They have- the New Statesman did just that with David Shayler.
Believe me, when they start to see us as a serious threat, this is the first thing they'll turn to.
Have you even ever tried to go out on the streets and talk to people about 9/11???? I recommend you do, it would open your eyes to exactly what NPT would do to our movement if your ilk had your way. _________________
Is it really necessary for them to "latch on to it"? Anyone pushing NPT does a pretty good job of discrediting themselves, and by extension the 9/11 Truth Movement the moment they bring the idea up.
Even if NPT did stand up to close scrutiny (which it doesn't), as a theory it doesn't even pass the sniff test. Surely even you can appreciate that challenging probably the most basic understanding about what happened on 9/11: that planes struck the Twin Towers, is inevitably going to get you dismissed as a nutter?
I think maybe that's half the attraction of NPT - the certain knowledge that your theory sounds so absurd that it will never in a million years get widespread acceptance, and that this 'privileged knowledge' is therefore bound to remain safeguarded in the hands of a rare few individuals who can 'see through the lies'.
On the other hand, pointing out the demonstrable incoherence, contradictions and omissions in the official story is an approach intelligible to almost anyone with an open mind on the subject. Unfortunately it involves careful research, reading and all that boring stuff. _________________ "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 4:49 pm Post subject: Re: Why hasn't the media used NPT to discredit us?
Witchfinder General wrote:
Us NPT ers are endlessly told by other so called truthers that NPT will damage the movement.
How is it that the media has failed to latch onto it in order to discredit us?
... so erm... you say FAILED to LATCH onto it?
Well its obvious they have not failed to latch onto it. I am sure a few times, when David has been on Radio or TV or something, there has been a point where he has been attacked for NPTs.
What a pathetic response, the fact is the mainstream media are not latching onto NPT to discredit us because they know it is their achilles heel.
Or could it be that they cannot be bothered to waste time and effort writing articles about schoolboy fantasies. Grow up WG. You sound like all the other NPT'ers. Or are you just the same person in disguise? - all full of sh*t with nothing to offer except to disrupt the movement.
If the media do start to discuss NPT you can be assured that it will be to prove how stupid we all are. It will be another nail in the coffin for truth and I happen to wonder whether you'd enjoy that.
So that's it, is it? The New Statesman? And did the article kind of say, "Well we thought he had a point about elements in US deliberately blowing up the towers and killing 3,000 of their own citizens, but once he got on to 'no planes' - well, he lost us there"?
So that's it, is it? The New Statesman? And did the article kind of say, "Well we thought he had a point about elements in US deliberately blowing up the towers and killing 3,000 of their own citizens, but once he got on to 'no planes' - well, he lost us there"?
Madge,
No mentioning it iself was discrediting. And what was a casual comment from David has following him around with every interviewer immediatley asking him if he thinks planes hit the towers.
You need to understand how the average person will dismiss this immediatley - it isn't an easily accessable or believable idea without the "evidence" in front of you (in my personal opinion, or with it in front of you but we can agree to disagree on that one). _________________
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject:
MadgeB wrote:
So that's it, is it? The New Statesman? And did the article kind of say, "Well we thought he had a point about elements in US deliberately blowing up the towers and killing 3,000 of their own citizens, but once he got on to 'no planes' - well, he lost us there"?
Some people might think you really are that naive Madge B.
I'm not one of them. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
So that's it, is it? The New Statesman? And did the article kind of say, "Well we thought he had a point about elements in US deliberately blowing up the towers and killing 3,000 of their own citizens, but once he got on to 'no planes' - well, he lost us there"?
Madge,
No mentioning it iself was discrediting. And what was a casual comment from David has following him around with every interviewer immediatley asking him if he thinks planes hit the towers.
You need to understand how the average person will dismiss this immediatley - it isn't an easily accessable or believable idea without the "evidence" in front of you (in my personal opinion, or with it in front of you but we can agree to disagree on that one).
The average person does not dismiss NPT at all.
In my job I visit people in their homes or at my office.
The last person I showed who believed NPT was a Prison Governer
Others include my daughter's teacher, the gasfitter who came to my home.
When I show them the CNN clip without exception they become No Planers
So what evidence do you have to back up your statement Stefan?
Your not even sure whether hijackers were used FFS
You see Stefan PLANES DO NOT ENTER BUILDINGS, the CNN clip was not a youtube and even if it was poor quality you can see quite clearly that the plane enters the building, the hole heals around the plane and the fireball happens too late and comes out the wrong side.
You come up with pathetic excuses for all of these anomolies.
You are clearly working for the perps with your mate Chek and are probably under some kind of mind control
Last edited by Witchfinder General on Mon May 21, 2007 10:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
Are you sure they're not merely smiling and nodding while secretly thinking "get me away from this nutter"?
Many salesmen are aware of the value of getting inside someone's home - their personal space. It's extremely awkward for anyone to say "sorry I think you're full of it" in such a situation. _________________ "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 10:12 pm Post subject:
Witchfinder General wrote:
Stefan wrote:
MadgeB wrote:
So that's it, is it? The New Statesman? And did the article kind of say, "Well we thought he had a point about elements in US deliberately blowing up the towers and killing 3,000 of their own citizens, but once he got on to 'no planes' - well, he lost us there"?
Madge,
No mentioning it iself was discrediting. And what was a casual comment from David has following him around with every interviewer immediatley asking him if he thinks planes hit the towers.
You need to understand how the average person will dismiss this immediatley - it isn't an easily accessable or believable idea without the "evidence" in front of you (in my personal opinion, or with it in front of you but we can agree to disagree on that one).
The average person does not dismiss NPT at all.
In my job I visit people in their homes or at my office.
The last person I showed who believed NPT was a Prison Governer
Others include my daughter's teacher, the gasfitter who came to my home.
When I show them the CNN clip without exception they become No Planers
So what evidence do you have to back up your statement Stefan?
Your not even sure whether hijackers were used FFS
You see Stefan PLANES DO NOT ENTER BUILDINGS, the CNN clip was not a youtube and even if it was poor quality you can see quite clearly that the plane enters the building, the hole heals around the plane and the fireball happens too late and comes out the wrong side.
You come up with pathetic excuses for all of these anomolies.
You are clearly working for the perps with your mate Chek and are probably under some kind of mind control
It reads like BS, quacks like total BS, and I as don't believe a single word of your unsubstantiated declarations normally, this BS is no different.
But while we're on the subject, maybe you can explain why 'planes do not enter buildings'?
As you seem so upper case sure of it. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Are you sure they're not merely smiling and nodding while secretly thinking "get me away from this nutter"?
Many salesmen are aware of the value of getting inside someone's home - their personal space. It's extremely awkward for anyone to say "sorry I think you're full of it" in such a situation.
So how many times has the mainstream media showed the slow motion replays of the second hit.
The mainstream media want to desperately keep all mention of 911 and 7/7 out of the spotlight.
So they dont mention any aspect of it.
If we want them to mention it then we must unite rather than argue amonst ourselves. In america alot of mainstream media talks about 911. The only thing we can do is contact journalists and talk tadio hosts and politicians and hope that one or more of them take up the reigns.
That is why i think these petty internal arguments are counter productive. the mainstream media and even the alternative media all ignore us.
I suggest posting these same debates on sites like Digg and urban75 and guardian unlimited and bbc blogs and journalists personal blogs
you can always post a backlink to this site.
www.5thnovember.blogspot.com
is another good blog to post in
most mp have personal blog sites too like webcameron _________________
Are you sure they're not merely smiling and nodding while secretly thinking "get me away from this nutter"?
Many salesmen are aware of the value of getting inside someone's home - their personal space. It's extremely awkward for anyone to say "sorry I think you're full of it" in such a situation.
So how many times has the mainstream media showed the slow motion replays of the second hit.
Not once, why is this?
I can't say I recall a slo-mo replay of any of the 2nd hit impacts, but then I haven't watched all the archive footage that obsessively so I can't state that for a fact. They certainly didn't shy away from repeatedly showing it from every which angle though. I don't see any reason to see this as sinister, there may have been a taste issue with slow-motion replays, like it was the goal of the century or something. A bit morbid isn't it?
Returning to the subject of giving people the NPT hard sell:
Be on the look out for defensive body-language; hand over the mouth, folded arms, closed posture, uneasy shifting of the feet, sudden inexplicable interest in picking bits off their clothes and in extreme cases, physically backing away with a fixed insincere grin. _________________ "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Are you sure they're not merely smiling and nodding while secretly thinking "get me away from this nutter"?
Many salesmen are aware of the value of getting inside someone's home - their personal space. It's extremely awkward for anyone to say "sorry I think you're full of it" in such a situation.
So how many times has the mainstream media showed the slow motion replays of the second hit.
Not once, why is this?
I can't say I recall a slo-mo replay of any of the 2nd hit impacts, but then I haven't watched all the archive footage that obsessively so I can't state that for a fact. They certainly didn't shy away from repeatedly showing it from every which angle though. I don't see any reason to see this as sinister, there may have been a taste issue with slow-motion replays, like it was the goal of the century or something. A bit morbid isn't it?
Returning to the subject of giving people the NPT hard sell:
Be on the look out for defensive body-language; hand over the mouth, folded arms, closed posture, uneasy shifting of the feet, sudden inexplicable interest in picking bits off their clothes and in extreme cases, physically backing away with a fixed insincere grin.
There have been no slow motion replays on TV this is a fact.
They have- the New Statesman did just that with David Shayler.
Believe me, when they start to see us as a serious threat, this is the first thing they'll turn to.
Have you even ever tried to go out on the streets and talk to people about 9/11???? I recommend you do, it would open your eyes to exactly what NPT would do to our movement if your ilk had your way.
So when they see us as a serious threat they will turn to NPT.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 11:02 pm Post subject:
Witchfinder General wrote:
EmptyBee wrote:
Witchfinder General wrote:
EmptyBee wrote:
Are you sure they're not merely smiling and nodding while secretly thinking "get me away from this nutter"?
Many salesmen are aware of the value of getting inside someone's home - their personal space. It's extremely awkward for anyone to say "sorry I think you're full of it" in such a situation.
So how many times has the mainstream media showed the slow motion replays of the second hit.
Not once, why is this?
I can't say I recall a slo-mo replay of any of the 2nd hit impacts, but then I haven't watched all the archive footage that obsessively so I can't state that for a fact. They certainly didn't shy away from repeatedly showing it from every which angle though. I don't see any reason to see this as sinister, there may have been a taste issue with slow-motion replays, like it was the goal of the century or something. A bit morbid isn't it?
Returning to the subject of giving people the NPT hard sell:
Be on the look out for defensive body-language; hand over the mouth, folded arms, closed posture, uneasy shifting of the feet, sudden inexplicable interest in picking bits off their clothes and in extreme cases, physically backing away with a fixed insincere grin.
There have been no slow motion replays on TV this is a fact.
It's a meaningless 'fact'. More a factoid.
Why haven't the meeja played slow motion replays of any disaster?
Hillborough/ the Russian midair collisions at Farnborough/ Concorde crash/
Hindenburg /King Kong in New York - whatever ... you name it.
Are you really so ... no, it's no good; words fail me. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
The mainstream media don't dare promote the concept, since once you realize that the videos are fake and check for yourself the entire official story falls apart completely.
Thus the resources are going to the shill possee on disinfo sites like this one, where Ian Neal lets them ruin every thread with their repetitive nonsense. Marky 54 and his sister accoutns John White, Iro, Chek, Stefan, Telecastration-- these guys do nothing at all for 9/11 Truth. Ian knows this and he doesn't care. The only people he will ban are no-planers. Perhaps he doesn't have the stomach to be Hitlerian in his censorship the way Loose Change and 911blogger are. Why ban when you've got full-time resources shouting down the people doing the hard work?
The mainstream media don't dare promote the concept, since once you realize that the videos are fake and check for yourself the entire official story falls apart completely.
You are deluded. As stelios points out the mainstream media don't cover 9/11 Truth at all.
Do you really think this christmas cracker vidoes of your would have a greater impact that an engineer talking about WTC7 might? REALLY?
Have you ever checked this irational beleif that if the public saw your octopus videos they'dd all march in step with the fact that you can't even convince other truthers of this?
Have you ever considered that the fact that you've been banned from virtually every 9/11 forum in the world might be because your arguments do not pass muster and your accusations that anyone who doubts them is a shill are just offensive?
Quote:
Thus the resources are going to the shill possee on disinfo sites like this one, where Ian Neal lets them ruin every thread with their repetitive nonsense.
Again with your desire to censor.
You really are amusing. You clearly want all other views but yours to be censored and everyone who disagrees with you to be banned.
There is nothing repetative about the responses to you, except for when you repeat the same videos over and over, of course you will get the same objections.
But each response is unique according to latest hair brained notion.
Quote:
Marky 54 and his sister accoutns John White, Iro, Chek, Stefan, Telecastration-- these guys do nothing at all for 9/11 Truth.
Actually Ian knows what we DO do, he knows that posting on a forum is just posting on a forum and real campaigning involves putting on events, public campaigning, writing letters, organising protests and so on, NOT producing embarrasing videos which can be debunked in a sentance.
Quote:
The only people he will ban are no-planers.
Wrong. He will ban anyone who insults other people, accuses people of being shills without evidence, repeats the same threads over and over again; in other words trolls. There are no planers here such as Andrew Johnson and Watson who have the general respect of their peers because they conduct themselves with some dignity. No one has problems with anyone having a different view to them here, they only have problems with arrogant and bullying upstarts like you. But you're still here aren't you? So why the claims of censorship? Oh yes because he ALLOWS PEOPLE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU- that's what really offends you, that he doesn't censor your opponents, not that he censors you.
Quote:
Perhaps he doesn't have the stomach to be Hitlerian in his censorship the way Loose Change and 911blogger are. Why ban when you've got full-time resources shouting down the people doing the hard work?
Once again your representation of anyone disagreeing with you as "censoring you" highlights the insecurity that can only come with having a weaker argument as you do. _________________
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 9:04 am Post subject:
aargh, another 2.5 minutes of my life I've lost watching one of your rubbish movies again Fred. Tell you what when you get some real evidence, come back and show it to us, until then please go away and stop wasting all our time. I couldn't believe your accusation of ian Neal allowing others to repeatedly post rubbish. You really are the king of doublespeak! _________________ "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King
It's OK, andyb, your time is worthless anyway. All you do is post insults. When was the last time you posted something of value here? I consider you to be a stalker who posts spam on NPT threads, nothing more.
The original question still stands. Why is it that the only people claiming that NPT hurts the movement are planehugging shills promoting an official alternative story? What got most people interested in 9/11 Truth in the first place? No plane at the Pentagon. There's no-one in the MSM ridiculing the TV Fakery evidence. They don't dare go near it for the same reason you're trying to suppress it. TV Fakery exposes the perpetrators, and AndyB can't have that.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:35 am Post subject:
The media has used David Shayler's pushing of the absurd NPT to discredit us.
Which is why there are so many anonymous shills (and, worryingly, one admin) on this forum doing their best to push the theory.
It's a measure of our media's sanity that they've reported so little of NPT as they have realised the gravity of 9/11 which NPT drags through the manure pile
The media haven't discredited David Shayler at all, and they certainly haven't used him to ridicule AndyB and his other accounts John White, Iro, and Marky 54 with their "nonsance" and "evidance".
The fact that AndyB posts pictures of feces and Tony shows up here to promote his planehugging nonsense is a pretty good indication of what this site is all about.
Let's see, how many people are you claiming are all the same person now?
AndyB
Chek
Me
Marky
John White
Telecasteron
Fallicious
FlameSong
EmtyBee
Did I miss anyone out?
Basically you have to merge everyone who disagrees with you into one person so you can keep your delusion alive that EVERYONE who sees one of your videos will be instantly converted to your world view; it's a way of not having to face the fact that virtually no one ever does.
"That's because you're all the same person and you're paid by the government!"
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:53 am Post subject:
Fred it is your utter nonsense that is a prime weapon for the people who committed this crime. You may as well be one of them in my eyes. This is my line and I'm sticking to it unless someone can show me any real evidance _________________ "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King
That's what the "evidance" suggests. Besides, there isn't a single post from any of the names on your list that helps the cause of 9/11 truth in any way.
Stop infesting no-plane-theory threads and go strangle old ladies or something if you want to get your jollies. You have multiple "non controversial" officially sanctioned and promoted forums here to go post in. Have another beer why don't you?
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 1025 Location: SW London
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 12:00 pm Post subject:
I tsake offence to the strangling old ladies accusation. You are a spreader fo dubious information and therefore cannot be trusted. Go back to 9/11 researchers stay there amongst your misinfo friends _________________ "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King
That's what the "evidance" suggests. Besides, there isn't a single post from any of the names on your list that helps the cause of 9/11 truth in any way.
Stop infesting no-plane-theory threads and go strangle old ladies or something if you want to get your jollies. You have multiple "non controversial" officially sanctioned and promoted forums here to go post in. Have another beer why don't you?
Evidance... you mean that a couple of those people at one point or the other hit the "e" instead of the "a" on their keyborad... that really is what constitutes evidence for you isn't it?
Most of the names on that list (all in fact) have contributed to constructive discussions on this forum, but what you are failing to note, and continue to fail to note, is that this forum is not 9/11 truth, and neither are any of the forums you have been banned on for your thuggish posting MO.
The list of names above are mostly 9/11 Truth Campaigners; they actually work in their local areas to bring awareness of this subject to the local population in a variety of pro-active ways.
You are a lost little lamb.
You think posting on a forum is going to change the general opinion of the broader public? You can't even change the opinion of the forum! If you went out into the real world you wouldn't be able to use the excuse that everyone who told you that you were a nutter was the same person, or that CNN superimposed them on your eyeballs. You'd have to face reality, so you hang around here instead.
In the real world you'd have to accept that it is because you haven't made a strong enough argument that people don't believe you, not invent fantasies that everyone who doesn't believe you is the same CIA agent.
I mean look at the insecurity of you lot: you couldn't even come on this forum alone; a big bunch of you all registered within the space of a fortnight and started an embarrasingly transparent campaign of answering each other as though you didn't know each other in the first place. You realise we can all access 9/11 researchers as well right?
And what have you actually come up with?
The missing building that was right there in plain sight?
The birds moving at a perfectly normal speed which you didn't grasp because a plane the best part of a quarter of a mile away from them moved across the feild of vision faster?
The "UFO" with flapping wings and a beak which "couldn't be explained"?
The non-fixed-POV camera shot from the helicopter which "proved" the WTC was spinning because the back ground moved as the shot did?
Nothing you have come up with here has raised anything but a roll of the eyes from anyone with critical faculties here.
So, now, in anticipation of any future postings you may submit, a blanket response:
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
