Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Refusing to Converse

Dear Mr. Limey wrote:

[El Once] posited the view that the planes that crashed into WTC1 and 2 where not in fact passenger liners and the footage screened throughout the world was CGI enhanced. I still maintain that this is utter nonsense and I still refuse to converse with el Once.

Mr. Limey's childish stance on refusing to converse with me applies not only to CGI, but also to selecting his favorite burned out 9/11 vehicle, as amassed on Dr. Judy Woods website.

Please ignore the limited hangout titles and subtitles for the pages referring to spaced based weapons and directed energy weapons (DEW). Just focus on the evidence. On the first link, look at the sequence starting with Figure toast2a to toast4. It shows a parking lot at some distance from the collapsing towers and the cloud of dust rolling in. Then it shows fires starting to burn in various vehicles, but not all vehicles and not paper or other non-metallic debris.

Mr. McKee and I love the fire truck.

I also like: (fire truck) (another fire truck) (police car) (another polic car)

Why does Mr. Limey refuse to pick out his favorite burned out vehicle? I believe that the starting point for his refusal is that he does not want to even acknowledge the pictorial evidence of these burned out cars, because to do so means that he has to dig for the official govt explanation regarding how gravitational collapse and fires from jet fuel and office furniture (80+ stories up) explains this. But this is something that the govt ignored and had no official explanation for. Ergo, better to come up with a lame excuse for not engaging Senor El Once than to expose this major weakness in the OGCT.

What does Senor El Once say on this subject despite these images being found on a limited hangout website for DEW? I say (1) that milli-nukes pulverized the content of the towers, (2) that unspent but fizzling nuclear material burned under the rubble for months, and (3) that the EMP from the milli-nukes slipped out line-of-sight and caused the damage to vehicles.

Of course, milli-nukes is only tangentially related to 9/11 media fakery on the boob tube. Those with the means, motive, and opportunity to level the WTC complex (and embed an exploding projectile into the Pentagon) would have a military objective to control the media and spin the message. Although the destruction screams for nukes, the perpetrators knew that revelation of nukes could escalate into the public demanding a knee-jerk nuclear response, which would then spoil the prizes they wanted in Afghanistan and Iraq.

To go directly into the evidence of 9/11 media fakery would require reviewing September Clues. Mr. Limey can't be bothered by that. He can't be bother into explaining why the commercial passenger aircraft of the OGCT exhibited no crash physics in the form of deformation and deceleration; how the lighter weaker material of the plane was able to slice the heavier stronger material of the towers into a cartoonish outline of the planes; why the aircraft approach was inconsistent from video to video; why the OGCT down to the Osama bin Laden culprit and the how-to of the towers' destruction was paraded on TV before the dust had even settled.

Nope. Instead of addressing my points and fixing the errors in my understanding, he'd rather sit there and act all aghast by my claims.

I don't blame you, Mr. Limey. You should continue this tactic of avoiding me and these very uncomfortable 9/11  milli-nuke and CGI discussion topics. Thomas Pynchon wrote:

If you can get them asking the wrong questions, you won’t have to worry about the answers.

But when they start asking the right questions, if you don't have your bogus answers lined up and ready to deflect and misdirect, silence -- although deafening -- will be golden.

I encourage you to keep writing blog postings to really beef up this body of work. It'll be a real treasure for database archeologists of the future to measure the Zeitgeist of our times... and how it was manipulated.

Señor El Once

No comments: