The most common objection people have to our research: "Too many people would have been involved to pull off such a massive hoax." Well, with trillions of taxpayers' dollars at hand, this operation could certainly afford contracting many individuals (under a gag order and on a need-to-know basis). Meet the real - and unreal - persons, companies & entities assigned to carry out this gigantic, media & military-assisted psyop.
FredB & Hoi, I think something may have got Lost in Translation here I doubt diagonal2 as a Norwegian, just like the British and Australians, would know why Americans consider "Jap" a "racist" term — any more than shortened terms like 'Brit', 'Aussie', 'Russky', 'Iti' or 'Yank'. I know Aussies use it as an abbreviation — we abbreviate everything (there are plenty of explicitly racist terms for Asians if that's the intent, after all). Didn't the racial connotation of 'Jap' spring from America's guilt over their internment of Japanese American citizens in camps during WWII? Imposed 'political correctness' on all language in America has also compounded it I guess.
Anyway, it's just as puzzling to me as Americans' considering 'god damnit' & even 'damnit' a terrible swear word
So, I'd say it's a case of 'know your cross-cultural memes', their origins and effects
MARK "PSYCHO" WALSH is the Harley Guy or: the collapse of the Ozzybinoswald character's gatekeeping games
I just wished to make sure at this stage that everyone knows that "the Harley Guy" interviewed by FOX's Rick Leventahl was a former FOX employee and wacky radio clown named Mark "Psycho" Walsh (and NOT Mark Humphrey!). This is now a firmly established fact:
This was discovered already back in 2010 by a brilliant researcher (Youtube user "falcon6073") who found the "Opie & Anthony" radio show of September 12, 2001 - featuring Mark "Psycho" Walsh - clearly exposing himself as being, beyond any possible doubt, the infamous Harley Guy" seen interviewed by FOX TV's Rick Leventhal on 9/11:
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iKhV68qPt0
For several years, this Mark Walsh enjoyed the protection of a cyber-entity named "OzzyBinOswald". Now, the man behind this Ozzy entity may or may not be named Greg Thomson - as he once introduced himself, but this matters little. I also briefly talked with him on Skype, during a Cluesforum conference call (with at least 6 different international members). This Ozzy entity - which I saw emerging in the early days after my first SC release - enthusiastically embraced the September Clues research and vigorously challenged SC naysayers, using pretty sophisticated/pseudo-intellectual language. Often though, he was pretty rude and cynical - to the point of being downright offensive. But it was effective, I guess,to attract some interest around the personnage - and to gain the sort of desired, niche following he needed to establish some "street cred".
I will readily admit that I fell for Ozzy's 'charm' for a (way too long) while. He kind of succeeded for some time to represent (in the minds of his readers) the hard-core sort of rebellious soul, filled to the brim with sizzling disgust of the PTB. Ozzybinoswald soon became a regular Cluesforum contributor - until he started clashing with our former administrator "Dduck". This trolling duo stirred up total mayhem on Cluesforum and, to make a long story short, the two of them were eventually bid farewell. Both are now mods/contributors at Phil Jayhan's LET'S ROLL FORUMS (and throwing mud at yours truly - for a living, I presume...).
Now, Ozzybinoswald had an obsession, "Mark Humphrey" - a Canadian actor which he accused of being the "Harley Guy", and unjustly/yet viciously stalked for years on end. Believe it or not, but Ozzy (still!) has an entire website dedicated to 'exposing' Mark Humphrey - even though it is now crystal clear that "the Harley Guy" is instead this former FOX employee Mark "Psycho" Walsh. It should now be equally crystal clear that Ozzy's real, underlying role was simply to protect FOX TV's Mark Walsh - and his notoriously atrocious performance as an 'eyewitness' of the 9/11 events - arguably the crappiest of ALL such phony 9/11 testimonials staged by the Great 9/11 Hollywood show.
It took a long time to convince my own near and dear ones about the CGI and media hoax that the entire 9/11 is. During the initial days almost an year ago now, I was considered to be a rebel without a cause by my own family. I tried to persuade them to look at the pieces of puzzle here but I was only able to create doubts and uncertainty that needed more convincing. The main SC video was a great start but it were short videos from here and there that finally broke the ice and at the top of the heap is the Harley Guy interview so it is easily one of my favorites. After showing it a few times along with the other anomalies in the same spot, it started to sink in. The following were the biggest help in order
1) SC Video. 2) Harley guy bad acting. Showed it several times in a row (Yah from beginning to the end mostly because of the CGI failures ... because the retardation was so high ) 3) The falling man - "Gwendolyn Briley" saying "Who we are" for effect towards the end along with dozens and dozens of bad acting and fake crap. 4) African American firefighter video ("It's like Vietnam out there" etc). 5) Polished it with vicsims thread.
And they were home ...
I hope to help Simon with a Hindi translation of SC sometime down the road. I know it would have helped big time as far as my friends and family are concerned and undoubtedly one of the largest population base.
- Just standing by right now ... can't say what role I am right now. - Uhb- D'uhb- Uhh... ERROR! ERROR!
Though the video creator 'Stackpot' sounds just like the code name for a turncoat trying to gain favor with researchers. Jackpot + Stacking the deck + Honeypot, etc. Very sinister connotations.
I wouldn't be so eager to post just any video like it. After Equinox and Staveley, I am guessing they are going to double their efforts at making simulated fans/researchers and so forth, making videos that can't be bothered to use spell check or sometimes put together a cohesive creative argument.
Then we'll fall for the ones that do and to what end? Create the illusion that we're a team? An organized force?
Simon, with all due respect, and this may sound a bit chauvinistic of me, but please try to tolerate your fans without being one yourself. Your eagerness to promote less than stellar videos invites the shills.
hoi.polloi wrote:Simon, with all due respect, and this may sound a bit chauvinistic of me, but please try to tolerate your fans without being one yourself. Your eagerness to promote less than stellar videos invites the shills.
I can see what you mean, Hoi - but my intention wasn't so much promoting the video maker as it was to re-promote the "stellar performance" of FOX's Mark "Psycho" Walsh. I just can't get enough of it - mostly due to its verbal structural failure ... it's just too intense!
**** ps: In fairness to Stackpot, though - he seems to have made a somewhat decent, no-frills attempt at illustrating Dave Mc Gowan's Laurel Canyon series. Here's part 5 of it - its about the Gulf of Tonkin hoax (and it appears he's been spell checking his captions this time) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfbLedN2nes
simonshack wrote:mostly due to its verbal structural failure
I independently agree with Simon's assessment based on my analysis of Walsh's language. My comments are in blue:
Walsh: "I witnessed the entire thing from beginning to end."
Leventhal: "People talk about how it looked like a movie, I know when I came walking down here earlier this morning and saw both towers on fire and people on every street corner, it was like a movie, but you watched the planes hit the towers."
We do not 'watch' planes hit towers if seen with our own eyes. We see them. We watch planes land at airports and we watch them on TV.
Walsh: "I was watching with my room mate"
Watching what? He does not say "I was on the roof and I saw a plane", or "I heard a sound and looked out of the window and saw a plane". He merely says "I was watching". What is missing is the word "TV". Second lie - a lie of omission.
"it was er approximately several minutes after the first plane had hit"
Proof he did not witness "the entire thing" as he previously claimed.
"I saw this plane come out of nowhere and just reeem right into the side of the twin tower, exploding through the other side"
Inappropriate use of the word 'just'. In this context it is a minimisation word. Use of 'this' indicates closeness to the subject, which is also inappropriate.
"and then I witnessed both towers collapse, one first and then the second"
'then' is a gap in time. From where did he see the towers collapse?
"mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense."
It was "just" too intense was it? How would he know? Is he a structural engineer? No.
At 2.01 in my video of his interview he says "up 43 floors" regarding his location yet earlier on he says he was on the 44th floor.
Mark Walsh is not a genuine eye witness. My assessment is that he watched it on TV, just like the rest of us. This is how deceptive language works. Walsh avoids direct lies where he can yet reveals covert ones via his language. He did see planes and towers collapsing, but he avoids stating the entire truth by leaving out vital information.
I agree with your analysis Apache. I would also add his use of "you" in "you watched the planes hit the towers". In an honest statement of course he would use "I". "You watched" does not have the same meaning as "I saw".
Indeed, following the pronouns is extremely helpful and I do that all the time when analysing statements. In the 9/11 witness statements and interviews I have studied there are copious uses of the word "you" instead of "I" (I have a lengthy essay on the Duane Street firemen where their use of 'you' becomes irritatingly tedious). However, it was Rick Leventhal who said to Mark Walsh "you watched the planes" so in that context it was correct language and not something that I had missed out accidentally. I left in Leventhal's introduction because it was what a prosecutor would call 'leading the witness'. Sorry if I did not make that part clear.
I did forget to mention that I picked on the verb "watched" because it's passive and not active. In witness statements I expect to see active verbs, horror, disbelief and shock, especially when it's on the same day as the alleged event. Mark Walsh was pumped up and excited in his interview, contrary to all expectations of a truthful witness, who would not be getting off on any of it.