9/11 CNN Pipeline: As (the media wants you to think) it Happened

Introduction

On September 11, 2006 - CNN admittedly did not rebroadcast everything that was originally aired five years earlier. I’m not sure what their exact disclaimer was about missing footage – something like “it got lost in the confusion of a very hectic day” or something to that effect.

And so every once in a while, seemingly at random (yeah, right…), anyone watching CNN Pipeline that day got to see this:

Whether this was their intention or not, what that did (for me, anyway) was to call greater attention to the contents of this “lost” footage, thereby setting me on a quest to both identify and scrutinize the missing footage of the “reenactment” more closely.

After just having obtained a copy of the CNN Pipeline “reenactment” as of this morning, I have only been able to perform a brief analysis thus far. However, even in the brief two hours I’ve had to perform this analysis, I felt that my observations and early conclusions were important enough to publish “on the fly.”

Analysis – Footage from 8:49am to 10:00am

This is as far as I’ve gotten thus far. Whenever I analyze any 9/11 footage, I am careful to keep in mind the possibility of either edited or missing footage.

In the case of missing footage, this is an extremely easy task, especially if you are privy to a copy of the Pipeline footage that includes segments of the “Be Back Soon” graphic I posted above. In order to maintain the real-time aspect of the Pipeline “reenactment,” this standard “disclaimer-substitute” was inserted into the footage, essentially acting as a time placeholder.

The copy of the CNN Pipeline footage that I have obtained does not include the “Be Back Soon” segments, so I had to pay attention for the “fade-outs,” “hard cuts,” or “time skips” in order to identify the missing segments.

Missing footage is relatively easy to observe anyway when it comes to most videos, due to the “live” time usually being a component of the “bottom third” graphic (almost always on the bottom right of the frame).

Working backwards in the Pipeline footage (not provided here), I noted a Video Run Time (VRT) of 1:09:44 at 10:00:00am. At 9:00:00am, the VRT was 0:09:44, indicating no footage was skipped. The time displayed in the “bottom third” at the inception of the footage is 8:49. This changes to 8:50 at 0:00:31 VRT, indicating that the footage begins at 8:49:35, after accounting for the opening 6-second “Viewer Discretion is Advised” disclaimer.

So somewhere between 8:50 and 9:00, 47 seconds of footage was “lost” (9:44 - 0:31 = 9:13, 47 seconds less than 10 minutes).

Analysis – Missing 47 Seconds

What has been cut out can be seen and heard between 5:12 and 5:59 VRT of the following video (in real time, that’s between 8:54:48am and 8:55:35am):




An easy assumption to make may be that CNN has cut this footage because of it's reference to the “eyewitness” account of “Rosa Cardona Rivera.”

However, aside from providing yet another example of an unbelievable set of circumstances that led to an individual “witnessing” the first “plane,” I found there to be no reason for CNN to specifically cut this part out. After all, her entire "eyewitness" account was only aired on FOX (Friedlgate video).

If anything, one would think that they would want to keep this segment of footage to help assert as quickly as possible that there was someone other than Sean Murtagh who had seen the first plane (much more info available on Sean Murtagh in my upcoming “Eyewitness” Report Card articles).

There are two obvious (and related) reasons why they chose to cut this segment of footage:

1.) Dick Oliver was behaving like a real reporter! Not only was he unable to find anyone on the street who would say that they saw a plane, he had actually just interviewed a woman who clearly gave no indication that she had seen or heard a plane. She also stated her firm belief that what she saw was an explosion that originated from the inside if the building, since everything was being “blown out.”

2.) Jim Ryan makes a ridiculous statement, probably at the urging of the producer who had just “pulled the plug” on Dick Oliver. After a short delay, Jim stammers “…our transmitter is at the top of the World Trade Center, so we apparently (uh) have consequently lost contact with Dick Oliver.”

Apparently, Jim (or his producer) would have us believe that Dick has his own dedicated transmitter. Listen closely to Jim after the Dick Oliver feed has been yanked. Jim is noticeably trying to listen to his producer’s instructions before being forced to lie about why they just “lost” Dick.

Obviously, if they had lost their transmitter, Jim himself wouldn’t be on the air, now would he?

Analysis – Additional Observations

There are two other observations that stand out in my mind as being noteworthy.

The first is tied to this missing 47 seconds of footage, but has apparently not been cut out of the CNN Pipeline footage. At 15:05 VRT, which represents to 9:05:21am, Steve Bartelstein (WABC Anchor) realizes that Winston Mitchell is no longer on the line. Steve then tries to ask his producer “Do we have an eyewitness who perhaps sees better than we do from these pictures..?”

After a very brief pause, an audio feed is opened up – and we hear somebody say (angrily) “Come on, Di…”

By itself this appears to be a random interjection. However, when pieced together with the missing 47 seconds and placed into the context of Steve Bartelstein trying to speak to his producer, I come up with the following:

Steve’s producer (or someone in the direct vicinity) is either arguing on the phone with Dick Oliver or is wondering aloud as to his whereabouts. My contention is that were it not cut off so quickly, we would have heard the remainder of the exclamation: “Come on, Dick!”

That Dick might have been angry about having been yanked off the air by FOX and consequently petitioning for airtime from a WABC producer is a matter of pure speculation. Furthermore, it isn’t really all that important – that is, unless we’re trying to figure out where the media hoax “headquarters” may have been.

My second observation is a much more obvious one, now that I have been able to see and hear the WABC feed in its entirety. It pertains to the eyewitness account of Winston Mitchell. The live version of this testimony falls within the 20 minute gap between Part 1 and Part 4 of the YouTube “CNN: September 11 - As it Happened” videos, as posted by “goatpussy.”

Switching now to Part 4, we at least can pick up the “replay” of his eyewitness account. Starting at 2:25 VRT, pay close attention to the information that Winston is relaying to Steve at precisely the moment that the explosion occurs:

By starting the replayed footage from this carefully-planned point, CNN has managed to cut out the most important detail of this account; that being, how Winston was acquiring his information.

As a matter of fact, Winston was standing outside WT1 on the north side, looking directly up at the hole at the same time the “second plane” supposedly hit WTC2. How then, could he not have seen or heard this massive plane? Furthermore, how did WE not hear it either by way of his phone?

The answer, of course – is because there was no plane. My previous article has already proven that in an iron-clad manner. This is merely “icing on the cake,” as it were.

I’m not going to waste my time trying to post the source footage that proves where Winston was and what he saw and heard. This is because I’m sure it would be yanked from YouTube as quickly as the original Part 2 and Part 3 of the CNN footage seems to have been.

Instead, I have posted the relevant excerpt from the CNN transcript of the entire eyewitness account below.

Please note that the “UNIDENTIFIED MALE” was fully identified on-screen in the original video feed as Winston Mitchell, and that the “UNIDENTIFIED WABC REPORTER” is actually (scandal-magnet) WABC Anchor, Steve Bartelstein. Also, to make for easier reading, I’ve highlighted the basis for my conclusions (blue), and corrected the transcript (red green):

We are going to join another one of our New York affiliates, WABC for their live coverage.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... plane overhead, and then all of a sudden -- I thought it sounded kind of loud, and then I looked up and all of a sudden it smashed right dead into the center of the World Trade Center. A big flash of flame, fire coming out from all over, then all the bricks -- it's a huge hole right now. It almost Looks like the plane probably went through. I'm not sure.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: Winston (ph), can you see -- are you on the north side there where the plane made contact?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I am.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: Now, when you say a huge hole, one of our earliest witnesses, Libby Clark (ph), said not much of the plane came down off the building, much of it went...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, it went totally into the building.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: It's in the building, from what you can see?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: Now, can you see if there is a lot of debris downstairs, Winston?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, because it looks like it's inverted. With the impact everything went inside the building.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: Inside?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The only thing that came out was a little bit of the outside awning. But I'd say the huge -- the hole is -- let me just get a better look right now.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: OK, go ahead.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'd say the whole takes about -- It looks like six, seven floors were taken out. And there's more explosions right now -- hold on -- people are running, hold on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: We should Winston, hold on just a moment. We've got an explosion inside...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The building's exploding right now. You've got people running up the street. Hold on, I'll tell you what's going on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: OK, just put Winston on pause there for just a moment...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, the whole building exploded some more, the whole top part. The building's still intact, people are running up the street. Am I still connected?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE WABC REPORTER: Winston, this would support probably what Libby and you both said that perhaps the fuselage was in the building, that would cause a second explosion such as that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, that's what just happened then.

Analysis - Bonus Insert (Replay Transcript)

Notice how Winston's eyewitness account in the replay was "chopped" in the Part 4 footage. There is nothing arbitrary about the starting point of the replay. They didn't just start it from when they switched camera feeds, either. They removed as much of the context as they could before showing the "impact."

Now let's have a look at what they did to the transcript of this replay (same link as above, farther down the page). This time, rather than correct the errors, I've just highlighted them (along with adding omissions):

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I say the whole takes about -- we saw six, seven floors were taken out, and there's more explosions right now. Hold on, people are running! Hold on!

UNIDENTIFIED WABC REPORTER: (Winston,) Hold on just a moment. We've got an explosion inside.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The building is exploding right now. You've got people running up the street. Hold on, I'll tell you what's going on.

UNIDENTIFIED WABC REPORTER: OK, just put Winston on pause there for just a moment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The whole building just exploded some more, the whole top part. The building's still intact people are running up the street. Am I still connected?

UNIDENTIFIED WABC REPORTER: Winston, this would support probably what Libby and you both said, that perhaps the fuselage was in the building that would cause a second explosion, such as that. That's what just happened then.

Do you suppose it's a coincidence that they changed "It looks like" into "we saw?" Even in the transcript, they're trying to place Winston's account into the past tense, trying to remove any idea that he was looking right at the WTC1 hole (or whole, as they call it) at the time of the explosion.

Just a random typo? Transcriber didn't hear it right? Hardly. This is clearly a case of malicious intent.

As far as the second error goes, why not go as far as attributing "That's just what happened then" to Bartelstein? After all, he pretty much shoved that idea into Winston's head anyway.

Conclusion

I personally find it hilarious that the entirety of the 47 seconds cut from this segment of CNN’s footage came from our good friends over at WNYW FOX5. Given the total number of screw-ups from this one source; if I didn’t know any better, I’d think they were doing it on purpose.

I could go on at length about how CNN has both cut and transcribed this footage in such a way as to deliberately deceive us. I have yet to decide whether this practice of “deceitful editing” is better or worse than simply withholding information from us altogether.

For now, I have to call it a tie.

And as if that weren’t bad enough, at the end of the ABC interview excerpt – we actually observe the eyewitness allowing the ABC ANCHOR to tell HIM what “just happened.”

This is a Pipeline all right - a sewage Pipeline. I've found all this "crap" already just in the first hour or so of the "story framing" process. I haven't even had a chance yet to look for the video-editing I'm sure to find (which is why I've consistently been referring this "re-aired" footage as a "9/11 reenactment").

Reference

Rare Footage (9:00am to 9:10am)

Rare Footage (9:10am to 9:20am)