FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Naudet Bros: The Luck of the French?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps General Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
StillDiggin



Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Unless that quote represents two separate tasks, I need to have somebody clarify the meaning of "digitize," and how electro-chemical aerosals enter into the equation.

I can see this leading to an endless chain of 2-year-old-child-like "but why?" questions from me.

I guess by keeping the post short and cryptic, you're encouraging me to visit the site.

Well, I have - and I still don't understand.

I am trying to focus on what occurred on 9/11. When I link to orbwar, I see pictures linked to more cryptic comments.

My "bird analysis" was an attempt to prove that the Naudet film was tampered with.

Suggesting that these were stealth "objects" sabotages my claim of tampering, casting the focus on determining what the "birds" really were.

Please note that I'm not using "sabotages" in an accusatory way. It just seemed more appropriate than "contradicts."

During CNN's "Pipeline" rebroadcast on 9/11/06, I caught a glimpse of "something dark" whizzing by immediately after they showed their first "non-live" camera angle replay.

For that reason, I am willing to consider these suggestions - but only if presented in a truly informative manner.

Anything less than a complete analysis of when, how, and why this technology was used on 9/11 is both time consuming and distracting. I have no desire to "learn-up" on stealth orbs just for the hell of it.

In other words, tell me a story. Or link me to one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, no.... - *I* merely provided that snippet from the orbwars site to show what a load of complete bollocks it is, IMHO. - and to not bother with it, unless you're low on (short-lasting) amusements...


Quote:
The chemtrails were put in place using rockets to eject the radiological aerosols into pre-position before detonation.


I mean, jeezus - these aren't 'chemtrails' from the 50's! Those are 'streamers' created by small rockets set off behind the the nuclear blast - they used them to determine blast-pattern, shock-wave speed etc.. This is just *one* of the examples of utter bollocks on that site.

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
StillDiggin



Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

General note to Continuity and others in the forums:

Sarcasm is often difficult to interpret in text.
However, when there is no text, it becomes an even greater challenge.

Unless you bang your head against a monitor hard enough, sarcastic thoughts do not manifest themselves in a visible manner (even then, they would show up on your monitor, not mine).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gritzle70



Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 72

PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

> Suggesting that these were stealth "objects" sabotages my claim of
> tampering, casting the focus on determining what the "birds"
> really were.

Then why bring up the issue of the "birds" in the first place except to note them as anomolies which you cannot at this time readily explain?

This leads to a discussion of what the orbs might be, when and where they appear in the footage, and how (if at all) they might be involved in the triggering the demolitions.

The appearance of the "birds" is perhaps part of what the Naudets caught on their video. It has nothing to do with disproving your point.

We can spend hours speculating on stealth technology, exotic EM beam weapons, neutron bombs, thermobarics, etc.. However, unless we know someone who works for the Brookings Insntitute and who is willing to come forward, we can only speculate:

http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/sites.htm

http://www.milnet.com/exotica.htm

http://www.milnet.com/b-2a.htm

http://www.milnet.com/f-117a.htm

It is my belief that the masterminds of 9/11 (the MIC) used it also as a cover to test their new exotic weapons systems, both in the avionics and explosives fields.

All disinformation is geared to keep us stuck in a circular pattern revolving around discussions focused the use of conventional planes and weapons.

In this case, no planes were used so they had to be edited them into the footage of the 2nd hit.

Likewise, thermite is as far as "conventional" weapons experts will go in terms of explaining the controlled demolition.

One of the MIC's main goals is to keep us in the dark about their new technologies (because they plan to use them again).

Nico Haup is working on exposing the use of video fakery done by the MSM on the 2nd hit.

Except for your group, few people have devoted themselves to exposing the Naudet film for what it is: a propaganda film to provide a staged setting as a "backdrop" to cover the 1st hit in "real" time.

You have to work with probabe cause, "coincidental" and/or "circumstantial" evidence -- this is a far more difficult and "speculative" task than dealing with CNN fake video footage.

I think you are doing an excellent job. Perhaps you should note such anomolies like the "birds" are something for which you have no plausible explanation at this time and move on to what you can focus on.

I didn't intend to cause a distraction except to point out that such bird-like aircraft do exist.


Last edited by gritzle70 on Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:54 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gritzle70



Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 72

PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

> Suggesting that these were stealth "objects" sabotages my claim of
> tampering, casting the focus on determining what the "birds"
> really were.

Then why bring up the issue of the "birds" in the first place except to note them as anomolies which you cannot at this time readily explain?

This leads to a discussion of what the orbs might be, when and where they appear in the footage, and how (if at all) they might be involved in the triggering the demolitions.

The appearance of the "birds" is perhaps part of what the Naudets caught on their video. It has nothing to do with disproving your point.

We can spend hours speculating on stealth technology, exotic EM beam weapons, neutron bombs, thermobarics, etc.. However, unless we know someone who works for the Brookings Insntitute and who is willing to come forward, we can only speculate:

http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/sites.htm

http://www.milnet.com/exotica.htm

http://www.milnet.com/b-2a.htm

http://www.milnet.com/f-117a.htm

It is my belief that the masterminds of 9/11 (the MIC) used it also as a cover to test their new exotic weapons systems, both in the avionics and explosives fields.

All disinformation is geared to keep us stuck in a circular pattern revolving around discussions focused the use of conventional planes and weapons.

In this case, no planes were used so they had to edit them into the footage of the 2nd hit.

Likewise, thermite is as far as "conventional" weapons experts will go in terms of explaining the controlled demolition.

One of the MIC's main goals is to keep us in the dark about their new technologies (because they plan to use them again).

Nico Haup is working on exposing the use of video fakery done by the MSM on the 2nd hit.

Except for your group, few people have devoted themselves to exposing the Naudet film for what it is: a propaganda film to provide a staged setting as a "backdrop" to cover the 1st hit in "real" time.

You have to work with probabe cause, "coincidental" and/or "circumstantial" evidence -- this is a far more difficult and "speculative" task than dealing with CNN fake video footage.

I think you are doing an excellent job. Perhaps you should note such anomolies like the "birds" are something for which you have no plausible explanation at this time and move on to what you can focus on.

I didn't intend to cause a distraction except to point out that such bird-like aircraft do exist.


Last edited by gritzle70 on Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:23 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gritzle70



Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 72

PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

> Suggesting that these were stealth "objects" sabotages my claim of
> tampering, casting the focus on determining what the "birds"
> really were.

Then why bring up the issue of the "birds" in the first place except to note them as anomolies which you cannot at this time readily explain?

This leads to a discussion of what the orbs might be, when and where they appear in the footage, and how (if at all) they might be involved in the triggering the demolitions.

The appearance of the "birds" is perhaps part of what the Naudets caught on their video. It has nothing to do with disproving your point.

We can spend hours speculating on stealth technology, exotic EM beam weapons, neutron bombs, thermobarics, etc.. However, unless we know someone who works for the Brookings Insntitute and who is willing to come forward, we can only speculate:

http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/sites.htm

http://www.milnet.com/exotica.htm

http://www.milnet.com/b-2a.htm

http://www.milnet.com/f-117a.htm

It is my belief that the masterminds of 9/11 (the MIC) used it also as a cover to test their new exotic weapons systems, both in the avionics and explosives fields.

All disinformation is geared to keep us stuck in a circular pattern revolving around discussions focused the use of conventional planes and weapons.

In this case, no planes were used so they had to edit them into the footage of the 2nd hit.

Likewise, thermite is as far as "conventional" weapons experts will go in terms of explaining the controlled demolition.

One of the MIC's main goals is to keep us in the dark about their new technologies (because they plan to use them again).

Nico Haupt is working on exposing the use of video fakery done by the MSM on the 2nd hit.

Except for your group, few people have devoted themselves to exposing the Naudet film for what it is: a propaganda film to provide a staged setting as a "backdrop" to cover the 1st hit in "real" time.

You have to work with probabe cause, "coincidental" and/or "circumstantial" evidence -- this is a far more difficult and "speculative" task than dealing with CNN fake video footage.

I think you are doing an excellent job. Perhaps you should note such anomolies like the "birds" are something for which you have no plausible explanation at this time and move on to what you can focus on.

