FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Note from Nico Haupt of New York 911Truth to 'Plane-Huggers'

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Wokeman
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK

PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:53 pm    Post subject: Note from Nico Haupt of New York 911Truth to 'Plane-Huggers' Reply with quote

Dear NIST and the planehuggers,

It appears to me that the investigation on WTC 7 and 9/11 is still
questionable, because there is apparently new footage of a new
'plane' crashing into WTC 7?

Since it wasn't established yet, who was the camera operator for
W-ABC 7 (including a WESCAM set) of the official second hit,
maybe you can shed some new light on their identities or also
about this new clip?

regards,

nico aka ewing2001
truthseeker new york city


9/11: The lost 'plane crash' into WTC7
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/
June 3, 2006
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ally
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
June 2006 (Updates)

June 5, 2006
Why the NY Times ignores 9/11 TV fakery

Today, the NY Times brought a pretty fair review on the 9/11 Truth Conference
in Chicago.
Not so much about vibes or content, but with a character description
of this 'movement'.
As usual, U.S. mainstream media doesn't write on the alleged 'controversial'
9/11 TV fakery research.
Opportunity in Chicago was enough though.

There had been a lot supporters around, even if they don't write about it 24/7:
Morgan Reynolds, Rick Siegel, even Rosalee Grable was there, though for sure
only among the audience, but this wasn't a topic for NY Times.

This is strange, isn't it?
The 9/11 truthlings argue, any kind of coverage on 9/11 TV Fakery
could 'damage' the movement, but instead there is still silence on this 'damage'.

Why?
Is the 'reptile factor' not strong enough?

The truth is:
9/11 TV Fakery research IS solid and it's too valuable, simple and clean than to reveal and sacrifice it right now.

This means, the limited hangout show on the 9/11 truth movement continues,
while the globalist fascists planning WW against each other.

With this ignorance, at the same time also the hostility of those increased,
who strongly oppose the evidence on 9/11 TV fakery research.

Fairly said, the 'spokesmen' of cointel-pro cult 911truth.org are even harmless, compared with their victims 'Jonathan Gold' (a convinced supporter of Insider and limited hangouter Keith Phucas/Times Herald/JRC), 'Andy' and 'Chris' of 9/11 Truth San Diego and others...
Even government shill skyking@ isn't hostile at all...

Here are just some recent examples:
"...I used to want to beat the * out of you.
Now, I just want to see you hang with Bush.."
Jon Gold 05.13.06

"...shut the * up you annoying son of a bitch...
...you are the opposite of a patriot you devisive *...
dumb son of a bitch....
...for the record, i have watched you footage and read your useless nonsense before.
your still a jackass...
you dont wanna have to look over your shoulder at any 9/11 events do you?..."
Chris, San Diego 9/11 Truth 06.04.06

"...I have nothing against the vast majority of the good German people, but I read in the NY Magazine article that Haupt is a German national in the U.S. (legally?) for unspecified reasons?..."
"Anonymous" close to John Albanese, 06.04.06

"...i hope you die of cancer..."
joe@911lies.org, 05.11.06


Why the hostility? And why are these truthlings hardly to distinguish from those
in this government, they allegedly oppose?
Because the 9/11 truthlings need aggressive oppression to cover-up everything else,
which isn't a limited hangout. They also didn't realise yet, how mainstream media
is playing them and that it doesn't matter if everyone worldwide knows, that there
was a controlled demolition in NYC.

Fact is, the U.S. Government and the real 9/11 perps are still in charge
and the 9/11 truthlings will never find out, what and who really brainwashed them,to ignore the clearest evidence on fakery, while they continue to doublespeak on Shanksville and Pentagon.

Planehuggers alive: The lost "plane crash" into WTC7 (v2)
http://www.911closeup.com/nico/UUU7c.html (long preload)


http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/ < TOPBLOG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This - http://www.911closeup.com/nico/UUU7c.html - is cartoon evidence, even less reliable than George Galloway's 'United 93' evidence.

WTC7 has become a lynchpin in the 9/11 Truth Movement - unshakable evidence with a confession from Larry Silverstein on video that a barely damaged building with a few small fires was deliberately demolished.

Then nearly five years later, literally out of the blue, comes a handful of very low resolution (200 x 120) gif (255 colours) frames (only three of which show a plane) to propose a 'fifth plane' theory.

This is what they call in the literary world, 'deus ex machina'.

If this is the creation of a 9/11 'truthperson' they should be put in the stocks. If it is the product of a bunch 'on the ropes' perpetrators, I can't wait to see how this pans out. The questions it raises would fell a forrest to print!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ally
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nico casts complete doubt on the four planes allegedly used in the attack, I doubt he's gonna throw his weight behind this new stuff about one hitting WTC7. Appears to me like he's mocking it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
orestes
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 113

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Someone is taking the piss. I don't get the joke.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ally
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Flamesong wrote:


If this is the creation of a 9/11 'truthperson' they should be put in the stocks.


Bit rich coming from a David Icke nuthugger me think.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ally
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

orestes wrote:
Someone is taking the piss. I don't get the joke.


reading this may help, http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ally wrote:
Flamesong wrote:


If this is the creation of a 9/11 'truthperson' they should be put in the stocks.


Bit rich coming from a David Icke nuthugger me think.

I'm writing this in an open forum, Ally, because you don't reply to personal messages.

At some point I seem to have upset you - ever since which it has been impossible to get any kind of response which is not littered with anger, insults or accusations.

I guess the problem might be that my opinions are not extremist and I do not necessarily agree with everything I read, hear or see.

Your point regarding David Icke, I assume is meant to puncture me in some way - but it is as blunt as a doughnut. But it is based, I suppose, on the fact that I do believe in some of the same things as David Icke, i.e. that 9/11 was a device of 'problem, reaction, solution' (often mistakenly described as the Hegelian Dialect). I also believe that there is a shadow marionette powerbase which exists above democracy and I'd like to believe in some kind of ubiquetous spirituality.

However, I am unconvinced about issues involving a hologramatic universe, a reptillian agenda nor numerous other issues for which David is renowned. My concern, when I met David to discuss making a documentary with him, was that these issues tend to alienate people who might otherwise embrace the other issues. I have a problem with his more fantastic ideas and I told him so. That doesn't preclude me from thinking that he is a decent bloke or that he has some interesting ideas (to which I don't necessarily subscribe).

The fact that I assume you are groundlessly acsribing these issues to me makes me wonder what your motive might be. This isn't the first time you have tried to demonise somebody by associating them with somebody else in this way. Yet you accused me of 'slandering' David Boyle and yourself by quoting what you and he said (how is that possible?). David Icke - to his credit - has responded to criticisms which I have made about groundless stories which have appeared on his website. David Boyle (with whom I assume you ally yourself) on the other hand continues to make groundless accusations about countless matters (despite having them pointed out) with which I do not wish to get entangled. The fact that many of these things are easily disprovable discredits him. I am sorry about that. When I first met David Boyle several years ago I found him very interesting - but the more I learned from him the more I discovered that his claims had no foundation.

I (along with others) helped him reconstruct his Conspiracies Exhibition in Blackpool, giving my time and effort freely. I promised that I would promote it on my website but having examined the exhibition found that there was much that I did not agree with. I put the exhibition on my front page but was accused of lible because I put a standard disclaimer in small letters (they are tiny on my browser) at the very bottom of the page. I immediately dropped it from the front page removed all links to it but it remains on the remote server, judge for yourself:

http://www.flamesong.com/exhibition/indexold.html

Unlike others, I prefer to engage on ideas and beliefs and not the people who hold them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ally
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're an honest guy Alf but your prickly attitude got on my tits sometimes.

I'll say it first; potkettleblack.

Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wokeman
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We don't have time for all this acrimony. When I posted Nico's comment, the 'plane huggers' name calling might have been a teeny bit patronising, but I watched Web Fairy's footage over and over again, and the image of the whatever-it-was that hit the Towers did not react like a plane hitting a sold steel building would react: It melted into it like a knife through butter. And planes don't do that. If that image was a fiction, then somebody show me the real one. Therefore if that is not the way planes react, then possibly, possibly, it wasn't a plane. Maybe it was an image of a plane. For now, let's leave it at that. Forget holograms. That's maybe down the line.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flamesong
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well thanks for the acknowledgement, Ally, if nothing else I endeavour to be honest - and when I cannot be honest I say nothing.

I only had a few moments to speak to you in Manchester and you seemed like a decent bloke - and trusting enough to give me your phone number beforehand. Unfortunately, I was stressed beyond rational being and was pretty exhausted having been chasing up and down the country for the previous week with a small mountain of equipment.

And whenever I feel that anything I am doing is harmful in any way to what I believe in I back away. There were numerous reasons why I did so last year but one - which I hope people from Kirkby Lonsdale will confirm - was that I felt that certain disagreements I had with certain people and issues was not constructive.

If my attitude seems shít, maybe it is just because that is what I have had to face in almost 25 years of activism - I don't see the point in talking through flowers when the issues are so serious.

Maybe next time we cross paths I won't be stressed out and our disagreements will be history.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth News All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

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


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group