I Don't Care If You're A Shill

"Why won't any of these guys touch September Clues?" - Youtube user WearechangeN

For strategic and career reasons, most likely. Sadly, many people, even many within the "911 truth movement" are closed minded to the possibility that the aircraft that hit weren't commercial flights, and even moreso to the possibility that nothing hit, and rather it was an internal explosion. Unfortunately, until a legitimate scientific investigation takes place the evidence will most likely remain inconclusive as to exactly what occurred. But as far as Alex, he probably avoids it for the sake of his career.

If you're asking me to do my research I assure you that I have, and also that even if I haven't, your immediate assumption that I should then be considered a "shill" is all to common with you hard-line no planers. The unsatisfying truth is that we just don't know everything we need to know about 9/11 yet. Which is why those more rational members of the 9/11 truth movement wisely stay focused on all the criminality and evidence that we can currently prove.

This doesn't mean that Alex isn't dodging the issue. He quite clearly is. But when attempting to investigate a crime, it's best to start from the bottom up when building a case. In other words, much of the "no plane" evidence appears valid but must be considered as of yet inconclusive (if we're going to be adult about this) This doesn't mean to stop investigating, quite the contrary. I encourage 'no planers' to diligently continue their work until they can present a more comprehensive case, perhaps including some form of physical evidence, like a whistleblower who would have worked on the visual manipulation, or some physical evidence, like some information left over from the computers they used to perform the trickery. But until then, you guys should really stop jerking off all over the whole 9/11 truth investigation, and accusing anyone who disagrees with your "skip to the last chapter" approach to 9/11 truth of being a shill. It just comes across clownish.

Smokin' Gibroneys Outa Their Holes

I found this Gibroney's video to be snarky and adolescent in its tone, and not terribly helpful. What do you think?



I'd like to discuss so called "no planers" with you. I'd like to know what has convinced you that they are creators of disinformation. I've watched September Clues and several films like it, and find some of the evidence to be very compelling indeed. While I see no reason not to believe the towers were hit by aircraft, I think the many obvious discrepencies and violations of simple laws of physics contained in the film footage is very incriminating evidence, and certainly not outside of the establishment's capabilities.

I find it amusing that many within the 9/11 truth movement go on at great length about just how capable the government is of great conspiracy.. yet when the topic of video manipulation arises most 9/11 truthers declare it ridiculous without providing any clear reasons why. For example, the majority of the 9/11 truth movement agree with David Ray Griffin that the cell phone calls from high altitude were faked. He even goes on about the corporation that patented the technology in his books, yet for some reason we're to believe that no discussion of a comparable VIDEO manipulation of the terrorist attack is necessary, because the idea's just so obviously ridiculous.

I can understand why many of the 'leaders' of 9/11 truth would steer clear of this topic. Namely, because it would risk alienating the movement from the general public, who are far too stupid to grasp such things as video manipulation of news footage. Again, I'm on the fence as to whether or not the projectiles that hit the buildings were authentic American Airlines flights, but i find the generally belligerent tone of the 'mainstream' of 9/11 truth toward 'no planers' to be very counterproductive. I'm interested in hearing any specific criticisms of no plane theory that you may have. Thanks for reading.

My Response To Jason Burmas' attack on "No-Planers"

My comments directed toward Jason Burmas and Alex Jones, originally posted on youtube:

It seems clear to me that the towers were hit by aircraft. However, Jason Burmas' belligerent tone and mockery isn't helping anyone. The 'nose-out' footage is very compelling indeed, and the long list of inconsistencies and suspicious anomalies within the footage does seem to indicate that the public video record of 9/11 has been manipulated and filtered by the establishment. This includes amateur films, as they have all been confiscated and possibly tampered with by the Central Intelligence Agency before being released publicly.

I'm not a 'no-planer' but I find the in-fighting to be very self-defeating. It should be clear to Burmas that the clowns in that picture are not real no-planers, but rather a couple of half assed operatives, probably meant to incite precisely this type of in-fighting. Jones and Burmas are playing into the establishment's hands by trash talking, and pretending that there's no credible evidence behind 'no-plane' theory.

Also, it's important to note that the vast majority of no planers do not argue the point that no aircraft hit the buildings, but rather present evidence that whatever did hit, it was not a hijacked American Airlines flight. Also very suspicious (regardless of which side of the plane issue you are on) is the peculiarly small amount of home video recordings of the events. 36, last time i checked. Planes or not, one would expect perhaps thousands of independent video recordings of the events of 9/11. Very strange.

Why The Hate For The No-Planers?

Why can't we stop using cunty terms like no-planer, and truther? That's another good question, but today let's focus on why the "mainstream" of the 9/11 truth movement so vehemently resists any open discussion of the possibility that the images we were spoonfed from the military industrial media complex that day could have been digitally manipulated.

I follow the rule that one shouldn't speak with absolute certainty unless one is absolutely certain. So I'll say what I'm certain of. I'm certain that much of the evidence presented by these mysterious "no-planers" is very compelling indeed. I'm equally certain of how repellent I find the instinctively closed-minded response of most of the 9/11 truth "establishment" regarding this issue.

I sometimes need to pause and remind myself of how truly inappropriate and unwelcome our "conspiracy theorist" title is. I was simply pursuing reliable information and genuine knowledge, and Conspiracy Theorist is the condescending title I ended up with. (Apparently, the irony is completely lost on these twits, that if there were no conspiracy theorists, no crimes would ever be solved, since the entire essence of law enforcement consists of theorizing about how, when, where, and why a suspect conspired to commit a crime.) It's precisely this kind of narrow-minded labeling, and dismissal that helped turn me off to the mainstream media, and attract me to the truth movement to begin with. And it dismays me to see people within the movement act like kool aid drinkers themselves by declaring certain things taboo. Our time here is too short to worry about taboos. That's what a Gibroney would do.