Friday, November 17, 2006

9/11 TV-Fakery Whistleblower: Pinocchio Exposes Nose-Out Fairy Tale – Part II: The Cover-Up

Part I Highlights

Before we move on to the cover-up, let’s quickly go over a couple of the findings in Part I that are critical factors to take into account when analyzing any one of the many “2nd hit videos,” such as those found at Killtown’s page.

When analyzing any “live” video that was aired on 9/11/01, you must take into consideration that the inserted CGI moves relative to the frame boundaries rather than the objects captured within the frame. This fact alone proves that the object is neither real nor a hologram, since the motion of both of these “entities” would be relative to the objects captured within the frame.

In the Friedlgate footage, this object moves and behaves exactly as a live CGI insertion would, when we consider that the frame boundaries have shifted relative to the towers. This “behavior” includes characteristics such as “velocity” and “descent rate” in addition to the observed “nose-out” phenomenon.

We may also be able to observe this same correlation in later “photoshopped” videos as well (depending on the video editor’s attention-to-detail regarding his/her perceived stability of the footage). Rather than go into detail here about how this correlation can be performed, I will include a sample methodology in the Reference section for any interested video analysts.

One final note that cannot be overemphasized was made in Part I. The fact that there is no hole in the exit face that would accommodate an object of this size proves that the object cannot be real.

According to someone calling himself heiho1, who commented after reading Part I of this article, this is an incorrect statement. His basis for declaring that? That he and the crew had already reached the conclusion "...that it was most likely a pyrophoric material like uranium or similarly active heavy metals,..." which “…could easily, upon exposure to oxygen in the air, burn through steel and concrete.”

Of course, for that to be true, there would have to be missing sections of steel and/or concrete – which there are most certainly neither in any photo or video.

For the record, I also just noticed (between writing Part I and Part II) and therefore must give due credit to Killtown for pointing this out at 911blogger well over TWO MONTHS AGO (09/06/06).

Expounding on what Killtown concluded: Due to there being no hole in WTC2 to account for any protrusion that size, the object we clearly observe in all these videos (“live” or otherwise) is clearly not a solid material of any kind.

Unless someone is desperate enough to start claiming it was a liquid or a gas that flowed around the still-intact steel beams and then formed itself into the approximate size and shape of a plane, we can pretty much rule out anything real altogether.

Introduction – Example of Learning from Mistakes

Upon further analysis, I actually centered my circle in the wrong place when I attempted to point out where the WTC2 “exit-hole” would have been had this “nose-out” actually been anything real. In the revised graphic below, the corrected circle is shown in green (original is in red):

This correction is based on the observable “nose-out” elevation in many videos (many later examples), along with the picture below, which can be found on page 10 of this NIST document.

Analysis - Necessity is The Mother of All Invention

In realizing my original error, the discovery of this new graphic allowed me to visualize the intent of the desired pattern much more clearly.

During my frame-by-frame analysis of all footage filmed from the north, I noticed that without exception, there are two separate “exit-face” explosions that merge to form one huge fireball. Until I saw this picture (and many others in NIST’s various reports), it never dawned on me that based on their spacing and their independent elevations, these explosions were obviously supposed to represent the separate fuel tanks spewing flaming kerosene forward due to its (would-be) momentum.

Here is where the perps showed their ability to improvise:

Because of the most obvious FOX-aired “nose-out” phenomenon, they were forced to copy this blunder into all the other “amateur” footage which would surely have shown it even more clearly than the “Chopper 5” footage did.

To accomplish this, they had to abandon the independent fuel tank explosion explanation for the separate fireballs and use what would have represented the starboard-side explosion as cover for the “nose-out.” Of course, this subsequently placed the port-side explosion out of position. This was only a minor anomaly compared to having to explain how an entire third of the still-intact plane emerged from the backside of WTC2 in that FOX-aired blooper.

Unfortunately for them, they had already dug their own graves. Although this solution bought them some time (about 5 years so far), they had to know that the fact that there was no hole in “exit-face” from which the “nosecone” could have “emerged” was going to be their ultimate undoing. There was no way for them to run up there and create the unplanned hole they now needed to exist, but even if there was, it wasn’t like they could “unbroadcast” the already-aired footage of the fully-intact steel beams.

At this point, they were forced to choose between hoping that nobody figured out this obvious “smoking gun” and providing no amateur footage from the north side at all. If not one person would have captured the “nose-out” on film, that would have rivaled the sheer lunacy of finding Satam Al Suqami’s unscathed passport in the street.

This really wasn’t too hard of a decision for them, for a couple of reasons:

1.) They had already aired “live” footage from the north that shows no sign of the “nose-out.”

2.) The “nose-out” phenomenon was obvious enough that it could be seen even at full-speed. Even if that weren’t the case, it would have undoubtedly been recorded and eventually released on the internet, immediately exposing the amateur videos as containing CGI planes.

And so in essence, the "fitting" logic behind that decision was the exact same logic that they used when they first decided they could get away with this crime in the first place:

Proving that something exists is far easier than having to prove that it doesn’t exist. “Seeing is believing” - no matter that it defies the Laws of Physics. Such is the power of the mighty media.

In this case, it was a far less daunting task to reinforce the physical impossibility that people had seen on television than to convince people that they didn’t see it at all.

As convoluted as that way of thinking may seem, it had to be the ultimate logic behind adding the “nose-out” into the amateur footage.

Analysis - Execution

As far as the execution of that impromptu plan goes, it would have been relatively simple. The matter of adding believable shadows and trying to match the rest of the “nose-out” characteristics would have complicated matters somewhat, but keep in mind that they already had video editors furiously working to add the CGI into every frame of every video anyway. I’m sure all this new “wrinkle” did was delay the release of these amateur videos by a couple of hours or so. To help speed up the process, they could have easily reassigned one or more video editors to work on just the nose-out frames.

So long as the editing time didn’t exceed by too great a factor the amount of time that a “somewhat in-shock” general public would expect to be “reasonable” for an anxious photographer to submit his/her footage of the event to a major network.

As I look back at it now, anything longer than a couple of hours or so seems unreasonable to me, since both parties should have been anxious to find each other, for reasons that almost seem too obvious to mention: instant fame for the photographer and “first scoop” ratings for the networks.


The cover-up of the FOX blooper ends up being much easier to prove than the actual FOX blooper itself. The proof ended up being so simple and so compelling that I felt I needed to publish it immediately.

I am stunned, quite frankly, at the luke-warm reaction to Killtown's original revelation of this concept at 911blogger. One anonymous coward actually replied: "Hate to say it...but that photo looks like a fake to me." I've already linked to one NIST document containing a photo showing no missing steel beams; but just in case, here is another one (see page 89).

Perhaps when accompanied by this analysis, which shows the motive behind adding the "nose-out" into every possible video angle, this easy-to-interpret physical impossibility will help everyone to see that this is irrefutable proof of how TV-Fakery led to video editing.

To clarify, what this ONE PICTURE proves beyond a shadow of a doubt is that EVERY SINGLE VIDEO showing the “nose-out” phenomenon contains a CGI plane.

When combined with the analysis I've presented both here and in Part I of this article, it also proves (by association to the motive) that the "plane" depicted in the FOX-aired "Chopper 5" footage was also a "live" CGI insertion.

By virtue of that proof, it can be promulgated that all other "live" footage from that day must also have contained "live" CGI insertions rather than real planes. This is because any real plane would have been captured by the camera affixed to Chopper 5.

Note: In Part I of this article, I attempted to use the term "osmosis" to explain the concept of a solid "passing through" another solid. Osmosis is actually a term used to define the passage of water through a membrane. Of course, there is no term in existence to describe the concept a solid passing through another solid - simply because it's a physical impossibility. And so in Part II, I have invented the term "Osnosis" to define this fictional event.


The original purpose of Part II was to further prove that what “exited” WTC2 was not any real object, by demonstrating that subsequent video releases showing the “nose-out” phenomenon do not correlate with the “live” footage. Furthermore, I planned on providing numerous examples of “live” footage which did not show the “nose-out” phenomenon at all.

Because what I have written thus far essentially renders my originally-planned approach into an exercise in redundancy, I will include the remainder of what was to be Part II as Reference material, to be updated and formatted "on the fly" until completion.

All that really remains is to go through every single video, documenting the specific proof behind the CGI insertion in each one.


Analysis - (from the department of redundancy department)

There is no other “live” footage that clearly shows the “nose-out” phenomenon. The closest we come to seeing this occurrence from a different angle is over at ABC. ABC’s nose-out is partially hidden behind their “bottom third” graphic.

When replaying ABC’s footage, CNN has to add an extension to their “bottom third” graphic to cover up the same part of the image.

When looking at the following clips (from which the screenshots were excerpted), you will notice the same “Chopper Drift” problem that occurred with the Friedlgate footage. Notice the towers drifting to the right within the frame boundaries just before the “impact,” and then back to the left after it.

This would have served as a convenient reinforcement of the “nose-out” that FOX offered us, except for one rather large problem…

Due to the CGI travel path, this camera angle would have shown the “nose-out” coming out of WTC2 somewhat sideways.

With the exception of these two “live” feeds, all other footage that was broadcast on 9/11/01 show no sign of the “nose-out” phenomenon whatsoever.

Analysis - “Live” Frames

Before I present these screenshots and videos I want to offer great thanks to Killtown, Webfairy, goatpussy, domscd, and others who have taken the time to make these videos available for all of us to analyze. Were it not for their efforts, we would be years behind where we find ourselves today.

The format here is simple. I have provided my usual screenshot notes for each video sequence. To see the source of the screenshot, click anywhere on the graphic for the link.

Live Frames & Notes To Be Added

Analysis - Edited "Amateur" Video

Bonus Note:

Let’s see what trigonometry has to say about this shadow.

In the frame 82 screenshot (above left), WTC2 is 48 pixels wide (black line). The nose-out protrudes out of WTC2 by 7 pixels (red line). Since the actual width of WTC2 is known to be 208 ft, we can apply a quick ratio to determine that the distance of protrusion = 30.33 ft (7 X 208 / 48).

I believe it is widely accepted fact that the sun was shining at a 13 degree angle to this face. Here’s a quickie graphic:

I’ll be generous and say that the minimum distance from the “nose-out” to the far side of the exit face is 190ft (that’s 8ft for the “fuselage” radius plus and additional 10ft from that point the closer corner).

For the shadow to stretch across the entire tower using these assumptions, the angle of the sun would have to be 9.2 degrees. Oops, there I go using the “expert” scientific approach (start with what we “saw,” then move the sun, moon and stars until it works out).

Since the 13 degrees is a given, and the protrusion distance can be measured, we can solve for the correct shadow length (s):

30.33 / s = tan 13°
s = 30.33 / tan13°
s = 131.37

Therefore, the correct length of the shadow for a 30.33ft protrusion should be 131.37ft.

If we wanted to determine how far the “nose-out” should have protruded before its shadow spanned the entire width of the face, all we would have to do is set s = 190 and calculate the appropriate protrusion (p) as follows:

p / 190 = tan13°
p = 190 tan13°
p = 43.86

Therefore, in order for the shadow of the “nose-out” to span 190ft, it would have to protrude 43.86ft from the “exit face.”

In pixels, this works out to 10.12 (48 x 43.86 / 208). Let’s just call it an even 10 pixels. That’s 3 pixels (13.53ft – green line) more than it is shown as protruding in frame 82. The "nose-out" doesn't protrude that far until frame 84 (two frames later).

Of course, since it’s already been proven that this was an inserted CGI, proving that its shadow was incorrectly edited into the footage is somewhat redundant.

More Analysis forthcoming.


Unknown said...

One guy's opinion:

I think you are missing one of the huge possibilities. I'm willing to be told go jump in the lake.....

What if there was a flying object that hit each building AND, that object was obscured by the CGI?

StillDiggin said...

The mere fact that I chose to investigate TV-Fakery in the first place should give everyone an idea of my general open-mindedness.

However, there is a problem with your argument. As I pointed out in Part I, "live" CGI insertions require a constant-colored background in order to be seen.

That means that in this case, the only thing it is capable of "covering" is sky-colored objects.

As I also point out in Part I, a live CGI insertion moves in relation to the frame boundaries of the digital image upon which it is superimposed, not in relation to objects within the frame.

So unless you want to start claiming that ALL of these CGI's were able to be cued to cover up something that would have essentially been invisible, you now have my permission to "go jump in the lake."

Unknown said...

I appreciate you taking the time to address my question.

I have two quarrels:

1) I think possibly the object was what people saw, and was not invisible to the camera. I'm not for a minute suggesting the object was a commercial aircraft as claimed by the govt. story.

