Humint Events Online: The Fairbanks Follies, Continued

Thursday, May 17, 2007

The Fairbanks Follies, Continued

The “anonymous physicist” has more on the strangeness of videographer Evan Fairbanks on 9/11:
Now we have Evan Fairbanks telling Peter Jennings how and why he got to video the second, alleged plane hit of the WTC.

"I walked out of Trinity Church after we had a blackout in our studio." (Allegedly from the the first WTC1 “hit,” while videoing the Archbishop of Wales.)

However the Archbishop of Wales, Rowan Williams wrote "...when the South Tower collapsed, there as a power failure in neighbouring buildings..."

So there appears to be a double lie by Fairbanks--
1. That the power failure cited by the Archbishop was in other nearby buildings, not in the Trinity Church as Fairbanks said, and
2. The power failure in other buildings occurred only after the first tower (WTC2) fell—- not as Fairbanks falsely stated, that the power failure occurred earlier just after the other (and first hit) tower WTC1 was hit. Note that the South Tower “collapse”, and the subsequent power failure is obviously after Fairbanks allegedly videoed the plane hitting it in the first place! No one should know this better than him.

So we must ask: Does Fairbanks claim the bogus early power failure just to give him an excuse for halting his videoing of the Archbishop and to go where he was predetermined to be? Archbishop Williams does not even mention being videoed by Fairbanks. But that could be an oversight.

Now to another Fairbanks dubious statement I have uncovered. As Spooked posted on 5/11/07, Fairbanks said: "FBI agents conducted me to a safe place, that I stopped shooting. When I told them what I had on videotaped, they brought me to their command center."

But we learn that now Fairbanks is supposedly saying that it was the Port Authority who got hold of him to make a copy of his video. Note this source says he “fell in” with the P.A.--“Around 10:15, Fairbanks fell in with two Port Authority officers who wanted a copy of his footage as evidence. He agreed to cooperate, walking with them toward Trinity Church, where he planned to make a duplicate tape in the building’s audiovisual facility. At the last moment before heading inside, he decided to turn his camera skyward for a final shot. “I did this very graceful zoom out from the plume of smoke,” he remembers, “and put these two people in the foreground,” careful to provide human scale. Just as he did, he heard and felt a rumble. He looked up to record the north tower coming down.…

Note this excerpt is from Chapter One of a new book by David Friend who has worked for Life Magazine and did a CBS “documentary” on 9/11. Life magazine will forever be infamous for printing reversed prints of the Zapruder film (while the tape itself was forbidden to be seen) that falsely “showed” President Kennedy going forward after the fatal head shot—when he was, in fact, slammed backwards—- making it impossible to have been done by the patsy, Oswald. And the CBS TV 9/11 documentary?… Well nothing ever changes. CBS’ Dan Rather was the lone reporter shown the Zapruder film in November 1963 and said Kennedy went forward in the limo. He rather quickly went from cub reporter to the very top.

Note another amazing coincidence from the above excerpt. Fairbanks also claims that just when “at the last moment before heading inside [now the Trinity Church, not the earlier cited FBI Command Center]” the North Tower just happens to “come down.” So we are to believe that whenever Fairbanks momentarily points his camera at a skyscraper, it will either be hit by a plane or collapse within a second or two!?

But we note that the powers that be apparently now want people to think that the Port Authority, not the FBI, got hold of Fairbanks. Could that be because the NYPA, unlike the FBI, would not have video doctoring capabilities? This appears to be like the federal agent in the WTC2 alleged plane hit videoed by Fairbanks. The agent has been morphing back and forth from being Secret Service to being FBI. But let’s examine the videography that includes him. First it is highly unlikely that a plane hit or explosion would randomly and momentarily occur just as Fairbanks gets the camera low to include the agent and the towers. Apparently those setting this up, or should I say creating it, wanted to have the shock and awe of someone in the video. There could even be reasons why they wanted it to be a federal agent. Such as “get with the program, see what we can do to anybody.”

Now many people have noted that the agent does not react to what should have been very loud jet noise near him, as the alleged jet approaches. Rather he reacts only a short time after the loud explosion itself. But at least he does jump. This brings us to Fairbanks, allegedly holding the camera. A loud explosion should automatically (and autonomically) cause him to also have a strong, startle response. Yet we see from the alleged video’s non-jumpiness that he does not do so for several seconds. When it does finally show change, it is well after an automatic, startle response should have occurred.

All this and my last piece on this site, and much else, indicate the likelihood of Fairbanks and his 9/11 video being as he himself put it “artificial…Hollywood… bad, special effects…” With the whole world suffering subsequent, bad, special effects.


I definitely agree with this assessment. I would also add it is odd that Fairbanks says there he was in a "studio" in the Trinity Church.

Another thing worth noting is in this clip, how unnaturally calm Fairbanks is as he relays his story of an extremely traumatic event-- the evening of 9/11 no less!!! Is Fairbanks hypnotized or on drugs? Really, look at him in the clip-- it is not as if he is an experienced TV personality-- but he is just so calm.

