The Controlled Opposition, "perp created" websites, forums, and moments.

I have heard from a lot of posters that many, if not most of the prominent 9/11 truth proponents are in reality double agents at best, hired by the perpetrators of 9/11 for a variety of possible purposes. I have a few questions I'd like to know more about...

Who are the "controlled opposition" or the fake truth movement?

Prime candidates are extreme theorists who posit the existence of basement nukes, or Dr. Judy wood with her space beams and dustification, or perhaps Captain Rob Balsamo. What about Kevin Ryan? Richard Gage?

What about websites, such as the cluesforum, or others, that promote controversial theories.

Why have the perps created these fraudulent "truth movement" personalities and establishments.

I can think of a couple of reasons that come to mind immediately:

1. To make the 'real' truthers look bad by association. The more ridiculous theories might conceivably have this effect on people. Think of what the No-Planes movement has doen to tarnish the entire subject.

2. To lead the 'real' truthers on a wild goose chase, down false paths that they know will lead nowhere, thereby delaying the ultimate exposure of the perps.

3. To gather information on people who are interested in conspiracy theories and suspicious of the government, in order to infiltrate their ranks, and by creating an organization, come to control and neutralize them.

Have the "fake" truthers succeeded in their mission, and will they do so in the future?

So which are the "fake" truth movement, and which are real? What are they trying to accomplish


This is my first thread, and I'd like to have fun, so let's all keep it clean, free of slurs and on topic!

Here's one video that claims the 9/11 truth movement, along with others are put in place to usher in the one world governtment by defaming the US government.

The best way to fool someone like you think, is to play friend, provide a place to discuss and inject more or less believable theories to the audience.

Originally posted by verschickter
The best way to fool someone like you think, is to play friend, provide a place to discuss and inject more or less believable theories to the audience.

The term is called frenemy.

frenemy. What a sneaky term.
In German it would be "freind". (freund + feind)
But in swabian (a german dialect), "freind" means "freund" means friend. Its all to confuse us.

Originally posted by verschickter
The best way to fool someone like you think, is to play friend, provide a place to discuss and inject more or less believable theories to the audience.

Sure, but do you think there is a controlled opposition in the 9/11 truth movement, and who?

911Review.org
WING TV
ScholarsFor911Truth.org
Physics911.net,.ca,.*
Letsroll911.org
Webfairy
nico haupt
Lose Change
September clues
In Plain Site


These are a few sites and flicks that are sponsored disinformation. They promote space weapons, lasers, wmds, mini nukes, fuel tankers, holograms, tv fakery. Some of these were funded by some people tied to the popular mechanic debunking 911 article.

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
Dr. Judy wood with her space beams and dustification,

First Dr. Wood never mentions Space beams or that concept at all she merely mentions Beam weapons developed during the Star Wars program under Reagan. SHE DOES NOT SAY THERE WERE BEAMS COMING FROM SPACE. As for Dustifaction its is more scientific to call an unknown phenomena by a new name rather and calling it by a known one. So instead of calling it Characteristic:1230 she gives it a reader friendly name. Dr. Wood is the ONLY person to take her evidence to court. And She is the Only person to do an independent forensic investigation. Just because some one calls her a lunatic doesn't mean she is. Plus she has the best credentials to do the investigation than probably any one in this country.
Dr. Wood received her
B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),

M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and

Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia
How about actually reading her work instead of judging it by what some one else has said about it.

Dr wood is a disinfo artist. They are false opposition.

Phil Jayhan, how are you doing, nice to see you still at your vile game after all these years.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

So you've read her book?

As for working who you can and cannot trust is a real head banger with so much conflicting information out there. The best source of any information is open peer review which has lead me to ae911truth.org . The debates surrounding this have been savage, complex and deep taking a lot of time and slowly sifting through a lot of uncertanity to seperate the truth from the fiction. Part of it is an information war, part is just misguided individuals trying their best in difficult circumstance.

reply to post by kwakakev


If your looking for a peer reviewed investigation Dr. Woods book where did the towers go has been by industry experts. Please people actually read this investigation before you judge it by what some one else has said about it. Until then you will never find the truths and I'm not even saying you have to believe the conclusions she comes to. You should look at the FACTS and then come up with your own conclusion about what you think happened. But the fact is that this is the only interdependent forensic investigation into this event and yes it has been peer reviewed. All of the evidence she provides can be found on her website if you don't want to by the book.

Originally posted by BriGuyTM90

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
Dr. Judy wood with her space beams and dustification,

First Dr. Wood never mentions Space beams or that concept at all she merely mentions Beam weapons developed during the Star Wars program.

Right. What's controversial about that is this; such beam weapons have not been demonstrated to exist outside of Judy woods writings. Nor do the events of 9/11 resemble the effects of any known beam weapons. So this makes it a rather unsatisfying explanation.

There is already a word, pulverize, that means, "To be ground or reduced to powder or dust." it's really a fine word. Dustify wasn't needed at all.

So I guess I understand why people think she's some kind of reverse shill, paid to make truthers look crazy or stupid.

reply to post by BriGuyTM90


I did have a quick look at Dr Woods website and have come across a few of her arguments in the past that did not sit well. I know directed energy weapons are a realitly, but such capability from a space based platform is unsubstainated. If such technology was a reality then the recent wars throughtout the middle east would have been over in a matter of days not months with no need for air support. There is no video evidence during the collapse of sparks, or arcing which would be expect from such technology, put some metal in a microwave oven for a demonstration. Warning that this is dangerious.

ae911truth.org already has over 1500 architects and engineers supporting its theories on how the buildings fell.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Some of these were funded by some people tied to the popular mechanic debunking 911 article.

Very interesting detail that I have never heard before.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer

Excellent topic, thanks for posting!

Why have the perps created these fraudulent "truth movement" personalities and establishments

You already answered this question:

1. To make the 'real' truthers look bad by association. The more ridiculous theories might conceivably have this effect on people. Think of what the No-Planes movement has doen to tarnish the entire subject.
2. To lead the 'real' truthers on a wild goose chase, down false paths that they know will lead nowhere, thereby delaying the ultimate exposure of the perps.
3. To gather information on people who are interested in conspiracy theories and suspicious of the government, in order to infiltrate their ranks, and by creating an organization, come to control and neutralize them.

What about Kevin Ryan? Richard Gage?

Both of these guys only point out the obvious.. Like for example the Houdini stunt WTC 7 performed that day. Or how 9/11 Commission Report and NIST are a total wast of paper. You don't need to pay them to see that. It's right in your face.

I spent $20 on Loose Change a couple years a go but it wasn’t even necessary because the movie is available for free on the web. On the other hand I spent 5 or 6 times that amount on books pushing the Official Story. So all this talk about 'damn fool conspiracy websites' only want your money is incorrect. I'm sure they want money but you don't have to pay them anything at all because it's free on the internet.

I know that you think truthers are all liars, I'm wondering what is a “truther” mission in your opinion?

EDIT: The $20 for Loose Change I spent.. In my local Barnes and Noble.

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
Why have the perps created these fraudulent "truth movement" personalities and establishments.

A good question would be how to discriminate between these fraudulent "truth movement" personalities and people who are just crazy. After all, conspiracy theories in general attract a lot of crazy people, and it would be very strange if this was not the case with 911 conspiracies.

Originally posted by -PLB-

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
Why have the perps created these fraudulent "truth movement" personalities and establishments.

A good question would be how to discriminate between these fraudulent "truth movement" personalities and people who are just crazy. After all, conspiracy theories in general attract a lot of crazy people, and it would be very strange if this was not the case with 911 conspiracies.

Don't forget that the OS is also a "conspiracy theory" when you talk about attracting "crazy people".

Good thing for one, is not all people who seek truth just blindly believe what is being put out there by either side.

To blindly believe is what i would call crazy...to blindly believe the OS side...Or to blindly believe the truth side is to have lack in ones own ability for critical thinking.

Could the Os be perpetrating these theories that are way out there....one needs to look into the site ownerships to work out what is true or what is not true....Any site that only spits out one side of any story is extremely questionable....It is just like butter and coffee....if you research either one of those you will know what i mean....One side says it is good for you the otherside says it is bad for you...and when you check who is sponsoring the research....Guess what you'll find.....LOBBYIST....for one side or the other....

You see i understand the purpose of this thread....It is being presented by an OSer....who is using their own viewpoint to try to make a blanket statement concerning truther sites....So therefore the OP is doing exactly the same thing as he is proclaiming these sites might be doing....As one can see the dilemma that is always faced in two opposing arguments.....one side will slander the other side to try to make their points more valid than the opposing side.

This happens all the time...it is not a 911 OS/Truther phenomena in any way shape or form.....Do all truthers fit in the nutter category....OF course if only looked at from the OS perspective....just as ALL OSer's are sheep IF looked at from only the Truther perspective.

So once again you have an OSer....instead of looking at the events of 911 would rather misdirect.....to make out truthers are less than intelligent critical thinking individuals who might actually have more credentials and knowledge based on learned skills ....and only followed what may deemed as far fetched ideas presented by one side of an argument.

to the OP

reply to post by Flatcoat


The OS is the mainstream theory. Of course you can completely take the term "conspiracy theory" out of context, but considering we are on a site that deals with conspiracy theories it should be pretty clear to you that the OS does not fall under that definition. (a tip is to read the Wikipedia page on "Conspiracy theory, this explains it in a bit more detail).

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by Flatcoat

 

The OS is the mainstream theory. Of course you can completely take the term "conspiracy theory" out of context, but considering we are on a site that deals with conspiracy theories it should be pretty clear to you that the OS does not fall under that definition. (a tip is to read the Wikipedia page on "Conspiracy theory, this explains it in a bit more detail).

So 19 arabs with boxcutters hitting 2 skyscrapers and bringing 3 down, then hitting the pentagon but not leaving a trace, and a hole in shanksville, while condy said it could have never crossed their minds, is not a "conspiracy theory", its a sensible and clear explanation...

Just so you all take note, eugene is a OSr, so its not like its trying to find the truth...