9/11 Mysteries http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871 http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
3 demolished buildings in the weeks before 9/11. Since 9-11 the
American public has shown a "remarkable indifference to being
deceived" (George Soros). But this is changing. As Hugo Chavez put it:
"The world is waking up. It's waking up all over. And people are
standing up." Millions around the world are realizing that they are
being lied to - not in a small, lazy way, but in a big way. It's time
to ask hard questions, many of which 911 Mysteries helps to answer. 90
minutes of evidence and analysis, filled with eyewitness testimonials.
Point-by-point review of the official story set alongside clear
science. The question is not one of politics or nationalism or
loyalty, but one of strict and simple physics. Does steel melt in open
air fires? What caused the core to vanish in seconds? No agenda. No
finger-pointing. Just the facts and the questions.
A story of people: Willie Rodriguez's strange recollection of noises
on the 34th floor. Who was up there, bumping around? Scott Forbes'
similar story, weeks before the towers fell. Here's how shaped charges
slice through steel beams to control the way they fall.
For greater clarity, download the movie over bittorrent - or buy a DVD
online at www.911weknow.com. 176  4775 
.. wrote:
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.
nothing to see here but x-posted bait.
On Sep 11, 10:40*am, "." <sweep1...@yahoo.comwrote:
9/11 Mysterieshttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871
<snip>
Shut up.
Mr. K.V.B.L. wrote:
On Sep 11, 10:40 am, "." <sweep1...@yahoo.comwrote:
>9/11 Mysterieshttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871
<snip>
Shut up.
In article <3e**********************************@i76g2000hsf. googlegroups.com>,
"." <sw*******@yahoo.comsaid:
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir
time in poo-pooing this post.
How about me? I'm spending almost no effort and maybe 30 seconds to
call you an idiot.
-- wds
On Sep 11, 3:46*pm, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
In article <3ebb89a2-c229-4086-88a9-144acd465...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups..com>,
"." <sweep1...@yahoo.comsaid:
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir
time in poo-pooing this post.
How about me? *I'm spending almost no effort and maybe 30 seconds to
call you an idiot.
-- wds
About the same for me, except I reported this person's profile to
Google which always gets them banned.
Mr. K.V.B.L. wrote:
On Sep 11, 3:46 pm, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>In article <3ebb89a2-c229-4086-88a9-144acd465...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"." <sweep1...@yahoo.comsaid:
>>Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir
time in poo-pooing this post.
How about me? I'm spending almost no effort and maybe 30 seconds to
call you an idiot.
-- wds
About the same for me, except I reported this person's profile to
Google which always gets them banned.
Encroyable!
"." <sweep1019 wrote:
>
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871
http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
3 demolished buildings in the weeks before 9/11. Since 9-11 the
American public has shown a "remarkable indifference to being
deceived" (George Soros). But this is changing. As Hugo Chavez put it:
"The world is waking up. It's waking up all over. And people are
standing up." Millions around the world are realizing that they are
being lied to - not in a small, lazy way, but in a big way. It's time
to ask hard questions, many of which 911 Mysteries helps to answer. 90
minutes of evidence and analysis, filled with eyewitness testimonials.
Point-by-point review of the official story set alongside clear
science. The question is not one of politics or nationalism or
loyalty, but one of strict and simple physics. Does steel melt in open
air fires? What caused the core to vanish in seconds? No agenda. No
finger-pointing. Just the facts and the questions.
A story of people: Willie Rodriguez's strange recollection of noises
on the 34th floor. Who was up there, bumping around? Scott Forbes'
similar story, weeks before the towers fell. Here's how shaped charges
slice through steel beams to control the way they fall.
For greater clarity, download the movie over bittorrent - or buy a DVD
online at www.911weknow.com.
Interesting stuff... thanks for posting.
--
Truck Stop Woman by Dockery-Conley http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXA4jekz_xk
Will Dockery wrote:
Interesting stuff... thanks for posting.
Yes, you surely are not the same person who made the original post, sure.
"Juha Nieminen" wrote:
Will Dockery wrote:
Interesting stuff... thanks for posting.
Yes, you surely are not the same person who made the original post,
sure.
No, I'm not.
--
Truck Stop Woman by Dockery-Conley http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXA4jekz_xk
In article <3e**********************************@i76g2000hsf. googlegroups.com>,
.. <sw*******@yahoo.comwrote:
>9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871
http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
The audio of the explosions heard in 9/11 Mysteries is fake according
to the film maker who shot video used in the film. The "Truth
Movement" is full of lies.
------------------------------------
Rick Siegel, the person that shot video of the WTC collapse
from Hoboken, 2 miles away, shows his original video and
compares it to the the versions used in two "Truth Movement"
conspiracy videos; "9/11 Eyewitness" by James Brewster and
"9/11 Mysteries" by Sophia Shafquat.
Siegel shows that the "explosions" heard on 9/11 Mysteries and
9/11 Eyewitness are, in fact, not on his the original tape. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jir7yWTroN8
Brewster & Shafquat claim the sounds are evidence of man-made
explosives at WTC. Someone manipulated the sound track to make
those noises.
Of the dozens of video tapes we have from WTC on 9/11, there are
no recordings that show explosions that sound like man-made
blasts and are loud enough and timed to be consistent with any
building collapse. The 1993 bombing, equal to 1,000 bounds of TNT
and loud enough to be heard throughout the WTC complex and for
blocks around, was not large enough to do any structural damage to
the WTC tower it was under.
WTC on 9/11 was probably the most-witnessed disaster in history.
For more information about all the imagery we have for it read the
book, "Watching The world change; The Stories behind the images
of 9/11" by David Friend
For more information about fact-based 9/11, go to http://911mysteriesguide.com/
and
911myths.com
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
In article <63**************************@KNOLOGY.NET>,
Will Dockery <do*****@knology.netwrote:
>
"." <sweep1019 wrote:
>>
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871
http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
3 demolished buildings in the weeks before 9/11. Since 9-11 the
American public has shown a "remarkable indifference to being
deceived" (George Soros). But this is changing. As Hugo Chavez put it:
"The world is waking up. It's waking up all over. And people are
standing up." Millions around the world are realizing that they are
being lied to - not in a small, lazy way, but in a big way. It's time
to ask hard questions, many of which 911 Mysteries helps to answer. 90
minutes of evidence and analysis, filled with eyewitness testimonials.
Point-by-point review of the official story set alongside clear
science. The question is not one of politics or nationalism or
loyalty, but one of strict and simple physics. Does steel melt in open
air fires? What caused the core to vanish in seconds? No agenda. No
finger-pointing. Just the facts and the questions.
A story of people: Willie Rodriguez's strange recollection of noises
on the 34th floor. Who was up there, bumping around? Scott Forbes'
similar story, weeks before the towers fell. Here's how shaped charges
slice through steel beams to control the way they fall.
For greater clarity, download the movie over bittorrent - or buy a DVD
online at www.911weknow.com.
Interesting stuff... thanks for posting.
Rodriguez has said many things over the years, He refuses to speak in
front of anyone who hasn't drunk the Kool Aide. He has turned down
many invitations that I am aware of. See this for the various
conflicting things he's said. http://911stories.googlepages.com/home
His first telling of the story is completely consistent with a gas
vapor explosion and not consistent with man-made demolition. His
claim of timing can be shown to be wrong.
"....The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement
when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I
thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that
moment. A person comes running into the office saying explosion,
explosion, explosion. When I look at this guy; has all his skin
pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like
it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the
elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a
force down the elevator shaft on the 58th . freight elevator, the
biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went
out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I
think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from
the B3 level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting
for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized.
William Rodriquez http://wtc.nist.gov/media/Public%20T..._withlinks.pdf
Transcript of NIST Public Meeting in New York City . February 12, 2004
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
On Sep 13, 8:41*am, ady...@panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote:
In article <63223$48cb8771$4b4c71e9$5...@KNOLOGY.NET>,
Will Dockery <dock...@knology.netwrote:
"." <sweep1019 wrote:
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871
>http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
3 demolished buildings in the weeks before 9/11. Since 9-11 the
American public has shown a "remarkable indifference to being
deceived" (George Soros). But this is changing. As Hugo Chavez put it:
"The world is waking up. It's waking up all over. And people are
standing up." Millions around the world are realizing that they are
being lied to - not in a small, lazy way, but in a big way. It's time
to ask hard questions, many of which 911 Mysteries helps to answer. 90
minutes of evidence and analysis, filled with eyewitness testimonials.
Point-by-point review of the official story set alongside clear
science. The question is not one of politics or nationalism or
loyalty, but one of strict and simple physics. Does steel melt in open
air fires? What caused the core to vanish in seconds? No agenda. No
finger-pointing. Just the facts and the questions.
A story of people: Willie Rodriguez's strange recollection of noises
on the 34th floor. Who was up there, bumping around? Scott Forbes'
similar story, weeks before the towers fell. Here's how shaped charges
slice through steel beams to control the way they fall.
For greater clarity, download the movie over bittorrent - or buy a DVD
online atwww.911weknow.com.
Interesting stuff... thanks for posting.
Rodriguez has said many things over the years, He refuses to speak in
front of anyone who hasn't drunk the Kool Aide. He has turned down
many invitations that I am aware of. See this for the various
conflicting things he's said.
* *http://911stories.googlepages.com/home
His first telling of the story is completely consistent with a gas
vapor explosion and not consistent with man-made demolition. *His
claim of timing can be shown to be wrong.
* *"....The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement
* *when the first plane hit the building. *And at that moment, I
* *thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that
* *moment. A person comes running into the office saying explosion,
* *explosion, explosion. When I look at this guy; has all his skin
* *pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like
* *it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the
* *elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a
* *force down the elevator shaft on the 58th . freight elevator, the
* *biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went
* *out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I
* *think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from
* *the B3 level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting
* *for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized.
* * * * William Rodriquez
* * * *http://wtc.nist.gov/media/Public%20T...20Final1_withl...
* * * * Transcript of NIST Public Meeting in New York City . February 12, 2004
--
Al Dykes
*News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
* * - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail- Hide quoted text-
- Show quoted text -
Just urban legend... Unlike my website... http://www.chuck-lysaght.info
Al Dykes wrote:
>
"....The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement
when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I
thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that
moment. A person comes running into the office saying explosion,
explosion, explosion. When I look at this guy; has all his skin
pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like
it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the
elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a
force down the elevator shaft on the 58th . freight elevator, the
biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went
out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I
think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from
the B3 level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting
for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized.
Wow! Please tell us more.
Al Dykes wrote:
The audio of the explosions heard in 9/11 Mysteries is fake according
to the film maker who shot video used in the film. The "Truth
Movement" is full of lies.
------------------------------------
Rick Siegel, the person that shot video of the WTC collapse
from Hoboken, 2 miles away, shows his original video and
compares it to the the versions used in two "Truth Movement"
conspiracy videos; "9/11 Eyewitness" by James Brewster and
"9/11 Mysteries" by Sophia Shafquat.
Siegel shows that the "explosions" heard on 9/11 Mysteries and
9/11 Eyewitness are, in fact, not on his the original tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jir7yWTroN8
Brewster & Shafquat claim the sounds are evidence of man-made
explosives at WTC. Someone manipulated the sound track to make
those noises.
Of the dozens of video tapes we have from WTC on 9/11, there are
no recordings that show explosions that sound like man-made
blasts and are loud enough and timed to be consistent with any
building collapse. The 1993 bombing, equal to 1,000 bounds of TNT
and loud enough to be heard throughout the WTC complex and for
blocks around, was not large enough to do any structural damage to
the WTC tower it was under.
WTC on 9/11 was probably the most-witnessed disaster in history.
For more information about all the imagery we have for it read the
book, "Watching The world change; The Stories behind the images
of 9/11" by David Friend
Please tell us more Al, you're ON A ROLL!
the messenjah <th*************@veryfast.bizwrote:
>Just urban legend... Unlike my website...
http://www.chuck-lysaght.info
The difference: Urban Legends contain lies, fabrications and
mistruths that are actually somewhat believable.
On Sep 13, 7:35*am, ady...@panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote:
In article <3ebb89a2-c229-4086-88a9-144acd465...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups..com>,
. <sweep1...@yahoo.comwrote:
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871 http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
The audio of the explosions heard in 9/11 Mysteries is fake according
to the film maker who shot video used in the film. *The "Truth
Movement" is full of lies.
------------------------------------
Rick Siegel, the person that shot video of the *WTC collapse
from Hoboken, 2 miles away, *shows his original *video *and
compares it to the the versions used in two "Truth Movement"
conspiracy videos; *"9/11 Eyewitness" *by James Brewster * and
"9/11 Mysteries" *by * Sophia Shafquat.
Siegel shows that the "explosions" heard on 9/11 Mysteries *and
9/11 Eyewitness are, in fact, not on his the original tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jir7yWTroN8
Brewster & Shafquat *claim the sounds are evidence of man-made
explosives at WTC. Someone manipulated the sound track to make
those noises.
Of the dozens of video tapes we have from WTC on 9/11, there are
no recordings *that show explosions that sound like man-made
blasts and are loud enough and timed to be consistent with any
building collapse. The 1993 bombing, equal to 1,000 bounds of TNT
and loud enough to be heard throughout the WTC complex and for
blocks around, was not large enough to do any structural damage to
the WTC tower it was under.
WTC on 9/11 was probably the most-witnessed disaster in history.
For more information about all the imagery we have for it read the
book, *"Watching The world change; The Stories behind the images
of 9/11" by * David Friend
For more information about fact-based 9/11, go to
* *http://911mysteriesguide.com/
and
* *911myths.com
--
Al Dykes
*News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
* * - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Remember the guy that brought Led Zeppelin to the US, made The Rose?
Aaron Russo?? He made a documentary called America: Freedom to Fascism
and a guy named Alex Jones did one called Terror Storm. I think
everyone should see these and another called End Game.
There is a lot of stuff you would not know about to even look for
unless you watch the films. Follow the BILLIONS in insurance payout
that went to the master lease holder for the towers.
I'm sure there are a lot of people out there that would love to spin
things in either direction they can, but watch the films. I'd like to
know what other's thought are. Me, it scared the S#^T out of me and I
believe most of it because the proof looks real to me.
You can watch it online for free: http://preview.tinyurl.com/kpl8r http://www.freedomtofascism.com/
Before someone flames me, please just watch the films. If you have
opinions, great. I'm as open now as I was when I watched the films.
On Sep 13, 7:35*am, ady...@panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote:
In article <3ebb89a2-c229-4086-88a9-144acd465...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups..com>,
. <sweep1...@yahoo.comwrote:
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871 http://www.911weknow.com
Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
The audio of the explosions heard in 9/11 Mysteries is fake according
to the film maker who shot video used in the film. *The "Truth
Movement" is full of lies.
------------------------------------
Rick Siegel, the person that shot video of the *WTC collapse
from Hoboken, 2 miles away, *shows his original *video *and
compares it to the the versions used in two "Truth Movement"
conspiracy videos; *"9/11 Eyewitness" *by James Brewster * and
"9/11 Mysteries" *by * Sophia Shafquat.
Siegel shows that the "explosions" heard on 9/11 Mysteries *and
9/11 Eyewitness are, in fact, not on his the original tape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jir7yWTroN8
Brewster & Shafquat *claim the sounds are evidence of man-made
explosives at WTC. Someone manipulated the sound track to make
those noises.
Of the dozens of video tapes we have from WTC on 9/11, there are
no recordings *that show explosions that sound like man-made
blasts and are loud enough and timed to be consistent with any
building collapse. The 1993 bombing, equal to 1,000 bounds of TNT
and loud enough to be heard throughout the WTC complex and for
blocks around, was not large enough to do any structural damage to
the WTC tower it was under.
WTC on 9/11 was probably the most-witnessed disaster in history.
For more information about all the imagery we have for it read the
book, *"Watching The world change; The Stories behind the images
of 9/11" by * David Friend
For more information about fact-based 9/11, go to
* *http://911mysteriesguide.com/
and
* *911myths.com
--
Al Dykes
*News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
* * - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Tell me how building #7 was wired for explosives in 19 hours? IT is an
admitted fact that building #7 was a demolition drop. How do you do in
10 hours what it takes many months to do normally and how the hell do
you do it with a mess like they had that day?
You don't - do you. You have the thing pre wired to go...... How many
BILLIONS did the Master Lease holder get for those building when they
came down? Wasn't it 6 BILLION DOLARS? Funny someone could get that
much money for a building that was condemned in a court of law about a
year earlier for asbestos and had a 20 BILLION dollar clean up cost
attached to it.
The best lies are mostly truth and right in front of your nose. Ask
any magician how they get away with it what they do and ......
Danny T wrote:
I'd like more then ANYTHING to believe you and the standard theory
You are either sarcastic or a liar.
While I know there are is a ton of stuff on both sides there is really
only one thing on the standard side that makes me feel ok and that is
the endless radar track that does show the flight of the planes...
there is one other thing with the downed plane and that was the phone
calls that came first...
I don't think anything was a government plot but I don't doubt that
there were some politicians that let it happen because the outcome was
better for their agenda.
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
I have not gone through all the links you were kind enough to list do
to time (and a little laziness) but I will because it is of interest
to me.
As for the other jackass that posted above you, people like that are
worthless to the world - thanks for not being one of them.
PS - I fully support our troops with more then just words. I have
little qualms with the beginning of the actions over there and I am
not educated enough in what is going on now to make a valuable
statement of what we should do at this point.
The military I know that have been over there all tell me we are doing
a good thing but my home budget says it wishes we'd get out of
there.......
In rec.photo.digital Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
On Sep 16, 1:24*pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.ukwrote:
In rec.photo.digital Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
off but I do see how the photos were faked. I'd bet that we were 1)
making sure there were great photos for cold war propaganda garbage or
2) doing something spy related that the general public wasn't suppose
to know about.
Either way, I think we went but I think we don't really know what they
were doing up there.
On Sep 16, 2:40 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sep 16, 1:24 pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.ukwrote:
In rec.photo.digital Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
off but I do see how the photos were faked. I'd bet that we were 1)
making sure there were great photos for cold war propaganda garbage or
2) doing something spy related that the general public wasn't suppose
to know about.
Yeah man. I know what you mean. Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. He was a cool dude, really.
Either way, I think we went but I think we don't really know what they
were doing up there.
Yeah that's like why Uncle Joe never really wanted to fight in the far
east. He knew the whole thing was a fake and he liked Neville. So
like he didn't want to go along with the fake. But like he wanted
Neville to get a treaty that would make him look bad. But by that
time there were too many fake entries being airbrushed. Like this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:S...ow_molotow.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:T...Vanishes_2.jpg
And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.
Theget
Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrites:
>I don't think anything was a government plot but I don't doubt that
there were some politicians that let it happen because the outcome was
better for their agenda.
Based on what? It's a bad idea to believe things with nothing to back them
up. Therein lies madness.
>If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
No, there was a tiny group of nutbars who, lacking any understanding of the
issues they were critiquing or flat out lying out their asses, who claimed,
for the sole purpose of making money, that clamied that the pinnacle
technological achievement of the human race was a lie. And then there's the
other 99.9999% of the population who aren't that stupid.
Sorry man, but moon landing conspiracy nuts are pants-on-head retarded.
>bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
So what, NASA went to the moon to mine green cheese?
>that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
So in other words, you like to make stuff up and pretend it's real.
Gotcha.
>I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
What bullshit. Truth is not determined by where the hankerchief tied to the
middle of the tug-of-war rope currently stands. It is quite possible for
one side of an argument to be totally off-their-nut wrong, and in fact this
is true more often than otherwise. The existence of contrary views doesn't
mean that the contrary view makes any sense.
>As for the other jackass that posted above you, people like that are
worthless to the world - thanks for not being one of them.
Shut up, internet tough guy. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
On Sep 16, 3:22*pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.netwrote:
On Sep 16, 2:40 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sep 16, 1:24 pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.ukwrote:
In rec.photo.digital Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
off but I do see how the photos were faked. I'd bet that we were 1)
making sure there were great photos for cold war propaganda garbage or
2) doing something spy related that the general public wasn't suppose
to know about.
Yeah man. *I know what you mean. *Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. *Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. *He was a cool dude, really.
Either way, I think we went but I think we don't really know what they
were doing up there.
Yeah that's like why Uncle Joe never really wanted to fight in the far
east. *He knew the whole thing was a fake and he liked Neville. So
like he didn't want to go along with the fake. *But like he wanted
Neville to get a treaty that would make him look bad. *But by that
time there were too many fake entries being airbrushed. Like this onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stalin_jeschow_molotow.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_Commissar_Vanishes_2.jpg
And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. *Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.
Theget
If you have no idea what I'm talking about you should remain silent
instead of making a total fool of yourself
I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrites:
>Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
And on this wonderfully comprehensive argument, a/k/a proof by assertion,
it is time to drop your loony self into the bottom of my killfile. Please
remove yourself from the gene pool as soon as you find convenient. Cuticle
shears and tweezers will be provided if necessary. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
theget wrote:
>
Yeah man. I know what you mean. Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. He was a cool dude, really.
The weird part is that Hirohito had Neville's Anne confused with Anne
Neville, so he was convinced that Chamberlein was both the King of England
and a hunchback.
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:00:01 -0700 (PDT), Danny T
<da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
Do you really? Want to think that one through?
Laurence Payne <lp@laurencepayne.co.ukwrites:
>On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:00:01 -0700 (PDT), Danny T
<da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>>I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
Do you really? Want to think that one through?
Quirk's objection raised. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
In article <2b**********************************@z66g2000hsc. googlegroups.com>,
Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>While I know there are is a ton of stuff on both sides there is really
only one thing on the standard side that makes me feel ok and that is
the endless radar track that does show the flight of the planes...
there is one other thing with the downed plane and that was the phone
calls that came first...
I don't think anything was a government plot but I don't doubt that
there were some politicians that let it happen because the outcome was
better for their agenda.
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You should know that none of the tiny number of people that invent the
claims that you base your skepticism on will speak in public and
address polite, relevant questions from anyone with relevant
expertise.
There is one alleged eyewitness that I would love to chat with and
learn more about his claims about what he saw at WTC. My line of
inquiry would be based on my 30 years of similar experience. We are
all in NYC, it's strange that he only shows up to speak with people
that have no knowledge about what he says he did at WTC.
I know he's been invited to show up for meetings to clarify and
elaborate on what he says he saw at WTC.
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Danny T wrote:
>
I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
All of those jerks on rec.arts.sf.written are exactly those kinds of idiots.
It would serve them right if you never talked to them again.
On Sep 16, 4:33 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sep 16, 3:22 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.netwrote:
On Sep 16, 2:40 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sep 16, 1:24 pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.ukwrote:
In rec.photo.digital Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
off but I do see how the photos were faked. I'd bet that we were 1)
making sure there were great photos for cold war propaganda garbage or
2) doing something spy related that the general public wasn't suppose
to know about.
Yeah man. I know what you mean. Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. He was a cool dude, really.
Either way, I think we went but I think we don't really know what they
were doing up there.
Yeah that's like why Uncle Joe never really wanted to fight in the far
east. He knew the whole thing was a fake and he liked Neville. So
like he didn't want to go along with the fake. But like he wanted
Neville to get a treaty that would make him look bad. But by that
time there were too many fake entries being airbrushed. Like this onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stalin_jeschow_molotow.jpghttp://e...
And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.
Theget
If you have no idea what I'm talking about you should remain silent
instead of making a total fool of yourself
I completely understand what you're talking about.
I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
I expect airbrushers to talk this way. You aren't one are you?
Or maybe you really do think that whole world war really happened.
Why? Because you've seen the pictures? They're not real. They're the
result of the airbrushers careful work. You should take a close look
at the links I posted above and you'll see how the airbrushers are
faking it all and making us look like suckers for going along with
them.
Theget
On Sep 16, 4:39 pm, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
theget wrote:
Yeah man. I know what you mean. Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. He was a cool dude, really.
The weird part is that Hirohito had Neville's Anne confused with Anne
Neville, so he was convinced that Chamberlein was both the King of England
and a hunchback.
It's not true. It's not true. The Emperor was never confused about
that. He loved Anne Chamberlein and was devoted to her and the study
of little fishes.
One day we will be able to put all the pixels back where they belong
and the truth will be known even to airbrushers.
Theget
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, Laurence Payne wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:00:01 -0700 (PDT), Danny T
<da*********@gmail.comwrote:
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
Do you really? Want to think that one through?
Yeah, what's the middle ground between 2+2=4 and 2+2=5 ?
No, the truth isn't 2+2=4.5
On Sep 16, 4:13*pm, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Danny T wrote:
I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
All of those jerks on rec.arts.sf.written are exactly those kinds of idiots.
It would serve them right if you never talked to them again.
I've never been to rec.arts.sf.written
Danny T wrote:
On Sep 16, 4:13 pm, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>Danny T wrote:
>>I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
All of those jerks on rec.arts.sf.written are exactly those kinds of idiots.
It would serve them right if you never talked to them again.
I've never been to rec.arts.sf.written
Oh really? Look at the newsgroups you've posted this drivel to.
Followups set to alt.flame.
On Sep 16, 3:34*pm, pv+use...@pobox.com (PV) wrote:
Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrites:
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
And on this wonderfully comprehensive argument, a/k/a proof by assertion,
it is time to drop your loony self into the bottom of my killfile. Please
remove yourself from the gene pool as soon as you find convenient. Cuticle
shears and tweezers will be provided if necessary. *
--
* PV * something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
* * * *like corkscrews.
You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny. Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake. I don't think we didn't go, I think the photos are fake.
Take a look at the photos and if you don't know much about
photography, I'm sure you will still be able to see they are fake if
you spend a few seconds looking at the lighting and such.
I never said we didn't go to the moon and if you think I did, go back
and read it again. I clearly stated I think we did but I said we were
for some reason faking the photos.
Don't go spitting out stupid statements when you can not even read a
simple statement and comprehend what was clearly written.
If you want to thin the gene pool, take yourself out. People that
would fight over stuff like this with a secondary source are
absolutely worthless to society. If someone believes that the moon is
made of cheese, that is what they believe and you are not about to
change anything by calling names. You WILL make the world a less
better place. If you have a problem with how someone thinks, go to the
source from which that person gets their information and try to
correct the problem.
Since you obviously lack the sophistication it takes to figure out
such simple thoughts, please feel free to remove YOURSELF from any
list that requires thinking.
Danny T wrote:
On Sep 16, 4:13 pm, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>Danny T wrote:
>>I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
All of those jerks on rec.arts.sf.written are exactly those kinds of
idiots. It would serve them right if you never talked to them again.
I've never been to rec.arts.sf.written
Check your headers.
On Sep 16, 3:53*pm, Laurence Payne <l...@laurencepayne.co.ukwrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:00:01 -0700 (PDT), Danny T
<dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
Do you really? *Want to think that one through?
Thought it through..... Yep, pretty much think most arguments have
some valor on both sides.
On Sep 16, 5:07*pm, Wolfspawn <cr...@bfn.orgwrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008, Laurence Payne wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:00:01 -0700 (PDT), Danny T
<dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
>I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
>the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
Do you really? *Want to think that one through?
Yeah, what's the middle ground between 2+2=4 and 2+2=5 ?
No, the truth isn't 2+2=4.5
Go back to school. That is not an argument. It's math. Look up the
word argument. Think it though...... it won't really hurt that much!
Danny T wrote:
You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny.
Oh my god. One of the Real Conspiracy believers. And I thought the
species was almost extinct!
You do know that the flag isn't blowing in the wind, but a rigidly
suspended flag? Because NASA knew perfectly well that there was no wind
on the Moon, and thus selected a flag design which would stay up as
though blown in the wind even in vacuum, so that it wouldn't just sag
limp and lifeless on the pole, which would look stupid?
Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake.
If you can point to one of these -- not 6,000, just ONE -- you'd have a
point.
Of course, you can't. You can point to some photos that some nutbars
have CLAIMED is fake, but as it turns out, they're not fake.
I don't think we didn't go, I think the photos are fake.
Take a look at the photos and if you don't know much about
photography, I'm sure you will still be able to see they are fake if
you spend a few seconds looking at the lighting and such.
I never said we didn't go to the moon and if you think I did, go back
and read it again. I clearly stated I think we did but I said we were
for some reason faking the photos.
And what reason would that be, which wouldn't be so ludicrous as to
surpass any sane person's belief?
(Hint: if you don't know, and can't think of a decent reason, and no
one's come forward with the evidence, YOU'RE WRONG.)
The Manhattan Project was, by comparison, a very short-lived, small,
easily controlled group of people, and there were STILL leaks. Shortly
after WWII, major facts that they'd tried to hide about the Project were
revealed or stolen.
You want us to believe that thousands of photographs of the moon
landings -- possibly the single most studied scientific achievement in
the history of the world -- were faked. At a time when faking so many
photos in a manner that would pass any reasonable examination would have
been an undertaking involving hundreds of people and with literally
THOUSANDS of people who knew about it, and that not ONE credible member
of this Secret Group has come forward to spill the beans?
As Ben Franklin once put it, "Three can keep a secret... if two of them
are dead." This is a secret that would have to have been kept DEAD quiet
for 40 years, aside from nutbars who will claim anything is faked.
IT CANNOT BE DONE. Thousands of people CAN'T keep secrets that well.
Someone talks. Someone decides that the secret isn't worth keeping, or
worse, that keeping it is the wrong idea. Someone makes a mistake and
releases the wrong info.
Try it. Really, do. Get yourself a thousand people and tell them a
secret, one important enough that it matters that it's kept. Do you
seriously think you could expect that secret to remain secret? Without
the Mighty Power of the Government behind you, I wouldn't give you three
months before the secret was out. Even WITH the armed fist of the US
Government and secret agents, I wouldn't give you more than a few years.
40? Not a chance.
The same thing is true of the World Trade Center business. Only FAR
worse, because one COULD speculate that whatever the supposed fakery
involved in the moon landings, it has some terribly important purpose
that no one would question.
Killing thousands of people in the WTC under the circumstances we
know... no. If I assume you find the largest collection of amoral
bastards on the planet, you'll STILL end up with someone who decides
what you're doing is wrong, and blows the whistle. Loudly. With
convincing and incontrovertible evidence, not with handwavy "someone
heard explosions" and badly-reasoned arguments about steel components
that they clearly don't understand.
The world isn't full of diabolical and shadowy conspiracies. Idiots and
incompetence, yes, but the conspiracies that exist are small, pathetic,
and usually found out within months, not decades.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Danny T wrote:
On Sep 16, 3:22 pm, theget <the...@bigmailbox.netwrote:
>On Sep 16, 2:40 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
>>On Sep 16, 1:24 pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.ukwrote:
In rec.photo.digital Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
off but I do see how the photos were faked. I'd bet that we were 1)
making sure there were great photos for cold war propaganda garbage or
2) doing something spy related that the general public wasn't suppose
to know about.
Yeah man. I know what you mean. Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. He was a cool dude, really.
>>Either way, I think we went but I think we don't really know what they
were doing up there.
Yeah that's like why Uncle Joe never really wanted to fight in the far
east. He knew the whole thing was a fake and he liked Neville. So
like he didn't want to go along with the fake. But like he wanted
Neville to get a treaty that would make him look bad. But by that
time there were too many fake entries being airbrushed. Like this onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stalin_jeschow_molotow.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_Commissar_Vanishes_2.jpg
And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.
Theget
If you have no idea what I'm talking about you should remain silent
instead of making a total fool of yourself
Why?
You don't know what you're talking about and you don't remain silent.
>
I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
Bye...
Auntie
On Sep 16, 6:59 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sep 16, 3:34 pm, pv+use...@pobox.com (PV) wrote:
Danny T <dannytad...@gmail.comwrites:
>Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
>people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
And on this wonderfully comprehensive argument, a/k/a proof by assertion,
it is time to drop your loony self into the bottom of my killfile. Please
remove yourself from the gene pool as soon as you find convenient. Cuticle
shears and tweezers will be provided if necessary. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.
You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny.
You are so right. I am very glad to see you agreeing with me. I
thought you might be an airbrusher because of what you posted before.
I'm glad to see that you know the truth. The airbrushers don't stop at
still pictures they are very good with motion pictures too. They are
making the breeze obvious. It's a signal that only people like you and
me can understand. Don't expect many other people to understand or to
be able to see the message that the airbrushers put in the photos. You
have to look very carefully to see it.
Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake. I don't think we didn't go, I think the photos are fake.
No, they're not fake. The airbrushers start with real photos and then
change them but they obviously weren't taken on the moon you can tell
because of the breeze.
Take a look at the photos and if you don't know much about
photography, I'm sure you will still be able to see they are fake if
you spend a few seconds looking at the lighting and such.
Yes, yes, yes. I think you are seeing the message.
I never said we didn't go to the moon and if you think I did, go back
and read it again. I clearly stated I think we did but I said we were
for some reason faking the photos.
Doh! Well, that's obvious. The airbrushers are at work again.
The whole thing is really an outgrowth of the airbrushers world war
fakery. They had to make up lies about so called rocket scientists
and the fake moon landings were the result. Plus they liked Jackie and
didn't want her to see the "promise" of going to the moon not kept.
Theget
Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>theget <the...@bigmailbox.netwrote:
>And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. *Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.
If you have no idea what I'm talking about you should remain silent
instead of making a total fool of yourself
Oh, we know _exactly_ what you're talking about. And there's only one total
fool involved in this conversation, who has no idea of the realities involved.
And who's crossposting to hell and back (apologies to the other groups here)
over groups that have nothing to do even slightly with what he THINKS he's
talking about.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from db*@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>Laurence Payne <l...@laurencepayne.co.ukwrote:
><dannytad...@gmail.comwrote:
>I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
Do you really? *Want to think that one through?
Thought it through..... Yep, pretty much think most arguments have
some valor on both sides.
By which you show that you aren't capable of actually thinking it through,
and don't know much about history, don't know much psy-cholo-gy, don't know
much about a science book... or about logic.
If you're talking about a comparison of opinions, then sometimes both sides
have something to stand on. But even there, a lot of times one of the sides
is UNINFORMED opinion and falls flat on its face when confronted with actual
data.
So no, most arguments DON'T have some "valor" on both sides. Sorry. You may
want to try next door, it's Abuse, instead?
Dave "setting followups out of here AGAIN" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from db*@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>f...@green.rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
>And don't forget my favorite:
Mike Walter rebuts "cruise missile" claims (video):
*http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305
Remember the famous "it was like a cruise missile with wings" quote that the
truthers like to pull out? *Well Mike Walter is the guy you're quoting. *He
was an eye witness and in this video, he calls out the truthers for the liars
they are.
So I ask, what if and why not explore it?
Because once you grow up, you learn to discriminate "things that are worth
checking into" from "things that the children are making up and saying 'Well,
it COULD have happened! Why are you punishing ME for this, when the space
aliens CLEARLY broke that window?". And to discriminate between people who
can check their imaginings against reality, and ones who try to keep reality
as far away from what they're talking about as they can.
Several other people have told you why the TRVTH you think you've found is
flat-out lies, and why the people you've picked it up from are pushing it
anyway. What if, and why not explore THAT? Cuz you aren't exploring that,
you know.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from db*@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
In article <ga**********@blue.rahul.net>,
Edward A. Falk <fa**@green.rahul.netwrote:
>And don't forget my favorite:
Mike Walter rebuts "cruise missile" claims (video):
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305
Remember the famous "it was like a cruise missile with wings" quote that the
truthers like to pull out? Well Mike Walter is the guy you're quoting. He
was an eye witness and in this video, he calls out the truthers for the liars
they are.
Yup.
Washington Newsman Mike Walters shows how Truthys have twisted his
9/11 reporting; http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 15:59:09 -0700 (PDT), Danny T <da*********@gmail.comwrote:
>You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny. Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake.
You're pretty much a major fool to believe the conspiracists that make a buck
off of your paranoia and delusions by selling you their books or feeding you
their spam-ridden web-sites.
Unlike you, I followed the moon-landing extensively while it was happening,
YEARS before it ever happened. I collected all news articles and reports
possible on what was going to occur, even built a 1:32 scale model of the LEM to
go along with my fascination of the upcoming event. I still have my three 4"
thick tomes of scrap-books that I saved as well as a commemorative Apollo 11
coin made of brass, given to me by someone that was involved in the project.
Discussions of how the flags would be reinforced with a support to make them
look like they were suspended in moving air was nicely explained months before
they ever lifted-off on the TV shows and in newspaper and magazine articles. Why
would they do that? Intentionally plan to suspend the flags with a horizontal
support? Simple, you fool. Because there is no air on the moon and a flag
wouldn't remain open for the live-TV transmitted back to earth, for the
higher-res photos, and to make a greater visual political-landmark for
generations in the future that might happen to visit the place. They planned
ahead for that dilemma, they weren't as stupid as you are. We even watched them
on TV as they unfurled the flag, upright support, and click the horizontal
supports into place. The flag, in a vacuum, now happily bouncing around (waving)
for a long time because there was no air-resistance to stop its motion.
Over the years I've occasionally stumbled on the "fake lunar landing" web-sites
and browsed them for the laughs they provide. Each and every photo can be very
easily explained by the science background of a 3rd-grader, common sense, and
some basic knowledge of light and photography, not to mention the way things act
in lower gravity and a vacuum. Only people with a kindergartner mentality would
believe the outlandish conspiracy-explanations invented by the "Fake Lunar
Landing" conspiracists. That be people like you. The only thing that you prove
is that P.T. Barnum was right, "A fool is born every minute." He too made his
fortune off of people like you, even after telling them to their face that they
were fools. They would rather buy the outlandish hoax than the truth, so he sold
hoax to them and made a fortune. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. |
