Title 18, "Misprision of treason" filed in District Court

[Liability]

I can show digital alterations of revision tables obsolete plans by someone purportedly connected to silverstein enabling the FEMA deception.

I can show the buildings engineer of record providing information to a globally prominant magazine.

MSNBC - ?Painful and Horrible?

I can show an endview of a concrete wall perhaps 4 feet thick as the west end of the core.

where is your proof that its a digital alteration?

It is its own proof. Look at the original on the wtc7.net and the anomalie can be seen on the original.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

One pixel lines and spaces at the scale of the pencil original are not possible pixel straight for the lengths seen. The precense of such things proves digital alteration of the sccanned plans.

The affidavit of the records analyst that made the disclosure of misprision of treason with me.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

Putting aside that a lot of the stuff you submit to Court is written in your strange pigeon-gibberish language, the Affidavit of Elton is stupid.

In her affadavit, she says that the allegedly unoriginal and now altered plans from Silverstein "are not sealed and signed by the New York City building official."

No shit, idiot.

As has been noted several times, you assmonkey, the MULTI-STATE inter-governmental agency known as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey was the entity to whom plans were submitted and the entity approving such plans. The Port Authority was not answerable to, nor required to file plans with, a New York City government agency.

 

[DiveCon]

Zoom of digitally altered revision table on plans from silverstein.
http://algoxy.com/psych/planimages/A-A-159.revtab.jpg

you dont seem to understand.

how can you prove it is digitally altered without comparing it to the original? how do you know that isnt on the original?

do you have the original plans?

The proof is that it and the original are the same. They have/are the same source. I linked to it,

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

but the infiltrating perpetrators would not want you to acknowledge the digital anomalies on the origianal so you logically would not notice and you probably don't even look at evidence because it basically cannot matter to you within your agenda.

and that very same scanner anomaly shows up there also

 

[Christophera]

You present it backwards.

The port authority was the owner/contractor and the city was the permitting agency. It claimed and got exemption on some building codes, but conformed to others, such as the "Two stairway" requirement.

In this case the City of New York is the jurisdiction and they must have responsibility because of the impact, but they must also, within reason coordinate with the port authority which has another maritime status altogether that can compete for jurisdiction in some ways.

 

[Christophera]

Zoom of digitally altered revision table on plans from silverstein.
http://algoxy.com/psych/planimages/A-A-159.revtab.jpg

you dont seem to understand.

how can you prove it is digitally altered without comparing it to the original? how do you know that isnt on the original?

do you have the original plans?

The proof is that it and the original are the same. They have/are the same source. I linked to it,

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

but the infiltrating perpetrators would not want you to acknowledge the digital anomalies on the origianal so you logically would not notice and you probably don't even look at evidence because it basically cannot matter to you within your agenda.

and that very same scanner anomaly shows up there also

Correct showing that my source for the zoom also has the anomalie. My sample is good, the scanned blueprints have been altered.

Such an anomalie is not possible WITHOUT digital alteration of an original scan file by addition of another, tampered digital image file of a revision table. Another different anomalie from sheet A-A-139.

 

[DiveCon]

Zoom of digitally altered revision table on plans from silverstein.
http://algoxy.com/psych/planimages/A-A-159.revtab.jpg


The proof is that it and the original are the same. They have/are the same source. I linked to it,

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

but the infiltrating perpetrators would not want you to acknowledge the digital anomalies on the origianal so you logically would not notice and you probably don't even look at evidence because it basically cannot matter to you within your agenda.

and that very same scanner anomaly shows up there also

Correct showing that my source for the zoom also has the anomalie. My sample is good, the scanned blueprints have been altered.

Such an anomalie is not possible WITHOUT digital alteration of an original scan file by addition of another, tampered digital image file of a revision table. Another different anomalie from sheet A-A-139.

the anomaly does not prove alteration, dipshit

 

[Christophera]

The anomalie of the revision table cannot exist within a digital scan of a pencil original on vellum.

 

[DiveCon]

The anomalie of the revision table cannot exist within a digital scan of a pencil original on vellum.

YES, it can
you know NOTHING of digital imaging

 

[Fizz]

Zoom of digitally altered revision table on plans from silverstein.
http://algoxy.com/psych/planimages/A-A-159.revtab.jpg

you dont seem to understand.

how can you prove it is digitally altered without comparing it to the original? how do you know that isnt on the original?

do you have the original plans?

The proof is that it and the original are the same. They have/are the same source. I linked to it,

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/plans/doc/pac1TowerA/A-A-159_1.png

but the infiltrating perpetrators would not want you to acknowledge the digital anomalies on the origianal so you logically would not notice and you probably don't even look at evidence because it basically cannot matter to you within your agenda.

no jackass. you linked to a SCAN. how do you know what you claim is digitally altered is not on the ORIGINAL?

 

[Liability]

The anomalie of the revision table cannot exist within a digital scan of a pencil original on vellum.

What the fuck is an "anomalie"?

 

[Christophera]

OMG! Pretending to be disabled from using a dictionary can only obsufucation.

Anomalie = ‘irregularity"

The thing in the cell of the revision table,

is an irregularity amongst the smoothed characters of the penciled initials of the intitial column.

 

[DiveCon]

OMG! Pretending to be disabled from using a dictionary can only obsufucation.

Anomalie = ‘irregularity"

The thing in the cell of the revision table,



is an irregularity amongst the smoothed characters of the penciled initials of the intitial column.

dipshit

Anomaly - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[Liability]

OMG! Pretending to be disabled from using a dictionary can only obsufucation.

Anomalie = ‘irregularity"

The thing in the cell of the revision table,

is an irregularity amongst the smoothed characters of the penciled initials of the intitial column.

Add an "s" at the end, dufus, and you have more than one. It's called "plural."

But without the "s" at the end, you have a non-word.

You probably MEANT to write "Anomaly."

Now, what is "intitial?"

And the image which you ignorantly conclude displays an anomaly -- does not, in reality, display an anomaly. It is nothing more than an "artifact" associated with scanning.

I see you've ducked the FACT that the architects were NOT required to submit their plans to any NY City Building agency. Yes, due to an agreement, the AUTHORITY did have to comply with various codes, etc. But that agreement did not require that they file plans, revisions or anything else with the NY City Building agency. Two very different concepts, you ignorant fraud.

 

[Christophera]

OMG! Pretending to be disabled from using a dictionary can only obsufucation.

Anomalie = ‘irregularity"

The thing in the cell of the revision table,

is an irregularity amongst the smoothed characters of the penciled initials of the intitial column.

Add an "s" at the end, dufus, and you have more than one. It's called "plural."

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?) The cause of death invalidated but spelling is important.

You've provided no links to support any of your other assertions which do not make sense for building 1/2 mile tall.

 

[DiveCon]

OMG! Pretending to be disabled from using a dictionary can only obsufucation.

Anomalie = ‘irregularity"

The thing in the cell of the revision table,



is an irregularity amongst the smoothed characters of the penciled initials of the intitial column.

Add an "s" at the end, dufus, and you have more than one. It's called "plural."

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?) The cause of death invalidated but spelling is important.

You've provided no links to support any of your other assertions which do not make sense for building 1/2 mile tall.

you have provided nothing to support your claims

bullshit does not equal proof

 

[Christophera]

Add an "s" at the end, dufus, and you have more than one. It's called "plural."

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?) The cause of death invalidated but spelling is important.

You've provided no links to support any of your other assertions which do not make sense for building 1/2 mile tall.

you have provided nothing to support your claims

bullshit does not equal proof

You are not judge, you are not jury, you have no evidence from independent sources to verify your information from FEMA.

Text = nothing.

This = 12 images and 3 independent authorities.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

You don't have even have one that is consistent with 9-11 images.

 

[Fizz]

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?)

you are the one bringing up the "initials" thing, jackass

 

[DiveCon]

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?) The cause of death invalidated but spelling is important.

You've provided no links to support any of your other assertions which do not make sense for building 1/2 mile tall.

you have provided nothing to support your claims

bullshit does not equal proof

You are not judge, you are not jury, you have no evidence from independent sources to verify your information from FEMA.

Text = nothing.

This = 12 images and 3 independent authorities.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

You don't have even have one that is consistent with 9-11 images.

my text has more FACT in it than your images

 

[Christophera]

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?)

you are the one bringing up the "initials" thing, jackass

Correct and digital alterations of the revision tables is important while spelling is not.

But the perpetrators would want you to make spelling more important.

 

[Fizz]

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?)

you are the one bringing up the "initials" thing, jackass

Correct and digital alterations of the revision tables is important while spelling is not.

But the perpetrators would want you to make spelling more important.

where is your proof that they were altered? how do you know its not an accurate representation of the original document?

 

[DiveCon]

Three thousand are dead but spelling is important(?)

you are the one bringing up the "initials" thing, jackass

Correct and digital alterations of the revision tables is important while spelling is not.

But the perpetrators would want you to make spelling more important.

you have not proven that what you show is in fact, an alteration and not just a scanning anomaly