Anomalies at the WTC and the Hutchison Effect

CB_Brooklyn

Anomalies at the WTC and the Hutchison Effect

by

Judy Wood and John Hutchison

http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/


Excerpt:

=======================
In considering how the WTC complex was destroyed, many people have criticised the research posted here because it does not state or describe the exact technology employed.

These pages include data which strongly implicates a class of technology as being one of the main ones used.

The data below seem to strongly tie up with features of what has become known as “The Hutchison Effect”. The Hutchison Effect actually seems to describe a range of observed characteristics, some of which are listed below. John Hutchison is a Canadian inventor and experimental scientist who has been experimenting with “field effects” for almost 30 years. There is a great deal of information about him on the internet, and a selection is linked from this set of pages.

The table below lists effects and events seen at or in the vicinity of World Trade Center and compares those with observed characteristics of the Hutchison Effect. Clearly, the posting of this material is quite controversial, but even in the various documentaries that have featured John Hutchison, he has suggested that the techniques he has discovered and developed have been further refined by places like Lockheed Skunkworks, S.A.I.C. (Science Applications International Corp.), and also by perhaps other defense companies.
=======================


My comments: Although still under construction, the new paper gives many clues to the technology that was used to destroy the World Trade Center. Take a look at the many pictures and see for yourself! People can no longer claim that this technology does not exist. It definitely DOES exist!

Also note the two companies mentioned in the excerpt above (Lockheed Martin and SAIC). Both are sponsors of the Directed Energy Professional Society! The government even contracted with SAIC for the NIST Report.

See the "News" section of Dr Wood's website for upcoming interviews with Andrew Johnson where he will discuss the new paper. Also in the "news" section is a downloadable MP3 of an interview with John Hutchison.
http://drjudywood.com/#news


For proof that the 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 cover up, and the 9/11 "truth movement" were all orchestrated by people associated with directed energy weapons and the media, see my new article:

9/11 Directed Energy Weapon / TV-Fakery Suppression Timeline
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=60


Also note the two Court Cases in the US District Court, Southern New York, with attorney Jerry Leaphart:

Dr Judy Wood, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that Directed Energy Weapons were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html

Dr Morgan Reynolds, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that the Media broadcasted cartoons of an airplane hitting the South Tower.
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=federal_case


Bottom line... there were NO hijackings on 9/11 and the entire War On Terror is BOGUS!

Even Peter Jennings knew the 9/11 airplane video was fake. Note his nervousness and word fumbling when ABC plays the clip back in slow motion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDu2V3yjS4

As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Kieth says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!"
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=no_planer_resigns


What about the eyewitnesses who say they saw planes hit the towers, you ask? See the following analysis of the WTC Task Force Interviews, which were published in the New York Times. You'll learn that only a very small percentage of the First Responders reported seeing airplanes hit the towers. Even fewer reported hearing them. But... they had no trouble hearing the fighter jets later on! Whatever they saw "hit" the towers was a projection:

Going in Search of Planes in NYC
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=134&Itemid=60


What about the airplane wreckage, you ask? Well, first of all, there are NO verified airplane parts. (The government refuses to release any.) And second, when an airplane crashes into a building, the engines are not going to wind up underneath scaffolding:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/trouble/73_230806wtc7.jpg

See here for more:
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=trouble_with_jones#NBB


What about the cell phone calls, you ask? Faked using advanced voice synthesizer technology as reported in the Washington Post two and a half years before 9/11:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm



There were NO hijackings on 9/11.

There were NO plane crashes on 9/11.

The entire War On Terror is BOGUS.

Gordon

CB_Brooklyn wrote: »

What about the cell phone calls, you ask? Faked using advanced voice synthesizer technology as reported in the Washington Post two and a half years before 9/11:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Are you saying that the government recorded audio, some time prior to the attack, of the people that made telephone calls to sample their voice to make bogus telephone calls on Sep 11th? Presumably they must have recorded the calls after their flights were booked.

Where are the people that were on the planes?

Gordon

CB_Brooklyn wrote: »

What about the airplane wreckage, you ask? Well, first of all, there are NO verified airplane parts. (The government refuses to release any.) And second, when an airplane crashes into a building, the engines are not going to wind up underneath scaffolding:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/trouble/73_230806wtc7.jpg

I don't understand what you are saying, is that meant to be an engine or are you saying that it's a truck axle?

