Humint Events Online: More Cool Videos from Coffinman

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

More Cool Videos from Coffinman

posted by spooked at 10:35 AM

12 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow. That's the coolest thing I've ever seen. I wish the documentary went a little further into how to set it up. I think that steel into dust and the bent pipe looked awfully familiar.

Way to go, Coffinman! Thanks, Spooked, for posting that. Very cool

Fred.

1:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A couple of more thoughts: since we're going with Beam Weapons as a working hypothesis, how about the planes were real (albeit not hijacked) and used this effect to cut out the "outlines" in the buildings and then turn to dust. Rember the Psyops "Eyewitness" who says it looks like the plane parked itself in a giant hangar inside the building? Maybe he's telling the truth. I personally agree with all the TV fakery stuff, but I know some people who actually saw the 2nd plane, so I've always felt there was at least something plane-like flying toward the towers.

The Air Force's directed energy directorate has lots of airborne lasers on boeing aircraft up on their site.

Also, if we have steel turning to dust, that explains why they didn't find engines or black boxes. Perhaps the perpetrators planted some backup engines on the street since they knew the real engines would get zapped.

I think the beam weapon explains how the plane disappeared, and it also explains how the cartoon cutout could have happened. The WTC scar looks SLICED to me, not BASHED.

I'm open to no plane at all, but to me that seems like it would be harder to sell than just a military plane (like Bob and Bri say) that then got edited for CNN viewers. (Take the real image out, replace with a CGI Boeing.) It's entirely possible that a lot of the amateur footage shows a blurry flying pig and that people didn't bother submitting their footage. I personally know someone who claims to have captured the 2nd hit on video but hasn't watched his tape because he saw it on TV a million times. (Yes, I'm trying to cajole this guy to get his camcorder out and post the tape, but he has zero interest in it.) I'd love to see what it shows, but he sides with the MSM.

2:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

he has zero interest in viewing his own video recording of this event and for 5 years now has still not viewed it? HOW LIKELY IS THAT?

3:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

J-- Look, I'm telling you the truth. The person in question wants the whole trauma of 9/11 to go away and isn't open to any "conspiracy theories" or politics. I say that "a lot of the TV footage was faked" and I just get a shrug like "you're crazy". The tape is sitting in storage.

I would bet money that there are more amateur tapes and photos that never saw the light of day because people think the stuff on TV looked much better. Not everybody has the psychological makeup to get involved with this stuff.




I've tried every argument I can think of, saying it's like having a video of the kennedy assassination.

4:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

anon, i didn't mean to yell - i must've hit the caps lock key accidently at the precise moment that made it seem as if i did it on purpose.
anyway i don't think that you are making that up, i thought that your friend probably watched his own footage and told you that he didn't.
but upon further reflection i realize that my physics professor brother and my aerospace designer friend both seem to have mental blocks regarding 9/11 and neither of these individuals will discuss 9/11 at all, so perhaps your friend's behavior as regarding his video tape is not entirely unheard of.

11:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unconventional weapons in Iraq part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62k6wr_6gVQ

12:49 AM  
Blogger spooked said...

Right, I think it likely a beam weapon was used for the building scars and I am still open on the existence of a plane. The problem is why is the footage so fishy and how did the plane disappear and make those holes? I'd love to see your friend's footage, assuming it exists. Do you know where he shot it from? If we knew where they where were when they shot it, we could have some idea how good it was. You might tell your friend that there is not much footage with any detail on the plane so his/her footage might solve some mysteries...

6:50 AM  
Blogger spooked said...

btw, anon--

perhaps your friend might be tempted by an offer of money? I'm sure there are a bunch of people such as me, who would shell out some serious money for new 2nd hit footage of the plane. It has to have the plane though. You sure he just didn't get the explosion? Seriouly, I would pay 100-200 bucks for new and bona fide 2nd hit footage-- assuming it had the plane! I would need some sort of guarantee beforehand though!

12:59 PM  
Blogger spooked said...

Perhaps a screenshot of the plane in the video would be a good teaser...

1:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll ask again and offer a couple hundred dollars. I'd like to see it myself. I don't know any of the details about where it was shot or whether or not it's in focus, but I could find all that out. The problem is getting them to go get the tape and hand it over. The last time I asked I got a bunch "it was shot on my old camcorder which uses 8mm and that ones broken so I'm not sure which tape it is on..." I believe that they really do have a tape, the problem is getting over the mental inertia and a desire not to get involved.

12:34 AM  
Blogger spooked said...

Thanks, anon! I'm serious about the money. At this point I'd easily pony up a couple hundred for an honest new 2nd hit video-- IF IT SHOWED THE PLANE. If it was just the explosion, I'm not very interested, though it still might be worthwhile to see.

6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Junk science is just that. But this goes farther into pathological science.

7:18 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger