|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Sept 12, 2008 20:27:49 GMT -4
Alaskan magnetometers went BONKERS with every 9/11 "event", including the planes-shaped holes appearing in the towers. HAARP was involved. No one in New York reported the deafening sound of wide-body commercial airliners hitting the towers at full throttle. In 1999, the Washington Post reported on the military's psychological operation hologram project. See here for source information for everything in this comment: 9/11: Distinguishing The Propaganda From The Smoking Guns www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=199&Itemid=60
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Sept 11, 2008 19:33:15 GMT -4
9/11: Distinguishing The Propaganda From The Smoking GunsBy CB_Brooklyn September 2008 (mirrored on checktheevidence.com) Seven years and the media still lies about 9/11. Disgraceful, isn’t it? A million leaflets, dozens of films, but continued silence. Why is this happening? Why hasn’t the truth movement’s work broken through the media’s lies? The answer relates to the material the “truth movement” promotes. Vladimir Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." A look through the “Global Analysis - International Intelligence” archives reveal many comparisons between Lenin and Bush. Those in control of the world have top-secret exotic technologies. These technologies could replace oil and gas, but instead have been weaponized. 9/11 was orchestrated with these technologies. They plan a police state culture and don’t mind if a limited number of people are exposed to the 9/11 propaganda, as long as the advanced technologies remain secret. See “The 9/11 Truth Movement, Free Energy Suppression and the Global Elite’s Agenda” for full information. Who controls the horizontal? Who controls the vertical? We know the corporate media to be our culture’s main source of news. Unfortunately though, our trustworthy media is completely controlled. Observe the graph below ( sourced here) and note all this happened in just 20 years time. This chart details the corporations involved. Did you know the Washington Post owns Newsweek? Or that the New York Times owns the Boston Globe? Believe it or not, getting the news “changed” to suit one’s preference isn’t that difficult. As this Saudi Prince and Rupert Murdoch know, all it requires is shares of a news agency and the owner’s phone number! Not only do the media censor information, they’re a propaganda-promotion tool:This March 2000 WorldNetDaily article gives some info on this. Note this quote: “…"psyops" (psychological operations) personnel, soldiers and officers, have worked in the CNN headquarters in Atlanta.” Why on earth would “PSYOPS soldiers” work at CNN? What possible purpose could they serve? This April 2006 Washington Post article concerning the Iraq war reveals something too: “The documents explicitly list the "U.S. Home Audience" as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.” Courtesy of the CNN PSYOPS Soldiers?? This June 2008 Washington Times article details Congress’ attempt to “ban Pentagon propaganda on the Iraq war”. What kind of system is this if Congress needs to create a bill to ban propaganda? Tom Curley, President and CEO of the Associated Press, voiced his opinion: “9/11 attacks harm First Amendment”. The perpetrators who orchestrated 9/11 are using these media-propaganda techniques to control the opposition. The “truth movement” is the opposition. Let’s start by sorting through some of the planted propaganda. Then we’ll examine the smoking gun evidence of exotic weapons, including a timeline of 9/11 events relevant to the technologies used. Following the timeline are some personal statements about a couple of individuals in the “truth movement”. In the final section, we’ll examine two non-9/11 “conspiracy theories”. These should help open up the mind to exotic weaponry should the reader still consider it science fiction. ( Warning: The last section contains potentially upsetting material, and will permanently alter the average person’s perception of reality.) * Lenin-inspired Propaganda *Let’s look at four examples of this propaganda and how the media promote it. The reader will note that “prominent figures” within the “truth movement” who support the propaganda have affiliations with exotic weaponry and the Global Elite. See the “Global Elite Agenda” article (linked above) for a list of people who lost their lives as part of the cover-up. Continued... www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=199&Itemid=60
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 13:09:11 GMT -4
[ Sorry, Purdue violates standard high school level physics. Newton's Laws cannot be violated, unless you're watching a sci-fi movie, playing a video game, or witnessing a hologram. I have seen that representation. What part of physics is violated? You cannot explain hurricanes yet you can explain complex crashes such as this? I should get an answer then. Newton's Laws are not complex. Neither are the 9/11 "crashes".
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 13:06:49 GMT -4
CBB, have you looked at other occasions of planes crashing into buildings? If you think that a plane cannot penetrate a structure of concrete and steel, then explain the crash of a B-25 into the Empire State Building.And before you rant about THAT impact, the plane was at relatively low speed, in a fog, when it hit. The two planes that hit the WTCs were going 440 mph and 540 mph, respectively. If you still think a plane cannot penetrate concrete and steel structures, then look at this. And this/You really take the cake with this statement: Perhaps you are unaware of the US national defense system's function. It was meant for massive attacks, from OUTSIDE coming INTO the the US. Mainly, it was to spot bombers and/or missiles coming at the US. It was NOT set up for hijackers of planes. You also seem to forget that in the cockpit of those planes, were human beings. You seem to forget that a human being can be cut by a box cutter. Say across the neck. Not really a survivable situation. You do the math from there. I never said an aluminum plane couldn't penetrate a building. I did say that the softer material would receive more damage. When an aluminum plane crashes, it crumples, twists and bends. I read about a friend of one of pilots in one of the supposedly hijacked planes. He said that his friend was a big military guy and would NEVER give his plane to anyone. And his neck was not cut, he was tied up and brought to the back and sat next to a flight attendant, according to the "official report" that is.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 12:56:10 GMT -4
Why would they receive permanent hearing damage from somethine 1000 feet or more away? Oh that's right, because some website told you they should and you never bothered to think for yourself about it. Any evidence for realistic looking holograms on such a large scale? If they could have projected a hologram why not set up a few speakers? Your "arguments" keep getting sillier. A jet plane takeoff at 300 feet altitude is 10 times louder than a rock concert: www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy99/phy99405.htmEvidence for realistic looking holograms? Not directly. But there is a Washington Post article from 1999 titled "When seeing and hearing isn't believing" which mentions the military's hologram PSYOPS project.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 11:48:31 GMT -4
CBB, your "common sense" arguments are inadequate because there is no pool of common sense available for the situation of an aircraft hitting a building. What you need is an engineering simulation, feeding the circumstances into the sort of computer program used to analyse structural interactions and seeing what is predicted. Here is an example: www.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/2006/060911.Sozen.WTC.htmlNote that if there were any validity in your "steel hard, aluminium soft" arguments, then no-one would have to worry about tornadoes, because air is much softer than a house. Sorry, Purdue violates standard high school level physics. Newton's Laws cannot be violated, unless you're watching a sci-fi movie, playing a video game, or witnessing a hologram.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 11:45:59 GMT -4
First, to clear something up, there is zero evidence than thousands of New Yorkers saw planes hit the towers. Well, here's quite a few eyewitness statements for starters. As for no noise, read the quotes: As we were at the box, a plane passes us overhead real low. You could hear it; you could feel it.The second plane came in. It was the biggest noise I ever heard in my life.What about these? Some witnesses reported explosions, bombs and missiles. A few examples: National Review has this quote: “I saw it," he says, "It could have been a plane, but I think it was a bomb — uh, a missile. This could be World War III." www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock052402.aspThe BBC reports: I distinctly remember somebody saying: “A missile just hit the trade center, I saw a missile hit.” news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/world/02/september_11/where_were_you_when/html/1.stmAccording to a CNN transcript, a reporter said: a small plane -- I did -- it looked like a propeller plane, came in from the west. An eyewitness also states: I had no idea it was a plane. I just saw the entire top part of the World Trade Center explode. So I turned on the TV when I heard they said it was a plane. It was really strange. transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.01.htmlThis eyewitness specifically says NO plane, just a bomb: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3pA
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 11:40:06 GMT -4
[ This explanation might help a bit more: The mainstream media is controlled and will not report what's really going on in the world. They must word things very carefully so as to not give away information as fact. The media is nothing more than a brainwashing tool, in the literal sense. If the American media did report what they should, then water-powered car technology would receive 24/7 coverage on CNN, FOX, front page in New York Times, etc. So I take it you cannot provide an explanation? Just theories of your own on a different topic. So, to recap. You say control but cannot provide any info? Do not forget the rest of the world has "media" as well. I cannot scientifically explain it. (I'm not a scientist.) The rest of the world does have media, which is why Reuters reported in Japan the new Japanese water-powered car a few months ago. Why didn't CNN pick it up? Were they too busy with their "War on Terror"?? Reuters clip: www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDME
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 5:22:39 GMT -4
Now I know you are really out of your tree. I have talked to people that saw the planes with their own eyes, there were tens of thousands of people that saw both planes. I know one person whose uncle was just missed by parts of the second plane and I have seen the accounts of people that got hit and killed by parts of the first plane. Computer graphics do not appear in the sky. Computer Graphics do not hit and kill people. If you seriously believe that there were no planes, you are lost, it's time for the rubber room because your are so far in to wonderland that quite simply reality and your imaginary world can never and will never meet. Seek out professional help now before it's too late for you. First, to clear something up, there is zero evidence than thousands of New Yorkers saw planes hit the towers. Next, how many people heard the planes? Do you know how loud commercial airliners are? How come there are no reports of people receiving permanent hearing damage? Note the volume in these clips: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vJliayH6cowww.youtube.com/watch?v=ldIEzBMI6qAYou are right that computer graphics do not appear in the sky. But holograms do!
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 5:16:30 GMT -4
I beg to differ.... your thinking has bullets bouncing off of normal glass. From your post A real plane would crash against the building, not glide through like a hot knife through butter.
Real plane = Aluminum Twin Towers = Steel / Concrete Bullets = lead (?) Glass = a hard liquid Softer plane crashes against harder building. Harder bullet shatters glass. A bullet it solid, an airplane is an aluminum tube. Note we must take in consideration the amount of damage done to each item. A real plane would receive more damage than the steel building. A real aluminum plane has mass, and would therefore encounter resistance when impacting another mass. The softer aluminum would crumble, twist, bent, etc as it crashed against the steel beams. It would not effortlessly glide through and create plane shaped holes in the building.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 5:02:31 GMT -4
Did you see the London Guardian Link I gave? Yes. Item from 2004. Uses words like "could change" and "scientists are developing" and this one "'Nothing stands in the way of hurricanes,' says Ross Hoffman" then goes on to use "The team has proposed several answers". My words now, nothing concrete. Like I said before, I also like explanations. As far as I can find, hurricanes are uncontrollable and will behave in a certain way above certain latitudes. Explain the control mechanism if you can. No links please. This explanation might help a bit more: The mainstream media is controlled and will not report what's really going on in the world. They must word things very carefully so as to not give away information as fact. The media is nothing more than a brainwashing tool, in the literal sense. If the American media did report what they should, then water-powered car technology would receive 24/7 coverage on CNN, FOX, front page in New York Times, etc.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 4:55:18 GMT -4
Er, I would think that, even with my understanding, the planes did exactly what would be expected in the circumstances. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.Right. How do you know that is not what happened in the complicated process? That thinking of yours has bullets bouncing of normal glass. I beg to differ.... your thinking has bullets bouncing off of normal glass.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 4:53:34 GMT -4
I've often thought the "no planes" argument to be one of the most ludicrous ones presented. If there were no planes, what happened to them--and the people on them? Who was responsible? How did they do it? Why did they do it? If you cannot answer such basic questions, why should I believe you? What happened to the planes?Who knows for sure they even exists. What happened to the people?A good question to ask Rumsfeld, who said a missile damaged the Pentagon and "similar" damaged the WTC: "Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center."Who was responsible?Evil people in the media, the government, the military, and other entities. How did they do it?Computer animation. Why did they do it?Some reasons include: Patriot Act and oil.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 4:38:08 GMT -4
Meanwhile, back to hurricanes in the wild behaving quite normally and not under control... is this a tactic used to divert the attention away from the topic subject? I asked the OP a few questions, any answers from the OP? I still believe hurricanes are uncontrollable, in so far as we can change direction, and will behave a certain way above certain latitudes. Did you see the London Guardian Link I gave?
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 2:55:24 GMT -4
Many people know these days that the idea of a guy from a cave in Afghanistan conspiring with 19 boxcutter-wielding Muslims, outwitting our entire multi-trillion dollar defense system, lies on insanity. But for this post, let's just concentrate on the science. The following video of the South Tower "strike" is a cartoon as it violates Newton's 3rd Law of Motion: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.The WTC was steel and concrete. Airplanes are aluminum alloy with plastic composite nosecones. A real plane would crash against the building, not glide through like a hot knife through butter. Any questions?
|
|