REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

[AmongTheThugs]

The only action I have taken is to make DVDs and hand them out to family and friends.

Nice to meet you. You might consider making DVDs of Simon's video, septemberclues.org , and distributing them wherever you think someone is open-minded. Prepare to be laughed at and ignored.

Dearest Fbenario,

I am well aware that for me to say what I'm about to say may sound exceedingly biased - being the author of SC.

However, let me try to convey my most honest feeling about your above quote : "Prepare to be laughed at and ignored."
Now, I will do this with a numbered list of thoughts - but please don't get me wrong - I'm not in any way annoyed by your statement - all I wish to do is to succintly relate my personal experience and feedback I've had from all these years of dedicated efforts which started with my unleashing September Clues on the worldwide web in 2007.

1: The overwhelming majority of comments/reactions received so far (and I'd say, conservatively, 85%) have been either one of a/b/c:
a) Great surprise and curiosity - people submitting questions about details that honestly concerned them but couldn't quite wrap their heads around.
b) Appreciation and support - people flipping their thumbs up and sending encouragement and wishing-wells in my pursuit.
c) Enthusiastic praise and gratitude - people thankful for having put behind them lots of nagging questions they'd had for years.

I'll skip the few ones who've proposed me for the Nobel Peace Prize - since I really don't wish to be compared to Obama in any way.

The remaining 15% of people commenting my work have been either one of d/e/f:
d) Inarticulate, apparently illiterate or/and raving lunatic people with either grave health issues or extremely poor education (or both)
e) Obvious, professional shills - the sort of which we have become familiar with throughout the years
f) Aspiring, honest debunkers attempting their very best to disprove September Clues - with a rather low or nil rate of success.

Outside the virtual world of internet I have, as you may know, presented SC in public on many occasions now. Not once has anyone laughed at me in any way that made me feel embarassed. The rare few who have used laughter to dismiss SC in public have ultimately made fools of themselves. As for those who 'ignore' it - well, I wouldn't know - but I guess it is quite fair to ignore them myself!

All this to say that no one needs to be prepared for being laughed at or ignored. All you need to be prepared for - is to be yourself, and to be proud of it.

count me a "c". i have to say that it was sc that answered my questions. it all seems so obvious now.
i've found that most people are afraid of this stuff. they won't even look at it. i've tried to turn so many people on to sc and only a few get it.

[fbenario]

1: The overwhelming majority of comments/reactions received so far (and I'd say, conservatively, 85%) have been either one of a/b/c:
a) Great surprise and curiosity - people submitting questions about details that honestly concerned them but couldn't quite wrap their heads around.
b) Appreciation and support - people flipping their thumbs up and sending encouragement and wishing-wells in my pursuit.
c) Enthusiastic praise and gratitude - people thankful for having put behind them lots of nagging questions they'd had for years.

Simon, I am very, very glad to learn this. All I face here in bad ole Merica is outright disdain and bad feelings. I had forgotten that you have had good responses in Italy, and that is a good example of the slightly more open-mindedness of many Europeans.

Now I have some reason to be more upbeat about the future!

[liz baller]

Hello,
I love and LOL with the drum class image you created of my still photos, video and recording of Flight 1549 into the Hudson River in NYC. However, the image is not quite correct. I also had binoculars around my neck and used them for close-up vision of the event. My MAC desktop was on, as well as CNN on my HDTV, and the phone was on speaker mode. My Nikon D300 was also around my neck and the Canon point and shoot was hanging from my wrist. Phew....I was actually quite proud of the fact that I could juggle all these products while recording the event...as I told my cat Tiger...."don't bother me now, I am on assignment!" Liz

[hoi.polloi]

Hello,
I love and LOL with the drum class image you created of my still photos, video and recording of Flight 1549 into the Hudson River in NYC. However, the image is not quite correct. I also had binoculars around my neck and used them for close-up vision of the event. My MAC desktop was on, as well as CNN on my HDTV, and the phone was on speaker mode. My Nikon D300 was also around my neck and the Canon point and shoot was hanging from my wrist. Phew....I was actually quite proud of the fact that I could juggle all these products while recording the event...as I told my cat Tiger...."don't bother me now, I am on assignment!" Liz

"Liz"

Your identity is naturally going to be under question since you would be the very first instance of an alleged photographer of one of the partially or wholly faked events under question on this site. I am ignoring your statement nearly in its entirety so that we can run over some basics about our engagement with alleged "eye-witnesses" like yourself.

In other words, you are being asked to presume that nobody will trust you or who you say you are - no matter how seemingly naive and jovial your introduction post is.

To gain a more or less quick understanding of the kinds of fake people who pose as people like yourself we have had to deal with and ultimately reveal to be the frauds they inevitably turn out to be, please read our archive of the Reality Shack here:

http://cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=8

I encourage all our readers to bone up on the same before giving a smidgeon of credibility to this "Liz Baller" person who posts so blatantly innocuously as if to erase all the evidence we have for reasons to be suspicious of the "Hudson crash" event. Furthermore, we will not waste further time with this character after we compile some questions from our regulars addressed to someone posing as a legit "Liz Baller" unless they make some better sense than the weird thing just posted above. Anyone want to pose some real questions to this "Liz"?

Thanks.
-hp

[reel.deal]

... yeah... i always take "Catford" the cat on assignments aswell... The CIA nearly 'had kittens' each time they received each "assignments" CATNIP bills... since the assignments dried up, he's having to slum it, getting his kicks sniffin' the brake-fluid under parked cars instead...

[kcud.d]

Hoi,

erase all the evidence we have for reasons to be suspicious of the "Hudson crash" event.

You dont have one evidence of any thing, all you have is bullshit speculations and a lot of arrows and circles "Ozzy style".
Surcouf and I have presented tons of real evidence that "Flight 1549" was in the Hudson but you guys are blind to it.
I will give you one other guy that also took pics of "Flight 1549" and go check this guys history.
http://www.moose135photography.com/Airp ... 2252_nhL8m

Sometimes a Duck is just a Duck and not a Fake Duck.

kcud.d

[fbenario]

Anyone want to pose some real questions to this "Liz"?

The 'event' supposedly happened so quickly that there weren't any eyewitnesses along the riverbank who came outside to see it. How in the world did you have time to get all that equipment around your neck and wrist, view the 'event' with your binoculars before taking pictures, and have a conversation with some wretched animal all at the same time?

[hoi.polloi]

...all you have is bullshit speculations

This will be your last post, D.Duck. I am deleting your useless attempt at a redemptive post about "layers" in the 9/11 thread.

The only person speculating that the images mean anything is you. We've only ever said that there is ample reason to doubt the imagery - mainly, evidence of tampering, doctoring and fabrication.

Surcouf and I have presented tons of real evidence that "Flight 1549" was in the Hudson

Hahahaha! You have presented digital images, that you didn't take yourself, that you simply link to - and you claim that's evidence of something? You also add the word "real" to it - meaning what exactly? That the digital images are "real" digital images rather than digital images of digital images? Your qualifier "real" makes no sense.

A "real digital image" can be a faked photograph. What does it matter if there is anything real about others -- especially created later and seemingly unrelated to the fake video footage?

but you guys are blind to it.

We've proven that even rudimentary fake photographs and fake computer-generated video fool the average person. You are acting (poorly and unconvincingly) "convinced" by an obviously dubious story? What do you want -- really? Your demands for respect and belief in you are absurd. You offer nothing, stomp your feet and tell us we are full of shit if we don't believe you. Tantrums are not going to get your way. This isn't the Alex Jones show, pal.

I will give you one other guy that also took pics of "Flight 1549" and go check this guys history.
http://www.moose135photography.com/Airp ... 2252_nhL8m

lol - these are hilarious. More blurry variations of a wingtip montage? Pictures of some guys standing around the airplane? Seriously - this is your "one other guy" -- your "last chance" for us to trust that the event happened exactly the way it was reported? You're joking! You're a clown! Of course they are not going to present images that contradict the official story. What do you want to find - a "real" photograph of what "actually happened"?

Your links to occasional alleged eye-witness amateurs (which take you ... how long to find? One per month?) do nothing to absolve the initially fake media around the Hudson event.

Simon and I have asked you to produce real substantial evidence that the fakery isn't fake, again and again. All you have provided is hyperlinks to bullshit - dodging the issue of fake and tampered video/audio/photos. You're done here, Duck. You are obviously just being a pest and trying to get people invested in the government's expensive investment in this media fakery. You cannot do anything except link to official, party-line crap and yell at everyone to get on board and "just believe it" and ignore the fakery, and say things like "I think there is something to it" and vague dangling hypnosis techniques to get people away from the subject of media fakery.

It's enough, now. Go start a blog.

Sometimes a Duck is just a Duck and not a Fake Duck.

And sometimes a fake duck is just a frustrated individual who can't spell out a useful theory of what's going on, like you. Your name isn't even a duck. It's just a parody of your previous persona, as if to make yourself appear more "hardcore" and "angry." You are a fake duck. A fake of a fake, actually. What "intelligence service" is training you to believe that anger is the way to get what you want out of life? You cannot possibly save the trustworthiness of an untrustworthy medium. Not by stamping your foot, calling us blind or saying we have nothing, no reason, or that we're bullshit.

Nobody is going to suddenly trust fake media just because you act hurt that the pretty pictures you find aren't believed and worshipped as the unquestionable truth. You've sacrificed all your cred - blew your wad. You're a clear "play dumb" troll and it's time for you to go. You are banned. No more really needs to be said about this Hudson nonsense being "partially real" until someone can actually come up with some reason for all the Hudson pics that are NOT real.

Please.

Thanks.

[ravenuk]

I am a musician/composer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF1-MqdSE-w and originally came your direction when I tripped over the "Hunt the Boeing" website. I don't remember exactly when, but I do remember that crawling punch-in-the-gut feeling of being lied to on a titanic scale. I went through all the stages of curiosity and plane-itis - pods, etc., until I found September Clues in 2008. I watched all the videos and became certain that I'd found the main truth of what happened that day. I found this forum a few days ago. I've been reading the postings and appreciating the expansion of the TV Fakery/PsyOp idea into more of the images and sounds of 9/11 beyond the video hoaxing.

I'm having trouble articulating a question about the towers' occupancy. Please correct me if I've wandered off the path here, but I get the feeling that some of the posts are saying that far fewer people were in the towers than eventually reported. I'm being charitable here, I guess, because if the end result of this path is to imply that the towers were empty when they came down goes one step too far, for me. I freely admit that I may have misunderstood some of the posts or comments in this area.

If there is a thread that expands this idea, please point it out to me and forgive my lack of depth of research.

UPDATE: I stand - or sit - corrected. I didn't edit the above, but I have since read some of the research into VicSims, and I retract any curiosity or snap disbelief. I feel punched in the gut again.

[logon_error]

thanks for this excellent cover of the events. I have not paid so much attention but seeing the evidence gathered together like this is very awakening.
I remember the morning after a convincing sounding guy came on uk radio 5 or maybe 4 phone in and said that he had been speaking recently to a colleague who worked in the building and he had said that there were people in there the weekend before doing wiring work on all the floors and that that was unusual. which looking back would be ideal cover for planting controlled detonation devices ( which is what I thought at the time and that is just reinforced with the spectacularly bodged video masks).

[AnOrdinaryAmerican]

UPDATE: I stand - or sit - corrected. I didn't edit the above, but I have since read some of the research into VicSims, and I retract any curiosity or snap disbelief. I feel punched in the gut again.[/quote]

Dear Raven,

I want to say "Hi and welcome". I am new as well - new to the truth, new to the truth I haven't yet discovered, and new to this forum. I like your "punched in the gut" analogy. I honestly feel real pain in my stomach and chest. Speaking for myself only, it is a little disorienting to be here with people who woke up years ago. I read old posts and have to let it sink in. Every day I learn more about not only the deception of 9/11, but many other events that, at the time, I swallowed like a good little mental patient taking his medicine.

Thanks to this forum, I now know that no planes hit the WTC, Pentagon, or anywhere. I think that some people must have died on 9/11 when the towers fell or when the powerful explosions went off inside and underneath. I don't see how it could be otherwise. My guess is that the true number is less than 50, perhaps less than 25.

I guess we will get used to it, but until then, we keep falling farther down the rabbit hole.

[hoi.polloi]

UPDATE: I stand - or sit - corrected. I didn't edit the above, but I have since read some of the research into VicSims, and I retract any curiosity or snap disbelief. I feel punched in the gut again.

Dear Raven,

I want to say "Hi and welcome". I am new as well - new to the truth, new to the truth I haven't yet discovered, and new to this forum. I like your "punched in the gut" analogy. I honestly feel real pain in my stomach and chest. Speaking for myself only, it is a little disorienting to be here with people who woke up years ago. I read old posts and have to let it sink in. Every day I learn more about not only the deception of 9/11, but many other events that, at the time, I swallowed like a good little mental patient taking his medicine.

Thanks to this forum, I now know that no planes hit the WTC, Pentagon, or anywhere. I think that some people must have died on 9/11 when the towers fell or when the powerful explosions went off inside and underneath. I don't see how it could be otherwise. My guess is that the true number is less than 50, perhaps less than 25.

I guess we will get used to it, but until then, we keep falling farther down the rabbit hole.

Hi, if you ever find proof of a single death, please let us know. So far, not even 25 or 50 have been reported anywhere. Do you suppose they could be hidden deaths that never made it to the fake news outlets?

[21stcenturybreakdown]

Hello, I'm Gemma. I'll reluctantly provide my facebook for you, despite it being mostly embarrassing nonsense.

I'm 27 and a single mother to 7 year old. I studied media at college and have contributed to independent articles in the past. I changed career course to become a travel agent, until 2009 I worked as a booking agent for Virgin Atlantic.

I was in NYC on 9/11 visiting my cousin Rachel. She briefly worked at the trade center during the summer before she began a catering course. I want to make it clear to everyone here that I fully intend to be respectful of you all and your opinions. My reasons for coming here are to further my understanding of what might have happened on a very confusing day.

[hoi.polloi]

Hello, I'm Gemma. I'll reluctantly provide my facebook for you, despite it being mostly embarrassing nonsense.

*URL DELETED*

I'm 27 and a single mother to 7 year old *NAME REMOVED*. I studied media at college and have contributed to independent articles in the past. I changed career course to become a travel agent, until 2009 I worked as a booking agent for Virgin Atlantic.

I was in NYC on 9/11 visiting my cousin Rachel. She briefly worked at the trade center during the summer before she began a catering course. I want to make it clear to everyone here that I fully intend to be respectful of you all and your opinions. My reasons for coming here are to further my understanding of what might have happened on a very confusing day.

Hi (Green Day fan)?

Your sharing of personal information is bizarre and unwanted. Since you have categorized 9/11 as a "confusing" day, would you care to elaborate - without the unnecessary personal story - about your impression (if any) of the WTC buildings?

We don't really care about a great deal of respect - we just want facts that are verifiable and provable. I am entirely skeptical of your story and your willingness to share ("reluctantly"?) your Facebook life with us. This is partially why I have deleted it.

What I would appreciate is if you gained an understanding of the proofs of mass photo manipulation and the concept that much of the 9/11 imagery - including of the alleged victims - was pre-edited/created by a studio hired to fabricate a "terrorist event" on American concrete. From there, you might be able to better assess all the things you have seen (or think you have seen) related to the World Trade Center. Many people confuse fiction for reality in this regard - even people who have lived their whole lives in New York (actually, I would say especially people I've met who have lived their whole lives in New York, but that's another topic I guess).

Frankly, try your absolute best to separate provable fact from everything else when relating details about this Rachel person whom you claim to be a real person you are related to.

[21stcenturybreakdown]

Hello, I'm Gemma. I'll reluctantly provide my facebook for you, despite it being mostly embarrassing nonsense.

*URL DELETED*

I'm 27 and a single mother to 7 year old *NAME REMOVED*. I studied media at college and have contributed to independent articles in the past. I changed career course to become a travel agent, until 2009 I worked as a booking agent for Virgin Atlantic.

I was in NYC on 9/11 visiting my cousin Rachel. She briefly worked at the trade center during the summer before she began a catering course. I want to make it clear to everyone here that I fully intend to be respectful of you all and your opinions. My reasons for coming here are to further my understanding of what might have happened on a very confusing day.

Hi (Green Day fan)?

Your sharing of personal information is bizarre and unwanted. Since you have categorized 9/11 as a "confusing" day, would you care to elaborate - without the unnecessary personal story - about your impression (if any) of the WTC buildings?

We don't really care about a great deal of respect - we just want facts that are verifiable and provable. I am entirely skeptical of your story and your willingness to share ("reluctantly"?) your Facebook life with us. This is partially why I have deleted it.

What I would appreciate is if you gained an understanding of the proofs of mass photo manipulation and the concept that much of the 9/11 imagery - including of the alleged victims - was pre-edited/created by a studio hired to fabricate a "terrorist event" on American concrete. From there, you might be able to better assess all the things you have seen (or think you have seen) related to the World Trade Center. Many people confuse fiction for reality in this regard - even people who have lived their whole lives in New York (actually, I would say especially people I've met who have lived their whole lives in New York, but that's another topic I guess).

Frankly, try your absolute best to separate provable fact from everything else when relating details about this Rachel person whom you claim to be a real person you are related to.

I was under the impression providing a personal website/page was prefered?
To clarify, I did not see the planes with my own eyes. I did not see the south tower fall and my view of the north tower collapse was almost completely obscured. Like millions around the world it was the tv coverage that showed me what apparently happened. Many people we talked to didn't know about planes, we would get responses like "I dunno, someone said it was a plane" or "we heard that two planes hit!"
The ONE thing I can say I saw was the apparent jumpers, I say apparent because I have no way of verifying it was people falling. I saw dark shapes falling and people were saying "Oh my God they're jumping!" Naturally I put two and two together.
Rachel briefly worked on the south tower observation decks in July and August. These areas were not yet open on the morning of 9/11 so naturally the staff were not up on the roof. However there were plenty of times the public observation decks were open by 9am while Rachel worked there. A later opening time policy would keep people off the roof that morning. I can't verify this information, finding an opening time schedule is probably not easy for a building that has not existed for almost ten years.