REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

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

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby brianv on Wed Oct 05, 2016 5:24 pm

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?
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:27 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: 5062
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby ObamaSimLaden on Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:31 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: 53
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:43 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:35 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: 5062
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby ObamaSimLaden on Wed Oct 05, 2016 7:12 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: 53
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:43 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Thu Oct 06, 2016 1:07 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: 5062
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby ObamaSimLaden on Thu Oct 06, 2016 1:52 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: 53
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:43 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby Vera Obscurata on Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:22 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
Banned
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:39 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby CluedIn on Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:06 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: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:15 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby Vera Obscurata on Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:51 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
Banned
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:39 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby kevlar on Wed Nov 02, 2016 5:44 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
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2016 7:34 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby TimR on Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:23 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
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby Anders on Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:32 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
Banned
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:20 am

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Nov 09, 2016 6:42 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: 5062
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread postby Anders on Fri Nov 11, 2016 7:00 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
Banned
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to HOW TO REGISTER at CLUESFORUM - and other tips

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests