Crazy CT'ers actually plants to create background noise to hide behind?

[Bonobo]

Just speculating here, but wouldn't the ideal way to throw people off the scent be to plant stupid conspiracy theories to undermine any real look into what happened as the work of "crazies"?
I mean, it worked here at DU after all... We can't engage in an intelligent discussion on the main board because any attempt to explain the most important event of the last 6 years is painted as a whack-job theory.

Am I tin-foiling?

[The Lone Groover]

1. If that is going on...

...then it's called rat-fucking and has been going on a long, long time in politics.

Some of the more exotic theories do have me wondering.

[SocraticTruths]

2. Yes

The Daily Kos I believe banned any 9/11 conspiracy talk. When HuffingtonPost was wide open they were flooded with crazy, divisive tinfoil spam.

I think there are some making money off of conspiracy theory. I think there are some who are interested but are either too believing or too robotic in their debunking.

But I do think there is another group with paid money whose task is to throw us off the "scent". "They" know that it is next to impossible to figure out who is who, and that we are forced to make decisions over what are rabbit holes and what are legitemate. Then there is the problem of paid fakes who sprinkle in some truths, making it very difficult to claim they are completely disinfo agents.

Look at this dude Jeff Wells. He argues that people are wasting their time on the controlled demolition, while common sense shows that CD is the "back and to the left" of 9/11. I once had a professor who had a student come to the front. The prof took a basketball and spinned it around, before we knew it, he was saying that this was how JFK's head went backward even though he was shot from the back. Jim Garrison was saying "back and to the left" means JFK got shot from the front, from the grassy knoll.

[rman]

3. At the same time Kos is rooting for Sibel Edmonds

But perhaps they don't know what she is about.


..."Then things start getting a lot of overlap-- money laundering, and drugs and terrorist activities and their support networks converging in several points. That's what I'm trying to convey without being too specific. And this money travels. And you start trying to go to the root of it and it's getting into somebody's political campaign, and somebody's lobbying. And people don't want to be traced back to this money."
-- Sibel Edmonds
http://baltimorechronicle.com/050704SibelEdmonds.shtml

---

..."once this issue gets to be investigated, you will be seeing certain people that we know from this country standing trial; and they will be prosecuted criminally," revealing the content of the FBI intercepts she heard indicates that recognizable, very high-profile American citizens are linked to the 911 attacks.

When asked how many Americans were named in the intercepts, Edmonds said "There is direct evidence involving no more than ten American names that I recognized," further revealing that "some are heads of government agencies or politicians - but I don’t want to go any further than that,"
-- Sibel Edmonds
http://www.fathers.ca/fbi_cover-up.htm

[William Seger]

4. JFK's head snapped *forward* when he was hit

... driving his chin into his chest, which proves he was shot from the back. It went "back and to the left" about 2 film frames after getting hit, which proves that motion wasn't caused by momentum from the bullet. I "discovered" that for myself when someone on this board was challenging people to watch the Zapruder film a while back, but after looking around the web for more info, I found that the forward snap has been known and precisely analyzed for a long time now -- by some people -- but it seems that most CTers cling to debunked "facts" forever. The moral of the story should be not to jump to conclusions based on sloppy and incomplete analysis of films or videos.

[SocraticTruths]

5. Your Writing is Nuts

JFK might have got shot from behind, but the shot that killed him came from the grassy knoll. I am no JFK expert, but this post reeks of what this thread is all about. The DU debunkers never seem to have anything good to say, just obfuscation and derailment. Friggin Jackie O was crawling to the back of the car, I won't say why, but that showed where the big shot came from, not to mention all those witnesses, and all the evidence. It is ridiculous at this place too often like this. The debunkers are nuts.

[SocraticTruths]

6. fake believers and fake debunkers both serve the same forces.

I think if there is all this fakery going on, it makes sense that it would come from both sides, the "conspiracy theorests" and the "debunkers". Just seems like common sense, the noise to signal ratio stuff, the nothing to see here, move along stuff.

[Bonobo]

7. I agree with that competely. Both sides makes sense.

In any case, I feel that this forum is NEARLY useless for real discussion with all the noise.

I am one of MANY (I think) who admit that they DO NOT KNOW what happened, but that see signs of COVERUP in many places. This is strongly suggestive that something fishy happened, but I don't know what it is.

[SocraticTruths]

14. Yeah

But it looks like those buildings fell funny. Strange how just even mentioning this upsets so many people. Those put options must lead the way to the criminal connection? right?

We need another Jim Garrison, enough of this Fitzmas sell-out crap. He is another one who could have become a great leader. I guess he puts his smarmy title ahead of what's best for the society. He must have tons of dirt on Cheney and GW, Rove. Now where is the friggin justice? Get Gonzales out of office now. Can him.

[AZCat]

15. It's not the questions that are upsetting...

it's the constant assertions that because a layperson can't understand how such a building would normally collapse, it must have been something else (i.e. controlled demolition, beam weapon, mini-nuke). Never mind the innumerable people with the necessary knowledge that don't find the collapses unbelievable - if the government said they collapsed because of the planes, then that must not be true.

[dailykoff]

39. Architects and structural engineers

(not to mention many "laypersons") had no trouble figuring out what was happening as it was happening.

John Skilling, the towers' lead structural engineer, figured it out before it happened and made sure a fairy tale like the official story never could.

So you happen to be an architect or structural engineer? Didn't think so.

[AZCat]

43. I've read what you think happened.

I don't think much of your ideas, nor do I think you have a very good grasp of the fundamentals that apply to the collapses. In fact, you happen to be one of the posters who regularly posits that his/her theory about the collapses is incontrovertibly correct (while failing to prove so to any degree), illustrating my particular beef in the post above.

[dailykoff]

45. Unfortunately you have no basis for assessing my or anyone else's

ideas on the subject, which I suppose is the reason you rely on third-rate propaganda like magazine summaries of the NIST report, which you've admitted you haven't read, to support your misconceptions.

[AZCat]

46. Nevermind.

In deference to the wishes of the OP, I have deleted a rather insulting post to dailykoff.

[Contrite]

57. AZ

Equally upsetting is being told you are not able to understand the OCT when many of us do understand enough, even though we may not be engineers, to question the story. Do you think the 9/11 victim family members are uninformed? Do you think they have no basis for their ongoing demands? Or do you think Man Coulter is right--that they are capitalizing on their misfortunes? What about Professor Jones? Kevin Ryan? Do you think they stuck their necks out on the basis of pure "guesswork" only to have their heads chopped off? These guys lost their jobs! And still they persist.

[jberryhill]

63. Yet Another False Dichotomy

No, the family members are not misinformed. I don't believe that every family member of every 9/11 victim is of one mind on every issue. There ARE substantial unanswered questions concerning government malfeasance and nonfeasance relative to 9/11, and the faith-based intelligence operations of the Bush administration. That has zip to do with dustification beams, holographic planes, controlled demolition, thermite, remote controlled plane switcheroos, or any of the other mass of self-contradictory nonsense that parades itself as "truth". Recognizing such twaddle also has zip to do with the spoutings of folks like Coulter.

[SocraticTruths]

16. check out these grassy knoll debunkers .....

It's as if they want to get us discouraged and waste our time interacting with fakery. Or they think we think this is some epic battle to win those on the fence. They are nuts. The debunkers in this section read as if it is for paid money, otherwise it's just mean spirited trolling, maybe they know we make some good points, but they are needling us, but then again some of it could be from some sick form astroturfing.

[AZCat]

19. Ahhh, the good old...

"If they don't agree with me then they must be mean trollers or paid posters" gambit.

[William Seger]

28. What a pant-load

From your "chemtrail" postings, I take it that you are very impressed with your own ability to intuit the "truth" without any need for facts or logical reasoning. This post proves to me that you really aren't very good at that.

[William Seger]

9. Wanna bet?

You can read about the forward head snap in several places (not an exhaustive list):

http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Physics_of_head_shot/2-Z-film.html
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/Scientific_topics/Physics_of_head_shot/Physics_of_the_head_shot.html
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/organ2.htm

But you can see it for yourself, as I did, if you simply look closely:



By the second frame (313), the bullet has passed through and imparted all the momentum it could possible impart, and the result (in addition to the obvious forward spray) is that JFK's head has been pushed forward until his chin is on his chest. By the next frame, 314, the head is almost back to where it was in 312, and then the much slower "back and to the left" lurch doesn't begin until the frame after that. It all happens pretty fast, but bullets don't wait 2 film frames before imparting momentum. The head shot was from behind.

But I don't doubt that you will go to your grave believing something that isn't true, despite this proof. Your post reeks of what this whole board is about.

[SocraticTruths]

10. I messed up

I think I messed up that professor story. Basically he said the spin of the basketball shows how someone could be hit from behind and have his head thrown back. Most of us even back then knew he was full of it, that JFK was killed from a shot coming from in front of him. Are you disputing this, and if so, you are as useful as William Cooper saying the driver did it. Nice friggin try Horatio.

[William Seger]

12. I proved what I'm claiming...

... and you just keep spewing and sputtering -- not even a nice friggin try.

[JackRiddler]

55. I remember that thread!

Others who cling to disbelief in the Coup d'Etat of 1963 have argued (like Posner) that a shot from behind could cause the head to snap backwards anyway.

I guess there are many ways to rationalize pictures like this one.



More of the same here
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html

True, I'm not forensically inclined. Now here's my idea of a persuasive photo - not that you're going to agree.

[Minstrel Boy]

37. "Look at this dude Jeff Wells..."

Speaking.

You say, "He argues that people are wasting their time on the controlled demolition, while common sense shows that CD is the 'back and to the left' of 9/11." That's the problem. It is. Just look at what dwelling upon trajectories has done for bringing justice to JFK. And by focusing upon how the buildings fell, the "9/11 Truth Movement" has been making the same missteps assassination researchers made 40 years ago by devoting their energies to how Kennedy died.

Crimes are Who Done Its, not How Done Its. And "9/11 Truth" is stuck in a How loop that is getting further and further away from effectiveness and relevance.

[CJCRANE]

62. Whodunnit

and in the case of 9/11 - Who Paid For It?

It's the simplest question that no one seems to be asking. The hijackers burnt through $500,000, much of which was wired to them from overseas. Where did that money originate?

Once you've found the hitman you then have to find the paymaster.

[Lilith Velkor]

8. Some of them are actually crazy

Others see to it that the crazier theories are spammed far and wide.

[SocraticTruths]

11. Hey

What's up with this dude disputing the grassy knoll? Is that nuts or what?

[AZCat]

13. Uhhh... "what", I guess. n/t

[SocraticTruths]

17. Get your posting together

I was talking about the grassy knoll. What do you do, just post random, disruptive thoughts. Look at the index. I was talking about the dumbass idea that there was no shooting from the grassy knoll, that JFK got blown away from the shot from the grassy knoll.

[AZCat]

18. I know what you were talking about.

Since I don't believe he is nuts, then the only other choice available was "what".

[SocraticTruths]

20. You both think Oswald did it alone, that all the shots came from the texas school book depository?

Is that your final answer? No grassy knoll? Hello Oswald?

[AZCat]

21. I can't answer for William Seger.

But yes, I do think that Oswald did it alone.

[SocraticTruths]

22. Hey- a flat earther

now that is some crazy shit you guys are posting. That is some a-1 tom flocco prime disinfo sauce. ha ha ha It's like you're trying to brainwash younger people or something.

The outrageous fake debunking is here for all to see. I am not saying they are paid debunkers, they could just be repeating something they have heard or seen about before {The History Channel?? ha ha ha}.

Outrageous. Anyone who looks into the JFK will see this type of insidious flat earther debunking for what it is.

[AZCat]

Do you have anything substantive to say...

or are you just going to rant cluelessly?

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AZCat]

27. Well congrats to me!

How convenient that you're the only one capable of detecting these beings with no humanity. Sort of like , huh? Except Roddy Piper got those cool sunglasses and you don't get anything... :(

[SidDithers]

47. Doncha love it when someone with...

"Chemtrails are real" in their sig calls you a flat earther? Some posters wouldn't know irony if it bit them in the ass.

Sid

[William Seger]

23. I believe what I just proved to you

The head shot came from the back. Obviously -- from the way you keep soliciting a support group to back you up -- this revelation has threatened the foundations of your belief systems. Sorry about that, but don't expect to be taken seriously when you posit theories that are contradicted by the facts.

[Bonobo]

26. Why are you guys talking about JFK anyway? Can you move it elsewhere?

[William Seger]

29. Because Soc said...

"... common sense shows that CD is the 'back and to the left' of 9/11."

There's some truth to that, but not at all the one Soc intended.

[Bonobo]

34. You could always ignore him or post on a JFK thread?

[William Seger]

35. Party pooper

Your OP was a little too vague considering that, for example, the Scholars for Truth split into two factions suspecting each other of being "disinfo agents." About the same thing happened over at the Loose Change forum. Seems to me "crazy CTer" is a pretty subjective term.

[Bonobo]

36. I don't want to get piled on by EITHER side.

You say too vague, I say diplomatic and trying not to further splinter into one of the radical sides. If we could actually talk to eachother, I bet most people here would agree that there were at least SOME funny things that happened that day, right?

[William Seger]

38. There are serious unanswered questions about 9/11, if that's what you mean

I consider about 98% of the "truth movement" to be nothing but a distraction from those questions, and I can't for the life of me figure out what the other 2% think they have to gain by having any association with that "movement."

[Contrite]

58. Seriously.

This is gross. The photos make me sick. And I worked for an ME for 8 years!

P.S. I think he was shot from the front.

[SocraticTruths]

30. I'm confident

I am sure that anyone who looks into the JFK assassination will see who is telling the truth, but the person starting this thread wants us to pipe it down, so great job Mr. Debunker!!!!!!!

[William Seger]

31. How confident are you...

... that YOU aren't the kind of person Bonobo suspects of being a "plant?"

[SocraticTruths]

32. I'm confident enough to...

stop disrupting the thread like he requested, and sane enough to add you to my ignore list. Wonderful Job Mr. Debunker!!! but now it's iggy time for you. {no shot from the grassy knoll yet back and to the left wow}

[William Seger]

33. Oooo, that's exactly what I'd expect a "plant" to do

I don't trust this guy, Bonobo.

[Bonobo]

40. That was pretty uncalled for.

By the way, I always agreed that it looks like JFK7s head goes forward, not back and to the left (even though I doubt it was a singe shooter).

Anyway, please don't make posts like the above. It's nasty, uncalled for, unsubstantiated and unecessary.

I'm trying to maintain a level tone and I don't post much on this forum.

An apology would be appreciated.

[AZCat]

41. If you're going to ask for apologies...

you've about a half-dozen of SocraticTruth's posts to respond to, asking for them from him/her also.

Otherwise you're just being hypocritical.

[Bonobo]

42. i didn't notice any insults from that direction...

[AZCat]

44. Then you weren't paying attention.

Look through the thread - if you don't see the continual insults from that poster then I don't think there's ever a chance we will agree on these issues, regardless of what you said in post #36.

[Bonobo]

48. You're right. I missed it. It was such a weird out of place resonse that I

didn't even notice it was aimed at me... Ha.

That particular poster, however, does not seem the type of person that I would even want an apology from as they seem to be either mentally or physically pre-adolescent.

You and Seger, on the other hand, are seemingly at least adults.

Your icon, Feynman, by the way, is certainly someone who's common-sense and logical way of thinking and asking questions is in great need here.

[AZCat]

50. If only he were still around.

Feynman was one of my early heroes. I was pretty young when the Challenger accident happened, but I still remember his part in the investigation (how brilliant an explanation that even a sixth grader could understand).

In the spirit of cooperation and communication, I apologize for my role in sending this thread off-track. I'll even throw in cessation of a budding flame war with my long-time nemesis dailykoff to smooth things over.

[Bonobo]

53. It would be great to here what Feynman said about 9/11 indeed.

Thanks for the kind words.

[William Seger]

52. Okay, I'll apologize to you, too

I posted below before I read this.

Hmmm... I wonder how many people on this board are old enough to recognize my icon?

[Bonobo]

54. I sure remember Petey!

[Bonobo]

56. If you like the music from the Little Rascals, check this out:

http://www.amazon.com/Hunks-Original-Little-Rascals-Music/dp/B000005YQ4

I think they are Swedish and they play the music from the Little Rascals live, from the original sheet music. It's great stuff. I have it on my iPod and it always cheers me up.

[Contrite]

60. Petey? I thought that was Spuds McKenzie!

Just kiddin...Spanky, Darla, Butch, Alfalfa and the rest of "Our Gang" were my main after-school viewing pleasure as a child.

[William Seger]

49. Apologize to whom?

To Soc? No way! I was just yanking his chain with a little joke, compared to the totally uncalled for crap he posted. To you? Well... that would be easier if you didn't have a certain bias about who should be apologizing. Anyway, starting a thread doesn't mean you own it.

[Bonobo]

51. Unintentional bias. Please see #48

[Lilith Velkor]

61. Exactly.

What's up with this dude asserting that a grassy knoll has any fucking thing to do with 9/11? That's nuts.

[SocraticTruths]

24. Hey dude

I'll go along with your theory as long as it includes the crazy debunkers too, it's like a yin-yang of disinfo.

[Contrite]

59. I'll second that emotion.

The story is too hot not to believe there are efforts at derailment coming from "both sides".

[Lithos]

64. Locking

Please avoid group comments of a negative nature.

Lithos
DU Moderator