9/11: "False In One- False in All"

Elaine to Jerry: "Fake, Fake, Fake!"


Yes, I agree with Mr Shack.[see previous post"Deconstructing the Grand Deception"]

After at first appearing patently absurd,thanks to his unrelenting work it now seems to me to be very obvious , that most, if not all of the footage aired by the media on 9/11 was faked on computers, as were all "amateur" videos showing aircraft [regardless of actual airspeed capabilties at 700 feet above sea level], magically penetrating buildings in one piece without slowing down, and without any parts whatsoever [let alone most!], shearing off at impact :-) ; as was all media footage showing two 1300 feet high, 500,000 ton steel and concrete buildings magically collapsing from top to bottom in 10- 17 seconds [depending on which "live"collapse version you happen to time], and as was [by logical extension] all of the footage of WTC building 7's collapse later that day.

Furthermore, all supposed "live" broadcast network imagery of the Pentagon [i.e. post- "terrorist attack" ], also appears to have been fake imagery generated by computers, as Mr Shacks close analysis appears to show.

And if that was not enough, it now it looks highly likely that many, if not all, of the supposed tower victims names were faked on computers as well, along with their alleged photographic likenesses.

As the female lead, in "Seinfeld", Elaine, tells Jerry when discussing her supposed orgasms with her former lover: "Fake, fake , fake, fake!"

In other words, fake plane into building videos, fake collapse videos, and now, fake victim lists.

Heh!

The Predicable Reaction- "It's a threat To our movement!"

At the same time, the reality is that the typical, violently negative reactions to even considering this type of information as valid,[Mr Shack's video presentation is available for viewing and consideration here : http://www.septemberclues.info/ ], is wholly predictable , given that the reality of ALL movements, regardless of whether it be the "Ron Paul movement", the "libertarian movement", the "911 truth movement [eg the "loose change/prison planet crowd"] or something else entirely [i.e any other political or quasi- political "movement you care to name - take your pick!], ALWAYS end working actively to suppress information that is seen as a threat to that "movement" .

A true search for truth becomes secondary and eventually counterproductive and therefor subordinate to the furtherance of the group agenda [usually political in nature] .

Therefor, more than likely, for political[i.e group] reasons, Mr Shacks research will continue be rejected and/or suppressed within the "Ron Paul movement", the "Libertarian movement", the "Austro- Anarcho- Capitalist" movement, the "911 Truth movement", etc. etc. as well as elsewhere, even, dare I say it, within any future so-called "September Clues Truth Movement" that might come into existence "down the road" :-)

However, all of those predictable "foaming at the mouth"and accompanying verbal and "logical" contortions/denials etc. of Mr Shack's work ARE highly amusing, to say the least! :-)

P.S. THE "FALSE IN ONE-FALSE IN ALL" LEGAL PRINCIPLE VERSUS "CORRECT" SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS AND PROCEDURE:

For those that do not know, there is a simple legal principle named "false in one false in all"[try "googling" that phrase], whereby a judge may instruct a trial jury that should they find that any part of a witness/entities testimony to be false then they have the incontestable right to discount all "evidence" provided by that person/entity.

Therefor,and according to that principle, and since we each have to be both judge and jury at this stage, should any of us find any one part of the government/media 911 story to be false, then it is perfectly acceptable for that person to then conclude that all "evidence" supplied by the government/media and/or "witnesses", is either knowingly false, or simply to be distrusted, until definitively proven otherwise.

Attention: Jim Fetzer/ Loose Change/Prison Planet/ Ace Baker/ Judy Woods/ Morgan Reynolds! Etc.

This judge to jury instruction would seem to be particularly relevant for the supporters of the 911 theories of "Loose Change" and "PrisonPlanet",website , as well as for the Jim Fetzer/Ace Baker/ Morgan Reynolds /Judy Woods supporters .

All of those researchers/scientists, and more besides, at this time continue to believe that it is acceptable, logical and procedurally correct [both scientifically and legally] to automatically assume the truth and veracity of certain sequences of media video footage [e.g the building collapse sequences], without definitive proof, , while rejecting other sequences as fake, possibly because it continues to suit their present agendas.


Regards, onebornfree.