Did anyone see our Fake News World coming?

[RoyBean]

You tell someone what you plan on doing to them and they do nothing to stop you, then that gives you the go ahead to carry it out.

I see what you mean. This is indeed how serial killers are shown to behave in crime dramas and movies. It's like they want an extra incentive to do evil to another person and so they come up with a private way of "asking" for consent and a private way of "receiving" consent.

In truth, mutual consent has not been communicated but they sociopathically make fun of society and human interaction by creating this private mockery of consent - as if it were some kind of justification for their actions. It actually makes a lot of sense that they would perceive articles warning us of fakery as some kind of excuse to actually enact it.

Simon and I have repeatedly emphasized true compassionate communication methods as wanting in our relationship with the perpetrators of 9/11 and 7/7 hoaxes. If they were truly humane people they would be willing to sit down and talk with us mano-a-mano, and discuss why they have done what they've done. This will not happen and we know this because their "revelation of the method" actually just reveals their cowardice in being unwilling to actually communicate with people.

Perhaps the superhero character Batman was right when he said all criminals are just cowards with superstitious fears.

shit...really? I always thought it was some sort of smoke signal thingy they had going cuz it just didn't make sense all the so called "clues" left just to 'fuck with us'. I thought they were more sophisticated than that. I guess I maybe overestimated them. Damn if they're that bold and assholey, I guess we don't stand a chance against such psychopathy?

[Dcopymope]

You tell someone what you plan on doing to them and they do nothing to stop you, then that gives you the go ahead to carry it out.

I see what you mean. This is indeed how serial killers are shown to behave in crime dramas and movies. It's like they want an extra incentive to do evil to another person and so they come up with a private way of "asking" for consent and a private way of "receiving" consent.

In truth, mutual consent has not been communicated but they sociopathically make fun of society and human interaction by creating this private mockery of consent - as if it were some kind of justification for their actions. It actually makes a lot of sense that they would perceive articles warning us of fakery as some kind of excuse to actually enact it.

Simon and I have repeatedly emphasized true compassionate communication methods as wanting in our relationship with the perpetrators of 9/11 and 7/7 hoaxes. If they were truly humane people they would be willing to sit down and talk with us mano-a-mano, and discuss why they have done what they've done. This will not happen and we know this because their "revelation of the method" actually just reveals their cowardice in being unwilling to actually communicate with people.

Perhaps the superhero character Batman was right when he said all criminals are just cowards with superstitious fears.

shit...really? I always thought it was some sort of smoke signal thingy they had going cuz it just didn't make sense all the so called "clues" left just to 'fuck with us'. I thought they were more sophisticated than that. I guess I maybe overestimated them. Damn if they're that bold and assholey, I guess we don't stand a chance against such psychopathy?

People like to think that we have a chance of defeating them; I can say that as far as stopping the new world order agenda or bringing those behind 9/11 to justice, this is not going to happen. Is it possible that we can halt the agenda and veer it off in a direction other than where we are heading, it is possible. Like any agenda or corporate business plan, every facet of the new world order agenda runs off timetables, if we can upset that timetable by stalling them, that will force there hand, exposing themselves for the tyrants they are, and only then can we hope that the masses wake up even a little. This is why the patriot act for example was extended, because they are expecting trouble later on, as the entire system collapses and what people thought were their rights, what little freedom they have now are blatantly violated on an increasing basis, and eventually vanish altogether.

[hoi.polloi]

Yes, but the crucial existential question is my biggest concern: even if we "defeat" this plan, expose everyone involved and lock them up or send them to an island or otherwise deal with them in such a way that we never have to expose our society to their abuses again ... they are the same species as us and we might develop the same illnesses from within our own society all over again.

The present "New World Order" psychopaths are connected to us. We are all one system.

In other words, I get the sense that we are dealing with an inevitable truth of human nature - an aspect that is forced into being by circumstances we don't yet understand. Will we ever understand how these sorts of people appear? I think so.

Can we take advantage of our situation and use it for good, positive research that can be passed down in wisdom for future generations? I believe Simon is trying to do just that - and we should all feel a little sorry for him that he has decided to take on this world issue almost by himself, maybe? I don't know.

Since nobody seems to have foreseen our fake news world, and indeed - even the perpetrators seemed to have a "bandwidth" of deeds that they were attempting to complete, so perhaps they didn't know if they would get away with everything or nothing - we are all part of this interesting research into ourselves. I don't know if the perps think of this situation the same way, but I hope they also wonder, "gee, how did we get here?" sometimes.

Still, whether it was "good" or "bad" that we are faced with this dilemma, it is real -- and we are doing our best to deal with it realistically. Those who exist in the Matrix seem to be okay sometimes, even if it is a sort of Corn Syrup-laden semi-comatose "good time" defined by cheap thrills and perception-dulling foods, drugs and misplaced medications. The greatest artwork of our society seems to play with the notion of addressing these issues, but also seems scared of getting "too serious" about anything, including matters that are fairly serious like the painful slow rape and murder of cultures, species and ecosystems.

"Well, we can't be too serious about these things or else we fall into despair," seems to be their argument. And that is definitely true.

On the other hand, it is frighteningly comforting to believe there is some kind of "higher power" making sure things unfold in a positive way. I think that is a dangerous assumption and we should try to take on some of the burden ourselves, as long as we don't beat ourselves up over it.

My intention isn't to beat anyone up about not seeing the Fake News World coming. I just want to gauge how many people really did and if it comes from true wisdom or just paranoia or because they helped imagine it into being themselves, or something in between all those.

[simonshack]

Can we take advantage of our situation and use it for good, positive research that can be passed down in wisdom for future generations? I believe Simon is trying to do just that - and we should all feel a little sorry for him that he has decided to take on this world issue almost by himself, maybe? I don't know.

Dear Hoi,

I really don't want anyone to feel sorry for me in the slightest way. I am enjoying every step of our common awakening to a world which simply isn't as bright and rosy as the one we envisioned during our childhood and teens. I believe most members of this forum are aware of this and justly try to clean the shit we are surrounded with - and decontaminate the offensive, fetid smell of corruption emanated by the low-life assholes governing this planet. I am sorry to use such harsh words - but there is frankly no other way to define the folks who pretend to rule over our lives in this sorry moment of history.

Humor and intelligence are the most effective weapons we still have to combat this scourge - and we should use them to the full. Let's laugh those 'rulers' out of their thrones - using our brain power. And no, I don't believe that mankind is such a stupid bunch of animals eternally condemned to be ruled, fooled and oppressed by a fringe, excremental residue of its most scummy and depraved specimens. We can do better than this.

[hoi.polloi]

Cool. Fellow optimists welcome!

[reel.deal]

preview sometimes times-out pretty fast, so you have to keep refreshing each edit...
safer saving all changes into 'Notepad', then copy/paste the whole thing...

[Unleashed]

Well... I'm a little discouraged after trying to post a follow up here, but somehow got logged out and lost my work. I spent an hour creating and linking a post FULL of info, only to have it all erased in the digital realm when I clicked the preview button.
I will retype and resubmit when I can gather myself.

Edit: It seems I may have screwed something up whilst trying to post here, and was under the impression I was automatically logged out.
No harm no foul, just lots of keystrokes lost in oblivion!

Hey MM,

Darn it. I feel you. It's happened to me, too when I first started posting here. Now I just try to review it and hit Submit. But, I always miss errors I make so you almost never see me where I haven't edited my post afterward. When in doubt post, unless you know how to paste elsewhere first.
I don't.

It's easier to beg forgiveness than to ask permission from the "Preview" button!

[figuringitout]

I don't understand why people can't see through Bill or William Cooper.

He looks like a simulated whistle-blower and he sounds like one of those preacher guys who were hired by the perps to jump around the Internet and alt-net groups saying "Death is coming! I warn you! On Tuesday everything will change!"

Then he supposedly dies, just like all the other protester sims.

That's another one of those people I don't want to hear any more about -- the so-called insiders. I am talking about people who are perpetually outsiders, people who are not "ex-CIA" or "ex-black ops" or "ex-blah blah blah" but real average people who were picking up the pieces and - if they didn't see 9/11 coming - at least had the sense that this was more of the same bull sh#t rather than a unique event. Not "informed" -- just smart ...

I agree about Cooper. I mean, maybe he was legit, maybe he wasn't, but common-sense tells me that he was just playing on the same side as Jones, and their whole wrestlemania-style shouting match over the air-waves is nothing but very bad theatre.

Cooper, an ex-naval (intelligence?) officer, said that he saw a spaceship the size of an aircraft carrier come out of the ocean, turn on it's axis and shoot off into the sky at incredible speed - all without making a sound and that he was the only person to see it out of the group of people he was with at the time. Amongst his many claims were that there are bases (whole cities?) on the moon, and the theory that the driver shot JFK (he actaully claimed that he had been shown official documents regarding this, like they would keep official documents regarding something like that and someone would show them in the first place), which is as far as I can see, easily debunkable. And most people seem to believe that he was completely legit, the 'founding-father' of the 'truth movement' as I heard him called on another forum the other week.

And why? Because he was shot and killed. And maybe he really did die, but like you say he could also have simply been 'retired' from his role to let the Jones persona come to the forefront of the 'movement'. The added bonus of being retired in such a way of course, would be that it adds weight to your claims, for why else would 'they kill him', if he wasn't on the right track?

The willingness of most 'truthers' to take for granted certain things that they're supposed to believe is incredible I find.

[Dcopymope]

I don't understand why people can't see through Bill or William Cooper.

He looks like a simulated whistle-blower and he sounds like one of those preacher guys who were hired by the perps to jump around the Internet and alt-net groups saying "Death is coming! I warn you! On Tuesday everything will change!"

Then he supposedly dies, just like all the other protester sims.

That's another one of those people I don't want to hear any more about -- the so-called insiders. I am talking about people who are perpetually outsiders, people who are not "ex-CIA" or "ex-black ops" or "ex-blah blah blah" but real average people who were picking up the pieces and - if they didn't see 9/11 coming - at least had the sense that this was more of the same bull sh#t rather than a unique event. Not "informed" -- just smart ...

I agree about Cooper. I mean, maybe he was legit, maybe he wasn't, but common-sense tells me that he was just playing on the same side as Jones, and their whole wrestlemania-style shouting match over the air-waves is nothing but very bad theatre.

Cooper, an ex-naval (intelligence?) officer, said that he saw a spaceship the size of an aircraft carrier come out of the ocean, turn on it's axis and shoot off into the sky at incredible speed - all without making a sound and that he was the only person to see it out of the group of people he was with at the time. Amongst his many claims were that there are bases (whole cities?) on the moon, and the theory that the driver shot JFK (he actaully claimed that he had been shown official documents regarding this, like they would keep official documents regarding something like that and someone would show them in the first place), which is as far as I can see, easily debunkable. And most people seem to believe that he was completely legit, the 'founding-father' of the 'truth movement' as I heard him called on another forum the other week.

And why? Because he was shot and killed. And maybe he really did die, but like you say he could also have simply been 'retired' from his role to let the Jones persona come to the forefront of the 'movement'. The added bonus of being retired in such a way of course, would be that it adds weight to your claims, for why else would 'they kill him', if he wasn't on the right track?

The willingness of most 'truthers' to take for granted certain things that they're supposed to believe is incredible I find.

The one thing that I find interesting is that to this day we are still getting an endless amount of detractors of Mr. Cooper from seemingly all sides, which tells me that he was certainly onto something. Every other day, there’s a new video somewhere discrediting Cooper, all regurgitating the same crap spouted in previous videos, it’s getting rather old. I laughed at the videos below from Mark Dice, one of the main superstars of the 9/11 truth movement.

Mark Dice exposes Bill Cooper's lies and exaggerations (1of 2):
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFvMiHbWe14

Mark Dice exposes Bill Cooper's lies and exaggerations (2 of 2):
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tM0lbLtFeU

[figuringitout]

I don't understand why people can't see through Bill or William Cooper.

He looks like a simulated whistle-blower and he sounds like one of those preacher guys who were hired by the perps to jump around the Internet and alt-net groups saying "Death is coming! I warn you! On Tuesday everything will change!"

Then he supposedly dies, just like all the other protester sims.

That's another one of those people I don't want to hear any more about -- the so-called insiders. I am talking about people who are perpetually outsiders, people who are not "ex-CIA" or "ex-black ops" or "ex-blah blah blah" but real average people who were picking up the pieces and - if they didn't see 9/11 coming - at least had the sense that this was more of the same bull sh#t rather than a unique event. Not "informed" -- just smart ...

I agree about Cooper. I mean, maybe he was legit, maybe he wasn't, but common-sense tells me that he was just playing on the same side as Jones, and their whole wrestlemania-style shouting match over the air-waves is nothing but very bad theatre.

Cooper, an ex-naval (intelligence?) officer, said that he saw a spaceship the size of an aircraft carrier come out of the ocean, turn on it's axis and shoot off into the sky at incredible speed - all without making a sound and that he was the only person to see it out of the group of people he was with at the time. Amongst his many claims were that there are bases (whole cities?) on the moon, and the theory that the driver shot JFK (he actaully claimed that he had been shown official documents regarding this, like they would keep official documents regarding something like that and someone would show them in the first place), which is as far as I can see, easily debunkable. And most people seem to believe that he was completely legit, the 'founding-father' of the 'truth movement' as I heard him called on another forum the other week.

And why? Because he was shot and killed. And maybe he really did die, but like you say he could also have simply been 'retired' from his role to let the Jones persona come to the forefront of the 'movement'. The added bonus of being retired in such a way of course, would be that it adds weight to your claims, for why else would 'they kill him', if he wasn't on the right track?

The willingness of most 'truthers' to take for granted certain things that they're supposed to believe is incredible I find.

The one thing that I find interesting is that to this day we are still getting an endless amount of detractors of Mr. Cooper from seemingly all sides, which tells me that he was certainly onto something. Every other day, there’s a new video somewhere discrediting Cooper, all regurgitating the same crap spouted in previous videos, it’s getting rather old. I laughed at the videos below from Mark Dice, one of the main superstars of the 9/11 truth movement.

Mark Dice exposes Bill Cooper's lies and exaggerations (1of 2):
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFvMiHbWe14

Mark Dice exposes Bill Cooper's lies and exaggerations (2 of 2):
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tM0lbLtFeU

I can't say I've ever seen one video alleging Cooper was a fraud etc, though I can't say that I've spent any time looking for such information, but despite that I find it hard to believe that 'every other day, there's a new video somewhere discrediting Cooper'. His reputation appears virtually untouchable in this so-called truth movement as far as I can see.

Thanks for posting those videos though, I've found them constructive.

I've never read Coopers book and have based most of my thoughts on him from a lecture of his from 1991 that I happened to watch a recording of 7-8 years ago. My thoughts imediately after watching that lecture haven't really changed over those 7-8 years.

I find it interesting then that the views I expressed in my post, which I wrote purely from memory and which I haven't seen mentioned in detail before, more or less mirror what the guy in the videos asserts. This just leads me to further believe that my initial gut reaction about Cooper was correct and that that is what the evidence regarding Cooper (whether Cooper groupies like it or not) generally suggests.

Now, maybe I'm wrong about this. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong on an issue though should I be given evidence to make me do so (or at least a decent argument to put a little doubt in my mind).

I think it's better to question issues like this in more detail rather than just believing any old sexed-up illuminati-based theory because it sounds good.

I don't know this Mark Dice, have never seen him before. Could be a plant/could be legit, who knows. On this occassion his thoughts seem fairly sound.

What is it about the videos that you personally found funny?

[Dcopymope]

I can't say I've ever seen one video alleging Cooper was a fraud etc, though I can't say that I've spent any time looking for such information, but despite that I find it hard to believe that 'every other day, there's a new video somewhere discrediting Cooper'. His reputation appears virtually untouchable in this so-called truth movement as far as I can see.

Thanks for posting those videos though, I've found them constructive.

I've never read Coopers book and have based most of my thoughts on him from a lecture of his from 1991 that I happened to watch a recording of 7-8 years ago. My thoughts imediately after watching that lecture haven't really changed over those 7-8 years.

I find it interesting then that the views I expressed in my post, which I wrote purely from memory and which I haven't seen mentioned in detail before, more or less mirror what the guy in the videos asserts. This just leads me to further believe that my initial gut reaction about Cooper was correct and that that is what the evidence regarding Cooper (whether Cooper groupies like it or not) generally suggests.

Now, maybe I'm wrong about this. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong on an issue though should I be given evidence to make me do so (or at least a decent argument to put a little doubt in my mind).

I think it's better to question issues like this in more detail rather than just believing any old sexed-up illuminati-based theory because it sounds good.

I don't know this Mark Dice, have never seen him before. Could be a plant/could be legit, who knows. On this occassion his thoughts seem fairly sound.

What is it about the videos that you personally found funny?

My point with clowns like Mark is you will never see him do a video picking apart all of the fear mongering, lies, exaggerations, and plain bull shit that people like Alex Jones, David Icke and all other gurus spout on a daily basis, but he goes on nitpicking about the inaccuracies in a book written by a man long dead, inaccuracies which amounted to less than 1% of the book. I've heard it all before and its gotten old.

[nonhocapito]

William Cooper is part of the Alex Jones psy-op. When they set up one manufactured dissenter, they retroactively set up the other.
Here's the reasoning:

"If Jones fails, the whole idea of right-wing isolationist dissent in america might be hurt. We must prepare a 'purer' version of him to fall back to for those who decide to leave Jones. We don't want them to go anywhere else. Of course, this other figure must be dead, because it has not to be a real substitute, but just a fail-safe to keep trust in the idea of a movement, that can still be worth working for."

The same way, a "good" "pure" and "dead" communist like Guevara would allow despised and unjust communist regimes to still get some (or a lot of) consent in the west.

[Dcopymope]

William Cooper is part of the Alex Jones psy-op. When they set up one manufactured dissenter, they retroactively set up the other.
Here's the reasoning:

"If Jones fails, the whole idea of right-wing isolationist dissent in america might be hurt. We must prepare a 'purer' version of him to fall back to for those who decide to leave Jones. We don't want them to go anywhere else. Of course, this other figure must be dead, because it has not to be a real substitute, but just a fail-safe to keep trust in the idea of a movement, that can still be worth working for."

The same way, a "good" "pure" and "dead" communist like Guevara would allow despised and unjust communist regimes to still get some (or a lot of) consent in the west.

So now everyone is repeating themselves again, I think we all get the message now nonhocapito. Repeating it for the umpteenth time doesn't make the message anymore valid than the first time it was said.

[jedi]

Okay, I get it. I need to rephrase the question. I am modifying the topic subtitle from "Who?" to "No gurus, media insiders or government agencies" and changing "9/11" to say "our present world of TV fakery" ... because I am not talking about The Simpsons or X-Files or X-Men or the folding dollar bill; nor am I talking about William Cooper, Alex Jones or Bill Clinton; nor am I talking about 80's video games; nor am I talking about simulated persons like the Racing Rescuer Rick Rescorla. Basically, not necessarily people who might call themselves insiders but people who were picking up the pieces along the way and decided - when 9/11 happened - that it was clearly a continuation of a pattern they had been previously aware of through prior experience in our society and wrote about it. Is that restrictive enough yet?

So far, my vote is for:

1. "Martin Tierney" (real?)

2. Silent watchful types who remain anonymous like godzilla said (though, unfortunately, that would mean we are still left with an unknown.)

3. An acquaintance of mine whom I cannot get in touch with any longer, who - like Simon - partially doubted the video when they first saw it. ("That doesn't seem quite right ... the airplane disappeared entirely into the building? Hmm.")

But that doesn't quite count either, because I was hoping we could come up with people out there who had an awareness of media monopoly influence. Maybe writers. Like those articles that Killtown had listed, that warned people of fake live news? I would nominate these specific discussions as being "media insider-y" because they specifically talk about TV fakery and the precise problem that we are encountering now (besides the live public actors like Nico Haupt and Webfairy, etc.) but they are not like "hints" and more like bold, slap-you-in-the-face warning shots which could be attributed to cleverness rather than 'inside info about the coming event of 9/11' ... and perhaps we might realize that all these people who have even so much as touched the mainstream media don't seem to be presently trustworthy:

ARTICLE 1.
When TV brings you the news as it didn't happen - The UK Independent, Monday, 24 January 2000, Anonymous writer. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 28236.html

The article doesn't have a writing credit but it cites the British ITC. http://www.itc.org.uk/
Unfortunately, that company - the very company which expressed concern over fake television - is no more. From above site which formerly belonged to the ITC:

The ITC has ceased to exist from 18 December 2003 and its duties have been assumed by Ofcom, the Office of Communications. Ofcom is the new communications sector regulator and will have wide-ranging responsibilities when it assumes its powers on 29 December 2003. Ofcom inherits the duties of the five existing regulators it replaces: the Broadcasting Standards Commission (BSC), the Independent Television Commission (ITC), Oftel, the Radio Authority and the Radiocommunications Agency.

Yikes. So that bit of consumer protection didn't last long after 9/11 or before 7/7. It was absorbed by a larger group called Ofcom, the Office of Communications: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/



ARTICLE 2
Lying With Pixels - Technology Review, July/August 2000, by "Ivan Amato". http://web.archive.org/web/200007110551 ... /amato.htm

Ivan Amato is a correspondent for National Public Radio and the author of Stuff: The Materials the World Is Made Of a chronicle of cutting-edge research in materials science.

- Technology Review

Mr. Amato left C&EN in November 2009

- Chemical & Engineering News

Amato's First Law of Awe

Awe begins in the eye of the beholder.

Limited as it is, biology's homegrown sensory physiology is sufficient in our case to ignite wonder and curiosity about just where it is we find ourselves thrown, how we got there, and how we can even know anything at all. Therein lies the beginning of science.

Amato's Second Law of Awe

Transcending our own sensory limitations with technological tools of observation, a relentless theme of the history of science, enhances the experience of awe itself because it expands the variety of attributes of the universe that we can know about. Therein lies one of the most underrated values of science.

(For example, we used to see the world in only a rainbow of colors. Our tools have shown us that the rainbow is a mere sliver of electromagnetic wavelengths sandwiched between an infinitude of previously invisible ones.)

- Edge, the World Question Center, http://www.edge.org/q2004/page3.html


Ivan Amato
blog: http://www.blogger.com/profile/12900938697891242746
email: ivanamato61@gmail.com

BAD NEWS: Ivan Amato writes about the ash volcano problem as if it were real. He writes for Washington Post - notorious propaganda spiel. Is Ivan real?



ARTICLE 3
CBS Is Divided Over the Use Of False Images In Broadcasts - New York Times, Published: January 13, 2000, Pasadena, California, by "Bill Carter" http://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/13/busin ... casts.html

Is Bill Carter real, at least? Or is there a continuing pattern of dead ends? Well, however real he is, he is apparently still acting concerned for the public, since he wrote this article about a month ago: CNN and CBS in Talks to Gather News Together - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/busin ... ill_carter
warning us somewhat of a gathering news monopoly, no? Perhaps he is trying to warn us. Or perhaps "he" is "trying" to "warn" us.



ARTICLE 4
When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing - Washington Post (apparently from a .mil source) Monday, Feb. 1, 1999 by "William M. Arkin" - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/na ... 020199.htm

This mini bio accompanies his article:

William M. Arkin, author of "The U.S. Military Online," is a leading expert on national security and the Internet. He lectures and writes on nuclear weapons, military matters and information warfare. An Army intelligence analyst from 1974-1978, Arkin currently consults for Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, MSNBC and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

e-mail: william_arkin@washingtonpost.com
---

This is why I don't trust 'media insiders' as true whistle blowers. They act like cowards, hiding in evil and surrounding themselves with it. Unfortunately all these "rescue writers" in each of the 4 articles I have given from Killtown's archives are deeply connected to the media and secret service and military organizations that are the problem. So can we count them as 'insiders' more than a fellow like a "Martin Tierney" who was supposedly "booted" from the media? What about Dan Rather's adventures in unemployment after his non-compliance? Must we rely strictly on these types of media people to know what was going on ... or had there been some small person who foresaw our Brave New Fake News World before it happened and who now has at least some minor voice we can now give ear time to? Someone who was always and has remained independent of the mainstream media?

I thought I had looked through all the threads and just saw this one. Hoi got it to where I think I can contribute but the guy is dead so we can not listen to his views today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Edward_Lopez
I remember on 9/11 listening to him on the radio, He knew when the second plane hit that OBL was involved. In the last few years I have wondered if he knew from his research or if he had been programmed to know. But the thing that always bring me questioning that day is the fact that he knew who was behind it.

[reel.deal]

oldskool...

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgd6gN9hirU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fw4TDjjDYYE&NR=1

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

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y--y3UPdvJA

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp46zZ2YcpM