Tuesday, November 11, 2008
What we see in this video seems so contrived and put-on that it’s almost laughable, but to someone who believes in everything they see on TV, thinking that the media would never go so far out of their way to deceive people, this would probably seem quite convincing, especially during a time of war when people are more suggestible and easier to manipulate with fear tactics. The very sight of Jaco putting on the gas mask, even if it only was a “false alarm,” is enough to trigger the desired fear in people watching on their television sets from many thousands of miles away.
But that’s not all. Not only are these people clearly acting, they are being recorded on a stage set from inside a studio. How do I know this? Well, if you look at the following clip where you see Jaco talking about the anatomy of a Scud missile, you see he is standing in front of the same background as in the previous clip. When the satellite feed is no longer being carried live via the network, you can clearly see that the background is part of a stage set in the middle of a recording studio. At 4:00 into the clip, you can see where the floor of the set ends and where the black floor of the studio, which is covered with electrical wires, begins. At approximately 4:07, you can see the wall of the studio lined with electronics and wires. (Pause the video if you have to.)
None of this should be a surprise to anyone, as they have openly admitted what they do in movies such as Wag the Dog (1997). It doesn’t matter, though, because many people cannot fathom the idea that this has been going on for most of their lives, and probably on a fairly regular basis. Nobody wants to admit they’ve been had.
In the aforementioned movie — directed by Barry Levinson and featuring actors Robert De Niro and Dustin Hoffman — a fake war with Albania is created to distract the public’s attention from a presidential sex scandal in light of an upcoming election. (It is no coincidence that the release of this movie coincided with sexual deviant and rapist Bill Clinton’s sex scandal with Mossad mole Monica.) In one part of the movie you see a young girl (played by Kirsten Dunst) on a stage set playing the role of a fleeing Albanian war refugee. From the control room, Hollywood producer Stanley Motss (played by Hoffman) orders the girl to run around the studio carrying a bag of Tostitos, while a digital image of a bombed-out Albanian village appears behind her. The bag of chips is morphed into a calico kitten and then switched to a plain white cat with just a few clicks of a button. Sirens and screams are added for dramatic effect. This fake footage is then sent to the news networks and disseminated throughout the country to gain support for war.
This is an example of how Hollywood puts out truth in movies, where it’s right in people’s faces. Most people shrug it off as something that could only happen on the big screen, when it likely happens on a regular basis without their knowing or even their suspicion. They are putting in your face and laughing at you.
In the the years after the attacks on 9/11, independent truthseekers have come forward with the media’s own footage showing clear evidence of the manipulation of the images that will forever be etched in most people’s minds of the planes hitting the World Trade Center towers. Excellent videos like September Clues present glaring questions that have not been answered: How does an aluminum plane plow through a steel-frame building, with a 47-column steel core, only for its fiberglass nosecone to emerge fully intact on the other side? Why did every media network airing live footage of the event show a “fade to black” screen as Flight 175 was plowing through the south tower, as if to cover up their error at the last minute? Why do we see numerous approach angles for Flight 175 as it closes in on the south tower? In some of the footage we see the plane coming in straight, while in others it makes a diving approach. In one of the clips we don’t even see any plane hitting. Why do certain shots show the Empire State Building in the foreground, with one network showing the building to the left of the towers and the other to the right, despite the fact that the backgrounds for both are the same and appear to be shot from the same location? This would suggest some sort of digital, blue screen layering was used to have full control over what the people were seeing on their television screens.
So if no planes hit the towers, is it not a legitimate question to ask why so many people reported to see planes that day? I have no doubt that people saw something. However, initial reports from that morning were conflicting. Some people reported seeing a plane other than the commercial airliners we were told struck the buildings. Some people reported seeing and hearing what they believed to be a missile, while some people reported seeing nothing other than a giant fireball emerge from the buildings. It is possible that whatever hit the buildings — whether it was a plane or otherwise — happened so fast that people weren’t able to really tell exactly what it was, but that the media’s power to manipulate is so great that once the official story came out, it became hard for people to believe it being anything other than a Boeing-767? Is it possible that there were people planted on the streets surrounding the World Trade Center to be interviewed by news reporters, to present the authorized, pre-scripted version of what happened to the public?
Take a look at the clip below. You see a guy on the streets surrounding the World Trade Center being interviewed by a FOX News reporter, who sounds more like an actor than just some regular person who happened to witness the events. Who is this guy, and what makes him an expert on how the buildings fell? Why is he telling us how the buildings fell before even many of the so-called “experts” knew? Why is he talking like he is trying to sell you something, kind of like the people you see in infomercials? This seems more than just a little fishy.
Consensus reality is a manufactured prison for the mind. It is indoctrinated into us from birth by our parents and teachers, whose beliefs, too, are products of this artificial reality. The media then picks up where our parents and teachers left off to further condition us into the desired mindset with endless soundbites, while ridiculing anything that goes against these established viewpoints that are given to the people to parrot without question. These viewpoints are designed to condition you to be easily lead in the direction seen by the controllers.
Nothing is to be trusted without suspicion and scrutiny. People have become domesticated, and trust has overridden the human instinct of self-preservation. People have become accustomed to depending on their abusers for everything. It has gotten so bad that people even depend on their abusers to think for them, because they are unable or unwilling to think for themselves. People like Zbigniew Brzezinski were writing about this back in the early 70s, and it has since become a reality.
One of the leading purveyors of modern-day propaganda, Edward Bernays, in his aptly-titled book, Propaganda (1928), perhaps said it best when he stated:
Bernays’ beliefs are identical to those of elitists throughout history. This belief system centers around the idea that the average “commoner” is little more than cattle to be used to the controllers’ advantage by obediently serving the state. They keep the cattle obedient by their control over human consciousness, keeping the people dumb, docile, and preoccupied with trivia and mindless entertainment while providing them only with the information they need to be good cogs in the system. The key to unlock your mind from their proverbial shackles begins with understanding the techniques they use against you, and for what purpose.
Mr. Jarvie questions the media participation in the 9/11 attacks in the above and the possibility that many of the videos we have seen may have been manipulated.
I don’t look at him as a ‘no planer’ but that there are still too many unanswered questions.
The newly released videos from http://www.penttbom.com/, which came from a FOIA request that took about 4 years, gives a chance to analyze and speculate if any of these have been altered.
Since they came from our ‘government’ I suppose once again it’s “Viewer Beware”