Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

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

Postby JohnNada on May 7th, 2010, 5:43 pm

Yes, I would love to know how Avery got access to all that hi-res footage years before it was available to everyone else. Much more to the making of LC than meets the eye. What info you got?
millions comatose in a world of illusion
JohnNada
Member
 
Posts: 18
Joined: December 8th, 2009, 3:22 pm

Postby McCob on May 7th, 2010, 7:14 pm

Captain Trek---Since you asked: Never in my life have I seen a headf#ck like 911. At this point it strikes me that any resistance to the powers that be or any headway at getting to the heart of the mystery have been feckless at best on all fronts. I have been reading stuff about tv fakery, secret societies, civil engineering papers, NIST and 911 report and I am as confused as ever. (My brother is a police chief recently retired. He believes the 19 arabs with boxcutters story. He doesn't see any reason for any suspicion against the government even though he is a cop and cops are supposed to be naturally suspicious people. A lot of people prefer to believe what the government says because the alternative is just to horrible.) To answer your question directly: I don't know what is valid even after all I have read and all of the time I have put into studying the matter. How does one tell where the propaganda ends and the truth begins? (rhetorical question)
McCob
Member
 
Posts: 26
Joined: December 1st, 2009, 7:21 pm

Postby D.Duck on May 7th, 2010, 8:23 pm

McCob,


How does one tell where the propaganda ends and the truth begins? (rhetorical question)



I am a bit disappointed cos you have been around for some time now and you should know by now.





John Nada,

Do you remember what I told you 3 years ago? I think you get it now.

I still think you are one of the guys out there who can do some good stuff.

You have the talent, so what are you waiting for, just f#cking do it and if you need help, please let me know.


D.Duck
D.Duck
Member
 
Posts: 295
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:08 pm

Postby SmokingGunII on May 7th, 2010, 9:45 pm

Captain Trek. Why would an airplane full of fake people land at Hopkins?
SmokingGunII
Member
 
Posts: 557
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 10:34 am

Postby antipodean on May 7th, 2010, 10:40 pm

As an example, what do you think about the theory presented in Loose Change Second Edition that posits that Flight 93 (with a number of passengers equal to the total that should have been on all four flights) landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport and unloaded the same number of people there that should have been on all four flights in total?



Flight 93 could have well landed there or anywhere else for that matter.
But the LC article infers that all the passengers were herded into some NASA (I think)building and got rid of.
If you post on the LC forum about there being no planes, no passengers & other victims being faked you get banned.
So LC was set up to steer people away from the simple to understand truth.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 595
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby McCob on May 7th, 2010, 10:49 pm

D.Duck @ May 7 2010, 08:23 PM wrote: McCob,


How does one tell where the propaganda ends and the truth begins? (rhetorical question)



I am a bit disappointed cos you have been around for some time now and you should know by now.





John Nada,

Do you remember what I told you 3 years ago? I think you get it now.

I still think you are one of the guys out there who can do some good stuff.

You have the talent, so what are you waiting for, just f#cking do it and if you need help, please let me know.


D.Duck


Mr. Duck....

I would hope a good soul such as yourself would cut a basically good hearted but somewhat mediocre intellect such as myself a little slack when I admit my ignorance.

I am on your side. If the sh#t hits the fan and a French revolution type scenario overtakes the land I will be on your side of the barricades.

Didn't Shakespeare say, "Conscience doth make cowards of us all." I think Shakespeare was wise.
McCob
Member
 
Posts: 26
Joined: December 1st, 2009, 7:21 pm

Postby antipodean on May 8th, 2010, 5:04 am

So I ask again, are any of the claims made by the Loose Change/In Plane Site/9/11 Mysteries/Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth crowd valid?



First of all you'd need to state what these 'claims' are. Like the Cleveland Airport claim.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 595
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby Realism911 on May 8th, 2010, 5:23 am

Captain Trek 4 May 7 2010, 03:16 PM wrote:

Since you're all so disparaging of Loose Change, I can well imagine you'll have plenty of rebuttals to the above.




I will give loose change a tiny (and I do mean tiny) bit of credit for talking about operation northwoods, and also calculating the towers fell at close too free fall speed.
But then again that dosnt really prove too much too people, It merely just implies something.

Well Im not gonna jump the gun again and post up something, that isnt correct.
(see sep clues thread from last night ... what a mess :lol: )

So Im hoping one of you guys will verify this with me......
In answering your comment. Do I have any rebuttals too what they say about U93 landing at the airport??


Everyone.... go too the link that was provided here---- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH_dZ_QAYLs
And have a listen too when Jason (or whoever it is) speaks at 1.52 he is talking about flight 1989......
" So too some it up ............ 69 passengers were evacuted into the FAA headquarters"
BUT earlier he said there were only 60 passengers and when EXACTLY he DOES say 69 passengers have a look at the screen it says. === 60.
You cant origonaly "say 60" then "say 69" " and at the same time show the "figure 60" on the screen.
You know for a guy (Jason Bermus) that always carries on about how bullshit September Clues is.
His Video is mega confusing....

WTF?????? That looks like a Loose f#ck up to me....
Realism911
Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: January 3rd, 2010, 3:45 am

Postby godzilla on May 8th, 2010, 9:12 am

Realism911 @ May 7 2010, 09:23 PM wrote: I will give loose change a tiny (and I do mean tiny) bit of credit for talking about operation northwoods, and also calculating the towers fell at close too free fall speed.
But then again that dosnt really prove too much too people, It merely just implies something.



Realism9/11. Don't forget, the tower descent calculations are based on the fake, digital creations of the towers falling. There is no real visual recording that we know of showing the true event of the destruction of the eight buildings in the Twin Towers complex
"It's not a matter of what is true that counts but a matter of what is perceived to be true." - Henry Kissinger
godzilla
Member
 
Posts: 179
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 10:43 pm

Postby Rasta84 on May 8th, 2010, 11:26 pm

antipodean @ May 7 2010, 10:40 PM wrote:
As an example, what do you think about the theory presented in Loose Change Second Edition that posits that Flight 93 (with a number of passengers equal to the total that should have been on all four flights) landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport and unloaded the same number of people there that should have been on all four flights in total?



Flight 93 could have well landed there or anywhere else for that matter.
But the LC article infers that all the passengers were herded into some NASA (I think)building and got rid of.
If you post on the LC forum about there being no planes, no passengers & other victims being faked you get banned.
So LC was set up to steer people away from the simple to understand truth.


Maybe not, maybe they're just wrong. A lot of average 'truthers' won't acknowledge this evidence either but it's not b/c they're bought off.
Rasta84
Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: April 8th, 2010, 3:54 pm

Postby Piper on May 9th, 2010, 1:21 am

Realism911 4 May 8 2010, 05:23 AM wrote:I will give loose change a tiny (and I do mean tiny) bit of credit for talking about operation northwoods, and also calculating the towers fell at close too free fall speed.


Personally I happen to view those two specific items as well-planned disinformation.

The Northwoods document probably never existed prior to 9/11 or shortly thereafter and was likely created and leaked in order to make people believe the hijacked plane scenario, thus reinforcing the idea that planes were used. Same with the Air Force stand-down and Flight 93 being shot down fabrications.

The freefall-speed collapse time was likely trotted out to distract researchers from looking too closely at the footage of the "collapses" by making them focus on the timing more than the appearance, similar to how the pod was meant to focus our attention on one part of the "plane" instead of the entire scene.
Piper
Member
 
Posts: 39
Joined: November 28th, 2009, 7:00 pm

Postby fbenario on May 9th, 2010, 2:20 am

Piper 4 May 8 2010, 08:21 PM wrote:
The Northwoods document probably never existed prior to 9/11 or shortly thereafter and was likely created and leaked in order to make people believe the hijacked plane scenario


But doesn't the Operations Northwoods document also propose 'mock funerals of fake victims', in addition to the proposed fake airplane hijackings?

I still believe that the perps don't want ANYONE ever thinking there was any media or vicsim fakery connected to 9/11, because then we would stop believing what we are spoon-fed by mainstream media - and it is much easier to control the American sheeple with media then with guns. As a result, I think it highly unlikely they would fabricate a document after 9/11 that puts the idea of vicsims in peoples' heads.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Dcopymope on May 9th, 2010, 6:25 am

Piper @ May 9 2010, 01:21 AM wrote:
Realism911 4 May 8 2010, 05:23 AM wrote:I will give loose change a tiny (and I do mean tiny) bit of credit for talking about operation northwoods, and also calculating the towers fell at close too free fall speed.


Personally I happen to view those two specific items as well-planned disinformation.

The Northwoods document probably never existed prior to 9/11 or shortly thereafter and was likely created and leaked in order to make people believe the hijacked plane scenario, thus reinforcing the idea that planes were used. Same with the Air Force stand-down and Flight 93 being shot down fabrications.




The whole point of Operation Northwood’s was to stage a massive terror campaign across America and Cuba, but no one was supposed to actually die in the attacks. The only part of the plan where it vaguely implies that there could be deaths was the part about them sinking boats of Cubans, rather "real or simulated". As far as the hijacked plane scenario is concerned, it says there would be attempts made, they weren’t meant to be successful, they would only be "harassment measures" that would be made to look like they were condoned by the Cuban government.






.
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Next

Return to Truthers and shills

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest