Problems With September Clues, Part D

     It is now time to go back to the September Clues series of videos.  I have already shown the problems with September Clues Part  A, Part B, and Part C.  We will concentrate on September Clues, part D in this article.

      From about the beginning of the video to about 11 seconds, the author of September Clues assumes that because all 5 major news networks had firsthand eyewitnesses handy on the phone within 5 minutes of the first impact, this “proves” a conspiracy.  In point of fact, it doesn’t prove a thing.  Here are some facts he overlooked: 1: A lot of media outlets have bureaus in New York-  after all, Wall Street is there, 2:  The first impact occurred at 8:46 am, which is when people are usually en route to work.  It would not be unreasonable for the reporters to have been on the way to work when the attack occurred, and it certainly would not be unreasonable for a few of them to have to pass the WTC on the way to work.    Also, I seem to recall that the media was in the area to cover some totally different event when the attacks occurred.  Anyway, some of the reporters clearly had families (or at least wives), so it’s quite possible that they may have called their homes to see if their families were okay after witnessing the crash.  That and obviously they would have called into their respective workplaces to report what happened. It seems to me that a few of the media people on the way into work might be camera people, plus, as I pointed out, they were in the area to cover some other event.  When they saw the first plane hit, of course, they were going to call it in and try to find eyewitnesses- it’s THEIR JOB!  After all, how often to you see a plane slam into a building at around 500 MPH?  Oh, and let’s not forget another factor- the Internet.  Thanks to the Internet, news is capable of travelling around the world in the blink of an eye. The headlines you see in your morning paper are likely to have been posted on the Internet the previous evening.

     Clearly, there also would have been witnesses in the area of the WTC as well- after all, that is when people are usually en route to work.  Also, it’s not surprising to find witnesses in or near the area after a disaster.  People are drawn to disasters like moths to a flame- that’s why you get so many looky-loos if there’s even a fender-bender.

     At 16-18 seconds, they say virtually all of the witnesses were media professionals, yet the very first witness they have, Sean Murtagh, is the CNN vice president of FINANCE!   Anyone else see the problem here?  It seems to me that the vice president of finance would have more to do with shareholders than reporters.

     At 53 seconds, Murtagh says it looked like a two-engine jet, but that does NOT prove anything.  Murtagh’s distance from the towers when the plane hit would have obviously affected his perception of the plane.

      At 1 minute 11 seconds to 1 minute 50 seconds, we see that the September Clues author considers the fact that one of Fox News’ producers, Owen Moogan is “proof of a conspiracy too. Hint:  The producer is NOT the reporter- he’s the SUPERVISOR.      Merriam Webster  has 3 definitions of producer, the second of which is: “a person who supervises or finances a work (as a staged or recorded performance) for exhibition or dissemination to the public.”  Moogan states that he was on the roof of his building, which is about 5 blocks away from WTC (per September Clues, this was about 4 minutes after the first impact) and he can see a huge hole in the side of the tower.  It seems to me that if Moogan only lived 5 blocks away from the WTC, he would have at least HEARD the first impact.  In point of fact, Moogan states that he was lying in bed, heard what sounded like a plane flying low and then this shattering explosion explosion, then he went up to the roof.  When one takes that statement in its entirety, it is not unreasonable that, after hearing those two sounds (a low flying plane followed by a shattering explosion), and going up to the roof and seeing the huge hole in the side of the tower, that he would have put 2 and 2 together and realized that a plane did indeed slam into the tower.

     At 1 minute, 52 seconds, they introduce ABC SENIOR PRODUCER Mark Obenhaus.  Again, look at the definition of producer in the previous paragraph.

