by Dreams End » Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:43 pm
Nice of Laura to take some time off from channeling aliens to involve herself in 9/11. I can't believe you people criticizing Qutb about "evidence". Holy hypocrites, batman. I wasn't even following this thread but I clicked on it and realized that the original article is in reference to a flash animation put out by her and her "sign of the times" productions. <br><br>If you guys really care about evidence, you'll find other sources of information. Un-freaking-believable. <br><br>I've posted about her before. I admit, it's a bit tough to get a handle on her because all of her articles are so long and discursive. <br><br>So let's be clear.<br><br>This lady is a rip-off, cult leading, con artist. <br><br>More info here:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.vincentbridges.com/cassIntro.html">www.vincentbridges.com/cassIntro.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>I am just absolutely flabbergasted that THIS is the source of this particular thread in which Qutb is derided thusly:<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Would it be too much to ask that you accompany your bold and confident statements with some supporting evidence? Or maybe just a source so we could evaluate it for ourselves?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br>You mean other than the OTHER 20 page thread??? And you make this "challenge" on a thread based on info from the Cassiopeians? <br><br>On the first page was this polite warning from 'fatladysings'<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Hi all: I would urge everyone to very carefully investigate information coming from signs-of-the-times.org. I'm not accusing anyone of anything but rather suggesting due dilligence before accepting what is posted there. I'm also not trying to single out the person who started this thread--I've seen others link to them as well. Just consider this a friendly tip. Honestly.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Too subtle, I guess.<br><br>Here's the beginning of a long and comprehensive overview of the Cassiopeian cult by a former member from the website linked above. I doubt anyone here will read it, because "just because she's a cult leading, scam artist, well that doesn't mean EVERYTHING she says is wrong." Or, " you can't disprove that she's channeling aliens from the future." Well, I can't disprove Santa Claus either, but I don't turn to him to find out how the intelligence agencies work, now do I? <br><br>This no plane thing is some kind of weird disinfo game (I don't mean by people on this thread...I mean by many putting out the "slick" presentations about it). Maybe I'm wrong...but if so, those who believe in this theory would be very well served by staying as far away from sources like this as possible. In my view, the whole purpose of such groups putting out such material is (if not simply $$$) to allow mainstream media sources to use THEM as examples of 9/11 truth. <br><br>(Side note...I like Dave McGowan...in fact he's been very influential on me. But he has some just plain wrong stuff on his site...like his post on the Mars Probes. Still, for some things, he's the only game in town who puts all the pieces together. His recent post on the Cheney shootings...well, there's just no one like Dave...go read those)<br><br>her story goes deeper...and we can credit her finding of true love to George Soros...but that's another story, mentioned by me on another thread that I'm sure I have no idea where it is now. Here's the beginnings of just one section of the website linked above.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>My name is Vincent Bridges and I am a former member of the Cassiopaea Cult. This is the story of how I got sucked in, was brainwashed and, once I was no longer useful, ended up being the scapegoat for the cult and its leaders. I went from being the only other person who truly understood what the Cassiopaeans had to say to the anti-Christ himself in just six short months.<br><br>Why? Well that is the plot of my story…<br><br>Soon after I returned from France in the spring in 1999, a friend told me about this strange lady posting channelled material about Rennes-le-Chateau and its mysteries on an egroup discussion list. Seemed that she was onto some of the same threads, alchemists in the Pyrenees and what not, so I began an email exchange with her.<br><br>This was Laura Knight-Jadczyk and her channelled material came from a mysterious source: "We transmit "through" the opening that is presented in the locator that you represent as Cassiopaea, due to the strong radio pulses aligned from Cassiopaea, which are due to a pulsar from a neutron star 300 light years behind it, as seen from your locator. This facilitates a clear channel transmission from 6th density to 3rd density."<br><br>These beings apparently communicated with Ms Knight-Jadczyk through the means of a Ouiji board and with the help of another individual, Fred Irland, whose name, curiously enough, can be found nowhere in the published Cassiopaean material. At first, the communications were the ordinary sort of thing expected from ouiji aliens. But as they got better at it, the answers began to take on a life of their own.<br><br>And then, the ouiji aliens provided a real miracle. Dr. Ark Jadczyk, theoretical and mathematical physicist, answered one of Laura’s posts on an egroup, and suddenly, they were soul mates. For a while, Laura and Fred kept track of Ark by means of the ouiji aliens, and then Ark made it to the USA, married Laura, and everything changed. Not overnight, but slowly and steadily.<br><br>What once was a fairly harmless hobby of two esoteric minded people became, with the addition of Ark, the beginning of a serious doomsday cult.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>If anyone wants to keep me amused today and try to defend these folks, please feel free. Candy and babies and all that.<br><br>Just so we are clear...I and Qutb happen to accept that there is a level of complicity in the US government for the events of 9/11 though I think neither of us, compared to some on this site, find exactly HOW all this works to be self-evident. Personally, I think the easiest way to pull off 9/11 whether organized by "muslim extremists" who are influenced and infiltrated by CIA agents, or whether ordered by Karl Rove himself, would be to get some guys to get on the planes and take them over and crash them into stuff. If they get caught...they are muslim extremists, so who cares. If they screw up and hit the wrong target, who cares. Every layer of complexity added onto that introduces huge possibilities for error. So there'd have to be extremely compelling reasons to, for example, attempt to fly something other than a plane into the Pentagon in such a tourist laden city as DC. Maybe none of those witnesses are credible, but there would simply be no way to control what other witnesses would be able to see and record those events. Very risky.<br><br>Personally, I'm going with the MC/cult aspect to much of this. I think that many cults have been experiments in mind control and have been put to use to create "fanatics" such as were involved in 9/11. that's probably what they are up to now at Abu Ghraib...traumatize not to get info, but to make the subject more susceptible to suggestion. It's easier if you start with kids, but Americans are nothing if not problem solvers!<br>But I can't prove that. (I'm interested in the behavior of these alleged religious fanatics as reported (I think) by Hopsicker who seem anything BUT religious.)<br><br>Qutb and I disagree about the potential for CD. I don't claim, like many of the illustrious physicists on this board (falling faster than gravity, atoms are like little solar systems...etc), to be expert enough to say I can PROVE CD. In fact, I'm agnostic about it. It's primarily the weird coincidence of three buildings collapsing like that. Instinctively, I feel there has to be more to it...but that's not the same as evidence. And I'm sorry, despite my feeling that Qutb is too accepting of the official version I think he's thoroughly kicked the asses of those he's debated here. In fact, when I weighed in a little on the last thread in support of CD, he kicked my ass too. I stated one thing that was incorrect and another thing that had only one source...a source that I would now not quote to support the theory of gravity, much less CD. But THIS MAKES MY RESEARCH BETTER..not WORSE. The last thing I want to do is embrace elements of a theory that are poorly supported or factually inaccurate. <br><br>Oh, and obviously I think the no plane at the Pentagon theory is not very solid.<br><br>This uncritical acceptance of anyone who puts forward a conspiracy view of 9/11 makes people ripe for manipulation and disinfo. We all need to be MORE critical of radical theories with which we agree...even moreso than with theories we disagree with. You can start by going to the bookmark of the "sign of the Times" site, and hitting the delete key. <p></p><i></i>