2) I don't think that the "football 1st down line" is the only insertion technology that could have been used.

Unknown said...

Let me take a different tack.

Do you think that an object that looked and sounded like a plane could have flown by and gone into "invisible" mode.

I know this sounds kooky. I'm just trying to find a way to reconcile the idea of tampered video (which I agree the evidence points toward) with witnesses who report hearing the sound (or were distracted by the sound to look up), or people who thought they saw a plane, with the conclusions your TV-Fakery evidence points toward.

The evidence that the Naudet Bros. video was planned to "catch" the first hit of 9/11, is a case I strongly believe in.

The Naudet 1st hit video shows what Webfairy has labeled the flying pig as a plane.

For my part, I'd like a unified theory of TV Fakery. I'm saying this, of course, in a somewhat touch-in-cheek manner.

I realize that the 1st hit wasn't shown live on TV (except for George W according to his statements), so the "live insertion" tech wasn't needed. Possibly I'm going in a direction that doesn't need be pursued.

StillDiggin said...

Why are you trying to bargain for a watered-down version of the truth?

Trying to link the two attacks on the towers is a flawed approach.

They are completely separate events, and must be treated as such, regardless of their proximity to each other.

TV-Fakery, to the best of my knowledge, is a term coined by Nico Haupt.

TV-Fakery specifically refers to the CGI imagery that was inserted into the "live" footage of WTC2.

TV-Fakery does not cover:

1.) The WTC1 attack
2.) Video editing of "amateur" footage
3.) Later video editing of original "live" footage

I will be dealing with the "eyewitness" testimony shortly.

In the meantime, sticking with the common "body of water" theme in my very kind dismissal of your bargaining attempts thus far, please "go find another pond to fish in."

Unknown said...

Here's another alleged eye witness to deal with:

Anonymous said...

Don't forget the Diane Sawyer flyby plane. I think there were certainly aircraft around for people to see even if none of them flew into the towers.

StillDiggin said...

Just a preview for anyone who decides to watch the video that bg posted:

At 6:15 of that video, a supposed ground controller (no name provided) at an airport (no name provided) says he saw a plane bank and hit WTC2.

The rest of the 8 minutes and 48 seconds is even more useless than that.

I wasted my time watching it - others shouldn't have to.

bg, you seem to be lost at sea... up the creek without a paddle, and obviously incapable of getting the facts strait. Cry me a river if you must - I really don't give a dam.

If you continue posting this crap, I'm going to have to start deleting it.

Anonymous said...

After seeing the recent update, I have amended my earlier analysis. My focus of 9/11 research has been very more in a different direction altogether. Thanks much for sticking to your guns.

Below was posted to the same mailing list:
I'm glad to say that StillDiggin has refuted my refutation.

One final note that cannot be overemphasized was made in Part I. The fact that there is no hole in the exit face that would accommodate an object of this size proves that the object cannot be real.

According to someone calling himself heiho1, who commented after reading Part I of this article, this is an incorrect statement. His basis for declaring that? That he and the crew had already reached the conclusion "...that it was most likely a pyrophoric material like uranium or similarly active heavy metals,..." which “…could easily, upon exposure to oxygen in the air, burn through steel and concrete.”

Of course, for that to be true, there would have to be missing sections of steel and/or concrete – which there are most certainly neither in any photo or video.

I am, of course, that "someone calling himself heiho1" as "heiho1" is an identity I have used online since first creating a account back when hotwired was cool.

In particular, StillDigging points to the image on page 89 of NIST chapter 9 final report:

Since this image shows WTC 2 and it *clearly* looks nothing like the "entry" hole, it must be the "exit" hole and yet the physical "exit" hole is noticeably missing the hole which would have accompanied the infamous "depleted uranium dildo exiting the building".

This, then, does strongly bolster StillDiggin's contention that the image has been modified.

Well over a year ago, when the "pod" theory was all the rage, I was asked about the visual anomalies surrounding the pod, the entry impact with three points and the "nosecone" exiting the building. At the time I said there were two possibilities:

1) The plane was modified.
2) The video was modified.

Based on this analysis, the video being modified has gained more credibility in my eyes.

Readers of this list are aware that my main current interest are the participants in the illegal removal of WTC evidence and how criminal prosecutions of such participants may be engineered. For this reason, I have remained somewhat agnostic on the topic of modified video feeds because it implies a greater deal of participation on the part of the mainstream media and thus widens the pools of suspects and the degree of complexity. It is not an area which I find "impossible" or "absurd" but simply an area which must be approached with a strong standard of evidence. Certainly using the NIST reports as the prima facie evidence for modified video is the right way to go about establish such proofs.

StillDiggin's analysis deserves critical appraisal and I thank him for taking the time to look into something which I have not myself examined.

Anonymous said...

Apologies for the absurd "English" above...typing from work :P

Anonymous said...

Check out my post on 911 blogger too and Alex Floum's reaction

Anonymous said...

Your analysis of the shadow is flawed, in my opinion. In the left-hand video clip you measure the emerging "nose-cone" as being seven pixels in length yet the object can be clearly seen to extend several pixels further, (albeit in a lighter colour than the rest of the cone). You can clearly see a "wobble" in the line of the far edge of the tower where the object crosses it way beyond your seven pixel mark. This would make the shadow length correct.

StillDiggin said...


So... let me get this straight.

You're ignoring the impossibility of an object passing through steel and you're questioning my shadow analysis?

You must be the guy who edited that video - because with all the proof I've amassed to date, he's probably the only one who cares that he fucked up a shadow.

Anonymous said...

It's me again.

Why are you so aggressive? I haven't ignored anything. You seem to assume that I have dismissed your analysis. Why do you assume that?

In fact I read your analysis with interest. (Though your reaction to my simple question makes me wonder about your judgement...)

All I did was point out an apparent flaw in your shadow analysis.

Would you like to answer my constructive point or would you prefer to mud-sling?

Your site is called 911logic... It is not logical to attack someone for asking a simple question about part of your analysis.

Anonymous said...

Why are you spreading such disinformation with this blog? What is so hard to understand about the fact that the conspirators PURPOSEFULLY DOCTORED SOME VIDEOS TO LEAD INVESTIGATORS SUCH AS YOURSELF ON A WILD GOOSE CHASE. How about concentrating on real evidence like the fact that there was at least one steel column found severed diagonally? The REAL FLIGHT 175 HIT THE WTC SOUTH TOWER. If fodder like this was presented as an official investigation, you'd just get laughed at. You're wasting your time.

Anonymous said...

Hi, I get to your articles only today, and I noticed that many external links are missing, like the NIST pictures and videos that were benned from Youtube...I recently watched the September Clues documentary that presents a great study on the flaws in 9/11 broadcast forgery and like this, your work is really superb...thank you.

teh anon said...

Killtown hangs around with "ozzybinoswald" whose real name is Neil Edward Thomson, a kiddie porno collector who resides in Canada. You would be wise to take Killtown's crap off your site unless you like associating yourself with pedophiles and internet stalkers.

Anonymous said...

I wonder just what Terry thinks with that.

kemper car insurance

Viagra Online said...

This is something that is very informational.I must appreciate your article writing skills.Every time i come here i see something very new.Thanks for sharing the information.I love when you share your views through the best articles.Keep sharing and posting articles like these.This article has helped me a lot.Keep posting this stuff.

Penis Enlargement Pills said...

I am thoroughly convinced in this said post. I am currently searching for ways in which I could enhance my knowledge in this said topic you have posted here. It does help me a lot knowing that you have shared this information here freely. I love the way the people here interact and shared their opinions too. I would love to track your future posts pertaining to the said topic we are able to read.

cheap kamagra online said...

This is an awesome post shared here. Great article and thanks for sharing this post.

Inversiones en petroleo said...

hello my friend i like ypur blog

Invertir en oro said...

Hello i like your blog

airbnb clone said...

Nice post. It was very interesting and meaningful. Keep posting.
groupon clone| Angry birds clone| Angry birds flash|

Multivitamins supplement said...

Good blog! I genuinely love how it is easy on my eyes as well as the details are well written. I am wondering how I can be notified whenever a new post has been made. I have subscribed to your rss feed which must do the trick! Have a nice day!

inversiones en oro said...

Hello, i would like to read more about this interesting topic, i think that it has good information, besides, this post help in a personal project

viagra said...

That is very good comment you shared.Thank you so much that for you shared those things with us.Im wishing you to carry on with ur achivments.All the best.

David Ross said...

Its really a wonderful post. Keep it up.
Generic Levitra

viagra online said...

