Who is Alexander Ace Baker (Colin Alexander)...?

By Mark Conlon

I came across this fascinating video called "Who is Alexander Ace Baker". As part of my research I have been studying some of the background connections Ace Baker has... His arrival and presence in the "No-Planes" movement is somewhat dubious following the strange behaviour that followed involving him "faking" his own suicide on Jim Fetzer's show, while causing division in the "No-Planes" community. 

It has also has been shown that he was deliberately promoting "false" video fakery misinformation, thus consequently casting doubt in people's mind over the authenticity of the video evidence record of "Flight 175". He also denounced the use of holographic technology. 

Video information below:

Published on 14 Jul 2009: Who is Alexander Ace Baker

Alexander "Ace" Baker AKA Alexander Collin derives his YouTube name from Alexandra Kollontai http://www.youtube.com/collinalexander Reilly, Ace of Spies:

This British adventure series is a dramatisation of the fantastic real-life adventures, from 1903 until the mid-1920s, of the Russian-born British agent Sidney Reilly AKA Sidney Rosenblum, who worked for MI6 (British Military Intelligence) as Agent ST-1.

The programme is based on books by Robin Bruce Lockhart - "The amazing true story of the world's first international super spy."

Other background information about Ace Baker:

Ace Baker and his wife work extensively for the media, both TV and Hollywood. Ace and his wife Claire Marlo, also have a production company called “Invisible Hand Production”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clair_Marlo

https://www.clairmarlo.com/

https://www.antiwarsongs.org/artista.php?id=10948&lang=en&rif=1

They have worked for companies such as: NBC, ABC, FOX, CBS and Paramount, Columbia, Disney, Franchise. Hollywood was busy paving the minds for the 911 attacks! What is Ace doing among them? Ace Baker has produced the musical scores mostly for films by Fred Olen Ray and John Puch - Franchise Phoenician Entertainment. Some films below produced by Phoenician Entertainment, note: the themes of these films; involving plane crashes, hijackings and terrorism.

  

He has also awarded a gold medal for his beat programming of ICE-T records. Ace also works with Reality Check Studios who is a software partner of Vizrt.

Vizrt’s product suite is used by the world’s leading broadcasters including: CNN, CBS, Fox, BBC, Sky, ITN, ZDF, Star TV, TV Today, CCTV and NHK. Also, many world-class production houses and corporate institutions, including both the New York and London Stock Exchanges, utilise Vizrt solutions. The 2002 VIZRT- Missile Defence Agency Connection which also works with Directed Energy Weapons, is confirmed since 1996. Vizrt are also connected to 3D holographic imaging. The type of technology Ace Baker was trying to steer people away from being involved on 9/11. Other research shows that Vizrt/RealityCheck/realityx is actually an Israeli Defence Company: http://www.vizrt.com/news/press_releases/article1347.ece.  

Does this show indirect links to holographic technology and directed energy?

My conclusion:

Does this suggest Ace Baker’s role was to infiltration the “No-Planes” community, and smoothly gain confidence and trust from the 9/11 research community. Jim Fetzer played a major role in helping Ace Baker promote the idea of “video fakery” using compositing through his radio shows - The Dynamic Duo and later the The Real Deal. Ace Baker claimed that compositing techniques such as 'Luma Keying' was used to insert a fake plane into the live TV coverage of 9/11. However there is one problem with this theory. Luma keying was shown to not be possible in the Chopper 5 video, plus not ALL eyewitnesses could be faked or actors. There would be no way of controlling all the photographers and videographers in the New York area who really captured what they took to be a plane crashing into the towers. 

Does it also suggest Baker's role was to create a cover story by providing an explanation to explain all the anomalies captured in the video footage such as, disappearing wings and the non-existent collision defying Newtonian Physics between the South Tower building and the plane, captured in the video evidence footage. Was the “video fakery” explanation used as a form of perception management to cover up the use of an advanced 3D Volumetric image projection hologram, which was potentially captured by many photographers, videographers and seen by the eyewitnesses?

