2014-06-28

to reject as untrue or of questionable accuracy

Hide All / Expand All


x89 Señor El Once : The "challenged" aren't going to come.

2014-06-26

{mcb: This is in reference to the x88 comments.}

Meaningful comments on the Pentagon topic have petered out. The "challenged" aren't going to come.

*Sigh.* With Mr. OSS's stellar work off-list and targeted URL bullets, the Pentagon debate was wrapped up four or more times over in as many or more other T&S threads. Somewhat *yawn* to see the two or three A.Wright carousel spins in this very thread necessitating a dizzying dive into "SOC/NOC" witness nuances, before GOTO links are applied to handle the heavy-lifting. *Snore.* But now a new crank to the merry-go-round with a "challenge to cowards." *Snooze.*

Mr. Adam Ruff brags about skipping my comments unread. More power to him! He and a few others should not read any further. Get a head start on ignoring me right now! Certainly don't bother writing a jejune response, because it'll only engage me and allow me to make more nookiedoo-ish comments!

Simply let this comment pass, unaddressed. Win-Win!

2014-06-12

to destroy confidence in the reliability of

Hide All / Expand All


x43 Señor El Once : Damn if this doesn't look like a familiar argument

2014-04-28

Mr. Rogue wrote:

If you can't "recall correctly" because you have never actually read {--redacted--}, then do not speak to them until you have. I am sick of listening to arguments from ignorance here... Until you are prepared to make an argument here of more substance than the hot gas passing through the seat of your trousers Mr. {--redacted--}, you are going to find it hard going here.

El-oh-el! Damn if this doesn't look like a familiar argument and something that I might have written myself about a different {--redacted--} theme, minus the "trouser gas" of course.

I am most curious as to what Mr. Rogue's response will be if his debate opponent impulsively and violently rips up a printed version of {--redacted--} and uses it for bird cage liner, as opposed to rationally and objectively considering them one-by-one and as a whole. Even if deemed disinformation, nuggets of truth persist.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

2014-04-16

Laying Bare the Propaganda Techniques and Dissembling

"The point in countering propaganda is not to change the propagandist’s mind, but to lay his techniques and dissembling bare to a candid world."~Willy Whitten aka HybridRogue1 aka Mr. Rogue (February 2012)

2014-04-14

Prelude to Nookiedoo

Hide All / Expand All

Over-acting tag-teaming on Truth & Shadows. Here are special messages for Mr. Rogue, "compelled to tell lies to bolster your arguments", and Mr. Huff, "sick of SEO claiming we have not done so." They both fancy debate tricks to bolster impressions in their favor.

Forewarned is forearmed. Nookiedoo, my hobby-horse, is ready to take them for a ride, even though the gate to T&S pastures is closed for the Spring grass to grow.

Your WWF highlights: Mr. A.Wright was mentioned by Mr. Ruff, appears, and is taken on by Mr. Rogue who's mighty enough to handle Mr. Owen Meister at the same time.

2014-04-12

NPT Carousel on FB "All Theories Welcome"

Hide All / Expand All



x165 Maxwell C. Bridges : won't be buried so easily

2014-03-11

The nuclear theory won't be buried so easily, because so much of the evidence -- even that collected by Dr. Wood -- points in that direction.

What will be buried are preconceived notions and deliberate mal-framing (e.g., Dimitri K.) of nuclear devices.

2014-03-11

Early-Adopter Fourth Generation Nukes on 9/11

Hide All / Expand All


Part 1: 9/11 Debates

The following comments were made under:

9/11 Truth Movement: All Theories Welcome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1408668326044814/permalink/1415066332071680/


9/11 Truth Movement: Neutron Nuclear DEW
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1408668326044814/permalink/1415066332071680/

2014-02-11

Neutron Nuclear DEW at Facebook 9/11 Debates

Hide All / Expand All


Part 2: Neutron Nuclear DEW at Facebook 9/11 Debates

The following comments were made under:

DEBATE ISSUES https://www.facebook.com/notes/911-debates/debate-issues/621888681188274



9/11 Debates: Neutron Nuclear DEW https://www.facebook.com/groups/602197473157395/permalink/662698580440617/


x40 Maxwell C. Bridges : premise: 9/11 was a nuclear event

2014-01-26

{This is a condensed re-posting on Facebook of another article. Fodder for skipping. It gets a total of three postings. This one, a re-start of this one, and then in another forum.}

2014-02-02

Facebook: Minor 9/11 Debates

Hide All / Expand All


Part 1: 9/11 Debates

The following comments were made under:

DEBATE ISSUES https://www.facebook.com/notes/911-debates/debate-issues/621888681188274



9/11 Debates: Neutron Nuclear DEW https://www.facebook.com/groups/602197473157395/permalink/662698580440617/


x4 Maxwell C. Bridges : it was a controlled demolition. However...

2014-01-10

Agreed: 9/11 was an inside job. It was a controlled demolition. However...

2014-01-11

Nuclear 9/11/2001 (for VT)

Hide All / Expand All


1. Introduction

Nuclear weapons were used on 9/11. The principle documents used to support the erroneous belief about 9/11/2001 ~not~ being nuclear are:

- "Study of Traces of Tritium at the World Trade Center" by T.M. Semkow, R.S. Hafner, P.P Parekh, G.J. Wozniak, D.K. Haines, L. Husain, R.L. Rabun, P.G. Williams.

- "Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers" by Dr. Steven Jones.

- The Paul Lioy et al Report on the characterization of the Dust/Smoke seems to deliver the no radiation premise.

- Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials

- Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction by Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe.

- "Supplemental: Miscellaneous Topics -DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence" by Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins

- "Where Did The Towers Go?" and website by Dr. Judy Wood.

Executive Summary: a re-configuration of the neutron bomb (or ERW: enhanced radiation weapon) was deployed on September 11, 2001. Such neutron devices (a) are a variant of fusion, (b) expel the lion's share of its nuclear yield as energetic neutrons, (c) can direct those neutrons and subsequently some of the blast and heat wave, and (d) may ~not~ leave significant levels of long-lasting, lingering alpha, beta, or gamma radiation. If not measured promptly (<72 hours), such radiation from the neutron devices dissipates quickly. The phrase is coined "neutron nuclear DEW" (directed energy weapon) to describe it. More than several were deployed per WTC tower.

This article will prove the nuclear 9/11 premise by reaching into the maw of disinformation sources and preserving the nuggets of truth that made convincing the disinfo case. That such nugget-mining efforts haven't already been exerted is testament to the infiltration depths of disinformation efforts. The nuclear argument is cummulative and not completely destroyed should individual nuggets be proven inapplicable or wrong. More importantly, when not proven otherwise, nuggets of truth remain and must be addressed in any theory-du-jour in order to be complete.

2013-11-12

Nuclear 2001-09-11

This piece was written by Maxwell C. Bridges for Truth & Shadows. It addresses the issue of what destructive force could have been employed to bring down the World Trade Center towers. The predominant belief within the 9/11 Truth movement appears to be that nuclear devices were ~not~ used, and that conventional chemical based explosives and incendiaries, including some form of thermite, were the primary destructive mechanisms. But here, Mr. Bridges looks at the reports that substantiates those beliefs, finds them untrustworthy, and points out the deliberate disinformation that has steered our understanding. He documents some of the key aspects of the destruction that can't be explained (e.g., duration of under-rubble hot-spots, tritium measurements, vehicle damage, etc.) without the involvement of some other force. Mr. Bridges is a frequent contributor to this blog under the alias "Señor El Once." ~Craig McKee

Instructions: Because some sections are long and induce lots of scrolling, all section titles are hyperlinked to show or hide their content. The controls below show or hide the content of all sections.

Show All / Hide All

While this article provides a rational sequencing of the sections for the nuclear argument being made, it can also serve as a reference piece where sections are read out-of-sequence. For this reason, some seeming repetition does occur to give context to readers who skim, skip, and hop.

1. Introduction

Mark Twain once wrote:

It is easier to fool someone than it is to convince them that they've been fooled.

This is one of many reasons that make discussing the details of September 11, 2001 so difficult: we've all been fooled by some aspect of it. To top this off, purposeful, crafty disinformation was created, was promoted by mainstream media, and was injected into the 9/11 Truth Movement (9/11TM) to dupe even the best of us idiots.

Apologies in advance: this article itself might be serving up its own share of misinformation, so readers are encouraged to prudentially consume this with a healthy dose of distrust. Verify it, nugget by nugget. And because I don't relish being the sole duped useful idiot on the subject, please correct me where I've been misinformed.

Nuclear weapons were used on 9/11

This article proves the nuclear 9/11 premise by reaching into the maw of disinformation sources and preserving the nuggets of truth. That such nugget-mining efforts haven't already been exerted is testament to the infiltration depths of disinformation efforts. The nuclear argument is cummulative and not completely destroyed should individual nuggets be proven inapplicable or wrong. More importantly, when not proven otherwise, nuggets of truth remain and must be addressed in any theory-du-jour.

Executive Summary

A re-configuration of the neutron bomb ( or ERW: enhanced radiation weapon) was deployed on September 11, 2001. Such neutron devices (a) are a variant of fusion, (b) expel the lion's share of its nuclear yield as energetic neutrons, (c) can direct those neutrons and subsequently some of the blast and heat wave, and (d) may ~not~ leave significant levels of long-lasting, lingering alpha, beta, or gamma radiation. If not measured promptly (<72 hours), such radiation from the neutron devices dissipates quickly. The phrase is coined "neutron nuclear DEW" (directed energy weapon) to describe it. More than several were deployed per WTC tower.

2013-11-11

Señor El Once and Herr der Elf

I am fully aware of the half century mark of that coup d'etat in the USA.

Destiny can be strange. Want to know the true story of how my Batman-alias came to be?

The eleventh day of the eleventh month, I came into this world. Eleven days later, assassin bullets violently departed JFK from this world. Conspiracy Truth were how the stars & planets were always going to align for me, with nine-eleven (2001) being a klaxon song to rally just another Blues Brother onto a mission from God: "Feed my sheep."

I had no choice. I donned the masks of my birthright.

I became: Señor El Once (and sometimes Herr der Elf).

// neu nookiedoo woo-hoo!!!