9/11 Reality TV: Why the Scarborough/Berger interview was mega-scripted
aka "the Scarberger 9/11 truthling hoax"
By Nico Haupt
July 21, 2006

On June 20th "Scarborough" presented us yet another reality tv lovefist for naive 9/11 truthlings to distract from the NY 9/11 TV Fakery research.
http://911closeup.com/nico/911truthlings.html

What most people ignore is the obvious fact, that we not only saw one actor provoking a fake activist, both in reality followed the same fraudulent acting script.
This rendon group inspired script implied, that this interview event was allegedly 'damage control' for the latest Zogby Poll and 9/11 Chicago "Reptile" Conference.

In reality we watched yet another false hope 'BS factor' actor campaign with phonies like Mike Berger and Michael Smerconish, who are both deliberately misled the 9/11 truthling movement, without showing any real emotions.

Also allegedly Michael Smerconish was "filling in for Joe", though it was more obvious, that Smerconish was chosen, because he is a better actor for this kind of media deception scam than Joe Scarborough or someone else from the tv team.


Included in this latest PR campaign for '911untruth.org' was another new video from the Pentagon showing a lousy CGI plane, which ended with a bizarre and sloppy triangle moving fireball effect.

Sources:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vnu_yiUzls&mode=related&search=911%20crash
Pentagon Plane crash september 11th NEW ANGLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqFfHndmvu0&search=911%20crash
plane crashes into pentagon 911

Since the double standard of Planehuggers is still high, even this lousy 'fake' will not convince them, how even more obvious "TV fakery" took place in case of the second attack on the Twin Towers in NYC.


About this staged interview:

1)
Smerconish, a 'cult idiot' from Phi Beta Kappa is interestingly also INDIRECTLY linked to Mike Berger via Philly News where Berger promoted his 2004 black box disinfo story http://www.mastalk.com/mastalk/biography.jspx



2)
Staged suspense and provoking outrage for the 9/11 Truthlings:
The scarborough feature used also a blurry version of the NBC wtc7 footage,
but edited it on purpose to minimize the drama and hide further details of the collapse, to keep the "silversteins" alive.
http://911closeup.com/nico/911truthlings.html

3)
Reportedly there was also an audience remark "go fuk yourself", which was either hard to understand or not audible in every video backup version.


However totally ignored is the fact that "scarborough" is NOT even a live show.
This should make every half realist think and is another indication that this interview was a complete acting rip off of both sides: Berger and Smerconish.
There was enough time to edit out these kind of remarks, therefore we can conclude that this yelled 'remark' was acted as well.

see also:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/115077388865979964/ "Go fuck yourself!"
Well, same here, to all three of them :)
(ed: 06/21 -Ironically it was now confirmed by Jonathan Gold, one of the hardline 9/11 truthlings, that it was actually his voice in one edit, who yelled the "Go f*k yourself!" remark.
Apparently Gold taped his version for 911podcasts.com with an open mic.
(The author of this rant only watched the YOUTUBE version and didn't hear this remark, but analysed the response to another edit)
This 'mistake' is another example, how even a silly mistake can mislead, deceive, manipulate and confuse other 9/11 truthlings.

"911blogger brigade"
"...Somebody audibly responds, "Go fuck yourself!" ...Who was this?...Probably someone on the crew, responding viscerally to the Substitute's stupidity...

Sorry to disappoint you Nick, but that was me. Jon Gold | Homepage | 06.20.06 - 8:57 am" )


4)
Notice also how obvious even the "interruptions" had been scripted to make the 911truthlings upset and sympathize with Berger.

5)
Even the timing and content was better filled this time (compared with the Prof. Jones appearence) and Berger did almost a satire stunt on Jones by claiming, he 'can't see the clip' (though he's in the studio watching this monitor). Then the NBC satire responded to him by looping the wtc 7 clip at least 5 times!!

Conclusion:
This appearance of an alleged 'truth speaker' (with unknown background in St. Louis, also HQ for Boeing) was COMPLETELY staged including apparent "interruptions" and "emotional remarks" on both sides.

This was indeed a pro-9/11 truthling consumer package and it worked, as you can notice at the reactions on blogger brigade at 911blogger.com.
The 9/11 truthlings, unexperienced with TV studio fakery, feel sorry for Berger and do hate the host, as it was scripted out in the first place.
see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2h9edQi-qA Scarborough Country Addresses 911

How to manipulate TV Broadcasts

1) Staging a report

A staged (TV-)broadcast is using actors, dramatization or other visual tools to manipulate a report.
That often also includes acting on the side of the host, but also interview guests or extras instead of real pedestrians, or other involved persons.

NOTE: The famous Naudet Documentary on 9/11 used actors, as proven at 911foreknowledge.com


2) Scripting a report
Often used in news shows, a staged report is often following a "script", from which the involved persons learn to act.
That also includes alleged interruptions, particular emotional reactions, nervous behavior or other kind of acting.
In most cases, also these acting persons or professional actors (undisclosed) are reading from a prompter.


3) Rigging a report
Mostly used in gameshows but also situationalized reports, the outcome of the event (i.e. gameshow, reality TV etc...)
is rigged via particular scripts, actors or manipulated electronic tools. Usually also associated with a "limited hangout".


4) Faking a report
Outdated slang for 'visual perception management' or other descriptions.
This could include any kind of fakery with any kind of visual tools.
see below


5) Planting a report
Planting a hoax or fictionalized report or putting visual elements into the report to manipulate particular suggestions or conclusions
(i.e. planting aircraft parts into videos or photos in front of Pentagon, Downtown New York City or Shanksville)

6) other additional manipulations:

editing:
manipulating speed of the broadcast, removing video frames or databytes from audio reports, removing or adding sound, lip synch, morphing visuals or audio, additional audiovisual effects, manipulations with cameras (particular zooms, cuts, shaking on purpose etc...)


visual fakery:

  • In the simplest way a photo is manipulated with photoshop tools.
    A video or TV broadcast can be also distracted with additional electronic logos or other visuals including CGIs (computer generated images).

  • If the video is upgraded with an additional VR scenery or VR environment, it is often described as AR (augmented reality).

  • Also, the scenery could be completely VR (including buildings, cars, visual effects). If the host is the only real element, it is AR.
    The person can be also replaced with a virtual Avatar or his face can be professionally replaced.

  • Some AR visuals can include live- or pre-produced Video or other visuals.

    It can also include live generated graphics, scripts, newstickers, chat windows etc...

    Since particular realities are competing with each other, including digital deceptions which are "accepted" by the audience, one cannot necessarily use the word "fake" anymore.


  • Some 9/11 researchers suggest that many visual elements of the 9/11 attacks had been the result of "visual fakery".
    (i.e. the first and only live broadcast from the second attack was an authentic video broadcast with an additional graphic plane, inserted as a CGI via vector keying. Both fireball and explosion have been real effects.

    The pentagon 'art frames' had been either photoshopped or had been upgraded with additional VR or AR scenery (2006 version).

    It couldn't established yet if the 2006 frames are completely VR or AR (with some photoshop elements)

  • Another new Pentagon 'video' (released at the same time during May 16th/17th 2006) shows most obviously authentic air video, filmed by an unidentified helicopter from the Pentagon and including a vector keyed CGI plane 'crashing' into the Pentagon.

  • There are also dramatization VR (only) clips available from the Pentagon attack (Purdue Institute), which ironically contradict with both "Pentagon art frames"(2002, 2006).

  • The Naudet Brothers documentary from the first attack on the North Tower was linked by Ray Ubinger and other 9/11 researchers
    with category 1) Staging a report.

    It has actors in it and shows a real non-computerized unidentified military object(s), impostering an alleged commercial aircraft.

    It was furthermore established, that some video frames had been removed to show as less as possible from this unidentified object.
    We cannot therefore classify this as "visual fakery", but simple "reality tv".
    (ed: The author worked 12 years for TV and is occasionally too lazy, too arrogant and too busy, to revise his articles into appropriate english)