| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:04 pm Post subject: The sacred art of encoded whistleblowing |
 |
|
Some of the 9/11 anomalies, especially in the footage of the 'planes' hitting the towers, are most probably the result of encoded whistleblowing. The documentary by the Naudet Brothers for example heavily illustarates this. The atrocious kiddie cartoon of the 'plane' hitting the North Tower is a prime example as is the further footage of the pedestrian reaction to the first hit.
I have always said, and my old posts can testify, that it looked like they wanted to get caught due to their being such shoddy workmanship on, say, the plane footage. I now think that it was probably isolated elements who were actually alerting an otherwise unsuspecting public. Of course, once this was all put out into the 'video recording' public domain it was impossible to take it back to the drawing board and re-touch any discrepancies.
All this I was thinking about after watching an excellent dvd of documentaries of the moon hoax which featured a multitude of 'smoking guns amongst which was a coke bottle rolling about on the surface of the 'moon'.
On this basis I have come to the conclusion that the Naudet Brothers were certainly complicit from the start but decided to highlight the hoax by 'silently' blowing the whistle on the project through aspects of their documentary imagery.
Your thoughts please.
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:17 pm Post subject: Re: The sacred art of encoded whistleblowing |
|
|
| thought criminal wrote: | Blah! Blah! Blah!
Your thoughts please. |
Wrong section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gareth
Suspended
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 398
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is obvious from looking at your posts Thought Criminal that you have a unhealthy preoccupation with disinformation and its propagation. I gather you live in london. Have you attended any meetings or events in london?
_________________
www.truthaction.org/forum
www.wearechange.org.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gareth wrote: | | It is obvious from looking at your posts Thought Criminal that you have a unhealthy preoccupation with disinformation and its propagation. I gather you live in london. Have you attended any meetings or events in london? |
Why should I attend meetings spearhdeaded by people who call the No Plane fact, 'disinformation'? I can't say I am going to fit in seeing as I find your take on what happened that day to be as big a fairytale as the OCT.
They are not truth meetings, they are half truth meetings, they are bogus and are crippling the movement. My campaigning is honest and factual, whilst yours is led a merry dance by a pied piper called Steven E. Jones.
I have attended events in London, though I missed the last Shayler one.
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gareth
Suspended
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 398
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Its the 'No Plane Fact' now is it? 
Steven Jones? You think the evidence for no planes is stronger than that of controlled demolition? Do you really believe that Jim Hoffmans and David Ray Griffins 11 features of controlled demolition that would be expected if, and only if, a controlled demolition took place is weaker evidence to be pursuing than yours?
So you haven't attended any campaign meetings? How do you know what they are like then? I've been to a few and there is zero discussion of theories. They tend to involve discussion based around campaigning funnily enough.
And you didn't see Shayler? Thats very surprising given that you have so much in common.
| thought criminal wrote: | | My campaigning is honest and factual |
Your campaigning is the opposite of honest and factual.
_________________
www.truthaction.org/forum
www.wearechange.org.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gareth wrote: | Its the 'No Plane Fact' now is it?
Steven Jones? You think the evidence for no planes is stronger than that of controlled demolition? Do you really believe that Jim Hoffmans and David Ray Griffins 11 features of controlled demolition that would be expected if, and only if, a controlled demolition took place is weaker evidence to be pursuing than yours?
So you haven't attended any campaign meetings? How do you know what they are like then? I've been to a few and there is zero discussion of theories. They tend to involve discussion based around campaigning funnily enough.
And you didn't see Shayler? Thats very surprising given that you have so much in common.
| thought criminal wrote: | | My campaigning is honest and factual |
Your campaigning is the opposite of honest and factual. |
Stop trolling this thread.
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Should this not be in "911 Controversies"?
Mods, don't let the NPTers mess this place up with their relentless spamming.
I suspect that the vast majority of us are not interested in endlessly rehashing this tired debate. And if we are we can do so in "911 Controversies".
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig W wrote: | Should this not be in "911 Controversies"?
Mods, don't let the NPTers mess this place up with their relentless spamming.
I suspect that the vast majority of us are not interested in endlessly rehashing this tired debate. And if we are we can do so in "911 Controversies". |
This is not just about no planes, it encompasses many of the other smoking guns.
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
Last edited by thought criminal on Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Witchfinder General
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 134
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As you say Craig, truth passes through 3 stages
You are ridiculing truth criminal
When there is overwhelming evidence to support no planes, why are you and most others in denial?
There are non so blind as those who will not examine the evidence |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Witchfinder General wrote: | As you say Craig, truth passes through 3 stages
You are ridiculing truth criminal
When there is overwhelming evidence to support no planes, why are you and most others in denial?
There are non so blind as those who will not examine the evidence |
Er...
I don't think that it follows that all that is ridiculous will be proven to be true.
I suggest you go to the newsagents and buy a logic puzzle book and come back when you have learned something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Witchfinder General wrote: | As you say Craig, truth passes through 3 stages
You are ridiculing truth criminal
When there is overwhelming evidence to support no planes, why are you and most others in denial?
There are non so blind as those who will not examine the evidence |
So present it, thought criminal has presented nothing even resembling evidence.
Perhaps start with a thread titled: How the damage to the WTC could have been acheived by explosives from within?
On the 9/11 Controversies Board please, where this thread will hopefully be moved once moderators notice it.
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan wrote: |
So present it, thought criminal has presented nothing even resembling evidence.
[/i]
|
Mirror!
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Witchfinder General wrote: | As you say Craig, truth passes through 3 stages
You are ridiculing truth criminal
|
How am I ridiculing him (it's "thought criminal" btw, a Freudian slip perhaps)?
| Quote: |
When there is overwhelming evidence to support no planes, why are you and most others in denial?
There are non so blind as those who will not examine the evidence |
Wrong. I have reviewed much of it and have seen nothing remotely approaching "overwhelming evidence". In fact, what I have seen doesn't even amount to a flimsy case. It is totally inadequate, though I appreciate an ENORMOUS amount of effort has gone into its creation.
However, I would be happy to consider your "overwhelming evidence" over on "911 controversies" if you would like to present it there. Perhaps on a single thread so we can all assess it fairly and see its true weight.
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Witchfinder General
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 134
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So why is Craig making comments when he has not bothered to examine the evidence?
How about explaining the self healing building? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Witchfinder General wrote: | So why is Craig making comments when he has not bothered to examine the evidence?
How about explaining the self healing building? |
Craig is making comments because he wants to 'fit in'.
_________________
| chek wrote: |
look at NIST's and other photos in a decent resolution to see what damage was actually caused. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gareth
Suspended
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 398
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:19 am Post subject: thought criminal is not 911 truth |
|
|
| thought criminal wrote: | | gareth wrote: | Its the 'No Plane Fact' now is it?
Steven Jones? You think the evidence for no planes is stronger than that of controlled demolition? Do you really believe that Jim Hoffmans and David Ray Griffins 11 features of controlled demolition that would be expected if, and only if, a controlled demolition took place is weaker evidence to be pursuing than yours?
So you haven't attended any campaign meetings? How do you know what they are like then? I've been to a few and there is zero discussion of theories. They tend to involve discussion based around campaigning funnily enough.
And you didn't see Shayler? Thats very surprising given that you have so much in common.
| thought criminal wrote: | | My campaigning is honest and factual |
Your campaigning is the opposite of honest and factual. |
Stop trolling this thread. |
You have ignored my questions and falsely accused me of trolling. Lets not kid eachother TC, you have no intention of ever attending any campaign meetings. Congratulations another person has rightly concluded you are disinfo!
_________________
www.truthaction.org/forum
www.wearechange.org.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
