Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11 & 7/7

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 26-06-2015, 05:04 AM   #181
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 345 (266 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111 View Post
IM SORRY BUT IM NOT WRONG..... Your in denial!!!

I KNOW WHAT I HEAR IN THESE CLIPS......... I know that "airplanes" crashing into the towers NEAR THE TOP would not collapse them ON THIER OWN!!!!
Nobody said that they would. But what you HEAR or SEE in these "clips" is no different than what you "hear" and "see" in a Bruce Willis action movie when a building collapses or when dynamite charges are set-off, made "documentary style." If it's in there, they recorded it and put it in there as sound effects, just like a movie. They did NOT record "the live events" themselves. Did you even read the posts on this thread? Do you go to action movies and assume those were "real events" too? No, they are not. They are MANUFACTURED events. If they set-off a terrorist bomb in a movie and you hear "real" sounds of explosions. That doesn't mean you heard "REALITY" or a real event in real life, on the stage of everyday reality, but a manufactured event made to look and sound "realistic" in order to be effective. They might have recorded real explosives, sometimes, although rare, they might even blow up a whole building and film is with "live sound," but it remains a premanufactured film. You DID NOT hear "live sound" on 9-11 or in any of the 9-11 Clips, you heard pre-manufactured, pre-recorded sound and you saw pre-manufactured and pre-recorded images aired as live by a fully complicit media.

Why is it so hard to understand this simple concept, given all the proof on this thread?

Why would they SHOOT LIVE FILM AT THE ACTUAL "EVENT" in which you claim you are hearing what happened in reality and FAKE THE EVENT IN A THOUSAND AND ONE PROVEN WAYS at the same time? Why would they whack 3000 people and fake 3000 people at the same time? Does a crazy modus operandi like that make the least amount of pragmatic sense to you?

Of course not! It's ONE OR THE OTHER, NOT BOTH. It is completely against the perps' own interests and goals to do both. It would be retarded and completely sabotage their own objectives. If they did it for real. If they filmed it for real, they wouldn't need to fake it at the same time because nothing beats the authenticity of a real life event. No actor or CGI studio can top it.

No one needs THEIR MOVIE to know 100% conclusively that planes cannot bring buildings down by themselves or to convince themselves of the unproven absurdity that Direct Energy Beam Weapons needed to be used to "pulverize" the buildings on film. Either way, you're basing your conclusions on a pre-made movie, not a "live" reproduction of reality. I knew on the very day of 9-11 that planes cannot bring buildings down by themselves and they would have to have been rigged many months in advance. Therefore, when they didn't come up with the names of who rigged the buildings, it was already obvious to me that they were lying through their teeth.

Why would you need THEIR MOVIE to convince you of a thing like that? It's obvious to anyone with the slightest knowledge of physics. Steel and concrete buildings do not come down due to Jet Fuel Fires. Never have and never will. Demolition was used. What kind? We do not know for sure BUT, considering that 100% of previous building demolitions used mostly dynamite, then it follows that similar methods were used here.

Not that it makes any difference if "non-conventional methods" were used because we're talking about EMPTY BUILDINGS HERE. Nobody that they claim "died" can be proven to have actually died, even now 14 years later. Disappeared somewhere else and given a new identity? Maybe. Died? No.

September Clues (2008) - Simon Shack

September Clues Addendum - Simon Shack

THE KING KONG MAN – Simon Shack

KING KONG MAN Part II – the 21 foot jumper! – Simon Shack

The 9-11 VicSim Report

http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsims.shtml

http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsi...m%20Report.pdf

The Age of Manipulation – The Con in Confidence, the Sin in Sincere – Wilson Bryan Key Ph.D. (close colleague of Marshall McLuhan):

http://www.slideshare.net/TheOccultT...lson-bryan-key

"Big winds come from empty caves." -- Ancient Chinese Proverb

Last edited by synergetic67; 26-06-2015 at 05:16 AM.
synergetic67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2015, 08:24 AM   #182
Dude111
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,406
Likes: 1,436 (935 Posts)
Default

Im sorry buddy.... I dont want ya to be mad at me
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2015, 07:20 PM   #183
childofthetao
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 499
Likes: 18 (17 Posts)
Default

OK, so I've seen researching this since I made that post and... yeah, I have to now agree that Simon Shacks theory seems the most plausable of them all.

So are you saying that all those vids of people running away from the collapse and being engulfed in the smoke are all actors?
__________________
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by sudden flight.
But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling upwards in the night.
childofthetao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2015, 11:39 PM   #184
Dude111
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,406
Likes: 1,436 (935 Posts)
Default

Well some of them may be... HOW COULD SOME PEOPLE SAY THEY DIDNT SEE A PLANE AND MOST DID??? (Everyone was LOOKING UP,shouldnt they have all seen one??)

THE ONES WHO SAY THEY SAW ONE ARE THE LIARS/ACTORS......
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 12:40 PM   #185
childofthetao
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 499
Likes: 18 (17 Posts)
Default

They must have seen that missile that looks like a plane since a plane can't fly that fast that low?

But about my last question. This 100% hoax theory (while having the best evidence of all theories) confuses me because if that's true, then every single person seen in a video must be an actor without exception.

If the area was cordoned off then there could not have been any one around the building to run from the smoke, hence these vids of people running away and being engulfed in it must ALL be actors in a fake composited video or something yes?
__________________
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by sudden flight.
But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling upwards in the night.

Last edited by childofthetao; 12-07-2015 at 12:41 PM.
childofthetao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-07-2015, 12:17 PM   #186
childofthetao
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 499
Likes: 18 (17 Posts)
Default

Synergetic I'd like your input on my questions please.
__________________
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by sudden flight.
But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling upwards in the night.
childofthetao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 12:45 PM   #187
childofthetao
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 499
Likes: 18 (17 Posts)
Default

The 100% hoax theory does have the fewest holes, but holes it does have.

For example: the people in all the vids, the running bystanders. There is one vid on youtube that has synced up the vids of two cameramen who were together (one was lying low infront of a red car as the dust cloud approaches).

I'd like to know to what extent the fakery goes in these vids. Which people are actors and which aren't? Are some not even real? I have heard they are CGI, but that is just silly.

Is the sky real? The ground? The buildings? The dust cloud? What is real what is not? Is it really 100% everything is fake? In all the vids? I need details man.
__________________
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by sudden flight.
But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling upwards in the night.
childofthetao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2015, 11:44 PM   #188
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 345 (266 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by childofthetao View Post
The 100% hoax theory does have the fewest holes, but holes it does have.

For example: the people in all the vids, the running bystanders. There is one vid on youtube that has synced up the vids of two cameramen who were together (one was lying low infront of a red car as the dust cloud approaches).

I'd like to know to what extent the fakery goes in these vids. Which people are actors and which aren't? Are some not even real? I have heard they are CGI, but that is just silly.

Is the sky real? The ground? The buildings? The dust cloud? What is real what is not? Is it really 100% everything is fake? In all the vids? I need details man.
To make a long story short, it's a "documentary style" "reality" movie. What you saw was a pre-manufactured Hollywood production, long in the planning (probably from even before the very building of the towers themselves, in somewhat mysterious and "hollow" fashion I might add, complete with ghost companies as well as some real tenants, as symbols of America's virility to be castrated in front of the world), complete with all the resources of a Hollywood studio, any-and-all techniques of Media Fakery, plus the resources of the Mossad and CIA: CGI, actors, green-screens, newscasters like Matt Lauer, Katie Couric, Diane Sawyer, Peter Jennings, Rick Leventhal and others acting in the film, etc. Everything they use in a movie to make you believe in a movie. Did they combine some real "live" newscasting with stuff that was faked before? Of course! But not all that much, because IT'S MUCH EASIER AND LESS LIKELY TO PRODUCE MISTAKES if they just shoot it in as many takes as necessary to get it right and then air it as "live," whenever and wherever they should need it. Who's going to check to make sure it's all "live"? NOBODY, that's who. That's the BIG MISTAKE that people make thinking there are all kinds of "guardians of honesty in the media" looking out for them. What a laugh! After a pile of bullshit as gigantic and as obvious as the Moon Hoax believed by BILLIONS? After the pile of Everest-high horse-shit that was 9-11? LOL All the techniques of faking an event can be and ARE used because a Media Fakery modus operandi LEAVES ALL OPTIONS OPEN. They can make ANYONE they want a "victim" and anyone they want a "terrorist," etc. Vic-SIMS from scratch on a computer or Vic-Sim actors who have little family connections, take a big-pay-off and receive a new identity or simply act the film under an assumed identity and go back to their original one. Creating the victims form scratch is the easiest and has the least hassle. JUST LOOK AT THE PICTURES OF BOB MCILVAINES "SON" below! Does that look like a "real person" to you? LOL

Could they use REAL LIFE people as actors in the film? YES. But if they do, they always give them fake identities. Then they just simply go back to their regular lives under their original names after they get their payoff and deny being the person in the 9-11 "movie," only a lookalike. Since no-one dies, only "weight on their conscience," (should they even have a "conscience") would be LYING to their countrymen for the benefit of hegemony and massacres of faceless people overseas. But as you'll see, if you read this thread and the September Clues VICSIM report, it's much easier just to create the identity from scratch, since nobody but a handful of people in the entire world bother to check these things at all. For example here are the ONLY PHOTOS of boo-hoo-hoo-on-cue actor Bob McIlvaine's "son" ever seen:



LOL

It's obviously the same idiotic and ridiculous frozen-face image photo-shopped in each picture, including the one with his supposed "fiance." Who the fuck is the fiance? Either a douche actor like the elder McIlvaine or a faked and shopped (and maybe even morphed from a template) image like the supposed "son." Does the son's name appear in the SSDI or have a death certificate? Of course not! And just recently I heard they changed the rules so that we can't even check the SSDI to verify "victims" except THREE YEARS AFTER EACH "terrorist" EVENT! I'm anything but a fear-monger and I hate Alex Jones, but can you say Orwellian tyranny?

Here's McIlvaine going about his disgusting and traitorous business like that other asshole actor and traitorous scumbag, controlled-opposition asset Willie Rodriguez:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aPvJSQtmoE

The unOfficial William Rodriguez unFan Club - "Free Willy Forum"

http://www.letsrollforums.com/forum/...ee-willy-forum

Note: the above link to Let's Roll Forum's complete exposure of the scumbag liar traitor William Rodriguez IS NOT an endorsement of LRF as a whole or even the 9-11 part of their theories as a whole, ONLY their research on Willie Rodriguez's bullshit which is the most extensive anywhere on the net, so much so that it seems to have sent Willie's shillery operation into permanent hibernation.

