1998 Armageddon 9/11 reference

not to mention that these clips are easily memorable even though their duration is limited.

reply to post by yourmaker


I loved this movie, and the soundtrack, seen it a few times.

This specific clip, I do not even remember, I remember meteors hitting the city, that's about it.

Honestly, the OP made a nice observation, but hardly anything to get excited over.

I will now go and listen to some Aerosmith.

vvv

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by boncho

 

I think you misunderstood, I meant that conditioning in this case would not make sense, since the purpose of 911 was to create the biggest possible shock to people, they would want them surprised.

So I´m actually disagreeing with the OP there. Can you dig?

edit on 18-4-2012 by RandomEsotericScreenname because: (no reason given)

I was agreeing with you, just more sarcasm.

No worries.

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Then why did you say this,

If it is as you claim to make it "easier to accept" or pre programming, why then such a short clip that is hardly going to be noticed?

Do you not imply that for it to be pre programming it should be very noticable? Just saying.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
reply to post by holywar666

 

A movie depicting meteor showers that are bombarding many various areas around the globe. Of those thousands of meteors, there is one that slams into the tallest buildings, in one of the largest cities.

Boy those illumaniti nwo dudes are pretty slick eh!!

Putting so many obvious references into things before they do something, goofy cads..

I'd never heard of America before 9/11 let alone the world trade centre!!

reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname


Mate splitting hairs is not what it is about.

A very short 1 sec clip, with two frames taken as reference by the OP, is hardly very noticeable, as I have said.

There is nothing here.

vvv

Mate splitting hairs is not what it is about.

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Not when it´s your hair I guess.

So you can make illogical statements, but when I call you out on it it´s not important enough. You could just admit that you were mistaken in either your thought process or in how you worded your post.

Instead you make 2 replies talking over it. It´s okay, I see you do this quite often tbh.

Just saying.

A very short 1 sec clip, with two frames taken as reference by the OP, is hardly very noticeable, as I have said. There is nothing here.

Again with the illogical, or irrelevant reasoning, I wasn´t discussing with you if something is there, nor claiming it.

And again with the hardly noticable, how is this relevant to the OP, or our discussion? Especially after what I just said to you?

This is the lack of contextual logic I was talking about.

I´m sorry, but you are making it impossible not to call you out on it, even though it is off topic.

reply to post by boncho



certainly am

reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname


Maybe it is you that have trouble reading and comprehending correctly. You are nit picking at something that is hardly even important.

You see me do it quite often? Wow, I am sure that was some interesting reading mate.

Also, why am I even wasting my time further with this reply.

Take care mate, I shall look for you on the boards.

ETA: Let me further state clearly, that English is not my first language. Although, that hardly makes any difference. You seem to read what you want mate, and so be it.

vvv

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Ok, so I´ll give you the chance to prove that I was the one actually not comprehending and making the illogical statement that shows ill contextual comprehension.

It is very simple to prove and I urge you to do so to further cement your accusations of my lack of reading skills and lack of comprehension.

First I´ll qoute you again,

If it is as you claim to make it "easier to accept" or pre programming, why then such a short clip that is hardly going to be noticed?

Now my question, all you have to do is answer it. I assume that it won´t be a problem if you are right with your accusations that the problem lies with my understanding.

Do you not imply that for it to be pre programming it should be very noticable?

Btw, our first languages are very much alike, yours is completely based on mine, your country is a former colony of my country.

I was not out to get you, just calling out the contextual illogicality. But since you weren´t willing to simply answer my question, and decided to add more illogical reason and even repeat your first illogical statement, I had to persist in the name of logic. I was actually doing you a favor.

If movies are made to condition us for something that TPTB are going to spring on us, I wonder when 'War of the Worlds' is going to be sprung?

The Armageddon movie was made in 1997 and 9/11 was in 2001.

We should be seeing some aliens soon, eh?

HG Wells book: 1898
Orson Welles radio drama: 1938
War of the Worlds movie: 1953
War of the Worlds movie: 2005

It's all coincidence OP.



But then, how many coincidences does it take...

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Why not do it properly, and show some planes loose control and crash into the building, with people jumping out, and all the other horrors.

Because many, MANY people would refer back to that scene. In order to project subconscious images onto the brain, you cant make it too obvious.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles

A movie depicting meteor showers that are bombarding many various areas around the globe. Of those thousands of meteors, there is one that slams into the tallest buildings, in one of the largest cities.

Wouldn't a meteor hitting the tallest building in one of the largest citys, be an important scene?
Yet it flashes on screen for under 1 second.

Another member said they loved this movie, but cant remember the WTC sequence i posted. Exactly my point. The eyes may have missed it, but dont think the brain didnt.

Then when 9/11 actually occurs, you wont be as shocked because you've already logged the image prior.


This to me, on some level, is pre-programming or conditioning. Not sure what to call it. (& dont think this is only scene out there. Remember Escape from NY?



There even more scenes in that movie, including a plane crashing into a building directly next to the WTC.

The 1993 WTC bombing is no different, just another conditioning tactic.

reply to post by holywar666

Another member said they loved this movie, but cant remember the WTC sequence i posted. Exactly my point. The eyes may have missed it, but dont think the brain didnt.

Then when 9/11 actually occurs, you wont be as shocked because you've already logged the image prior.

So people weren't shocked on 9/11? What you are saying makes no sense at all. In fact, the shock on 9/11 is exactly what was used to sway public opinion that led the US into a war with a country that wasn't even responsible for 9/11. The very mention of "Terrorism" and "Iraq" in the same sentence however, made it seem treasonous to even question a war in the ME.

This idea of yours makes no sense at all.

Originally posted by boncho

This idea of yours makes no sense at all.

People were shocked yes, but MANY questions from that day have gone unanswered. Now 11 years later...no one seems to care anymore.

Where is the Boeing in the Pentagon footage? Why were their people like Tonya Head , a woman who lied about her fiance being in the WTC, talking publicly and on television?? How did jet fuel cause 2 steel buildings to collapse into rubble? How were only 300 bodies recovered, yet passports from the terrorists were found on the sidewalk?

By pre-programming, this leaves humans shocked enough to support a war, but not shocked enough to where we question our own governments involvement. How many plane crashes, collapsing buldings, terrorist attacks, etc could be on our subconscious prior to 9/11 ?

Here is a movie i loved to watch as a kid, created by Steven Spielberg. Its set in Manhattan, and in this particular scene, the main characters are chased into a bulding thats under "demolition"..............
What are the chances of a controlled demolition happening in Manhattan? Could there have been a controlled demolition on 9/11? Would this be a new idea to me, or have i seen it already in a movie................ah i did see it already in a movie! Just like the Armageddon sequence.

Pre-programming.

(watch first 40 seconds, look for WTC images & demolition sign)

reply to post by holywar666


So what would you have people watch on TV then so they aren't "preprogrammed"?

The Golden Girls?

Should we all sit around watching a bunch of old ladies play euchre so no one gets "programmed"?



Maybe you should try and write, create a story and market it before you go hammering on about Hollywood.

Oh... and what is Spiderman preparing us for?

I will concede that a number of Western stories/movies are borderline propaganda, but that is because of the mentality of the writers and the audience. There are interest groups that try and convey certain messages through stories by trying to influence writers and producers but that is a reflection of the world around us. As for certain messages being dropped to "program" people, it's just not realistic.

All you have done by the way is post a few clips here and there and superficially link them to real events (poorly I might add). If you really wanted to sell your argument, you would need corroborating evidence. And as I said, credits of movies list everyone that's involved. If you wish to present a well thought out argument by combing through the credits and linking people involved to the "overseers" behind this dastardly programming, feel free to.

Originally posted by boncho

Oh... and what is Spiderman preparing us for?

Same reason as Godzilla........... an outside terror attacking Manhattan. Spiderman's job was to protect the people from villans. Coincidence the color scheme for the Spiderman suit is Red White and Blue?

The bigger picture, is how they got away with filming huge movies like Spiderman in Manhattan? Wouldnt that take a lot of actors, camera's, blocked off streets etc etc.... Everything that could have occured on 9/11? Television series like Sienfeld/ Cosby Show and movies like Men in Black and King Kong were ALL filmed in Manhattan. The list is very long.

Dont think they couldnt pull off a fake terrorist attack.

Ok Boncho, lets start easy.

Try explaining this scene. Pause it at 0:36. Its a 1997 Simpson's episode.



Coincidence again?

Lets look at a few more:

Here is a X-Files episode that came out in March of 2001. This blatantly shows a hijacked plane about to crash into the WTC, yet it gets manually overrided and misses its target last second.

Plane approaches at 8:21



Another coincidence??