News Page
Deanna's site
Official chat room
Spingola Speaks .Info
Download
February 13, 2014
Spingola Speaks 2014.02.13
News Page
Deanna's site
Official chat room
Spingola Speaks .Info
Download
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
News Page
Deanna's site
Official chat room
Spingola Speaks .Info
Download
5 comments:
I called in and was one of the callers who didn't get on, and here was my question for her.
On the second page of Dr. Wood's preface, she states:
"It may surprise you to learn that there is no actual, verifiable evidence confirming that airplanes crashed at any of the four locations on 9/11/01. However, as Dr. Reynolds shows, there is an abundance of evidence to the contrary."
To me, that implies that the television footage and pictures of the second plane going into the South Tower aren't verifiable evidence, which I actually agree with, but how can we take the photos in her book as being verifiable evidence when they were also shown to us by the same media that showed us the plane videos?
FauxCapitalist said...
Don Damore said:
"the great work Ace Baker has done."
You mean the faking of his own suicide, or calling Fetzer a shill after his post-suicide appearance? The latter is why Fetzer isn't paying more attention to him.
Those interviews between Fetzer and Baker occurred before Baker had posted his video, and when Fetzer was a little naive, and possibly, still is regarding his "hologram" theory. He didn't want to go out on a limb and contradict those "eye witness accounts" of people having witnessed planes crashing into buildings. Fetzer, back in those days didn't always listen, and didn't always allow his guests to develop their ideas. In other words, Fetzer can be frustrating. However, his interview style is much improved.
The planes or no planes theory is very important to understanding 9/11. I like baker because he has addressed it and provided us with a plausible explanation.
The plane theory is about as important as knowing if JFK's head shot shows a bullet entering his head or exiting.
@Don Damore,
Ace Baker posits that fake images of planes were inserted into real backgrounds, but when he was on John Friend's show, he didn't find anything out of the ordinary about the hazy skyline shown during the "live" footage.
They had better cameras than amateurs, yet the NBC footage in particular looks like a broadcast from the surface of Mars. How do explain that with most purported amateur footage is showing a mostly or completely blue sky except for right near the Towers?
Baker said the footage was deliberately made that way to "hide the fingerprints"
It's easier to insert plane images into poor quality video and make it look real, than it would be in good quality video.
Thanks for that, Don, because that's news to me, as he acted on John's show as if it was normal for such weather in the second week of September in New York, as he cited Los Angeles, but LA is not New York.
He had made it clear on that interview that it was video compositing with fake planes onto real scenery, so it seems that he changes his story, as this interview was late last year compared to his writings since 2007.
Post a Comment