It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

PSYOP Stock Footage Shown on 9/11

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:25 AM
link   
The TV Fakery dam is breaking and all the lying shills and infiltrators are helpless as their whole little matrix of illusion collapses around them.



Here's Peter Jennings happily selling the War on Terror to an unsuspecting world. How sick do you have to be to pretend that it was shot on 9/11 and try to convince other people that the smiling nurses out on a sunny day with their blurred faces on the clean streets walking around is really the aftermath of a major catastrophe?

The theme of this montage they showed is "government workers come to the rescue" and it's designed to make people rely on the authorities.

As for the people re-titling my posts here at ATS, I'm very happy to help spread the word about what you're up to. You might talk to your handlers before you decide to retitle my posts. Your role in the cover-up will get you some attention in the coming months.

``````````````````````




AboveTopSecret.com Editorial Update
The majority of ATS members participating in these TV FAKERY threads have discovered serious problems with the theory. Please use the thread linked below for the ongoing discussion.
SEPTEMBER CLUES exposes 911 TV Fakery





TV FAKERY TOPIC UPDATE

Several ATS members have raised serious doubts about the validity of these "TV Fakery" 9/11 conspiracy theories, as well as the motives of the group promoting them.

An important series of posts begins with: Conspiracy Fakery: The Deception of "TV Fakery" Conspiracies

In the previous few days, we have been witness to a flood of new topics on 9/11 TV Fakery from a group calling themselves 911researchers.com. We (ATS) are not the first board of our ilk to be graced with the disruptive trollishness of this group. Members of 911researchers.com who are active in 9/11 discussion groups combine indignant denigration of disbelievers with disdainful neglect of valid questions that are posed to them...more



[edit on 9-6-2007 by AboveTopSecret.com]




posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:30 AM
link   
That video is showing up too blurry to see anything you claim is there. As for your Insulting of ATS, why are you posting here then? I believe I'll bite my tongue on this and let the mods deal with you.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:45 AM
link   
I would be with AccessDenied on this except then you will claim it's just the lackeys here at ATS giving you grief.

Well, I've pissed off enough people here that no one would call me part of anything. And you are so out of it that it is not even funny. Tittles get changed for a variety of reasons, usually having to do with making them more understandable.

Threads also get moved, which has happened to me. And while I didn't agree with it, and thought it was the work of someone needing sleep or some 'No-Doze' or something, it was not the work of agents of the "Evil GWB'.

You lack insight into the world bud, and your paranoia is getting out of control.

So list me in your notes, because I have you listed, listed as a 40watt bulb trying to flare up like a searchlight. Can you spell 'b-u-r-n-o-u-t-?



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsregistration
As for the people re-titling my posts here at ATS, I'm very happy to help spread the word about what you're up to. You might talk to your handlers before you decide to retitle my posts. Your role in the cover-up will get you some attention in the coming months.

The "FRAUD?" indication was added to the title of one of your threads, as a result of the work of our members, and member demand. If you're able to provide sufficient evidence that refutes the research of our members, our staff will be more than happy to remove it.

Our goal here is to discover the reality of these and other events that enter the mind space of conspiracy theorists. Even at the expense of discovering our favorite theories may be wrong.

The real truth transcends the egos of conspiracy celebrities.

The real truth survives harsh scrutiny (and real conspiracy theorists welcome and embrace critical scrutiny).

The real truth is so important that ridicule of wrong theories and lies is needed.

The victims of these events deserve the real truth (and that comes at the expense of tossing aside theories that are wrong).


I'm sorry for your reaction. I would like nothing more than for strong evidence, that survives intense scrutiny, to surface and clearly point to the criminal activity of responsible individuals and/or organizations. And I can assure you that if you produce such evidence, and it is posted to ATS, the considerable power of our search engine optimization, 1.5 million monthly visitors, and massive email newsletter subscriber list will be focused on spreading the evidence in an undeniable fashion.

Until then, we need to work with what we have, and respond to our members.

Work with us to find that evidence. We will work with you to spread it.


SR

posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:55 AM
link   
^^^^^^^'As for the people re-titling my posts here at ATS, I'm very happy to help spread the word about what you're up to. You might talk to your handlers before you decide to retitle my posts. Your role in the cover-up will get you some attention in the coming months.'^^^^^

Well in a way good i hope you do 'spread the word' and i hope these people come on to ATS and see why these threads were retitled to 'Fraud' for there own eyes and read and think about the evidence that was presented that debunked your theory. Instead of simply being told that 'ATS is up to something' 'Role in the coverup' I hope these people don't get fooled into thinking just because your theory was deemed a hoax that it adds any creditability to it.

I don't know bsregistration you must think we're all out to get you or something and we're all a massive conspiracy to hide 'your truth' but seriously speaking for myself i have no handler unless it's the barmaid at the student union bar or i'm being brainwashed by my pc monitor. Not everyone is out to get you i was interested in your first thread when you posted it but you know research and evidence clearly disputed your claims and just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they are apart of a conspiracy.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 07:57 AM
link   
bsregistration

With all due respect, ATS has given fair listen to theories of TV fake stuff for a very LONG TIME. In fact Alternative Theories are presented here all the time. So don't give yourself some over imagined importance. When something is shown to be a 'hoax' or a 'fraud' it gets the well deserved title. You are not the 'Wolf crying in the Wilderness'.

I do hope some of your followers watch your behaviour here and what you have claimed, because it is good evidence on your *REAL* intentions.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Your member claiming that I'm a fraud is also calling me Nico Haupt. Let's have some proof, please, otherwise I'd like you to relabel his posts as fraud.

As for being called paranoid by a "UFO Conspiracy Site", I just have to laugh.

Somebody posted an animated gif. That doesn't "debunk" my video in any way.

There is plenty of evidence for TV Fakery on 9/11 and in fact I know exactly what kind of TV Fakery they used. In the days ahead everyone is going to know about it, regardless of efforts by anyone here to mislead.

So, first of all let's see some proof that I'm Nico Haupt. I'm sure one of your "respected" members wouldn't just make up something like that would he?

Would he?

Let's see who's credible and who's a fraud.

forum.911movement.org...



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:07 AM
link   
If there is a worthwhile message to take from this, it's overshadowed by the transparently manipulative production. If you or your sources were more honest in your presentations, your message would carry more weight. This is the last I shall bother reading/viewing.

It was no surprise to see some familiar 'personalities' among the list of those associated with BS, which was displayed at the end.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:19 AM
link   
I'd read your post if it weren't written in such a manipulative font. I'm sure someone cares what you think about my work, but I sure don't Coughy. I guess you must have studied film appreciation in Grammar School. I'm sorry you couldn't understand the message.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:22 AM
link   
It seems all your argument is to show the same films over and over, and tell me, on the day, what did you think it was? Did you immediately think that your own government was attacking you? Or did you think it was terrorism, like everyone else?

You seem to think that since media mentions terrorism as a possible cause, that because of that they are in on it? Why, think back to pre 9/11, if you were to see that happening, why would you think it was anything other than terrorism?



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsregistration
As for being called paranoid by a "UFO Conspiracy Site", I just have to laugh.

Just to clarify, members of the site have that opinion of you... not the site.

We (admin and owners) work hard to remain neutral, and let the members have their say within the boundaries of the Terms & Conditions.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Just to be clear, you as site admin have changed the title of my post to add the word FRAUD. You as site admin are highlighting the views of some dissenting members of your site and putting it at the top of the thread.

Just to be clear I think that's totally biased and I'll be very happy to publicize your editorial policies.

www.911researchers.com...

[edit on 5-6-2007 by bsregistration]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 09:25 AM
link   
bsregistration, you are walking on very thin ice here. As much as SO will deny it, I know that he's being very patient with you right now. If this were any other forum I was on, you would be warned and/or banned by now simply due to the way you have conducted yourself. If you want to bring your proof to the table, fine, but do not do it in a manner that degrades the people you are trying to show the proof.

If you truly want to be taken seriously, you, yourself, need to comment and provide information from an unbiased viewpoint and to stop insulting everybody else. So what if SO put "FRAUD" in one of your posts due to members requesting it? That's irrelevant. All you need to do is to present your proof in a clearer fashion that is undeniable 100%.

Just stop the insults. The insults and disrespect of ATS and its members (and your "threat" to SO) will only do further harm to your case. Patience is the key, and if you have the truth, no amount of time can ever erode your claims.

[edit on 6/5/2007 by SonicInfinity]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsregistration
Just to be clear, you as site admin have changed the title of my post to add the word FRAUD.


It doesn't say "FRAUD" it says "FRAUD?". There is a difference there, one is a statement, the other a question. If anything, it may help to attract more people to your thread, so they can make up their own minds about your information. I really think you're getting bent out of shape over nothing.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I will say this.

I think bsregistration is taking a pretty confident, ballsy stand, and if he feels like hes going to have the evidence to back this up in the "coming days", then we should let the "coming days" come, and possibly pass, before jumping on the bandwagon and bashing mr bsregistration for his overt-defensiveness, however you'd like to describe it. he feels he is doing it for good reason.

lets face it, the majority of the sh#t posted up on abovetopsecret is probably incorrect, or people "felt" like posting it for incorrect reasons, but some are truthful, and some get proven, and some are justified in the end after evidence is presented.

so I say, nay to the band wagon, I'll wait until these coming days he speaks of occur, and see if the evidence he claims he'll be posting is really as good as hes saying it will be. how long will i wait? uhh.. probably a full 7 day week from this moment before something pretty substantial is posted, if not by then, If I were into that kinda thing, I'd feel 100% justified to tear into said person on the board for being a liar and etc.

so in short, give him a chance to walk the walk before trouncing him with your disbelief and criticism. simply because he takes a hard line w/the forum mods .... OOOH.. like i havent done this when i felt like it was justified.

[edit on 6/5/2007 by runetang]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   
That video is disinfo, not a psyop. There is no ballesy stand going on here either. Also remember, people who do things because they 'feel' it is for the greater good could jsut be delusional and have a single tracked mind.

It is people such as this that 'handlers' look for. INsecure, easiily influenenced and filled with false misdirected anger. Also, for his initial actions there should be no afforded time to cull his information because he should learn to have everything ready before bad mouthing people.

There is want of change, and there is blind ignornace. Thank you pick on this thread.



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:03 AM
link   
For starters, here's some background reading. The MIT magazine outlines the basic technology used in the fake 9/11 videos. They fly aerial drones around and georegister the terrain. Then they're showing cut-out buildings on 9/11 and interspersing bits of live footage as they feel like updating the people out in TV land. All networks were getting military feed, and they brought down an informational cone of silence on the TV News trucks that would normally be covering a big event like 9/11.

For some examples of glitches with the overlay technology, please see cnn fake footage blasted: more proof for the hard headed. You can view that at youtube.com... conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com... or livevideo.com... or just search for it on google.

OK, here's three sources outlining the source of the moving bridge problem.

killtown.blogspot.com...

And an article from the National Security Council talking about TV Fakery for national security matters www.au.af.mil...

And finally an actual reference to the system they used for the TV Fakery on 9/11 (aerial drones with stored georegistered landscapes) from MIT's Technology magazine forum.911movement.org...

There are many, many examples of these same glitches all throughout the 9/11 videos. If you don't believe me, go to any location where the shot was taken from and try to line it up for yourself.

The evidence is clear at this point, and as more people go and try to recreate the shots, more people will discover that the skyline on 9/11 was all messed up and out-of-position. Go to the locations and shoot them yourselves.

Even Prof Fetzer has been won over to TV fakery now.



``````````````
fixed vid link



[edit on 5/6/07 by masqua]

[edit on 5-6-2007 by bsregistration]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:14 AM
link   
That's a lot of stuff you've posted, bsregistration, and I can't wait to take a look at it all. I'm especially interested in the National Security Council.

Let's just say for one second that all of this is definite and true. There is something that you haven't answered (or at least, haven't seen answered by you) yet: Why would the government fake all of this? Would it not just be easier to fly actual airplanes into the WTCs instead of putting disputable video fakery of it up? What's your conclusion behind this?

[edit on 6/5/2007 by SonicInfinity]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   
BS, have you ever been to New YorK, I am curious? You see, some of the information that you are posting is valid for technology, but not applicable to 9/11. Now, according to you, every video on this I will give you must be fake.

link to archive.org

Why do so many life in denial that 9/11 occured?



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:27 AM
link   
These kind of video's are just disinformation, it really detracts from the real issues of 9/11.

There are far more concrete bits of evidence of a 9/11 conspiracy than the alleged video's of media manipulation.

The fact that 3 buildings fell at free fall speeds, the evidence for controlled demolition, the inconsistent damage of a plane hitting the pentagon, flight 93 etc.. are the real issues, the rest are just a smoke screen used to divert attention from the real issues.

OP if you are a real believer of a 9/11 conspiarcy then please spend more of your efforts on uncovering the hard data & not flimsey video's that are editied in such away that it actually discredits the 9/11 truth movement.

You are doing more to harm the truth than actually helping & for that you get no sympathy for me.




new topics




 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join