Are you a mind controlled victim?

[thought criminal]

WATCH. LISTEN. THINK. FEEL.


Link



Link

[Fallious]

Where those orders you were just shouting at us?

Someone's got a vested interest in us all believing in the power of mind control and it's not the truth movement.

[Emmanuel]

Of course it was mind control on a mass scale, on which much of our media is built on today.
Those in fear are easier to control so it was designed this way, the same as those in germany under Hitlers power.
Which other crime or disaster announced the culprits within seconds on national tv worldwide?

[thought criminal]

WATCH. LISTEN. THINK. FEEL.


Link



Link



Are any of you victims going to comment on these videos or are you just gonna run off and play with your toy planes?

[Stefan]

What are you looking for?

There is nothing in the videos which makes me suspect that no planes hit the WTC towers.

Sorry.

What point was it making?

That on poor quality digital film the shadowed side of the plane, the shadowed side of the tower and the hole all appeared the same colour?

That a different perspective on the same scene gives a different image?

Now you know that section called "9/11 controversies"?....

[thought criminal]

[Emmanuel]

We would have to look at weights and materials made of the supposed aroeplane and the supposed world trade centre. I am far from expert on any matter, ,less this one.
But the second vid challenges the obvious, that i didnt think of before. Why didnt the aeroplane crash and shatter outwards?
Thankyou for presenting these Thought Criminal. And good music too.

[Stefan]

Jacob,

The poster Snowygrouch has conclusivly demonstrated more than once here that it is indeed possible for a plane to penetrate the WTC towers.

There is no evidence which cannot be explained simply which says anything other wise.

[thought criminal]

[Stefan]

Thought Criminal,

I don't know what plane.

Does that shock you?

Why can't you accept that it is neither possible, nor even remotley neccesary to our campaign to know exactly what happened on 9/11?

All we need to do is demonstrate what DIDN'T HAPPEN - i.e. the official conspiracy theory - and raise awareness around that point, and we have had enough to be getting on with a long time before beam weapons or holograms raised their heads.

I may have my own little personal theories, it is human nature (as we are creative creatures) to do just this. But they are NOT TRUE they are THEORIES - a product of my imagination made from stringing facts together with speculation. My outlining of my creative process would be as useful to this campaign as a water colour of a dog playing poker.

We have FACTS among our arsenal, facts which contradict the official story and that is enough.

Our mission as a campaign is to get out there and bring as many people around to realising these facts exist as we can, as the main stream media will not do it for us. The best way to do this is to state nothing which can not be confirmed. We must not be "conspiracy theorists" but "anti-theorists" on a mission to debunk that most abusrd theory of all- the official conspiracy theory.

Do you have any idea how detrimental outlandish theories are to this aim?

[thought criminal]

[Stefan]

"Truth Seeking"?????????

Are we a religion or a campaign?

Do you actually WANT as many people as possible to question the official story of 9/11?

Do you think approaching people who have never even questioned the OTC with claims about no planes and space beams is going to get the desired response?

At this point I'll leave you with those questions, this is getting silly and it's best just to agree to disagree.

[thought criminal]

There has to be thousands, tens of thousands of video footage kicking about from that day that can be used as evidence and if this theory was embraced more we could employ 'experts' to have a look at them. There isnt one 'plane' to be seen hitting the North Tower and the second 'plane' looks completely different or half invisible in all the shots.

This is psychological deviance being played out through the psyche of humankind. It is not just about exposing 9/11 but eradicating mind control which they can use on the masses again and again in the dark future they have designed for us.

[andyb]

^ pseudo science, coming from you that is very funny. Like stefan said we don't need any theories, the holes in the official story are enough. These more exotic theories are harmful to the movement as they WILL be used as straw men. Stick to facts, speculation gets you nowhere

[thought criminal]

[andyb]

TC, you will note I didn't say what hit which of the towers, it doesn't matter, simple. Hard selling any particular theory will marginalise you. Like you said about the Naudets -2in many peoples opinion' The word opinion here is all important. We are entitled to these but shouldn't force them on others. Just give them facts and let people form their own opinions. We're fighting the same bunch of b****** and infighting over pet theories isn't going to help us succeed!

[EmptyBee]

The 9/11 truth movement needs, in order to be effective, to be as broad based as possible. That means that theories without strong supporting evidence, i.e. the Fraternal Order of Illuminated Lizards, Orbital Mind Control Lasers and NPT have no place in any campaign that doesn't want to self-destruct on the launch-pad.

Unless you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that no planes hit the towers any and all attempts to forward NPT as an important and plausible theory will be laughed off as a sick joke. To the best of my knowledge, NO SUCH PROOF EXISTS. So, why not shut up about NPT unless you have some SOLID EVIDENCE TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS? Until such evidence can be found you might as well be arguing for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Belief in the OCT is essentially faith-based. It is based on the perception (widely promulgated in the media) that no right-thinking person disbelieves in the OCT. Evidence isn't a big part of it. Any reasonable independent-minded appraisal of the facts leads inexorably to the conclusion that the OCT is a morass of lies and half-truths. Poorly supported assertions such as NPT are not effective at eroding the OCT, quite the opposite, it merely confirms in the mind of the skeptic that CT is the realm of unhinged screwballs.

I, like many approached 9/11 truth as a skeptic - initially not expecting to be convinced, but willing to entertain the idea, examine what facts could be found, what anomalies lacked explanation, what events remained unexplained. If NPT had been put forward as a cornerstone of the 9/11 truth campaign I have to say I doubt very much whether I would have bothered persisting in my reading. Thankfully it wasn't, and thankfully I did. Let's keep it that way, eh?

[thought criminal]

[thought criminal]

[Bongo]

EmptyBee,

I think this is the first time I have read a post of yours, so hello.

Anyway, If I could comment on your post for a minute, I would just like to...well... basically copy it and paste it here...






'Blank Space Left'





.... (Agreed!!!)

[EmptyBee]

[thought criminal]

[EmptyBee]

[thought criminal]

[EmptyBee]

Ok let's look at what we've got - a plane shaped hole, eyewitnesses claiming a plane struck the building, widespread media reporting that a plane hit the building. One rule of thumb with disasters is that the media is most likely to be 'off-message' in the early stages of a crisis, before a consensus is formed as to the correct version of events. Nonetheless there is widespread reporting of a plane striking the building, not simply 'an explosion'.

Evidence to support NPT: a dubious interpretation of the only los-res footage of the North Tower impact - the Naudet brothers film.

What does the Naudet film actually show? It shows a group of people standing on a street corner. One of them is a fireman (the subject of the Naudet brothers' documentary). We hear the sound of an aircraft. The fireman looks up at the sky, the camera quickly pans to the towers, what appears to be a plane (more of a blur) impacts the towers in the far distance and a large explosion (zoomed in on by the camera) consistent with a jet airliner impact is seen and heard, accompanied by the exclamation "holy s**t!" by one of the bystanders. So...either this footage was faked or there was a plane striking the building or...what? Loudspeakers? Holograms?

This view is confirmed by another very distant snippet of film taken apparently showing the approach of Flight 11 and its impact here.

Then there's the lack of eyewitnesses claiming to have seen only an explosion and no plane. The plane was apparently travelling at speed, so it wouldn't be particularly surprising to hear that nobody saw the plane impact, but doubtless hundreds if not thousands of people must have heard the plane, as in the Naudet film.

I'm prepared to keep an open mind on all aspects of 9/11. That doesn't equate to taking seriously theories with scant or non-existent evidence. That includes NPT.

I'm normally loathe to wave Occam's Razor arround 9/11 issues, the world can be complex and the simplest explanations are not always the best, but in this case I think it applies, as there's no credible evidence to say that it doesn't.

[xmasdale]

[ian neal]

TC

A bit less morons and simpletons and f*cking this and f*cking that please.

You strongly believe in one theory. That's fine. Do not insult those who disagree with you please. If you want to know where the line on this lies look up the posts of both Patrick Brown and TTWSU3. Both threw insults at each other on this issue and refused to heed the advice not to do so. The result: they were both banned.

Thanks

[IronSnot]

ha ha.

Please, please be nice. Please. Please.

BTW Ian you say I'm banned on another thread for insulting other posters too much. Ummm where are those insults?

[david carmichael]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=K_cHc6yRyS8


Hi,

This is my first post.

I saw the video hyperlinked above posted by thoughtcriminal.

I don't have any questions about the FIRST PORTION of the video

My question is in regards to the FINAL 2:27 minutes/seconds.


Where are those missing buildings?

[thought criminal]

[quote="xmasdale"]