Shayler Talks 911 on Sky News

[utopiated]

This is my stance, but I'm afraid poiuytr will have to battle all these indignant handmaids solo for a while

<snipped>

'handmaids solo' ? You mean Han Solo from Star Wars - because this seems to be where you're at - fighting the forces from behind your screen with your friend poiuytr. Poiutry is probably just you re-signing in having learned what an anonymous proxy is.

As admirable as your advice is to everyone it really would go down better if you referenced some longer term research and/or investigation you've done in this area or wider, online or otherwise that lead you to these conclusions. Anyone can pull a timeline together or jump on the lastest paranoid ramblings about traitors in the movement.

Have a good Xmess anyway.

[Pete J]

Hi Commanderson

Thought I'd make a couple of observations regarding your challenge to Dave & Annie since I've been watching your argument develop and wondering if the point you're trying to make really matters given the size and scope of the 9/11 'truth' movement now.

I suppose it's possible that they are 'plants' designed to go off like a time bomb with a 'credibility implosion' after initially gaining popular support. If that's true, it wasn't a very effective plan since there is so much diversity of opinion and personalities in the movement that the adverse influences of any individual are simply dampened by those with alternative views. Also, this would have had to have been planned way back in the early NINETEES when there were no web forums, no widespread email, no 'You Tube' etc. D.S's excape to France and subsequent Guardian campaign would also have had to have been staged. It doesn't sound like much fun to me.

The fact that they 'flip flopped' their views as you put it may or may not be important, but if you choose to draw significance from it then you're not really doing justice to the way generally accepted theories developed. Until about a year ago, for example, anyone who suggested that controlled demolition was involved in the tower collapses was being branded a 'disinfo agent' in many quarters. Also, D.S. and A.M. weren't exactly in a minority by not jumping on the 9/11 'Inside Job' bandwagon at the time of Thierry Meyssan.

The other thing which makes this issue not as relevant as you're making it out to be is that your talking about people who's identities are known. Their faces are known, their day-to-day activities, their professional backgrounds - even their 'flip flopping' views (as you're so eager to point out) are in the public domain. It's also public knowledge that they are former MI5 people, so the challenge your making presents itself automatically and you can make your own mind up. They seem to be genuine people who have wrestle with the day to day challenges of public life (and probably personal life also). Nobody can prove that they're not still 'agents' with a different agenda, but people know this and that fact in itself is empowering for their audience when deciding whether or not their views are expressed in good faith.

The same cannot be said for yourself, however. You could have just come on the forum, made the point constructively and left it at that. Instead you've ground out one of the longest threads ever making very speculative but nonetheless public accusations against specific individuals. Nobody knows who you are, what particular axe you have to grind, what motivates you or anything about you (you haven't even filled in your profile at your blogspot). This is normally no problem - most of us on here post anonymously - but the point should be raised when someone starts making personal accusations against other posters, antagonistically, with no evidence whatsoever other that 'he changed his mind' or 'I have made my mind up'. (Even the Klingons, nasty as they were, had to 'de-cloak' before firing any torpedos .

So what if you're right ? We would still need people to go up and down the country organising grassroots meetings to bolster questioning of the 9/11 account. We would still need people with some public prescence bringing the technical issues into the mainstream media. If you read Annie Machon's account of David Shayler's behaviour when she first encountered him professionally you'll see that he was generally 'against the grain' and asking a lot of questions, even back then. So it's not exactly out of character for him to be making waves now then, is it ? I always try to keep an open mind on everything because people are people - not robots. They are complex. But I generally like the fact that D.S. is prepared to entertain unpopular theories. You don't have to agree with him (I don't actually - until the next piece of evidence comes along which might change my mind). It just makes him more credible as an individual in my view since he isn't scarpering around trying to find a 'mast' to nail his colours to like everyone else.

[drunkenmunky]

Hi, although this is my first post on this forum, I have been looking into 'Conspiracy' Theories for about a year now.

From what I gather about this topic, it’s an argument about whether David and Annie still work for MI5. Sparked by the 'No-plane' theory David admitted to believe in, when interviewed on SKY.

Concerning the video, it does seem strange that David, who I assume was trying to build up credit for the 9/11 theories, should suddenly introduce the 'No-plane' theory right at the end of the interview; thus building upon the stereotype of the 'Conspiracy' theorist. [Bearing in mind, that the average person remembers the first and last things they do in greater detail, whether that’s watching TV or studying in school. Also, most people find it hard to believing in the 'Conspiracy' theories with the most factual evidence, let alone the 'No-plane' theory. Which I would have though David would have taken into account].

I don't know whether the two still work for the MI5 or not. But I see nothing wrong in questioning it. To just question the Government, and then not question the other half, I think is foolish. And to attack people who question certain 'Freedom Movement' figures, I also think is foolish.

Furthermore, I find it really distressing when I read through other people quotes, and find they seem to have elevated certain people campaigning for freedom to some sort of saviour/leader, this happens a lot with David Icke, and David Shayler. And the irony in this is crazy.


Originally posted by Annie:

What are you doing, Commanderson, except sitting at a keyboard?

Its not a competition.

[lifeinthed]

Also, this would have had to have been planned way back in the early NINETEES when there were no web forums, no widespread email, no 'You Tube' etc. D.S's excape to France and subsequent Guardian campaign would also have had to have been staged.

I agree that it's quite unlikely that David's whole public life has been staged to give him credibility for this one mission, but that doesn't have to be true for these allegations to stand. It just conveniently gives him a decent defense against accusations of this nature, perhaps his public image is the reason why he's the one on this case? If it was someone else, without David's history to back him up, coming out of the blue to become a spokesman, then the fact that this person had towed the non-conspiracy line for years only to do a sudden u-turn would be a whole lot more suspicious. Not to mention if it was someone with intimate knowledge of false flag terrorism dating back before 9/11... It would make us wonder how he could ever say "no conspiracy" with the knowledge that he had, wouldn't it? Not with good ol' Dave though. He fought Mi5 you know! No reason to suspect him at all!

[poiuytr]

I'm still waiting for agent Annie responses to David's quotations from Alex Jone's show and in the 2005 "Stop the War" book.

And how about missing the beat on Thierry Meyssan's pentagate ?? It made a splash around the world in 2002;hard to believe false flag whistleblowers like you two didn't jump the gun then like the few others.

Or maybe you just consider you really can't be bothered ?
Are you and David going to do like Mike Ruppert and exile yourself in Central America ,away from a doomed western civilisation ?

I suggest you stick around and keep try getting in the news whats hapenning with DU in Iraq;that will give you a lot of support,not to mention put to rest suspicions .

DU travels around the world in three weeks:central america might not be the safe heaven Mike Ruppert and your pair had hoped.

[brian]

Ruppert is now in Canada.

[prole art threat]

I'm still waiting for agent Annie responses to David's quotations from Alex Jone's show and in the 2005 "Stop the War" book.

And how about missing the beat on Thierry Meyssan's pentagate ?? It made a splash around the world in 2002;hard to believe false flag whistleblowers like you two didn't jump the gun then like the few others.

Or maybe you just consider you really can't be bothered ?
Are you and David going to do like Mike Ruppert and exile yourself in Central America ,away from a doomed western civilisation ?

I suggest you stick around and keep try getting in the news whats hapenning with DU in Iraq;that will give you a lot of support,not to mention put to rest suspicions .

DU travels around the world in three weeks:central america might not be the safe heaven Mike Ruppert and your pair had hoped.

Youre not making any sense. Why on earth do you feel Annie Machon or David Shayler should have joined the truth movement before anybody else? Are you suggesting they have super psychic powers or something because they were once employed by millitary intelligence?

David Ray Griffin and Steven E Jones both thought that the theory that 9/11 was an inside job was al oad of baloney in the first instance. You just continue to spout nonsense over and over. It's really, really boring.

[poiuytr]

Why on earth do you feel Annie Machon or David Shayler should have joined the truth movement before anybody else? Are you suggesting they have super psychic powers or something because they were once employed by millitary intelligence?

They were intelligence officiers;they were insiders and knew what kind of business is going on in there.
For you and me and every day people a false flag operation is something you get from Bond movies or spy novels (up to 911);Annie and David knew all too well this was reality,not fantaisy.

"Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation".

said Andreas von Bulow, a former German parliament official who worked with the German Secret Service.
Realise this and wise up.

David Ray Griffin and Steven E Jones both thought that the theory that 9/11 was an inside job was a load of baloney in the first instance.

The first is a theologian,the latter a physics professor.
They never worked for secret services departments;what would you expect in these conditions ?
Their treshold of suspicion is naturally higher than for secret agents;they are every day folks like you and me.
The people who awakened them weren't agents neither,but just curious academicians who spotted some inconsistencies and decided to dig deeper.
And even without the background of an intelligence officier,David Ray Griffin wrote and published "The new Pearl Harbour" in march 2004,while it took our duo a full additional year to finally join the 911 debunkers .
Half of new york said in an august 2004 zogby poll they believed 911 was a false flag operation ,for god's sake!!
They weren't insiders,were they?
Your free to believe this duo.
I don't.
David endorsing the NPT out of the blue confirms it even more .

You just continue to spout nonsense over and over. It's really, really boring.

Pardon me for trying to usurp your reputation on this forum .

[IronSnot]

Originally posted by Annie:

What are you doing, Commanderson, except sitting at a keyboard?

Its not a competition.

I couldn't agree more.

[paul wright]

There's this persistance that D & A cannot possibly be genuine because they once thought something else. Most people here once thought something else, and 9/11 may sooner or later have been the trigger to think differently, or to perceive differently.
From that triggerpoint, if you really understand the meaning of 9/11, rather than regard it rather as some kind of possible misdeed by a single regime, then a whole network of possibilities and probabilities are awakened, NPT being just one
Why the obsessing? why shouldn't Shayler generally follow this small thought pattern amongst a host of others he's expressed?
Why have we got this self-obsessed argument on board, with people who've no idea of who Shayler is expressing expertise, who start threads on subjects they have previously disdained?
What's Paul Stott's view on all this. Some posters here might find a man they can follow there

[utopiated]

Ruppert is now in Canada.

Heheheh... Canada now?

Did anyone see the hacker scam pulled off on his Fromthewilderness site?

Somoneone hacked the members area and opened it up BUT best of all they got hold of [and this was genius] the HUGE FTW mail out list and did a subtle p*ss take mail out regarding Mike having gone abroad.

If you were once a subscriber to FTW mails and did not see this google it or PM me and I'll send you what got sent out. You had to sort of get the FTW thing to get the mail but anyhow - Pure genius, and I don't use that word a lot

[poiuytr]

There's this persistance that D & A cannot possibly be genuine because they once thought something else.

They were blowing the whistle BEFORE 911 about false flag ops taking place.
Then they ENDORSED the official explanation for THREE more years after Meyssan blew his worldwide mediated whistle ,whilst scores of non intelligence people called it a false flag.

NPT being just one
Why the obsessing? why shouldn't Shayler generally follow this small thought pattern amongst a host of others he's expressed?

1.Because this false flag op has plenty of clear and non ambiguous evidence to stand on

2.Because the most famous NPT advocate, Jim Hoffman, has blatantly betrayed the 911 mouvement and viciously attacked his most renowed members,ie David Ray Griffin,Jim Fetzer,Steven Jones

3.Because the potential of the NPT to fuel the fire of media spinners working 24-7 to discredit the 911 mouvement and portray his members as whackos

4.Because it's a fairy tale requiring blind disregard for the available evidence

What's Paul Scott's view on all this. Some posters here might find a man they can follow there

Are you talking about Peter Dale Scott ?

[chek]

There's this persistance that D & A cannot possibly be genuine because they once thought something else.

They were blowing the whistle BEFORE 911 about false flag ops taking place.
Then they ENDORSED the official explanation for THREE more years after Meyssan blew his worldwide mediated whistle ,whilst scores of non intelligence people called it a false flag.

NPT being just one
Why the obsessing? why shouldn't Shayler generally follow this small thought pattern amongst a host of others he's expressed?

