Looking for John P. Salamone

The notion of 'thousands of victims' was crucial to generate universal public outrage. However, having 3000 angry families breathing down their necks was never part of the perps' demented plan. Our ongoing analyses and investigations suggest that NO one died on 9/11.

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby lux on February 9th, 2013, 6:49 pm

simonshack wrote:
CTGal1011 wrote: However, a tiny part of me wanted to see what BBS was going to "offer" on other subjects. I guess I am a rubbernecker after all.

Dear CtGal, a tiny part of me is a bit like that as well ...

The thing is, when I've seen enough - that's enough. Let me just inform everyone that BBS contacted me on Facebook ten days ago or so (yeah, I'm on the horrid FB too now, reluctantly - just to show that I'm a 'normal' person - heh!...). BBS then proceeded to send me a string of messages (7 in total), most of which were lamenting about Hoi's "bad manners" and "verbal abuse". But get this: a few hours after 'she' was blocked from Cluesforum - 'her' FB page was simply deleted - point blank! In her last message she had called me "the worst kind of liar", so I replied: "A liar? What exactly have I been lying about?" But my reply never went through - as her FB account was already gone...

Now, what does that tell you?


It tells me the trolls are stymied by the excellent troll-handling done here by hoi and others and they are trying to attack that very troll-handling in hopes they can rally some support for the idea of easing up on them and allowing fakes onto the forum who pretend to have known 9/11 victims and thus erode confidence in the research.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby lux on February 9th, 2013, 7:05 pm

omaxsteve wrote:Hoi and Simon:

The treatment of new members is not really any of my business, I also do not want to appear to be questioning your judgement as again, that is not my place.

I do not mean to be critical of your work as a moderators,or as a researchers. I think (both of) you are terrific at both. I only wish that everyone here used the same level of civility that they would expect from others. I am not sure that outsiders will always distinguish between hostility towards potential shills versus just plain hostility as a means to keep others from questioning your theories. (as in the sites that refuse to entertain or even allow discussion of the "no plane" theory).

All your points, and Hoi's,rebutting my defense of BlindedbyScience, are well taken and I appreciate the fact that you responded with your usual candor and thoughtfulness.

There are some of your points that I disagree with but there is nothing wrong with that.

The purpose of my writing in "defense" of the poster is only to point out that there may be some negative consequences to the level of hostility an disrespect shown to new members.

I may have been incorrect in my assumption, but I believe that one of the primary purposes of the forum is to disseminate information and expose the MSM for the hoaxsters that they are. In my opinion the best way to do that is to have as many new members join as possible. Each new fake event , like the Sandy Hook affair brings more visitors and exposes more people to the media fakery. By posting and contributing the new members become more more involved and start digging deeper into the research here and the deeper they dig the more aware they become that the media is nothing more than a propaganda machine. As they get more convinced they will spread their opinion to others.

Treating members with disrespect and `chasing" members away with rudeness, when the exact same point same can be made in a diplomatic fashion does not serve any useful purpose.

This little anecdote may better illustrate my point. When my brother and I argue, I can always tell when I am "winning " the argument by his demeanor, The angrier he gets, the louder he shouts, the more he loses his temper and becomes hostile , the better I am doing. When an impartial outsiders watches a debate the debater who "keeps his cool" always seems more credible than the one who acts "hostile".

A good theory , especially one that is so shocking and incredible when first heard like the vicsim theory, gains strength by welcoming, and standing up to, and refuting, challenges to its validity through sound arguments and evidence NOT by bullying and dismissing "out of hand" any and all who dare to challenge it.

Challenging one`s assertions is far more appealing than challenging the person who makes them. The fact that someone was a classmate of a vicsim a dozen or so years prior to 911 does nothing to invalidate the whole VicSim theory. The fact that someone believes that "some" victims were real people and others were fictitional, should not in itself be reason to call them names and be abused. At worse, it may mean that some of the identities were taken from, or based on, actual living people.

And yes, while on this forum we are just screen names and anonymous entities, for the most part there are real people behind those entities.