     At 2 minutes 8 seconds, to 2 minutes 50 seconds Obenhaus states that he was heading for work and was on his way to the subway. He states that when he was at the corner of Franklin and West Broadway and heard a tremendous roar go over his head as he was approaching the subway, looked up immediately, and it was a plane much lower than he’d ever seen a plane. He stated it was a large plane but he couldn’t identify it as anything other than a commercial jet, which doesn’t prove squat.  Before any “truthers” make the obvious statement that they were able to see that Flight 77 was an American Airlines plane, there’s one little detail:  The Twin Towers were just a TAD TALLER than the Pentagon.  The Pentagon is a 5-story building; the Twin Towers were 110-story buildings.  Logic (something that escapes the 9/11 “Truth” Movement) dictates that a plane trying to hit a 5-story building is going to have to fly just a LITTLE  lower than one trying to hit a 110-story building.  As we see here, the North Tower was hit between the 93rd and 99th floors, and the South Tower was hit between the 77th and 85th floors, which, in both cases, are fairly close to the top of the towers. Oh, and Obenhaus mentions that he was about 15 blocks from the WTC.  The September Clues Author states that no wings fell off, yet again ignoring the difference in construction materials between the WTC and the Pentagon- the WTC was primarily glass and steel, while the Pentagon, which is designed like a bunker, is primarily reinforced concrete. At about 2 minutes and 53 seconds, note the quote in writing inserted by the author of September Clues- it is as follows…” the worst kind of effects in movies.”  However, if you listen, you will get the FULL quote from Obenhause, which was ( emphasis is mine), “ IT REMINDS YOU OF THE WORST KINDS OF EFFECT IN MOVIES THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU’RE REASSURED WATCHING A MOVIE THAT IT’S AN EFFECT BUT THIS IS NOT.”   There’s a slight difference in meaning there. Once again, the full quote exposes “truthers” for the frauds and liars that they are.

     At 3 minutes, 14 seconds, they bring in Dr. Jay Adlersberg (the title should be a clue there) of ABC’s Eyewitness News, who is a MEDICAL reporter.  Yet another clue that makes it obvious “truthers” are lying.

     At 3 minutes, 37 seconds, Dr. Adlersberg says he saw a small plane, and the September Clues author puts that in writing in the video in a rather pathetic attempt to “prove” a conspiracy.  Once again, “truthers” fail to realize that a person’s distance from an object, whether it be a plane or a building, will affect their perception of its size. The closer you are to something, the bigger it looks and vice versa.

     At 3 minutes, 54 seconds, the author of September Clues quotes Dr, Adlersberg as saying, “So I couldn’t tell if it hit the building or not.”  However, here is the FULL quote from Dr. Adlersberg: “ About 20 or 25 stories below the top of the center, it disappeared for a second, and then exploded behind a water tower, so I couldn’t tell if it hit the building or not.”  Now, if the plane was behind the water tower, then logic dictates that the water tower was probably between Dr. Adlersberg and the plane. Generally, speaking, buildings make better doors than they do windows, so unless Dr. Adlersberg is Superman and used x-ray vision, he would NOT have been able to see the plane through the water tower.

(picture from here)

     Once again, the person’s position relative to the WTC is a factor.

     At 4 minutes, 6 seconds, he goes to Mark Birnbach, who is a Fox TVemployee.  As has been pointed out many times, Mark Birnbach was TWO MILES AWAY (reference ). Also, the term employee has a rather broad definition- a Fox TV employee could be a reporter, a gopher, a secretary, etc.  As we see here, Birnbach is a reporter, but you get the idea.  Birnbach says there was definitely a blue, circular logo on the front of the plane.  Here is the exact quote, provided by Internet Detectives:  “It definitely didn’t look like a commercial plane; I didn’t see any windows on the side. Again, it was not a normal flight that I’ve ever seen at an airport. It had a blue logo on the front, and it did not look like it belonged in the area.” There is yet another problem:  If you go back to the beginning of the video, you see the video is concentrating on the FIRST impact.  The problem is, as we see here,  Birnbach is talking about the SECOND impact, which was UNITED FLIGHT 175.  Take a close look at the United Airlines logo sometime-  it would not be surprising that it looked like a blue circle from 2 miles away.   And as for his comment that the plane looked like it did not belong in the area, that’s not surprising, either.  Generally speaking, passenger jets don’t go around deliberately flying into buildings.

