Egypt’s president a 9/11 truther: less America-centrism offers hope for Truth movement

Morsi suspects there is a much more to the crimes of Sept. 11, 2001 than we’ve been told.

I’m extremely pleased that media critic and journalist Barrie Zwicker, one of the most respected names in the 9/11 Truth movement, has accepted my invitation to write an article specifically for Truth and Shadows. -Craig McKee
By Barrie Zwicker (Special to Truth and Shadows)

In Canada, mainly because of the generality of mass media output, it’s hard to avoid being sucked into America-centrism. For instance the world pretty well has to grind to a halt every four years in deference to the ever more delusional U.S. election circus. For my part I confess to having watched two of the U.S. TV debates. An old friend, upon learning this, rightly admonished me: “Migawd man, you’ll never get back those 180 minutes!”
In a more ongoing way, many of us in the 9/11Truth movement in North America may be too involved with 9/11Truth in an America-centric way. Again, I do not exempt myself. Most of my Truther friends are American, and I have no wish to cut ties with such a terrific band of brothers. Nevertheless a search for antidotes to America-centrism is likely to be benign and mind-expanding.
One antidote is to look outward, internationally, more often. Websites such as, Voltairenet .org and our own and outlets such as Russia Today (RT) and Iran’s PressTV are welcome in general. (Although RT, as Montreal’s Michael Pengue has flagged recently, seems to have turned recidivist on 9/11Truth. False flag ops are a trade secret of rulers in general, and presumably Vladimir Putin doesn’t want to endanger the franchise by pointing to other offenders.)
One benefit of encouraging in ourselves a more internationalist outlook is that we might find more reasons for hope than we can extract if we remain too fixated on the belly of the beast. After all, what are the chances of a proper U.S. investigation of 9/11 – in our lifetimes?
I was moved to make some non-U.S.-centric reflections when I encountered a story by David D. Kirkpatrick of the New York Times News Service, out of Cairo, reprinted in the Globe and Mail on June 30th. The Globe’s headline and deck read:
Morsi vows to free sheik jailed in U.S.
President-elect’s statement about blind cleric convicted in New York City bombing plot likely to ruffle feathers in Washington
The focus of Kirkpatrick’s story – and it’s an example of how nourishment can be found in mainstream media – was a televised speech Mohamed Morsi made “to hundreds of thousands of supporters in Tahrir Square” the day before.
In the vow referred to in the headline, Egypt’s then president-elect was stepping very close to a landmine, namely the false flag 1993 WTC bombing. Later, as we shall see, he stepped close to a much bigger one, 9/11. Those with vested interests in these and other such operations – that comprise the main fuel for the so-called “war on terror” – will devote many resources to pressuring Morsi to back off. And these vested interests, the global monopoly capitalist elites, are used to getting their way.
At risk is the whole war and geopolitical control and resource theft system that these fake events are so central to creating and maintaining.
Morsi’s first vow, according to Kirkpatrick, was “to free Egyptian civilians imprisoned here after military trials during the transition after the ouster of Hosni Mubarak.”
Kirkpatrick quotes Morsi as continuing: “I see signs for Omar Abdel Rahman and detainees’ pictures.” Morsi was referring to placards held by the crowd. “It is my duty and I will make all efforts to have them free, including Omar Abdel Rahman.”
Very soon after Morsi made what Kirkpatrick describes as an “almost offhand comment … the Muslim Brotherhood moved quickly to try to shift the focus of Mr. Morsi’s pledge, saying in a statement on its website that the goal was a potential humanitarian extradition to Egypt, and that there was no attempt to question Sheik Abdel Rahman’s 1995 convictions for plotting terrorism against targets in the United States and Egypt.”
My reading of this spin is that the Muslim Brotherhood is no bunch of ninnies and that its leaders know a Sherman tank when they see one. They have no illusions, in other words, about the world of illusion the U.S. elites have manufactured around show trials of the type that have put Rahman into the slammer for life at the Butner Federal Correctional Institution in North Carolina.
Kirkpatrick’s story was the best I found on Morsi’s address to the crowd in Tahrir Square, in accuracy, context and allowing through to readers some of what Morsi said, verbatim. There is enough substance to enable the alert reader to draw some inferences that that story only partly reflects. (Morsi’s televised speech was notable also in its astute timing. The Brotherhood had Morsi take his oath of office one day early, thus pre-empting the Egyptian military’s planned choreographed swearing-in ceremony the next day.)
Not least important is the context in which Morsi ad libbed, in response to placards held by his grassroots supporters. His unscripted remarks showed he believed in what he said. He could have ignored the signs.
Writing from the U.S.-centric stance he must maintain to stay employed, Kirkpatrick observes: “The comments could deepen existing American suspicions of Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, an 84-year-old Islamist group with a long history of opposition to the policies of both the United States and Israel.”
Kirkpatrick’s piece at the same time is telling for contextual observations he inserts around the main focus. Jumping out is this: “…in an interview with Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Doha Center, Mr. Morsi once said he harbored suspicions that still-unknown hidden hands played a role in the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.” My my.
In other words, the new Egyptian president is a 9/11Truther. “When you come and tell me that the plane hit the tower like a knife in butter, then you are insulting us,” Mr. Morsi told Mr. Hamid, as he (Mr. Hamid) later reported in Foreign Policy [magazine], according to Kirkpatrick. “How did the plane cut through the steel like this? Something must have happened from the inside. It’s impossible.” Kirkpatrick adds in parentheses that Mr. Morsi earned a PhD. in materials science at the University of Southern California.
In his final paragraph Kirkpatrick writes: “Although it is all but impossible to find an Egyptian who supports either the 1993 or 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, many are skeptical about the official American accounts of who was responsible for them or for other terrorist plots.”
This mainstream media report, together with some earlier mainly non-mainstream coverage out of Egypt that I’d seen, provide me with an all-too-rare glimmer of hope.
The earlier coverage – highly significant but that must be treated super-briefly here – was of widespread support for Coptic Christians by Muslims in Egypt.
Hidden in a Google search haystack of Muslim-versus-Christian emphasis one can find needles of truth. One of them, from the website World Peace Through Technology (, is headlined:
Muslims protecting Christians in Egypt
It’s dated January 6, 2011 and reads [bolds mine]:
Yesterday was the Eastern Orthodox Christmas Eve for Egypt’s Coptic community. Across Egypt, Muslims came out to support their Christian neighbors, risking their own lives to protect a religious minority. It was an inspiring sign of unity and support, at a time when religious conflict threatens the region and the world.
Just a week earlier, on January 1st, there was a bombing at a Coptic church in Alexandria. Blamed on Islamic extremists, the New Year’s Day attack on a church killed over 20 Egyptian Christians, and injured dozens of people.
Adding to the tension, a video attributed to Al Qaeda widely circulated on the Internet, called the “Jihadi Encyclopedia for the Destruction of the Cross,” featured a line calling on Muslims in Egypt to “blow up churches while Copts are celebrating Christmas or any other time when churches are packed.”
Anxiety among the nation’s Coptic Christians, who make up approximately 10 percent of the 80 million population, was at a high in the wake of the New Years Day attack. But Muslims turned up in droves for the Coptic Christmas mass Thursday night, offering their bodies and lives as “human shields” to Egypt’s threatened Christian community. Egypt’s majority Muslim population stood in solidarity with the fearful Coptic community, as thousands of Muslims showed up at churches around the country and at candle light vigils held outside. They made a pledge to collectively fight the threat of Islamic militants and work towards an Egypt free from sectarian conflict, announcing “We either live together, or we die together, we are all Egyptians.”
Other reports suggested that Muslims surrounding Christian churches probably scotched further bloody and provocative false flag events.
It’s not a stretch to infer from this and other similar reports* that millions of Egyptian Muslims are wise to false flag ops designed to foment inter-religious tensions, an inference that resonates with a careful reading of the Kirkpatrick dispatch.
So the glimmer of hope to which I refer emerges from what I take are 10 facts-on-the-ground points, from Egypt and beyond:
1 – By a U.S. reporter’s account an unknown number – but obviously far more than a handful — of Egyptians in Tahrir Square last June hold up placards demanding the release of Omar Abdel Rahman and other detainee victims of the so-called “war on terror.”
2 – By the same reporter’s account “many” Egyptians do not buy the official stories about the 1993 and 2001 WTC outrages “and other terrorist plots.” In other words false flag operations. The placard holders in Tahrir Square are, then, not outliers but more likely representative of the Egyptian population in general.
3 – Muslims “turned up in droves” for the Coptic Christmas mass [last January 5] “offering their bodies and lives as human shields” for Egypt’s threatened Christian community,” suggesting they did not buy the official story about who massacred 21 Coptic Christians a short time earlier.
4 – This skeptical mindset, or worldview, is one that the new Egyptian prez must take into account. But doing so puts him in the position of a man pushing on an open door: he is of the same mind, and has a PhD in science, earned in the USA, that underpins his suspicions about these official accounts, to the point that he calls the official accounts “insults.”
5 – Mainstream polling organizations have found that in most countries, including the U.S.A., large fractions of the populations – one-third or more – do not buy such official accounts. It’s relevant to add that similar fractions do not accept the official accounts about the murders of John F. Kennedy, his brother Bobby, of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. or of Malcolm X, to name the victims of some other state-sponsored false flag assassinations.
6 – In other words, great swatches of humanity do not buy the official versions of many or most of the events that underpin the so-called “war on terror.” This “war” includes media reports about “planned terrorist plots,” the arrest of suspects such as the LOL “underwear bomber,” the show trials of these suspects, and their convictions — the vast majority of them in U.S. courts.
7 – If the skepticism continues or grows, it’s almost mathematically predictable that an increasing number of elected leaders in many countries will be obliged to take into account their followers’ suspicions about the so-called “war on terror,” the knowledge of these followers of the phenomenon of false flag ops, and the followers’ parallel distrust of or hatred for the corrupt elites that traffic in them.
8 – The dynamics of electoral politics will tend to favour leaders who themselves share their electorates’ suspicions. Therefore more leaders who are de facto members of the 9/11Truth movement can reasonably be expected to take office.
9 – At the same time, however, the across-the-board complicit brainwashing by gatekeeper moles of the mainstream and so-called alternative media through systemic omission, repeated lies, failures to investigate or even to question official accounts of false flag ops can be expected to continue indefinitely.
10 – One of the outcomes of this continued media complicity in massive de facto censorship and the continuous purveying of interlaced lies in an increasingly interconnected world is, and will continue to be, increasing distrust of all media that continue to present and promote the fraudulent versions of most of the events comprising the so-called “war on terror,” including the crimes of 9/11.
It’s hardly, then, “a thousand points of light” that constitute my glimmer of hope. But considering what we’re up against, I’ll take 10.
Barrie Zwicker became a Truther the day of 9/11 and soon after vowed to make it the focus of the rest of his life. He’s the author of Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11, currently selling more copies than ever.
* Other URLs out of sync with the official lines in the subject areas of this post include:


