The English and 9/11?

All other news and developments related to 9/11
JamedD
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:23 pm
Contact:

The English and 9/11?

Unread post by JamedD »

I remember someone on the old forum I think it was hoi.polloi mentioned that the algorithm used to generate the vicsim names in the 9/11 terror hoax had British English spelling and very particular Brit-centric stuff such as actor names from the BBC soap EastEnders were a recurring theme.

If this is true it's a smoking gun that the 9/11 terror fabrication was planned in the UK most likely by the BBC/MI6. Now that's not to say there isn't an American and an Israeli connection, that is obvious. But it's remarkably strange that intricate planning such as the vicsim algorithm can be traced to London?

P.S. I do not intend any kind of racial hate towards the English people. The English are a fundamentally decent and honest people but if the 9/11 terror hoax has some kind of London Connection and there is evidence for this it should be out in the open.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

I guess we are getting a taste of our own hideous medicine we sewed on the Native Americans and Africans, Hawaiians and everywhere else. If the living world is one big wild jungle, why should we ever expect peace from those we've had strong past relationships with? Probably only because of our strong past relationship to the UK are there so many signs pointing to London and its spawn. After all the tie-ins to 7/7, BAE Systems and the cross-Atlantic NGO 'Mitre'/RAND (on which MartinL and Ozzy have both shown support for my accusation that it is a prime suspect), it certainly is involved. But is it really out of proportion to our collaborative hoaxes of the past? The Lockerbie bullshit? The moon nonsense? We have a history of lying together. I don't want to say this is certain, but I do think there is something to the notion of 9/11 being primarily an 'inside job' of those who think they are doing good by 'breaking a few eggs' ("...and hey, we didn't have to kill any Americans! We'll clear the area and simulate some victims, too!") while also being some way for guys with big armies to have some fun.

However ... it certainly gives food for thought ... the concept of a classical fairy-tale foe in England. After reading the Rothschilds history posted by McCob, I am inclined to think there are very old powers at work on 9/11 - older and more traditional than the country of 'the United States of America' itself. Unfortunately, it took 9/11 for me to wake up enough to retrace on my own our historical relationship to the British Empire and re-examine what we are taught about it. We as a completely fabricated 'Nation' (actually alien republic on foreign territory) started bankrupt - both financially and morally - and the UK was willing to make some sort of shady rearrangements at the time of the colonies to sustain this tenuous existence and bar other European countries from overriding us. Just why is that, I wonder? Those in power who have retraced our historical relationship to the Empire the way we have at September Clues and gotten further than us ... have often been disappointed about these historic deals, declared them false and hostile in nature, and later tried to reject them. That has resulted in consistent disapproval and reprobation.

Need we go into the many examples of military countermeasures against such intellectual uprisings against darling oppressors? The United States government seems to be more beholden to the UK and other terrorist states than it would admit to the world citizenry. Although I find that possibility offensive to my sensibilities of freedom, I realize those sensibilities may have been created in me by the ruling state itself as a part of some negotiated package rather than an accomplished peace. The history of the populist movement seems to be one ongoing struggle of the parental masses of society frantically trying to disarm a spoiled child that is armed to the tooth.

We should really try to have a look at the accounting books of the UK to see complete transparency on what that terrorist country thinks we owe it. We might find they 'hate our way of life' enough to invent al-Qaeda, use it as a mask for their own feelings toward us, and export it - through the Kerrs of the Mitre corporation - into our intelligence system and cause some sort of faux coup as an explanation for their impatience with the American people's "misbehavior". Is it something else the UK dislikes about America's idealism -- something familiar? Do we remind them too much of themselves? Note the Anglos ongoing psychological issues with headmasters.

But it takes two to tango. Maybe our executive branch caught the strict headmaster-worshipping Anglophile bug and they wanted to test it out, even though we don't need the 'discipline', simply because the US admires the Big Brother aspect of UK society? If so, there's pretty much only one place to collaborate with on bringing that load of crock here ... the UK government! They've pretty much been in charge of Empire since Spain dropped the ball, right?
timothymurphy
Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:51 pm
Contact:

Unread post by timothymurphy »

hoi.polloi 4 May 17 2010, 08:11 AM wrote: I don't want to say this is certain, but I do think there is something to the notion of 9/11 being primarily an 'inside job' of those who think they are doing good by 'breaking a few eggs'
Yes.
I think you meant political / social ideals.
But a dimension of this is those who see hoaxes as grand works of art.


In England we are supposed to be masters of subtlety and irony that Americans don't get. Because we're so clever, it means we can pioneer "edgy" stuff like the new Chris Morris film, "Four Lions" - a slapstick comedy about terrorism.

Image


I think the arts/media in the UK venerates the hoax and the spoof, and it is central to its identity to be superiour to those naive Americans.

(here is UK/Irish TV presenter Graham Norton phoning up Americans, *snigger*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1md5VTYn8Rs )



In other words, it seems entirely fitting for England to have been in on, if not inventors of 9/11.

(didn't September clues show that clip from Brasseye of a plane crashing into the houses of parliament?)

Examples of recent known hoaxes sustained in the UK arts (outside comedy)include:

1/ Novelist William Boyd's 1998 biography of a phoney artist, which fooled alot of people apparently.
Image

2/ BBC radio 3 - the classical music station - has had numourous fake composers and musicians on the station since 1997, including a 112 year old Viennese man played by actor John Sessions on MIchael Berkeley's show.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Berkeley
(Ian McEwan has collaberated with this radio presenter - McEwan being a suspected terror-faker as seen on other threads.)

It's the goal of every serious UK media-person to "Break America"
What better way to show America who's boss than by faking alot of them (vicsims), and laughing at how trapped they are in their hysterical media system, while we're free to be detached, cool and ironic.

Image

-
I don't suppose this post has increased Hoi's level of Anglophilia. Don't worry, I'm well aware that all this clever-cool-detatched thing is just our brainwashing, same as American's get told they are the most free etc.

P.S. what does this mean?:

Note the Anglos ongoing psychological issues with headmasters.
Image
fbenario
Member
Posts: 2256
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Unread post by fbenario »

Hoi, your theory/thesis makes a lot of sense.

It raises one obvious question, however. Why, 65 years ago post-WWII, did Britain and its perp government decide to let the world think America was the new power, while receding behind the scenes themselves? Kind of like a puppeteer controlling its marionette from behind the curtain, letting the puppet get all the applause/money/power.

Are there any other obvious examples in history of power-hungry megalomaniac governments choosing to remain hidden behind the scenes while all the goodies accrue to the perps in another country entirely? (I'm thinking on a bigger scale than just a few stray Rothschilds.)

Or have I misunderstood what you are proposing?
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Good thoughts all.

Not proposing anything, fbenario. Just speculating What Ifs from either side - I agree with you that it seems unlikely America would get real power from a foreign shadow. On the other hand, timothymurphy knows best of us 3 from the English perspective being the only one in this thread who is actually living in England!

I wonder if the cool and collected sarcastic attitude wouldn't be the way England will always handle world events, being that they wish to impose it on their populace as America imposes a superiority complex on its own. If so, it will be difficult to tell from our positions on the ground floors - so to speak - of our respective countries what exactly the 'leaders' are doing - and sort successfully the messages they want to impose from the clues that give us a better measure of their corruption.

Perhaps some English 9/11 investigators like timothymurphy should like to go to New York and some of us American ones should go to London and split up - Scooby Doo style - to get a better cultural perspective on our so-called enemy. I think we will find snacking on local cuisine fun while realizing that it wasn't the UK or USA exclusively but some kind of twisted, dark partnership that created 7/7 and 9/11. It might be easier for an Englishman to see the blindspots of an American city and vice versa. Given it is hard for a person to figure out who they are without comparison to others, maybe cultures are the same.
911Analyzer
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:13 pm
Contact:

Unread post by 911Analyzer »

In response to the point about the English involvement in making the morphed VicSim images, and the links to the BBC - check this one out... The guy on the left is 9/11 Vicsim William Mahoney, the guy on the right is ex-Eastenders actor Dean Gaffney. The resemblence is quite uncanny! It looks as though the perps used this actor as the matrix image template. I hope the image shows up below, as this is my first post here.

http://img808.imageshack.us/img808/1618 ... illiam.jpg

Image
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

lol

Wow, nice. I'd believe it, based on the uncanny resemblance of certain face parts in the vicsims to famous actors. One-o-these days, I'll publish a similar thing I did comparing various celebs to the vicsims that seem to have borrowed the most parts from them.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

BUMP
nonhocapito
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Unread post by nonhocapito »

The absence of Israel from this discussion is so loud I almost can't hear you, people...
these governments, banks and corporations are all infiltrated/handled by zionist/mossad agents who act as liaisons and puppet masters, which is the main reason why they can work together so well --despite the different angles they have in business and politics. The political goal is not Britain or the U.S., but Israel. Otherwise we would be at war against China or Latin America-- not the muslim world.
carcdr
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 3:11 am
Contact:

Unread post by carcdr »

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Unread post by Dcopymope »

fbenario 4 May 18 2010, 02:27 AM wrote: Hoi, your theory/thesis makes a lot of sense.

It raises one obvious question, however. Why, 65 years ago post-WWII, did Britain and its perp government decide to let the world think America was the new power, while receding behind the scenes themselves? Kind of like a puppeteer controlling its marionette from behind the curtain, letting the puppet get all the applause/money/power.

Are there any other obvious examples in history of power-hungry megalomaniac governments choosing to remain hidden behind the scenes while all the goodies accrue to the perps in another country entirely? (I'm thinking on a bigger scale than just a few stray Rothschilds.)

Or have I misunderstood what you are proposing?
Go to the CFR thread where I explain why America is the new face of the empire. Just think of Britain as the parent who gave birth to a much bigger and stronger child America to be the new thug enforcers for the ruling establishment. Britain was known by the world as the premier brutal hegemonic power so they needed a knight in shining armor to continue the empire, thats where America comes in.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

nonhocapito @ Sep 15 2010, 02:16 AM wrote: The absence of Israel from this discussion is so loud I almost can't hear you, people...
these governments, banks and corporations are all infiltrated/handled by zionist/mossad agents who act as liaisons and puppet masters, which is the main reason why they can work together so well --despite the different angles they have in business and politics. The political goal is not Britain or the U.S., but Israel. Otherwise we would be at war against China or Latin America-- not the muslim world.
"Evil Israel" is covered in many discussions.

This is about Britain's role. If you are going to bring up Zionism, Britain and the Rothschilds must be included in the discussion somewhere, I feel.
fred
Banned
Posts: 592
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:43 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fred »

The military tried fighting wars without the support of the media and decided that the "Lesson of Vietnam" was that you need the media to keep morale up on the home front, otherwise the public turns against your war and makes the military unpopular.

Military-media cooperation is the name of the game. The military is controlled by the Anglo-American establishment. Who controls the media? They have to agree on a common enemy.

If the plan were to demonize Jews and establish a Germanic master-race, the media wouldn't readily cooperate because that's been tried that once already and they decided to "never again" go along with that plan.

How about demonizing some other religion? "Radical Islam" is an enemy that makes both the media and the military happy. The "Western allies" of puppet king in the middle-east don't like radical Islam either. China doesn't like Radical Islam. Russia doesn't like Radical Islam. India doesn't like Radical Islam. Who likes Radical Islam? Everybody wins.

The media bosses like wars because wars create a steady flow of "news" and are good for ratings. Israel wants a free hand to keep the Muslims at bay and they need US backing so they tell the Hollywood establishment and "news media outlets" that the plan, the War on Terror, is a good idea.

So, the Saudi kings and princes and gulf oil emirs get to stay in power for now if they cooperate with the plan. They don't want a coup that re-distributes power and wealth. They've been bought off. Their radical elements get an external enemy to complain about, and they get to read articles that their kings are secretly supporting terrorists. So the terrorist sympathizers are happy. China gets to keep their hundred-million or so Muslims in check. Russia gets to crack down on the Chechnyans. India gets to fight against her rebel provinces.

Israel gets some sympathy in the West for fighting the common enemy of the US and UK. So it's a good thing, just like Netanyahu said.

Maybe 9/11 is not so good if you're active duty military, a Palestinian, or an Afghan or Pakistani villager. But those people don't really have a seat at the table. They're supposed to sit back and wait to be liberated by a smart bomb or predator drone.

I don't think Israel is actually in the driver's seat, but like Eisenhower says they need to be inside of the tent and pissing out of it, rather than standing outside pissing in.

The US and UK share a common intelligence community. It's like Texas vs Vermont. They may make fun of each other, but when it comes to military adventures they're all on the same side.
Mudkipz
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:11 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Mudkipz »

Right, so I saw this thread and thought, 'hey, I live in England, lets have a look through some vicsims and see what comes up'.

I hope you don't think I'm taking the piss, I think the people who put together the base images must have been.

Image

Weird, right? a bit younger and a bit happier or is it just me?

and to cap it all off:

Image

Gordon Brown was still our Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time so he was most definitely a prominent public at the time.

Hope you find them as interesting as I did.
fred
Banned
Posts: 592
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:43 pm
Contact:

Unread post by fred »

I think you're right, Mudz. In order to generate some camaraderie and buy-in from the actors who participated it's important for everyone on the inside to know that nobody really got killed in the WTC. Showing them that the vicsims aren't real people is probably important for morale.

Letting them see that the obituaries are for people like L Ron Hubbard, various unknown comedians, famous actors, and a morph of "Mr Bean" with "Mr Prime Minister" helps to reassure the insiders that they didn't actually help murder anybody.

Relax, relax, nobody got killed. That lady holding the sign who says her son was murdered is actually just on a soap-opera. Here look, there she is. The guy who wrote Frasier is still alive and well. We told you nobody was going to get hurt and nobody did. OK? Try not to spend all your money in one place. We'll have more work for you in a couple of months. Take some time off and don't worry about it.

The public needs to believe that a lot of innocent victims were murdered by cruel terrorists. The actors need reassurance that they didn't really help murder anybody. They have to do a good enough job to fool the public, without doing such a great job that one of their own feels so guilty that he has to confess. It's an interesting dilemma.
Post Reply