REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

How to register at Cluesforum / General administrative topics / and things that every member must read
casper
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:53 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by casper » Tue Apr 30, 2013 12:33 am

Thanks for the welcome. I had just read about Alt+0151 (on this forum), so I couldn't resist. I'll probably use it everywhere now in place of "--". I never space my em dashes; I suppose it makes a difference whose style manual you're referring to at the time. Can you post a link to the cluesforum style manual? I promise I'll study it.

As for grammar and stuff, I appreciate the idea that if you can't pay attention to that kind of detail, can we really trust the big things you're saying, the ideas and the research?

Clearly, the term "conspiracy" is only for use by government agents, for whom one person can make a conspiracy or for whom one incident can make a racket; until I encountered this forum, I had not much else to go on. As I say, my understanding has been shaken rather to the core in the last couple of weeks.

Caspar/Casper—it's a handle, so who's to say what's right?

Caspar

Maat
Member
Posts: 1422
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by Maat » Tue Apr 30, 2013 2:14 am

Good response, Caspar. Thank you for confirming my instincts were correct :)

Ah yes, I know the style manuals differ — no set rules on that here, though — it's just one of my ways of testing a newcomer's bona fides. As long as you remain true to your own style preferences (or 'have respect for your own "internet dialect'", as Hoi would say), you'll do fine.

Of course, attention to detail is most appreciated in a researcher here; that's where the "devil" lies (in more ways than one). ;)

Oh, I have no problem with your handle, I only asked because of how you referred to the different spelling yourself so just wanted to be sure there wasn't a glitch or something.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Tue Apr 30, 2013 3:28 am

casper wrote:One thing I can contribute is that while it has been observed that Dzhokar is, of course the Joker, I haven't seen it pointed out that Bauman is Batman—Ba(t)man and the Djoker. I can also demonstrate that the Aaron Tang photo of the Exeter St. sign would have had to been taken from behind the large monitor.
That's funny, thanks for bringing it up. Welcome to the forum.

ruckus
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 4:33 am

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by ruckus » Tue Apr 30, 2013 12:46 pm

Simon,

Thanks for the terrific amount of work and research you, and others, have poured into the topic of media fakery and psyops. It's been truly eye opening for me after the most recent events that have been unraveling in the US.

I am typically too busy with my work as a web developer and father to concern myself much with the news or other media outlets, yet I was captivated with the series of events that followed the Boston bombing. To see a city in complete lock down while searching for two alleged suspects was frightening, to say the least. The response did not fit the danger, in my opinion, after these two apparently rogue brothers set off what appeared to be small explosive devices which resulted in a relatively low death count - 3 - despite detonation within a well populated location. All that was missing from "The Siege" style door-to-door neighborhood sweep was a police round up of any and all residents of Chechen descent. Maybe in the next sim.

I came to learn about Clues Forum while searching for more details on the Boston event and its aftermath. I must admit that I had never even considered that any of the events were staged, but after reading a number of threads at your forum I could definitely see the reason you hold to such theories so strongly. The imagery being fed to the world via major media outlets has many tip offs of manipulation - if not pure fabrication - and many of the human profiles do not stand up to close scrutiny. Continuing that thought further, it is always the same group which controls all of the evidence gathering and investigation so the risk of being "betrayed" by the real, physical evidence is minuscule in such operations.

With my curiosity piqued and a desire for truth that borders on obsession, I continued to read through many other topics at Clues Forum. I remember vividly the morning of Sept 11, 2001 after having been called over to the TV by my wife. I did not go into work that day but instead watched in amazement as the events in NY - not more than 2 hours away from my home in Pennsylvania - unfolded before my eyes on the news. Although it forever changed my view of the world there were things - even then - that did not "feel" right. Why were people jumping out of a sky scraper to certain death? Why was there no obvious evidence of any airplane debris at any of the 4 crash sites? How could a newbie fly a commercial airliner into the Pentagon at such a low altitude and high speed?

While your video series "The September Clues" does not answer all of the questions surrounding the events of 9/11, it certainly addresses many of the points that do not add up in my mind. The detailed break down of the various network broadcasts was phenomenal! Comparison of many of the "official story" photos that were also controlled by the major news outlets is baffling. Multiple credited photographers taking shots at precisely the same angles and heights?! Propaganda-type photos showing different scenery and images in front of the same rubble piles?! It's all so unbelievable yet it was impossible to do such a full-breadth and objective analysis of it at the time.

Your work, and the work of many others at this forum, is nothing short of amazing. The level of detail reached in inspecting all of the video and photo coverage of events is terrific - as is the commitment to providing evidence and sources with all posed theories. It is the type of community to which I hope to be able to contribute. Recently, I've been spending much of my free, and not so free, time pouring over news reports, photos, and fund raiser sites. I have begun noticing many things askew at Boston, Sandy Hook, and Sept 11. In particular, I have some observations on certain photos of Bauman from Boston and Peter Lanza - father of the Sandy Hook gunman.

I've gone on long already but, as you're sure to see of me in the future, writing is just another area where once I start I can't stop!

Sincerely,
Ruckus

enlightened21
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 6:09 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by enlightened21 » Tue Apr 30, 2013 1:25 pm

Hi!

I'm a female in my 30s from the USA. I joined cluesforum because I was interested in the recent Boston Marathon incident. I've been to the marathon many times to watch a family member (although not in the past 10 years) and I know a bit about running. I had some thoughts I wanted to share that I think are relevant to the discussion.

I have visited cluesforum in the past, briefly, when I became interested in 9/11 a few years ago. I don't know much about these "events". I'm still learning.

GabeLager
Banned
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by GabeLager » Sat May 04, 2013 7:39 pm

Hi, Simon,

I registered on cluesforum.info with the username GabeLager (somewhat humorous, no?).

I'm American. I am an I.T. professional and Web Developer (programmer) with well over a decade of highly-specialized work experience. My formal university education was largely based in the graphic arts (mostly printing). I have worked for private industry as well as government (in an information security capacity). My line of work requires me to be proficient in the Adobe Creative Suite products, as well as 3D modeling and basic CAD. I have a lot to offer the forum in terms of image analysis, compositing, recreation of to-scale scenes, etc.

I had never heard of cluesforum.info until someone on ATS posted a link to the Boston thread. I've been a so-called "lurker" on ATS for years, but as with all forums of its ilk, ATS is not without its problems, and I have never felt inclined to register and contribute. In fact, I have yet to contribute to any "conspiracy" forum.

But once I saw the work that you and others are doing at cluesforum.info, I became fascinated, and I wish to contribute my expertise. After reading-through the Boston thread (which, at the time, was 30-something pages in length), I decided to drive to Boston to have a look at "ground zero" for myself (I live about two hours away).

I scrutinized every crack in the sidewalk cement and pavement (there is some asphalt patch-work over top of the concrete slab), looking for some trace of blood. None was to be found. The sidewalk in front of Marathon Sports is pretty "old and beat-up". It is by no means new. And it didn't appear to be particularly clean. One would expect the area to have been sand-blasted and pressure-washed, but nothing about the scene implied as much. I saw absolutely no shrapnel embedded in the surrounding building facades. No scrapes, no dents, no chipped paint. Nothing. Just a few broken windows that were boarded-up. The "scorch mark" that can be seen in the photos in front of Lens Crafters was not there. But again, the area did not appear to have been scrubbed-down. These observations only furthered my suspicions.

At this point, I've read all 53 pages of the Boston thread and I would like to share my insights regarding the matter.

I "woke-up" around 2004 when for the first time I stumbled upon a video that questioned the "official story" regarding 9/11. Even though the general consensus regarding said video seems to be that it's of questionable motivation and origin, it raised questions regarding 9/11 that I had never considered. That movie was "In Plane Sight". Since that time, I have spent countless hundreds of hours reading and researching and seeking truth about these manufactured events in the face of intense criticism from family and friends. The quest for truth has alienated me in many ways. Needless to say, anybody who is on this forum knows how it feels for friends and family to shun and condemn the line of research.

I am most interested in exposing those behind these acts. The level of complicity would have to be staggering for these events to be manufactured, in part or in whole. As such, there must be hundreds of people who are at some level complicit, and said individuals are subject to human folly. We will corner them and force them into increasingly more elaborate lies that serve only to expose the truth.

I must say that after reading the Boston thread in its entirety, I have yet to encounter a "smoking gun". Certainly, there is compelling evidence of foul play, but nothing that I would "run with" and present to a friend or family member as "proof".

The loosest thread is Jeff Bauman. There are several indications that he is a fabrication, to some extent, if not entirely. I will save my observations and questions regarding Bauman for my first forum post.

I hope to be a positive addition to the team of researchers on the forum.

Thanks for your time and consideration, Simon.

ETA:

I should mention also that I have worked as a photo-retoucher (working mostly in Photoshop), professionally, for two companies, the first of which is photo studio that shoots retail catalog photography, and the second of which is a $1.5B retailer, where at I retouched human models (as in fashion models) and product photos. Much of my time was spent using the bezier pen tool and a Wacom tablet, with which I hand-painted very convincing shadows behind products that had been masked with a clipping-path.

Amerikkka
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by Amerikkka » Mon May 06, 2013 9:05 pm

Ciao Everyone,

I have spent innumerable hours reading and educating myself on Cluesforum and I have learned much. I saw September Clues a few years ago and it was eye opening, to say the least. My initial interest that helped me stumble upon the forum was my research into the Apollo hoax and I realized what an oasis of knowledge this forum was after exploring the other threads.

I am American with Italian dual citizenship and I don't have any extraordinary expertise, but I do have a pretty good BS meter. I don't trust the official version of just about anything, unless my own research aligns with the facts as told. I'm still waiting for that to happen one day. I don't have much faith that things will ever get better, unless the idiots of the world turn off their television sets. What I can contribute remains to be seen and depends on what the government and their Hollywood cohorts serve up to us in the future. I hope I can provide something of value at some point and return the favor to those that opened my eyes by sharing what they have learned.

Thanks for having me Simon.

Vext Lynchpin
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:11 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by Vext Lynchpin » Sun May 12, 2013 1:45 am

Hello,

My user handle is Vext Lynchpin (Vext was the name of a short-lived comic published by DC Comics back in the '90s). I registered a couple of weeks ago but didn't see the registration requirements until today. I'm Canadian, and I live in Vancouver, BC. I'm a freelance web developer with some experience with Photoshop and Adobe Creative Suite, mostly through creating slides and banner ads for clients. My background is mostly on the creative and IT side of online marketing, and I've worked for a couple of small local marketing companies in the past.

The September Clues documentary on YouTube was what drew me to the website and the forum. I was first exposed to the idea that the official story of 9-11 didn't hold up back in 2002, but over the years as I casually followed it, the various and contradictory conspiracy theories threw me off. Alex Jones in particular seemed awfully shady and still does today. September Clues introduced to me the idea that the video accounts of 9-11 were themselves suspect, which I'd never heard before, and the evidence for tampering and outright fabrication is compelling.

I'm mostly interested in Clues Forum for my own research into media deceptions for a video series I've just begun working on, and I've been reading a few of the longer threads on the Boston Marathon, 9-11, and the Apollo missions to get a sense of what is expected from users. I suspect I'll mostly be reading, but I'd like to add my own observations on website and photographic evidences when I have something worthwhile to say. I don't plan on writing long-winded posts (except this one) full of empty words that just distract from the issues at hand. I'm open to criticism on whatever I write.

I first registered for the site a couple of weeks ago to add something to the discussion about 9-11 VicSims. I wanted to ask if anyone has looked into the families of the 2,500 to 3,000 or so supposed victims of 9-11 and searched for evidence that they may exist through social networks like Facebook, by comparing VicSim family members with typical real people on Facebook. If these families were real, there should be a fairly big "footprint" in social media. If they aren't real, I'd suggest there would be a much smaller footprint than the national average. Now that I've read a bit more in the forum, I'm kind of glad I wasn't registered immediately, because I wouldn't attempt to add this kind of contribution to a discussion thread without doing a good deal of research into it first. And a few posters have pointed out how easy it is to fake social networks. Still, I think there's some merit into looking into the digital footprint angle a bit more, and if I find some compelling evidence for VicSim fakery in social media (or lack thereof), I will try to present it in an organized and thoughtful manner.

Thank you.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sun May 12, 2013 11:23 am

If these families were real, there should be a fairly big "footprint" in social media. If they aren't real, I'd suggest there would be a much smaller footprint than the national average.
I think you might be very wrong about that. My experience of Facebook was that there were about ten unlikely people to every real person in a people search.

When all you have to do to create a fake person from scratch is have some actors wiggling around at a wedding, photoshop their faces onto some photos and fill in a profile, imagine what a clandestine social network program, with hired personality creator/updater employees, is capable of.

- frequent updates of the Sims, including age, birthdays, weddings, attendance at sports, social, and globally popular events, etc.
- realistic relationship simulation and monitoring to keep Sims related to one another and interacting with each other like demographic population samples of human behavior
- assigned real life agents claiming to know just one Sim reinforces entire false network
- novelistic preplanned back-stories or News Video Events can be crafted for deployment/implementation during hoaxes
- coincidental relationships to Sims in other hoaxes supports the network of fake and controlled history/science

No, thinking that technological means will reveal the truth misses the point of September Clues entirely. We are pointing out that if it's a simulation, it's fake-able. And if it's digital, it's fake-able en masse at a furious pace. Increasingly mass produce-able, actually. Of course we don't know their methods yet but it seems to be a combination of video editing/animation software, Photoshop-like programs, writers, actors and Hollywood-style film crews.

I don't want to discourage you from pursuing research, even as the onslaught of fake imagery mounts; I just want to remind you that even the lack of names in the SSDI (Credit Suisse's Social Security Death Index) creates doubt. It doesn't prove or disprove anything. If you find something suspicious, though, let us know of course. And welcome.

Vext Lynchpin
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:11 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by Vext Lynchpin » Mon May 13, 2013 9:56 am

hoi.polloi wrote:
If these families were real, there should be a fairly big "footprint" in social media. If they aren't real, I'd suggest there would be a much smaller footprint than the national average.
I think you might be very wrong about that. My experience of Facebook was that there were about ten unlikely people to every real person in a people search.

[snipped]

I don't want to discourage you from pursuing research, even as the onslaught of fake imagery mounts; I just want to remind you that even the lack of names in the SSDI (Credit Suisse's Social Security Death Index) creates doubt. It doesn't prove or disprove anything. If you find something suspicious, though, let us know of course. And welcome.
Thanks. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the whole idea of rampant media fakery. I've always held skepticism toward the media, especially the U.S. channels (though Canadian news doesn't do much to distinguish itself except through blandness), but this is another level of skepticism that has a steep learning curve. Reading through the various threads is part of my education.

I have done a bit of research on one of the 9/11 VicSim families already, and it felt much like going through a maze of bunny-trails. I'm going to read your 9/11 VicSim Report before I proceed any further on that front.

beyondafringe
Banned
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:22 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by beyondafringe » Sat May 18, 2013 1:41 am

Hi, my name is Jason, i'm 37 and live in my native England.

The username i tried originally to register with was beyondafringe, an unfortunate reference to both my hairline and opinions on the current affairs and historical narrative.

I have no professional or occupational background that is of relevance to the deciphering of false information, but a vociferous cynicism of any official claim.

The fact that such an attitude is held by such a small minority is to me evidence of a culpably dupe-able populace, as no less reliable source of information exists than the establishment - be it political, military, religious, scientific or other - they all can be designated compulsive liars.

Up until recently, maybe 2 or 3 years ago, i held the opinion that so-called knowledge, of whatever vintage, was a mix of wild exaggeration, total falsehood/exact opposite of fact and spun for effect minor occurrences inflated for impact on the general populace.

I now believe the entire 'world event' and 'national event' narrative to be utterly contrived, the inclusion of truth croutons in the dishonesty broth can only highlight the moronic nature of the lies told, the truth giving a contrast that is dangerous and unnecessary to the tellers of tall tales.

To want to register, and therefore post, at this forum obviously displays a belief that i can in some way influence its readers. If not, then why not just peruse and digest?

Such a candid statement may not be considered wise, but it is true, so should have some value here if almost nowhere else.

I can only assure everyone here that I have no agenda but my own, that every word i type is generated by my own thoughts, and that my motivations are purely personal.

I have observed with great relish the identification and vilification of those who have participated here with nefarious purpose when in almost any other online environment they would have festered for longer or more likely ad infinitum, this being one of the several truly defining features of this site.

I hope to be part of this tiny cornucopia of common sense.

-------------------------------------------

The above text is the email I sent to Simon as an introduction, thinking it would be posted here as such upon my registration being completed. If intended as such, I think it should remain so, as the urge to improve by retrospective alteration is a slippery slope indeed if embarked upon.

I will add briefly to my stated desire to alter some perceptions by my contributions here, as upon re-reading it could be seen as mildly nefarious.

There remains in even the most cynical and erudite thinkers a cut-off point at which some belief is considered acceptable, even necessary, perhaps to maintain some cognitive barriers within which the questions already raised can be corralled and tamed.

For instance, the idea that the reason and intent of fictional terror acts is the swaying of public opinion in favour of invasions and wars or money making; in the form of armament sales and charity scams.

All of which exist only in the same context that the original events exist, that being in the minds of whoever believes the same sources of information that are lacking in even a shred of credibility.

It is I think much easier to tell a negative lie, so the claims of criminal wars, drone attacks or impending martial law seem attractive to anyone who already stands apart from the establishment and it's version of what is 'popular opinion'.

The opinion of the majority is perhaps of interest to whoever decides on what is what, or at least what will be said is what.

But any such information would hardly be shared, even if it served a current interest or agenda, as a matter of principal. That principal being - lie, lie, lie.

Millions marched, we are told and shown, against wars. But armies follow orders, so public support is not required to wage them, and where is the evidence of these invasions, or wars?

Yes, they criminalise many who are viewed as 'leaders', if they are true. All the more reason to fake them, like the deaths in 'terror attacks', that see conspiracy promoters frothing at the mouth over the 'murders' committed in 'false flag' events, the complicity of the small number of people involved in the hoax is far easier to gain and maintain if there are no deaths, no potential murder/genocide trials, no hangings.

If the whole song and dance is fictional, as I believe it is, what laws are being broken of any real significance?

Scaring the gullible with nasty stories is wrong, in my opinion, and should end. And as far ahead of the curve as many of the posters and their thinking here are, I doubt they/we are further ahead than 'They' are.

They, being still wholly unknown in regard to numbers, location or intention, must have foreseen the eventual unraveling of the fabric of lies that has hung for who knows how long over the eyes of the vast majority of people.

What lies behind it? Unfortunately I think another layer of defensive dishonesty, it's precise nature unfathomable to me at this time.

I am aware such wild speculations are discouraged here, and will not return to this avenue of thought again in the process of the analysis and destruction of the faked narrative and accompanying faked imagery, but for me the goal of said narrative destroying activity is to get a grasp of it's ultimate origins.

I do not predict success for anyone hoping to decipher the recipe for the porridge eaten by the three bears by the reading of Goldilocks, however abstract and clever the interpretation is.

But if the same author is required to produce story after story, some small truths may eventually bleed through into their work. That is my hope, anyway!

Wow, I've rambled extensively, not a portent for the future I hope.

For anyone still reading, I'll finish with one question. If all the fictional nonsense is to reinforce fundamental truths where there are none, what is the singular repeated so-obvious-lets-not-even-mention-it truth every space stupidity screams at the top of it's lungs?

Even the billions generated, or more accurately accounted for, by these crazy adventures in space, do not provide for me enough of a reason for space craziness.

In regard to money harvesting scams, the very highest level of decision makers can, I contest, create as much money as they like - and certainly don't rely on the comparatively paltry millions gathered by the charities either of long standing (Oxfam, Cancer Research) type or the more transient disaster/terror/personal tragedy event linked type.

They may well be used to explain to some who are involved in faking as to the source of their reward, so as to refrain from explaining the unlimited nature of the real 'funds' available. No need to foster the greed a paymaster with bottomless pockets may induce.

All the best to one and all,

Jason.

lux
Member
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by lux » Sat May 18, 2013 4:13 am

^ Welcome to the forum, Jason.

Ultimately, I agree that it's not about making money. Money is nothing but a hoax itself and its purpose has to do with the creation of false debt which then leads to the crooked acquisition of real property.

IMO wars aren't profitable due to arms sales -- they're profitable because they put countries (on both sides) into debt. The debt is the thing.

And, taxes aren't for obtaining money (they can simply print it at less cost). They're for preventing the accumulation of wealth by the public so they must borrow to live and thus go into debt.

The end purpose of this fake “debt” (fake because money is nothing so nothing was borrowed) is the accumulation of real property used to “secure the debt” and the creation of an obedient population and work force. Money, loans and debt are the “smoke & mirrors” used to achieve this.

I suspect that those at the top of the economic food chain don't really care about money because they know it's nothing but a hoax and a public diversion from the concept of real wealth such as property and other real things.

But, I'm speaking in ultimate terms here. Money has its uses. It keeps the lower ranks doing what they need to do to keep the whole fraud going, etc.

As for what the ultimate underlying purpose is to all this (if there is one), I too can only speculate. It may simply be a manifestation of some form of insanity having no rational explanation.

Internot
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:40 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by Internot » Sun May 19, 2013 12:00 am

Greetings...

I'd like to give a brief introduction as required. I avidly scour the internet for any little bits of information about what goes on behind the scenes of media fabrication, I read about many other subjects, like the real reason behind events that have shaped our society we find ourselves living in.

I check the news daily to see what it is we are supposed to be buying into on any given day.
I have visited many sites in my quest. The important rule is not to get conned by some site or person who you might think is coming from the same angle as yourself. In other words I try to find the real story amongst the sludge from both ends. The MSM and the ridiculous stooges who try to portray common sense inquisitive traits as some far out wacko nutball sensationalist movement.

There is a wide spectrum of people who look into different avenues of fake history and events so I don't see it as black and white. the main aim is not to get wrapped up in any chaos from either side.

I thought it was important to clarify that I am very careful about what I entertain as the real truth and that's why I like this forum because it's about getting to the real truth. We all make mistakes, I just try to make them less often.

I intend to try to offer some input into this arena, I don't promise it will be groundbreaking but it could play its part in the overall scheme of things and offer some resolution in certain areas. If I spot any image or video footage that I think might be useful I will be sure to add it here.

Bear with me in regards to adding videos or images, it might be straight forward or maybe not, we will see.

Take it easy.
internot user Liverpool, England

Banazir
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 4:08 am

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by Banazir » Mon May 20, 2013 7:23 pm

Hello Simon. It is a great privilege to be writing to you.

I'd only just discovered your September Clues videos late last year which has opened my eyes to the concept of media fakery.

I live just outside Vancouver, British Columbia and make my living in maintenance.      

I only wish to provide another critical eye on the media and to let you know that you've got another on board to your general thought process.

I've been speaking quite a bit lately with Tim of abirato.info and contributing as much as I can to his website, lately in particular with the Canadian Tim Bosma psyop.

My screen name just about everywhere is Banazir and I hope I can contribute to your site when I have something constructive to add.

Keep up the good work Simon,

Banazir

I, Gestalta
Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:00 pm

Re: REQUIRED: Introduce Yourself

Unread post by I, Gestalta » Mon May 20, 2013 11:27 pm

Banazir wrote:Hello Simon. It is a great privilege to be writing to you.

I'd only just discovered your September Clues videos late last year which has opened my eyes to the concept of media fakery.

I live just outside Vancouver, British Columbia and make my living in maintenance.      

I only wish to provide another critical eye on the media and to let you know that you've got another on board to your general thought process.

I've been speaking quite a bit lately with Tim of abirato.info and contributing as much as I can to his website, lately in particular with the Canadian Tim Bosma psyop.

My screen name just about everywhere is Banazir and I hope I can contribute to your site when I have something constructive to add.

Keep up the good work Simon,

Banazir

Greetings, Banazir. I find your genuine curiosity and skepticism---displayed on Wake Up With Ab---encouraging, myself.

I especially liked your response to Tim's question regarding Robert Pickton.

Banazir: It seemed to me that he was a real person.

Ab: Why does it seem to you that he's a real person?

Banazir: Haha. I don't know!

Post Reply