Question: When in all of history has anyone ever seen a top-down collapse of a building into its own footprint?
Answer: Never. There have NEVER been any top-down collapses of any buildings into their footprint, by controlled-demolition or otherwise. The foundation of the building, which is always on the bottom has to be destroyed first.
Therefore, if you see TWO top-down collapses on video on the same day and there have NEVER been any top-down collapses in history, the very first thing that you should call into question is THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE IMAGES you just saw. The very first thing any proper scientific or criminal investigation would have to do is examine the images which purport to show something that has never happened before in history outside of Hollywood predictive programming CGI flicks like "Independence Day."
Question: What would you call someone who writes an entire book WITHOUT even bothering to establish the authenticity of the images which purport to represent the authenticity of the event, criminal or otherwise, which the entire chain-of-logic of the book is built upon?
Answer: As UNSCIENTIFIC as it is possible to be.
Question: Why did they FAKE the collapse videos to show a TOP-DOWN collapse which has never happened in the history of the world?
Answer: Because, according to the narrative coming to the peons from enemy propaganda and the single most untrustworthy source of information in the universe, the mainstream media, the so-called 'Hi-jacked PLANES' are supposed to have caused the collapse of the two buildings and these 'planes' hit near the top of the building. Therefore, according to the absurd logic of their pre-manufactured narrative, the pre-manufactured video has to show a TOP-DOWN collpase.
By making the top-down collpase a 'dustification' or pulverization, again on FAKED VIDEO, the perps can then have a shill like Judy Wood offer a 'scientific' explanation of it by examining a bunch of INAUTHENTICATED images and video, completely ignoring proper criminal procedure and scientific method, and postulating DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS as the cause of it. lol
Question: Has anyone ever seen or can prove the existence of Directed Energy Weapons?
Answer: No. There is no solid proof that any kind of DEW has ever existed outside of fear-mongering propaganda. Therefore, examining a bunch of OBVIOUSLY FAKED images of impossible 'top-down' collapses from 9-11 to postulate their existence without the slightest attempt at authentication outside of tracing them to this-or-that so-called photographer set-up to take fraudulent credit for them outside of a court of law and penalties of perjury is as absurd and unscientific as it is possible to get.
So, the answer to all the endless people of challenged mentalities who still cannot fathom the simple reason why the building collapses were also faked is: In order to show a TOP-DOWN collapse due to the impact of the so-called 'planes.' Why would they do that? Who would be so dumb as to believe the absurdity of a top-down collapse as long as the authoritative voice of the mainstream media is behind it? Well, apparently the entire planet of almost 7 billion people minus the tiny million or so 'truthers' questioning things on the internet on sites like DIF, who are FURTHER GATEKEPT away from the core-truth by an endless parade of direct agents and useful idots poisoning the well.
Direct agent or useful idiot/ego, the result of shillery is the same: dis-information or making everything believable and nothing knowable.
The reason why the collapse of building 7, given as a red herring only to the alternative community and not to mainstream-media watchers who didn't play very lose attention, was, again, FAKED as a 'regular' demolition, is simply because it was never hit by a plane. The cockamamie reason given for the collapse of that building was out-of-control fires and 'saving lives' and whatnot and Silverstein even went on fully-controlled PBS and admitted to pulling the building. The reason for this was to give CREDENCE, not just to the authenticity of the 9-11 imagery but to bamboozle the public to think that reporters were on-the-scene reporting this event 'live.' They were not.
The ENTIRE 102 minute event PLUS later 'amateur' footage was pre-manufactured on video LIKE A DOCUMENTARY STYLE MOVIE, complete with FAKE firefighters and paramedics and all the rest. The real paramedics and firefighters were left out-of-the-loop altogether and ASSUMED the job was already well taken-care of by the fake or compromised-paid-off ones they could see on their boob-tube, just like the rest of us TV-baby peons.
Capiche?
Simple enough for you all?
Please stop the endless spinning around and pointless rationalizations of the simple FACTS in front of your noses.
Just like the Moon-Landings of 3 decades before, they faked ALL of 9-11 on film, including the building demolitions, which happened in reality very differently than how they were shown on pre-manufactured film purporting to be 'live.' For starters, even for those in the alternative media who know about building 7's collapse, 9 buildings in all were destroyed that day and not 3, etc.
It does not necessarily follow that a non-fakeologist is a shill. And we don't need fakeology to prove that the government's official 9-11 conspiracy theory is false.
A shill is anyone who deliberately or through useful idiocy keeps you from finding out the full truth about something. If you only want half-truths and are comfortable only with half-truths then keep drinking that poisoned Judy Wood and Spingola water.
It makes not one bit of difference whether you can "prove" the government's official 9-11 conspiracy theory is false or not. Obviously you can "prove it." I already proved it to myself on the very day of 9-11, 2001 when I said: "they had better come up with plausible explanation of who rigged those buildings for demolition." You can 100% prove that no jet-fuel fire can ever cause a "controlled demolition" and that's that, case solved, prison terms or traitors' death-penalties for all the criminals, starting with all the news-anchors on TV and their bosses and everyone who tried to pass this event off as anything else but a fraud.
Did that happen?
No.
Did you need "WTC Building 7" then?
No. The fraud was already proven and yet, somehow, the perps were not at all afraid of it were they? Not at all afraid of people saying: "wait a second! Planes can't demolish buildings into their footprints!" The most obvious thing in the world.
That's because the perps know that when psychological control is achieved through trauma-based fear-conditioning, the critical thinking process breaks down and almost anything that validates the propriety of the emotional reactions of the mass subconscious will be believed, regardless of factual validity.
So, who needs Building 7? It was given to the dissenter community, on purpose, so that they'll have something to chase their tails on for 14 years, away from the real modus operandi of the "event," right in front of their noses in absurd aluminum planes cutting through 500,000 ton steel-&-concrete buildings like a hot knife through butter with zero deceleration and no parts falling off out of up to 3 million on each plane? LOL
You and plenty of other people in the truth community believed that for over a decade and still continue to believe it regardless of how many proofs of media-fakery are offered.
So, no, you don't need media-fakery to "prove" the fraud of 9-11, but you do need it to understand how it was done, so that you can prevent the same bamboozling being repeated a hundred times over for a hundred times larger curtailment of freedoms and liberties as a result.
You don't need Building Seven or any of the rest of the crap "discovered" by Alex Jones and Loose Shekels either, put in on-purpose, given to you deliberately, not as "mistakes," but as fully-planned and deliberated PsyOp rabbit holes to get lost in for as long as possible while their running other PsyOps using the same Media Fakery mode of operation.
4 comments:
Question: When in all of history has anyone ever seen a top-down collapse of a building into its own footprint?
Answer: Never. There have NEVER been any top-down collapses of any buildings into their footprint, by controlled-demolition or otherwise. The foundation of the building, which is always on the bottom has to be destroyed first.
Therefore, if you see TWO top-down collapses on video on the same day and there have NEVER been any top-down collapses in history, the very first thing that you should call into question is THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE IMAGES you just saw. The very first thing any proper scientific or criminal investigation would have to do is examine the images which purport to show something that has never happened before in history outside of Hollywood predictive programming CGI flicks like "Independence Day."
Question: What would you call someone who writes an entire book WITHOUT even bothering to establish the authenticity of the images which purport to represent the authenticity of the event, criminal or otherwise, which the entire chain-of-logic of the book is built upon?
Answer: As UNSCIENTIFIC as it is possible to be.
Question: Why did they FAKE the collapse videos to show a TOP-DOWN collapse which has never happened in the history of the world?
Answer: Because, according to the narrative coming to the peons from enemy propaganda and the single most untrustworthy source of information in the universe, the mainstream media, the so-called 'Hi-jacked PLANES' are supposed to have caused the collapse of the two buildings and these 'planes' hit near the top of the building. Therefore, according to the absurd logic of their pre-manufactured narrative, the pre-manufactured video has to show a TOP-DOWN collpase.
By making the top-down collpase a 'dustification' or pulverization, again on FAKED VIDEO, the perps can then have a shill like Judy Wood offer a 'scientific' explanation of it by examining a bunch of INAUTHENTICATED images and video, completely ignoring proper criminal procedure and scientific method, and postulating DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS as the cause of it. lol
Question: Has anyone ever seen or can prove the existence of Directed Energy Weapons?
Answer: No. There is no solid proof that any kind of DEW has ever existed outside of fear-mongering propaganda. Therefore, examining a bunch of OBVIOUSLY FAKED images of impossible 'top-down' collapses from 9-11 to postulate their existence without the slightest attempt at authentication outside of tracing them to this-or-that so-called photographer set-up to take fraudulent credit for them outside of a court of law and penalties of perjury is as absurd and unscientific as it is possible to get.
So, the answer to all the endless people of challenged mentalities who still cannot fathom the simple reason why the building collapses were also faked is: In order to show a TOP-DOWN collapse due to the impact of the so-called 'planes.' Why would they do that? Who would be so dumb as to believe the absurdity of a top-down collapse as long as the authoritative voice of the mainstream media is behind it? Well, apparently the entire planet of almost 7 billion people minus the tiny million or so 'truthers' questioning things on the internet on sites like DIF, who are FURTHER GATEKEPT away from the core-truth by an endless parade of direct agents and useful idots poisoning the well.
Direct agent or useful idiot/ego, the result of shillery is the same: dis-information or making everything believable and nothing knowable.
(continued . . . )
The reason why the collapse of building 7, given as a red herring only to the alternative community and not to mainstream-media watchers who didn't play very lose attention, was, again, FAKED as a 'regular' demolition, is simply because it was never hit by a plane. The cockamamie reason given for the collapse of that building was out-of-control fires and 'saving lives' and whatnot and Silverstein even went on fully-controlled PBS and admitted to pulling the building. The reason for this was to give CREDENCE, not just to the authenticity of the 9-11 imagery but to bamboozle the public to think that reporters were on-the-scene reporting this event 'live.' They were not.
The ENTIRE 102 minute event PLUS later 'amateur' footage was pre-manufactured on video LIKE A DOCUMENTARY STYLE MOVIE, complete with FAKE firefighters and paramedics and all the rest. The real paramedics and firefighters were left out-of-the-loop altogether and ASSUMED the job was already well taken-care of by the fake or compromised-paid-off ones they could see on their boob-tube, just like the rest of us TV-baby peons.
Capiche?
Simple enough for you all?
Please stop the endless spinning around and pointless rationalizations of the simple FACTS in front of your noses.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=224648
Just like the Moon-Landings of 3 decades before, they faked ALL of 9-11 on film, including the building demolitions, which happened in reality very differently than how they were shown on pre-manufactured film purporting to be 'live.' For starters, even for those in the alternative media who know about building 7's collapse, 9 buildings in all were destroyed that day and not 3, etc.
September Clues Addendum:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD_IgCKpNrY
THE KING KONG MAN – Simon Shack
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2374833#p2374833
KING KONG MAN Part II – the 21 foot jumper! – Simon Shack
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?t=501&p=2389314#p2389314
The 9-11 "Hug-Me" Clones:
http://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/ddefjao2p6/SimonShackAAA_HugMeClones_COMPLETE_01.jpg
The Sun Does Not Lie, Bad People Do:
http://k007.kiwi6.com/hotlink/xz7nxm2ha6/Simon_Shack_SUNdoesnotlie.jpg
It does not necessarily follow that a non-fakeologist is a shill. And we don't need fakeology to prove that the government's official 9-11 conspiracy theory is false.
@Whooli
A shill is anyone who deliberately or through useful idiocy keeps you from finding out the full truth about something. If you only want half-truths and are comfortable only with half-truths then keep drinking that poisoned Judy Wood and Spingola water.
It makes not one bit of difference whether you can "prove" the government's official 9-11 conspiracy theory is false or not. Obviously you can "prove it." I already proved it to myself on the very day of 9-11, 2001 when I said: "they had better come up with plausible explanation of who rigged those buildings for demolition." You can 100% prove that no jet-fuel fire can ever cause a "controlled demolition" and that's that, case solved, prison terms or traitors' death-penalties for all the criminals, starting with all the news-anchors on TV and their bosses and everyone who tried to pass this event off as anything else but a fraud.
Did that happen?
No.
Did you need "WTC Building 7" then?
No. The fraud was already proven and yet, somehow, the perps were not at all afraid of it were they? Not at all afraid of people saying: "wait a second! Planes can't demolish buildings into their footprints!" The most obvious thing in the world.
That's because the perps know that when psychological control is achieved through trauma-based fear-conditioning, the critical thinking process breaks down and almost anything that validates the propriety of the emotional reactions of the mass subconscious will be believed, regardless of factual validity.
So, who needs Building 7? It was given to the dissenter community, on purpose, so that they'll have something to chase their tails on for 14 years, away from the real modus operandi of the "event," right in front of their noses in absurd aluminum planes cutting through 500,000 ton steel-&-concrete buildings like a hot knife through butter with zero deceleration and no parts falling off out of up to 3 million on each plane? LOL
You and plenty of other people in the truth community believed that for over a decade and still continue to believe it regardless of how many proofs of media-fakery are offered.
So, no, you don't need media-fakery to "prove" the fraud of 9-11, but you do need it to understand how it was done, so that you can prevent the same bamboozling being repeated a hundred times over for a hundred times larger curtailment of freedoms and liberties as a result.
You don't need Building Seven or any of the rest of the crap "discovered" by Alex Jones and Loose Shekels either, put in on-purpose, given to you deliberately, not as "mistakes," but as fully-planned and deliberated PsyOp rabbit holes to get lost in for as long as possible while their running other PsyOps using the same Media Fakery mode of operation.
Post a Comment