• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How 9/11 was done

Sparky said:
This "obvious technology available now" is only capable of shifting a voice to a higher or lower octave. It does not have the effect of altering a person's accent, inflection or other speech patterns. In other words, if a person has a thick southern accent the output from the voice changer will still have a thick southern accent at a higher or lower frequency. And it most certainly does not have the realtime ability to match another person's unique voiceprint.
Click to expand...

Several here like Sparky, calebprime and Dr. Adequate have expressed their scepticism (post 57, 64, 68, 70, 436) about the availability of (near) realtime voice-morphing software in 2001.

That problem is solved. The technoogy was around:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile.

Whereas early voice morphing required cutting and pasting speech to put letters or words together to make a composite, Papcun's software developed at Los Alamos can far more accurately replicate the way one actually speaks. Eliminated are the robotic intonations.

The irony is that after Papcun finished his speech cloning research, there were no takers in the military. Luckily for him, Hollywood is interested: The promise of creating a virtual Clark Gable is mightier than the sword.

Video and photo manipulation has already raised profound questions of authenticity for the journalistic world. With audio joining the mix, it is not only journalists but also privacy advocates and the conspiracy-minded who will no doubt ponder the worrisome mischief that lurks in the not too distant future.

That was feb 1999. Not a big stretch to assume that two-and-a-half year later real time high quality voice morphing was possible for a resourceful agency like the Mossad based on sound samples acquired via eavesdropping by telco-related Israeli firms like Amdocs or Comverse/Verint.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/ketcham.php?articleid=13506

Let's recapitulate: according to the ICT on 9/11 there were a group of Israeli agents with a list of telephone numbers and voice morphing devices programmed with sound samples from passengers who were at that moment still alive. These phone numbers and sound samples had been obtained by means of eavesdropping. Earlier from a dutch interview I quoted Griffin saying that the transcripts of all the so-called telephone conversations were one-way, not needing intimate knowledge of the circumstances at home.
 
9/11-investigator said:
I have stated earlier that half a year before 9/11 there was a successful full-automatic (unmanned) test flight from Edwards to Australia.

Here is link that proves that as far back as 1995 this kind of technology was in full development:

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1995/news.release.950802.html

Boeing/Industry Team Evaluates Automatic Landing Systems

Flight testing of four global landing system (GLS) concepts is currently under way at NASA's Wallops Island Air Field in Virginia, following pre-trials out of the Boeing Glasgow, Mont., airfield.

All four GLS systems are installed and are being tested simultaneously on the 757, although only one is coupled to the autopilot for each approach.

"The program is much more than just a trial," says Miller. "We will be testing systems, developing simulations and defining certification requirements.

Is it too far fetched to assume that Boeing product engineers will have had brain storming sessions about possible applications of this technology? Of course not. Being able to put a plane on the ground safely in London fog is one thing. Begin able to put a plane on the ground in case something happens with a pilot is a second application. And an anti-hijack-application is a third. Remember Boeing filed for a patent concerning this third option one month after 9/11.

The big question remains: was this technology implemented yes or no on the 9/11 planes?

Maybe as a beta version?
Click to expand...
What they're talking about developing there is an automatic landing system which does not, in fact, work by remote control; it merely gets its position from GPS. Even if such a system was fitted (secretly, without anyone noticing, and without any evidence) and you could remotely activate it, which you couldn't, you still wouldn't be able to remote control it, and it still wouldn't perform the manuoevres of 9/11, because flying slap-bang into large buildings is very much the sort of thing an automatic landing system is designed not to do.

Automatic landing systems already exist: the only novel thing about the proposal you cite is the use of GPS. Other types of ALS have, indeed, been fitted to Boeing 747s without any secrecy whatsoever. I do not know whether they were in use in the 9/11 flights, but as they do not do what you apparently think they do, the question is not a terribly interesting one.
 
9/11-investigator said:
The big question remains: was this technology implemented yes or no on the 9/11 planes?

Maybe as a beta version?
Click to expand...

Here's a link you need to read carefully...It proves why the remote takeover theory can easily be debunked.

Remote_Takeover.pdf
 
9/11-investigator said:
I understand and agree with all the responders.

There is still the possibility of so-called easter-egg functionality, secret/classified/non-publicly-specified functionality. Like the FAA demanding from Boeing to implement this kind of functionality. As a secret option for the authorities. Not something you want to advertise.

I am looking for hints that this might be the case.
Click to expand...



Edited by jmercer: 
Removed uncivil remark.
You are inventing things to try and desperately fill in holes in a theory that is literally gaping with them.

You obviously have no understanding of government, of aircraft, or of the FAA.

