Posts Tagged ‘actor’

Unkown Darth Vader dead

Darth Vader dead

The actor that was used in the Darth Wader fencing scenes of Star Wars, Bob Anderson has passed away, 89 years old.

Bob Anderson had a background as a olympic athelete, and also stared in films such as ”Die Antoher day”, ”The legend of Zorro” and ”The princess bride”.

It was unknown that it was Bob Anderson that was hiding behind the mask of Darth Wader, but in a interview in 1983, Mark Hamill that played Luke Skywalker in the original Star Wars trilogi revealed the secret.

It was thought to be a secret but at the end George Lucas and Mark Hamill agreed that it wasn´t fair against Bob that worked very hard and deserved to be known for it.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by Targenor - 03 januari 2012 at 15:40

Categories: Film, Kändisar   Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


Tries to fool people, by using ”It was aired on tv very quickly, therefore it was a wellprepared attack which many people knew about.

Lets see what it says more,

”The wittnes is a paid actor”

Whell this was a suprise, trying to discredite wittness which not tell the story the person behind making the clip wants to hear.

”Called Ace Baker – suprisingly similar to ”Able Baker”

Why should they use so similar names it would only give themselfs away.
So no there isn´t much evidence in the ”paid actor” theory

And then the question, How did he know all this, since the collapse already happened?

This is a very stupid question acctually.
If a car collides whit a tree and the driver is dead, should we then think that he died from a sharkbait ?

The thing that happened here, is called analysis, you see something a you tell what you see.

Ok, next question in this movie.

Structure failure, Wouldn´t bombs be a more likely scenario since WTC was bombed in 1993?

No it wouldn´t, this is where the creator of the film tries to show his own theories.
The man didn´t hear any explosions, didn´t see any explosions, so why should he bleive that

Firemen and engieneers didn´t understand the collapse but this bozo on the street did?

That firemen didn´t understand it is quite obvius, they aren´t trained in that way.
The next question needs more information, which engineers and when did they not understand the collapse?
Here the creator is whitholding information in a effort to save his cause.

He ”witnessed” the both towers collapes?
”Due to structural failure?”
”Who talks like that?”

Ok, what does the maker of the movie know about this person, since he tries to discredite this person so much whitout so far not publishing any evidence for his claims

Next step is ”Whos is this guy”?

Once again he is claimed to been a actor that was paied for beeing a eywittnes.

”Off all eye wittness on the scene why was he chosen to tell the story?”

Whell the answer is obviusly, he had a falling actor carrer, and did this for money.

So far he hasn´t proved that this guy is a actor, never the less paid to tell the story, just pure bullshit.

”Everyone else was in shock, but this guy sounds like an infomercial (correction TV actor) actor”

Yeah, he sounds, but that dosen´t prove a thing.

Then the movie repeats once again.

Then there is time for the next ”Clue”, presenting no evidence what so ever for the first claim being true.

Clue #2

”Where did he get all this from before any studies where done?”

He told what he did se, and belive.
Just going down this road as the creator does is dangerous, such a big conspiracy as this wouldn´t have lived for long, since people would have talked.

”No watch him change the subject”

How do we know he changed the subject?
How do we know that the creator didn´t ”clipp” the movie?

”Note the emotion-laden buzzwords”

Whell he is talking about sad and tragic things, shouldn´t that be emotional, if he where in on it he would have talked whitout the emotions.

”Rescue Workers”
”Policemen and firemen”
”Incalcuable loss”

”The Method”
”Sell the lie whit authority, then change the subject to something emotional”

Whell, but where is the proof that this person where in on it?

And then, one more time.

”Then the guy is expert on Bin Laden”

Whell the problem is not a problem here, when something happens newsdesks tend to invite people whit knowledge, and still there is now evidence that he, knew of the attacks in advance.

Ok, then we point him out as lier since we don´t know what he´s talking about

”So who is this expert, who knows so much about Bin Laden and falling buildings and is on CBS the morning of 9/11?

”Jerome Hauer”

”Bio-Warfare Expert”
”Drug Company Director”
”Bush Administration Insider”
”and a lot more….”

What more is the creator talking about?
He hasn´t proved a thing.

”But here´s the introduction that Dan Rather was given to read”

And no more information, but quickly jumping to Cover Story #3

Ok, Clue number #3

”More information about Bin Laden, that was aired 9:34 EST”
”This was only 33 Minutes after the second tower was hit”

Not that much evidence, USA knew about Bin Laden for many years before the attacks, Bill Clinton wanted to chase Bin Laden whit tomahawk misslies for one thing.
So of course did people knew alot of Bin Laden

”Who wrote this elaborate story and got it on air so quickly?”

No answer to that question, the creator want´s to show something more….

Lets see what that is, shall we?

”Mud huts, tent cities and caves, a rich fanatics threat to U.S, Fire causes steel buildings to collapse”

Ok, here the creator leaves out one thing in the tv speech, a very important thing that acctually maters.

”At one time, the US had him under satelite surveliance”
So if the US used this method, shouldn´t they then know things about him?

”The complete set of 9/11 myths were all laid down in the first hour after the attacks by the U.S mass media”
Still no proof of this, but the creator makes a point for himself when he thinks that many people where involved in the attacks.
and still no one have come forward and talked, funny.

”Did this all happen by itself or were these stories prepeared long before the attacks started?”
They wheren´t prepeared, its fun to watch people saying things where prepared when they ”speak their langauge”, what they belive in, but not the otherway around.

”Think about it”
Whats to think about?
You making a video claiming things that isn´t true, and you don´t know what you are talking about?

Then all three clues playes once again….

The creator has failed to prove anything

”Turn off your TV”
”Turn on Brasscheck”

Ok, what is Brasscheck?
Why should we turn on Brasscheck?
To recive even more lies and disinformation, whitout any evidence?

That was 9 minutes and 41 seconds that i spent watchinh pure bullshit, sadly it won´t be the last time……

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by Targenor - 15 januari 2010 at 20:30

Categories: Brott & Straff, Conspiracy, Debunked, english, Historia   Tags: , , , ,