Truthaction User Deliberately Conflating "No-Planes at WTC" With "No-Plane at Pentagon"

Listening now... I think his name should be spelled Arct-uh-r-uhs, yeesh. Plus you can hear him breathe during the interview--yuck.

[Just sayin' -- from the perspective of keeping an eye on the Fake Truth Movement. Arcterus showed up pretty recently at Truthaction and began parroting the party line perfectly, which made me raise an eyebrow. I thought he might be another "usual suspects" sockpuppet, but now I think he's something even stranger. Frankly, I think he's an excellent candidate for Extreme Fetzalization. Here's some material from another site, also from an Arcterus in Bellevue. I've omitted signature lines and user info after the first mention. There is additional material at the link. -- c455]

http://www.soniccomic.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1327

Dropping out

Postby Arcterus on Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:20 pm
So next week is my last week. About damn time too, really. I was going to drop out later but I'm dropping out sooner instead due to a power play going on that went further than I'd like.

Arcterus

Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:27 pm
Location: Bellevue, Washington

Re: Dropping out

Postby Zach on Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:22 pm
Dropping out of high school?

Zach
Site Admin

Posts: 991
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:41 pm
Location: Clemson, South Carolina

Re: Dropping out

Postby Arcterus on Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:10 pm
No, I thought I'd drop out of something else instead.

Yes, I'm referring to high school.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Taylor Hedgie on Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:17 pm
Yay, another soon-to-be low-life! This will be excellent for the economy! Another person to give my tax money to! YES!

Taylor Hedgie

Posts: 1669
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:31 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky

Re: Dropping out

Postby aj - comic guru on Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:14 pm
Would you like to elaborate as to why you're dropping out?

aj - comic guru

Posts: 911
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:28 pm
Location: USA! USA!

Re: Dropping out

Postby Taylor Hedgie on Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:19 pm

aj - comic guru wrote:Would you like to elaborate as to why you're dropping out?

Bitches stealing his bike.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Arcterus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:56 am
Because I don't need a high school diploma and so the extra time and effort required to obtain one would be wasteful.

I've only been here as long as I have for my friends and a few of my classes.

Re: Dropping out

Postby aj - comic guru on Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:46 am
So what job or career are you going into, then? I've heard of people making it pretty good with a well thought-out plan, so I'm interested in hearing that, not just "don't need it." I really hope you aren't dropping out just because you don't need one.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Sonic Remix on Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:42 pm
You've been in school your entire life pretty much, and now you're going to drop out half way in your final (senior) year?

Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusettes - America

Re: Dropping out

Postby Arcterus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:41 pm

Sonic Remix wrote:You've been in school your entire life pretty much, and now you're going to drop out half way in your final (senior) year?

Yes.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Taylor Hedgie on Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:53 pm

Arcterus wrote:
Sonic Remix wrote:You've been in school your entire life pretty much, and now you're going to drop out half way in your final (senior) year?
Yes.

Epic fail.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Zach on Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:16 pm
Unless you can qualify this extremely well, I am going to say you just completely dropped off my list of "intelligent people". I expect way better from someone like you.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Arcterus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:32 pm
Obviously, I have a well-thought-out plan. Otherwise I wouldn't drop out. Where would the logic be in that?

Re: Dropping out

Postby Zach on Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:07 pm
I find it noteworthy that you, a man who uniformly flaunts his intelligence, schemes, triumphs, etc. is being very silent on what this plan actually entails...

Re: Dropping out

Postby aj - comic guru on Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:19 pm
...yeah, so quit avoiding the question and tell us what scheme has come up inside your head.

Re: Dropping out

Postby Arcterus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:25 pm
And I have two extremely good reasons for that.

1. I don't want to

The best human explanation for such secrecy lies in preference. Without any desire and/or incentive to say a word of detail about my plans, I lose any valuable reason to do so.

My second reason is more likely to appeal to you, despite the clear validity of my first reason.

2. People are too stupid to comprehend whatever is different

Initially, a few years ago when I formulated this plan of mine, reason 1 was the only one that affected me. Reason 2, however, formed as time went on with the outright attacks against my choice, despite a complete lack of knowledge in what I was doing. Whenever I talk to people of this, they're too attached to the social norm to understand that I've put a great deal of thought into this, and instead do whatever they can to provoke my ambitions. I refuse to allow them such fuel for their fire. Look at you, Zach, who despite being an intelligent and reasonable person generally, went and said "I expect way better from someone like you." without actually hearing the qualifications you asked for earlier in the referenced post. It's this behavior of attachment to the social norm that has had me decide to not flaunt my plans publicly.

Some people have said that they wouldn't go ratting off about it or "provoking my ambitions", as I put it, but I don't tell those people anyway, solely out of wanting to avoid double-standard. I think I'd feel safe telling most people on this board what my plans, but I wouldn't unless I in some way needed them or until said plan was no longer secret. There are only 4 people in the world who I've told my plans of, and all of them were needed in some way. Not necessarily in essence, but perhaps simply as a consultation. All 4 people I can trust, and so obviously all 4 people have promised to remain quiet about this until I publicly reveal said plan myself.

Having said all that, you'll all undoubtedly find out soon enough, but at the present time I'm not going to make a public announcement.

somewhere... maybe an email? In any event, here's what he posted at Truthaction:

Wow. that was not my intention at all. They should have said something to me up-front because they have a whole plethora of misconceptions about me. CIT's no-plane theory is completely ludicrous, just like the others, so even though I don't intend to bunch them up with no-plane-at-WTC, I hardly hold them at a higher level.

Also I have a plan that I announced shortly before joining Truthaction and so I must be COINTELPRO? Haha. First of all, I found TruthAction through Arabesque. Joining a forum is not a devious plan. Second, MY PLANS HAVE ALREADY BEEN PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED! SO MUCH FOR RESEARCH!

And to top it off, any quick look at that forum would show that I've been talking about 9/11 for YEARS there! And that's just on that forum. Then there's back when I went to TBFPITU and at the multiple incarnations of LCF. However, I was relatively absent on forums because I've spent most of the past few years sorting out my thoughts on 9/11 and compiling information. On some of the earlier forum posts I mention, I sound like a complete idiot because I had no idea what I was talking about. I was endorsing this same no-plane-at-Pentagon crap, for example.

And then I use "uh" a lot in my interview. What these people don't know since it's audio-only is that I'm constantly getting messages from technical staff about what's going on, not to mention I had to do the hour-long interview STANDING in a heated sound room. All things that make it difficult to concentrate. I almost didn't hear the first bit of what Jim was saying having to adjust to all this.

And then you can hear me breathe. Yep. That's what happens when you have high-quality microphones right up to a speaker phone that's picking up every sound in the room, of which the phone and myself are the only sources for such sound. So yeah, it stands out a bit, but it's easy to fucking ignore.

And I didn't really read the rest. Whatever. I can tell bullshit when I see it.

http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5204

Too funny! They all seem to think that *we* are obsessed with *them*! Especially coming from the Jenny Sparks person who is apparently convinced that we're stalking her. Poor Arcterus, if he is indeed sincere, has fallen in with the most pathetic group of disinfo clowns ever to have sullied a message board. They realize by now that having documented their woeful impersonations of real truthseekers none of them will be able to take credit when the truth comes out. The best they can hope for is that no one will pay too much attention to what they were actually doing for YEARS (discouraging focus on the wtc demolition, promoting false and racist claims against muslims, claiming AA77 really hit the Pentagon, equating examining Zionist involvement in 9/11 with anti-semitism, telling people to buy 20 copies of LIHOP bullshit fiction like the Shell Game*, etc.) because when the whole truth is known it will be VERY obvious what their agenda was all along. And we're documenting it all for posterity. That's why they banned so many of us from 911Blahhgger and True Faction when we helped make those sites popular years before most people had heard of 9/11 Truth. To quote them, but with much better cause, "we must be doing SOMEthing right!"

* so where's Steve Alten these days? did he give up on 9/11 truth when he realized we were not actually stupid enough to line his pockets in exchange for his poorly written pulp?

So now the New York Times, which has pimped everything from 9/11 and "al Qaeda", to Saddam's WMD, publishes the column (way down)below by Roger Cohen, where he argues that Pakistan, not Iran, should be of most concern to Israel (and presumably to the U.S.?) So what do we see? There are Arab muslims (Palestinians et al), Persian muslims (Iran), and South Asian muslims (Pakistan). All are accused of various things by various people, and all presumably would be happy to see that kind of attention paid to one of the others instead of them, and they all realize that such attention will never be paid to Israel. What we are talking about is indeed a war over who will get hegemony over this important region.

Now, WL, I want to point out that in your last comment you say that the MSM, or mainstream media, "also downplay" a bunch of stuff. But that wasn't my point--my point is about that which what passes for the "mainstream" truth movement downplays. I am not going to let myself be dictated what to believe by the mainstream media's coverage OR their non-coverage of things. This is the logic used by people like Jon Gold who claim that "since the mainstream media love to (try to) debunk controlled demolition, and ignore the Pakistani connection, this means they are acknowledging that the Pakistani connection is more dangerous to them." Now, that's like a prisoner being threatened with torture saying "Do what you will--burn me, electrocute me, beat me--but PLEASE, I BEG YOU, do NOT force me to have sex with beautiful women!! ANYTHING but that!" Now, if the would be torturers are really gullible, they will indeed unleash the starlets on him. And if truthers are really gullible, when people like Jon Gold say that what the perps are REALLY afraid of is the Patstystani connection, they will unleash the pork chop transfer.

And what will any of the various LIHOP theories accomplish? Aside from being wrong they are also virtually indistinguishable from the incompetence (LIHBA, let it happen by accident)theory. "Sure they let it happen, because they were too stupid to take the warning signs seriously!" And the LIHOPpers will counter that NO NO! They did it on PURPOSE! The Patsystani wire transfer PROVES they helped the hijackers! And instead of a real limited hangout where some lies are *actually* sacrificed we will end up back at square one--those damned muslims, and arguments about whether Bush is evil or stupid. And when this debate is finally taken up by the MSM, and someone tries to bring up the demolition of the WTC, either they will try to pin that on Pakistan or Saudi Arabia somehow OR they will say "that's just an unprovable theory, we best focus on the foreknowledge." And just as some truthers are taken in by those arguments, the newly "awake" American public will surely be taken in by them, considering how much less disturbing they are to their world view.

April 9, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
Israel Cries Wolf
By ROGER COHEN
ISTANBUL — “Iran is the center of terrorism, fundamentalism and subversion and is in my view more dangerous than Nazism, because Hitler did not possess a nuclear bomb, whereas the Iranians are trying to perfect a nuclear option.”

Benjamin Netanyahu 2009? Try again. These words were in fact uttered by another Israeli prime minister (and now Israeli president), Shimon Peres, in 1996. Four years earlier, in 1992, he’d predicted that Iran would have a nuclear bomb by 1999.

You can’t accuse the Israelis of not crying wolf. Ehud Barak, now defense minister, said in 1996 that Iran would be producing nuclear weapons by 2004.

Now here comes Netanyahu, in an interview with his faithful stenographer Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, spinning the latest iteration of Israel’s attempt to frame Iran as some Nazi-like incarnation of evil:

“You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs. When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran.”

I must say when I read those words about “the wide-eyed believer” my mind wandered to a recently departed “decider.” But I’m not going there.

The issue today is Iran and, more precisely, what President Barack Obama will make of Netanyahu’s prescription that, the economy aside, Obama’s great mission is “preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons” — an eventuality newly inscribed on Israeli calendars as “months” away.

I’ll return to the ever shifting nuclear doomsday in a moment, but first that Netanyahu interview.

This “messianic apocalyptic cult” in Tehran is, of course, the very same one with which Israel did business during the 1980’s, when its interest was in weakening Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. That business — including sales of weapons and technology — was an extension of Israeli policy toward Iran under the shah.

It’s also the same “messianic apocalyptic cult” that has survived 30 years, ushered the country from the penury of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, shrewdly extended its power and influence, cooperated with America on Afghanistan before being consigned to “the axis of evil,” and kept its country at peace in the 21st century while bloody mayhem engulfed neighbors to east and west and Israel fought two wars.

I don’t buy the view that, as Netanyahu told Goldberg, Iran is “a fanatic regime that might put its zealotry above its self-interest.” Every scrap of evidence suggests that, on the contrary, self-interest and survival drive the mullahs.

Yet Netanyahu insists (too much) that Iran is “a country that glorifies blood and death, including its own self-immolation.” Huh?

On that ocular theme again, Netanyahu says Iran’s “composite leadership” has “elements of wide-eyed fanaticism that do not exist in any other would-be nuclear power in the world.” No, they exist in an actual nuclear power, Pakistan.

Israel’s nuclear warheads, whose function is presumably deterrence of precisely powers like Iran, go unmentioned, of course.

Netanyahu also makes the grotesque claim that the terrible loss of life in the Iran-Iraq war (started by Iraq) “didn’t sear a terrible wound into the Iranian consciousness.” It did just that, which is why Iran’s younger generation seeks reform but not upheaval; and why the country as a whole prizes stability over military adventure.

Arab states, Netanyahu suggests, “fervently hope” that America will, if necessary, use “military power” to stop Iran going nuclear. My recent conversations, including with senior Saudi officials, suggest that’s wrong and the longstanding Israeli attempt to convince Arab states that Iran, not Israel, is their true enemy will fail again.

What’s going on here? Israel, as it has for nearly two decades, is trying to lock in American support and avoid any disadvantageous change in the Middle Eastern balance of power, now overwhelmingly tilted in Jerusalem’s favor, by portraying Iran as a monstrous pariah state bent on imminent nuclear war.

A semblance of power balance is often the precondition for peace. Iran was left out of the Madrid and Oslo processes, with disastrous results. But that’s a discussion for another day.

What’s critical right now is that Obama view Netanyahu’s fear-mongering with an appropriate skepticism, rein him in, and pursue his regime-recognizing opening toward Tehran, as he did Wednesday by saying America would join nuclear talks for the first time. The president should read Trita Parsi’s excellent “Treacherous Alliance” as preparation.

The core strategic shift of Obama’s presidency has been away from the with-us-or-against-us rhetoric of the war on terror toward a rapprochement with the Muslim world as the basis for isolating terrorists.

That’s unsustainable if America or Israel find themselves at war with Muslim Persians as well as Muslim Arabs, and if Netanyahu’s intense-eyed attempt to suck America into a perpetuation of war-on-terror thinking prevails.

The only way to stop Iran going nuclear, and encourage reform of a repressive regime, is to get to the negotiating table. There’s time. Those “months” are still a couple of years. What Iran has accumulated is low-enriched uranium. You need highly-enriched uranium for a bomb. That’s a leap.

Israeli hegemony is proving a kind of slavery. Passage to the Promised Land involves rethinking the Middle East, starting in Iran.