David Icke's Official Forums (https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php)
-   9/11 & 7/7 (https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   25 Second 9-11 Truth Test for All Your Friends & R (https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=224648)

synergetic67 13-10-2012 02:56 AM

25 Second 9-11 Truth Test for All Your Friends & R
25 Second 9-11 Truth Test for All Your Friends & Relatives !

The great thing about this is that it will only take around 25 seconds to a couple of minutes of their 'oh-so-precious' time away from watching the crap on their TV, so they will almost always do what you say even to just get rid of you.

Have them watch this 25 second clip:

http://img.youtube.com/vi/YFjjmvu5ei8/0.jpg Click Image to go to video

let them watch it a few times if they want and then ask them what the video is asking which is

"If this happened tomorrow, would you believe it ? "

and see what they say.

It should be good for lots of laughs because if they have the brains to recognize this 25 second clip for the complete media fakery and forgery that it so obviously is (by the video maker - complete with fake headlines and CNN logo - CNN: Breaking News - F18 hijacked by Hamas terrorists - Iran is supporting terrorism on U.S. soil, a non-event, & audio transposed from the 9-11 newscasts in the background) then you can just tell them:

Well, this is what you saw on 9-11 as well, so why do you believe that ?

After which you can show them one of the ridiculously fake 9-11 clips such as this one:


and ask them why in the world would they not believe the one they just saw & believe the others from 9-11 ?

Then try not to laugh at the look on their faces as they try every lame excuse in the book to deny their own eyes and logic.:p

Interview with Simon Shack of September Clues - Brian S Staveley, Justin Cooke - 04 / 08 / 2012


Introductory Tour Guide to the September Clues research by Simon Shack - (updated on July 18 2011)


synergetic67 13-10-2012 06:07 PM

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/396/075/396075778_640.jpg Click Image to go to video


synergetic67 01-12-2012 11:45 AM

Anyone interested in putting some money into Simon's new venture ? :D

"Anyone interested in investing in my new business venture? I am planning to buy a dozen old Boeings, fill them with kerosene and fly them by remote control into the top of old steel buildings scheduled for demolition. Our service will put the competition (conventional demo firms) out of business and corner the market! It will cost our clients a fraction of the price - and the job will be done in a matter of hours - not weeks. Top-down collapse guaranteed - as advertised (twice) on TV on 9/11 ! " ~Simon Shack



skulb 01-12-2012 03:54 PM


Originally Posted by synergetic67 (Post 1061081895)

and ask them why in the world would they not believe the one they just saw & believe the others from 9-11 ?

Well obviously 9/11 was a serious event and besides it was on TV so it must be true!

Dude111 02-12-2012 03:04 AM


MSM bullshit to confuse and keep them in THIER CONTROL!!

synergetic67 18-12-2012 11:00 PM

Flashback to some of the high points of 9-11 truth research:

911 AMATEUR part2 by Simon Shack

http://img.youtube.com/vi/yjQmxS-DpyM/0.jpg 911 AMATEUR part2



"It appears that NO PHOTOGRAPHY was allowed at Ground Zero, as of an official order signed by NY Mayor Giuliani. I am inclined to believe that this was actually the case (even though some may accuse me of choosing to believe only pictures that fit our theories...):

So, what sort of justification would such a menacing WARNING SIGN have? What kind of problem would anyone cause to anyone by snapping pictures of the premises of such a historically defining, public event? One official motivation given was that "it was a crime scene". Oh yeah - it sure was !...

PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT: If you have had your camera seized by the authorities around Ground Zero, please get in touch!

For years, I 'knew' that only ONE photographer had access to Ground Zero.

I thought it was time to remind everybody about this dude...




" the only photographer allowed unrestricted access to ground zero immediately following the attack":

-- Simon Shack


Shack on "Where Did the Towers Go?" by Judy Wood

"I see that Judy Wood has published a new book. However, her research is based on fake pictures. The sole purpose of her existence is, imho, to provide 'a plausible explanation' for the very stupid-looking WTC 'pulverization' animations."



There may be one easy way to find out just how the 9/11 planners impeded any genuine, private footage to be captured or/and to prevent any such footage to leak out to the public: ask Steven Rosenbaum.

This is a brief overview of the guy - and his activities since 9/11:

Mr. Rosenbaum’s pre-9/11 company, BNN TV, employed over 80 people and occupied five floors of a Fifth Avenue building in Manhattan. The proud slogan of his company was “BNN TV Changes the Way Stories Are Told”. His clients included CNN, CBS News, MSNBC, HBO and Court TV. The studios were equipped with state-of-the-art AVID video editing equipment - the sort of which you only find in major Hollywood studios.

As the story goes, in the days following 9/11, Steve put up posters and fliers in NYC and placed an ad in The Village Voice “urgently requesting images that captured the attack, its aftermath and the mood of the city”. That effort seems to have worked out nicely. His 1,700 video clips of 9/11 constitute, he says, “the largest archive of my now dormant television production company, Camera Planet”. His website tells us that 76 people contributed to these “500 hours of videos”, which are owned by Mr. Rosenbaum and his wife, Pamela Yoder (no mention is made whether or not he paid these [b]76 people for their precious footage).

In other words, Steven Rosenbaum claims to have collected 500 hours of 9/11 amateur footage - from amateur videographers who would have willingly handed over their 9/11 footage to his new Camera Planet company - so that he could set up a big, nice archive of 9/11 amateur footage! Later, as Camera Planet went bankrupt, he allegedly put this 9/11 archive up for sale - for a mere $3 million. Do you think I'm kidding you? Check out this 2005 piece of the New York Observer:


(When the company was in dire straits last winter, Mr. Rosenbaum attempted to sell off his vast library of 9/11 footage valued at $3 million. So far, there have been no takers.)

Does anyone here have $3 million to spare? Perhaps we could relieve Mr. Rosenbaum of his dire burden?

I trust everyone on this forum will be familiar with the numerous, horridly low-res video clips of purported 9/11 footage infesting Youtube - carrying the Camera Planet logo. Taken together, and providing you have watched/compared them all, anyone should be able to see that they are nothing but an assembly line of animations created in a digital 3D environment and are, all in all, just a crude series of computerized animations - slightly rotated & retargeted at will. The purpose they serve is, of course, to convey the illusion that many different cameramen shot these videos in reality.

So let's ask Mr. Steven Rosenbaum if he can supply us with a list of the alleged 76 authors of these "amateur videos", shall we?

Simon Shack


Colonel George Nelson (U.S. Airforce Retired), an air-crash investigation expert has observed that NOT ONE uniquely identifiable part has ever been produced by the government FROM ANY OF THE 4 ALLEGED 9-11 CRASH SITES:


Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic:

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet NOT ONE PIECE of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. …"


"Between the four airplanes which allegedly crashed on 911 there should be
approximately 9 million parts. 3 million parts each for the 767 and 1.5
million parts for the 757. In addition to the parts there should be 60 miles
of wiring for each 757 or 120 miles for both. There is 90 miles of wiring
on each 767 which makes 180 miles for both 767's. Wiring is stamped every 12
inches or so with data which includes where it is going, where it is coming
from and its maximum load capacity. The reason for this is that wiring is
braided into bundles of up to one hundred wires and when you are tracing
down a problem you have to know quickly which wire you are looking for and
identify it."



Planted engine on Murray Street (way away from the buildings) that was conclusively proven to be from WRONG plane:



"I did an exhaustive check of the list of victims provided on the CNN website. What I found is that out of 2,970 people listed, only 446 appear in the Social Security death index. Of those only 249 have a confirmed death certificate on file. Of those, not a single one has a valid “last address of record” on file."~ Ersun Warncke, Salem News - Independent confirmation of the 'Vicsims Report' - 9/11 Reflections Part 2: Interview with Simon Shack of September Clues





Dennis Cimino of Pilots for 9/11 Truth on The Real Deal with Jim Fetzer Podcast - August 26, 2011


"Of all major U.S. airline crashes within the U.S. investigated and published by the National Transportation Safety Board during the past 20 years, the 9/11 'black boxes' are virtually the only ones without listed serial numbers." - Dennis Cimino

synergetic67 18-12-2012 11:28 PM

Radio Abirato - Exposing Media Fakery One PsyOp At A Time



Direct links to some recent episodes:

Sandy Hook Newtown, Connecticut Shooting Psyop - 12 / 17 / 2012 - Guests: Larry and Chris Kendall


Simon Shack on Abirato Radio – 12, 16, 2012 - Additional Guest: Hoi Polloi aka Max Konrardy



Simon Shack on Abirato Radio – 12, 09, 2012 - Additional Guest: Hoi Polloi


Simon Shack on Abirato Radio – 12, 02, 2012 - Additional Guests: Hoi Polloi and One Born Free


Brian Staveley on Abirato Radio - 11 / 24 / 2012 -



Note: Brian Staveley makes a mistake on the audio calling "Mark Humphrey" the 'Harley Guy'. It has been conclusively proven that the 'Harley Guy' was NOT Canadian actor Mark Humphrey but was in fact, a FOX employee called MARK "PSYCHO" WALSH:



Hoi Polloi aka Maxeem Konrardy on KFAI radio, Minneapolis, December 9, 2012:



Chris Kendall's Hoax Busters - 01 / 16 / 2012 - Guest: Simon Shack - TS-578407:


Chris Kendall's Hoax Busters 01 / 31 / 2012 - Guest : Simon Shack Part 2 - TS-586676:


Chris Kendall's Hoax Busters Talkshoe Show


Introductory Tour Guide to the September Clues research by Simon Shack - (updated on July 18 2011)


synergetic67 29-12-2012 07:58 AM

Abirato Radio - 12 / 26 / 2012 - Simon Shack on Sandy Hook, NASA and 9-11




Information warfare, in its largest sense, is simply the use of information to achieve our national objectives. Like diplomacy, economic competition, or the use of military force, information in itself is a key aspect of national power and, more importantly, is becoming an increasingly vital national resource that supports diplomacy, economic competition, and the effective employment of military forces. Information warfare in this sense can be seen as societal-level or nation-to-nation conflict waged, in part, through the worldwide internetted and interconnected means of information and communication. [...]

Information warfare, in its essence, is about ideas and epistemology- big words meaning that information warfare is about the way humans think and, more important, the way humans make decisions. And although information warfare would be waged largely, but not entirely, through the communication nets of a society or its military, it is fundamentally not about satellites, wires, and computers. It is about influencing human beings and the decisions they make. [...]

A major new factor in information war is the worldwide infosphere of television and broadcast news. Information warfare at the strategic level is the "battle off the battlefield" to shape the political context of the conflict. It will define the new "battlespace." We face an "integrated battlefield," not in the usual sense of having a global positioning system (GPS) receiver in every tank or cockpit but in the Clausewitzian sense that war is being integrated into the political almost simultaneously with the battle. Many people suspect that the national command authorities (NCA) are in danger of becoming increasingly "reactive" to a "fictive" universe created by CNN, its various international competitors, or even a terrorist with a video camera. This media-created universe we live in is fictive rather than "fictional" because although what we see on CNN is "true," it is just not the whole, relevant, or contextual truth. Nevertheless, this fictive universe becomes the politically relevant universe in which the government or the armed forces are supposed to "do something." [...]

Fictive or fictional operational environments, then, whether mass-targeted or niche-targeted, can be generated, transmitted, distributed, or broadcast by governments or all sorts of players through increasingly diversified networks. [...]

Let us take just one example of how current technologies could be used for strategic-level information warfare. If, say, the capabilities of already well-known Hollywood technologies to simulate reality were added to our arsenal, a genuinely revolutionary new form of warfare would become possible. Today, the techniques of combining live actors with computer-generated video graphics can easily create a "virtual" news conference, summit meeting, or perhaps even a battle that would exist in "effect" though not in physical fact. Stored video images can be recombined or "morphed" endlessly to produce any effect chosen. This moves well beyond traditional military deception, and now, perhaps, "pictures" will be worth a thousand tanks. [...]

Excerpts from Professor George J. Stein's 1995 essay "Information Warfare"


Flashback Espisode:

Brian S Staveley on the 9-11 Psy-Op - 03 / 18 / 2012 -



synergetic67 30-12-2012 08:03 AM

Weatherchange - by Simon Shack & friends (2000)

http://img.youtube.com/vi/g8WxIqYHymM/0.jpg Weatherchange - by Simon Shack & friends

"Weatherchange" is all about the silly, fearmongering, corporate hoax that goes by the name of "global warming".


Playlist for Shack's band Social Service: click on the title 'Strange' to go to the full playlist

http://img.youtube.com/vi/-Jhz48tORMQ/0.jpg STRANGE

September Clues Soundtrack:


synergetic67 31-12-2012 05:52 PM

Abirato Radio - 12 / 29 / 2012 - Guests: Jon B. from Canada & Eric from Norway - 9-11 and other Psy-Ops


Super-comprehensive Frank O. Collins links page:




synergetic67 07-01-2013 05:58 PM

Brian S. Staveley on Freedomizer Radio - 01 / 03 / 2012 -More on the 9-11 Psy-Op and the pitfalls and manufactured dead-ends of the 9-11 half-truth bowel movement:





synergetic67 21-01-2013 01:53 AM

How the 'Sandy Hook' Psy-Op ties in to the 9-11 Psy-Op and the wider scheme of all media fakery Psy-Ops and why it was most likely deliberately done in a sloppy manner:



Ok folks, here we go...Shame on us all !

If the primary underlying motive for these recurring "shooting" psyops was still a bit foggy until recently - I think it should now be much clearer - at least to all of us here at Cluesforum. The perps have been caught with their pants down faking "3000 victims" on 9/11. What we see unfolding now is their obligatory damage control in action - and we have seen how 9/11 is not OUR obsession - but rather THEIR obsession. The media goons MUST always stay 'a step ahead' of their opponents - and keep in high gear the discrediting-game of the same, year in and year out.

Just read this 'SALON' article to see where this public Sandy Hook discourse is going - and was always meant to be going :


Meet the Sandy Hook truthers

Theorists think they've found “absolute proof” that Newtown was a hoax. Have they no shame?

By Alex Seitz-Wald

"There are dozens of websites, blog posts and YouTube videos extolling the Emilie Parker hoax theory. If you Google her name, the very first result is a post mocking her father for crying at a press conference after the shooting. One popular video, which already has 134,000 views, was made by the producers of a popular 9/11 Truther film. “Just as the movie ‘Operation Terror’ shows the 9/11 attacks were a made-for-TV event, so too were the mass shootings … There can be no doubt that Sandy Hook was a staged event,” the narrator intones. He goes on to say that the adults who participated in the media coverage of the shootings “should be prosecuted as accessories after the fact in a mass murder” — i.e., the parents whose children were murdered in the massacre should be thrown in prison. "



What we have here is nothing but the age-old tactics of 'discredit by association' at play. No matter how old and worn-out, the perps propaganda experts are using it once again to good effect. These shooting-psyops serve the primary purpose of counteracting the (slow yet relentlessly growing) realization that the NEWS MEDIA had a central role in pulling off 9/11 (and keep fooling the masses on a daily basis). As we now know, the TOP LIE of 9/11 is that "3000 people were KILLED that day". In fact, this crucial lie has turned out to act as a pretty efficient, emotional wall - behind which the perps hope to escape public scrutiny. "How dare you question our dead 9/11 heroes?" - is the standard reply you'll get from Joe Public today. But what about tomorrow? Is this protective wall somehow indestructible? Of course not : just like every other construction, the perps' wall needs maintenance from time to time - all the more so ever since its very foundations (the "3000 victims" lie) started crumbling under our Cluesforum findings.

STAYING ONE STEP AHEAD (or - the 9/11 hoax maintenance)

Enter the "MAD-SHOOTER" psyops, in which mostly teens and children reportedly get slaughtered like cattle (be it in Norway, Italy or the USA). So what are these psyops' purpose? Gun control? Nah. With pink whale Alex Jones behind it - I'd now say that's a pretty fat red herring. Let us try this: could the seemingly 'sloppy' manner in which these "MAD-SHOOTER" psyops are staged be entirely intentional ? Could the piss-poor actors, the clumsy backstories and the many 'conspiracy baits' be all part of a 'sophisticated' script? In this scenario, the media perps would be AIMING at generating a fresh new 'amateur-army of conspiracy theorists' - whom they can then play tricks with and, ultimately, easily ridicule wholesale on their globalized TV networks. As we have seen after this latest Sandy Hoax, a mini-tsunami of keen observers (aka "conspiracy theorists" in media speech) have been flooding the internet with questions about the very phony and contrived media coverage. Well, this 'mini-tsunami' would hardly scare or worry the perps - confident of the fact that they still have the masses on their side. Basically, these shooting psyops would serve to keep the TV-addicted masses outraged by "those crackpots who even dare question the tragic victims of smalltown events...And hey, now they're claiming that NO ONE DIED ON 9/11! Pfffuueyy! "

In pure propaganda terms, these recurring "MAD-SHOOTER" psyops (peppered with blatant fakery clues) may be - in other words - just a way to lure out of their lairs the observant folks of this world, only to launch 'pre-emptive strikes' on their overall credibility within the so-called 'mainstream' population. At the end of the day, we may find solace in the fact that no one gets hurt in the staging of these shameless mass-murder simulations.

Simon Shack

(yes, you are welcome to diffuse these thoughts of mine wherever you wish)


synergetic67 31-01-2013 01:31 AM



Let us never forget that the term "psy-op" means 'psychological operation'. My following thoughts may sound to some like 'stating the obvious' but I feel it is important, at this stage, to remind ourselves of what precisely is at stake in this whole affair - and what exactly the media strategists/psychologists are trying to achieve with these recurring, 'minor' (as compared to 9/11) terror psyops.

To illustrate my first point, let me use my own personal experience concerning the reactions/feedback I have registered within my immediate entourage which, of course, is well aware of my longstanding media fakery research. A typical reaction I got the other day came from an Italian friend who fully supports my 9/11 research, which went a bit like this : "Simon, I can understand the reasons for faking victims for a huge operation like 9/11, but why would they do so for these local shooting events? Besides, why would you even go there? If it turns out you are wrong about these minor events, wouldn't this undermine your 9/11 research and turn you into a callous monster who now even questions the death of poor innocent kids?"

Well, yes - undoubtedly. And it could very well be part of the perps' long term strategy. Needless to say, I believe that all this is intimately related to 9/11 - and to the strong and mounting evidence exposing the 3000 digitally-fabricated victims of that day. It stands to reason that the media corporations would go to very great lenghts to try and wrestle back their dwindling credibility - and that major efforts are now deployed to patch up their formidable 9/11 blunders - which threaten to implode the entire, worldwide media establishment. So let's see, step by step, what tactics may have been 'expertly' (or shall we say, desperately) devised by the media propagandists to cover their exposed butts. I have called it...


Step1: Stage a long string of 'terror shootings'(across the USA and abroad), gradually instilling in the public's consciousness the notion that we live in dangerous times - and that such shootings can occur anywhere and at any time these days ("so get used to it, people!").

Step2: Insert progressively a number of 'baits' in the form of absurd inconsistencies/ fluctuating death tolls/ outlandish storylines/ crass acting by alleged family members and so on and so forth. This, in order to wilfully attract a growing number of doubters of these events' media coverage - the more the better. (Since most people get their news from TV, there's no chance the doubters would reach anything near what is known as 'critical mass'...)

Step3: Once these increasingly publicized events have people (split into two belligerent factions of news-believers and news-doubters) arguing in their own homes about them, drop the NEWS-CLEAR BOMB into their TV sets! This 'bomb' can be defined as a news item so devastatingly powerful and convincing as to blow all the doubters' arguments to rest - covering the same with a dust cloud of ridicule and derision. And, most importantly, making anyone arguing that 9/11 featured fake victims sound like a complete fool.

So, let's see: what may we imagine such a NEWS-CLEAR BOMB to be made up of? Well, perhaps it could come in the form suggested by our Cluesforum member 'Farcevalue' : "A tour de force release of an impeccable surveillance camera recording/documenting the "event" could have a pretty adverse effect on all the new fakery researchers that have come out of the woodwork to challenge this story." Indeed, imagine that. What if, sometime in the future, some graphic/gory CCTV imagery "from the Sandy Hook school" gets released (complete with childrens' guts getting splattered across the classrooms) including 100 clearly audible rounds of semi-automatic gunfire and blood-chilling screams? How many people will still have doubts that the event occured in reality?

Sadly, only the few of us who know perfectly well that absolutely ANYTHING can be faked / fabricated in a studio - with "Hollywood-grade" special fx imagery.



The 9/11 VicSims Report

http://img.youtube.com/vi/wNShpKrcuOw/0.jpg The 9/11 VicSims Report


synergetic67 09-02-2013 11:04 PM

INTRODUCTORY "TOUR GUIDE" to the September Clues research

by Simon Shack -
(updated on July 18 2011)

Hello and welcome to the Clues Forum. We believe that Media Fakery is the most urgent issue to tackle in order to restore a bit of sanity on this planet. Media Fakery is the weapon of mass distraction used by a network of nutty power brokers (I like to call it "The Nutwork") to fool the world to their advantage. It has worked out nicely for centuries, for such is the essence of human nature that, when squarely duped, a man's ego will prefer to ignore the fact rather than dealing with it. The Nutwork and their subservient media conglomerates have long been well aware of this inherent weakness of mankind; their news-hoaxing tricks are routinely employed to generate incalculable profits and public consensus for waging murderous, barbaric wars of aggression. But their insane obsession for mass mind-control is now turning against them. Their wretched deception ploys are now exploding in their faces - one by one.

It is fair to say the September Clues research has established these 4 main points:

1- The 9/11 imagery was nothing but a Hollywood-style film production, complete with actors in the role of 'eye-witnesses' or 'firefighters', staged 'running crowds', 3D-compositing and special cinematic effects. The '9/11 movie' was split into a number of short clips and sold to the TV audience as 'newscasts'. The few clips featuring 'airplanes' (or dull silhouettes thereof) were computer-generated images - clearly in conflict with each other. Years of relentless 'debunking' attempts have failed to disprove the evidence expounded in the longstanding September Clues research.

2- No commercial airliners were hijacked or - much less - crashed into the WTC towers, the Pentagon or the Shanksville field. No valid/verifiable records exist for : their airport logs/schedules, their numbered parts, their alleged passengers. Their reported speeds at near sea-level as well as the visuals of their total disappearance into the WTC defy the laws of mechanics and physics - and the absence of visible wake vortexes in the WTC impact imagery also defies the laws of aerodynamics.

3- The World Trade Center Complex (9 buildings in all) were demolished with powerful explosives. No image-analyses of the tower collapses can help determine just what type of explosives were employed - since the videos are 3D animations and do not represent the real-life events. In reality, as they collapsed, the WTC complex was most likely enveloped by military-grade smoke obscurants. No real/private imagery exists of the morning's events - 'thanks' to electromagnetic countermeasures.

4- No "3000" people were trapped in the top floors/nor perished in the WTC towers. Only one thing was more important to the perps than avoiding a mass murder of 3000 US citizens : to sell the notion that "bogeyman Bin Laden" killed 3000 US citizens. We have renamed the 'victims' of these psy-operations "VICSIMS" (SIMulated VICtims). In fact, our research has seen the same pattern emerge in all the so-called "Al-Quaeda Terror Attacks" around the world (LONDON 7/7, MADRID 11, BALI, MUMBAI, etc...). In all logic, the very last aggravation the plotters behind these false-flag operations wish to have, are scores of real families hounding them forever with real questions. Hence: NO real terror victims = Logical PsyOp rationale.

9/11 is but a giant - and still ongoing - money-making scam. It rotates around the most well-funded and profitable hoax of modern history. Everyone involved in the scheme is reaping a sizeable return from their 'investment bond' which, naturally, has "SILENCE" printed all over it. For anyone to 'speak out' would be both ruinous and suicidal - a most distasteful option. To be sure, 'suicidal heroics' only exist in journalistic fairy-tales such as the outlandish newsmedia's narrative of 9/11 and its "nineteen religious fanatics". The skeptics objecting that "too many people would have had to be in on this" fail to account for the most fundamental aspect of human nature: our survival instinct.

The master plan of 9/11 was to demolish the redundant, asbestos-filled WTC complex in Lower Manhattan - 9 buildings in all. The area would naturally be evacuated (as for all such demolitions) in order to prevent a slaughterhouse of dreadful proportions - not a good idea at all. To be sure, this was no mass murder scheme - just a formidable opportunity for massive financial gains and military propaganda. The military (and its various intelligence affiliates) would manage the ground logistics, such as securing the area, raising smokescreens to hide the proceedings from public view, and last but not least, electromagnetic countermeasures to keep any private cameras from filming the mayhem. The WTC complex was thus 'safely' destroyed in bright daylight. It was a magician's trick, pulled off by sleight of hand to fool the few (the NY onlookers) - and with computer graphics to fool the world (the TV viewers).

The rest was (and still is to this day) a gigantic simulation staged and upheld by the complicit news media propaganda machine. The major news corporations are headed by a handful of moguls who are, contrary to popular belief, wholly subservient to the executive powers of USA, Great Britain, Europe and indeed, most of the world's governments. This unfortunate, yet widespread public belief (that the media checks and 'polices' our politicians) is being currently exploited to its full potential for the profit of a restrict so-called 'elite'. In his time, George Orwell would have called their structure "the Network". I suggest to call what we have today "the Nutwork" - since their inconsiderate behavior betray tell-tale signs of rampant megalomania and an alarming absence of mental balance.


The SC website gathers in one place the bulk of our research. On the 'welcome page' you will be able to watch the full 90-minute September Clues documentary. Click "ENTER SITE" to reach all the site's articles listed on the righthand sidebar. I will now list a number of FAQs and the relevant articles which address them. Feel free to repost this "tour guide" anywhere you like.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the source-material of September Clues?
What did the 5 US TV networks broadcast on the morning of 9/11?


2. What about the many amateur videos we have seen?


3. What about the 4 flights we have heard about - and their passengers?


4. What about all the eye-witnesses we have heard of on the news?


5. Where can I verify the September Clues claim that all the 9/11 imagery was fake?










(Think of the 9/11 imagery as a fully pre-fabricated "Hollywood" production)

6. How did they prevent New Yorkers from capturing real images of the events?




7. Where can I verify the claim that the 9/11 victims were (most or all) fictitious identities?




9/11 MEMORIAL SCAMS, VICSIMS,ETC (newer thread)


8. What about the people we saw jumping out of the WTC towers?




9. Where can I find the full 80-page pdf file of the "VICSIM REPORT" ?


10. What would be the purpose of fabricating victims for an alleged terror attack ?


11. Who are the people claiming to have lost a family member on 9/11?

9/11 ACTORS (on Youtube) 9/11 ACTORS


12. What about the many other 9/11 truth organizations?




************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************

This said, let me spell out what this forum is about: we are a bunch of nice and open-minded people, but if you are to contribute to our ongoing research, make sure you have something valuable to offer. At this time, we are looking for human quality - not numbers - because we believe there is intelligent life on this planet - although it is a rare resource which needs to expand. At this advanced stage of our research, we will not tolerate mere cheerleaders, time-wasters or chit-chatters. As for professional government agents typing from their little cubicles, we strongly advise you to leave us alone; get a life - and a honest job. Your masters are busted - and you know it. Stop wasting your lives supporting their insane war games.



falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus

False in one particular, false in everything. This principle of Roman law is still respected and has been appropriated by other disciplines. The concept is that if a witness has been shown to lie in one particular respect in a case, he is not to be trusted in anything else he says. This is why it is important for attorneys to impeach opposing witnesses in court: it discredits the rest of their testimony. The object behind the principle is to reject questionable testimony (even if it might be true) before accepting falsehood into evidence.

The legal principles of interrogating witnesses have been drawn into the task of evaluating historical sources. Just as a witness in court can be impeached by being shown to have lied, an historical source likewise loses much of its authority if its author can be shown to have deliberately falsified something--how can we trust an author concerning fact X when we know him to have lied about fact Y? Such an author may corroborate something a better witness says, but has forfeited our trust where he speaks without corroboration.

So, too, a manuscript bearing copies of ancient works is called a witness: not to a crime, obviously, nor to a contract, nor to historical facts, but rather to an earlier version of its text. Many of the same principles have been drawn into this field as well. A manuscript which contains many errors or bad readings (for example, a simpler phrase replacing a more difficult one which the scribe did not understand, or frequent spelling blunders) cannot be trusted without corroboration from an independent manuscript (i.e., one which is neither its copy nor its descendent).


synergetic67 05-03-2013 12:30 PM

Picture Below is Credited To Luc Courchesne


Below Is A Screengrab Of The Herzakhani Video Given To CNN


How can any of this absurd, cartoonish, 100% fake nonsense be taken as real by literally BILLIONS of people ??:p

Furthermore, how can anyone who considers themselves a 9-11 truther who disbelieves the official fable have any credibility whatsoever if they make the laughable claim that these same images are real ?

How About The Below Image Credited To Jennifer Spell??

The Plane is almost all the way in and still no hole in the tower??!!!!!:D


So, ladies and gentlemen, ask yourselves this: how much of a retard does a person have to be to still be a 9-11 plane-hugger after seeing just these 3 images, never mind all the other mountains of evidence linked on this very thread ?



Just these 3 fake images are enough to throw out ALL the 'evidence' for the official fable of 9-11 in any proper and uncorrupted court of law


falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus

False in one particular, false in everything.

This principle of Roman law is still respected and has been appropriated by other disciplines. The concept is that if a witness has been shown to lie in one particular respect in a case, he is not to be trusted in anything else he says. This is why it is important for attorneys to impeach opposing witnesses in court: it discredits the rest of their testimony. The object behind the principle is to reject questionable testimony (even if it might be true) before accepting falsehood into evidence.

The legal principles of interrogating witnesses have been drawn into the task of evaluating historical sources. Just as a witness in court can be impeached by being shown to have lied, an historical source likewise loses much of its authority if its author can be shown to have deliberately falsified something--how can we trust an author concerning fact X when we know him to have lied about fact Y? Such an author may corroborate something a better witness says, but has forfeited our trust where he speaks without corroboration.

So, too, a manuscript bearing copies of ancient works is called a witness: not to a crime, obviously, nor to a contract, nor to historical facts, but rather to an earlier version of its text. Many of the same principles have been drawn into this field as well. A manuscript which contains many errors or bad readings (for example, a simpler phrase replacing a more difficult one which the scribe did not understand, or frequent spelling blunders) cannot be trusted without corroboration from an independent manuscript (i.e., one which is neither its copy nor its descendent).


synergetic67 24-03-2013 07:52 AM

Simon Shack on Radio Abirato Ep33 - 03 / 17 / 2013 - 9-11 & Other Media Fakery Psy-Ops


Willing participants of the 'front line' of the big lie of the 9-11 Psy-Op, the people whose co-operation was crucial and therefore had to be in on it and must know how it was played out :

Steven Rosenbaum of Camera Planet -


Responsible for all of the 'amateur' non-network videos that came out later, reinforcing the false idea that actual 'normal' people had filmed the planes. This was a very important part of the Psy-Op. The public had to be made to believe that people were there all over the streets with cameras ready and shot 45 or more different videos. Rosenbaum had a company with over 80 employees and state of the art state-of-the-art AVID video editing machines, the stuff they do Hollywood films with. He says that he collected all this film from people who just willingly came into his office and handed over their videos to him. He says he collected over 500 hours of film this way !

The first time Simon found this guy's website, he wasn't even listing the names of the people who supposedly shot these videos. He was just saying he put an ad up in the "Village Voice" and people just came streaming into his office giving him their videos, already a crazy idea. Who would believe that if people did shoot these videos they would just give it away to these all-important videos to this guy just for the asking ? Rosenbaum said later he had 170 people giving him this material and declared himself the 'curator' of all the videos of the day, making Camera Planet a 'museum' of the imagery of day. If you go on you tube, you will see scores and scores of videos with the Camera Planet tag. So, apart from the Network videos, the Camera Planet videos were the first videos that Simon Shack analyzed back in 2006 / 2007.

At the time, the Camera Planet videos were really low in quality. That's one of the modus operandi of these Psy-Ops: at first they release really low quality videos, so that if something goes wrong they can always say, 'well, that's because the videos are low resolution.' They always progressively release these 'videos' of these Psy-Op events, upgrading them as time goes on to satisfy people who will always ask, 'hey, isn't there ANY high quality video of this event ? ' This is why in 2010, some 9 friggin years later, NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) released several gigabytes of videos which were much sharper and better in quality. So in 2010, Clues Forum had to start again and analyze them and found that, fortunately, the sharper the video image is, the easier it is to prove that they've been manipulated and created on a computer. At that point, it became easy to see how they had been manufactured in a chain assembly. You just have a 3-D model of Manhattan and you rotate it and you put a plane here and a plane there, etc. They screwed up this job terribly, so it was actually a service to Clues Forum for them to give out these higher quality videos, because they can now show in an even more compelling way how fake they are.

Kenneth Feinberg - the only man in charge of all victims compensation funds, not just on the 9-11 Psy-Op but in almost every Psy-Op.




Some of Feinberg's past activities:

- September 11th Victim Compensation Fund ("worked for 33 months entirely pro bono")
- The BP oil spill - appointed by Obama


to run the compensation fund - a job which apparently made him filthy rich


- The "Hokie Spirit Fund", 'set up for the victims' families in the wake of the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting' (33 dead)
- Arbitrator who determined the allocation of legal fees in the holocaust slave labor litigation.
- Arbitrator who determined the fair market value of the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination [no kiddin' !]
- and now, here he pops up again handling the "Batman Shooter" compensation fund ...

Don't know about you, but it looks to me as if this Feinberg guy is cornering the "psyop-compensation market"... http://www.cluesforum.info/images/smilies/tongue.gif

Or, more seriously, I'd say that his ubiquitous presence around many psyops we have been scrutinizing / exposing here on Cluesforum suggests this is a case of "economy of players": the Grand Psyop Club which keeps hoaxing America is perhaps made up of a rather restrict clique of gangsters, less numerous than we may have previously imagined.


Kenneth Feinberg bio - Time magazine:


Feinberg was in charge of the 9-11 compensation funds for all the families who supposedly lost someone on 9-11. He pops up on all different kinds of Psy-Ops and media events and seems to be the only man in America who handles compensation funds.

These willing participants are lesser known to those who have self-censored themselves from looking into media-fakery but just as busted as Larry Silverstein. Few people who have looked into the 9-11 false-flag at all have any doubt that Larry Silverstein, who bought the entire World Trade Center complex one-month-&-a-half before the event, was a willing participant in the entire 9-11 Psy-Op.


Then they have the guy who was in charge of the 'litigations,'


because they always have to make sure that the public thinks that there were real victims on that day, so there must be litigations.

So they put this Alvin Hellerstein judge in charge of the litigations. But THERE ARE NO LITIGATIONS. These people are just fronts for the whole scam.

Network Anchors: Matt Lauer, Katie Couric, Diane Sawyer, etc., were certainly informed of how the 9-11 Psy-Op was pulled off or they would not have known how to play their parts.


Salary $12,000,000 a year


Salary $25,000,000 a year


Salary $40,000,000 annually

There were no camera-cell-phones in 2001. They came out in 2002 and these were crappy and nothing like the camera-cellphones they have today. Besides, it's almost impossible to film something steadily with a cell phone, let alone a plane at 500 miles an hour. The only people who might have filmed the event would have had heavier cameras such as a Sony Handicam, etc. But the question of how they controlled the 'private imagery' is moot because how many people would have been in an ideal position to film anything, in Manhattan when the area was quarantined off ? So, people will ask: maybe they were filming from across the Hudson, from Brooklyn or from Hoboken ? Well, first of all, you don't get much detail from so far away and after looking at all available imagery there is nothing from anyone that contradicts what was shown as fake video on TV. And if the towers were covered with smoke before the collapse and someone filmed this, contradicting what was shown on TV, what would anyone do with such a video ?

How did they manage not to have somebody come up with a video of collapses completely different from the fake stuff shown on TV ? A video of the towers enveloped in smoke perhaps ?

It doesn't even matter what the actual witnesses might have provided because they were going to be running into a tsunami of media and their message will have been completely drowned out.

So even if you're totally right, there is no way to verify it because when you're going up against those who control the media, it doesn't even matter what you have to say, you're going to be completely overwhelmed. And who are people going to believe ? The entire gigantic mass-media apparatus or a single person with no media access except maybe on the fringes of the internet ? How is that one person going to create any kind of wave to challenge the mass-media avalanche ? It's just not possible or realistic.

Ask yourself this question: Out of all the people that talk about 9-11 and all the distractive fairy tales that go along with it, why is that most of them are never able to approach the media fakery angle ? Why do they never even make that one of the possibilities in any of the Psy-Ops ?

Well, because there are an enormous amount of gatekeepers. People who do gatekeeping as a job. They pretend to look for the truth but they obfuscate and at the last step they derail and deviate from the truth on purpose.

One example is Judy Wood. She's been inserted into the 'truther' community as a scientist who explains why we've seen these strange collapses, these collapses look crazy, what kind of demolition is that ? So she comes up and says 'that must be Directed Energy Weapons,' and justifies the visuals, that's her job, she's protecting the media. The unspeakable truth is that the media was in on it, so they always have to protect at all costs that 'the media must have shown us real imagery.' So that's why you have a Judy Wood put there to say: 'Look, the imagery was real, I've done a whole book about it, I have lots of pictures and I prove my case with the pictures.' But what if the pictures are fake ? That's not a scientific study ! First you have to verify if your pictures are real. But that's her job and the job of many others, to gatekeep for the media.

So, they always have to justify the imagery. The last ridiculous hologram theory from this guy Richard Hall is another case in point. He says: 'the imagery is real guys because I've compared all the different amateur videos and they all match.' They don't match. He just makes up a 3-D model and says he's got radar trackings, one from FAA and one from NTSB and they don't match, so that must be a military plane that passed and projected a hologram which made some people claim to have 'witnessed' these planes crashing. What he's basically saying is that the media showed us real images of a plane but the plane was a hologram !! Here again, his job, just like Judy Wood's, is to gatekeep for the media. Of course, what is ignored is that even if a hologram was possible on thin air without anything to reflect off, it would have had the same trajectory in all the different videos. However, since all the different fake videos show different trajectories, this makes the hologram theory completely absurd even if someone actually believes holograms on thin air are possible.


After the 1993 bombings, the towers were evacuated and the tenants sent to other available office space around because they had to 'upgrade the security' of the towers. The towers were completely emptied of companies and then after the so-called 'security upgrades' got repopulated by not so many companies, just a few banking and brokerage companies: Cantor Fitzgerald, Marsh and McLennan, etc. It got repopulated by a select group of companies which were probably all controlled then.

Who Controls Television ?


Who Controls Radio ?


Who Controls Big Media ?


Who Controls the News ?



alljokesaside 26-03-2013 12:07 AM

great work synergetic. pretty overwhelming stuff to the unfamiliar,
but pretty simply (and true) when considered overall and in the
right 'fakery' context.

synergetic67 27-03-2013 10:14 AM


Originally Posted by alljokesaside (Post 1061401328)
great work synergetic. pretty overwhelming stuff to the unfamiliar,
but pretty simply (and true) when considered overall and in the
right 'fakery' context.

It does take a while to get into because you have to de-program and wean yourself from not only the mainstream media lies but also the alternative media half-truths and gatekeeping and most of that stuff is gatekeeping, from the plane-huggers all the way down to No-Planers like Ace Baker and his fancy 9-11 American Psy-Opera film, put in there to go as far as proving No-Planes but only to then irrationally gatekeep all the just-as-easily-proven non-plane fakery and the vicsims report. All of these people are there to reaffirm that the media wasn't in on it, that the media covered 'real events' and you saw 'real planes,' (but they were 'remote controlled' :p), a real 'collapse' (but it was nukes or thermite or beam weapons) and above and beyond all else: that there were 2970 'real victims.' Because if people find out to what extent they were lied to by their media, they will NEVER trust a single news story ever again without having it confirmed by their own completely independent investigative reporters.

The best way not to get overwhelmed is to start reading Clues Forum using 'The Introductory Tour Guide' posted above. If you spend a half-hour a day reading the threads linked there, by the end of the month you'll be well-versed on most of the 9-11 media fakery. After that familiarity with the basic concepts of how these things are done, you can move on to the other psy-ops such as the Norway shootings, Sandy Hook, etc.

synergetic67 15-04-2013 08:37 PM

These posts prove beyond a shadow of a doubt and in the most blatantly obvious terms how absurdly fake the 9-11 building and 'jumpers' videos are which so many people in the "9-11 truth alternative media community" have considered authentic for almost 12 years now and continue to do so:


Re: The Jumpers
by simonshack on September 8th, 2012, 7:23 pm

Incontrovertible proof of sloppy digital compositing

Dear Deejay,

I will use the video you linked to above (the "worst one", as you rightly call it) to prove beyond any shadow of doubt that those images of people leaning out of those façades are utterly fake - or, in any case, that they simply cannot represent images captured at the World Trade Center. Firstly, let's take a look at a couple of pre-9/11 pictures of the WTC. As you will see, what I am interested to illustrate and to establish - are the relative proportions of the external structure of the WTC façade:


Here is a view of the pre-9/11 WTC façade itself - as we should see it in the 9/11 imagery:


The problem is that the 9/11 imagery depicts nothing even remotely similar to the above :


Now, whatever perspective issues we have here related to this low viewing angle (which would certainly compress the height versus the width of the windows - I'm well aware of that) it would hardly account for such a dramatic height/width discrepancy. Moreover, there is frankly no explanation as to why that spandrel height - adjacent to the below window - should be 10% taller than expected.

Any doubts as to the fakeness of these purported "WTC façade images" should be dispelled by this other, wholly absurd shot :


I hope this settles the matter for your hurt and offended friend - and for you too. In my humble opinion, the only thing one should feel offended for, is the offensively piss-poor job on the part of the (undoubtedly well-paid) folks recruited to manufacture the 9/11 CGI illusion.

As you may agree, this is all very easy to comprehend - even for a little child. It would be childish for any adult person to whine and protest when faced with incontrovertible evidence which happens to clash with his/hers preconceived beliefs, don't you think?

This photo was, according to its author Andrew Morang, snapped in 1995 from the top of the 22-story Vista Hotel:




synergetic67 15-04-2013 08:54 PM

And for the coup de grâce :


by simonshack on October 5th, 2012, 3:54 am

And just to finish off this extensive analysis of the supposed "jumpers" of 9/11, here is what I would love to call 'my final take'. Of course, we have by now exposed the absurd "9/11 jumper imagery" in every imaginable way - and reached the conclusion that ALL of this imagery was forged by digital means. However, there can never be 'too much' evidence to expose the massive 9/11 scam - so here we go:



At one stage in the above-linked video, we see a man stepping out of a WTC window. Now, we know that ALL of the World Trade Center windows were approximately 7-feet tall. So, the question is...


Well, he appears to be about 13 feet tall (or 4 meters tall). Since we don't have any records of human beings reaching such heights/dimensions, we can definitively conclude that this video is a crass forgery. Beyond any shadow of doubt.

Important edit update! The original source of the above imagery with the "KING KONG MAN" is actually from the official TV documentary "102 Minutes That Changed America":



Now, for the fun part: Phil Jayhan (the founder of Letsrollforums) actually observed these absurd proportions back in 2010 and made this fantastically warped and hilarious, leap-of-logic conclusion:


Yes, believe it or not, but Phil Jayhan actually put forth the notion that the WTC towers' external aspect had somehow been "reconfigured", that is, the windows/spandrel heights had been stealthily shrunk/modified at some stage in time - and THIS is why we see these giant people leaning out of the windows... http://www.cluesforum.info/images/smilies/laugh.gif http://www.cluesforum.info/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

In other words: Phil Jayhan works very hard to uphold/protect the notion that the 9/11 imagery is REAL AND LEGIT.

Read it to believe it:


Now, whether the folks responsible for crafting these atrocious 9/11 photo/video frauds were stupid or not is open for debate. I'm getting more and more people asking me if I think that they made these 'mistakes' on purpose (for some reason). My answer to that is: "I don't know. But does it matter? After all, hasn't 99% of the world fallen for it all (pun intended) - to this day?".

The bottom line is that the entire pool of 9/11 imagery (upon close scrutiny) turns out to be riddled with such a pervasive amount of blatant forgery as to make it impossible - for any honest person - to ignore.

Today, I bumped into this still picture credited to one "Bolivar Orellano". Here's the gut-wrenching story of Bolivar's harrowing 9/11 experience as he allegedly snapped his pictures that day ...:



Does the above image credited to this Bolivar look familiar to you? Where have we seen that scene before? Let me help you out: it appears to be from that video with the giant, 4-meter-tall man (see my previous post in this thread):


So let me now enlarge a section of Mr. "Bolivar Orellano's" still picture :


Ladies and gents - I think we can now call it a day. We can tranquilly conclude that these images are crudely crafted digital frauds. We can also conclude that ALL of the "veteran 9/11 "truthers" who keep using the 9/11 imagery to formulate any sort of theories (and any sort of fanciful conclusions based on those images) are frauds too - or simply inept/whimsical researchers.

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23 AM.