Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

How the controlled opposition was designed to be part of the 9/11 hoax

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby PPT on Sat Apr 16, 2011 1:55 pm

Where TV fakery stops, and where reality starts ?
First, you want to make sure they both dont interfere or interact,
then, you drop lots of misleading (dis)informations to divert the attention.

I just want to take your attention to one fact(is it ?):
3 of the 4 "alledged" planes where due to land at LAX.
Some smart journalists when there to interview the afflicted "plane-crash victims" relatives, friends and family,grieving for their "lost ones".
Guess what ?
No one showed up !
And, LAX was evacuated and closed, just in time ...

Very "convenient", but I would think also "too close for comfort".
Always make sure Fake and Reality do not "collide".

Another example is the phony "scientific" reports NIST and FEMA ...
They killed Isaac Newton for a second time.

Discard the impossible (like a plane flying into a steel building), and the truth MUST be in
what's left, and that's what science is all about.

The point of "collision" is always the place to look.

People are ready to swallow anything.

Can someone please fly a real jet into a building and film the event ...
PPT
Member
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:26 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sat Apr 16, 2011 4:01 pm

Interesting post, PPT.

Yes, the weak spot of their lies is always at the juncture between truth and fiction - where the fiction must be "fused" to the truth using persuasion methods like hypnotism, subliminal tricks, smooth-talking and the like. If they can get us past that hump, then they have us for the whole hook line and sinker.

At various points during my curiosity about all this, I started thinking it was individual people lying to their family-members that was most to blame for 9/11. At some point, the buck stops at a point where people who work for the government, who work in academia, who work in churches - are lying en masse for some (presumably illusory) "reason". Lying about fake people who never existed. Seemingly to profit a few in a grand "us vs. them" mentality.

I still don't find this is far from the truth -- if we can challenge those we love to stay honest with themselves and with those around them, we might be less inclined to need to lie to each other. We might be more skeptical of those we don't know - in a polite way when possible, of course. We might not need these leaders of society to be so cryptic if we are capable of building trust between us and amongst us all. Ultimately, though, it starts with us. What are we lying about to ourselves and to others? Why?

I don't know for sure if we are making any sort of difference in this world. But these are things to think about.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby fbenario on Sun Apr 17, 2011 12:32 am

hoi.polloi wrote:I don't know for sure if we are making any sort of difference in this world.
Oh my goodness. You absolutely ARE making a difference in the world. Your Vicsim Report, and Simon's video, are the critical building blocks for understanding the world accurately.

You taught me to think for myself about questioning the 'approved' version of all of everything, and my gratitude knows no bounds.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby Equinox on Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:45 am

hoi.polloi wrote:Interesting post, PPT.

I don't know for sure if we are making any sort of difference in this world. But these are things to think about.


Oh belive me we are. I think like most things in life the research is going through its natural stages and courses. In my opinion a story like this cant stay quite for 2 long. I am positve that this year will be the year the world wakes up to what really happened on 9/11.
Equinox
Banned
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby Gandhi on Thu Apr 21, 2011 4:34 am

Seeing as everyone else is doing it I may as well too...

"I don't know for sure if we are making any sort of difference in this world."

You certainly made a difference to my world, and hopefully the people I have managed to get to take a look at September clues/vicsims.
Gandhi
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby WES689 on Sat Apr 23, 2011 9:47 pm

Simons work definitely has changed my world and everyones who looked into it!
I cant believe that the most important information the modern world has seen can be suppressed this long because it is so easy to verify for everyone... but sadly still not even one person with credits spoke out about it even in the "truther" community and that makes me sick
WES689
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 9:39 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby repentantandy on Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:22 am

Since this fairly long thread is still supposedly about the possible merit of non-TV fakery truthers, how about an updating poll -- to see if any "alternative news/history" websites, other than those reluctant admirers over at the Jayhan, WarRan and Fetzer clans, are currently allowing even the slightest doubts to be raised and publicised as to the authenticity of the photos, videos, memorials, and martyrs. Anyone have any recent examples to share? If not, then an easy, quick test would be to try posting little more than a September Clues link in a comment box, and then see whether it even makes it past moderation, or just disappears in a flash. <_<
repentantandy
Member
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:17 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:03 pm

Killtown used to have some members of 911movement do little tests like that to see where we could post about the lack of proof of airplane crashes on 9/11. Each web site has its own "clamp down" effect pretty quickly.

Actually, we are not much of an exception. We don't tolerate trolls nearly as much as 911movement did.

It sucks to ban people who might be legitimately stupid, but it ultimately makes sense that people float to the place they want to end up -- and will not leave the comfort of a cosy forum they find fits them.

I would encourage any user who feels uncomfortable with our site to explore other sites for a while and see if that suits them better. No grudges held. I would also encourage a general discomfort with being on the Internet at all - no matter to what capacity. As it is a military invention, it is in the tight grip of that selfsame military and everything - especially on this site - is being examined so their next psy-ops can be more "successful" at fooling people.

I sometimes even feel personally like I don't want to be here but now it's turned into a sort of 'responsibility' thing - because I'd be banned by any other forum except my own, so I'd better maintain this one! :lol:

On the other hand, the time may come when it's just not worth fighting this shit. The number of new users and new viewers and readers encourages me to continue though. Thanks for that.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby simonshack on Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:42 pm

Repentandy,

Just a reminder of the ol' Loose Change forum rules:

Image

“On a final note, NPT theories (No Plane Theories) and support of movies like September Clues, is not allowed in any way. Planes hit the WTC. We refuse to allow that to be disputed on this forum.” Exquisite, isn't it?
Btw, here's some excellent digging by 'Lord Tsukasa' regarding the people behind Loose Change: http://www.septemberclues.info/loose_change.htm

Now here's Just a little update on the subject of “9/11 truth” groups that censor the September Clues research:
(this update is, ironically enough, courtesy of a longtime 'aspiring SC debunker' , the ever-helpful 'BoneZ'....) :lol:
-9/11 Blogger:
“So those who propose that the 9/11 planes were video forgeries are either seriously confused, or they are purposefully promoting disinformation. This site will not defend, support, or promote the instigators of these lies, or those who give them a platform. They are not friends of the truth.”

-Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice: “STJ does not support theories of exotic weaponry or similar (DEW, nukes, TV Fakery, no planes at the WTC) and will remove from its membership any who make public assertions about such theories. That is not a personal decision but a scientific, strategic and common sense one those theories have no scientific evidence to support them and serve to undermine what our own published researchers are moving forward with by making us appear nonsensical, and cannot be supported by STJ.”


Other organizations that veto any discussions about SC and the wider TV-fakery research :


-Alex Jones's Prison Planet
-Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
-Pilots for 9/11 Truth
-Lawyers for 9/11 Truth
-Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
-Rigorous Intuition
-Let's Roll forums


The last two are cited by longtime 9/11 researcher Steven Warran in a post he wrote at AboveTopSecret in 2020:

From the moment September Clues first appeared about two-and-a-half years ago, a concerted effort has been made across a wide swath of the internet to stymie and shut down any possible positive discussion of the material. I was a member of Jeff Well's Rigorous Intuition back then. When I started a thread advocating for and linking to September Clues 7 on August 23, 2007, the thread was immediately locked and I was banned forthwith based on a directive of Jeff's dated August 20, which stated peremptorily that: "Advocating or advancing theories contending that no planes whatsoever struck the WTC is not permitted, and such threads will be subject to locking, moving to the Fire Pit, or deletion." In the same vein, yesterday, I began posting on Phil Jahan's long-running 9/11 forum, Let's Roll, for the first time, and within the day I was permanently banned for speaking positively (albeit only tangentially) about no-plane theory.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread555302/pg4


I welcome any contributions to complete this list of priceless, censorial antics honoring this research... ;)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6728
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby Brutal Metal on Tue Apr 26, 2011 3:17 am

Why do they always make it SO ABRUPT without ever giving a thoughtful debunking response to the "No Planes" theory?
It's just "PLANES hit the towers if you don't believe that then take a hike!!" Hardly a debate allowing differing points of view?
Brutal Metal
Member
 
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:58 am

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby antipodean on Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:54 am

Brutal Metal wrote:Why do they always make it SO ABRUPT without ever giving a thoughtful debunking response to the "No Planes" theory?
It's just "PLANES hit the towers if you don't believe that then take a hike!!" Hardly a debate allowing differing points of view?

It's basically a case of branding. Alex Jones, Looeschange etc. have retained their fan base, by refusing to allow their members to debate NPT. To the point where no planers are ridiculed, because it gets cheap laughs & everything is dumbed down because all there is to discuss is WTC1&2 controlled demolition, & building 7.
They know full well that the footage of planes hitting the towers is fake, but to admit it means they become followers & not leaders. Plus having to admit they're wrong & issue an apology to the likes of Simon, & everyone else they've attacked & accused of being disinfo.

People new to 9/11 truth get sucked into the personality cult. I recently met someone with a reasonably high level profile in the truth movement, we started to discuss the tennants (or lack of)in WTC1&2, the conversation was cut short when I was told to read up on Kevin Ryan's work, I mean he's a 9/11 truth personality with expertise in this field, how can anyone possibly know more than the great Kev.
Here are 2 sites where I have recently been banned or censored, for promoting no planes at the WTC
http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2987#comment-24568

On this site 'No planers' get limited posting privileges. Which is even accompanied by a complex explanation of what is a 'no planer'.
http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5931 http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html
You have to wonder what it is these people have missing from their lives.
(my rant for the day)
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 618
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby CokeSupply on Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:00 pm

I'm quite shocked that so many sites don't allow people to discuss the no plane theory. This is only the 2nd 911-related forum that I have ever participated in. I was ejected from another forum (whose name I cannot remember) because I got bull-baited by one of the goddamn MODERATORS when I asked about the source of a particular image (nothing to do with NPT, if I remember correctly). It put me off joining any other forums on 911. But I'm glad to join this one, as it discusses a subject that I find is a lot more deserving of discussion and investigation than the rest of the 911 Truth community seem to believe it deserves. I'm still not 100 percent sure if I buy the idea that most of the 911 Truth community is "controlled opposition", as I myself used to ridicule the no-plane theory... until I came across the September Clues videos on YouTube. Now I'm very interested in the no-plane theory. The point is, I'm here because my mind IS open to the possibility of no planes being used - and I guess I would have enrolled in one of those other forums if my mind was NOT open to the possibility.

Some of the reasons why I remained open to the notion of no planes...

1) In the allegedly fake videos, the planes show a "pod". This pod is most likely visible in the faked footage to hide the missiles that would have been used in real-life. Those missiles would most likely have been responsible for the "flash" at the nose of the planes (as they line up perfectly with the "pod") and the idea of showing a pod would have been to fool most people into thinking that the planes were real but had extra equipment on them that caused the flash - therefore reinforcing the notion that real planes were used. Once the idea of fake footage is introduced, the pod suddenly makes a lot more sense - it is a disinfo tactic to hide the fact that the plane graphic is hiding the missile.

2) Fake passengers - I don't think I can really contribute anything more to this research with my mere words, the evidence seems pretty damning already I think ;)

3) The maneuvers that these "planes" executed on the day would be remarkably difficult for even the most seasoned pilot - the second "plane" strike, for example, shows multiple approach angles, some showing a straight flight path while others show a curved flight path - indeed, the perpetrators of this crime would have needed to show a curved path to explain the diagonal gash on the building - exactly what one might expect to see from a banking plane - but given the remarkbly difficult objective of hitting a building at 500mph in a banking curve, it is highly likely that the flight path of whatever hit - be it a plane OR a missle, regardless - would most likely have been executed via computer software.

4) Aluminium wings don't slice through heavy structural steel beams like they are made of goddamn butter.

5) The Pentagon strike... someone probably figured out at some point that it would not be possible to fake that particular missile strike with images of a plane, as the plane would simply have been too large for the shot, with its engines digging into the ground, wings disappearing into the building without leaving any marks, etc etc, so the perpetrators decided that it was best to simply just confiscate all associated footage of the strike instead.



Anyway... back to the original question "is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?"

I believe that this is a slightly loaded question; faked footage is not required to obfuscate ALL areas of 911 research, and therefore, I believe that there is information out there that is perfectly valid, regardless of whether faked footage was used or not. For example, the guys at "Citizen Investigation Team" might believe that the idea of faked planes hitting the WTC buildings is laughable - does that mean that their investigations are worthless, skewed, misinformed etc? So, I believe that the question "is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?" as it currently stands is not one that can be answered unless it is placed into context by indicating exactly which research the "non-TV fakery truthers" are conducting. Otherwise, it's just a sweeping question, wanting a sweeping answer, is it not??
CokeSupply
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:44 pm

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby fbenario on Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:21 am

antipodean wrote:You have to wonder what it is these people have missing from their lives.

A little bit of a backbone, giving them the courage to deal with having nothing in common with anyone around them, and being willing NOT to believe any part of the mainstream, established, 'approved' version of anything.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby fbenario on Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:24 am

CokeSupply wrote:1) In the allegedly fake videos, the planes show a "pod". This pod is most likely visible in the faked footage to hide the missiles that would have been used in real-life. Those missiles would most likely have been responsible for the "flash" at the nose of the planes (as they line up perfectly with the "pod") and the idea of showing a pod would have been to fool most people into thinking that the planes were real but had extra equipment on them that caused the flash - therefore reinforcing the notion that real planes were used. Once the idea of fake footage is introduced, the pod suddenly makes a lot more sense - it is a disinfo tactic to hide the fact that the plane graphic is hiding the missile.

Welcome. I look forward to your future contributions to the work of this forum.

Please be careful not to base any conclusions at all on anything you either see, or don't see, in any image/video of 9/11 released in mainstream, controlled media, unless you can prove to us it accurately depicts the events of the day. Good luck!
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Is there any merit to the non-TV fakery truthers?

Unread postby repentantandy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 6:49 pm

Last Sunday, one of the few genuinely insightful (regarding 9/11) web-radio talkshow hosts nevertheless went into a foaming-at-the-mouth rant over how Jim Kosior's "amateur" video, now on sale at the reduced price of 15 dollars from that show's website, had been unfairly, falsely dissed by the Clues Forum folks.

IIRC, Simon dismissed the Kosior offering as essentially being recycled footage from the Camera Planet archive. If that's the case, could you identify precisely which (suspect) Camera Planet video was plagiarized?

Thanks.
repentantandy
Member
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Truthers and shills

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests