Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:35 am Post subject:
I was hoping to allow a few days to let the more ... progressively minded posters have their say before being shouted down by adding any filthy fake identitied pseudo rationalist comments. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 645 Location: UK Midlands
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:09 pm Post subject:
Awwww... it must be great being part of a popular movement with such back-slapping agreement on the primary theories.
I think that [Andrew's] new forum's emptiness says more about the state of the 9/11 research cul-de-sac than much else.
The final nail in the 9/11 coffin was when Ron Paul did his Judas denial on the US presidential hopefuls TV debate - This will be seen as a watershed moment by history.
The only reason this forum is alive is because it adapted to new areas after [ahem!] a few hints through out last year and so it survives well. Mind you the fact there is a limited tolerance of alternative 9/11 viewpoints could lead things to a pretty watered down situation. Since getting banned I've decided not to post on 9/11 issues here but I like the other categories.
Mostly 5 mins in - the fact we have this very suspect windscreen display when the supposed plane hit is behind the reflecting object by a huge amount. Is this light bouncing eternally like some holographic laser??
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:29 pm Post subject:
utopiated wrote:
Awwww... it must be great being part of a popular movement with such back-slapping agreement on the primary theories.
I think that [Andrew's] new forum's emptiness says more about the state of the 9/11 research cul-de-sac than much else.
The final nail in the 9/11 coffin was when Ron Paul did his Judas denial on the US presidential hopefuls TV debate - This will be seen as a watershed moment by history.
That remains to be seen - although it would appear we are to be denied the sight of Dubya and/or senior officials being led from Office in handcuffs.
Mostly 5 mins in - the fact we have this very suspect windscreen display when the supposed plane hit is behind the reflecting object by a huge amount. Is this light bouncing eternally like some holographic laser??
I can't see a great deal to get excited about Utopiated.
A well lit view from the east side with the sun still relatively low and plenty of light; a correctly reversed mirror image in the screen, visible by means of the large reflex angle afforded by the raked screen itself, the low camera position and the plane's 800ft altitude.
A difinitive answer would require some research which I'm not convinced is justified beyond what's already available in the existing footage.
It's not like old Social Simon's abysmal track record warrants the effort. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Is that so John?
Well I can see two well developed examples myself.
And I have spent an awful long time looking at this
Ignore the tumbleweed _________________ http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 645 Location: UK Midlands
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject:
chek wrote:
I can't see a great deal to get excited about Utopiated.
Don't think excitement is needed... this was what I was after..
Quote:
A well lit view from the east side with the sun still relatively low and plenty of light; a correctly reversed mirror image in the screen, visible by means of the large reflex angle afforded by the raked screen itself, the low camera position and the plane's 800ft altitude.
My basic notions of fizz-icks tells me that even with 800 foot altitude - the plane/explosion would still not manage to replicate in the perfect way it did into a *poorly* reflecting object like a windscreen in shade - given the significant distances between supposed object and the source of reflection.
No-planers have probably heard these questions many times but I would like some direct answers please.
Why would they employ video-forgers with no sense of physics?
Why would they allow such poor quality "fakes" to be released?
What about all the people looking up at WTC1 smoking after first "plane" hits, wouldn't they remember that they didn't see a plane?
What about the witnesses saying they saw the second plane, like Owen May of the May Davis Group from 87th floor of wtc1 and others on the record saying that they saw plane parts and even plane-seats with bodies still smoldering in them?
Why is it that all the no-plane films use such poor quality footage to analyze and present their evidence from? Perhaps the anomalies they find are a product of over-rendering.
Perhaps the footage used are fakes. Tampered with to create the no-plane line.
Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 645 Location: UK Midlands
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 2:40 am Post subject:
Lee wrote:
Why would they employ video-forgers with no sense of physics?
Hi Lee...
I'm not in any label on these issues - I just don't believe the idea most of the 9/11 half-truth movement do - that it was just a pile 'o' mega-thermate that brought down the towers.
One idea we see time and time again in the UFO field and black projects generally is that due to the covert and compartmentalised nature of things - there is sometimes a struggle to "recruit" effective personnel. This is due to the fact most ppl with any sense will refuse to sign up for something like that... I mean would you.. possibly playing a part in the biggest psy-op in history? An accomplice to 1000s of deaths?
The thing is you can't get someone to do that job with them NOT knowing what is was for. They'd have to know a good part of the "story". So in this case they prolly got hold of the son/daughter of Jeb Bush's second cousin once removed who had pretty good video manipulation skills but had not passed grade 1 physics.
