The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

How the controlled opposition was designed to be part of the 9/11 hoax

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby Haze on September 25th, 2012, 8:51 pm

bostonterrierowner wrote: Believe me or not but I just commited a crime according to a Polish penal code :)


We have a same law in France called " loi Gayssot " and many europeans country too, like Belgium, Germany ...
For example, Robert Faurisson was condemned to 3 months imprisonment in 2007.

PS : this law has been passed after the " Carpentras affair ", wich can be a government hoax... but it's hard to know ...
Haze
Member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: September 24th, 2012, 8:44 pm

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby teriyaki taryaki on September 30th, 2012, 8:05 pm

Hey, have you guys seen this ?

Would you believe this?

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFjjmvu5ei8

It's a friggin 25 second 'No-Planer / Media Fakery' video making fun of the idiocy of plane-huggers and it has 27 million friggin views since 2008 !!!

This must be the most popular No-Planer / Media Fakery video ever, no doubt because it's so short and the same people click on it many times

Most people commenting don't know how to make heads or tails of it. One guy's comment I read even says that 'it can't be a real plane unless it was hi-jacked' !
teriyaki taryaki
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: September 14th, 2012, 2:27 am

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby simonshack on October 3rd, 2012, 2:29 pm

teriyaki taryaki wrote:Most people commenting don't know how to make heads or tails of it. One guy's comment I read even says that 'it can't be a real plane unless it was hi-jacked' !


"It can't be a real plane unless it was hijacked! " :lol: :lol: :lol:

Well, maybe I should contact Fetzer (under a pseudonym) and send him this silly montage I just put together (in less than 2 minutes of GIMP work). I'll enclose the above Youtube clip telling him, "Hey, Jim - me and my stepfather actually witnessed with our own eyes that F18 crashing as shown on CNN ! Here's my own picture I captured of the hijacked jet about to smash and disappear into the tower!"

Image
(Photo montage by Simon Shack)

I bet Fetzer will spend eleven years researching the case and conclude that - since there were witnesses to the event - it must have been a hologram. :P
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby teriyaki taryaki on October 6th, 2012, 7:15 pm

That's right, Simon. I'll bet most of the millions who watch that little video do not even realize that it's not a real CNN clip just because it has the silly CNN logo there, never mind that it's not a 'real clip' or news event of any sort (the audio is from one of the 9-11 newscasts). :P



25 Second 9-11 Truth Test for All Your Friends & Relatives !

The great thing about this is that it will only take around 25 seconds to a couple of minutes of their 'oh-so-precious' time away from watching the crap on their TV, so they will almost always do what you say even to just get rid of you.

Have them watch this 25 second clip:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFjjmvu5ei8

let them watch it a few times if they want and then ask them what the video is asking which is

"If this happened tomorrow, would you believe it ? "

and see what they say.

It should be good for lots of laughs because if they have the brains to recognize this 25 second clip for the complete media fakery and forgery that it so obviously is (by the video maker - complete with fake headlines and CNN logo - CNN: Breaking News - F18 hijacked by Hamas terrorists - Iran is supporting terrorism on U.S. soil, a non-event, & audio transposed from the 9-11 newscasts in the background) then you can just tell them:

Well, this is what you saw on 9-11 as well, so why do you believe that ?

After which you can show them one of the ridiculously fake 9-11 clips such as this one:

Image

and ask them why in the world would they not believe the one they just saw & believe the others from 9-11 ?

Then try not to laugh at the look on their faces as they try every lame excuse in the book to deny their own eyes and logic. :P
teriyaki taryaki
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: September 14th, 2012, 2:27 am

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby teriyaki taryaki on July 26th, 2013, 6:59 pm

teriyaki taryaki wrote:

Sommersonntag in Berlin 1942 - Summer Sunday in Berlin 1942

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6oAmSij1zE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6oAmSij1zE




Alternate links for the above previously-posted period documentary of Berlin in 1942, now deleted:

Sommersonntag in Berlin 1942 - Summer Sunday in Berlin 1942


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoexlEkGJcs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQs8eDvAaBM
teriyaki taryaki
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: September 14th, 2012, 2:27 am