Best regards,

Steve O.


P.S. the decrease in the quality of my writing is probably due to a combination of old age , and the fact that my old trusty large screen desktop with the nice big keyboard is no longer functional and now I am trying to get used to a tiny laptop with very small keys and a 14 inch screen. I will try to make a better effort with my spelling and punctuation in the future.


This entire post by omaxsteve is extremely troll-like. It substitutes the more sympathetic term "new member" for the real issue: persons claiming to have known 9/11 victims. It feigns respect for the moderation here while doing nothing but criticizing it. Similar sentiments have been expressed by this person in other posts as well.

IMO, if the person who wrote this isn't a plant then he would certainly suffice until the next one came along.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby simonshack on February 10th, 2013, 3:32 am

*

Just for the record (I frankly don't care if I am violating the privacy of this BBS entity by posting this).

This is the full content of the last PM that BBS sent me on Fakebook (just before deleting 'her' own FB account):

"Lisa Paige" wrote:
"You obviously haven't really read any of my posts in detail. You have just exposed yourself as the worst kind of liar. Good riddance from FB. But I'm sure you'll hear from my agency again. BTW, it's not CIA."

I'd just love to hear from her agency again! Will they offer me a plum, spy-busting James Bond-type intelligence job - with a licence to kill ? :lol:
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6361
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby MrSinclair on February 10th, 2013, 5:21 am

I commend Hoi and other senior members here for maintaining a high standard and throwing down a gauntlet. I encountered it myself with my first posts as they addressed my having met the step-son of an alleged victim (Paige Hackel). I read the site extensively prior to first posting and so it was quite obvious that the one thing not to do was take attacks personally. I said what little I knew, stayed on point with the inevitable and completely justified queries and left it at that.

Clearly Hoi's instincts were right from the start, honed no doubt by seeing this crap too many times. Even I see a certain cadence to the shills, the way they shift to a personal or unrelated topic just when the pointed questions reach a certain crescendo. It's almost musical in a way. BBS dug her own grave here as it were and with the additional information recently posted here we can be entirely certain that she is garbage.

I say many thanks for the insistence on good grammar and spelling. I also say thanks for the vigilance which keeps this site continually relevant. Having high standards is in no way a bad thing. We should all be grateful that personal feelings, particularly those of the newly arrived mean little or nothing and that the material and issues are what matter here.
MrSinclair
Member
 
Posts: 382
Joined: December 23rd, 2011, 2:29 am

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby hoi.polloi on February 10th, 2013, 8:45 am

Failbook wrote:BTW, it's not CIA.


So, it's the CIA then, after all. Go figure.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4779
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby antipodean on February 10th, 2013, 10:49 am

The thing is, when I've seen enough - that's enough. Let me just inform everyone that BBS contacted me on Facebook ten days ago or so (yeah, I'm on the horrid FB too now, reluctantly - just to show that I'm a 'normal' person - heh!...). BBS then proceeded to send me a string of messages (7 in total), most of which were lamenting about Hoi's "bad manners" and "verbal abuse". But get this: a few hours after 'she' was blocked from Cluesforum - 'her' FB page was simply deleted - point blank! In her last message she had called me "the worst kind of liar", so I replied: "A liar? What exactly have I been lying about?" But my reply never went through - as her FB account was already gone...

Now, what does that tell you?


Simon just curious, when BBS contacted you on Facebook did she do so with a regular name ?
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 571
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby simonshack on February 10th, 2013, 1:29 pm

antipodean wrote:Simon just curious, when BBS contacted you on Facebook did she do so with a regular name ?

Yes. 'She' had a whole bunch of random, 'still life' pictures on her FB account - a couple of images of 'herself' and a handful of her teenage actress daughter.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6361
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby brianv on February 10th, 2013, 3:25 pm

simonshack wrote:*

Just for the record (I frankly don't care if I am violating the privacy of this BBS entity by posting this).

This is the full content of the last PM that BBS sent me on Fakebook (just before deleting 'her' own FB account):

"You obviously haven't really read any of my posts in detail. You have just exposed yourself as the worst kind of liar. Good riddance from FB. But I'm sure you'll hear from my agency again. BTW, it's not CIA."

I'd just love to hear from her agency again! Will they offer me a plum, spy-busting James Bond-type intelligence job - with a licence to kill ? :lol:


AMCE Shill Co.
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3861
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby omaxsteve on February 10th, 2013, 7:25 pm

Lux wrote:

This entire post by omaxsteve is extremely troll-like. It substitutes the more sympathetic term "new member" for the real issue: persons claiming to have known 9/11 victims. It feigns respect for the moderation here while doing nothing but criticizing it. Similar sentiments have been expressed by this person in other posts as well.

IMO, if the person who wrote this isn't a plant then he would certainly suffice until the next one came along.


I have stated on a number of occasions that I agree and full heartedly believe that most of the people who are claimed to have died on 911 were simulated entities that never really existed.

I happen to believe that this theory does not apply to 100% of the cases. I am 100% convinced that no planes crashed on 911 and that the media showed fake hollywood style videos.

I don't understand the hostility displayed here by some towards people who claim to have known one of the victims. I have no way to know whether this John Salomone charcater was ever a flesh and blood person that attended and played soccer on the Ogelthorpe University team 15 years prior to 911 and frankly, I don"t understand why if it's true, or someone believing it to be true, does any harm to this forum.

I would understand why someone would be chastised, ridiculed, and disparaged for claiming that Salomone, or anyone else , died as a result of planes crashing or buildings tumbling on 911.

I would think that people here could differentiate between a troll and someone who may have crossed paths with a vicsim. Why is it detrimental to this forum to even speculate that the perps pulled one, or some, of the vicsim list from actual people?

Could they not have used blackmail, bribery, or other methods to convince some families to offer up an already dead, or dying, loved one for the purpose?

It seems, in fact it is quite apparent , by the actions taken after leaving the forum, that BBS had some hidden agenda, but if her entire purpose was only to support the claim that this person or simulated person actually went to OU in the 80's, why even bother?

Why is that different than pointing out that one of the faked victims played hockey for the Boston Bruins in the 70's?. It does not in anyway contradict or invalidate the Vicsim theory in any way UNLESS the hypothesis is that 100% of all the alleged vicsims were 100% fabricated out of thin air.

If one believes, as I do, that some of the vicsims were actual people, or at least their identities were stolen from actual people, there is no harm in allowing discussion about someone having known someone years prior to 911. I personally believe that exploring those "connections" may actually bring us closer to uncovering some of the people who were involved in perpetrating the hoax.

Let's use BBS as an exampl; had she stayed on here and kept posting perhaps we may have been given some clues as to who she is working with and who her agency is.

If , and please correct me if I am wrong, the worst that someone like BBS , or anyone who claims to have known a Vicsim, can do is help us discover how and why that particular person, faked or real entity, was chosen for the role, why does everyone get so hostile and defensive?

No matter how much "proof" and old photos they can provide, it does nothing to counter the media fakery evidence shown here. On the other hand, if someone who posts here trying to claim that anyone at all died in the towers or the plane crash on 911, they deserve to be ridiculed, insulted, labeled as troll and an idiot and permanently banned.

To summarize, if believing as I do, that the great majority if VicSims were fabricated out of thin air, but SOME of the vicsims were once real live flesh and blood people, makes me a troll and not welcome here, than so be it. Ban me.

regards,

Steve O.
omaxsteve
Member
 
Posts: 178
Joined: March 29th, 2010, 1:44 am

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby hoi.polloi on February 11th, 2013, 1:01 pm

I would think that people here could differentiate between a troll and someone who may have crossed paths with a vicsim.


Do you not include yourself from that expectation? You may want to after it was shown you could not and are still complaining about it and defending blindedbyscience. Why, if you are valuable at telling a difference that we can't see, are you still hammering into this particular case - one of the worst examples of a shill, if not the worst, we've ever encountered?

Never before this have we actually gotten a shill that said, 'Hey, you're right, I'm a shill!' and yet you're still seeing stuff "in the pixels"? What? Pray tell, what is it?


Could they not have used blackmail, bribery, or other methods to convince some families to offer up an already dead, or dying, loved one for the purpose?


Fine, but why are you still speculating about this particular case where the perp is laughably encouraging us to believe they are one?


It seems, in fact it is quite apparent , by the actions taken after leaving the forum, that BBS had some hidden agenda,


Understatement award of 2 years of the forum.


but if her entire purpose was only to support the claim that this person or simulated person actually went to OU in the 80's, why even bother?


Your open-mindedness is laudable. But a bit philosophical at this point in their game. Gee, why did they destroy the buildings? Why fake airplanes? Why fake the city? Why monitor people's use of the Internet? Why develop Artificial Intelligence software, morph faces and develop fabricated novelistic identities? Why deceive?

Who knows? We don't - what more do you want? Is it really that difficult for you to figure out that supporting a fiction is what the perps are programmed/employed to do? Don't you think if it's not all fake, then we should be seeing some evidence that looks like reality led by real people instead of fakery presented by perps? Perhaps it's just a psychological study we're all being used for.

You are not getting banned, but you are not explaining your case well at all. What is your point - that this shilly fictitious identity was peppering the forum with real information? If there is an alternative agenda behind a perp being here besides defending the official story, what do you imagine that it is?

I insist we remain open to your obsession with real deaths/disappearances, but you are not baiting us with much: reality hiding somewhere in the shadow of overwhelming fakery, but that which we can never see nor prove without the help from lying perps?

:wacko:
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4779
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby lux on February 11th, 2013, 3:27 pm

omaxsteve wrote:I don't understand the hostility displayed here by some towards people who claim to have known one of the victims.


Because, obviously, it is a ruse that would be used by someone whose only purpose would be the erosion of the vicsim research. A situation that pops up here from time to time.

Frankly, it's a little hard for me to believe that someone wouldn't understand that. And, when expressed by someone who himself claims to know a 9/11 victim (or is related to someone who does) it becomes downright incredible.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby omaxsteve on February 14th, 2013, 4:18 pm

lux wrote:
omaxsteve wrote:I don't understand the hostility displayed here by some towards people who claim to have known one of the victims.


Because, obviously, it is a ruse that would be used by someone whose only purpose would be the erosion of the vicsim research. A situation that pops up here from time to time.

Frankly, it's a little hard for me to believe that someone wouldn't understand that. And, when expressed by someone who himself claims to know a 9/11 victim (or is related to someone who does) it becomes downright incredible.


With all due respect, Lux, that IS the whole point. I have stated, on numerous occasions that I believe that the VicSim research is sound, and I believe wholeheartedly that the huge majority if the VicSims were computer generated. I also happen to believe that "some" of the alleged Vics were taken from flesh and blood living people. I do not believe that the two are mutually exclusive, in fact, if the VicSim theory rests on the fact that ALL of Vics were computer generated entities , it would lose much of, if not all, its credibility.

The reason I would be more open and less hostile to posters who claim to have known a Vic, is that my opinion is that those “real vics" were chosen for a reason. Perhaps that is why their wives and families are the ones that are chosen to be celebrities, those that are often interviewed, and those that head up the different foundations. Think about it, if the perps did not utilize any "real" Vics where would the media find their pool of "celebrity" family members to parade on the airwaves?

I do not believe that these "real" Vics died in the towers, and, thanks to Simon and September Clues, I KNOW that they did not die in the non-existent airplanes. For all I know, they may still be alive and living with a new identity.

As you stated, I do admit to having a relative that “knew” a vic. I posted such in March 2010.
omaxsteve @ Mar 29 2010, 12:58 AM wrote:
My problem, is what about those victime that in fact really did exist. My sister is visiting from Maryland, and she knows (or knew) a victim who supposedly crashed in the plane at the pentagon. His name was Todd Reuben. In fact two weeks before sept 11, she sat at the same table as Todd Reuben and his wife at a wedding reception. Her daughter (my niece) was a class mate of one of Todd Reuben's children.

My sister reports that the former Mrs. Reuben has since moved to Florida and has remarried. She also said that she never showed any interest whatsoever in participating in any memorials.

I would love to believe that all the victims were "sims" but this person obviously existed. Is it possible that he is still alive and has assumed a different identity? I guess so.

One thing that I am absolutely certain of is that if he is in fact dead, he did not die on a plane that crashed in to the pentagon.

Has anyone done any research on this particular victim?


So according to your logic either my sister and my niece are lying, or I am a shill, is that correct, Lux?

I can, and in fact have, asked my sister for proof of this Todd Reuben`s existence but she has nothing that would “stand up” as solid evidence. (My sister, thinks I am crazy for even believing that there were no planes and she refuses to look at the evidence), I can prove that (at least one) of the entities purported to be Todd Reuben's daughter existed, but what difference would that make?

Hoi wrote;

Do you not include yourself from that expectation? You may want to after it was shown you could not and are still complaining about it and defending blindedbyscience. Why, if you are valuable at telling a difference that we can't see, are you still hammering into this particular case - one of the worst examples of a shill, if not the worst, we've ever encountered?

Never before this have we actually gotten a shill that said, 'Hey, you're right, I'm a shill!' and yet you're still seeing stuff "in the pixels"? What? Pray tell, what is it?


Personally, I don’t believe that BBS was “the worst example” of a shill. (Unless you are saying worst from the perp’s perspective). While her actions, and the messages she sent to Simon after her departure indicate that she has "issues" , nothing that she claimed, none of the evidence she provided, did anything to damage the VicSim research. Let’s say, hypothetically, that she stuck around and provided rock solid irrefutable evidence that she attended school with John Salomone, what would be the harm in that? It would only be harmful if the VicSim theory is advanced as one that is predicated on the fact every single one of the alleged deaths were Sims.
If the only ammunition that the "shills" have to counter the VicSim research is that one (or a few) of the thousands of alleged VicSims actually lived and attended University in the 1980's then I would say that the VicSim theory has been validated, not repudiated. If the majority of the alleged vics were actually drawn from real flesh and blood, we should seen dozens, if not hundreds, of school mates, former team mates, co-workers, etc. appearing here to "prove" their acquaintance actually existed.

There is someone going around claiming to be John Salomone`s wife that is heading up 911 foundations. We (here) all know that John Salomone did NOT perish in the towers on 911. What we don’t know is why they used his name, his identity, to be one of their chosen Vics. I believe that whatever harm BBS could have done by “exposing” the fact that she went to school with some guy named John Salomone would have been far outweighed by the chance that we could have uncovered some connection between him and the handful of other human fake vics that were chosen to play the parts of victims.

What I am trying to saying is that in my opinion the VicSim research is fantastic, BECAUSE it can by elimination lead to identifying the handful of Vics that were taken from “real” flesh and blood. Finding those Vics, those that had to be involved in some way with the plot (by virtue of their having faked their deaths), and discovering any common thread between them may lead to we will get one step closer to finding the perps. On the other hand, by dogmatically refusing to consider that any of the thousands of the alleged Vics were in fact drawn from real people, we are no closer to uncovering anything that we don`t already know.

If we made an analogy between this forum and a courtroom, we would want the perps to step up and testify so that they could be questioned and cross examined. Calling them liars, perps, and shills, and chasing them away, EVEN IF they are liars, in my opinion, does not bring any benefit to the Forum. Their demeanor and behavior will make it easy for everyone to see if they are legit, or not.

This, hopefully, will be my last post on this issue and in conclusion, this is how I see it:

Logically, there are only two credible scenarios. One has to either accept that ALL of the almost 3,000 Vics were fabricated Sims that never existed, OR if not, only MOST of them were. Believing that ALL were computer generated is a dead end in my opinion. Believing that some of the Vics were in fact perps who faked their death and were a part of the scheme is an opening to take the research to the next level. As the detective`s say “follow the money”. It is the Vics families who received compensation. Where did that money go? How much did Mrs. Salomone receive? Eliminate the obvious CGI Sims, look at the handful (I would start with those that have “vociferous” family members) and try to find some common threads between them, and their back stories. What schools they and their spouses attended, where they were born, are the spouses remarried, etc, etc? It is my humble opinion that taking the VicSim research to the next level requires investigation and the exploration of the identities that were chosen. If Hoi and others are satisfied to let the VicSim theory stand as is, they have earned the right. Simon, Hoi, and other researchers here have done more than anyone should expect. I, for one, am forever grateful for having learned the “truth” about the media fakery and I would not have discovered it without the research found here. I wish I had the time, energy and intelligence to have uncovered for myself even one percent of the truth and knowledge I have learned on these pages.

I am off to reread ,and re-examine the entire 80 page VicSim report one more time. I wish you all the best, and I hope that no one takes any offense with what I have written.

Best Regards,

Steve O.
omaxsteve
Member
 
Posts: 178
Joined: March 29th, 2010, 1:44 am

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby lux on February 14th, 2013, 5:28 pm

omaxsteve wrote:
The reason I would be more open and less hostile to posters who claim to have known a Vic, is that my opinion is that those “real vics" were chosen for a reason. Perhaps that is why their wives and families are the ones that are chosen to be celebrities, those that are often interviewed, and those that head up the different foundations. Think about it, if the perps did not utilize any "real" Vics where would the media find their pool of "celebrity" family members to parade on the airwaves?


So you believe that all the "relatives of 9/11 victims" who are given media coverage really are related to real people who really had a connection to the 9/11 events and that these real people are still alive and living under another identity?

And, you base this belief on what your sister told you about Todd Reuben?
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby omaxsteve on February 14th, 2013, 7:01 pm

lux wrote:
omaxsteve wrote:
The reason I would be more open and less hostile to posters who claim to have known a Vic, is that my opinion is that those “real vics" were chosen for a reason. Perhaps that is why their wives and families are the ones that are chosen to be celebrities, those that are often interviewed, and those that head up the different foundations. Think about it, if the perps did not utilize any "real" Vics where would the media find their pool of "celebrity" family members to parade on the airwaves?


So you believe that all the "relatives of 9/11 victims" who are given media coverage really are related to real people who really had a connection to the 9/11 events and that these real people are still alive and living under another identity?

And, you base this belief on what your sister told you about Todd Reuben?


Why are you putting words in my mouth? what I believe, is that there are only three possibilities for the "relatives of the victims that are given media coverage"
1) they are actors, playing the role of relatives of people who never existed
2) they are real people who know that their real relatives did not perish on 911 as reported and knowingly going along with a hoax,
3) they are unknowingly going along with the hoax.

Since i believe that some of the Vics were real, than not everyone can be in category 1 above. Therefore anyone that claims to have been related to a an alleged Vic falls either either in category 2 or 3 above.

I do not know if these alleged Vics, the FEW that were based on real people, are still alive in hiding or under an other identity, or if they died a death unrelated to 911.

I base this belief partially on the fact that Reubens kids went to the same school as my niece, and mostly on my knowledge that Garnet "Ace" Bailey was an actual person who I personally saw on a number of occasions playing hockey. when he supposedly died on the fake airplane that crashed into the south tower he was with another scout of of the NHL LA Kings hockey Mark Bavis.

Mark Bavis played ice hockey at Boston University and became an assistant coach at Brown and Harvard and was working as a scout for the Los Angeles Kings in the National Hockey League when he was reported to have died on Flight 175.

I never personally saw Mark Bavis play hockey but I am extremely doubtful that his recorded history has been totally manufactured.
does that mean that I don't believe the VicSim theory is sound? Absolutely not, I just don't think that it accounts for ALL the alleged victims.

I believed, and still do, that most of the people here are interested in discovering the truth. If others, as Lux, prefer that the very notion of the idea that not ALL of the VicSims were totally computer generated and prefer to ignore the evidence to the contrary then so be it.