Exposing the fraudlent Naudet film is as important as exposing the tv fakery.

I didn't intend to cause a distraction except to point out that such bird-like aircraft do exist.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StillDiggin



Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Michigan

PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear gritzle70,

You are correct. Since the time of my initial "bird analysis" post, I have been made aware of the error in my assumptions.

I will leave the analysis of the Naudet film to the experts, and hope that they will trust me enough to keep me informed.

Thanks for your support.

BTW, if you need it - the "Delete Button" is a check box at the bottom of the edit screen, directly above the Preview/Submit buttons. It took me a while to find that little bugger myself.

_________________
Prediction: 9/11 Without Tinfoil - Part 327: WE'RE ALMOST THERE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gritzle70



Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 72

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not to sound dumb, but I cannot find a delete button. I would like to delete my duplicate posts

Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
Notify me when a reply is posted

This is all that I see
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gritzle70 asked:
Quote:
Not to sound dumb, but I cannot find a delete button. I would like to delete my duplicate posts

It's the little 'X' at the top right-hand side of the post's box, to the right of 'Quote' and 'Edit', Sometime's it's not there, but I'm not sure if this is a time-delay thing, or what - but it *should* be there on all of your posts after you've logged in.

Addendum: Hmm, no - maybe it's just this thread, but the 'X' boxes aren't appearing on any of *my* posts, either - but only in this thread. Weird.

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elbowdeep



Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I **think** it's only there IF you are the LAST post in the thread... if someone posts AFTER you, you can't delete...

(Edit - Actually, after posting this post, the X isn't there, even though I AM the last poster... maybe a setting in the forum is changed!?)
ED

_________________
One day the cows will sprout wings and fly away...
http://twitter.com/elbowdeep
http://elbowdeep.posterous.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ray Ubinger
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:15 am    Post subject: 1st Hit "birds" - vid excerpt Reply with quote

The pair of "birds" in question, are enlarged and slowed down at
http://webfairy.org/bird/firsthitbirds.htm

To me they look like they are high-fiving each other. Then the one going rightward (after the clip stops short) floats down in front of one of the foreground buildings and turns into a white laser-like dot moving along the building surface. It is also the same object which reappears very briefly from offscreen up right for a couple frames just before the dvd clip ends. At that point the dvd cuts to an interview segment with John O'Neill ("I knew right then and there that this was going to be the worst day of my life as a firefighter").

See also
http://911foreknowledge.com/rayswhatzits.htm
http://tinyurl.com/4vo5u
http://tinyurl.com/3ufe3
http://thewebfairy.com/911/bird
http://thewebfairy.com/911/canale
http://thewebfairy.com/911/newwhatzits
http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/blackbird



Ray Ubinger
http://911foreknowledge.com
exposing the Naudet-FDNY snuff film since 2004
Back to top
Ray Ubinger
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 10, 2006 5:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Stop it. Reply with quote

hawkwind wrote:
Is this site rense.com? Do you really think that the fire fighters of NYC are involved in this?


Hee hee, rense.com. I'd like to see rense.com mirror my page that shows the fire fighters of NYC murdering their own chaplain inside WTC-1 on 9/11:
http://911foreknowledge.com/judge.htm

The brilliance of infiltrating the FDNY with perps (for the specific purpose of making a snuff film out of the day's events and then selling back to us as a respectable documentary) is precisely because so many people like you would dismiss it out of hand, as a total impossibility. The perps knew the FDNY would be practically canonized after S11. Therefore you and many others are literally unable to conceive of the possibility FDNY being involved in the plot. That's the brilliance in them choosing to do just that.

Quote:
Is Cheney's phone number on speed dial with the fire fighters?


Dunno. I think a few of the boyz in the Naudet-FDNY snuff film may have gotten real firefighter training, but only to make them better actors. Narrator/Fireman/Co-Director/Interviewer James Hanlon is in fact a TV actor (with a resume going back to 1995), a fact never mentioned in the Naudet movie.
http://imdb.com/name/nm0360137/


Ray Ubinger
http://911foreknowledge.com
FDNY WAS IN ON IT
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps General Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.