One of the reasons why I like visiting your blog so much is because it has become a daily reference I can use in order to learn new nice stuff. It's like a curiosities box that surprises you over and over again.

price per head service said...

Very informative and helpful. This is a nice information shared here. Keep Posting :)

pay per head said...

I have wanted to learn more about particular topics, but not many websites would help me out in informing me the way I expected. This left me with many question, but after reading your article, I got an answer to all my questions. You are too cool dude!!!

Tamsyn said...

For my part one and all must browse on this.

Anonymous said...

xanax online 2mg of xanax high - alprazolam 0 5mg c 30 ems

Anonymous said...

buy cheap xanax dosage for xanax for anxiety - xanax bars fake

cheap nfl jerseys said...

I think you are missing one of the huge possibilities. I'm willing to be told go jump in the lake.....

What if there was a flying object that hit each building AND, that object was obscured by the CGI?

Anonymous said...

wPiz ghd
lIta nike nfl jerseys
iLxo ugg online
5hFtd ghd nz sale
5nVfm cheap ghd straighteners uk

Anonymous said...

viagra, viagra,

viagra, viagra,

viagra, viagra,

viagra, viagra,

viagra, viagra,

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the good writeup. It in truth used to be a enjoyment account
it. Look complex to far brought agreeable from you!
By the way, how can we keep up a correspondence?
Feel free to surf my weblog :: nicer dicer

Anonymous said...

I leave a leave a response whenever I appreciate a
article on a site or I have something to contribute to the
conversation. Usually it's caused by the passion displayed in the article I looked at. And on this article "9/11 TV-Fakery Whistleblower: Pinocchio Exposes Nose-Out Fairy Tale - Part II: The Cover-Up". I was moved enough to post a comment :-P I actually do have some questions for you if it's allright.

Could it be just me or does it look like some of the comments appear as if they are left by brain dead individuals?
:-P And, if you are posting at additional online social sites, I would like to
follow you. Could you make a list every one of all your social sites like your linkedin profile, Facebook page or twitter feed?
Feel free to surf my web blog ; buy youtube views

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online canadian online pharmacy tramadol - tramadol for dogs addictive

Anonymous said...

generic xanax drug interactions xanax sudafed - xanax overdose symptoms

Anonymous said...

xanax online xanax narcotic - can buy xanax hong kong

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol for dogs anti inflammatory - sniffing tramadol high

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol cheap tramadol used no prescription - tramadol withdrawal usa

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online order tramadol online overnight - tramadol dose for kids

Anonymous said...

xanax without a perscription clonazepam generic xanax - xanax 1mg street value

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online can buy tramadol online legally - can i buy tramadol over the counter usa

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol overnight can you buy tramadol online in the usa -

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online buy tramadol at walmart - tramadol withdrawal valium

Anonymous said...

xanax antidepressant xanax withdrawal can't sleep - xanax dosage fear flying

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol y alcohol - tramadol tablets dosage

Anonymous said...

buy xanax online cheap generic xanax 027 - xanax dosage iv

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online legal buy tramadol online us - buy tramadol online with visa

Anonymous said...

All of the excellent payday impart services we reviewed are genteel, dependable institutions that forward a commonsensical support to those who be in want of a two strikingly dollars to exhort it under the aegis a rude patch. In this placement, you'll discern articles with payday loans recommendation and foetid warm tips, as opulently as full reviews and a side during side deviate from to expropriate you cause an informed firmness on which advantage is amend toward your short-term accommodation needs. We argument that the nicest options hunt seek after of payday loans online.

Fit those that fundamental difficulty cash between paydays, intuition the differences in payday advance lenders can fix on how easily and speedily you catch the money you need. It in use accustomed to to be that you had to work to a physical setting and discontinuation for an acceptance on your payday allowance, after submitting copies of check stubs and bank statements. Modern, there is a inconsistency in payday accommodation lenders because there are some that make available quick and within easy reach online options. When you away benefit of online options, it is reachable to hire twinkling of an eye approvals and have the gelt you fundamental in a matter of a scattering hours, or less.

Best Online Payday Loans and Cash Advance:
uk payday loan
[url=]Cash cards cash advance[/url] - Payday loan without checking account

Anonymous said...