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby simonshack on September 18th, 2014, 1:18 pm

repentantandy wrote:Thank you, Simon, for responding to this thread with some needed good humor and common sense. :)


The above quote by Repententandy (aka Andy Tyme) is from page 2 of this very thread -(September 7, 2012). Repentantandy / Andy Tyme - who strangely hasn't posted here for quite a while (and seemingly prefers to pursue his 9/11 efforts over at Fetzer's "REAL DEAL" comment section) - has now come up with a brand new, quite comical theory. I will use my best good humor and common sense as I share it with our readers...

Here's the link to Andy Tyme's latest posts over at the "REAL DEAL", expounding his new theory: http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/2014/09 ... 2876349994

*****************************************************************************


"THE TV NETWORKS WERE HIJACKED !" (says Andy Tyme) :lol:

Andy Tyme's theory goes roughly like this (but you can read it in full at the link provided above) :

"On 9/11, all the TV NETWORKS' feeds were hijacked by some external entity - unbeknownst to the hapless /incognizant TV NETWORKS' technicians."

Now, Andy goes on to speculate that the clandestine feed (complete with phony aerial helicopter imagery featuring supposed footage from ABC's chopper 7, FOX's chopper 5, NBC's chopper 4 and CBS's chopper 2) may have been beamed from WTC7 - or from STRATCOM, Omaha... However, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to see where this is going - and what this latest, outlandish theory might be implicitly suggesting ... Hey, what if the phony feed was beamed from a techno-cave in Afghanistan?

Image


To be sure, the desperate, multiple and ongoing efforts to shift the blame away from the TV NETWORKS' total complicity with the 9/11 hoax have been relentless over the years. Here are a bunch of them, listed in random order:


- RICHARD HALL'S HOLOGRAM THEORY: "The planes that eyewitnesses reported seeing hitting the towers were, in actuality, holograms."
("Ergo, the TV NETWORKS innocently aired real and legit imagery of the events of September 11, 2001")

- JUDY WOOD'S DEW-DUSTIFICATION THEORY: "The absurd top-down / pyroclastic tower collapses we all saw on TV can only be explained by the use of exotic / classified weapons (turning the towers into very fine dust). This would also explain the gigantic smoke cloud engulfing Manhattan for the entire day."
("Ergo, the TV NETWORKS innocently aired only real and legit imagery of the events of September 11, 2001")

- JIM FETZER'S NUKE-DUSTIFICATION THEORY: "The absurd top-down / pyroclastic tower collapses we all saw on TV can only be explained by the use of mini nuclear weapons (turning the towers into very fine dust). This would also explain the gigantic smoke cloud engulfing Manhattan for the entire day."
("Ergo, the TV NETWORKS innocently aired only real and legit imagery of the events of September 11, 2001")

- ACE BAKER'S ONLY-FAKE-PLANE-INSERTS THEORY: "The absurd imagery of the sim-hits (the poor animations of "Flight 175" hitting WTC2) was stealthily inserted into (composited on top of) authentic aerial sceneries of Manhattan shot by the TV NETWORKS that morning."
("Ergo, the TV NETWORKS innocently aired only real and legit imagery of the events of September 11, 2001")

- ANDY TYME'S HIJACKED-TV-FEED THEORY: "The absurd imagery of the sim-hits (the poor animations of "Flight 175" hitting WTC2) was stealthily inserted into the feed beamed to people's TV sets by a clandestine entity - completely unbeknowst to the unwitting TV NETWORKS."
("Ergo, the TV NETWORKS innocently aired only real and legit imagery of the events of September 11, 2001")


Good grief - what will they come up with next? ... :rolleyes:
And when will they give us an effing (as opposed to commercial) break?

