FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
9/11 for dummies - The Five Basic Facts
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> State Terror: 9/11, 7/7, CIA Fakes
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
MattMarriott



Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 125

PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2006 7:32 pm    Post subject: 9/11 for dummies - The Five Basic Facts Reply with quote

9/11 for dummies - The Five Basic Facts, by Matt Marriott

1. There was no plane debris at the Pentagon. .
Cover-up: none. "Witnesses" and an old piece of metal was the package used to make sure that people get the message "It was an inside job", as part of the truth planted to terrorise you.
Web of disinformation: some (rense, whatreallyhappened.com, etc) go as far as to try to cover-up what was meant to be obvious, since that helps people to swallow the core lie.

2. There was no plane debris at Shanksville.
Cover up: live videos of first images on the scene never shown again; packaging it to let the web of disinformation continue the job.
Web of disinformation: suggesting the plane was shot down.
BTW, first Video footage at the scene
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JZekosYOmXc

3. The WTC towers were pulled.
Cover up: live footage only from close-up scenes (smoke, people running away); no live videos with global view on 9/11 or ever after.
Hoax: faked photos released short after, with WTC tower above "impact" tilting.
Web of disinformation: will not deny it, since is not important to make people swallow the core lie.
BTW, here is finally video of the first tower as it was demolished:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk

4. No planes ever hit the WTC towers. The simple truth, the other side of the coin being the core lie: we saw the second "impact" live. As long as people believe it, the BIG LIE technique will work.
Hoax: CNN inserts the second "plane" with real time software, disappearing behind the burning tower, one second before the "impact", i.e. the bombs are detonated. Faked photos and videos, most released short after, with frontal "plane" crashes.
Cover-up: no live videos, no videos ever after, exposing the core lie.
Web of disinformation: all sorts of false tracks, from remote controlled planes to holograms. Anything as long as people believe that CNN had nothing to do with it.
BTW, the previous video also exposes the core lie, showing why the second tower to be "hit" had to be pulled first.

5. Some people were previously murdered to accont for the "passengers".
Hoax: "passengers" were faked, previously murdered (Barbara Olson) or given new identities; family members reporting cell phone calls to these "passengers". In the case of real people, two cases, depending if they were offered an opportunity to get rid of someone (Ted Olson) or not.
Cover-up: family members evaporate, other than those part of the conspiracy.

Again: understanding the core lie was not required to see that "Reichstag Fire = 9/11". Any of the first three facts were enough for that. The first ever since day one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ormond



Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas

PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2006 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Question:

What was the advantage or necessity that no planes hit the WTC?

_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geo
Guest





PostPosted: Tue May 30, 2006 3:01 am    Post subject: No Planes................ Reply with quote

Shocked There were no Planes because if there were it would have been very hard to do it as the 'Hollywood' Special Effects Departments did in the Edited Feeds that many 'brainwashed' Captain Video's think was LIVE TV....Captain Video is having a hard time DE-Promgraming themselves from the LIVE From CNN etc.....

If you look at the made to arouse your attention Plane that doesn't appear to be a passenger Jet [done on purpose] as it goes in to WTC 1 [the second Plane] it doesn't break appart because it's a Edited Feed of a Plane....the exposion blasts outwards...enough if you can't figure it out ...stay in Disney-Land and await your 'Chip'...

Holograms were used on the outside 4 the people to see a Jet coming in but they were very poor on the Jet noise area....so awake People did notice that there was no Jet Engine noise...

As said before they went to great lenghts to make you think that Planes were there...from the 1st Liar down............ Wink

Ave Maria !

If you want to analize a pile of shit and guess what part was the Lima Bean and where that Bean came from..what farm and what materials the plant used to make the bean or the Chicken and what it ate etc...you would have to be on a angelic dimensions...it's just a wild goose chase that people love so...a fn Murder Mystery :roll:

All the great dramas in the last 4 thousand years of History are just Scripts out of the Insane Minds of the Controllers of the Illuminati....a on-going 'Wag the Dog' Soap.......................Infinity
Back to top
Toto



Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue May 30, 2006 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dont forget the whole thing was televised by CNN (crap no news) almost exclusively. What does that tell you??? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 1:34 am    Post subject: Re: No Planes................ Reply with quote

geo wrote:
Shocked


LIMA BEANS?
Back to top
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6522

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 9:41 am    Post subject: Why Bother Faking It? Reply with quote

I've said this before about the no-planes theory, but it's worth repeating.

If there were no planes, then how did they smuggle the 20,000+ gallons
of kerosene up to where the huge explosion took place? Did they just
bring it up in one of the lifts? Or maybe they brought it in a couple of
gallons at a time --hidden inside briefcases.

Or maybe the huge fuel-air explosion was a hologram too. And maybe
they planted explosives in the outline of a plane so the result would look
convincing?



So tell me this. Why go to all that bother?

Cruise missiles can be targeted at a ventillation shaft and could certainly
have precisely homed in on any part of the second tower. So, presumably,
the 9/11 plotters were unable to secure a plane and figure out how to fit
it with cruise-missile technology to make it slam into the second tower
at exactly the right point.

Which is clearly rubbish.

Slamming a plane into the tower is a piece of cake.

So why bother faking it, when you can just do it?
So why bother faking it, when you can just do it?

All this is 9/11 Analysis 101.

Nobody who thinks it through can possibly buy the no planes theory.

But I am not saying that the famous CNN footage is unretouched.
That's another issue. But you better have your thinking hat on to figure
just why someone would would mess with 9/11 footage. One reason is to
deliberately seed the pod and flash theories. Think about it.

However I am saying that the easiest way to inflict the damage and
effects is to hit the building with a cruise-controled, kerosene-laden plane.

My own analysis of the soundtrack of the explosion suggests two high
intensity charges aboard the plane to trigger the kerosene esplosion.

"My God!" - The WTC2 OverDub
http://www.breakfornews.com/mygod.htm

by Fintan Dunne, BreakForNews.com
Exclusive: The audio on CNN footage of the plane hitting the South Tower
was altered to obscure evidence of multiple blasts at the moment of impact......





The 'no planes' theory looks more like a psyop smear designed
to make 9/11 "conspiracy theorists" look like fools. I don't buy it.


Last edited by Fintan on Wed May 31, 2006 8:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
geo
Guest





PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 10:46 am    Post subject: Gone through this in my mind Reply with quote

Shocked for years, from robotic planes with missles to Holograms n the foolish stuff but one day talked to a bright woman who I had talked to before but this time in our conversation she just had to tell me she was there on West St [Hudson River side] when she heard the explosion at WTC 1 [the second one] and looked up and saw the Hole in Building and Fire but she SAID THAT SHE HAD HEARD NO JET NOISE [she just had to tell me this and knew I would give her, her answer]....told her because their was no Jets and in my mind I just KNEW THEN, that it was Holograms and Controlled Demolitions and I told her so and she just knew that she had her answer......I called Alan Watt a few days later and mentioned the incident with the Woman and Holograms and Alan said to me, did I see 'Wag the Dog' ? and did I know the Apollo Moon Landings were fake and I said Yes to both...well he said do you know now what it was and everything from the years of looking at '911' fell into place and that is why I close the book on it and say It was a Hollywood Production....'911 Wag the WTC/Pentagon PROGRAM' and on-going 'SOAP'... Wink ...the fire-balls were Hollywood 'fire'...so u could research how many pounds of that fake fire they would need or it could have been a Hologram for those present and a EDITED FEED for TV..... :roll: Cool

Well there can be some 'Corn' in the 'Pile' also, just said Lima Beans cause I like 'em' ...and I do think about where all the 'Elements' that make-us-up were in 'their' travels in 'Creation'...

Ohh and I don't alway's agree with Alan and I'm not his 'moonie' but I do respect his 'genius'...was taking last Sunday with Alan on the Phone for a hour n a half [[been talking iwith him for 2yrs,bout} ...and mentioned that I was dropping his name and he did say that it was , ok.....I don't pretend or claim to be his spokes-person or do I claim to be able to re-count the story as it took place but do try to give the 'essence'....Alan does say 'Holograms were used and it was a Production, Hollywood Style n edited TV Feeds and more....would love to hear Fintan interview him and ask him to spend a-little time on the '911 Program' from Big Brother and Babylonian Harlot Studios..........

Love n luck n good sex/emotions/vigor... Arrow right-on

Ave Maria ! holy dora dyke, Robin !...Infinity

{PM me, Fintan and I'll give you Alan's Phone Number if u like}
Back to top
Ormond



Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
So why bother faking it, when you can just do it?


THANKYOU, Fintan!

_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Toto



Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Remember the idea that it was a plane fits right into the NWO order agenda more than a missle. Also 99.9 percent of us were not there to see anything and so we must rely on national television news footage again this falls right into their agenda. I am not saying it was a hologram but this whole thing was perception managed and if they want us to think there were planes they they did a good job. You cant prrove there was no plane becuase you cant provide a photo of no plane so it is possible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geo
Guest





PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:14 pm    Post subject: Seems....................... Reply with quote

Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 3:01 am Post subject: No Planes................

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were no Planes because if there were it would have been very hard to do it as the 'Hollywood' Special Effects Departments did in the Edited Feeds that many 'brainwashed' Captain Video's think was LIVE TV....Captain Video is having a hard time DE-Promgraming themselves from the LIVE From CNN etc.....
........................................................................................................

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh well as my fellow-driver [was still driving his-own Yellow Cab in NYC last time I saw him, he was 86yo, he's RIP now, used to say "when you know, you know" can't tell em, till then....... :roll:

Also a 'real' Plane might have left 'evidence' that might have fallen into the 'wrong' hands... Wink

OK, Captain Video [s] you can run around in circles like 'they' want you too, yeah, saw the Edited Film Missle coming out the other side too, LOL...when you know, you know... Cool

Like the picture of the Driver shooting JFK and Bill Cooper and Alan Watt both say it was the Driver who Killed JFK but 'others' will 'boch-a-galop it up 4ever so 2 say..................... :roll:

Get a loop-to-loop of the Plane going in and you will see clearly that it's a edited clip and the plane doesn't break at all, remember the outer wall with the Windows was all steel supports....

Holy Dora Dyke, Robin !............................... Arrow right-on

Ave Maria !.....................Infinity

{ what about the 50 or so BILLION in GOLD that was under the WTC ? and the stock trades...oyeah, they had their pin-up girl, Martha...}

LOL n luck...get down baby..............JC, the Playwright
Back to top
Toto



Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cant a missle be dressed up as a plane???? Does not seem that hard to do really and when you see it your brain goes ya a plane. Your bain likes to make sense of situations you know.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jerry Fletcher



Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 837
Location: Studio BS

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only thing that is obvious to me is that we were all intended to believe was that UNITED and AMERICAN airplanes were hijacked on US soil, and used to attack AMERICA.

That provided ample reason to militarize the airports and give citizens a clear choice: Relinquish all individual rights to property and privacy, or stay home. Considering some sort of air travel is a necessity for most people these days, it provided the opportunity to investigate anybody near an airplane as part of the war on terror. That's a fascist wet dream already, especially when it's smothered in Patriot act gravy.

All the footage of the towers' demise looks weird to me, but then I have little to compare it with. It makes sense to me, though, that if the 'perps' had the ability to pull off a holographic impact, then they certainly had the ability to dive a real plane in there, so, why use the hologram?

What operational advantage would a holographic plane have over a real plane when the object is to get us to see a real plane - it implies that it couldn't be done with real planes. Is there any reason why a real plane couldn't have been used?

If anybody thinks commercial airlines are not tightly regulated federal assets, I'll beg to differ. I don't think the DiCaprio's version of Howard Hughes really painted the complete picture.

What would the use of holograms accomplish that real planes couldn't?

If both options had the same intentional effect, then what is gained from making the distinction at all? Swapping a prop or two doesn't change the script's plot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Toto



Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The plane theory fits into the NWO agenda more than a missle because a plane is more scary to the public because we all use them to travel and if you can create a phobia around travel then 911 and the plane theory extends beyond that day well into the future. Not to mention militarizing the airports and borders..Its important that we think it was a plane to them i would think. I would think they would want us to believe it was a plane. It does not matter that much if the plane was real or a fake the result is the image that people buy into and fear. Its all about perception and illusion and problem reaction solution.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MattMarriott



Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 125

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
What was the advantage or necessity that no planes hit the WTC?


Quote:
that if the 'perps' had the ability to pull off a holographic impact, then they certainly had the ability to dive a real plane in there, so, why use the hologram?


As mentioned in fact 4: the Web of disinformation planted all sorts of false tracks, from remote controlled planes to holograms. Anything as long as people believe that CNN had nothing to do with it.

But in the case of remote controlled planes and hologram there is additionally a reason for the web of disinformation to plant those false tracks.

Because none of them were feasible in 2001, and that has not changed till today. Nobody stating the opposite will be able to present any proof of it.

Since after close examination people will conclude this was not feasible, this will create - refusal by dissociation - conditions to make people reject the underlying truth.
In the case of the remote controlled planes hoax, this means rejecting the truth about the fact that there were no suicide pilots.
In the case of the holograms hoax, even more important, this means rejecting the core truth, i.e. that there were NO PLANES at all.

So this is the first and most important reason why no planes were used: because there were no suicide pilots available to do the job.
-------
P.S. I know, one obvious question remains open - the thousands of eyewitnesses. But since that touches more than just 9/11, I think it's better to explain that in a separate thread, which I will just create.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ormond



Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry. I don't buy that CNN's faked footage is a worthwhile lead. CNN's role was peripheral, following that thread leads down a blind alley. Whomever was on the 'team' inserting the pre-made footage had no contact or connections to the direct operation of either rigging the airliners, or rigging the demotion charges in the WTC. So it's a dead end...and a dead in is a red herring. And I have spoken face to face with eight eye witnesses who lived on Manhattan and saw the second plane impact, (most missed the first) and the collapse of both the towers. Hologram theories and CNN faking what they saw somehow hadn't occured to any of them.
There was a fellow on this blog, Hawkwind, who is one eye witness. I think Geo ran him off with a diatribe about holograms in the 911 discussion, but he did leave his testimony for anyone to refer to.
Anyever talk in person with someone who was there? I did. within the first year. People present were traumatized. 911 is not a simple matter, nor is it a causal one for 'fun time' one-up-manship or pet theories. It was long planned, massive criminal operation of mass murder, for power. Television was used as a tool in the script......but the event was not television.

There is such persistant disinfo bent on leading the public away from the fact that planes did in fact impact the WTC. The 'Big Lie' technique is to cast doubt in the minds of eye witness that they witnessed a crime. sure is a helluva lotta energy gone into denying that the aircraft were 'real'.

Questioning that is a wasted motion. That's why any suggestion that the planes didn't impact the building is counterintelligence.

No passengers needed to be murdered elsewhere. They only needed to get on their planes. The scenario called for real deaths of dozens of innocent passengers, and thousands of innocent schmucks just going to work, and they were available. No need to fake it. Kill them on television. Real death...even if not seen close up...it has a psychic impact when that many people like you and me die in our familiar surroundings.
Millions of people at their jobs in offices watched people just like them die in their offices.
And if you were the monsters who contemplated this thing, you would desire that. Maximum reality. 911 was to be 'reality televsion'.
CNN's coverage was pre-coreographed. But that's just the side show.
Media was involved, but everything in an op like this is compartmentalized.

Ignore the red herrings and follow the trail of direct action...the demolition, the removal of evidence from the crime scene. In a murder case, what matters first is the corpse, the murder weapon, and witnesses.
Counterintelligence will seek to distract your attention from the real elements involved in the crime--such as the planes. They also seek to discredit the eye witness accounts . HOW DARE YOU.

And striking the WTC with real passenger planes and real passengers was necessary to keep real time witnesses eyes looking at the top of the building....not down below at the internal demolition. Now they keep people arguing over whether there were planes or not. In short...STILL... looking up, when we need to be examining the DEMOLITION. The plane crashes were for pyrotechnics and distraction---AA 11 and UA 175 did not collapse the towers......and that's what they don't want investigated. Wake up.

The question isn't 'if', but 'how' did the perps assure that the planes would hit the targets the right way, the right moment.
A team of scrawny, unintelligent, mentally unstable 'terrorists' would be far too unreliable to trust with such a mission. They were decoys.
Well known industry strandard technology exists for enabling expert pilots to perfectly control Boeing 700 class aircraft remotely. Any Boeing can be modified covertly in that manner, without risk of discovery by crew, passengers, or airport security. An aircraft so equipped also bypasses pilot controls when enganed, and not a thing anyone on board could have done about it.

See how neatly counterintelligence agents meld two very different methods into 'one' supposedly...
Quote:
remote controlled planes to holograms.


Remote control of aircraft is one thing, holography is entirely another.
The hologram notion is absurd. I challange anyone supporting it to explain projection holography, or even cite one example of large "free roaming" ""holograms". People spouting "holograms" don't have a clue what holography is, or how it works. It doesn't work that way, this side of Star Trek episodes. The technology you envision simply doesn't exist.

Remote control of Boeing 700 class aircraft is an industry standard technology. So I think that this thread is about discrediting the remote control of flights 11 and 175. Don't be fooled.

Quote:
In 1984 NASA Dryden Flight Research Center and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) teamed-up in a unique flight experiment called the Controlled Impact Demonstration (CID)

On the morning of December 1, 1984, a remotely controlled Boeing 720 transport took off from Edwards Air Force Base
(Edwards, California), made a left-hand departure and climbed to an altitude of 2300 feet. It then began a descent-to-landing
to a specially prepared runway on the east side of Rogers Dry Lake. Final approach was along the roughly 3.8-degree
glide slope. The landing gear was left retracted. Passing the decision height of 150 feet above ground level (AGL), the aircraft
was slightly to the right of the desired path. Just above that decision point at which the pilot was to execute a "go-around," there appeared to be enough altitude to maneuver back to the centerline of the runway. Data acquisition systems had been activated, and the aircraft was committed to impact.

see the films here, courtesy of NASA (your tax dollars at work...)

http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/movie/CID/index.html

_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> State Terror: 9/11, 7/7, CIA Fakes All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.