[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Why will Kamala Harris resign from her occupancy of the Office of Vice President of the USA? Scroll down for records/details

Secret Negotiations! Jill Biden’s Demands for $2B Library, Legal Immunity, and $100M Book Deal to Protect Biden Family Before Joe’s Exit

Mark Levin: They lied to us about Biden

RIGGED: Pfizer cut deal to help Biden steal 2020 election

It's Dr. Kimmy date night!

Glenbrook Dodge will raise a new American flag just before the 4th of July

Horse's continuing struggles with getting online.

‘Trillion dollar trainwreck’: US super stealth fighter is eating the next generation

Who Died: June 2024 Week 4 | News

MORE TROUBLE FOR OLD JOE

"Gestapo" Müller - Hunting Hitler's Secret Police Chief

How Michelle Obama Could Become Democrats' Nominee after Biden's Terrible Debate, with Steve Bannon

Was This Lethal Spitfire Ace Killed by His Own Tactics?

Welsh Police Pay Home Visit To Man For Displaying Reform UK Political Sign

Liz Harrington Drops a BOMBSHELL on How Georgia Was Stolen

Trudeau govt to make all bathrooms in Parliament buildings GENDER NEUTRAL

French official admits censorship is needed for government to control public opinion

Bill Maher Predicts Trump Victory: The Left Is Aggressively Anti-Common Sense

Google is suppressing Blaze Media. Heres how you can help.

Large-scale prisons being secretly erected in all 50 states will they be used to house illegals or force Americans into concentration camps?

Hezbollah is ready to confront Israels military, with Jon Elmer

Balloons Land in Southern Lebanon, Warning Locals the Land Belongs to Jews

German Politician Hit With Hate Crime Investigation For Demanding Migrant Criminals Be Deported

DNC Caught Funneling Millions to Law Firms Involved in Unprecedented Lawfare Campaign Against Trump

Here Are The 20 Biggest Whoppers Biden Told During His Debate With Trump

NYC to ban cellphones in public schools.

New York Times Columnists Turn On Biden After Disastrous Debate Performance

8 Armed Men With Venezuelan Accents Violently Rob Denver Jewelry Store

Uvalde Police School Chief Indicted, Arrested Over Response To 2022 Shooting

Greetings from the Horse


9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: NO PLANER COINTELPRO Operation Becoming Transparent
Source: Prison Planet Forum
URL Source: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=945.50;wap2
Published: Aug 1, 2008
Author: Morgan Rose
Post Date: 2012-10-06 10:54:21 by FormerLurker
Ping List: *9-11*     Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 15854
Comments: 309

COINTELPRO, an acronym for Counter Intelligence Program, was a series of covert operations conducted by the FBI starting in the mid 50’s and continuing until 1976 when it was exposed by the investigations The Church Committee. One of the primary methods of COINTELPRO consisted of forging pseudo-movement groups as a means of conducting Psychological Warfare operations to spread disinformation, disrupt, and divide existing movements. These ‘psy-ops’ tended to foment suspicions among the targeted movements and try to dissuade sympathies from people outside the targeted movement.

Today, COINTELPRO has reared its ugly head again, with infiltrations popping up everywhere from Anti-War activism groups to peaceful gun owners and militias. Provocations have become more and more conspicuous to the public as the Seattle World Trade Organization protests and Ontario Security and Prosperity Partnership protests successfully exposed provocateur operations. Of course, something as dangerous to the establishment *body politic* as 9/11 has not been without its alleged incidents of COINTELPRO action. Allegations of government disinformation have been swirling around certain figures in the movement, such as former Bush Administration official Morgan Reynolds, who has recently proposed that “no planes hit the World Trade Center”, has alleged “TV Fakery”, and submitted that the towers were brought down by “Directed Energy Weapons” a.k.a. “Laser Beams”.

While the government has spent innumerable resources trying to contradict eyewitness statements regarding reported explosions in the towers, Morgan Reynolds and his “mockingbirds” expect the 9/11 truth movement to put their energy into further contradicting even more numerous eyewitness statements . See a problem here?

Typical of the above outlined methods, “No Planers” have become a pseudo-movement, adding lunacy, deception, and division to the legitimate questions emanating from 9/11 families, first responders, government officials, intelligence experts, scientists, engineers, architects, academics, entertainment personalities, and so many others.

Perhaps the more visible purveyors of this pseudo-movement are supported by Paula Gloria’s “Concordia Foundation”. The “Concordia Foundation” claims 501 (c) 3, or “nonprofit” status, However, recent investigations conducted by concerned donors have uncovered that her “foundation” does not retain “nonprofit” status with the IRS. In fact, more rigorous inquires have obtained that no records of the “Concordia Foundation” even exist in its home state of New York. Funding of Paula Gloria’s “foundation” originates solely from an information technology firm, Bit By Bit Computer Consultants. “Donations” to the “Concordia Foundation” are actually billed directly to Bit By Bit. The apparent fraud has appropriately prompted multiple complaints with the FTC and IRS.

Bit By Bit, and its subsidiary 3BDigital, admittedly list among their portfolio Bloomberg LLC, Chase Bank, The National Football League, Citigroup, and The National Security Council. 3BDigital boasts to have partnerships with Nokia, Cisco Systems, IBM, Compaq, Microsoft, Goldman Sachs, and Level (3) Communications. Level (3) Communications, a defense contractor doing business, primarily, with US and UK interests, is the developer of the WESCAM system said to be the delivery mechanism for the supposed “TV Fakery”. Of course this is nonsense, but it is fascinating that these harlequins would incorporate their partnerships into their own theories.

The “Concordia Foundation” numbers among its surrogates Nico Haupt,” a man who exhibits *prima facie *schizophrenic behavior. Allegations of COINTELPRO surrounding Haupt have, in the past, seemed to be justified. WeAreChange recently had two unprovoked incidents with Haupt, where he assaulted the groups members, only to be ignored by onlooking NYPD.

Haupt continuously spreads disinformation, even abject lies, surrounding the 9/11 truth movement. From calling legitimate 9/11 truthers “Plane Huggers”, to claiming “Alex Jones works for ABC” and is “covering up for the media”, Haupt’s tactics and behavior exhibit classic COINTELPRO methods. Haupt even advocates “waterboarding Plane Huggers”.

So a “foundation” with intimate ties to international defense contractors, major Wall Street banks, prominent telecommunications firms, and The National Security council is a driving force behind the “No Plane” pseudo-movement?

The information promulgated by Paula Gloria, Nico Haupt, Morgan Reynolds, and others is clearly suspect in light of these new revelations. Whereas, before, all of the speculation regarding “No Plane” theories were simply diffused by logic and common sense, now we see that something much more sinister is at play. The divide and conquer tactics employed by these clowns has warranted past allegations of COINTELPRO. Today, the charade has been fully exposed: the pyschological warfare, the subliminals, the allegations of ‘cover-up’ within the movement, the show on the Howard Stern Channel. Although these revelations should prompt further investigation, it certainly begs the question: does it get any more transparent? Subscribe to *9-11*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 82.

#2. To: FormerLurker (#0)

Thanks for the dogged defense of the positions that you have taken, FL.

Given the effect of ten years of debate on the internet, which has brought the debate out into the open and has now made discussion of these many questions acceptable in polite social conversation, a reaction on the part of the most dangerous parts of our establishment is to be expected.

We have to be extra vigilant these days when we examine evidence and theories as to causes and methods used in the attacks on that day. There is a lot of disinformation out there. COINTELPRO is not dead.

randge  posted on  2012-10-06   11:15:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: randge (#2) (Edited)

You're welcome randge. And it's quite obvious that COINTELPRO is not dead, it is thriving and kicking in full bloom.

It's to be expected with something as huge as 9/11 that it would be used to divide and conquer the truth movement, while at the same time discrediting those who are the most vocal, such as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, etc.

FormerLurker  posted on  2012-10-06   11:24:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: FormerLurker (#3)

i noticed that the clique of "mainstream" (kosher) truthers bombasted reynolds & fetzer yrs ago. Dr. Fetzer addresses the zionists & even the holhoax, which makes him trustworthy in my book.One may debate matters without necessarily being cointelpro.

Artisan  posted on  2012-10-06   20:09:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Artisan (#4)

Liking a guy because he claims to be "addressing the zionists" or pretends to do so, is like voting for Mitt Romney because he calls himself a conservative and pretends to be one.

FormerLurker  posted on  2012-10-07   15:01:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: FormerLurker (#8)

he doesnt 'claim' to be discussing the forbidden topic of jews, It's just something i noticed after he was excluded from the kosher 'clique'. It has nothing to do with the no-plane stuff, a topic which i find irrelevent.

Artisan  posted on  2012-10-08   4:54:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Artisan (#14)

The "no-plane" nonsense seems pretty clearly to be disinformation planted to disinform, discredit 911 Truth, and mislead.

I don't pretend to have the final data set but I think it is safe to say that the "Official Conspiracy Theory" involving a "Magic Arab" with his "Charmed Cellphone" in a cave in Tora Bora makes about as much sense as "no planes". In other words both are disinfo.

I do think focusing on the likely Mossad connection is a bit of a Red Herring as well. It is not that I do not think that there were Israelis involved, but that they were not in charge of the Op but just one of the players.

Original_Intent  posted on  2012-10-08   14:26:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Original_Intent (#17)

The "no-plane" nonsense seems pretty clearly to be disinformation planted to disinform, discredit 911 Truth, and mislead.

And why do you say that?

Have you looked into it as deep as you could have?

I know I did not become a no planer over night.

But their remain problems... big glaring huge ,"drive a mack truck through the hole in the plot" problems...

Problems I can not turn a blind eye away from.

Inconsistencies I refuse to ignore.

One plane can not be caught on camera flying on different flight paths.

.......

I am not attempting to mislead anyone. I may not have the fine debate skills of GreyLmist but at least I don't resort to using disinformation tactics strait from the disinformation hand book.... it is very hard to deal with that kind of shit Original-Intent... god knows FormerLurker is just getting his jollies off on it all... thats part of the problem with utilising the tactics of disinformation.... Amateur enthusiasts forget the tactics are a weapon and then that becomes their default style of internet posting.... In my view he discredited himself..... especially when he crossed that line of using innocent bystanders to get at me. One should never use another friends against them... only scum do that. ......

This topic has exhausted me.

I don't get paid for this shit... I damn sure earned nothing for my tens of thousands of hours of investigation. ..... I am no shill. I am not discrediting anything.... I may not know the whole truth of all.. in fact if I did I would probably need to stand trial.. as for the planes though...

NO plane at the pentagon.

No plane at shanksville.

No planes.

titorite  posted on  2012-10-08   16:41:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: titorite (#20)

One plane can not be caught on camera flying on different flight paths.

Isn't it amazing what can be done with Photoshop these days?

The "no-planes" does not pass the smell test. There is too much independent footage, too many witnesses, and it would simply be technologically more advanced and complicated than I credit the gooburmunt with.

No, the planes did not bring down the buildings, but the combination of internal demolition charges (nano-thermites and possibly a micro-nuke or two) along with some type of microwave or particle beam better accounts for the observed phenomena - particularly in terms of the microfine concrete dust.

No, the "no planes" is planted disinformation - of that I am pretty well convinced just in terms of logic and known, or even extrapolated, available technology.

Original_Intent  posted on  2012-10-10   18:41:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Original_Intent (#37) (Edited)

Isn't it amazing what can be done with Photoshop these days?

The "no-planes" does not pass the smell test. There is too much independent footage, too many witnesses, and it would simply be technologically more advanced and complicated than I credit the gooburmunt with.

No, the planes did not bring down the buildings, but the combination of internal demolition charges (nano-thermites and possibly a micro-nuke or two) along with some type of microwave or particle beam better accounts for the observed phenomena - particularly in terms of the microfine concrete dust.

No, the "no planes" is planted disinformation - of that I am pretty well convinced just in terms of logic and known, or even extrapolated, available technology.

NO.... what was amazing is what graphic technologies were available back on September tenth 2001... the day before.

....Man....

You should not just say "Disinfo" and dismiss me outta hand.

THis is not dis-info.... this is an unhappy realization. Years of observation and ...unwanted conclusion... yet it is what it is.

LIke the microwave thing you refer too... are you really gonna acknowledge that fucked up spire and disavow the possiblity of CGI effects and planted charicter acotrs? ... The producers of the news media play a big role in 911... from fox to NBC and on and on.. many of the on the ground reporter, interviewers, and interviees were " Major News Media Producers" ....... BIG FREAKING COINCIEDENCE THAT!!!!

Ever seen wag the dog?

It is a propaganda war man... To fight it they need as much diversion as possible. With us truth seekers the wilder the truth the better,,,,

It was controlled demolition...WTC 7 was totally conventional..... wtc 1 and 2 and the surrounding buildings were not conventional... those were a combination of DEW weapons and conventionals... I think the conventionals were used to make the plane holes and destroy the tops.........

From all that I read and know of WTC 1 and 2... they were built like all modern sky scrapers with a destroy plan ( a forethought plan of building removal for when it became outdated) .. it was so huge and new (I love the tube within a tube concept) built in three sections ... to eventually be destroyed in three sections starting from the top down....

And if you follow the squibs and blow outs that is pretty much what it looks like. Top section first, then mid section, then bottom and spire ......freaky,,,

As you learn about areodynamics, and wake vortex and videographic alteration ......man.... things become apparent.

in 93 the plan failed because an untrusted asset was used.

in 2001 their were no untrusted assets , no way for anyone uncommited to fuck ip the evil plan twice.

The pentagon plane couldn't bank and survive those alleged angles of desent... the WTC plans can not have multple flight paths leading into the impact points,... those cell phone calls are BS, WTF is up with the atomization of it all... AHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

NO!!!!

Discount nothing until you can prove it wrong....

Their was no WIFI connections for those remote connections. Not Atop WTC1 september elvenenth two thousand and one. ..... Remote planes.... I wanted to believe that at one point... I went about to prove it as I looked for the evidence... Truth lead me to the sad strange truth instead.

THE PATH OF "THE LEAST AMOUNT OF EFFORT USED TO OVERCOME THE MOST RESISTANCE" IS, WHAT WAS ENACTED!

Deadly Shadow puppet games used to distract a people from ever getting to the truth.

titorite  posted on  2012-10-11   9:12:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: titorite (#59)

NO.... what was amazing is what graphic technologies were available back on September tenth 2001... the day before.

However, NO ONE has produced, AT ANY TIME, evidence for the existence of holographic technology of the requisite level, nor any evidence that equipment capable of producing such an illusion was in place on September 11th 2001.

It was controlled demolition...WTC 7 was totally conventional..... wtc 1 and 2 and the surrounding buildings were not conventional... those were a combination of DEW weapons and conventionals... I think the conventionals were used to make the plane holes and destroy the tops.........

Here we are almost on the same page. I do believe multiple technologies were used both to initiate and control the building's collapses. It is the only hypothesis which accounts for ALL of the observed phenomena. As I pointed out above the "No Planes" hypothesis is at very best a distraction. Having spent a lot of time studying disinformation and how it is planted and used the "No Planes" hypothesis carries a lot of the hallmarks of disinformation used to discredit and divert into profitless lines of inquiry and on down the "Rabbit Hole".

As for the fallacious argument that I must "prove it wrong" to discredit the "hypothesis" that is in and of itself a logical fallacy. From the point of view of sound reasoning and logic the burden is simply to show that there is no evidence of the technology of the requisite scale to produce the observed phenomena. Can you cite even one example of holographic technology which can be verified and crosschecked which would support that technology being available on September 11th 2001?

Original_Intent  posted on  2012-10-11   18:43:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: Original_Intent (#64)

However, NO ONE has produced, AT ANY TIME, evidence for the existence of holographic technology of the requisite level, nor any evidence that equipment capable of producing such an illusion was in place on September 11th 2001.

The ability to take over networks already existed. Live time insertion of pre-recorded stuff would of been no problem...

What is a problem is What wreckage (what little of it there was) was found and where. What is a problem is PBS showing off the wrong planes as the ones alleged to hit the towers.

I don't believe in holographic planes. If the holographic technology were their it would of been re-used by now. ... And I still don't think the Blue spiral lights over norway counted.... IDK what the fuck that was but it wasn't hologram. NO.......no........ When I think about the easiest most plausible best way to accomplish this monstrous act certain actions line up ....

By not using planes but rather only showing CGI planes... or plane... only one.

On that day we saw alleged flight 175 over and over and over ... not any other plane... just that one... over and over... in the hypnotherapy industry they would call that a repetitive program. Later all sorts of other images would appear .... I prefer the zero hour images ....... Too few of those. Anyways it is from that zero hour film that we can see everything.

Every flaw, Every inconsistancy... every failure on there part.. of which their are legion... but they did not have to make it work forever.... they only needed to fool everyone for a short amount of time.... God Help us.

Their is another terrible fact about four real planes. and that is the human factor. The unpredictable human factor. Real Hijakers might of really been over powered.

Real drones would of really exploded all over the place and into the hands of the public.

Remember the columbia? Some private individuals still own genuine wreckage. The public. We are wild and unpredictable.

The best way to over come that risk is to fake it. Plant the charges , fake the event with CGI and if anyone says they did not see any planes ignore them and riddicule them and give attention to every exagerator on the planet ewarth that will swear to god and zues and pan that they saw the planes just like their brother and cousin and best friends....... never mind the alleged speeds of the planes, the angles,... and never ask these fuckers what they were doing, when and where... cause when someone claims to of seen a plane asking them the finer details of the event always pisses them off.........exagerators. go figure. Very useful to promote propaganda though,.

IF the TV shows it over and over and over that does not make it true.

I mean it's like the jews who swear to god xyclone B is at awshuwitz in the walls and showers and such... but science can't prove it... someone or something is lying... it aint science.

The details of the devil are important.

titorite  posted on  2012-10-12   0:07:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: titorite, *9-11* (#67) (Edited)

The ability to take over networks already existed. Live time insertion of pre-recorded stuff would of been no problem...

killtown Why They Didn't Use Planes To Hit The WTC -- article and comment excerpts

May 31, 2007 (Updated: 09/23/08)

"Of the five 'live' shots of the alleged impacts there is not one reporter with any of those camera crews. It's like the anchors were the reporters. Did the networks just decide to share cameras? Why is there NOT ONE local newscast with a video of their own? And why do we know the identities of ALL of the people not associated with the networks that submitted videos of the alleged impacts and NOT know the identities of ANY of the news crews that captured the most spectacular shots in the history of live news?"

Monday, 24 January 2000 independent.co.uk

Viewers tuning into American broadcaster CBS's recent news coverage of the millennium celebrations in New York witnessed a televisual sleight of hand which enabled CBS to alter the reality of what they saw. Using "virtual imaging" technology, the broadcaster seamlessly adjusted live video images to include an apparently real promotion for itself in Times Square. The move has sparked debate about the ethics of using advances in broadcast technology to alter reality without telling viewers that what they are seeing isn't really there.

"CBS owned a PVI LVIS computer, purchased for the EARLY SHOW in 2000. CBS was the command center for the broadcast. CBS generated the PVI animation.

Do some research before all the links to CBS are pulled down owning a PVI LVIS COMPUTER SYSTEM IN 2000."

"CBS bought PVI LVIS computer in 1999:

i took a class at PVI (Princeton Video Image, ownd by Cablevision), Lawrenceville, NJ, in August 2007. On the 4th day we learned to animate graphics on virtual path created on a PVI 3D wireframe. It was then that I saw how PVI was used to animate the plane graphic on 911. PVI graphics are mapped to specific colors on which they appear on the TV monitor.Graphics is assigned (ie, green of football field, SKY blue of the 911 morning sky for the plane graphic to be annimated on TWIN TOWERS.camera shot). I can’t put this information in your head. You have to understand how PVI graphics animation appear only on the color chosen for the graphic to appear. (ie green on football field, sky blue on 911 am)..

CBS bought a PVI LVIS computer in 1999 for the Early Show (during which time 911 01 plane graphic was animated).Early Show is broadcast from GM building on 59 St. and 5th avenue, NYC."

[My note: the GM building is the location that's been identified as where the Empire State Building footage-angle was generated; which was aired by CBS on 9/11 and was later altered by PBS for usage in the 2003 documentaries referenced in the Smoke and Mirrors topics.]

"CBS network usedt PVI L-VIS computer for the EARLY SHOW in 2000. The PVI virtual insertion was. used on New Year’s Eve 1999 broadcast to insert a CBS logo of NBC logo, CBS PVI made news.

CBS Is Divided Over the Use Of False Images In Broadcasts By BILL CARTER Published: January 13, 2000

[My note: NYT, CNN, and digitalbroadcasting links available at the article site]

A mainstream network president had even warned in 2000 about fake plane crashes using CGI:

[Andrew Heyward, the president of CBS News,] said that he understood the argument against the use of the technology — which is widely employed in sports and some entertainment shows — on news programs. The danger is “that it looks too real and therefore it’s wrong or potentially wrong,” he said. “I certainly agree it’s potentially subject to abuse.”

He noted that advances in computer-generated techniques had made things like missiles hitting Baghdad and airplanes crashing look so real that it was incumbent on networks to underscore that these were not real images.

"Correction CBS bought the PVI L-VIS computer for the EARLY SHOW in 1999. The Early Show was moved from 524 W. 57th St. Broadcast Center to GM Building (also where Apple is) on 59th and 5th Ave. from which control room, the PVI plane graphic was generated. i took a class at PVI, Lawrenceville, NJ to learn to operate the PVI LVIS computer in 2007. On the 4th day, we learned to animate a graphic on a virtual path. That is when I learned that a PVI L-VIS computer generated the plane graphic. Another poster sent me the links to CBS logo story on the millenium broadcast and Andrew Heyward warned of corruption that might follow this technology being aired on TV."

My note: So, I plan to move a link for this post to the Smoke and Mirrors topic for the records there because I think we have now established, with the above info, that the Empire State Building angle discussed in that contentious controversy (and which was traced to coordinates of the GM builiding) was generated from the very same GM building where a PVI L-VIS computer was located; and that is also the same building where the CBS Early Show with Bryant Gumble is broadcast, which aired the alleged news footage of that questionable Empire State Building angle (where the approach of the plane image seemingly appears as if out of nowhere from behind that building or as if out of the blue from an inward point in the sky). Circumstantial evidence at this point, yes, but quite the notable coincidences -- the main one being the PVI L- VIS computer. More on the PVI L-VIS computer here: 911 was a PVI VIRTUAL PLANE GRAPHIC ANIMATION:

The system CBS used was developed by a United States company called Princeton Video Images (PVI). Other players in this field include Symah Vision - part of French defence to media group Lagadere; Israel-based Orad Hi Tech Systems, and SciDex, another Israeli firm with offices in Europe and the US. Each system, while similar, has its differences. None of the companies will publicly discuss how their's works. But the principle is common: each alters the live video image in the split second before it is broadcast.

"There is great potential to use virtual imaging in other ways but it remains a tool whose biggest advantage is for live broadcasting," Madge says. "There are obvious advantages in virtual studios as you don't need a physical set, just a blue screen against which the presenter is shot and a three-D computer model. You can change it over very quickly - there's no need to shift scenery.

CBS's problems arise from the fact that its use of the PVI system went one step further than "enhancing" the look of its presentation: it tampered with the reality of an actual event it was depicting in a news show, raising the spectre of TV news reporters reporting "live" from around the world when they're actually far closer to home. The broadcaster - which has also used virtual imaging to modify the New York cityscape - defended itself by insisting: 'CBS News' internal standards prohibit digital manipulation or other faking of news footage."

However, a CBS spokeswoman admitted that virtual insertion technology is yet to be covered by the broadcaster's guidelines. But Dan Rather, for one, thinks it should be. "At the very least we should have pointed out to viewers we were doing it,'' he told the New York Times. "I did not grasp the possible ethical implications of this and that was wrong on my part.''

