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 ... , 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
Killtown



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

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:08 pm    Post subject: Re: ` Reply with quote

Hombre wrote:
1) 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?

2) 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.

3) To answer your questions about Val and the FBI, and the pic... 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?

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

1) No, I am the only one behind "Killtown." Always been, always will.
What instance of "we" are you referring to?

2) Yes, I agree the crash site defies the laws of physics from being caused by a plane. Not sure why you are bringing this up in relation to Val's photo.

3) What about the FBI faked it to cover something up that Val really took? Is that such an impossible scenario?


Seems like a lot of you are resistant to the idea that the FBI faked it, or see no big deal if they did. Why is 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
Killtown



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

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
1) 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.

2) 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.

3) 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...

4) 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.

5) 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.

1) What if Val really took that photo, but it showed something like that white unmarked UAV Susan McElwain saw fly over her head and that's why the FBI photoshopped the plume on there to cover it up? Wouldn't that be significant?

2) With 30-50% Americans believing there was something fishy with 9/11 and aware from the efforts of the truth movement that 9/11 was an inside job, do you really think people would buy that excuse from the FBI?

3) Who said if the FBI faked it that they faked it at Val's house? They took back her memory card and quite possibly her computer's hard drive. Looks like the faking happened at FBI headquarters.

4) Who's going to believe Val faked it and the FBI didn't realize it even after they took her memory card back with them for "further analysis"?

5) The ignorance of some dumbass wanting to try to lump it together and sap bystanders gobble it up should deter you.

_________________
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 6:36 pm    Post subject: Re: ` Reply with quote

Killtown wrote:

Seems like a lot of you are resistant to the idea that the FBI faked it, or see no big deal if they did. Why is that?

Au contraire - not that it's "no big deal", but that it seems likely that little tangible results could come of it. Unless you can prove a conspiracy between them and Val. Maybe you can.

A faked photo by itself, is not, IMO, a point to turn many heads outside the Truthers. And the ambiguity is a great rallying point for the deniers. I know I essentially started this whole thing, but I think all I did was create a bandwidth-sucking issue that will go nowhere, and has little hope of ending in any real revelations. But I'd love to be wrong, KT.

When confronting the shills on this issue, I admit they never had answers for the physical discrepancies. They can argue cloud color, and wind drift (both of which are absurd), but no one can successfully dismiss the outrageous size of the cloud. It doesn't work. Nothing outside of a nuclear blast can become that large in that short of a time, if a plane crash cloud even become that large at all.

_________________
"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 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You seem to have a burr under your saddle son. Why is that?

The FBI faked something that Val really took! ah~~~~~~Wouldn't Val realize that when she got her stuff back from the FBI?

You're implying something that would lead to all sorts of things ultimately ending up in either the Grave Yard, or Prison, if you're lucky!

I brought the crash scene up because to me it's of more significance than Val's pic. What, in your eyes, is so bloody important about her pic?

The FBI may very well have faked her pic and then told her " AS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY " Laughing Laughing Do you part~~ blah blah blah, be a patriot, oh and by the way we're gonna turn you loose now, " keep your nose clean, ya hear " " Remember the secret "

Come on dude you're smarter than this, are you not?

I'm reluctant about nothing when it comes to 9-11 except pure shit when I see it. Anyone, and I do mean anyone, who claims that they heard a plane in rapid decent at a speed of 500 plus MPH go directly overhead, or even near by, is either dumb as hell, or lying. ( JMHO )

She would have heard it " ONLY " after it passed, and at that speed it's HIGHLY UNLIKELY that she would have seen it before it crashed.

Ever been to an airshow? An f-14 can come up behind you directly over head at 300 mph @ 1,000 ft and you'll never hear it until it's well beyond you. If it's clipping along at 500 MPH you'll hear a faint whistle but I doubt you'd recognize it as a plane of any kind, BECAUSE most people have never heard such a sound.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqdbCGzmCfg&feature=related

Mach 1 is a bit unfair but accurate given the circumstance surrounding Val's seemingly keen hearing capabilities during the supposed crash of flight 93! Shocked

Hombre'

PS. KT~ If you're sincerely interested in the truth of 9-11, then I'M WITH YOU. But for some gut feeling reason I'm not getting that vibe form you. Before you blow that off, consider one of my previous post's. I'm professionally trained in the aspect of communication that would give me such a feeling! Wink
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 8:44 pm    Post subject: Re: ` Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
1) Au contraire - not that it's "no big deal", but that it seems likely that little tangible results could come of it. Unless you can prove a conspiracy between them and Val. Maybe you can.

2) A faked photo by itself, is not, IMO, a point to turn many heads outside the Truthers.

3) And the ambiguity is a great rallying point for the deniers. I know I essentially started this whole thing, but I think all I did was create a bandwidth-sucking issue that will go nowhere, and has little hope of ending in any real revelations. But I'd love to be wrong, KT.

4) When confronting the shills on this issue, I admit they never had answers for the physical discrepancies. They can argue cloud color, and wind drift (both of which are absurd), but no one can successfully dismiss the outrageous size of the cloud. It doesn't work. Nothing outside of a nuclear blast can become that large in that short of a time, if a plane crash cloud even become that large at all.

1) Well that's what my latest question is trying to determine.

2) If that photo is found fake, it should be on the front page of EVERY major newspaper across the country: "Flight 93 Photo Proven Fake"

3) The only reason it may seem like a "go nowhere" issue because people dismiss it's potential of what it could reveal.

I have a hard time believing that if it's confirmed a fake with FBI involvement that that's not going to spark an investigation into a cover-up of the attacks, especially with so much momentum with the truth movement.

4) Correct. I haven't seen anybody been able to debunk its size being too big and in the wrong location.

_________________
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 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hombre wrote:
1) You seem to have a burr under your saddle son. Why is that?

2) The FBI faked something that Val really took! ah~~~~~~Wouldn't Val realize that when she got her stuff back from the FBI?

3) You're implying something that would lead to all sorts of things ultimately ending up in either the Grave Yard, or Prison, if you're lucky!

4) I brought the crash scene up because to me it's of more significance than Val's pic.

5) What, in your eyes, is so bloody important about her pic?

6) The FBI may very well have faked her pic and then told her " AS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY " Laughing Laughing Do you part~~ blah blah blah, be a patriot, oh and by the way we're gonna turn you loose now, " keep your nose clean, ya hear " " Remember the secret "

Come on dude you're smarter than this, are you not?

7) PS. KT~ If you're sincerely interested in the truth of 9-11, then I'M WITH YOU. But for some gut feeling reason I'm not getting that vibe form you. Before you blow that off, consider one of my previous post's. I'm professionally trained in the aspect of communication that would give me such a feeling! Wink

1) I get that way sometimes with I ask simple questions and seem to get long complex irrelevant answers.

2) Who said she wasn't in the know the whole time and went along with it? Plus, if her photo wasn't of something the govt didn't really want to hide, why did they send THREE FBI agents over to her house and confiscate her equipment, possibly leaving her with no trace of her photo?

3) And?

4) So just because you think something is more significant that means others can't investigate something else?

5) It's the ONLY piece of 9/11-related evidence where someone involved in the event verifies that it is fake:

Quote:
Jeff: Val McClatchey... she has a famous photo.

Ms. Leverknight: It was a fake photo, because it didn't have a mushroom cloud.

http://flight93photo.blogspot.com/2007/03/shanksville-resident-says-val.html


6) Who owes the copyright and get's to make $20 per sale of her photo the rest of her life? Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me.

7) That's OK, my gut feeling sometimes is that you're a troll. So why do you think I'm not really interested in solving the 9/11 lie?

_________________
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
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
7) That's OK, my gut feeling sometimes is that you're a troll. So why do you think I'm not really interested in solving the 9/11 lie?


Okay: I'll play you silly game:

Are you hinting that Val was in on 9-11? Seriously in on it, had prior knowledge, the FBI picked her out of a line-up so to speak. Come the hell on man!

Here's where my apprehension comes from. Guilt by association in other words.


Hombre'

PS. I've yet to be banned form any board in 15 years of wed activity including the days of DOS!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Killtown



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

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hombre wrote:
1) Okay: I'll play you silly game:

2) Are you hinting that Val was in on 9-11? Seriously in on it, had prior knowledge, the FBI picked her out of a line-up so to speak. Come the hell on man!

3) Here's where my apprehension comes from. Guilt by association in other words.

4) PS. I've yet to be banned form any board in 15 years of wed activity including the days of DOS!

1) What "silly game"?

2) No, you misunderstood. What I meant is who says the FBI didn't "present an opportunity" to her when they came over? Seriously, when does it take 3 Feds to rush over a person's house of confiscate a legit photo?

3) Not following. Not an Avery fan?

4) And?

_________________
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
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KT,

You are saying, that in your opinion, the FBI faked Val's photo, gave it back to her with the smoke plume added, and then brokered a deal with her where she could have copyright of the photo in exchange for her silence about the faked photo.

If that is the case, then why did Val tell a friend that her pic didn't have a mushroom cloud in it? I just can't buy an after the fact deal between the FBI and Val, way to big a stretch. What's the FBI gonna do if Val says" thanks but no thanks "

Setting this all up prior to 9-11 would make more sense, safer, but that involves a whole new host of things, one being the Feds holding something over Val and Hubby's head. Oh the stories that could be spun. Is Val Shanksville's 9-11 patsy?

I get your drift: You think Val and the FBI are in bed/were in bed together on this photo because if the photo is actually fake then there could be only two possibly answers as to who faked it.

So Val twists in the wind by claiming it's real while the FBI looks the other way neither in confirmation or denial, as the bloggers/posters discover the conspiracy/cover-up and start stirring the pot.

I hear you Rump, I hear you, remorse indeed!

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



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

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hombre wrote:
1) You are saying, that in your opinion, the FBI faked Val's photo, gave it back to her with the smoke plume added, and then brokered a deal with her where she could have copyright of the photo in exchange for her silence about the faked photo.

2) I get your drift: You think Val and the FBI are in bed/were in bed together on this photo because if the photo is actually fake then there could be only two possibly answers as to who faked it.

1) I'd go with brokered a deal before the FBI left her house.

2) As I ask in my latest questions, *if* it's fake, who faked it and why?

If you don't think the idea that the FBI faked it and brokered a deal with Val, then who do you think faked it and why?

_________________
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: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FYI, this if from Domenick DiMaggio (aka "Terrorcell"), who has done the most investigating down in Shanksville than anyone, responding to a poll question I started: "*If* Val's plume photo turns out to be a fake, is it evidence of a 9/11 cover-up?"

Quote:
yes. it absolutely is.

and i know beyond all shadow of a doubt that it is a fabrication created by [most likely] the fbi.

i know this from talking to eyewitnesses who all describe a black smoke rising into the air and trailing off as one would expect from a violent explosion. none of them described a mushroom cloud and i have spoken with a witness [off the record] who agrees with kelly leverknights assessment that it is faked. furthermore this witness could not believe the whole i dropped my camera and couldn't load the batteries before it was gone because they said the smoke lasted for several minutes.

http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=5726&view=findpost&p=15310149

_________________
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
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Killtown,

on your blog, you know the one you run by yourself. You claim that this photo is fake on one hand only to use the words, " IF IT'S FAKE " on the other.

Now you reference a guy who knows beyond all doubt that the image is faked and says " PROBABLY " at the hands of the FBI, yet given your stance, questions, polls, ETC it's obvious to me that you're reluctant to forge ahead and implicate, accuse, or just down right say " THE FBI FAKED VAL'S PHOTO "

I have an idea:

Laurel Highlands Resident Agency

P.O Box 615

Elton, PA.
15934-0615

(814 ) 262-9290

Simply call or write the above and ask them, tell them your thoughts on this photo. I'd be curious as to their thoughts, response!

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 ... , 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 12 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.