It is not known to many people that Ace Baker was also hired to produce his film (The Great American Psy Opera) promoting "video fakery" while also discrediting Dr. Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds and other 9/11 researchers. This information came to light due to the late Gerard Holmgren disclosing Ace Baker's e-mail asking Holmgren to be involved in his film. Ace Baker has since disappeared after faking his own death on Jim Fetzer's radio show, in a bizarre fake suicide. It was established that Baker was still alive and did the stunt as a piece of "art performance". 

I will leave the reader to draw their own conclusions about Ace Baker's role in the 9/11 research community.  

The North Tower Airplane Wing Gash and the Gelatin PSYOP

By Mark Conlon

In this short analysis of the first "alleged" plane impact explosion on the North Tower, I am going to demonstrate once and for all, that it was not a secondary explosion, or cutter charges that caused the plane wing gash 6 seconds after the initial explosion captured in the Naudet video footage at 8:46 a.m. on 9/11.

This suggestion has been made by countless 9/11 researchers over the years, and it is my belief that this idea has been deliberately put-out to ostensibly cover-up and conceal something else which took place during the time when the North Tower got its plane shaped hole.

Below, Simon Shack suggested in his short film - 9/11 Amateur film - Part 2, that a secondary explosion or cutter charges caused the plane wing gash 6 seconds after the initial explosion.

Below, Shack claims that the secondary linear explosion is made 6 seconds after initial impact using pre-placed charges.

When we study the Naudet video closely, this isn't what we observe regarding the behaviour of the explosion, which Shack, Ace Baker Jim fetzer and others have ostensibly claimed was a secondary event.

Detailed analysis and short video below:

Below, we can observe how the wind drifts the bright ball of glowing fumes across the North Tower face, in a westerly direction.

Below we can see how the glowing ball of fumes conceals the initial impact area, but as the wind drifts the glowing fumes across the face of the North Tower it begins to reveal the wing gash and plane shaped hole.

As wind continues to drift the fumes across the North Tower face it exposes the already made but hidden plane shaped hole, thus creating the illusion that the wing gash was created 6 seconds after the initial impact. It is the behaviour between the wind and the glowing fumes combined which creates the illusion of the appearance of the wing gash. This proves the plane wing gash was NOT made 6 seconds later, as suggested by various 9/11 researchers, however was simply an illusion.

Here's a short video below, highlighting the behaviour of the fireball and the reveal of the wing shape:

This video demonstrates without a shadow of doubt, that the plane wing shaped gash did not appear 6 seconds after the initial impact time. It was just concealed by the fumes which eventually drifted westwards across the face of the North Tower revealing the plane wing gash.
  
The Gelatin Art Students PSY OP & Cover Up of Advanced Technologies...

The Naudet video footage above has been cited by many 9/11 researchers such as, Ace Baker, Jim Fetzer and later Rebekah Roth, as evidence of proof of involvement of the Israeli art students group called Gelatin, who they allege are responsible for pre-planting the cutter charges and explosives in the North Tower to create the plane shaped holes. It is my belief (based on evidence) this story is a convenient cover story to conceal more significant evidence involving more "unconventional" means to create the plane shaped holes and also the illusions of the planes in the sky in New York.

Firstly, the Gelatin art students were not Israeli, they were Austrian. Secondly, they were not in the South Tower, so this does not account for the creation of the plane shaped hole in the South Tower building. Thirdly, the Gelatin art group were housed on the 91st floor of the North Tower, and the North Tower damage was between the 93rd - 97th floors. Finally, at the time of "alleged" impacts in the North Tower at 8:46 a.m. and the South Tower at 9:02 a.m. the earth's magnetic field fluctuated and spiked. As far as I am aware, bombs, explosives or plane crashes cannot cause the earth's magnetic field to fluctuate and spike in this fashion. This evidence has been concealed from public knowledge. See below:

 

The magnetometer fluctuations are indicative of some type of field interference taking place on 9/11, which happened during every event on 9/11. All 4 plane crashes and the destruction of the North Tower, South Tower and WTC 7.  Please watch this short segment taken from the - 9/11 Alchemy "Facing Reality" film below:

 
Watch Film Here: 9/11 Alchemy "Facing Reality"

It is my belief after carefully studying the Gelatin art student story, that the story was created and used to conceal the evidence I have cited above, thus to aid the promotion of "conventional" means to explain the creation of the plane shaped holes in the buildings, and also cover up the use of a sophisticated holographic "image projection" technology to create planes in the sky, which many people observed, photographed and videoed on their camcorders, thus why the "video fakery" PSY OP cover story was invented and introduced to conceal anomalies captured in the video and photographic evidence record - example, missing wings on the planes and lack of crash impact collision physics between the building and plane.

The name 'Gelatin' also implies explosives if you check the dictionary. 
 

 

However, 'Gelatin' is also related to holographic technology, as it provides 100% diffraction. Also it is referenced to in a declassified IDA Memorandum - An Israeli document from April 1987 called Critical Technology Assessment - Israel and NATO Nations. See Below:

So could 'Gelatin' be a cryptic clue as to the type of technologies deployed to create the plane shaped holes in the buildings and also the plane illusions in the sky on 9/11? At the same time we have the idea being promoted with a story reported in the New York Times on 18th August 2001 in relation to the Gelatin art students which has gained traction in the alternative media which ideally has created a cover story about them being Israeli art students and "bomb experts" which aids the cover-up of unconventional advanced technologies involved to create the planes shape holes and plane illusion. Ace Baker, Jim Fetzer and later Rebekah Roth have promoted this false story about the Gelatin art student group. They are not bomb experts, or Israeli, neither were they in the South Tower, which Ace Baker claimed in his Film - The Great American Psy Opera. Ace Baker's background is very suspect which I have written about here in this blog post and also Simon (Hytten) Shack's behaviour which Andrew Johnson wrote about in an article. Simon (Hytten) Shack also has usual connections with his brother's (Mario) sponsorship deal with the Bin Laden Group, and Shack's father worked for the United Nations. Shack also confessed to having done paid work for the European Space Agency. It is also interesting how the mainstream media have left the Gelatin art students story up online since 18th August 2001 which has helped to create this misleading "false" story, when more important evidence has been removed online. We have to consider that the story was deliberately put out and left up online for this very reason. Why is Ace Baker, Jim Fetzer and others so trusting of this story, when they know all too well how the mainstream media works; perception management and psychological operations?

Conclusion: 

From my analysis of the plane wing gash formation, it was not made by conventional explosives or cutter charges that were activated 6 seconds later, something which has been promoted by Jim Fetzer, Ace Baker, Simon Shack, Rebekah Roth and other researchers, who are most likely promoting this false information to conceal the involvement of "unconventional" technologies used instead to create the plane shaped holes in the North and South Towers and plane illusion in the sky. The Gelatin art students story has acted as a cover story and perception management mainly in the alternative 9/11 truth groups, which ostensibly introduced a "false" explanation for the creation and formation of the plane shaped holes and promote the use of conventional explosives, while ignoring and concealing evidence of the use of unconventional technologies such as, holographic and directed energy. It is interesting also what role the "video fakery" cover story PSY OP played to explain the anomalies captured in peoples' video and photographic evidence. Something I have written about extensively throughout my blogs.

More Ad hominem Attacks From Steve De'ak

By Mark Conlon

I want to highlight and bring attention to Steve De'ak's response, to a short article I wrote, and video I made. De'ak took to the 9/11 Plane Hoax Facebook page thread, by calling me a "Con"? De'ak, a custom to reverting to his usual name calling, which deflect attention away from actually talking about the content of my video analysis. 

De'ak admits in his Facebook comment that he didn't read or listen to what I was saying in my video, as he only read a so-called apparent "frauds" list. 

This is an inaccurate reference in his comment, as I make NO reference to the list being a "list of frauds" in my article, which he would realise if he had read the article or watched the video. In the paragraph I provide a "brief" history of "No-Planes", then show a list of people who have promoted video fakery, no-planes and also holograms.

Please Note: The two people I refer to in my article above Rosalee Grable AKA (The Webfairy) and Gerard Holmgren passed away.. which I reflected in the article saying "Sadly both are no longer with us".. 

If you read through all my previous blogs, there is no reference to either Rosalee Grable or Gerard Holmgren being disinformation OPs, and they are NOT certainly portrayed in a "negative" light, or being called "FRAUDS" in my blog articles. I have merely quoted a fact that both believed "No-Planes" were involved in the WTC attacks, and also believe TV Fakery/Video Fakery was involved, which I used to believe was correct, although now after extensive research of my own, disagree with both Grable's and Holmgren's assertions. To be clear, I am only stating from observing Grable in her many interviews, Grable's own position on the subject. The same for Holmgren. I just state their last known position on the subject, which is fact.

 Please Note: The list accurately states that Steve De'ak has promoted Video Fakery, No Planes and Crash Test. At no-point is he called a "fraud" or was the list called a "frauds list". In my articles I have always been respectful towards Steve De'ak, and expressed why I disagree with his findings or theories regarding "video fakery" and the Hezarkhani video. 

In fact I showed Steve De'ak credit for showing "humility" twice and admitting when he was wrong about two theories he had changed his position on after observing new evidence. So I am not quite sure as to why he feels this is bad to document people's theories, or make light of the changes in their positions once held. 

I even quoted where I had changed my own position on the Fox News - Chopper5 "Nose-out" sequence because of new evidence presented to me. So Steve's issues towards myself pointing-out when people are wrong in their theories, according Steve De'ak makes me a "CON", which doesn't really quite sit with the investigative research method, as after all my main body of research has proven conclusively the many flaws in Simon Shack's - September Clues film. Is this something I should not have talked about or pointed out regarding the "incorrect" points which are made by Simon Shack, or should I have kept quite about it so we can all still believe the inaccurate points proposed by Simon Shack in his September Clues film? Would this bring around progress in finding the truth, just so people can feel nice and comfortable in their "comfort zone"... NO! So why does Steve claim this is a dishonest practice, and not someone looking to find the truth...?

Please Note: I have not called Steve De'ak a "fraud", as he claimed I have in his latest Facebook comment. I would ask him to produce evidence of me calling him personally a FRAUD...?

I also correct De'ak's accusations, that "I" had deleted my YouTube comments, which I addressed in my recent response published - 19/12/2017 to De'ak's questions to me on his blog/website - 17/12/2017. As I explained, my YouTube Channel was terminated by YouTube, thus deleting all my comments in the thread, and not by me deleting my comments, which De'ak has again "inaccurately" repeated in his Facebook comments. 

On a final note, all this diverts attention away from the "original" findings of the analysis I did regarding the Hezarkhani video, thus pointing-out the incorrect claims made about the Michael Hezarkhani video and also my analysis of Steve De'ak's claim about Michael Hezarkhani fuzzing-out, blurring and fabricating his video evidence to conceal the plane gash, which I believe to be incorrect, and based on no evidence offered other than what Steve De'ak says Michael Hezarkhani did to his video.

So I will leave it to the viewer/reader of the article and my update to make of Steve De'ak's claims about me and to draw your own conclusions.

Thank you for reading and caring...

New Video Evidence Showing Ferry Boat Docked In Battery Park

By Mark Conlon

I feel this is important new evidence discovered by YouTube channel: Conspiracy Cuber, who posted this latest video evidence of the ferry boat docked in Battery Park which Michael Hezarkhani and Carmen Taylor were stationed on when they documented the 2nd WTC event. See Below:

Make sure you check-out the video description, as there is a lot of information that has been included.

Please follow me to keep track of new blog articles I post, or you can contact me using the Contact Form located at the bottom of the side-bar on the right hand side of the blog. 

Thanks for reading, watching and caring! 

Setting The Record Straight About The Michael Hezarkhani Video

By Mark Conlon

For many years, falsehoods have been circulated attributed to the Michael Hezarkhani video, which has cast doubt in peoples minds over the authenticity of what was really captured in the video in relation to the plane. The video captures a number of strange anomalies, such as, impossible plane speed and impossible crash physics. Theories such as video fakery and CGI compositing have been suggested to explain why the anomalies exist in the video, however hundreds of people did witness the plane in sky and crashing into the building. Also, many researchers have claimed the location where Michael Hezarkhani took his video, doesn't exist. 

Below, is a still image from the Michael Hezarkhani video: 

In the video below, I discuss the misconceptions which have been circulated over the years by various 9/11 researchers, which I show are incorrect. 

Thanks for reading & watching!

Mysterious Flashes & Fumes Near The Woolworth Building on 9/11

By Mark Conlon

In the video below, it shows some type of fumes rising and a mysterious flash, along with some small flying objects at very low altitude, which don't appear to be either a helicopter nor birds. It appears some type of electrical static interference was happening near the Woolworth building on 9/11. 

Also captured was two other mysterious flashes. See below: 

In the image below, it shows some type of trail, whether it is fumes of some kind is hard to tell? 

Again, in the image below, it shows another trail. Again whether it is fumes of some kind is hard to say?

Conclusion:

Could this be part of the electrical static interference from the directed energy weapon, which was used to destroy the World Trade Center Towers? What is observed in the video and the GIF images are very strange. 

Were the mysterious orbs captured in videos and photographs, which I wrote about in a previous article, connected to what we are observing here in the video and GIF images?   

This definitely needs further investigation!

Thanks for reading & caring!      

September Clues - BUSTED! - By: Anthony Lawson - Nov 2007

By Mark Conlon

This is an excellent analysis of Simon Shack's film September Clues by the late Anthony Lawson, who made some great observations in relation to Simon Shack's presentation of "alleged" evidence of TV Fakery on 9/11. 

Watch video here: https://www.bitchute.com/video/DTOKSijieKtW/  Also, video embedded below:
  

 
Disclaimer: I "disagree" with Anthony Lawson's final point he makes at the end of his video in relation to the "impossible plane speed" that a 767 Boeing plane can travel at 572mph at sea level. 

As we can see yet again, Simon Shack uses very deceptive means to present his evidence. This has been a common theme with Simon Shack throughout all his September Clues films, which can no-longer be trusted to present 9/11 video evidence in a fair and balanced objective manner. 

Simon Shack appears to lack any "real" credibility anymore, and has proved himself to be extremely poor at conducting research analysis, or he is simply setting-out to deceive his viewers of his films. 

What exactly is Simon Shack's mission? 

Is Simon Shack promoting the idea of ‘video fakery’ to discredit the video evidence record of 9/11? When studying Simon Shack’s presentation in his film, it becomes clear that he has continually omitted or misrepresented evidence – by using cleverly timed editing.  This has therefore concealed evidence which shows a number of his claims are false. From my past analysis, where I have disproven other claims he makes in his film, it is now appearing to be a deliberate pattern of deceptive and misleading behaviour, rather than poor research skills, suggesting an agenda to promote disinformation about the video record on 9/11. Is Simon Shack promoting the idea that ‘video fakery’ explains anomalies in the behaviour of Flight 175 when it crashes into the South Tower? Is Simon Shack attempting to discredit the 9/11 videos to help conceal what was really captured in the videos? Again, I ask the question - is Simon Shack disseminating disinformation in an attempt to hide the fact that advanced image projection technology was used to create the illusion of plane crashes?

Is Simon Shack is overseeing a "Psychological Operation" to promote ‘video fakery’ to lead people away from closely studying other explanations for the 9/11 video evidence. When people believe they have an explanation for the anomalies, it stops them studying the evidence any further.

This is a great analysis by the late Anthony Lawson. R.I.P, who really "BUSTED" Simon Shack along time ago and should be credited for his efforts to expose the "falsehoods" contained in Shack's film, although I completely "disagree" with Anthony Lawson's final point at the end of his video in relation to the "impossible plane speed" that a 767 Boeing plane can travel 572mph at sea level. I have posted his video purely on merit for the September Clues analysis.  
  
To find out more about Simon (Hytten) Shack and his mission and his unusual connections, read this article by Andrew Johnson:
9 or 11 “Clues” about Simon Shack and a 3D-Analysis of Flight 175