It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


September Clues

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 07:50 PM
_BoneZ_, I would like to debate Vicsim theory with you. Do you accept my challenge?

Why would you want to go over the same ground you covered so well with no-planes and TV Fakery? I'm sure you'd find that tiresome. Vicsim offers fresher territory with the possibility of new insights for the both of us.

White always leads by the way.

en garde!

posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 08:19 PM

Originally posted by stevenwarran2
I live in the vicinity, and am easily reachable by phone or in person. This establishes a higher degree of credibility to espouse my beliefs than anyone else on this board---anonymously---possesses.

I guess I don't have to worry about anonymity as I'm a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. My name is on both websites. Some of my 9/11 research has also been recognized and acknowledged by CNN.

Originally posted by stevenwarran2
They would be tired of the same sham, shallow insincerity as has been your forte.

Shallow insincerity? How can you even accuse me of that when you say:

Originally posted by stevenwarran2
I can say that the members of the NYFD are not only sham heroes, they are villains and scoundrels of the highest order.

ATS Terms and Conditions forbid me to say what I want, but suffice it to say, we're done here.

Originally posted by stevenwarran2
_BoneZ_, I would like to debate Vicsim theory with you. Do you accept my challenge?

No I do not. Not after what you said about our FDNY heroes. I'll not entertain you anymore. We're done here. You can talk to yourself in this thread now.

posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 09:36 PM
reply to post by _BoneZ_

No I do not. Not after what you said about our FDNY heroes. I'll not entertain you anymore. We're done here. You can talk to yourself in this thread now.

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
stevenwarran2 -
"I can say that the members of the FDNY are not only sham heroes, they are villains and scoundrels of the highest order." link to post

Well you are the little Missy aren't you?!

At least I finally got through to you Mr. Prominent Anonymous.

Read the following blog to appreciate the full horror of what the FDNY did and didn't do on 9/11:

Chief Joseph Pfeifer/Pfeiffer and Deputy Chief Peter Hayden: Big Twitter or SharedCopy This at Your Peril!

Read the following three blogs to understand how the gay chaplain was a sacrificial murder committed at the hands of his fellow band of brothers for his open casket public relations value. Badda bing!

Father Mychal Judge: Icon in a Can

Who Gets the Last Laugh Now?

Highlighting a Father Mychal Judge Update

Likewise, view another fire department ritualistic and ceremonially necessary murder victim

Danny Suhr: Former Quarterback & Brotherly Murder Victim

Want to understand the full absurdity of the NYFD play acting? Read:

The 9/11 Bucket Brigades at Ground Zero

Want more? Read these four horror stories:

New York City Fire Department Chief Daniel Nigro'n-word'.html

Chief Albert Turi Estimates the Dead

John Perrugia, the Chief of Planning for the Fire Department,

New York Firefighter John Schroder Finds a Dead Body in a Closet on the Third Floor of the North Tower, Moments Before It Collapses

So we are through talking, but you'll alter your signature tag in order to expose my sentiment? Well, thanks for highlighting my original contributions to 9/11 research. I appreciate the publicity! Anytime you want to debate the less controversial aspects of 9/11, like the Vicsim theory, let me know.

[edit on 29-3-2010 by stevenwarran2]

posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 12:58 AM
reply to post by stevenwarran2

While not agreeing to your conclusions Steve, with regards to all & or everybody being vicsims, I would hope that everyone here would be mature enough to take a look for themselves.

I disagree with your method and conclusion, while agreeing that there were indeed inflated casualties on 9/11. And also agreeing that there is overwhelming evidence for some people being simulated altogether. I prefer a different method of investigation personally. I prefer to find one single person, and then go on level by level proving this on one person. My thinking is this; Show and prove this with one single person beyond doubt,and show this to people,and in time there will be enough people to sniff out the rest.

You live out east Steve, near New York. I would urge you to take your investigation to a new level, find a person you suspect of this, that you think you also might be able to track down as still alive. I know you have spoken about many of these policeman and fireman retiring in upstate New york, where many of them retire.

If that's the case Steve, then go to the local bars, in that retirement community where they hangout and hang out as well. If your strapped on time, do it every other Friday or Saturday. I'll be honest with you, I honestly think if you did this, it would pay off. I really do. I have read enough of your blog to know that your barking up a right tree here and there's a squirrel up there. I just disagree with your conclusions. Which is fine, doesn't matter. Is all you have to do is prove it with one person. Once you do this there will be a Domino effect.

And what I mean by proof is tracking down one of the "actors" where he is living now, and prove it. Find that retirement community and go to those upstate New york firemans balls they have in the summers. And bring your camera, like everyone else. You know enough of these guys faces by heart you would recognize them in a heartbeat. The truth is, we don't know what really happened on 9/11.

Dead Person in the Closet


posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 07:30 PM
These no plane theories try to sell what can't be sold, to the general public.
It is a huge task just trying to get people to believe 9/11 was an inside job.

Get people to believe first, the exact how can come later.
This theory scares people away from even looking into it further.

The advocates of this theory either understand this, and if they do, we know why they push it. Or they can't understand why this is an undesirable icebreaker with somebody you talk to about 9/11 truth.

Either way it harms the truth getting out there.
And they rather stubbornly refuse to "Get It".

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

I disagree strongly Blue_Jay33. Rather than "putting off" newcomers to 9/11 truth, the more "out there" component 9/11 theories tend to create a "safe inner harbor" where newbies can get their feet wet, believing as they will as they endlessly debate the merits of Building 7.

That Building 7 can even be "debated" is the problem.

I don't mean to speak condescendingly of what I see not so much as a limited hangout as an incremental progression, or unfoldment, of our collective ability to experience "truth." It takes great courage to let go of American Exceptionalism and self-righteousness. To see our leaders as murderous thugs (I'm speaking of Iraq and Afghanistan now, not the 3000-minus supposed victims of 9/11.) is a very threatening existential undertaking.

The film made by the supposed militant group in Michigan, the Huteree, is as much a government fake as was the film made by the supposed beheaders of Nicholas Berg. The manipulation is so vast that, yes, it could be said, EVERYTHING is a fake. The best way to control the opposition is to lead it yourself, so the best way to control "reality" is to control both sides of every debate.

I strongly condemn Christian militarism but I want my opponents vanquished morally and legitimately---and not set up as unknowing patsies to take a fall in some pseudo-reality.

People like Simon Hytten and myself, if we do nothing else, make people like Richard Gage look like a combination between Moses and Dwight Eisenhower. We "normify" yesterday's unthinkable with today's "outrageous."

I can't vouchsafe my sincerity without necessarily calling it into question, but I must say, you sound sincere Blue_Jay33; and even _BoneZ_ is starting to sound more sincere upon reflection. The only difference between us, I might hazard, is that you seem to think we can set things right by simply purging the U.S. government of its criminal element, while I think the required upheaval will be much vaster and deeper and systemic.

[edit on 6-4-2010 by stevenwarran2]

[edit on 6-4-2010 by stevenwarran2]

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 11:57 AM
"You will understand the Truth, and the Truth will set you free."
Apostle John, 98 AD

"Those who have failed to work towards the truth have missed the purpose of living."
The Buddha

I like the quote of the Buddha better, said the bitter batter.

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 02:39 PM
The film supposedly made by the Hutaree:

Research about and links to the Nicholas Berg decapitation video:

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 04:41 PM
Neither one of your posts above have anything to do with this topic. Show us some provable evidence of no planes at the WTC. Thanks.

[edit on 6-4-2010 by _BoneZ_]

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 06:20 PM

No I do not. Not after what you said about our FDNY heroes. I'll not entertain you anymore. We're done here. You can talk to yourself in this thread now.

Sorry _BoneZ_, you don't set the terms of the debate any longer, especially when you return to the scene of the crime after having forsworn an appearance.

Why don't you stick to architecture and engineering, plus I'll cede to you the entire land of Nano-Thermia. In return, I'll lay claim to metaphysics and social engineering the coming upheaval. On Edit: make that read, "apocalypse."

[edit on 6-4-2010 by stevenwarran2]

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 11:04 AM
I asked a poster to the Reality Shack forum with whom I am friendly to help me please appease _BoneZ_ by feeding me some ready-made no-planes arguments. This is the private message I got back:

I'm not a no planer. I'm a total fakery person. No planes is a false paradigm and limited hangout.

But as far as it goes, if guppies can't understand now that real planes crash immediately upon impact, that real planes look and behave like real planes, I just don't bother engaging them at all.

Total fakery is a theoretical explanation rolled out like any other. It's all concept. It begins with "what if...?"

You assume the postulate and interpret all evidence accordingly. If my postulate answers possible objections to a greater and more consistent extent than another then it has more merit and becomes the best candidate for what in fact occurred.

I don't waste any time #ing around trying to win converts from among the navel gazers. Half of them are payroll anchors and immovable anyway. Let them watch September Clues and once they get that we can tell them to forget it all and bump 'em up to the next dimension.

I just can't even think in terms of proving fake planes anymore. Assume the postulate, interpret accordingly. This is why I still recommend Stein's Information Warfare article. These birdbrains have yet to even conceive of what's possible. They're in Plato's Cave and demanding all arguments to be framed from within.

This poster is very intelligent in my opinion---I think he/she may even be college educated! I didn't realize that we could admit to a working style consisting of

"a theoretical explanation rolled out like any other. It's all concept. It begins with 'what if...?' You assume the postulate and interpret all evidence accordingly."

I had assumed that that would be construed as a logical fallacy by others, but it perfectly describes how I have approached the disparate elements found floating amidst the great unknown.

His/her recommendation of the Stein article is right on!

Information Warfare by Prof George J. Stein, AWC, published in Airpower Journal - Spring 1995:

( A compendium of similar articles on Information Warfare is found here: )

This public domain material is enough to get us thinking on the right track. Can you imagine what information comprises the more recent research theories in the field?

So to answer _BoneZ_'s request in its entirety, I'd offer up the statement that "real planes crash immediately upon impact, [and] that real planes look and behave like real planes."

As an aside, in response to the uncorrected error that _BoneZ_ promulgated earlier in this thread that some 9/11 theorists postulate that the World Trade Center towers were in fact holograms, I remember news reports from 1991 and the first Gulf War that spoke of beaming holograms of Saddam Hussein into the night sky telling his troops to lay down their arms. It's too bad that didn't happen, but instead, the U.S. forces sadistically and mercilessly mowed down helpless and befuddled Iraqi troops as they exited Kuwait on the "Mile of Death," or the "Highway to Hell," in a "turkey shoot" carnage.

Our leaders are evil, power-mad #s---the minions of Satan. That's my postulate.

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 07:56 AM

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Every single no-planer before you has gotten themselves banned or ran away with their tails between their legs because once they get educated with real facts, they can't do anything but to attack or run.

if that were true, i wouldn't be typing this right now nor would there be other debunkings of you that i've done.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
What I've noticed about your posts so far is you are already headed down the path of those before you. You've done nothing but attack FDNY, and pretty much the entire 9/11 truth movement.

What you haven't done is try to show any provable, factual evidence to support your claims. Nor do I expect you to since there is none.

pot kettle black bonez?

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:32 PM

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by IceDash

Do your own research, I went and looked up everything I post. If someone tells me something then I GO LOOK IT UP. I don't whine like some others on here who want others to do what they should have done in the first place.

[edit on 3/25/2010 by mikelee]

Classic line from someone that does not have the evidence to back up their claims!

You said there were higher quality vidoes on google vids to prove the other videos were due to compression etc, then to back up you 'claim' you then said do your own research! Which translates to you have no other better quality video evidence. Nice try, people might take you seriously if you provided this mysterious 'evidence'.

More shillness..

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:38 PM

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by IceDash

They are not real people

Try telling that to the victim's families faces before going any further with your charade.

This nonsense has been debunked. Why am I even wasting time here?

[edit on 26-3-2010 by john124]

Yes, why are you and all the other disinfo shill wasting your time on something that you have supposedly debunked?! Debunking something doesn't mean the dunking attempt is correct, your kind of debunking is down to discredit and hide the real truth. Do you lot really think most people are that stupid?!

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:39 PM

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by truthquest
I plan to publish this research at some point but since its pretty much a waste of my time as this stuff is not used as argument anymore

The no-plane disinfo cult absolutely does still argue the camera angle BS and that the planes were all coming in at different angles, so go ahead and post your findings. It's not like it will change any of their minds anyway.

Originally posted by truthquest
The only thing that seemed especially odd that I did not research was the disparity between the impact time from what was seen on TV and the impact time from what was measured by the earthquake monitoring equipment

I'm not sure what the time difference is. If you know, please post it. But earthquake seismographs register vibrations in the ground. The planes hitting the towers nearly a quarter mile up would not cause significant vibrations on the ground.

Basement explosions, on the other hand, most definitely would.

Why would you be bothered about disinfo when that is all you seem to post?

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:43 PM

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by talisman
They could start arguing that the World Trade Center was a Hologram

They do even go that far. The videos are fake. The witnesses that saw the planes are all liars. The victims are fake. Some of the buildings in Manhattan are fake. The list goes on. Their isn't any end to the purposeful disinformation that the tv fakery cult puts out.

I can see your game as most people can. You and your other paid shill buddies are the disinfo people, september clues has nothing to do with disinfo and you know it. The no-planes theory is a fact, all video people saw on tv was largely cgi. Many video experts have proven this and backed it up. This fact is much more believable than you and the story your disinfo buddies try to project.

Dont worry, people wont give up and you'll be in a disinfo job for a very long time.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in