Notice that McIlvaine sometimes even "blames Bush" and hints that it might all be an "inside job" to give his sorry-ass acting some "street-cred" and credibility in the eyes of the gullible-as-fuck alternative media. How gullible they all are! How gullible I was, until I started reading Shack's brilliant work. The most banned theory in all of the alt media.

Now remember, here is McIlvaine going on 9-11 "victims' families" tours with a few other clowns CRYING ON CUE every time he talks about his supposed "son" that died on 9-11 AND THOSE ABOVE IMAGES are the ONLY ONES available! How can anyone believe this shit? And yet, BILLIONS have, for 14 years, and MILLIONS have as well in the alternative gatekept media, for 14 years, including that gatekeeper you've been getting led around by the nose by "Doctor" Judy Wood. lol

That's right, Judy friggin Wood still thinks that 3000 people were whacked, still thinks that the KING-KONG-sized "jumpers" were real, still thinks Bob McIlvaine's "son" is real, etc., and did not bother to do ANY image verification before she put up her pompous-assed theories and sold me and many suckers like myself a 40 dollar book! I wipe my ass with her worthless shill book now. It's absolutely worthless to me know.

And here's the disgusting shill Kevin Barrett having this obvious actor McIlvaine on his laughable "truth jihad" show, while agreeing with him 100% and not even asking him: "Hey asshole, how come there are only 4 shopped photos of your 'son' on the net and how come you're going around saying he 'died on 9-11' and he's not in the Social Security Death Index?"

http://grizzom.blogspot.com/search?q...rett+mcilvaine

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php...=kevin+barrett

Then they simply aired this entire fully controlled movie and its photographic image-pool as "live" in many pieces, as needed, including stuff released later as "amateur" captures THROUGH ONE COMPANY called "Camera Planet" owned by a guy named Stephen Rosenbaum who claimed to have received 500-plus hours of "amatuer" film in response to a simple ad placed in a paper. lol

You obviously have not taken even 5 minutes to read anything on this thread and want me to babysit you through it, instead of making the effort yourself.

That's not going to happen. Not in a million years. I don't babysit anyone. I answer questions by people who DO THEIR OWN WORK FIRST.

Go back and read this ENTIRE thread first and take as long as you have to in order to do it (shouldn't take more than a few days), second, go to the links at Clues Forum and investigate a bit further (a few more days), third, listen to the many audios done from a media-fakery angle posted here (a few more days), and IF YOU STILL HAVE QUESTIONS LEFT about problems with Shack's theory after that, I'll try to answer them then if I can. Fair?

Meanwhile, to give you a little motivation to get off your ass and start the reading, check this out:

WTC 7, the so-called "smoking gun" of the alt media gatekeepers, completely disappearing on FOX News at the 31 second mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB8HycK-S8s

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php...=802&start=315

This short 3 minute video alone is conclusive proof that the "smoking gun" of 9-11 is media-fakery. Everything else given to people on a Silverstein platter or the Loose Change/Alex-Jones bait-with-the-government-did-it-&-hook platter or the Chistopher Bollyn / Alan Sabrosky / Prostink bait-with-Israel-did-it-&-hook platter is different variations of the same rabbit trail leading the fully anticipated dissenters and internet researchers away from the MANY conclusive proofs of media fakery such as this and the media's full complicity in the 9-11 PsyOp.

Two gifs of the 31 second mark in the above posted Fox airing (notice also that the front "buildings" shift, totally damning evidence of layering):






Every other PsyOp we've seen since the Moon Hoax follows more-or-less the same template and could not have even been accomplished had it not been for full media control and complicity. It is certainly not a "moral" decision not to whack people in these PsyOps and just make people believe they were whacked but a PRAGMATIC ONE. It works better. Just look at how well it's worked over-&-over again since 9-11 and since before that, the Moon Landing Hoax! Since the media's full complicity is established, then all that needs to be answered is the already answered question of "Who Owns and Runs 90-plus percent of the World's Media?"

The answer is: Elite Jews and their collaborators

How did they acquire this ownership?

The answer is: through the practice of legalized usury (lending the entire money supplies of countries at compound interest, money which they print out of thin air or enter into a computer screen) and legalized fractional reserve counterfeiting

That's who did 9-11 and every other PsyOp using the same template requiring FULL media complicity, period.

Who Controls Television ?

http://thezog.wordpress.com/who-controls-television/

Who Controls Big Media ?

http://thezog.wordpress.com/who-controls-big-media/

Who Controls the News ?

https://thezog.wordpress.com/who-con...e-news-part-1/

Not very complicated now, is it boys and girls?

Not at all, once we have the proper info. Problem is, it is the really damaging info such as this that the entire post-PsyOp controlled-opposition gatekeeping groups are seeded to bury under mountains of dis-information. We've been bashing our heads against walls for years because so many people continue to get suckered in by these obvious false trails and red herrings, these baits and hooks. And then to see the absurdity of people continuing the nauseating charade with the most obvious media-faked PsyOp of all -- Sandy Hook -- is enough to give even the most persistent researchers a case of burn-out.

September Clues Addendum - Simon Shack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD_IgCKpNrY


"The world is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper." -- Bertrand Russell

"Fear is the main source of superstition, and one of the main sources of cruelty. To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom." -- Bertrand Russell



"I have listened with great interest to discussions regarding decentralization and centralization and I have thought that the question of whether it is valid to decentralize or centralize is unanswerable because it deals with one one-way sign in two-way traffic. It is a static question in a dynamic universe.

