Who was the first to push the Space Beams/ No Planes Memes?

Discussion in '9/11' started by l4zarus, Jul 2, 2014.

?

Who was the first to promote Space Ray/No Planes theories about 9/11

  1. Alex Jones

    1 vote(s)
    14.3%
  2. Morgan Renolds

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Judy Wood

    5 vote(s)
    71.4%
  4. Nico haupt

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Christopher Bollyn

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. Jim Fetzer

    1 vote(s)
    14.3%
  1. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    This seems to be topical lately. Wikipedia has a page on the "no planes" phenomena:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-planers#No-planes_theory

    Nico Haupt and former chief economist within the Labor Department under the Bush administration, Morgan Reynolds, argue that no planes were used in the attacks. Reynolds claims it is physically impossible that the Boeing planes of Flights 11 and 175 could have penetrated the steel frames of the Towers, and that digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in both news reports and subsequent amateur video.[168] "There were no planes, there were no hijackers," Reynolds insists. "I know, I know, I'm out of the mainstream, but that's the way it is." According to David Shayler, "The only explanation is that they were missiles surrounded by holograms made to look like planes," he says. "Watch footage frame by frame and you will see a cigar-shaped missile hitting the World Trade Center." Some truth movement veterans have repeatedly refuted the "no-plane" claims.[75][168][169] In fact, discussion of no-plane theories has been banned from certain conspiracy theory websites and advocates have sometimes been threatened with violence by posters at other conspiracy theory websites.[170]

    These "theories" are closely related to the space laser theories spammed here a year or so ago:
    http://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-Directed-Free-energy-Technology/dp/0615412564
    [it's depressing to see 164 people gave it 5 stars.]

    These so called theories hit their stride around 2007-2008(?) But who was the first to push these wacky ideas?


    [BTW, I think it's another fraud like the Bentham paper. ]
     
  2. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I see there are votes for Judy Wood.

    Since this is more a test than a poll, I've abstained.

    I'll let it run till the end of the week before the reveal. :smoking:

    Now if I was some people, I'd complain about no replies...
     
  3. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I don't know who started it but it was obviously a plan to make the truth movement look silly.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=358521&p=1063932002#post1063932002

    Real truthers believe that empty remote-controlled planes hit the towers. Only disinfo agents posing as truthers push the no-plane theory.


    The Pentagon is a different story though. The evidence shows that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon.
    http://0911.voila.net/index4.htm
    (5th picture from top)

    September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
    (1:55:25 time mark)
     
  4. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The 'truther' movement needs no help to look silly..
     
    usda_select and (deleted member) like this.
  5. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Heh.:cool:
     
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,817
    Likes Received:
    367
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Apparently not very silly since the debunker movement is a gargantuan failure lol

    Odd that the poll asks for who claimed space beams and other crazy (*)(*)(*)(*) and he listed everyone but the debunkers so I couldnt vote.

    These originated from debunkers as pejorative strawman spin.
     
  7. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    That's an interesting hypothesis. Care to link to evidence?
     
  8. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since we have yet to achieve agreement on exactly WHAT
    was done, it is futile to speculate about HOW it was done.
    I personally do not rule out any potential weapon system
    or device used, but rather would like to achieve some traction
    on the WHAT was done angle, note that the towers WTC1,2 & 7
    were totally destroyed.

    The contention that "real truthers" .......
    is an excuse to foment divisions & factions.
    We are all seeking the truth here ( unless there
    are agents of the dark side looking to promote lies ...)

    There is sufficient evidence to say without a doubt
    that 9/11/2001 = Fraud.
    Now lets get Mr. & Mz. average citizen off their dead bottoms
    and getting active on this issue.

    or is that too much to ask?
     
  9. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    There certainly are agents from the dark side looking to promote lies. Some of them are saying that no planes hit the towers.
    http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/articles/twenty_five_ways.html
    http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
    (excerpt)
    ----------------------------------------------
    In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:

    "You're dividing the movement."

    [Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]

    This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
    ----------------------------------------------


    Here's a link to some real truther info.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=348380&p=1063729867#post1063729867

    Nowhere do they talk about holograms or nuclear devices in the basements of the towers.
     
  10. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Again you seek to produce a division between
    "real truthers" and the faction for whom nothing
    is off-the-table. The reality here is the discussion
    of "no planes" tends to tangent out very easily in
    the direction of speculation as to HOW it was done
    rather than properly defining what was done.
    Is there any debate at all about the nature of the
    "FLT175" hit to the south tower? the bit about an
    airliner being flown at 590 mph at so near sea level,
    the cartoonish penetration of the image of "FLT175".
    the fact that the aircraft wreckage was never accounted for.
    There is an abundance of evidence that points to the fact
    that the whole "hijacked airliners" story is FRAUD.
    The discussion of HOW it was done, only serves to muddy
    the waters, can we focus on what we can agree upon, and
    that is 9/11/2001 is a fraud perpetrated by some as yet unnamed
    faction that has the goal of blaming Arabs for the attack when in
    fact no airliners were hijacked at all that day.

    There is the distinct possibility that the images of airliners
    were inserted in the the videos, to cover the image of a missile,
    and that the object that people witnessed, was actually a missile
    or a specially modified military aircraft of some sort, but having
    a commercial airliner penetrate a wall in the manner that was
    alleged by the news media, is a farce, airliners are not missiles
    and can not be expected to perform as missiles.
    ( BTW: this is NOT an argument from incredulity, its common sense)
     
  11. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,830
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The no-plane theory is so silly that no real truther would take it seriously.

    "provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents"
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A
    (7:20 time mark)

    9/11: The Absurdity of the No-Planes-in-New York Theory
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV4rvTxcMSY

    92 views clockwise attacking WTC 2 (no planes theory debunked)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wtu9r_v-XHE

    THE INFOWARRIOR with Jason Bermas (HD) No Planes Theory on 9/11 is Total BS!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBMOxLkhilU

    People who claim to be truthers and consider the no-plane theory are mostly agents trying to split the movement.
     
  12. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You consider the no hijacked airplanes position to be valid
    no? ... this discussion consists of two parts, there is a
    quest for definition of what was done and also speculation
    about how it was done, in the bit concerning what was done,
    I'm in, completely .... and as for the speculation about how
    it was done, please count me out.

    I intend no ill-will toward those who want to speculate
    about how it was done, that is their privilege, its a free country,
    ( so far ..... )
     
  13. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I apoloigze to readers for not getting back sooner. Real life distracts, etc.

    The correct answer is Christopher Bollyn:

    http://www.splcenter.org/get-inform...se-all-issues/2002/fall/risking-their-freedom

    "From there, it got weirder still. In a question-and-answer period following the speeches, Bollyn suggested that the Trade Center towers might have been zapped with a "disintegration ray." The fine dust would be the logical outcome of such a ray."

    "Dustification", anyone? I may have brought this up before, but thsi was in 2002. No Judy Wood. No Morgan Renolds, Fetzer. No "no planes". The information in the ADL blog supports what many critics and debunkers have been saying at least since 2006: the "Truth" movement is a haven for antisemitic/Holocaust deniers and their blame the Jews agenda.

    Bollyn/Space beams resurfaced in another ADL blog(comments), with a strange clarification from a CTer:
    http://blog.adl.org/anti-semitism/christopher-bollyn-september-11-anti-semitism-2
    " Jon • 24 days ago

    Not that it matters much, but Bollyn, in a 2002 article, claims a German physicist suggested the laser beam destruction of the towers.
    I've not found the interview to get the physicist's name, but I just want to clarify that contrary to truthhurts' comment, Bollyn was not the inventor of the theory, he was merely reporting about it.

    "
    " Sombody Jon • 22 days ago

    >Not that it matters much, but Bollyn, in a 2002 article, claims a German
    physicist suggested the laser beam destruction of the towers.
    I've
    not found the interview to get the physicist's name, but I just want to
    clarify that contrary to truthhurts' comment, Bollyn was not the
    inventor of the theory, he was merely reporting about it.

    So "truthhurts" was wrong about Bollyn inventing it, but you're confirming it was invented in 2002 and NOT by Judy Wood?

    "
    " Jon Sombody • 22 days ago

    Correct. I think truthhurts just misread the SPLC article which said Bollyn SUGGESTED the towers MIGHT have been zapped by a ray.

    Judy's associate, Andrew Johnson confirmed to me that Judy never claimed to be the first. He thought it was Icke who first suggested it in his 2002 book "Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Disaster".

    Regardless of who first suggested it, it was obviously Dr. Wood that fleshed it out
    ."

    Actually it's not obvious at all.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8

    " Published on Jan 31, 2013

    Judy Wood is one of the first and foremost supporters of the hypothesis that so-called (imaginary) "Directed Energy Weapons" were used to destroy the World Trade Center Twin Towers on 9/11.
    "
    I think most people assume Wood invented/"researched" DEW. I can't find any place where Wood refers to previous researchers, much less Bollyn or Benton Partin. The most obvious explanation: this wackiness was cooked up by Bollyn, &co, but the people pushing 911 "truth" didn't want an obvious connection to Holocaust denier crazies. Wood was brainwashed to front it.

    And for those calling this a conspiracy theory, you are correct: this is, and it has more proof than the Inside Job conspiracy theory. This is a conspiracy to de-fraud(to push a political agenda and/or sell DVDs). That is btw a crime.

    http://www.bonavitalawoffice.com/wh...chusetts/fraud-or-conspiracy-to-commit-fraud/

    http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/criminal-law/white_collar_crimes/conspiracy-to-commit-a-crime.htm

    Anyone with intimate knowledge of 911 conspiracy group fundraising should read the above links very carefully.

    Of course this will dismissed this as an ADL plot by Zionist Jews to spread "disinfo". But I finally realized if someone insists on believing bat(*)(*)(*)(*) woo, not matter how much it's debunked, there is nothing anyone can do until they're ready.

    Kinda like alcoholism.
     
  14. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    anyone who believes they have evidence of wrong-doing by any "truther" faction, can of course provide evidence to the powers-that-B and demand prosecution.

    If you believe you have a case, go for it, what are you waiting for?
     
  15. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What are you talking about? Who said anything like that?
     
  16. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The implication appears to be that the people who are involved in the TRUTH MOVEMENT are only in it for the $$$! ......

    whatever ........
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They are. The 'movement' died out years ago, but there are still rubes to be milked.
     
  18. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    What makes you think I'm someone with " intimate knowledge of 911 conspiracy group fundraising" ?

    Believe me, if by chance I'm informed of legaly actionable activities of a "truther" group, I will report it. However, not being part of a truther group, that is unlikely.

    You appear to be a defensive about this issue.
     
  19. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you ever so much for your opinion
    & just as useful as the OPINION that there were airliners hijacked on 9/11/2001
     
  20. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is a perfect example of why the 'truth movement' shredded itself.
     
  21. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is NOT a no plane, that is flying object theory, I'm stating the FACT
    that there were no hijackings that day and the objects, whatever they were,
    that struck the Towers & Pentagon were NOT commercial airliners!
    Missiles .... quite possibly but NOT airliners. GET A CLUE PEOPLE!
     
  22. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My point stands. You say there were NO PLANES hijacked.
     
  23. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and indeed there were NOT. The whole story is a combination of emotional appeal and a scheme to invent an excuse to create the draconian TSA farce.
    If you really believe that commercial airliners were hijacked, then where is the proof of there being an airliner at any one of the 4 alleged crash sites?
     
  24. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's not the point of this thread, GB. Are you just going to hijack this thread, too?
    Do try to remain on topic, there's a good lad.
     
  25. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Speaking of being on topic, it would be helpful if some "truthers" could explain what possible reason that Judy Wood is pushing a theory invented by a group of extremist fringies anti-semites like Christopher Bollyn. Apart from a scheme to defraud people selling crap conspiracies. Because it is not a coincidence.

    The person who introduced Judy Wood, is James Fetzer, with the endorsement of Steven Jones [ 911blogger.com/node/4449 ],
    "Dr. Judy Wood is Dr. Jim Fetzer's special guest on Jim's internationally-syndicated RBN radio show tonight, Saturday night (November 11th).

    Dr. Wood will discuss her new scientific article, "The 9/11 Star Wars Beam Weapon," available in preliminary form at http:// janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam6.html (containing 150+ high-quality pictures). Her co-author for the article is Dr. Morgan Reynolds.

    You can listen live to the show by clicking on one of the links at www.rbnlive.com/listen.html. Dr. Wood and Dr. Fetzer will be taking your questions -- live -- during the broadcast.

    After you read the article and after listen to Jim Fetzer's show with Judy Wood, let's discuss it below.

    Following is Dr. Steven E. Jones' request that the Scholars for 9/11 Truth "take a close look at these ideas.""

    Fetzer thinks highly of Bollyn on his blog jamesfetzer.blogspot.com(use the search feature). Reynolds is praised by Bollyn on his personal website, in 2005:

    www.bollyn. com/morgan-reynolds-on-wtc-demolition

    "Ridiculed and abused by the controlled press, independent 9-11 researchers have found a powerful ally in Morgan O. Reynolds, a former official in the Bush administration."

    That is also not a coincidence. Many conspiracy websites connected to these people are now flooded with spam accusing each other of being "disinfo". But since there is no conspiracy, there is no "disinfo". Just people trying to cover their fraudulent schemes.
     

Share This Page