Let's pretend, for one insane moment, that the FAA, secretly, made all aircraft manufacturers install remote operating systems into all of their aircraft, and that the aircraft manufacturers kept this secret, not telling anyone including their customers who purchased the aircraft. Let's go with your ridiculous fantasy and accept that the FAA and aircraft manufacturers were perfectly happy to do this, and no one working for any company or the agency decided what they were doing was illegal or immoral and spilled the beans. Let's pretend the FAA installed (secretly of course) a functioning network for using this remote operating system to control aircraft flight.

You still have the minor problem that pilots and ground crews would have noticed it and started asking questions.

And, just for kicks, might I ask what exactly the purpose of this system was? Aircraft crashed prior to 9/11. Aircraft were hijacked prior to 9/11. Aircraft went AWOL and were otherwise an issue in US Airspace prior to 9/11. The only legitimate reason the FAA would go to this trouble is to avoid such incidents. If this utterly unfathomably stupid theory of your is true why had the FAA never used it?. And given the significance of this system, and how easily, in the wrong hands, it could cause untold death and destruction, how did the FAA allow it to get in the hands of Mossad or whoever you think did this?.

You seriously have not thought this through, have you?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On the Dancing Israelis theme.

This was THE smoking gun that pointed early on at Israeli involvement in 9/11. The debunkers are going to great lengths to minimize the significance of this event:

Dave Rogers in post 405 says: Now let's look at the spin. The article claims that "they were there within 15 minutes of the first tower being hit, if not before". This is not supported by the paraphrased testimony, so appears to be an invention of the person reporting the events. In particular, the comment, "if not before", is utterly unfounded and unsubstantiated. It also says, "they were celebrating before anyone know whether it was an accident or not"; again, this is not supported by the paraphrased testimony. Nowhere in "Maria"s account is it substantiated that any of these events took place before the second tower was hit, and at that moment it was obvious to any intelligent observer that an attack was taking place.

Other posters also try to diminish this damning evidence by suggesting that there is no proof that the movers were at the waterfront that early.

1337m4n says "Or perhaps they DID believe they were witnessing a terrorist act. But who's to say they were 100% certain? One could infer after the first plane hit that a terrorist attack was at least one possibility, since planes generally don't crash in perfectly clear weather (at least, not into buildings). So maybe they thought it WAS a terrorist attack, and simply turned out to be correct by sheer coincidence.

And as yet another possibility, perhaps they were cheering about something completely unrelated to the WTC."

They are standing at the waterfront, with film camera's installed and pointing towards the smoking Twin Towers and you really want to suggest that they were only cheering because they learned that FC Tel Aviv had beaten Jerusalem United 2-1 yesterday night? With arguments like these from opponents like you I do not really need allies!

Let's go back to hear what Fox News had to say:
The New York Times reported Thursday that a group of five men had set up video cameras aimed at the Twin Towers prior to the attack on Tuesday, and were seen congratulating one another afterwards.

But we do not need the New York Times:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17260.htm
Law enforcement officers across the New York-New Jersey area were warned in the radio dispatch to watch for a "vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack":

White, 2000 Chevrolet van with 'Urban Moving Systems' sign on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion. FBI Newark Field Office requests that, if the van is located, hold for prints and detain individuals.

This was the content of a so-called FBI BOLO (be on lookout) sent out on 3:31 pm. There can be no doubt, the Israelis were at the water front with film camera's installed waiting for an anticipated event to occur before the first impact. Not that it matters much. Even if they had been spotted first after the second impact (which is not the case), that had been more than enough proof of advance knowledge. It is simply impossible for 3-5 Israeli 'movers' to infer from 2 planes crashing into the twin towers, that it had been Arab hijackers who had done so. And that as a consequence the US would invade the Middle East to fight a couple of wars in Israel's interest. They were cheering because the plan they had helped to bring about had succeeded magnificently. And to make the case for the debunkers worse, a couple of hours later the Israeli movers were caught. Dogs sniffing for explosives responded positively. How much more proof do you need? Movers better not use explosives if they are keen on being paid for their services. And they had 4,700$ in a sock! What kind of movers keep so much money in a sock? It is obvious that they had not earned any money that day since they had been too busy 'documenting events'. These 4,700$ were leftovers from this 500,000$ 'business loan' Urban Moving Systems had received from the US-government and in fact had been used to buy radiographic controlled detonators and thermite or whatever explosives were used to bring the towers down.

GStan says: "The FBI was indeed suspicious and disturbed by the actions of these Israelis. That's probably why they investigated them and held them in custody for ten weeks, then deported them. They found NO EVIDENCE of a 9/11 connection or foreknowledge."

The real reason why the Israelis were released was because of higher circles intervening, much to the frustration of lower ranking FBI-officials: Around this time intense political pressure is put on US officials holding five Israeli men arrested for suspicious behavior at the time of the 9/11 attacks (see 3:56 p.m. September 11, 2001). According to the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and two unidentified “prominent New York congressmen” lobby heavily for their release. According to a source at ABC News, well-known criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz also becomes involved as a negotiator to help get the men released. (Dershowitz will later refuse to comment on the matter.) [CounterPunch, 2/7/2007] ABC News will later report that was “high-level negotiations between Israeli and US government officials” over the five men, resulting in a settlement.

Like with the USS Liberty cover up, the American establishment does everything to keep Israel free of blame in connection to 9/11. Now, what says that about the American establishment? Who is the dog and who is the tail?

It's a rethorical question. I know the answer.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Let's recapitulate: according to the ICT on 9/11 there were a group of Israeli agents with a list of telephone numbers and voice morphing devices programmed with sound samples from passengers who were at that moment still alive. These phone numbers and sound samples had been obtained by means of eavesdropping. Earlier from a dutch interview I quoted Griffin saying that the transcripts of all the so-called telephone conversations were one-way, not needing intimate knowledge of the circumstances at home.
Click to expand...


Just one minor little issue with what is otherwise yet another utterly brilliant theory by yourself, how exactly did Mossad know which people to spy on? Or are you suggesting that Mossad has substantial sound recordings of all 300 million Americans?

In regards to your "evidence" there is actually a clue in the article to why your theory (like all your others) is woefully flawed:

"They chose to have him say something he would never otherwise have said," chuckled one of Papcun's colleagues.
Click to expand...

Impressing a bunch of people by playing a recording that everyone knows isn't a guy, but sounds somewhat like that guy, is one thing. Maintaining a real time conversation with someone who knows a guy intimately, and convincing that person they really are talking to the guy? Different story entirely.

You would need to literally capture hours upon hours of telephone conversations before you could even hope to map the speaking mannerisms of a person, and even then chances are you'd miss some vital factors because every conversation is so unique. I'm an actor, believe me there's vastly more to pulling off a convincing mimic of a person than "sounding like them". More importantly, the context of the 9/11 phone calls is such that you're unlikely to ever capture a similar scenario phone conversation with your targets.

How long were Mossad monitoring these people? You'd be lucky if I talk to people on the phone for more than an hour a week. I probably talk to family on the phone maybe once a month. How long in advance did these people book their plane tickets?

Using my earlier methodology, we're going to ignore most of the stupidly obvious flaws in your non-theory, and we're going to pretend real-time voice-morphing technology of that quality actually did exist in 2001. There's either two options:

1) Mossad simply records every single phone conversation in the USA and logs them against the participants to create a voice log of every single American in the off chance they might want to kill them and fake their voice.

OR

2) All of the passengers on all four flights booked their tickets months and months in advance.

Since 2) isn't true (I've already given examples of passengers who made phone calls but only got on the flights at the last moment), the only way your theory could be even possible is if 1) is true. So let's see if you're willing to man up to the absurdity of your claims. Do you think Mossad has audio recordings in significant quantity of every single American?

Of course, if Mossad really were going to carry out the attacks they simply wouldn't have any phone calls at all - the phone calls are a needless complication. But they happened, and that's a real problem for people like you who want to make up fairy tales about what happened. So you have to invent this abysmal theory to explain away something that, if you were right, wouldn't exist in the first place.
 
Operation Northwoods

For those who believe that the US-government is not capable of covering up an event like 9/11, have a closer look on Operation Northwoods.

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false flag conspiracy plan, proposed within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for CIA or other operatives to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Castro-led Cuba. One plan was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".

This plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and signed by the chairman and presented to the defense minister, Robert McNamara.

There you have it: the government killing their own people is not unthinkable at all.

In the end it was McNamara who killed the plan.

In the case of 9/11 there was no US government official who had to rule over a proposal presented in an official document by the military. Most likely Cheney was informed about events that were about to occur and who could give the nod without having to fear to be implicated himself. Everything would be carried out without American state organisations. Cheney's role and task was to convert the 9/11 attacks in a US assault on the Middle East.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Several here like Sparky, calebprime and Dr. Adequate have expressed their scepticism (post 57, 64, 68, 70, 436) about the availability of (near) realtime voice-morphing software in 2001.

That problem is solved. The technoogy was around:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile.

Whereas early voice morphing required cutting and pasting speech to put letters or words together to make a composite, Papcun's software developed at Los Alamos can far more accurately replicate the way one actually speaks. Eliminated are the robotic intonations.

The irony is that after Papcun finished his speech cloning research, there were no takers in the military. Luckily for him, Hollywood is interested: The promise of creating a virtual Clark Gable is mightier than the sword.

Video and photo manipulation has already raised profound questions of authenticity for the journalistic world. With audio joining the mix, it is not only journalists but also privacy advocates and the conspiracy-minded who will no doubt ponder the worrisome mischief that lurks in the not too distant future.

That was feb 1999. Not a big stretch to assume that two-and-a-half year later real time high quality voice morphing was possible for a resourceful agency like the Mossad based on sound samples acquired via eavesdropping by telco-related Israeli firms like Amdocs or Comverse/Verint.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/ketcham.php?articleid=13506

Let's recapitulate: according to the ICT on 9/11 there were a group of Israeli agents with a list of telephone numbers and voice morphing devices programmed with sound samples from passengers who were at that moment still alive. These phone numbers and sound samples had been obtained by means of eavesdropping. Earlier from a dutch interview I quoted Griffin saying that the transcripts of all the so-called telephone conversations were one-way, not needing intimate knowledge of the circumstances at home.
Click to expand...

I believe Dr Adequate's objection to the use of voice-morphing technology (other than the obvious), was that there were a number of passengers who made calls from the flight, who had booked in at the last minute. No advance notice, no chance for your hypothesised Israeli agents to obtain phone numbers or sound samples via eavesdropping.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Several here like Sparky, calebprime and Dr. Adequate have expressed their scepticism (post 57, 64, 68, 70, 436) about the availability of (near) realtime voice-morphing software in 2001.

That problem is solved. The technoogy was around:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm
Click to expand...
You seem to have smuggled the word "near" into there somehow.

We expressed our skepticism about actual realtime voice-morphing.

So, the things you have no evidence for with respect to the "voice morphing" part of your hypothesis:

* That the technology was advanced to do realtime morphing in a couple of years. (Has anyone achieved this even yet?)

* That the Israelis stole it.

* That it was even possible for them to get the requisite voice samples.

* That they did.

* That it was used to fake any phone calls on 9/11.

Earlier from a dutch interview I quoted Griffin saying that the transcripts of all the so-called telephone conversations were one-way, not needing intimate knowledge of the circumstances at home.
Click to expand...
Then David Griffin is a barefaced liar.

Perhaps you should have looked at the transcripts and first-hand accounts of the actual conversations, rather then a transcript of a Truther's account of the conversations.
 
The debate over the existence of a technology to facilitate a CT is futile. The person making a claim should provide evidence the technology was/b] used.

911-investigator - Please provide evidence that remote control or voice morphing technology was used on 9/11.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Operation Northwoods

For those who believe that the US-government is not capable of covering up an event like 9/11, have a closer look on Operation Northwoods.

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false flag conspiracy plan, proposed within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for CIA or other operatives to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Castro-led Cuba. One plan was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".

This plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and signed by the chairman and presented to the defense minister, Robert McNamara.

There you have it: the government killing their own people is not unthinkable at all.

In the end it was McNamara who killed the plan.

In the case of 9/11 there was no US government official who had to rule over a proposal presented in an official document by the military. Most likely Cheney was informed about events that were about to occur and who could give the nod without having to fear to be implicated himself. Everything would be carried out without American state organisations. Cheney's role and task was to convert the 9/11 attacks in a US assault on the Middle East.
Click to expand...
i have had a closer look at northwoods, nowhere does it indicate anyone was to be killed, in fact it listed wounding people as an "extreme" case

and why do you assume that no one would have rejected a 9/11 plan, when northwoods was rejected for proposing far less?
 
9/11-investigator said:
On the Dancing Israelis theme.

This was THE smoking gun ...
Click to expand...
No, it's a red herring.

Unless the children of Israel can control planes or bring down buildings by "dancing", there seems little point to what is anyway a very flimsy story.

... that pointed early on at Israeli involvement in 9/11.
Click to expand...
What did you make of all the dancing Arabs? You know, the ones that you could actually see 'cos someone made a tape and there was some gosh-darned evidence?

The debunkers are going to great lengths to minimize the significance of this event ...
Click to expand...
Great lengths are not required.

Like with the USS Liberty cover up, the American establishment does everything to keep Israel free of blame in connection to 9/11. Now, what says that about the American establishment?
Click to expand...
Did your hypothesis suddenly get much bigger, more complicated, and less plausible?
 
9/11 Investigator, why is it instead of answering legitimate issues concerning your theories you simply quicky change the subject? Do they teach that in "Conspiracy Theorist 101"?
 
Wait ....from NJ they had a camera poiting at the twin towers ? Does anyone see anything wrong with this ?

I mean, I am sure most of you do but investigator ?
 
Last edited:
defaultdotxbe said:
not really, you could see the towers rather easily from NJ, 9/11 eyewitness was shot from NJ
Click to expand...


My point is that OF COURSE the camera is going to be pointed towards the towers. From NJ looking at the city there are a ton of others things it was pointed at also. He made a big deal about the camera being pointed at the towers.
 
9/11-investigator, did you ever post the evidence you have that the power was shut off at the WTC prior to 9/11? I know that you were asked, but haven't seen it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom