He Did It! Nimrod Says There Were No Deaths in the Texas Church
In my previous aricle, "Blue Pill Blue Ribbon. No passenger deaths on 9/11; also, no deaths at Sandy Hook, Orlando, Las Vegas, and New York City", I reported on his views of mass-murders. There were none. They were all staged.
By whom? He has no opinion. Why? He has no opinion. But they were staged.
But he held back on Texas. I reported: "no opinion yet." I feared he would wimp out. I had a moment of doubt. Would he let us down? I have great news. This was posted Saturday.
Nimrod posted:TX shootings Sorry for the delay. The LV and NY fake hoax shootings burned me out.
Turns out TX is another fake.
1.) Shooter dead. Dead men don't talk.
2.) Pastor and family out that week. What are the odds? Call it a miracle.
No more research needed. I'm tired.
Let's be honest here. We don't see this kind of dedication all that often. We don't see people who hold to a position that is this off-the-wall crazy on a regular basis. He had a quinfecta going for him: 9/11, Sandy Hook, Orlando, the New York City bridge, and Las Vegas. Most of us have heard of a trifecta. A quadfecta is really obscure. Nimrod began with a quinfecta, except that there isn't such a thing in horse race betting.
Nimrod has added another: a sexfecta. He has boldly gone where no man has gone before. He is pioneering the whole field of faked mass murders. There are people who hold lots of different conspiracy theories, but they are not specialized researchers. This is one unique form of conspiracy, one which virtually no one else holds. How many people do you know who have denied all six? I know the answer: none. Yet on this website, we have such a person.
There is a kind of grandeur about Nimrod's view of historical cause-and-effect. Rest assured, it is in no way tainted with verifiable historical documentation. There is nothing there holding up these theories. This is like levitating half a dozen elephants. I can understand someone who holds an inconceivably bizarre theory of a particular historical event, and has no facts to back it up. But six in a row? This is extraordinary.
The historian asks these six questions: what, where, when, who, why, and how? He begins with what because that is the focus of his investigation. If you are going to offer a new theory of the origin of a unique historical event, you have to start with the event. If there was no what, there is no reason to start the investigation. This is why all conspiracy theorists focus on the final five. In contrast, Nimrod goes to the heart of the matter, conspiratorially speaking: the what. He is arguing that the entire world is wrong about the what. If this is true, this is serious conspiracy theory. It's one thing to think that an event took place in a completely different way from what the major media have reported. But to say that the event never happened takes conspiracy theory to a whole new level.
I call this "David Copperfield historiography." I don't mean the fellow in Dickens' novel. I mean the guy who makes elephants disappear from a stage in Las Vegas.
It's one thing to point out that there was an elephant in the living room. That's what somebody is saying who points out a striking anomaly in the official government/mainstream media explanation. The collapse of Building 7 on 9/11 was such an elephant. The absence of any trace of fragments of the plane over Shanksville was such an elephant. But it's an order of magnitude greater to say that there wasn't any elephant. It was David Copperfield doing the reverse. Instead of making an elephant disappear, he made an elephant appear. He did it four times in one day on 9/11. No passengers died.
Let's hope that there is not a team like Penn and Teller willing to take it from here. I've had quite enough of these magic shows.