Advocating violence against "Chemtrail" planes, pilots, scientists, and debunkers

IIRC that was how the old Prodigy started also, requiring real names be used. I think that is silly. While it is charming that they think everyone will be so much more polite if they require real names, they're extremely naive thinking it's gonna happen.
 
Yesterday I visited Sylvain's radiothon prep page and offered to speak about the threats and how such a violent outcome could be avoided. My intent was to advocate that his folks begin a concerted crowd sourced campaign to identify the planes they see as ordinary passenger planes as previously explained here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/14-years-of-chemtrails-comments-and-suggestions.100/

Sylvain Henry rejected my suggestion. He doesn't want his cohorts to know. He gains power over others by maintaining the status quo and rejects a logical solution which would make progress away from a violent outcome and instead is guiding his sheep towards a tragic conclusion. We have previously spoken over the phone about this and he eventually banned me from participating on his Facebook group.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the post was removed by facebook, after I posted the threat here, I posted the link to this page under his poll. It didn't take him long to remove the post, block me from his page, and make his "retraction"

Thanks for the reply. Well done for your post on his group! At least it has been a wake up call for him and quite amusing that he had to make a "No violent or aggressive suggestions" post.
 
Yesterday I visited Sylvain's radiothon prep page and offered to speak about the threats and how such a violent outcome could be avoided. My intent was to advocate that his folks begin a concerted crowd sourced campaign to identify the planes they see as ordinary passenger planes as previously explained here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/14-years-of-chemtrails-comments-and-suggestions.100/

Sylvain Henry rejected my suggestion. He doesn't want his cohorts to know. He gains power over others by maintaining the status quo and rejects a logical solution which would make progress away from a violent outcome and instead is guiding his sheep towards a tragic conclusion. We have previously spoken over the phone about this and he eventually banned me from participating on his Facebook group.

Did you tell him, specifically, that you intended to explain how to ID planes? If so, he is a lost cause.
 
Flying Spaghetti Monster.png

Yeah, well, if y'all ever actually produced any real, serious, evidence that could withstand any
sober scrutiny, and was worthy of being using in a courtroom, your "movement" (and I use the term broadly)
probably wouldn't just sadly stagger on year after year after year...not taken seriously but by yourselves...
 
Last edited:
Did you tell him, specifically, that you intended to explain how to ID planes? If so, he is a lost cause.
In several phone conversations in November 2013 I explained that was the best contribution his group could make towards peace and a resolution, I told him that he could personally identify the planes and explained how to do it.
This weekend Sylvain invited the public to suggest names of people who could be interviewed during his radiothon.
I suggested myself and offered to speak about the violent threats and how a bad outcome could be avoided. I wasn't able to get into specifics on his google doc but Sylvain immediately rejected me. He does know that I consider him a hypocrite and consider him to personally be a lost cause but I did make the offer in good faith.
 
I have been blocked from the page but luckily my handy dandy alternate account has not. "Violent option" has been removed.
 
you mean it was actually ever there in the first place? Astounding!!!!
When I first viewed the page after M Bornong had posted it, it was shown under "view more options" (and had +1 vote).

It's only when I've seen TEEJ's further posting that I've realised that page members can add options to the poll, so I suspect the "Learn science and meteorology" option was added by someone else.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, he may not have added the "Rocket launchers" and "Violent options" personally?

Ray Von
 
When I first viewed the page after M Bornong had posted it, it was shown under "view more options" (and had +1 vote).

It's only when I've seen TEEJ's further posting that I've realised that page members can add options to the poll, so I suspect the "Learn science and meteorology" option was added by someone else.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, he may not have added the "Rocket launchers" and "Violent options" personally?

Ray Von
We were posting at the same time.

For the record, as far as this mornings post, https://archive.today/kRf57 , the one like was from, Kim Monson, https://www.facebook.com/KimInMinn?fref=ufi . I did look at that, sorry I don't have a screen shot. She is still a member, she was not removed.
 
This one is particularly distasteful:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/290971927776851/permalink/329700473903996/

Capture.JPG


This photo is taken from Wikipedia: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MAFFS_loading_into_a_C-130_080623-F-7564C-071.JPG

It shows a Modular Airborne Fire-Fighting System (MAFFS) being loaded into a C-130 Hercules.

The reason the comment is very distasteful is that this exact aircraft, ANG31458, crashed in 2012 while fighting fires in South Dakota, with the loss of four lives.

http://www.wbtv.com/story/22732740/maffs-7-crew-honored-one-year-after-deadly-c-130-crash

 
Good to know there's a right and wrong direction for the flag to face and we've been putting the wrong one on our warplanes for the last few generations.
 
Good to know there's a right and wrong direction for the flag to face and we've been putting the wrong one on our warplanes for the last few generations.
Yes there is so much ignorance on that thread. "Charlotte" is of course not the name of the plane but the location of the Air National Guard base in North Carolina.

And flags on vehicles are supposed to face with the hoist side towards the front of the vehicle.
 
Marginalize whenever possible.

There are over 1400 posts of specific examples. The "marginalization" is certainly NOT coming from this website.

The posts that show as evidence of the sort of vitriol that exists against innocent people is quite obvious. Sorry. Perhaps a few hours' perusal will show this to be true.
 
Keep the disinfo flowing. Afterall, that's what you are being paid for.
I don't suppose you have anything to back that comment up?
If you have some proof that I am being paid to post on this site, or anywhere else, then I would like you to produce it.
I would also like you to investigate why the money isn't actually reaching my bank account. I could really do with paying my overdraft off.
 
Regarding Post #1428 above, and the very first posted image?
I see that as possibly a portion of one panel from an MD-11. I base this (admitted guess) on the fact that most modern airliners being built today are either "twin-jets"...or have four engines.

The MD-11 is a variation of the older DC-10...BOTH just about the same, except for some added components into the MD-11 cockpit design and lay-out which eliminated the "third" pilot, or "Flight Engineer". It was a way to better 'automate' many systems that were historically "managed" by the 'F/E'.

Now, having explained? Looking again at that image snippet? I see a portion of an Electrical Panel....every button and indicator there is clear to me, as a pilot.

(Editing to add...that portion of image may, or may not be from a 3-engine airplane...the only other idea, as I search for 3-engine airplanes, built recently in the USA, is the possible "re-vamp" of the B-727 into a two-person flight deck concept....IF it was cropped on the right...had another look, seems not to have been cropped)...


...the second image in Post #1428? Once again, it might be a mis-use of images of fire-fighting airplanes, and the tanks that they carry for that purpose.
 
Last edited:
...the second image in Post #1428? Once again, it might be a mis-use of images of fire-fighting airplanes, and the tanks that they carry for that purpose.
Oh how could it POSSIBLY be that?
EVERYONE knows that super secret spray tanks are always exhibited where anybody can stand there witrh a good quality camera and take photos, just like the guy in the picture is doing!!! :rolleyes:

I want a sarcasm smiley.
 
That was the first photo when I took the screenshot. This was the first photo when I just went back.die.PNG
 
Oh how could it POSSIBLY be that?
EVERYONE knows that super secret spray tanks are always exhibited where anybody can stand there witrh a good quality camera and take photos, just like the guy in the picture is doing!!! :rolleyes:

I want a sarcasm smiley.

AND they wear patches proclaiming they're on "Team Chemtrail".

team.PNG
 
Regarding Post #1428 above, and the very first posted image?
I see that as possibly a portion of one panel from an MD-11. I base this (admitted guess) on the fact that most modern airliners being built today are either "twin-jets"...or have four engines.

I couldn't get a shot of the whole image without making the whole thing too small. Here is it. The old chemtrail switch.group.PNG
 
The old chemtrail switch.

Ahhhh....I missed that the first time. Looks again to merely be the APU switch **....has been mis-used from the Boeing 737 Forward Overhead panel already.

AS I LOOK AT THIS PANEL AGAIN? I am thinking it is a FedEx MD-11 derivation.

I draw the viewer's attention to the portion of the panel BELOW the Electrical portion.

(This would be the "Pneumatics/Air Conditioning" part)....you can see the three Pack switches....the three Bleed Air switches....but most importantly, the two (visible) knobs labelled "COURIER" and "CARGO"....the knob not visible, above....out-of-frame on the left would be labelled "FLIGHT DECK". (or, abbreviated to "FLT DECK"...or "COCKPIT"). These designations are often up to the buyer, as to exact wording.

The APU rotary switch would be correctly labelled "OFF", "START" and "RUN"...of course this image has been altered.

** Did some more research....the mis-labeled switch on that MD-11 Forward Overhead panel is the Smoke Detection switch:

[img=[url]https://www.metabunk.org/data/MetaMirrorCache/cecd211ed50abbb6ddfc4462ff3cf5c1.jpg[/img][/url]
 
Last edited:
Several people have reported that group, and Facebook have taken no action as it apparently does not meet the required standard... level of explicit threat, presumably.
 
Several people have reported that group, and Facebook have taken no action as it apparently does not meet the required standard... level of explicit threat, presumably.
I reported them and they rejected it. I don't get it. The title is pretty explicit.
 
Several people have reported that group, and Facebook have taken no action as it apparently does not meet the required standard... level of explicit threat, presumably.
I'm really not sure what level of threat is required. There's a group called "Shut Down Ocean Odyssey" (renamed from "Burn Down Ocean Odyssey" and later "Destroy Ocean Odyssey" after police involvement). The owner of the group posted pictures of himself outside the pet shop with a gun and the text, "Just working up the courage to go inside and shoot [actual name of an employee]." The employee named reported it, the owner of the pet shop reported it, and I reported it as I owned a shop in the same building and that's bad for business.

Facebook said the post was not a violation.
 
Back
Top