Also, it seems you still have not answered Flabbergasted's questions.
You SEEM to be understanding and admitting that nobody has been to the moon, and that nobody has orbited Earth. But, actually, your answer still left room for back-pedaling:
"Yes, these two are obviously fabricated."
OK, so you admit the official "footage" of the moon-walks and space-walks are obviously fabricated, wonderful, but, since you didn't actually state "nobody has been to the moon" and since you didn't actually state "nobody has orbited Earth" I worry that this is still a long-con limited hangout multi-year project being initiated with this new character.
Since you only admitted the FOOTAGE was fabricated, there is still the chance that months or years in the future, after kinder-than-me folks here have become emotionally invested in assuming you are an intelligent honest non-shill, you still have the ability to eventually reveal and push your still-hidden stance of, "Well, I admitted the moon-landing and ISS humans-in-space FOOTAGE was fabricated, but... surprise, I am now going to start gradually pushing the belief that NASA released fabricated footage but has done those things, so now let's have a time wasting debate about how maybe NASA actually DID send people to the moon, and DOES send people to the moon, and maybe NASA has actually HAS put people into orbit, and DOES have people in orbit right now. C'mon guys, I've been a member here for 5 years now, I've visited your home, I know you, you know me, I honestly wanna' use the CluesForum forum to debate about the possibility that: even though the official FOOTAGE is fabricated, maybe space travel is actually being done man!"
In the same way, it is not enough to merely say "they fabricated SOME parts of the footage of 9/11 (for example, just the planes were added in)", and it is even not enough to say "they fabricated ALL of the footage of 9/11 (the planes, the buildings, the victims, the whole movie from start to finish, even the wreckage aftermath images)." Meaning, of course it is essential to admit ALL the 9/11 "footage" was fabricated, total CGI, start to finish, but then one needs to go the extra final step of clearly stating: "Yes, they fabricated all of the footage of 9/11, AND, none of the official 3,000 victims were killed on 9/11."
The fabricated victim footage (like the fabricated "King Kong" victims depicted as being as tall as the 3.5 meter twin tower floor heights) means one has to admit none of the official 3,000 victims were killed on 9/11.
One cannot waffle on that point, one cannot remain on the fence, one cannot quietly refuse to take a stance on that issue, one cannot be coyly vague about THE MOST VITAL POINT proven by CluesForum: that none of the official 3,000 victims were killed on 9/11.
Never mind space satellites for a moment, the main point which infiltrators try to bring up here at CluesForum (after posting hundreds or thousands of "right on" comments over the years to build trust) is the eventual, "You know, I haven't spoken up on this issue before, but I'm not convinced that none of the official 3,000 victims were killed on 9/11. This is a little embarrassing, but as it happens, my family-member / ex-coworker / online-friend was killed on 9/11. Let's debate the possibility of one victim being real, or a few victims being real, for many posts back and forth, until I eventually get banned."
Even after being banned, they still get a bonus from their boss, for having seeded doubts in the minds of a few readers and for having wasted the time and energy of the members who they pulled into the debate. The war-initiators have trillions to continuously hire thousands of typists whose goal is simply to drain the energy and time of potential actual revolutionaries who, with enough free-time and energy, might actually defeat the war-initiators, the war-initiators who (safely, indirectly, anonymously, of course) are paying and giving orders to the limitless number of shill "terror victims are real (so give more money to the government for defense)" and "space travel is real (so give more money to the government for exploration)" typists and AI typing programs.
Every time such "terror victim / space travel" typists receive a reply from actual honest CluesForum members, they have achieved their goal of draining us, whether we reply to them once negatively and then justly ban them on day one, or whether we reply to them positively a thousand times and foolishly become "online friends" and then eventually justly ban them on day 1000 after they start pushing the "maybe, maybe, maybe some terror victims are real, maybe, maybe, maybe some space accomplishments are real" aspects of the official story too hard.
Look, nobody is killed in the production of any of the terror-movies, especially not in 9/11 hoax and not in any of the subsequent hoaxes, because these wealthy war-initiators do NOT take the unneeded risk of killing actual victims in America or Europe during the production of their war-initiating CGI terrorism movies.
AFTER their CGI terrorism movies have rationalized the desired war-initiation, THEN of course their military pawns actually do kill millions of faraway defense-less lawyer-less poorest humans (for oil-grabs, gold-grabs, land-grabs, power-grabs, tax-grabs, fiat-printing-grabs, human-right-cancelling, fear-increasing, thus health-decreasing, thus happiness-decreasing, thus consumerism-increasing, profit-increasing-projects, etc.) but those faraway murders pose no risk for the terror-movie-creating war-initiators, since current society refuses to imprison or punish in any way the top war-initiators or the middleman order-givers or the lowly trigger-pullers.