I believe, and I hope that I have made my position quite clear, if not I summarize.

I am a "fan" of this forum and a believer in the VicSim research as the working theory, and I believe that all the events discussed here are a result of a complicit Media having shown Fake Videos and attempting to pass them off as reality.

regards,

Steve O.
omaxsteve
Member
 
Posts: 178
Joined: March 29th, 2010, 1:44 am

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Postby lux on February 14th, 2013, 9:00 pm

omaxsteve wrote:Why are you putting words in my mouth?


I asked you 2 questions regarding your beliefs. IMO this is hardly "putting words in your mouth." If I were "putting words in your mouth" I wouldn't bother asking you for clarification.

It is this sort of over-reaction & false accusation that, more than anything else, makes me suspicious of your motives. This is troll behavior. Just as you have accused us of being discourteous to "new members," an outright lie, which you have still not answered up to even though it has been pointed out more than once.

If you believe you are being attacked when someone simply asks you to explain your views, you are going to have a difficult time here.


what I believe, is that there are only three possibilities for the "relatives of the victims that are given media coverage"
1) they are actors, playing the role of relatives of people who never existed
2) they are real people who know that their real relatives did not perish on 911 as reported and knowingly going along with a hoax,
3) they are unknowingly going along with the hoax.

Since i believe that some of the Vics were real, than not everyone can be in category 1 above. Therefore anyone that claims to have been related to a an alleged Vic falls either either in category 2 or 3 above.

I do not know if these alleged Vics, the FEW that were based on real people, are still alive in hiding or under an other identity, or if they died a death unrelated to 911.

I base this belief partially on the fact that Reubens kids went to the same school as my niece, and mostly on my knowledge that Garnet "Ace" Bailey was an actual person who I personally saw on a number of occasions playing hockey. when he supposedly died on the fake airplane that crashed into the south tower he was with another scout of of the NHL LA Kings hockey Mark Bavis.

Mark Bavis played ice hockey at Boston University and became an assistant coach at Brown and Harvard and was working as a scout for the Los Angeles Kings in the National Hockey League when he was reported to have died on Flight 175.

I never personally saw Mark Bavis play hockey but I am extremely doubtful that his recorded history has been totally manufactured.
does that mean that I don't believe the VicSim theory is sound? Absolutely not, I just don't think that it accounts for ALL the alleged victims.


Thank you for the clarification.

I believed, and still do, that most of the people here are interested in discovering the truth. If others, as Lux, prefer that the very notion of the idea that not ALL of the VicSims were totally computer generated and prefer to ignore the evidence to the contrary then so be it.


Now, there you go manufacturing another lie. I have never said any such thing. It is YOU who are "putting words in others' mouths," that is, you are accusing others of what you yourself are doing -- another common troll tactic.

You continue to misidentify my criticisms of your posts. I have only criticized your troll-like behavior and responses here yet you keep insisting that I am criticizing your beliefs when I haven't even understood what your beliefs were until you clarified them above. I don't even necessarily find that much to criticize about them per se (though I don't agree with your conclusions). However, I have protested the way you use them to justify baseless criticisms of this forum and its members and the way you jumped to defend a recent highly questionable member (bbs) who as much as admitted to being a plant.

As for your beliefs themselves, it is my opinion that it seems unlikely to me that real people who were never publicly known prior to 9/11 would have been used in the way you suggest but I'm not going to say it's impossible. The reason I think it unlikely is that it would be a loose end that could later arise to threaten the hoax and of too little value to risk such a thing.

As for your examples of real publicly known (prior to 9/11) figures being used, this has already been discussed here such as in this post but we're talking about very, very few people and ones who had some notoriety and thus propaganda value, not ordinary citizens such as the person you say your sister knew.

Now, the above 2 paragraphs constitute my opinion about your opinions.

The rest of what I've written is about your behavior here which I think is less than acceptable.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

PreviousNext

Return to VICSIMS: the simulated victims of 9/11

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests