Conversation with Kathy Cacicedo 9/11 Second Plane Photographer
A Major Blow For The Video Fakery and CGI Promoters
This is a phone conversation that Jeff Hill had with Kathy Cacicedo, who was a photographer on 9/11, who captured photographs of the second “alleged” plane.
Some things to note in the phone call. Kathy received emails from people accusing her of faking her photographs (inserting the plane). Kathy maintains she observed what she took to be a plane in the sky. “A grey plane”. Kathy is also a free-lance photographer at the time, who mainly worked in advertising and doing wedding photographs. She also shot her photographs on film, not digital, and has the negatives, which were developed at the Star-Ledger.
My Thoughts
This conversation alone is a major blow for the video fakery and CGI promoters, who persist in maintaining, there was nothing in the sky, and the plane was inserted into all the TV footage and photographs. However, the videos and photographs show impossible plane speed, impossible crash physics, along with disappearing and reappearing wings/tail section.
Also notable is the inconsistencies with the reflective lighting and shadows on the plane.
So what ever Kathy was observing and photographing she took to be a plane was not a real plane or solid object, because a plane’s wings and tail section does not disappear and reappear like a magic trick. So we can rule out other theories, such as, a supped-up military plane, or a remotely guided controlled plane and video fakery. None of these theories are sufficient in explaining the three major issues.
The evidence shows some type of “real-time” 3D volumetric image projection illusion technology was at play, which satisfies all criteria, of eyewitnesses who seen a plane, who photographed and videoed a plane. Also, the criteria is satisfied with eyewitnesses who report seeing a small plane or missile, which they would have observed the 3D projection glitch issues which seemed to be the case from differing perspectives where the plane was not convincing due to its disappearing wings. Eyewitness Les Sweeting is a prime example. See video clip below:
For those interested in furthering their studies about the military - 3D volumetric image projection technology and its existence, please follow the link below to a number of articles I have written covering the technology and plane issues.
https://911planesresearch.substack.com/t/3d-volumetric-holograms
Also, you can watch the 2018 film I was involved with called - 9/11 Alchemy “Facing Reality”.
Thanks for reading, listening and caring!
If Kathy is shooting ASA 500 (fast) film outside in sunlight, then her shutter speed must be high too. (Also she said she was shooting into the sun.) This would be a good opportunity to test out the theory that the image of the plane is being 'drawn' over a short span of time, since with a short shutter opening some part of what is being 'drawn' might be missed when the shutter closed before it finished the 'drawing' -- as you have suggested before. Of course with a reflex film camera, there would be a curtain that moves quickly across the film and at very short exposures, it would be more like a slit that moves across (but the effect of missing some part being being 'drawn' would be the same).
So it seems we have glitches in photos/videos that are CONSISTENT in 2 (or more ?) shots at exactly the same time, and then glitches that appear DIFFERENT in different shots at the same time (i.e. the lighting effects).
My own belief is that these are not done using conventional, yet very advanced technology, but that it is in effect alien technology (like was used to create illusions of the Virgin Mary in Fatima and with other Marian Apparitions (The Portuguese researchers who did extensive research on Fatima concluded it was a UFO event. one of their books: HEAVENLY LIGHTS: The Apparitions of Fátima and the UFO Phenomenon) Also they discovered after going to the reports of the original witnesses, that what different witnesses said they saw varied widely -- but it was more like the total illusion always remained the same, except that some saw its totality, some only some part of it, while others nothing at all.
So if you consider with regard to the 9/11 planes that it was actually a physical missile which was cloaked in an illusion this would be consistent with the Marian Apparition effect, where that guy in this post saw only the missile (w/o being cloaked the plane illusion) while most others saw the full illusion over the missile. And some seem to have vacillated between seeing a plane, then something else -- unknown or unremembered to them. And if everyone is saying "planes" you become wary at saying "sometimes it was a plane, other times (when the illusion faltered) a missile.
Marian Illusions have been photographed as well, and if you consider someone like Ted Serios who could project with only his mind, images of real objects and landscapes onto the film in a camera, you can see that such illusive illusions as those made in someone's mind, can also be photographed. Similarly there are genuine photos of ghosts.
Also the high speed and drastic maneuvers (which planes cannot do) point to it being a missile. As well it explains how the 'plane' at the Pentagon fit into the hole. Bill Brockbrader, a navy SEAL who guided Tomahawk missiles on their final approach to targets in the Middle East in the 90s (before the uplink was fast enough to be done remotely) has said that the way the 'plane' banked and came at the Pentagon, was exactly how he guided the Tomahawks. If you are creating just a holographic illusion of planes hitting buildings, then why not have all aspects -- speed, maneuvers etc. match what an actual plane would do ? An illusion of just a plane could follow a preset and direct approach path, but if you are firing a missile you couldn't plan the exact path beforehand and some real time corrections would always be needed as it zeroed in to the target. Also if it was a real missile you couldn't predict exactly where on the building it would hit, so any illusion to do with the 'Wily Coyote' holes needed to be flexible in terms of the exact location, as well.
If we are talking about illusions over solid objects, why then not also include how the top of the (i believe) South Tower rotated to keep from coming down off to the side, and consider that the nature of this illusion was the same as the one of planes cloaking actual missiles ? So in all 5 cases (N & S Tower collapse, 'planes' cloaking missiles that hit N & S Towers and Pentagon), we have solid objects cloaked with illusions, and in each case the illusion needs to do some real time tweaking -- the "plane' illusion to the specific approach its missile made and (at least with the South Tower) -- of the building falling illusion to the specific physical disintegration characteristic of its building. However it's not quite that simple, since unlike the hole in the Pentagon which matched a missile hit, the holes in the Towers matched that of the illusion (a plane). So there's a lot of tweaking of illusions to solid matter going on, but it is a comprehensive approach to all effects observed.
But how did the actual solid buildings come down ? An alternative source says it was through scalar pulses directed underground. i remember there was this maintenance manager who kept trying to get anyone to hear his story that about 15 mins. before any plane hit, he was in a sub-basement of one of the Towers and one of his workers came to him with all of his skin peeling off. This would be from the scalar pulses (which apparently travel slowly underground) arriving and collecting their energies in the Bathtub before doing their deed on the buildings. Similarly it would explain why the jumpers jumped later, after the effects reached the tops of the Towers.
Remember all buildings in the Bathtub were heavily damaged. Building 7 was not in the Bathtub, and was a conventional demolition (which left a conventional rubble pile) and it was done to create inconsistent data to how the Towers actually came down. They even announced on TV that they were "pulling" it, expecting that those who questioned the official narrative, would settle on a controlled demo explanation, avoiding at all cost any esoteric explanations. (Holographic Insert Technology is supposed to be illegal in the galaxy.) Scalar pulses coming from underground explains how cars burned at a distance from the WTC. Also it can be seen being used this way in the weird fires, like Lahaina and Paradise, where cars some distance from the main fires, had engine blocks and glass melted, while rubber and paper remained intact.
Why would you even need an illusion over a crumbling building ? It could be that the effect of the building crumbling from the scalar pulses, could not be made to look like a plane could possibly have caused it (it might have started crumbling at the bottom, or like with the South Tower having the top just tumble off). So there was a dynamic illusion created over an actual crumbling building until the rubble came to rest and the illusion coincided enough with the remains. Meanwhile stuff went on inside the crumpling buildings (people survived) which didn't match what observers saw happening in the illusion.
While I appreciate the work of authentic 9/11 investigators, I find much of the discussion surrounding the event, similar to the JFK assassination, falls in the "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" category. What truly matters is that we know they did it, they're still doing it and they are going to continue doing it until their goals are achieved.