L.A. Conference Covered on C-Span
GeorgeWashington Mon, 06/26/2006 - 7:59am
Infowars.com states that C-Span covered part of the L.A. conference, and will rebroadcast it this week:
Infowars.com is just off the phone with Alex [Jones], who confirms the conference has been a huge success. C-SPAN covered part of the event (which it will rebroadcast several times this week) . . ."
I don't know whether this is the main C-Span channel or C-Span2.
- Login to post comments
I was at the conference
I was at the conference during the panel discussion that C-SPAN taped. It was great. We had Prof. Jim Fetzer roaring on how we need to impeach Bush Cheney for commiting murder on 9-11. the whole crowd was roaring. The panel also included Prof. Steven E. Jones, Col. Bob Bowman, Webster Tarpley, and the one and only Alex Jones. Cant wait to see it on T.V. Had a blast at the convention, hope you did too.
. http://heygeorgewbush.blogs
.
http://heygeorgewbush.blogspot.com/
.
Would like to know if there
Would like to know if there is more to this program then just what this clip shows.
Bush Caught Lying About Sept.11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60&search=bush%20lies%20plane
"Thanks" for the nonsense,
"Thanks" for the nonsense, Agent Nico.
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.c
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/
Jimmy Walter presents 9/11 TV fakery evidence in L.A.
June 25, 2006
Report by Izzy aka Malaprop
"...Jimmy Walter showed two clips of 'flt 175' that 'hit' wtc2 that have
been shown here....the CNN clip with the extreme closeup repeated
several times, and the clip where the reporter on the street
disagrees with the guy in the studio that there was any plane.....He
pretty much just let the videos do the talking. While we have been
looking at these same clips all this time, on little screens, it was
quite dramatic to see them on two 10-foot screens. In fact, those 10-
feet wide screens did it.
The room was so quiet athe proverbial pin could be heard dropping as
they watched the repeats--I don't know if Jimmy had shown these
before or not, but I heard the comments of the people sitting on
either side of me, and both were stunned by what they saw....."why,
there's no hole....." "it doesn't even slow down"......
There was no heckling, no booing, no discussion of wanting to run him
out of there--no threats at all, and no ridicule, no insistance that
the discussion be shut out, or moved to another room. Just quiet
contemplation---it takes a while for everything to sink in..."
(ed: The Reporter "on the street" who disagreed "with the guy in the studio" was Don Dahler from ABC, see archives)
Open multiple messages at once with the all new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
Do any of you know what
Do any of you know what program this video is from?
Bush Caught Lying About Sept.11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60&search=bush%20lies%20plane
>derided by critics ...none
>derided by critics
...none of which is available for a debate
9/11 Skeptics Share
9/11 Skeptics Share Theories
Washington Post | June 26 2006
About 1,200 people gathered over the weekend for what organizers billed as the largest conference on the conspiracy theories that consider the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to be a result of official negligence or a U.S. attempt to incite world war.
"There are so many prominent people . . . who have stated that the evidence is overwhelming that 9/11 was an inside job," syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones said at a news conference.
Conspiracy theorists are convinced that the U.S. military command "stood down" on the day of the attacks, that the hijackers were trained at U.S. military bases and that the World Trade Center towers collapsed because of a series of controlled explosions set before they were hit by two hijacked planes. Suggested motives include expected benefits for U.S. arms and oil conglomerates, and revolutionary plans for a new world order headed by the United States.
The theories have been derided by critics as wild and far-fetched. The official Sept. 11 commission cited government intelligence lapses in the failure to prevent the attacks by al-Qaeda that killed nearly 3,000 people. A 10,000-page investigative report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology held that jet-fuel fires led to the twin towers' collapse.
FT: "Conspiracy theories
FT: "Conspiracy theories abound as US line on 9/11 challenged"
That's a much better title than the original from the zionist shill girl Jill from LA bureau of Reuters..
Unfortunately, the rest of the artile is the same horse shit..
The 9/11 smoking gun + the
The 9/11 smoking gun + the media:
http://www.packrat-toyz.com/images/Airsoft/Wholesale%20Airsoft/G26%20wit...
Sorry OT but this is
Sorry OT but this is amusing...
a love letter to ann coulter from henry rollins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9fQAQenllo
Everyone should e-mail CSPAN
Everyone should e-mail CSPAN to rebroadcast the LA 9/11 show.
Here is the email address:
viewer@c-span.org
In defense of CSPAN, CSPAN
In defense of CSPAN,
CSPAN broadcast Rep. McKinney's entire Congressional Briefing last year called;
"The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later... A CITIZENS’ RESPONSE – DID THE COMMISSION GET IT RIGHT?"
http://www.gnn.tv/B12001
It was the only broadcast of this historic event. They even broadcast Michael Ruppert's condemnation of Bushco. Here is Ruppert making clear his position to ex-CIA (he quit CIA) Mel Goodman;
"RUPPERT: Professor Goodman, you and I will forever and strenuously disagree about a couple of things, one of which is your statement that these were blunders and they were personal and not institutional, I will go to my grave and I believe my book documents the irrefutable case that the "mistakes" made were intentional, and they were both personal and systemic... you made a brief reference to Pearl Harbor, and there is a book by... Stinnet... "Day of Deceit" with FOIA release of documents showing that we had broken the Japanese codes prior to Pearl Harbor, knew the attacks were going to take place, and allowed them to happen, I go further with respect to 9/11, arguing that we facilitated the attacks, we'll never agree on that..."
_______________--
CSPAN let that fly, in the re-broadcast, which they could have edited out. They did not censor any of the speaker's comments, even Peter Dale Scott's criticism of Patrick Fitzgerald:
"The Report describes Ali Mohamed as “a former Egyptian army officer who had moved to the United States in the mid-1980s, enlisted in the U.S. Army, and become an instructor at Fort Bragg,” as well as helping to plan the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya (68). In fact Ali Mohamed was an important al Qaeda agent who, as the 9/11 Commission was told, "trained most of al Qaeda's top leadership," including "persons who would later carry out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing."[25] But the person telling the 9/11 Commission this, U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald, misrepresented Ali Mohamed’s FBI relationship. He told the Commission that, "From 1994 until his arrest in 1998, [Mohamed] lived as an American citizen in California, applying for jobs as an FBI translator and working as a security guard for a defense contractor."[26]
Ali Mohamed was not just an FBI job applicant. Unquestionably he was an FBI informant, from at least 1993 and maybe 1989.[27] And almost certainly he was something more. A veteran of the CIA-trained bodyguards of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, he was able, despite being on a State Department Watch List, to come to America around 1984, on what an FBI consultant has called “a visa program controlled by the CIA”, and obtain a job, first as a security officer, then with U.S. Special Forces.[28] In 1988 he took a lengthy leave of absence from the U.S. Army and went to fight in Afghanistan, where he met with Ayman al-Zawahiri (later bin Laden’s chief deputy in al Qaeda) and the “Arab Afghan” leadership.[29] Despite this, he was able to receive an Honorable Discharge one year later, at which point he established close contact with bin Laden in Afghanistan.
Ali Mohamed clearly enjoyed U.S. protection: in 1993, when detained by the RCMP in Canada, a single phone call to the U.S. secured his release. This enabled him to play a role, in the same year, in planning the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya in 1998.[30]
Congress should determine the true relationship of the U.S. Government to Ali Mohamed, who was close to bin Laden and above all Zawahiri, who has been called the “main player” in 9/11.[31] (Al-Zawahiri is often described as the more sophisticated mentor of the younger bin Laden.)[32] In particular Congress should determine why Patrick Fitzgerald chose to mislead the American people about Mohamed’s FBI status."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=SCO20050...
CSPAN has done great work, including the BookTV broadcast of David Ray Griffin:
http://www.booktv.org/General/index.asp?segID=5677&schedID=362
I say send them an email and ask them to broadcast the entire Alex Jones segment unedited. They just might do that.
More coverage: same reuters
More coverage: same reuters article on Financial Times too but different heading. Check it out.
Number one it is 100%
Number one it is 100% impossible for Jet fuel to blow down 80 floors of an elevator shaft, elevators dont even go 80 floors you had to exit elevators at the 44th and 78th floors to get into other elevators to take you the rest of the way there is not a single continuous shaft.
Clearly a bomb or 2 was placed in the basement area to destroy the foundation columns and this is what blew the lobby windows out.
As for this on CSPAN, I dont see it listed anywhere on any channel, I serious doubt they will show it.
Whew, after my first post
Whew, after my first post here, C-Span and BBC to cover event. I was almost made out to be a disinfo agent. Im glad it was true! I had faith in Jack Blood on the Alex Jones Show. My credibility has been restored. I only want the truth, like us all! ......Except for shills.
I think we get involved with
I think we get involved with masks, costumes and stuff we will be easily dismissed..i think we all need to be as professional and serious as possible
Off topic: There's this
Off topic: There's this video of firefighters going into the WTC:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6932.htm
Q: Did anyone find a smoking gun in this video? Anything that confirms the secondary explosions before&after the planes hit?
Any other media reports
Any other media reports today?
And Alex claims it was a success. One single shitty article from Reuters about the event.
That's pathetic. And Charlie Sheen was there for crying out loud.
CSPAN is way ahead of the
CSPAN is way ahead of the curve. I love that they covered the event. I can't wait to see it.
I love that mask too, but I
I love that mask too, but I have this feeling any media sources that cover it would love to make people look ridiculous by making it seem like it was a scifi convention. Sort of like when they always show the guy in the alien mask at a Roswell gathering.
"Bush regime under fire at
"Bush regime under fire at 9/11 conspiracy-theory conference"
http://www.pretorianews.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3309890
Once again a media blackout, our MSM pretends to hear no evil, see no evil...
Al, Love the fact that you
Al, Love the fact that you have a V for Vendetta mask! So cool! See below my message about 911 Vendetta video! Great video! We desperately need alot of V's and NOW!
Also covered on FIP radio
Also covered on FIP radio news, one of the best musical radio in France. That's the first time a heard about the truth mouvement on our mainstream media. And the coverage was fair, not talking about conspiracies, just about people demonstrating for throwing to the Court some in the administration.
I was so excited I phoned their journalists to encourage them to follow on reporting.
Keep up the good work brothers!
Smoking Guns?- yeah, read
Smoking Guns?- yeah, read this!
I was barely able to send my brief tech info to Steven Jones before his presentation. This is important because, {as I've said all along,} it was decided to 'pull' the towers years ago due to structural degradation at the joinery between the steel and the aluminum frame members. Yesterday, I recalled the exact instant when I discovered the severity of their 'solution,' if you will, as I entered the library at ER&A and was surprised to see this floor-to-ceiling model of the curtain wall.
"OH!" -exclaimed my boss, who had attended a meeting in the room the night before, "Don't touch that!" -he added, as if surprised it was there. "Well, it's a pretty impressive sculpture, I guess not!" -I put my hands behind my back, respectfully, just as if I were at the Modern or the Whitney. "We'll get that moved," he said and he left.
This sent me reeling, and I had to figure out what it was for? It looked brand new, yet should have read, circa 1970-72. There were 2 alum. frames L/R of a central glass panel, with the steel collums partially cut-away. (illust.) On the plain side, I felt the coarse raw aluminum, and it appeared to be native (normally oxide-rich) cast-type surface. Welds indicate Ser. 5000-grade, but it felt like 10grain, NOT smooth! I didn't dare touch the green insulated side at first. Then, I went to the files to 'skim' related topics, knowing I was not slacking on company time. Ah-ha! I found a folder that related to the 'coring', and seeing fresh, 3" holes at the bottom, this looked close enough. With just enough to go on from the summary, I could see that something was terriably wrong about the bolt-holds at the bottom of each collum-joint.
I spent the day doing my final image comparisons, noting specific building-pearches from which I would later shoot from. Still, I had to know why the plasticized, greenish -aggragate- insulation? Why was it so unique, relative to the soggy red stuff? I rubbed it gently, so as not to cause the rocks to fall-out. Then I thought about files "I' through 'F.' Neither Insulation, or Fireproofing contained anything remotely new, so I thought; I can't find it if it's Not here. I had wiped the jelly off on my jeans, before pawing the paper and it was quite relentless, again, I wiped fervently to get it off. THEN my hand turned bright red! I'm thinking this is caustic as hell. I went to the Men's room and washed with soap, but as soon as I dried my hands, again, it stung like S***! Barry was there as I returned, and he asked, unnaturally (2pm) if I were done for the day? "Yeah, as a matter of fact I've seen too many pictures to tell one damn tower from another. Plus, I'm hoping to shoot something today." -"Good, we'll get this thing out of there tonight, so it's out of your way."
This dialogue just didn't fit the situation, and sure enough, the next day, it had been moved about 8 feet, covered in canvas and turned, back to the wall. That night it was removed, but by what army? There were only about 6 scrawny people left in that office...
For the rest of my 20-something page 'legal deposition,' I'll have it at my site as soon as I can live with the final edit: http://redlineav.com
*****Not necesarily. C-SPAN
*****Not necesarily. C-SPAN is a not for profit organization and perhaps the individuals and higher ups there know the truth. They would also know if they made the decision to put this on the air and start putting more 9/11 truth material on the air they would likely loose their job.****
Says who? Brian Lamb (aka CSPAN CEO).
I like CSPAN, but I'd be a fool to think they didn't have any .gov control given the nature of what they do.
My guess is that the rebroadcast of the Alex Jones 9/11 event will be half an hour long and will be only shown between 3-3:30 am in the morning.
OT: I'd like to point those
OT:
I'd like to point those interested towards this wikipedia 9/11 conflict:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/MONGO
Be sure to read the discussion page too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/MONGO
The more Truthers who edit 9/11 pages, the better! (Just be sure you post with a NPOV - Neutral Point Of View)
FYI... Weldon may have
FYI... Weldon may have cancelled my meeting. I just called to confirm, like I was asked, and Rita from the Upper Darby office told me that they're scheduling meetings in the House this week, and Rep. Weldon may not be able to meet with me.
Fucker.
Sweeeeeeet!
Sweeeeeeet!
just got home from the
just got home from the conference. it was great. the panel that c-span covered was AWESOME. I think i recall a.j. saying it was gonna air on wed.
look for the guy in the crowd w/ the v for vendetta mask. (thats me.)
What panel(s) specifically
What panel(s) specifically received coverage? Please tell us it's Steven Jones!
They're gonna spin it to
They're gonna spin it to make the conference look like a group of lunatics...
fuck yeah
fuck yeah
Not necesarily. C-SPAN is a
Not necesarily. C-SPAN is a not for profit organization and perhaps the individuals and higher ups there know the truth. They would also know if they made the decision to put this on the air and start putting more 9/11 truth material on the air they would likely loose their job.
Greg, near the beginning of
Greg, near the beginning of that video, 1 of the Naudet Bros. says that as soon as he entered the lobby, he saw two people on fire, but didn't want to film them.
The firemen & Naudets got to the WTC very quickly. How/why would there be people on fire in the lobby? The plane struck 800 feet above? These people could have been in the basement. Looks like another smoking gun to me. (Oh, and I'm sure the elevator shafts were very fireproof.)
Nico Haupt's mission is to
Nico Haupt's mission is to prove the 2nd plane was a cartoon (ridiculous) not to prove 9/11 was an inside job.
Jon, Welden is a hopeless
Jon, Welden is a hopeless liar anyway. He still claims there were WMD in Iraq.
I am beginning to think that
I am beginning to think that the planes that hit the towers were some sort of a projection. Every time I watch the videos it looks like the plane slides into the tower like a hot knife slicing into butter. One would think that the plane would break-up when it hits. At least the wings would be sheared off. Actually it doesn't make much difference. The real action takes place below. That "Shock and Awe" tactic was just a distraction much like a magician's slight-of-hand..... I would appreciate some feed-back.
"I am beginning to think
"I am beginning to think that the planes that hit the towers were some sort of a projection."
Someone throw some cold water on that man.
That's wack Jon! Fxck
That's wack Jon! Fxck Weldon! He ain't no John Conners!
quote: Would like to know if
quote: Would like to know if there is more to this program then just what this clip shows
In fact he made this statement on 2 different occasions, the other one was at Town Hall Forum on Economy in California jan. 05. You can find them both here:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/9-11bushbooker.html
Maddog, I've seen tornados
Maddog, I've seen tornados make straw go right through telephone polls. It's all about speed.
That's... ConYers... ;) And
That's... ConYers... ;) And believe me... John Conyers has done a SHITLOAD, but he has NEVER touched 9/11... and he loses a lot of points with me because of it.
Tony S. I'm familiar with
Tony S.
I'm familiar with Bush lying. I've just never seen it reported on T.V.
I was just wondering what program that clip is from, and if there is more?
Sorry about the spelling.
Sorry about the spelling.
Anybody that holds hearings on Capital hill to impeach Bush, is all right by me. It was right around that time that I started to get into 9-11 truth.
"I am beginning to think
"I am beginning to think that the planes that hit the towers were some sort of a projection."
Forget it. If anything, they were drones that were switched for the original planes at Stewart Airport--where the original planes criss-crossed & their transponders went off.
Just curious.....does anyone
Just curious.....does anyone else here have family members or friends who think you are out of your mind because you think the U.S. government was complicit in bringing about the destruction on 9/11?
No need to apologize.
No need to apologize.
"no-plane" says that there
"no-plane" says that there was less going on than it appeared,
but i guess there was much more, really much much more going on than we know now (like the 3rd plane cruising near the burning WTC). You said it:
"like a magician" - you're fooled to believe he's not doing anything to get the rabbit out of his hat, like it's 'magic', but behind the smoke&mirrors he's busier than ever to get the trick done
Just curious.....does anyone
Just curious.....does anyone else here have family members or friends who think you are out of your mind because you think the U.S. government was complicit in bringing about the destruction on 9/11?
truthsearching2006
_________________________----
Alot of my friends and family are 100% behind me. But my mother thinks I talk too much about it? She's crazy tho! :)
"Just curious.....does
"Just curious.....does anyone else here have family members or friends who think you are out of your mind because you think the U.S. government was complicit in bringing about the destruction on 9/11?"
My family has been supportive, but I do have a few friends who think I'm crazy. I have more friends who are on board thought.
So the truth has been
So the truth has been delegated to cartoons, comedy shows, & C-Span
Is it safe?
Have you ever gone to a dentist before? Of course you have. (Unless you're British!) And that's why the torture scene in "Marathon Man" is arguably the most famous of all mainstream torture scenes.
Anyone who has gone to a dentist before can relate to the fear and excruciating pain that Babe (Dustin Hoffman) experiences when he is asked, "Is it safe?" and has no idea what his interrogator is talking about, then finds himself being given a root canal without any Novocain.
The interrogator is Szell (Laurence Olivier), a dreaded German murderer who carried out awful deeds during World War II and offered Jews a free ticket out--for a hefty price.
Szell's question ("Is it safe?") exists because he needs to know whether or not it is safe to withdraw diamonds he stole from Jews during World War II from a safety deposit box. As the film opens, Szell's brother dies in a car crash, which sets up this entire aspect of the plot, since his brother had the key to the vault.
Babe's brother, Doc (Roy Scheider, "JAWS"), comes to visit him in New York City, but turns up at his apartment with stab wounds. Babe soon finds out that Doc was part of a secret "Division" (CIA black-ops stuff) that was on Svell's trail. Believing that Doc may have spilled the beans to Babe, Svell kidnaps the college graduate and this is where the famous torture scene starts. "Is it safe? Is it safe? Is...it...safe...?"
Knowing that 9/11 was a US military shock and awe program and not a terrorist event,
http://nineeleven2001.tripod.com/images/ua175-1-a.swf
the following news reports still give me concern about our safety and who the real terrorists may be. Who are Tamir D. Sason, and Daniel Levy and how do they relate to post 9/11 events?
http://www.news4jax.com/news4georgia/3344771/detail.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20040723012510/http://www.wcyb.tv/newsread.as...
You may be asking yourself who Samuel Dahan is. He is the son of the Likud Party spokesperson Shmuel Dahan. Another important bit of information left out of this news report is that they were busted near the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in Erwin,Tennessee.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020316223600/www.nuclearfuelservices.com/Sp...
The following shows the passengers aboard the four flights who we were told made telephone calls on
9/11/01. Only one death was reported to the Social Security Death Index. And none of the
callerÂ’s families applied to the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001. Maybe the callers should not have wasted airtime on their family.
Caller/Death Reported to SSDI /Application to September 11thVictim Compensation Fund of 2001
Flight 11
Betty Ong NO/NO
Madeline Sweeney NO/NO
Flight 77
Barbara Olson NO/NO
http://www.geocities.com/subliminalsuggestion/olson.html
Flight 175
Peter Burton Hanson NO/NO
Flight 93
Todd Beamer NO/NO
Thomas E. Burnett Jr. NO/NO
Mark Bingham NO/NO
Jeremy Glick NO/NO
Linda Gronlund NO/NO
Joseph F DeLuca* YES/NO
Marion Britton NO/NO
Sandy Bradshaw NO/NO
Edward Felt NO/NO
Honor Wainio NO/NO
CeeCee Lyles NO/NO
Sandra Bradshaw NO/NO
* Linda Gronlund was flying to San Francisco aboard
United Flight 93 with her boyfriend, Joseph F DeLuca.
Linda was a sailor, a scuba diver, A BROWN BELT IN
KARATE, a lawyer, a car mechanic, a ardener, a
photographer, a gourmet cook, a guitarist, an
emergency medical technician and a volunteer with
autistic children. Why wasn't Wonder Woman using her
skills to help stop those mean nasty Arabs?
"Joseph Deluca called his dad. His girlfriend, Linda
Gronlund,called her sister, telling her THE
COMBINATION TO HER SAFE DEPOSIT BOX and how much she
loved her." page 206 of "Let's Roll: Ordinary People,
Extraordinary Courage" by Lisa Beamer
Another book quotes Linda's call to her sister as, "I
want to let you know how much I love you; please tell
Mom and Dad", Linda said."I don't know if I'll be able
to tell you again IN PERSON how much I love you. I
hope I will. I'M REALLY GOING TO MISS YOU." page 161
of "Among the Heroes: United Flight 93 and the
Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back" by Jere Longman.
Does this sound like a woman who is about to die? Or
does this sound like a lawyer who has to go away for a
long time and take a new identity?
The Cleveland Airport Mystery may help explain.
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323
http://web.archive.org/web/20021109040132/http://wcpo.com/specials/2001/...
http://911digitalarchive.org/objects/3.pdf
http://ssdi.genealogy.rootsweb.com/
http://thewebfairy.com/911/nicknack/
Family is easy... they've
Family is easy... they've known me my whole life, and know that I'm not "crazy". They also know I'm fairly intelligent. They also know what kind of person I am. If I believe in something as strongly as I do 9/11 Truth, then they know something must be up without even looking into it. On my word alone. Friends on the other hand, are a trickier sell. I've got about 95% of them on board.
>out of your mind because
>out of your mind because you think >the U.S. government was complicit
One thing people refuse to believe is that Bush would have done all that for personal gain. After all, he became President, the leader of the once best nation on earth, so what does he have to gain? He'll get his presidential library anyway! He'll get secret service protection and tons of money for the rest of his life. Cheney too, does he really need the Halliburton money?? And for that, 3000 murders??
- That's a legitimate question, and i think the answer is really somewhere in the Bohemian Grove, in worshipping Satan, or some ongoing extortion onto them.
Thanks for the comments. I
Thanks for the comments.
I long for the day when we can turn on the "news" and hear that people on a wide scale are waking up from their collective denial about 9/11.
Just to hear the "news" report that masses of people admit to understanding that the WTC buildings were deliberately blown to bits by insiders would be a good start.
In the meantime, I feel like I am living among Stepford citizens who simply dismiss all evidence before their eyes. Or, at the very least, to some, 9/11 is "the past" and is no longer relevant.
***I think (if) we get
***I think (if) we get involved with masks, costumes and stuff we will be easily dismissed..i think we all need to be as professional and serious as possible.***
I agree 1000%.
BTW there have been a lot of OT posts in this blog. Lets try to stay on topic everyone.
@Mike jr. Sorry, better link
@Mike jr.
Sorry, better link with descriptions of both occasions:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/bushlie.html
The first one: President Bush Holds Town Hall Meeting [CNN, Aired December 4, 2001]
You might also ask why
You might also ask why Prescott Bush or Poppy Bush were involved in the Kennedy family cleansing and other nasty stuff or highly enjoyable activity - that depends on your viewpoint..
They just like power and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Bushevik's control over the USA spans from 50s, where Prescott's protege Nixon was doing all the black op stuff for Eisenhower.. The Kennedy, Carter years where just a short pause. And eve than people like Brezinski ran the show behind the curtain so what?
Now, Busheviks are only the mechanics the true power is where Rockefellas and other clepto families hang out..
Interesting piece from the
Interesting piece from the New Yorker about the relationship between David Addington and Cheney.
Cheney's Cheney
"Q: You argue that the September 11th attacks did not change Cheney and AddingtonÂ’s expansive views of the power of the executive branch so much as allow them to implement their long-held views. What led you to this conclusion?
A: At least fifty sources were interviewed for this story. And those who knew Cheney and Addington during the Vietnam War and Watergate told me that, ever since then, both men have wanted to correct what they saw as a weakening of the Presidency. Cheney has participated in the writing of two reports reflecting this view, and he talked about it in a recent press conference. In many ways, 9/11 gave Addington and Cheney the chance to implement their views on the need for a stronger Presidency, since in times of war the PresidentÂ’s powers are greatly augmented."
Among other things.
Among other things.
Mike Jr, I think it was this
Mike Jr,
I think it was this program or at least this series:
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/
Amanda , very interesting ,
Amanda , very interesting , very long post , but I wish you would be more straightfoward and just come out with what your getting at. What's your theory as to what happened to all these folks , if they existed at all ?How does it relate to LA conference and how does it further our collective goals ?
Thierry Meyssan wrote: "In
Thierry Meyssan wrote:
"In the name of the victimsÂ’ memory, the Bush administartion imposes its own will"
confirmed by the FBI's big mouth:
"To even suggest that AA77 did not crash into the Pentagon on September 11 is the ultimate insult to the memory of the ... ruthlessly murdered by terrorists on September 11."
FBI statement, April 2, 2002
Thanks FrankV
Thanks FrankV
http://english.aljazeera.net/
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/902292ED-65D9-46BC-A6A9-4C9941F94...
Yeah, that was a sad story
Yeah, that was a sad story Greg. Does anybody have an update on this guy, and what he's been up to since then?
"Forget it. If anything,
"Forget it. If anything, they were drones that were switched for the original planes at Stewart Airport--where the original planes criss-crossed & their transponders went off."
OK, I know this is OT, my apologies, but this "coincidence" really intrigues me. Has someone studied this? Where is the best info on this?
I find it especially interesting with all the recent news coming out about Huffman Aviation Airport in FL, where Atta and other alleged hijackers were trained, what with the April Mexican bust of a DC9 with 5.5 tons of cocaine on it. Apparently the plane was owned or had ties to a CIA front company based at Huffman.
So, what more is there to learn about Stewart?
AV Voice Changer Software
AV Voice Changer Software Diamond Edition
You can freely adjust voice settings and apply effects to enhance sex appeal or characteristics. Built-in Voice Comparator helps simulate people's voices by comparing and hinting. Compatible with most voice chat clients: Yahoo Messenger (YIM), AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), ICQ, MSN, PalTalk, Odigo, Netmeeting and Roger Wilco; and PC2Phone programs: Net2Phone, Dialpad, Go2Call, DeltaThree, MaxPhone.
http://www.sharewareriver.com/products/25258.htm
Hey, do you have links to
Hey, do you have links to the Financial Times and Washington Post articles on the L.A. conference?
If so, I'll post them here.
Amanda , very interesting ,
Amanda , very interesting , very long post , but I wish you would be more straightfoward and just come out with what your getting at. What's your theory as to what happened to all these folks , if they existed at all ?How does it relate to LA conference and how does it further our collective goals ?
colin | 06.26.06 - 12:15 pm | #
I never know what to make of these "Amanda" posts. They are often intriguing, but very mysterious & hard to verify.
London 7/7 New bombing
London 7/7
New bombing claims fuel calls for a public inquiry
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-2243365,00.html
Operation Northwoods called
Operation Northwoods called for false-flag operation including: switching planes, using drones disguised as airliners, imposters playing the parts of college-student passengers, etc.
>Yeah, that was a sad story
>Yeah, that was a sad story Greg. >Does anybody have an update
>Mike Jr. | Homepage | 06.26.06 - >12:42 pm | #
What happened to him shows crystal clear the fear of 9/11 truth among the MSM: they don't think it's 'safe yet' - let's not wait for them
- That's a legitimate
- That's a legitimate question, and i think the answer is really somewhere in the Bohemian Grove, in worshipping Satan, or some ongoing extortion onto them.
Greg | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 11:41 am | #
I also believe that Bush/Cheney/Rummy et al, are psychopathic. Barry Zwicker says that 1% of the population are psychopaths. To make things worse, I think many of these dangerous nuts are drawn to politics & leadership roles.
Yeah, I'm familiar with
Yeah, I'm familiar with Operations Northwoods, that's why the Stewart "coincidence" intrigues me. I just want to know more about the timeline regarding how close the planes intersected over it and when the transponders were turned off.
Is this information in Thompson's 9/11 Timeline?
It sounds like they could have easily gotten original planes down had another in the air to switch a drone for the actual flight.
BTW, the DC9 drug plane busted in Mexico had been painted up with a Dept. of Homeland Security logo.
Guys, I just got back from
Guys, I just got back from the conference...oh man, it was a 10 hour ride back, so I'm just collecting my thoughts. But the bottom line is the deal is sealed folks:
1. 9/11 Truth will go mainstream. You coul dnot find a more diverse group of intelligent peopel from around the world than in this one room...from teachers, doctors, lawyers, current and foremr millitary, law enforcement, producers, college students, longtime activists, etc. If this is any litmus microcosm, 9/11 Truth will be breaking
acceptable to the masses.
2. We got it. I don't know how to say this other than the deal is sealed on the irrefutable proof of controlled demolition. There is a point of utter silence during a scene from the upcoming Loose Change Final Edit. God bless thse guys for getting this WTC footage...but it shows a clear shot of the entire WTC in frame, with pools of thermite literally pouring down the sides of the building, and then boom---boom---boom...and the reporter is screaming that she just heard what sounded like hundreds of fire crackers go off. Youll have to see the footage. The new 911eyewitness footage that show a series of bright flashes within the top of the wtc initial explosion was also one of those meoments where people were silent. William Rodriguez, the biggets hero of 9/11 finally told every detail from that day, and the deliberate sabotage by the government to try and make sure noone survived that day is soul crushing. And Steven Jones' new smoking gun evidence...this is all grand jurty stuff akin to a video of a shooting.
3. I was struck how everyone I met could not have been more kind, pasisonate, loving and truly concerned yet informed about everything going on worldwide. Yes, this was a 9/11 Truth event, but it touched on virtually every important issue we're facing today. And this is why liberals and conservatives need to realize from 9/11 truth, comes understanding the very future of America and the world...the positive outcome for all issues that can come. But I am completley in awe...the closing speach by Alex Jones, and William Rodriguez's talk will leave almost anyone in tears.
just got back. TOTALLY
just got back. TOTALLY INSPIRING. great speakers, great attendees. i felt empowered to start screaming from rooftops. alex's main speech was off the hook. everyone in excellent form really. i got to talk to jimmy walter to try and get an idea of where he was coming from w/ the tv fakery business. he doesn't confirm or deny whether a plane hit the south tower but does assert that footage was doctored, that a chain of custody of videos are not established, and that a plane hitting the tower "shouldn't" look like what we see. in fact, the trailer to this was shown before the new 9/11 Eyewitness and I must say it caught my interest. What they're saying with this shot is that the left wing disappears before impact.
No tabloid covered the
No tabloid covered the conference on the "wacky wifebeater Charlie Leader of Tinfoil hat brigade" angle ?I'm surprised.It might be nice to have an albeit smeared ,911truth movement hinted at in every grocery aisle in northamerica .
Loose Change is on third
Loose Change is on third place on Google Video.. with Korean subtitles :)
Welcome back Pocky! Great to
Welcome back Pocky! Great to hear from you , I'm thrilled to hear of the Rodriguez speech , as he is a Hero of mine as well. I cannot wait to see video on all this .
Is this unseen new footage
Is this unseen new footage of w7 CD ?Coupled with SJones' findings , this could really be something to get excited about!
EXCELLENT Aaron Russo
EXCELLENT Aaron Russo interviews! Check'em out. I love this guy!
1 of 3
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/interviews...0Hour%20Two.mp3
2 of 3
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/interviews...our%20Three.mp3
3 of 3
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/interviews...Hour%20Four.mp3
They are dissen our man Jon
They are dissen our man Jon Gold here
http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/
Lets make them pay for not answering the questions Jon Gold ask them. by asking them more questions.
peace,pw
the trailer to this was
the trailer to this was shown before the new 9/11 Eyewitness and I must say it caught my interest. What they're saying with this shot is that the left wing disappears before impact.
emptyground
_____--
I don't think the left wing is "disappering" in that photo. Look at the left tail wing. It's hard to see because of the color of the building and the wing. Plus I can see the left engine, and there is a shadow cast by the plane that could also make the left wing hard to see.
yeah, this tv fakery shit
yeah, this tv fakery shit needs to stop now.
They are dissen our man Jon
They are dissen our man Jon Gold here
http://911conspiracysmasher.blog...r.blogspot.com/
Lets make them pay for not answering the questions Jon Gold ask them. by asking them more questions.
peace,pw
pw | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 1:59 pm | #
that should be flattering coming from those pathetic souls. the fear is always fun to watch.......
The plane was going 500 mph!
The plane was going 500 mph! Of course the video looks wierd, blurry, messed-up, etc.
pockybot, please provide
pockybot,
please provide more details of this video clip you describe. are you sure it is new? there is that one video of the molten metal which steven jones refers to, is this different footage?!
Yeah Steven Jones had a lot
Yeah Steven Jones had a lot of new photo slides and a wealth of new evidence, cant remember it all.
The smoking gun "Zapruder" footage of WTC detonation will leave people speachless. I dont even know how the anti 9/11 truthers will spin it, maybe theyll claim it was doctored.
I took Jimmy Walters and Rick Siegel(both great heroes in their own right) about the poisonous "video fakery" stuff. I think they are just trying to be fair to all the theories, but the fact there is a clear plane cutout in the building with plane pars everywhere on the ground render's Nico's hypothesis mute.
Btw, let me say...standing in a small bar shoulder to shoulder with Alex Jones, Profeseor Jones, the Loose Change guys, William Rodriguez, Mike Berger(NO IDEA why he wasnt allowed to speak...guess theres still some politics in the movement), Barry Zwicker, Fetzer, Tarpley, Anthony Hilder, and so many others...it was surreal to say the least.
Oh yeah, the "conspiracysmasher" people. There could be an audio tape of Cheney admitting it, and theyd call us UFO idiots. Cant the GOP do any better at their cointelpro?
yeah, this tv fakery shit
yeah, this tv fakery shit needs to stop now.
Chris | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 2:06 pm
Great idea! Anytime some brings up some evidence pointing towards M$M involvment from the beginning (those pesky TV fakery no-planers) we should denounce them a shills and disinfo agents!
We can safey ignore evidence of birds damaging 767 wings in midflight and go on assuming that a 767 can slice right thru the structural steel at the WTC!
Forget about the studies done by the Materials and Surfance Science Institute at the University of Limerick which claim that: While the most commonly damaged component is the engine, the second most damaged element is the wing. “The main worry if birds hit the wing is if they were to penetrate the leading edge and hit the spar, behind which lies the fuel tank,” said Professor McCarthy [a member of the Materials and Surface Science Institute at the University of Limerick]
I witnessed it on 'live' TV, it must be true! The M$M is a neutral third party who would never lie. Why on earth would the videos be fake?
Open your eyes and do a little research...
forget the MSM you jackass,
forget the MSM you jackass, there are various videos that you NICO morons ignore simply because it blows your disinfo to shit.as if the thousands of people in New York that day 'were in on it".fucking moron. 911blogger.com should consider a disclaimer for people like this.
Open your eyes and do a
Open your eyes and do a little research...
shep | 06.26.06 - 2:56 pm | #
i have read a lot of NICO type cartoony bullshit. its more selective than The New York Times pre-war coverage. really amatuer stuff, and not in a good way.
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.c
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/
Uncropped long distance, not-live shown footage proves fakery (06/26)
How "Opposition" of 9/11 TV fakery evidence reacts... (06/26):
Mon Jun-26-06
All of the "hologram" and "CGI Planes" threads . . . .?
Anyone who posits this theory is straight up DIS-INFO direct from the shadow government. Nothing more and nothing less..."
The visual evidence of NON-LIVE footage however proves i.e.:
1)
no impact sound at time of CGI 'attack' of South Tower,
no crumbling walls at time of impact:
YOU TUBE
2)
2 actors used as an off-voice for alleged amateur footage which shows
a CGI showing a black silhouette impostering as an alleged real aircraft,
though the walls also do not crumble and wings do not break apart:
YOU TUBE, "Witness Reactions"
3)
2 other actors ("holy cow") used as an off-voice for alleged amateur footage,
which shows a completely different CGI with different behavior
at time of vanishing behind the North Tower:
BodyAtomic, "my window", formerly another source
4)
The NON-LIVE footage provided by an unidentified helicopter and camera operator team for FOX, proves clearly that it was shot from a distance of apprx. 5-6 miles away.
It wasn't explained yet, why this camera team did violate 2 existential camera rules:
Showing more of the alleged incoming real aircraft from the right side as an EWS (Extreme Wide Shot) or ECU (Extreme Close up), to show more details and flight route:
"Loose Change Saltergate Video"
You see also that after the zoom from 5-6 miles away, a logo is obscuring the CGI black silhouette, apparently on purpose to hide more details.
(see pictures above)
What you also logically realize is that the black silhouette is still coming from a straight right angle, which contradicts the LIVE Footage from ABC7:
(see also 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world
http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html
and "Compare the 9/11 TV Fraud (Updated w/6 flashies)
http://www.911closeup.com/nico/ccc_comparefraud.html
right on cue agent Nico.
right on cue agent Nico.
Zapruder footage of 9/11..
Zapruder footage of 9/11.. ?!?
Well, we have had Zapruder on JFK for some time and the MSM cretins still look into your eyes and say, "no conspiracy, Oswald was the lone gunman"..
People get real, there will be no change unless part of the army ranks will openly revolt. My guestimate is 7% so not likely..
i have read a lot of NICO
i have read a lot of NICO type cartoony bullshit. its more selective than The New York Times pre-war coverage. really amatuer stuff, and not in a good way.
Chris | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 3:12 pm
Yes, perhaps. But don't selectively choose what to believe. Don't ignore something obvious.
If you support drone planes or real planes, you need to find an reason why birds can damage a 767 wing in midflight, but structural steel @ WTC does nothing. The wings slice right thru the building, but a bird can damage the wings? explain that!
as if the thousands of people in New York that day 'were in on it"
When did i make that claim?
BTW, Nico does not speak for me.
there are various videos that you NICO morons ignore
Lets find one! You say various, I'll make it easy... show me one secondhit video which you would stand behind as being authentic. I believe there exist ~17 videos of the second hit (the only event which was captured from multiple source - ok, fine.. WTC1 might have 2 sources, naudet and bridge footage).
Why is that when someone offers a disenting viewpoint, they are disinfo agents? Gotta love it!
Tvfakery talk is like the
Tvfakery talk is like the ring in 'lord of the rings', as soon as you put it on , the all-seeing eye of mordor can see you. Nazguls are dispatched to swoop down on legit threads.
let me ask you 2 simple
let me ask you 2 simple questions. is there not enough DAMNING and damaging information to convery that 9/11 was an inside job without expecting people to jump to the conclusion that "holograms" and shit were used? why is it "tv fakery" is the #1 issue for you with the mountains of highly credible, verifiable info showing the "official story" is complete bullshit? why is that your #1 issue? that looks suspect to many here(hence the admittedly overused disinfo tag),not just me. of all the inside job evidence, you expect people to buy your theories about cartoons.can you not see my point?
its funny how all of you
its funny how all of you hologram pushers ignore everything BUT holograms and CGI. that is why people question your motives.(maybe not specifically you,i dont know you, but people who typically push that theory). take James Ha for instance, he seems to be on your side when it comes to "tv fakery", but nobody here ever really(at least not regulars) calls him disinfo or an "agent" because he talks about much more than CGI. its not a constant drive-by of insults and CGI CGI CGI HOLOGRAMS, PLANE HUGGERS bullshit that Nico,blimp and their ilk spew.
the "no plane" is
the "no plane" is theoretically possible, but unrealistic: Why would they stage 17 amateur video "plants", when their military has the capability for such covert ops. + they have the established secrecy procedures, especially the Air force, e.g. they don't even admit the Area 51 airbase exists, so how can you expect they can't secretly send a 757 or similar plane and crash it into the big WTC? when smart bombs can be directed down into chimneys?
And above all: Bush is a very old-fashioned type of guy. Has he ever made any modern statements about the information age?? Nope. In Bush's world there's only old fashioned things, something 'blown up' (see dozens of quotes from Dubya), cars, old fashioned ground wars, and above all: OIL
The first ever Global Hawk
The first ever Global Hawk piloted by an Arab: http://gritzie.com/images/binladentapeattackimage.jpg
and why would they risk
and why would they risk regular people walking the streets with video cameras(because tourists dont usually have cameras right Nico? no, not in New friggin York right?)taking a video of the second plane not hitting or not even being there as they allege? its absurd.
i am not pushing for
i am not pushing for anything, CGI, holograms or blimps. If fact, those are the first times i've used those words...
what i am pushing for is a reexamination of the basis for your claims (not specifically you chris) by pointing to real evidence: real plane wings slice thru real steel (as seen in 'videos) vs. real birds slicing thru real plane wings (as documented above) something strikes me as odd about that? can you see it?
is there not enough DAMNING and damaging information to convery that 9/11 was an inside job without expecting people to jump to the conclusion that "holograms"
as stated above, i never concluded holograms - in fact, made no conclusions. to answer your question, yes, there is damning evidence (CD, stand down, foreknowledge, etc..), but I believe by ignoring the potential for TV fakery, you're letting alot of the perps off the hook, no?
do i preach no planes when i am trying to expose to newbies? no. do i point out the obvious contridictions in believing real planes were used? yes...
but deaf ears and blind eyes...
Id be open to any theory,
Id be open to any theory, BUT...there is an obvious plane cutout in the side of the two towers, with amatuer footage never shown on tv yet on cameraplanet and elsewhere that shows the plane.
Also, there is the fuselage in the middle of the street and other plane parts that could NOT have been planted.
Now Ive seen some new evidence, and am willing to consider that maybe there was authentic but fake drones used ultimately, and no flight 77 at the pentagon. Again just startling new information and footage Ive seen.
But I find it curious the no planers focus SOLELY on this "theory". Just like Wingtv focuses on "The Jews" and
attacking the 9/11 Truthers. If they were at the LA conference, I would have asked what their real purpose is?
but I believe by ignoring
but I believe by ignoring the potential for TV fakery, you're letting alot of the perps off the hook, no?
shep | 06.26.06 - 3:50 pm | #
i believe we are letting ALL the perps off the hook if tv fakery is what our main argument is, or even close to being a leading argument for inside job.this is reality, and even if you believe %100 that tv fakery was used, you have to be rational enough to know how thats going to look to the average citizen. now how is the NORAD info,the foreknowledge,put options,fake Osama tapes,CD etc. going to look to the average citizen? a lot more digestible,believable and rational.you dont even NEED to be pushing CGI(or whatever it is you want to call it) to convey to people the problems of the official story.thats my point.
do i preach no planes when i am trying to expose to newbies? no.
shep | 06.26.06 - 3:50 pm | #
its a damn shame some of the people that also believe in tv fakery are not that wise.
But I find it curious the no
But I find it curious the no planers focus SOLELY on this "theory".
pockybot | 06.26.06 - 4:01 pm | #
exactly my point pocky, i should have just left it at that. haha.
>what their real purpose
>what their real purpose is?
Their purpose is to make 9/11 truth absolutely undigestable for the Media. Because once you accuse THEM of direct complicity CNN etc., what else can you expect?
Now Ive seen some new
Now Ive seen some new evidence, and am willing to consider that maybe there was authentic but fake drones used ultimately, and no flight 77 at the pentagon. Again just startling new information and footage Ive seen.
pockybot | 06.26.06 - 4:01 pm | #
wow, thats new. care to share any info that changed your outlook?
You always have to keep in
You always have to keep in mind: Bush, the elitist, thinks you're stupid. He doesn't think you'll notice the difference between a small passenger plane hitting the WTC1 hight above your head or a B-767.
And should you find it out, he doesn't think you couldn't be intimidated and your testimony couldn't be BULLDOZED over by propaganda.
WTC7 is the prime example: the only evidence for NOT a controlled demolition is denial & propaganda, and so far it worked!
Yeah , don't tease us ,
Yeah , don't tease us , Pocky.
Tell us about the new
Tell us about the new evidence.
Also, there is the fuselage
Also, there is the fuselage in the middle of the street and other plane parts that could NOT have been planted.
and of course a link can be provided to photos of this fuselage in the middle of the street, yes?
__________----
i believe we are letting ALL
i believe we are letting ALL the perps off the hook if tv fakery is what our main argument is
i said before, maybe not clear enough, it is not my main argument. personally, CD is my tool for exposing or attacting the attention of newbies.
and even if you believe %100 that tv fakery was used, you have to be rational enough to know how thats going to look to the average citizen.
yes chris, but are you an average citizen? (perhaps, i don't know you personally) if you'll grant the assumption that you are not an average person in that you have been convinced already for 911 inside job, how about taking a look closer at tvfakery? what harm can it do you? you've been convinced already! (again, i assuming)
after researching 911 evidence for even a short time, it didn't take long to convince myself of CD, foreknowledge, stand down, etc.. and all the other rock solid pieces of evidence.
so what harm does it do to examine tv fakey? none.
and i point out, no one refuted or offered rebuttals to my arguments (and documented evidence) of birds vs plane wings.
step to the plate, plane-huggers!
so what harm does it do to
so what harm does it do to examine tv fakey? none.
Keerist! No wonder we compare you folks to the Flat Earth Society. Yer completely bonkers!
>step to the plate,
>step to the plate, plane-huggers!
>shep | 06.26.06 - 4:19 pm | #
I looked into no-plane, too. The only thing odd i find is the 'loose engine' on the second plane. About other effects like disappearing wingtips: maybe it's video-compression effects, that would explain it.
But what makes it impossible for me to believe is that it would take a wide conspiracy by that many media sources: So someone would have had to coordinate these fakes, make sure they look real, are consistent from every perspective, consistent with the explosion, and confiscate any privately made video showing no plane before the explosion, and the photographs of the 2nd plane. And all the people who would claim to have made these videos/photographs would have to conspire to lie about it. So many people, and people make mistakes - that's why i don't believe it.
9/11 didn't require that perfect of a stunt. It just required a really good cover-up.
BTW. the latest Bush quote:
We're at war with a bunch of people who want to hurt the United States of America," the president said. "What we were doing was the right thing."
indeed. put up or shut
indeed. put up or shut up
__________
while being accused of disinfo i discover real disinfo:
Also, there is the fuselage in the middle of the street.
i am eagerly awaiting a link to photos of this fuselage in the middle of the street.
also, please reference this statement:
'loose engine' on the second plane
_________________
mystery solved! oh case
mystery solved! oh case closed! thanx, i can desist now. ha.
__________-
james ha | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 9:53 pm | #
Yes, please cease & desist now.
mystery solved! oh case
mystery solved! oh case closed! thanx, i can desist now. ha.
__________-
i'm convinced there's simple
i'm convinced there's simple explanations for all the 9/11 topics. As long as we don't know what happened, it is a mountain of possibilites, but the truth is just a fraction of it.
e.g. The WTC7 might be a simple story after all: Giuliani's bunker etc., all false, only Silverstein's insurance fraud, then it didn't go down together with the WTC as planned, they worked overtime, phoned even Bush on Air Force One about it, and in the afternoon, finally found the circuit breaker and blew it up, casualties: 1 special agent found in the rubble
or: the remote control issue: we're trying to find evidence that it's possible, digging up the NASA footage, infos on Global Hawk etc., but it's much simpler: the Neocons found some suicidal yet patriotic pilots that flew the planes into the WTC. Period.
there weren't many media
there weren't many media sources - the only "live" footage of any "plane" was filmed by an ABC7 helicopter with a military system and shared with the other networks. and despite being "live" footage it was delayed by nearly 10 seconds. it wasn't a conspiracy that required a large number of participants, certainly not as many as remote control would have entailed. - did you know that the only eyewitless who claimed to see a 767 (after blob11 struck and before yosemitesam175 struck) was a CNN high muckity-muck?
__________-
"...And many of the video
Exactly, Greg. On top of the technical problems you described so well, add the fact that the subject was moving @ 500 mph. Mystery solved!
> It's always the 2nd plane
> It's always the 2nd plane at WTC >that everyone saw that you must >insist was fake.
Anonymous, you nailed it!
The first plane is what made trickery simple as hell. It also hit even higher above than the second one, so even less could be seen.
Then the Pentagon had the big advantage of 1. many Pentagon/govt. personell appearing as witnesses, so they could more likely be corrupted than random New Yorkers, and 2. the 'crash' was all nicely confined to the Pentagon compound, the most restricted, most off limits area of the world, where Rumsfeld had total control over what happened to plane parts afterwards, what photographs were allowed inside this super-secret building, and of course, what CCTV video frames would be released.
Those that push the second plane CGI theory try to prove the impossible, to prove the most unlikely possibility, like trying to prove that Rumsfeld himself is a CGI. That's why i said, Bush is a very primitive, old fashioned type of guy, he understands flying a plane into a building and telling people lies about it - simple ways and means -, and not any high technology computerized stuff.
And many of the video anomalities can indeed be explained by video-compression: Since almost all videos were either right away made with digital cameras or later digitized before being broadcast/put online, they suffered some data-loss. So if, e.g. you have an MPEG stream (same for WMV, MOV, JPEG), it is absolutely normal that sometimes a bird appears in one frame, disappears in the next, and then reappears. So the cut wingtip of the 2nd plane maybe has as simple an explanation as that.
>where people are reacting
>where people are reacting to the >first explosion, and if you look >closely at the background you will >see the area already roped off with >yellow crime tape ahead of time.
Very interesting, that's the type of investigation we need of 9/11. Another thing I think could be a treasure trove is the whole passenger issue, especially the 'callers'.
The missing plane part mysteries are of course fueled by the whole secrecy. Whether the engines were found in the rubble or not is what Giuliani intends to take to his grave, so out of this 'gap' flourishes all possible theories...Only getting new information would help here, i'm afraid.
actually it's always the 2nd
actually it's always the 2nd plane because there are about 30 images total of the 2nd plane, (even though only 4 of the actual hit), all of them phony looking: ghostgun UA175, and only 1 image of blob11 (can anyone a truly say that blob11 in any way resembles a 767?)
so it's very easy to see and point out the weird anomalies with yosemitesam175 as there are so many to point out.
__________-
But what makes it impossible
But what makes it impossible for me to believe is that it would take a wide conspiracy by that many media sources
Fair enough, this was my belief too at first. I encourage you to watch 9/11 Chronology Source Material with an eye for no planes. FOX and CNN show the same clip from the same source for the 'live' WTC2 impact. Following that, CNN showed its own unique clip prior to collapse (CNN wide angle) and FOX showed it own unique clip prior to collapse (blue plane). So how many fakes did they need?
So someone would have had to coordinate these fakes, make sure they look real, are consistent from every perspective, consistent with the explosion, and confiscate any privately made video showing no plane before the explosion, and the photographs of the 2nd plane.
Theoretically, yes. But these inconsistencies is no-planers main issue. When you examine the evidence with an open mind, all those inconsistencies exist plane as day. Different flight paths, different approach angles, cameramen who should have seen the plane don't, and explosions0 with different timings.
Regardless, plane-hugger or no-planner, you should watch the chronology source because it gives a nice M$M timeline from just after first hit up until second collapse, both CNN and FOX.
Comments on my bird vs. plane wing evidence? I'd love to hear!
The 'loose
The 'loose engine':
http://www.planetburrito.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=18&pos=9
The left turbofan of plane No'2 seemed to be tilting and down during the approach. Some news-broadcast speculated the plane was 'damaged' (have no link for it however).
What i was not able to find
What i was not able to find so far was some eye-witness statements about the first plane. Nobody in NYC saw it?
I'm convinced they just used a smaller plane, also to fool radar operators, and maybe because they had this one (Global Hawk) in stock.
I think the second plane had to be real with all the people looking at the burning tower. If there is really a lack of people that saw it...
A Critical Review of WTC "No
A Critical Review of WTC "No Plane" Theories
A very succinct debunk by Eric Salter, a professional video editor for over 11 years.
;)
The Nico Haupt/Team 8
The Nico Haupt/Team 8 material is intriguing, even titillating. Perhaps that is its purpose. I haven't delved into all of it, but what I have examined seems to lack corroboration, unlike Paul Thompson's timelines, or lots of other material now commonly held in the 9/11 world. What it lacks most of all is coherence. Perhaps the group should save up their money and spring for a good writer.
did you know that the only
did you know that the only eyewitless who claimed to see a 767 (after blob11 struck and before yosemitesam175 struck) was a CNN high muckity-muck?
ha, right again! if anyone doubts this, just watch the chrono source i referenced earlier. the first and only 'eye witness' to support to the first plane (blob11) was a CNN exec! see for yourself: http://www.archive.org/details/911-Chronology-Source
BTW, thanks for the great cut&paste job Fred.
strike that! by saying the
strike that!
by saying the first and only 'eye witness' to support to the first plane i meant to more accurately say..
the first and only 'eye witness' to support a commericial plane hitting WTC1 (blob11)
re: looking serious and
re: looking serious and professional,
this wasn't the comic book convention in san diego, and we need some ammount of humor and fun in our research and about ourselves. I wouldn't ever wear a 'grey' alien mask or other shit like that cuz we already get labeled alienlovingtinfoilhatters enough, the purpose in my wearing the mask was to 1 have fun 2 remind folks that we've got to be like guy fawkes and liberate our minds and our asses will follow.
Re: no planes I was talking
Re: no planes
I was talking shit to ppl next to me when jimmy put forward that crap. what about the plane parts they found on the ground? the idea is ludicrous and i think is meant to discredit the other verifiable info 911truthers bring out.
i'm so envious of you
i'm so envious of you guys...
yall really got things going---
basically the birth of the 911truth movement from the underground
I'm alarmed at the current
I'm alarmed at the current situation. Many of the most important 9/11 sites rely on Holmgren's analysis of the Pentagon anomalies. If he persists in pushing this baseless theory, large portions of the 9/11 truth movement stand to be tainted through this association. The debunkers would approach it like this: "Within the community of 9/11 conspiracy theorists, broad support is given to a man that believes that no 767s hit the World Trade Center." Guilt by association may not be an honorable debating tactic, but the other side is anything but honorable. The anti-conspiracy article in the May 2004 issue of Vanity Fair ("Welcome to the Conspiracy") uses Paul Joseph Watson's analysis of the first hit at the WTC to illustrate how absurd 9/11 conspiracy theories are. Though Watson doesn't go as far as the no-planers, his claims about multiple missile firings and the different sizes of the plane and the hole are erroneous enough to give the debunkers plenty of ammunition. It goes to show how risky this kind of speculation can be. The WTC no-plane theories are a danger to the 9/11 truth movement and should be vigorously rejected.
makes sense to me.
What i was not able to find
What i was not able to find so far was some eye-witness statements about the first plane. Nobody in NYC saw it?
I'm convinced they just used a smaller plane, also to fool radar operators, and maybe because they had this one (Global Hawk) in stock.
I think the second plane had to be real with all the people looking at the burning tower. If there is really a lack of people that saw it...
Greg | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 5:00 pm | #
why the hell would they fake the first one only to make the second one real?
this is why the no planes
this is why the no planes bullshit doesnt work.you go in circles as intended by whoever the hell thought it up in the first place. (Holmgren?)
Al, planted plane
Al,
planted plane parts?
That is also ignored when it comes to Shanksville and Pentagon.
Double Standard pure for the NYC Planehuggers who stopped hugging in DC and Shanksville :)
Thanks for pasting today's CC debate.
Now i hope, that you realize that this debate won't go away, even if you guys continue to censor it at 911blogger.com
After dz also violated the oldest netiquette: Chat rooms should never be censored. This isn't about "infighting", it is about a documentation where everyone stands in this movement.
Speaking for this argument, your website is still editorialized and doing a good job.
There is no defacement on the website, while team8plus, inn.globalfreepress and 911closeup.com got several times hacked or defaced.
Speaking with double standards, let us present our evidence and don't censor.
You even allowed the flagwavers from 911conspiracysmasher back.
So why not the 9/11 TV fakery researchers?
What are you really scared about?
There was ZERO coverage in any U.S. mainstream report yet about 9/11 TV fakery including the latest REUTERS report of Jill Serjeant, Weekly Standard or Washington Post.
That means, the censorship of 911blogger.com is even stronger and still more hostile than the 'ignorance' of U.S. Media on that matter...
nico haupt aka ewing2001
911tvfakery.blogspot.com (video fakery updates)
team8plus (no flight research)
911Inside Jobbers Yahoo (think tank)
ex-ny911truth.org co-founder (activist group)
ex- INN World Report, ex -Shadow Government TV (tv shows)
ex- 911skeptics.blogspot.com and inn.globalfreepress.com
prove that i am an agent...
Agent for what???
Nico, what do you think of
Nico, what do you think of the collapse of WTC7 and the put options on AA? oh wait, i forgot, YOU DONT, you only think of cartoons. sorry i asked. see my point?
Chris wrote: "...why the
Chris wrote:
"...why the hell would they fake the first one only to make the second one real?..."
You have that backwards again.
The first footage wasn't faked and shows a real unidentified military aircraft plus unidentified additional formations from unknown nature at time of impact.
(the second attack live footage was faked and so was all other non-live footage and some doctored amateur footage at Camera Planet, who is in cohut with NY Times/Nathaniel and Bank of America, as they confirmed on their own website. Many footage was also confiscated by FBI and FEMA. There is furthermore no amateur New Jersey Footage which shows any plane hitting the North Tower)
Witnesses? 12-14 saw nothing and/or filmed nothing. Useless for any side of the argument though.
The 911Emergency Transcripts even show, that 'witnesses' believed, that this was a helicopter, who hit the North Tower.
http://911closeup.com/nico/witness_contradictions.html
0859 hours, 46 seconds
OPERATOR:
8621, this is 1821 in Manhattan for the One World Trade...
...CRO: No problem. Did you hear it was a confirmed helicopter or a plane?
OPERATOR: They said it's a helicopter.
CRO: Helicopter; right? Yeah.
OPERATOR: Yeah, yeah. They're not sure. But most people are saying helicopter...
0853 hours, 40 seconds
OPERATOR:
8758, 1796. In Manhattan we got two people hurt at the Marriott Hotel.
The caller is on the line...
...there was somebody that fell out of the window from there too.
OPERATOR: Oh, my God. You're getting hit with everything over there.
CRO: Yeah, I guess the guy was in a helicopter and just fell out of the helicopter.
OPERATOR: It was a helicopter or a plane?
CRO: They say helicopter...
Nico, what do you think of
Nico, what do you think of the collapse of WTC7 and the put options on AA? oh wait, i forgot, YOU DONT, you only think of cartoons. sorry i asked. see my point?
Chris | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 6:11 pm | #
hes like a drone, he doesnt see anything but cartoons and holograms.
Nico, what do you think of
Nico, what do you think of the collapse of WTC7 and the put options on AA? oh wait, i forgot, YOU DONT, you only think of cartoons. sorry i asked. see my point?
Chris | Homepage | 06.26.06 - 6:11 pm | #
Nico Haupt aka ewing2001 | 06.26.06 - 6:14 pm | #
no Nico, i was responding to someone elses claims(try and read before you spew your bullshit ok?).
oops, meant to put
oops, meant to put this.
Chris wrote:
"...why the hell would they fake the first one only to make the second one real?..."
You have that backwards again.
no Nico, i was responding to someone elses claims(try and read before you spew your bullshit ok?).
Chris wrote: ",...Nico, what
Chris wrote:
",...Nico, what do you think of the collapse of WTC7 and the put options on AA? oh wait, i forgot, YOU DONT, you only think of cartoons. sorry i asked. see my point?..."
You still ignoring my history in this movement. I was the co-founder of the "9/11 Science and Justice Alliance" pushing physical evidence on controlled demolition of wtc 1, 2, 7 for years against the very same truthlings, who now also block all other evidence on TV fakery.
Without us, there wouldn't be any 911Scholars, Griffin, Jones, WING TV and co. on that matter.
What the 'put options' depends, this is a red herring meme by Mike Ruppert, himself debunked as cointel pro asset and disinfo author.
Put options also furthermore had been confirmed by the 9/11 report, which was ignored even by Griffin.
It was a footnote which declared the 9/11 put options as the result of a "newsletter" based on prior knowledge.
Therefore double red herring and limited hangout.
Question back:
What about the 9/11 FBI insider trading as resported in 2002?
Where are you on that? They even indicted and arrested all involved persons. Why is 911truth.org and Ruppert never reporting about that?
(I have the answer. Just ask why ElGindy's brother was really working for Cynthia McKinney and why Ruppert played this down :)
IMO, 2 real drones struck @
IMO, 2 real drones struck @ the WTC. The commercial airliners landed at Stewart Airport. The empty drones flew via remote-control/auto-pilot (the commercial airliners that took off from Boston probably had imposter passengers (a la Operation Northwoods) and were not fitted for remote-control nor auto-pilot into buildings.
A drone or missile hit the Pentagon.
then why Nico, do you
then why Nico, do you endlessly stick to JUST cartoons. you are seen as irrational at best based on your tactics.(it doesnt help that you insult people who dont take your delusions seriously)
Nico, you seek to prove
Nico, you seek to prove EVERYTHING--THAT IS--EVERYTHING EXCEPT THAT 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!
Nico, are you just a disinfo
Nico, are you just a disinfo agent or are you also one of the 9/11 perps???
I was holding banners and
I was holding banners and leaflets in my hand at Ground Zero, that 9/11 was an Inside job back in 2003 and said this years earlier.
I was also co-founder of ny911meetup in 2003, which is still around and actually in 30 minutes and that's why i have to go now.
Ask "anonymous" why he always hides behind a pseudonym instead of revealing his real identity :Jon Albanese and his fanclub.
Ask him also, why they changed the message on this banner during beginning of 2004.
Nico, explain to us why tv
Nico, explain to us why tv fakery is the most effective aspect of 9/11 to present to people who still believe the official story.i wanna know your motive in pushing tv fakery harder than any other aspect.please, no rah rah bullshit, see if you can give me a REAL answer.
do you HONESTLY believe this
do you HONESTLY believe this is the most effective way to get people to see 9/11 was an inside job? not the CD, not the foreknowledge, not the Bin Laden CIA ties, not WTC7, but tv fakery? honestly?
Exactly Chris, Nico spends
Exactly Chris, Nico spends WAY, WAY too much time on the tv fakery stuff. Then the remainder of Nico's time is sprent on bashing other truthers.
I think this tv fakery stuff turns off new truthers who get a first impression that we are kooks.
I can't figure out this Nico guy for sure, be he seems highly suspect to me.
I want to thank Nico. "The
I want to thank Nico. "The greatest kindness one can render to any man consists in leading him from error to truth." Â St. Thomas Aquinas. I've looked at a lot of the Media manipulation evidence - just like I did for all aspects of the 9/11 event in the past - even though I initially resisted the idea of complicity by the government at all. What would've happened if I'd never decided to try to find out for myself? And just listened to people advising, "Nothing to it?" The evidence for Media manipulation is good evidence, persuasive. I was brow-beat by Mark Rabinowitz, John Judge against controlled demolition and Pentagon attack. Why should I listen now when people saythe same thing about Media manipulation? Levis and Albanese woulsn't even admit to me controlled demolition a few months ago. Can I help it? It blows my mind that the trajectories shown in the different video clips extant do not match. Why should that be covered up? Why should people tell you, "shhuch."? I've thought for a while that the Media manipulation aspect, in it's broader implications, is key. Only by addressing the psychological manipulation implications, psyops aspect, can we make a break through. Why else would people ignore obvious evidence, unless they were under some kind of mind control? ? I refer here to any and all of the evidence that is ignored, causing the implications of that evidence to never be acted upon and for the evidence to be discounted. The huge amount of sound evidence indicating government complicity is so overwhelming, we shouldn't be so paranoid our case is weak. Our case is not weak. But if we are persuaded our case is weak, we lose before we even start. Media manipulation/mnd control aspect also bears upon why those who are hip to the event can't even work together, IMO. I wish that was not the case.
Like someone said
Like someone said previously:
"Why is it always the 2nd plane that was a cartoon with you people??? You know, the plane videoed, photographed, & seen by thousands of people already looking at the WTC due to the first plane hitting earlier???
You don't mention the 1st plane at WTC that a handful of people saw; you don't mention the plane that no one has seen at the Pentagon or the mystery plane in Shaksville??? It's always the 2nd plane at WTC that everyone saw that you must insist was fake.
For what possible reason would they take a huge risk to "cgi" the 2nd plane, when real planes work just fine??? There's nothing for them to gain--only everything for them to loose in getting busted with a cartoon plane image!"
I'm sorry, but what sort of
I'm sorry, but what sort of PsyOp, propaganda, nonsense is that by Peggy Carter^?
Peggy Carter | 06.26.06 -
Peggy Carter | 06.26.06 - 6:54 pm | #
hi Nico.
Looks like we have an
Looks like we have an imposter!
Yeah, Nico put a gun to my
Yeah, Nico put a gun to my head to write it. But it's my own words and thoughts.
:)
Check the IP address if you don't believe it.
I usually keep my mouth shut when there are testosterone fights, but I guess I can't be a wimp my whole life.
in that case, i feel very
in that case, i feel very sorry for you.........
It's always the 2nd plane at
It's always the 2nd plane at WTC that everyone saw that you must insist was fake.
Gee, I wonder why? Could I have something to do with us (everyone, just go look @ 'em) having ~16 or so videos of the second hit, 1 video (or 2 if you count the super far away one from right before the tunnel) of the first hit, 5 frames from the pentagon, and hole in the ground at shanksville?
It's always the second plane because thats where evidence is!
How could the coverup have lasted this long without media involvement? How could such broad investigative oversights have been made on the part of the M$M, if they weren't in it from the start? To all you people shouting CD, CIA/UBL ties, NORAD standdown, and insider trading, well, the M$M certainly hasn't done much at exposing that, have they?
The M$M was involved from the start. Total complicity via TV fakey by the M$M. But don't take my word... I would reference covertoperations.blogspot.com to anyone who has SERIOUS questions on no-planes.
You seem much more
You seem much more interested in proving the WTC planes were fake (quite impossible to prove, anyway) than in proving 9/11 was an inside job.
And Nico, do you ever answer a question directly & succinctly? The way you carry on like a blithering idiot also makes you look like a disinfo agent.
"It's always the second
"It's always the second plane because thats where evidence is!"
Ah, no. It's always the 2nd plane because that's makes the truth movement look totally ridiculous.
Maybe Nico projects cartoon
Maybe Nico projects cartoon IP addresses too.
oh christ......
oh christ......
As I told Jimmy Walters and
As I told Jimmy Walters and Rick Siegel, exact plane cutouts in the towers:
http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/WTC767images/WTC_hole.jpg
and plane parts everywhere:
http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/WTC767images/fuselage.jpg
http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/WTC767images/engine.jpg
PLUS a TON of amatuer footage NEVER TOUCHED by the media proves the Nico folks insane. Sorry. This is just the one "theory" that I feel is designed to focus on a mute issue. Its like the people who think it was all the "jews".
Also, why is it the "Jews did it" and "no planers" always attack the 9/11 truth leaders? Thank god there is only lik3 5 people who buy this stuff.
Ah, no. It's always the 2nd
Ah, no. It's always the 2nd plane because that's makes the truth movement look totally ridiculous.
Right.
Denounce and ignore.
Denounce and ignore.
Denounce and ignore.
Denounce and ignore.
...
You've got the routine down!
Pocky, you hit the nail on
Pocky, you hit the nail on the head!
Also, why is it the "Jews
Also, why is it the "Jews did it" and "no planers" always attack the 9/11 truth leaders?
Pockybot
Isn't it obviouse????!!!!!!!!!
so pocky, whats up with your
so pocky, whats up with your conversion to the "no Flight 77 at the Pentagon" clique? you gonna tell us what swayed you?
@pockybot In response to
@pockybot
In response to your clever selection of wireframe plane outlines to overlay WTC2 (I believe thats tower 2), I reference you to some actual constructive analysis some on the FEMA and NIST wireframe overlays:
http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/04/wings-and-south-tower-entry-hole.html
http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/05/it-fits-not.html
In response to the engine and fuselage pictures referenced (plane parts everywhere as you preface, right?) I will say that those certainly don't appear very conclusive to me. If plane parts were everywhere, can you provide more pictures?
And in response to your claim of amateur footage untouched by the media [PLUS a TON of amatuer footage NEVER TOUCHED by the media proves the Nico folks insane] I point you towards this video on the NYTimes site (you've got to watch a little commercial blurb first) which talks about the NYTimes working together with cameraplanet archiving ~500 hours of video from 9/11.
How many video can you find now which are untouched by the media? If cameraplanet worked with nytimes in the days after 9/11, I don't think your statement of 'tons of amateur footage never touched' by the media holds up.
What else ya got, plane gatekeepers?
what day is the c-span
what day is the c-span coverage airing?
Why so antagonistic shep ?
Why so antagonistic shep ? This is a thread about progressive stuff , like the conference.
I think it's perfectly clear
I think it's perfectly clear that these "cartoon huggers" are disinfo artists.
not antagonsizing you colin
not antagonsizing you colin (nor anyone for that matter, just seeking constructive debate) and if you didn't notice, this thread has turned into planes vs. no-planes for the last hundred posts or so
i don't know when the cspan coverage is airing
I think it's perfectly clear
I think it's perfectly clear that these "cartoon huggers" are disinfo artists.
And I think it's perfectly clear I find any constructive debate on this topic here today. Just more no-name anons floating among those who seek the truth and ask questions.
The whole truth discussion
The whole truth discussion has so far always revolved around the "remote control" technologies.
Now call me a nut but i'm seeing the possibility for a CIA/Special Op. suicide pilot. These elite units are trained to go into 90% fatal missions anyway, Green Berets etc.
They asked for 2 volunteers that wanted to die anyway, that wanted martyrdom for whatever they told them 9/11 was done for.
Don't dismiss this possibility folks! The Neocons have been caught again and again framing the Muslim world for what they themselves are doing (terrorism), so why not also suicide attackers?
greg, thank you for the
greg, thank you for the damaged left engine link - now i have to wonder how a 767 with a bent left engine could possibly have been controlled properly (at a speed faster than it was able to go at sea level) into the south tower -
pockybot, are you kidding? that fuselage, did it travel all the way thru the tower and out the other side, or did it break off on it's way in and fall to the street below, or was it trapped in the tower when the tower collapsed? because it certainly didn't break off on the way in, and there wasn't a hole big enough on the other side of the tower, and there's no concrete dust on it - that leaves only one option and by the way, nice paint job that fuselage has for having shredded itself to bits while ramming thru a steel columned wall.
do you seriously accept that fuselage as not having been planted? i say preposterous. now about that engine -
if you go here: big junk, and follow the links you will find a section where people are reacting to the first explosion, and if you look closely at the background you will see the area already roped off with yellow crime tape ahead of time.
__________--
Chris: "yeah, this tv fakery
Chris: "yeah, this tv fakery shit needs to stop now."
Exactly.
And that is one reason why everyone should be highly suspicious of people like Jimmy Walter -- who proudly promote bullshit like that -- if you already aren't highly suspicious of them.
Come on - Ø®£Z -,
Come on - Ø®£Z -, with all Jimmy Walter has done! So he's been tricked into some "fake 2nd plane" b.s. and we should be "highly suspicious" of him? Seems to me that you just want to smear Walter on everything.
You'll note -- should you
You'll note -- should you re-read my comment that you replied to -- that I wrote that the proud promotion of TV fakery bullshit was one reason why everyone should be highly suspicious of Mr. Walter's; it is far from the only reason.
Anyone know when this is on?
Anyone know when this is on? I just got a video capture card, and would be willing to record it.
A man called in to the Jerry
A man called in to the Jerry Springer show today(the 26th.) claiming that 9/11 was an inside job. Springer replied that if he ever finds evidence then he will spend the entire show on Air America discussing it! Just curious if anyone else caught wind of this