Hi! This is my first comment here so I just wanted to give
a quick shout out and say I truly enjoy reading through your posts.
Can you suggest any other blogs/websites/forums that go over the same
subjects? Thanks for your time!

My web page agen bola
My blog post : judi bola

Anonymous said...

order xanax what is generic xanax called - much does 1mg xanax sell

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol get high off it - tramadol no prescription free shipping

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol withdrawal vs vicodin withdrawal - taking 100mg tramadol

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol dosage vicodin - buy cheap tramadol cod

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol 60 mg - tramadol dosage levels

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol high bluelight - order tramadol for pets

Anonymous said...

xanax online what will 2mg xanax do - xanax and alcohol recreational

Anonymous said...

buy xanax bars online generic xanax round blue pill - xanax grapefruit juice side effects

Anonymous said...

cialis online canada cheap-cialis-e - order cialis online us

Anonymous said...

generic xanax what does 1mg generic xanax look like - xanax dosage recreational

Anonymous said...

buy cialis online buy cialis australia - buy cialis online with prescription

Anonymous said...

cialis online genuine cialis price - order cialis phone

Anonymous said...

buy cialis online overnight shipping cialis price usa - generic cialis mississauga

Anonymous said...

xanax online 2mg klonopin compared to 2 mg xanax - xanax side effects brain

Anonymous said...

cialis online cialis side reviews - cialis 0 02

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol without prescriptions buy tramadol extended release - tramadol make u high

Anonymous said...

tramadol 50 order tramadol no prescription cheap - tramadol hcl get high

Anonymous said...

learn how to buy tramdadol tramadol withdrawal timeline - buy tramadol online overnight fedex

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol brand name ultram - tramadol 50 mg stronger than vicodin

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol cheap online tramadol for dogs cancer - buy tramadol online cod only

Anonymous said... tramadol dosage info - day 5 tramadol withdrawal

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online buy tramadol tennessee - tramadol hcl 50 mg pill identifier

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol quitting - tramadol for dogs pain

Anonymous said...

tramadol 100 tramadol for dogs benadryl - tramadol hcl 50 mg tab

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol with paypal tramadol ultram medication - tramadol withdrawal 2 weeks

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online with mastercard tramadol online no prescription overnight delivery - order tramadol no prescription

Anonymous said... order tramadol online cod overnight - tramadol overdose fatal dose

Anonymous said... generic tramadol 200mg - buy tramadol online overnight fedex

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol buy tramadol online usa - 800 mg tramadol overdose

Anonymous said...

tramadol online effects of tramadol high - tramadol vs hydrocodone

Anonymous said... tramadol withdrawal in newborns - tramadol dosage 100 pound dog

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol 319 high - tramadol tv 58

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol tramadol overdose erowid - tramadol no prescription 100mg

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol buy tramadol cod online - tramadol for dogs with food

Anonymous said... xanax tramadol overdose - tramadol addiction constipation

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol tramadol withdrawal klonopin - tramadol 50 mg what is it for

Anonymous said...

ativan online pharmacy buy sandoz lorazepam - ativan dosage nausea

Anonymous said...

ways to buy ativan online ativan withdrawal elderly - buying ativan online no prescription

Anonymous said...

buy ativan online ativan uses in hospice - ativan side effects panic attacks

Anonymous said... xanax side effects with alcohol - xanax addiction

Anonymous said...

buy tramadol online tramadol take get high - tramadol sr tablet 100mg

Anonymous said... buy generic tramadol no prescription - tramadol y alcohol

Anonymous said... upjohn generic xanax - xanax white pill

Anonymous said...

where to buy tramadol online tramadol generic fedex no prescription - tramadol hcl like vicodin

Anonymous said...

I feel that is among the so much significant information
for me. And i am happy studying your article. But should statement on some common
things, The website style is wonderful, the articles is truly excellent :
D. Just right task, cheers

My web page :: michael kors watches

Anonymous said... round white generic xanax - how many xanax pills to overdose

Cars for sale dubai said...

I my point of view 9/11 was totally drama, the uS government wants achive some of its objective, like reason to invade Afghanistan to make a military base against China...

Anonymous said...

xanax no prescription xanax 0.5 side effects - one time use xanax drug test

Anonymous said... generic xanax looks like - xanax dosage 1mg

Anonymous said... xanax bars and alcohol - xanax 4 bars

Anonymous said...

Very nice article, exactly what I needed.

Also visit my web site ... Cheap Christian Louboutin Shoes

Anonymous said...

Everyone loves it whenever people get together and share ideas.
Great blog, continue the good work!

Check out my blog post ... cheap mac makeup

Anonymous said...

I just couldn't depart your web site before suggesting that I actually enjoyed the usual information an individual provide on your visitors? Is gonna be again regularly in order to check out new posts

Also visit my blog post chi flat iron official website

Anonymous said...

I could not refrain from commenting. Perfectly written!

Feel free to visit my web page ... nike free run 5.0

Anonymous said...

Unquestionably believe that which you said.
Your favorite reason seemed to be on the internet the easiest thing
to be aware of. I say to you, I certainly get irked while people
consider worries that they just don't know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top as well as defined out the whole thing without having side-effects , people can take a signal. Will likely be back to get more. Thanks

my webpage; Nike Free Run

Anonymous said...

Excellent site. A lot of useful information here. I'm sending it to a few buddies ans additionally sharing in delicious. And certainly, thank you for your effort!

my web page ... polo ralph lauren outlet

Anonymous said... buy tramadol no prescription overnight - best buy tramadol

Dr Purva Pius said...

How I Got My Loan From A Genuine And Reliable Loan Company

Hello Everybody,
My name is Mrs.Irene Query. I live in Philippines and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of $150,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a single mother with 2 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of$150,000.00 US. Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs.Irene Query, that refer you to him. contact Dr Purva Pius,via email:( Thank you.

1. Your Full names:_______
2. Contact address:_______
3. Country Of Residence:______
4. Loan Amount Required:________
5. Duration:_____
6. Gender:_____
7. Occupation:________
8. Monthly Income:_______
9. Date Of Birth:________
10.Telephone Number:__________

Email Us: said...

Are you looking for a loan to pay off your bills and start up your own Business? We can assist you with any amount you need with just 3% interest rate provided you are going to pay back at when due. If interested do contact us via email today for more details.Email

Dr Purva Pius said...

Hello Everybody,
My name is Mrs Sharon Sim. I live in Singapore and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of S$250,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a single mother with 3 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of S$250,000.00 SG. Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs Sharon, that refer you to him. contact Dr Purva Pius,via email:( Thank you.


1. Name Of Applicant in Full:……..
2. Telephone Numbers:……….
3. Address and Location:…….
4. Amount in request………..
5. Repayment Period:………..
6. Purpose Of Loan………….
7. country…………………
8. phone…………………..
9. occupation………………
11.Monthly Income…………..

Email Kindly Contact:

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

very helpfull us for more information about sains and the others info thank for your sharing
cara daftar sbobet online deposit murah terpercaya
cara memasang taruhan di agen bola sbobet online terpercaya
cara menang bermain di agen daftar bola sbobet 2018
Agen Poker Online

games asia said...

Login Sbobet mobile is a service created by the sbobet to enable sbobet gambling players to be able to bet football online via smartphone, wherever you are and whenever you want. On the other hand you can use it to check the match schedule at any time or with other advantages that this sbobet mobile has.

login to games

Ann Maria said...

Thanks for high grading the content and recommending it too and do visit again for more...Color Grading Company In Chicago

herbalincensekush said...

we offer top quality bath salts,herbal incense,research chemicals,actavis prometh,nembutal,HGH,steroids,pain pills,weight loss pills,marijuana,weed,weight gain pills and many other products.Our products are top quality,packaging and shipping is discrete.Only you and us know what is in your package.Special discounts on wholesale orders. Visit our official website to place an order now.

buy cocaine online

maxbet said...

agent maxbet terpercaya
Alternatif Maxbet

herbalincensekush said...

Legit Online Drug Supplier Welcome legit online drugstore buy all your pills here, cocaine for sale online, buy ecstasy, amphetamine pills, crack, cocaine

Buy Fentanyl online

Buy Pure Grade Heroin online

Buy Cocaine Powder online

Buy Ghb powder for sale

ibrahiemzachary said...

Betfair casino app not working - JRM Hub
Betfair Casino app not working: · If 사천 출장샵 you 광주 출장안마 have any issues with your account or the 남원 출장안마 Betfair mobile app download, call Customer Support · If you have any 거제 출장마사지 issues 안동 출장마사지