FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Flight 93 - the McClatchey Photo
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
stannrodd



Joined: 26 Jun 2008
Posts: 521
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Killtown wrote:
Now please answer, *if* the photo turns out to be a fake, who faked it and why?


I find the question a bit nebulous .. KT

What do you mean by "fake" ? (In terms of "*if* the photo turns out to be a fake")

Is it altered?

Is it a real photo but of an unrelated event?

Is it just something else .. I really don't know what the question is calling for in terms of an answer.

Perhaps you can explain more clearly what you are really attempting to "detect-ive" in asking the question.

Stann Smile

_________________
Ultimately, the study of all that is .. based on everything we have learned about our existence and our universe .. is only theory... 1984
PsytationStation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Killtown



Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 65
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stannrodd wrote:
What do you mean by "fake" ? (In terms of "*if* the photo turns out to be a fake")

Is it altered?

This isn't rocket science.

Yes. Photoshopped.

Not sure why everyone is so reluctant to give their opinion on this.

_________________
Homepage - 9/11 Index - killtown.blogspot.com - Flight 93 Photo Fraud
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
stannrodd



Joined: 26 Jun 2008
Posts: 521
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Killtown wrote:
stannrodd wrote:
What do you mean by "fake" ? (In terms of "*if* the photo turns out to be a fake")

Is it altered?

This isn't rocket science.

Yes. Photoshopped.

Not sure why everyone is so reluctant to give their opinion on this.


I'm not reluctant KT .. just don't have an answer I guess.

I see it as an unproveable .. ??

Who do you think photo shopped it and why .. just curious.

Stann Wink

_________________
Ultimately, the study of all that is .. based on everything we have learned about our existence and our universe .. is only theory... 1984
PsytationStation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
Killtown wrote:

3) Now please answer, *if* the photo turns out to be a fake, who faked it and why?

Social control psy-ops are about icons - both their destruction and their creation. Both positive and negative symbols of an event, to affirm it's validity and to provide tangible, visual documentation of it's existence.

The Trade Towers are now gone, and the NYC skyline is forever altered - which is why one plan to reconstruct the original towers never got off the ground. The Flight 93 scenario was, IMNSHO, the Frank Merriwell docudrama that was used to rally the populace behind the WOT. Without that stirring tome of average Joe's fighting back against the terrorists - and simultaneously protecting "the White House", public sentiment wouldn't have been so close to unanimous.

McClatchey's "photo" provided the new symbol, the rally point for public defiance, and the reminder of the "horror that justifies" carpet-bombing everything, including innocent civilians, in some assholes' minds.


My apologies Killtown, it seems as if this may very well be rocket science to some.

Read Rumps post. In my opinion it's pretty much spot on and covers all things Shanksville, from locals, to photos, to crash, either real faked or staged. I assumed the level of intelligence oozing from this thread would allow for most to pick up on my wayward way of communication. Seems I was mistaken in that regard.

The photo is a tool to SELL the official story of Shanksville, 9-11 heroism 101, rally the masses, write books, makes movies that forge legend. The key element to this for those that were behind 9-11 is exactly as Rump says, a means to justify their action via a strengthened public sentiment. Albeit a manufactured sentiment didn't matter, the event galvanized the human emotions of 9-11. Imagine those brave brave people on that plane as a cake, a clever hook " Lest roll " , as the icing. The masses are then eating right out of your hand and chanting, " KILL KILL KILL " or something similar. Death to those who had nothing to do with it, just give us deaths.

Am I making fun of 9-11, and those families closely involved " HELL NO " But I must admit a chuckle at all who try to manipulate the events for personal gain, money, fame, or the stroking of their own already inflated EGO's.

Killtown I get the impression that you're afraid to ask the authorities about your suspicion of that photo. Am I correct? If so I can advise you on the proper tact to take, I'm a professionally trained negotiator, one with a proven track record in the toughest business know to man. One of the very best. Given your elaborate web page it's a given that you're on a watch list like the rest of us who post, or comment, on anything about 9-11, CORRECT, or do you get a hall pass? So there's really nothing to lose at this point.

Simply call them up and strike up a subtle conversation in regard to that photo. Don't lead in with a lie, just tell them who you are, and what your concerns are. Their response should speak volumes , after all this isn't rocket science.

Hombre'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That being said, I still don't believe - as I said in a much earlier post - that the photo is all that critically important, in the grand scheme of things. A tipping point for further revelation? Perhaps. But in the masses' minds, I believe the sentiment, even if proven conclusively in a court of law would be, "Okay, so some greedy asshole faked a photo. Move on." It doesn't prove there was no plane, it doesn't prove there was a shoot-down, it doesn't prove anything tangible about a false-flag op.

I doubt McClatchey is nothing more than a dupe. Did she fake the photo, was she instructed to? Maybe she's knee-deep in 9/11, and maybe pressure of an impending jail sentence would loosen her tongue. But I think you'd still be miles way from the perps, in terms of chain of command (and low-level operators who sing wind up having 1-car accidents on deserted roads anyway). That's why I eventually decided not to make more of an issue of it than, "Hey check this out, this photo is messed up!"

When I started triangulating the photo's location, I never even intended to find what I found. I wasn't looking for evidence of deception at all. I was just clowning around with the new Google Maps app that had just come out. This was one of many photos I inspected, and not even for validity - just to see where the photographer was standing, out of (hopefully) intellectual curiosity.

My current point is this: I still firmly believe there's "no plane" at Shanksville. None. Nada. Zilch. Some parts in the ground that could have been placed there way earlier. But somehow, "no plane at Shanksville" has been dishonestly lumped in with the entire "no planes theory." That if you don't see a plane in PA, then you also don't believe there were planes at the Pentagon or the 2 towers. That's deliberately misdirectional horseshit. IMNSHO. Cool

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
That being said, I still don't believe - as I said in a much earlier post - that the photo is all that critically important, in the grand scheme of things. A tipping point for further revelation? Perhaps. But in the masses' minds, I believe the sentiment, even if proven conclusively in a court of law would be, "Okay, so some greedy asshole faked a photo. Move on." It doesn't prove there was no plane, it doesn't prove there was a shoot-down, it doesn't prove anything tangible about a false-flag op.


I have to agree, that was basically my point. Something I find more important about Shanksville are those that can swallow the obvious lack of debris and accept it as a possibility, especially given a plane of that supposed size. Can people really be that gullible?

http://www.airdisaster.com/news/0805/14/news.shtml

decompressed at 30,000 feet, crashed, and, well, completely intact tail section. Miracles come in all shapes and sizes I suppose.

Hombre'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hombre wrote:
I have to agree, that was basically my point. Something I find more important about Shanksville are those that can swallow the obvious lack of debris and accept it as a possibility, especially given a plane of that supposed size. Can people really be that gullible?

http://www.airdisaster.com/news/0805/14/news.shtml

decompressed at 30,000 feet, crashed, and, well, completely intact tail section. Miracles come in all shapes and sizes I suppose.

Hombre'

Well, I maintain to this day that whoever drew up this 9/11 op really had their act together, as far as details. (Another reason I don't buy the "Flight 93 was supposed to be a backup attack plane, and they aborted.") As far as I can see, everything went correctly, down to the smallest detail, and this made-for-tv-and-movies story was a critical psychological element.

One of the key ingredients was that the "coincidence theorists" can point to conditions that never existed before. Who knows what happens when you deliberately plow a plane into the ground at 500+ knots? Who knows what an aluminum plane will do to a steel tower if the plane hits it at top speed? Who knows why Rumsfeld deliberately "misspoke" the word "missile" on camera? Twice! Laughing

Everything that happened was to not only obfuscate the realities, but to foster controversy as well. Early on in the truth movement, there was a concept introduced (most likely by the perps themselves) of the "honey bee" theory - that all the concentric hijackings made it impossible to follow any one plane successfully. I feel that was also the m.o. for the entire 9/11 "post-op" cover-up - so many intertwined theories about possible scenarios that no one could sort them all out, even if they had the time. It's the same as packing a jury with your own agents - no verdict renderable, because there's no clear mindset. It's a designated hung jury, built-in from the start.

Add to that the fact that anyone at all who wanted to investigate these "anomalies" suddenly had to take a crash course (pun intended) in physics in order to keep up. Very few could, so we were left to following the suspect opinions of the first people we saw on the 'net who sounded like they knew what they were talking about. Not a lot of chance for success in that scenario, I admit. I participated, and really thought I knew the story too.

This was, to me, a study in the fine art of controversy manufacture. How to get people emotionally involved in an argument, but only if needed - precisely how I think most control is manifested on this side of the pond. If you have a dumbed-down populace, then you have to hit them over the head repeatedly with something, or they'll just go back to watching entertainment TV. But once you establish that meme of grabbing attention precisely when you need it, and having them slink away when necessary, you have the perfect mechanism for deception and control.

As Fintan once said - we're dealing with some smart cookies here. Confused One thing I've learned in this invaluable forum, is that I didn't have a clue as to the depth of deception going on in the MSM, at most levels. I'm starting to now.

Those who choose to maintain attention, and truly investigate and inspect from all sides, can simply be marginalized as "fringe loons" to the masses, who trust their MSM sources as the ultimate authority - a mold they've been carefully shaped in throughout public school, where individualism and rational thought is replaced by the need to conform and get approval from higher ups. It never changes, and by design, people never grow out of childhood. Anyone who chooses to actually become an adult is not to be trusted (remember that one, "Don't trust anyone over 30, man!"). That wasn't just a cute hippie phrase, or just a good idea. It's the law. Laughing

And the final icing on the cake is the pervasive art of ridicule, wherein anyone who truly steps out from the crowd and does things differently, is a freak to be mocked. As much as I love Jon Stewart and The Daily Show, I can't even watch it anymore, because it's all part of that sub-system.

Way to go, Fintan. Now I can't even watch The Daily Show. Good thing I grew up, and realize now that the only thing that won't warp my brain is [adult swim] on Cartoon Network. Cool

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Killtown



Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 65
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stannrodd wrote:
Killtown wrote:
Not sure why everyone is so reluctant to give their opinion on this.


1) I'm not reluctant KT .. just don't have an answer I guess.

2) Who do you think photo shopped it and why .. just curious.

1) I'm asking for an opinion. There only two logical choices who faked it *if* it's fake: 1. Val & friends, 2. the FBI.

Sooooo, which of those TWO would be your leading suspect?

2) If it turns out to be a fake, my opinion is the FBI did it for reasons of a cover-up surrounding 9/11. Hard for me to believe Val & friends faked it and the Feds not realizing it after the FBI had 3 of their agents rush over there to confiscate all her equipment.

_________________
Homepage - 9/11 Index - killtown.blogspot.com - Flight 93 Photo Fraud
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Killtown



Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 65
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hombre wrote:
1) My apologies Killtown, it seems as if this may very well be rocket science to some.

2) The photo is a tool to SELL the official story of Shanksville

3) Killtown I get the impression that you're afraid to ask the authorities about your suspicion of that photo. Am I correct?

4) Given your elaborate web page it's a given that you're on a watch list like the rest of us who post, or comment, on anything about 9-11, CORRECT, or do you get a hall pass?

1) Why? I asked a simple question that requires ONLY TWO logical answers. How hard can that be?!?

2) That very well may be, but what has that got to do with my question about who faked it if it's fake?

3) No. If I was afraid, I wouldn't have a public blog about it.

4) Hall pass???

_________________
Homepage - 9/11 Index - killtown.blogspot.com - Flight 93 Photo Fraud
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Killtown



Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 65
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
1) I still don't believe - as I said in a much earlier post - that the photo [isn't] all that critically important, in the grand scheme of things... I believe the sentiment, even if proven conclusively in a court of law would be, "Okay, so some greedy asshole faked a photo. Move on."

2) I doubt McClatchey is nothing more than a dupe. Did she fake the photo, was she instructed to? Maybe she's knee-deep in 9/11, and maybe pressure of an impending jail sentence would loosen her tongue. But I think you'd still be miles way from the perps, in terms of chain of command (and low-level operators who sing wind up having 1-car accidents on deserted roads anyway).

3) My current point is this: I still firmly believe there's "no plane" at Shanksville. None. Nada. Zilch.

4) But somehow, "no plane at Shanksville" has been dishonestly lumped in with the entire "no planes theory."

1) Even if the FBI faked it?

2) So if the FBI faked it, you don't think that would be enough to invoke an investigation of a cover-up and possible conspiracy?

If there was a conspiracy, all we have to do I prove the slightest bit of it wrong. We don't have to "catch the big fish." We just have to catch a minnow.

3) I believe no plane crash there either after a long time being duped with the "shoot down" theory which I believe is disinfo (and you don't hear me 'disinfo' a lot!).

4) Where do you see that?

_________________
Homepage - 9/11 Index - killtown.blogspot.com - Flight 93 Photo Fraud
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Killtown wrote:
1) Even if the FBI faked it?

I suppose it depends on the level of cover-up. As far as a simple faked photo, the shallow depth of criminality leaves little. Now, positive proof of FBI complicity with McClatchey in advance is a different animal. That would involved advance planning, which would involve advance knowledge of what was about to go down.

Quote:
2) So if the FBI faked it, you don't think that would be enough to invoke an investigation of a cover-up and possible conspiracy?

If there was a conspiracy, all we have to do I prove the slightest bit of it wrong. We don't have to "catch the big fish." We just have to catch a minnow.

If you can tie the two entities together in a conspiracy - Val and the Feds - in advance of 9/11, yes then that's a big deal. Otherwise, simply proving the FBI faked a photo could be brushed off with, "Well, we wanted the American people to have some sort of remembrance." And a few "overzealous, hyper-patriotic" wrists get slapped, case closed.

In fact, any conspiracy of those 2 entities is something. The probability that on 9/11 itself, the FBI just happened to stop at Val's house and decided to help her fake a photo - both technically with graphics and coaching with media training - is a stretch of belief akin to OJ Simpson cutting his hand on a glass in Chicago. (Oops, wait.... bad anaolgy. OJ walked.)

I think it's an easy case to prove to a untampered-with, sane jury that Val is lying. Her comments about how she came to snap that photo within seconds of the crash are simply beyond belief. But tying her in complicity with the Feds is the chore.

Quote:
4) Where do you see that? (associating 'no-planes theory' with Shanksville)

Uh, just about everywhere (including here, if memory serves). On several forums where years ago I brought up this photo (right after you and I spoke), the first denial by the shills was "Oh, here we go again with the no planes bullshit." And most of the surrounding participants/bystanders easily accepted that ridiculous association.

It's just more of the brilliance of this op. Let's crash 3 planes, fake the 4th one, then create a sub-movement that relies on no planes at all, anywhere. Even the scripted heroic epic that never happened will be protected, because no one will buy that they didn't see planes in the sky over Manhattan, and therefore all planes were real, and existed.

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 5:16 pm    Post subject: ` Reply with quote

Killtown,

I've been reading your blog in regard to Val. Pretty detailed work in that regard. Can I assume that based on your use of the word " WE " found within that you are indeed more than one?

Association with some of the other truthers is a concern to me, but to each his/her own I guess, it's your business and certainly not mine.

In reading some of the comments left by people in that section, I see you attract the same all around class of intelligence as the others, none are immune to the know it all's of today's society.

Vals' pic is one thing, the crash scene " dug by backhoe " IMHO is quite another. The wings parted the earth as the earth was oblivious to the laws of physics and the arrest of energy it most definitely would produce. Oh well such is life, at times full of obscurity, full of deception.

To answer your questions about Val and the FBI, and the pic- I would be wise to defer to Rump and his response, I agree 100% with his point of view about the subject. Did she fake it for money, maybe. Did the FBI look the other way so as to help sell a plane crash to the public?

Either Val is as dumb as a stump and made the perfect pawn, or so smart that she was capable of fooling professionally trained FBI field agents as well as countless others who may impede her plans. Me, I'm going with the stump. ( jmho )

Anything beyond this is also beyond reason in my book.

Oh and her husband being a board member of that Bank/Financial firm. LOL~~ Pennsylvania is spelled wrong in their " Mission statement "

If she photo shopped it: Why would the FBI cotton on to it?

Hombre'
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 -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 11 of 13

 
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.