pretzelogik Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 The only evidence that I can verify myself are the videos and photographs, as I have no personal connection to any other elements. The 9/11 videos and photographs depict impossible events, therefore must be fake. Proof of this can be verified by examining the videos and photos themselves and noting the numerous conflicts, examples of digital rendering, compositing, crude graphical inserts, cut and paste, etc. One can use the same forensics to dismiss most of the so-called 9/11 victims. There is no debate about this. I will be happy to listen to any countervailing evidence regarding the enormity of evidence showing video manipulation that exists, but as of yet, not a single contradictory eplanation has been offered nor can it be, as it is outside the realm of the possible. As far as who did it, why they did it, or how it was accomplished, I have no opinion as I cannot offer any sort of evidence of proof. I have no access to physical objects, witnesses, scientists and the like, nor could I verify the veracity of any report. I can use my own eyes to see, however and would encourage anyone who thinks there may be some importance to these events to verify the evidence I used to draw my conclusions for themselves. It's quite easy to do, readily available and won't take all that much time. Come on in, the water's fine!
masonman Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 "The only evidence that I can verify myself are the videos and photographs, but they appear to be fake to me" You're proving my point.
pretzelogik Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 "The only evidence that I can verify myself are the videos and photographs, but they appear to be fake to me" You're proving my point. They don't appear fake, they ARE fake. But why belabor the point in words. Just give me your simplest explanation of this image extracted from a Sept. 11 NBC evening newscast and we can move forward.
masonman Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Its a passenger aircraft flying towards a tower, about to slam into it
pretzelogik Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 I don't know if that comment is in jest or a Jedi mind trick. What I see is the rear half of a cartoon jet protruding from an image of a building with no visible disturbance to either. This is not prior to slamming, this is mid-slam, as it were. If you don't mind, I am curious as to your take on the simplest explanation for how this type of situation could exist in the real world. It's a head scratcher for me.
MrCapitalism Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 It's a head scratcher for me. Just so we're clear: you're the poster who couldn't figure out why the lunar lander wasn't aerodynamic, how it maintained a pressure vessle, and how it kept a stable temperature. Let me guess.. you are expecting to see this: Do you know you're setting this argument up for fantastic failure?
pretzelogik Posted January 19, 2013 Posted January 19, 2013 Can one of the above posters have a look at the graphic image above extracted from a NBC TV broadcast (it's one of thousands of examples of manipulated video; I used this one because I thought it would be a slam dunk) and explain how the vessel (we can assume it is real for the sake of argument) can be halfway inside the building and neither the vessel, nor the building show any sign of disturbance. Is the lunar lander relevant that particular image? Is a crash test vehicle relevant to that image? I just need someone to explain that frame to me in a way that doesn't contradict what is possible in reality and I may reconsider all the conclusions I have drawn about this. Perhaps you could just point me to one example of any video or picture taken anywhere, ever, that demonstrates this phenomenon. What argument are you referring to, BTW? I am certainly not setting up an argument, I am asking those that know more than I do about such things for an explanation.
David L Posted January 19, 2013 Author Posted January 19, 2013 Statist media attacks Florida professor for questioning Sandy Hook http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_lZhxsDAHJM
pretzelogik Posted January 19, 2013 Posted January 19, 2013 Statist media attacks Florida professor for questioning Sandy Hook http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_lZhxsDAHJM PJW from above clip 05:46 - 05:54, "I don't buy into the notion that this never happened or that the parents...the family members... were acted in some sense...." MSM, saved by alternative media. Move along these aren't the droids you are looking for...
David L Posted January 19, 2013 Author Posted January 19, 2013 PJW from above clip 05:46 - 05:54, "I don't buy into the notion that this never happened or that the parents...the family members... were acted in some sense...." MSM, saved by alternative media. Move along these aren't the droids you are looking for... Thanks for the point, well taken. James Tracy's work does propose the possiblity that the event may never have happened at all, that's one reason why it's probably good to hear him speak at length without being demonized by the desperate, stuttering MSM and their flailing credibility in journalism reporting. See for example this seemingly desperate attack on him, quite relevant to our topic here...
pretzelogik Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 The real reporting on this story, of there is even a story at all, the evidence is so scant, is being done on the web by curious bloggers and forums dedicated to verifying and/or debunking stories put out by the media. It's a tragedy in a way, that one has to do one's own research or look to other amateur researchers who have put time and energy into actually beating the virtual streets to confirm or gather factual information, while at the same time the huge apparatus that as all the manpower and money necessary to conduct this enterprise studiously avoids doing so. One can only come to the conclusion that this is done by design. There is a saving grace nowadays, in that the modern consumer can readily be in touch with contrary evidence and shaky back stories in a few mouse clicks (the Gene Rosen story is oh, so rich), allowing for a much more complete picture of the events if they have some mild curiosity. Sadly, the information blitzkrieg rules the day: "26 dead, including 20 children, killed with an AR15, gunman commits suicide." Next!
David L Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 This is the false flag that can create the civil war. People who watch Youtube vs people who watch mainstream news. They will never ever air this on mainstream news. Remember some people won't change their minds and only respond to emotional arguments. They will demonize you with this video. Thank you for posting this here. Everyone on FDR needs to know this. Email Stef too. I am now. Good call, my friend. You got it bingo...
pretzelogik Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 I enjoyed the Max Igan vid and thought he made some valid points, on the mark about a lot of things. I am not sure about his civil war prognostication. I can get a very clear picture of what an civil war in America would look like, as there would be very little clarity in terms of defining which side was which. In 1861, there were clear boundaries a union, a confederacy with uniforms, etc. Not so now. The coup, if this country was ever released from the yoke of British imperialism, about which I have doubts, would have occurred in 1912. There is a good research thread about this event here: http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1521 The latest entries are turning up abandoned properties, a couple of abandoned schools, a possible ghost town, so there may be a land clear at work here, as well the usual gun control and fear-mongering. The five minute attention span of the American public, as well as their stubborn inability to flip beyond the first page of any of these outrageous stories in sadly familiar, yet expected. On the plus side, more people than ever before are beginning to notice that the news media is far less about documentation that promotion.
David L Posted February 9, 2013 Author Posted February 9, 2013 Surprise, surprise... "The statement by the CT prosecutor's office is the first indication from state authorities that Adam Lanza may have not acted alone." Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/342829
pretzelogik Posted February 9, 2013 Posted February 9, 2013 Translated: "We will leave no stone unturned in finding new ways to manipulate public attention away from the fact that not one scrap of verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm that this event ever happened in the first place and is not a media invention created from whole cloth." Surveillance video footage of a school shooting in Brazil:
David L Posted February 12, 2013 Author Posted February 12, 2013 "Has 'Sandy Hook shooter' Adam Lanza Even Been Alive The Last Three Years?" http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/79712-has-sandy-hook-shooter-adam-lanza-even-been-alive-the-last-three-years
pretzelogik Posted February 13, 2013 Posted February 13, 2013 I have found no compelling reasons to believe any part of this story whatsoever. There is only one Adam P Lanza in the SSDI matching the supposed age and loaction of the media creation from last December and he expired 12/13/2013, according to official records. Is it even remotely plausible that anyone in the industrialized world does not have some form of recent hi-res image accessible by the PTB, whether a drivers license photo, school ID photo, or anything other that some ghostly, black and white blurrily rendered policesketch looking thing? It's nonsense. I'll say it again, the story here is that the media is CREATING these stories. Christopher Dorner is now burned alive in some Waco truck bomb thing, case closed. Did this guy ever exist? I don't know, but now they have set a precedent of using drones in manhunts and justifying door to door searches of hundreds of houses for this suspected "cop-killer". Did Adam Lanza exist? it's doubtful, but every media pundit and politician with his finger to the wind is calling for victim disarmament. Were there any plane crashes on 9/11? There is no credible evidence to support this claim, yet there are myriad government agencies involved in all manner of intrusion into the lives of every prodcutive person in the US in the name of preventing "terror", all the while causing it. What do these events have in common? They are media driven responses to media creations that are scripted and played out in the minds of the public to advance an agenda. There is no longer any verification of the stories required, whatsoever. Roll tape, activate thug brigade. Simple.
ToeKneeIsFree Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 There was nano thermite found in the dust of the towers. That is really the only evidence you need to acknowledge that there were explosives in the towers. The video is really interesting. Live callers call into CSPAN and want answers to all of this hard evidence. They will not answer any of the questions. Its almost impressive how well they dismiss the continuous stream of calls. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bHAiB7tOeGo#t=1106
shirgall Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 The important thing to try with this video and others like it is to show the core content to someone cold and ask them about it afterward, instead of being primed to see the performance as fake in the first place.
Recommended Posts