The Lying M$M, The Alternative Gatekeepers and Their Respective Flocks
When discussing 9/11 'Conspiracy Theories', the guillibility of many supposed 'critical thinkers', will never cease to amaze me. There are many people that claim that they 'don't believe' the Official Fairy Tale given to us by the M$M and THEN parrotted by government officials.
These people have many different theories of what really happened, from LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) to plane-swaps by the military. There is even a very, very small group that maintains the no planes reality, myself included.
Most of the theorists have at least one common denominator, ThePLAINS PLANES.
Some examples of the theories.
Village Voice
Popular Mechanics
We will we will FLOCK YOU.
We will we will FLOCK YOU.
Now get this, there has supposedly been a 'division' created in the '9/11 Truth Movement' over the issue that some people maintain a no planes perspective. This small group is being blamed for 'turning off' Joe 6-Pack from looking into the anomalies of 9/11.
This is patently ubsurd. Do you really believe that a group of less than 100 people that post on forums, run a few obscure blogs or put up a web page or two are having ANY influence on the average citizen?
The M$M & the Gatekeepers are the ones that influence Joe 6-Pack, not a small group of internet users with a different perspective. The people that have bought into this myth have shown that their mental fortitude has about as much stamina as single-ply tissue in a hurricane.
It is very difficult to get the average person on the street to go from 'foreign terrorists' to LIHOP. To make the leap from terrorists to faked media psyop is therefore impossible.
Seeing that this is the case, Who Really Gains From Disseminating IT? There seem to be so few that support the no planes perspective, Why such the BIG fuss about us?
Who created it? Webfairy? Dr. Grossman? Brianv? Me?
The Gatekeepers are the ones that created this 'division' as a way to keep their flocks in check. It is great fortune for the M$M & the Gatekeepers that their flocks never question the 'information' that they provide or the MOTIVES for providing that 'information'.
Why are the Gatekeepers so intent on discrediting the no plane perspective? If it truly had no merit, it would never be discussed or it would be debunked and tossed down the memory hole, as was the "Raelian Cult Clones" story.
The fact that they have brought it up and put such a negative view to this perspective is encouraging, at least to me. For the 'pre-emptive strike' shows that this is an issue that they are afraid to have openly and freely discussed.
To make matters even more ironic is the fact that most of the people that attack the no plane perspective, partly support it by saying there was no plane at the Pentagon or Shanksville.
WTF? Talk about sitting on the fence, the Official Fairy Tale says four planes, yet these theorists claim there was only two, because they have pictures & videos to prove it. Well I have pictures & videos of Aliens detroying the Earth, big deal.
I guess the fence sitting is like being 'kinda pregnant'.
I challenge you 'flock-stars' to go out and ask 20 people that you do not know if they have ever even heard of the no planes at all perspective in regard to the events of 9/11.
I'll bet that you don't find 2 that have, never mind enough to say the majority of Joe 6-Packs don't pay attention to the issues 9/11 for they had heard the no planes perspective and it "turned them off of conspiracy theories."
The Branch Davidians are a small, obscure sect of Christianity. Can you imagine Billy Graham, Oral Roberts or Pat Robertson going on national T.V. for the purpose of denouncing the Davidians for "Creating a Division in the Christian Movement?"
Or how about this:
"Please Gloria, don't wear the work boots, you'll divide the feminist movement."
FWIW, the sky is NOT blue, the sun will NOT rise tomorrow but I will still be discussing my perspectives whether I face Gatekeeper/Flock-star flak or not.
P.S. I spoke to the clerk at a local gas bar this morning about 9/11. He works the night shift, 11pm - 7am and listens to Coast 2 Coast, which was on when I entered the kiosk around 4am.
He told me he listens to that show 5 nights a week when he is at work and he said that he had never heard of the no planes perspective, though he also admitted that he doesn't here every minute of each show.
We talked about last night's show with James Fetzer, David Ray Griffin and Morgan Reynolds and he was still having a hard time digesting that information, to try to convince him that no planes were used would have been an exercise in extreme futility, as he can barely accept the idea of 'insider' complicity, but the fact that I brought it up didn't make him automatically 'discard' the information that he had heard on C2C.
These people have many different theories of what really happened, from LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) to plane-swaps by the military. There is even a very, very small group that maintains the no planes reality, myself included.
Most of the theorists have at least one common denominator, The
Some examples of the theories.
Village Voice
Popular Mechanics
We will we will FLOCK YOU.
We will we will FLOCK YOU.
Now get this, there has supposedly been a 'division' created in the '9/11 Truth Movement' over the issue that some people maintain a no planes perspective. This small group is being blamed for 'turning off' Joe 6-Pack from looking into the anomalies of 9/11.
This is patently ubsurd. Do you really believe that a group of less than 100 people that post on forums, run a few obscure blogs or put up a web page or two are having ANY influence on the average citizen?
The M$M & the Gatekeepers are the ones that influence Joe 6-Pack, not a small group of internet users with a different perspective. The people that have bought into this myth have shown that their mental fortitude has about as much stamina as single-ply tissue in a hurricane.
It is very difficult to get the average person on the street to go from 'foreign terrorists' to LIHOP. To make the leap from terrorists to faked media psyop is therefore impossible.
Seeing that this is the case, Who Really Gains From Disseminating IT? There seem to be so few that support the no planes perspective, Why such the BIG fuss about us?
Who created it? Webfairy? Dr. Grossman? Brianv? Me?
The Gatekeepers are the ones that created this 'division' as a way to keep their flocks in check. It is great fortune for the M$M & the Gatekeepers that their flocks never question the 'information' that they provide or the MOTIVES for providing that 'information'.
Why are the Gatekeepers so intent on discrediting the no plane perspective? If it truly had no merit, it would never be discussed or it would be debunked and tossed down the memory hole, as was the "Raelian Cult Clones" story.
The fact that they have brought it up and put such a negative view to this perspective is encouraging, at least to me. For the 'pre-emptive strike' shows that this is an issue that they are afraid to have openly and freely discussed.
To make matters even more ironic is the fact that most of the people that attack the no plane perspective, partly support it by saying there was no plane at the Pentagon or Shanksville.
WTF? Talk about sitting on the fence, the Official Fairy Tale says four planes, yet these theorists claim there was only two, because they have pictures & videos to prove it. Well I have pictures & videos of Aliens detroying the Earth, big deal.
I guess the fence sitting is like being 'kinda pregnant'.
I challenge you 'flock-stars' to go out and ask 20 people that you do not know if they have ever even heard of the no planes at all perspective in regard to the events of 9/11.
I'll bet that you don't find 2 that have, never mind enough to say the majority of Joe 6-Packs don't pay attention to the issues 9/11 for they had heard the no planes perspective and it "turned them off of conspiracy theories."
The Branch Davidians are a small, obscure sect of Christianity. Can you imagine Billy Graham, Oral Roberts or Pat Robertson going on national T.V. for the purpose of denouncing the Davidians for "Creating a Division in the Christian Movement?"
Or how about this:
"Please Gloria, don't wear the work boots, you'll divide the feminist movement."
FWIW, the sky is NOT blue, the sun will NOT rise tomorrow but I will still be discussing my perspectives whether I face Gatekeeper/Flock-star flak or not.
P.S. I spoke to the clerk at a local gas bar this morning about 9/11. He works the night shift, 11pm - 7am and listens to Coast 2 Coast, which was on when I entered the kiosk around 4am.
He told me he listens to that show 5 nights a week when he is at work and he said that he had never heard of the no planes perspective, though he also admitted that he doesn't here every minute of each show.
We talked about last night's show with James Fetzer, David Ray Griffin and Morgan Reynolds and he was still having a hard time digesting that information, to try to convince him that no planes were used would have been an exercise in extreme futility, as he can barely accept the idea of 'insider' complicity, but the fact that I brought it up didn't make him automatically 'discard' the information that he had heard on C2C.
posted by PerpetualYnquisitive at 2/25/2006 07:50:00 AM
6 Comments:
I'm not too keen on absolutes, for example "You're either with us or ...".
Flight AA11 & AA77 were never scheduled to fly on 9/11 and didn't even magically show up in the BTS database until at least 2 years later. The 2 video's of AA11 impact at 1WTC appear to be from the same video team who were responsible for nAUdEt fake mockyoumentory. There is also no video evidence of a large aircraft hitting the Pentagon as flight AA77 is aledged to have.
As for the other 2 alledged flights, it is more difficult to call. They were scheduled and according to the BTS, departed but never arrived at their destinations. In the case of UA175, there are numorous videos (including amature) of a large plane hitting the South Tower, whether it is UA175 is impossible to say. The witnesses could be as fake as cell phone calls from 30,000 feet and so could all the video but so far there is a lack of contradicting evidence. As for UA93, there appears to be some evidence something was shot down over Indian Lake but I've not yet seen anything convincing about what went on there.
The Gatekeepers however have been delivering steller performances recently. I've was very impressed with Lisa Guliani's tearful breakdown due to the lack of response from the other members of the Alternative Propaganda um Media to Dr. James Fetzer's interview on Coast to Coast. Dr. Fetzer, already a radio interview veteran after his exposer of the zAprUdEr film hoax, see AssassinationScience.com,
didn't miss a step and avoided all of Noory's side balls with ease. It would seem that Dr. Fetzer is the real deal!
And now Alex Jones, not to be left out, made his Oscar attempt with a pathetic tearful display in his recent "Free View" report. Come on Alex, you can do better than that!
Maybe crying on camera is the next level in the alternative propaganda? All the gatekeepers in tears, quick bing me some tissues!
Which "facts" might you be refering to?
I have to say that I find myself in close agreement with your take on the "no plane" brouhaha that has developed.
When I first started looking into 911 almost five years ago I didn't know much about anything- everything had to be looked into and only after I became conversant was I able to know what was relevant and what could be discarded, but one thing remained virtually certain- if you were on to something, you would be attacked big time.
I still don't really know who, how or what was involved, but I know what my gut tells me and I know that you don't take flak unless you're over the target.
I just discovered this blog today and wasn't aware that anyone believed in the "no planes" theory. That would be different than "drones", right?
What exactly is the "no planes theory"? Could someone explain that to me?
If it is that there were no planes and the videos of planes crashing into the towers were faked by the media, could someone explain the following point to me?
Whereas it is possible to believe that no New Yorkers were looking at the first tower when it was hit, wouldn't it be impossible to believe that once the first plane hit, or whatever it was that started the fire, nobody would have been looking at the twin towers, some almost continuously? Therefore, if there were no second plane, people would have noticed that, wouldn't they?
Thank you.
The no plane theory posits that the video footage aired on September 11, 2001 is doctored to make it appear as though commercial passenger planes hit the WTC towers.
The supposed 'most documented' event in modern history has less than 3 dozen videos showing the 'planes' hitting the WTC, many of which contain suspicious anomalies.
http://911tvfakery.blogspot.com/ &http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/
&http://killtown.911review.org/2nd-hit.html
Check the above links for more detailed information.
Village Voice's Jarrett Murphy is definitely "on the take"; even when it was pointed out to him that his logic was flawed (he thinks he can prove a negative), he never would correct his gatekeeping conclusion that Bush's incriminating 9/11 witness statements -- indicative of prior knowledge at the highest level of the U.S. government -- were "erroneous".
Post a Comment
<< Home