1.Because this false flag op has plenty of clear and non ambiguous evidence to stand on

2.Because the most famous NPT advocate, Jim Hoffman, has blatantly betrayed the 911 mouvement and viciously attacked his most renowed members,ie David Ray Griffin,Jim Fetzer,Steven Jones

3.Because the potential of the NPT to fuel the fire of media spinners working 24-7 to discredit the 911 mouvement and portray his members as whackos

4.Because it's a fairy tale requiring blind disregard for the available evidence

What's Paul Scott's view on all this. Some posters here might find a man they can follow there

Are you talking about Peter Dale Scott ?

You say Hoffman's become a no planer?? As far as I know, he may not belive they were the hi-jacked flights, but that's not what NPT is about.

Morgan Reynolds would make more sense in your context.

[paul wright]

Paul Stott of the 911Cultwatch who was around here recently
Apologies for the typo

[poiuytr]

You say Hoffman's become a no planer?? As far as I know, he may not belive they were the hi-jacked flights, but that's not what NPT is about.

Morgan Reynolds would make more sense in your context.

You're right about that.
Hoffman has advocated the towers were brought down by MASER weapons (electromagnetic beams).
When asked what evidence he had about them,it went the same way as for NPT:none !
He argued : "Well, there is no evidence that Maser weapons exist, but the government has a big black-ops budget, so they may have developed a lot of amazing technology"

Sorry for the confusion;in my mind it is part of the same drivel non planers theoricists are pushing forward.

David stands in the camp of the "it may be real,but we can't prove it" ,so,"take it or leave it."

[scar]

I think you might mean Jim Fetzer.
If not please provide a link to Hoffmans NPT/beam weapon stuff.
ta.

[chek]

Er...yeah. Hoffman may have entertained the maser theory, but he was never an advocate, as his rebuttal below shows:

"Problems With EM Weapons Theories
There are at least three serious problems with any theory that EM weapons were used to destroy the Twin Towers.

The electromagnetic energy beam would have to have emanated from some source. What was the source, and how did it escape notice?
The weapon would have needed to possess an extremely high-powered energy supply. What was that supply, and how did it escape notice?
The weapon would have needed to direct the energy into regions within the Towers and move that locus down to produce the descending pattern of destruction observed in each Tower. How could such a weapon deliver energy to such zones without producing visible disturbances to objects in the beam's path?

The coaxial beam microwave interferometry theory postulates that the energy source was some ultra-high-powered maser or antenna in the foundation of each Tower, that the energy supply was electricity piped in via fat copper or superconducting cable from a distant location, and that the energy was delivered to a limited and time-varied zone of each Tower through interferometry. Leaving aside the matter of how so much electrical energy could be stored and/or transported to the site, and how a maser or antenna could be engineered to produce such high-energy multiple directed microwave beams, we see a number of problems with the idea that the energy could have been delivered to the zone of destruction through interferometry.

Each floor slab of the Towers consisted of concrete poured onto corrugated steel pans. Steel is electrically conductive, and therefore affects the propagation of electromagnetic waves -- the "Faraday cage effect." It is difficult to imagine that EM beams with the wavelengths required by this theory to produce controlled zones of constructive and destructive interference (radio or microwave) could have passed through so many floor pans without being blocked or severly attenuated.
The production of a slow-moving zone of constructive interference depends on the individual beams being standing waves. But it is difficult to imagine how an antenna or maser could be modified to produce standing waves, rather than waves propagating at the speed of light".

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... ybeam.html

[poiuytr]

I think you might mean Jim Fetzer.
If not please provide a link to Hoffmans NPT/beam weapon stuff.
ta.

from http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:GL ... =firefox-a

"A version of the maser theory, which might be dubbed the "coaxial beam microwave interferometry theory" is described in some detail in the interview with Jim Hoffman entitled Your Eyes Don't Lie: Common Sense, Physics, and the World Trade Center Collapses.
(Hoffman has since rejected this theory )


An Interview of Jim Hoffman by Bonnie Faulkner
On Guns and Butter (21 and 28 january 2004)

link to listen online part 1:http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=77

link to listen online part 2:http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=62


Furthermore,Hoffman REJECTS the signifiance of the word "PULL" as a term to design a controlled demolition in the interview made by Larry Silverstein.
He advocates that Silverstein meant PULL THE FIREFIGHTERS CREW FROM THE WTC 7 (which weren't inside at that time)

[scar]

Ta for link, i missed that 1 or it slipped down the memory hole.
He explored the idea and rejected it which is rather different than advocating it wouldnt ya say.
Whats the problem?
How else can conclusions be reached?

2.Because the most famous NPT advocate, Jim Hoffman

I have never heard of Hoffman advocating NPT. I find that VERY hard to believe. He is certainly not famous for it at all, let alone 'most famous'
Afaik he rejects all no plane theories including those at the pentagon.
Got a link?

The most famous NPT advocates are: Nico Haupt, Gerald Holmgren, Rosalee Grable, Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Killtown and now David Shayler.
The 911research site that hosts Hoffmans articles has quite a few debunkings of NPT like this one:
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/salter/review.html

Quite a few reject the PULL IT quote as 'our' best evidence.
That the firefighters were out hours earlier ought to be a clue one would think.
What conclusions do you draw from someone rejecting that?

We dont have to agree on everything, although it is perhaps quite remarkable there is so much consensus generally, not that one would know it browsing this forum.

Peace

[poiuytr]

Ta for link, i missed that 1 or it slipped down the memory hole.
He explored the idea and rejected it which is rather different than advocating it wouldnt ya say.
Whats the problem?
How else can conclusions be reached?

Nothing wrong with exploring an idea;the problem comes when one keeps exploring an idea too far fetched and requiring a leap of faith which makes you disregard the evidence at hand.
Like Hoffman insistance of a boeing hitting the pentagon ,the NPT doesn't stand when one examines all evidence at hand and is clearly indefensible ,not to mention it puts the discredit on the 911 reserchers field.
The MASER theory acts as a distraction:it's build on speculations and isn't needed to prove the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

I have never heard of Hoffman advocating NPT. I find that VERY hard to believe. He is certainly not famous for it at all, let alone 'most famous'
Afaik he rejects all no plane theories including those at the pentagon.
Got a link?

I made an error and mixed the NPT and Hoffman's MASER drivel.
Hoffman is the most recognised "plank" because not only does he advocate the "pull the firefighters"and "boeing at the pentagone "theories,he's part of the few that attempted to smear 911's most prominent researchers.

this from 911scholars for truth site:

At the David Ray Griffin talk in Oakland on March 30th, which I attended, Jim Hoffman's Truth Police descended on the venue wearing pre-printed tee-shirts directing people to go to Hoffman's web sites and handing out flyers that try to convince people, particularly the new-comers to the 9/11 truth movement, to be distrustful of any 9/11 researcher who supports the Pentagon No-757 theory or the Fake Cell Phone Calls Theory. The flyers also tried to discredit the movie "Loose Change".

Quite a few reject the PULL IT quote as 'our' best evidence.

The context of the quote is the most important factor when attempting to interpret it .Silverstein talked about having it "pulled" and they watched it come down.
How do you contend,in that circumstance,that Larry meant "pull the firefighters" ?

What conclusions do you draw from someone rejecting that?

For there to be no Boeing 757 at the Pentagon creates an enormous hole in the official account, one that every American could easily understand. That Larry Silverstein said, "Perhaps the best thing to do is to pull it!", creates another of these easily understanble enormous holes .
The objective of disinformation (and Hoffman )is not to convince us of "the official account" but to create enough uncertainty that "everything is believable and nothing is knowable".

[Thermate]

How do you contend,in that circumstance,that Larry meant "pull the firefighters"?

Combined with the fact that Lucky Larry doesn't 'do' sympathy very convincingly. I'd love to see him on a polygraph.

[commanderson]

Happy christmas,commanderson.
You're a good guy.

I hope by the time you come back,we will see our dynamic duo buzy exposing on sky how the world is comitting suicide with DU.
By then,the war would have been stopped and the vets would be at the governement throat for poisonning them.
That's my christmas present wish.

Thats a beautiful chrismas wish there poiuytr, would be nice to get some regular folks revealing some solid heartfelt opinions on the MSM, but sadly thats why it the MSM- you only get a matrix of lies mixed in with the truth, (to discredit it,) from moles like Shayler. But we can keep up the momentum on revealing the false oposition thats something.
Am just in Boston here seeing some freinds for a couple of nights, befire heading to R.I. peace and love to all of you for the festive season, (even you prole), and good luck poiuytr
peace

[scar]

Nothing wrong with exploring an idea;the problem comes when one keeps exploring an idea too far fetched and requiring a leap of faith which makes you disregard the evidence at hand.

And yet he refuted the theory thus adding weight to 'your' argument.
If he hadnt explored such a far-fetched idea he couldnt have refuted it.
Has he kept exploring the idea after that?
Who judges when an idea is too far-fetched?
Did i miss a meeting? "Yeah we had a meeting, the line is here, you were asleep."

Like Hoffman insistance of a boeing hitting the pentagon ,the NPT doesn't stand when one examines all evidence at hand and is clearly indefensible ,not to mention it puts the discredit on the 911 reserchers field.
The MASER theory acts as a distraction:it's build on speculations and isn't needed to prove the towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

Hang on there. No boeing at the pentagon IS a no plane theory.
The NPT generally refers to the WTC and as you admit below, he doesnt support the NPT either. He refutes the maser theory so ???
No plane at the pentagon implies the Norman Mineta testimony which damns Cheney is false.
I agree with you about the NPT but if some damning evidence emerged that would change. Every faked video getting posted as absolute proof only serves to muddy the waters. I shant hold my breath.

I made an error and mixed the NPT and Hoffman's MASER drivel.
Hoffman is the most recognised "plank" because not only does he advocate the "pull the firefighters"and "boeing at the pentagone "theories,he's part of the few that attempted to smear 911's most prominent researchers.

Who are these prominent researchers and why are they above reproach?
You attack one of the uk's leading campaigners then call Hoffman a plank for smearing others?
What does that make you?
A bit confused? Made of wood?

this from 911scholars for truth site:

At the David Ray Griffin talk in Oakland on March 30th, which I attended, Jim Hoffman's Truth Police descended on the venue wearing pre-printed tee-shirts directing people to go to Hoffman's web sites and handing out flyers that try to convince people, particularly the new-comers to the 9/11 truth movement, to be distrustful of any 9/11 researcher who supports the Pentagon No-757 theory or the Fake Cell Phone Calls Theory. The flyers also tried to discredit the movie "Loose Change".

Oh noes...

At Ground Zero on 9/11/06, Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas's truth police descended wearing pre-printed t-shirts directing people to go to the Loose Change website and handing out dvd's that try to convince people, particularly the new comers to the 9/11 Truth Movement that no plane hit the pentagon and the calls were faked etc etc

I think its called campaigning.

Have you checked the oilempire piece on all no plane theories - about them being there to cause 911 families to shun the movement etc etc?

I thought Hoffmans debunking of Loose Change was well done. They have some errors in there and, using your logic, they have promoted possibly flawed theories as likely facts, therefore discrediting the movement... Just as IPS/LC1 did. I dont believe its deliberate, they are seeking the truth.
I hope they take hoffmans critique onboard for final cut.
Noones perfect.

The context of the quote is the most important factor when attempting to interpret it .Silverstein talked about having it "pulled" and they watched it come down.
How do you contend,in that circumstance,that Larry meant "pull the firefighters" ?

I dont.

What conclusions do you draw from someone rejecting that?

For there to be no Boeing 757 at the Pentagon creates an enormous hole in the official account, one that every American could easily understand. That Larry Silverstein said, "Perhaps the best thing to do is to pull it!", creates another of these easily understanble enormous holes .
The objective of disinformation (and Hoffman )is not to convince us of "the official account" but to create enough uncertainty that "everything is believable and nothing is knowable".

So your desire for there to be no plane at the pentagon means there wasnt one? That every American can easily understand it doesnt make it true and leads to the possibility that it may be a honeytrap set up to funnel our focus then discredit us.
I appreciate there are people out there trying to create uncertainty that nothing is knowable - we have a few here... Not everything is knowable but there is plenty of consensus on what we do know.
That Hoffman doesnt agree with you makes him disinfo?
I think he tries to weed out the disinfo, pushing spurious claims as facts could be argued to do more damage.

I tend to steer clear of the pentagon generally, many mirrors + smoke. The NTSB data for me only serves to muddy the waters further.
All the conflicting eyewitness reports and fake? whistleblowers etc etc its a quagmire by design.

Enough about Hoffman i say, get back to speculating about Shayler...
Or...not.
Ever tried breakfornews? It where all this paranoia leads. Nowhere...
Here ya go:
http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26
http://www.breakfornews.com/TheCIAInternetFakes.htm

Apparently everyone is disinfo...apart from Fintan of course.

Peace and Love

[poiuytr]

If he hadnt explored such a far-fetched idea he couldnt have refuted it.
Has he kept exploring the idea after that?
Who judges when an idea is too far-fetched?
Did i miss a meeting? "Yeah we had a meeting, the line is here, you were asleep."

Nobody asked him to refute anything;he came to great lenghts at imagining a supposed hi tech weapon and then proceeded to debunk it himself.Great waste of time and attention.
A good diversion useful to distract from other alternative demolition theories better sustained by evidence,like the use of small nukes proposed by a finnish military expert.

If you advocate far fetched ideas should be looket at,i can propose the theory of bovine gas from cows accumulating underground and blowing up the towers.
Wrap your mind around that one.Answer coming in next week.

No plane at the pentagon implies the Norman Mineta testimony which damns Cheney is false.

I said Hoffman agrees with the official version of a BOEING hitting the pentagone

poiuytr wrote:
Like Hoffman insistance of a boeing hitting the pentagon,...

You're barking at the wrong tree.

I agree with you about the NPT but if some damning evidence emerged that would change.

Sure.Its like these governements officials waiting for the surfacing of footage showing the head of Kennedy being wancked from the back instead of the front.

Who are these prominent researchers and why are they above reproach?

David Ray Griffin,Jim Fetzer,Steven Jones are accomplished academicians,have tought classes,received awards (jones) and published numerous books and articles in fields as different as theology,cold fusion,philosophy of science, computer science, artificial intelligence and cognitive science.That's quite some accomplishments there.

Hoffman is a software engineer.

You attack one of the uk's leading campaigners then call Hoffman a plank for smearing others?

Leading campaigners ?
Not anymore.
And what exactly is Hoffman for you ? A leading campaigner ?

At Ground Zero on 9/11/06, Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas's truth police descended wearing pre-printed t-shirts directing people to go to the Loose Change website and handing out dvd's that try to convince people, particularly the new comers to the 9/11 Truth Movement that no plane hit the pentagon and the calls were faked etc etc

I think its called campaigning.

This certainly is campaigning.
What Hoffman did at David Ray Griffin speech ressembles more to crashing the party.

So your desire for there to be no plane at the pentagon means there wasnt one? That every American can easily understand it doesnt make it true and leads to the possibility that it may be a honeytrap set up to funnel our focus then discredit us.

I said no BOEING.And if you think it constitues a honeytrap destined to discredit us, try fitting a boeing in a 16 foot hole and leave no debris.
Feel free to use any far fetching theory of your liking.

That Hoffman doesnt agree with you makes him disinfo?

It's not with me he disagrees,it's with the whole 911 truth mouvement.

I think Hoffman tries to weed out the disinfo

There goes your credibility on this forum.

pushing spurious claims as facts could be argued to do more damage.

You mean like PULL THE FIREFIGHTERS and watch them come down the stairs ??

[Thermate]

I hope they take hoffmans critique onboard for final cut.

I read a post today on LC forum from Dylan saying he spent a day with David Ray Griffin thrashing out the script for Final Cut, they're aiming for watertight with no controversial guesswork this time, fingers crossed eh. Loose Change is/was an emotive eye opener for new people but far from perfect. Griffin should steer them right.

[Mick Meaney]

I just wonder if we will see them introduce themselves at any of the 9/11 events ? Theyre all up there gang. Starting Thursday in Lancaster.

On Thursday the response from most was very positive. Nobody had issues with David or Annie and seemed very supportive of what they are doing.

[rodin]

While i believe Jim Fetzer ,David Ray Griffin,Steven Jones and Kevin Barett are notable exceptions to this rule,i am forced now to include David Shayler,and the person defending him on this forum,Annie (machon ???).

Unless these two persons come up with a sound scientific explanation for the NPT,they join other notable desinfo artists as Jimmy Walter,Jim Hoffman ,Alex Jones as people who seemingly were made an offer they couldn't refuse.

Steven Jones is a shill. A gate-keeping fusion scientist promoting thermate LOL

[rodin]

some people here think jones,shayler and others are controlled in some way. although i disagree with npt and putting it out there as a main talking point i disagree about peoples comments here about them. if it wasnt for people like jones,shayler ect i would'nt be aware of half the stuff thats happening now or false flag operations. why would they expose things then try to tred them down on purpose? it dosnt make sense.

The MO of the Jewish elite is to give us our heros. Big life is Hollywood. Look to the little people for scraps of the truth they don't want you to know.

Look @ the the credentials of the front-runners UK&US

US S Jones - fusion scientist - headed Fleishman & Pons off at the pass. Religious nut. Don't mention the words 'fusion' and '911' when he's around. Gatekeeper.

US A Jones - Bullhorner with Jewish wife. Somehow knows 911 is going to happen. Site up & running nicely to jump on the event. Refuses to bring up the 100's of Israeli spies (art students etc) swarming all over the 911 plot. Never mentions the 5 dancing Israelis who tell us they were merely there to document the event.

UK D Shayler. Background - MI5 Great performer. Talks with confidence. Has loads of insider knowledge. Who has loads of insider knowledge? Insiders. Gets on Sky & is given the oxygen of publicity. Is he 'kosher?' If he is he will appreciate that the only way to get to the bottom is to keep asking questions until they are answered.

How will this play out?

911 and 77 will come out. Rogue elements in the 'authorities' will be blamed. A new team will be sent in to clean up politics. In the US Hilary Clinton will have Alex Jones as VP.

Make up your own storyboard for the YUK

I have the links if you have the time. Not tonight though, Josephine. Dig 'em out by looking thru rodin's postsbag at www.goldismoney.info

[rodin]

David Ray Griffin admitted himself he wasn't very convinced by the no plane theory at the pentagone.He let subsequently the matter to rest,and didn't bother to dig any deeper.
If it wasn't for some academician friends of him who directed him to Paul Thompson's timeline,he might not have bothered any further.

Different people take different tresholds of truth to realise.If everyday Jo stumbles on David's sky interview and hears the impact holes damages don't correspond to the size of the planes,i ask you,will he keep paying attention to 911 conspiracy theories in the future?

I certainly wish he would,as i know you would too.But...

Do you think David Ray Griffin would be making conferences throughout the world at this moment if he included non verifiable material in his presentations ??

By twice including the NPT in his sky appearance,David Shayler caused a lot of damage to a mouvement badly needing credibility.

He did more damage than good.

The Pentagon actually is quite a hard wall, er I mean call. I call no plane. Used to think there was. Might change my mind again. Not an issue I push.

Agree about the Shayler thing. He & Marigold sort of put on a double act. If Marigold the Jew was worried He'd have been interrupting David's flow. Look how the 5 Israeli's issue was handled. Superbly I thought - for MOSSAD. Defused the issue before most become even aware. 'They were just excited, not laughing. LOL. Check out the excitement of Americans watching 911. Horror very different from elation.

[rodin]

How polite from you.
Glad you found at least an issue you know where you stand on.

I know where I stand with you two. Youre a pair of poisonous bitches, clear off out of it!

Let me explain what it actually is prole, you and Ironsnot believe me to be an agent, just because I take issue with 9/11 truth being marred by no planer theorey peddled by a someone we know was an agent at somepoint.
I along with poiuytr, believe these lines of enquiry are valid, and we should ASK QUESTIONS, we have a difference of opinion, thats all, you obviously can't handle a reasoned debate so must spit the dummy and resort to calling me a shill, creep bitch and dirtbag- whats the matter can't follow this line of questioning, taboo area for truthseekers- tsk tsk, wake up and open your eyes WIDE.

They are the agents not you. Plane as the nose cone on their faece.

Try spell checker then cut n paste