Diogenes

CB I'm sure you cab explain to me, if the mainstream is blocking 911 truth, why was morgan reynolds on fox news?

oscarBravo

Guys, why are you bothering? The OP never, ever, ever answers questions, but will reappear in another couple of months with another "hit and run" post full of vague and inaccurate claims.

Witcher

Gordon wrote: »

.Where are the people that were on the planes

thank you for posting that, how come conspiracy theorists never bring that

up? because it blows their whole case to sh1t.




:cool::cool::cool:

Kernel

blay1 wrote: »

there was people in the towers who said they saw the planes flying towards

the building! explain that away, no you cant all this conspiracy sh1t is made

up by people who pick and choose the facts from any event and mould them

into their stupid theories.


just grow up, you sad people



:cool::cool::cool:

Well, that's an abusive post for a start. I believe planes struck the towers. I also believe 911 was an inside job, and the particle beam/missile stories are disinformation or simply tangeants created by CTers themselves. Does that make me a crazy? A sad person? A lot of the radical information is simply used as a smokescreen to distract from the truth (in my opinion) that the US government/administration were complicit in the 911 attacks to further their own agenda.

zippy 99

Good topic.

No planes involved, no parts found. All sorts of unexplainable events happenng, like pulling of WTC7.

Conspiracy Fact.

miju

blay1 banned for 2 weeks for abuse

nyarlothothep

I for one believe this guy. Energy weapons were used. The pictorial evidence is compelling, I truly believe. Moreover the US government has wormhole technology based on the Casimir effect and has adapted technologies from other races throughout the galaxy. Why we don't have a galactic empire yet is beyond me.

Diogenes

Kernel wrote: »

Well, that's an abusive post for a start. I believe planes struck the towers. I also believe 911 was an inside job, and the particle beam/missile stories are disinformation or simply tangeants created by CTers themselves. Does that make me a crazy? A sad person? A lot of the radical information is simply used as a smokescreen to distract from the truth (in my opinion) that the US government/administration were complicit in the 911 attacks to further their own agenda.

Typical Kernel you dispargde anyone who's wild conspiracy throries disagree with you, and at the same time demand anyone who challenges your own theories.

You don't bother to define your criteria for what in your mind makes a credible or absurd theory, you expect the mods to do that for you, but you're happy to dismiss "outright lies"

You never present a solid argument for your theories, just speculation and hissy fits if someone disagrees

Kernel set up your own forum if you feel you need somewhere to voice your views

Diogenes

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I for one believe this guy. Energy weapons were used. The pictorial evidence is compelling, I truly believe. Moreover the US government has wormhole technology based on the Casimir effect and has adapted technologies from other races throughout the galaxy. Why we don't have a galactic empire yet is beyond me.

Perhaps because we lack the ability to achieve FTl technology, maybe you can explain it to me,

meglome

CB_Brooklyn wrote: »

Even Peter Jennings knew the 9/11 airplane video was fake. Note his nervousness and word fumbling when ABC plays the clip back in slow motion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDu2V3yjS4

So I suppose if he was asked after 911 he backed this statement up. Yeah right.

CB_Brooklyn wrote: »

As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Kieth says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!"
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=no_planer_resigns

Not to be awkward but I've seen footage of a few planes hitting large buildings and they do indeed smash though. Depending on the size of the plane and the speed. This statement is just nonsense. Ever even see a car hit a wall or a building?

CB_Brooklyn wrote: »

What about the airplane wreckage, you ask? Well, first of all, there are NO verified airplane parts. (The government refuses to release any.) And second, when an airplane crashes into a building, the engines are not going to wind up underneath scaffolding:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/trouble/73_230806wtc7.jpg

See here for more:
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=trouble_with_jones#NBB

Utter rubbish. Those planes were mostly incinerated and then pulped into micro sized pieces when the buildings collapsed. But at the pentagon there was several pieces of plane lying about. One piece I remember had a nice AA logo on it.

CB_Brooklyn wrote: »

What about the cell phone calls, you ask? Faked using advanced voice synthesizer technology as reported in the Washington Post two and a half years before 9/11:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Give me a break. They also knew exactly what to say to each persons loved ones apart from saying it in the correct voice. Then they marooned all the passengers that were videotaped getting on to the planes on a cloud.

zippy 99

[/quote]Not to be awkward but I've seen footage of a few planes hitting large buildings and they do indeed smash though. Depending on the size of the plane and the speed. This statement is just nonsense. Ever even see a car hit a wall or a building? .[/quote]

Yeah, I dont know of planes hitting large buildngs. Have you got any links to videos of this?



[/quote]Utter rubbish. Those planes were mostly incinerated and then pulped into micro sized pieces when the buildings collapsed. But at the pentagon there was several pieces of plane lying about. One piece I remember had a nice AA logo on it..[/quote]

Top security Pentagon, yet no decent video footage exists. The fact a plane got even close to the building is a mystery given all the defenses. Oh, and the impact just happened to occur in a part of the builidng that was due for refurbishment, and noone was located in the area.



[/quote]Give me a break. They also knew exactly what to say to each persons loved ones apart from saying it in the correct voice. Then they marooned all the passengers that were videotaped getting on to the planes on a cloud.[/quote]

Put a gun to someones head, force them to say what you tell them. Hardly needs high technology.

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

Yeah, I dont know of planes hitting large buildngs. Have you got any links to videos of this?

Concorde flight AF4590 for one.

Top security Pentagon, yet no decent video footage exists.

Are we still on this?

The fact a plane got even close to the building is a mystery given all the defenses.

What defenses did the pentagon have?

Oh, and the impact just happened to occur in a part of the builidng that was due for refurbishment, and noone was located in the area.

190 people who worked at the pentagon were killed when flight 77 hit the building . Your basic factual errors are letting you down.

Put a gun to someones head, force them to say what you tell them. Hardly needs high technology.

Are you suggesting that the family members on all the flights were threatened into calling their loved ones, and every one of them, meekly obeyed, read out the script which included them getting information about other hijacking which led to the death of all other passengers, and then they were coerced into pretending to rise up and fight the pretend hijackers?

Because if you are thats one of the most offensive things I've ever heard.

bonkey

zippy 99 wrote: »

Yeah, I dont know of planes hitting large buildngs. Have you got any links to videos of this?

I find this interesting.

OP says "planes don't penetrate buildings", and your response is "good topic".
Another poster says "Yes, they do", and your response is "I've never seen planes hit buildings, so give me proof".


[/quote]Top security Pentagon, yet no decent video footage exists. [/quote]
Why should it? Can you supply evidence that any high-security buildings have cameras watching the skies? If so, can you supply evidence that the Pentagon did?

The fact a plane got even close to the building is a mystery given all the defenses.

a) What defenses?
b) Are you aware how close the nearest international airport is to the Pentagon?

Oh, and the impact just happened to occur in a part of the builidng that was due for refurbishment,

No, it didn't. The impact happened to occur on the one face where reinforcement against bomb-blasts had been completed. The odds of that are a not-so-staggering one in five.

and noone was located in the area.[/B]
Of this group of no-one, 125 people were killed.

Don't you find it highly suspicious that more people than were present were killed?

I do.

zippy 99

bonkey wrote: »

I find this interesting.

OP says "planes don't penetrate buildings", and your response is "good topic".
Another poster says "Yes, they do", and your response is "I've never seen planes hit buildings, so give me proof".

Top security Pentagon, yet no decent video footage exists. [/quote]
Why should it? Can you supply evidence that any high-security buildings have cameras watching the skies? If so, can you supply evidence that the Pentagon did?


a) What defenses?
b) Are you aware how close the nearest international airport is to the Pentagon?


No, it didn't. The impact happened to occur on the one face where reinforcement against bomb-blasts had been completed. The odds of that are a not-so-staggering one in five.

and noone was located in the area.[/b]
Of this group of no-one, 125 people were killed.

Don't you find it highly suspicious that more people than were present were killed?

I do.

No planes were involved in the WTC attackes. That news footage was tampered with. Look at the infamous 'nose out' video of a plane hitting the tower.

First eye witnesses speak of hearing what sounded like missiles hitting the towers, no the obvious roar of a large jet aircraft....

Diogenes

Zipply please learn to use the quote function properly.

1. You claim that pentagon had "defenses" what were these defenses.

2. You claim passengers were coerced, into making calls, do you stand over this claim still?

3. The "nose out" story is nonsense. Thousands of eye witnesses saw the planes crash into the WTC. Claims that the footage has been altered come from people watching poorly compressed internet videos, with artifacting. I'm someone who regularly worked with uncompressed archived copies of the sept 11th footage, and I'm one of thousands of media workers who have access to the same footage, are we all "in on it"?

zippy 99

Diogenes wrote: »

Zipply please learn to use the quote function properly.

1. You claim that pentagon had "defenses" what were these defenses.

2. You claim passengers were coerced, into making calls, do you stand over this claim still?

3. The "nose out" story is nonsense. Thousands of eye witnesses saw the planes crash into the WTC. Claims that the footage has been altered come from people watching poorly compressed internet videos, with artifacting. I'm someone who regularly worked with uncompressed archived copies of the sept 11th footage, and I'm one of thousands of media workers who have access to the same footage, are we all "in on it"?

The US have claimed for years that anyone goes within protected airspace they can scramble fighter jets in a matter of minutes which will 'intercept' possible threats. What happened on this day?

Mossad claims they warned the US a threat was going to happen, which was ignored.

The planes appear in different colours within the different various 'amateur recordings', strange.

Im not saying your in on it, your probably not high enough up within the industry to know any of this happened. Just like with a political party, only the top people need to be under the control of the enemy, the rest follow orders like they are instructed.

How could a man in a cave mastermind all this??

humanji

zippy 99 wrote: »

How could a man in a cave mastermind all this??

How could one man reunite the people of germany and take over half of Europe?

zippy 99

humanji wrote: »

How could one man reunite the people of germany and take over half of Europe?

Again, another myth.

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

The US have claimed for years that anyone goes within protected airspace they can scramble fighter jets in a matter of minutes which will 'intercept' possible threats. What happened on this day?

Really where did they make these claims? The best example of an intercept in US airspace was the payne stewart death. The plane traveling on a steady course with transponder on , and it took 80 minutes for an intercept to occur.

You've also explicitly mentioned the pentagon's defenses, so I'll ask again, what where they

Mossad claims they warned the US a threat was going to happen, which was ignored.

Can you prove they were intentionally ignored, or just lost in the chatter about many other bogus or non existant threats?

The planes appear in different colours within the different various 'amateur recordings', strange.

Im not saying your in on it, your probably not high enough up within the industry to know any of this happened. Just like with a political party, only the top people need to be under the control of the enemy, the rest follow orders like they are instructed.

zippy do you not see the paradox here?

You're suggesting that the video fakery was so amateurish anyone could spot it, but thousands of news and media workers, who regularly come in contact with the footage, are just worker ants who blindly ignore what is obvious to you, and CB_Brooklyn?

The different colours can be explained by incorrect colour balance on domestic video cameras.

You're also ignoring all the eye witnesses, thousands of them, how could the NWO ensure one of them wasn't videoing and captured the "missile"
hitting the WTC

How could a man in a cave mastermind all this??

Whats so difficult to mastermind, this was an extremely low tech affair?

humanji

zippy 99 wrote: »

Again, another myth.

Please tell me you're taking the piss.

zippy 99

Diogenes wrote: »

Really where did they make these claims? The best example of an intercept in US airspace was the payne stewart death. The plane traveling on a steady course with transponder on , and it took 80 minutes for an intercept to occur.

You've also explicitly mentioned the pentagon's defenses, so I'll ask again, what where they



Can you prove they were intentionally ignored, or just lost in the chatter about many other bogus or non existant threats?



zippy do you not see the paradox here?

You're suggesting that the video fakery was so amateurish anyone could spot it, but thousands of news and media workers, who regularly come in contact with the footage, are just worker ants who blindly ignore what is obvious to you, and CB_Brooklyn?

The different colours can be explained by incorrect colour balance on domestic video cameras.

You're also ignoring all the eye witnesses, thousands of them, how could the NWO ensure one of them wasn't videoing and captured the "missile"
hitting the WTC



Whats so difficult to mastermind, this was an extremely low tech affair?

Low tech affair?? The mind boggles with this statement.

Go try reinacting this, I'll pay the rent on your cave if you get away with it.

Most of the eyewitnesses interviewed worked for the broadcast companies, fact.

Many didnt know that a plane hit until hours later, some were sure it was a bomb, other heard a missile.

But, of course it was two planes, flown by amateurs, sure I saw it on TV.

zippy 99

humanji wrote: »

Please tell me you're taking the piss.

Do some research and you will find Wall Street funded Hitler.

Indeed, Prescot, who's little grandson is now president of the US, was charged with trading with the enemy.

Conspiracy Fact.

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

Low tech affair?? The mind boggles with this statement.

Go try reinacting this, I'll pay the rent on your cave if you get away with it.

What was so hi tech? It required 19 zealots willing to die, small knifes, and an exploitive hole in the US air security.

Most of the eyewitnesses interviewed worked for the broadcast companies, fact.

I'll assume you can support this with links and evidence.

Many didnt know that a plane hit until hours later, some were sure it was a bomb, other heard a missile.

But, of course it was two planes, flown by amateurs, sure I saw it on TV.

And thousands more saw two planes with their own eyes.

But I'll not leave you on two points you seem eager to drop.

Thousands of people, with expertise in editing and special effects have access to uncompressed masters of the 911 footage, why haven't these people come forward to support your claims.

You made a specific claim about the pentagon's "defenses" I ask again, what were they?

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

Do some research and you will find Wall Street funded Hitler.

Indeed, Prescot, who's little grandson is now president of the US, was charged with trading with the enemy.

Conspiracy Fact.

Really? Charged by whom? Was he found guilty? What sentence did he recieve?

zippy 99

Diogenes wrote: »

What was so hi tech? It required 19 zealots willing to die, small knifes, and an exploitive hole in the US air security.



I'll assume you can support this with links and evidence.



And thousands more saw two planes with their own eyes.

But I'll not leave you on two points you seem eager to drop.

Thousands of people, with expertise in editing and special effects have access to uncompressed masters of the 911 footage, why haven't these people come forward to support your claims.

You made a specific claim about the pentagon's "defenses" I ask again, what were they?

Look I could argue the points with you for weeks, providing evidence, facts, footage.

But you not an open minded person, you will not change.

Your are happy with your life, you dont want to rock the boat and see you've been fooled from birth and will never want to gain real knowledge.

Thats your choice.

zippy 99

Diogenes wrote: »

Really? Charged by whom? Was he found guilty? What sentence did he recieve?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

Look, im not here to educate you. Do you own research.

humanji

zippy 99 wrote: »

Do some research and you will find Wall Street funded Hitler.

Indeed, Prescot, who's little grandson is now president of the US, was charged with trading with the enemy.

Conspiracy Fact.

He wasn't charged. A Jewish author accused him of being behind it, but in reality, a company he worked for was pumping money into Germany after WW1 to take advantage of them, not to support them. That's how capitalism works. The company was seized (along with many, many others. But because nobody likes George W, (and quite rightfully so), CTer's use this as evidence that the bush family orchestrated WW2.

zippy 99

humanji wrote: »

He wasn't charged. A Jewish author accused him of being behind it, but in reality, a company he worked for was pumping money into Germany after WW1 to take advantage of them, not to support them. That's how capitalism works. The company was seized (along with many, many others. But because nobody likes George W, (and quite rightfully so), CTer's use this as evidence that the bush family orchestrated WW2.

A Benevolent Dictatorship is the Best Form of Government. Everything in Secret and above the law needs to be imperative.-- George H W Bush

Former U.S. President George H. W. Bush in 1988 said: New World Order is the consolidation of more power and money into tighter, fewer, righted, eliter, whiter, hands. NAZI Adolph Hitler first coined the phrase: New World Order.

Bush further stated in June 1992 to Sarah McClendon the Grandam of the Washington White House Press Corps when she asked Bush what will the people do if they ever find out the truth about Iraq-gate and Iran-Contra? George H W Bush Replied: Sarah, If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched.


Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.--George W. Bush August 5, 2004

There's a government inside the government and I don't control it.-- President Bill Clinton

Are we to remain a nation convenient to our politicians? Are we to remain a nation that, according to Bush Goon Former Kansas Senator Bob Dole is "The Land of the Provincial and Home of the Naïve Thank God"?

Governments are only there for Us to Rob, Loot and Pillage.--President George H. W. Bush

The American People, The BUD People, The Broke Useless and Depressed. We are the MPBs, Money, Power and Brains. As long as we keep food on the BUDSTERS tables, a roof over their heads, a car in their driveway and gas in their gas tanks to go to and from work. We can keep the BUDSTERS at bay.--President George H. W. Bush

WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT ON THE BUSH FAMILY?? THIS STILL NOT CONVINCING??

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

Look I could argue the points with you for weeks, providing evidence, facts, footage.

Considering you've not provided a single shred of any of the above before now, you'll pardon me if I assume you lack all three.

But you not an open minded person, you will not change.

Your are happy with your life, you dont want to rock the boat and see you've been fooled from birth and will never want to gain real knowledge.

Thats your choice.

There's a host of assumptions about me not backed up with a shred of evidence, by you, par for the course really.

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

A Benevolent Dictatorship is the Best Form of Government. Everything in Secret and above the law needs to be imperative.-- George H W Bush

Former U.S. President George H. W. Bush in 1988 said: New World Order is the consolidation of more power and money into tighter, fewer, righted, eliter, whiter, hands. NAZI Adolph Hitler first coined the phrase: New World Order.

Bush further stated in June 1992 to Sarah McClendon the Grandam of the Washington White House Press Corps when she asked Bush what will the people do if they ever find out the truth about Iraq-gate and Iran-Contra? George H W Bush Replied: Sarah, If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched.


Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.--George W. Bush August 5, 2004

There's a government inside the government and I don't control it.-- President Bill Clinton

Are we to remain a nation convenient to our politicians? Are we to remain a nation that, according to Bush Goon Former Kansas Senator Bob Dole is "The Land of the Provincial and Home of the Naïve Thank God"?

Governments are only there for Us to Rob, Loot and Pillage.--President George H. W. Bush

The American People, The BUD People, The Broke Useless and Depressed. We are the MPBs, Money, Power and Brains. As long as we keep food on the BUDSTERS tables, a roof over their heads, a car in their driveway and gas in their gas tanks to go to and from work. We can keep the BUDSTERS at bay.--President George H. W. Bush

WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT ON THE BUSH FAMILY?? THIS STILL NOT CONVINCING??

I googled this quote

Governments are only there for Us to Rob, Loot and Pillage.--President George H. W. Bush

It amazingly came up with a single page
http://www.stewwebb.com/bush_crime_family_quotes.htm

Which amazingly came up with the exact list of quotes zippy produced. In fact googling several of these quotes brings us back to a the same single page. Which doesn't provide references or sources as to when Bush or Bush Snr said these horrible things

Which means these famous quotes have gone unrecorded except by one man, stewwebb or he's making them up.

Hmmm which do I believe...

zippy 99

Diogenes wrote: »

I googled this quote



It amazingly came up with a single page
http://www.stewwebb.com/bush_crime_family_quotes.htm

Which amazingly came up with the exact list of quotes zippy produced. In fact googling several of these quotes brings us back to a the same single page. Which doesn't provide references or sources as to when Bush or Bush Snr said these horrible things

Which means these famous quotes have gone unrecorded except by one man, stewwebb or he's making them up.

Hmmm which do I believe...

Sure you wouldnt believe anything unless it was on rte.

humanji

You gotta love out of context and made up quotes. They prove everything. Maybe YOU should do some research, instead of taking what you find on the internet as gospel.

zippy 99

humanji wrote: »

You gotta love out of context and made up quotes. They prove everything. Maybe YOU should do some research, instead of taking what you find on the internet as gospel.

Former U.S. President George H. W. Bush in 1988 said: New World Order is the consolidation of more power and money into tighter, fewer, righted, eliter, whiter, hands. NAZI Adolph Hitler first coined the phrase: New World Order.


How out of context can some of these be...


And the internet is one of the few outlets which is not controlled by government or hands of government.

Ciaran500

I'm always amazed that ones that believe in one CT seem to believe everything anti establishment. Do they not take a step back and see maybe they're a bit gullable?

zippy 99

Ciaran500 wrote: »

I'm always amazed that ones that believe in one CT seem to believe everything anti establishment. Do they not take a step back and see maybe they're a bit gullable?