Back to you, TripleSpeak:
If you still are thinking that "the video footage of 9/11 was authentic", and that "the impossible top-down destruction thus actually happened", and that "MAYBE MANY of those 3,000 official victims were actually in the towers on that day" you have NOT watched Simon's movies, you have not read Simon's Tour Guide, and you have not read the relevant threads here at CluesForum.
It's rude for sudden posters to expect their opinions to be read, without first reading the vicsim evidence already posted here.
It's absurd for CluesForum to waste time on supposed thinkers who won't even state in their intro: nobody was killed on 9/11.
To begin to understand that nobody was killed on 9/11, you need to read Simon's intro link.
Then, take the time to ponder the other 1000 threads here.
At the very least, you should watch Simon's 19 videos which are currently hosted on this page.
Currently you have merely stepped up from the "remote control planes theory" stage to the "just the plane images were added in" stage. You have a long way to catch up, but if you are real and honest and intelligent, as you are purporting to be, you can catch up!
Currently, you are still wrongly thinking and/or implying that "the 9/11 footage of the buildings' destruction and the victims hanging out the windows was all REAL, they couldn't fake footage the buildings' destruction footage, they couldn't prevent the existence of actual footage from New Yorkers with cameras, they couldn't have employed military city-obscuration smoke machines to prevent the actual bottom-up normal victimless controlled demolition from being seen or recorded, the brave firefighters in the footage are really pulling victims out of the wreckage and not military actors on a movie set, not greenscreen, not CGI, that's crazy, with the exception of the planes the 9/11 footage is authentic, and we should make various conclusions based on this authentic media/amateur footage of what happened on 9/11."
"...I don't see why the 'nobody died on 9/11' needs to be so absolute..."
"...when doing a controlled demolition in a new way (from top to bottom)..."
So currently, you're striking out on the vital 9/11 issue by directly implying that "the top-to-bottom footage is authentic", and thus indirectly implying that the victims depicted in that "authentic footage" are actual humans about to be killed by "the top-to-bottom destruction we see in the footage, done by DEW weaponry, maybe DEW weaponry attached to the ISS, since satellites are the lynchpin to the ISS existence, man!"
And about the less vital issue of "space success" (and your belief that the ISS is orbiting 400km above us, with a possible 9/11 top-to-bottom DEW weapon attached no less, all launched into space and constructed in space using rockets and space shuttles, haha) your current claims about your current supposed beliefs are illogically conflicting:
You CLAIM to be understanding and admitting that all rocket launches (if actual ones have even been done) go right into the ocean, not space, and even better, you seem to be understanding and admitting that some (or many, or all) of the rocket launches are 100% CGI.
Great, then since you supposedly KNOW we can't launch rockets beyond (or even close to) the Karman line, then why oh why are you still desperately internally holding on to, and pushing here at CluesForum, the old disproven belief that "since my location-telling radio-receiver works, they really must have somehow rocket-launched thousands of satellites into orbit" belief?
If rocket launches to space are impossible, how are satellites in space possible?
Look, maybe you are a shill, maybe you are an honest person who simply still hasn't figured out: ALL the terror "footage" is fake AND none of the terror "victims" are real, ALL the space "footage" is fake AND none of the space "manned orbits / unmanned orbiting items" are real.
In the spirit of admitting I am also a flawed non-perfect human, I'll share with you my intro post here, in which I admit I too, like you, was once trapped in the "DEW beam from space dustified the Twin Towers top-to-bottom as seen in the authentic building destruction footage" totally mistaken stage of waking up:
Look, how about clicking the links I have given you in this post and pondering the evidence which CluesForum has altruistically given you, before posting anymore half-baked "maybe maybe" theories which have already been disproven here.Observer » February 7th, 2015, 9:50 pm wrote:Hello Simon, and everyone here, I hope we all are feeling happy, healthy, and in good humor today!
Long time silent reader, I've finally decided to sign up... I am very grateful to have found this intelligent group of free-thinking logical, seekers of truth, who have the mental-ability to see the lies (in images/claims/situations) PLUS the heart-courage to share openly with humanity all of these discoveries. Thanks for opening my eyes to the visual proof of image fakery behind the terrorism hoaxes, the space hoaxes, the nuclear hoaxes, etc.
