911 Truth Hijacked: 911 Perps Created the Truth Movement!

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: wotyathink

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
haemorrhoids.

The good thing is:

# Truthers Judy Wood simply is misunderstood.

I think Judy is full of it!

I agree, but this all plays into the premise of the thread that these nonsensical theories are meant to be argued ad-nauseum as you can see .

"2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit. "
" How dare you criticize judy woods!"...

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I think Judy is full of it!

NP, everybody's fine with what people think.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
but if you want to discuss her theories then might i suggest you go and create a thread on the topic because getting drawn into her theories is kind of off-topic.

Whoops there's got to be a misunderstanding. I'm not discussing Judy Woods, nor hers or any others "theories". I thought I had made that clear in a couple of posts during this thread.

Still, I would love to please you but guess what....

Some rather incriminating claims have been put forward and these have so far not been backed up by anything else than arguments and hearsay. You may in fact even agree with that.

What I AM doing, however, is explaining how the person incriminated (Judy Wood), came to think of other possibilities than conventional explosives. My integrity tells me to continue to do so till the statements have been backed up by acceptable evidence. This would eventually get any misunderstandings, or even disinfo out of circulation. Anyway at least here at ATS!
In case these incriminating statements against said person can't be backed up then they should be retracted or at least be modified by OP.

You (anybody) could ask OP to provide evidence, retract, or modify. Or you could ask the mods do something about the matter. You could even help pointing out that observation and theory are two completely different things..

The statements in question can be read in this post

Your request to have me move to another thread has actually been fulfilled already. There is another topic where similar incriminating statements have been put forward. The OP of this thread "hit and ran" so to speak.
But anyway I guess you simply want the online lynching to be dealt with whether it's here or there..

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
the topic at hand is the OP claiming that she or those like her are part of a coordinated disnfo agenda constructed by the "real perps" of 9/11 as opposed to those theories themselves

Yes, again I do not intend to be a pain in the butt. As explained above this is not about me, Judy Wood, "theories" or even OP. It's about whether the online lynching is correct or not.

originally posted by: Shadow Herder

" How dare you criticize judy woods!"...

To get done with this circus we have to become a bit more accurate. This is not about just critique Shadow Herder, you know that...

I have been taking the time and been reading some of your other posts in different topics. Most of you're writings make a lot of sense to me. In my opinion you are well informed on a wide range of topics.

I will be glad to admit if I'm wrong. I do hope you have the same abilities. After all it's truth we're out after aren't we?

originally posted by: Rhiannon
I'm pretty new to this forum, and I do love 'Stars' (someday I might figure out what it means at this site), but I do like beer even better.... Cheers and I'd pour you a shot of Jager, but I don't see an icon for that :'(

I'm new too but you have less posts and more stars than me That what you write must make a lot of sense.
Or maybe the guys spam you with stars. You've got a cute horse by your side

I may just need an avatar and I be ok..

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
Judy Wood sent in her theory directly to NIST in the form of a legal document that energy weapons from space caused the destruction of the WTC Towers: "I assert that NIST contractors, as listed in NCSTAR 1, including by way of non-exhaustive example, those listed below, either knew or should have known of the falsity of NCSTAR 1 as it relates to the use of directed energy weapons." Request for Correction per Section 515 of Public Law 106-554 SUPPLEMENT #2 to RFC submitted April 20,2007
ocio.os.doc.gov... [pdf]]

Instead of borrowed quotes and irrelevant links I recommend you go to the SOURCE:

"Beam Weapons, Energy Weapons, and Directed Energy Weapons (DEW): We have used the terms "beam-field weapons" and "directed energy weapons" to refer to unconventional weapons (exotic weapons) that are energy weapons. We broadly define DEW as Energy that is Directed and is used as a Weapon. The full range of these weapons is classified information, so we make no limits or distinction of categories within the realm of energy weapons, as doing so would imply specific knowledge of all that is available. In the following paragraph, we have listed some of the possibilities we are aware of.

Our critics have accused us of insisting that beam weapons did their damage from outer space, yet we make no claim about whether the directed energy weapon operated from a space-, air-, or ground-based platform. Nor do we make any claim about what wavelength(s) was used, what the source(s) of energy was, whether it involved interference of multiple beams, whether it involved sound waves, whether it involved sonoluminescence, whether it involved antimatter weapons, whether it involved scalar weapons, whether it was HAARP (more here], whether it involved a nuclear process (e.g. NDEW, more info), whether it involved conventional directed energy weapons (conDEW), whether it involved improvised directed energy weapons (iDEW), nor what kind of accelerator was used, nor do we claim to know what the serial numbers of the parts that were in the weapon(s).

What we do claim is that the evidence is consistent with the use of energy weapons that go well beyond the capabilities of conventional explosives and can be directed."


Get it straight from the horse's mouth:

Where Did The Towers Go?

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
DR. JUDY WOOD on behalf of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff/Relator,
vs.
Defendants.

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
911 Truth Hijacked:

I've seen many indications pointing towards wikipedia is being both censored and monitored, and not necessarily by we-the-people-and/or-sheeple..

Somehow I believe it's technically possible for this supposed-to-be open web encyclopedia to push, ignore and condemn certain info and people. Promoting a certain mainstream politically correct view of "reality", if you will.

Wikipedia would be a powerful tool in the hands of those wanting to control the flow of information.

How's wikipedia doing concerning 911 and the truth movement in your opinion?

LIke the magic bullet theory and the wtc collapse theories, dew weapons and other exotic bs, they were designed to be argued forever and will not get you any closer to who did 911. That is the designed intent.





in the 911 disinformation cover up these are some of the techniques being deployed in forums

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic
which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'

Sounds familiar?

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
LIke the magic bullet theory and the wtc collapse theories, dew weapons and other exotic bs,

I'm not here to discuss any theories. This was to show you how far the quote and link you posted were off the mark. In addition there was disinfo includet in that link.

What you keep coming up with has NOTHING to do with providing evidence for you incriminating statements vs Judy Wood and her research.

If you wish to debunk Judy Woods research; you're welcome in the other thread. You've been invited several times and you keep going at it here without debunking anything.

You need to know WHAT you criticize BEFORE you criticize!

"LIke the magic bullet theory and the wtc collapse theories, dew weapons and other exotic bs, they were designed to be argued forever and will not get you any closer to who did 911. That is the designed intent.
"
You will see users on this site unrelentlessly promoting theories that lead you away from the culprits of 911.
DONT be derailed by these special fantastic weapon theories, they are meant to mislead you away from real evidence and no truth seeker has ever seriously embraced such misinformation.


Transcripts from the video with links and sources. www.corbettreport.com...



Ill discuss j woods in that thread. thank you

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
DONT be derailed by these special fantastic weapon theories, they are meant to mislead you away from real evidence and no truth seeker has ever seriously embraced such misinformation.

OK let me get this right....

This after all is about promoting your own fav theory, while incriminating others?

And where is the "real" evidence btw? Are there any dogmas in place yet?


Editing in your edit here:

originally posted by: Shadow Herder

Ill discuss j woods in that thread. thank you

That's good I really look forward to that

originally posted by: wotyathink

I'm new too but you have less posts and more stars than me

That what you write must make a lot of sense.
Or maybe the guys spam you with stars. You've got a cute horse by your side

I may just need an avatar and I be ok..

Or realize when it's time to just agree to disagree lol apparently this thread is just so the op can proclaim everyone a disinfo agent, while pushing his agenda whatever the heck it is. It's easy to go off topic on this thread, because it really should have been titled ...

"Listen to me I am the ONLY one that knows the truth, AGREE or be threatened for going off topic and removed" lol

Hmmm I guess, I just went off topic because I just stated my opinion on this topic, crap, do I get banned for life now?

Yeah, that horse is pretty badass if I do say so myself ; ) or maybe it's because I like giving stars out too, I hear Prince screaming in my head everytime I do ... wahhh ooooo OOooOOooo! Baby Babee Babeeeeeeeee hahahahaha

a reply to: Shadow Herder

There are so many things wrong with that video i do not know where to start.

But this is a interesting alternative if you want a parody.

originally posted by: Rhiannon

originally posted by: wotyathink

I'm new too but you have less posts and more stars than me

That what you write must make a lot of sense.
Or maybe the guys spam you with stars. You've got a cute horse by your side

I may just need an avatar and I be ok..

Or realize when it's time to just agree to disagree lol apparently this thread is just so the op can proclaim everyone a disinfo agent, while pushing his agenda whatever the heck it is. It's easy to go off topic on this thread, because it really should have been titled ...

"Listen to me I am the ONLY one that knows the truth, AGREE or be threatened for going off topic and removed" lol

originally posted by: Rhiannon
I think people need to face the fact that there are some serious literal psychopaths trying to march the globe to a one world order with the rot child and their ilk at the top. Anyone that disagrees with that imo is a disinfo agent or too afraid to entertain the thought that everything they've been taught their whole lives is a fairy hollywood tale.

a reply to: DelMarvel

In second quote Rhiannon apparently had a Jager and fell for Shadow Herders cool avatar.

First quote could describe Rhiannons reaction to Shadow Herders new avatar. Instantly sober.

But she has a cute horse.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

But this is a interesting alternative if you want a parody.

This may or may not be parody on the news they have in Russia.

a reply to: DelMarvel

haha I see what you're doing. Okay to clarify... it seems like anyone that has an opinion that the op disagrees with is considered a disinfo agent from the op, that's what it seemed like to me, and obviously I misunderstood what is on topic or off topic (and still don't know the answer to that one)

I stand by my earlier remark that you posted 2nd, in which I stated my opinion. The difference between me and the OP is I didn't start a new thread saying,

'Hey let's discuss whether the people that are behind the nwo are also the people shilling for anti-nwo' list all my reasons for believing it's the rot childs, and then threaten everyone that came to my thread with going off topic if they suggested someone other than rot child at the head.

My mistake was thinking this thread was a discussion about who was behind the 911 attacks and how they manipulated media from the truth coming out, My Bad! And that will be my last post here, but I really hate hypocrites, and the worst thing would be to be a hypocrite on hating hypocrites eh? star for you, nice try

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
LIke the magic bullet theory and the wtc collapse theories, dew weapons and other exotic bs, they were designed to be argued forever and will not get you any closer to who U did 911. That is the designed intent.

in the 911 disinformation cover up these are some of the techniques being deployed in forums

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic
which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'

Sounds familiar?

this video?

originally posted by: Rhiannon
thinking this thread was a discussion about who was behind the 911 attacks and how they manipulated media from the truth coming out,

Not your mistake Rhiannon.

Many participants, me included, started out believing OP had a sortof "uniting" purpose.

Thread confirms that theory easily becomes religion.

originally posted by: Rhiannon
a reply to: DelMarvel

haha I see what you're doing. Okay to clarify... it seems like anyone that has an opinion that the op disagrees with is considered a disinfo agent from the op,

And you also posted on this thread saying that those who disagreed with you were disinfo agents.

After further research into Dr. Wood's data, I've changed my mind. Though the interview I heard was fairly straightforward, there doesn't seem to be much to her website drjudywood.com, at least in the way of scientific data. There are plenty of videos, and a little writing, but that was about it. I was as equally unimpressed with the researchers that were linked on her page. I suppose that I was wrong about her not making any wild claims, she does seem to be running off into the woods with it.

Does anyone have links to other data that she has presented that is more compelling? I am open to considering it...

There are also aspects of some of her theories that don't seem to add up; but I suppose that elaborating would have me drifting off topic, so I won't other than to say that this assesment was another reason that I'm now viewing her in a more dubious light. Thanks Shadow Herder, for helping me learn something new!