CBS is not the only broadcaster to use this technology in news broadcasts. Rival ABC recently included a report on Congress by a reporter wearing an overcoat in front of what to viewers seemed to be the US Capitol. The entire report was taped in a studio.

Edited for a grammar insert and excerpt section at the last link.

GreyLmist  posted on  2012-10-12   3:02:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#82. To: GreyLmist (#78)

it tampered with the reality of an actual event it was depicting in a news show

The footage wasn't tampered with till years later, and the source of the tampering hasn't yet been determined, but it first showed up on PBS documentaries of the event.

Perhaps it was done to get folks like you all riled up over it, feeding into this "no planes" absurdity in order to through gasoline into the fire, and muddy the waters in terms of 9/11 research.

A reasonable person would not overlook that rather strong possibility.

FormerLurker  posted on  2012-10-12   10:08:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 82.

#94. To: FormerLurker (#82) (Edited)

it tampered with the reality of an actual event it was depicting in a news show

The footage wasn't tampered with till years later, and the source of the tampering hasn't yet been determined, but it first showed up on PBS documentaries of the event.

Perhaps it was done to get folks like you all riled up over it, feeding into this "no planes" absurdity in order to through gasoline into the fire, and muddy the waters in terms of 9/11 research.

A reasonable person would not overlook that rather strong possibility.

You've confused the quote you cited above with the Smoke and Mirrors topic on 9/11 CBS footage altered by PBS for 2003 documentaries. What you cited above is from this link and info below at Post #78 on the PVI L-VIS computer topic there; which I think I'll subtitle here as: PVI L-VIS arrives at the GM Building. I'll highlight the quote you cited so that you can find it easier and also some related Israeli info, which you claim to have a particular interest in -- unless it's me and not you or your faction who has posted the Israeli info, apparently, but here it is again anyway:

911 was a PVI VIRTUAL PLANE GRAPHIC ANIMATION

The system CBS used was developed by a United States company called Princeton Video Images (PVI). Other players in this field include Symah Vision - part of French defence to media group Lagadere; Israel-based Orad Hi Tech Systems, and SciDex, another Israeli firm with offices in Europe and the US. Each system, while similar, has its differences. None of the companies will publicly discuss how their's works. But the principle is common: each alters the live video image in the split second before it is broadcast. "There is great potential to use virtual imaging in other ways but it remains a tool whose biggest advantage is for live broadcasting," Madge says. "There are obvious advantages in virtual studios as you don't need a physical set, just a blue screen against which the presenter is shot and a three-D computer model. You can change it over very quickly - there's no need to shift scenery.

"There is great potential to use virtual imaging in other ways but it remains a tool whose biggest advantage is for live broadcasting," Madge says. "There are obvious advantages in virtual studios as you don't need a physical set, just a blue screen against which the presenter is shot and a three-D computer model. You can change it over very quickly - there's no need to shift scenery.

CBS's problems arise from the fact that its use of the PVI system went one step further than "enhancing" the look of its presentation: it tampered with the reality of an actual event it was depicting in a news show, raising the spectre of TV news reporters reporting "live" from around the world when they're actually far closer to home. The broadcaster - which has also used virtual imaging to modify the New York cityscape - defended itself by insisting: 'CBS News' internal standards prohibit digital manipulation or other faking of news footage."

However, a CBS spokeswoman admitted that virtual insertion technology is yet to be covered by the broadcaster's guidelines. But Dan Rather, for one, thinks it should be. "At the very least we should have pointed out to viewers we were doing it,'' he told the New York Times. "I did not grasp the possible ethical implications of this and that was wrong on my part.''

CBS is not the only broadcaster to use this technology in news broadcasts. Rival ABC recently included a report on Congress by a reporter wearing an overcoat in front of what to viewers seemed to be the US Capitol. The entire report was taped in a studio.

Edited for rewording of 1st paragraph, excerpt insert and to add that the CBS tampering noted was reported in 2000. Much more such interesting info on the PVI L-VIS subject at that link.

GreyLmist  posted on  2012-10-12 12:23:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 82.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]