  1. Thanks for writing this, Barrie. I felt more hopeful after reading about the Muslims protecting the Coptic Christians, so the thesis of your article has already been proven right as far as I’m concerned.

    1. It’s good news the money has been raised for Ellen Mariani’s Legal Defence fund.
      Re; Prominent people and media talking heads speaking out (or not) about 9/11 Truth. Having doubted the integrity of the MSM for some years I seldom tune in unless I am comparing the news spin of different networks or watching Family Guy. I used to like RT for it’s perspective and questioning of US policy. Recently I noticed that RT have gone off the boil so far as editorial comment leaning towards the truth about the events on 9/11 and have cooled their critisism of the US as Mr Zwicker mentioned. Certainly many of the ‘truther’ guest commentators on RT seem to have disappeared or have toned down their critique somewhat. The Keiser Report used to be garnished with quips about 9/11. It’s obvious to me Max Keiser and Peter Lavelle who hosts Cross Talk on RT don’t believe the official story. But recently Max Keiser has been faithfully reading the auto cue. Then a glimmer of recalcitrance surfaced a few weeks ago when referring to the “terrorist attacks” on 9/11 he snarled as he sarcastically said “terrorist attacks”, bringing both hands up to make the quotation marks with his fingers. Well, not a big deal I guess but it got noticed.
      On a different subject but to do with delayed reporting of government sponsored terror attacks. 12 years too soon eh? How about a 70 year delay?
      A few threads ago someone mentioned Pearl Harbour and the fact that President Roosevelt at least was aware of the impending attacks by the Japanese. I mentioned this to a friend as a lead-in to trying to persuade him to look into 9/11 a few months ago. My friend scoffed at the suggestion that Roosevelt was pre-warned. Recently I have been looking on the web for Pearl Harbour info and then last night while monitoring Super Storm Sandy from the comfort of the southern hemisphere up popped a documentary on History Channel. “History’s Verdict-Roosevelt”. Yeah, I know. History and Nat. Geo and all the rest put a wonderful spin on history but hey, I just love all that old war footage, and in colour! So about 10 minutes into this documentary I was intrigued to hear a researcher explaining that Roosevelt not only knew in advance of the Japanese plans but was planning to use the attack to justify entry into the war. The segment about this wasn’t the typical 2 minute hand-wave of a silly conspiracy theory, instead a detailed explanation of the hidden version of events for about 15 minutes. At one stage near the end of the piece the commentator was on a roll, getting a little excited, sounded to me the topic was well researched but then in true MSM fashion, with some slick editing, there was a cut to him saying (after combing his hair and adjusting his tie) “… however, this is just a theory, bla bla bla…” It’s the “however” explanation “final word” that will be cemented in the minds of the sheeple. The truth stuck it’s head up only to get severed by the spin doctor.

  2. Barrie Zwicker said: “In other words, the new Egyptian president is a 9/11Truther. “When you come and tell me that the plane hit the tower like a knife in butter, then you are insulting us,” Mr. Morsi told Mr. Hamid, as he (Mr. Hamid) later reported in Foreign Policy [magazine], according to Kirkpatrick. “How did the plane cut through the steel like this? Something must have happened from the inside. It’s impossible.” Kirkpatrick adds in parentheses that Mr. Morsi earned a PhD. in materials science at the University of Southern California.”
    Hah! Why doesn’t Mr Morsi ask all of the various pontificating “scientific experts” [loser clown/shills actually] arrayed here at this site how aluminum planes cut through steel like, [as he said] ” a knife in butter” ?
    Obviously Mr Morsi is entirely unaware of the magic of “kinetic energy” which, I’m sure, they will all be super-willing to “explain ” to him in mind-numbing detail , in unison parrot-like chorus form , I might add!
    regards, onebornfree

    1. Need to see the pumpkin canon AGAIN OBF?
      Kinetic energy is quite real I assure you as this pumpkin smashing through both sides of this car proves:
      Note that the pumpkin is much smaller and lighter then the car and since it is a frickin pumpkin it is MUCH softer than the car door which is made out of hmmm… let me think…oh yeah… steel. Oh and the fact that the door is set into the VERY STRONG frame of the car makes it extra impressive that this soft vegetable can smash right through it yeah? Quite simply put OBF your argument is worthless because the plane had BY FAR enough kinetic energy to smash through the towers outer wall.
      Also this guy you are refering to in Barrie’s article makes the same “mistake” as you do in trying to characterize the plane as “slicing” through the wall when what it actually did was smash through the wall. Totally different than “slicing” OBF. Of course this argument has already been thoroughly explained to you which leads me to an inescapable conclusion about you. You are attempting (badly) to spread misleading information and you are doing it on purpose.
      As to your lame attempt to pit Morsi against us I say bring him on man because if he doesn’t “get it” how a plane that heavy, moving that fast, has enough brute kinetic energy to smash through the outer wall then he is an idiot as well as you and doesn’t deserve a PhD. I will be happy to pit my high school education against that kind of moron any day of the week and twice on sunday.
      BTW in the video why isn’t the pumpkin or at least the pulp remains of it sitting next to the car? Why? Because kinetic energy is real not magic OBF.

      1. Adam Ruff,
        As far as Morsi is concerned, I would say that he is suffering under the same illusion as many are when it comes to the videos of the planes striking the towers. These videos that are pointed to to make such assertions are low quality, highly pixelated, having a great lack of definition and are in many cases out of focus.
        I doubt if Morsi has actually given much thought to, or investigated the crash physics and material strength ratios of the two objects in question; plane v tower.
        But by the same token, we have PhD’s in the movement who claim to have made such deep studies, yet steer towards incomprehensible theories as well; such as Fetzer who doesn’t even understand the qualities of momentum nor kinetics, actually claiming that the building at rest {in a state of inertia} would possess the quality of ‘vector’.
        I was struck by that sentence uttered by Morsi concerning ‘slicing like butter’ as well.
        I also have issues with accepting the Muslim Brotherhood as an entirely independent organization, and think a more thorough study of the history of this group is needed.
        At any rate, the pumpkin shot is fun and makes a great point.

    2. The only live footage was taken by helicopter and from behind the towers. Something went wrong and that’s why we see the nose of the second plane piercing the south tower and coming out the other side. This is actually not possible but that is what the folks witnessed on their TVs, only once though.
      The other video footage made by (Hezakhani, Fairbanks and Naudet) showing planes hitting the towers was broadcast on MSM hours later if not the next day and when a more professional fake job could be made. Were these people well connected insiders, Probably?

      1. “Something went wrong and that’s why we see the nose of the second plane piercing the south tower and coming out the other side. This is actually not possible but that is what the folks witnessed on their TVs, only once though.”~Socrates
        You are wrong about the nose coming out the other side Socrates. This is again, another optical illusion caused by lack of definition, over pixelation and lack of focus in a long shot.
        Being adept at the technologies involved here, I can guarantee you that these images are live shots taken of real events in Manhattan that day. But it is just too much effort to go back to my files and make this argument over and again on these threads.
        September Clues, and Simon Shack is utter nonsense brought to you by amateurs who haven’t the slightest expertise in video analysis. You are following pied pipers for a walk in tall weeds by buying this garbage.

      2. hybridrogue1
        Let’s try to agree on this.
        Question: Was Hezakhani, Fairbanks and Naudet on 9/11 working for a media network?
        If the answer is no, then the video footage that they shot/made/took could not have been delivered live to a TV network.
        I’ll get back to you when you provide your answer.

      3. “Question: Was Hezakhani, Fairbanks and Naudet on 9/11 working for a media network?”~Socrates
        No, none of these were “in the loop” as far as working for a network as part of a coverage team__deployed as such, as it were.
        The Naudet’s, were of course making a documentary. It is my understanding he other two were filming due to happenstance/opportunity.
        . . . . . . . . . . .
        I want to interject a question to Craig as to whether this dialog should continue much further on this thread. And I want to say for myself that we will be entering a dialog that has already been covered exhaustively over a period of several months on many threads here.
        {Regardless of what a particular party might believe,} I am volunteering my time here, as we assume we all are. To ask me to go back and reiterate arguments I have already made several times over is asking a bit much. And this is particularly so when the issue is ‘9/11 Video Fakery’ – something so absurd on the very surface of it that it is laughable. Like OSS and Adam Ruff, I am really sick of it.

      4. Since Craig has made no objection, and I would rather not go into the ‘Video Fakery’ gumbo again, I will address the issue this way:
        . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
        Jet Impacts on WTC Towers 9/11/2001
        Analysis by Willy Whitten – August and September 2012
        All available data and reasoning based on such, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that large twin engine jets hit the world trade towers.
        That they were flown by remote control, and had special engines configured to fly at the speed {at sea level} recorded: 450mph.
        This evidence includes, video footage and still images – radar analysis [A] – wind shear analysis proving superior control [1] –Sandia crash data [2] – as well as kinetics analysis proving the energy needs were more than sufficient [present essay].
        > First law: Every object continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless compelled to change that state by external forces acted upon it.
        This first law has to do with inertia or momentum, depending on the original states of the bodies in question.
        As per the event we speak to, the first body is the building. In the frame, ie planet Earth; this body is at rest, an inert state, which has only one property: Mass.
        >Second law: The acceleration a of a body is parallel and directly proportional to the net force F acting on the body, is in the direction of the net force, and is inversely proportional to the mass m of the body, i.e., F = ma.
        A state of Momentum has three components: Mass – Velocity – *Specific Direction. [*vector] -Velocity is described as mass-times-velocity squared in the energy equation.
        In our frame, ONLY the plane has a state of momentum.
        Moment and Point of Impact are both necessary integers in formulating impact physics. At that point and moment the kinetic energy of the mass in movement is transferred into the building AT THAT SPECIFIC POINT – the impact zone.
        It is at this point that we come to the third law; that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. And this does certainly depend on the speed of an impact, regardless of what Fetzer claims, as the first two laws clearly state that they are of first and second account before the third proposition can manifest.
        Yes you can reverse the objects theoretically for the formula, but you cannot dismiss the actual frame of the physical event under analysis. That frame is on Earth; a building sitting at rest, ie, a state of inertia. This frame is described by the first two of Newton’s laws of motion.
        Again it is at the point and moment of impact that the third law comes into effect and must be translated as per the laws of kinetics incorporating the maxim of equal and opposite reaction:
        KINETICS 9/11:
        The energy equals one half the mass times the velocity squared: ( E = 1/2 m v^2)
        The plane has a Mass of 120 tons – traveling at a Velocity of 540 MPH:
        The kinetic energy resulting would be equal to 0.75812 ton TNT
        OR: 3.1720e+9 joules (watt second)
        So, let’s put together what we now know about the crash physics for this event:
        This explosive energy, equivalent to about ¾ ton of TNT is applied as a directed force – vector quality – against the structure of the façade at the points on the structure corresponding to the shapes of the entering jet {the shapes change because of original contours meeting at different moments, plus deformations from impact.
        We also have verification that the energy was applied externally from a video analysis shows a measurable rocking back of the building in reaction to the impact. This movement is imperceptible to the human eye until seen in a grid.
        An interior explosion would create a radial blast lacking vector.
        This is overwhelming evidence that real jets impacted and penetrated the towers.
        [2] ALSO: (
        [A] Señor Once Exposition: September 4, 2012 at 12:49 pm NOTE : it was actually the work that Achimspok has done – that Hall uses without attribution that is the valuable contribution to the case:

      5. hybridrogue1
        November 3, 2012 – 9:53 am
        “Question: Was Hezakhani, Fairbanks and Naudet on 9/11 working for a media network?”~Socrates
        No, none of these were “in the loop” as far as working for a network as part of a coverage team__deployed as such, as it were.
        The Naudet’s, were of course making a documentary. It is my understanding he other two were filming due to happenstance/opportunity.
        OK. hybridrogue1
        You have made your position on that issue quite clear.
        Can I now ask you if you believe the two New-York bound planes were piloted by terrorist hijackers or by an unknown person or group and guided by remote control?

      6. hybridrogue1
        I should have got back to you a little earlier, I expect you might want to move on now that there are fresh articles.
        Personally I hope you do continue to identify your position and your understanding of these fundamental elements of 9/11
        You said on
        November 4, 2012 – 1:39 pm
        “I do not think there were any hijackings, I think the planes were flown by remote control.”
        Question: Did the two New-york bound planes have the regular and legal complement of pilots and was it the pilots operating the planes on take-off?

      7. “Question: Did the two New-york bound planes have the regular and legal complement of pilots and was it the pilots operating the planes on take-off?”~Socrates
        Frankly I don’t know. There is counter evidence that reports there were no such flights that day. So the whole thing may have been ‘theater’__in the sense of just a made up story. Where did the pilots and the so-called passengers end up then? A great mystery; one only the insider perps have the answer to. Obviously real people are involved here, that are still maintained as missing.
        One would need clairvoyance to figure this out at this point…or subpoena power and police powers to back it up. You know who’s hands that’s in…”it ain’t me babe”.

  3. Quite a spectrum of issues to grasp, a whole ‘world view’ to consider. Much to ponder.
    I appreciate Mr Zwicker’s depth of knowledge and his pledge to see the truth of 9/11 exposed. I think that the brainwashed Amerikans will be the last to see it. It is sad, they will ultimately pay the hardest price for their ignorance and hubris.
    Note to OBF…not here, not again, enough.

    1. In other words, the new Egyptian president is a 9/11Truther. “When you come and tell me that the plane hit the tower like a knife in butter, then you are insulting us,” Mr. Morsi told Mr. Hamid, as he (Mr. Hamid) later reported in Foreign Policy [magazine], according to Kirkpatrick. “How did the plane cut through the steel like this? Something must have happened from the inside. It’s impossible.” Kirkpatrick adds in parentheses that Mr. Morsi earned a PhD. in materials science at the University of Southern California.

      Excellent article Barry. Although I’m pretty skeptical about the Muslim Brotherhood and the “Arab Spring” in general, it’s still good to see the US hierarchy squirm.
      Craig, I’m getting pretty sick and tired of this dickhead OBF. One thing is to have an issue with another poster but to label everyone taking the time out to interact and exchange differences of opinion on this blog as “shills” while ignoring the multiple debunks is hard to take. It’s even harder to take when he addresses nobody in particular and seems to have a carte blanche to insult. What’s the difference between him and arsehole Snowcrash?
      He’s what, the third post here and already he’s detracted from yet another article that could otherwise be a very interesting discussion.

        1. Sorry, onesliceshort, I didn’t mean to ignore your question. The thing is that he is commenting on something that is mentioned in the article so it’s hard to justify not allowing the comment (although I won’t allow this thread to go further into no planes, I assure you). I do not put OBF in the same category as Snowcrash despite the shills comment. Snowcrash’s mission is to attack everyone on any and all 9/11 topics in the nastiest way possible. OBF is more of a one-trick pony, not quite the “prince of 9/11 darkness” that Snowcrash is.

  4. I will speak to my personal take on what I shall term the “sub-mainstream critical analysis,” one which posits the hypothesis of a “Pax Americana” as the main political force in the 20th and 21 centuries. My research takes the architecture of modern political power a level deeper.
    At this level we see that Amerika is merely the garrison state for a more centralized power.
    This is referred to as the New World Order, or the Illuminati, or any number of names. However it may be, my studies lead me to the inescapable conclusion that such a central power exists and is ensconced with it’s managerial headquarters in the City of London.
    As such, my comments as to the Muslim Brotherhood fits into this more panoramic view from a different perspective, one that takes into account the realities of the former British Empire at the hand-off wherein the US became the visible ‘storefront’ for what is now termed “neo-colonialism”. This was taking shape in the early 1900s as the industrial power of the US began to eclipse the rest of the nations.
    At its apogee, the Britain Empire ruled one quarter of the globe and most of the world’s seas and oceans. At the heart of this vast empire lay its “jewel,” India. Britain’s rule over India was known as the British Raj (raj meaning rule in Hindi).
    This technique of using indigenous satraps in lieu of British “boots on the ground” has been a technique used for several centuries, and became perfected in the more modern era under the auspices of the British Fabians and the creation of Chatham House, a Royal Society ‘think-tank’ connected with the Council of Foreign Affairs in the US.
    This introduces us to the “Round-table” groups and their agendas, the Rhodes Scholarship Fund and other interlaced organizing templates.
    In taking this route to parsing out just what the Muslim Brotherhood is, it is found it is a mirror image of the Raj used in India. The ‘Brotherhood’ is the creation of British Intelligence under the direction of the Fabians. There are complex structures to deal with here. Only those at the very peak of power are aware of the real agenda and the parts the various subsidies play. So the general membership of the ‘Brotherhood’ would see itself as an autonomous organization, while in fact being manipulated behind the curtains.
    Most here are probably aware of how the same general techniques are used to rule Amerika, how the ‘nation’ is divided between a phony two party system that is in fact an expression of the same central agenda.
    What it boils down to from this perspective is that Morsi has no more real power than any other political puppet, including the POTUS, who is simply a figurehead managing the agenda with “advisers” actually dictating policy.

  5. Hey Craig,
    Are you feeling any effects from this hurricane in your area?
    East coast US is getting slammed, especially Jersey, Atlantic City and Manhattan.
    I am getting a lot of buzz about HAARP as driving this bus.

    1. Hybridrogue1,
      We’ve been lucky up in Canada (I’m in Montreal). We got some fairly heavy wind Monday night and a bit of rain today, but that’s it. But the HAARP angle is one I’ve been watching as well. I’m a believer in chemtrails, so manipulating weather is not a stretch at all.

      1. Yea Craig,
        No doubt about chemtrails nor for that matter HAARP. It is in their application that is what is hard to figure from simple old Mother Nature. This very strange superstorm has some aspects to it that are exceedingly strange. I am apt to think there is manipulation of the human kind involved here.
        A very late in the year storm for one thing, and then the magnitude of it, and the timing being just in time to drown the elections on the East Coast. As well as the financial shenanigan opportunities during the market black out due to the storm…as they say, “a basket” of possibilities awaiting hatching.
        Strange doin’s on Turtle Island…

        1. If we can imagine the hand of HAARP in manipulating Hurricane Sandy, why not with Hurricane Erin, which was heading for New York City on Sept. 10, 2001 but which turned around on Sept. 11 and went the other way? This left beautiful blue skies that would have been essential to the mother of all psy-ops. Possible?

      2. As we discussed before, I see that as the only possible application for Erin 9/11.
        I did agree that was a distinct possibility. It was in the other propositions that I see as having no sensible bearing on the mechanics of the destruction of the towers.
        With this Sandy superstorm I do see direct bearing, as of which some I laid out. We could also see a pretty big manifestation of martial law for FEMA Region 2 as a consequence of this nightmare storm.
        We should all keep our eyes pealed as to what all this turns out to mean.

    2. I’m already wondering about how this natural disaster is going to affect the election, either way. Will Obama’s approval rating go way up, or at least up enough to break away from the “statistical dead heat?”
      Or, from another angle, it could benefit Romney. The storm is hitting one of the most blue, democrat-voting regions of the country. Think of all the Obama supporters who won’t vote now, thanks to this, because they’ve been displaced or because there won’t be a suitable place to host the polls. So yeah, perhaps the region is getting HAARPed. That being said, we can only really speculate how far mankind has truly come in being to manipulate the weather on such a grand scale, since virtually all of this progress happens in tightly classified programs. But here’s what we do know: way back in 1898 (yes you read the year right), Nikola Tesla designed a prototypical “earthquake machine,” i.e. the Tesla Oscillator. If that could be done then, imagine what is possible now.
      I have to confess I’m not sure which way the election will go, but my gut intuition tells me that the NWO has already decided who it’s gonna be. I have some friends in the movement who are positive that the fix is in for Obama, and others who are just as equally convinced that the fix is in for Romney.

  6. ” I have some friends in the movement who are positive that the fix is in for Obama, and others who are just as equally convinced that the fix is in for Romney.”~Adam Syed
    Same here. The only sure thing is the next POTUS will be another New World Order puppet.
    Things fall apart in slomo with Obamy and go into FFWD with Romnoid…
    Shitskiepops one way of the other. It really is like a perpetual episode of the Twilight Zone.

    1. Yes. The Republicans are the more transparently evil of the two parties, and you’re right, the shit might hit the fan faster under a republican administration. I’m waiting for this whole mess to COLLAPSE, the sooner the better! Frankly, I think that as long as there’s food and clothes and iPods in the stores, 9/11 and other truths will be confined to “conspiracy subculture.” I sometimes think only a full blown crash of the USA might wake a majority of people up.
      Remember what KRS One said in Obama Deception: “This country was on the verge of revolution [after 8 years of Bush]! They put a black man in there. Now we’re like this [sitting back in chair and folding arms, to indicate complacency and going back to sleep].”

      1. Yea, the whole “Hope and Change” hypno-spell from a black man…a brilliant, and obviously long range plan by the elite planners…a Hegelian super storm dialectic.
        The sheep will NEVER figure this out. That is why I argue that ‘gun control’ is just more theater. They know full well every time the ‘gun control’ issue surfaces that Amerikans rush to the stores for more guns and ammo. It’s a ploy – they want a heavily armed population divided amongst themselves, so when desperate times hit they will kill each other off.
        I think we are headed to Road Warrior times. We are in a real fix.

  7. Barrie,
    Very finely written article. (Do I no longer hold the record for longest article?) I have occasionally pondered moving to a part of the world where more than 50% of the population are 9/11 truthers. And as much as I hate both major parties, it is indeed quite painful to live in conservative Cincinnati (and particularly, the rural environs outside it) and see this collective amnesia, in the form of Romney lawn signs, whereby the world started 4 years ago; the fact that the prior 8 years was when the country really went down the crapper seems to be all but forgotten. The fact that all this evidence about 9/11 and other events is right here on the table, but the US public for the most part doesn’t seem to care, is quite a difficult thing to live with.
    I have friends from a number of other countries. They’ve told me that outside the US and its closest allies, the skepticism about 9/11 is through the roof. This is certainly the case in Korea, Taiwan, Turkey… you name it. Then there’s the Japanese senator Yushihika Fujita who openly challenged 9/11 in their Parliament. I’ve heard that in Turkey you can ask 10 people about 9/11, and 10 out of 10 will agree it was an inside job. Maybe I should order Rosetta Stone and start learning some Turkish.
    Adam Syed

    1. I thought of leaving Amerika as early as the late 60s. I wish I had. I had some great times in rock’n’roll, then the movies here…but the whole ambiance of this asylum gets me so down.
      It is really like living among the living dead.
      Hmmm, I guess it’s an apropos evening for that thought, it being Halloween and all.

  8. On the subject of nations outside the USA and the issue of 9/11, I am very emotionally pained, as a native Brit (and one who’s dad is from Pakistan), to read some comments on youtube today by Britons. It’s unfortunate because I wouldn’t need Rosetta Stone to move there. But I’m thinking perhaps the UK is the last place to which I’d want to move now; perhaps even worse than the USA because it’s such a small, overpopulated island country.
    A few might know that I’ve been on a kick for a few months of checking out the earliest surviving motion film in existence (starting with the Rounday Garden Scene of 1888). Just today, I’ve watched a 1902 film of everyday urban life in Bradford, England. The video is fascinating, but some of the comments are alarming. Here are a couple of representative samples:

    Bradford was a much nicer place then than it is now. Now it is an islamic hellhole with burka women and osama bin laden lookalikes.

    Bradford looked beautiful back then. Now it’s a pakki dump with pakki drug dealers, chavs & extremists.

    Somehow, I have a feeling these guys buy the official story of 9/11 and 7/7.
    I’m pretty sure many citizens of countries that fell to the British empire didn`t want Brits there governing them, just as much as Brits now don’t want their decendants living in Britain. Karma. Deal with it, Bradford youtubers.
    I haven’t been in England since June 2001. What’s life like there now? OSS?

    1. I moved to Spain in 2001 myself Adam (from Ireland).
      Have to say though, those posts show the extent of the racism in Bradford when “Western states” are droning the crap out of Pakistan but “burka women” are seen as the extremists.

  9. Alistair hits a big nail on the head by raising Pearl Harbor (after “a 70 year delay”) as a false flag op.
    The best book by far on Pearl Harbor is Robert B. Stinnett’s Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor (A good start in checking it out can be found at Take the Wikipedia entry torque with several grains of salt).
    Ex-US Navy man Stinnett, and BTW an admirer of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, began his search for the truth about Pearl Harbor 44 years after what most know or think about as “a day of infamy,” in FDR’s classic and memorable phrase. Stinnett devotes the next 17 years of his life to researching and writing Day of Deceit.
    The nub of it is that Roosevelt wanted the USA to join Britain and Canada (that declared war on Germany in 1939) and other countries in the war against Hitler. But he faced overwhelming domestic opposition from an historic public preference for isolationism, energetically encouraged by the US capitalist elites that liked Hitler and corporatist Nazism a whole lot.
    In 1940, as the Battle of Britain raged, FDR had a secret plan created to draw Japan into an attack on US facilities. For instance he had US Navy headquarters moved from San Diego to vulnerable Pearl Harbor. Numerous provocations were launched against Japan. (None of this is to say Japan was not a belligerent militaristic imperialistic player.) The key was that Japan, not the USA, “must fire the first shot.” Japan made its fatal move. According to a Gallup poll, one day before Pearl Harbor — the day of deceit — only 14% of Americans favoured US entry into World War 2. The day after, one million men volunteered to fight. Two days after that, the USA was at war with the Axis powers.
    In retrospect, the informed can appreciate the immense power of false flag ops from this one history-changing instance.
    I didn’t know about, and have not yet viewed, the History Channel’s “History’s Verdict-Roosevelt” but find Alistair’s comment astute that 15 minutes of “detailed explanation of the hidden version of events” are followed in the doc by a deceitful “final word” that will be cemented in the minds of most viewers. “The truth stuck its head up only to get severed by the spin doctor.”
    He might have generalized that just two kinds of 9/11 documentary are aired by mainstream media: the kind he just described and the outright lying propaganda kind (such as “Flight 93”).
    Day of Deceit is well worth buying. See
    Barrie Zwicker

    1. Hi Mr Zwicker,
      I haven’t read Stinnett’s Day of Deceit, but have read several long essays laying out the essentials on blogs. The record is very clear that Roosevelt regime created a provocation and then watched as the Japanese fleet made its way across the Pacific, leaving Hawaii uninformed. A “day of infamy” for certain, one generated by the author of that quote himself.
      False flag provocations have a long long history, even the story of Spartacus is the tale of a Roman false flag, the whole thing manipulated by the power elite of the day in Rome.
      Such systemic templates for psychological operations have been in place long before the term “Psychology” was coined. Of course in the postmodern technocratic system, it is all down to a science.

    2. FDR and his time in office was something I could never get my head around.
      He was and is painted as a great person. The corporatists did indeed favour Hitler (and Franco and Mussolini) and General Smedley made people aware of the conspiracy to oust FDR from office and replace him with a dictatorship (or a puppet controlled by them – same difference).
      But then to act in the way he did regarding Pearl Harbour, as Barrie described, and delve the US in to a war that the corporations benefited hugely from, and which Smedley himself had warned about, confused the beyjesus out of me.
      Maybe there are many blanks that I haven’t filled in.

      1. “Maybe there are many blanks that I haven’t filled in.”~OSS
        It’s the Hegelian Dialectic. Thesis/Antithesis/Synthesis. It does take some study of this to get your head around it, I know__because it is a matter of controlling opposites to achieve a single central agenda.
        It is two opposing teams, owned by the same management. The object for the management is not who wins the game, but that the games continue. It is PROCESS which is the goal, never ending process, one that the management control.
        This is how it is that the Banking Cabal financed Marx and Communism, while at the same time financing Hitler’s ideological mentors [Right/Left Hegelianism]. There is no real ideology, it is just theater — there is only the process of statist power growing ever stronger and more centralized.

      2. Not quite as elegant response from me as from Mr Rogue I’m afraid – however I think we all agree.
        The way I see it is that Nazi Germany had to be built up to be powerful enough to take control of a large part of Europe. That’s quite an achievement for a bankrupt country in such a short time (thank you bankers). Now it was a delicate balance between being powerful enough to take large parts of it over and taking over too much. Hence when Germany should have invaded Britain, it never happened allowing Britain to build strength to compete. But USA needed to enter the war in order for the game to eventually be “won” by the “goodies” and for the Cold War to start. And popular sentiment wasn’t in favour of USA in the war, hence Pearly Harbour and the rest is history.
        The rule is, if you want a good competitive game, you have to back both sides and tip the balance when necessary to achieve the desired result.
        KP’s rule when assessing history is to follow this maxim. Look at what actually happened in the end, then assume that this was the result that was intended from the start and all actions taken were working towards that end.

      3. Protocol 13, subsection 6

    3. @Barrie Zwicker
      If you have been reading recent posts on this forum, one thread for which you actually wrote the lead article, then you will have seen debate on the subject of the statements you have made about 911 and the events of that day. As I pointed out , in numerous interviews where you talk about this , time after time you make statements that are misleading and inaccurate and likely to mislead the audience that you address. As an example you make statements such as
      ‘In a drama in the skies that lasted almost two hours not a single US interceptor turned a wheel , until it was too late’.
      Anyone listening to that is almost certain to get the impression that no US interceptors took off for almost 2 yours. That is not true and you ought to be aware of that fact. When you say ‘In a drama in skies that lasted almost 2 hours not a single US interceptor turned a wheel.’
      or that
      ‘ There are no jets at all. It’s a matter of historical record’
      then those are just simply false statements. It appears to me that you simple don’t know the facts and you base a lot of your conclusions about the events of 911 on statements such as these. What is more important is that you are presenting misleading statements to other people and using those statements, and arguements based on them, to convince those other people. Someone who is a journalist has a certain obligation not only to first of all present accurate information and not to mislead their audience but then to address and correct those inaccuracies . This is especially so if these conclusions involve accusations of complicity in the mass murder of thousands of people by people that you accuse in public forums. I heard a phone conversation you had with a journalist who had some time before made a drunken incoherant phone call to a 911 witness and you rightly criticised him for making such a call. I just wonder what the comparison is between making a drunken phone call to someone and going on air in public forums , on tv and radio and, directly or indirectly, making accusations of involvement in mass murder against them.
      The whole existance and persistance of the 911 truth movement depends on the on-sided presentation of evidence, the dismissal of the vast bulk of evidence by labelling it ‘the official story’ -and declaring it false- combined with the caustic criticism of anyone who points these things out and thinks all evidence should be addressed objectively and without prejudice.

      1. Is this guy for real?
        Hey Wright, there are a lot of posts gathering dust in the last blog which answer your accusations against Barrie. and which expose how blinkered you (allegedly) are.

  10. >”The whole existance and persistance of the 911 truth movement depends on the on-sided presentation of evidence, the dismissal of the vast bulk of evidence by labelling it ‘the official story’ -and declaring it false- combined with the caustic criticism of anyone who points these things out and thinks all evidence should be addressed objectively and without prejudice.”~A. Wright
    This is such a remarkably scurrilous statement that one wonders where to begin…
    And I for one will give Mr. Zwicker a chance to reply before offering any comments myself.

  11. Socrates said :
    “The only live footage was taken by helicopter and from behind the towers. ..”
    A slight correction to your wording, if I may: the only _allegedly_ live footage [of the second plane piercing the south tower and coming out the other side] was _allegedly_ taken by helicopter ..” .
    You refer, of course, to the Fox 5 “live” footage.
    In my view the question of whether or not that footage depicts the nose of the jet emerging from the other side of the tower intact , or is simply an [admittedly , and super-coincidentally , nose-shaped] , cloud of dust/smoke – as the usual suspects and self-proclaimed “scientific” and “video” “experts” here and elsewhere err… “speculate”, or loudly insist, is pretty much besides the point.
    For regardless of whether or not that image is supposed to be the nose of the plane, or simply a cloud of plane-nose shaped dust/smoke ; the fact of the matter is that whatever it is is completely flattened out when it reaches the exact center of the frame – that is , when the nose/smoke/whatever image runs into the [until then] hidden mask layer that runs down the exact center of the screen between the two tower images. Meaning the entire clip must be a forgery, _not_ a real live video sequence.
    This mask layer can be clearly seen in Simon Shack’s “Nosed Out analysis of the Fox 5 footage:
    Regards, onetrickpony

    1. I think it’s important to note that this comment comes from onebornfree, which he stated openly in a subsequent comment asking when this would appear. I don’t allow people to post under more than one name unless that is disclosed.

      1. The “shape” of this ‘shaped charge’ we see in the WTC crash is the leading point of the vector in momentum. This would be a pressure charge of blasted fragments and gases maintaining the momentum of the crash.
        I know some have posited a missile being involved – fired from the plane just as it hit the facade. I think this is unlikely, there is enough energy in the momentum of the crash to account for such a focused blast.
        And again we know it wasn’t an internal bomb, because the building is jogged at impact in the direction of vector at the impact point. OSS provided video where this was shown to be the case.

    2. This Shack “video analysis” isn’t even video, it is a horribly pixelated gif image.
      What you see here is a gif animation of such low quality that trying to “analyze” what you are seeing is futile. It as all a blur of pixels. Anyone staking their opinion on something like this is long on gullibility and short on other imagery that is much clearer and from a great variety of angles.

  12. Well since we are moving on with this…
    First of all A. Wright,
    You have yet to offer one single bit of evidence. Where is it?
    You continue to come on to this forum with spurious questions. You will not state a case, but simply assume that the official story is backed by ‘evidence’ that you cannot yourself seem to articulate. The reason for this is glaringly obvious__the official story has no legitimate evidence that you can cite.
    On the other hand we have offered substantial proofs that the official story is nothing but rhetorical spin, a myth built of flatulence. And even now you won’t even offer a single flatual for us to fumigate.
    It is now up to you: WHAT EVIDENCE?
    Here is something from the official record:
    The original story was delivered by Gen. Richard Myers, vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and acting chairman on the morning of Sept. 11, Myers told the Senate that “no fighter jets were scrambled to intercept any of the 9/11 flights until after the Pentagon was struck.”

  13. It is simply gut wrenching to read the transcript of the dialog between these Senators and Myers in the Confirmation Hearings. Consider the fact that this guy Myers had just presided over the most devastating events in the history of mainland USA, and we are treated to this soft-shoe charade between this clan of ‘good ol’boys’, obviously none of them interested in revealing the truth of what went down on 9/11. This is because they are simply toadies for the Banking Cabal and they know which side the bread is buttered on.
    A simple ‘conspiracy’?
    No this is a systemic constant, as we note as per the Pearl Harbor event under FDR, the assassinations of the 60s, Gulf of Tonkin, etc etc.

    1. Craig,
      I was looking to post links to where A Wright was torn a new one in the last blog regarding his accusations against Barrie (from myself, Willy and Adam R). Is it not possible to do so now?
      Not a criticism, just wondering if you were aware of it? I’m as computer “savvy” as yourself by the way!
      I think A Wright has a problem making a distinction between fighter jets actually being deployed in the area of the alleged threat before they had time to do anything and without the distraction of disinfo being slung at them through the airwaves.
      It’s like 4 murders taking place in Ireland and the few cops left on duty are informed after the fact, having been sent to France. Am I wrong in saying that the murderer was given a free run? Or are the police technically correct in saying that their officers were “mobile”?
      And the alleged “journalist” that Wright mentions, is he talking about Jeff Hill?

      1. “And the alleged “journalist” that Wright mentions, is he talking about Jeff Hill?”
        Sure sounds like that incident doesn’t it?
        Wright is using the same game as Albury Smith with these banal complaints about accusing the perpetrators of these events for what are most obviously their crimes.
        Smith used to to go on and on about how I was libeling poor Larry Silverstein for his involvement, denying that Silverstein had let the cat out of the bag with his “pull-it” comment.
        It is all too obvious that the upper echelons of the military industrial complex, including their front men, the politicos were responsible for the events of 9/11 and the ongoing criminal and inhumane activities that were prepared in advance to grow out of it.
        It is not only Wright’s denial of their culpability in 9/11, but his denial of the whole psychosis of the system that we are submerged in. He calls our criticisms of him “caustic”, when they do not even come close to characterizing the demonic delusions he is under.
        Like I said, it is gut wrenching to look into the abyss from which Wright and his ilk hail.

      2. No Craig, my comments are appearing just fine, thanks.
        It’s just that I used to right click on the date of the comment and could copy the link for future reference. It doesn’t work any more. Maybe lost in the formatting of the new look blog?
        Yeah, if he refers to Hill as a “journalist” I think Wright has just narrowed his “circle of friends” down quite a bit. He holds his cards close to his chest but he has just revealed one of his tells.

      3. Craig and OSS:
        Yes you have to copy the time and date, and then copy the URL of the page it’s from.
        But since most of what you want is from the Ventura, Asner thread, that is pretty consolidated.

      4. Craig,
        Is your second appearance of Kevin Barrett’s radio show air tomorrow?
        I went to the page, ended up listening to a part of Barrett’s interview with Ed Ward.
        What a ditz that guy Ward is…he is an obvious charlatan who doesn’t have any grasp of the issues he attempts to speak to. It was ridiculous, I turned it off about 15 min into it. Junk.

      5. Curious is good Craig!
        You should go ahead and give Ward a listen then. Like I said, I found his grasp of the issues infirm and his delivery slipshod.
        He spoke to the Thermite issue, saying that it takes about a gram of Thermite to cut a gram of steel. This is so. But then he goes on to hyperventilate that it would therefore take a ton of Thermite to chop through each ton of steel, which is ludicrous. One only needs to cut a quarter inch slice through a steel beam to cut it in half, at an angle the beam will slide apart. One need not melt the entire ton steel column.
        His comments on Tritium were equally uninformed. Again the numbers being close to correct, but not understanding what they actually mean, nor could he even state the units he was speaking to. Like most laymen who haven’t studied the issue he took the amount of becquerels which he exaggerated, claiming near a thousand, as some huge amount of radiation. As I have noted before, a becquerel is one billionth of a curie. It is a trivial amount. It would be like saying spilling a glass of water had flooded your house.
        So you might keep a critical ear to what he is saying. Be careful of simply accepting the assumptions he makes. He lost both feet in the first two steps he took, so he was already ambling on bloody stumps when I turned it off.

      6. He spoke to the Thermite issue, saying that it takes about a gram of Thermite to cut a gram of steel. This is so. But then he goes on to hyperventilate that it would therefore take a ton of Thermite to chop through each ton of steel, which is ludicrous. One only needs to cut a quarter inch slice through a steel beam to cut it in half, at an angle the beam will slide apart. One need not melt the entire ton steel column.

        No matter what side of the thermite argument anybody is on that statement by Ward is ridiculous! Jesusss….
        I found this image very interesting

      7. Yea OSS,
        The correlation of the fireproofing upgrades, and the floors that failed is interesting enough – then the correlation of where the planes struck and both the others is more than simply interesting — it is a tell. As good a shot as William Tell.
        “No major coincidences here folks…move on.”

  14. Hi Craig,
    I was disappointed in the second radio show…I would rather have heard a lot more of you and a lot less callers. It didn’t seem quite fair to have you on just to sit and listen to those phone callers hog all the air time.
    The first hour with Barry was pretty focused. The second hour was like, WTF? to me.

    1. I felt the same way. The woman who called went on and on about nothing (Obama being cloned?), and the second guy had good points but I think he talked more than I did. Hopefully next time will be better. Thanks for listening, though.

  15. Craig McKee says: “An explosive event [South tower tilts]- To believers in the 9/11 official story: If the top of the South Tower is tipping like this, what is providing the symmetrical force downwards? And why didn’t the top of the building topple to the ground? And where did the energy come from to crush the building AND turn all the concrete to powder?”
    1]: “If the top of the South Tower is tipping like this, what is providing the symmetrical force downwards? And why didn’t the top of the building topple to the ground? ”
    That photo is a fraud, a 100% digital creation, nothing more. Which makes your questions unanswerable as it is impossible to know what that tower looked like in reality when it was being demolished.
    For one thing, depending on which particular photo of that event is viewed, the tower tilts in contradictory directions.
    2] : ” And where did the energy come from to crush the building AND turn all the concrete to powder?”
    Just as that photo is just one of many fraudulent stills allegedly captured by photographers that day, all of the alleged “live” network video sequences that show the impossibly fast collapse of the twin towers are also 100% digital animation sequences, created pre-9/11 and then fraudulently broadcast as live imagery on 9/11- meaning that any conclusions about the energy required to crush a purely digital creation are a waste of time, as is the [unproven and unprovable] assumption of “towers turning to dust” .
    Regards, onetrickpony.

  16. Onetrickpony
    Two key phrases which sum up exactly why NPT should be avoided like the plague.
    “Impossible to know” and “a waste of time”
    Two categories of the most important evidence available to us – visual and witness testimony – need to be dumped in the crapper for NPT to hobble along in its negative little cul-de-sac.

  17. @Craig McKee: Craig, an apology. Regarding the Amy Sancetta WTC2 “top tilt” photo you have posted and asked questions about, I had previously said:
    ” …For one thing, depending on which particular photo of that event is viewed, the tower tilts in contradictory directions. ” ….
    However, on re-checking, it seems I had inadvertently confused videos/ photos of WTC1 with those of WTC2.
    On re-checking, I found that the contradictory fall direction for the top of _WTC1_ is on record in video archives, but not nearly as clearly for WTC2, which is the subject of the photo you use [credited to one “Amy Sancetta”], not WTC1 .
    However, other photos similar to Sancetta’s WTC2 photo raise serious issues of authenticity, to my mind.
    Here is a link to my recent article comparing some of those other photos that superficially resemble the famous Sancetta WTC2 shot, and therefore raise what I believe are valid authenticity issues :
    Regards, onetrickpony

    1. I don’t suppose Oneborn to be a Onetrickpony, that you had the wherewithal or even the curiosity to read my essay {URL above}:
      I know you ‘ignore’ me and others here, so it would make sense that you would ignore that as well. It’s too bad, you might learn something if you weren’t so intent on ignoring and remaining therefore, ignorant.

  18. Belatedly I’m getting around to a few responses for those who took the time to post comments about this article. First of all many thanks to Hybridrogue1 for many if not all of his posts. But particularly regarding the Muslim Brotherhood. I was aware to some extent of its origins as a setup for manipulation by an imperial power to serve its own ends. But I did not think I could go into that history in this particular article, but rather chose to take the Brotherhood as it is today.
    It’s origins are, however, really important as an example of a template used over and over by imperial powers. The Brits, notably Colonel Frank Kitson, pioneered “low intensity operations” in Kenya 1952-1960, covertly running the Mau Mau “insurgents” and thus destabilizing the country with terrible losss of life. Likewise Mossad had a whole lot to do with the establishment of Hamas and we know al Qaeda was a creation of the CIA. On and on we see the covert creation of a “controlled opposition.”
    However, as with Hamas, the monster can come to life in a way its Frankenstein creator cannot entirely control. Especially when the surrounding context changes. So now Hamas has a degree of legitimacy that complicates the situation for Israel. In Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood has not remained as its invisible parent created it.
    As to the very latest developments in Egypt, it appears the country has reached an historic pass in which no player or group of players can command the outcome. I personally am totally a small-l liberal socialist humanist radical democrat committed to tolerance and non-violence, one who sees fundamentalists of all stripes (from Egypt’s Salafists to Israel’s ultra-Orthodox) as a perennial psychological-bloc problem. The best book I know of dealing with this problem is Bob Altemeyer’s brilliant The Authoritarians. It can be downloaded for free at
    We know Morsi is not a Salafist, but he has to take them into account, as he must take into account the general makeup of the 80-million-strong Egyptian society, which, as Patrick Martin wrote in the Globe and Mail on Saturday, December 15th is “religious and patriotic.” Within Egyptian society in general are minorities of Christian Coptics, full secularists, and moderate Muslims. The Brotherhood, as I understand it, has morphed more or less into the moderate Muslim camp.
    Morsi is almost certain to be damned if he does (does, that is, rest a loose hand on the tiller and hope democracy will lead to national reconciliation, permitting him to be an enlightened leader) or if he doesn’t (but tries to be pro-active and strike while the iron is hot to prevent the resurgence of the military and lose control to other forces).
    I think he’s chosen to be forcefully pro-active, which in the context probably is his best bet. But he’s playing with fire to make pushing through a constitution that owes too much to political accommodation with fundamentalists.
    I take a little respectful issue with Hy1 in his 30 October post in which he writes: “What it boils down to from this perspective is that Morsi has no more real power than any other political puppet, including the POTUS, who is simply a figurehead managing the agenda with “advisers” actually dictating policy.”
    I’m glad he says “no more real power” rather than saying that such leaders have no power. They have some. JFK for instance had some. I think they have the most when much is in flux and major power groupings are jockeying. Then they have some leverage. That’s Egypt today.
    I’m not going to sit in judgment on Morsi, at least not yet, because I haven’t walked a mile in his red hot moccasins on red hot coals that seem to be stretching quite far into the future. I do think Egypt could do far worse than him (and did under Mubarak, and look at Netanyahu in Israel). And I wish him luck. That he needs, because he’s got an oven full of hot potatoes. (Now my metaphors are really mixed.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *