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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 19-09-2012, 11:06 AM   #1561
andrewjohnson
Senior Member
 
andrewjohnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 124
Likes: 10 (6 Posts)
Default

Quick exercise:

Approx 1560 posts on this thread. How many are by posters using their real name?

Wow. How powerful it is a - a culture of forum anonymity created and preserved for perhaps 12 years.

Just a thought for you all.
andrewjohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2012, 12:24 AM   #1562
denton
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 718
Likes: 25 (21 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewjohnson View Post
Quick exercise:

Approx 1560 posts on this thread. How many are by posters using their real name?

Wow. How powerful it is a - a culture of forum anonymity created and preserved for perhaps 12 years.

Just a thought for you all.
Why the urgency and eagerness to know the real names of posters on here? Wood has proven none of her claims to be anything other than wild conjecture.
__________________
And one by one, the dissenting voices are silenced. Submission or suppression. Censorship is alive and well.
denton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2012, 05:56 AM   #1563
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewjohnson View Post
Quick exercise:

Approx 1560 posts on this thread. How many are by posters using their real name?

Wow. How powerful it is a - a culture of forum anonymity created and preserved for perhaps 12 years.

Just a thought for you all.

What kind of dumbfuck uses their real name on the internet? Seriously!
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2012, 09:51 AM   #1564
uprising
Senior Member
 
uprising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 28 (13 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewjohnson View Post
Yes - which is partly why you use an anonymous handle - this is not about belief it is about evidence.

Did the towers turn to dust or didn't they?

I believe YOU are probably a fraud - based on your stance and anonymity. But whether you are or whether you aren't does not change the following:

1) The WTC towers were once there.
2) They are no longer there now.
3) Most of the buildings turned to dust.

Separate to that, you present no real evidence apart from a 5 year old interview which has already been deconstructed and discredited for what it is.

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cm...ask=view&id=46

Mind you, you don't care about evidence, else you would not have even posted here. Presumably you never looked at my free ebook - posted earlier in the thread which provides more detail and evidence about what I am saying.

So 2 differences then:

1) I am not anonymous (like you)
2) I present the evidence for people to study what I am saying (regularly updated and not 5-6 years out of date).

Is it any wonder why it is largely a waste of time to post on forums like this. Heck, you don't know who you're talking to most of the time! Could be the nicest person in the world, or some spook, connected, somehow, to the folks that "did" 911 and are working to keep it covered up.


As I see it the buildings were pulverised (or 'dustified' if you prefer) by explosives.
I've looked at both sides and it's just how I feel.

I could be wrong, I just see nothing in her theory that convinces me where as I find the work by the A&E guys highly convincing.
I'd rather we just agree it was controlled demolition, there's little point in arguing about the method used really when the majority still think it was fires and impact damage that caused the collapse.

Perhaps Andrew, if you could talk me through some of what convinced you and maybe you can convince me.

I've PM'd you my name and email address if you prefer

I've just read the link, thanks and agree the tone of the interview was not nice. Still I had to agree with what he was saying, despite not liking his attitude.

Last edited by uprising; 20-09-2012 at 10:25 AM.
uprising is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2012, 08:32 PM   #1565
noncooperation
Senior Member
 
noncooperation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Europe GMT+1
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 551 (349 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
What kind of dumbfuck uses their real name on the internet? Seriously!
Doesn't make any difference; just basic data collection cross referencing would reveal a persons real identity if someone needed the info.

Very few people know how to go online anonymously and most of them don't know for sure the are actually anonymous.

Now they are using face scanning there is no escape even if you have multiple 'paper' identities; they will still x-ref your face.
__________________
I will ignore and not reply to irrelevant, antagonistic or off topic posts.
Some of my replies will be brief and contain errors as my online time is insufficient these days.

video series - Ancient Knowledge - expand your understanding of History!
noncooperation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2012, 10:39 AM   #1566
uprising
Senior Member
 
uprising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 28 (13 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by noncooperation View Post
Doesn't make any difference; just basic data collection cross referencing would reveal a persons real identity if someone needed the info.

Very few people know how to go online anonymously and most of them don't know for sure the are actually anonymous.

Now they are using face scanning there is no escape even if you have multiple 'paper' identities; they will still x-ref your face.
I agree it's safe to assume if the authorities want to ID someone they can, but no point in making it easy for other criminals, weirdos and trolls etc
uprising is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2012, 04:18 PM   #1567
noncooperation
Senior Member
 
noncooperation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Europe GMT+1
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 551 (349 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uprising View Post
I agree it's safe to assume if the authorities want to ID someone they can, but no point in making it easy for other criminals, weirdos and trolls etc
yeah, good point
__________________
I will ignore and not reply to irrelevant, antagonistic or off topic posts.
Some of my replies will be brief and contain errors as my online time is insufficient these days.

video series - Ancient Knowledge - expand your understanding of History!
noncooperation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 05:58 AM   #1568
synergetic67
Senior Member
 
synergetic67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 141 (85 Posts)
Default

The problem with Judy Wood's theory is basically that ALL images from 9-11, absolutely EVERYTHING, all photos & all videos are completely suspect & most are already absolutely proven fakes. Simon Shack at Clues Forum is banning her 'evidence,' not because he hasn't seen it but because he's had enough of it already. They already debunked many of the photographs and videos that are the main source of her 'evidence' beyond hurricane Erin, the seismic footprints, the dust being nano-scopic & that other stuff. That other stuff without all the images & the videos Wood relies on doesn't prove much.

And yes, I do have her book, bought it the first week it came out, back when I still thought that most of the images aside from the videos of the planes could be trusted and thought, just like Deanna Spingola, that it made a solid case based on those images. Not anymore. Some aspects of Wood's non-photographic evidence might turn out to be valid but not the gist of the DEW theory and certainly not with that bozo fraud Hutchison attached. She even thinks that the videos and photos of the so-called jumpers are real which have been debunked any number of times as fake.

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=501


Jim Fetzer is also not very well-liked at Clues Forums because he sits on the fence forever & especially since he recently came out with the childish hologram theory again citing Richard D. Hall's film & some witness named Steve Forbes he interrogated who 'saw a plane' whom he absolutely, positively believes just like he believes Willie Rodriguez because he had dinner with Rodriguez. Andrew Johnson recently mentioned this Richard D. Hall film on Deanna Spingola's show as if it was some kind of new breakthrough. In fact, not only is it not a breakthrough, but it's not even much of a challenge to the Clues research since it took Shack just one friggin post to debunk it with ridicule straight out the door:

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1246

scroll to the middle of the page

It seems that all these people, including Andrew Johnson, Judy Wood, Richard D. Hall and Jim Fetzer have not even bothered to read this:

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

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=477

so that confusion will not reign in their heads in case confusion and making everything believable and nothing knowable was not what they were after in the first place.


"The objective of disinformation is not to convince you of one point of view or another, it is to create enough uncertainty so that everything is believable and nothing is knowable." -- James Fetzer

He knows exactly what he's doing doesn't he ? Isn't that cute ? Reminds me of Judy Wood's 'easter eggs' story. The disinformation specialist identifies the techniques of disinformation to draw attention away from themselves while in the process of spreading disinformation themselves.

Last edited by synergetic67; 15-10-2012 at 06:01 AM.
synergetic67 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 02:20 AM   #1569
iq_145
Senior Member
 
iq_145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Trapped in a body.
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

I have not read her book, but has Mrs. Wood performed a calculation of the energy required to "dustify" one of those towers, as asked of her by Dr. Greg Jenkins when he tried to interview her?

And does she say what weapon was used and where it was positioned?
__________________
The Titanic never sank, it was the Olympic that the US Navy sank in the North Atlantic in 1912.
iq_145 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 03:24 AM   #1570
yankee451
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: White Salmon, Washington, USA
Posts: 590
Likes: 32 (24 Posts)
Default Godlike power for the military

Throughout history the military of various nations have used propaganda to inflate the prowess of their own weapons, even to spread word of nonexistent weapons so as to frighten and confuse the enemy. This has been going on since before Hammurabi.

Now, in the old days it was easy to distinguish who was the enemy - often the color of their skin or the cut of their clothing was all it took, but these days the lines are not so clearly drawn. We who have no money and no assets have much more in common with people of other races in other countries who also have no money and no assets, often much more in common than we have with our so-called leaders.

The leaders are wealthy, and being wealthy they can buy advertising - hell, they can buy television stations, but they don't need to do that because they already share the same prostitutes with the fellas who currently own the television stations, so why bother, you know? I digress.

What I'm getting at is this; if Judy Wood was "for real" and was exposing some kind of top-secret weapons information, I notice three beneficiaries right off the top; the military, the media and the perpetrators (but I repeat myself).

1. The military will be able to claim the power of god, which lets face it, leaders have been doing for thousands of years - hello! Isis anyone? With so many researchers bowing in awe to the power of the military's invisible space-weapons, no one will be looking when they misplace a few more trillion dollars.

2. The media that published Dr. Wood's book in defiance of the "establishment" will be able to continue flying their banner of faux independence and self-righteousness. With hurricane-powered energy weapons "dustifying" steel sky-scrapers and their contents, the media's role in this farce will be ignored. At the same time, the federal government, the FBI, the FDNY, the NYPD, the OEM, the Mayor's office and the PANYNJ won't need to explain how these buildings managed to be gutted and prepared with explosives since '93 while still maintaining the appearance of being fully-occupied "cities within the city". Furthermore, the ironically-named "truth movement" will look like wild-eyed conspiracy nutcases thanks to the guilt by association one gets by being within spitting-distance of a Judywoodtard. All of the above considerations make the good doctor and her cult of followers highly suspect, at best.

3.The perpetrators - see above.

Last edited by yankee451; 25-10-2012 at 03:26 AM.
yankee451 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 06:07 AM   #1571
yankee451
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: White Salmon, Washington, USA
Posts: 590
Likes: 32 (24 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewjohnson View Post
Quick exercise:

Approx 1560 posts on this thread. How many are by posters using their real name?

Wow. How powerful it is a - a culture of forum anonymity created and preserved for perhaps 12 years.

Just a thought for you all.
My handle may be yankee451, but my name is Steve De'ak. Anonymity is for sissies.
yankee451 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 08:42 AM   #1572
andrewjohnson
Senior Member
 
andrewjohnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 124
Likes: 10 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
2. The media that published Dr. Wood's book in defiance of the "establishment" will be able to continue flying their banner of faux independence and self-righteousness. With hurricane-powered energy weapons "dustifying" steel sky-scrapers and their contents, the media's role in this farce will be ignored. At the same time, the federal government, the FBI, the FDNY, the NYPD, the OEM, the Mayor's office and the PANYNJ won't need to explain how these buildings managed to be gutted and prepared with explosives since '93 while still maintaining the appearance of being fully-occupied "cities within the city". Furthermore, the ironically-named "truth movement" will look like wild-eyed conspiracy nutcases thanks to the guilt by association one gets by being within spitting-distance of a Judywoodtard. All of the above considerations make the good doctor and her cult of followers highly suspect, at best.

3.The perpetrators - see above.
Wow! "Judywoodtard"? - pretty amazing... for someone who wants a scientific test! I believe this poster is Steve De'Ak as he uses the handle Yankee451... Folks can look at this if they want to:

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cm...=359&Itemid=60
andrewjohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 08:54 AM   #1573
andrewjohnson
Senior Member
 
andrewjohnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 124
Likes: 10 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by synergetic67 View Post
The problem with Judy Wood's theory is basically that ALL images from 9-11, absolutely EVERYTHING, all photos & all videos are completely suspect & most are already absolutely proven fakes.
FALSE - see the books and videos to prove this statement is false. (Also see below)

Quote:
Simon Shack at Clues Forum is banning her 'evidence,' not because he hasn't seen it but because he's had enough of it already. They already debunked many of the photographs and videos that are the main source of her 'evidence' beyond hurricane Erin, the seismic footprints, the dust being nano-scopic & that other stuff. That other stuff without all the images & the videos Wood relies on doesn't prove much.

And yes, I do have her book, bought it the first week it came out, back when I still thought that most of the images aside from the videos of the planes could be trusted and thought, just like Deanna Spingola, that it made a solid case based on those images. Not anymore. Some aspects of Wood's non-photographic evidence might turn out to be valid but not the gist of the DEW theory and certainly not with that bozo fraud Hutchison attached. She even thinks that the videos and photos of the so-called jumpers are real which have been debunked any number of times as fake.

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=501


Jim Fetzer is also not very well-liked at Clues Forums because he sits on the fence forever & especially since he recently came out with the childish hologram theory again citing Richard D. Hall's film & some witness named Steve Forbes he interrogated who 'saw a plane' whom he absolutely, positively believes just like he believes Willie Rodriguez because he had dinner with Rodriguez. Andrew Johnson recently mentioned this Richard D. Hall film on Deanna Spingola's show as if it was some kind of new breakthrough. In fact, not only is it not a breakthrough, but it's not even much of a challenge to the Clues research since it took Shack just one friggin post to debunk it with ridicule straight out the door:

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1246

scroll to the middle of the page

It seems that all these people, including Andrew Johnson, Judy Wood, Richard D. Hall and Jim Fetzer have not even bothered to read this:

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

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=477

so that confusion will not reign in their heads in case confusion and making everything believable and nothing knowable was not what they were after in the first place.


"The objective of disinformation is not to convince you of one point of view or another, it is to create enough uncertainty so that everything is believable and nothing is knowable." -- James Fetzer

He knows exactly what he's doing doesn't he ? Isn't that cute ? Reminds me of Judy Wood's 'easter eggs' story. The disinformation specialist identifies the techniques of disinformation to draw attention away from themselves while in the process of spreading disinformation themselves.
That's funny - an anonymous poster listing some real names. I guess he and others haven't read this. Simon Shack eventually had to reveal his real name. I have never had to hide my real name - neither has Richard D Hall. Reading this might help some people:

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cm...=349&Itemid=60

To answer the other posters question - I like to know who I am discussing things of world importance - it helps me to determine if they are disingenuous or not. As you will see if you read the above, it can help then to prove when people are lying - or hiding something for reasons that are dishonest.

Last edited by andrewjohnson; 25-10-2012 at 08:57 AM. Reason: added observation about a lie
andrewjohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 02:33 PM   #1574
yankee451
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: White Salmon, Washington, USA
Posts: 590
Likes: 32 (24 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewjohnson View Post
Wow! "Judywoodtard"? - pretty amazing... for someone who wants a scientific test! I believe this poster is Steve De'Ak as he uses the handle Yankee451... Folks can look at this if they want to:

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cm...=359&Itemid=60
Yeah I said it - Judywoodtard.

I was trying to collect a "unified front" of the truth movement for this scientific experiment (the 9/11 Crash Test), but I've given up on that pipe dream. It's clear the majority of the truth movement aren't interested in the truth, they're interested in selling snake-oil; and Judy Wood's brand lowers the criminal investigation of 9/11 to the level of science-fiction, while simultaneously raising the prowess of the military to godlike-power and diverting attention away from the role the media plays in all this.

If such top-secret energy weapons actually existed, Dr. Judy Wood would certainly not be publishing about it - unless they desired her to do so, which raises the question "why?" Why would the propaganda arm of the military, the same propaganda arm that lied about planes, why would they publish such a book, especially if such weapons exist? Well, when the military claims the power to destroy the planet, or "dustify" buildings from space, we the people won't balk at the Trillions of dollars shoveled at the Pentagon to develop and protect-against such mythological weapons. The military's bread and butter is to ensure the people are fearful of attack, else there would be no justification for their expense. Judy Wood supports that justification.

But besides all that, I didn't like the way she mocked me when I asked for her endorsement - for a forensic scientist to write that I would be better off to raise awareness by wearing a sandwich-board than to conduct the Crash Test, makes me doubt her sincerity even more.

Last edited by yankee451; 25-10-2012 at 02:34 PM.
yankee451 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 02:53 PM   #1575
dave52
Senior Member
 
dave52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,100
Likes: 951 (392 Posts)
Default

What if she's spot on and completely right, but the Military PTB were confident that no-one would take her seriously...?
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 03:20 PM   #1576
yankee451
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: White Salmon, Washington, USA
Posts: 590
Likes: 32 (24 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave52 View Post
What if she's spot on and completely right, but the Military PTB were confident that no-one would take her seriously...?
I bought what she was selling for a bit, but I kept researching.

9/11 can be better explained through good, old-fashioned corruption and propaganda than through physics. For something as important as 9/11 to succeed, if it was me, I would have used tried and true conventional means - and the available evidence indicates this is exactly what happened.

The buildings were prepared for demolition since at least '93 - this means the government, NYPD, FDNY OEM, military, media, etc. were well aware the complex was being prepped for demolition and was not a "city within the city".

Judy Wood's work protects the real perpetrators by distracting from more down-to-earth conclusions such as insurance fraud. This article goes into some of the background. I followed it up with "False Fronts for a False Flag", but that one needs updating - still it can be found at Let's Roll and gives a good background on the corruption that the WTC was steeped in since it was just a gleam in the eyes of the Rockefeller brothers.

http://yankee451.com/2012/02/28/911-for-psychos/
yankee451 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 03:25 PM   #1577
dave52
Senior Member
 
dave52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,100
Likes: 951 (392 Posts)
Default

That's a lot to read, I'll get to it though - thanks for the link.

Out of interest, you say that the WTC was rigged for Demo by 1993, do you have a source for that...?

Cheers.
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 03:29 PM   #1578
yankee451
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: White Salmon, Washington, USA
Posts: 590
Likes: 32 (24 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave52 View Post
That's a lot to read, I'll get to it though - thanks for the link.

Out of interest, you say that the WTC was rigged for Demo by 1993, do you have a source for that...?

Cheers.

The sources are sketchy (as can be imagined), but the circumstantial evidence supports this conclusion. 9/11 for Psychos is long, and so is False Fronts for a False flag. I need to make some corrections and re--post it on my own blog now that I'm no longer welcome at Let's Roll.
yankee451 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 03:39 PM   #1579
dave52
Senior Member
 
dave52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,100
Likes: 951 (392 Posts)
Default

I think there was plenty of opportunity to rig the buildings (if that was what happened), it's the first time I've heard of it from that far back (apart from the unsupported "when they were built" claim).

I honestly haven't come to a conclusion on the subject. I'm settled on no planes, happy with that. I'm also of the belief that there is a very advanced space program, so the DEW thing is not beyond the realms of possibility imho.
__________________
Dave.

www.DaveWare.co.uk
Are You Listening...?
dave52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-10-2012, 05:14 PM   #1580
yankee451
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: White Salmon, Washington, USA
Posts: 590
Likes: 32 (24 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave52 View Post
I think there was plenty of opportunity to rig the buildings (if that was what happened), it's the first time I've heard of it from that far back (apart from the unsupported "when they were built" claim).

I honestly haven't come to a conclusion on the subject. I'm settled on no planes, happy with that. I'm also of the belief that there is a very advanced space program, so the DEW thing is not beyond the realms of possibility imho.

9/11 changed the way I look at everything - if they'd lie like they did on 9/11, none of their claims should be accepted at face value. If it was a court case and a witness is exposed as lying, all of their evidence can be disregarded, and that's how I treat the government's claims now. Their extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, which is always well-hidden behind national security. I think its much more likely they're scamming trillions out of the flock by forcing us to pay for fantastical weapons that don't exist, and that the leaders in other nations with whom our own leaders have more in common than they do with us, are complicit.
yankee451 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 09:45 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.