Simon “aces” Baker

Be the 1st to vote.

Simon responds to the resurfacing of Ace Baker. I often wonder what happens to entities like Ace, why they go dormant and then suddenly re-appear years later.

I’ll add a few more notes on the John Friend interview. One, there was so much verbal filler from Ace, lots of 0;you knows”, “ums” and ignoring or deflecting direct comments. This to me indicates . Also, he mentioned that parts 9 and 10 of the movie couldn’t be released to due (un)implied threats.

Here’s a question for Simon: do you think the psyOpera was in the can, waiting for the a movie like yours to come out, or do you think they whipped their movie together on short order (I know it  came out in parts, the release dates I’m not sure of)

Seeing that the Ace Baker personage is being discussed again on various websites – along with “his” ultra-slick, special-effects-ridden movie “The Great American Psyopera”, I would like to put forth a historical overview / chronology of Ace Baker’s antics – ever since he contacted yours truly – out of the blue – in July 2007. Should I ignore this clown altogether? Perhaps. Perhaps not. I’m in two minds about even giving him the attention that he obviously was meant to attract. Anyways, here goes. Please note that, in this chronology which I have compiled with utmost patience, I am only stating verifiable FACTS.

via ACE BAKER – top September Clues “plagiarist” •

Enhanced by Zemanta
No tags for this post.

8 thoughts on “Simon “aces” Baker

  1. Pingback: ep76-Simon Shack |

  2. simonshack

    Dear Tim,

    Re: your question: “do you think the psyOpera was in the can, waiting for the a movie like yours to come out, or do you think they whipped their movie together on short order ?”

    Well, if my memory serves me correctly, it took at least three years (after Ace’s 2007 appearance on the scene) before his PSYOPERA took shape. It was first advertised (with a short trailer) in 2010, I think, and another year for its various episodes to start trickling out. So it wasn’t ‘in the can’, as you say – waiting for my September Clues to come out. However, it stands to reason that the 9/11 perps HAD to prepare for the REAL truth to eventually be revealed – that is, that the TV networks aired fake imagery on 9/11.

    The very first personage they put in place was a kooky, slimy-looking meth-addict by the name of Nico Haupt. He trundled around the various 9/11 truth meetings in New York ever since day one, screaming and shouting and making a complete ass of himself, suggesting that there were no planes on 9/11. “Ever since day one”, really? Yes, we have even found that Nico Haupt ran a chat-blog on September 11 2001, just as it happened. In this chat-blog, Nico Haupt commented the events in real time, what with airplane striking on the WTC and so on and so forth, He later posed as the very first “no-planer” and continued acting like a lunatic and being ostracized by the entire 9/11 truth community such as “Wearechange” which, I would like to stress, was undoubtedly made up by countless honest truthseekers – BUT WAS ALSO a totally phony truther organization controlled from the top, with “leaders” like Luke Rudowski, Manny Badillo and the like.

    But back to Ace Baker: as you now know, he was invited by Jim Fetzer to present September Clues at the 2007 Madison “9/11 truth” conference – which took place less than two months after September Clues was released. The “TOP no-planer” in attendance there was Morgan Reynolds – a former Bush administration economist – and the only person on this planet who has ever been on FOX TV (or ANY television news network) mentioning that there were no planes on 9/11. He was of course promptly derided by the FOX TV anchorman. Other attendees at the Madison conference were Judy Wood, Rosalee Grable (“The Webfairy”), Dave Von Kleist, Paula Gloria and, of course, Ace Baker (Nico Haupt, funnily enough, was absent. The Madison Conference was probably the start of “PLAN B” of the TV FAKERY gatekeeping efforts. )

    Has Morgan Reynolds ever contacted me? No. Have I tried to contact him? Yes – but to no avail. He simply ignores me – point blank. Now, has Jim Fetzer ever tried to contact me? Yes, (and insistingly) – but by the time he did so, I had already sensed that the whole gang of “9/11 truthers” (mentioned above) was most likely THE VERY HUB set in place years beforehand to control and distort the emergence of any serious evidence of 9/11 TV FAKERY – such as September Clues.

    So, to answer your question, I don’t think that “Ace Baker’s” actual PSYOPERA movie was a ready-to-go-damage-control movie, but the afore-mentioned “truther” gang led by Jim Fetzer was certainly set up long ago – in order to counter anyone revealing the core of the magic trick that 9/11 was. If you think about it, the scheme was quite smart: Jim Fetzer himself is, after all, a very controversial ‘fringe figure’ in America. For him to ’embrace’ the TV FAKERY aspect (which he did – without EVER mentioning / or linking to September Clues in his endless articles) is a quite brilliant move by the “Nutwork” (aka the 9/11 perps). Who is going to lend credence to that greasy old toad – or to his picturesque, nerdy-looking “video-expert” Ace baker?

    We now really need to tackle the problem of these “cutting-edge” gatekeepers (such as Jim Fetzer and Ace Baker – and a few other clowns – who VAGUELY support the 9/11 TV FAKERY and NO VICTIMS evidence ) . These individuals posing as “9/11 truthers” are, in my mind, the very last hurdle to overcome in order to pave the way for a wider understanding of the 9/11 hoax.

    1. ab Post author

      Quite possibly the best summary of the controlled truth movement I’ve seen. Thanks Simon. I didn’t realise the timeline of PsyOpera was as late as 2010.

      I would like to have you on to deconstruct Ace’s interview with John this week.

  3. ArmunnRigh

    Indeed, Aybesea, in another post, I pointed this out and John Friend gave such an evasive excuse, that I decided not to bother pursuing it further. It would be a waste of time.

    Me: «Oh so then you did know, when Simon was telling the story about Ace Baker, that he would be a guest the following week? Why not a even a mention of that? Why wouldn’t you just simply interject with a natural and simple “Really? Ace Baker? Hey Simon, I have him scheduled for next week, coincidently. I’ll be sure to ask him what he has to say about that”. That would be the proper honest attitude of someone with nothing to hide.

    To me it could be Ace Baker or Archie Bunker, it’s not about the guest, it’s about what I can only read as a sneaky attitude. At no time in the show, after you’ve heard what Simon has to say about Ace, did you mention the scheduled interview. Were you forced to say? No, but honesty would dictate as much, in my opinion. In the same way if you had Ace talking about Simon and you had Simon scheduled for a future show, honesty should compel you to tell him.

    And then in the end you even mention you don’t have anyone for monday while knowing all along you’d have Ace Baker on tuesday? Are you telling me it never occurred in your mind to mention it while Simon was on the air?»

    JF: «I didn’t want to get side tracked. I wanted to focus on Simon’s views of 9/11. Simon knows Ace will be appearing on my show tomorrow.»

    1. aybesea

      I like John I enjoy his blog. But the podcast I feel he is to nice at times. This whole side of the net and reality makes everyone so damn paranoid. If someone missteps or asked or doesn’t ask one question we all jump and attack .. Sometimes in an interview you could get sidetracked or feel uncomfortable being confrontational…so I get that.. But being somewhat misleading in the guest lineup is odd..

      What would have been great is to have baker and shack on at the same time.. Ha

      1. ArmunnRigh

        I feel his behavior is more a consequence of his background guiding story, as John has admitted to have at least thought about telling Simon with his comment «I didn’t want to get side tracked. I wanted to focus on Simon’s views of 9/11. Simon knows Ace will be appearing on my show tomorrow.»

  4. aybesea

    My first question.
    How does JF get these guests?
    Why would he even have baker on the show? The guy is a piece of sheeet?
    Especially right after Shack came on?

    Also it very odd how baker is just about forgotten until Shack brings him up or Friend did I forget . Then all of the sudden Baker comes out of the shill rock he’s been hiding under. To give his side of 911… In regards to 911 there isn’t much more to add to what Shacks presents of the events of that day. So why even deal with this “ace baker” personality? I didn’t even listen to more than 5 minutes… The dude is full of it.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.