The last thing is again is in this clip, Fairbanks says he sees the plane in his viewfinder and SAYS (out loud?), "gee- it is awfully close for a plane to be here now". This has to be a lie-- assuming he even really took this footage attributed to him, since the plane is only in the video for a fraction of a second. There is simply no way he can think about a plane being next to the tower before the tower exploded.

The bottom line here is that Fairbanks story is obviously a load of crap, and everything Fairbanks says is consistent with him being an agent or a patsy who is peddling a fake video.

10 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

aha!
lies and more lies.
are we to believe that none of the "opposition" politicos are unaware of the 9/11 deception?
bollocks! silence is complicity.
for the perps it is now just a matter of covering up the perpetuation of the cover-up.

wheels within wheels in a spiral array, the pattern so grand and complex...

2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the fairbanks video is not an accurate recording of a true event - even by fairbanks' own words it is "a hollywood production".
in short, it is phony.

anyone who purports to discuss the physics of a REAL 767 penetrating a wtc must start at the very beginning of the first moment of contact between the two.

IN WHAT MANNER does the smooth rounded lightweight plastic nosecone of the thin walled lightweight aluminum fuselage of a real 767 penetrate thru the massive steel box columns and 5' wide steel spandrel plates not to mention the horizontal steel reinforced concrete floor slabs of a wtc?

does it:
A) cut thru like a blade?
B) bludgeon thru like a hammer?

newton's 3rd law:
for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

this means that if a 767 is hitting a wtc with a force equivalent to x then the wtc is also hitting the 767 with the same force equivalent to x.

it boils down to the phrase:
ALUMINUM/PLASTIC 767 -vs- STEEL/CONCRETE WTC.

the front fuselage of a REAL 767 is nothing more than a flying beercan and in reality would squash against the massive steel/concrete of a wtc.
it is indeed as simple as that.
^ha.

5:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yet none of the worlds real scientists agrees with you. Shouldn't that give you pause?

9:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

""Yet none of the worlds real scientists agrees with you.""

worlds real scientists?
name one that says a 767 can penetrate a wtc and i will insist that he explain in what manner that it can.

9:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All real scientists agree that planes cannot fly through buildings and emerge out the other side.

The fairbanks story is completely ridiculous, of course. If you look at the monitor behind the "agent" you'll see that it's displaying the plane animation that's bluescreened into the shot.

This makes perfect sense because the whole 9/11 video animation style is layered with foreground and background cameras. The video on the monitor is the "background layer" for the Evan Fairbanks shot. It's just a vanity piece, like having Hitchcock or Tarantino walk into frame and speak a few lines. Or Stan Lee make a cameo in the Spiderman movies.

For more sloppy tradecraft and ridiculous storytelling please see Tom Scott-Gordon's recent claim not to see any signs of TV Fakery, arguing instead that the towers themselves were "fundamentally illusive" (whatever that means.)

It turns out Tom Scott-Gordon's home address is linked to at least 2 other front companies and an obscure Texas oil company, and that a Jean Gordon at the same address and phone number hosted the former head of the Indian Navy to talk about nuclear terrorism.

Hmmm.

Fred

www.911researchers.com/node/493#comment-3609

10:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the agent being the man seen reacting to the explosion.
the point being that since fairbanks little clip was supposed to have been inadvertently capturing both the explosion and the man's reaction to it, it shouldn't already be on the monitor behind the man.
do i have the point right fred?
---
anyway, no airplane on the face of this earth could possibly have penetrated a wtc no matter how fast it was going.
it is not enough anymore to simply say that it could not - if someone says that it could then it should be insisted that the someone explain exactly IN WHAT MANNER that it could. (see comment #2. blow me swort_of_truth!)
if any of the world's real scientists actually said that it could then they would have no problem with this. would they.
---
t.s. gordon talked a good game originally, re: the "secret meetings" that he was party to, but you have exposed him fred. kudos!
^h.

11:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yet not ONE real scientist in the entire world has stood up and made your claim - again - doesn't that give you pause?

12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

no it does NOT give me pause...
again; i insist that ANY "real scientist in the entire world" who states that a 767 could penetrate a wtc must explain exactly IN WHAT MANNER that it can. (see above comment #2. {my apologies to sword_of_truth for my inappropriate suggestion}).
^ha.

2:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fred@10:36...
texas oil, front companies, and foreign militaries...sounds like CIA/State Department...have we found a PERP, SPOOK, or SHILL in Mr. Tom Scott-Gordon???

10:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder what Tom's deal is. He has a lot of good people vouching for him. Apparently his mom is in the CIA or just very active in civic and social circles (Friend of Bill Clinton?)

I hope Tom will use his photographic skills to help debunk some of the 9/11 fake videos.

I don't really know if he's a good guy or a bad guy, but he's a character with an incredible story.

Fred

5:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger