Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11 & 7/7

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 17-04-2009, 05:50 AM   #1
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default 3 docs *PROVING* Video Fakery & NRPT!!

I think these have been around for a while, but hadn't seen these PARTICULAR ones before until the other day. Amazing how many obvious anomalies I didn't realize were there even though like most, I've seen these over and over.

IMO, these are perhaps among some of the best video analysis i've seen that present irrefutable video evidence and proof of Video fakery and manipulation by the MSM of the so-called "Live Footage" of planes hitting the WTC.

The entire Manhattan scenery appears to have been composed with digital imagery aimed at faking "hijacked aircrafts" hitting the Twin Towers and these analysis show how the TV footage was used to concoct "amateur videos" endorsed by individuals like Devin Clark and Evan Fairbanks who may have also participated in the image doctoring.

People can make their own determination, but this is a MUST SEE for real NPT supporters or anyone that doubts the fakery or believe boeing jets such as flight 11 or 175 were used on 911.

Check out part 2 first as it PROVES beyond any doubt that the GASHES and NAUDET Video have been manipulated and FAKED... its quite amazing.


Next, PART 1 Exposes DEVIN CLARK the so-called random amateur photographer allegedly responsible for MAJOR 911 pieces of footage that appears to have originated by the MSM perps "live" footage.


Part 3 exposes Evan Fairbanks and his video. What amazes me most is how convincing these alleged "amateurs" appear to be. Its no surprise so many have been deceived for so long.



Major Props to Simon and Jeff once again. Thanks for your work.

Last edited by krakhead; 26-04-2009 at 10:48 AM. Reason: do media tags ever frigging work?!
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-04-2009, 12:23 PM   #2
supersmell
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 173
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

How about a link?
supersmell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-04-2009, 01:25 PM   #3
ronisron
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,108
Likes: 2,842 (1,323 Posts)
Default

Have you ever considered "this";

If you take a look at a lot of the amateur footage shot that day, the main thing people say is that "these are not passenger planes", most describe them as "windowless", "something is on the undercarriage", etc. And if you look closely at some of the videos on youtube or elsewhere, you can see what these people mean.

Is it possible that the TV fakery you see is a result of news agencies and video editors attempting to make the planes in question appear to be the average, everyday passenger planes they say they are, and not appear as windowless gray planes with something hanging from the undercarriage?
ronisron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-04-2009, 10:16 PM   #4
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supersmell View Post
How about a link?
you can't see the links? thats really strange since when i posted originally, the links and IMAGE of VIDS were there YESTERDAY and no problem! ... now they've oddly disappeared. HMMMMM. I've checked the three links again and oddly PART 2 refuses to play on YOUTUBE...never had this problem before. Maybe its just a temporary glitch, but it is very strange since PART 2 is quite an amazing analysis. makes you wonder if some perps are running around or gained access to YOUTUBE now.

try it now...

part 2

Last edited by matrix911; 18-04-2009 at 07:44 AM.
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-04-2009, 11:24 PM   #5
supersmell
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 173
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

The links work now.
I don't think they're nearly as definitive as you're making them out to be. They're really just an extension to September Clues, which had enough BS not to be taken seriously.

Some of the stuff in it even contradicts what was claimed in September Clues, like in this he makes a big deal about the screen showing a reflection/video of the crash happening while in SC he claims that the entire scene was faked.
supersmell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 04:05 AM   #6
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supersmell View Post
The links work now.
I don't think they're nearly as definitive as you're making them out to be. They're really just an extension to September Clues, which had enough BS not to be taken seriously.

Some of the stuff in it even contradicts what was claimed in September Clues, like in this he makes a big deal about the screen showing a reflection/video of the crash happening while in SC he claims that the entire scene was faked.
have you looked at part 2?

PART 2 is the best and puts the fakery doubt to rest imo. Its definitive for me so not sure we agree on that.

but its odd since i'm still unable to play Part 2... are you saying all 3 links work?
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 06:09 AM   #7
helloperator
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The creamy middle
Posts: 3,121
Likes: 163 (105 Posts)
Default

Part 2 doesn't prove nothin
helloperator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 07:04 AM   #8
daveskey69
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 31
Likes: 6 (3 Posts)
Default

still..part 2 is pretty interesting. How are people explaining the gash, or lack thereof ?
daveskey69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 07:24 AM   #9
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helloperator View Post
Part 2 doesn't prove nothin
except the evidence PROVES beyond a doubt it DOES. Sorry.

You can deny it all you want, but anyone with half a brain can see in that vid, theres more than CLEAR evidence proving fakery.

the gashes were faked and created after the impact/explosion, there were many other explosions inconsistent with the impact, and no boeing 757 hit that tower as the oct claims.

If one video has this much clear evidence of fakery, all other questions and doubts of tampering and fakery elsewhere, really isn't even necessary to argue.

Unless you can present a counter-argument and show exactly how and where (in this case part 2 ) whats presented is wrong, what you claim is nothing more than a worthless opinion that proves or disproves "NOTHIN".

When your argument has more substance other than "part2 doesn't prove nothin", and you can actually DISPROVE what the video evidence shows,
let me know.

Last edited by matrix911; 18-04-2009 at 07:47 AM.
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 07:47 AM   #10
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveskey69 View Post
still..part 2 is pretty interesting. How are people explaining the gash, or lack thereof ?
seriously right?

thats the million dollar question...

I know these vids have been out for a while, but whats pointed out in detail frame by frame, i hadn't noticed before. So to me of all the 3 vids, YES, part2 is the best and puts the fakery question to rest imo.

Last edited by matrix911; 18-04-2009 at 07:49 AM.
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 02:42 PM   #11
helloperator
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The creamy middle
Posts: 3,121
Likes: 163 (105 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix911 View Post
except the evidence PROVES beyond a doubt it DOES. Sorry.

You can deny it all you want, but anyone with half a brain can see in that vid, theres more than CLEAR evidence proving fakery.

the gashes were faked and created after the impact/explosion, there were many other explosions inconsistent with the impact, and no boeing 757 hit that tower as the oct claims.

If one video has this much clear evidence of fakery, all other questions and doubts of tampering and fakery elsewhere, really isn't even necessary to argue.

Unless you can present a counter-argument and show exactly how and where (in this case part 2 ) whats presented is wrong, what you claim is nothing more than a worthless opinion that proves or disproves "NOTHIN".

When your argument has more substance other than "part2 doesn't prove nothin", and you can actually DISPROVE what the video evidence shows,
let me know.
No...a video doesn't prove shit mate.
helloperator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 05:04 PM   #12
kooskoets
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 833
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

People that have no arguments at all could write :

Quote:
Originally Posted by helloperator View Post
No...a video doesn't prove shit mate.
..but of course....that doesn't change anything.

911amateure2 is a defintive evidence of NPT/TVfakery.
Only the dumber half of humanity would deny that.
kooskoets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 05:09 PM   #13
dave52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,141
Likes: 985 (411 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helloperator View Post
Part 2 doesn't prove nothin
So it does prove something....
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-04-2009, 07:04 PM   #14
jahzel
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Concenctration Camp 7b
Posts: 636
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

jahzel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2009, 04:42 AM   #15
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrix911
..... and no boeing 757 hit that tower as the oct claims.
You are quite correct for once Matrix .. it was actually a Boeing 767 as the Official Claim stands.

Stann
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2009, 06:54 AM   #16
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd View Post
You are quite correct for once Matrix .. it was actually a Boeing 767 as the Official Claim stands.
Stann
my bad stannly! thanks for correcting me.

i guess we now have the proof nrpt is bs.
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2009, 09:11 AM   #17
stannrodd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrix911
... thanks for correcting me.
You are most welcome

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrix911
... the gashes were faked and created after the impact/explosion ..
No doubt you can explain this without your SC video.!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrix011
there were many other explosions inconsistent with the impact,
.. could you explain how you know that "there were many other explosions inconsistent with impact" .. if ...

1 .. you don't believe there was an impact at all !!
2 .. you could compare those explosions with an impact you don't believe in !!

Stann

Last edited by stannrodd; 19-04-2009 at 09:13 AM. Reason: added text
stannrodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2009, 04:03 PM   #18
matrix911
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd View Post
You are most welcome

No doubt you can explain this without your SC video.!
what the hell does it matter whether i use the SC video or the NAUDET?

your question makes no sense.


Quote:
Originally Posted by stannrodd View Post
.. could you explain how you know that "there were many other explosions inconsistent with impact" .. if ...

1 .. you don't believe there was an impact at all !!
2 .. you could compare those explosions with an impact you don't believe in !!

Stann
actually i'm not saying there wasn't an impact.
matrix911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2009, 07:04 PM   #19
branjo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: No longer with this forum
Posts: 2,271
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

You know I have to say something here that has niggled me for a while, Before I would have said the thought of the NTP was quite upsetting but seeing as how the only evidence on 911 I got, was through video, I have to concede, its entirely possible.

And on the other hand I can see the reason behind just assuming it was actual planes, I am not so one sided about this subject anymore. Im not so much leaning to one or the other as residing in the middle, and I don't feel confident enough anymore to choose one or other.

I get these crazy thoughts like, what if (from the faked aspect theory) 911 was a "test", what if it was a gauge of how many people would believe the entire thing based on TV reporting, could this be a prelim to some sort of false flag alien attack if the war on terror were to rapidly crumble, could the next phase really be "war on interplanetary terror?"

Then as someone also said the footage could have been "remastered" to induce the maximum emotional impact, and to cover up any discrepancies that may lag behind like tail markings on the planes and such.

But these mistakes in the videos are so blatantly obvious, like the buildings moving that if it is faked, it would need to be someone without a working braincell doing it. Could that be purposefully done or simple mistake.

Well all I really wanted to say is, now with any kind certainty is, I don't know which route to take for an explanation for 911.

Is the real dilemma "how" or "why", the how gets us into a hell of a debate and I have been very one sided in the past scowling at the NPT, but really, did anyone here actually see the planes hit, and how hard would it be to fake this kind of thing?

The "why" is always sitting there hiding behind the "how", was 911 the final act or was it a prelim, is this agenda still being built upon or has it crumbled in failure, behind closed doors. If everything we have done to make people aware of certain theories and possibilities had an actual effect on these people behind the power, how would we know about it?

Anyway sorry to any one who is for NPT or against it, if I were closed minded before, cause now I just can't make a rational decision that I could argue over anymore. I don't know if its more important to prove the possibility, of each theory or if even the debate itself was a preplanned and calculated thing to keep certain people intensely busy with the how.

to say the least, still retain my common sense regarding the fall of the buildings n all, but nonetheless
branjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2009, 10:53 PM   #20
dave52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,141
Likes: 985 (411 Posts)
Default

Hey branjo, you're in an interesting place right now... Find your own way - make your own decisions...!

It's great to be out of the box isn't it...?!?
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:46 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.