******
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... eBOU#t=239
Matt Lauer: "here we go to the tape!"
Katie Couric: "we have the tape!"
<_<
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby brianv on September 18th, 2014, 4:51 pm

A rehashing of the : "Yes, the "Moon Footage" is fake - but we really went to the moon. NASA does not want us to see the ancient alien cities and technology that the astronauts discovered and filmed" theme, which spews from the Apollo apologists. Another Clown outs himself!
Last edited by brianv on September 18th, 2014, 5:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: missing comma ffs.
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3854
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby simonshack on September 20th, 2014, 7:32 pm

brianv wrote:A rehashing of the : "Yes, the "Moon Footage" is fake - but we really went to the moon. NASA does not want us to see the ancient alien cities and technology that the astronauts discovered and filmed" theme, which spews from the Apollo apologists. Another Clown outs himself!


Brian, your excellent analogy (re: 9/11 footage apologists / versus Apollo footage apologists) made me think the following thoughts...

The absurd antics of Ace Baker and Andy Tyme (who basically argue that only PARTS of the mainstream media's 9/11 imagery is fake) would be like someone arguing that ONLY PARTS of the Moooon Landings were fake:

"Hey, the part where we see the asstruenots jumping around the Moooon like kangaroos is totally fake!"

"But hey, the part where we see the astronauts playing golf on the moon is absolutely real and authentic!"


:lol:
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby repentantandy on September 21st, 2014, 9:19 pm

Simon, your hair-trigger attack on me is unjustified, but I forgive you.

Nevertheless, you still owe me a public apology for attributing this false quote to me:

"The absurd imagery of the sim-hits (the poor animations of "Flight 175" hitting WTC2) was stealthily inserted into the feed beamed to people's TV sets by a clandestine entity - completely unbeknowst to the unwitting TV NETWORKS."

I never said these words, and it was unethical of you to put quotation marks around them, falsely indicating that I did.

If you had omitted the quotation marks, you would only be guilty of committing a misunderstaning paraphrase, rather than a manufactured (just as phony as the 9/11 imagery) quotation.

It has never been my assertion that the management/owners of the TV-news networks were unwitting pawns in the 9/11 deception game.

If you go back and re-read my TRD posting, you will see that I was only speculating that there might have been some low-level "tech grunts" in the vast, multi-network labyrinth who WEREN'T either prepped on the forthcoming scam or coerced into post-event silence -- but who might, someday, have their consciousness raised by discovering your work and thus dare to ask questions (or supply insider perspectives) anew.
repentantandy
Member
 
Posts: 145
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 6:17 pm

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby simonshack on September 21st, 2014, 11:36 pm

*

Hi Andy - good to hear from you, been a long time! :)

So ok, I shouldn't have put that in quotation marks - I apologize - but I think anyone can see that I was only trying to summarize in one sentence the gist of what you (and the other quoted fellows) were theorizing. Let me try and make up for this by publishing here the entire text of your musings - as published over at Fetzer's "REAL DEAL":

Andy Tyme wrote:On the 9/11 morning, when a record-setting number of "war games" were covertly running in DC, NYC, and all throughout the Military-Industrial complex, those far-from-perfect computer simulations of the twin-towers attack (probably originally prepared for "Vigilant Guardian" et. al.) had to be hot-switched BY SOMEBODY into the national network feeds of each of the major TV networks. And all the other technicians, busily watching and adjusting their vision-and-audio mixers, preview-and-program monitors, vectorscopes, waveform monitors, frame synchronisers, microwave-linking hardware, and INSTANT REPLAY units just HAD to include some guys (far enough down the chain of authority not to have been sworn to secrecy and threatened with death) who either instantly, or eventually, realised that their live-program streams had been HIJACKED -- for at least a few minutes, if not the rest of the morning.

Now think about this: The broadcast-TV technicians' unions, in the nation's capitol and in the Big Apple, are among the strongest in the country. NOBODY touches a switch or adjusts a knob that's outside his closed-shop, contract-defined job classification and assignment. And these dudes stay in their jobs for decades, with iron-clad employment security. If even one of the many master-control or microwave-link technicians from that day is reading these comments, or if one of this website's readers knows somebody who knows somebody who was "on the inside" of big-time network TV technical operations on 9/11, then maybe we can get some details on JUST HOW the hot-switching was done and WHERE the substitute video/audio feeds came from?

WTC7 perhaps? Or possibly StratCom in Omaha -- next door to where lots of financial bigwigs were gathering that very morning, and where Dubya was "summoned" by the PTB later in the day.

And if the feed point was out in Omaha, rather than at the soon-to-be-demolished WTC7, then maybe, just maybe, the playback tapes and transmission gear that were used still survives -- somewhere in the heart of DARPA-darkness. (It would make great material evidence at an international warcrimes tribunal someday.)

In Mr. Shack's excellent "Synched Out," showing each of the simultaneous network news streams and also displaying the precise time both before and after the second sim-hit, you can see each network SUPPOSEDLY choosing, INDEPENDENTLY, to execute replays of the sim-hit at various later intervals and from SUPPOSEDLY their own proprietary chopper or fixed-cam feeds of the Manhattan skyline. A careful analysis of these simultaneous network streams reveals, however, that some identical segments of the same "footage" show up, multiple times, on different network streams AND with different keyed-in logos!

So, if some of these identical segments of proprietary footage were being borrowed from the rival networks' news streams (a courtesy arrangement that can and does occur in crisis situations) there should have been one logo layered upon another logo, or a "courtesy of" notice, each time the borrowings occured, but that is not the case -- strongly suggesting that all the networks' proprietary video shots of the sim-hit actually originated from a single, covert source. And although most of the network "real-time choices" to replay the sim-hit do give the illusion of being the result of independent editorial/control-room decisions to activate a replay device (either a dedicated instant-replay unit or just a re-wound and re-cued video deck) with independently chosen starting and stopping points, a dead giveaway to there being an external, covert source for the "footage" occurs just before the networks all "decide" to switch to a pool feed from the Bushmaster's Florida photo-op.

Now get this: The last of the networks to switch to the Florida feed shows one final replay of the sim-hit, and both the camera composition and the starting/stopping points are IDENTICAL to a replay shown earlier on another network -- but now the keyed-in logo is different!

It seems that the perps had a only a rather limited amount of pre-edited (with replays) sim-footage prepared for each network to show, with each of the sim-streams varied (in shot choices) just enough to create the illusion of separate "live" switching decisions going on in the respective control rooms. However, the creators of the sim-footage (maybe working on a tight deadline... or just geting lazy) eventually started to repeat even the replay starting/stopping decisions, which meant that just before that overly repetitious point occurred in playing back the simulations, it was essential for all the network control rooms to "dump out" of the sim-footage and switch to Florida. But one network was slightly too late.

Gotcha! :)

http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/2014/09 ... 2876349994


For now, I will only quote and address one particular statement of yours, namely:

"So, if some of these identical segments of proprietary footage were being borrowed from the rival networks' news streams (a courtesy arrangement that can and does occur in crisis situations) there should have been one logo layered upon another logo, or a "courtesy of" notice, each time the borrowings occured, but that is not the case."

Well, as a matter of fact, that IS actually the case, Andy - as I showed back in 2008 in my "FOXED OUT" video. Not only did the TV Networks (APPARENTLY) inexplicably share in real time the feeds from rival networks - but when they bothered to write a "courtesy of" watermark on the screen - they even credited the WRONG Network!!!

For instance, here we have FOX 'borrowing' an image we all saw on CNN - and thanking ABC (?) for the courtesy !
Image
Image
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzCW197AqpM (at 0:45)

So here's my point, Andy: if you're going to come up with sophisticated theories about how all this played out, please DO spend more time getting familiar with my detailed analyses of the 9/11 TV broadcasts.

MY ADDITIONAL 9/11 VIDEO RESEARCH: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... 24F0FA4A22
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby brianv on September 22nd, 2014, 12:04 am

Andy, all the bollox about war-games aside, Operation Vigilant Tossers whatever :rolleyes: , are you suggesting that somebody hacked into the all the TV networks to show us fake footage of airplanes crashing into the WTC complex, while real airplanes were crashing into the WTC complex and which was occupied by several thousand workers and approximately three thousand of them died??

Who has been carrying the can for your "inserted footage" ever since the 9/11 TV Show"? Who is still driving the getaway car? Would it be the same TV stations and Media that you say are innocent of any wrongdoing?

It was hacked into all right - by the TV stations themselves. It was just another TV show.
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3854
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby repentantandy on September 22nd, 2014, 1:09 am

Thank you, Simon, both for your apology and for assisting (due to your intense familiarity with your own, excellent work) in correcting and amplifying a central point I was attempting to make over at TRD. Namely, that the actual, historic, industry-standard practises of how American TV-news networks (and many local affiliates) BORROW (under copyright law's "fair use" provision) each other's imagery was SUSPICIOUSLY and IMPLICATIVELY NOT FOLLOWED by the (perhaps insufficiently familiar) CGI/video-editing gnomes (possibly working out of cubicles in the UK or Israel) who crafted that war-enabling, 102-minute television simulation of a spectacular terror attack.

OF COURSE, the ethnicnally/economically/politically joined-at-the-hip owners and managers of the news networks were willing, perhaps bloodthirstily eager facilitators of the wargames video being "flipped live" to fool the masses and initiate the wholesale slaughter of Muslims.

But in the complex infrastructure of big-time, professional television (something I am obviously rather familiar with, if you go back and read through my previous postings) I strongly suspect that there were more than a few lower-level technicians who while being left "out of the loop" (via bribes and threats) might ultimately (in retrospect) view the standard live-program streams of their respective employers as appearing to have been "hijacked," i.e. replaced with specious material, on that Tuesday morning, so long ago.
repentantandy
Member
 
Posts: 145
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 6:17 pm

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby simonshack on September 22nd, 2014, 9:40 am

repentantandy wrote:But in the complex infrastructure of big-time, professional television (something I am obviously rather familiar with, if you go back and read through my previous postings) ...


Well, Andy - you are touching another question I was planning to ask you: are you sure that your stated familiarity with professional television techniques isn't a tad antiquated / behind-the-times? See, in your essay above, you wrote:

"And although most of the network "real-time choices" to replay the sim-hit do give the illusion of being the result of independent editorial/control-room decisions to activate a replay device (either a dedicated instant-replay unit or just a re-wound and re-cued video deck) with independently chosen starting and stopping points, (...)"

Pardon me, but are you actually saying that big-time television studios were still, in 2001, using tapes & reels - which needed to be rewound for replays? If so, I think you're in for a techno-shock! :P Please know that the first version of the consumer video editing software (Sony Vegas v.7.0) I used to make September Clues was already available to the public in 2001. Here's its precursor, Sonic Foundry VEGAS:
http://www.videomaker.com/article/8502- ... egas-video

Just asking. :)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6342
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby hoi.polloi on September 22nd, 2014, 4:13 pm

Simon, don't you think it's possible that some studios in 2001 were using tapes for such things as low-budget commercials and Z-grade news? :P
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4760
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: The SC shills' DISCREDITING TACTICS

Postby Farcevalue on September 22nd, 2014, 6:02 pm

I did a demo and reno of a small community TV station in 2005 that was still using tapes and DVDs at that time. They were employing a software that had a variety of command protocols that could be managed remotely and would send commands through infrared, Control S or RS232 depending on the receiving device. That way the devices could be loaded and cued and would follow a coded script so the station could run uninterrupted through the night or weekend with no personnel (barring hardware failure).

The upgrade replaced the analog decks and players with a media server that would schedule content, manage the live control room switch and upload files via a network or through an analog to digital capture/conversion card. They had purchased the server at least a year prior but had had no opportunity to schedule an install. This was a small time outfit. Major networks could not have been so far behind the curve as to not have had the entirety of their content being delivered through media servers in 2001. They may have decks on hand for conversions/uploads, but it's unlikely that any content would be so urgent as to demand being played directly from a deck.

The 9/11 movie could have been managed from start to finish over a network administered offsite or behind closed doors away from the prying eyes of anyone not in the requisite loop. No hijacking required.
Farcevalue
Member
 
Posts: 374
Joined: August 27th, 2011, 12:21 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Truthers and shills

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests