Complete Fetzer/onebornfree radio interview 09/05/12[MP3 file]
Interview Section 4.
Subjects Covered:
1]The Richard Hall Video Analysis and My Questions For Dr. Fetzer, Continued
2] Fake Network Fl. 175 Footage with contradictory flight paths.
3]Fake WTC1, 2 and 7 Collapse Footage + New[2010] Fake N.I.S.T. Collapse Footage.
4] Fake "live" Amateur Footage [Herzekhani video] :
Below are screen shots [2] and [3] of Hall video data used to expound hologram plane theory [ Clip 20 in the Richard Hall hologram theory video, starting at around the 18:50 mark, mistakenly referred to by myself in my interview as clip 21] which uses the original CBS "live" 9/11 aired 16 sec. "divebomber" sequence:
The next screen shot from the Hall video does at least graphically demonstrate the extreme downward path of Fl. 175 according to the original CBS "16 sec. "divebomber" sequence:
Below is screen shot [4] of Hall hologram plane theory video [as I mentioned to Dr Fetzer, Mr Hall has misrepresented the CBS Fl.175 flight path by drawing a straight line to show Fl. 175's last moments whereas the original CBS footage shows the plane image as viewed "live" considerably to the left and below that line, so that the plane image must make a massive swerve back to the viewers right in order to strike the building [ In the screen shot still, below, the plane image can be seen directly below Hall's red line that is at a 45 degree angle from the left side of the frame to where it touches the WTC2 image] :
[Click on image to enlarge]
Q: If Holograms, What About The Contradictory Flight Paths For Fl.175 in Network Footage?
Q:If a Hologram Was Used, Why Not Two Plane Images In at Least Some Aired Footage? :
My questions for Dr. Fetzer:
2] [ This question was not asked of Dr. Fetzer during my interview]:
if the hologram theory is correct, would we not expect to see TWO plane images [1400ft. apart] in at least one of the wide-view MSM video sequences [e.g the CBS, NBC, and FOX 5 wide shot]? Or is there something I am misunderstanding about Mr Fetzer/Mr. Hall's theory perhaps? [update/correction 11/11/12: on a subsequent listening I learn that Mr Hall believes that the plane projecting the holographic plane image was invisible via S.T.E.A.L.T.H. technology or similar. ]
[Just] One example of the contradictory flight paths of Fl 175 as depicted in the various original network "live" imagery [CBS, NBC,ABC, FOX,] :
Here below we can see [again thanks to Simon Shack!], how even within one network [NBC] , the Flight path of Fl.175 is contradicted in two separate broadcasts, one morning and one evening, one with background scenery; the second one [evening broadcast] mysteriously missing background scenery entirely, plus with an entirely different, shallower approach angle [while the first is closer to the angle seen in the 16 sec. CBS "divebomber" sequence shown above :
[Click on image above for enlarged view].
[from :http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=961&p=2372768 ]
What's more, none of the original MSM broadcast approach sequences for Fl.175 [e.g. CBS NBC, ABC, FOX, etc.] show matching flight paths, the most glaring differences are between original CBS "divebomber" live sequence and all the rest, but even with the CBS footage excluded, the others still do not match each other, nor do they match all of the subsequently released alleged "amateur" footage either, which even if taken as a group by themselves [i.e. all "amateur" only], fail to match each other! [ The question being: if holograms were used and were caught live on camera by the networks and amateurs, why are there such obvious, glaring discrepancies in the flight paths of Fl.175 in the various original "live" video records?].
Fake "Live" Network Collapse Footage
I told Dr Fetzer that I currently believe that the "live" MSM network collapse sequences for WTC1 and 2 [and 7] , just like all of the original, allegedly "live" MSM aired network Fl.175 sequences [and like all, post-event released amateur equivalents], are also all fake[i.e pre -manufactured on computers, then dishonestly broadcast as being "live"], as also revealed by Simon Shack and the various talented September Clues researchers.
Recently the super observant folks at September Clues uncovered yet more evidence in support of this proposition:
Imagery discrepancies in NIST footage released 2010 [ debris falls towards camera without becoming larger on screen; debris falls at a speed far above terminal velocity [apparently under 4 sec.s , more than double the real-world possible speed- see the gif below extracted from the video ] :
My Final Point to Dr Fetzer : The Total Fakery of the Herzekhani video sequence that he takes as being genuine and has used as part of the evidence to support his holographic plane theory :
Below is a "slo-mo" gif file of the famous Herzekhani footage as shown on CNN later on 9/11 [i.e. never "live"]:
Below is an analysis [by "teardrop"] of the last few frames of the same video. Notice that the tail of the plane remains exactly centered in the frame [red line] and that in reality, it is the building that moves towards the plane , and not the plane towards the building as it should be:
Original onebornfree 2009 mythbusters blog entry featuring these gifs here :
N.B. There are many other internal problems with the Herzekhani sequence- I only had enough time in my interview to briefly address the one issue. Hopefully if I am invited back I will have a chance to address other problems with it as revealed by various researchers over the years, as well as to possibly address similar problems with the Evan Fairbanks "live" video sequence.
Don't forget, that outside of Newton's 3rd. Law of Motion [assumption number 1 for Dr Fetzer] the Herzekhani and Fairbanks make up his second and third assumptions, and that those three assumptions together are the primary reasons for his conclusion to date that holograms of a plane image were employed on 9/11.
Our working assumptions always pre-date our conclusions. So if Dr. Fetzer's assumptions regarding the authenticity of both the Herzekhani and Fairbanks video are proven incorrect, then the entire Dr. Fetzer /Richard Hall hologram theory would appear to be, ahem, "highly questionable" to say the least :-) .
Regards, onebornfree.
