Is this all true about Shayler?

[Patrick Brown]

I thought this might interest some of you:

http://www.911cultwatch.org.uk/911cult_006.htm

And

http://www.911cultwatch.org.uk/911cult_007.htm

Perhaps this explains why certain people on this forum despise 911cultwatch.org?

Just for the record I don't have an opinion about Shayler but I don't trust the bloke (Ex MI5???), do you?

[Dogsmilk]

[John White]

I reckon the small matter of 9/11 cultwatch/Notes from the Borderland being ardent "anarchist" supporters of the Official Conspiracy Theory and smugly concluding anyone not like them is mentally deranged and a "cultist" has quite a lot to do with it: Robot Radicals at best, I say

[Snowygrouch]

I`ve had a very long argument with a NFTB lady and she was without doubt the most mentally unhinged person I`ve met on-line.

Se likes to say stuff like "you cant imagine the stuff we've got on the shayler lot", then when anyone asked her WHAT STUFF SPECIFICALLY.....she had absolutely nothing to say!!!

(other than that you had to BUY their newsletter to find out....)

That was after they accuse Annie of "peddalling" her book by "using" 9/II truth as a forum to publisice it (forgetting that it has nothing to do with 9/11 directly). Hmmmm hypocrisy me thinks (I`ve never heard Annie even mention her book at any truth meetings I`ve been to; but I suppose thats beside the point when you have a personal vendetta to run!!

I wont mix my words, morons........(NFTB once told me I was "a spottly little boy" HE HE HE ) Thats about the extent of their thought processes.

Nonsence from the borderlands would be a somewhat improved title for their work.

C.

[Dogsmilk]

I'm sorry, SG, that's just unfair. As you can see from the cover, this is a highly professionally put together publication using the latest in publishing technology and the 3.50 cover price is obviously a total bargain. Do you really expect these hardened anti-capitalists to disseminate stuff for free on the net like those sad, deluded truthers?!

[Dogsmilk]

[ian neal]

More background if you must

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=4995

Yawn

[kbo234]

The hit-piece on David and Annie is absolute rubbish IMO.

David has the habit of saying what he believes to be true at any given time.

This makes him an honest man. He might not be always right but he does say what he really thinks.

Of course his opinion, and therefore his political take, on 9/11 changed over the years. So did mine......and, no doubt, yours.

None of us realised until quite recently, I think, that 9/11 was a total inside job and that Osama and his pals had next to nothing to do with it.....other than, perhaps unknowingly supplying a few patsies.

There were a bunch of these NFTB people at a meeting I attended. They were not interested in discussing details of 9/11 evidence.

Theirs was a fixed and, to me, mindless position. I did not like these people at all. I did not begin to understand the way they were directing their enegies.

Disinfo artists methinks...

....but could be wrong about that. I have never really understood people who treat a political ideology as a religion. Maybe to this type of leftie with their left/right mindset, 9/11 is a door through which there can only be one short step into mental self-immolation. Maybe we should not condemn them for fearing the loss of all they hold dear.....However, their thinking is false (the ideologies of left and right both have as their end the concentration of power in the hands of a small elite. It is interesting that the PTB seem to prefer the communist model for our world in the future) and their desire to paint ideological enemies, like David and Annie, as dishonest is symptomatic of a sickness that exists in themselves to a far greater extent than in anyone they choose to attack.

Remember, these people are NOT 9/11 Truthers. Their objective is to damage our movement.

In order to achieve this they are trying to discredit two of our most passionate and effective advocates.

[andrewwatson]

There is nothing substantial in the article cited by Patrick Brown. All it really says is that David and Annie changed their minds about 9/11 some time in 2005. So did lots of people who are now 9/11 aware.

I find this campaign and those who wage it to be a hostile act.

There are certainly infiltraitors on this board as on all 9/11 forums. Some of them present themselves very convincingly as bona fide Truthers.

For my money we need much more evidence than this flimsy piece of trash to accuse two of our leading lights of treachery.

I notice Patrick Brown has a link to Steven Jones. I am relieved that he does not have a problem with someone who has worked at Los Alamos and who succesfully killed Cold Fusion Research - not to mention his ground - breaking study of the evidence for Jesus Christ having travelled to America ( whenever I mention this I am told it is a faith matter. Actually it was published as a scientific paper).

[rodin]

Anyone who takes an ex MI5 agent at their word is not a truth seeker but a believer.

Belief is the Enemy of Truth.

Why is it that some deny the absolutely obvious - that David and/or Annie could very well be (note I say could) working to disrupt those seeking to expose what happened on 911, 7/7, and what is coming?

Don't you think that mid 2005 or whenever - mebbe after 7/7 - they could have got the word from 'M' - Get onboard 911 UK and help us steer it into a cul-de-sac. Here's our plan - we start a psyop claim that no planes hit the towers - you pretend to believe it - later we demolish this argument in our MSM and sink 911 UK below the waterline. Meanwhile get intel on all activists, especially those posting sense...

Of course 911 UK could've just got lucky. David and Annie could be the real deal. But given the scale and scope of the international crime gang (remember they OWN the media and Hollywood and government) do you think that is likely?

If D & A are absolutely honest they will admit that what I say is just common sense logic, not a witch hunt. They must know that it is legitimate that they be under scrutiny, not 'bad form'. They should accept such scrutiny willingly and without ill-feeling. In fact, they should be glad that the 'team' are trying to be thorough in their vetting of the truth.

We should ALL willingly subject ourselves to scrutiny. The gravity of te situation demands it. There is no doubt we have been infiltrated. Even if there was NO evidence of this it MUST be true, for our enemy is resourceful and wily. We must be on our guard.

I think if David and Annie or whoever want to be the spokespeople for UK 911 researchers they should not be promoting ideas and theories that are NOT generally agreed on as self-evident by those seeking justice over 911 and by association the way the world is run. If they want to speak for themselves - fine.

We could really use people like David with media access. Trouble is, the media we want to access has an agenda.

Still, we have the internet, and the truth memes are spreading exponentially. The counter to this is to spread disinfo, which also spreads exponentially, at least until it is thoroughly rebuked. Given the anarchic nature of the internet it is possible that once the dust of disinfo settles only truth will remain standing. We must hasten this process of global e-wareness as much as we can.

Music sales are majoring in downloads. Most downloads are probably ripped for free. Record stores are being closed down.

MSM is suffering a similar fate. Internet will soon be the credible news source for the majority. If it isn't already. An internet movement could overtake all other media combined. Public distrust of MSM is growing and it's a one-way ticket. Who goes back to the MSM having broken through the Matrix?

To David's credit, he did make a point of bringing up the 5 dancing Israelis on Sky. Most MSM punters will never have heard of that. Who knows, perhaps MI5 think he is still working for them, while all the time he is playing THEM along?

A David/Annie challenge - can you get the 5 dancing Israelis story out in print in the national newspapers? And while we're at it, how's about the one about Bush seeing the first plane hit? Hows about getting some MSM reporter to query that? Those are facts that really make people think - wait a minute...

Free-fall collapses and thermate require a modicum of scientific comprehension. Never assume that. Jade Goody's expulsion from Big Bro has 8 million plus viewers. Her 'hate crime' is an international event. That's the public you have to shake & wake.

Sorry - must go now...

[andrewwatson]

Is it also not patently obvious that those who want to harm the 911 truth movement will do the following:

1) Pick off our leaders and most persuasive speakers one by one by starting smear campaigns.

2) Promote as leaders people who undermine 911 research and ridicule those who find the truth.

3) Plant a few ludicrous theories such as 'pods' and 'holograms' in order to discredit the genuine research into the fraud that included the media.

4) Deliberately confuse all the 'theories' so that the valid is tarred with the same brush as the absurd. Thus you get no-planes and tvfakery lumped together with mini-nukes, directed energy weapons and blue-screen technology. At least two of those are not impossible, indeed probable.

5) Create a general perception that disinfo = wacky theories, when it is in fact just as likely to be the negation of genuine research.

[paul wright]

[Justin]

Patrick said:

[Patrick Brown]

The truth is that Shayler is not really very important and would do much better if he went into comedy as he seems to have a knack for irony.

[ian neal]

It is a shame those like Patrick who wish to re-ignite this line of debate do not do a bit of research themselves before kicking things off. Ironically this is similar advice that I have offered to NFTB. This research might consist of doing a quick search into this topic both on this forum and elsewhere (in my post I give links). It might consist of contacting those within the movement who have worked closely with Annie and David over the past 2 years and ask their opinion. Finally you might wish to contact the authors of the NFTB article ask them if they have anything of weight and substance to offer. My opinion based on reading their article and website is they do not. You of course are entilted to come to a different opinion, but if all you have to offer is the evidence NFTB have presented I suspect you won't convince many people.

For those who can't be arsed to do this research I will just repeat what I have said before.

Yes, 'we' as a movement could be infilitrated by people who are working for the state or who have a hidden agenda. We could be infiltrated by people who are deliberately seeking to undermine a united movement by a whole variety of tactics.

But don't jump to evidence-free conclusions over who these people are. Students of the history will know the preferred tactics of the powers that be are

divide and rule, polarise opinions and have agents on all 'sides' of any argument, ferment discord and disunity between these factions and ensure any movement is consumed with paranoia and distrust.

name calling and personal attacks are particularly effective in this, since it further polarises the debate into camps and moves the 'debate' away from anything approaching evidence.

So in brief David and Annie are not above suspicion any more than any one else is. But to challenge someone's integrity is not a small thing. To do so you are basically calling them a liar and an agent of war-criminals. This is why I take such strong exception to people calling each other a shill or dis-info agent on this forum. If you have evidence, fine let's see it and we will debate it, but there is far too much name calling and personal attacks based on no evidence of any substance. This is bullsh*t and it should be stopped.

Secondly, if you Patrick or anyone else for that matter, reckon David is doing a nonsense job at presenting the case for a re-examination of 9/11. No problem. Step forward and do a better job. Others will no doubt pick up on your talents and recommend you to others.

As a case in point, I give you Callum (aka Snowygrouch). I have yet to see Callum speak publicly but others who have speak highly of him and I like how he takes great care over what evidence he presents, what evidence he doesn't and yet a year ago I don't believe many of us were aware of his campaigning.

As an example of the opportunity to do so, the up-coming truthfest (may 07) basically provides an open space for people to present their truth. Step up and show us how 9/11 truth should be presented in a professional manner and all number of people will sit up and take notice

Don't like public speaking? Then make a video. No one (except perhaps an inner circle within the July 7 campaign) know who made 'ludricrous diversion' but its quality has meant people have taken notice of it. The same opportunity is there for others. http://www.myspace.com/truthfest

So my advice is instead of wasting your time and other peoples' time criticising people like David and Andrew Johnson and casting suspicions on their characters, I would focus your energies on doing a better job than them

[Patrick Brown]

[Patrick Brown]

[rodin]

To answer a couple of points.

I am fairly new here but have been posting thoughts and articles since 2002 or 2003 (I forget which) at www.contrarianthinker.com I started off questioning the stupidity of government, and ended up seeing that policies were designed to have a bad effect. I also got into technical analysis at this time. Researching gold and money inevitably lead to Rothschild & co.

I recently got booted off Gold-Eagle for being too political, so I joined friends at goldismoney.info (a great bunch of people BTW) It was actually David's video that brought me here. GIM posters were saying how good it was - I watched it enthusiastically but then I was pretty horrified when at the end David brought up the NPT. How many here got that sinking feeling?

I felt I had to say something.

It just so happens I had also recently been reading and listening to Eric Hufshmid and Darrly Bradford Smith's warnings about 911 truth being penetrated. And of course, when you think about it, it would be astonishing if it was not - given that 911 has the capacity to expose a criminal gang whose long-term plan for total world domination is in its final stages. No resource will be spared to stop the sleeple waking up and spoiling their worst-laid plans.

I disagree with Patrick that David is not important. Either way, he is.

Only shills and idiots push this no-plane-theory nonsense (let's leave the Pentagon out of it - that's a special case). David is assuredly not an idiot. Ergo he must be a shill. This is my reasoning, anyway. Others here vouch hand on heart for David (and Annie). If David is a shill, they have either been duped or are part of the operation. Maybe I am being a bit harsh...

It was a bitter blow to me to see that NPT thing come up in what was otherwise great exposure for the lies of 911. But I know what I saw.

You can see how divided the 'movement' has become recently, with sites at loggerheads etc. Much ad hominem attacks instead of evidence collection examination and distillation. Even the odd murder! IMO some controller somewhere has decided that with Iran and the wider phase of WW3 only weeks away it was time to sow confusion and dissent. Anyone can be a sleeper, and some have been activated. The MO of the criminal gang is to place their people in key positions - this is evident throughout history.

Here is my plan going for how to go forward.

We democratically, across all forums, agree what evidence and conclusions can be made that we all agree with. Part of this process must include the destructive testing of such evidence. Meanwhile, we build an identity and a logo that sums up the truth movement with panache. Something catchy - hooky we say in music. Independent sites can research the how, why and who and publish their findings and opinions, but the core set of agreed evidence and conclusions should be common to ALL within the movement.

Some fringe sites will be excluded altogether form the 'club of credibility'. For example any which might espouse the idea that WTC7 never existed in the first place... Acceptance of the core truths wil be a prerequisite for a site to get the G911 (Global 911 - just thought of that ) seal of approval. Hallmark of credibility.

Then, anyone who has signed up to the G911 constitution will not take far-out theories into mainstream media. Far-out is for internal debate. Until a consensus is reached that accepts it far out is excluded from the core set. Even thermite charges may not make it into the core set. There are debunks out there that, while unlikely, are just about possible. I am collecting links.

The demolition of WTC7 is IMO an unassailable smoking gun, but who knows, someone may even challenge that.

Collections of evidence should be made.

The Israeli connection.
The enabling of 911 by insiders in the US. etc. etc.
The pulling of stories by the press

A collection of circumstantial evidence all pointing in one direction would get a conviction in a fair trial. Perhaps such can convince the public. They, not our legal system or government, are going to be our jury.

I hope that David and Annie will play a leading role as a valuable spokespersons for G911. And Ian Crane too. And anyone who can project to an audience. David Icke - why not? But only if they sign up to the G911 constitution - stick to the script in public. No more lizards from Icke. No more ignoring the real Israeli connection from Alex Jones. And no promoting of left field theories about how the scam was carried out.

[Patrick Brown]

Good post rodin.

I'm interested in looking for evidence that gives a Muslim terrorist connection as it currently just seems to be a witch-hunt aimed at the American government. America may well have a dodgy foreign policy but seeing them, and possibly Israel, as the “only” parties involved seems a tad contrived! Do people doubt that there are extremist Muslim factions that would be only too happy to see America implode because paranoia?

I've often suggested that America may well implode under the weight of it's own crass bullsh*t regardless of 911. Although this may well be true is it wise to provoked the monster before it self-destructs and do people doubt that the cornered wounded government will use nuclear weapons if needed?

I often feel that the “911 Truth Movement” has been high-jacked by anarchists, anti-western types and the national front! So when I made a post several weeks ago trying to gain interest in a global 911 sit down protest I wasn't surprised that it only got a couple of lack luster responses. People can play a character roll when posting to forums such as this but behind their words you can sometimes glimpse of a raging psycho bent on destruction and chaos.

In truth it seems that the “911 Truth Movement” has just become a lever used by radicals and extremists to sporn hatred, confusion, doubt and ultimately war, destruction and death.

The corny old saying is right when it says:
“don't stoop to their level”

[rodin]

I think the connections between Jack Abramoff and Mohammed Atta put the notion that Muslims mastermined it into the dumpster.

The stand-down by NORAD - Bush saying he saw the first plane hit - the only live 'arabs' on the scene turned out to be 5 Israelis with arab constumes. An obvious frame up - imagine the impact of seeing a video of 5 arabs cheering as WTC burns in the background?

Everyone - pass this last tidbit on - it explains why the 5 Israelis were doing what they got caught doing.

Source :

http://www.nolajbs.net/forum/index.php?topic=7060.285

Poster 'Proemio'

[kookomula]

"But only if they sign up to the G911 constitution - stick to the script"

Do you still mean that? Can you imagine for one minute people like David Icke signing up to a constitution?

I've seen this come up before, "let's agree on what we agree on and stick to it" and go away again. I don't think we're there yet and don't know if/when the movement will be.

I'm tired and finding it hard to write, so I'll just say this, ride the wave, things are going ok, be active, be creative. Man, I am tired.

Stick to the script eh!

[ian neal]

[rodin]

[rodin]

[ian neal]

In general terms I agree Rodin.

That was the basic thinking behind the statement on the front page of this site. Since then, the chatter on this forum has at times threatened this message and call for unity. Discussions (that should culminate at a meeting in 2 weeks time) are on going with regards the web presence of the campaign in this country.

A bit of the background can be found here
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=5123

[kookomula]

Rodin, I haven't been posting here recently so I am not aware of any of the fighting, obviously I have seen this post regarding David and Annie, if you wouldn't mind could you give me a bullet point list of what you see to be the main causes of the fighting.

Without knowing anything about what is going on, I can't help but think if these people who were fighting were out doing something positive themselves there may not be such a problem.

I do find no-planes difficult and as I said before I think many people would feel alienated by it. For those who have read a fair amount about the events surrounding 9-11 their belief will not be shaken by no-planes.

Also, what is "esoteric demolition"?

[rodin]

[Mark Gobell]

Interesting insight provided by this Nov 2006 "press release" from NFB.

http://www.911cultwatch.org.uk/911cult_002.htm

[Patrick Brown]

[utopiated]

Whatever people think of NFB - they did do some good research into the UK UFO scene and it's infiltration a few years back.

What's strange is they have a good handle on statte sponsored and staged terror historically [yes it was going on before 2001 folks] but despite this NFB won't make the link to 9/11 being a staged / covert op.