| Welcome to Pumpitout. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Bird Poop OR Notbird Proof?; the 9/11 birdcage | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Dec 15 2008, 09:23 AM (2,377 Views) | |
| Matt | Dec 15 2008, 09:23 AM Post #1 |
|
THE BIRDS OF SEPTEMBER 11 Bird Poop OR Notbird Proof? - skip to video - ____________________________________________________________________ Not all the images of birds in the 9/11 footage show birds. Some show advanced technology: morphing stealth UAVs. This thread aims to prove this... to people who care to think about it. Doing so advances the 9/11 Truth Movement's position with physical evidence in the form of video. High tech involvement not only means 9/11 had state support, but state military support. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ About the author: Matt Nelson, B.A. English, Magna Cum Laude. Personal website: http://www.911conspiracy.tv -- where absolutely no profit is made by advertisements, endorsements, t-shirt sales, etc. http://www.youtube.com/user/911conspiracyTV or http://www.youtube.com/user/911footage ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Why birds? The 9/11 masterminds needed air support-- eyes in the sky with more mobility and more ability than the satellites or conventional UAVs and helicopters could provide. These UAVs had to be designed such that they could be captured on video, because they would appear frequently. (Later in the day, however, at least one obvious UAV was used.) This is where the biologically inspired design of the bird comes in. Spy pigeons have been used since World War 1. They have evolved into machines with telecommunication electronics, weapons and sophisticated sensors for all types of vision.  This vision was needed more than anything. First, there's the obvious purpose of reconnaissance and real-time mission status awareness. The area of Manhattan had to be under tight surveillance, if only to ensure the stage was properly set for the main events. Second, the videos and photos of the days major events had to be collected (or at least managed) at all costs. In addition to cops and FBI patrolling for photos and video - as "evidence for the investigation" - the well disguised UAVs would be intently searching for photographers during the crucial three minutes of the 2nd plane hit: 9:00 to 9:03 am. ...as well as the times 9:59 (scheduled South Tower "collapse" initiation) and 10:28 (N. Tower demolition). Also, WTC Building 7 would have to be under surveillance during the delayed "collapse" initiation at 5:20. Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR when abbreviated for military terminology) would be needed to collect video of the noisy demolitions with explosives, etc. Some extant recordings of explosion audio can be seen/heard here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoGDq6iiMa0 (911 Eyewitness Hoboken clip w/ analysis, original here: http://www.911raw.com/ and partial here: [ironically w/ 911 Mysteries short intro] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9wVvJD2a-I ) and a good explosion audio compilation here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A9X_8flGeM is mirrored here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH6JVXk7jpQ (download here: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ZI1OV4CG ) My personal collection of WTC demolition evidence resides here: http://www.911conspiracy.tv/WTC_demolitions.html Examples/Evidence of Censorship For those who aren't aware, it is proven that videos were taken from citizens by authorities and altered. This isn't to say that UAVs were directly related in these proven cases. It is to show how important the videos were to the perpetrators of the attacks. Evan Fairbanks is the best example, despite some no planers' accusations of his involvement in the event. His tape, which includes closeups of both the 2nd hit and the South Tower demolition, has no audio, according to some sources due to the FBI. See http://web.archive.org/web/20031103022825/http://www.gvny.com/columns/linguvic/linguvic02-15-02.html - where this quote is found: "'Someone handed me a video camera and I ran outside,' he said. 'And it was only after the first tower collapsed and FBI agents conducted me to a safe place, that I stopped shooting. When I told them what I had on videotaped, they brought me to their command center. They have the original, which has five minutes of audio. This is a copy. Sorry there's no sound.'" Also, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZpAeKWFzX4 - which includes: A. A clip from the 9/11/01 ABC evening news broadcast interview where Fairbanks said Port Authority police took him to a location to obtain his footage, whether it be a copy or the original is up for debate. B. Clips from his footage showing the police/FBI taking him to said location... as seen in HBO's 2002 "In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01" C. Other Fairbanks footage WITH audio. This audio is then compared with or found in OTHER amateur footage of the event. Almost all alleged (or artistically implied) Fairbanks audio samples are found to be fraudulent or artistically added, which validates the Linguvic 2/15/02 article. See also the comments under the video. Additionally, to support the mass video confiscation claim we look to the 2002 Charlie Rose interview of the Naudet brothers and James Hanlon. Jules Naudet specifically says the FBI came to get his footage of the 1st plane impact: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71eKhC1oqr4 . See also the beginning of Pt. 3 of my video series THE BIRDS here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY6qrKrkkm8 for more investigation of the Naudet-Hanlon team. Also see the Epilogue of September Clues ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT1z90BB8E4 ) for an Italian news special clip where a policeman specifically mentions collecting film of the morning's events: "We searched the store - we went in every little photographer store... and when we went behind the counter we saw a table that had films, developed films with people's names on it - in alphabetical order - and it said 'Pick up at September 11 at 10:00 am' and we got these photos and we had to get a picture record of people's memories. For them, September 11 actually really never came...." Additionally, 2nd WTC hit videographer Jennifer Spell has been quoted recently saying she saw TV ads requesting footage of the event. (on edit: link now broken, deleted) "she said the feds were advertising on tv, that if anyone had videos of the attack, they should contact them !!" Examples of Video - see bird footage playlist - When the 2nd plane hits in the videos, a bird often flies by simultaneously. There are currently 48 videos showing this plane. Several more miss the plane but not the birds. Here's the distant Jersey Shore shot, the closer PAX-TV shot, the Gamma Press bird, one of several captured by Evan Fairbanks (see below), one of several from Luis Alonso (see THE BIRDS Pt. 7 at 7:00), Hezarkhani extended version, anonymous Camera Planet #1, 2, 3, 4 (etc. - see below for more links) and this photo by Robert Fisch (bird, bottom right):  The coordinators of the covert military operation needed air support to ensure the success of the WTC 1st and 2nd strikes in real time and in close enough proximity to effect success of a contingency plan. Immediate attention was required (a.) if the explosives and "Flight 175" did not score a direct hit and (b.) if the numerous explosives didn't all detonate in a timely manner. With the fate of the day - the WTC "collapses" - resting on these two events, everything had to be perfect... and the perps had to assure themselves things were running smoothly on the ground-- from every angle and elevation. Start with the film by Jules Naudet during the 1st strike. The famous footage usually ends after the explosion. That hides the birds, not that they needed hiding from the common viewer, obviously-- considering the shaky camera and quick flight. Here I am pointing it out 7 years later to doubtful readers. See the last half of the Naudet 1st hit footage here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TkoEY6MeCU It comes from the 2002 version DVD "9/11: The Filmmakers' Commemorative Edition" - which has been stabilized using the VirtualDub video filter "deshaker" [google 'Gunnar Thalin'] and slowed down for clarity. The sequence of images that make up the video has been saved here in this .rar file (right click, save as). These are the images that originally intrigued me.        (every 5th frame shown) [On edit: I no longer assert that the bird goes through the smoke and behind the tower.] Three birds are seen, not just the two big ones. At the beginning of the video (0:04 here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TkoEY6MeCU&fmt=18 (high quality link) - a smaller one enters at right, just barely above the top of the building and flying horizontally between the towers, through the smoke. If you doubt the authenticity of the images, I understand. Research the footage yourself. I assure you they are real frames from video shot by Jules Naudet, in the company of firemen who would take him into that smoking building in order to falsely document its non-demolition. The final frames of the video are of prime interest, despite the apparent lack of perspective issues. They are missing from the 2006 revised edition of "9/11."        These images are just the beginning of a day full of bizarre bird behavior. These UAVs, I believe, came in different classes, some more complex... some perhaps being "orbs" that camouflaged themselves with images of birds. (I don't know!) Consider this frame taken from a version of the Naudet footage aired by PBS in 2003 (Center of the World: New York):  Some of the birds that did ISR for the perps were likely "intelligent machines" built using shape memory polymers, or "smart materials" that move on command when a stimulus is applied, like heat, magnetism or even LIGHT:  - http://www.crgrp.net/morphingsystems.shtml More on morphing aircraft technology is seen in this NASA educational video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7TJtIzdL50 from the Destination Tomorrow series. Flapping wing aircraft are for real. More Images The Fairbanks footage (in slow motion, a few seconds after the explosion): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0emwFKYVmA&fmt=18 Watch as the "birds" fly toward the exploding building! See the footage in its regular speed, in high quality, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qYnwRTmAT4&fmt=18 The relevant action happens in the final 2 seconds, after the fade to black that MAY HAVE BEEN the result of tampering to hide more obvious aerial phenomena. As discussed above, the tape WAS altered to remove audio... and add a plane.           Seen above: Objects flying by One Liberty Plaza, a 743-foot tall, 54 story building. (Edit: I previously thought these flew OVER the building [not BY] and into the explosion like a missile. I was wrong. Thanks to RasgaSaias for pointing out my error.) The 2nd hit footage shot by Pavel Hlava, while it shows birds, requires some rethinking on my part. See debunking by Rasga below. The original, as broadcast on ABC, is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4rf_zRNvdY A stabilized version can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLKJ3UoFk6Q Here you may wonder about Michael Hezarkhani's shot. Also Luc Courchesne was under the South Side of the South Tower with his camera. In my THE BIRDS: Morphing Stealth Pt. 7 this is investigated. Back to #3 reason why. Weapons. In THE BIRDS Pt. 8 the demolition of the South Tower is seen, with birds flying into and out of the smoke and toxic dust - in several clips. One clip in particular, famous for its closeup on molten metal flowing from the South Tower (that Judy Wood questions as fake here: http://drjudywood.com/articles/why/why_indeed.html ) shows the "collapse" and subsequent dust-loving birds here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Mz0_x7313I as well as here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4sRi5stG10 (see final minute for questionable birds). Whether or not the notbirds were armed with some beam weapon isn't the point, despite the obvious implications. The point is that birds do not behave like the ones in the video. Nor do birds light up. Part 8 includes footage of just such an anomaly, from several sources. First, Luc Courchesne (in footage only seen on the Radio-Canada site (and rips like mine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBNWfgv6tE8 ) at 4:22. One or two of the other clips from Camera Planet and/or "102 Minutes that Changed America" could just be pigeons with white undersides, or renegade dust-intoxicated pigeons (or something). But not all of them. I submit for inspection the Tim Canale VHS MSNBC dub here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHmHsS_qaAk -- the "Blinky Bird." Also, the Naudet first hit aftermath footage shows this unmistakable blinking. I'll repeat this link to shape memory polymers, or "smart materials" that move on command when a stimulus is applied, like heat, magnetism or even LIGHT. Some of my selections may be images of real live birds. But not all of them. Please comment on the YouTube videos linked above. Add any responses that will further this study here in this thread at the PumpItOut forum. ------- Video Fakery Distracting from the Important Issues? We must also consider the possiblility of fakery in regard to the weird images of birds - see THE BIRDS: Morphing Stealth Pt. 5, which includes Simon Shack's "Some Birds" that makes just such an allegation. Also, take into consideration Webfairy's comment at http://www.webfairy.org/missileout/index.htm "Photoshopped fuzz to amuse the UFO croud [sic] and keep focus away from the 'missile out' phenomena?" Hopefully after watching all the footage collected in THE BIRDS series, you will disagree with the digital city/desktop view/layered video theory, even though the [distant] cameras of the TV stations didn't capture many of the birds, and even though many of these videos contain a fake plane image. The idea that this portion of the Luis Alonso 2nd hit video (see 7:20 to 8:00) is the product of someone's imaginative fakery is more far-fetched than my theory. I could understand if it were just the infamous Gamma Press shot, with its streak of a bird to distract from the "nose/missile out" (that is, I could understand until I saw the 2005 version linked above) -- and maybe the fast-looking PAX-TV and Jersey shot birds are coincidentally timed. Maybe the speed is an illusion. You can think that, at least. Fine. Add to the list of CGI (or real) birds those from Hezarkhani post-explosion, Scott Myers mid-explosion, and a few from Camera Planet, too, if you want. Videos will remain to support the notbird hypothesis. If you watch all the 9/11 videos with an open mind, you WILL discover that you have seen exotic high technology being used in the most important black op ever. To be edited as needed.... P.S. Thanks for reading. Edited by Matt, Sep 25 2009, 03:38 AM.
|
 |
 
|
| elephant room | Dec 15 2008, 03:00 PM Post #2 |
|
when do we vote for best thread title of all time ... |
|
|
|
| Witness | Dec 15 2008, 05:13 PM Post #3 |
|
Well, I'm an expert on Secret Ancient Weapons Technology, and that my friend was a bird!
Edited by Witness, Dec 16 2008, 07:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Matt | Dec 15 2008, 05:21 PM Post #4 |
|
Thanks. How's the subject matter beneath? Ideas? Questions and corrections are welcome. So are opinions. Edited by Matt, Dec 15 2008, 05:24 PM.
|
|
|
|
| elephant room | Dec 15 2008, 05:46 PM Post #5 |
|
This is well layed out Matt. Good Citation. I agree that they needed to have surveillance of the entire scene, it would help account for the thorough collection of all the videos. This is also a good example of technological capabilities that we know exist. I have trouble putting any emphasis on the post from ABS, originally from mothman.us ... that seems like a shaky source to trust... and would be vulnerable to critics. Yet, it is the first thing in your movie (i think) and your post here. This subject is a tough one because of how speculative it is, and I don't know if that could ever change (absent the addition of new footage/photo that would show a close up.) But I admire your willingness to explore it and clear up the previously vague subject. I find it to be a perfect fit into the "For Your Consideration" category for those who know there is more to the conspiracy than Loose Change & Alex Jones ... and understand the planes are fake (in one way or another) ... but the videos are real. Your work is very honest and comprehensive of the topic. Edited by elephant room, Dec 16 2008, 05:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Matt | Dec 17 2008, 01:11 AM Post #6 |
|
Good quote, shaky source. I had to include the source, though. Funny, another source for an interesting photo is talking about dinosaurs in present day. Pterodactyls! http://www.s8int.com/eyewit22.html  I found it following a link at the ATS forum... talking about possible photo fakery. Ha. Where did the guy think that up? Edited by Matt, Dec 17 2008, 01:43 AM.
|
|
|
|
| shure | Dec 17 2008, 11:30 AM Post #7 |
Administrator
|
Flying Dragons on 9/11 ???  |
|
|
|
| genghis6199 | Dec 17 2008, 12:07 PM Post #8 |
|
xeno just upped the wabc original feeds. it notes a few gems. the first time the kpax video was played is one of them. it was taken near the hospital. i didn't look for birds but it will be worth a look. also the 175 strike knocked out the audio , i have never seen that before. also many weird eyewitness accounts. also a sonic boom account. i suggest you all go download it, it's from vhs and very rare. there's a few birds in seven days i notice too hey matt ? Edited by genghis6199, Dec 17 2008, 12:08 PM.
|
|
|
|
| RasgaSaias | Dec 17 2008, 07:58 PM Post #9 |
|
"A few reported seeing 'winged, flying men' in the areas surrounding the Twin Towers." You mean, like this? This is how winged flying men look like. They don't resemble any known bird in size, shape or behavior. And let's make things clear. The link you gave as reference took me to a place where was written: "Here are some photographs of a demon that was flying at the scene of the World Trade Center on 9/11. You can see in the closeup that like most demons it has webbed wings like those of a bat. Also, notice the configuration of the legs and how they bend backward at the knees like the hind legs of hooved animals such as goats, instead of bending forward like the legs of human beings. Demons also usually have either hooves or talons instead of feet such as humans."  So the expired source of your first quote could have never been a serious source given the kind of subject we're dealing with in these research environments.
far-fetched means: unlikely to be true. So the whole thread is already compromised by the way you classify your own theory. And you shouldn't aim to prove something you consider impossible to prove. It's a self conscious waist of time. Let's try to understand why you say so: There are tons of conventional methods that could be used if needed. But I can't think of a reason why would ISR be applied in a demolition scenario. I noticed you have a video (Source, minute 03:45) where you say: "It almost looks like the "birds" are flying up close to the damage to preform an inspection." Is this an example of how the UAV's could provide ISR? - It could be done simply with one high definition video camera zooming on the damage. And why preform an inspection? Would it change anything if the hole wasn't perfect and they preformed a high tech inspection? UAVs would also be useless for the demolitions. Demolitions are planned in advance. It wouldn't change anything if they had expensive robots flying around. And I also don't understand the connection you made between the UAVs and the sound from from explosives. These are two completely unrelated issues. I suspect this was just used to create a connection between UAVs, sound (Fairbanks) and the videographers. Using the lack of audio on the Fairbanks shot as evidence of ISR provided by UAVs makes no sense at all. You just mixed FBI agents on the ground with robotic UAVs on the air. Does this means Fairbanks was a victim who was just recording the wrong tower (the one on fire was on the opposite side) in the moment of the second explosion on the WTC? Then you proceed with the video confiscation quotes as if it was evidence of UAVs. "she [Jennifer Spell] said the feds were advertising on tv, that if anyone had videos of the attack, they should contact them !!" No it doesn't. If the perps had UAVs providing ISR, they wouldn't need to ask for the footage on the TV. They would know where to go get it in the first place. If I may be permitted to provide a reality call. Manhattan has an overpopulation of pigeons. They even employed hawks "as part of a pilot programme to drive a growing number of pigeons out of Bryant Park" (Source). And during the second explosion on the WTC, as expected in such situation, there was at least one loud and scary sound of an explosion echoing through all those tall buildings. That's why we see dozens, maybe 100 or more yesbirds flying chaotically in every directions. If (a.) and (b.) were not accomplished, what difference would make having UAVs on the air? Would they change anything? Plus, (a.) and (b.) could be simply monitored by conventional methods if such was really necessary. What do you mean by "clearly visible flying through the smoke"!? Are we watching the same video?  The bird just "flies through the smoke" if you want to imagine it that way. Because it's easy to see it isn't. And it's also logic it isn't. Watch the video in high resolution frame by frame if this gif isn't enough. I used the images you linked to make this analysis. Then why did you just ignore those laws of perspective and supposed they are that big instead of knowing they're right there in front of the camera less than three block away? How can you believe in something that goes against the laws of perspective you just mentioned? Didn't they teach you anything?  It doesn't. It's not even near the towers. Why would anyone doubt the authenticity of the images if they feature perfectly normal events apart from the WTC on fire? I haven't see anything bizarre about the bird behavior. Anything at all. This sounds like a quote from Simon Shack. In a 2D world the birds are at the level of the explosion and flying into it. In a 3D world the birds are way lower and closer to the ground. The laws of perspective you already mentioned and the scale tell us that. And again, there's nothing bizarre in a flock of birds disoriented with the sound of an explosion echoing everywhere. They're not flying above it. You can also see that easily...  (Source from the frames used) It isn't even a proper example of birds flying into the fireball. Actually there wasn't a single bird doing such extraordinary thing. Not on the Fairbanks shot, not in the Hlava's shot, not in any shot. There isn't even a reason for them to do so. That's enough... All this is what I've already said. A delusional theory based, as shown here and in the other thread, on a bad interpretation of the footage - Someone trying too hard to find what isn't there. It is illogical, irrational and unsupported. There's zero evidence of such UAVs. There's zero evidence of a bird doing anything bizarre. Just a lot of imagination to say the least. But I think it makes perfect sense. When we're starting to expose the layer people and they're also starting to expose themselves, there's nothing better than this "notbirds" stuff to help on the psyop equation. What better than those debunking September Clues being involved with this nonsense? Very cleaver! Keep looking at the birds... Edited by RasgaSaias, Dec 17 2008, 10:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
| dutchskeptic | Dec 17 2008, 08:34 PM Post #10 |
|
Nice catch, they clearly do not fly at the height of the explosion in WTC 2. |
|
|
|
| RasgaSaias | Dec 17 2008, 10:00 PM Post #11 |
|
What fakery are we talking about!?  Bird B.I.R.D. BIRD! Edited by RasgaSaias, Dec 17 2008, 10:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
| hoi.polloi | Dec 18 2008, 12:52 AM Post #12 |
|
The Naudet footage is all fake. Including the birds. |
|
|
|
| Witness | Dec 18 2008, 01:14 AM Post #13 |
|
Your Fake |
|
|
|
| hoi.polloi | Dec 18 2008, 01:19 AM Post #14 |
|
My fake? No, not mine. The Naudets' - or at least that's who's taking the blame for such a bad motion picture with so very many plot holes. |
|
|
|
| RasgaSaias | Dec 18 2008, 02:07 AM Post #15 |
|
I remember you never told me why. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Alternative Theories · Next Topic » |
6:19 PM Nov 23
