19-09-2012, 04:06 AM | #1561 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 111
|
Quick exercise:
Approx 1560 posts on this thread. How many are by posters using their real name? Wow. How powerful it is a - a culture of forum anonymity created and preserved for perhaps 12 years. Just a thought for you all. |
19-09-2012, 05:24 PM | #1562 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 667
|
Why the urgency and eagerness to know the real names of posters on here? Wood has proven none of her claims to be anything other than wild conjecture.
__________________
And one by one, the dissenting voices are silenced. Submission or suppression. Censorship is alive and well. |
19-09-2012, 10:56 PM | #1563 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.
Posts: 5,460
|
Quote:
What kind of dumbfuck uses their real name on the internet? Seriously!
__________________
. "To me, you're just another anonymous govt funded jerk spreading propaganda like a good little minion that you are." -- stompk "Filming a smoking tower just doesn't make sense ... what idiot would get out a cam. instead of a cup of coffee ?" -- kooskoets "Sublimation needs air to occur. It cannot occur in a vacuum." -- stelios "(now baked, am i making sense ?) " -- oooooooooo |
|
20-09-2012, 02:51 AM | #1564 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 920
|
Quote:
As I see it the buildings were pulverised (or 'dustified' if you prefer) by explosives. I've looked at both sides and it's just how I feel. I could be wrong, I just see nothing in her theory that convinces me where as I find the work by the A&E guys highly convincing. I'd rather we just agree it was controlled demolition, there's little point in arguing about the method used really when the majority still think it was fires and impact damage that caused the collapse. Perhaps Andrew, if you could talk me through some of what convinced you and maybe you can convince me. I've PM'd you my name and email address if you prefer I've just read the link, thanks and agree the tone of the interview was not nice. Still I had to agree with what he was saying, despite not liking his attitude.
__________________
Investigate the Hollie Greig case-Petition http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/...reig-case.html Please show support for Tony Farrell. Sacked for telling the truth about 9/11 & 7/7 http://www.change.org/petitions/camp...igence-analyst Last edited by uprising; 20-09-2012 at 03:25 AM. |
|
20-09-2012, 01:32 PM | #1565 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,781
|
Quote:
Very few people know how to go online anonymously and most of them don't know for sure the are actually anonymous. Now they are using face scanning there is no escape even if you have multiple 'paper' identities; they will still x-ref your face.
__________________
The Gentleperson's Guide To Forum Spies and HERE Don't forget the real risks Truth Researchers take to bring us information. Use your own discernment to decide what is true for you. |
|
21-09-2012, 03:39 AM | #1566 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 920
|
Quote:
__________________
Investigate the Hollie Greig case-Petition http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/...reig-case.html Please show support for Tony Farrell. Sacked for telling the truth about 9/11 & 7/7 http://www.change.org/petitions/camp...igence-analyst |
|
21-09-2012, 09:18 AM | #1567 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,781
|
yeah, good point
__________________
The Gentleperson's Guide To Forum Spies and HERE Don't forget the real risks Truth Researchers take to bring us information. Use your own discernment to decide what is true for you. |
14-10-2012, 10:58 PM | #1568 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4
|
The problem with Judy Wood's theory is basically that ALL images from 9-11, absolutely EVERYTHING, all photos & all videos are completely suspect & most are already absolutely proven fakes. Simon Shack at Clues Forum is banning her 'evidence,' not because he hasn't seen it but because he's had enough of it already. They already debunked many of the photographs and videos that are the main source of her 'evidence' beyond hurricane Erin, the seismic footprints, the dust being nano-scopic & that other stuff. That other stuff without all the images & the videos Wood relies on doesn't prove much.
And yes, I do have her book, bought it the first week it came out, back when I still thought that most of the images aside from the videos of the planes could be trusted and thought, just like Deanna Spingola, that it made a solid case based on those images. Not anymore. Some aspects of Wood's non-photographic evidence might turn out to be valid but not the gist of the DEW theory and certainly not with that bozo fraud Hutchison attached. She even thinks that the videos and photos of the so-called jumpers are real which have been debunked any number of times as fake. http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=501 Jim Fetzer is also not very well-liked at Clues Forums because he sits on the fence forever & especially since he recently came out with the childish hologram theory again citing Richard D. Hall's film & some witness named Steve Forbes he interrogated who 'saw a plane' whom he absolutely, positively believes just like he believes Willie Rodriguez because he had dinner with Rodriguez. Andrew Johnson recently mentioned this Richard D. Hall film on Deanna Spingola's show as if it was some kind of new breakthrough. In fact, not only is it not a breakthrough, but it's not even much of a challenge to the Clues research since it took Shack just one friggin post to debunk it with ridicule straight out the door: http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1246 scroll to the middle of the page It seems that all these people, including Andrew Johnson, Judy Wood, Richard D. Hall and Jim Fetzer have not even bothered to read this: Introductory Tour Guide to the September Clues research by Simon Shack - (updated on July 18 2011) http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=477 so that confusion will not reign in their heads in case confusion and making everything believable and nothing knowable was not what they were after in the first place. "The objective of disinformation is not to convince you of one point of view or another, it is to create enough uncertainty so that everything is believable and nothing is knowable." -- James Fetzer He knows exactly what he's doing doesn't he ? Isn't that cute ? Reminds me of Judy Wood's 'easter eggs' story. The disinformation specialist identifies the techniques of disinformation to draw attention away from themselves while in the process of spreading disinformation themselves. Last edited by synergetic67; 14-10-2012 at 11:01 PM. |
24-10-2012, 07:20 PM | #1569 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Trapped in a body.
Posts: 1,583
|
I have not read her book, but has Mrs. Wood performed a calculation of the energy required to "dustify" one of those towers, as asked of her by Dr. Greg Jenkins when he tried to interview her?
And does she say what weapon was used and where it was positioned?
__________________
The Titanic never sank, it was the Olympic that the Jesuits sank in the North Atlantic. |
24-10-2012, 08:24 PM | #1570 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 19
|
Godlike power for the military
Throughout history the military of various nations have used propaganda to inflate the prowess of their own weapons, even to spread word of nonexistent weapons so as to frighten and confuse the enemy. This has been going on since before Hammurabi.
Now, in the old days it was easy to distinguish who was the enemy - often the color of their skin or the cut of their clothing was all it took, but these days the lines are not so clearly drawn. We who have no money and no assets have much more in common with people of other races in other countries who also have no money and no assets, often much more in common than we have with our so-called leaders. The leaders are wealthy, and being wealthy they can buy advertising - hell, they can buy television stations, but they don't need to do that because they already share the same prostitutes with the fellas who currently own the television stations, so why bother, you know? I digress. What I'm getting at is this; if Judy Wood was "for real" and was exposing some kind of top-secret weapons information, I notice three beneficiaries right off the top; the military, the media and the perpetrators (but I repeat myself). 1. The military will be able to claim the power of god, which lets face it, leaders have been doing for thousands of years - hello! Isis anyone? With so many researchers bowing in awe to the power of the military's invisible space-weapons, no one will be looking when they misplace a few more trillion dollars. 2. The media that published Dr. Wood's book in defiance of the "establishment" will be able to continue flying their banner of faux independence and self-righteousness. With hurricane-powered energy weapons "dustifying" steel sky-scrapers and their contents, the media's role in this farce will be ignored. At the same time, the federal government, the FBI, the FDNY, the NYPD, the OEM, the Mayor's office and the PANYNJ won't need to explain how these buildings managed to be gutted and prepared with explosives since '93 while still maintaining the appearance of being fully-occupied "cities within the city". Furthermore, the ironically-named "truth movement" will look like wild-eyed conspiracy nutcases thanks to the guilt by association one gets by being within spitting-distance of a Judywoodtard. All of the above considerations make the good doctor and her cult of followers highly suspect, at best. 3.The perpetrators - see above. Last edited by yankee451; 24-10-2012 at 08:26 PM. |
24-10-2012, 11:07 PM | #1571 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 19
|
My handle may be yankee451, but my name is Steve De'ak. Anonymity is for sissies.
|
25-10-2012, 01:42 AM | #1572 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 111
|
Quote:
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cm...=359&Itemid=60 |
|
25-10-2012, 01:54 AM | #1573 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 111
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cm...=349&Itemid=60 To answer the other posters question - I like to know who I am discussing things of world importance - it helps me to determine if they are disingenuous or not. As you will see if you read the above, it can help then to prove when people are lying - or hiding something for reasons that are dishonest. Last edited by andrewjohnson; 25-10-2012 at 01:57 AM. Reason: added observation about a lie |
||
25-10-2012, 07:33 AM | #1574 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
I was trying to collect a "unified front" of the truth movement for this scientific experiment (the 9/11 Crash Test), but I've given up on that pipe dream. It's clear the majority of the truth movement aren't interested in the truth, they're interested in selling snake-oil; and Judy Wood's brand lowers the criminal investigation of 9/11 to the level of science-fiction, while simultaneously raising the prowess of the military to godlike-power and diverting attention away from the role the media plays in all this. If such top-secret energy weapons actually existed, Dr. Judy Wood would certainly not be publishing about it - unless they desired her to do so, which raises the question "why?" Why would the propaganda arm of the military, the same propaganda arm that lied about planes, why would they publish such a book, especially if such weapons exist? Well, when the military claims the power to destroy the planet, or "dustify" buildings from space, we the people won't balk at the Trillions of dollars shoveled at the Pentagon to develop and protect-against such mythological weapons. The military's bread and butter is to ensure the people are fearful of attack, else there would be no justification for their expense. Judy Wood supports that justification. But besides all that, I didn't like the way she mocked me when I asked for her endorsement - for a forensic scientist to write that I would be better off to raise awareness by wearing a sandwich-board than to conduct the Crash Test, makes me doubt her sincerity even more. Last edited by yankee451; 25-10-2012 at 07:34 AM. |
|
25-10-2012, 07:53 AM | #1575 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,541
|
What if she's spot on and completely right, but the Military PTB were confident that no-one would take her seriously...?
|
25-10-2012, 08:20 AM | #1576 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
9/11 can be better explained through good, old-fashioned corruption and propaganda than through physics. For something as important as 9/11 to succeed, if it was me, I would have used tried and true conventional means - and the available evidence indicates this is exactly what happened. The buildings were prepared for demolition since at least '93 - this means the government, NYPD, FDNY OEM, military, media, etc. were well aware the complex was being prepped for demolition and was not a "city within the city". Judy Wood's work protects the real perpetrators by distracting from more down-to-earth conclusions such as insurance fraud. This article goes into some of the background. I followed it up with "False Fronts for a False Flag", but that one needs updating - still it can be found at Let's Roll and gives a good background on the corruption that the WTC was steeped in since it was just a gleam in the eyes of the Rockefeller brothers. http://yankee451.com/2012/02/28/911-for-psychos/ |
|
25-10-2012, 08:25 AM | #1577 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,541
|
That's a lot to read, I'll get to it though - thanks for the link.
Out of interest, you say that the WTC was rigged for Demo by 1993, do you have a source for that...? Cheers. |
25-10-2012, 08:29 AM | #1578 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
The sources are sketchy (as can be imagined), but the circumstantial evidence supports this conclusion. 9/11 for Psychos is long, and so is False Fronts for a False flag. I need to make some corrections and re--post it on my own blog now that I'm no longer welcome at Let's Roll. |
|
25-10-2012, 08:39 AM | #1579 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,541
|
I think there was plenty of opportunity to rig the buildings (if that was what happened), it's the first time I've heard of it from that far back (apart from the unsupported "when they were built" claim).
I honestly haven't come to a conclusion on the subject. I'm settled on no planes, happy with that. I'm also of the belief that there is a very advanced space program, so the DEW thing is not beyond the realms of possibility imho. |
25-10-2012, 10:14 AM | #1580 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
9/11 changed the way I look at everything - if they'd lie like they did on 9/11, none of their claims should be accepted at face value. If it was a court case and a witness is exposed as lying, all of their evidence can be disregarded, and that's how I treat the government's claims now. Their extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, which is always well-hidden behind national security. I think its much more likely they're scamming trillions out of the flock by forcing us to pay for fantastical weapons that don't exist, and that the leaders in other nations with whom our own leaders have more in common than they do with us, are complicit. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|
|