[ KEY DOCUMENTS ]
PNAC: NEW PEARL HARBOR
OPERATION NORTHWOODS
UDAY/PUTIN/VREELAND
OBL WAS TIM OSMAN
BOJINKA - CENSORED
W 199 EYE
VREELAND NOTES
BIN LADEN & W BUSH<1<2
GOV SHAM 911COMMISSION
USA PATRIOT ACT
6 AUG 01 PDB(scrubbed)
CONGRESS 911 REPORT

Sunday, July 01, 2007

From 911researchers.com:

"obviously as a result to the latest success of "SeptemberClues" (51,000 hits and counting plus mirrors!), 911blogger TV and the rising popularity of all 9/11 VideoMashups [connected to the evidence of 9/11 TV fakery, the use of exoW on 9/11 and the Documentation of Infiltration], the psychological warfare against so called "no-planers" reached a new climax.

[...]Last night, Rosalee Grables server (administrated by Lou Duchez for years) faced an aggressive lethal attack and had to be temporaily disabled by the provider.

This means at least 4 [popular] websites are down right now.

911videomashups.com will temporarily continue at http://www.911researchers.com/blog/9 and in its own "book" at 911researchers.com...

All 9/11 research updates will continue at 911researchers.com and 911movement.org...

We will try to recover Gerard Holmgren's 911closeup.com...

According to Grable, "...thewebfairy.com webfairy.org. 911 foreknowledge.com and Missilegate.com were blackholed by spamhaus.org although I never spammed in my life..."


-----




Labels: cointelpro

Construction expert Christopher A. Brown has evaluated the World Trade Center "blueprints" leaked by the founder of STJ911 disinformation cell, Steven E. Jones.

Brown's analysis follows:

"Unfortunately the WTC plans released appear to be fraudulently presented as "Construction Drawings" or "Architectural plans" actually used for construction of WTC 1.

[...]

The following is an analyses of random samples of the revisions table from the graphics files of the above [Jones-leaked] WTC 1 plans "4.)PAC1 TOWER A". The analysis of graphic appearances and text from the "4.)PAC1 TOWER A" subdirectory above.

Most of the dimensions are not legible at any zoom level on any of the scans. The title block shows 1967 on most sets, some are not legible.

Below is a portion of the title block of A-A-13.TIFF



PROBLEMS WITH AUTHENTICITY OF THE ABOVE.

Note the lack of clouding (dots and trash) in the background of the actual dated "REVISIONS" table. An area usually really smudged creating major clouding in a scanned plan. NOTE the clean, sharp edged cutoff of the dot cloud to the right of the word "REVISIONS". Something VERY typical of photoshopping documents.

NONE OF THE SHEETS ARE ACCEPTED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OF THE PLANNING DIVISION. You can count on every sheet being signed with approval on a job for a building with this prominence.

These are not construction drawings. If they were from LERA they would be from scanned from vellums and these are from beat up blue lines judging by the clouding trash on them. Some of the digital files were created on 10/15/02 at 4:44 AM

Below is a portion of the title block revisions table of A-A-99.TIFF Notice the anomaly in the initial columns of the left side table, 3rd cell from the bottom.



Below is a zoom of that cell. Not much to be said about it except it definitely does not belong there and it is some sort of digital, graphic artifact. Not a hand lettered initial. far too straight for too many pixels



A portion of the title block revisions table of A-A-139.TIFF [and] title block revisions of the table on A-A-140.TIFF also has the same anomaly with its characteristics.

Sheet A-A-141.TIFF has the same anomaly but twice. ..

Comparison of the initials of the revisions tables of 99 and 139 show the same initials circled in blue are suspicious and could be the same numbers copied and pasted perhaps after being separated from their accompanying triangular detail numbers and being altered by scaling. blurring or distorting. The date appears as the same quite often in the "REVISIONS" tables.

CONCLUSION

The plans are actually 1964 plans that have had their date altered to appear as 1967 or during construction. Since there is no approval by the chief of the planning division it is certain the plans are not actual construction drawings.

Clearly the anomaly in the revisions table should not be there and the table is free of most clouding where there should be more than usual. Slice lines of graphic manipulations appear in A-A-13.TIFF.

It seem very likely that a revisions table was scanned and dissected then reassembled into a graphic which matched the title block of the WTC 1 preliminary set then pasted in. The entire file could then had been rescaled or saved at another resolution to hide the splices.

The .dxf files are useless and mostly nonsense. One file "wtc1_2000.dxf" is a product of the "LZA Technology A Division of The Thornton Tomasetti Group" and appears to be the beginning of an effort to analyze the plane impacts as the impact area of flight 11 is shown.

Since the WTC2 plans are missing it is clear that is because the WTC2 plans only show the concrete core and cannot be used to deceive the public as to the actual construction of the towers by representing them as having 47 steel core columns. The concrete core of the towers is documented with images from 9-11 here.

-----

• Go to source link for images from tiff files 139, 140 and 141

  Labels: cointelpro, stj911, WTC

Monday, June 11, 2007

After independent researchers filed Requests for Correction earlier this year with federal agency NIST regarding the WTC, disinformation cell STJ911 followed quickly, claiming to have filed a copycat RFC which unfortunately suckered in naive co-complainants, including victims' family members.

However, several months after claiming to have filed the RFC, the Department of Commerce, which oversees NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology), has not posted the RFC has received to its online archive of received RFCs as maintained by its Chief Information Officer. This, despite the fact that the STJ911 RFC was purportedly filed April 12, and a supplement, dated April 20, to independent researcher Dr. Judy Wood's RFC, has been posted to the CIO's website for some weeks now.

One possible explanation is that the RFC filed by STJ911 did not in fact challenge the quality of NIST's data so much as praise it. The RFC process is a result of the Data Quality Act, which provides a form of redress for citizens who find data ginned up by federal bureaucracy to fraudulent.

Yet the RFC filed by STJ911 in fact praises the quality of NIST's fraudulent aircraft collision data and only demands that NIST share more of their purportedly fabulous (yet factually fraudulent) data with the public. This is a classic false-opposition tactic, pretending to argue with the powers-that-be when in fact buttressing their central premises. Indeed, the purported RFC filed by STJ911 asserts that "in real life" Boeing airliners crashed into the World Trade Center towers.

This appears to be an attempt to bait NIST into explicitly endorsing claims made by the criminal federal agency FEMA regarding Boeing airliner crashes. One of the co-authors of the purported STJ911 RFC, Los Alamos' Mormon WMD developer Dr. Steven Jones, has cited obviously planted aircraft debris pimped by FEMA in its reports regarding 9/11.

Dr. Jones has claimed on 911blogger.com to expect a response from NIST on June 11th to his fraudulent complaint. Given the efforts by Dr. Jones' false-opposition cell to prop up NIST's fraudulent claims, Dr. Jones may indeed have the inside track on what NIST is to do next.

Labels: cointelpro, los alamos, stj911