We see this in the UFO field too - often there are stories of labs/units run by not the brightest and best but just somone who is
- not married [no-one to confide in]
- fell out with their family [see above]
- has a gambling or drug habit and so needs/spends cash [causes career 'addiction']
..on top of this the use of blackmail is far bigger than we think. You only need look at some of the testimony from Project Monarch, Iran Contra plane pilots and various presidential models to know this. People working for the govt eventually get important enuff to get set-up with:
- A 'ho in their bed
- A 3 year old kiddy on their lap whilst they have a leery smile
and they are video'd and get sent a copy. This way no-one says "NO" and no-one turns down the work tasks they get assigned to.
...see you can hardly go round putting these jobs in the paper so they tend to recruit from within. In addition there are increasing technologies to eradicate SELECTIVE parts of the memory - so they employ to get the job done then re-set a few synapses.
Quote:
Why would they allow such poor quality "fakes" to be released?
See above.
Quote:
What about all the people looking up at WTC1 smoking after first "plane" hits, wouldn't they remember that they didn't see a plane?
See Andrew Johnson's study of FIRST verbal reports on the day itself. Only 2 out of a hundred or so he found said plane. The rest said nothing or said missile or said a plane was nothing like the plane eventually "used".
Quote:
What about the witnesses saying they saw the second plane, like Owen May of the May Davis Group from 87th floor of wtc1 and others on the record saying that they saw plane parts and even plane-seats with bodies still smoldering in them?
Is this on video? I'd liek to see that.
We have evidence of stooges doing media interviews on the crucial first day. It was vital they got certain lines/ideas out within hours and then they left the sheep like media to do the rest.
Quote:
Why is it that all the no-plane films use such poor quality footage to analyze and present their evidence from? Perhaps the anomalies they find are a product of over-rendering.
They used the same sources as everyone else. In addition most things end up on Youtube where the compression on submission reduced quality.
Quote:
Perhaps the footage used are fakes. Tampered with to create the no-plane line.
May well be. But personally I think there is loads more substance to the idea of NP than we're prepared to collectively admit.
You simply start at the Pentagon with its 5 foot hole and clean lawn and move on from there. Anyone that thinks a boeing landed within a mile of that venue needs to book the,mselves in for a Sirius reality check.
Seriously I am curious about the NPT but have yet to be convinced.
Dunno - I'll go watch it now.
<EDIT> - it's a link - I don't know where the TV fakery is but will check it out.
<EDIT #2>
Ahhh... I know this guy now - seen him on some 9/11 docu[dramas]. Found the video and out-take interview from youtube - at the end Chris Bollyn, the AFP journalist catches him out with a fixed question.
So the answer to the last question is:
A:Lying - true
B:Mind Controlled - probably
C:More TV fakery - no, just a delusional wannabe suffering from hormone imbalance as he approaches the male menopause.
Note he himself says "I was hypnotised standing up there..."
Quote:
About This Video
Welcome Stanley Praimnath to the 911 liars club... (more)
Added: 10 September 2007
Welcome Stanley Praimnath to the 911 liars club. Hes been telling lies for 6 years now selling a fictional book and getting away with it. Hear Stanley debunk himself in his own words ! (less)
Heheheh... best laugh all evening:
Quote:
- "the wing sliced right thru the office..."
Quote:
- "the wing was intact in the office - it ended up right by me after slicing thru the second tower..."
Quote:
- "I struggled up from under my desk and there was the intact wing. It was close enough for me to use as a coffee table, if i'd had some coffee - which I didn't - the wing went straight thru the office coffee machine - actually and the water cooler now I recall it..."
Quote:
"People wonder why all those people were forced to make the awful choice to jump... well I can reveal it was the wing. After slicing thru the floor i was on, the wing started moving again with the vibration of the fires. Lo and behold - the wing began slapping people on their arse's with its tip until they were catapulted out of the tower..."
So he managed to get out to tell his great little tale without getting burned to a Walkers by all that jet fuel that managed to melt all that thick steel. Amazing.
Note also how his language use gives away the deception at various points when he repeats:
"...in the REAL world yes the place would have done that - but on that day it did this - very strange."
Awwww... it must be great being part of a popular movement with such back-slapping agreement on the primary theories.
I think that [Andrew's] new forum's emptiness says more about the state of the 9/11 research cul-de-sac than much else.
The final nail in the 9/11 coffin was when Ron Paul did his Judas denial on the US presidential hopefuls TV debate - This will be seen as a watershed moment by history.
The only reason this forum is alive is because it adapted to new areas after [ahem!] a few hints through out last year and so it survives well. Mind you the fact there is a limited tolerance of alternative 9/11 viewpoints could lead things to a pretty watered down situation. Since getting banned I've decided not to post on 9/11 issues here but I like the other categories.
Mostly 5 mins in - the fact we have this very suspect windscreen display when the supposed plane hit is behind the reflecting object by a huge amount. Is this light bouncing eternally like some holographic laser??
Good post utopiated, is that a hand I see holding up a model plane in the so called reflection? And I've know about the see through left wing for some time now
Thanks utopiated for taking time to explain things in more detail.I've read through it and here's what I found
[quote="utopiated"]
Lee wrote:
Why would they employ video-forgers with no sense of physics?
Hi Lee...
I'm not in any label on these issues - I just don't believe the idea most of the 9/11 half-truth movement do - that it was just a pile 'o' mega-thermate that brought down the towers.
First off, I don't BELIEVE in the pile of thermite issue either. It is merely a theory. There is however a good deal of evidence for it.
Ie....
1;Metal recovered from Ground Zero showed residues of other elements which could indicate it's use.
2;White smoke rising from the rubble is also indicative.
3;Residue on cut columns.
4;Molten metal underneath rubble.
Now I know at this point you may say Molten Metal is disinfo. I know that's often said by NP'ers. But again there is a lot of evidence to suggest it's presence.
1;Firefighters comments..."Molten Steel running down the channel rails..."
2;Firefighters boots melting.
3:Firefighters and others commenting on the temperatures at Ground Zero.
4;Thermal pictures of hotspots exceeding those of normal hydrocarbon based fires..
One idea we see time and time again in the UFO field and black projects generally is that due to the covert and compartmentalised nature of things - there is sometimes a struggle to "recruit" effective personnel.
Here, one must assume a number of things...
A;UFO's are "real" and not just "lights in the sky" or other natural causes.
B;They are not actually alien craft
C;They are military craft either retrieved from an alien crash site and back engineered
or
They are military craft and their designs resemble science-fiction based imaginings of "alien craft"
D;There is a ufo conspiracy meaning the public is not being informed of the truth whatever the reality of UFO's
E;The ufo conspiracy and 9/11 are linked
How are they linked?
If there is such a huge UFO cover up then surely there is a wealth of people involved who
A; Have given their services freely
b; Been manipulated in some way
This is due to the fact most ppl with any sense will refuse to sign up for something like that... I mean would you.. possibly playing a part in the biggest psy-op in history? An accomplice to 1000s of deaths?
If BLACK OPS/PSYOPS are a real phenomena it would be reasonably easy to force people to play a part in any psyop you would want them to including flying planes into buildings. Through either...
C; And if you go for UFO's being Military in nature or sophisticated futuristic technology who's to say they couldn't use robot-drones?
The thing is you can't get someone to do that job with them NOT knowing what is was for. They'd have to know a good part of the "story".
This is assuming you don't believe in the use of "Patsies". Patsies are exactly that, people who are used in such a thing as a psyop without KNOWING they are taking part.
So in this case they prolly got hold of the son/daughter of Jeb Bush's second cousin once removed who had pretty good video manipulation skills but had not passed grade 1 physics.
This seems very contrived indeed and you are assuming that someone in the Bush family is...
A;Proficient in Video manipulation,
B;Heartless enough not to come forward once they've realized what they were used for.
You also assume the whole of Bush's extended family are as heartless and calculating as Bush's snr and jnr are supposed to be.
Also, if we again assume that UFO technology exists within the secret world of Government inner circles then surely they'd be able to get hold of a very sophisticated computer software program (voice operated perhaps so anyone could use it) that would make crystal clear and totally believable fakes for the public to believe in.
We see this in the UFO field too - often there are stories of labs/units run by not the brightest and best but just somone who is
not married [no-one to confide in]Bush,Cheney and Co are married but haven't blurted out anything incriminating yet...
- fell out with their family [see above]So they'd be less of a Blackmail victim...
- has a gambling or drug habit and so needs/spends cash [causes career 'addiction']So would say an alcoholic or a shaky heroine addict be reliable when using computer software?
..on top of this the use of blackmail is far bigger than we think. You only need look at some of the testimony from Project Monarch, Iran Contra plane pilots and various presidential models to know this. People working for the govt eventually get important enuff to get set-up with:
- A 'ho in their bedSo instead of having this minor embarrassment (which it is these days after Hugh Grant and others) known to the public they'd rather take part in the murder of 3000 people?
- A 3 year old kiddy on their lap whilst they have a leery smileWould this be fake or a real image?
If it is faked, to blackmail someone innocent, why don't they use the guy whose faking that image to fake the the videos..
If it is real does this mean that Bush's distant relative is a paedophile. Does this then mean you believe that the Bush's are involved in child sex trafficking and if so wouldn't he be able to blow the whistle on them as well if they tried to blackmail him.
and they are video'd and get sent a copy. This way no-one says "NO" and no-one turns down the work tasks they get assigned to.
...see you can hardly go round putting these jobs in the paper so they tend to recruit from within.
Again, if they are recruiting from within as you say surely they'd choose and blackmail someone with superior video manipulation skills AND a good awareness of physics. Why wouldn't they just Blackmail someone like that? Also if there is such a huge UFO cover-up then there would be many people involved so there would be lots to choose from to either use voluntarily or blackmail
In addition there are increasing technologies to eradicate SELECTIVE parts of the memory - so they employ to get the job done then re-set a few synapses.
So essentially everything you have said about them being restricted when selecting operatives to carry out the crime for them is now invalid if anyone they choose can have their brain and memory tampered with
Quote:
Why would they allow such poor quality "fakes" to be released?
See above. Here I'm assuming you are referring me to using someone in the Bush family who's not very good with video manipulation software. This has been dealt with.
Quote:
What about all the people looking up at WTC1 smoking after first "plane" hits, wouldn't they remember that they didn't see a plane?
See Andrew Johnson's study of FIRST verbal reports on the day itself. Only 2 out of a hundred or so he found said plane. The rest said nothing or said missile or said a plane was nothing like the plane eventually "used".
So some DID say that they saw SOMETHING (missile,plane of some sort) so his evidence contradicts one of the NPT which says no projectiles were used of any sort. (apart from holograms) Those that said nothing may have had their vision obscured perhaps
Quote:
What about the witnesses saying they saw the second plane, like Owen May of the May Davis Group from 87th floor of wtc1 and others on the record saying that they saw plane parts and even plane-seats with bodies still smoldering in them?
Is this on video? I'd liek to see that. Yes I do have this on video. I'm currently working on getting it converted so I can show it on here.
We have evidence of stooges doing media interviews on the crucial first day. It was vital they got certain lines/ideas out within hours and then they left the sheep like media to do the rest.
So, are these stooges...
A;Members of Bush's extended family.
B;MKULTRA victims.
C;Robot-drones
D;Blackmailed paedophiles
E;Gambling,Drug,Career addicts
F;All of the above
Quote:
Why is it that all the no-plane films use such poor quality footage to analyze and present their evidence from? Perhaps the anomalies they find are a product of over-rendering.
[b]They used the same sources as everyone else.In addition most things end up on Youtube where the compression on submission reduced quality.
That's exactly my point. The ACTUAL recordings from the day haven't been used they use instead images that have been uploaded,downloaded, edited, rendered, uploaded, compressed, downloaded again. This to me explains the anomalies much more easily
Quote:
Perhaps the footage used are fakes. Tampered with to create the no-plane line.
[b]May well be. But personally I think there is loads more substance to the idea of NP than we're prepared to collectively admit.
You simply start at the Pentagon with its 5 foot hole and clean lawn and move on from there. Anyone that thinks a boeing landed within a mile of that venue needs to book the,mselves in for a Sirius reality check.
I agree that something other than a plane may have hit the pentagon. I also believe that the so called "planes" used at the WTC may not have been actual planes, or not necessarily the planes we have been led to believe. But when folks start saying that it was all just TV fakery and the people staring at wtc1 smoking were fooled into believing they saw a plane hit wtc2, that's when I lose interest.
Seriously I am curious about the NPT but have yet to be convinced.
Dunno - I'll go watch it now.
<EDIT> - it's a link - I don't know where the TV fakery is but will check it out.
[b]<EDIT #2>
Ahhh... I know this guy now - seen him on some 9/11 docu[dramas]. Found the video and out-take interview from youtube - at the end Chris Bollyn, the AFP journalist catches him out with a fixed question. what specifically is this question/answer. where can I see/hear it?
So the answer to the last question is:
A:Lying - true
B:Mind Controlled - probably
C:More TV fakery - no, just a delusional wannabe suffering from hormone imbalance as he approaches the male menopause.
A little harsh there with C I feel, but this man does appear on many 9/11 specials and has what seems to be a credible witness to back his own statements up. A man called Brian who saved his life. Now I know they could both be plants, mkultra'd and all the rest of it but errr....
Note he himself says "I was hypnotised standing up there..." I think this may be a figure of speech, besides would his handlers allow him to remember that he was hypnotised and blurt it out, causing suspicion? What about wiping his memory as you suggested could be done?
Quote:
[b]About This Video
Welcome Stanley Praimnath to the 911 liars club... (more)
Added: 10 September 2007
Welcome Stanley Praimnath to the 911 liars club. Hes been telling lies for 6 years now selling a fictional book and getting away with it. Hear Stanley debunk himself in his own words ! (less)
Heheheh... best laugh all evening:
I actually watched this video myself before posting my initial post on this thread. There are many flaws in it like when they claim Stanley could not have seen the north tower from his corner view in the south tower. The thing is he could because he had a corner view. The video only suggests that Stanley could see out of one side of that corner.
Quote:
- "the wing sliced right thru the office..."
Quote:
- "the wing was intact in the office - it ended up right by me after slicing thru the second tower..."
These are entirely possible if...
A; You consider the buildings were tube structures and the lesser integrity of the outer walls
B; The "planes" used were not "real planes" but reinforced or missiles made to look like planes made from something that would cause maximum damage
Maybe he's mistaken because of the stress caused by the event but isn't lying.
Quote:
- "I struggled up from under my desk and there was the intact wing. It was close enough for me to use as a coffee table, if i'd had some coffee - which I didn't - the wing went straight thru the office coffee machine - actually and the water cooler now I recall it..."
Quote:
"People wonder why all those people were forced to make the awful choice to jump... well I can reveal it was the wing. After slicing thru the floor i was on, the wing started moving again with the vibration of the fires. Lo and behold - the wing began slapping people on their arse's with its tip until they were catapulted out of the tower..."
So he managed to get out to tell his great little tale without getting burned to a Walkers by all that jet fuel that managed to melt all that thick steel. Amazing.
But isn't that the point? The fires weren't hot enough to melt all that steel. All of "The Movement" agrees with that point. Surely he would have survived then?
There is also footage of a woman waving from the wound in the building which could have been a similar scenario for her. Or do you believe that footage is more TV fakery?
If Stanley is a plant, why would they have given him such an unbelievable story which...
A; Brings attention to the fact that the planes may not have been real planes (the wing surviving)
B: Brings attention to the fact that the temperatures of the fires were low enough for someone to survive in
Note also how his language use gives away the deception at various points when he repeats:
"...in the REAL world yes the place would have done that - but on that day it did this - very strange."
I think he means that on 9/11 it wasn't like the real world. Things were happening that were not usual. It was like a dream. Being involved in that kind of event creates vast releases of chemicals in the brain which make the world seem strange as well as the event itself.
We've already established that the 'projectiles' could have been reinforced. Or could have been something other than real planes as suggested in Andrew Johnson's research that you mentioned so those planes would not have behaved like they would in the "real" world.
Perhaps Stanley is trying to say something to "us" without risking too much. Perhaps without him "knowing it", his experience is evidence against the official story.
Errr - also, you only need see his website to discount him as a decent witness. That site is a crime against decency
Remember this man is American, I've heard it said that fame and notoriety, are career options above all others in the good old U.S. of A. I'm reminded of a Bill Hicks quote about shilling for products at this point.
What I mean is his need for attention doesn't necessarily make him a co-conspirator.
I'm sorry but after reading the theories you put forward I'm even less convinced. For me NPT relies on too much of a contrived over-elaborate world of conspiracy intrigue....
... Employing Bush's distant cousin, in a world of UFO cover ups where they have back engineered ufo technology but can't employ someone with a knack for decent computer film editing software and physics all at the same time..where they can mind control someone to do anything they want but not someone who'd be the best for the job...
I'm perfectly willing to admit that the projectiles may not have been planes but I do believe there were projectiles of somekind.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
- This will be seen as a watershed moment by history.
