Since the core of the 9/11 operation relied on airing fake imagery on TV (to simulate the real-life events of the day), it would be only logical to assume that a solid infrastructure was in place to ensure 'success'. To be sure, the news media has been caught red-handed many times in the past, shamelessly airing outright fake news. This time, however, more sophisticated safeguards were necessary in order to control and impede any inconvenient private footage being captured - most embarassingly leaking out and exposing the hoax. Here, we will look at some technology which conceivably could achieve these goals. Admittedly, addressing this issue requires some level of speculation - yet one may well presume that this operation would have put to good use the most advanced technology available.

Why don’t we have a single authentic video of the crucial 9/11 events? Firstly, there are many indications that a blanket evacuation of Lower Manhattan took place after the first "plane" strike at 8:46AM. Few people were likely left dwelling around snapping pictures. In any circumstances, the chances for anyone capturing a clear image of an unexpected, sky-diving 550mph+ object are extremely slim. These factors alone drastically reduced the probabilites of undesired image recordings in the area. Nevertheless, one must assume that the 9/11 military-backed operation would have required no less than a 110% "safety level". It should also be safe to say that the perpetrators relied on top-end military technology. Thus, we may formulate a plausible hypothesis - based on the known objectives which had to be met.

If total visual control of the wider Manhattan area was a top priority of the 9/11 psyop, it would have been essential to impede any authentic footage to be captured in NY that morning. Electromagnetic weaponry (EMP/HERF or HPM) is routinely used in war zones to jam the enemy’s electronics. Read about it here . Conceivably, this technology was used to prevent any private footage being recorded throughout the limited (102min) time-window in which the defining 9/11 events took place (from first "plane" strike to last tower collapse). To be sure, the research into this field has long been a top military priority: with this in mind, we may reasonably consider that this well-tested technology was employed on 9/11. It is, all in all, a hypothesis grounded in logic and (military) common sense.

Do we have any indications from the day that may back-up this hypothesis? Indeed, we do: it is a well-known fact that thousands of electronic devices malfunctioned - or blacked-out altogether. As many as 4 important electronics-related disruptions were reported in the 9/11 aftermath :

• 1) : all New York cell phones
• 2) : the firefighters' NYFD radio-transmitters
• 3) : the WTC’s internal communication system
• 4) : the Port Authority's transmission repeater on top of WTC5

The official explanations for these four serious and (apparently) unrelated disruptions, all seem appallingly contrived. Now, even though EMP/HERF beams can be calibrated to disrupt a specific Hz range, one may reasonably surmise that some ‘bleed’ may have occurred - thus affecting more than the targeted videocamera circuitries. In any case, an electromagnetic "storm" would keep any private cameras from operating. Only special cameras shielded in protective faraday-cages would function.

It would be interesting to hear from people who may have experienced camera disfunctions in New York on 9/11. To this day, I have ran into 2 such accounts on the internet which I report below. If you wish to add your own, please make it as detailed as possible and have a way to verify your authenticity. Quentin (aka youtube user Qmorsol) (Many thanks to Quentin for sending me a detailed account of this testimony) "My cousin Stephen's PVDV401 Cam failed to turn on but assumed it was the battery; he blames Panasonic for "making unreliable shit". But it was in the charger for more than 4 hours the night before. The incident actually happened closer to the second hit - before 9 am. The camera simply wouldn't turn on. He released and re-seated the battery several times, and he noticed the power indicator flash on and off each time he put the battery in, one time it stayed on a few seconds - it just didn't give any juice to the camera. At this point he says one cop approached him aggressively because he wasn't moving fast enough or whatever (Interesting note : Stephen claims a rather swift evacuation was in effect minutes into the event, people being directed out of there in a jiffy - being pushed up Church St and Broadway). When he arrived at the apartment he casually put the camera away without a second thought testing it only after giving it another recharging session hours later. At first it stalled, powered-on-off, and then it worked fine! (which of course infuriated him). It should be noted that he had been bringing his new camera to work almost every day and never encountered a problem with the power or any of the cams functions." "SassyMami"-youtube user (Unverified comment - no reply to my attempts at obtaining more details of this account) "My camcorder at the time wasn't perfect and I don't know if it was momentarily powering on and off due to some defect. The litte red button on it would get stuck sometimes, or not work." Add your testimony

Relevant Articles on Visual Control

Dawn of the E-Bomb
- http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/devices/the-dawn-of-the-ebomb/0