Hey Simon, I called you once, from my home in Japan, after I first saw September Clues. As I recall, you seemed pleasantly surprised to get my call from such a seemingly-exotic country (I've lived here for about 20 years now, I have a wife and 4 loving kids, I speak Japanese quite fluently, I will probably stay here for my remaining 1000 years - haha, just thinking positively) and I remember you asked me, "How did you get this number?" and I told you how, as well as how to hide it better for the future, to which you explained you feel no need to hide, you are not scared of being known, you simply were asking because you are curious about everything. I really respect those qualities, courage and curiosity.
Anyway, let's see here, about 9-11, here's my thinking as it improved over the years - and yes, I am embarrassed it took me so long to come around to the total fakery understanding. I should have realized INSTANTANEOUSLY that wings, with their heavy engines attached, would have been broken right off as soon as they touched the wall, and those wings would have fell to the ground immediately, regardless of everything else, so I should have KNOWN that the images were faked right from the start. But I didn't. So here, I'll describe how I finally got to the level of understanding which the members of this small community here at September Clues have been saying all along, which is that all of the images were faked. Here is the long winding path I took:
First I knew from the start that explosives were used to demolish those 3 steel buildings, that's simple logic, because fire doesn't demolish the steel frame skeleton of buildings, and neither does the relatively minor vibrations from even a big plane crash (as shown by the B-52 Bomber hitting the Empire State Building in 1945, plus again, even without that history tidbit, this first point is simple logic.) [Edit: Actually those 9 steel buildings, not just 3.]
Then, I realized that no 757 even hit the pentagon (I was woken up in this area by first seeing Meyssan's J'accuse image collection, which included the earliest images, when the wall was still standing totally intact, merely blackened, not yet having fallen down, still showing the tiny hole where the 757 could NOT have entered, and clean grass, and yes, those images like all images can no longer be trusted, I'm simply saying that those images are what helped my mind open to the no-plane reality.)
Then, there was a time when the "Pod images"(faked) and the "Missile being fired from the pod at the moment of entry images"(faked) had fooled me (because I was still at that point stupidly assuming that the images were real.) Those images fooled me into wrongly assuming that Jayhan was right about some hardened military plane with a missile having been used to help break through WTC2. (Wrong.)
Then, Baker's video helped me realize a little video trickery was used, and then Simon's amazing September Clues video helped me realize a LOT of video trickery was used. Thanks to Simon's September Clues, I finally let go of the false assumption of any passenger planes hitting anything on that day. Even before seeing those videos, I had already realized on my own that "Since they obviously faked the Pentagon hit, using no 757 at all there, it would be illogical to use real planes elsewhere, it would simply be extra risk without any extra reward, because any real planes (whether hijacked by humans or by remote control, whether carrying humans or not, whether officially-claimed regular planes or some special military planes) would ALL be too risky (due to leaving clues in the crash, or missing the targets altogether and exposing the whole project.) It was September Clues that finally made me realize for sure that we were presented with fake plane images for sure. And yet, I was somehow stupidly still holding on to the buildings. At this stage I knew that the planes were faked images, but I was still assuming that all of the OTHER images (of the buildings turning to dust, and of the people in the streets covered in that dust) were real. (Wrong.) Next, since I was still assuming the building images were real, I'll go ahead and admit, even though now I'm really gonna' look stupid, I was then pulled into the "Judy Wood" directed-energy-weapon web for a few years. There I was, explaining to people what I thought was the situation:
"The plane images were added in real time, the building destruction was then initiated by conventional bombs same as in regular building demolitions, you can see some squibs here, and a little bit of thermite was added in just to keep us arguing about the details, see these sparks over there, but the most shocking thing is, while the towers were being destroyed mainly by conventional methods, a more thorough destruction of all the evidence came from unconventional means as well, namely directed energy weaponry, which is like a combination of laser and microwave, because just look at this footage, the beams of steel are turning to dust, watch these beams here, they all turn to dust in the next few frames, look at this spire itself turning to dust as it falls, and in the end look at the lack of steel sitting on the ground, the lack of steel elevator doors, desks, chairs, etc, and check this out, this Judy Wood lady is suing a bunch of directed energy weaponry company executives who were actually brought in by NIST to give their expert opinion about how this whole 'collapse' was initiated by fire, why would these DEW guys be brought in if DEW wasn't used, and notice how the NIST literally limited the scope of their own investigation to only 'the events leading up to the INITIATION of the collapse' and thus totally steering clear of making any statements about what caused most of the steel to turn to dust AFTER the beams started to fall. This was a message, from the people who did this (CIA, Mossad, etc) to the Presidents around the world, saying 'Warning, we've finally perfected this DEW thing we started back in the Reagan era, this is much better than nukes because we can pinpoint destroy specific buildings, totally turning them to dust, without any pesky radiation blowing back to our side of the earth, and we can even overlay this DEW destruction with faked-terrorist-attack claims which the world believes due to our total media control, so Russia and China and all you Arab oil sellers, you had better let the dollar continue to have the monopoly on all oil sales, or we will simply use this DEW to turn your home to dust while claiming terrorists flew a plane into it. We have this new big stick, and we have the balls to use it. We even used it against our own citizens, so we'll surely use it on you if you don't do what we say."
After a few years of that, I read about the hollow towers idea, which made me realize, "Hmmm, that would explain the lack of steel in a way that doesn't make me look crazy with all this DEW talk. This hollow tower makes sense, the buildings were basically empty shells, the world's largest atriums, right from the start, with only the lobby and the tourist spots up top having floors, and only occasionally having additional floors added in for tenants now and then, but most definitely all tenants and floors being removed before the big demolition. But then I remembered that the same guy pushing the hollow towers thing is the same guy who fooled me with the pod image he "bought on the street at ground zero." And then I learned that his rich lady-friend who was with him on that trip, got caught leaving messages on tribute pages claiming to know victims who we now know never existed - and then she faked her own death but loved her skinny dogs too much to get rid of them - and so, he supposedly then lives together with her and her skinny dogs and her new fake name.) (I say supposedly, because I now realize it is foolish to assume that ANY of these characters are real living humans, from "victims" to "witnesses" to "image suppliers" to "truthers", thanks again to Hoi for having created that PDF which really opened my eyes to the surprisingly prevalent reality of mass simulated characters.) [Edit: actually, the hollow towers idea (both aspects: the no-actual-employees for months or years in advance, which helped make the victimless demolition easier, and the mainly-atrium not-many-actual-floors from the very start or for months or years in advance, which helped reduce the damage to non-WTC buildings by creating a relatively smaller pile of steel from the towers) turns out to be a quite logical (but not essential) probability, BUT: the "PJ" shill allowed/pushed it merely to keep propping up the grand "video footage, of the building destruction, and of the final wreckage, was authentic footage, so we should keep basing our conclusions on the media and 'amateur' footage" lie.]
Then, I decided to come back to Simon's site, after many years of being away. And thank goodness I came back here to see how far you guys have gotten. Thanks to Simon, and everyone here, I finally realized that all the building images, with all their "evidence" of the steel turning to dust, were all totally faked images. So, even though the perpetrators created all those building images, and even though they brought in some DEW guys to give Judy somebody to sue, the fact is that since the building images were faked, there is no evidence of DEW having been used at all. The image fakers simply added faked evidence of DEW into their computer animation forgery, just like they added so many other red-herrings in there. I now see the point of all that "evidence of DEW" was simply to make folks talking about that seem crazy. Who knows, maybe the CIA perps actually DID try to also fool various leaders into believing the DEW thing, to blackmail them and perhaps to even sell them some fake DEW technology plans?
Anyway, the main point is that at this point I realize that no conclusions about what happened can be made from the images, since they were all forged. We can't say "they definitely used X technique to destroy the buildings, we know the details for sure." What we CAN say instead is that, "this image A, and that image B, could definitely NOT both be real, because they conflict with logic AND they conflict with each other. Both of these images can't both be true, so at LEAST one of them is faked, and if even one of these official photos is faked, that is evidence of the source of these images (government and media) being involved in this hoax.
And that's exactly what you guys are doing, pointing out evidence of the image forgeries. We don't need to argue about the details of what they did do, because we know for sure what they didn't do. They didn't show us real images. We here all agree on that. And thanks to Hoi, I finally realized for absolute sure that the victims were all totally faked as well. So the bad guys didn't have to land any real planes at any military base to kill the passengers, nor to any ocean to kill the passengers, because there never were any actual passengers, and there weren't any people in the buildings either. The fact that the names of the so-called-victims don't appear in the SSDI is the ultimate proof that the whole thing was a hoax. The fact that the hoax didn't kill anyone on 9-11 is the good news. The fact that the hoax led to the death of millions of humans in Afghanistan and Iraq is the bad news. Thank goodness some humans alive today invest energy each day to work towards preventing this from happening in the future, by exposing as many of these hoaxes as possible.
Love & Gratitude
Again, the most important link is Simon's intro link.
And you need to actually watch Simon's 19 videos which are currently hosted on this page. (But don't get distracted or pulled into that site, simply watch Simon's 19 videos which happen to be hosted over there then come back here.)
I look forward to you proving you are NOT a long-con character, when after carefully considering all the information above by Simon Shack, you can finally honestly state whole-heartedly: ALL the terror "footage" is fake AND none of the terror "victims" are real, ALL the space "footage" is fake AND none of the space "manned orbits / unmanned orbiting items" are real.