REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

How to register at Cluesforum / General administrative topics / and things that every member must read

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby hoi.polloi on October 5th, 2016, 7:27 pm

Is there evidence that lower Manhattan was cordoned off before the buildings were hit? Are you saying no one was in the towers or other WTC buildings? Are you also saying there were no rescue personnel on site when they collapsed? You haven't found one real victim in your research?


Yes, there is as much evidence, so to speak, as there is that the media was "in the know" about exactly what they were supposed to say, which means they were under some kind of "top down" order (e.g.; military) to spread a story that glued reality to the simulation.

So we must ask, what is a reasonable faked story that people on the street could not find contradiction with? Something behind a smokescreen, yes. But there were probably two smokescreens used that day. One, very conventional, and which most intelligent people can see through: the idea that all police and firefighters (and stock brokers?) are all the nicest blokes imaginable, they never lie together as a gang does, to protect its interests. They never work with the government. These ideas are stupid at best. And if you believe these, I am afraid you may be too naive to do research for yourself.

The other kind of smoke screen was probably a bit less conventional, and which was meant to block everyone from understanding the events outside of television's story — not just the naive. It's likely they used a military obscurant of some kind.

As such, with both naive and rebellious types blocked from the official information, we must ask ourselves why the entire news media was spreading the story that people were being herded and controlled on 9/11. This is probably a stretch of the truth to make it seem as though the whole area wasn't controlled until after the first plane hit. But indeed, this would have been a perfect excuse to explain why the herding operation was in operation anyway.

Please review http://www.SeptemberClues.info research here: http://septemberclues.info/power_of_imagery.shtml

We haven't found one real victim in our research, that's absolutely correct. In fact, the only people that appear to have been "real" are tied up with religious institutions, show business, "intelligentsia" or all the above. It seems some might not have even been using real names, but this is our latest area of research: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1921

So congratulations on getting here! You are among the small population of the planet that has actually researched 9/11 rather than repeating speculations and conspiracy theories handed to us by military intelligence groups trying to control the conversation. Hopefully as you shed that habit, you find yourself willing to do research for your own sake and the sake of your community, and hopefully the world community at large.

Please remember that when you post in threads where you are not being "interrogated" to post cogent relevant posts that succinctly capture your best points rather than giving us your every single speculation. Help people narrow the possibilities to your most reasonable and potentially provable speculations, when speculating. If that makes sense. However, point taken. We shouldn't be arguing about things outside this thread and let's not.

Better yet, don't take arguments personally. It's not about personality — but about getting the best information out. And not making it more confusing than it already is for the average person to read and understand.

Yes, I was joking about deleting your account. The point is that you consider yourself and others so difficult to contain or control and my point is to the contrary: people obey authority, especially when threats are involved.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4830
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby ObamaSimLaden on October 5th, 2016, 7:31 pm

brianv » October 5th, 2016, 12:24 pm wrote:
ObamaSimLaden » October 5th, 2016, 4:06 pm wrote:
Prescient » October 4th, 2016, 4:11 pm wrote:
ObamaSimLaden
I'm sure


Are you "sure" you have done enough reading here?

Have you read the Vicsim Report?
http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsims.shtml

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Still sure?

I believe(d). I'm not sure. I haven't read all the 911 stuff. Reading this now. Thanks. I mainly registered here for other topics, but I'm happy to be further enlightened.



I'm sorry didn't I just hear you say...
I've spent 100's of hours absorbing/researching info on 911, Moon fakery, False flag/hoax events. I question everything and who profits from said event.


Elsewhere I take it?


Yes mostly elsewhere. I stumbled on this place at some point in the last year or two, but I have only skimmed the surface really. I spent more time on the non 911 stuff here. I do spend a good deal of time on and off on this sorta stuff, but it's not a full time job.
ObamaSimLaden
Member
 
Posts: 46
Joined: September 30th, 2016, 3:43 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby hoi.polloi on October 5th, 2016, 7:35 pm

Nobody that runs this forum is treating it like a full time job. It's about a passion to find, identify and spread the truth.

It does take a certain amount of dedication, though, so please don't be offended by the methods that have sort of "sprung up" here that we've found to be the most effective at keeping threads on topic. Thank you so much, and welcome.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4830
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby ObamaSimLaden on October 5th, 2016, 8:12 pm

hoi.polloi » October 5th, 2016, 1:27 pm wrote:
Is there evidence that lower Manhattan was cordoned off before the buildings were hit? Are you saying no one was in the towers or other WTC buildings? Are you also saying there were no rescue personnel on site when they collapsed? You haven't found one real victim in your research?


Yes, there is as much evidence, so to speak, as there is that the media was "in the know" about exactly what they were supposed to say, which means they were under some kind of "top down" order (e.g.; military) to spread a story that glued reality to the simulation.

So we must ask, what is a reasonable faked story that people on the street could not find contradiction with? Something behind a smokescreen, yes. But there were probably two smokescreens used that day. One, very conventional, and which most intelligent people can see through: the idea that all police and firefighters (and stock brokers?) are all the nicest blokes imaginable, they never lie together as a gang does, to protect its interests. They never work with the government. These ideas are stupid at best. And if you believe these, I am afraid you may be too naive to do research for yourself.

The other kind of smoke screen was probably a bit less conventional, and which was meant to block everyone from understanding the events outside of television's story — not just the naive. It's likely they used a military obscurant of some kind.

As such, with both naive and rebellious types blocked from the official information, we must ask ourselves why the entire news media was spreading the story that people were being herded and controlled on 9/11. This is probably a stretch of the truth to make it seem as though the whole area wasn't controlled until after the first plane hit. But indeed, this would have been a perfect excuse to explain why the herding operation was in operation anyway.

Please review http://www.SeptemberClues.info research here: http://septemberclues.info/power_of_imagery.shtml

We haven't found one real victim in our research, that's absolutely correct. In fact, the only people that appear to have been "real" are tied up with religious institutions, show business, "intelligentsia" or all the above. It seems some might not have even been using real names, but this is our latest area of research: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1921

So congratulations on getting here! You are among the small population of the planet that has actually researched 9/11 rather than repeating speculations and conspiracy theories handed to us by military intelligence groups trying to control the conversation. Hopefully as you shed that habit, you find yourself willing to do research for your own sake and the sake of your community, and hopefully the world community at large.

Please remember that when you post in threads where you are not being "interrogated" to post cogent relevant posts that succinctly capture your best points rather than giving us your every single speculation. Help people narrow the possibilities to your most reasonable and potentially provable speculations, when speculating. If that makes sense. However, point taken. We shouldn't be arguing about things outside this thread and let's not.

Better yet, don't take arguments personally. It's not about personality — but about getting the best information out. And not making it more confusing than it already is for the average person to read and understand.

Yes, I was joking about deleting your account. The point is that you consider yourself and others so difficult to contain or control and my point is to the contrary: people obey authority, especially when threats are involved.

Thanks for the detailed response. Quick too! Are you sure it's not a full time job? :P I've been looking those links over the past few days. Still looking..Thanks.
ObamaSimLaden
Member
 
Posts: 46
Joined: September 30th, 2016, 3:43 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby hoi.polloi on October 6th, 2016, 2:07 am

Yes, I am certain caring about the human race and its exposure to unhealthy propaganda isn't a "full time job" by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. I am not paid to write here. I am not employed to write here. The time I spend maintaining this cyber space and composing these anti-war writings is a consequence of my being alive in this world and feeling a deep respect and custodianship toward the blessing of life, and because I have come to understand that this is a proper public medium for transcribing these thoughts and critiques of the military industrial complex.

If that's amusing to you in some way, that's fine. Believe me — the irony of using the Internet to do it does not escape me.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4830
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby ObamaSimLaden on October 6th, 2016, 2:52 am

hoi.polloi » October 5th, 2016, 8:07 pm wrote:Yes, I am certain caring about the human race and its exposure to unhealthy propaganda isn't a "full time job" by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. I am not paid to write here. I am not employed to write here. The time I spend maintaining this cyber space and composing these anti-war writings is a consequence of my being alive in this world and feeling a deep respect and custodianship toward the blessing of life, and because I have come to understand that this is a proper public medium for transcribing these thoughts and critiques of the military industrial complex.

