Was ozzybinozwald replaced?

[Terence.drew]

What "rulebook" are they playing by to make sure they are on the same page together and why do they seem to communicate with one another using numbers and symbolic days?

They were on about the Chilean miners today on the radio.

33miners.

22 August they were found 'alive' in the 'underworld'.

Multiples of 11

Chile has long been a testing and play ground of the Materialists (1973 sept 11 etc.) and is now in the good books and compliant
Looking at it on the map geographically spanning nearly 2/3s of the South American continent with convenient and vast sea access for rape and pillage mineral exports.

[timothymurphy]

This topic was prompted by suspician about Ozzy.

FWIW, I don't think Ozzy is any kind of shill, and he never seemed like anyone but himself in his posts on this forum.

Yes, the photos of his cousin look funny.

But like Fred pointed out, it seemed to be a totally local story, with no international pretentions. It just got to this forum by chance.

Perhaps there are many weird local stories out there, weirdly presented.

I just randomly searched for missing persons in my local area and got images of this girl who looks totally simmy.

Missing in late 2009, she has no connections with me, and was not destined for this forum, or anything outside the local area:



The pictures are from a police website and a local paper.
I'll send anyone the links if they're interested, but don't really want to advertise where I'm from to casual readers.

In short, I don't think Ozzy was nabbed.

[hoi.polloi]

It just got to this forum by chance.

Well .... that's true in one sense. In another sense, it's not true at all.

[idschmyd]

There are problems all over the place with the issue. Dunno much about it, really: the debate went off-line and stumbled madly back in the door. Either way, in my dumbass way I miss the ol’ boy.

Commentator:
I dont know who I hate more inbread brits or wanna be french jews like your self

Oz:
Oui vey! That is a tough call. For even I despise bakery blokes. Scone schmone.

[simonshack]

In short, I don't think Ozzy was nabbed.

Tim,

I've been hesitating to express a firm opinion about this whole affair. I guess I'm supposed to get all excited about it...

Here's what "OzzybanOswald" just wrote on his Youtube channel:

OzzybanOswald (7 hours ago)
Simon Shack just got both my photobucket accounts deleted in retaliation to the challenge I left on his account.

He's been nothing less than a high-level misdirection infiltrator shill the entire time. I should have realized when he just showed up fully formed 3 years ago without any web history, no development. But his sophisticated presentation seduced me. Now all the inconsistencies and anomalies make sense.

Better to realize late than never. "Simon Shack" is the enemy.

And I don't trust the poster below either.

http://www.youtube.com/user/OzzybanOswald

Maybe "OzzybinOswald" will now reveal that my true name is Rupert Murdoch and blame me for deleting all existing conspiracy videos from Youtube... *sigh* :rolleyes:

[brianv]

Tim, as regards the missing girl photo. Here are a few reminders of some recent British Police hoaxes....


The "Stephen Lawrence" Murder -- Knife Law


The "Jamie Bulger Murder" -- Surveillence Equipment

PC "Sharon Beshinivsky Murder" -- Further Demonise Muslims - During Iraq, Afghanistan


The "Madeleine McCann Disappearance" -- Total Media Coverage - During Iraq etc

"Norwich Prostitutes Murders" -- Ditto

and the Beat goes on....

This is an old Establishment tactic....justifying their own existence to the Tax Payer and it gives them the ability to introduce Legislation as they see fit. Knife law, gun law, surveillece equipment, checkpoints, random searches, more police...etc etc. They have been pulling this sh#t since "Jack the Ripper" and before. I s'pose you could call it Crime Mythology! They constantly remind the public that they are criminal, drumming it in, which I'm sure has some sort of societal effect. It's also apparent in british soaps.


"Missing Girls" get great traction in the Media. Selling the Police! The Government and the Police are the underlying messages in almost every "News" Broadcast. According to Managment Cybernetics Research "Corporations", such as these, spend much of their time being themselves, the rest is spent giving bad service to the public.

Three of the above happened during the Fony Bliar's criminal Iraq invasion and they ran and they ran and they ran.......

PS How could I forget Dunblane!? Just before Bliar took hold!

-- Gun Law

Recent Irish Proverb: "You are ruled by being fooled."

[hoi.polloi]

In short, I don't think Ozzy was nabbed.

Tim,

I've been hesitating to express a firm opinion about this whole affair. I guess I'm supposed to get all excited about it...

Here's what "OzzybanOswald" just wrote on his Youtube channel:

OzzybanOswald (7 hours ago)
Simon Shack just got both my photobucket accounts deleted in retaliation to the challenge I left on his account.

He's been nothing less than a high-level misdirection infiltrator shill the entire time. I should have realized when he just showed up fully formed 3 years ago without any web history, no development. But his sophisticated presentation seduced me. Now all the inconsistencies and anomalies make sense.

Better to realize late than never. "Simon Shack" is the enemy.

And I don't trust the poster below either.

http://www.youtube.com/user/OzzybanOswald

Maybe "OzzybinOswald" will now reveal that my true name is Rupert Murdoch and blame me for deleting all existing conspiracy videos from Youtube... *sigh* :rolleyes:

If that's really Ozzy's channel, it's not good.

Not good at all.

How exactly would you be to blame for his Photobucket account disappearing? I wonder if the reason Ozzy had been so dodgy on the subject of some of his videos being removed by his own person was because this was going to be his defense all along -- self-victimizing to blame it on others.

I would like more clarification on all this, but it seems to me as if Ozzy should be banned for being off his rocker or an outright planted shill.

I just want to make one point that I have been thinking of against the idea that this isn't a terror hoax so we should all just see it as more trustworthy. It has to do with the whole purpose of this fakery system in the first place.

9/11 and the Moon Hoax and the Powerful Terrorists Hoax are all part and parcel of the same phenomenon, going back decades into our history - with the technology developed to fake human beings on video - 2D and 3D video are no problem - and in audio. Video and audio are presently the two most pungent forms of simulating someone's presence without using actors in a getup standing face to face with you.

We are to believe that they don't intend on improving this system and using it, now that it's installed in all the news networks across the world?

Whether a hoax has to do with terrorism or not should never be used to dismiss it as unimportant. The whole point behind this global propaganda system is to simulate human systems and replace them with completely fabricated, controlled systems that cordon and move people the way the operants of the sim want people to move. The Terror hoax is just one example of a simulated system dynamic, one that we have concentrated on here because it is the tool we used to crack open the revelation that such system dynamics are widely employed against democracy and equality today.

Of course seemingly innocuous hoaxes will plague us as their system improves and the subtleties of human systems are further dismantled and simulated. The fact that one such hoax should show up at our forum - where we have done the most work to uncover these simulations for what they are - would be a rather striking example of how people will be targeted by this system from now on, and into the future - and a testament to the "threat" of our Thoughtcrime of doubting what we are told.

They have no intention of letting go of this technology. It still convinces the vast majority of people, even people who accept that 9/11 is a total fabrication. Look at all the ridiculous adventures on the Hudson in the past few years, all the plane crashes and the fishy stories behind them all.

It's interesting that we are being told to trust an apparently "unimportant" story and move on. Why aren't we being allowed to distrust an apparently "unimportant" story and move on?

[simonshack]

If that's really Ozzy's channel, it's not good.

Not good at all.

How exactly would you be to blame for his Photobucket account disappearing? I wonder if the reason Ozzy had been so dodgy on the subject of some of his videos being removed by his own person was because this was going to be his defense all along -- self-victimizing to blame it on others.

I would like more clarification on all this, but it seems to me as if Ozzy should be banned for being off his rocker or an outright planted shill.

Hoi,

I didn't really wish to spend much time on this matter - but I probably owe it to the newer members of this forum (who might wonder what the deal was with Ozzy and could feel confused) to write a few lines - including some historical background - about this last 'drama'. I will just assume, for lack of any better evidence, that the "Ozzy Bin Oswald" (a.k.a. Greg Thompson - I presume) which I first heard about in 2007 is the same as the current "OzzybanOswald" and his various YT aliases.

Ever since day one (intended as the day I published September Clues online in June 2007), I have seen a stream of initially enthusiastic 'supporters' of my work suddenly doing a 180? and start viciously attacking it. None of them, I must say, have held on for as long as Ozzy to their fake good intentions - but that doesn't make him any different. He's just the latest of a steady flow of clowns cajoling me and hugging up to my research - only to abruptly flip-flop and 'betray me' (Aargh - the pain, the pain!...)

It cannot be more obvious what the purpose of such tactics would be :

1. To establish themselves as "trusty friends who grasp the value of the research" - but after "giving it further thought, discover all sorts of flaws and errors with it". This is obviously designed to gain some credibility among the outside observers (people less invested in the research) naturally prone to be influenced by 'group-think' and to fall prey to (and copycat) the defections of "trusted insiders" (a.k.a. "cyber-herders").

2. The other wished-for effect of such tactics is evidently to discourage and bog down the researchers themselves, hoping that they will become psychologically distressed by 'losing so many trusted friends' (*sob-sob*) and ultimately give up researching altogether.


A little 'historical' background for you...

Back in 2007, the very first person to contact me and ask for an 'urgent copy of September Clues' was one "Peggy Carter" who said she wished to screen it at some New York truther meeting. Peggy, at the time, said that Nico Haupt had wept (can you picture that :P ?) when he first watched September Clues and that she, herself, had experienced the very same emotions as when the classic Beatles album "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" was released...(no kiddin'!)

At the time, I had of course no idea who these people were, praising so strongly my work and making me jolly happy and proud - yes, I do have an ego, I'm a real human being, you know! (although hopefully not over-inflated...) A while later, Ace Baker contacted me and told me he was a video expert who was going to present September Clues at the "Madison 9/11 Truth Conference" - with the presence of Jim Fetzer, Morgan Reynolds, Rosalee Grable ("The Webfairy"), Dave Von Kleist and all... I remember e-mailing Ace Baker wishing him well and saying "go,go!". Soon after, on Youtube, there was a video shot inside a car travelling to the Madison Truth Conference, featuring Peggy Carter and - for the first time - one repulsive "new-agey" character named "Paula Gloria" (whose syrupy ways immediately made me shudder...)

Many of you will know what Ace Baker went on to do - attacking September Clues and faking his suicide on the Jim Fetzer show and whatnot. Next, the "Jeff Hill" personnage was served to us - the 'Canadian hero' who "fearlessly made phone-calls to the amateur videographers of 9/11". I must say he fooled me for a good while, until I woke up and realized (*slapping my forehead*): "Hold on! ...But there WERE NO amateur videographers !!!" Jeff Hill had also, initially, vigorously promoted September Clues and kept it as a main feature on his home page - only to flip-flop and start viciously smearing it along with a full team of monkeys swinging in his Pumpitout.com cavern.

Now, back to Ozzy. Looking back, his '9/11 research' has been nothing else than mirroring. He has mirrored on Youtube all the September Clues research, all the way up to the Vicsim findings. My two favorite OzzybanOswald videos are, in fact, simply put together with ripped images from http://septemberclues.org/vicsims_photo-analyses.htm - the ones Hoi and I made to compare the Vicsim portraits. Other than that, he has pushed the imagery analyses to their very limit - and beyond - often overflowing into ridicule with dubious comparisons of smoke patterns and the like. Anyone pointing out any flimsiness in his work was met with very rude and offensive language. I myself (mistakenly) long accepted this side of Ozzy, thinking he was just a grumpy old character, understandably annoyed with the stubborn sheeple.

I was very wrong. Also, I humbly admit my failure to notice his close ties (and dog-and-pony show) with the crew of Paula Gloria, Nico Haupt, Howard Stern and the depraved lot whose warped antics (clearly designed to ridicule the so-called No-Planers) are neatly illustrated by this 'humorous' video which has been up on Ozzybinoswald's Livevideo channel since July 2008:

http://www.livevideo.com/video/85C3820F ... 2-fur.aspx

Here's a telling comment on that video - which calls out Ozzy's 'tactics' :

Comment by "Fortyone":
Promoting people who think you're retarded and that your tv fakery argument is retarded? MAKES A LOT OF SENSE Why did you seem to flip out when pg (Paula Gloria) made the "paranoid and twitchy" comment, calling her vicious names like a "vapid twit", right?, but then...defended her appearance on the Howard Stern show?

Response by "Ozzybinoswald":
Tactics change buddy.

"Tactics change"... Oh yes - they sure do. And it looks like Ozzy has now adopted the "Ace Baker suicide tactics": By making the utterly inane accusation that I am responsible for "DELETING HIS TWO PHOTOBUCKET ACCOUNTS", Ozzybanoswald has committed a credibility suicide which was probably programmed ever since day one.

But don't you worry, folks - someone will soon replace him ! <_<

[hoi.polloi]

It doesn't bode well for Fred, either, who seems to be some kind of Ozzy supplement who simply cannot accept the behavior.

Especially weird since he and Ozzy both were endorsing Judy Wood's and Nico's ideas about magical partical/beam weapons that don't really make sense and lost their basis once Judy Wood, Hutchison and all the videos came under question.

And particularly odd because Fred is a good writer - and one would think creative types with creative brains would be slightly more discerning of the difference between fiction and reality.

But I guess some people just get so into their fantasy worlds.

[fred]

It doesn't bode well for Fred, either, who seems to be some kind of Ozzy supplement who simply cannot accept the behavior.

Especially weird since he and Ozzy both were endorsing Judy Wood's and Nico's ideas about magical partical/beam weapons that don't really make sense and lost their basis once Judy Wood, Hutchison and all the videos came under question.

And particularly odd because Fred is a good writer - and one would think creative types with creative brains would be slightly more discerning of the difference between fiction and reality.

But I guess some people just get so into their fantasy worlds.

Whoa! Where did that come from?

Anyway, yes, it's true: I believe in weapons. I believe in lasers, particle beams, microwaves, nukes, biologicals, chemicals, bombs, missiles, GPS, radio, radar, etc.

Like all technology, weapons technology improves over time. Using new weapons saves time and effort and makes figuring out "what actually happened" more difficult. New weapons let you use smaller teams. 9/11 was all about using the new techniques: cyber warfare, simulation, media, face morphing, HERF, etc. I doubt that the perps were techno-phobic luddites when it came to bringing down the buildings. I reject Steven Jones's "thermite that you can buy on eBay" explanation for how they demolished the WTC complex.

What's an "Ozzy supplement"?

[hoi.polloi]

It's just that you have been so "buddy-buddy" with Ozzy (well not really, but about as much as it is possible to be in this research, I guess Simon and I can be accused of the same) I just assumed you would continue to release your statements that you think it's good to trust Ozzy on this.

Advanced weaponry is fine, and "inoculation against truth" (e.g.; are DEW capable of destroying enormous buildings? we don't know because it sounds like absolute madness) is also a powerful concept. But I've never been compelled enough to gun for the stuff.

So I just can't help but think ... it doesn't really have much basis besides arguments for it with no evidence. You, Ozzy, Tsu and sparkoflife seem to be the main proponents on our forum. If Ozzy was a stooge, it gives me less reason to assume he has the truth in mind when he's talking about it.

Do you trust/know/sense or even suspect Ozzy is correct when he says Simon is responsible for doing anything to Ozzy?

[hoi.polloi]

I am fine with whatever answer you give, but I'd certainly like some real evidence that Simon has the slightest influence over Photobucket accounts! :rolleyes:

[fred]

Here's what I think right now:

1. According to Ozzy, SimonShack was making up quotes and falsely attributing them to Ozzy, so he sees that as "shill tactics".

2. Somebody is actively working on making threads disappear here (quietly) which suggests that there are shills/agents/disruptors/infiltrators actively trying to cause trouble over here.

3. My email on the forum got screwed with. [Believe me or don't, it doesn't really matter. The same thing has been happening to others.]


What 1, 2, and 3 suggest to me is that either some combination of you, Simon, and Ozzy are agents, OR that we've got external forces trying to disrupt or shut the forum down using dirty tricks.

I have a hard time seeing any of you, Simon, or Ozzy being agents and deleting important photos or threads, so I'm assuming that outsiders hostile to our interest are using classic "Cointelpro" tactics of forging letters and sending them to people who will react badly. Why would Simon Shack make up things Ozzy never wrote and deliberately misquote him? I don't think Simon would do that.

I don't think Simon can delete Ozzy's Photobuckets any more than Ozzy can make topics mysteriously disappear here. I suspect that the saboteurs see a dispute between Ozzy and Simon and say, hey, Ozzy's getting angry, we can exploit this. Let's delete some of his accounts.

Simon's right, of course, that there is a long list of ardent supporters who suddenly do a 180 and become turncoats. I suppose that's possible with Ozzy, too, but I think given the overall climate and the rapid progress here that it's more likely that we're just getting hacked and screwed with.

Believe it or not, I only send nice letters to people, so if anyone has gotten a nasty email from me, it's not actually from me.

Anyway, Simon's complaining about threads getting deleted here "Bali Bombing" etc. Ozzy's complaining about his accounts getting deleted.

Who has the power to get these accounts at third-party providers deleted? Ozzy? Simon? The 9/11 perps with their trillion dollar budget?

I blame the perps. They have whole departments devoted to degrading communication, cyber-war, etc. They have the power, why wouldn't they use it?

I've been burned a bunch of times in the past thinking that people are OK when they're not. So, if it turns out I'm wrong, I won't be crying in the corner with a bottle of vodka over it.

I think FBenario was complaining his yahoo email just got hacked, too.

I'm not sure if this is related, but my e-mail has been repeatedly hacked. This began a few days ago.

On September 21, 2010, my Yahoo email was hacked. Every one of the contacts in my email address-book started receiving multiple spam emails from my email address. Even worse, I soon discovered that ALL my Sent emails back to October 8, 2007 (!!!!) had disappeared.

You can imagine how unhappy and angry that made me - think about how much research was included in 2 years of my emails that I no longer have. Talk about feeling helpless.

We've got three of the regulars here complaining about hacked email in the last month, threads disappearing and accounts getting zapped. I doubt that's just 'bad luck' all around. It sounds like an attack to me.

The core group here was fairly cohesive up until a couple of weeks ago, and I think we're getting hit with aggressive harassment techniques. The drooling wingless cubicle dwellers at AFCyber are sitting there salivating and rubbing their fat greasy fingers together saying, look, a fight, let's take advantage of it. Send out a couple of angry emails. Delete some accounts. Change a word here and there.

[hoi.polloi]

"to discern the leather from the vinyl and quit seeing hoaxes and intrigues everywhere".

This rhetoric of Simon's was not meant as a quote of Ozzy. It was a fictional strawman. Ozzy took it personally because of his 'leather and vinyl' statement that was enclosed within. Simon has a hard time admitting when he caused a miscommunication, and he can speak for himself but that's what this was.

The illusionary "who?" of all this can be answered pretty squarely in most cases.

Q. Who misquoted Ozzy?
A. Simon. Deliberately. It wasn't an Ozzy quote. It was something Simon made up because he was angry about Ozzy's dismissive attitude toward Simon's point that Ozzy's "cousin" was looking very simmy. Ozzy said the "leather and vinyl" thing. Not the rest. That should be clear for everyone now I hope.

Q. Who is deleting forum topics?
A. InvisionFree because of copyright claims that they fail to alert us to with adequate warning.

Q. Who is changing words and altering PM destinations?
A. I don't know. I can't say. It hasn't happened to me as far as I know. At worst, one of my emails ended up in Simon's spam folder. Wow. Overactive spam filter. Big deal! As for other people, they deserve to try to explain more in full those stories. But how much should we trust those stories? I for one can't say.

Q. Who is "hacking" email accounts and Reality Shack forum accounts?
A. I can't say. It doesn't seem to be happening to me. If it did happen, it's probably the same people who are electing themselves moderator status and fucking with the rules of the forum as if they were Admins. H@cz0rs. People who read 2600 magazine. http://www.2600.com/

This is probably our biggest problem. The "rules" of the InvisionFree system aren't followed by everyone. Some people are capable of breaking into value areas and apparently electing themselves stats and groups. Some people posted and their post count remained zero. There is no logical explanation for this as a "bug" in InvisionFree. This is hacking - plain and simple. It doesn't seem to extend into our Admin control panel, though. It seems to be pretty limited. Are they capable of redirecting messages? Possibly. Have I personally witnessed evidence of this yet? No. I can't look at other people's PMs so I can't trace how fred's miscommunication with nonhocapito went down.

Perps are certainly doing some of this! But just because perps mask each other with other perps doesn't mean one of them is legit. In-fighting is staged frequently to make it seem as though one must be more in the right than the other. Remember Gamalon and Christophera - the Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee of endorsing fake video.

Let's face it. Ozzy has always been this way. Posting stuff, then taking it away. He says "get it while it's hot!" and then removes it himself. When I asked him why he did this, he gave no response.

Why don't Simon or I do the same thing?

Because it's not a believable vulnerability. When Ozzy was in our Skype conference, he never mentioned getting messed with in this way. Don't you think that should have been his most pressing concern? That he was not being accurately represented on his own channels and usernames?

Instead, it seems he has moderately full control and he is now acting deliberately antagonistic along with his old game of "now you see it, now you don't" nonsense that was never explained or excused when the "real" Ozzy should have been around.

There never was a "more real" Ozzy than the very one we are encountering now. That is why I don't buy the "Ozzy is getting hacked" argument.

[fbenario]

Believe it or not, I only send nice letters to people, so if anyone has gotten a nasty email from me, it's not actually from me.
...
The core group here was fairly cohesive up until a couple of weeks ago, and I think we're getting hit with aggressive harassment techniques.

I also never use insulting language toward any forum regular or personal friend, as all my posts over the last year show, even when someone is harshly rebuking me. My anger/vitriol is directed only at obvious shills, like new members who muse about planes and victims.

As for my hacked Yahoo account, my take on it at the time was that a virus 'bot' had arbitrarily chosen my Address-book to steal to send out spam to others, and my deleted 3 years of Sent emails, with all their research, was merely an unfortunate byproduct of the bot attack.

Not only do I not think I'm important enough for the government to come after, but there are obviously many worse ways someone could screw with my life.

As for your second point about the recent lack of cohesion among the regulars, I agree completely, and it has really saddened me. We don't further our collective work by trying to hurt each other, and we don't look mature or believable to the outside world. This intramural anger and hostility is terribly destructive.