Man was invented a mobile device and process. He has survived through his ability to advance or retreat as his mortal requirements have dictated. Of his two primary faculties, quickness is of great importance but intellect is first.

He recognizes that vital quickness may be momentary reflex but that satisfactory continuities are proportional to his degree of comprehension of the consequence of his initiative. Degree of comprehension he measures in the terms of the complex integration of all individuals' all-time experience, as processed by intellectual integrity. His quickness would be a spontaneous servant to that integrity.

Despite intermittent submissiveness to runaway momentums of residual ignorance, man guards most dearly and secretly his freedom of thought and initiative. Therefrom emanates the social-industrial relay, from self starter to group starters.

Out of this freedom alone understanding may be generated. Man recognizes understanding as an activated circuit of mutual comprehension by individual minds. Understanding must be plural. However, because individual experience is unique, understanding can be developed only in principle out of the compounding significance of plurality of experience. Thus, man knows that the voluntary interactions of understanding dealing in fundamental principles will always master involuntary mass actions, and that individual freedom ever anticipates and ultimately masters mutual emergency."

~ from "Ideas and Integrities" by Buckminster Fuller (1963)




Negentropic Chronicles - Episode 1 -

http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/yfh2hc...nicles_001.mp3

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showt...post1062532930

Last edited by lobuk; 17-07-2015 at 01:29 PM. Reason: Removed unnecessary comments
synergetic67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2015, 01:26 PM   #189
lobuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Roger That
Posts: 21,944
Likes: 3,706 (2,108 Posts)
Default

Admin Note

Lets not resort to getting personal please folks. It is a much more enjoyable experience to discuss things civilly and constructively.

Thanks.
lobuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2015, 08:30 PM   #190
ivailonik
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Synergetic67 Simon Shack has done wonderful research and I feel obliged to share it in my own language. I want to create subtitles in my native language. How can I do that? I would like some cooperation because I haven't yet done any subtitles at all. I have already tried to contact Mr Shack but he has not responded yet. Can you help me with any information on the subject. I would be grateful.
ivailonik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-07-2015, 10:10 PM   #191
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 345 (266 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivailonik View Post
Synergetic67 Simon Shack has done wonderful research and I feel obliged to share it in my own language. I want to create subtitles in my native language. How can I do that? I would like some cooperation because I haven't yet done any subtitles at all. I have already tried to contact Mr Shack but he has not responded yet. Can you help me with any information on the subject. I would be grateful.
Thanks for the kind words. My "research" was only highlighting the most important parts of Shack's and some other people's original Media-Fakery research theories, most of which are still undebunked to this day.

Undebunkable SepClues:

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=961

Shack is a hard person to get hold of. I myself have only talked to him online 2 or 3 times in private messages since the days I was a Clues Forum member under a different name.

I've never done any subtitles myself. Your best bet is to go on you tube and search for videos teaching you "how to do subtitles on videos"

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...les+for+videos

and watch them until you learn. I'm sure there are many free video-editing applications that feature that option. Then I hope, you're not just using "google translate" and actually KNOW the two languages yourself or else your "translation" will have many inevitable mistakes and problems.

We might not have 20,000 (LOL !!!! Yeah right!) "architects and engineers" signed up like that clown Richard Gage's BOGUS limited-hangout gatekeeping operation completely ignoring ALL media-fakery evidence, but we do have the theory that is CLOSEST to the truth and least debunked.

P.S. If you do subtitles in languages you know, don't forget to do "September Clues Addendum" which is essentially "September Clues II" or most of the 9-11 related videos from Shack since 2008. You might even want to put the two back-to-back in one long presentation. Also don't forget to mention somewhere that the "missile theories" still being contemplated by Shack back in 2008 are no longer within the realm of possibility given the mountains of other media fakery evidence (of ALL TYPES and not just "the planes") discovered since 2008.

September Clues (2008) - Simon Shack

September Clues Addendum - Simon Shack

THE KING KONG MAN – Simon Shack

KING KONG MAN Part II – the 21 foot jumper! – Simon Shack



Check out the BARCODE still visible on both of these photoshops! Oh yeah! They're two different people, alright! LOL How stupid are people? The perps are laughing at them with deliberately sloppy work like this.


"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself." -- St. Augustine






"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary." -- Henry Louis Mencken

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdohDVlZliU

"Thus, to comprise all my meaning in a single proposition, the dissimilarities and inequalities of men gave rise to the notion of honor; that notion is weakened in proportion as these differences are obliterated, and with them it would disappear." ~ Alexis de Tocqueville - from Democracy in America - Chapter XVIII: "Of Honor in the United States and in Democratic Communities"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLpyS9ISpyg

"The preoccupation with numbers in the U.S. and USSR is often an exercise in hiding things. Both societies have deeply instilled cultural fantasies that numbers do not lie. Perhaps numbers do not lie, but mathematicians and statisticians frequently lie, manipulate, and deceive. They are paid handsomely to do so. Numbers can misrepresent reality as easily, if not more so, than words. Both languages -- verbal and mathematical -- are useful tools only with conscious awareness of their limitations and frailties. Symbols can never be the things they symbolize.

Numerical objectivity is a fallacy. Like verbal language, numerical designations must be abstracted by humans. They are subjected to varying interpretations by both initiator and receiver. Numbers constitute merely another language with built-in paradoxes, confusion, contradictions, and hidden agendas.

So-called scientific facts -- like so much of perceived reality -- are rarely what they appear to be. The moment a scientific fact is cited in support of an argument, it no longer has anything to do with either science or facts. While scientific methods of inquiry, examination, and discovery have produced useful explorations into the unknown, science becomes psychological silly putty when used to hype an industry, cause, ideology, product, person, group, or nation. Unquestionable scientific facts attributable to high-credibility sources impose an end to critical thought. Especially in high-technology cultures, science is accepted as a mythological, godlike creation presumed omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.

Real scientific advances usually stem from the discovery of errors in human perceptual judgments, judgments once considered scientific themselves. Scientific advances are new perceptual formulations that correct prior errors or omissions. The process continues infinitely, and always with considerable uncertainty. People with something to sell indiscriminately lump technology into science. Technology is a machine, a gadget, a profitable process or invention easily perceived, profitably produced, and usefully applied. All this has nothing remotely to do with scientific exploration. The illusion of scientific truth provides the ultimate attribution, replacing scriptural confirmations of validity. Scientific truth, accepted without question or reservation, isolates an individual from constantly changing reality perceptions. Science must always be viewed as tentative. The discovery of 'truth' terminates the scientific and intellectual process." -- Wilson Bryan Key, The Age of Manipulation


http://www.slideshare.net/TheOccultT...lson-bryan-key


"After all, what is a law of nature as such for us? We are not acquainted with it in itself, but only with its effects, which means in its relation to other laws of nature—which, in turn, are known to us only as sums of relations. Therefore all these relations always refer again to others and are thoroughly incomprehensible to us in their essence. All that we actually know about these laws of nature is what we ourselves bring to them—time and space, and therefore relationships of succession and number. But everything marvelous about the laws of nature, everything that quite astonishes us therein and seems to demand explanation, everything that might lead us to distrust idealism: all this is completely and solely contained within the mathematical strictness and inviolability of our representations of time and space. But we produce these representations in and from ourselves with the same necessity with which the spider spins. If we are forced to comprehend all things only under these forms, then it ceases to be amazing that in all things we actually comprehend nothing but these forms. For they must all bear within themselves the laws of number, and it is precisely number which is most astonishing in things. All that conformity to law, which impresses us so much in the movement of the stars and in chemical processes, coincides at bottom with those properties which we bring to things. Thus it is we who impress ourselves in this way. In conjunction with this, it of course follows that the artistic process of metaphor formation with which every sensation begins in us already presupposes these forms and thus occurs within them. The only way in which the possibility of subsequently constructing a new conceptual edifice from metaphors themselves can be explained is by the firm persistence of these original forms. That is to say, this conceptual edifice is an imitation of temporal, spatial, and numerical relationships in the domain of metaphor." -- Friedrich Nietzsche, "On Truth & Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense" (1873)


http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl2...oral_Sense.htm

Last edited by synergetic67; 18-07-2015 at 05:00 AM.
synergetic67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-07-2015, 11:54 AM   #192
childofthetao
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 499
Likes: 18 (17 Posts)
Default

Maybe you can explain this, as Simon's explanation made no sense.
__________________
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by sudden flight.
But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling upwards in the night.
childofthetao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2015, 08:18 AM   #193
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 345 (266 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by childofthetao View Post
Maybe you can explain this, as Simon's explanation made no sense.
It made perfect sense to me.

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php...+kong#p2389381

Wrong move, posting a link to that "nukes on 9-11" clown from Fetzer's stable.

Even linking to that weak of a pathetic "debunk" proves to me that either you're very bad at reasoning and logic or you have no interest in the truth whatsoever and are here to troll and shill.

Just ONE instance of proven deception, lying or fakery completely discredits the ENTIRE testimony of that lying and fraudulent witness in a court of law under the principle of law called Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Ombnibus.

Shack has proven HUNDREDS of instances of fakery with regard to the 9-11 PsyOp, from "the planes," to the "building collapses" to "the jumpers" and the "victims."

Notice, it's falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, and NOT

verum in uno, verum in omnibus

true in one particular, true in everything

the backwards method of many conspiracy hobbyists, a useful idiocy loved and cherished by all con-artists and liars and completely inadmissible in any proper court.

Not that there are ANY instances of truth at all in the media's version of 9-11, but even the slightest whiff of "reality" or "realism" in an image or made-up story by some controlled opposition asset provides the excuse for tens of thousands of follower lemmings to cling desperately to their long-ago-discredited plane-hugging & victims-hugging theories as they would a life-raft for their egos. They simply cannot face the fact that not only were they duped by the mainstream media but by most of the alternative media as well. It's hard to think of oneself as a complete dupe and sucker. The urge for endless rationalizations is very strong among these factions of self-styled "truthers" and their fragile egos.

This case of the 9-11 PsyOp would have long been CLOSED already had it ever reached a proper court of law and everyone involved in it arrested and given punishment matching the crime, in this case UBER-FRAUD & TREASON and the massacre of anywhere between a hundred thousand to a million people in overseas wars of hegemony for the Rothschild kabal of usurers and counterfeiters and Rothschild-created Israel. Since "peak oil" is a fraud anyway, "oil interests" hardly factor into it at all and even if they did, they are FAR DOWN THE LINE of wealth and subservient to their multi-trillionaire financiers, the banksters.

But there are two sets of laws and courts, those that don't exist for the elites and their crimes and those that exist as written by those above-the-law for the rest of us.

Actually, Shack's theory of the 9-11 PsyOp is not just valid and undebunked on its own merit, but is now THE SINGLE MOST CORROBORATED theory in its modus operandi by almost all of the PsyOps that came after, including London 7/7, the Norway Shootings PsyOp, the Aurora Shootings PsyOp, the Sandy Hook PsyOp, the Boston Marathon PsyOp, the Charlie Hebdo PsyOp, the Isis Beheadings PsyOps and the recent Charleston Church Shooting PsyOp. All of these PsyOps were done using FAKE "victims," and a pre-manufactured "documentary style" movie (aired as "live" in many pieces) and a fully-controlled image pool, just like 9-11 and just like the Moon Landing Hoax before it.

http://cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=24









WTC 7, the so-called "smoking gun" of the alt media gatekeepers, completely disappearing on FOX News at the 31 second mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB8HycK-S8s

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php...=802&start=315

This short 3 minute video alone is conclusive proof that the "smoking gun" of 9-11 is media-fakery. Everything else given to people on a Silverstein platter or the Loose Change/Alex-Jones bait-with-the-government-did-it-&-hook platter or the Chistopher Bollyn / Alan Sabrosky / Prostink bait-with-Israel-did-it-&-hook platter is different variations of the same rabbit trail leading the fully anticipated dissenters and internet researchers away from the MANY conclusive proofs of media fakery such as this and the media's full complicity in the 9-11 PsyOp.

Two gifs of the 31 second mark in the above video, one in more close-up and the second in the small box, in direct comparison to the video (supposedly from the same angle) of the same "collapse" and time-frame used on CNN:






http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php...=802&start=315

Last edited by synergetic67; 22-07-2015 at 09:14 AM.
synergetic67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2015, 02:09 PM   #194
childofthetao
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 499
Likes: 18 (17 Posts)
Default

You're just rehashing the same old stuff I've been reading about for weeks on end over at clues forum. (not saying I don't agree with it).

I can clearly see the fakery. You're attitude seems to be "If we have enough fakery, we don't need to care about the details".

Well, I'm past all that and now I'm on to the details, I want to know specifically what is and isn't true, down to the minutest detail (of course I can't ever know that, but I can do my best).

Now, Simon's explanation made no sense, all he said was "they got the proportions wrong" how does he know he didn't get the proportions wrong? Could we have an analysis of that? Could we have something in the way of an explanation please?

Simon's explanation was not an explanation at all, he just said "No, you're wrong".

And less of the silly shill calling please, it makes you sound immature.
__________________
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by sudden flight.
But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling upwards in the night.
childofthetao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2015, 03:11 PM   #195
liltroofer
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 257
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

That's actually, a really good point. Simon is not clear about his explanation.

So now my only question is, since we haven't seen those types of windows before, what is the source of the so-called 1995 picture by "Andrew Morang"? And then why does that blog only have three posts on it? Is he the same Andrew Morang connected to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers?

Quote:
CHL Personnel
Research Physical Scientist

Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory
Email: [email protected]
-http://chl.erdc.usace.army.mil/chl.aspx?p=s&a=Persons;136


Not saying Simon is being the most lucid in that post. It doesn't make enough sense to address every point and that is confusing. But what does make sense to me is that if you look at all the pics available the official world trade center's appearance on 9/11 was funky all over the place.

Just how exactly each little discrepancy from reality takes place will be hard to find because there is now much more simulated and Hollywood WTC models in the media than there ever was documentation of the actual original!!!

I do see this though. In the "Andrew Morang" pic you only have one window showing that splits three ways. Haha, that's TOTALLY different from the tiny little windows shown in the KING KONG man video. (I am not actually sure it's KING KONG man any more than any other sim but just to reference that video we're talking about).

In the 9/11 pic, the window alternates window-bar-window-bar-window-bar. The spandrels or whatever they are called. In the "Andrew Morang" pic you just have a solid glass thing with a flimsy little line trying to divide up space AS IF there were a spandrel there. Hmm. Rookie mistake. haha

So, where is the documentation that the special split windows that Andrew Morang claims to have found in "1995" (ha! I wonder ... was it really taken in 1995?) existed right there at the top of the building.

And even then, what kind of ridiculously LONG angle would have to take place, several miles away, to get that kind of zoom of the building so that there is that much foreshortening?

If it was shot from below, you'd see the beams going together in the distance near the top and wide at the base ... you know ... PERSPECTIVE!

But instead it's like someone is 5 miles away zooming waaaaay into this little space, and they discover these little blurry ant people clinging to the outside of a tower pouring out obscuring smoke ... Hmmm. Is that real? Did that really happen? Would the photographer have to be buried in the ground with a viewing hole designed for this purpose in order to get such an extreme angle? Was it ALLOWED to happen? Or was it DESIGNED?

Also, there is apparently someone leaning out of a spandrel?! That's poor placement of a sim or cut-n-paste stock actor or whatever you want to assume about how they got people imagery in impossible places.

ALSO also, that blogger said of simple mistakes something like this:

Quote:
When errors are as mind-bogglingly clear as this one can only conclude that Simon Shack is one of two things:

A. Hopelessly incompetent

B. Deliberately misleading people.
So if ANYONE makes a mistake, it's Simon Shack's fault! ha right. Obviously he is trying to allege that a mistake that is simple enough is moronic or made deliberately. But the same could be said of himself, then, and worse. Because, look. If this blogger really messed up on his explanation by:

1. Not showing evidence of spandrels where the 9/11 WTC image shows spandrels, and therefore showing the window he claims exists DOESN'T actually exist ...
2. Not showing pre-9/11 evidence of the wide variety of windows shown on 9/11 WTC videos ... and not proving any of the inconsistent windows there that Simon points out are quite STRANGELY varied in the footage
3. Not "noticing" how poor the quality of the 9/11 WTC videos are ...

Does that mean THE BLOGGER THEMSELVES (and his few commenter friends ... where did they come from? How did they hear about this little 3-post blog?) at the bottom are one of those two things as well?

Maybe that's why there are only three blog posts. He was like "Wait I suck at this. I quit!" haha

Last edited by liltroofer; 22-07-2015 at 03:20 PM. Reason: more explanation
liltroofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-07-2015, 07:43 PM   #196
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 345 (266 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by liltroofer View Post
That's actually, a really good point. Simon is not clear about his explanation.
I have no idea whatsoever what you're on about and any more completely incoherent posts like this obviously intended to thrash this thread with garbage and deliberate dis-info will be deleted faster than you can blink twice.

I couldn't make sense of a single thing you wrote. Apparently you seem to think that PHOTOS and IMAGERY and VIDEO of A HUNDRED-TIMES PROVEN PRE-MANUFACTURED MOVIE can somehow still be trusted in "spots" to tell you "what really happened," just like "Mr-Details" ChildoftheTao before you who doesn't understand how NOTHING a hundred-times-proven completely discredited witness (in the case of 9-11, the ENTIRE mainstream media) can say in a court of law would ever be acceptable even if ONLY ONE INSTANCE of fraud had been proven and NOT HUNDREDS!
Quote:
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.

http://everything2.com/title/falsus+...sus+in+omnibus
Without applying principles of law, even if no proper court exists to take a case of fraud as gigantic as 9-11, how in the hell can anyone arrive at even a remote idea of "the truth" or what's closest to the truth BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT?

This is absurd.

And that's not even mentioning that THE KING KONG MAN (and KING KONG MAN PART II, THE 21 FOOT JUMPER!) is not the only evidence THAT ALL OF THE 9-11 "VICTIMS" WERE COMPLETELY FAKED (a minority might have been "real flesh-&-blood people" given new identities, either after or before the acting job, but that is also part and parcel of techniques of media fakery), but only the most easily perceived one for anyone with the least amount of logical consistency and reasoning ability. Things need to be proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT and that's it. That's what the KING KONG MAN posts of Shack's have done. Now, proving things BEYOND UN-REASONABLE DOUBTS, or what you and childofthetao want, is impossible. There will always be UNREASONABLE DOUBTS about everything and for as long as there are FAR MORE unreasonable people than there are reasonable ones.

Just remember, AFTER it's already been determined that MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF FAKERY was used to stage 9-11, you can learn what "really" happened in NYC on 9-11 by watching "videos of 9-11 on you tube" about as much as you can "what really happened" on a particular day in NYC, if Bruce Willis had shot a friggin' Hollywood disaster flick partly on location there.





The original photo used for Shack's WTC proportions comparison:



http://worldofdecay.blogspot.it/2011...ter-later.html

Is that clear enough for you?

If not, take your UNREASONABLE DOUBTS and other mental problems and absurd speculations about "who faked the original photo that Shack used for comparison" (as if no authentic photos of the original WTC towers, which stood for close to 30 years, exist) elsewhere.



Given fully consolidated mainstream media monopoly in just 6 hands controlling gigantic multi-nationals for the entire world and FULL COMPLICITY with everything the big-bosses say by the TV anchors and all the important people working the top spots at most of the major networks, there are basically three or four basic ways that I currently know of faking victims or any other protagonists in a pre-manufactured PsyOp:

1) Completely from scratch on a computer. A person that never existed with a family and circle of friends that never existed. MOST of the 911 Victims were faked this way
2) An actor given a fake identity who acts as a "victim" in the PsyOp and then goes back to his real identity. If anyone tells him "you look like this or that guy on the 9-11 'victims' list," he simply denies it and says "I'm not that guy, look I have a different name." Even if some extremely rare and persistent investigative reporter proves that it is the same guy under a different identity, WHO will air his findings? Certainly not the mainstream channels and few of the alternative media gatekeeping channels as well. Richard Gage and his bogus army of 20,000 "architects and engineers" certainly won't take the case, since, they are all still plane-huggers and victims-huggers full on and neither would Alex Jones, the biggest shill of all, who only accepts media-fakery on Sandy Hook (as bait for his other hooks) and not on any other PsyOp.
3) An actor who acts as himself, under his real identity, and pretends to die in the PsyOp, then is given a completely new identity and goes into a witness protection program somewhere with a big wad of cash (printed out of thin air by usurers and counterfeiters, of course) to keep him happy. However, an actor used like this would have to have very few family and friends, since he would be almost completely separated from his former life in his new life. Therefore it's much easier for the other acting scenario.
4) Actors of either the #2 or #3 variety whose facial characteristics are morphed and animated just enough to hide what they look like, therefore making it almost 100% safe for them to engage in the deception. I don't think this was fully possible in 2001, but it is certainly possible today.

Since the mass-public have been conditioned for decades to be dumb-as-rocks anyway, the first option, faking them from scratch, works the best, utilizing maximum "big lie" psychological technique and leaves the most options open for the perps: who to blame, exactly who to victimize, what false trails to lay for dissenters to keep them busy chasing their tails, etc.












http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsims.htm


September Clues (2008) - Simon Shack

September Clues Addendum (basically "September Clues II" or most of Shack's post-September-Clues 9-11 related videos from 2008 to 2013 collected in one place) - Simon Shack

THE KING KONG MAN – Simon Shack

KING KONG MAN Part II – the 21 foot jumper! – Simon Shack

The 9-11 VicSim Report - Simon Shack and Max Konrardy aka "hoi polloi"

http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsims.shtml

http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsi...m%20Report.pdf

The Age of Manipulation – The Con in Confidence, the Sin in Sincere – Wilson Bryan Key Ph.D. (close colleague of Marshall McLuhan):

http://www.slideshare.net/TheOccultT...lson-bryan-key

Last edited by synergetic67; 23-07-2015 at 09:14 PM.
synergetic67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2015, 08:46 PM   #197
ivailonik
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Synergetic67 I have contacted Simon through email, and he sent me an excell file with the quotes to translate into my own language. I have done the translation, but I cannot contact him since he is not answering yet. Could you write me your email on a personal message, so that I could send you the file? This way you could contact him or someone else on the septemberclues forum, authorized to edit/add subtitles in the video. I have registered in the forum myself, but no one has activated my account yet.
Thanks in advance for any cooperation.

Last edited by ivailonik; 01-08-2015 at 08:50 PM.
ivailonik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2015, 08:08 AM   #198
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 345 (266 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivailonik View Post
Synergetic67 I have contacted Simon through email, and he sent me an excell file with the quotes to translate into my own language. I have done the translation, but I cannot contact him since he is not answering yet. Could you write me your email on a personal message, so that I could send you the file? This way you could contact him or someone else on the septemberclues forum, authorized to edit/add subtitles in the video. I have registered in the forum myself, but no one has activated my account yet.
Thanks in advance for any cooperation.
Sorry, but I have no direct contact with any September Clues Forum member. I was banned there over a year ago by Monsieur Hoi Polloi because they did not like me criticizing and ridiculing the scam of multi-culturalism and cultural Marxism, being anti-egalitarian, plus defending Germans against the 70 year smear-campaign against them by holohoaxing Jews (although Clues Forum has exposed the holohoax as a laughably obvious fraud, they don't like it when you defend the noble aspects of the National Socialist era, and there were MANY noble aspects, against the avalanche of unending Jew slander). Simon Shack has occasionally contacted me through private e-mail here but I don't have his contact information or that of anybody else on SCF.

What you can do is leave a message for Abirato here:

http://fakeologist.com/

And either he can forward it to Simon or some of the other people from Clues Forum who frequent that site will do it instead.

All the best and thanks for putting in the free and honorable work to spread the least debunked and most probable theory of the most gigantic fraud and deception of our time: the 9-11 False-Flag Psyop.







"The finest workers in stone are not copper or steel tools, but the gentle touches of air and water working at their leisure with a liberal allowance of time." -- Henry David Thoreau

"Persistence is to the character of man as carbon is to steel." -- Napoleon Hill

"The best government is a benevolent tyranny tempered by an occasional assassination." -- Voltaire

"There are three things extremely hard: steel, a diamond, and to know one's self." -- Benjamin Franklin

"I'm armed with more than complete steel, - The justice of my quarrel." -- Christopher Marlowe

"A knife is sharpened on stone, steel is tempered by fire, but men must be sharpened by men." -- Louis L'Amour, "The Walking Drum"

"My mind is my sword, and if you linger you shall feel its edge." -- "The Walking Drum," Louis L'Amour

"Be a philosopher. A man can compromise to gain a point. It has become apparent that a man can, within limits, follow his inclination within the arms of the Church if he does so discreetly. Remember this, Julot, even a rebel grows old, and sometimes wiser. He finds the things he rebelled against are now the things he must defend against newer rebels. Aging bones creak in the cold. Seek warmth, my friend; be discreet, but follow your own mind. When you have obtained position you will have influence. Otherwise you will tear at the bars until your strength is gone, and you will have accomplished nothing but to rant and rave." -- Louis L'Amour, "The Walking Drum"

"There are many ways of fighting. Many a man or woman has waged a good war for truth, honor, and freedom, who did not shed his blood in the process. Beware of those who would use violence, too often it is the violence they want and neither truth nor freedom. The important thing is to know where you stand and what you believe, then be true to yourself in all things. Moreover, it is foolish to waste time in arguing questions with those who have no power to change." -- "The Walking Drum," Louis L'Amour

Last edited by synergetic67; 03-08-2015 at 08:09 AM.
synergetic67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2015, 12:00 PM   #199
ivailonik
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

It is very hard to contact these guys. I have registered there too. Waiting for account activation. I doubt I will have any success. I cannot even use my septemberclues account...
ivailonik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2015, 09:12 PM   #200
liltroofer
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 257
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

HUH?!?

I was being supportive and you are saying I'm full of nonsense? Read my post carefully and you will see I am not trying to start anything or make anything "incoherent" at all! I am SAYING. The spandrel-window-spandrel argument of Simon's makes sense. The building is a fake. Practically EVERY image of the building in the 9/11 fake terrorist attack is a fake, and same with the aftermath footage and even some of the stuff today where they edit it in advance.

I am arguing that the other person's "argument" doesn't hold up. I was agreeing with you.

Also, Simon isn't hard to contact and never has been. Just go here: http://septemberclues.info/contact.shtml

He responds when he has time I am sure. Also, he has to personally ADMIT each person manually to the forum, which is why it takes a while.
liltroofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:33 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.