The atomic age caused America to dream of world without internal combustion engines or fuel. Engineers designed small ships, airplanes and even rocket ships with nuclear reactors – though few came to reality. Ford even fleshed out a prototype Ford Nucleon fission-powered car equipped with its own nuclear reactor.
9/11 was a media fakery extravaganza AND a military psyOp hoax.
Like the twin towers, these two pillars intertwined to create the biggest military media psyOp hoax of our time. I know this description is a mouthful, but I think it’s important to use all these terms (perhaps even more) when describing this first day of the new millennium.
It’s with this understanding that I’d like to create a spreadsheet composed of two 111 row columns. We will place and re-arrange in order of significance two concepts:
Column 1: the most important evidence or factors describing the media fakery of the day
Column 2: the most important evidence or factors describing the psyOp hoax elements of the day
This is a flexible idea. The point is to create a powerful tool for illustrating the powerful deception to others who have no clue where to start their research. Charts and handy guides are one way to get a handle on the enormity of this event. This blog is a mish mash of ideas and concepts that is hard to navigate. There probably is no good way to impart fakeologist wisdom on others. A bullet point list like this might help.
I’ve credited Brian before for getting me off the talkshoe.com site and its terrible audio and chat. I find I agree with much of what he has to say, and I thank him for shouting out to this site in the above audio’s last segment.
That said, the site that’s done the most to further the revelation of the 9/11 deception, cluesforum.info, one that I promote and champion, has members who have serious doubts about Brian’s persona.
Now I admit I am clearly not the best at determining shillery, to wit the psyopticlown debacle that clearly duped me (if not for his final outburst on Jayhilla blog, I’d still be unconvinced).
Since this is not the cluesforum.info, but we like talking about the forum, perhaps this is a good opportunity to hash out what Hoi Polloi (someone I hold in the highest esteem, and have said so many times publicly) has written about Brian, and Brian’s subsequent responses.
This got me thinking: is Brian S Staveley a simulated entity? The spelling on his site is decent enough, but when he appeared on this site, he started hitting keys twice, forgetting to capitalize words and generally his entire text persona disintegrated. He also refers to himself occasionally in the third person on his site – in the title of the show – which could be construed as humor but of what kind? Mocking his own role as a pretender?
The thread is quite long but worth reading. I am on the fence on this issue, but am remaining vigilant on the subject and looking forward to reading the views of readers here. I’ve told people to even question me, but readers should know that I am not willing to share any more of my persona for verification. I understand that either position holds risks for my credibility, which I accept as part of this entire psyOp.
Anyone who engages in research into this complex and well managed military psyOp should expect no less than a very bumpy ride. It’s not for the faint hearted.
This post is important and within the realm of my research for a good reason. I am investigating media fakery AND 9/11 psyOp hoax management. The two subjects are intertwined, like the alleged double helix DNA molecule.
While much or most of the 9/11 imagery is fake, the personas that manage and promote the 9/11 deception are NOT. There are real people portraying fictitious characters throughout the entire myth. Family members, participants, officials, researchers, news anchors and media celebutards are all actively being spoofed to this day and for the future. We need to make this distinction when explaining our research, since the two are easily confused to anyone who chooses to only lightly peruse the operation. Two and half years later I am still trying to unravel the two.
An update on what to do if you run into the world’s most enduring hoax, the nuke bomb.
The best advice for surviving a nuclear bomb is to be somewhere else when it goes off. If that doesn’t work out for you, though, a recent study carried out at the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) provides some simple guidance for maximizing your chances of survival.