If that's amusing to you in some way, that's fine. Believe me — the irony of using the Internet to do it does not escape me.


I'm just kidding. It was more of a backhanded compliment to your responsiveness and thoroughness. This stuff can really consume you. I find myself spending too much time on it, so I take breaks and resume when I feel the need. My mind is very curious in general and many topics interest me (including everyday stuff like guitar lessons, photography and what not). My ex GF would get tired of my rantings about hoaxes, conspiracies and crisis actors. Most people (and that's not many) that I try to broach this subject with are very reluctant to buy into it or wake up and probably think I'm crazy. Frankly, if my job didn't allow me the freedom or time and unlimited internet usage some of these hoaxes might have never crossed my radar. There's just not enough hrs in a day. I think that's why so many sheep believe them. They are too busy to think twice about it. Just put a rainbow up on Facebook and send money to gofundme. I was on to 911 early, then the FED, but not aware how pervasive all this sh1t was. Now it's irritating just to see "news" on TV or online. I turned on the TV at my ex's house the other night and that stupid Kim K story was on (someone left the TV on E or some entertainment channel) and the batteries must have been dead, because I couldn't get that crap off fast enough. It pisses me off to hear that name mentioned. I'm sure that was a total BS story. Anything to keep her attention whoring name in the news.
ObamaSimLaden
Member
 
Posts: 46
Joined: September 30th, 2016, 3:43 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby Vera Obscurata on October 10th, 2016, 7:22 pm

Hello Cluesforum investigators,

I have just registered here, after a good two years of reading the various topics on Cluesforum, and congratulations for all the work done. Excellent stuff and unfortunately (still) frowned upon on other sites around.

I registered mainly to add a post on the "Pi=? 4" question proposed by Miles Mathis and defended by users VexMan and daddie_o, but just now I see that the topic has been closed, so I will add the post in the Derailing Room to not disrupt further discussions.

Other topics of interest are the Nuke Hoax, the "Holocaust", the fakery of "events" worldwide and "Space Travel". At a later moment I will try to contribute to those.

I look forward to our joint efforts in exposing the everyday increasing faked unrealities,

Vera Obscurata

My user name refers to obscured truths. A common factor in the way the hoaxsters are presenting their stories is by leaving out crucial elements; trying to convince people of "truth" by not telling the truths. Even more effective than telling outright lies is to remain silent on truth.
Vera Obscurata
Member
 
Posts: 35
Joined: October 8th, 2016, 9:39 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby CluedIn on October 10th, 2016, 8:06 pm

Welcome Vera O! I don't frequent many forums, so I'm curious which ones you are referring to that (still) frown upon SC research?
CluedIn
Member
 
Posts: 257
Joined: December 1st, 2015, 1:15 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby Vera Obscurata on October 10th, 2016, 8:51 pm

CluedIn » October 10th, 2016, 1:06 pm wrote:Welcome Vera O! I don't frequent many forums, so I'm curious which ones you are referring to that (still) frown upon SC research?

Thank you!

Basically the same things:
"those people are just crazy"
"Simon Shack is a jew/Zionist, look at his brother driving Formula 1 for Osama Sim Laden"
"no planes are bullshit; too many people saw them"
"there's no need to fake shootings, because it happens so often [pointing to another fake shooting as 'proof']"

Showing the people who speak those words do not really (wish to) investigate anything. It's all cheap misdirection and ad hominems and nothing solid.

Thus far I haven't seen a link to Cluesforum that says "those people have a point" or "good in-depth research". Or even "they are right about A but not about B".

Your question was "where?". Basically what I have done mostly is try to see well-meaning honest people on various sites and then by private message talk more in-depth. But even then, it is "too crazy" for most people to understand hoaxing as the preferred option for perverts.
Vera Obscurata
Member
 
Posts: 35
Joined: October 8th, 2016, 9:39 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby kevlar on November 2nd, 2016, 6:44 pm

Hello out there, I'm new in town. Hailing from New Hampshire currently. The text below is from my email to Simon.

Kevlar is an old nickname of mine based on my first name. It is also my twitter name if any of the members find themselves there. There are several reasons for joining, primarily I want to make sure I get on the list of folks that actually figured it out. I am also interested in discussing current events with people that share my perspective. I don't have many acquaintances that I can discuss these topics with. They are all too brainwashed. I also feel that I may be able to share some new or expanded insights based on my professional background (civil engineering & environmental science).

My goal is to continue putting the pieces together to aid my understanding of it all. Talk to you later.

Peace.
kevlar
Newbie
 
Posts: 1
Joined: October 29th, 2016, 8:34 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby TimR on November 8th, 2016, 7:23 pm

Hi Simon-


I discovered CF a month or so ago and have enjoyed reading many of the threads there. Of particular interest to me is the one on dinosaurs. It has prompted me to look at some of the mainstream sources with a critical eye, and try to determine what I think about the matter.


I also wrote a satirical piece on the topic, which I would like to share with CF readers, or link to the post on my blog: http://timrockscomics.blogspot.com/2016 ... ogist.html


Beyond that I would hope to contribute to the discussion on that and other posts in the future. My username is "TimR."
TimR
Newbie
 
Posts: 8
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 9:30 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby Anders on November 9th, 2016, 1:32 pm

Hi,

I'm a software engineer from Sweden. I think that there is fakery in many events, such as planes simulated with computer graphics in the 9/11 attacks. Recently I heard that some people claim that even Edward Snowden is a simulated character. Most people will likely think that idea is too crazy even for a conspiracy theory. When I looked at a few Snowden videos I got the impression that, maybe not likely, but at least as a possibility that Edward Snowden is a CGI character. And when doing a quick web search, the only place I found where this had been discussed was on the Cluesforum. So as a first brief investigation I would like to post some ideas about Edward Snowden.
Anders
Member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 9:20 am

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby hoi.polloi on November 9th, 2016, 7:42 pm

Anders » November 9th, 2016, 12:32 pm wrote:Hi,

I'm a software engineer from Sweden. I think that there is fakery in many events, such as planes simulated with computer graphics in the 9/11 attacks. Recently I heard that some people claim that even Edward Snowden is a simulated character. Most people will likely think that idea is too crazy even for a conspiracy theory. When I looked at a few Snowden videos I got the impression that, maybe not likely, but at least as a possibility that Edward Snowden is a CGI character. And when doing a quick web search, the only place I found where this had been discussed was on the Cluesforum. So as a first brief investigation I would like to post some ideas about Edward Snowden.


Hi Anders. We have already begun the discussion, and thanks for your smart words.

I was wondering how you came across CluesForum, and what other sites you might have found that possibly explored the topic of Snowden, and why they might not have reached your expectations.

Also, where does your name Anders come from?
^_^
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4830
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby PianoRacer on November 11th, 2016, 12:35 am

Greetings! Below is copied my "handshake" email with Mr. Shack.

First and foremost I want to thank you and congratulate you on the tremendous work that you have done, both with September Clues as well as Clues Forum. Both are invaluable contributions to the cause of truth and I am incredibly grateful to you for them. I have probably spent more time hungrily devouring the content on CF over the past year than anywhere else, and I feel I am much the better person for having spent the time here. I find the insights and conclusions of you and your members exactly in line with my own on almost every topic, which causes me to feel connected to you without ever having actually interacted (bi-directionally, anyway). I would relish the opportunity to leave the ranks of the silent observers and become a contributing member.

To that end I would like to share my story with you, as you have requested for all new members. I am not sure you or anyone else would find my story terribly interesting, but I will do my best. I am not sure where to start other than the beginning, so I apologize in advance if this becomes long-winded and boring. The last thing I would want would be to bore or offend the wise and erudite members of this forum, so I beg your forgiveness if I do not meet the very high standards of discourse that you have come to expect of your members.

I grew up in the city of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Going through the inner city “public school system”, which I now refer to by the more accurate term “government child indoctrination prison system”, I was not really in a position to even come tangentially close to clearing the scales from my eyes and were it not for a stroke of luck I have no doubt that I would be no different from the vast majority of humanity, at least with respect to my relationship with the truth. It may sound odd, but it was actually a class that I took in college that started me on the path to wisdom. The class was a class in logic, and the textbook that we used had a quote on the first page that I would like to repeat here because it dramatically impacted my life. The quote is this:

It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insuficient evidence.

– W. K. Clifford

This quote, along with the material that I learned from the course, stuck with me. It changed me. It’s been said that a mind, once expanded by a new idea, can never retain it’s original shape, and this was certainly the case for me. I would highly recommend to anyone who has not spent some time familiarizing themselves with the teachings of logic, to pursue the topic. The book that contains that quote, and which I believe is still the definitive source on the topic, is called “A Concise Introduction to Logic” by P. J. Hurley. It can be purchased at Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Concise-Introduc ... 1111346232

An adept googler may be able to find a PDF copy to peruse, though I would encourage anyone who enjoys the material to purchase the actual book.

As I said, this class, and this quote, changed me fundamentally. I learned to identify and dismiss logical fallacies. I learned formal logic, how to break an argument down into it’s constituent parts and evaluate it. Once I had that knowledge, everything that I read became a sort of challenge - is this person making an actual argument, with premises, logic, and conclusions? Is the argument valid? Do I accept the premises? This skill, which so many seem to lack, proved absolutely fundamental in my growth as a human being and a thinker. I would strongly recommend it to the readership of this forum, though of course anyone who finds themselves here is obviously already a talented thinker, and must have at least some grasp of the concepts of logic.

So - this nugget of wisdom would grow within me over the next few years, not really coming into full bloom until I well and truly began my quest for the truth. The first big impetus was the “economic collapse” around 2007-2008. I found myself determined to understand the economic crisis, and economics in general, and was somewhat surprised to find that all of the mainstream voices and explanations of how the system worked and why certain things happened didn’t have any actual, sound arguments or logic backing their claims. I would read articles by Paul Krugman and his ilk and come away disgusted that he was offering no solid, tangible arguments and instead seemed to be engaging in pure sophistry. That is when I feel my descent down the rabbit hole truly began. After realizing that Krugman and the “mainstream” neoliberal economists were complete frauds, I kept searching for an explanation and an argument that actually made sense. It wasn’t until I discovered the Austrian school, and the writings of folks like Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, etc. that the economy actually started to make sense to me. It was the State, with their omnipresent threat of violence, that caused the world economy to be so schizophrenic. I came to understand that it was the fact that someone is pointing a gun at you and threatening you with kidnapping, caging, and (if you resist) murder that makes all of the insanity of the global economic system possible. Understanding that, the core element of the threat of violence, it finally made sense to me.

And, consequently, so did the State. I came to understand WHY people paid “taxes”, or why the followed laws at all - it wasn’t because they thought the State was good or right or just (that is just the story they tell themselves and others to justify their cowardice), it was because they didn’t want to be murdered. The works of folks like Lysander Spooner, Albert Jay Nock, and yes, even that viper, Stefan Molyneux, woke me up to the reality of the world we live in. I came to understand the value of having values and having integrity. I came to admire and accept the Non Aggression Principle (NAP) and desired to live with integrity with respect to my values, even when that made things difficult or uncomfortable. I came to reject aggression (which can be simply defined as violence or the threat of violence against the peaceful) in all it’s forms, which mostly relates to the State, since that is the only institution in our lives that most people grant an exception to the NAP.

A few years ago my wife and I decided to have our first child, and I took this responsibility incredibly seriously, as did my wife. While researching birth, we both came to the conclusion that a hospital birth was a bad idea. I would highly recommend the book “The thinking woman’s guide to child birth”, where it is pointed out that statistically, a home birth is safer than a hospital birth for the vast majority of women. Here is the link in case anyone is interested (I can repost this in the “Parenting in the Simulation Age” thread if appropriate):

https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Womans- ... 0399525173

I took it upon myself to research vaccines, and what I found completely shocked me. Coming to terms with the truth about vaccines is pretty depressing. I won’t go into it here, but we are clearly experiencing a modern-day genocide through the mass poisoning of babies. It’s sick, it’s evil, and I have much scorn for those who perpetrate it for their own benefit and much pity for those who fall victim, especially the poor, innocent, permanently injured children. If I could recommend one source of information on this topic, it would be the 130+-year-old masterpiece, “The Story of a Great Delusion”, available online for free:

https://archive.org/details/storyofgreatdelu00whitrich

I myself own several hardcover copies, one of which is signed by one of the contributors to the book, and is one of my most prized possessions.

I eventually found a group of people who shared my values with regards to the NAP and the treatment of and respect for children. They called themselves Voluntarists, and they, like me, wished to live in a world where all human interactions were voluntary and never coercive, to reject aggression in all it’s forms, primarily that of the State and of violent parents. Unlike many, I turned my values into action. After my wife and I had our first child, we moved a thousand miles across the country, from Minneapolis to Asheville, North Carolina, to join others who shared our values. Here we remain, and I am happy to report that the decision to surround ourselves with those who share our ideology of peace and integrity has been one of the best decisions of our (and our children’s) lives. We felt so alienated from everyone else around us (“Statists” as we tend to refer to them) that now I can’t imagine ever going back.

Once I rejected the State as a fundamentally criminal, evil, and completely unnecessary institution, my search for truth continued. My preferred way of thinking of it was this: I had a baseball bat called Truth. Every idea that I had accepted, every conclusion I had come to, everything that I had been “taught” (indoctrinated with) was fair game for a pummeling by the “truth bat”. If I could assail an idea from all angles with my truth bat, and it was left standing, then I would accept it as truth until I found evidence to the contrary. And oh how the propaganda did fall, often much to my surprise.

Coming to terms with the truth about organizations like NASA was another big eye-opener. Watching videos of bubbles coming out of the “space” suits, the ridiculous claims and impossible explanations, the lack of pictures from “space” despite allegedly thousands of satellites and many probes/spaceships/etc., even the incredibly awkward and uncomfortable press conferences following the first “moon landing” and “mars rover” were damning. I had no choice but to accept that everything NASA, and all other “space” agencies claimed was a complete fabrication, which wasn’t that difficult since I had already rejected the State as an illegitimate organization. It was then that I realized that the lies go deep to the core, and literally nothing that I had been told or believed was exempt from scrutiny and potential revision. Nietzsche once said of the State, “Everything they have is stolen and everything they say is a lie”. I once thought that hyperbole - no longer.

From there I came to understand the truth about nuclear weapons (they do not exist), mass shootings (they are all staged), assassinations, serial killers, even history itself after coming into contact with the work of people like Antony Fomenko. I had seen the “synced out” video at some point and accepted it as the most logical explanation of the events of 9/11, but the algorithms are effective and even after trying to find the video again I was not able to and didn’t really get the true extent of the fakery until I found Clues Forum and watched September Clues in it’s entirety. The truth about 9/11 is so instructive and so damning that I cannot adequately express my gratitude for the original research done by yourself and the membership of the forum. I don’t expect that I will ever contribute to the cause of truth with original thoughts and research the way that you all have.

I do, however, believe that I have found some other fundamental truths. None of it is due to my original research, but rather my seemingly rare ability to ferret out the truth from the arguments of others. These topics are of such immense importance, at least to me, that I feel compelled to bring them to the attention of the membership of this forum, who, with no intention of being hyperbolic or obsequious, I consider to be the smartest and bravest people currently living. I would find it incredibly valuable to get the feedback of the membership of this forum on these topics.

And yet I am hesitant. I know that the purpose of this forum is media fakery, and I cannot claim that the ideas that I wish to explore and get feedback on are directly related to that. And yet, in a way, I think that they are - human beings are inherently motivated to seek the truth, and it takes a great deal of propaganda and indoctrination to confuse us. Therefore, any important truth that has been obscured by relentless propaganda and misdirection seems like it could be fair game. Reading some of the threads here, I know that there is a great deal of hesitancy to “go there”, with the concern that delving into other topics and coming to conclusions that may upset and offend others may “turn people off” to the amazing original research done by the members of this forum, which I empathize with and understand. I genuinely do not want to run afoul of the rigorous standards of this forum, yet I feel compelled to bring the arguments and evidence that I have in my possession to the attention of the members of this forum, and let the chips fall where they may.

In the spirit of not prevaricating about the bush, here are some of the truths that I feel confident that I have uncovered, which may or may not be of interest to the readers of this forum:

  • The prevention and cure for cancer
  • The origins of human beings
  • The shape and nature of the Earth (and the Universe)
  • The truth about children - how they are treated, poisoned, assaulted, destroyed
  • The truth about the State - much of which I have already alluded to

There is probably more, but aside from the very important truths already conclusively exposed by this forum, these topics I think could use some definitive answers, and I truly believe that I have found them. And if I am wrong - so be it. Show me why, and I will rescind my conclusions and continue my pursuit of the true answers to these questions, about which I am very passionate. My allegiance is to the truth, not to my conclusions.

As for my user name - it is an anagram for my real name, something that could probably be discerned rather easily by anyone who might be interested. As a recent member mentioned, part of my motivation for posting here is that of posterity - I “figured it out”, dammit, and want history to record that fact!

I should probably leave it there. I can go into further detail on some of the topics I’ve mentioned on the appropriate threads, where they exist. I would like to share my views on Cancer in the “Engineering Disease” thread, my views on children in the “Parenting in the Simulation Age” thread, etc. I truly hope to bring valuable insight and information to these topics, as I find them incredibly important, perhaps more than the media fakery which is the driving force for this forum. I hope that others find my contributions valuable, my primary motivation is to get feedback from the people who have shown a mastery of intellect and skepticism, and again I like to think that I am not married to my conclusions, though I often do find them exciting.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to tell my story, Simon. I truly hope that I can give something back in exchange for the immense value that I have already received from yourself and the members here.

Yours in peace,
PianoRacer
PianoRacer
Newbie
 
Posts: 5
Joined: November 10th, 2016, 2:13 am

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Postby Anders on November 11th, 2016, 8:00 am

hoi.polloi » November 9th, 2016, 7:42 pm wrote:
Anders » November 9th, 2016, 12:32 pm wrote:Hi,

I'm a software engineer from Sweden. I think that there is fakery in many events, such as planes simulated with computer graphics in the 9/11 attacks. Recently I heard that some people claim that even Edward Snowden is a simulated character. Most people will likely think that idea is too crazy even for a conspiracy theory. When I looked at a few Snowden videos I got the impression that, maybe not likely, but at least as a possibility that Edward Snowden is a CGI character. And when doing a quick web search, the only place I found where this had been discussed was on the Cluesforum. So as a first brief investigation I would like to post some ideas about Edward Snowden.


Hi Anders. We have already begun the discussion, and thanks for your smart words.

I was wondering how you came across CluesForum, and what other sites you might have found that possibly explored the topic of Snowden, and why they might not have reached your expectations.

Also, where does your name Anders come from?
^_^


I missed to cut and copy this part from my handshake email: "I registered myself as the user Anders at Cluesforum.info which is the name I often use."

And I haven't done any more web searches about Edward Snowden than what I mentioned in my email. But it was striking how little information I found (via Google Search) about Snowden being a simulated character. Among the few other websites where it had been mentioned it was more of a total dismissal of the idea. One website had it listed in a top list of the most craziest conspiracy theories about Edward Snowden or something like that. The only serious discussion about the idea I found was on Cluesforum.
Anders
Member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 9:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to HOW TO REGISTER at CLUESFORUM - and other tips

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests