9/11 EXIF Data

I was always fascinated by this research. I decided to let others on FB know about this on recent 9/11. The Bingham pic is original. I used this EXIF link in next, which is different than the EXIF used on previous version of LRF. Notice Date Created. This backs up the Last Picture Day Taken on other EXIF used. There was a question as to what that phrase meant.

Screenshot_2021-09-11-12-19-14.pngScreenshot_2021-09-11-12-19-25.png



R (4).jpeg
 
Last edited:
The above two persons are Pentagon personnel. As will rest going forward. So far out of first four pics, two have 2/15/00. These two pics do not.amundson.craig.jpgbarnes.melissa.jpg
 

Mr Robot

New member
Someone had modified the exif data, including the "Date Created" field, probably with a batch job. That's why some of the pics contain the same dates. They were processed in bulk via batchjob, fields like the IPTC "Caption Abstract" field were then filled manually.

So what is your conclusion from this? The pictures had to be created at these dates? I don't think so, as described above, someone just put in these dates as the supposed to be created dates. I absolutly agree that the filled dates are weird and suspicious. But it's just metadata that can easily be edited. Or am I wrong and missing something? Please correct me if I am wrong.

But isn't the most simple solution to this, that the person who filled those fields was a bit unsensitive when chosing the dates? Any idea who was responsible for putting in the exif data?
 
My conclusion is the 2/15/00 date created was taking a pic and adding the obit on that date. CNN needs to explain why they took down all those pics off the memorial page and replaced them with lit candles. I think Phil and Larry hit the jackpot on exif data.

I still have to do the rest of the photos.
 
Last edited:

gl69m

Member
@ Mr Robot (post #12)
Someone had modified the exif data, including the "Date Created" field, probably with a batch job. That's why some of the pics contain the same dates. They were processed in bulk via batchjob, fields like the IPTC "Caption Abstract" field were then filled manually.

So what is your conclusion from this? The pictures had to be created at these dates? I don't think so, as described above, someone just put in these dates as the supposed to be created dates. I absolutly agree that the filled dates are weird and suspicious. But it's just metadata that can easily be edited. Or am I wrong and missing something? Please correct me if I am wrong.

But isn't the most simple solution to this, that the person who filled those fields was a bit unsensitive when chosing the dates? Any idea who was responsible for putting in the exif data?
This is all well and dandy speculation on your part here, just like you are trying to say that the theory the obits were created on the "date time created"/"date time original" shown is just speculation. You pose a very simple question and answer here;
"But isn't the most simple solution to this, that the person who filled those fields was a bit unsensitive when chosing the dates? Any idea who was responsible for putting in the exif data?"
Well that hardly explains anything even if that happened to be true; so the much bigger question is who is or who are the people that created the obits in the first place and not only simply when they were created. I am not a good enough detective to really to do that myself, you know really I can't recall how much of that question had been researched and answered on the original forum. I think Phil and Larry are about as good as officianados of the details and facts and various "theories" of 9/11 (and details of 'theories' too I suppose, many such 'theories' they had debunked as well) as any I know of, unfortunately the bulk of the mass of information and data of the old forum is not too accessible at the moment. All I know is, is that Phill, Larry, and TheTruthisSweet, they're all definitely better detectives at 9/11 and the various false flag and staged events than I am.

from TheTruthisSweet (post #13)
My conclusion is the 2/15/00 date created was taking a pic and adding the obit on that date. CNN needs to explain why they took down all those pics off the memorial page and replaced them with lit candles. I think Phil and Larry hot the jackpot on exif data.

I still have to do the rest of the photos.
Absolutely the onus is on the MSM to explain why the obits were chosen from the respective sources they were pulled (I'm assuming) from,
(for instance the sources for pics in the previous posts here, The Contra Costa Times-Mark Bingham; Akamai Technologies-Daniel Lewin; The Daily Oklahoman-David Rice; Army Times Publishing Co.-Kris Romeo Bishundat, etc. etc.): and why they used obits/pics with those particular dates and data, that were then removed off the memorial page (after people were snooping into the exif data perhaps? like Phil and Larry caused them possibly to be removed huh:)). Or we can speculate like Mr Robot that it was just "unsensitive choosing" of some prior date(s) before 9/11/2001 (but no explanation for this huh??!) by some unknown mega batch 9/11 victim(or vicsim??) obit creator(s)? "Unsensitive"? Really?, does that mean they didn't do it nefariously or with any attempt/intent to deceive the world with this change of exif data or something? Yeah that really makes sense:rolleyes:.

One thing that makes me curious is the time listed after the date all shows the same thing; 00:00:00-05:00 (at least in all the pics posted so far), is this supposed to be Midnight or 12 AM, or 5 AM, or 0 hundred hours to 05:00 hundred hours (military time)? I'm a little confused by this really...
 

Mr Robot

New member
My conclusion is the 2/15/00 date created was taking a pic and adding the obit on that date. CNN needs to explain why they took down all those pics off the memorial page and replaced them with lit candles. I think Phil and Larry hit the jackpot on exif data.

I still have to do the rest of the photos.
I have to agree to your conclusion, I did more research now. And great idea from you to put the rest of the photos, please do that. Then we can compare the groups of similar dates.

In another thread the Admin had it explained perfectly: "The picture being taken day, from our understanding is overwritten when the picture is edited, as in this case, with the white side bar which says Family Photo/AP Press and also the obituary which is embedded into the digital coding of the picture."

menchaca.dora.jpg

In the context of the pics from 9/11 memorial site, the most logic answer is that they all got enhanced with the white side bar. Therefor the field "picture being taken day" is updated to the date when the white side bar got added. Which was probably the last change beeing done to the pictures before they got uploaded to the AP Server. This sounds way more realistic than my speculation about an unsensitive choosing.

34c11bb2c1c5d4.jpg

Absolutely the onus is on the MSM to explain why the obits were chosen from the respective sources they were pulled (I'm assuming) from,
(for instance the sources for pics in the previous posts here, The Contra Costa Times-Mark Bingham; Akamai Technologies-Daniel Lewin; The Daily Oklahoman-David Rice; Army Times Publishing Co.-Kris Romeo Bishundat, etc. etc.): and why they used obits/pics with those particular dates and data, that were then removed off the memorial page (after people were snooping into the exif data perhaps? like Phil and Larry caused them possibly to be removed huh:)).
Excellent explanation, thank you :).

Or we can speculate like Mr Robot that it was just "unsensitive choosing" of some prior date(s) before 9/11/2001 (but no explanation for this huh??!)
Now that I understand the context, I realize how hard it is to come with a valuable explanation for "unsensitive choosing".

I found this thread from the old forum.


One quote sticked to my mind: "It is about the fact that the exif data on many of these photos is far too similar to have been gathered by normal means. That is, like the Portraits of Grief, they become so similar as to suggest they may have all come from just a few sources."

by some unknown mega batch 9/11 victim(or vicsim??) obit creator(s)? "Unsensitive"? Really?, does that mean they didn't do it nefariously or with any attempt/intent to deceive the world with this change of exif data or something? Yeah that really makes sense:rolleyes:.
Although it is not beyond the realms of possibility, the likelyhood of it beeing an unsensitive mistake of some editor is very low. Those pictures should come from different sources. The batchjob then must have been executed by some agency that thought nobody dives deeper into this.
When TheTruthIsSweet puts all pics in comparison, then you will see that some fields are filled identical (due to the batchjob).

All I know is, is that Phill, Larry, and TheTruthisSweet, they're all definitely better detectives at 9/11 and the various false flag and staged events than I am.
Your answer was pretty damn smart too. The thoroughness of the admins and some members research is very very impressive and kind of gives me back my faith into humanity. Without such brains we would be lost.
 
Was informed earlier that Clearwire was the company that set up and did the work on CNN Memorial page. Mr. Robot, thanks for that link to old forum. Very valuable information.
 
Top