"THE HEROIC FIREFIGHTERS"
by simonshack on October 25th, 2010, 12:57 am
*
Were there fires on 9/11? Well, yes - there seemed to be some flames in the upper floors of the WTC towers after "the plane crashes". But as everyone noticed, they were quite confined and, even if you believe the official tale of 9/11, you'll have to admit they would have been completely choked out as the towers collapsed. No other heat source than the 'jet fuel' could possibly have ignited any successive blazes. Ok, so we were told about burst gas lines and WTC7's huge diesel tank, yada yada...Some fires were seen raging in selected imagery depicting WTC7, 5 & 6 but those appeared to be mostly unattended!
Yet, the unchallenged heroes of the 9/11 myth are the fearless firefighters who "fought the flames", 343 of them apparently giving their lives to save the people stuck on the upper floors of the buildings. As we have unveiled through our extensive (and yes, I would say "heroic!") investigations, none of those people and firefighters were -in reality- inside those towers. All appear to be fictitious identities generated by a bogus computer database featuring morphed portraits and phony tributes and obituaries.
So then what are these photos we now have from "Ground Zero", showing NFDY firefighters spraying more water on the flame-less heap of debris, trudging around the rubble with buckets, seemingly very much "in charge" of the area? Do these pictures somehow contradict our thesis that this was just a plain demolition job and that the NYFD was certainly not asked to clean it all up? Let's take a good look at the available pictorial record of the 9/11 aftermath and the - supposed - Ground Zero operations. As I scoured through hundreds of photographs generically credited to "FEMA", I immediately bumped into a familiar face:
Anyone who has seen the Naudet brothers' movie 9/11 will grasp the significance of this little fact. The young actor "Tony Benetatos" appears in the FEMA Ground Zero pictures which only features a handful of close-up pics of "FDNY firefighters"...But let's look at a wider view of the collective effort at Ground Zero:
Here follow a couple of enlargements of this quite interesting group picture:
Talking about spades, we will now look at two shots evidently snapped a mere couple of seconds from each other. (Note the majestic cinema lighting here). A firefighter walks towards the photographer. He swaps his spade from one hand to the other and, in the meantime, his colleagues start spraying the rubble behind him. Just consider my caption for a minute:
Next, we have a similarly dramatically lit scene with a seemingly fear-struck firefighter:
Now we have a lone firefighter balancing on a WTC beam against a dramatic rubble backdrop:
The firefighting apparently went on and on. Here's a dramatic scene featuring three young firefighters manhandling a firehose.
Their senior supervisor (apparently enforcing the FDNY's strict dress-codes) brings them some fresh replacement garments:
Meanwhile, out on the streets of Manhattan, a firetruck sprays another devastated building:
More firefighting is seen in the distance as Jack and John converse in a rubble pit:
Back in the bombed-out craters of Ground Zero, more water is sprayed at yet more improbable fires - but firefighter Bob is a little bit skeptical :
Bob finally gets to relax. Some patriot has managed to stick a flag in a high-rise WTC beam:
Bob shouldn't complain: he's got the Best Job in the World!
...and all of us poor civilians were kept out of the Great Ground Zero party:
Basically, the idea that the FDNY was in any way involved with the 9/11 false-flag operation is a total myth. If any honest New York firefighter reads this thread, I trust he will thank us wholeheartedly for suspending any suspicion of himself and his colleagues being part of this scam. I'd love to hear from one of you guys! Come on, be real men and speak out for yourselves! It's about time!
Were there fires on 9/11? Well, yes - there seemed to be some flames in the upper floors of the WTC towers after "the plane crashes". But as everyone noticed, they were quite confined and, even if you believe the official tale of 9/11, you'll have to admit they would have been completely choked out as the towers collapsed. No other heat source than the 'jet fuel' could possibly have ignited any successive blazes. Ok, so we were told about burst gas lines and WTC7's huge diesel tank, yada yada...Some fires were seen raging in selected imagery depicting WTC7, 5 & 6 but those appeared to be mostly unattended!
Yet, the unchallenged heroes of the 9/11 myth are the fearless firefighters who "fought the flames", 343 of them apparently giving their lives to save the people stuck on the upper floors of the buildings. As we have unveiled through our extensive (and yes, I would say "heroic!") investigations, none of those people and firefighters were -in reality- inside those towers. All appear to be fictitious identities generated by a bogus computer database featuring morphed portraits and phony tributes and obituaries.
So then what are these photos we now have from "Ground Zero", showing NFDY firefighters spraying more water on the flame-less heap of debris, trudging around the rubble with buckets, seemingly very much "in charge" of the area? Do these pictures somehow contradict our thesis that this was just a plain demolition job and that the NYFD was certainly not asked to clean it all up? Let's take a good look at the available pictorial record of the 9/11 aftermath and the - supposed - Ground Zero operations. As I scoured through hundreds of photographs generically credited to "FEMA", I immediately bumped into a familiar face:
Anyone who has seen the Naudet brothers' movie 9/11 will grasp the significance of this little fact. The young actor "Tony Benetatos" appears in the FEMA Ground Zero pictures which only features a handful of close-up pics of "FDNY firefighters"...But let's look at a wider view of the collective effort at Ground Zero:
Here follow a couple of enlargements of this quite interesting group picture:
Talking about spades, we will now look at two shots evidently snapped a mere couple of seconds from each other. (Note the majestic cinema lighting here). A firefighter walks towards the photographer. He swaps his spade from one hand to the other and, in the meantime, his colleagues start spraying the rubble behind him. Just consider my caption for a minute:
Next, we have a similarly dramatically lit scene with a seemingly fear-struck firefighter:
Now we have a lone firefighter balancing on a WTC beam against a dramatic rubble backdrop:
The firefighting apparently went on and on. Here's a dramatic scene featuring three young firefighters manhandling a firehose.
Their senior supervisor (apparently enforcing the FDNY's strict dress-codes) brings them some fresh replacement garments:
Meanwhile, out on the streets of Manhattan, a firetruck sprays another devastated building:
More firefighting is seen in the distance as Jack and John converse in a rubble pit:
Back in the bombed-out craters of Ground Zero, more water is sprayed at yet more improbable fires - but firefighter Bob is a little bit skeptical :
Bob finally gets to relax. Some patriot has managed to stick a flag in a high-rise WTC beam:
Bob shouldn't complain: he's got the Best Job in the World!
...and all of us poor civilians were kept out of the Great Ground Zero party:
Basically, the idea that the FDNY was in any way involved with the 9/11 false-flag operation is a total myth. If any honest New York firefighter reads this thread, I trust he will thank us wholeheartedly for suspending any suspicion of himself and his colleagues being part of this scam. I'd love to hear from one of you guys! Come on, be real men and speak out for yourselves! It's about time!
http://www.septemberclues.info
- simonshack
- Administrator
- Posts: 3494
- Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
- Location: italy
by Tufa on October 25th, 2010, 2:19 am
There are many things wrong with these pictures. I'll try to come back to you with my info on the pictures.
This one, it looks like the backdrop is much larger, or closer, compared to the scale of the man:
The N.Y. fire department(s), you can simply call them, and tell them we have a few questions on the pictures and generally on the activities on the 9/11 2001 and days following. Kindly release your taped interview!
EDIT 2010-12-19: The rubble pile is now exposed at FAKING THE RUBBLE. This picture is a 100% hoax.
This one, it looks like the backdrop is much larger, or closer, compared to the scale of the man:
The N.Y. fire department(s), you can simply call them, and tell them we have a few questions on the pictures and generally on the activities on the 9/11 2001 and days following. Kindly release your taped interview!
EDIT 2010-12-19: The rubble pile is now exposed at FAKING THE RUBBLE. This picture is a 100% hoax.
Last edited by Tufa on December 19th, 2010, 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Tufa
- Member
- Posts: 191
- Joined: November 24th, 2009, 11:13 pm
by Terence.drew on October 25th, 2010, 2:26 am
Nice one Simon - the complete picture of the day is coming squarely into focus.
The heroic fireman, adrenaline pumped with thoughts of rescue and chivalry and the biggest fire fighting duel of his life, sits some time later atop his bucket and surveys the still quiet and flame less scene.
he thinks to himself....F . D . N . Y .... (Feckin Done Nothing Yet)'
simonshack 4 Oct 25 2010, 12:57 AM wrote:
Bob shouldn't complain: he's got the Best Job in the World!
The heroic fireman, adrenaline pumped with thoughts of rescue and chivalry and the biggest fire fighting duel of his life, sits some time later atop his bucket and surveys the still quiet and flame less scene.
he thinks to himself....F . D . N . Y .... (Feckin Done Nothing Yet)'
- Terence.drew
- Member
- Posts: 234
- Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:55 pm
by idschmyd on October 25th, 2010, 2:30 am
Nice job as ever, Simon. Definitely looking forward to hearing from some service staff. This is one of the most fascinating and under explored areas -
How did this operation keep real emergency personnel out of the way and out of the loop?
Love to hear from anyone who was not called, anyone whose entire department was not called, to help on that day, yet believes they should have been. Anyone who knows Ladder Companies One and Eleven, and what they were doing on the day. Were service staff misdirected, sent to out-of-the-way locations, seemingly legitimately? I mean, if all responders were 'legitmately' sent to sites other than GZ, who was at GZ? (Could this have been the purpose of otherwise inexplicable out-of-the-way damage, such as burning vehicles?).
Anyone who remembers new faces giving instructions and info on the day - significant faces that came and went around the time of '9/11'. We have some information and some ideas already - anyone verfiy that radios weren't working - but more testimony from NY emergency services would be a tremendous help. Even if you were on leave, if you were not sent to GZ and never used a hose or a laddrer on the day, even for good reason, your account is invaluable at this stage. As they say, you might not think it's important, but it is!
How did this operation keep real emergency personnel out of the way and out of the loop?
Love to hear from anyone who was not called, anyone whose entire department was not called, to help on that day, yet believes they should have been. Anyone who knows Ladder Companies One and Eleven, and what they were doing on the day. Were service staff misdirected, sent to out-of-the-way locations, seemingly legitimately? I mean, if all responders were 'legitmately' sent to sites other than GZ, who was at GZ? (Could this have been the purpose of otherwise inexplicable out-of-the-way damage, such as burning vehicles?).
Anyone who remembers new faces giving instructions and info on the day - significant faces that came and went around the time of '9/11'. We have some information and some ideas already - anyone verfiy that radios weren't working - but more testimony from NY emergency services would be a tremendous help. Even if you were on leave, if you were not sent to GZ and never used a hose or a laddrer on the day, even for good reason, your account is invaluable at this stage. As they say, you might not think it's important, but it is!
- idschmyd
- Member
- Posts: 251
- Joined: October 19th, 2009, 10:33 pm
by fakers911 on October 25th, 2010, 11:15 am
Great post Simon! Chapeau!
Another odd thing I noticed in this picture: Are kids allowed to a site which has 3000 death body's to be found underneath the rubble? Or did the FDNY hire midgets to crawl into the smaller holes to look for survivors?
Another odd thing I noticed in this picture: Are kids allowed to a site which has 3000 death body's to be found underneath the rubble? Or did the FDNY hire midgets to crawl into the smaller holes to look for survivors?
- fakers911
- Member
- Posts: 72
- Joined: September 29th, 2010, 7:55 pm
by simonshack on October 25th, 2010, 1:28 pm
THE TRICKS OF THE FORGERY TRADE
BrianV did a cool demonstration of how to add, move, remove people and objects over given backgrounds (just in case people don't know how easy it is...)
Thanks BrianV. It seems such tricks may have been employed a lot for the FEMA Ground Zero pictures. Here I compare two pics which struck my eye as soon as I saw them - and put them side by side (all I did was enlarge/crop the second picture -"LOOSE RUBBLE b"- to match the size of the two backdrop sceneries) :
Here's how they compare when overlaid:
In order to believe that both pictures are legit and untampered with, we would have to accept that:
- Rubble 2 and 4 were moved around by someone between the two snapshots.
- During that same time window, someone climbed up and stuck that US flag in the beam.
If we are to consider "different perspective" issues, we must note that:
- To snap "LOOSE RUBBLE b", the photographer's vantage point had to be more elevated and to the right of his "LOOSE RUBBLE a" vantage point. This can be surmised by the slight angle change of the backdrop elements. However, if you draw a line between the flagpost-beam and rubble 3 in the foreground, there seems to be little or no lateral change/movement of the camera perspective. All in all, it doesn't seem to add up.
*******************************************************************
I then noticed some lettering in the rubble at top right of "LOOSE RUBBLE b". I enlarged, applied rotation and had a look.
I could just make out "PA...IFIC...AR...AND FOUNDRY.CO". Well there you have it, I guess!
Hehe : 'Ultimate proof' that we are actually looking at the WTC steel and rubble... <_<
"Pacific Car & Foundry was the largest contractor of the 13 steel fabricators that provided steel for the World Trade Center towers."
http://www.washington.historylink.org/i ... le_id=4272
BrianV did a cool demonstration of how to add, move, remove people and objects over given backgrounds (just in case people don't know how easy it is...)
Path Tool or Intelligent Scissors (with background synthesis)...nearly 2 mins later....
http://z6.invisionfree.com/Reality_Shac ... &p=2297541
Thanks BrianV. It seems such tricks may have been employed a lot for the FEMA Ground Zero pictures. Here I compare two pics which struck my eye as soon as I saw them - and put them side by side (all I did was enlarge/crop the second picture -"LOOSE RUBBLE b"- to match the size of the two backdrop sceneries) :
Here's how they compare when overlaid:
In order to believe that both pictures are legit and untampered with, we would have to accept that:
- Rubble 2 and 4 were moved around by someone between the two snapshots.
- During that same time window, someone climbed up and stuck that US flag in the beam.
If we are to consider "different perspective" issues, we must note that:
- To snap "LOOSE RUBBLE b", the photographer's vantage point had to be more elevated and to the right of his "LOOSE RUBBLE a" vantage point. This can be surmised by the slight angle change of the backdrop elements. However, if you draw a line between the flagpost-beam and rubble 3 in the foreground, there seems to be little or no lateral change/movement of the camera perspective. All in all, it doesn't seem to add up.
*******************************************************************
I then noticed some lettering in the rubble at top right of "LOOSE RUBBLE b". I enlarged, applied rotation and had a look.
I could just make out "PA...IFIC...AR...AND FOUNDRY.CO". Well there you have it, I guess!
Hehe : 'Ultimate proof' that we are actually looking at the WTC steel and rubble... <_<
"Pacific Car & Foundry was the largest contractor of the 13 steel fabricators that provided steel for the World Trade Center towers."
http://www.washington.historylink.org/i ... le_id=4272
http://www.septemberclues.info
- simonshack
- Administrator
- Posts: 3494
- Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
- Location: italy
by nonhocapito on October 25th, 2010, 3:49 pmsimonshack 4 Oct 25 2010, 01:28 PM wrote:- To snap "LOOSE RUBBLE b", the photographer's vantage point had to be more elevated and to the right of his "LOOSE RUBBLE a" vantage point. This can be surmised by the slight angle change of the backdrop elements. However, if you draw a line between the flagpost-beam and rubble 3 in the foreground, there seems to be little or no lateral change/movement of the camera perspective. All in all, it doesn't seem to add up.
Let's say photo a was taken later than photo b.
The appearance of the rhetorical flag marking the passing of time (*after* the moon landing).
Let's say it was days afterwards. Sonnenfeld obviously is not generous on details of when he or others took these pictures. He never says which days he walked around the rubble: ALL the metadata of his pictures is dated 2009. Maybe the details are in his book "el perseguido" but I doubt it. A "perseguido" has more serious things to think about. <_<
Anyway, the only piece whose movement can be explained between b (earlier) and a (later) is piece number 4, that disappears. We can imagine it was taken away cause it was a hazard.
Why number 2 or number 3 should have moved at all?? They look quite heavy. Is rubble normally arranged to allow for people to walk around it and take pictures?
- nonhocapito
- Administrator
- Posts: 1846
- Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
- Location: Italy
by fakers911 on October 25th, 2010, 8:11 pm
I've been looking carefully at the photo's in this thread again and I am blown away by the obvious evidence of photoshopped material! These are by far the most clearly Photoshopped pictures I've seen so far! Even a blind guy can see this is fake stuff!
Can you please provide the originals so that I can supply them to whoever asks for them?
Well done!! B)
EDIT: Ah.. we have found ourselves a ( C ) picture!!
Source: http://www.cracktwo.com/2010/05/911-fem ... -zero.html
Also notice the stacks of buckets in almost every single picture.
Can you please provide the originals so that I can supply them to whoever asks for them?
Well done!! B)
EDIT: Ah.. we have found ourselves a ( C ) picture!!
Source: http://www.cracktwo.com/2010/05/911-fem ... -zero.html
Also notice the stacks of buckets in almost every single picture.
- fakers911
- Member
- Posts: 72
- Joined: September 29th, 2010, 7:55 pm
by simonshack on October 25th, 2010, 10:42 pmfakers911 4 Oct 25 2010, 07:11 PM wrote:These are by far the most clearly Photoshopped pictures I've seen so far! Even a blind guy can see this is fake stuff!
I agree - but what we need to do here is to convince the 'slower' people who fail to see all this crap - in spite of having perfect eyesight... I think that there's more to 'blindness' than meets the eye!
So here's my last contribution. I dearly hope this will settle the matter for most folks equipped with a good brain - and decent sense of perspective. ;)
The objects named A, B and D are three WTC beams present in the picture.
The red "C" is a precise spot of the backdrop of the picture (please get familiar with "C" and its surrounding rubble).
Now we have a slightly different angle: A, B and D are your perspective references to gauge just how little the photographer's vantage point has changed in space.
But look where "C" is now. I will tell you that this is simply impossible - but it's always up to you to make your mind up:
I also did a Gradient Map test using a 'sister' picture from this FEMA series. The Gradient Map is a photo-processing tool that selects chromatic tonalities within a photograph and alters the RGB balance accordingly. In any normal picture, it will of course alter every element equally. Not in this case, though:
In fact, the firefighters appear to be on wholly different/crisper chroma levels - no grade/amount of chroma alteration will make them blur/or disappear. They have rather evidently been inserted digitally into this Ground Zero scenery. At closer inspection, it would appear that another piece of rubble (bottom left part of the picture) has also been added into this alleged Ground Zero rubble scenery.
************************
Original image (from the batch of FEMA/Sonnenfeld pictures released in 2009)
A Zip file containing both the FEMA photos and the photos credited to Kurt Sonnenfeld can be downloaded from here:http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/WTC-Photos.zip
http://www.septemberclues.info
- simonshack
- Administrator
- Posts: 3494
- Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
- Location: italy
by simonshack on October 25th, 2010, 11:12 pmfakers911 4 Oct 25 2010, 09:50 PM wrote:Can you post the 2 originals including the source you've got them from, please?
You may find some of this Ground Zero photo series here, credited to:
Andrea Booher/FEMA News Photo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32610356@N ... otostream/
A Zip file containing both the FEMA photos and the photos credited to Kurt Sonnenfeld can be downloaded from here:
http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/WTC-Photos.zip
http://www.septemberclues.info
- simonshack
- Administrator
- Posts: 3494
- Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
- Location: italy
by fakers911 on October 25th, 2010, 11:24 pmsimonshack @ Oct 26 2010, 12:12 AM wrote:fakers911 4 Oct 25 2010, 09:50 PM wrote:Can you post the 2 originals including the source you've got them from, please?
You may find some of this Ground Zero photo series here, credited to:
Andrea Booher/FEMA News Photo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32610356@N ... otostream/
A Zip file containing both the FEMA photos and the photos credited to Kurt Sonnenfeld can be downloaded from here:
http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/WTC-Photos.zip
Grazie sir!!
- fakers911
- Member
- Posts: 72
- Joined: September 29th, 2010, 7:55 pm
by nonhocapito on October 26th, 2010, 1:05 amsimonshack 4 Oct 25 2010, 11:12 PM wrote:fakers911 4 Oct 25 2010, 09:50 PM wrote:Can you post the 2 originals including the source you've got them from, please?
You may find some of this Ground Zero photo series here, credited to:
Andrea Booher/FEMA News Photo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32610356@N ... otostream/
A Zip file containing both the FEMA photos and the photos credited to Kurt Sonnenfeld can be downloaded from here:
http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/WTC-Photos.zip
Thanks for the Booher link, Simon, this one I didn't know.
Judging from her website, Booher's clients are among the most horrendous fake-charity GO and NGO out there that profit from disasters and the needs of people.
Including the italian development cooperation agency which is a notorious den of corrupted officials that financed dictators such as Siad Barre for decades.
Booher task is one of providing phony pictures of 3rd world people in distress to motivate rich white middle class families to pledge their money to the mentioned horrendous organizations in order to wash the fastidious pictures away.
Yeah, I always wondered what low life person would do that. I bet she's proud, too.
Here she is by the way:
...looking ahead to a profitable career in propaganda.
by simonshack on October 26th, 2010, 1:53 amnonhocapito @ Oct 26 2010, 12:05 AM wrote:
Thanks for the Booher link, Simon, this one I didn't know.
Judging from her website, Booher's clients are among the most horrendous fake-charity GO and NGO out there that profit from disasters and the needs of people.
Oh, great. Thanks to you for your follow-up on Booher.
I can't hold my silly self, sorry: let's just boo her ! :P
http://www.septemberclues.info
No comments:
Post a Comment