     At 4 minutes, 43 seconds, the author of September Clues states that Bin Laden was named a key suspect 41 seconds after strike.  I see one VERY obvious problem here-  they don’t specify WHICH strike.  There were FOUR strikes, one of which was actually an attempted strike as it never reached its target. Also, how do they know how long it took for Bin Laden to be named a key suspect?  As I pointed out in an earlier article, it wouldn’t be the first time the author of September Clues edited the video to suit his purpose. It’s highly unlikely that Bin Laden was considered a key suspect after the first strike, as many people dismissed the first one as an accident, and understandably so.  It is far more likely that Bin Laden was named a key suspect after the THIRD OR FOURTH strike and probably a LOT longer than 41 seconds afterwards. After all, I mentioned in a previous article  that the second strike occurred 17 minutes after the first strike-  it was the second strike that made it obvious it was an attack.  Of course, there were two more strikes, one successful, one unsuccessful that day. It is also NOT surprising that Bin Laden was named a key suspect not long after the second strike-  after all, he was behind the ’93 WTC bombing, the Khobar Towers bombing, and the embassy bombings that occurred during Clinton’s term.  Hmm, now if you have someone who’s threatened to attack you, has done so several times, and you suddenly have a devastating attack on you, just who do you think the first person to come to mind would be?

     From 4 minutes 57 seconds to 5 minutes 32 seconds, they make it look like Eric Shawn, a Fox TV terror expert and war correspondent is lying. The problem is, the author of September Clues makes the mistake of mentioning that the interview with Eric Shawn took place ONE MINUTE after the second strike, so of course, he’s going to sound a little vague- he’s simply doing what any good reporter should and waiting for the facts to come in.  It is totally unreasonable to expect complete information such a short time after a disaster initially occurs.

     At 5 minutes, 50 seconds, they quote Stewart Nurick, who is a WAITER/INTERN  at the CBS Early Show-  again, NOT a reporter.

     At 6 minutes, and 14 seconds, September Clues goes to CNN on-site envoy/tv producer Winston Mitchell.  You will also notice the video seems to have double-vision, possibly the copy of a copy effect.

     At 6 minutes, 33 seconds, they mention that Vince Cellini, a CNN Sports Anchor, was talking a bit on the fast side.  This doesn’t prove squat- people talk at different rates of speed than their normal rate when they’re shocked or excited.  As for the part at about 6 minutes, 36 seconds, where he gets a little tongue-twisted, that’s not all that surprising either.  The only thing it proves is what we already know-  immediately after a disaster, chaos is the order of the day.

     At 7 minutes, 45 seconds to 8 minutes, they quote Fox reporter Dick Oliver, who was interviewing people on the street.  He states that some people said they THOUGHT they saw a missile-  that is NOT the same as saying it was a missile. He states there was a POSSIBILITY that it was a missile attack, which, again, is  NOT the same as saying it was a missile attack.

     Now, at 8 minutes 34 seconds, they begin interviewing Jane Derenowski, who is a PRODUCER at MSNBC.  Also, take a look at the picture-  that is the worst quality picture I have ever seen. Either it was edited ( rather poorly, I might add) and copied far too many times by the author of September Clues or the camera was on acid.

     Finally, on a similar note,  readers may remember “Truther” B, who I mentioned in a previous article.

     “Truther” B provides this YouTube video of Joe Lieberman saying WTC 7 did not occur-  however, he glosses over the part where Lieberman says he does NOT support a new investigation.  Also, Lieberman is mentioning that McCain was one of the ones that insisted on the 9/11 Commission. Here’s one tiny little detail they forget: McCain also wrote the foreword for Popular Mechanics book debunking all the 9/11 conspiracy theories.   At around 59 seconds, the video cuts out, and then comes back on showing Lieberman to the side of the podium.  That sudden cut-out reminds me of what used to happen whenever I would record a TV show on the VCR ( this was before DVD’s) and edit out the commercial.  When I would watch it at a later date, the portion I edited out had a rather choppy effect like that. How do we know that a significant portion of Lieberman’s talk wasn’t edited out here?  Furthermore, how  do we know that Lieberman’s statements are even in chronological order in this video?   Notice that from about one minute 38 seconds to about 1 minute, 47 seconds, they go from Lieberman’s speech to a video of 9/11 and back to Lieberman’s speech, again, with that choppiness that is generally indicative of an edit.  Also, when it comes back to Lieberman, it sounds like they caught him in mid-statement.

     Once again, we see that “truthers” have been indulging in a bit too much of that Christmas cheer.

  (picture from here )

 (picture from here )


Posted December 24, 2010 by Victor Chabala in Real 9/11 Facts

Tagged with , , ,

%d bloggers like this: