't have of a nonexistent conspiracy.

ETA And talk to your family or loved ones. Please. This is sad.
 
Sir Knight said:
Well you missed my point once again. When it comes to my life I will do the choosing and you haven't given me a reason to feel otherwise. I have asked on here if there was anyone who could actually do something to help me or have contacts etc and I get nothing. So if what I say is true what good would me exposing myself to anyone of you do me but take a bigger risk that I already have? And I am not sure that YOU are qualified to tell me who to trust for it would be just your opinion at this point and I would have to take a poll to find out the person who would be the best one. Which would be a joke on here I can assure you of that.
Click to expand...

Can I say the obvious? If you believe in the CT, and you believe you have information on the CT, why are you talking to us? Why aren't you talking to Dylan Avery, Alex Jones or Eric Hufschmid? They're much more inclined to believe you right off the bat than the folks who hang around here.
 
In response to the Pentagon Crash...

The camera which captured the impact was a fish-eye lens. this means it is incredibly wide angle. As such lateral distance is significantly exaggerated.

Now, I did a very fast and loose calculation on the angle of view for the piece of footage with the orange cones in it. I used vector lines and a satellite pic from Google Earth to determine the edge of frame.

At the approach path of the aircraft only about 30m of space is visible in the frame in front of The Pentagon.

I also put the camera frame rate at roughly 1 frame per second.

Assuming an even approach speed of 500 MPH...

= 223 m/s

I put the OVERALL field of view of the camera, at the distance of the aircraft's approach trajectory, at about 250m.

In other words, in a single frame from this piece of video, AA77 would traverse the entire width of the frame.

So. Is anyone surprised that we can't see an aircraft in these images? I know I aren't.

However, I don't need the video, because I've seen the evidence that AA77 crashed into The Pentagon. I've seen and read eye witness reports that are consistant with AA77 hitting The Pentagon. I have seen photographs of the physical evidence of AA77 and its aftermath.

And I have yet to hear of a single alternative theory that fills all the criteria of the documented physical evidence (ignoring the eye witness testimony for a moment).

-Andrew
 
delphi_ote said:
Your previous posts, like this post, have been full of nothing but excuses. Stop claiming you have evidence you don't have of a nonexistent conspiracy.

ETA And talk to your family or loved ones. Please. This is sad.
Click to expand...

Well you better put me in touch with one of those people you said come on here then because my family is all dead. And phoning just don't work I guess. And I just lost a very near and dear friend lately which knew of everything that has happened to me. They said he died of a heart attack from other complications.

So you want me to lie? Sorry not happening, I do have what I have and just because you don't know everything that doesn't change a thing. But you make me laugh cause you don't have a clue, not one.
 
Diagnostic criteria for Schizophrenia
(cautionary statement)

A. Characteristic symptoms: Two (or more) of the following, each present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or less if successfully treated):

(1) delusions

(2) hallucinations

(3) disorganized speech (e.g., frequent derailment or incoherence)

(4) grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior

(5) negative symptoms, i.e., affective flattening, alogia, or avolition

Note: Only one Criterion A symptom is required if delusions are bizarre or hallucinations consist of a voice keeping up a running commentary on the person's behavior or thoughts, or two or more voices conversing with each other.

B. Social/occupational dysfunction: For a significant portion of the time since the onset of the disturbance, one or more major areas of functioning such as work, interpersonal relations, or self-care are markedly below the level achieved prior to the onset (or when the onset is in childhood or adolescence, failure to achieve expected level of interpersonal, academic, or occupational achievement).

C. Duration: Continuous signs of the disturbance persist for at least 6 months. This 6-month period must include at least 1 month of symptoms (or less if successfully treated) that meet Criterion A (i.e., active-phase symptoms) and may include periods of prodromal or residual symptoms. During these prodromal or residual periods, the signs of the disturbance may be manifested by only negative symptoms or two or more symptoms listed in Criterion A present in an attenuated form (e.g., odd beliefs, unusual perceptual experiences).

D. Schizoaffective and Mood Disorder exclusion: Schizoaffective Disorder and Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features have been ruled out because either (1) no Major Depressive, Manic, or Mixed Episodes have occurred concurrently with the active-phase symptoms; or (2) if mood episodes have occurred during active-phase symptoms, their total duration has been brief relative to the duration of the active and residual periods.

E. Substance/general medical condition exclusion: The disturbance is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical condition.

F. Relationship to a Pervasive Developmental Disorder: If there is a history of Autistic Disorder or another Pervasive Developmental Disorder, the additional diagnosis of Schizophrenia is made only if prominent delusions or hallucinations are also present for at least a month (or less if successfully treated).

Classification of longitudinal course (can be applied only after at least 1 year has elapsed since the initial onset of active-phase symptoms):

Episodic With Interepisode Residual Symptoms (episodes are defined by the reemergence of prominent psychotic symptoms); also specify if: With Prominent Negative Symptoms

Episodic With No Interepisode Residual Symptoms

Continuous (prominent psychotic symptoms are present throughout the period of observation); also specify if: With Prominent Negative Symptoms

Single Episode In Partial Remission; also specify if: With Prominent Negative Symptoms

Single Episode In Full Remission

Other or Unspecified Pattern
Click to expand...
DSM-IV: Paranoid Schizophrenia

Delusions and auditory hallucinations predominate in patients with this subtype of Schizophrenia while their affective and cognitive functioning remain relatively intact.
Diagnostic criteria for 295.30 (Schizophrenia) Paranoid Type
(cautionary statement)

A type of Schizophrenia in which the following criteria are met:

A. Preoccupation with one or more delusions or frequent auditory hallucinations.

B. None of the following is prominent: disorganized speech, disorganized or catatonic behavior, or flat or inappropriate affect.
Click to expand...

Just trying to educate.
 
Last edited:
gumboot said:
I also put the camera frame rate at roughly 1 frame per second.
Click to expand...

im pretty sure the framerate was higher than that, the plane does seem to be in 2 or 3 frames, the 2 frames for the fireball, based on that id put framerate at 15 at the most (still lower than "regular" cameras)

gumboot said:
And I have yet to hear of a single alternative theory that fills all the criteria of the documented physical evidence (ignoring the eye witness testimony for a moment).
Click to expand...

i have yet to hear a CTers offer ANY explanation at all for why dozens fo peopel saw a large airliner, they always point to the 1 or 2 who said it was a smaller plane and demand and explanation, but they can never explain the dozens who saw a larger plane (save for some vague accusations that they were "paid off" but i guess the other 2 peoples checks bounced)
 
defaultdotxbe said:
im pretty sure the framerate was higher than that, the plane does seem to be in 2 or 3 frames, the 2 frames for the fireball, based on that id put framerate at 15 at the most (still lower than "regular" cameras)
Click to expand...


My 1fps is based on a car which came through the barrier arm - it only moved position once every second (roughly).

As far as I am aware the aircraft is only in one frame prior to impact.

I used this video. The frame I used was the second one (it has both the cameras, one after the other).

-Andrew

ETA. 0.5fps is not uncommon for a surveillance camera.
 
Last edited:
My 1fps is based on a car which came through the barrier arm - it only moved position once every second (roughly).
Click to expand...
This matters little. The cam is a static vid. The recording device, old tape it looks to be, decides the "frame rate" here. There were other frames just not recorded.You just set these things on a rec rate, like sp, lp ets. Tree in the woods etc...
 
gumboot said:
My 1fps is based on a car which came through the barrier arm - it only moved position once every second (roughly).

As far as I am aware the aircraft is only in one frame prior to impact.

I used this video. The frame I used was the second one (it has both the cameras, one after the other).


Isn't that interesting the person that put the film up has plenty to say which you didn't even refer to.

Here it is below and I quote:

If you download this exact footage, then focus on frame 7152. Frame 7152 is when the "plane" comes into view, but is only half painted in. Frame 7153 then adds a white color to make the plane seem real. At the same frame 7153 a tree behind the plane also seems to grow, or something coming out of it where it was not in the previous frame before. Frame 7185 is when smoke magically appears before the plane seems to hit the building, and then the big fireball happens. Is this for real, or made up?

I am not suggesting either way, fake or real. I also want to make it clear I don't have a firm resolution on whether a plane hit the Pentagon, because there is evidence and witnesses, and testimony on both sides. I do want to suggest that photos released, and information released about these events is very manufactured.

WHY WOULD WE NEED TO MANUFACTURE EVIDENCE?

If there is so much un-deniable proof that things went the way the 9-11 commission report stated, why did it take a year for it to come out? Why are there still so many questions? We need a 3rd party investigation team. Please visit infowars.com and 911truth.org ...
Click to expand...
 
Sir Knight;

So I did as you said, just to be sure they didnt have anything new in the "latest" version of their factual documentary.

the section about the Hotel tape is the same. There are two written quotes placed on the screen, neither of which indicate the employees were told to keep quite, the quotes merely say that the FBI confiscated the tapes.

over this the narrator says the employees were warned by the FBI "not to discuss what they had seen". So like I said before, I am not going to take the word of the "Narrator" who is the director of the film, when the filmaker and his producer have admitted the film is full of "intentional" errors, and when he provides no proof that the employees were told any such thing. I see no quote from an employee of the hotel stating this, that someone could then verify...just the narrator's word...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom