IS the ISS “impersonated” by three solar-powered drones?
There comes a time when – as we research the hoaxes & illusions of this world – we need to offer a plausible, no-nonsense alternative explanation of the frauds that we diligently keep calling out. I will now ‘take the plunge’, and offer my personal, reasonable and observational-founded supposition as to exactly how the “ISS” fraud is upheld. Here follows the little we know for certain – and can empirically verify – about the “ISS”:
Forget building 7 – what a beautiful demolition this is. I wonder if the colorful smoke was supposed to spell something. A few of the explosions seemed for sound effect. Notice the dust clouds. It’s hard to imagine anyone else taking down the twins. You know the real footage is in CDI’s vaults. Probably locked up tighter than the Coke or KFC secret forumulas.
Psyopti-gone: While I’m not convinced at all of the voice morphing allegation, I’ll defer to those with more experience than I with shills and disable psyopticon’s account here. The clues experience plus the disruption of fakeologists that I respect leads me to this decision.
* * *
Simon deconstructs the ISS deception – and the entity Psyopticon pulls out another strawman from his bag.
EE’s claim that “the media reported this as unusual” is obviously utter bullcrap – and a bare-faced silly lie. The rest of EE’s post is more of the same – and I do not believe a single word of it. I am well and truly done with the Evil Edna character (aka the dreaded “Psyopticon” over at Fakeologist.com). He can go and shave his legs in the bathtub while delusively singing Nessun Dorma. That will hopefully keep him off the keyboard for a while. He may then resume his clammy trolling antics over at Godlike Productions – a more suitable place for the garrulous clown.
This is the second strawman argument that Simon has noticed from Dr. Evil.
I think I will reinstate Evil Edna for the time being – and put him back to work… Of course, Lux and Hoi did well to question EE and his shaky imagery analyses – it would appear that he couldn’t (intentionally or not) see the forest for the trees. However, I will give EE credit for pointing out the ‘subliminal’ relevance of that distant mosque dome, an unlikely ‘coincidence’ indeed. And I guess it’s just another koincidink that two worried ‘muslim-looking’ faces appear in the backdrop of this most-frequently-seen interview of a now familiar Clutha ‘eyewitness’…
The plot thickens…
A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent’s argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument.
The so-called typical “attacking a straw man” argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent’s proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., “stand up a straw man”) and then to refute or defeat that false argument (“knock down a straw man”) instead of the original proposition.
This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining “battle” and the defeat of an “enemy” may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue.
Studying psyOps is like learning a new language – and I admit I AM learning. Please be patient.
Psyopticon can react while he still has a voice here. The audience is listening.
No tags for this post.