Absolute proof of video fakery

[defaultdotxbe]

People keep making the claim that 1000's saw the second plane. Ok, I'll make this easy.

Produce 50 people who saw a plane and I'll shut up and go away.

Fair enough?

since you now appear to be claiming Flight 175 was faked as well as Flight 11 would you like to respond to this?

I had to jump in.

Let's look at this from another angle entirely. Let's assume that your allegation is true - That this video was doctored to appear that a plane had impacted WTC. If this is in fact true, then every single TV station that aired that footage is also complicit. This doctored footage would have to have been delivered to the television station(s) in the NYC area that were covering the event live. It would have been brought back to the Master Control area where the tape machines for on-air are kept. It doesn't end with the operator placing the tape into the machine and pressing play, either.

In order for this to have been pulled off, the Technical Director in the control room would have placed that tape machine on the on-air program source, with the various station CG ("live" keys, and such) superimposed over it. He/she would have used this tape rather than the usual tower-cam or helicopter shot, which if we follow the OP's allegations, would have showed a completely intact building.

This is ludicrous. I have worked in the TV business for a while now so I'm qualified to debunk this particular aspect of it. So - a shadowy NWO operative drops the tape off with instructions with what to do with it...no, no, that wouldn't work. It'd sit there on the receptionist's cart until someone from Engineering came down and got it. No, there would have been a team of armed "AGENTS WOO!!!" that would have stood directly behind the Master Control or Tape Operator as well as the Technical Director in the Production Control room and made sure they complied. In addition, these shadow operatives would have briefed the news director, producers, and on-air talent on what to say. I would make a call to WNBC's master control folks to see if anything like this happened back in 2001, but that would be insulting. You're more than welcome to do it if you wish.

This just points out the most likely scenario for this supposedly doctored footage making on the air and being presented as fact. I'm always 3 steps ahead of truthers so here's a couple counters to what I believe the retorts will be:

1. Maybe they shot the entire coverage beforehand and just aired the entire thing as if it were live.

Not possible. This would be conceivable had mass digital storage been utilized widely back then. How long was the coverage event? Several hours at LEAST. The capacity to store that video digitally and replay it on the air didn't really exist at the time, not unless they deleted all of their digitally stored local commercials/paid programs to make room. No TV station is going to do that - that's what generate their revenue. Ah, but maybe it was rolled off of tape! NO. Even today, the longest duration for a DigiBeta or Beta SP tape is about 80 minutes. These are the standard tape formats for TV stations. Even if they had recorded it on several tapes and rolled them out over the air, there would be a visible switch in the coverage as the Master Control router took one tape machine offline and put the other one on the air.

2. Mebbe they pirated the signal LOLZ!

No sir, I don't think so. There hasn't been an incident of broadcast signal intrusion since the Max Headroom incident in Chicago back in 1987...before that Captain Midnight managed to override the HBO uplink for a few minutes...that's it. The station would have used either a point-to-point studio to transmitter RF link, but most likely they're using fiberoptics to send their program signal to their transmitter - which would be located in an area outside of the greater city limits owing to RF hazards. Perhaps the NWO was able to somehow cut into the fiber cable between the studio and the transmitter and inject their doctored news footage with enough signal strength to override the actual TV signal, but you would have seen the line get cut at some point - the TV station would have gone dark for however long it took them to get their pirate signal on the line to the transmitter. I don't think that happened, Jeeves.

mchapman, if you would be so kind as to explain to me how it was that this doctored footage made it on the air?

Sorry this was so longwinded, but I think we're looking at game, set, and match here.

 

[beachnut]

I was there and I saw an explosion but no plane.

See how easy it is?

It was an impact, not an explosion, then there was a fire ball but you see, the plane entered the building with 1300 pounds of TNT kinetic energy you lack the understanding to grasp!

You saw an impact and a fireball, no explosion; the KE fooled you, GOT Physics?

An explosion would have outward blast effects, you FAILED.

 

[mchapman]

Look you little wanna be lemming crackpot, we don't choose to rubber neck. While I know you can't comprehend what its like to witness something devistating or anything outside of youtube watched on the computer mom and dad got you, some of us have no choice.

It might be easy for you to make a mockery of this just as it is easy for writers from AFP to make a mockery of the holocaust. But while you're playing your little idiotic games to fulfill your fantasies that compensate for your feeling of lack of purpose in life and your lack of attention, the rest of us have to deal with reality.

Forgive me for not being understanding when some little pip squeek who probably was in diapers at the time of the event wants to use it to justify being picked on in school and dreams of playing the unsung hero that no one listened to, but now they will because he was the lone hero who knew the truth. And then all the kids that picked on you will be sorry and your purpose in life will be fulfilled.

On that note, we should once again point out that you, like all the many lemmings before you who make the same arguments verbatim, have yet to provide evidence of an inside job. Heck, you're too much of a coward to even admit what you believe happened because you know that your own hypothesis can't hold up to your childish argument tactics.

Ooh I think I hit a nerve there.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

People keep making the claim that 1000's saw the second plane. Ok, I'll make this easy.

Produce 50 people who saw a plane and I'll shut up and go away.

Fair enough?

No, you won't shut up. And what you are trying to tell us that in the morning rush hour of Manhattan, where about 5 million people are located at that time, after a huge plane crash that almost every person in the world outside of Manhattan became aware of and was watching. That no one happened to be looking? That in a few city blocks with over a million people just in that vicinity, that everyone there was looking elsewhere?

Do you not realize how absolutely idiotic that is? Do you realize how idiotic it is for you to sit here and tell us that we're all lying about being there? If you had 50 testimonies, why would you believe them? If you're going to believe that in a small area with over a million people in it, that none of them were paying attention to the burning skyscraper next to them, what do you expect?

Just give us ONE person that has some physical evidence of an inside job.

 

[Drudgewire]

Ooh I think I hit a nerve there.

That's all you're looking to do. Guess it's Miller time.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I was there and I saw an explosion but no plane.

See how easy it is?

Then you are either making it up, or you weren't looking. You can choose to tell us which one.

 

[mchapman]

No, you won't shut up. And what you are trying to tell us that in the morning rush hour of Manhattan, where about 5 million people are located at that time, after a huge plane crash that almost every person in the world outside of Manhattan became aware of and was watching. That no one happened to be looking? That in a few city blocks with over a million people just in that vicinity, that everyone there was looking elsewhere?

Do you not realize how absolutely idiotic that is? Do you realize how idiotic it is for you to sit here and tell us that we're all lying about being there? If you had 50 testimonies, why would you believe them? If you're going to believe that in a small area with over a million people in it, that none of them were paying attention to the burning skyscraper next to them, what do you expect?

Just give us ONE person that has some physical evidence of an inside job.

Right, so we have 5 million people in the vicinity and thousands who saw a plane. It should be easy for you to produce just 50 of them.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Right, so we have 5 million people in the vicinity and thousands who saw a plane. It should be easy for you to produce just 50 of them.

So you are requesting that 50 people sign up to this forum to convince you? And you don't see the stupidity in that request? Just as you don't see the stupidity in the claim that with 5 million people on that island that day that not a single person was watching the burning building that was just hit by a plane. What do you suppose those 5 million people were doing instead? Please just answer that question.

If it helps, as someone who was there, I can tell you what they were doing because as someone who was there I saw the 1000s and 1000s of people who like me were all gathering to watch. according to your theory, everyone was pre-occupied with something else and weren't watching the buildings. And using your idiotic logic, everyone that was there should also be here and should have a written statement right? And you wonder why we laugh at you?

Actually your request would not be hard to fulfill seeing as my sister was hired by the city to compile artifacts and statements from people to use for the NYC 9/11 museum. But this isn't about facts. This is about your little fantasies of nonsense. If someone is going to pretend that millions of people didn't notice the events right in front of them, why would such an idiot be swayed by 50 people?

 

[twinstead]

After a few years here I thought, having seen it all, there was no longer a need for the jaw-drop emote to convey how flabbergasted I was by twoofer idiocy.

I am just as flabbergasted that somebody could even be alive who hasn't read at least dozens of accounts and heard dozens of eye witness reports from one of the THOUSANDS of people who where there when those planes hit.

Like I said. A special kind of stupid.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Right, so we have 5 million people in the vicinity and thousands who saw a plane. It should be easy for you to produce just 50 of them.

Yes, in fact, I can produce about 150 of them, by myself. We watched the second plane hit from several very large picture windows in an office in Jersey City.

So, I, a regular all around swell guy, can come up with 150 people, by name, who saw the plane hit Tower 2*. And from the people downstairs when we were forced to evacuate, I can count another several hundred as the entire conversation was about just witnessing the second one as proof positive that it was some sort of attack (remember, this was live in real life, no one was certain yet that it was an attack and many of us were still "hoping"((poor choice of gerunds, but you get my drift)) that it was some sort of accident at WTC1).

*And no, I'm not posting their names, but if you send me your personal contact details by PM, I'll be happy to give them to the ex-Marine drill sergeant who I worked with at the time.

 

[mchapman]

So, none of you can link me to just 50 testimonies. Very telling.

 

[mchapman]

I am just as flabbergasted that somebody could even be alive who hasn't read at least dozens of accounts and heard dozens of eye witness reports from one of the THOUSANDS of people who where there when those planes hit.

Like I said. A special kind of stupid.

Feel free to link to them and I will be happy to read them.

 

[beachnut]

Feel free to link to them and I will be happy to read them.

Thousands of people saw the second plane, to deny that fact, is a terminally stupid idea. Do you have terminally stupid ideas on 9/11? Yes you do.

 

[mchapman]

Thousands of people saw with their own eyes the second plane, to deny that fact, is a terminally stupid idea. Do you have terminally stupid ideas on 9/11? Yes you do.

If thousands saw the plane and you know that thousands saw the plane then you must have read their testimony. So link me to some of them, whats the delay?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

so how did they put the fake planes into live broadcasts from multiple networks?

 

[JimBenArm]

Feel free to link to them and I will be happy to read them.

And just as quickly dismiss them out-of-hand as you did the others posted here, since they would require you to abandon your absurd fantasy.

What's the point of sending them to him? Arguing with no-planers is like discussing quantum physics with your dog. You get it, the other one just drools.

 

[Foolmewunz]

This is one of the most idiotic pseudo-derails in JREFF history. Are you planning to slink away in the confusion while all us befuddled debunkers scratch our heads and ask "Who was that masked man, anyway?"

They have the crash of the Hindenburg on film, with an announcer who was there live. And there were survivors and workers who saw it. In true TM fashion, are you saying that it's not real unless one of us takes the trouble to make a YouTube video (which you are required by Article 11 of the TM membership code to believe without questioning). Or that if I say there were dozens of witnesses to the demise of the Hindenburg, your only answer is going to be that I have to produce the links to the people or the claim isn't real?

Do you not own a history book or newspaper subscription? Can you not google? Try the periodical sections of the local library (I'm sure The Guardian has archives)... I suggest reading copy from, say, Sep 12, 2001. You'll find more than your fifty.

This is a derail to cover up for the fact that THE OP IS PURE IDIOCY AND YOU'VE BEEN SHOWN TO BE MR. WRONGIEST WRONG OF WRONGVILLE. Nice try. Retire to a neutral corner and start some other ridiculous and ill-supported nonsense. This one's not just toast, it's burnt toast.

 

[dudalb]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_1884048ca062020e8b.jpg[/qimg]

You beat me to it.
These accusations of 9/11 video fakery are even stupider then all the video "evidence" that the Moonbats come up with to prove that the Apollo missions were faked. I can't think of anything worse to say.

 

[Totovader]

If someone goes through the trouble of collecting 50 names and testimony of those 50 names to corroborate that there was in fact a plane, what good would it do?

Would that information be enough to abandon these stupid no-plane theory?

I would be willing to bet money that it wouldn't. 11,000 names wouldn't be enough.

It's what we call a fools errand- you're simply stalling to avoid the facts.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

So, none of you can link me to just 50 testimonies. Very telling.

Once again, you are implying that out of the millions of people who were there first hand that none of them noticed? And you determine this because no one has given you a link to their testimonies? This further implies that unless you have written testimonies, that millions of people were not there that day. I can account for a couple thousand who were right by me. No one wwalked around collecting testimonies.

Either you are implying that there were not millions of people in the city during rush hour. Or you are implying that millions of people all saw no plane which contradicts the official consensus, but millions of people are all keeping quiet about this. New Yorkers no less.

Do you still not understand why you are being laughed at?


Stil waiting for one piece of physical evidence of an inside job.