John Friend.net
The Realist Report (BlogTalk)
The Realist Report (TalkShoe)
Download
November 12, 2013
The Realist Report with John Friend 2013.11.12
John Friend.net
The Realist Report (BlogTalk)
The Realist Report (TalkShoe)
Download
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
John,
Were you aware, before scheduling this interview, that Ace Baker had faked his own suicide on air in 2009?
And having seen his documentary, what did you think of 19 minutes into part 2 where he has a cartoon video of Dick Cheney singing and acting ridiculous?
I listened to the entire interview and never heard you raise either of these points, despite discussing parts of his documentary in detail.
Near the end of the interview, you asked a very good question about the hazy pictures we saw from the live footage on 9/11 and he made the amazing claim that it wasn't out of place to have such a hazy skyline on the East Coast in September. Really? I'm familiar with Toronto, and have seen a hazy skyline downtown many times, but only during the summer months.
His answer doesn't address why the live footage is so hazy, given that most (if not almost all) of the purported amateur footage shows a clear blue sky, despite him asserting, upon your press for clarity, that the amateur footage was real, except for fake planes.
Despite your repeated attempts to invoke September Clues, he obviously had no interest in specifically refuting any of the claims in it, nor did he justify the claim that Simon reported him as saying, that around 98% of September Clues was disinfo.
Here is an article I wrote about this, with the video links in question.
http://fauxcapitalist.com/2013/11/10/why-is-john-friend-giving-a-platform-to-ace-baker-who-discredited-himself-by-faking-his-own-suicide-on-air/
"Ace Baker" is as low as you can go as far as interviewing a guest is concerned, and I am appalled that this guy was on the program.
Lindsey
I appreciate the fact Friend has interviewed Shack AND Baker. Then I can judge for myself who is closer to the truth. Plus I can cherry pick ideas that make most sense to me.
My opinion of Baker as a researcher improved post this interview
Thanks rodin, I appreciate that.
Hi FauxCapitalist, thanks for the comment. I was aware of Ace's fake suicide on Jim Fetzer's radio program, and I even had it on my outline for this program to bring up and ask him about. I probably should have, considering it IS a big deal if you fake your own suicide... but to be totally honest with you (and everyone else here), I found Ace to be an extremely genuine guy (even though I didn't agree with everything he said during the interview).
I had some suspicions of him prior to this program, especially considering his fake suicide AND the totally DISHONEST stunt he pulled on Simon Shack (which I was NOT aware of prior to inviting him on the program). See here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynvY2nK5e-I
And I don't agree with many of the things he said during this program. From what I understand, it IS possible to fake the entire 9/11 footage and present it as real (which is what September Clues has concluded, if I'm not mistaken). I think the "jumper" videos are fraudulent, and I think most, if not all, of the "victims" are fabricated. Both the "jumpers" and the "victims" - and their family members - are crucial aspects of the 9/11 PSYOP, which Ace apparently doesn't recognize or agree with. And that's fine, I still think his take on 9/11 is interesting, unique, and worth talking about.
I also question the authenticity of the collapse footage, and the imagery of the aftermath of 9/11 (which Dr. Judy Wood and others base much of their research off of). I question EVERYTHING relating to 9/11, as any objective, honest person should. I think there IS indeed a major problem with the hazy background in the 9/11 footage, something Ace didn't seem to be concerned about. From where I stand right now, I don't think that ANY of the footage depicting what took place on 9/11 (the official media footage, the "amateur" footage, etc.) is genuine. Ace thinks it is, BUT fake planes were inserted to sell the 9/11 PSYOP to the public. I disagree, but I'm glad I had him on so he could clarify his views for us all.
Back to the fake suicide business - I didn't bring it up because I think Ace has been through a lot during his pursuit of 9/11 truth, as well all have. Realizing that the government and media have lied to us and are lying to us about virtually EVERYTHING, especially major events like 9/11, is extremely TRAUMATIZING and emotional. Trust me, I have really only resolved all the trauma in my mind "waking up" to the reality we find ourselves in today relatively recently - and doing these radio programs and writing on my blog has been a major help. It took a loooong time for me to really deal with this stuff on a basic psychological, emotional and even intellectual level. When Ace faked his suicide, I don't think he had fully healed from the trauma associated with coming to the realization that everything he had been told in his life was a lie. That's why I didn't bring it up.
Re Tom in Connecticuts's petition to dismiss video evidence. Without that what else is there?
Now consider this, why fake free fall collapse videos? Better to fake something that fits the official narrative. The Zapruder film is a case in point. I divined from it that Jackie shot JFK by vector analysing the exit trails left on 2 consecutive frames of the Zapruder film. I was criticised for using the 'fake' Zapruder film. But if the film was fake how come I was able to see something in it no one else had, using technologies that were not available at the time?
Regarding hazy shots - the footage was taken with long telephoto lens. Go try taking similar pics and see what you see...
All good and interesting comments.
I am not particularly impressed with Ace Baker. He taught us a lot about video compositing and what is possible and for that I am grateful as we need to consider ALL possible alternatives regarding videos.
The "web fairy" believes in CGI (computer graphics imaging) rather than video layering compositry.
Both theories only relate to the videos we saw "live" on TV.
I pretty much agree with John Friend's comments about the parts of Shack's ideas I agree with.
Shack seems unnecessarily to take some very extreme positions, such as that NO PERSON in the Towers were killed, that there is a device that prevented there being ANY AT ALL legitimate live videos of the towers being destroyed. (I know personally of an acquaintance in my town who was in NYC on 9-11 and he videod from his hotel room the collapse of Building 7 and that video became widely used in the Loose Change films and other 9-11 videos. The person is an honest reliable informant -- name is Jeff Kantoff.) Also says there are NO authentic still photos of the aftermath, but I do not believe that blocking device could have blocked all still photos, especially ones taken some days after 9-11. I commend Shack and Hoi Pilloi for exposing us to the whole idea of fake victims (vicsims) which leads to the whole idea of extensive use of crisis actors.
Dr. Fetzer's latest strongest belief about the Towers' destruction being possible mini or micro nukes is based not on videos, though he does take the background part of the tower destruction videos at face value. Dr. Fetzer's ideas are based on the presence of over ten fission pathway elements found in the dust analysis done by the US Geological Survey, elements that Dr. Steven Jones, Richard Gage and all their so-called vaunted "peer reviewed scientific published research studies" just forgot to tell us about, focusing soley on one element found in the dust, thermite.
I do have a bit of problem with Dr. Fetzer;s fascination with hologram theory because he never paid much importance to the few people who said they saw real planes, but when he found such a neat nifty fitting hologram theory by that guy in England, then he ran with that idea. In other words, it is like the Downing Street Memo method of fitting the facts around the policy.
The technical truth of how 911 was done lies somewhere between the Shack and Baker positions. Shack however seems to me to be the deliberate disinfo here, introducing the turd of "building collapses were simulated". Vicsims / crisis actors yes we know now this is standard issue. IMO all the crisis actors are same tribe as the perps, pretty much, hence the closed shop deception. As for the energetics used in towers 1 and 2 it seems to me some kind of nuclear chemistry was employed. However I also know atom bomb test footage is faked. I think an interesting line of enquiry would be S Jones and cold fusion...
I have to get my comment in, even before I have even heard one word from the interview.
FauxCapitalist said...
John,
Were you aware, before scheduling this interview, that Ace Baker had faked his own suicide on air in 2009? Did he say he had a gun in his hand and was about to pull the trigger? No he did not. he might have been trying to say; Fetzer, sometimes you really do piss me off!
lindseynarrates said...
"Ace Baker" is as low as you can go as far as interviewing a guest is concerned, and I am appalled that this guy was on the program.
Lindsey, Why, I hope you are not suggesting that 9/11 truth would have been served better had Ace Baker not had made this video?
Ace Baker has produced the best 9/11 truth documentary. He really has identified the perps, he does point the finger of blame directly at the TV news media, and he does mention the Israeli "B team" and attempts to uncover their plot.
Thanks John for getting Ace on your show. I tried to contact him a couple of times a year or two ago just to say thanks for his contribution to 9/11. Unfortunately the email address that I found on his blog bounced.
Post a Comment