Maybe your the gullable one...

humanji

zippy 99 wrote: »

Former U.S. President George H. W. Bush in 1988 said: New World Order is the consolidation of more power and money into tighter, fewer, righted, eliter, whiter, hands. NAZI Adolph Hitler first coined the phrase: New World Order.


How out of context can some of these be...


And the internet is one of the few outlets which is not controlled by government or hands of government.

Well, can we trust anything you say, after all, I found this quote on the internet:

George W. Bush stated today, "Zippy 99 and I are in cahoots. We're the ones running the NWO, and we're soon going to run the world. All your bases are belong to us!"

And that's from the internet, so it must be true.

Ciaran500

zippy 99 wrote: »

Maybe your the gullable one...

Ooo, didn't see that one coming.

From what you have posted you seem to believe in a hell of alot of CT's, surely every one can't be right which would lead me to the conclusion that you are believing in things because you want to, because you haven't done research and they make sense to you or for some reason you believe people like Alex Jones when they make a claim.

Diogenes

zippy 99 wrote: »

Sure you wouldnt believe anything unless it was on rte.

Thats pretty ironic coming from a man who blindly swallows unsubstantiated quotes from an anonymous website. Your quote doesn't appear anywhere else, one wonders how your website got a hold of it.

zippy 99

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Ooo, didn't see that one coming.

From what you have posted you seem to believe in a hell of alot of CT's, surely every one can't be right which would lead me to the conclusion that you are believing in things because you want to, because you haven't done research and they make sense to you or for some reason you believe people like Alex Jones when they make a claim.

Well you point wasent so strong in the first place, so I felt an equally weak reply was just.

I dont know Alex Jones.

I've researched all my beliefs, not from the general media mind, so therefore they differ from general opinon.

zippy 99

Diogenes wrote: »

Thats pretty ironic coming from a man who blindly swallows unsubstantiated quotes from an anonymous website. Your quote doesn't appear anywhere else, one wonders how your website got a hold of it.

Theres a view that if you think the direct opposite of what your fed from the general media you will be nearer reality.

Ciaran500

Is that a view you hold? Is it how you come up with these CT's?

humanji

zippy 99 wrote: »

I dont know Alex Jones.

I've researched all my beliefs, not from the general media mind, so therefore they differ from general opinon.

How can you possible not know who Alex Jones is if you've researched your beliefs?

zippy 99

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Is that a view you hold? Is it how you come up with these CT's?

Its a general rule of thumb, a basis for further research.

Donny5

zippy 99 wrote: »

Again, another myth.

zippy 99 wrote: »

Do some research and you will find Wall Street funded Hitler.

Indeed, Prescot, who's little grandson is now president of the US, was charged with trading with the enemy.

Conspiracy Fact.

So, just to be clear, Hitler's conquest of Europe is a myth, but WW2 was funded by Wall Street. So WW2 didn't happen, but it did, and the yanks are behind?

I'd be interested to see you explain this. Actually, nevermind, I won't be checking up on this thread.

zippy 99

humanji wrote: »

How can you possible not know who Alex Jones is if you've researched your beliefs?

The name rings a bell, cant say im familiar with his work.

There is so much disinformation and counterintelligence out there it is better to avoid many of these self proclaimed truth seekers.

Ciaran500

zippy 99 wrote: »

The name rings a bell, cant say im familiar with his work.

There is so much disinformation and counterintelligence out there it is better to avoid many of these self proclaimed truth seekers.

o_O

So where do you do your research then, any site with quotes like the ones you posted earlier would be owned by a self proclaimed truth seeker.

zippy 99

Donny5 wrote: »

So, just to be clear, Hitler's conquest of Europe is a myth, but WW2 was funded by Wall Street. So WW2 didn't happen, but it did, and the yanks are behind?

I'd be interested to see you explain this. Actually, nevermind, I won't be checking up on this thread.

Yeah his conquest of Europe is a myth, he lost.

He was fund by wall street. Read:

Wall Street and The Rise of Hitler - By Antony Sutton

zippy 99

Ciaran500 wrote: »

o_O

So where do you do your research then, any site with quotes like the ones you posted earlier would be owned by a self proclaimed truth seeker.

Where do you do yours, the tv times?