September Clueless - Plain Dishonest or Plane Disinfo

[Indubitably]

Chek,

What hit the Twin Towers ?

[my left bollock]

So somebody who spends every waking hour ridiculing NPT but is unable to say what hit the twin towers, doesn't add up to me.

What do you think indubitably?

[chek]

[my left bollock]

What hit the Twin Towers Chek?

For someone who so violently opposes NPT you must know

So spill the beans, we can't wait to hear your pearls of wisdom

[Indubitably]

Well, Left Bollock, I'm sure that Chek is trying to help us get away from this bad error of NPT. Wish he would tell us what DID hit the WTC ?

So, Chek, here are two willing disciples. Just help us to be rational. Be compassionate on your readers. Can you finally share with us what hit the Twin Towers ?

Thank You

[my left bollock]

Yes Chek

If you wish to debate so passionately that NPT is false then please tell us what you believe to be the truth.

It would not be possible to be 100% certain that a theory was false unless you believe something else was the truth

So please tell us what YOU THINK HIT THE TWIN TOWERS?

[chek]

[Indubitably]

OK Chek,

Can you tell us what hit the Twin Towers ? Or are you just mentally incapable of understanding (and answering) this basic question ?

[chek]

[chek]

Still no on topic responses from Killtown's horde of trolls?

[chek]

[chek]

In a way, as stated in the preceeding post, I'd hope there'd always be a Killtown's Komedy Kult Klub.

But alas, realism would tend to indicate it can only last until the sheeple who are currently sheeplised continue to be spellbound.
And for how much longer can that be?

Raw human intelligence is like the grass, and we know that even concrete paving blocks cannot stop the grass growing around and eventually through it.

But then, people are also fond of their illusions, no matter how hopelessly killtownish they may be.

All we can do is hope and/or pray.

Still, I really do wish they'd answer these questions that are somewhat pertinent to their apparently ridiculous beliefs. I'm sure it could all be cleared up in no time.

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11608

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11695

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11664

[chek]

Hmmm nearly, but not quite a thousand views on this forum. It's good to see the message exposing deception is being seen by so many.

According to 911 Truth action:

""September Clues" is turning out to be a great litmus test for how on or off base a local group is. Any group who decides to show these films at one of their open group meetings, where newbies might be, without any explanation or complaint from the rank and file, is compromised on some level.

It doesn't matter if it's infilration or hideously bad judgment on the part of the leaders--the effect is the same--a group that has so many liabilities will not be effective".
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2413

I'd mostly agree with that - though maybe quibble that 'brainwashed' may be a better word than 'compromised.'
Although having said that, I appreciate their view is more politically centred in the mainstream sense.

It's been suggested that the 'errors' may be honest 'mistakes', but as there are so many 'errors' and the mistakes are always in one direction and are always in favour of an agenda, outright fraud seems a far more likely motive.

Fortunately, using that as the suggested yardstick, it's easy to tell which 'truth' sites are indeed compromised.
If it promotes or features the fraudulant September Clues, the site itself is a fraud.
No question, end of story.

More information on the scale of the 'no planes's deception' can be found at the following links:

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11608

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11695

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11664

[John White]

[chek]

Indeed it is worthwhile - it's the issue that defines whether a site is interested in moving people politically or just being a conspiraloon's hobby site where amatuers prod and tweak away at technical processes they don't understand and draw subsequently wild and ludicrous conclusions from.

If 911Movement thought that their evangelical tours were going to spread their word, they are about to find out it all backfired on them spectacularly.

Another crack in their dam appeared this morning.

"Ok, before I start with 9/11 and the "No-Planer" theory I want to offer you some historical background.

The JFK assassination "conspiracy theories" versus the truth

Those who were behind the JFK assassination knew very well that many would ask questions about the assassination. They knew very well that some would question the lies that were passes off as truth in the media. So in order to obfuscate their investigations, send them into a wild goose chase and discredit them, false clues were planted into the events. Those deliberate false clues were planted to promote false "conspiracy theories". For example, Oswald had a Russian wife and he had spent some time in Russia. Oswald was picked as the patsy to promote "conspiracy theories" that the Russians were behind the assassination of JFK.

Then Jack Ruby, a man with connections to the mod was picked to kill Oswald. This was done to create yet an other "conspiracy theory" with the idea that the mob was behind the assassination of JFK.

Then images of anti-Castro Cubans in Florida cheering the death of JFK were also planted into the news to promote and other "conspiracy theory" - the idea that anti-Castro Cubans were behind the assassination of JFK.

Then more rumors were circulated about the possibility that Castro himself was behind the assassination of JFK. And more and more rumors were circulated, all intended to provide more "conspiracy theories" - it was the mob, it was the Communists, it was the South American drug lords and so on ......

All these "conspiracy theories" were intended to be piled up on top of the truth. So now instead of one unified truth movement, their was a wildly divided bunch of "conspiracy theories" and everyone was sent researching on a wild goose chase. But the mob, the anti-Castros, the Communists, the drug lords, the Russians, and so on, none of these organizations would have had the power to prevent the truth of JFK from coming out for the past 40 years. None of these organizations would have the power to corrupt the Warren commission.

But the goal was simple: to bury the truth under a ton of impossible, easily discredited "conspiracy theories".

The 9/11 "conspiracy theories" versus the truth.

Today, with 9/11 being a much more elaborate event then assassination of JFK was, the planted false clues and the planted "conspiracy theories" would have to be much more subtle and complex and much more elaborate. Again, they knew ahead of time that many would question the events of 9/11. So even before 9/11, some false clues were planted to promote varying "conspiracy theories". Some of these "conspiracy theories" are promulgated by agents planted into the movement, some others are promulgated by innocent and well intended people who were fooled into accepting the false clues at face value without questioning common sense. I will not examine all of these false "conspiracy theories" here with you as it would take too long but I will address only one of them : The "No-Planer Conspiracy Theory" which was planted in the truth movement, not only to send us on a false track, but also to discredit the truth movement as it is a simply idiotic theory which should be dismissed on pure logic alone. But in order to express this pure logic I shall take you to one of my childhood experiences.

The shed explosion

This was about 25 years ago during my teenage years back in Northern Quebec. I grew up in a "cottage country" with hunting and fishy as common hobbies for all. So one evening, I was riding my snowmobile with a friend, I must have been 15-16 years old. We were riding on the frozen lake Pressac when we saw a cottage in the distance that appeared to be going up in flame, so we set to get closer and see for ourselves what was going on. By the time we got to near the burning cottage, the firefighting crew was already there with there hoses and all along with maybe 15-20 other onlookers. Some of the onlookers were up on the road on the other side of the cottage while some were like us, on the frozen lake riding their snowmobiles. We stuck around to witness the firefighting efforts, the firemen drilling a hole in the lake to get more water, the roof of the cottage slowly collapsing after a while and all that stuff. While the firemen made sure nobody was getting too close, we could see very well what was going on from a distance of maybe 50-70 away from the house.

But all of a sudden, after having been there for maybe 15-20 minutes, a shed about 25-30 feet away from the main house exploded. Well it didn't really per say explode, it was more of a sudden burst of fire. But right out of the blue, that shed was engulfed in flames and burning bright. Now, I don't know what caused that shed to catch fire like that, maybe a spark of flame traveled downwind to the shed, maybe there was some flammables stored up in the shed ..... maybe someone had deliberately set fire to it and maybe it was intentional ..... I just still don't know. But what is sure is that a snowmobile wasn't driven into that shed. If a snowmobile had been driven into the shed, or if a missile of some sort had been thrown in there, there would have been a lot of people who were in the area who would have witnessed a snowmobile coming over and driving in, the noise of a snowmobile driving into it and also the tracks of a snowmobile leading to the shed.

There was at most 25-30 people there - at the most! If anyone had tried to claim that a snowmobile or a missile or a car had been impacted into the shed, there would have been at least 10-15 people who would have seen it and exposed the snowmobile-missile-car lies.

Finally the "No-Planer conspiracy theory"

The shed fire happened some 25 years ago in a quiet part of Northern Quebec with very little population around the scene. Most people back then didn't own video cameras ..... unlike the WTC complex scene. Today almost everyone owns a camera, or at least one out of two people own a camera, video or photo camera that is. And the Manhattan area is a great deal more populated then my childhood lake Pressac. The cottage I speak of was buried in the woods on the side of a lake while the WTC towers were the high point of a large city with almost 20 million people living there. Many of those people would be in their high rise condos or apartments or in their offices with a direct view of the WTC complex and of the towers which were erected above all other buildings and could be seen from a great many vintage points - even from across the river!

By the time the second plane hit, there would have been countless cameras pointed towards the buildings from all angles, cameras from the mainstream news reporters but also cameras from independent non-affiliated reporters, cameras from tourists in the area, cameras from people in their apartments with a view of the towers, cameras from people on the streets, cameras from people in their offices and even some of the very very numerous security cameras everywhere in NYC. Even Rick Siegel was at least two miles away across the river and he caught the events of 9/11. How many footages of the second plane impact exist? We don't know exactly, some might not be published, some might still be collecting dust in people's living rooms, some might still pop up on the net over the years.

So if there was no planes hitting the towers, how is it that every single video footage available show us a plane hitting the buildings? You can't drive a snowmobile into a shed in cottage country without people seeing it so how is it that we can't find a single video footage that reveals no plane hit the second tower? Surely some people would be on the opposite side of the building and would not see the plane coming in, they would only see the ensuing explosion without the plane. But of all those who were on the proper side, how is it that none of them can tell us that they saw the building explode without a plane going in? How is it that they managed to confiscate every conceivable video of the impact and add digital fakery to them? How did they manage to make sure that nobody catches the building on video exploding without a plane going in?

These simple logical questions can not be answered amongst many other questions, so the no-planer theorists just ignore them, they just pretend that the question is irrelevant. And this allows them to keep promulgating their false theories. They know very well that their theories do not hold a candle to simple logic, but that's what they want. They want to create the impression that the truth movement is as illogical as these theories are, they are attempting to destroy the truth movement's credibility and bury the truth under yet an other pile of lies, "conspiracy theories", distortions, false evidences and laughable claims.

But don't try to tell them this, they will accuse you of being a disinfo agent.

Don't get me wrong, the no-planers might not all be deliberately trying to spread lies, some of them were simply fooled by those lies but the result is all the same - discrediting the truth movement and burying the truth under a pile of "conspiracy theories".

The "No-Planer conspiracy theories" are not the only lies being spread, there is also the "Missile-Pentagon theories", the "Deep Energy Weapons theories", the "David Icke lizard-men from space theories" as well as the "pod-plane theories" and various others all intended to make us look more like "conspiracy theorists" rather then serious researchers, divide the movement, and bury the truth under a large pile of "conspiracy theories" which are illogical and sometimes down right ridiculous.

Cheers,
PepeLapiu

http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=1858

[John White]

Excellent post from PepeLapiu

to which "slick", Administrator (FFS!), replied:

[chek]

Well, well, well, who says irony and sheer hypocrisy is dead?

Looks like 911Movement - the site that likes nothing more than to whinge interminably on about how 'oppressed' they are by 'censorship' - have pulled PepeLapiu's thread on the previous link provided!

Although the post is still in the original thread, before it was posted to one of its own. Someone's getting uncomfortably close to the truth it seems.

http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=1840&view=getnewpost

No answers from the noplaners there yet!

[gruts]

great post from PepeLapiu and no surprise about the reaction in killtown's komedy kult korner.

or that there's no sign of any truthful admissions from simon shack, killtown or any of his minions that "september clues" is proven disinfo.

imagine if somebody had the time to go through all the points listed in this document in the same level of detail that chek has done for just one of them in this thread....

http://twilightpines.com/images/debunkingseptemberclues.pdf

mind you - I'm sure that some people would still go on blindly believing it....

[gareth]

Great work chek!

[chek]

[Anthony Lawson]

I've not been following things on this site; I've been busy doing something which I hope will be looked upon as constructive. A video called:

September Clues - Busted!

Exposing the deception, insidious innuendo, misdirection and lies in the “September Clues” series of videos, which many scholars and others have mistaken for the truth about some of the events that happened on that terrible day: September 11, 2001.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=823734902101057550

Note: The streaming quality is not great, but the download MPEG-4 is pretty good, given the file size limitations on Google. However, the download goes out of sync., around 24 minutes, ruining a demonstration having to do with a sound delay. So for that section, refer to the on-line stream.

There is no question that Simon Shack (and I think I know who he really is) knew exactly what he was doing. You don't edit out important parts of an on-air eyewitness's voice, if you are being honest. I've also revealed a fatal flaw in his 'nose-in, nose-out' rubbish, besides the fact that the images don't match.

To call the series "September Clueless" is to give him (or her, or them) the benefit of the doubt. There is no doubt: the series is full of lies, innuendo and misdirection. "Septic Clues" would be a far better name, because the series has tainted and divided the 9/11 Truth Movement in a manner which must have the real culprits, as well as the mainstream media, rubbing their dirtly little hands with glee.

Whoever is, stop apologising for the perpetrator(s) and get on with more important things.

Anthony

[Anthony Lawson]

Hello gruts,

Thank you for directing me to this topic.

[gruts]

you're welcome....

the first 9 mins of your film covers the same ground that we've discussed in the threads below (ie the CNN and CBS footage used in part 1 of september clues) - so it was interesting to see your take on it....

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11695
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11664

do you know if "simon shack" hangs out anywhere where it would be possible to debate this stuff with him? he seems to be rather elusive....

[Anthony Lawson]

A Twisted Web

[gruts]

That's interesting stuff!

it's certainly the case that many of these NPT promoters seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet.

and while I have no problem with somebody who genuinely believes that it's impossible for real planes to have hit the wtc on 9/11, people like Ace Baker and Simon Shack - who are deliberately trying to deceive people with what they know is bogus evidence - just make me puke.

and while I accept that debating with these proven liars and frauds might appear futile (it certainly won't make them admit what they're up to) - it's worth it to expose what they're really doing to people who might otherwise be fooled into believing them.

[chek]

It looks almost directed. The link between the questionable Fetzer and the no planer/fakerist/DEWologist faction is very interesting.
If there's one thing Fetzer knows about it's (mis)directing 'conspiracy theories'.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a marketing brains link somewhere in there as well.

[Anthony Lawson]

I'm sorry, I missed copying some of Simon Shack's email; the last part seems to have fallen off the clipboard. Here it is in full:

[John White]

[Anthony Lawson]

"September Clues - Busted!" -- Removed

Google has removed the video "September Clues - Busted!", from their site, but it can still be seen at:

http://www.livevideo.com/media/commentmedia.aspx?cid=78796257DF3E47E68 8BF8C6819E764D0

Google has probably used the fact that I left an audio F- word and JC expletive in a clip of the second plane hitting the South Tower, as an excuse. Considering the kind of stuff they do allow, this could well be censorship, by another name.

Quite often, what people say, and the way they say it, is as important, in a documentary context, as the picture is, which is why, after some consideration, I left these words in. I intend to produce a shorter version, and put it up on U-Tube, as soon as I can, so I'll leave out what may have been the excuse to take it off Google. (I can't access my account, either.)

If you haven't time to look at the video, in the lengthy format that I felt was necessary to explain the deceptions in detail, I hope you will look at the U-Tube version. I'll let you know, when it is finished.

[Roadrunner]

Dear Anthony Lawson,

The problem with people like you is that you pose as being grounded in the laws of science but have neither the knowledge nor even the basic honesty that it required to lecture us on anything. You are a charlatan.

Rule No. 1 - Be Accountable for what you write

Rule No. 2 - Don't use images that are of poorer quality than those already widely available

Rule No. 3 - Know your subject

In all three cases you fail.

If you wish to debate/discuss the contents of your 'Orange' film (which fails completely in tackling the main issues of media fakery on 9/11/2001) I will be happy to do so with you at any time. Ideally on radio, live.

How about it ?