PumpItOut.com speaks with alleged 9/11 cameraman Evan Fairbanks; callers discuss 9/11 tvfakery, 9/11 victim Edna Cintron, and 9/11 exoweaponry; new reports on political conflicts of interest in the Kean/Hamilton/Zelikow 9/11 Commission.
Silvio Berlusconi, former Italian Prime Minister linked to the P2 Masonic Lodge terror cell and other false-flag operations, is apparetly now using his media empire to attack researchers into 9/11. From Il Giornale 15 novembre 2007:
" Secondo Marx la storia si ripete sempre due volte, la prima come tragedia e la seconda come farsa. Il movimento complottista nato per sostenere che l’11 settembre è stato un auto-attentato orchestrato dall’amministrazione Bush, per passare alla farsa ci ha messo pochi anni. L’esponente più rappresentativo di questa seconda fase è l’americano Webster Griffin Tarpley, che questa settimana gira l’Italia per propagandare il suo libro La fabbrica del terrore (Arianna Editrice - Macro Edizioni), già record di vendite negli Stati Uniti: per il gran finale a Roma il sito della casa editrice annuncia anche la presenza dell’immancabile europarlamentare Giulietto Chiesa.
Tarpley - il cui libro è un centone di assurdità tecniche sugli attentati di New York e Washington, già cento volte confutate ma che continuano a circolare - è screditato all’interno dello stesso movimento negazionista dell’11 settembre per alcune tesi e iniziative davvero bizzarre. Quest’estate ha lanciato il cosiddetto «Allarme di Kennebunkport», annunciando a breve un altro attentato in stile 11 settembre organizzato dal governo americano e distribuendo un manifesto firmato da alcuni dei più noti critici della guerra in Irak: quattro dei quali, però, hanno negato di avervi mai apposto la loro firma.
La quarta di copertina del suo libro negli Stati Uniti riporta i giudizi favorevoli di personaggi considerati «lunatici» anche da molti negazionisti come Nico Haupt, secondo il quale nessun aereo ha colpito le Torri Gemelle ma si è trattato di un astuto videomontaggio, e Gerhard Wisnewski, autore di due libri dove sostiene che anche lo sbarco sulla Luna è stato soltanto un trucco video («lunatici», appunto).
The National Institute of Standards and Technology finally responded earlier this month and denied a Request for Correction (RFC) filed by Dr. Morgan Reynolds regarding its 9/11 report. Reynolds has offered some preliminary thoughts at his NoMoreGames.net:
"At the appropriate time I will formally appeal NIST's decision, but meanwhile I have filed two requests to obtain NIST data under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) so that I may properly exercise my appeal rights: • Video evidence from original sources of airplanes at the WTC, held on a secure NIST server • NIST contract with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) and related documents regarding the NIST work performed by SAIC
[...]
Airplane Video Fakery
So-called live videos of the south tower plane "event" showed a plane image disappearing behind the South Tower wall, although at least one shows a plane's nose momentarily exiting the opposite north side, then fade to black, an obvious "overshooting" error in video fakery. Subsequent videos of airplane image entry into the south tower emerged in days, months and years later. These "penetration" videos show impossible physics like little or no deceleration, which NIST and its contractors have accepted at face value. These impossibilities were modeled, allegedly via sophisticated methods, according to the NIST response to my RFC: "The models used to analyze the aircraft impact into the towers fully capture the constitutive properties of the aircraft and the building materials and account for the deformation, fracture, and failure of these materials as well as conservation of momentum and energy." NIST, of course, did no such thing. NIST did not account for the conservation of momentum and energy because energy can only be spent once. Energy consumed in fracturing tower materials and impressing a cartoon-like outline of an airliner's silhouette of passage is not available for constant speed. The event as depicted by NIST is impossible.
NIST asserts in its defense, "By using original sources of photographic and video evidence and by using a NIST expert to obtain copies of material directly from these original sources, NIST was able to ensure the integrity of the photographic and video evidence used in the investigation. Further, all photographs and video records obtained by NIST are kept on a secure server with access limited only to authorized NIST personnel." Am I supposed to accept NIST assertions at face value? Does NIST deny, for example, that the FBI had custody of the Evan Fairbank video for hours and returned only part of the video to Fairbank? NIST does not comment. NIST claims it "collected photographs and videos from original sources only," yet evidence showing physically impossible events like no crash and no deceleration in the plane image must be fake unless NIST believes Newtonian mechanics no longer apply. "Further, all photographs and video records obtained by NIST are kept on a secure server with access limited only to authorized NIST personnel," NIST asserts. Secret evidence is no evidence at all. Until shown otherwise, I am told to rely on NIST assertions, undocumented, without proof. To properly pursue my appeal, that is, confirm NIST's claims independently, I must have access to the photographic and video evidence NIST has denied to me and other taxpayers. I will file a FOIA request to obtain this evidence in order to properly exercise my appeal rights.
Are SAIC's Hands Clean?
In my supplemental letter, I asserted that SAIC had a clear and palpable conflict of interest and offered evidence to support that proposition. "SAIC was contracted by NIST to provide administrative support to the team conducting the investigation," NIST responds. "They did not perform technical work in support of the investigation." Yet NIST offers no proof and no documentation for the claim that SAIC did no technical work, only administrative work. SAIC was the largest NIST contractor with 25 employees assigned, followed by ARA with 9, so it is hard to believe that SAIC performed no technical work. SAIC does not reveal the job titles and professional training of its employees and NIST likewise has kept its WTC contract with SAIC secret. I will file a FOIA request to obtain this NIST contract and all related evidence to discover the work SAIC performed.
Are ARA's Hands Clean?
My original RFC identified ARA as the principal contractor hired to analyze plane impacts and create relevant animations. I obtained this data from the NIST contract with ARA as presented on NIST's website. But NIST is silent about the role ARA played in plane analysis and animation. The NIST published contract with ARA clearly specified that ARA would perform analyses and animations of plane impacts on the towers. If accurate, ARA plainly violated Newtonian mechanics and substituted patently false physics in its analyses and animations and is therefore culpable for fraudulent and misleading misrepresentations. What role did ARA play? Unless NIST reveals ARA's role with supporting evidence, I may have to file a FOIA request regarding the work ARA performed.
Time-Warner television host Bill Maher, who has previously made a point of calling pharmaceutical drugs "poison," on Friday endorsed the drugging of Americans who don't endorse the treasonous 9/11 myth propagated by his corporate masters. Maher retreats to the "television is reality" meme, which is breaking apart under the relentless assault of independent 9/11 TVfakery researchers who must contend both with mainstream shills such as Maher as well as perps and dupes inside the "9/11 movement" itself.
Thanks to CheckTheEvidence.com for archiving Revere Radio Network's live coverage of the "Science of 9/11" conference held this past weekend in Madison, Wisconsin:
This 100-minute edition of Total Information Radio aired on Revere Radio Network Monday night. Highlights:
Hear actor/lecturer tell Gary Welz WPIX he saw an airplane hit the World Trade Center, a story he has since retracted. Hear another "9/11 eyewitness" who appears to be Welz in disguise.
Callers!
The last lost BEATLES track? Samarkhand Mystery Tour
Peggy Carter of NYC911truth with an update ongoing 9/11 litigation, and announcing an upcoming 9/11 truth video installation by avant-garde artist Nico Haupt.
Excerpts of and commentary on the Congressional hearing examining the Environmental Protection Agency's pronouncements on 9/11 air quality.
Killtown offers thoughts on Gary Welz and 9/11 censorship.
The following presentation examines Gary Welz, an actor/lecturer, who apparently donned a disguise to play the part of an "air crash witness" in footage aired on MSNBC on 9/11/2001. Welz is a founding member of the disinformation cell STJ911, who in an interview with CBS News, denounced Scholars for 9/11 Truth for examining classified, exotic weaponry in relation to the destruction of the World Trade Center.
Yes, I am an actor and an adjunct lecturer at John Jay College and I was an eyewitness on 9/11 but I did not participate in fake news interviews or say anything about 9/11 except what I believe to be true. The person interviewed on Fox [sic.; i.e.: MSNBC] who looks a bit like me is definitely not me. I support the 9/11 truth movement and I'm very surprised to find myself attacked in this way...
In this episode of Total Information Radio, which aired live on Revere Radio Network Monday June 18:
NYC 9/11 truth activist Peggy Carter talks about working with folk legend Pete Seeger to spread the word about 9/11 at Seeger's Clearwater Festival on the Hudson River.
How to challenge broadcast license of 9/11 tv-fakery stations
Federal Communications Commission licenses for New York and New Jersey television stations expired on June 1. Applications for license renewal by WABC-7 and by WNYW (FOX5) have been "accepted for filing" but, the license renewal has not yet been granted.
Until the renewal application is granted, the FCC will accept "informal complaints" from residents of the New York City market (i.e., anywhere you can receive New York television stations over the air, including Northern New Jersey).
The procedure is simple. Viewers must send the FCC a complaint detailing the station's breach of the public trust. The complaint should be sent in triplicate (three copies) -- the first with an ink signature, the other two copies of the orginal. The headers should include a reference to the application umber as well as the correct FCC address, thusly:
ATTN: Video Division, License Renewal Processing Team Room 2-A665 Office of the Secretary Federal Communications Commission c/o Natek, Inc. 236 Massachusetts Ave., N.E. Suite 110 Washington, DC 20002
RE: Station call sign: WABC (Channel 7) City and State: New York, New York Station facility Identification number: 1328 License renewal application file number: BRCT-20070201BHD
For the separate complaint regarding FOX5, the last four lines of the header should read:
RE: Station call sign: WNYW (Channel 5) City and State: New York, New York Station facility Identification number: 22206 License renewal application file number: BRCT-20070201AJS
The complaints should point out that the station in question may be in violation of the FCC hoax rule, Section 73.1217:
This rule prohibits broadcast licensees or permittees from broadcasting false information concerning a crime or a catastrophe if: (1) the licensee knows this information is false; (2) it is foreseeable that broadcast of the information will cause substantial public harm; and (3) broadcast of the information does in fact directly cause substantial public harm.
If the broadcast of the CGI airplane animations on 9/11 were intentional and known to the management or owners of the station (Disney-ABC and News Corp-Fox), the stations are in breach of the hoax rule because the panic caused by the broadcasts brought about substantial public harm via the resultant overseas conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the expansion of the domestic police state via the USA PATRIOT A Even if the broadcasts were somehow unintentional, the negligence in failing to disclose the falsity of the broadcast at a later date is a breach of the public interest.
Some suggested points to make in the complaints follow.
Regarding WABC-7:
ABC News reporter Don Dahler reported no plane hit the south tower even as the video feed showed an airplane image and anchor Charlie Gibson from the studio asserted an airplane hit.
The plane image broadcast on WABC was stop-motion across each frame, indicating a computer generated animation. Actual footage of an actual airplane would have revealed "go-motion" blurry images.
The suspicious blackout in the helicopter feed following the nose-out indicates an attempt at cover-up.
The purging of the footage form the Internet by WNYW is a clear proof that that WNYW is acting against the public interest in denying access to this footage by researchers and the public. WNYW has purged the footage from YouTube and on the Internet Wayback Machine at www.archive.org, WNYW has replaced the video track of the South Tower event with video from CBS (while retaining the original Fox5 audio track).
In dealing with a regulatory agency like the FCC, remember that several individual (even if similar or duplicative) complaints are more powerful than one complaint co-signed by several people. This is an important opportunity for NYC-area activists to have their voice heard and possibly force a response from Disney-WABC-7 and NewsCorp-FOX5-WNYW.
A very interesting presentation about synchronized audio anomalies that occur 17 seconds apart across all live TV network feeds as the "2nd hit" event unfolded on the morning of September 11, 2001.
While this film contends that the first anomaly indicates the actual time of the explosive event in the south tower, that seems incorrect and a more likely expplanation would be that it was rather the cue for the cgi upload of an airplane into the Future Combat Systems cameras which were wired into the mainstream media.
While the use of CGI "plane" inserts on "live" 9/11 coverage is now well-established, 9/11 video researchers are moving into new territory. The following video presentation makes a good case that some greenscreen trickery was used in composing "instant replay" shots of the disintegration of the towers which were shown later in the day. But if this is so, to what end? More research is necessary.
Rosie O'Donnell received a show of support on her birthday from 9/11 inside-jobbers on her birthday Wednesday, in light of recent comments she's made regarding WTC7 and KSM. But will she take it to the next level and finger the 9/11 involvement of her employer ABC/Disney?
" 911tvfakery.net joined a protest in front of the lobby of "The View" (Rosie O'Donnell, ABC), NYC.
[...]
911tvfakery.net arrived at 9:00 AM and tried to hand out leaflets to the waiting audience, with mixed reactions. At around 9:30 AM the local nyc911 activist group around Luke Rudkowski, R Rod and Tom Foti arrived at the spot and started to deliver their leaflets and DVDs as well (911bloglines reported).
The group including NY911Truth and CHANGE members also tried to deliver a DVD, leaflets and a t-shirt birthday present to Rosie O'Donell, but got rejected several times by security.
At around 10:00 AM ABC7 decided to call the police. Three police cars then joined the peaceful protest group, always switching between two doors of the lobbies.
Apprx. 30-40 Protestors chanted "9/11 was an Inside Job", "Stop the 9/11 Cover-Up- join Rosie's View" or sang "Happy Birthday to you, Rosie". The protest was succesfully organized with enough leaflets, banners and DVDs.
[...]
After a few unsuccesful attempts at the lobby entries on opposite sides of the building, finally at around 11:30 AM, 911tvfakery.net was able to get a DVD with 100 of the best 9/11 Video MashUps (including evidence on 9/11 TV fakery) personally delivered to O'Donnell with help of "Freddie", a flower delivery guy, who stuck the DVD and leaflet into a flower buquet and promised to hand it over...
Text message of 911tvfakery leaflet:
What about ABC7's "9/11 TV Fakery" Cover-Up, Rosie ?
"One of Jones' three main arguments in support of his "planes" thesis, which he presents as a rebuttal of the "no planes theory," is the deceleration argument, as follows:
An 18% deceleration of "Flight 175" during its impact with the South Tower, which Jones states can be observed in a video by Evan Fairbanks, is consistent with the expected loss of kinetic energy from such an impact as modeled by Tomasz Wierzbicki, Professor of Applied Mechanics in MIT's Department of Ocean Engineering and director of the department's Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory.
My criticism is that Jones does not address subsequent research done by Karim and Hoo Fatt who are on the engineering faculty at the University of Akron, and who address Wierzbicki's model in concluding that a much higher amount of kinetic energy would be lost in such an impact.
[...]
Both Jones and Salter should have disclosed and addressed this contradictory data that was published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Engineering Mechanics.
I have now learned of other pertinent and contradictory data that was not disclosed by Jones and Salter, even though it was available 9-12 months before each of their publications.
NIST NCSTAR 1-5, pages 24-26, analyzes the Scott Myers video of "Flight 175" and concludes that the tail of "Flight 175" "did not slow as the aircraft entered the building."
I repeat: "the tail did not slow as the aircraft entered the building."
That means 0% deceleration, as opposed to the 18% found by Salter and cited by Jones.
Jones and Salter state that the plane decelerated 18% in support of their conclusion that the video of "Flight 175" is real, but do not disclose NIST's data and conclusion to the contrary.
Please click on the below JPEGs of three pages from NIST NCSTAR 1-5, pages 24, 25, and 26.
Read section 2.3.2, Estimated Aircraft Speed on the first page. It refers to Figure 2-7 on the second page, which is frames of the Scott Myers video on the second page. It also refers to Figure Figure 2-8 on the third page, which shows parallel lines of pixel location of the nose and tail over time, and which NIST says is evidence that the tail of "Flight 175" in the Scott Myers video "did not slow as it entered the building." [...]
Thus, he cannot reasonably argue that he did not know about the upper graph on this page, which contradicts Salter's 18% deceleration result.
Note also that both of these results were obtained from NIST's analysis of the same Scott Myers video (the "stable video in section 2.3.3 of the above page of NIST text). How can Jones offer the second graph but not the first, without acknowledging the first graph and explaining why he thinks it is invalid?
At Journal of 9/11 Studies, Jones published a Power Point presentation, dated July 2006...
Jones cites the Scott Myers video as evidence that a Boeing 767 hit the South Tower:
[...] In the page below, Jones cites an analysis of the Evan Fairbanks video by Eric Salter, who concludes that the video shows an 18% deceleration as "Flight 175" enters the South Tower...Jones fails to cite to the NIST study of the Scott Myers video that he used in the previous page, and which showed 0% deceleration as opposed to 18% deceleration. One can also see that he failed to disclose the Karim/Hoo Fatt study which found a 46% loss in initial kinetic energy from piercing the external columns alone, without considering the increased resistance of the external columns when backed by floors, without considering the resistance of the floors themselves, and without considering the resistance of the core columns.
Salter's 18% deceleration compared to Hoo Fatt's 46% kinetic energy loss (really much closer to 100% as I show in my paper) gives a drastically larger discrepancy that would not be "consistent with the data within allowable tolerances."
NIST's result compared to Hoo Fatt's data gives an even more drastic discrepancy, and that's without even considering the massive resistance of the floors and core columns found in Wierzbicki's paper,as Hoo Fatt looked only at the resistance of the external columns.
Jones' own reasoning is that the relationship between observed deceleration and modeled kinetic energy loss is important evidence of a video's authenticity or lack of authenticity.
Any one of these combinations proves that the videos of "Flight 175" slipping into the South Tower are falsified.
Given Jones' failure to disclose these results, he has no business stating that the "assertion . . . real commercial jets did not hit the WTC towers . . . has been disproved by the evidence."
By his own reasoning, this assertion has been proved by the evidence that he fails to acknowledge.
I ask Steven Jones to be more careful in the future about academic standards, both in his own work and in his editing of the Journal of 9/11 Studies.
-----
This is a slightly condensed version of an essay which can be found in full here. The most valuable conclusion to take away from this data is that in Ningen's first endnote, "It may be that neither the Scott Myers video nor the Evan Fairbanks video are authentic, or it may be that one but not the other is authentic." Thus the conclusion that TV fakery was a central component of the 9/11 psy-op is inescapble.
This podcast examines witness accounts of an aircraft crashing into the South Tower of the World Trade Center on 9/11 in light of Orson Welles' 1938 "War of the Worlds" broadcast.
![[PLAY]](http://totalinfo.podomatic.com/img/play_button.gif)
MP3 DOWNLOAD![[PLAY]](/img/play_button.gif)
Silvio Berlusconi, former Italian Prime Minister linked to the P2 Masonic Lodge terror cell and other false-flag operations, is apparetly now using his media empire to attack researchers into 9/11. From Il Giornale 15 novembre 2007: 
MP3 DOWNLOAD HERE
The National Institute of Standards and Technology finally responded earlier this month and denied a Request for Correction (RFC) filed by Dr. Morgan Reynolds regarding its 9/11 report. Reynolds has offered some preliminary thoughts at his NoMoreGames.net: 
MP3 DOWLNOAD HERE 
More audio is available from the "Science of 9/11 Conference" held at the beginning of the month:
MP3 DOWNLOAD
Federal Communications Commission licenses for New York and New Jersey television stations expired on June 1. Applications for license renewal by WABC-7 and by WNYW (FOX5) have been "accepted for filing" but, the license renewal has not yet been granted. 
Rosie O'Donnell received a show of support on her birthday from 9/11 inside-jobbers on her birthday Wednesday, in light of recent comments she's made regarding WTC7 and KSM. But will she take it to the next level and finger the 9/11 involvement of her employer ABC/Disney?
MP3 DOWNLOAD
FEED
KEY DOCUMENTS ]
DAVE EMORY
