Blasting Off The Head of the Snake

[Indubitably]

There is NO view of what actually happened on 9/11/2001 in New York which antagonises and exposes the criminals and agents of misinformation more than NPT - No Planes Theory - the view that NO planes hit the WTC. NPT is simple. It's also scientific and it's unstoppable. It first exposes the scale of media fakery on that tragic day. It's the mongoose at the dirty cobra's neck. It questions and monitors the ever changing output of unaccountable media corporations, it justly calls in to question the reliability of 'plane' eyewitnesses (many of whom were professional actors or close relatives of media executives and all of which have for years been shielded from public accountability). It points out that 'plane' wreckage at WTC is still, 6 years on, still not shown to belong to any of the mythical two jetliners. And it exposes the truth that except for fake videos planes entering these giant twin towers at the WTC is utter nonsense. NPT IS the very basis of the truth movement. The head of the cobra reacts to NPT with venom, never letting up on the LIE of planes crashing at WTC. And they, the media perps, really hate it. It's the ONE thing they can't stand. They know it eventually spells their doom.

Here are two great clips -

Preposterous Head of the Fake 911 Plane Snake - 1 of 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgu-g6FFjrU

and also -

Preposterous Head of the Fake 911 Plane Snake - 2 of 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwfOPOIm1Jk&mode=related&search=

[chek]

There's no such thing as media fakery - with the exception of the faking done by those claiming to find it in the mainstream media.

Peddle your pap where there's a chance it might be believed.

[Indubitably]

Chek, it's the great public who are open to truth. It's for them the truth movement exists and that this forum exists, isn't it ? . It'd be great if you'd recognise the tide has turned against your views and that you're sitting like King Canute on the beach protesting against the fact that your ankles are being submerged. But that's what agents of misinformation have to live with. Sounds fair to me.

[chek]

Well speaking as someone who has expended a lot of time, energy and effort (something you as a braindead link poster probably know very little about) into investigating the claims put forward by those including yourself, BSFred, King Killtown and Simon Shoite,. like I said in another thread, you timewasters and energy sappers have cried wolf once too often.

I doubt you've verified one example in the link you posted for yourself - you just blindly accept whatever those fakery charlatans tell you to.

In fact, I sincerely doubt you even have the wherewithal to know how to go about verifying any of their specious claims.

MSM Media Fakery is a crock.

End of story.

[gruts]

not sure if its the same video but it's the same guy who doesn't even understand this

[chek]

[Indubitably]

Some simple facts -

FACT 1. 6 years after the tragedy of 9/11 the media corporations remain almost completely unaccountable for their televised output from New York on that day. They simply refuse to answer specific questions on its content, its creation and its truthfulness. The BBC Standley affair is a prime example. There are dozens of others.

FACT 2. 'Eyewitnesses' to planes at the WTC have been, and still are, publicly UNACCOUNTABLE despite them often being paid executives of these same media corporations, or actors, or people whose actual whereabouts on that tragic day are still, today, unknown. The same is true of supposed 'plane' filmers and photographers. Once again UNACCOUNTABILITY is the rule.

FACT 3. Wreckage from the supposed 'plane' that allegedly hit WTC South on 9/11/2001 has STILL, 6 years later, NOT been proved to belong to the supposed plane. That's a disgrace.

FACT 4. Planes are said to have entered the Twin Towers on 9.11.2001 on no more evidence than that of dubious eyewitnesses and highly questionable video tape - the eyewitnesses (as already said) UNACCOUNTABLE and the video tape made and produced by UNACCOUNTABLE media sources. There is NOT a shred of scientific evidence to prove that commercial jetliners entered these towers.

FACT 5. Not a single live televised source caught a plane hitting either tower of the WTC on 9/11/2001

Unless/until this forum comes to terms with the above facts (which is surely the duty of the 9/11 truth movement) this forum will be viewed with suspicion by any fair-minded person. And quite rightly.

[chek]

NONE of which has anything to do with media fakery.

Oh - and the only reasons you are forced to declare the eyewitnesses 'dubious' is because they were there, and you weren't,
and they blow your little psy-op mindgame out of the water.

Permanently.

[Indubitably]

Were they ?

Can you or your plane hugging friends produce a single accountable eyewitness of note to 'planes' hitting the WTC on 9/11/2001 ? Can you even tell us, 6 years later, which floor of the huge building at 111 8th Avenue Therese Renaud was working at when she spoke live as an 'eyewitness' to the television station at the time of the fireball in WTC South ?

Maybe you can, at last, provide some useful information. But your reply will of course be the usual evasion.

[chek]

[Indubitably]

Chek,

Only a dogmatist would refuse to read as you suggested. But I note on the very first screen -

1. The author of this paper wishes to remain anonymous. Any contributions to this article will be done anonymously as well.

Geez, here we go again Chek ! It’s ACCOUNTABILITY we seek, isn’t it ? But you give us ANONYMOUS stuff ! Can you do better ?

Can we please have publicly accountable eyewitnesses to ‘planes’ at WTC on 9/11 ? How about the famous Therese Renaud, whose floor location at 111 8th Avenue remains, 6 whole years later, one of the great mysteries of 9.11 research. Yet she’s one of your star 'eyewitnesses'. Is she also UNACOUNTABLE ?

[gruts]

[Indubitably]

OK Gruts,

How many of these eyewitnesses are today publicly accountable ?

[gruts]

as predicted - no matter what evidence is provided you will always move the goalposts and reject it.

if there were no planes then all the witnesses are either lying or mistaken and it's up to you to prove it, but so far you have proved nothing as usual.

good luck....

[Indubitably]

May I repeat what I think is a fair and reasonable question. Of these eyewitnesses to planes hitting the WTC how many of them are today publicly accountable for their testimony ?

[chek]

[Indubitably]

So, in answer to the question of whether these eyewitnesses to planes at 9/11 are today publicly accountable you have no answer, right ?

You, who believe they are reliable, cannot provide a single eyewitness of planes at WTC who is willing to be publicly accountable, right ?

I ask you one last time whether YOU, who believe such testimony, can produce for us here or even know of a single eyewitness who is willing to be publicly accountable on his/her testimony ? For their testimony is crucial to your case.

Such is the truth. There is today not a single eyewitness from those listed above who are willing and able to be publicly accountable for their testimony. And those who believe in planes at the WTC expect the rest of the world to put up with such attitudes !

The simple facts are these. The above testimonies are not sound. They would not survive cross-examination. And this can easily be demonstrated if you can provide even a single eyewitness to defend your view. You cannot.

[chek]

[gruts]

mr indubitably - the problem isn't with the evidence - the problem is you.

you are someone who can look at a helicopter flying slowly past the tower and convince yourself that it's a missile and refuse point-blank to believe that it isn't even though the fact that it's a helicopter it's blindingly obvious.

concepts like "evidence" would seem to be completely meaningless in your delusional dreamworld, because you'd rather fly in the face of reality every time....

[Indubitably]

Well, this particular thread is focused on whether you can produce a single eyewitness to planes at the WTC on 9/11 who is today publicly accountable for their testimony in 2001. Or whether you even know of one such person. It seems you can't produce one and don't even know of one. Not very good is it ? Nor can you tell us the location of 'eyewitnesses' such as Therese Renaud.

In a public hearing such a feeble case would have no chance of winning.

[chek]

[Indubitably]

OK Chek,

What is the EXACT office postal address of the 'eyewitness' Therese Renaud at the time of 9/11/2001 ? 111 8th Avenue has dozens of offices on its many floors.

Bet you can't even tell us that.

[alwun]

Indubitably,

I salute your persistance and also let me say that your measured responses speak much louder than those of your adversaries, whose shrill tones are more squeaky than sensible. I presume that the notable mismatch in delivery will not have escaped the more astute in the audience.



all the best

cheers Al..

[truthseeker john]

[Indubitably]

Thank you Alwun,

The vital thing is that fair minded people can and do judge these issues for themselves. The illusionist creates his illusion but it's nothing more than an illusion. We, the audience, allow him the stage. The corporate media and these 'eyewitnesses' to planes at the WTC have created their stage and have made their own illusions. On the surface they seem to present an unanswerable case. But the first thing we see is they are totally unaccountable. Such an attitude towards crimes which took the lives of thousands of innocent men and women makes them accessories to these crimes of 9/11/2001. Let these 'eyewitnesses' be publicly accountable for their testimony, real or false, sincere or insincere, in a fair, open and public forum. It's shameful that efforts to obtain their public participation in establishing 9/11 truth are resisted by the very people who claim to have 9/11 truth as their priority.

Regards

[chek]

[Indubitably]

Truthseeker John says we should not involve ourselves in complicated or controversial theories.

He's right. In fact, in science, the simplest explanation is inevitably the best. There is nothing complicated in saying no planes hit the WTC. Once again simplicity is superior. Contradictions exist in denying this. Contradictions that involve the facts of science, the documented history of aviation, of engineering, of design, and of public accountability. The complication begins with constructing what is a web of lies, reliant on confused and contradictory testimony from every single area of this issue.

As Robert Louis Stevenson wrote -

O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!

To unravel this knot of complex lies and errors at this distance of 6 years has become easier, not more difficult. We are now able to see, clearer than ever before, which side of these issues believes in public accountability, fairness, open-ness and basic honesty. This is our guide and it will see us through.

[John White]

[Indubitably]

Ah, yes, Chek, you were about to provide members here with Therese Renaud's EXACT office address at 111 8th Avenue on 9/11/2001, the details of which you wrote here are already available and from which she phoned the television station who broadcast her 'eyewitness' testimony on the plane hitting WTC South live, right ?

Let's see if you can handle this.

[chek]

111 8th Avenue
New York City,
New York,
10011
USA

There you go, sunbeam.
Have a short memory do you?
Or just more of your love of giving the impression with no substance.