Have some conspiracy theorists gone too far.....

[AMystic3434]

I like a good conspiracy and am open minded to the fact that there is more to the story than what we are being told. But it really bothers me when people put up these conspiracy you tube videos that are just so stupid.

So now the conspiracy on the Boston bombing is that no one was really injured and that they were all actors. This is the biggest bunch of BS ive heard in a long time. I just dont believe it, how can people live with themself and spread such nonsense. These are the people that give the good conspiracy theorists a bad name. Its the same when people were saying that airplanes really didnt hit the WTC buildings. How gulible can people really be. But more importantly, how shameful is it to spread such BS.

Despite such nonsense by these conspiracy theorists. I still believe that we dont have the full story. I guess you just have to be careful what you decide to let in. And dont forget to think about things before you believe them. A little logic goes a long way.

[sigma6]

You sound like you are trying to misdirect the real threads with a non-sequitur argument... very few people have said no one was injured, in fact it is stock and trade to make sure a number of innocents get hurt in every faked up scenario. I would go back and review the hundreds of videos that have been posted... rather odd response when there are a hundreds of videos describing the staged events, clairvoyant bomb drill before the events occurred, brothers trying to give up and saying they didn't do it, false media press against family, amputee actors, but you're concerned that some think maybe no one was injured??? if there really are a few that have said that maybe they are just laying a false trail so that someone can come along and create a false argument... all designed to distract focus from the main issue...

Isn't this the same anti-propaganda argument that failed miserably to distract the Sandyhook whistleblowers... (ouch, )

[Prodigal Son]

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
So now the conspiracy on the Boston bombing is that no one was really injured and that they were all actors. This is the biggest bunch of BS ive heard in a long time. I just dont believe it, how can people live with themself and spread such nonsense. These are the people that give the good conspiracy theorists a bad name. Its the same when people were saying that airplanes really didnt hit the WTC buildings. How gulible can people really be. But more importantly, how shameful is it to spread such BS.

Well, I'm one of those BS spreaders. If it is proven to me that at least SOME of the injuries were faked, then how do I determine which ones are real? Is it not prudent to question ALL the injuries and alleged deaths once it is established that there was fakery going on?

As for the planes that allegedly hit the towers, if there was no plane at the Pentagon and no plane in that ridiculous hole in Shanksville, wouldn't I be stupid to automatically assume that whatever hit the twin towers were 757's? Especially when hollow aluminum absolutely cannot cut through thick steel beams no matter what speed it is traveling? Especially when I saw no wake vortices and several other anomalies that would rule out the possibility of 757's being involved? Especially when it was proven beyond a doubt that the media inserted the "plane" that hit the south tower?

How do you really know what is BS and what is not?

No matter what conclusions they reach, everyone questioning the official story is really on the same team. Do you think you are helping the cause for truth by causing division among the truth-seekers?

[naste.de.lumina]

Their greatest concern are the conspiracy theories go too far.
The truth is one, whatever name you want to give her.
You have government Blowing up your own people as well as other people, intentionally obscure and petty purposes, does not seem to bother you as much as an error of judgment of a reasonably valid analysis.
No, not conspiracy theories.
Are real freaks practices committed intentionally, willful, premeditated.
Governments would not have a long time gone too far in their atrocities, would be the right question.
peace.

[AMystic3434]

how can you say that 2 airplanes didnt hit the WTC. It was witnesses by hundreds of people. The media didnt insert the plane that hit the south tower an airplane really hit it. As far as the pentagon goes. Im not sure if an airplane really hit the pentagon, even though they say that im still not convinced. So you saying there were faked injuries at the Boston bombing. That is BS why would they even need fake injuries when they have a real bomb going off. That would mean that the medical team was in on it. You dont see any medical personal coming forward saying that some of the injuries were fake.

All im saying is that be careful what you watch on you tube and believe. Its like when in the movie the Matrix when Neo asks if you die in the matrix do you die in real life and Morphius says yes the mind makes it real. Well that is what happens....The mind makes it real.

[andrewgreen]

Posted by Prodigal Son (here)

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
So now the conspiracy on the Boston bombing is that no one was really injured and that they were all actors. This is the biggest bunch of BS ive heard in a long time. I just dont believe it, how can people live with themself and spread such nonsense. These are the people that give the good conspiracy theorists a bad name. Its the same when people were saying that airplanes really didnt hit the WTC buildings. How gulible can people really be. But more importantly, how shameful is it to spread such BS.

Well, I'm one of those BS spreaders. If it is proven to me that at least SOME of the injuries were faked, then how do I determine which ones are real? Is it not prudent to question ALL the injuries and alleged deaths once it is established that there was fakery going on?

As for the planes that allegedly hit the towers, if there was no plane at the Pentagon and no plane in that ridiculous hole in Shanksville, wouldn't I be stupid to automatically assume that whatever hit the twin towers were 757's? Especially when hollow aluminum absolutely cannot cut through thick steel beams no matter what speed it is traveling? Especially when I saw no wake vortices and several other anomalies that would rule out the possibility of 757's being involved? Especially when it was proven beyond a doubt that the media inserted the "plane" that hit the south tower?

How do you really know what is BS and what is not?

No matter what conclusions they reach, everyone questioning the official story is really on the same team. Do you think you are helping the cause for truth by causing division among the truth-seekers?

Agree but agencies do intentionally plant ridiculous stories and people embellish things to make more money. Alternative media is like every other form of life you create your own reality and one man's bulls **** is another's truth. Stereo typing definitely isn't helpful though.

[Prodigal Son]

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
how can you say that 2 airplanes didnt hit the WTC. It was witnesses by hundreds of people. The media didnt insert the plane that hit the south tower an airplane really hit it. As far as the pentagon goes. Im not sure if an airplane really hit the pentagon, even though they say that im still not convinced.

I would suggest that you do a little more research on 911. I'm talking about real footage that was aired on TV that was later edited and changed. There is no disputing this. Once you see it you will know what I am talking about. I'm just too tired to post all these videos again. They are all here. Search on this site or search google. Look into the lack of wake vortices. You must adhere to the laws of physics. Don't let them bend your mind.

[AMystic3434]

You cant dispute amature home video that clearly shows that 2 airplanes hit the WTC. No doubt, the conspiracy theorists that say this didnt happen are tricking people for there own personal agenda.

[Chester]

Within the various defined realms of form, you have opposites involved in a dance that balances that realm. In instances of extremes, one side conspires against the other.

Within the realm of form itself, you have the same type of dance albeit it becomes realms in opposition to realms. Again, extremes can bring forth conspiracies.

So what is a conspiracy? It is when two or more "beings" get together to impose their will upon one or more other "beings."

I see all things as a manifestation of a being... you, me, others, animals, plants, air, wind fire, water, the Earth, the Sun the purportedly manufactured Moon, black holes, the visible light spectrum, all light outside of the visible light spectrum, the dark, and everything else that was not just mentioned or included in what was not just mentioned and this includes thought generated beings, archetypal beings, and currently unnamed and/or unknown beings.

When we step outside of all of "that" we see that essentially, the only conspiracy one might possible be able to do anything about is the conspiracy one has...

...against themselves.

I rest my case with the "Serenity Prayer" (paraphrased)

Accept the things I can't change, change what I can and be wise and courageous enough to discern the difference between the two.

[Prodigal Son]

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
You cant dispute amature home video that clearly shows that 2 airplanes hit the WTC. No doubt, the conspiracy theorists that say this didnt happen are tricking people for there own personal agenda.

All we have for the north tower is the Naudet Brothers video that shows a blurry craft that eyewitnesses said looked like a flying pig and had a whirring sound that didn't sound like any passenger aircraft they had ever heard. If you have anything else please post it.

The second "plane" is not visible in every video... in one clip whatever approached the building looked more like an orb. In another, a view from the Jersey side, there is no plane at all visible on the wide-pan shot before it zoomed in. What we "saw" could have been a hologram but was most likely inserted into the video. The nose came out intact on the other side: IMPOSSIBLE.

There were very few witnesses, if any, that saw the hit on the south tower because you would need to be observing from points south of the WTC, which is a very small area. As for the "hundreds of witnesses", if you have any further evidence please post it, but we already know there were government plants who lied, so once again, how do you distinguish between them?

[Kryztian]

All one can do is be open to the truth and the possibilities. The problem that we humans have, it that we want quick answers, and come to hasty conclusions.

Perhaps some conspiracies aren't conspiracies, but the only way to be sure is to let people to the good and honorable work of the conspiracy theorist and work our way through the evidence and sort things out. If you offended by the process, than perhaps Project Avalon is not the place for you.

[noprophet]

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
You cant dispute amature home video that clearly shows that 2 airplanes hit the WTC. No doubt, the conspiracy theorists that say this didnt happen are tricking people for there own personal agenda.

Link please.

[donk]

Emotional attachments to manufactured events and focusing on details hides the implications and broader reality.

While we argue over whether we're "conspiracy theorists" or how many people were hurt and how, Enron is still off the hook, people made bazillions of dollars, factions of gov't latched onto tighter control, and the general populace became effectively divided and distracted.

How easily we forget every lesson we learn (quo buono or whatever, who benefits?)

There shouldn't be this enormous gap of evidence in 911. We let it happen in pretty much every media event since, just like US national elections (probably the most effective and expensive and distracting conspiracy ever)

It's fun and maybe important to figure out the details. But I think we'll be hard pressed to ever get adequate information again, not since we never needed it, not for JFK, disclosure, elections, whatever. We'd rather have the drama and play Easter egg hunt for he devilish details.

The implications I am finding from the most recent events (sandy hook and Boston) is that we no longer need evidence, we don't expect detailed eye witness accounts or intelligent in depth explanations of events: whatever the teevee says is gospel, only to be amended by "authorities", who need no credentials or evidence, just a camera and title

[Carmody]

Too far?

Not far enough. Human credulity is the issue, as is usual.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Il07ok_Ah8U

[donk]

So us "conspiracy theorists" are left to pick through the crumbs of info left. Perhaps you (op) have a point that too many people try to be the messiah and turn the crumbs into loaves and fishes and wine, but even still--is it all that important to get the details right?

I think in this day and age where CSI and Law & Order and counter-terrorism type shows are like half the teevee programming, we would expect more from investigators and the media.

Is that the biggest conspiracy of all? Tricking EVERYONE into ignoring such basic truths?

Watching a million shows of crime fighter and mystery solvers and terrorist thwarters wrap up their cases nice and neat, then flipping to the news, where I guess we assume Scooby and the gang will get those pesky perps eventually, everyone else is doing a bang-up job of whatever it is they say they're doing.

Remember anthrax?

How bout Iran-contra??

[Referee]

Posted by sigma6 (here)
You sound like you are trying to misdirect the real threads with a non-sequitur argument... very few people have said no one was injured, in fact it is stock and trade to make sure a number of innocents get hurt in every faked up scenario. I would go back and review the hundreds of videos that have been posted... rather odd response when there are a hundreds of videos describing the staged events, clairvoyant bomb drill before the events occurred, brothers trying to give up and saying they didn't do it, false media press against family, amputee actors, but you're concerned that some think maybe no one was injured??? if there really are a few that have said that maybe they are just laying a false trail so that someone can come along and create a false argument... all designed to distract focus from the main issue...

Isn't this the same anti-propaganda argument that failed miserably to distract the Sandyhook whistleblowers... (ouch, )

Agreed Happening Too often here IMHO.

We are open minded here however we also see through the BS.

[Prodigal Son]

Posted by noprophet (here)

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
You cant dispute amature home video that clearly shows that 2 airplanes hit the WTC. No doubt, the conspiracy theorists that say this didnt happen are tricking people for there own personal agenda.

Link please.

For anyone who is wondering why no real planes were used, the truth is that this was a carefully planned attack to destroy evidence... evidence that was leading to the exposure of mind-boggling fraud and money scams. The targets in the WTC were secure computer rooms that were conducting high level investigations. And still, not all the evidence was destroyed. This is one of the best connect-the-dots follow-the-money 911 videos I have seen to date:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=vduFYcjbqec

[conk]

When there are so many BIG, BIG lies, everything must be questioned. And when last did one tiny bit of truth come from government or authority?

[Vitalux]

Posted by AMystic3434 (here)
I like a good conspiracy and am open minded to the fact that there is more to the story than what we are being told. But it really bothers me when people put up these conspiracy you tube videos that are just so stupid.

Their are a lot of people, just like you, that have a good laugh at people who believe in conspiracy theories
Just as the people who had a good laugh at Galileo Galilei, when he advocated that, much to what the Church was telling folks, the world was round and not flat.






One free piece of advice I have to offer is simply this. You can never to too sure about anything.

[donk]

Are we sure it was gallelio? Or was it that the time was ripe for the Vatican's allowing of "disclosure"??