People need to know just how absurd the official story of the Shanksville “crash” is.
October 2, 2014
By Craig McKee
Let’s face it: the 9/11 Truth Movement is all over the place. But that’s not surprising – nor necessarily bad.
When you have an official story that is so clearly false in so many ways, there are going to be a multitude of valid angles from which to examine and expose the deception. There are also going to be many directions the movement can take to advance the cause and to awaken the uninitiated.
But all these ways are not created equal. When you have many thoughtful and intelligent truthers, some not-so-intelligent and not-so-thoughtful truthers, and an undetermined number of outright disinformation agents, you’re bound to get a “diversity of opinion” that would make Cass Sunstein very happy indeed.
So how do we decide what is important and was is not? How do we know where our efforts are best directed? It’s clear that we must keep our focus on things that will advance the cause, which is to expose the lies of 9/11 and other false flag operations. To this end, there are clearly some areas of 9/11 research that deserve all the attention they get and more. Meanwhile, there are areas that are getting attention to the detriment of the cause. Below, I list the areas I feel deserve more attention and those that deserve less, or none, especially when it comes to awakening newcomers. I know that readers will have their own items that they feel should be included. Some will also want to contest the items on my two lists.
We need to be fighting this battle on a multitude of fronts because the movement as a whole has to expose all elements of the 9/11 lie. When you look at the entirety of the bogus official story, the case for inside job becomes overwhelming. For the movement as a whole, picking just one area to concentrate on is not the best approach. What convinced me was an accumulation of all the evidence. The twin towers, Building 7, the Pentagon, Shanksville, the military stand down, the absence of proof that any alleged hijackers boarded any planes, the bogus Bin Laden “confession” video. And so much more.
Of course, individuals and organizations can be extremely effective by specializing – Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth continues to be very valuable by focusing on the controlled demolition of the twin towers and Building 7. It is also doing a great job reaching out to the public and the media with the Rethink 9/11 campaign and other efforts in an effort to advance the cause.
And, no, it’s not as simple as saying let’s avoid obvious disinformation. Yes, overcoming disinformation is one of the greatest challenges we face, but sometimes the cure is worse than the disease – or perceived disease. We’ll never be able to eradicate all the ideas we don’t like, especially if those ideas are being promulgated by fake truthers, because they’ll never get tired and go away. If we turn our attention away from our best evidence and instead spend all our time trying to crush bad ideas and attack those who may or may not sincerely believe them, we risk bringing more attention to those ideas than they really deserve. And the idea that if we don’t obliterate everything we think is disinfo then “we’ll look stupid to the world” is overstated, in my opinion.
We can’t destroy disinformation completely but we can expose the mechanisms that make it function and in doing so, marginalize it. And we can stay on message with the strongest and most undeniable evidence.
And there’s so much to choose from.
MORE ATTENTION SHOULD GO TO…
1. Shanksville and the self-burying plane: Without a doubt, the single major area of 9/11 study that has received the least attention is the impossible tale of Flight 93, which is supposed to have crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The plane, so the absurd story goes, is supposed to have crashed into the field and buried itself in the “soft” soil with the hole covering itself in. That’s right, the government claims (without a shred of proof offered to the world) that the plane ended up completely underground. They had to dig the whole thing up (except for the drivers license of one of the alleged hijackers, which was suitably singed and found above ground). It’s really more accurate to say that most people – at least 99 out of 100 – have no idea that this is what the official story says.
2. Evidence that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon: The claim that annoys me more than any other is that we should ignore the Pentagon evidence because it is “too controversial” and “too divisive.” This is nonsense and plays right into the hands of the perpetrators. The only reason it appears controversial is because some misguided members of the Truth Movement, along with some real live disinfo agents, are trying to convince us that the part of the official story that says a plane crashed into the Pentagon – and plowed through three of its five rings – is actually true.
I get why disinfo agents would want us to ignore the overwhelming evidence that a plane crash was faked there, because a faked crash would positively implicate the Pentagon itself, but I have never understood why any sincere truther would do so. The justification given – that if it proves untrue later it will embarrass the movement – is paper thin. Some even use the demonstrably faked video images as proof that a real plane zipped along the lawn, parallel to the ground. They point to pictures of scraps of metal as proof of the crash (Look! There’s a piece painted with American Airlines colors!). They’ll even resort to claiming that the DNA evidence proved that a real plane crashed.
When did these people forget that this was an event designed to look like one thing (terrorist hijackings and crashing of commercial planes into specific targets) when it was actually another? The World Trade Center “attack” was supposed to create the impression that plane impacts caused so much damage that the buildings collapsed. But we know that the buildings were destroyed by explosives, not jet fuel and not plane impacts.
So why do we want to toss out the overwhelming evidence that the Pentagon event was not what it appeared to be? When you combine: the wreckage (or lack of it), the damage to the building (or lack of it), the absence of trenches dug in the lawn and building foundation by the engines; the two video views that are incompatible with each other; the withheld video from 85 other Pentagon cameras, the aviation evidence, the highly credible witnesses interviewed by CIT, the Flight Data Recorder (which, whether the data is fake or not still discounts the official story), and quite a lot more, you get a very clear picture that no airliner crashed into the Pentagon.
3. The absence of evidence that any “hijackers” ever boarded any planes: This is a hugely important area that needs a great deal more attention (It will be the subject of a future post). The fact is that there is not a shred of hard, verifiable evidence that any one of the 19 alleged hijackers ever boarded any of the four alleged 9/11 flights. Not one.
There is no video footage that proves any of them boarded. All we have is video showing Mohamed Atta and Abdul al-Omari in the Portland airport earlier that morning, and we have the five alleged hijackers of Flight 77 in Washington’s Dulles International Airport (with no time stamp or camera identification number that would authenticate the footage).
There are no witnesses that can positively place any of them on any of the planes. There are no authenticated flight manifests that place any of them on any planes. Nor are there any authenticated boarding passes. We can add to that the fact that several alleged hijackers turned up alive after 9/11 and that the 19 alleged hijackers’ identities have changed numerous times without an explanation being given for how the replacement names were arrived at.
4. Positive initiatives to advance the cause: it’s easy to dismiss some of the public awareness and legal efforts to punch holes in the official 9/11 lie, but I think we do so to our own detriment. Yes, we might think that one initiative or another may not succeed, but I believe we need to continue to hack away at the official story until we find a vulnerable point that will begin unravelling the public’s trust in that story. Certainly the worst thing we can do is nothing. To be sure, we have all been frustrated by the court failures of Ellen Mariani, April Gallop, and others. But there have also been hopeful signs, including video of the destruction of Building 7 is showing on a huge digital screen in New York City’s Times Square as we speak. We also have the rest of the Rethink 9/11 campaign; the High-Rise Safety Initiative; the recent documentaries September 11: The New Pearl Harbor by Massimo Mazzucco and The Anatomy of a Great Deception by David Hooper; Richard Gage’s appearance on C-Span and on Jesse Ventura’s Off the Grid, the opportunity afforded by the 9/11 Memorial and Museum to focus opposition and reach the public, and many other developments. In fact, we should be thinking of new and creative ways every day to shine a light on 9/11.
The 9/11 Truth Movement appears to be revitalized and making progress. We even saw a mainstream newspaper, the Fresno Bee, publish an opinion piece stating calling for a new investigation into 9/11. We could be discouraged by the fact that 13 years have passed, but I think people are starting to notice that we’re still here and we’re not going anywhere.
5. The workings of disinformation: There is no question that the 9/11 Truth Movement has been under assault from agents, infiltrators, and shills since very early in its existence. It is also clear that this assault has had a damaging effect on the movement. As a result, it has become essential that we discuss and come to understand how disinformation works, how it is being used against us, and how best to react to it (and when not to react at all).
Disinformation, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is:
“The dissemination of deliberately false information, esp. when supplied by a government or its agent to a foreign power or to the media, with the intention of influencing the policies or opinions of those who receive it; false information so supplied.”
DELIBERATELY false information.
So when someone who purports to be a 9/11 truther shares information that he or she knows to be false, this is disinformation. This does NOT mean that all incorrect information and poorly supported arguments are disinformation.
6. The connection between the Anthrax attacks and 9/11: This one is excellent timing considering the recent publication of Graeme MacQueen’s new book The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy. MacQueen shows how the original official story of the anthrax attacks – that it was the same Muslim extremists who supposedly perpetrated 9/11 – had to be tossed when it became clear that al-Qaeda did not have the means to produce or acquire highly sophisticated and weaponized anthrax. MacQueen shows us the role the media played in raising the fear level of a biological attack (and specifically an anthrax attack) even before the first case was reported. He also explains how the targeting of Senators Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy helped facilitate passage of the Patriot Act. MacQueen has done his part to reveal the depth of this deception, now it’s up to the rest of us to make sure everybody hears about it and understands its implications.
7. The links between 9/11 and the advancing police state: The intelligence apparatus of the United States (and those of other Western countries, including my native Canada), has grown massively since 9/11, and this is no accident. The Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act and many other legal (and illegal) initiatives are steadily hacking away at the U.S. Constitution. And it’s all done under the guise of protecting the population against terrorists. The problem is that most of these supposed terrorists and their groups end up having ties to Western intelligence (and this was going on before 9/11: Try Googling operations Gladio and Northwoods). The war on terror is a deception that is designed to scare us into surrendering our freedom, our privacy, our safety, and our right to determine our own future.
We’ve seen recently how local police forces have been equipped with military equipment that they could not – under any reasonable conditions – ever need. But they are using it against the population. People are no longer to be served and protected, they are the enemy to be controlled.
It seems very clear that the infrastructure is being put in place for complete martial law. This includes FEMA camps and Fusion Centers and immigration checkpoints and Constitution free zones. Add to that, the erosion of the sovereignty of nations being orchestrated by a global elite through the Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, and other organizations, and you have a very disturbing picture of where our future is headed.
8. The links between 9/11 and past deceptions and false flags: 9/11 is not unique, except maybe in its scope and its audacity. Operations like the Kennedy and King assassinations, the London 7/7 bombings, the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, Operation Northwoods, Operation Gladio, MK-Ultra, Pearl Harbor, and a host of other events and programs fit into a historical context that includes 9/11 and recent events like the Boston Marathon bombing (which was a dress rehearsal for martial law). The more we educate the public about the history of false flag operations and other deceptions that trick us into supporting things we otherwise would not, the better chance we have of waking some people up and reaching a critical mass.
And a major part of this, of course, is looking at who was and is responsible for all of these events. Who benefited? Who had foreknowledge? Who picked the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 to be out of their office because his wife made an appointment for him with his dermatologist?
9. Why the “let it happen on purpose” position is untenable: Some people cling to the notion that incompetence was the reason for the “success” of the 9/11 operation. This is the position that the U.S. government itself would like us to take. But it holds no water at all.
Others are willing to believe that the government found out about a coming terrorist attack and decided to allow it to happen. This is known as the “let it happen on purpose” or LIHOP position. But the position that the evidence points to is that 9/11 was an inside job involving the U.S. government (and likely other governments). This is known as the “made it happen on purpose” or MIHOP position.
On a moral level, LIHOP and MIHOP amount to the same thing: mass murder for political gain. But the critical difference – and the reason we must expose the full spectrum of the lie – is that the LIHOP position allows the myth of the Muslim terrorist threat to stand. It accepts that real terrorists wanted to attack the United States (presumably for its “freedoms”) and that they remain a real threat. The truth, of course, is that the terrorist threat is manufactured and groups like al-Qaeda are really instruments of Western intelligence.
10. Eliminating language that supports the official story: We must carefully consider the words we use to describe what happened on 9/11 so that we don’t inadvertently reinforce the official story. This means we should never refer to “what hit the Pentagon” or “the terrorist attacks of 9/11” or “the plane that crashed in Shanksville” or “the 9/11 hijackers.” I know it means using “allegedly” and “supposedly” a lot, but it has to be done. As Barrie Zwicker says, each of these phrases carries the DNA of the 9/11official story.
AND LESS ATTENTION SHOULD GO TO…
1. Judy Wood and Directed Energy Weapons: I just don’t get it. With so much strong evidence available to the Truth Movement, I see no value in arguing about Judy Wood and her non-theory about directed energy weapons and dustified steel. Yes, she has raised some questions. And yes, she authored the glossiest textbook that has been produced about 9/11, but fighting about her won’t bring new and constructive attention to the movement or the effort to tell people that this event was an inside job. To Wood’s opponents, stop obsessing about her.
2. Nukes at the World Trade Center: Even mentioning this (or no planes) is going to get me into trouble with somebody. The nuclear position has been getting a lot of attention lately with the efforts of Jim Fetzer, Don Fox, Gordon Duff, and others to raise the profile of the issue and to take on established figures in the movement like Richard Gage of AE911Truth, Steven Jones, and Niels Harrit over their position that thermite (or nano-thermite) played an important, although not exclusive, role in destroying the three WTC towers. (It is important to note that AE does not claim that thermite destroyed the towers on its own; their position is that it was combined with explosives of some kind.) The proponents of the nuke position say they have already proven their case. Their opponents say there’s no evidence at all to support their claim.
I can’t see how this fight at this time can help us to advance our cause, particularly since AE911Truth has been making some real progress with its public outreach initiatives. Why would we want to work against those efforts when they seen to be bearing some fruit? There is just so much evidence that these buildings were blown up that I think our focus should be on bringing this truth the widest audience possible.
3. Excessive preoccupation with disinformation: This case has been made in the article already. And I mean “excessive” preoccupation. I’m not saying we ignore all disinformation, but I am saying that we have to try and reduce its power to dominate the agenda.
4. Excessive cynicism about the future of 9/11 Truth: it’s an uphill battle and it won’t be won in a year or two. And yes, the deck is stacked against us. But we have to see the positives in small victories and keep pushing forward. Telling each other that it’s hopeless and that we’re tired of making this argument or that argument is not going to help us achieve our goals. If you’re tired and fed up with fighting, take a break. Recharge the batteries. Don’t discourage others from the efforts they are making.
5. The incompetence defense: We have seen a lot of supposed 9/11 truthers like Abby Martin of Russia Today talk about the Aug. 6 memo “warning” the Bush administration about Bin Laden’s intention to attack the U.S. and all the other supposed warnings that an attack was coming. But all of this supports the lie that 9/11 was a real terrorist event that could have been prevented by a stronger and more alert defense. The incompetence theory is the worst thing that anyone who calls them a truther should ever push. It reinforces the terrorist threat and justifies the continued war on terror.
***
I know that both lists are very subjective, and I’m sure readers will let me know what I should have included and what I shouldn’t have. So what would you include on your list?
*IMPORTANT! Comments on this article should about which topics we should focus on in our ongoing effort to awaken the world to the lies of 9/11. I DO NOT want to hear the scientific case for or against Judy Wood or nukes or no planes, etc. This isn’t the point of the article. If people do this anyway, I will remove their comments. And for this thread, please limit comments to 500 words. Thank you.
Nice. Well thought and well written. And I agree with just about every point.
Thank you, Nikogriego.
We always need to have a list handy of what offices/headquarters were in Building 7. It’s common now to hear that 7 was brought down by rigged demolition, but the WHY is still not mentioned enough, if ever. Just as the reason WHY the Pentagon was hit–because of the offices at that particular spot–is much more important today than other details.
I agree. It’s worth noting who the tenants of B7 were as well as the twin towers.
“Loose Change” can be watched on youtube and does an outstanding job of showing who benefited. The only thing I disagree with is I think it is important to prove how the buildings were brought down. I also think when the American public wraps their head around the fact that our own government nuked us they may finally realize the truth. The sick and dead piling up in NY suffering from what can only be diagnosed as radiation poisoning is conclusive evidence that should be used.
AE911Truth regards nukes as disinformation. I personally (and I studied nuclear physics in graduate school) think that a small underground nuke was a possible part of the equation, but it is not an important part, except possibly for the ensuing medical problems, and I am quite willing to drop it until 80% of Americans accept that the twin towers were demolished by explosives. I am seeing some inroads, as I have a boatload of nationalistic relatives who are starting to change their mind about George Bush, and I can finally get my foot in the door.
Sorgfelt,
Since you studied nuclear physics in graduate school, won’t you tell me about nuclear weapons that leave no radiation? The ensuing medical problems are adequately explained by the chemical toxicity of the dust.
\\][//
I don’t want to get into an argument, because I am not at all sure that nuclear explosives were used. But there is evidence. Ths USGS has itself provided data showing abnormally high levels of strontium and barium in the dust. And I do not agree that all of the medical problems can be well explained by chemical toxicity. There is one video I saw from across the river that shows a very large underground explosion preceded the collapse of at least one of those two towers. You could easily see that it bounced the ground and threw up dust one or two blocks in all directions. That does not mean it was nuclear, but it is just more evidence of something of that scale. The picture I saw of the apparently melted granite at the bottom of one of the towers is more evidence. If you can explain that, I could accept it. Then there is the alleged Cerenkov radiation and the burned cars. The upshot to me is, I don’t think it is important at this point to push the nuclear issue. It is far more important to get the vast majority of the U.S. population to see what was obvious to anyone who doesn’t have psychological blinders on. Once we have a proper investigation, we might be able to find out for real just what was done. I have already seen one post from someone who allegedly was paid “8 figures” to replace the fire extinguishers on the columns by fake ones containing radio controlled shaped charges. It was anonymous and unsubstantiated. What would you expect? That doesn’t mean it wasn’t true. It just means we don’t know, but, like too much of the other evidence, only adds to the suspicions and provides some possible explanations.
There were no readings taken of possible radioactivity at the time, as far as I know. After three days of wind and rain, most of it would have been blown away. The strontium found in the dust by the USGS is radioactive. There are variations of nuclear bombs that produce much smaller radiation than conventional bombs, but I don’t feel qualified to discuss it, especially because most of it is classified.
“but I don’t feel qualified to discuss it, especially because most of it is classified.”~Sorgfelt
Of course logically that it is classified means one can only make conjecture of anything one can only suspect.
Perhaps you will find this interesting:
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/disinformation-dew-nuke/
\\][//
Actually, I did find that interesting. I admit that the absolute amount of strontium and barium found was very low. It was just abnormally high compared to some of the other elements. But you have given plausible explanations for that in your comments, so I will drop that from now on. I have never given any credence to Judy Wood’s theories, because they just do not fit the way those structures fell. The use of conventional explosives was obvious. And I have never given any credence to the idea that nuclear explosives were used above ground, because that also would not fit the facts. There has been a recent uptick in malignancies normally caused by exposure to radiation, but in line with everything else, you win. I will drop it.
Irradiated metals would not blow away nor the radiation wash away in the rain, especially at “ground zero” for whatever device was used.
\\][//
Why the Pentagon was hit!
search Donald Rumsfelds Sept 10, war on spending.
The Military could not account for 2.3 Trillion Dollars. Does anybody even realize what part of the Pentagon was attacked by the so called terrorists; oddly enough they attacked the accounting and financial records division.
Changing the names of the alleged hijackers… Or rather changing facts in general… I read that in “1984”.
Your response wasn’t posted yet when I wrote the same thing.
Another minor victory lately – for what it’s worth: John Lennon’s son Julian recently promoted awareness of WTC7 on his page. While not of Takei popularity, he has a quite sizable following nonetheless.
https://www.facebook.com/julianlennonofficial/posts/10152618089116117
Personally, one of the most compelling categories is what I term the Story Change category. Any look at all the story changes – and there are many – and the direction they take and point towards (complicity and not incompetence) ought to cause anyone to pause. Personally, I find them fascinating in their own right. Admittedly, they take a bit more time to understand than an eleven second clip of WTC7 collapsing, but they’re valuable.
That’s a great idea for an article. Mind if I steal it?
Right off the bat I think of how the account of when the military found out about the supposed hijackings changed. What examples of this would you point to?
Thanks! And please do ‘steal’ it! At present, I’m out of pocket, away from books, and on someone else’s computer. So my answer won’t be fully developed:
Yes, the military plane hijacking times changed at least twice. In conjunction with this, the FAA times changed. The commission changed the story again. Those three versions are, as you likely know, outlined in Omissions and Distortions.
The school teacher changed her story. More stories regarding Bush at school may have changed, too.
The story of when Cheney got to the bunker changed multiple times.
The man who’s still alive from WTC7 changed his story.
I know the story of other key players locations changed, too, though I’d have to reread to jog my memory on the details . . . and always, as DRG points out, away from what one would expect with incompetence. He says with incompetence one would expect the story to change to where those responsible would be in place and on the job earlier than they were, rather than (much) later than they should’ve been, which was the way the story changes occurred with Cheney and co.
I also had it firmly in my mind that there was an initial story regarding the passport “found” near the WTCs that was even more ridiculous, if you can believe that, than the one where “someone found it and turned it over to a detective.” I remember this b/c it seemed obvious that it was changed to make it look a wee bit less ridiculous . . . though that’s been years ago, and when I just went to look that up, I couldn’t find it as such . . . though I did read that there were several reports that were conflicting regarding the location of where it was found. (Strangely, when people want to refute this and attempt a debunking, they say that things could in fact blow out of buildings . . . but this is never countered with the absurd chances of someone seeing it, picking it up, deciding it must be important – that is, that it must belong to what would become an alleged hijacker – and, even though we’re under attack and in the middle of a catastrophic event, find a detective then rather than later when things calm down and turn it over.)
It’s late at present, and I wanted to go ahead and reply, but I’d be almost certain that that’s not nearly all of them . . . I’m sure there were some other incriminating stories that had to be fixed!
Part and parcel of the Story Change Category is that the changes are never acknowledged; they just change with no explanation of why the newer story is to be trusted more than the previous.
Ted Olsen changed his story twice, I believe, regarding Barbara’s phone call, (before the FBI said the call was 0 seconds).
The woman in the Florida classroom changed her story a bunch (mostly for PR purposes, but it’s very damning). I blogged about it in 2008.
http://911blogger.com/news/2008-03-28/sandra-kay-daniels-teacher-florida-classroom
Another story change/disappearance concerning the nose of the pentagon plane (from the Matt Taibbi/DRG Alternet interview:
“The authorities could have provided such evidence by showing reporters the various airplane parts that have unique serial numbers, including the flight data recorder, but they did not. They could have shown some of the 85 videos from cameras trained on the Pentagon, which the Justice Department admits having, but they have refused. One of the pieces of evidence offered by Rumsfeld in the first week was that the nose of Flight 77 was sticking out of the hole made in the Pentagon’s C ring. But this claim, being ridiculous (the fragile nose could not have survived the impact with the reinforced outer wall), has been quietly dropped.”
Craig,
I welcome your list and largely share your viewpoint here. Actually, the lack of evidence about the alleged hijackers is the issue I often start with when discussing 9-11 with a new person and for two reasons. First, it still gets me very angry that they can be convicted in public without evidence offered and even with evidence offered that some were alive after 9-11. Second, it is easy to say to a person: go to the “9/11 Commission Report” and look for evidence and then comment that it is not even attempted.
I think you have missed the topic of “follow the money”: insider trading and much more. James Rickards, a CIA operative, published a book this year entitled “The Death of Money” and we have been sufficiently successfully that he acknowledges insider trading before 9-11!
Go to the second video down of Lars Schall at the Open Mind Conference 2014 in Denmark and start at 3 hours 50 minutes. You will hear, nevertheless, a demolition of Rickards and much other information useful for the 9-11 movement: It is at http://new.livestream.com/accounts/6101272/events/2655964 (second video down at 3:50 and is one and one-half hours).
Lars expresses reservations about the truth movement even as he offers positive comments about MacQueen, Harrit, Ruppert, and Truscello, perhaps because of some of the 5 items you list that have received too much attention and have annoyed him. Don’t be diverted by those comments.
Paul
Dr. Zarembka wrote to Mr. McKee:
I agree.
Here’s the most comprehensive report I’ve seen yet to justify 9/11 as an inside job, and thankfully ties in the criminality of former CIA Director G. H. W. Bush as both Vice President (to clueless Reagan) and President.
– Collateral Damage of 9/11 (PDF)
– Collateral Damage of 9/11 Part II(PDF)
//
Paul,
Thanks for that excellent suggestion. And I’m glad you mentioned the subject of insider trading (which you cover so well in The Hidden History of 9-11), which is another indication of the deception that is the official story. I will watch the video.
WTC6. “Customs” Building was evacuated within 12 minutes of the first plane hitting the North Tower. There was an explosion in the building which left a huge hole from basement to ceiling. There was no debris, the area appeared to have vaporised. This happened before any tower collapsed, as can be seen on videos of the fire, with the street clean, dust free. See the infra red pictures taken a day or two after 9/11. Notice that a FEMA photographer was persecuted for holding evidence and fled to Argentina.
Thanks for the article, please keep up the good work.
Very good point about WTC6 – a while ago I posted on a forum the series of photos that shows that the huge hole appeared after WTC7 was destroyed and before the overhead photo was taken the next day. Can did that up if anyone is interested.
Please link these photos
KP,
I have heard this reported and seen photo’s purporting to show this, and found those photos unconvincing. As far as what I have seen the hole in the top of # 6 was caused during the tower explosions.
Can you show me where to go to see the pics you are referring to here?
Thanks, \\][//
I don’t mean to steal KP’s thunder, but I believe these are the pics he was referring to:
http://letsrollforums.com/wtc6-damage-analysis-originally-t20520.html
which he embedded in a thread on the Let’s Roll Forum in 2010. (5th posting down in the thread)
And yes, it is a mystery; one for which I’ve not seen a definitive explanation.
In the first several pictures of WTC6 you can clearly see it has been damaged from the falling debris from WTC1 & 2, but the penthouse on the roof is intact. Building 7 is still up, but damaged with the smoke wall swirling on the south side. 1 & 2 are definitely on the ground at this point.
Scroll down to the last pic, taken after 7 is on the ground, and the WTC6 penthouse has been obliterated. It’s gone. There’s nothing but a big hole where it was earlier in the other pics.
Did 7 do this? The penthouse looked like it was more behind the Verizon building than 7.
The plot thickens.
On #6 WTC,
These photo’s on Let’s Roll forum are from 3 different angles. It would be my assessment that this is what gives the ‘appearance’ of ‘more damage’ on the last shot of it on the page.
Check out how the building is sat catercorner on a foundation in these shots. It is easy therefore to conclude this diversity of POVs:
>130 jpg — the base is on R. side of frame.
>131 jpg — the base is on bottom of frame.
>179 jpg — the base is on the L. side of frame.
It would be my opinion that it is an optical illusion caused by these differing POVs that give the appearance of different damage levels. I think all the damage was caused by the tons of steel falling on #6.
\\][//
Thanks hadmatter,
Both you and the rogue are correct, those were the initial photos I was referring to and they don’t clearly show that the damage caused was between towers down and the next day. Took a while but this was the post on Pilots that I was referring to :-
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20426&st=0&p=10805356&#entry10805356
Just follow the red rectangle to compare the same area while looking from a different angle.
What about wtc7? Any wtc6 pics after wtc7 got destroyed?
Thank you KP for the further photos of #6.
Frankly, aside from foreshortening issues due to varied lenses, I cannot see a great change in the damage from just after the towers fell – to the satellite shot a few days later Certainly nothing there indicating another bomb blew something up from within … [??]
There may have been shifting and further collapsing of areas due to the fires, but that seems minimal from what I see here.
This is only my opinion. Others may see it differently.
\\][//
“Some reports suggested that explosions were responsible for the holes in WTC 6 and WTC 5. 1 The depths of the holes have been cited as evidence of this, as have their clean profiles.
However, it does seem plausible that falling pieces from the breakup of the North Tower could have created the holes. The steel in just the upper half of the Tower’s northeast wall weighed several thousand tons. It can be imagined, given the degree of mushrooming in the Tower collapse, that Building 6 received most of the weight of the Tower’s northeast wall. Thousands of tons falling from a thousand feet could have crushed all eight stories of such a building. Moreover, the rectangular shape of the hole, and the fact that it runs the length of the Tower’s northeast wall (whose remnants can be seen in the left side of the photo), suggests that it corresponds to the region of heaviest steel fallout from that wall. If the Tower continued to disintegrate in the uniform manner seen before dust clouds obscured the region of breakup, it is easy to imagine that the column-and-spandrel panels of the perimeter wall would be blown off fairly consistently in the direction perpendicular to the wall. That would result in a roughly rectangular distribution of fallout.”- article at URL below:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc6_5.html
\\][//
Dear Mr. KP,
I apologize for my tardiness in finishing my response to you. Good thing, because at first from the links just to “Let’s Roll Forums” and then my own viewing of the images in wtc-nist-gjs.zip, I was skeptical. Your posting of images on Pilots4Truth, however, changes my opinion. Indeed the crater did get larger on the next day. I attribute it to settling of the destruction, though. Some supporting structure underneath that “Penthouse” finally failed.
WTC-4, WTC-5, and WTC-6 both individually and collectively are also topics for Mr. McKee to add to his list of 9/11 things about 9/11 deserving more attention.
Alarming to me is the nature of the tower debris visible in the crater and around the WTC. The pulverization of WTC-1 concrete and the relatively small amount of exterior wall assembly steel raise awe in my mind as to the destructive energies applied to the decimation of the towers. Indeed, pictures and videos show the pulverized innerds of the WTC-1 spilling forth as if a fountain.
Coming back to WTC-6, I recall reading that it was evacuated within ~15 minutes of the first aircraft impact, undoubtedly because debris from the aircraft damaged the building and possibly caused fires. Fires did at some point rage in WTC-6 before WTC-1 came down, and lots of pictures show this. What is interesting is that many show the fires and blackened windows in the portion of the building that did not end up at the bottom of the crater.
I’m also reminded of EMT Patricia Ondrovic’s testimony, where she talks of seeking refuge in WTC-6 from the WTC-1 destruction and being turned away by a small congregation of government and law enforcement officials.
Guns encased in concrete from the WTC-6 armory hint at a different story and energy forces regarding WTC-6 not being “collateral” but part of the plan.
http://letsrollforums.com/imagehosting/37524baae38ecdbfa.jpg
WTC-4’s gold vaults and the flattening (by WTC-2’s debris) of its main edifice at a line with the North Wing (which remained standing) are two other curious feats.
// <~
–“Guns encased in concrete from the WTC-6 armory hint at a different story and energy forces regarding WTC-6 not being “collateral” but part of the plan.”~Señor El Once – October 17, 2014 @ 2:03 PM
.. . . . . . .
Concrete is a complex mixture of different metal oxides, hydroxides, and silicates (many of which form extensive, interpenetrating networks), mixed with a filler material such as gravel or rock. It does not maintain its chemical identity when heated. If concrete is heated to a high enough temperature, the hydroxides decompose to form oxides and water; the water is quickly lost as the vapor. The remaining metal oxides are quite refractory; they remain solid at very high temperatures. The rock components of concrete will decompose or melt at differing temperatures depending on their mineral composition.
Concrete will decompose rather then melt when heated, and the material that remains after it cools back down will unmistakably not be concrete.~ww
. . . . . . . .
“Due to its low thermal conductivity, a layer of concrete is frequently used for fireproofing of steel structures. However, concrete itself may be damaged by fire.
Up to about 300 °C, the concrete undergoes normal thermal expansion. Above that temperature, shrinkage occurs due to water loss; however, the aggregate continues expanding, which causes internal stresses. Up to about 500 °C, the major structural changes are carbonation and coarsening of pores. At 573 °C, quartz undergoes rapid expansion due to Phase transition, and at 900 °C calcite starts shrinking due to decomposition. At 450-550 °C the cement hydrate decomposes, yielding calcium oxide. Calcium carbonate decomposes at about 600 °C. Rehydration of the calcium oxide on cooling of the structure causes expansion, which can cause damage to material which withstood fire without falling apart. Concrete in buildings that experienced a fire and were left standing for several years shows extensive degree of carbonation.
Fire will expose the concrete to gasses and liquids that can be harmful to the concrete, among other salts and acids that occur when fire-gasses get in contact with water.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete#Fire
\\][//
—“For example, while NT incendiaries can get very hot locally to the point of being able to cut steel columns, the desired destruction wouldn’t require NT to be placed everywhere, least of all on the concrete around a weapons store supporting nothing. Likewise, while explosives also can get very hot, their true destructive energy is rapid and violent changes in air pressure to “blow things to smithereens.” It isn’t as if explosives even in combination with incendiaries would leave large, lingering patches of sizzling, unspent material to be the heat source for fusing the concrete aggregates to the weapons and creating other “meteorites”.
~Señor El Once – OCTOBER 24, 2014 AT 11:27 AM
. .. . .
Señor contends that “the desired destruction wouldn’t require NT to be placed everywhere..”
And yet as we can extrapolate from the Jones-Harrit paper on the explosive materials discovered in the WTC dust – NT was indeed spread “everywhere”. The most logical supposition to be drawn from this is not to leap into fantasyland with exotic mourning-dew nonsense, but rather to suppose that there was a good reason to salt the whole thing with nanothermetics: to eat the remains! The perps obviously wanted the crime scene destroyed as utterly as possible. It would therefore by logical that the plan was to, not only blow up the WTC, but to have the remains dissolve themselves – very like a murderer dissolving a victim in a vat of acid.
\\][//
I wrote in error:
What makes my statement in error is that the guns aren’t enclosed in concrete per se; they are enclosed in the melted aggregates to the concrete.
Mr. Rogue was not very careful in sourcing the quotations from his comment, giving a false impression about the extent of his actual words / knowledge versus those written by others.
Here’s the situation with WTC-6 and these guns.
First story line is that flaming aircraft debris started the office fires. The heat from the office fires [~not~ in open air] likely would have been insufficient to melt the differing components of concrete. For points of reference, office and hydrocarbon fires burning in open air have temperatures between ~216°C to 815°C; iron or structural steel melt at ~1,482°C. What happens to concrete at various temperatures: 300°C normal thermal expansion; 450-550°C cement hydrate decomposes; 500°C carbonation and coarsening of pores; 573°C rapid expansion of quartz; 600°C calcium carbonate decomposes…
In other words, this first story (e.g., the government’s) about office fires causing this piece of anomalous evidence is incomplete.
The second, third, and fourth story lines are respectively that (2) incendiaries — in particular super-duper nano-thermite [NT] –, (3) explosives, and (4) combinations of the two created the works of patriot PR art of metal guns fused with aggregrates of concrete. However, logistics and implementation foil such; they are incomplete as well. For example, while NT incendiaries can get very hot locally to the point of being able to cut steel columns, the desired destruction wouldn’t require NT to be placed everywhere, least of all on the concrete around a weapons store supporting nothing. Likewise, while explosives also can get very hot, their true destructive energy is rapid and violent changes in air pressure to “blow things to smithereens.” It isn’t as if explosives even in combination with incendiaries would leave large, lingering patches of sizzling, unspent material to be the heat source for fusing the concrete aggregates to the weapons and creating other “meteorites”.
Moreover, logic combined with natural human laziness of the planners inform us that the WTC 9/11 operation might exhibit overkill in the estimated energy required, but that overkill would not have been implemented in a boots-to-the-ground sense of the planners deciding to use many orders of magnitude greater quantities of conventional, chemical based incendiaries and explosives, that in turn must be installed, controlled, and coordinated. No. The overkill would have been more of an accidental bonus of the mechanisms chosen… From the arsenals of the world and the MIC, money being no object.
Thus, a story line and energy source that completes the picture must be sought.
It is remarkable the twister-style gymnastics that has the 9/11 truth movement avoiding these inevitable conclusions.
// ~490 words
The only conclusions that are “inevitable” are ones based on real data and facts – not conjecture and supposition.
\\][//
\\][// ~18 words (grin)
First of all, my placement of my last comment was simply due to my not being sure where it would land here…. and I don’t like my comments turning into the narrow columns that often results in using the reply button as I have done here.
Secondly, I admit straight up that my proposition of the perps adding nano-thermites that would survive the initial destruction is conjecture and supposition. But it is based on actual data and evidence. This is opposed to the tack that the anonymous entity takes, wherein there is absolutely no evidence for his fantasy weapon – NONE.
It all turns circular as he posits that this evidence “proves” the existence of such exotic weapons.
Again, this is all gone through exhaustively on my blog at this URL:
http://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/controlled-demolition-and-the-demise-of-wtc-on-911/
\\][//
Tsk, tsk. Mr. Rogue’s response to a complaint about a posting being made where it didn’t belong gets posted… again, where it doesn’t belong. Kind of a passive-aggressive way to purposely make a discussion difficult to follow.
Mr. Rogue wrote:
Such a wonderful, erroneous turn of a phrase regarding “this evidence ‘proves’ the existence of such exotic weapons.” In error because such exotic weapons do not need 9/11 to prove their existence. We can admire the extent with which information about them is classified and hidden. Yet still, important nuggets come to light in the published, researched, overview works of scientists that sneak out and validate the premise.
Therefore, the evidence isn’t proof of their existence, but of their use.
Mr. Rogue is correct about things turning circular, though.
Again, this is all responded to exhaustively…:
[1] On my blog, for instance with an entry from 2014-07-15 called how to gather, how to sow {Extended}, starting about 1/2 way in.
[2] On Truth & Shadows, for instance from 2014-06-06, starting about 1/3 of the way.
//
“Moreover, nothing in the “10 Signature Characteristics of a Controlled Demolition” excludes nuclear mechanisms. …”~Mr. Señor
This statement is absolutely false. Both the entity and I have offered URLs where our opposing arguments are made. So flogging his rocking horse here all over again is a waste of everyone’s time.
\\][//
In my last posting, I didn’t make a major issue of Mr. Rogue’s careless quotations bordering on plagiarism. In this posting, I will suppress my complaint that careless Mr. Rogue likes to insert his comments where they don’t belong, messing up readability and context for those reading on the web.
But I won’t suppress pointing out the errors in what he propagates from his faulty understanding, when he wrote:
Extrapolation is not evidence! Least of all extrapolation based on purposely faulty assumptions!
NT was ~not~ “everywhere”. No, no, no!
NT was only found in the dust samples given to Dr. Jones, samples whose chain of custody and integrity can leave thinkers with questions. NT was not found in the dust analyzed by the USGS, by the RJ Lee Group (relating to the Banker’s Trust building), or even by Lioy et al.
On the one hand, we certainly have reason to distrust the veracity of these reports. On the other hand, all of these reports had data tables that were fairly consistent in the sense that they exposed elements and compounds (heavy metals, etc.) that maybe they shouldn’t have if they were trying to control the message. To cover themselves, though, they do not discuss these anomalous elements or why they were there; the tables were it. If the data tables were exposing elements important to nuclear mechanisms [that they were going to ignore in the plain text], no reason why the data tables wouldn’t also validate NT. Except if the dust didn’t really have NT or other such things.
What the Jones-Harrit paper [that Mr. Rogue didn’t link] said was that they found in the dust “everywhere” a significant percentage of iron spheres. They make a huge-ass ASSUMPTION that these iron spheres were the direct resultant of NT reacting with steel in the various buildings (primarily WTC-1 and WTC-2). Even Dr. Harrit calculated that, depending on oxygen content of the steel, the implication is for massive quantities to have been present… if going with the NT hypothesis.
The kicker is that those iron spheres could be generated by other mechanisms.
Most interesting that Mr. Rogue would write:
Most interesting that Mr. Rogue would write:
When and how did the master chef behind 9/11 step in “to salt the whole thing with nanothermetics”? Does this conjecture and supposition have any real data and facts?
The very nuclear mechanisms that Mr. Rogue regularly — like a Pavlov’s dog — drools over and poo-poo’s inside 1/2 hour as “leaps into fantasyland” fulfill his logical plan of “not only blowing up the WTC, but to have the remains dissolve themselves”. The disintegration is evident in the fountaining plooms of pulverized debris from the earliest phases of each tower’s demise and represents a massive energy sink that logistics say would be hard to implement with conventional chemical-based mechanisms, but most easy with special things from the depths of MIC arsenals.
// ~640 total words include 140 Words from Mr. Rogue to give context
140 Words from Mr. Rogue in context, the other 500 words being rhetorical jabberwacky.
\\][//
“Quand une chose a été dite et bien dite, n’ayez aucun scrupule, prenez-la, copiez.”~Anatole France
\\][//
Key words and phrases jumped out at me — “plausible,” “it can be imagined,” “could have crushed,” “suggests,” and “it is easy to imagine” — when I read the speculative 911research.wtc7.net quotation:
Correcting the above, it is easier for me to imagine that the fountain of pulverized WTC-1 content and exterior wall assemblies was not thousands of tons falling from a thousand feet concentrated on the region of WTC-6’s roof that became the crater, because:
(a) The fountaining, pulverized debris went radially around the tower and landed on other portions of WTC-6’s roof, WTC-5’s roof, and the plaza. Those areas were not breached in the anomalous manner as the WTC-6 crater was. [Examples exist of tower wall assemblies “spearing” the plaza and streets. Big difference in energy-over-impacting-surface-area between (1) a spearing wall assembly and (2) wall assemblies and beams “belly-flopping”.] By my highly speculative estimation, the debris inside the crater from the towers was not significantly greater than the debris landing on other areas; the dispersion was rather uniform. That an 8-story crater would be formed in one area and not another is anomalous.
(b) It isn’t as if WTC-6 had 8-pancake layers of stories in its crater, with the roof and then the pulvized WTC-1 debris on top. [It isn’t as if the clean-up and escavation were treated as a crime scene or even a geological expedition, because such would have produced more documentation about what was discovered in the “pancake layers.”] I speculate there were no pancake layers, and the pulverized debris on top of the crater from WTC-1 covers this over.
// <~
Yes, opinions will vary.
One thing to keep in mind however is these thousands of tons of raining steel members, while spraying out far and wide will crash through structures that have basement levels deeper within them. So #6 which was after all almost right under one of the towers, would likely have had the debris crash through and fill up the area beneath while the areas around it would have piled on more ground area levels.
More telling is the actual signature damage. To me it looks as if #6 was struck from above. I see no indication of an explosive event within the building.Which would also be “speculative, “plausible,” “it can be imagined,” “could have crushed,” “suggests,” but I do not think from the photos “it is easy to imagine”
\\][//
Let me add, to end with a point of agreement with Mr Señor’s comment:
” [It isn’t as if the clean-up and escavation were treated as a crime scene or even a geological expedition, because such would have produced more documentation about what was discovered in the “pancake layers.”]”
Yes, it is because there was no forensic analysis of the crime scene that this particular issue – like all others is a mystery. And it is that “after-the-fact crime” despoiling the Crime Scene, that is the most telling indicator of the “authorities” themselves as the perpetrators of 9/11.
\\][//
This discussion began with this:
“There was an explosion in the building which left a huge hole from basement to ceiling. There was no debris, the area appeared to have vaporised. This happened before any tower collapsed, as can be seen on videos of the fire, with the street clean, dust free.”~Adrian Maasdorp – October 2, 2014 AT 9:42 AM
_______________
What is needed here is a link to; “videos of the fire, with the street clean, dust free.” (Maasdorp)
\\][//
“This photograph by Bill Biggart, who died when the North Tower collapsed, shows what appears to be a damaged and burnt WTC 6 on the left, in front of the North Tower. This photo was taken as the South Tower was demolished with super-thermite, which caused the super-pulverization of the concrete. Whatever caused the scorched damage to WTC 6 clearly happened before the first tower collapsed”~Bollyn
______________
Does this show “…damage to WTC 6 clearly happened before the first tower collapsed”? I think “..what appears to be a damaged and burnt WTC 6 on the left” is a more accurate statement. The clarity of what we supposedly see in these photos is not so clear as Bollyn suggests. One thing is certain, if #6 is “scorched” it is certainly not blown to bits as we see in its final state after the demise of the towers. So I do not find this a persuasive argument at all.~ww
http://www.bollyn.com/the-mystery-of-wtc-6/
“This photo shows the collapse of WTC 2 with a mystery plume of light smoke rising from the street beside WTC 6. This secondary plume of sandy-colored dust is similar to the larger plume seen in the CNN footage rising above WTC 6. Both of these plumes are light and sandy in color and appear to be of another composition than the concrete dust clouds of the pulverized tower. This plume is clearly rising from below the street and is not part of the pyroclastic cloud coming from the demolished WTC 2. It is rising from below the street and obstructing the Quebec-New York.com sign seen behind it on the walkway, while the pyroclastic cloud has not yet reached the walkway. These images suggest that a powerful explosion may have occurred below WTC 6 at the exact time WTC 2 collapsed.”~M-Report
______________
So now the “explosion” in #6 didn’t happen “before” WTC 2 collapsed – it happened as the falling debris hits # 6!
This my friends is stretching rhetoric to the limit. The most obvious conclusion is that the debris from # 2 is the cause of the destruction of # 6.~ww
http://themillenniumreport.com/2014/07/no-explanation-for-building-6-implosion-on-911/
\\][//
A once over read of this new article by Mr McKee has me firmly in agreement with most all of what he has to say. And there is so much to say in agreement, that I’m not sure where to start. So I will read the article over again and relish it this time, as well as consider the commentary that comes in as well.
Thanks for this new well thought out and constructed piece Craig, good job!
\\][//
Thanks, Willy.
I think the list of 10 things should be expanded to 11, in order to include this:
http://obscurantist.com/oma/wtc-7/
“Or it could have been due to a carefully rigged controlled demolition which had been set up months in advance by special teams of elfin bomber-commandos.
According to the invisible elfin demolition team theory, these magical creatures tore out the interior walls of three massive skyscrapers, wrapped the structural beams with powerful cutting charges, replaced all the walls and furniture exactly as they were, and erased the memories of the thousands of people who would have witnessed their walls and furniture moving around without apparent cause. (They were probably aided by rings imbued with unspeakable powers, and cloaks woven by spiders of pure darkness.)”~Amelius Brown
. . . . . .
Horse-shit Brown, go play your juvenile pranks elsewhere.
\\][//
Since Craig set up this page as a brainstorming session open to ideas other than his, readers should not shot down suggestions. But your link is, as its name suggests, the product of an obscurantist mind, and an imbecilic–offense meant–conspiracy theory. Its credibility is even lower than that of the official superstitious attribution of Building 7’s destruction to an office fire. It has no place in a serious discussion of 9/11 Truth’s future and any reasonable 9/11 activist will summarily dismiss it.
Love,
Hooda thunk it. We be terrorists influencing ISIS. I guess the CIA had to come up with a new bogeyman, too many people getting hip to their old spook Al Qaeda.
http://youtu.be/SOdDu6J0B1I
Check this one out for a re- election campaign promise. Really berk of these twits to put it right out there in plain sight that we’re gaining major traction. They’re afraid of us.
Theresa May, the current UK Home Secretary, has announced that, if re-elected, her party (the Conservatives) will push for “extremist disruption orders” which would effectively ban people declared “extremist” (using a very broad definition) from using social media or appearing on TV.
Extremists will have to get posts on Facebook and Twitter approved in advance by the police under sweeping rules planned by the Conservatives.
They will also be barred from speaking at public events if they represent a threat to “the functioning of democracy”, under the new Extremist Disruption Orders.
The broad definitions here matter. Part of the plan is to make such rules cover a wide variety of groups and individuals, based on what the government “reasonably believes” they may be up to:
Under the Tories’ new proposals, groups that cannot currently be proscribed could be subject to banning orders should ministers “reasonably believe” that they intend to incite religious or racial hatred, to threaten democracy or if there is a pressing need to protect the public from harm, either from a risk of violence, public disorder, harassment or other criminal acts.
Yes, if the government “reasonably believes” you engage in harassment at some point in the future, it can have you declared an extremist, bar you from TV and public events, and make sure that all your social media posts are pre-reviewed for approval. Supporters flat out admit that this would be done to get people who are currently doing things that are perfectly legal:
The new orders will be part of the Government’s “Prevent” strategy, which tackles the ideology behind the terrorist threat. So-called hate preachers, who currently stay just within terrorism legislation, will be one of the targets of banning orders and Extremism Disruption Orders (EDOs).
But, of course, things like that imply that it will only be used against “terrorists” or terrorist sympathizers. But, as the details make clear, this expands way beyond terrorism to those who may be involved in other offenses. Big Brother Watch details how environmental groups may be tied up by this:
The fact that these Extremist Disruption Orders won’t only apply to potential terrorists, but simply to those who present a threat to public disorder, clearly highlights that this policy is the thin end of the wedge.
We were told that the National Extremist Database would contain details of those who posed a nations security, yet we know members of the public who have done little more than organise meetings on environmental issues are on the database.
What’s especially galling is the fact that May is claiming that this is being done in the name of “British values,” which certainly suggests that freedom of speech and freedom to associate are, in fact, antithetical to British values. Also, all of this assumes that speech, alone, is somehow dangerous — despite years of proof that speech by itself is rarely dangerous. However, thesuppression of speech often creates more problems
These points made by Veri are important to grasp as it becomes more apparent each day that the power elite are becoming tense and unsure of their grip on people’s perceptions. The PR is slipping, and the elites are scrambling to stay ahead of the game.
This is a positive situation but a dangerous one as well, as the noises the agents of the elite indicate. They intend more draconian measures to fill the gaps in the “softsell PR”, and are looking to some hard core measures to shut up dissent. Well, there is entanglement with economics that has always made this a complex issue. Perhaps overwhelmingly complex. One one hand they want ‘business as usual’ for the sake of status quo – on the other hand they are desperate to shut down free speech politically.
Robots and systems don’t seem too efficient when faced with dilemma. Fictitious entities are ultimately fiction that divorce themselves from reality and truth.
\\][//
Veri, I have a new email account – will explain when we finally can get in touch…
\\][//
Cool man
That means I lost all my contact addresses – including yours.
Not sure how to resolve this…???
\\][//
Armchair critics come a dime a dozen. Why is criticizing Dr. Judy Wood more important than the evidence she presents? Remember, Directed Energy is a category. Those promoting disinformation claim it is a specific device. That’s like claiming the category of Kinetic Energy means a pea shooter or a slingshot. Dr. Wood does not name a weapon. What she does present is a comprehensive forensic investigation of what happened. Dr. Wood does not make any statement as to a device or where it was located. Only those promoting disinformation have made such claims. Why do you think that is? Here’s a hint The EVIDENCE Dr. Wood has gathered is indisputable EVIDENCE and cannot be refuted. If this EVIDENCE became widely known, it would incriminate a lot of people and undermine the power structure. Now, who has a dog in this fight? Remember that the empirical EVIDENCE tells us that the majority of the buildings turned into dust in mid air. Therefore, something that can do this (turn it into dust in mid air) must exist. That is the proof that it exists. It happened. You don’t need the serial numbers for the gizmo to know what happened. When “white man” first arrived on the American continent with firearms, indigenous people did not need to know the serial numbers of their weapons to know what they can do. They didn’t need to have seen such weapons in order to know that there exists a weapon that can fire a piece of metal fast enough to kill their brothers. Likewise, by the end of the day on August 6, 1945, the people living near Hiroshima, Japan, did not need to understand how a nuclear bomb works in order to know that there exists a technology that can produce enormous amounts of heat or to know that there exists a super-duper Kinetic Energy Weapon (KEW) that is capable of destroying an entire city.
It has been over 13 years since a classified technology was used to create domestic terror and mass murder for the sake of imperialism and hegemony based on a fiat money system in its death throes. What are we as a people left with? A published scientific forensic investigation that concludes a type of Directed Energy that was used as a weapon “dustified” the World Trade Center complex and a group of shadowy people determined to suppress that evidence by any means. This is the sad reality that we live in Mr. McKee. 🙁
Personally, I think I’ll respond to all that by just saying: Great article Craig!!!
I would merely point out that our interloper “Goldstein” has blatantly breached a subject that Mr McKee has demanded not become part of this discussion. There are huge lapse of reasoning in Goldstein’s assertions that have been addressed ad nauseam in the last dozen years or more.
\\][//
If Craig feels I am initiating the beginning of a snowball rolling down a hill, he can feel free to delete this comment. However, rather than the beginning of a downhill roll, I’d like to think this comment will the boulder in the road that brings the carriage to a halt.
Goldstein (who I think is a troll/shill based on the fact that he posts lengthy comments in support of Wood on many sites including Amazon, i.e. in the comments for my Kevin Ryan book review) is either sorely in the dark, or deliberately lying, when he says:
Dr. Wood does not make any statement as to a device or where it was located.
There is a reason why veteran truthers call her theory “space beams” and it goes back to 2007.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110515030654/http://truthaction.org/media/Judy_Wood_and_Jim_Fetzer_discuss_DEW.mp3
My apologies for this additional response to Trollstein. It’ll be the last one.
Thanks, Adam.
You do make a few very valid points that are quite obvious, however the fact that you deliberately try to discourage others from investigating Dr. Judy Wood’s work makes me believe that you are part of the disinformation and cover-up.
I never bought the original story surrounding the events of 9/11, however I did jump on the AE911 Truth bandwagon for many years. I put my blinders on until I finally realized that the AE movement hasn’t done anything in years but put up billboards, travel the world charging high prices to watch Richard Gage’s presentations and accept donations.
Why is Dr. Judy Wood the only one that has done an independent investigation, which if folks take the time to review her textbook *Where Did The Towers Go – The Evidence of Directed Free Energy Technology on 9/11*. Has it ever occurred to others that perhaps this has more to do with a technology that we aren’t privy too? A technology so miraculous, that if used for good, would provide the entire globe with FREE energy. Before anyone can make an informed decision, you need to look at all the evidence presented. http://www.drjudywood.com/
I do hope this post is approved – as don’t you think we are already censored to death?
–“Why is Dr. Judy Wood the only one that has done an independent investigation…?”~DianeDi
Why is it that the Judy Wood supporters use such spurious hyperbole in their circular reasoned PR?
. . . . . .
Let us go back to this assertion by Goldstein/Wood:
–“Remember that the empirical EVIDENCE tells us that the majority of the buildings turned into dust in mid air. Therefore, something that can do this (turn it into dust in mid air) must exist. That is the proof that it exists. It happened.”~Goldstein
. . . . . .
This is not true, nor is there any proof whatsoever presented by Wood as to such an assertion.
The majority of the building’s CONCRETE were pulverized in varying degrees; from rubble sized chunks to sand-like material, to dust sized material [as specifically gone into in the body of this commentary]. Classic explosive demolition results in the same material effects.
There simply is no proof at all that any of the steel was “dustified”, or that the buildings went “poof”. These terms are fairy-tail language, having no place in a discussion of physics.
See:http://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/disinformation-dew-nuke/#comment-3374
\\][//
As far as “beam weapons” being a misinterpretation of “disinformation agents” out to slur Wood, this can be dismissed by simply reading Wood’s own words:
“The Star Wars Beam Weapons and Star Wars Directed-Energy Weapons (DEW)
(A focus of the Star Wars Program) by Dr. Judy Wood and Dr. Morgan Reynolds”
(originally posted: October 17, 2006)
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam1.html
\\][//
How ironic that you would say that I am “part of the disinformation” Did you read the part of my article on that very subject? Expressing an opinion is not disinformation. You have to be claiming facts that you know are false. Are you saying that I am doing that? I made no statement that people should not investigate Judy Wood. In fact, i invite them to inform themselves about her positions. I said that arguing about her is not helping the movement. And that’s what I meant.
You’ve really hit it out of the park this time Craig. Great job and I will be forwarding the link to my posse.
Thanks a bunch, Sheila.
If I may, I’d like to suggest we add the phrase “when the building(s) collapsed” to your list in item 10, as it implies that they simply gave in.
I agree with Lilaleo, with a caveat; “collapse” like “attack” are loaded words, even though technically they can be applicable. ‘An explosive collapse’, ‘A false flag attack’, are both proper uses once specified. More than anything we should learn to use specific, focused language and terminology in our commentary.
\\][//
Yes “collapsed” is a bogus word put out there and repeated by the PR regime in order to plant an idea in the heads of the population. I wrote about that specific topic 6 years ago and why it is used here:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_by_3a_adam_080108_demolished_vs__colla.htm
I find it amazing truthers still use the term collapsed when talking about the demolished towers.
Absolutely. I like the refer to “the destruction” of the three WTC towers.
Seeing as how this pendulum is swinging back and forth, may as well dump this one into the fray. I cherry picked this entry into the fray. This is via “Forbidden Knowledge”. Some info from this source, I tend to be skeptical of, but then you know the saying: “Not being skeptical of your own skepticism means you’re not a skeptic”.
This is from “Veterans Today” which reads of being 9/11 pro nuke, this is an interview with Gordon Duff with James Fetzer making commentary throughout this interview.
It’s about an alleged recent release of information from Russia as a blowback of sanctions against them which details that neutron nukes were used to take down the towers. That’ll drive some here on this posting wild but remember, don’t shoot the messenger.
There’s one very interesting point made in this video though that deals with the Pentagon and all the info of the missing 2.3 trillion dollars being wiped out that Rumsfeld let out of the bag the day before as being unaccounted for.
Duff explicitly stated that no laptops are allowed in, the computer terminals in the Pentagon don’t have USB ports and all info is stored in mainframes deep underground so the info still exists which if true is another lie.
This is a little over an hour long
http://youtu.be/Bc4IKlJIyoA
“Duff explicitly stated that no laptops are allowed in, the computer terminals in the Pentagon don’t have USB ports and all info is stored in mainframes deep underground so the info still exists which if true is another lie.”
As far as my experience with both Duff and Fetzer, they are moles and bullshit artists. I wouldn’t take a single thing either has to say seriously, without multiple verification’s from more trusted sources.
Simply the assertion that Putin’s ‘alleged’ release… alleged by whom? By Duff’s confidential “intelligence sources”. The very existence of these so-called 3rd generation devices is based on suppositions drawn by disingenuous misrepresentation of source materials.
There is this dilemma that arises every thread here on T&S, that is to simply let bullshit sit there and fester in the comments, or to make a reasoned reply. There are cans of worms in the “truth Movement” that need to be taken out to the garbage bin, because inevitably someone opens one of these things and stinks up the whole kitchen and dining room.
So here we are discussing 2 of the 5 things that “aren’t worth discussing” in the opinion of the author of this blog. WTF? Yea, I admit to being here in the middle of it. Sorry Craig, it seems these are the balloons people want to hold onto at the party. You have the straight-pin with the sharpest point…
if you choose to pop them.
\\][//
Like I said Willy don’t shoot the messenger. I listened to the whole thing knowing Duff’s and Fetzers MO’s.The only thing I found interesting in the whole interview was about stored info. That wasn’t the first time I heard mention of the Russians talking about the buildings being taken down by nukes.
There’s just too many indicators out there alluding to the buildings being brought down by explosives. As has been discussed many times here and elsewhere, the whole nookydoodoo thing has been done to death. Looks like this slant is rearing it’s ugly head again.
Reads to me, it’s being spun to keep the topic off kilter. Whether the monsters at the helm have that level of sophistication of weaponry as suggested from the DEW crowd reads to me to be a stretch and doesn’t nuking stuff kind of evaporate things first then the percussion wave blow matter all over the kingdom?
Please enlighten (convince) me that it wasn’t controlled demolition by explosives because I’m having a hard time buying all the other chaff.
It’s a no brainer that they wanted everything to come down in as neat a pile as possible. Especially with the big towers, if they came over sideways. That’d be a much larger payout out of their coffers. My read is that would have been betting the house on what they planned on achieving with their smoke and mirrors magic act. They needed it to be as neat as possible considering what was at stake for them.
No Veri, I certainly wasn’t shooting at you. I was shooting at the ones I mentioned in my commentary.
I know your views well enough to know that you weren’t promoting the dewy noodles flambe.
As you say in so many words, the hallmark signature of classic controlled demolition wraps the case up as far as WTC is concerned. This I agree with.
\\][//
Not to worry Willy, I didn’t take it as any slight. It just takes a practical perception to see the obvious as we’ve discussed many times. If it looks like crap, smells like crap and if you were so inclined, feels like crap and tastes like crap. Metaphorically speaking, odds are highly in favor, it is crap.
Willy, I think you’ve already forgotten what this post is about. And it is not your job to answer everything you think is bullshit, regardless of whether it is off topic or not. This thread is not about whether you like Jim Fetzer or not. My point was that arguing about whether nukes were used vs. other types of explosives is not helping the movement right now.
Nice to see you again too Craig.
\\][//
Responding to Diane’s words: “I put my blinders on until I finally realized that the AE movement hasn’t done anything in years but put up billboards, travel the world charging high prices to watch Richard Gage’s presentations and accept donations.”
Gee, is THAT all? Yeah, they’ve only been trying as hard as they can to reach the masses, and I needn’t remind your (or do I?) that while AE’s presentations are watchable online for free, obviously speaking tours need to be funded through donations and ticket sales. They’ve earned the support of the Jersey Girls, they teamed up with Bob McIlvaine to appear on Geraldo’s FOX program… Did you hear Geraldo on that program saying that it was the “twelve hundred [at the time] architects and engineers” who got him to rethink his position? Let’s see, AE also was on Fresno local news, CSPAN… they’re trying to get their message noticed by the NY Times with a billboard right outside their offices. They’re trying to reach millions of pedestrians who pass through Times Square.
Let’s see, they also periodically show up at AIA (American Institute of Architects) conventions in major cities, with a booth, and they reach out to fellow architects and engineers who haven’t heard of WTC7 or looked closely at the WTC1 & 2 evidence.
Outside of that, they’ve done absolutely nothing but twiddle their thumbs and Gage does nothing but flirt with the waitresses at Hooters.
What I have been looking into the last few months is the heating up of the propaganda arm devoted to defining ‘conspiracy theory’ as a “mental illness”.
After reading several reviews on such, I found the lair that this pack of jackals is spawned in:
The Conspiracy of Psychology Theories
A coven of postmodern shamans housed at Goldsmiths, University of London.
http://conspiracypsychology.com/about/
It is interesting that this whole cult has sprung from Goldsmiths, University of London.
London…Goldsmiths…(grin)
Of course those who know the history of “money” and the genesis of ‘Fractional Reserve Banking’ [Usury] and how it started with the goldsmiths making loans with ‘interest’ of paper IOU’s based on the theory that not all depositors of gold for safekeeping would ever demand their gold at once. And how this whole racket revolved around the “fraction” of the reserves of held gold was expanded dishonestly in issuing more IOU’s than actual gold in the storehouse …that whole thing.
And now we have this cabal of postmodern shamans housed at Goldsmiths, University of London.
As Alice said, the deeper we look into this issue the more it becomes “curiouser and curiouser”.
Goldsmiths, University of London, is a public research university and a constituent college of the federal University of London which specialises in the arts, designs, humanities, and social sciences. It was founded in 1891 as Goldsmiths’ Technical and Recreative Institute by the Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths in New Cross, London. It was acquired by the University of London in 1904 and was renamed Goldsmiths’ College. The word College was dropped from its branding in 2006, but “Goldsmiths’ College”, with the apostrophe, remains the institution’s formal legal name.~Wiki
Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths
The Company, which originates from the twelfth century, received a Royal Charter in 1327 and ranks fifth in the order of precedence of City Livery Companies. Its motto is Justitia Virtutum Regina, Latin for Justice is Queen of Virtues.
The Goldsmiths’ Company founded a London Technical and Recreative Institute in 1891, which is better known nowadays as Goldsmiths, University of London.
The Company was established as a medieval guild for the goldsmith trade, and over time became responsible for silversmiths and jewellers too. Only those clothed with the livery (liverymen) of the Company were licenced to trade such precious commodities within the bounds of the City. Whilst this arrangement maintained standards, it also became restrictive in an ever increasing global market.
The word hallmarking derives from the fact that precious metals were officially inspected and marked at Goldsmiths’ Hall, the Company’s HQ. Today, the Company is one of the few Livery Companies still to play a formal role in its ancient trade. Until the late 20th-century, the Company retained paramount responsibility for hallmarking platinum, gold and silver, but successive parliamentary legislation has devolved much authority to Government departments.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worshipful_Company_of_Goldsmiths
_________________________________________________________________
What we have here on ‘The Conspiracy of Psychology Theories’ is:
Design masquerading as Diagnosis – social engineering in the guise of social analysis, ie; psychologism and scientism, a cultist pretense to science. In essence, a theology.
Those who grasp history, especially the last 200 years of our contemporary era, will note that there have been ‘predictions’ that have come to pass [see: The Protocols of Zion]. A rational person would thus conclude that the only way to predict the future is to engineer it. The only caveat to that is to point out that there have been those who have studied the social engineers and discovered the agenda, such as Huxley, and Orwell who both gave dire warnings as to this future we now inhabit.
So here, where the social engineers gather to design their glorious despotic future of a world raped and stripped of its free will; we find a place of study, where we can see the latest trends in the social engineering agenda.
\\][//
Superb!
[Disclaimer: Quotations from Mr. McKee which provide context do ~not~ count towards my 500 words… which came out at <650 words.]
Dear Mr. McKee,
Your best article ever! To conserve my precious word count, if I don’t address a specific point in your well thought out and well written article, then register my agreement, thereby making my disagreement in certain areas below just a hair-split out of the whole. The following quotes from you are not in sequence:
Indeed. In order for disinformation to have traction, it must have a believable foundation consisting of valid nuggets of truth. If the effort to debunk disinformation limits its scope to only the flaws, it remains incomplete and possibly even played: right into the hands of a multi-faceted disinformation agenda. Acknowledgment of nuggets of truth and their applicable re-purposing are the requisite steps for completion.
The obsession — those for and against — has been a sign of a disinformation game, particularly when the objective review is missing that end-to-end would acknowledge nuggets of both truth and error. On top of this, yet another game is to extrapolate evidence from one aspect of the operation to other aspects.
For example, discussion of WTC-4, WTC-5, and WTC-6 are often ignored in favor of WTC-1, WTC-2, and WTC-7. Yet the former three are inexplicable and strange, sufficiently so that decades of known space-based weaponry research — framed properly — isn’t so far-fetched as being applicable.
I believe that the vulnerable point is 3rd/4th generation nuclear involvement.
Public realization of the literal message of 9/11 nuclear involvement should have figurative massive nuclear fall-out all over, which is why it becomes the line that cannot be crossed, and organizations will be co-opted to park it: “thus far and no further.”
Although AE does not claim that thermite destroyed the WTC on its own, combining nano-thermite with other (chemical-based) explosives only addresses a portion of the observed effects and makes it worse for addressing other portions (e.g., vehicle damage, under-rubble hot-spot duration, implementation logistics), which is why thermite can be viewed as a limited-hangout. I fault AE for years of unobjective and uncomprehensive assessments relating to the evidence (nuggets of truth) of nuclear involvment strung through many different disinformation endeavors, such as Dr. Wood’s work.
This is key. Brief diversion, a YouTube video that was brought to my attention a few weeks ago highlights the dangers that this planet faces and gives me insight why some (political / false-flag) events unfolded the way they did.
9/11 was about securing energy sources in the Middle East, almost like a last-hurrah party of gluttony and consumerism — to get the very last beer — to tip the climate change into crisis. Our daily creation of warming green-house gases through our unsubstainable lifestyles only ratchets things so far. The huge danger is that global warming will thaw and release deposits of methane and other gases presently frozen at the bottom of the ocean. That is the tipping point that gives us a steep acceleration in green-house gases that changes climate to unrecognizable and even unhabitable levels.
In other words, rising sea levels and unprecedented violent storms are going to create refugees out of those who aren’t outright culled,… err… killed. Turning local police forces into armies is seen as necessary to control the perceived migrating masses of “have-not’s” to the high elevation areas with the “have’s and have more’s”.
One goal of chemtrails are a cosmetic effort to stop symptoms of global warming by reflecting sunlight back, but don’t address root causes of fossil-fuel consumption, clear-cutting, pollution, etc. Another goal of chemtrails will be to cull populations to reduce need, because obviously the introduction of plastics into our consumerism (about the same time pick-up’s and SUV’s were first hyped) and into the “great garbage patch” isn’t killing us fast enough.
//
Evidence of space based weaponry does exist on YouTube. ,video footage of US military using energy weapons to destroy buildings. Geez, am I the only one that has seen these?
“Directed Energy Weapons used in Iraq” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IDoLPD3XfDU
On YouTube. See additional videos in R hand column. There are plenty of them to review.
Perhaps J woods is on to something that needs revisiting?
Tesla howitzer used on mosque
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VWzEzpMWkyQ
Another example of an energy weapon
It is conceivable that all manner of overkill was used that day, eh?
“…overkill was used that day”~Gabe
I would say that is most unlikely. The demolitions would have been done for a precise and calibrated effect. A pro-military op would not “throw in the kitchen sink” (as it were).
For my analysis on the destruction of WTC, see the URL below:
http://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/controlled-demolition-and-the-demise-of-wtc-on-911/
\\][//
Anthropomorphic global warming is a hoax. The planet may indeed be warming, but it is doing so at an expected rate in relation to the occurrence of the last ice age. Global warming, climate change, or whatever the hell they’re calling it this week has not occurred as a result of too many Americans driving fuel-inefficient SUVs. This is simply another globalist money-making, population-controlling scheme.
BTW, how can carbon dioxide of all things, be a “greenhouse” gas? Every plant on the planet NEEDS it to survive! So how about this? If there’s too much CO2 in our atmosphere, perhaps we should create more consumers of CO2 by simply planting more trees!
As for dangerous frozen gases at the bottom of the ocean, we’re talking about a net temperature change of ONE DEGREE, not the 6-15 degrees I’ve seen mentioned. I don’t think that’s going to melt anything frozen at the bottom of the ocean.
Perhaps a better idea to fight global warming would be for the MIC to stop spraying us all DAILY with aluminum, barium, strontium, et al? Instead of reflecting the sun’s heat like a giant disco ball, these heavy metal particles absorb heat from the sun, creating warmer temperatures beneath!
ALL this crap is just a series of scams design to control us useless eaters.
9/11 happened for a number of reasons. These kind of events done in the public eye are always done for a varying number of reasons only known to those who were behind it.
In this case, one can surmise that it was done to enter Iraq to grab their oil resources, to get the Patriot Act put in place, to make Larry Silverstein a lot of money, to sure up Israel, and deflect any criticism of the Jewish Lobby in the US (ie to make Muslims/Arabs/Islam look evil fundamental terrorists … Maybe there was even an “occult” reason for it. That, of course, is really far out … but you must not disregard it. Remember you don’t have to believe it. But it may be that the infamous “powers that be” believe in it, and you should be open to that idea.
Some people may remember what happened in 2007 when the 9/11 Truth Movement effectively broke apart. Or actually, it was, I believe pre-destined to fall apart because some people in the field were set up before hand to be “9/11 Truthers”, and were tasked to destroy the field from within, and to stop it getting any real traction. I saw all this from quite close quarters at the time.
People in this camp were Alex Jones, (of course, as I discovered and which has been built upon a bit since then, has extremely close links with the Bronfman family of Canada), Jim Fetzer (who set up his elitist “scientific” 9/11 investigation group with Steven Jones, and proceed to alienate everyone around him), Eric Hufschmid (who had some terrific photos of the incident but never came up with those who took said photos, and had one of the first books on 9/11 to be published. He then claimed that 9/11 was done by the “Jews” which made anyone who looked at the Israel/Jewish connection look mightily anti-semitic). Hufschmid by the way was a half-brother to one of Murdochs (yes, those Murdochs!).
Then there was old Christopher Bollyn who cosied himself up to American Free Press, and Michael Collins Piper, and put out a lot of bull … which still happens to this day. He then claimed to have been attacked by police, and buggered off to Estonia (which is where I tracked him down to, at the time). Did you know that not only did he marry an Israeli for a while, and spent time on a Kibbutz but … here’s something I found out a few years ago, and I don’t know if anyone else knows this … but his parents are Jewish (don’t know if they’re still alive or not).
Then there was the guy who claimed to have seen a drone flying into the Pentagon, and exploding … which turned out to be utter bull as well. Although, this very scenario could very well have happened, it made any people investigating this angle, again look stupid, and they got tarred with the same brush.
All this happened in 2007. It was quite a year.
Now back to Fetzer. As he is still doing, he only ever concentrates on the minute details in something like this. He has been doing this in the JFK assassination field for years. He distracts attention by pulling apart every tiny bit of the mechanics of how something like this happened, and never questions who did it. He is also a complete blowhard … but that’s neither here nor there.
I left the field pretty much after the fallout of 2007, and only very occasionally follow any bits of news on it. I can’t believe that people are still finding out and following Judy Wood now, and that Fetzer is still going as well. There was so much disinfo in the field back then, it must be there in astonishing amounts now.
There, of course, may be something in what Judy Wood says. But, she is very strange (which is not that bad in itself, cos I’m a bit weird too … but it detracts from the message, and its possible veracity), and talks about an excess of energy or something (I’ve not looked at her work for years) but has no evidence to show for her theory (as far as I know). I always felt that if a directed energy beam weapon had been fired at the twin towers, then there would have been some sort of heat signature on the footage. Something like a heat haze or some such at the time of the towers falling.
I think the nuke theory has more legs to it … but talking about the hows like this detracts from who the people actually were behind it (mostly people with Israeli connections, dual citizenships, or something to gain from it like Larry Silverstein).
Remember that the so-called War on Terror was started because of this event, and who wrote a book in 1986 defining this phrase? None other than Benjamin Netanyahu.
That’s all you really need to know about who was behind it.
Best wishes
Harvey P
To speak to Craig’s number “5. The incompetence defense:”
This is one of those more subtle issues that novices get trapped into buying; especially those who are unfamiliar with espionage, covert activities and spycraft.
“Incompetence” is a revetment, or what is referred to as a modified limited hangout. It usually goes in tandem with another limited hangout; “Blowback”, which is the proposition that a real enemy has been pushed to the point of striking back at the actions of imperialist domination.
While neither concept, incompetence nor blowback (revenge) is an absurdity in itself; the actual history of the architecture of political power shows that both concepts have been used to veil the reality that it is the imperial powers themselves that create a “controlled enemy”. And this is proven to be the case in the modern and post modern era, as such groups as The Muslim Brotherhood, the Taliban, al Qaeda, and the current boogeyman, ISIS are all creatures of Western Intelligence, puppets on strings of the Global Elite. These groups bring the theater of the ‘Strategy of Tension’ to life on the world stage.
\\][//
LANGLEY, Va. – Startled employees of the Central Intelligence Agency discovered this morning that Lee Harvey Oswald had been quietly added to the memorial wall at CIA Headquarters. Oswald is widely believed to have assassinated U.S. President John F. Kennedy, or someone dressed like him (sic), in Dallas in 1963.
The action does not appear to have been a prank. As of press time the extra star was still there, along with Oswald’s name listed in the memorial book, located between entries for fallen agents Felix Leiter and Charles Calthrop.
A spokesman from the CIA refused to comment or elaborate on why the agency has added Oswald’s name to the memorial, only saying that after 50 years several documents had been declassified, which have “finally allowed the Agency to set the record straight.”
Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/11/lee-harvey-oswald-quietly-added-cia-memorial-wall/#ixzz3F2s0iRnM
\\][//
They were just talking about that on Corbett Report “New World Next Week”. You might want to take a listen over there to hear what they have to say about that one.
I wanted to Veri, but I don’t have a sound system for this new PC…I am working on it though.
I imagine what Corbett et al have to say will be close to my addendum on this issue I just posted…
\\][//
It was traced back to one of those spoof blogs. They even admitted they were even sucked in by one a few years back
Note on the above about Oswald; it is interesting but unconfirmed. At least by official sources. Independent research however indicates a strong link between both FBI and CIA in Oswald’s background.
“A spokesman from the CIA refused to comment..” – this is the same type of unsubstantiated garbage we get from Veterans Today – Duff and Fetzer. And what purpose does such disinfo serve?
It will either be found to be bogus (likely) and when such occurs the whole subject is ‘assumed’ to be discredited.
See:
http://joanmellen.com/wordpress/2014/04/30/lectures-given-for-dealey-plaza-uk-canterbury-kent-uk-april-26th-and-april-27th-2014-canterbury-christ-church-university/#more-631
\\][//
As far as the power of the Public Relations Regime, consider this ‘magic feat. Is this indicative of how stupefied and ‘dumbed down’ the western populations are? Or is it a testament of how all powerful Oz is?
Obama sin laden… Hussein! Obama sin laden … what ‘magic’ could cause the Amerikan people to buy into this charlatan’s necromancy? After being literally waterboarded with Osama bin Laden as the boogeyman… along with Saddam Hussein; the PR regime was able to flip the population totally backwards. Now that is some powerful medicine, some black magic woowoo!
\\][//
Hello!
I’m new here…..I tried to comment, but it didn’t show up.
Any comment by someone who has not commented before will automatically go into moderation. Once you have had a comment approved, future comments will appear directly.
Welcome to a great site, I’m new myself:P
Hello!
Maybe a good on to add to the list of “things that need more attention” would be the first thing all investigators of murder ask:
Cui bono?
Who has benefitted from 911 and all the wars it has spawned in the Middle East?
Yes sockpuppet2012,
“Cui bono”,Motive, MO, Means & Opportunity. The forensic staples.
\\][//
Thanks Craig for your perspective and analysis on where the movement stands; there has been significant traction the past two years.
As far as introducing the subject, a good starting point would be David Hooper’s documentary. It is a well-conceived primer that in 90 minutes removes the blinders of the myth and the basic narrative surrounding the event. The film deftly emphasizes the hard science and irrefutable evidence–with use of AE911Truth experts’ footage–while at the same time calling out the frauds at NIST and the media spin which, through the years, has perpetuated the false narrative. Hooper as narrator effectively leaves room for further inquiry beyond what occurred in lower Manhattan that day.
I noted in the credits that Fran Shure is one of the producers of Anatomy of a Great Deception. This documentary succeeds (on a very challenging subject) by reaching out to the viewer on a personal level, in which it’s okay to pursue truth on the uncomfortable state of affairs, arising long ago from the advent of the military-industrial complex.
Another thing that’s a rather largely over looked point, though one that would probably be lost on those not in the know, is the lack of following protocol. This would certainly involve any investigation of the buildings; even if they decided to move the rubble, there’s no way they would’ve sent it off to China or wherever without orders to do so. I was working in a rather small chemical plant and part of it exploded. We all knew pretty much for certain what caused it, yet we were still told to flag off around the debris and not move it. They sent it off to have it examined to tell us exactly what we all already knew. I imagine that this doesn’t sound like much to most people, but it is.
Also, in any instance where we at the plant would’ve had an emergency, there would be a hierarchy of sorts established. This would happen naturally, and it simply wouldn’t be possible for someone to circumvent this without someone else pointing this out and not allowing it . . . much like you’d expect in the military. So, this is why it’s beyond absurd – that is, I can in no sense take it seriously – that Rumsfeld was out in front of the Pentagon helping walk a stretcher to an ambulance. In the event of a real attack, this would’ve never, ever happened. Even if he were that incompetent to not know what he was supposed to be doing – which I don’t in any sense believe for second – no one would’ve allowed him to do that. It’s simply not possible to get that out of whack, hierarchically; he would’ve been at (or near) the top of the pyramid, not all the way down at the bottom.
I’m sure I’m unaware, overlooking, or forgetting other standard emergency protocols that were overridden.
All that ‘missing’ gold and silver that was stolen from WTC 4 the night before needs some traction.
Or maybe that Bin Laden was so crafty, he slipped into the WTC 4 basement the night before 9/11 and stolen hundreds and hundreds of millions of gold and silver bullion before the WTC attacks?
Don’t think so, someone knew what was coming down and grabbed some loot before the attacks, knowing that the media frenzy over the attacks would be good cover, just like Rumsfeld announcing the day before about that missing 2.3 trillion.
The one major area of 9/11 that needs much more attention and as far as I can tell has not been mentioned yet by anyone is the evidence of cover-up after the fact. Although Reece hinted at this subject in his/her comment of October 3, 2014 at 4:01 am the real meat of this issue is almost entirely ignored by us here and by the truth movement as a whole with only a few minor exceptions. For example part of the cover-up after 9/11 involved stopping legitimate investigations into the crimes and destroying the evidence. Both of these activities are themselves serious crimes and the kicker of it is we have a clear understanding of exactly who obstructed investigations and who ordered the evidence destroyed.
I have long thought that we should go after the people involved in the cover-up much more vigorously because that is where we can really nail them to the wall right now today! Much like they finally got Capone on tax evasion instead of racketeering, murder, bribery, and blackmail we could nail the 9/11 perps to the wall just based on how they broke all the rules to perpetrate the cover-up. Think about it, they destroyed massive amounts of evidence, blocked critical information from being released and threatened police and fireman to keep quiet about what they know. On and on their crimes pile up just implementing the cover-up. Who at the SEC blocked the public from finding out who failed to pick up their 5 million dollars made from the short sales on the airline stocks prior to 9/11? Who is that person at the SEC who says we wont tell you who placed those shorts and failed to pick up the 5 mil profit? That person is guilty of serious crimes don’t you think since he or she is protecting the identity of a person or persons with pre-knowledge of 9/11?
Not only did they cover-up 9/11 and destroy evidence but they also completely scuttled the bogus investigations they were forced into doing as well. They failed to follow up on or investigate valid eye witness evidence of bombs in the towers which goes far beyond being incompetent and becomes a crime in itself. Ignoring of evidence done at this level becomes racketeering, evidence tampering, and massive perjury related to mass murder so it is VERY serious crimes we are talking about here.
I have not even touched on the corporate whore media’s role in the cover-up which makes them accomplice to all of the above mentioned crimes and guilty of their own RICO crimes.
Why don’t we go after this stuff with a vengeance and get some of the rats involved with the cover-up to squeal on the perps who actually put them up to it? I would bet a lot of fraudulent federal reserve notes that the ones who ordered the cover-up are the same ones who did the deed.
I agree again with Mr Ruff,
The evidence of cover-up is often the very tell of a major crime, and those doing the whitewash are accessories after the fact. And they often turn out to be accessories during the fact, thus perpetrators themselves.
It is in fact the cover story, the official narrative itself that often turns out to be the key to the truth.
I give you just three examples, the Warren Commission Report, the NIST Reports, and the 9/11 Commission Reports as flaming examples.
Just as much is the media coverage as burlesque. An prime example is in the illustration used at the top of this page: ‘Attack On America’ (MSNBC) – all three of the large TV networks had their own ‘”movie title” complete with theme music. It was in fact this electronic propaganda barrage which was the real ‘Main Event’ on 9/11.
It was the obviousness of the scripted nature of the commentary of the ‘usual suspects’; the ‘talking heads’ that were lined up and on the same page on NPR, that was the first major clue to me on the morning of 9/11. I was in LA that morning, and decided to hightail it back to San Diego after an interview. It was a surreal experience; not a single other car on the FWY from LA to SD, not a plane in the sky. The trip to LA the night before was more than 3 hours to get there. The trip back was 25 minutes from the Ventura FWY on ramp to the exchange to the route to HWY 101 to San Diego.
It was on the show with the revolving “experts” that the main points of the official narrative was sketched out. Hillary Clinton was the first I heard to use the term “Homeland”. The mantra of bin Ladin, al Qaeda began there in my experience. The story-line was settled in general terms from the beginning – BEFORE any chance for an investigation. And when eventual “investigations” ultimately cement the very same story-line it is a sure sign of fiction and cover-up.
\\][//.
“Who at the SEC blocked the public from finding out who failed to pick up their 5 million dollars made from the short sales on the airline stocks prior to 9/11? Who is that person at the SEC who says we wont tell you who placed those shorts and failed to pick up the 5 mil profit? That person is guilty of serious crimes don’t you think since he or she is protecting the identity of a person orA persons with pre-knowledge of 9/11?”
Adam,
Actually, there was no $5 million insider trading profits not picked up. Profits were picked up … as is imbedded in the evidence presented by Chesney, et al., that I had occasion to report upon at the Toronto conference. Chesney, et al, didn’t explicitly address the issue because that was not the purpose of their econometric investigation but it is there in a careful reading.
I could go into details, but let me merely flag a caution and point to http://ithp.org/articles/septemberinsidertrading.html.
Paul
Paul this article is fairly complex, so I will ask this direct question to you;
Is it fair to say that the evidence of insider profiteering is stronger for the entire market drop than for the specific companies originally cited?
\\][//
Yes, I think that is a fair assessment. Indeed, would perpetrators (who are not stupid) choose such obvious targets as put options on American and United stocks, unless they knew they could get away with it by having all bases covered ahead of time — not so sure, in my estimation.
Nevertheless, there is something going on with American and United stocks that the 9/11 Commission felt it needed to dismiss from consideration in a ridiculously simple comment. I think they were concerned with press commentary that the Osama, et al, had exposed themselves, when, in fact, they knew they had nothing to do with those transactions and had to quiet down the evidenciary issue.
In any case, we haven’t gotten to the bottom of this.
Thank you for your reply, and the article we are discussing.
You mention here:
“Nevertheless, there is something going on with American and United stocks that the 9/11 Commission felt it needed to dismiss from consideration in a ridiculously simple comment.”
Which once again buttresses the idea that it is very much the cover-up that gives some of the surest clues as to who is behind a crime.
\\][//
Some promo for Paul Zarembka here:
Interview 955 – Lars Schall and Paul Zarembka Dissect the 9/11 Insider Trading
Posted: 16 Oct 2014 05:43 AM PDT
“Today James talks to Lars Schall of LarsSchall.com and Dr. Paul Zarembka at SUNY Buffalo about Jim Rickards’ recent “revelations” regarding the 9/11 insider trading. We discuss the evidence that Rickards (who supports the official 9/11 narrative) leaves out of his analysis and where the economic analysis of 9/11 insider trading stands today.”
\\][//
Re: #3 of the “don’t” section of Craig’s list: Excessive preoccupation with disinformation…
For the argument’s sake, let’s pretend, if you will, that all leaders of all 9/11 movements and organizations, whether activist, blogger or scientist, are compromised (Sorry, Craig ;-}). This can range from a benign mental and intellectual handicap of otherwise well meaning people, all the way to the sinister, conscious and professional disinfo agents, provocateurs, or outright moles…
For good measure, let’s go a step further and also assume that up to 10% of each pool of people, commenters, underlings, administrative people in the so-called truth movement and blogosphere are also compromised in some shape or form, in varying degrees.
What we are left with would be the vast majority of people who smell a rat in the official story, who have developed a certain distrust for the “guberment” and choose to set out to figure out the very elusive “truth” in their own capacity, as well as those less capable of developing original thoughts who pick and choose from the wide range of “truth” offerings from the top of the pyramid based on their prejudices, political and religious views and philosophies and their (in)ability to engage in scientific and critical thinking.
What we end up having here is an impossible knot which gets tighter every time the trolls, agitators and provocateurs tug at either end of the rope, causing people with good intentions to dismiss each other’s opinions, engage in philosophical vendettas about relatively trivial facts, and perhaps most importantly, dismiss valuable thoughts, opinions, scientific and general research by others simply by determining which faction of the movement the “other” subscribes to, which “leader” they follow, which blogs they comment on or read, etc. in one single brush stroke. (without taking sides, I’ll just point out that this has already happened twice on this very page, which is barely two days old at this point)
I am wary of being perceived as falling in to #4 of the list, Excessive cynicism about the future of 9/11 Truth, but I assure you it is not really the case… I just want to point out that this paradigm of utter distrust, whether justified or not, is detrimental to any truth seeking by the big-ego participants of the movement, and creates a stranglehold which the professional mind-benders know how to induce all too well, empowered by proven-to-work buttons that they can push at will and get the desired response… Travel the same road, will surely end up in the same town. Therefore, I feel there needs to be a more fundamental change in not only the way these people manipulate the discourse are dealt with, but in the way the main mission (if there is such a thing) is defined and redefined.
While these agitprop agents are distracting and keeping us busy, the focus on moving towards a legitimate, impartial and independent re-investigation are getting infinitely delayed… While people argue whether nukes were used or not, or who said what first on which blog, or who is less compromised than whom, or who is smarter, who has been in the movement longer, who is real, who is not, witnesses are dying off, more evidence is being disappeared or manufactured… And, while we play open hand poker on the internet sharing ALL we have got with “them”, they hide behind closed doors to manipulate the movement and set in motion major social engineering projects fueled by pseudo-scientific agenda-driven research in institutions like the one hybridrogue1 posted above, who are analyzing and profiling the crap out of us, and passing their findings to the upper levels where the gathered data is weaponized and put in to use with seemingly unlimited resources.
In short, I strongly believe that mustering the support for a re-investigation, whether you believe nukes were used, or the dust fairy sprinkled some fairy dust on the buildings, (or whatever), is of utmost importance. They are ready, willing and able to carry out even more outrageous mass casualty events to stop (or slow down) the masses from catching up with them and exposing the lies… But if this so-called truth movement reaches its 20th anniversary, it will have been too late. “One day” is no longer good enough as a deadline.
If absolute truth is unattainable, then exposing absolute lies needs to take front stage.
“… impartial and independent re-investigation are getting infinitely delayed…”~Lilaleo
At the cost of being perceived as falling into box #4, let me just say this about that (and in JFK’s accent);
I have said before and will say again, WE ARE THE INDEPENDENT RE-INVESTIGATION. And this is likely as “impartial” as it gets.
Relying on the System that perpetrated the event to investigate itself with any degree of honesty is naive to say the least.
Call me cynical, call me arrogant, call me compromised, call me anything you want, but I don’t see anything “official” happening that won’t be new episode of “The Official Narrative”.
Frankly, in my view the case is cracked, and many times over, regardless of the infighting. The Official Story is preposterous and any who do not see that by now likely will never see it, because they simply do not want to.
\\][//
I hear you, Willy, I hear you.
And, in theory and in concept, I agree with you.
I also agree with you that we now have enough cumulative knowledge and enough evidence against certain people to hang them off their dicks in Times Square.
But, I am not talking about whether the case is cracked or not. I’m talking about unity… About fighting, and hopefully overcoming the manufactured and engineered divisions forced upon the efforts of a whole generation truth seekers?
Or, are “we” cracking everything just to help future generations understand history, without any hope of a mass awakening before these psychopaths kill off a few billion people?
Or, do we need to just accept that this is the way the world has always been run, and this is the way it shall always be?
Childhoods End
The human race will have grown-up when it throws off the delusion of “government”.
Government is no less a ‘fictitious entity’ than are corporations. It is a FICTION! i
Governments power is in your mind. To acquiesce your powers of liberty to others, a group or an individual is to kneel as a slave.
Read Lysander Spooner…
\\][//
No Treason – The Constitution of No Authority
by Lysander Spooner
http://jim.com/treason.htm
\\][//
“Or, do we need to just accept that this is the way the world has always been run, and this is the way it shall always be?”~Lilaleo
I might choose this one with this alteration:
Maybe we need to just accept that this is the way human beings have always been, and this is the way they always will be. It is not just the leaders my friends, it is those who follow leaders, those who go along to get along.
Can you force someone to choose freedom? Can you force them to see what they look away from? Can you defeat their fear of death, which is the spawn of all their fear and loathing?
These are deep questions and I have pondered them for a long time. I find there are no certain answers.
“Human kindness is overwhelming… I think it’s going to rain today.”~Randy Newman
\\][//
This is one of the best reasoned arguments for the “inside job” hypothesis. He also avoids many of the extreme explanations that have been used to discredit the Truth movement. Were there only one or two anomalies that appeared to discredit the official story it would be reason enough to cast doubt. There are literally hundreds. Clearly an unbiased, powerful, independent investigation must be launched. I don’t believe the demons in power will allow it. I stopped believing in this country decades ago. So this is no surprise to me.
I agree with HR1 in his statement above that we the 9/11 truth movement have already done the investigation and have already cracked the case. It is a done deal as far as I am concerned 9/11 was an inside job, the pentagon crime scene was staged, the towers were blown up, and the government and media are lying about it all and are actively involved in an ongoing criminal cover-up.
What we have to decide is what we are going to do about it. The case is cracked but the ones who did it are still on the loose so it comes down to exactly this question: Now that we know beyond any shadow of doubt that 9/11 was an inside job what are we going to do about it?
The situation is akin to catching a rapist in the middle of raping your wife and confronting him and he says “yeah I raped her what the hell are you going to do about it?” “I got a gun and I got the cops in my pocket and they aren’t going to do shit so what the hell are you going to do huh?”
That is where we really are, they are just openly, brazenly, and flagrantly committing all kinds of crimes right in front of our faces and saying to us “I double dare you to do something about it!”
It is a dilemma isn’t it Mr Ruff?
What is “doing”?
Is this “doing”? Writing our thoughts, dissenting? Is it any less “doing” than running wild in the streets seeking rupture from “the Law”?
What are “They” really more afraid of? I think it is obvious that they are more afraid of “conspiracy theorists” than ‘terrorists’, that is why they attempt the absurd fusion of both as the same thing.
‘They’ have an excuse for bombing, droning, shackling, torturing those they designate as ‘terrorists’.
We the anti-propagandists have more effect than any act of physical sabotage. That is why they are close to shitting in their own nest by truncating the Internet (which, by the way is a product of the military industrial complex itself). They WILL fuck up the status quo of the economy if they mess with the web. They are in a damned if they do-damned if they don’t situation.
There is ‘hope’ in the foolishness of ‘Their’ own machinations catching up with them and biting them in the ass. Keeping the pressure of anti-propaganda up is, in my opinion the most effective strategy ‘we’ have.
\\][//
I was a few city blocks away when the World Trade Center bombing happened in 1993. It was soon irrefutably established, through hearings, FBI’s own admissions, some not-yet-dead real journalism, and even secret recordings of FBI conversations with the patsy, that this was an FBI plot. And it all didn’t require a truth movement to come out.
As I watched the first tower crumble from less than a mile away, the knowledge of the first bombing should have been sufficient to immediately induce doubts about the situation. But, the truth is, it was the sheer physical impossibility of the crumbling that I was witnessing that caused me to be certain that this was an inside job. One needed only to have lived on this planet and be familiar with its laws of physics to recognize that… The repeat performance of the second tower and the absolute demolition of wtc7, which I had walked by and saw standing (and not on fire) just an hour prior to its demo, were simply cherry on the icing.
The ensuing “sanitation” of ground zero by Giuliani/Chertoff cover up team, the dead or alive Osama posters reminiscent of the blind sheik of ’93, made it clear that this was a huge, multilateral operation, and no private citizen or institution would ever have access to any real evidence at the criminal level, never have subpoena power, and the war atmosphere created would not prevent any dissent for the foreseeable future.
Which left a single aspect of the attacks within the reach of a civilian investigation that would operate outside of the system… And, this was not figuring out how they did it, what technology was used, who did it, etc, but simply showing, through scientific, academic and internationally peer reviewed research and experiments proving that the destruction of even a single tower in the manner it was destroyed was simply impossible, period! With all the data at hand, I thought this would be easier than proving the single bullet none sense wrong. There has not been a single scientist (NIST, the commission or anyone else since) who could scientifically and satisfactorily explain the so-called “collapse” of any of the towers, whose detailed specs from its nuts to its bolts were publicly available to anyone interested. I felt it was irrelevant how exactly the buildings were brought down, and just showing why it couldn’t have happened due to “structural damage, of course”, was sufficient..
At the time, most of us were not really able to comprehend the power of mass psychological trauma, and the subsequent psyops and propaganda they had in store for us… and we seem to have miserably misjudged the time the general populous would require to recover from the trauma-induced trans.
But now, it has been 13+ years. The sole entity that has a flying chance of accomplishing this feat with any credibility, Architects & Engineers, has bismal numbers of membership, no international support, and not a single scientific institution in the whole wide world endorsing their science. 9/11 is now referred to as old news as a new generation too young to know or remember is coming of age. At ground zero, on this year’s anniversary, there were 7 sad looking protesters, compared to the hundreds and hundreds of just a few years ago. And, as exciting as the idea seemed to be, I did go to Times Square and did not see many lifting their heads up from their phones long enough to notice the wtc7 demolition video playing on the jumbotron.
So, if I had to pick the single, most important thing missing from the truth movement, it would not be the “doing”, but some real sense of urgency. For most, researching 9/11 and going on to our favorite blogs to read and/or comment and argue has become a hobby, and for most of those who are professionally invested in the movement, it has become a job. Despite the underlying passion that drives truthers, the pace and momentum of progress has fallen far behind the speed “they” are moving things forward. And, all the invaluable “doing” that is done by truth seekers seems to have settled to a cruising speed on autopilot.
—–
(I did not count my words like señor did above, but please accept my apologies for the lengthy post. Been a long time silent reader of T&S… I seem to have bottled up stuff that I’d like to say. Will try to be more frugal with words henceforth)
Thank you for your comments Lilaleo,
I for one appreciate them, and think I grasp where you are coming from.
In a way the events of 9/11 are indeed passing into the fog of “history” – it is that essence of being human again; easily distracted, easily spooked, easily domesticated and very much “pets” of whatever system has the leash in hand. As I cynically call them, ‘Homo Vishnu Idiodicus’.
This is why, as a bottom line advisory I like to mention what Orwell says about “fighting back against Big Brother” … although it may seem futile, the point is not to overthrow the system, the point is to remain sane despite the system and it’s overwhelming insanity. Remain sane and remain human personally; carry on that legacy into whatever future avails.
It may be difficult to settle for that, but it is something to hold on to while one chooses which battles to fight, what stands to take, what messages one wants to convey. And remember in the large march of time, a human lifetime is but a moment, embrace that and cherish it as you can.
\\][//
I live in a rural setting far enough out of the big smoke to be in a healthy environment both with the real estate and people. From being out here on this side of the shift and talking about it to people. A lot of people are starting to come around and are more open to discussion than even a few years ago. People have a sense that we exist in a rigged game but can’t quite put their finger on it.
We’ll never get through to everybody, too many are still enmeshed in the system with some hopelessly so.
All the signs are out there that TPTB know their time is getting critical. With the militarization of police forces across the country, it’s a sure indicator that they know the time’s not far off. that people are reaching the demarcation point between remaining propagandized or disillusioned. After all culture is but a state of mind, truth talks bullshit walks. We’re certainly to the gunwales on this lifeboat in the latter.
When nothing you have been taught to believe is true; when you have been raised in an utterly false paradigm, what does it matter whether you call the plan to propagate such an agenda a “conspiracy theory” or something else? The fact is that the great mass of the peoples on this planet are living a manipulated delusion.
\\][//
As far as Shanksville and “flight 93” – the so-called “crash site” is an abandoned mine-shaft… consider the odds – like so many aspects of 9/11 the odds are again staggering as to this likelihood.
But there are also the many witnesses who saw the plane blow up mid-air, and there is a known debris field some 6 miles long leading to the so-called “crash site”.
But the most damning part of this is the lack of known debris at the “crash site” and again the lack of chain of custody of the so-called evidence the government holds. These typical absurdities are what define the “Official Narrative”
\\][//
This plane that blew up, whatever it was, is that what was intended for building 7 but for whatever reason didn’t reach its intended target?
Peter Andersen,
Such a theory has been proposed. It is a fairly sound theory, but I don’t know how one would prove such and assertion.
Another theory is that the plane called “Flt 93” may have in fact ended up with all of the expendable passengers from the other flights that morning – that it was like the others a remote controlled plane and was fitted with a self destruct device and ended up right where it was intended to, over the mine shaft in Pennsylvania.
I favor the second proposition because the “stage-dressing” most certainly was planned beforehand.
I don’t think it likely they just happened to have a collapsed mine shaft where the plane just happened to end up. Anything with the smell of coincidence puts me off.
\\][//
It just seems odd that Building 7 would go down so late in the day and not in the morning like towers 1 and 2. That’s why I wonder if there was a glitch in the plans.
Peter, I agree that there may have been a glitch but I don’t know that this could have involved a plane crashing that was intended to hit Building 7. That’s because the scene of the non-crash would have to have been chosen in advance, and if a plane really did crash then they wouldn’t have needed to pretend it crashed in a different location. My speculation is that if there was a glitch it involved Building 7 not coming down at the same time that the towers did. If they had brought down B7 at the same time, the cloud of pulverized concrete would have obscured the smaller demolition and everyone would have assumed it was knocked down by debris. About Flight 93, I’m inclined to believe that the whole “shoot down” is a red herring that actually reinforces the official story’s claim that it was actually a hijacked aircraft. Since I don’t believe that any planes were truly hijacked, I can’t buy the idea that Flight 93 was shot down.
I don’t believe there were any hijackings either. I think the planes that hit buildings 1 and 2 weren’t passenger planes since the latter aren’t designed to fly at that speed at low altitude.
Right. So if there were no hijackings there would be no reason to shoot anything down. But placing evidence of a shootdown would succeed in getting us focused on whether a passenger should have been shot down rather than how these faked hijackings were staged.
“I can’t buy the idea that Flight 93 was shot down.”~Craig
I am in total agreement. I don’t think any of the planes involved in any of the events were the commercial aircraft designated in the official narrative.
There is a chance that none of the commercial aircraft of the official story ever took off from the claimed departure locations. But absolute certainty of the proposition is hard to establish. We get into a thorny issue when asserting that none of the people cited as victims of the “crashes” actually existed, or some percentage of them are simply faked names and profiles.
I think that there are real people involved, and that some were expendable, some were sheep dipped and given new persona’s. This is why I posit that so-called “Flt 93” may have been carrying the ones that were deemed expendable for a realistic legend to be framed.
I think the most convincing proposition is that all the aircraft were disguised military craft flown by automated systems, whether with or without real-time human input.
\\][//
Hybridrogue1 said:
“I think that there are real people involved, and that some were expendable, some were sheep dipped and given new persona’s. This is why I posit that so-called “Flt 93″ may have been carrying the ones that were deemed expendable for a realistic legend to be framed”
Interesting. Where would Barbara Olson fit into this? Officially, she was on Flight 77 establishing the box cutter story but since I don’t believe there was a flight 77 what happened to her?
And I agree with you, I think the aircraft were military planes.
Peter Andersen,
I would be inclined to posit that Barbara Olson is a candidate for ‘sheep-dipping’ and has a new persona living ‘abroad’ somewhere. I think the named ‘pilots’ of some of the ‘official planes’ may be as well.
This is an area that is rather necessarily conjecture. Although there were reports that Olson had been picked up for questioning overseas somewhere at one point. I was not able to get ample verification at the time.
My memory is hazy but there was that story of one of the “official flights” landing at an airport that had a “NASA facility” that the passengers were herded into… but it has been so long ago now that I forget the details … which are in files of computers several generations gone here.
\\][//
Peter,
I just found this on the web doing a quick search. This is the story I was thinking of in my last comment about a grounded ‘official flight’:
UAL Flight 93 Landed Safely At Cleveland Hopkins Airport …
https://911justicehalifax.wordpress.com/…/ual-flight-93-landed-safely-at-…
Apr 26, 2012 – A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at … White said the plane had been moved to a secure area of the airport, and was evacuated. … Our prayers are also with everyone on the ground who may have been involved. … Proof that 9/11 flight 93 did not crash at Shanksville.
\\][//
Flight Termination System (FTS)
Developed by SPC International (System Planning Coorporation).
Former Vice President was Dr. Zakheim.
System Planning Corporation developed the Flight Termination System (FTS), a safety and test
system for remote control and flight termination of airborne test vehicles.
Doc Zakhaim became later member of the Bush Administration.
\\][//
Obviously, “Flight 93” was destined for Building 7.
It’s a “no-brainer”, Peter Andersen.
How is that obvious? Just because there’s one plane without a building and one building without a plane?
“How is that obvious? Just because there’s one plane without a building and one building without a plane?”
Mostly a building without a plane; but I think your argument is pretty good that “because the scene of the non-crash would have to have been chosen in advance, and if a plane really did crash then they wouldn’t have needed to pretend it crashed in a different location”
That’s good reasoning…..maybe it’s not a “no-brainer” after all.
I have to agree with Craig here sockpuppet2012,
There are mitigating circumstances as to whether this is so “obvious” as you posit, and that is the fact of planning for the “plane crash” staged in Pennsylvania … as has been proposed previously. I think assuming that this was some sort of last minute tweaking is a weak argument.
I think Craig’s proposition that 7 was meant to go down at the time of the second tower’s demise is a good idea.
But there is the possibility of #7 being a ‘revelation of the method’ event as well. In other words to display to the cognizant that it was an act of state. Much like the JFK assassination, it could have been done out of site – but the exposition was important, to show who is boss, therefore a flagrant public execution. As Adam Ruff suggests about the current state of affairs, a “thumbing their noses at us”, a provocation and a strategy of tension working on multiple levels.
\\][//
I would agree that this is another strong possibility. This motivation also explains why so many false flag events are previewed in movies and TV. Predictive programming, that is.
“I think Craig’s proposition that 7 was meant to go down at the time of the second tower’s demise is a good idea”
Yes, that makes a lot of sense; to have it go down invisibly, shielded by the “pyroclastic flow” of the Twin Towers.
“But there is the possibility of #7 being a ‘revelation of the method’ event as well. In other words to display to the cognizant that it was an act of state”
Yes, Willy, I’m a strong believer in the “revelation of the method”, and the “thumbing the nose” at “us”…..not the sheeple…..”us”, as you say, the cognizant.
That’s what “pull it” was; that’s what the “magic passport” was; that’s what the
“C ring exit hole” was; the Sandy Hook “giggling parents”; the “no shrapnel at Boston”; the bloodless non-struggling “beheadings” with the giggling “relatives”, etc…etc…ad infinitum.
Moral Cowards
It is moral cowardice that balks at the truth and in the final argument says ‘I don’t want to know’. They may or may not say it up-front, but it eventually comes out in their subtext. They have been terrorized by the propaganda of ‘Fear & Loathing’. Big Daddy told them to be afraid, very afraid, convinced them with horror shows Big Daddy designed himself; gruesome carnage on an industrial scale, heartless and bloody. Calibrated to fascinate and repel with cognitive dissonance slamming their manipulated emotions.
The great majority is enchanted & stupefied, their minds frozen by fear into seeking empty rituals of mindless entertainments and distractions. And they are willing to fight you to the death if you attempt to wake them up from their sedated state.
\\][//
Great post HR1 I could not agree more with this! Moral cowardice is absolutely right! I would only add to the reasons for not wanting to face the truth the following: Avoidance of responsibility to actually do something about that truth. If you don’t acknowledge the awful truth then you are not responsible as a human being to do anything about it.
Peter also notes: “there wasn’t enough evidence to convict Bin Laden should receive more attention.”
Yes very important is the issue that there isn’t enough evidence to convict in a court of law, but it is asserted there is enough evidence/reason to go to war!
This is of course utterly insane, but when proposed to a nation of idiots driving around with “American” flags on their cars by the billions – flags made in China…. WTF?
And bumper stickers “SUPPORT OUR TROOPS” – which would more honestly read:
“SUPPORT OUR MYTHS”
That is when you know you are living in a psychotic society with the mainframe system of BIG BROTHER…and each passing day, month, year has made that clearer, until it is burned into our consciousness like the brand of a curse.
\\][//
“the niftyboys ISILS just keep headchoppin, aren’t they just so brave? I suppose if we nuked all of the assholes in the world, half the planet or more would be gone – so how can we target more selectively, and not have a glow in the dark Earth? got it! tiny blow-yer-head off drones with genetical fuckhead detectors!”
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The comment above is written by a guy I have known for many years. He isn’t a dumb guy, in fact he’s pretty smart. But he works too hard at making a living and doesn’t have (take) the time to stay informed. So he falls for the silly bullshit of the MSM. He has no idea that ISILS/ISIS or whatever designation they carry today are boogeymen invented by the State. He is horrified of “headchoppin” and would rather have such things accomplished by modern high-tech weapons such as drones or nukes (but for the subsequent “glow in the dark Earth”.
I am sure everyone has friends like this, family members like this… so whattaya do? Do you lecture them every time they go stinkythink? it becomes an endless proposition for people that cannot seem to hold the notion in their head that the State is a lie, that the State exists on lies and war. For my friend here to see that the US is indeed making war, and he cannot possibly miss that fact, and not be the slightest suspicious of the excuses used for war THIS TIME, is of course inexcusable.
So I do not excuse my friend here. I dismiss him as a serious person. I don’t have time to teach the ABC’s to anyone over and again.
Fuck it! I’ll be his “single serving friend” just as he so chooses.
\\][//
Another fine article Craig. Also, I think the fact that there wasn’t enough evidence to convict Bin Laden should receive more attention. I think back to his FBI photo and the glaring absence of 9/11 in the list of his crimes.
“According to recent polls, four out of five registered American voters overwhelmingly support military attacks against the Islamic State. The acquiescent, ignorant American masses, still irretrievably pacified by the propaganda “shock and fear” effect of 9/11, enthusiastically back any “retaliation” against “bad guys who cut off heads” and “threaten America”, and have no problem sending American youth to the front lines to be cannon fodder. They are “defending freedom”. The American sheeple believe—even love to believe—the Big Lie. Whereas the citizens of Hong Kong and in other countries take passionately to the streets to fight for their democracy, the average American has long abdicated his and her duty as an informed, vigilant citizen. Far too busy shooting nude selfies on handheld gadgets—their brains addled by inane entertainment, and Hollywood celebrations of the national security apparatus—to care
[…]
There is no reasoning—no negotiation— with the functionaries and enablers of this empire—in governments, in media, everywhere. There is also no reasoning—no negotiation— with the cognitively impaired sheeple.
There is no reasoning—no negotiation— with the killers, the world planning orchestrators speaking the “language of force”; these “great men and women” who hold humanity in contempt.
There is, indeed, no reasoning—no negotiation—with this brand of evil.”~Larry Chin
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-anglo-american-empires-war-of-conquest-the-war-on-the-islamic-state-isil-is-a-lie/5406458
\\][//
Central Bankers – Central Intelligence
… Like Bread & Butter
\\][//
At the risk of spoiling these comments and with all due respect to Craig, I’ll offer a correction to his stated goal of “[exposing] the lies of 9/11 and other false flag operations.” While this goal is highly valuable, a still more valuable goal would be to investigate the possibility that the study of 9/11 would demonstrate the existence of some conspiracy against humanity that would be larger than a pattern of false flags or that would be easier to clear than 9/11.
This is where an essential, yet largely overlooked and neglected, 9/11 subconspiracy comes in: the apparently concerted censorship of the self-evident televised criminal controlled demolition of the twin towers and of its transparent cover-up story by countless institutions, from Amnesty International to the Iranian theocracy, who could effortlessly educate their audiences on 9/11 yet have been living the superstitious paradigm of its attribution to Osama bin Laden’s fanatical hijackers against their ostensible vested interests.
The 9/11 censorship is by far the most alarming 9/11 subconspiracy, because of its worldwide scope, its permanence over time, its grip over watchdogs of highly variegated natures (Muslims and Hindus, socialists and capitalists, peace-mongers and warmongers, etc.), its self-healing capability, and its nearly flawless execution. Besides, the top-notch engineers who directed the WTC’s criminal controlled demolitions and the high-ranking public servants who covered and protected them would probably have refused their assignments unless they were assured that the myriad watchdogs would not bark. As such, it would deserve a prominent spot in 9/11 Truth’s top 10 to-do list, both as matter for further research and as essential material for outreach.
Love,
“… investigate the possibility that the study of 9/11 would demonstrate the existence of some conspiracy against humanity that would be larger than a pattern of false flags or that would be easier to clear than 9/11.”~Daniel Noel
Isn’t an awareness of the ‘Grand Conspiracy’ a persistent subtext in all of this we have been discussing here? I mean, I thought that this was core to what we were all getting at here anyway … ?
Or maybe I am not getting what you are saying Daniel. I mean, certain ‘dogs’ have been sedated and sitting on laps for more than a hundred years – it is just systemically understood. Isn’t it?
\\][//
A Curriculum for Studies in Systemic Power Structures
Important contributions have been made by:
Charlotte Iserbyt, Antony Sutton, Carroll Quigley, John Gatto, Foucault’s analysis of power…
‘Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling’~Gatto
‘Weapons of Mass Instruction: Through the Dark World of Compulsory Schooling’~Gatto
\\][//
Daniel Noel said:
“While this goal is highly valuable, a still more valuable goal would be to investigate the possibility that the study of 9/11 would demonstrate the existence of some conspiracy against humanity that would be larger than a pattern of false flags or that would be easier to clear than 9/11.
This is where an essential, yet largely overlooked and neglected, 9/11 subconspiracy comes in: the apparently concerted censorship of the self-evident televised criminal controlled demolition of the twin towers and of its transparent cover-up story by countless institutions, from Amnesty International to the Iranian theocracy, who could effortlessly educate their audiences on 9/11 yet have been living the superstitious paradigm of its attribution to Osama bin Laden’s fanatical hijackers against their ostensible vested interests”
That’s a very good idea, Daniel; it should have been done years ago.
Name all of the “watchdog” organizations and people that didn’t “bark”, and add their voice to the cause of truth.
You mentioned Amnesty International and the “Iranian Theocracy”, although Ahmadinejad was the only world leader to get up before the United Nations and call 911 an inside job and receive a massive walk-out.
I don’t know how many watchdog organizations there are, but I think we could name the ACLU, James Randi(JREF), Michael Shermer(Skeptic Magazine), the most laughable title of any magazine in history!
There’s the American Professorial class, physicists and scientists of all types, and I would add religious leaders.
“The 9/11 censorship is by far the most alarming 9/11 subconspiracy, because of its worldwide scope, its permanence over time, its grip over watchdogs of highly variegated natures (Muslims and Hindus, socialists and capitalists, peace-mongers and warmongers, etc.), its self-healing capability, and its nearly flawless execution”
The 911 censorship points directly at some of the culprits.
“Besides, the top-notch engineers who directed the WTC’s criminal controlled demolitions and the high-ranking public servants who covered and protected them would probably have refused their assignments unless they were assured that the myriad watchdogs would not bark”
Excellent observation, Daniel.
Articles and videos should have been produced years ago dealing with these matters.
“As such, it would deserve a prominent spot in 9/11 Truth’s top 10 to-do list, both as matter for further research and as essential material for outreach”
Absolutely, Daniel!
The things you mentioned haven’t received nearly as much attention as they should have.
Dear Mr. Noel,
I regret that I was unable to reply promptly when you made your excellent comment from October 7, 2014 at 7:56 pm.
At this late date, I’d like to express kudos.
Thank you,
//
Social Engineering from the horse’s mouth:
‘Propaganda’ by Edward Bernays
‘Crystallizing Public Opinion’ by Edward L. Bernays
‘The Engineering of Consent’
(an essay by Edward Bernays first published in 1947)
Bernays explained, “Professionally, [public relations] activities are planned and executed by trained practitioners in accordance with scientific principles, based on the findings of social scientists. Their dispassionate approach and methods may be likened to those of the engineering professions which stem from the physical sciences.”[2]
The threat of engineered consent in democracy has been expressed in a textbook on American government:[3]
Under modern conditions of political advertising and manipulation, it has become possible to talk of the engineering of consent by an elite of experts and professional politicians. Consent that is thus engineered is difficult to distinguish in any fundamental way from the consent that supports modern totalitarian governments. Were the manipulated voter to become the normal voter, the government he supports could hardly be said to rest on his consent in any traditional sense of that word.
To some observers, consumer psychologists have already made the choice for people before they buy a certain product. Marketing is often based on themes and symbols that unconsciously influence consumer behavior.
The “Engineering Consent” chapter of Christopher Bryson’s book The Fluoride Deception describes how Bernays helped the water fluoridation campaign in the USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Engineering_of_Consent
\\][//
A Pittsburgh truther named Amanda Sedell went as far as to delete and then block me on FB, after I called her out on an extreme degree of Pentagon ignorance she was displaying. Apparently it’s rude and uncivil to harshly call out a fellow truther. But what can you do when they defend the official story, and say that 1, yes, ONE, gas station employee “believes” the plane came in at a different angle. Here is the comment that caused the “unfriending” and later “blocking.”
http://i62.tinypic.com/2nvulon.png
Maybe because she’s a young, cute, female truther who supports inside job, CD and AE, and because I generally enjoyed her comments prior to this, I simply thought better of her. I’d seen in the past where she’d make comments about how “talking about the Pentagon is unproductive” and I respected that difference of opinion on the strategy front. It wasn’t til yesterday that she outed herself as a full blown supporter of the official impact narrative. Here’s how the “fallout” started:
http://i60.tinypic.com/vgk038.png
Not only that, but now Mike Collins is going after Craig M on this same issue, always raises tension and animosity, even amongst those who apparently are seeking the same thing. There seems always to be a small percentage of hard-core truthers who wholeheartedly embrace the large-jetliner-hit-the-Pentagon theory, and will scratch and claw and call anyone who disagrees all kinds of names from “disinfo agent” to “tard” to “idiot” and on and on. Can’t really explain it.
Nikogriego,
This is happening on FB?
Who the hell is Mike Collins?
\\][//
You should check out the FB group “911 Truth Movement” it is a closed group but you could join. It is generally great, but having 40,000 members there will always be weirdos and people with disparate viewpoints. Mike Collins is an arrogant, self proclaimed expert, with a master’s degree in physics, who is generally okay, but sometimes not, and often condescending and insulting to those with whom he disagrees. He has some good thoughts, but he believes a large jetliner impacted the Pentagon.
Thank you Niko,
I finally got to read some of Collins’ commentary on the screenshots Mr Syed posted.
Yes, I agree he is arrogant to the point of hubris. University degrees do not impress me in the slightest.
What impresses me are cogent arguments that take all of the known data into account.
If Mike Collins believes a large jetliner impacted the Pentagon, he bases his belief in faith not evidence.
\\][//
Yes it is very sad that the disinfo pushers in the truth movement seem to have claimed another victim. This is the damage that people like Kevin Ryan, David Chandler, Jon Cole, and Frank Legge are doing. Very sad indeed that we don’t just go into a full blown knock down drag out bloody fight to the death with these people here and now and let the damn chips fall where they may. Sickening that Amanda is so badly misinformed thanks to these disinfo pushers. I say we take the gloves off and yes I have been wearing gloves so far.
Yes, and of course, it’s “not cool” to call out people like Kevin Ryan and David Chandler, because they are such American heroes…
http://i58.tinypic.com/4t6po6.png
Oops, wrong image above. Here is the correct one –
http://i57.tinypic.com/qogahv.png
Well, get Amanda and Ken over here – this thread, right now!
Tell them we will hash it out fair and square.
\\][//
“I say we take the gloves off and yes I have been wearing gloves so far.”~Mr Ruff
Yea well, I feel that way about several issues. It is time some 9/11 blog takes a stand against the disinfo all round.
\\][//
Dear Mr. Syed,
Facebook long ago could have had the features in place that make it a great and addictive venue for debate, like URLs, labels, and logical navigation into discussion topics. Could have been (or still could be) an overlay to what they have.
Instead, they let their sole navigation be established by algorithm that is unique for each and changes based on latest comment and by whom. Unless a person is astute enough to note the URLs in the notifications and store those in an off-list copy of one’s comment, it can be very difficult to get to old discussions, let alone refer others to them (like, if you wanted to avoid looping through terrain already covered).
If those others don’t have a facebook account, they can’t get to the URL. Sometimes you can’t get to it if you aren’t a member; other times you can, but you can’t comment until you join; and other times if you get bounced from a group, no comments and to spite you, no free views either. I won’t go into the details of groups, owners, blocking, bouncing, etc.
Its commentary auto-scroll-up showing only 3 or 4 of the last comments in the default news feed view easily gets juked merely by someone posting several comments (of often meaningless filler by the spooks) in a row. I’m convinced that not all Facebook users are equal in terms of access to admin functionality. When someone pays (like a favorite record label), they are entitled to features that include placement in their fans’ news feeds. Some of the 9/11 groups must pay to get some of these features. Another distinction in user functionality depends on the amount of personal information that you cough up: the more you’re willing — for security purposes, of course — to associate your telephone number, home town, high school, college, places of employment, likes & tastes, etc., the more you can do.
And competing against your rational debate on a weighty topic is the algorithmic news feed unique for you based on friends, their shares, their comments, and anything you have ever “liked” that can become, not just a distracting, but an addicting obsession that morphs into an embarrassing time suck.
Yeah, I’ve got my Facebook account(s), but I’ve resorted to placing a yellow sticky with “NO FB” on my work’s computer to remind me not to be tempted.
I guess someone has to venture into Facebook’s 9/11 forums to voice truth, but unless you are taking steps for preservation elsewhere, you are just throwing away your efforts at convincing the masses [albeit they’ll be thrown right into the files of the Homeland Security to be used against you at your trial.]
//
“*IMPORTANT! Comments on this article should about which topics we should focus on in our ongoing effort to awaken the world to the lies of 9/11. I DO NOT want to hear the scientific case for or against Judy Wood or nukes or no planes, etc. This isn’t the point of the article. If people do this anyway, I will remove their comments. And for this thread, please limit comments to 500 words. Thank you.”
~Craig McKee
Hmmmm???
\\][//
SEO’s comment was on topic and not too long.
Adam,
You are reading the comment after Craig edited it. SEO reposted the whole thing again farther down the thread – PLUS more BS.
\\][//
Dear Mr. Rogue,
Stop your lying:
Nothing has been edited or deleted (yet). It probably won’t be either, because it is on-topic and short & concise (for me) within allowable tolerances. Everything is as it was originally posted, typos and all.
Because nothing was edited or deleted, there hasn’t been any need to re-post anything.
Your anger is clouding your brain and forcing you to make stupid mistakes with your promises, your stupid lies, and your hyperventilating tattle-tailing.
For the record, you purposely posted your rabble-rousing comment in the wrong place to obscure your nefarious hand and got your ass handed to you.
PLUS, it isn’t your duty to call out the “BS”.
It isn’t your job to put out fodder to engage me.
You’ve got a big enough buffer in your comment count, you can afford to ignore me. Please take advantage of that lead by STFU. Your lying and disinfo antics are unbecoming to this forum.
//
The comments by SEO of OCTOBER 10, 2014 AT 11:46 AM & OCTOBER 10, 2014 AT 11:48 AM, both addressed to Adam Syed are so similar to one another that I thought the one left up at 11:46 AM was the top half of what is left at 11:48 AM …
I am not lying, at most I am mistaken, but I am not sure that I am mistaken yet either. I could have sworn there was an original post that had what shows at 11:46 AM as a first part and what now shows at 11:48 AM as a second part.
At any rate, now the first part is certainly on topic, but the second part is not and has been called out of bounds by the quote I made of Mr McKee from the original essay above. If anyone here is a liar it is Señor El Once.
\\][//
You are mistaken. I did not edit anything yesterday.
What exactly is Mr. Rogue objecting to when he quotes from Mr. McKee in response to my comment to Mr. Syed?
Mr. Syed posted several images of off-topic conversations that he has been having in Facebook. Mr. Rogue made several comments in response to Mr. Syed relating to Facebook and the exchange. Facebook is already proven on topic.
My comment to Mr. Syed about Facebook and some of the reasons why I hate it for 9/11 discussions came in at 452 words. My six (6) total comments to this discussion [including this one] are only 3.8% of the total [155]. Mr. Rogue has over ten times my contribution to this thread. He doesn’t need to add to his tally by spillage directed at me, about me, or about anything I post.
Mr. Rogue, please make better use of your blog and refrain from engaging me here, because your blatant and stupid antics put the “sin” in “disinformation”.
//
Mr Syed, you brute!!! Hmmm … wait … I don’t see a single rude or uncivil in your comment at all.
WTF??
Well, as we know, just the label “Truther” doesn’t magically make you smart. Or pleasant.
\\][//
I also boldly called it like it is, and declared that promoting that a 757 hit the Pentagon is flat out gatekeeping disinformation right up there with promoting no CD of the WTC. I guess Amanda took exception to that too.
People like her and Ken Doc have no problem howling down and marginalizing DEWers (since that’s actual disinfo), as well as blitzing them with facts that will fill the holes in their knowledge, but when we do it to them re the Pentagon, we’re perceived as somehow not being respectful to a mere difference of opinion. THEY post the disinfo (well meaningly or not) and then THEY get butthurt when we call them out on the codswallop they are promoting.
As we here know, all the “evidence” for a plane crash comes straight from the perps. People like Amanda Sedell rely on personal incredulity for their viewpoint, thinking that it’s somehow too inconceivable that everything was planted and faked, and that witnesses could have been fooled. Rather strange given the magic show that was the WTC, which she fully embraces.
Here is a teaspoonful of what Mr. McKee and I have had to deal with the past 24 hours.
http://i58.tinypic.com/4t6po6.png
Oh … so Amanda “unfriended” you, so that means she doesn’t see your comments anymore?
Is that how it works? Well ask Ken over for some lessons on the Pentagon.
There is no controversy – no plane hit the Pentagon, simple as that.
\\][//
A mere “unfriending” doesn’t result in comments not being allowed to be seen. There are close to 40,000 members in that group, most of whom are not my FB friends, but I can see anyone’s posts or comments. However, there is a stronger feature available on FB, for those for whom “unfriending” is not enough. That is the “block” feature. If one person does not want to even see the existence of another person on FB, they can put that person on their block list. That’s what it appears Amanda has done – it means I can’t pull up her profile URL or see any of her comments on a thread. She had “unfriended” me within last evening, but I could still pull her up as a non-friend and I was considering messaging her. Today, I realize that between night and morning, she took that extra step and blocked me.
Well, talking about this makes me look like the butthurt one over an “unfriending,” to be sure. But it is a bit surprising that someone who was a casual follower of mine for years on there, and who generally enjoyed my posts, would be so quick to reverse based on my calling it like it is on the Pentagon and declaring her understanding of the evidence to be “piss poor” as well as declaring plane-hugging promotion to be disinfo.
Adam,
Obviously Amanda “thinks” with her emotions. It is not a mistake to be passionate, it is in having nothing else that is the mistake.
If she can’t discuss the issue frankly it is because she is afraid she doesn’t have the facts on her side.
\\][//
The discussions on the forum Adam is talking about are incredibly moronic. And in some cases, suspicious.
“And in some cases, suspicious.”~Craig
Yes there is always that lurking in the deep dark forest of covert ops. On a 9/11 thread of any kind the chances are pretty good of spooky-biz. They probably use sex appeal, just like any savvy PR system would incorporate. And being the web, you don’t know who is real and who is legend.
The web is very much a masquerade ball with stages of burlesque running 24/7.
The New World Circus.
\\][//
It’s not just about thinking with emotions. It’s about speaking publicly about a subject she doesn’t know jack shit about. Which she doesn’t, if she thinks that there’s only one employee from the Citgo, and no one else, who contradicts the official flight path. SMH…
Are you sure that is really a pic of Amanda?
Why I could…and I would, but I ain’t… grin
\\][//
It is her. BTW, I messaged Domenick DiMaggio, lead Shanksville investigator, about Amanda, since both are in Pittsburgh. His thoughts:
“We were real cool then that shill fuck ken doc got in her ear. Now she’s on the wrong side of the fence. She blocked me months ago and i was gonna give her a guided tour of shanskville…”
I asked if he knew her in person, he said: “Yea we hung out at the march against monsanto. She was really cool… but she sure has changed ever since that ken doc got in her ear. What a shame…at one time i thought she was potential gf material…lol live and learn”
Well, Ken Doc (or someone close to him who drew his attention here) has obviously seen these comments. Out of the blue a couple days ago, I got a private message from him on FB asking: “Yes or no Adam: Do you really think I am a “shill fuck”?”
I can only imagine this was after seeing my comment above in which I quoted Domenick. I didn’t realize it at first, and wondered what triggered KD to send me the message, then it occurred to me – T/S has a silent audience in addition to the active commenters!
“T/S has a silent audience in addition to the active commenters!”
Of course Mr Syed,
And many of those remain silent because they realize that they aren’t capable of standing up to the regular commentators on T&S. Ken Doc is obviously someone who wouldn’t attempt a debate here. Just like most of the featherweights posting on Facebook and other sleazy “social media”.
Any venue that caters to “U R” as a stand in for “you are” is a juvenile circus.
\\][//
Yes,
When Amanda can make such an idiotic comment as “one gas station employee believes the plane came in from a different angle,” then I call her out on it, all for Ken Doc to chalk it all up to an honest difference of opinion, and “why bother arguing about the Pentagon when we’re so united on the WTC?” it’s obvious these people just don’t have the ability to properly analyze evidence. Ken D is ambivalent about CIT’s work because he had a sour online interaction with Aldo, therefore he subscribes to “the pentagon divides us” bullshit. Yeah, let’s just forget about how the plethora of witnesses corroborate each other in destroying the official damage path, and just focus on the WTC because some feel that Aldo isn’t a nice person.
Seriously, fuck that shit.
Angry is good Mr Syed! It means you are getting beyond being despondent.
“Aldo isn’t a nice person”… grin. Sometimes I can not be a “nice person”, as you well know Adam.
From what little I have read by Ken Doc, and your comments about him, I can imagine how easily someone with Aldo’s temperament might cut hot with someone as jejune as Ken Doc, I might even ask a plastic person such as Ken how Barbie’s doing, and what’s new in her wardrobe.
\\][//
Oh Willy, I’ve BEEN angry. For years.
Dear Mr. Syed,
With regards to the Pentagon plane (or lack thereof) you wrote on October 8, 2014 at 6:48 pm:
You continued on October 8, 2014 at 6:56 pm with:
I agree that most “DEWers” peddle some disinformation purposely and with no openness to modifications and tweaks to their opinions when faced with new information. They try to compartmentalize DEW in a manner that excludes nuclear devices as DEW’s most likely and easy-to-come-by power source. “DEWers” have an additional problem of framing — or allowing it to be framed by opponents as — “space-based weapons” and getting it misapplied to instances of the whole where it doesn’t apply.
Likewise, most “Nukers” peddle some disinformation and with no openness to modifications and tweaks to their opinions when faced with new information. They malframe the nature of the 9/11 device such that its energy output and side-effects won’t match the evidence. They often exclude the collected evidence of the DEW camp, when in fact most modern nuclear weapons all fall into the category of DEW.
Major disinformation is in an unwillingness to have a trial marriage between the two.
Whether we’re talking DEW, nukes, or chemical explosives & incendiaries, the proponents of each have been too obtuse (and other adjectives) to acknowledge that the 9/11 event was ~not~ mutually exclusive in any of the forms of destruction. The proponents add a layer of disinformation by saying “X was found here at A, therefore X must apply to A, B, and C as well. And by extension of this faulty assumption, Y & Z were not involved.” No! The destruction of each of the seven or so buildings at the WTC needs to be studied individually to see what unique collection of methods might have been involved with each.
I have different issues with Mr. David Chandler and Mr. Jonathon Cole, which are data points fitting your trend line.
Mr. Cole did those wonderful thermite experiments. While fascinating to watch, they leave major gaps in getting super-duper nano-thermite to explain the observed destruction as well as the duration of under-rubble hot-spots. They purposely omitted the calculations and analysis to prove that NT could reasonably go the distance in the pulverization and hot-spot duration without completely whacked and obscene quantities.
Moreover, the only dust samples that show NT were handed to Dr. Jones. The USGS did not report anything about NT; the RJ Lee Group reported nothing; the Paul Lioy report didn’t have it either. Although we have basis to believe that such information might have been purposely edited and suppressed from those untrustworthy reports, many other damning things from those reports weren’t suppressed from being measured and reported in tables, albeit the plain text explanations ignored them (like the presence of Uranium and other trace elements of nuclear involvement).
Back to the DEW front, Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cole (among others) have spoken up loadly regarding (misframed) DEW being disinformation. Yet they don’t offer specifics. It should have been deja vu for some T&S participants when they were challenged like Mr. Chandler was to review Dr. Wood’s book for the good, bad, and ugly, something still sorely needed by the Truth Movement. The issue would not have been finding bad and ugly. The issue would have been acknowledging any of the good, because it’d have to get married in some way to other things they were propping up without getting those things shot full of holes.
Mr. McKee on 2014-09-15 updated the comments to a closed thread on behalf of Mr. Gage that tried to point to FAQ #3 on the AE911Truth site to supposedly debunk DEWish topics. The correct link to FAQ #3 should have been:
http://www.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/505-faq-3.html
Of the FAQ #3’s terse ~2,600 works, only a mere ~1,500 words (57%) were devoted to the topic of DEW itself and have zero references to anything specific in Dr. Wood’s work. [Another case of a book report without having the book.] The remaining 43% went off topic and into the weeds with a distraction into NT.
To give readers an idea of how few words that is, this comment alone is already about half of what their “final authority” FAQ #3 devoted DEW.
Thus, DEW and nuclear discussions becomes a textbook cases of Mr. McKee’s #5: The workings of disinformation.
//
“Thus, DEW and nuclear discussions becomes a textbook cases of Mr. McKee’s #5: The workings of disinformation.”~Señor //
As is this comment of Señor’s, a textbook case of disinformation.
\\][//
Mr. Rogue wrote that my last comment was “a textbook case of disinformation.”
If I am wrong, then it is “misinformation”, not “disinformation.” I’m not deliberately disseminating false information. I back up how I get to my conclusions, and I am amiable to correcting my views when validated new information or analysis suggests such.
The two problems that Mr. Rogue has reside in (1) proving where I’ve gotten it wrong and (2) acknowledging where he has gotten wrong, something his emotions and ego won’t ever admit to.
Mr. Rogue’s prompt, knee-jerk [agenda-toting(?)] response within 48 minutes of my last comment lacks substance (or links) to prove his contention. Boils down to a personal attack that could easily be interpretted as more than just a disgruntled debate opponent, particularly in light of Mr. Rogue commanding 40% of the overall comments [153 total so far.] How quickly he forgets the October 2, 2014 at 11:58 pm reprimand:
Is Mr. Rogue borrowing from certain chapters of that disinformation textbook?
//
Señor,
WARNING: Do not visit “your page” on my blog anymore. It is now rated XXX.
Anyone else who would be offended should be aware of this as well.
\\][//
THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN REMOVED…
…for breaking the rules set out at the beginning of this discussion. While Senor El Once’s original comment from yesterday was a delicate balancing act on the line (of staying on the topic), this comment went way over. Hybridrogue, you have simply ignored my requirement that we not argue the merits or lack thereof of DEW, nukes, etc. The fact that you think SEO did the same isn’t an excuse.
Señor El Once, your comment comes in at 788 words. If you would like to send a 500-word version by email I will substitute it. Or I could chop it if you like. And just for simplicity’s sake let’s assume I mean 500 words in total (including any quotes from elsewhere). So that means when the entire comment is pasted into a Word doc, the total word count should not exceed 500 words. I just think it makes the thread much more readable this way. And rather than having long essays on many aspects of a topic, it encourages everyone to make more specific and focused comments.
[Dear Mr. McKee: My October 10, 2014 at 11:48 am comment and the minor off-topic discussion it spawned may be removed. As requested to adhere to guidelines, this is Part 2/2 of its replacement with added links to assure a trip through the moderation queue.]
Dear Mr. Syed,
With regards to the Pentagon plane (or lack thereof) you wrote on October 8, 2014 at 6:48 pm:
I have different issues with Mr. David Chandler and Mr. Jonathon Cole, which are data points fitting your trend line.
Mr. Cole did those wonderful thermite experiments. While fascinating to watch, they leave major gaps in getting super-duper nano-thermite to explain the observed destruction as well as the duration of under-rubble hot-spots. They purposely omitted the calculations and analysis to prove that NT could reasonably go the distance in the pulverization and hot-spot duration without completely whacked and obscene quantities.
Moreover, the only dust samples that show NT were handed to Dr. Jones. The USGS did not report anything about NT; the RJ Lee Group reported nothing; the Paul Lioy report didn’t have it either. Although we have basis to believe that such information might have been purposely edited and suppressed from those untrustworthy reports, many other damning things from those reports weren’t suppressed from being measured and reported in tables, albeit the plain text explanations ignored them (like the presence of Uranium and other trace elements of nuclear involvement).
Back to the DEW front, Mr. Chandler and Mr. Cole (among others) have spoken up loudly regarding (misframed) DEW being disinformation. Yet they don’t offer specifics. It should have been deja vu for some T&S participants when they were challenged like Mr. Chandler was to review Dr. Wood’s book for the good, bad, and ugly, something still sorely needed by the Truth Movement. The issue would not have been finding bad and ugly. The issue would have been acknowledging any of the good, because it’d have to get married in some way to other things they were propping up without getting those things shot full of holes.
Mr. McKee on 2014-09-15 updated the comments to a closed thread on behalf of Mr. Gage that tried to point to FAQ #3 on the AE911Truth site to supposedly debunk DEWish topics. The correct link to FAQ #3 should have been:
http://www.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/505-faq-3.html
Of the FAQ #3’s terse ~2,600 words, only a mere ~1,500 words (57%) were devoted to the topic of DEW itself and have zero references to anything specific in Dr. Wood’s work. [Another case of a book report without having the book.] The remaining 43% went off topic and into the weeds with a distraction into NT.
Thus, DEW and nuclear discussions becomes a textbook cases of Mr. McKee’s #5: The workings of disinformation.
//
I haven’t run across any site with such drool and spittle as I see from killerguy on this psychoblog:
http://conspiracypsychology.com/2014/06/11/why-tidying-your-desk-might-make-conspiracy-theories-seem-less-plausible/comment-page-1/#comment-6032
\\][//
I wouldn’t waste two minutes on a blog like that. That was about the amount of time I wasted on the forum of a right wing Cincinnati talk radio station. Any facts at all responded to with animated memes that look like they were made by a teenage douchebag.
I named a “paradox” after Kevin Ryan in 2013. I now introduce “The Amanda Sedell Paradox: How a display of ignorance can be both painful and mind-numbing at the same time.” Here are some more gems for all to see:
http://i61.tinypic.com/n2n4ef.png
http://i60.tinypic.com/eqqptf.png
Of course, it’s eventual that the website of Responsible Truther Jim Hoffman is cited:
http://i57.tinypic.com/zjgphu.png
http://i60.tinypic.com/30lcua8.png
http://i61.tinypic.com/2hpubk1.jpg
Ahh, now that Mike Collins needs to get over to T&S for a good ass kicking. He sure sees himself as a hotshot. Aye?
The most important ‘physical evidence’ is the Pentagon – the building itself and the damage path that could not possibly been caused by the trajectory of the plane witnessed by all that day.
There is no other evidence that is reliable as it is controlled by the authorities. As it is impossible for the NOC plane to have caused that damage, the presumption of staging and planted evidence in the most likely position to hold.
This is simple straight forward reasoning. Once NOC was established beyond reasonable doubt, the conclusion that no plane crashed at the Pentagon is established beyond reasonable doubt.
Amanda’s last comment is so foolish it is hard to stomach…as she calls others “illogical” … kettles and pots, ya know?
\\][//
Yes, those screen shots also show, imo, how much damage the missile theory did in poisoning the well.
Awhile back, Mr. OneSliceShort and I were on the same page about the Pentagon, missile involvement, and plane fly-over. The cattiwompus & torched construction trailer aligned with the destruction path would have been an excellent covered launching pad for a missile launched into the Pentagon.
I don’t see a missile per se poisoning the well. Framing it as a missile that flew a lengthly flight path somewhat parallel to the observed plane yet remaining unobserved itself, that is poisoning the well.
//
I do not agree that these postings by Mr Syed are in anyway “off topic” as is asserted by a certain anonymous poster here.
Both Mr McKee, Mr Ruff, and I have joined in the discussion with Mr Syed – it is on the topic of the Pentagon, a very well worked topic for T&S, and not one that has ever been deemed inappropriate for discussion here.
I do see a “poisoning of the well” beginning to take place on this thread, yes indeed. But neither Mr Syed, Mr Ruff, myself, and certainly not Mr MCkee have any hand in that.
\\][//
Mr. Rogue wrote:
Technically, Mr. Syed’s comments were “off topic” in his newly found “paradox” et al on Facebook, but they were permitted and responsed to, so became on-topic.
My comments have been on-topic with multiple tie-in’s to the overall thread and the specific topic of this area. They can be ignored. In Mr. Rogue’s case, I highly encourage that he ignore me.
Given that my comments are only 3.8% of the total while Mr. Rogue’s are ten times that, he can well afford to let my words pass on by.
But Mr. Rogue doesn’t:
Thus, we must express our wonder at Mr. Rogue’s inability to see how his engagement of me — hardly 13 minutes after his blog’s promise — becomes the very “poisoning of the well” that he supposedly fears. An instigator, in its purest form, eh?
I have hope that Mr. Rogue doesn’t repeat the slip-up and will regain hold of his resolve to stick with his own promise.
I’ve said my piece(s). If Mr. Rogue doesn’t engage with his faux hysteria and rabble-rousing, I’ll have no further opportunity to express my views. If others engage (which I doubt), different story. I’ll need 60 or more comments, though, before I match Mr. Rogue’s output.
Given that Mr. Rogue can’t be bothered to lend Mr. Syed and Mr. McKee a hand on Facebook (where he belongs), Mr. Rogue should put up some more meaningless comments and filler to his blog.
//
Señor,
I have removed your link to hybridrogue1’s blog. And I made clear before, I do not want Truth and Shadows to be a venue for continuing or rehashing fights that have taken place there or on your own blog. Also, I have admonished hybridrogue1 for challenging me on whether rules are going to be enforced or not, so I must also ask you to stop referring to the number of comments made by him and others. If you have a complaint or suggestion to make about this, write me an email. Thank you.
Here is an explosive expose from a German Journalist that does not directly relate to this topic but it is so powerful and revealing of the state of Journalism in the western world that it must be posted far and wide. This brave whistle blower exposes the CIA and other agencies for bribing and controlling journalists and turning them into NOC (Non Official Cover) operatives. Please distribute this everywhere and make it go viral please it is SO IMPORTANT!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp-Wh77wt1o#t=511
“As I outlined in my post, The American Public: A Tough Soldier or a Chicken Hawk Cowering in a Cubicle? Some Thoughts on ISIS Intervention, as long as the citizenry remains in a fetal position praying for the return of a middle-class lifestyle that is not coming back without concerted effort and struggle, it will continue to be slaughtered like sheep and milked like cows.”~Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-08/leon-panetta-says-brace-30-year-war-isis
\\][//
ISIS
https://public.isishq.com/public
ISIS provides worldwide security, intelligence, technology and training to government and private enterprises. ISIS is strategically positioned across the globe, with …
About ISIS
https://public.isishq.com/public/about/default.aspx
ISIS exists for one purpose: To provide government and business the sophisticated intelligence, technology, security and training they need to support and …
Co-creating Our New Earth : ISIS is American. All True …
co-creatingournewearth.blogspot.com/2014/07/isis-is-american-all…
Jul 06, 2014 · “ISIS: INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY TRAINING” That’s what’s written on their website. Image source. ISIS are affiliates to Lockheed Martin – “Intelligence Training”
Emotional Intelligence | ISIS Training
https://www.isistraining.com/products/emotional-intelligence
Training & Coaching. Emotional intelligence is much more powerful than IQ in determining who emerges as a leader. IQ is a threshold competence. You need it, but …
Blog: The “other” [?] ISIS – American Thinker
americanthinker.com/blog/2014/08/the_emotherem_isis.html
… which turns out to be an arm of US intelligence: ISIS provides worldwide security, intelligence, technology and training to government and private enterprises.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gee what a coincidence … aye?
\\][//
Here’s more quinkydink
http://youtu.be/QTjYlp4P7V0
“Why should we not form a secret society with but one object, the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole world under British rule…” – Cecil Rhodes
Why not? So they did, the ‘Round Table Group’. Has sort of that Arthurian flair to it. Doesn’t it?
Carroll Quigley has this all told with citations in his books, Tragedy & Hope, and The Anglo-American Establishment.
This secret society established the ‘Royal Institute of International Affairs’ in 1919. It controls, to a very considerable extent, the sources and writing of the history of British Imperial and foreign policy since the Boer War.
A sister group was established in the US known as the ‘Council on Foreign Relations’, which operates on the same principles as the British group, inner and outer circles of memberships, rather the typical hierarchical structure of most organizations.
See: http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/The_Anglo-American_Establishment.pdf
\\][//
In 1941, revolutionary pacifist A.J. Muste declared, “The problem after war is with the victor. He thinks he has just proved that war and violence pay. Who will now teach him a lesson?
\\][//
I do not get it!
The bean counting, the blatant disregard of Mr McKee’s specific instructions with a massive post on those topics he did not want discussed here.
Are there going to be rules here? Or is this going to be a free-for-all?
I am ready to deal with it either way. But I want it made clear which way it is.
\\][//
Hybridrogue1,
I’m not sure if I have expressed this before (I’m kidding; I’ve said it several times), but I really hate it when people become all indignant and wonder if there are any “rules here.” As you have been told, I now have a work schedule that may delay my reactions to comments. That is where the good will of the contributors comes in. If I think someone is breaking the rules when they think it won’t be dealt with for a few hours, then that person will be dealt with.
So if you think rules have been broken, then send me an email and I will look into it. But do not ask if this is going to be a free-for-all because you think someone has broken the rules when you know I have not had the chance to look into the situation. It’s a direct shot at me, and I don’t appreciate it. Thank you.
I want to make my apology public here that I have already made to Mr McKee in private.
And I now apologize to the forum as well,
\\][//
Thanks, Willy.
“Mr. Rogue promises on his blog:”~~Señor
And another infraction, referring to my blog again.
Mr McKee and both agree that what is said on my blog has no place on T&S. And I have told Señor that he has no valid business there.
\\][//
“How many genocides does it take to make a fascist? How
many war lies to make a dictator? How much theft to make
a Senator? “You should have stolen a railroad,” Mother
Jones suggested to the shoe thief. How much bad result
does it take to suggest a bad intent? Is it that if they did
mean it, we¹re REALLY in trouble and have to act? How
many Brownshirt “idiots” to make a Nazi Party? How
many distortions did it take to erase History? How many
conspiracies did it take to make you believe in
coincidence?” John Judge
\\][//
I think one of the things important to stress in any argument for 9/11 Truth is the FACT of blatant criminal activity in the aftermath of the events. One of the best documented of official malfeasance and clearly illegal activities is the despoilment of the WTC crime scene.
Here is a beginning list of the documented examples, occurring as the evidence was being “disappeared” by the so-called ‘authorities’:
The Destruction of Evidence from Ground Zero at the World Trade Center following the events of September 11, 2001, occurred, even though the criminal code requires that crime scene evidence be kept for forensic analysis. FEMA had steel recovered from the building rubble destroyed or shipped overseas before a serious investigation could take place.
Bill Manning, “$elling Out the Investigation,” Fire Engineering, January 2002:
“For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car.
“Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.”
http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Archives&Subsection=Display&ARTICLE_ID=133237&KEYWORD=
“A shipment of scrap steel from New York’s collapsed World Trade Center will arrive in Shanghai tomorrow, according to media reports. The steel was bought by Shanghai Baosteel Group Corp. and several other domestic mills, which are always eager to buy scrap metal.
“Baosteel Group, the nation’s largest steel firm, has purchased 50,000 tons of the scrap steel from ‘Ground Zero,’ the ruins of the September 11 terrorist attack, at no more than US$120 each ton, according to yesterday’s Beijing Youth Daily. … Most of the scrap will be recycled into ingots, but part of the relics will be molded into WTC souvenirs, the paper said.
“Baosteel officials reached by Shanghai Daily, however, denied they will make keepsakes out of the debris, but declined to give more details of their plans, saying only that the scrap will be melted down and reprocessed into new steel products.
“Another shipment of 10,000 tons of scrap from the WTC arrived in India earlier this month, reported Shanghai Morning Post. The metal will be melted down and recycled into kitchenware and other household items, the paper said.
“India bought its lot at US$120 per ton from the New Jersey scrap processor Metal Management, which purchased 40,000 tons of the debris at an auction held by the New York City government. Dealers estimated that the WTC disaster created more than 300,000 tons of scrap metal.”
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/china_baosteel.htm
“Probing Trade Center Collapse,” AP (CBS News), March 7, 2002:
“The investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center has been hampered by the destruction of steel wreckage that could hold vital clues about why the twin towers fell, a fire expert says. … Glenn Corbett, a fire science professor at John Jay College, criticized New York City’s decision to melt down and recycle tons of charred and twisted steel from the trade center.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/06/national/main503116.shtml
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Destruction_of_Evidence_from_Ground_Zero_at_the_World_Trade_Center
\\][//
Cui Bono?
Who benefits from the erasure of a crime scene?
The answer is obvious, the perpetrators of that crime.
\\][//
Cui bono?
Not Larry Silverstein, according to Kevin Ryan. 😉
Silverstein Properties
“Larry Silverstein owned WTC building 7, and in May 2001, he also finalized a 99-year lease of the WTC complex and took over operation of WTC buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 from the PANYNJ. His partners in the deal were retail operator Westfield America and real estate investor Lloyd Goldman. To finance his deal for the WTC, “Silverstein borrowed $726 million from GMAC Commercial Mortgage, a unit of General Motors. GMAC in turn converted the loan into securities, which it sold to investors like pension funds.” [123]
Alan Reiss of the PANYNJ had been working on a three-month transition plan with a team including Silverstein Properties, in the weeks before 9/11. Just before the attacks, the Silverstein group had asked Reiss to let it more fully operate all systems, from safety systems to tenant relations. [124]
In 2007, Larry Silverstein was awarded a $4.55 billion settlement in insurance payouts for the destruction of the WTC, as a result of the largest insurance claim ever made. [130]”~Kevin Ryan – August 13, 2009
http://www.911truth.org/demolition-access-to-the-wtc-towers-part-two-security/
\\][//
Strangely, that info didn’t make it into his book.
Adam,
I have issues with Ryan as well, and he is liable for criticism in many areas, but he has in fact highlighted Silverstein as a likely suspect behind the events of 9/11. The fact that he doesn’t bring it up in everything he writes is quite understandable given the amount of detail and amount of writing Ryan has done so far.
If we want to chastise Ryan for the actual errors and problems they cause, such as his stance on the Pentagon, his admonition to “accept as much of the official narrative as possible” – etc:
I think that is productive. I do not think it is productive to try to frame Kevin Ryan as ‘persona non grata’ as per the entirety of his contributions, this would be is a mistake.
As far as real disinformants, they should be given more attention and shown for the moles they are.
You know I agree that Legge is a mole, and likely was from the very start. I won’t mention others because it is deemed “inappropriate” to do so here. But there are the mole and agents, and there are the dupes of such. To attempt to sort them out is important for the information we accept or discard that these people have contributed.
I am simply stating my views here. Whether anyone else accepts the logic of what I am saying is up to them. But this has been a long hard haul – 13 plus years, and a lot of head banging has gone on. I am trying my best to keep my perspective. I hope everyone here is making that effort.
And Mr Syed, I am not trying to ‘confront’ you, or’ make you look wrong’ – I admire you and find most of what you say, and are about worthwhile and constructive to the discussion. I just think we should keep the historical record straight — and “keep our heads”
\\][//
HR,
I agree, his entire output shouldn’t be dismissed.
I’d like to reply further, but am too tired tonight.
-A
Well Adam,
I hope you find some time…
Craig has made an invitation for an in-depth discussion of the sociopolitical state of the world as it stands, and has left the forum pretty much wide open as far as that general topic goes. This is a great opportunity to give our opinions on a variety of matters to hash out where we think things are headed, how we got here, and what the possibilities are of getting beyond the dam blocking humanity’s progress towards justice and heath and happiness.
Is humanity really so divested of its own self interests to simply acquiesce and become destitute flotsam swirling in the swampy pools in the waste-waters of the New World Order?
\\][//
Still feeling very gutted, several days later. Gotta take care of my own life. I am “this” close to not even considering myself a 9/11 activist anymore.
Mr Syed,
Your input is much too important for you to give up on 9/11 activism – I protest. I will not have this!!
Sure take a break, refresh your juices. But don’t you dare back out of this!
Grin, I know I can’t really give you orders, but I want you to realize how disappointed all of us would be to lose you.
\\][//
Yes take a break Adam but come back stronger! I too find it unacceptable for you to leave the truth movement and will not tolerate it LOL! Try what I do myself which is to take a week off here and there and watch comedy shows, walk on the beach, have a poker game with friends, and generally just goof off for a while and not even think about this stuff at all. Then I come back renewed and ready to take on the challenge.
Does this stuff make me angry? You bet your ass it does!
Am I going to let it spoil my day?
Hell no!
I am going to spoil their day!!
By writing counter-propaganda against this bullshit state. I relish the opportunity.
\\][//
HISTORICAL MEMORY
“Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.”~George Santayana
Another critical thing is to be cognizant of history. Anyone recalling the history of ‘Mr Fixer’; Lee Hamilton, would have known instantly when he was appointed to the 9/11 Commission as a co-chair, that we were going to be given the old-boy routine whitewash.
I was around and very involved in the days Of Iran-Contra. I have all the hearings on audio tape that I taped myself off of KPFK Pacifica, LA when they broadcast the whole thing live.
I went to an event in Santa Monica to listen to Hamilton in person (put on by KPFK) and was stunned at the rhetorical back-flips this shyster is capable of.
. . . .
“Lee Hamilton played key roles in covering up two of these inter-connected scandals, October Surprise and Iran-Contra. Defrauding America provides an excellent account of Hamilton’s role in the October Surprise Committee, which he chaired, links particular players amongst all these scandals, and documents in detail Hamilton’s refusal to allow relevant testimony from whistle-blower CIA operatives, and concluded that October Surprise never occurred. As summarized by FAA whistle-blower Rodney Stich, whose offer to facilitate testimony of eyewitness participants in Iran-Contra was refused despite a long personal letter to Lee Hamilton detailing the evidence:
In July 1992, the Hamilton committee released an interim report stating there was no evidence that Bush was in Paris [to clinch the October Surprise deal] or that there was any support for the October Surprise charges. The Hamilton Committee didn’t obtain testimony of any of the parties willing to testify that would prove the existence of the scheme and Bush’s presence at the Paris meetings. 16
Though short on specifics, Michael Ruppert writes of Hamilton’s role in Iran-Contra:
Iran-Contra was effectively “managed” by Lee Hamilton in the House and John Kerry (among others) in the Senate throughout the late 1980s to conceal the greatest crimes of the era, crimes committed by a litany of well-known government operations. At the time, Hamilton was the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Ruppert quotes famed investigative reporter Sarah McClendon regarding October Surprise:
Congressman Hyde elicited and obtained a promise from Chairman Lee Hamilton, D., Ind. Of the House Task Force on October Surprise, that the group would clear President Bush of going to Paris to cinch a deal of weapons for Iran in exchange for retaining American hostages to be delivered to President Ronald Reagan and not to outgoing President Carter. …Hamilton held a press conference to clear Bush before the investigation into the deal between the Reagan-Bush candidates for presidential office and the Iranians had even started. Hamilton then admitted he had not interrogated witnesses or talked with his special attorney hired to investigate the matter.
Perhaps the best line, though short, is that Hamilton declared himself “satisfied” with the testimony of Lt. Colonel Oliver North in the Iran-Contra hearings.”~~Michael Green
\\][//
As per Col Oliver North; if an officer of state chooses to invoke the 5th, he must do so in the status of and individual to assume that right. Authority is not granted the rights of Liberty. Authority is restricted by enumeration. Authority is compelled to testify truthfully as a matter of proper duty.
An officer wishing to invoke the 5th must have his commission of authority revoked in such instance.
These remarks adhere to the spirit and word of the Constitution in the context it was so delivered.
The distinction between ‘authority of state’ and ‘individual rights’ must be maintained, or law is rendered meaningless.
\\][//
“What no one seemed to notice was the ever widening gap between the government and the people.
And it became always wider…..the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting, it provided an excuse not to think….for people who did not want to think anyway gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about…..and kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated…..by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us…..
Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’…..must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing…..
Each act is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow.
You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone…..you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes.
That’s the difficulty.
The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves, when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed.
You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things your father…..could never have imagined.”
— Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1938-45 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955)
\\][//
Damn this entire statement by Milton Mayer hits home with me in the most profound way. Thanks for posting it HR1 very memorable and very relevant NOW!
The whole book is fascinating Adam,
Mayer interviewed mainly middle class, working Germans; clerks, shopkeepers, butchers, college professors (I think the quote above is from a professor)…
There stories vary. some of them were low level in the Nazi party, such as those in menial government positions; postmen and such.
Most were still baffled as to the depth of what had happened and how their country had fallen to such ruin. Most of these people interviewed had been and were ambivalent to politics, none had been particularly for or against Hitler or the Party. Like we see today, they were just going along to get along.
I still have a hardbound copy of the book, I bought it at a sale at a local library in the late 60s, I think I payed a quarter, or maybe 50 cents for it! Lol
Reading it, you get a sense of it, life in the big shitty. And yes the reminiscent sensation to the present is particularly overwhelming. I could see it already back when I first found the book. Today of course the goon-squads are out of the closet with no apologies whatsoever.
\\][//
“In a presidential proclamation kicking off the 50th anniversary commemoration of the Vietnam War, President Barack Obama distilled the conflict down to troops slogging “through jungles and rice paddies… fighting heroically to protect the ideals we hold dear as Americans.” He talked of “patriots” and “heroes,” “courage” and “valor.” He said the war was “a chapter in our nation’s history that must never be forgotten.”
A few days later, in a speech at the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C., Obama continued praising Vietnam veterans, lauding their “sacrifices” and “courage,” their “valor,” “patriotism,” and “honor.” He welcomed them home and commended them for helping “build the America that we love and that we cherish.” He told the veterans present, “You earned your place among the greatest generations.” Obama even gave a passing nod to the civilian toll “not just in Vietnam, but in all wars,” even if he then followed it up with some eyebrow-raising lines. “We hate war,” he intoned, though a history of almost constant warfare and overseas military interventions suggests otherwise. “When we fight,” he continued, “we do so to protect ourselves because it’s necessary.” The tacit suggestion being that, somehow, barefoot Vietnamese guerrillas seeking national reunification also had designs on the United States.”~Turse
_______________________
So here we are 50 years after the war of US aggression against Southeast Asia, and the official narrative is magically converted back to the same old jingo bullshit story the so-called “government” and the Public Relations Regime was spewing back then. Regardless of how putrid the scum in this petri dish, it is hailed as a glorious meal and called “history”.
\\][//
http://hybridrogue1.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/tvz-c21.jpg?w=225&h=300
Pity you dont discuss judy wood’s case anymore. She’s still the only one making sense. I still have not seen any credible explanation of the toasted cars, the spire or the trails of dust behind the falling steel girders.
Interview 954 – Sibel Edmonds Explains “The Lone Gladio”
Posted: 14 Oct 2014 06:05 PM PDT
“FBI whistleblower, BoilingFrogsPost.com founder and author of the new spy mystery novel “The Lone Gladio” Sibel Edmonds sits down with James Corbett to discuss her book, how it was written, and how its fictional events and characters intersect with reality. From the power of self-publishing to subvert the traditional corporate media gatekeeper system to Operation Gladio and staged terror, this conversation covers it all.”~Corbett
\\][//
Good article Craig and very hard to disagree with any of it. I’ve spent a lot of time on the Pentagon, more than any other part but do believe that Shanksville and the Anthrax event are worthy of serious attention.
Keep up the good work.
Grand Ruse
‘The Beautification of the Psycho-killer’ and the dialectic ‘Excommunication of the Saint’.
Metaphor
Obama the Savior/Obama the Antichrist.
Obama Nobel Peace-Prize laureate/Obama Warmonger.
Their technique of design masquerading as diagnosis.
\\][//
A different bent from the current conversation here but interesting never the less
Bob Graham: Censoring 28 Pages Paved Way for ISIS
Bob Graham: Censoring 28 Pages Paved Way for ISIS
October 12, 2014 28 pages, 9/11, Bob Graham, Brent Bambury, ISIS
Brent Bambury
CBC Radio’s Brent Bambury
In an interview with Brent Bambury of Canada’s CBC Radio last week, former Senator Bob Graham said the unwarranted censorship of a 28-page finding on foreign government support of the 9/11 hijackers shielded Saudi Arabia from scrutiny—enabling that country to continue funding extremists in the Middle East and setting the stage for the rise of ISIS:
“I believe that had the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11 been disclosed by the release of the 28 pages and by the declassification of other information as to the Saudi role and support of the 9/11 hijackers that it would have made it much more difficult for Saudi Arabia to have continued that pattern of behaviour…and I think would have had a good chance of reigning in the activity that today Canada, the United States and other countries either are or are not considering going to war with.”
Graham reinforced assertions by Congressman Stephen Lynch—who joined Rep. Walter Jones in introducing a resolution urging the president to declassify the 28 pages—that the redacted finding is highly relevant to the country’s confrontation with ISIS:
“The connection is a direct one. Not only has Saudi Arabia been promoting this extreme form of religion, but it also has been the principal financier, first of Al Qaeda then of the various Al Qaeda franchises around the world specifically the ones in Somalia and Yemen and now the support of ISIS.”
Bambury asked Graham—who co-chaired the inquiry that produced the 28 pages—how he felt when he learned this section would be redacted. Graham said, “I was dismayed, surprised, angry (along) with my colleague, who was a Republican senator. Neither of us felt there was any national security issues involved in those 28 pages which justified their being censored from public scrutiny.”
Graham was blunt when asked what he thought of Saudi Arabia’s claim that it, too, wants the 28 pages declassified: “I think that was a farce,” said Graham.
Veri,
Yes, interesting stuff, no doubt true as far as it goes – but that makes it a modified limited hangout, for use as a political weapon.
The full depth of the situation – that being that the Saudi’s dance to the Empire’s tune just like all other so-called “independent nations”.
Graham is an old hand at despotism, at realpolitik. He isn’t naive. He is playing poker politics with a poker-face.
\\][//
I say we declare victory for the 9/11 truth movement and put out a public statement to that effect.
As far as I am concerned we have torn the official lies to shreds and soundly defeated all the government loyalists and cover-up artists they have thrown at us. The official story of 9/11 is a laughing stock all over the world, no one with an ounce of common sense believes it. The vast majority of people consider the government and media to be pathological liars. We won so lets publicize it.
I hereby declare that the 9/11 truth movement has proven it’s case and exposed insider involvement in the crimes themselves and in the cover-up following 9/11. No one and no organization has been able to address our evidence or refute our contention that 9/11 was indeed an inside job. NIST has utterly failed to refute the fact that the WTC towers were blown up with explosives. No organization or individual has been able to refute the fact that the pentagon crime scene was staged and that the plane flew over and away from the pentagon thus proving insider involvement. The 9/11 truth movement has proven its case and we the undersigned individuals insist that a citizens Grand Jury be formed immediately to hear the evidence and air it publicly and begin prosecutions of implicated government and media representatives.
Adam Ruff
As per Declaration of 9/11 Truth Proven,
I Willy Whitten endorse this declaration.
Let it be known…
\\][//
Here here.
I’m wondering if I can apply to be on the Citizens Grand Jury or alternatively am I going to receive a subpoena to appear before it…
Frankly, if justice were ever to be served in the 9/11 case, a person such as the one posting here as A. Wright would be issued an indictment to stand trial as a collaborator. This is technically a type of subpoena and a summons. The case for such collaboration against agent Wright is extant on the Internet.
In my opinion the excuses I have gotten from him would not stand up in court as a defense. If he were at all actually concerned about such an unlikelihood – or simply wished to clear his record, he could of course begin a plea that he has seen the error of his ways, and come clean as to his misapprehensions thus far expounded.
As it is for everything, time and opportunity is running out…
\\][//
I take it I can’t serve on the Citizens Grand Jury then. I would be interested to see an outline of the charges against me though, which maybe Judge Ruff could provide. – if he is actually serious.
Sorry Wright, your indictment is to be sealed for National Security reasons
… grin
\\][//
“While President Obama maintained that the “likelihood of widespread Ebola outbreaks in this country are very-very low ” in one statement, in another he contradicted himself saying, “What I have directed the CDC to do is that as soon as somebody is diagnosed with Ebola then we want a rapid response team, a SWAT team essentially, from the CDC, to be on the ground as quickly as possible. Hopefully within 24 hours.”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILD3gMwiPtc&feature=player_embedded#t=0
So may I ask: What’s the urgent need for rapid response Ebola SWAT teams and a newly appointed Ebola czar if the U.S. Government didn’t anticipate a major outbreak or pandemic to sweep the U.S. in the coming weeks? And exactly what is a SWAT team anyway? What do they do?”~Shepard Ambellas
http://www.intellihub.com/obama-announces-cdc-directed-ebola-swat-teams-rapid-response-infected-homes-hospitals/
\\][//
czar
noun
noun: tsar; plural noun: tsars; noun: czar; plural noun: czars; noun: tzar; plural noun: tzars
see tsar.
tsar
zär,(t)sär/
noun
noun: czar
1. an emperor of Russia before 1917.
“Tsar Nicholas II”
a South Slav ruler in former times, especially one reigning over Serbia in the 14th century.
2. a person appointed by government to advise on and coordinate policy in a particular area.
“America’s new drug czar”
Origin: from Russian tsar’, representing Latin Caesar.
______________________________
Yup!
\\][//
Tsars are just flunkies passing out the cash to all the cronies.
This is a big picture perspective that ties into this thread. 9/11 is a perception manipulation ploy that is one of many as the readership here well knows. With events like MH 17 as snapshots of the whole geopolitical spectrum as it’s unfolding. There’s more to come in the maneuvering’s of the grand chessboard towards NWO. Don’t you just hate being cajoled and corralled into an agenda this mercilessly as just so much chaff in the wind by someone else’s leave.
Sorry for the length of this comment Craig but I believe this is important reading.
Putin’s East vs. Globalist West: Merging Into a New World Order
Written by Alex Newman
Putin’s East vs. Globalist West: Merging Into a New World Order
With all of the alleged points of conflict — Ukraine, Syria, Cuba, Iran, and more — between Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and the West, the notion that Russia and its allies may someday “merge” or “converge” with the United States might sound ludicrous. Still, as we shall show, that is the ultimate plan, and it has been for decades, if not longer. In fact, even the supposed “crises” and “tensions” between “East” and “West” — largely manufactured for public consumption — are helping to drive that process. Somewhat behind the scenes but hardly in total secrecy, Putin and his supposed nemeses among the global government-promoting Western establishment are in fact working together toward what they call a “New World Order.”
Toward that end, globalists have long been advancing what they refer to as “convergence.” In essence, for the world to be ruled under a single global regime, East and West, Third World and First World, will all have to “converge” — meet in the middle, perhaps. (See our related article Putin: Key Player in the ‘New World Order.’”) In recent decades, however, it has become clear that the scheme involves making the United States and Europe more like China and Russia, rather than the other way around, playing the public on both sides to accelerate the process.
This, too, has been a long-term operation. As far back as 1953, then-Ford Foundation President H. Rowan Gaither, an important operative with the global government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), explained the strategy to congressional investigator Norman Dodd. The major tax-exempt foundations and key government insiders, he explained, were working “to so alter life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.” The White House was apparently fully on board as well.
It is of course true that, outwardly at least, Russian society has in some ways become more “Western” oriented, even though the tragic and horrific legacy of mass-murdering communist tyranny is still everywhere. While Russia now has many “companies,” the economic system is similar to Communist China’s — state-owned behemoths run by regime functionaries and cronies. The system is often referred to as “state-capitalism,” or, more properly, communism with a thin façade of “markets.” Even the media in Russia remains largely owned and controlled by Putin and his apparatchiks.
The United States, meanwhile, is quickly moving in a similar direction, with the federal government gobbling up, subsidizing, controlling, and bailing out companies while increasingly trying to dictate how they operate. Power is quickly being usurped from other branches and levels of government, becoming consolidated in the federal executive branch instead of where it belongs. As explained in a September 22 cover story in this magazine by Charles Scaliger, “In very many respects, American government and society are now aligned with the vision of the Communist Manifesto.”
In Russia, despite claims of real reform from the Soviet days, the old communist KGB-FSB bosses still run virtually the entire show. “Four out of five political leaders and state administrators in Russia either have been or still are members of the security services,” the BBC reported, citing research in a study about the surging influence of the KGB-FSB in the “new” Russia under Putin’s rule. Unsurprisingly, many of the KGB officials in question were appointed by Putin himself. Other key Soviet figures simply became crony “oligarchs,” buying up state-controlled resources for pennies on the dollar under the phony guise of “privatization.” Those who oppose or expose them often end up dead.
Even former Soviet bosses have compared Putin’s “United Russia” party to the old Communist Party of the Soviet Union, or CPSU. Still today, Putin and his comrades proudly march their military forces around Moscow’s Red Square covered in Lenin images and Soviet-era symbols, such as the infamous hammer and sickle and the red star, as the Soviet National Anthem blares in the background.
Shedding a great deal of light on it all was former KGB disinformation specialist Anatoliy Golitsyn, widely regarded as among the most important Kremlin operatives ever to defect to the West. In his book The Perestroika Deception, Golitsyn, whose track record of predictions has been virtually flawless, argued that the apparent collapse of the Soviet regime was, in fact, a giant fraud — as was the alleged Sino-Soviet split used by Western leaders to alternately offer assistance to both communist regimes under the guise of pitting one against the other. “When the right moment comes the mask will be dropped and the Russians with Chinese help will seek to impose their system on the West on their own terms as the culmination of a ‘Second October Socialist Revolution,’” Golitsyn explained. It will be convergence, on communist terms.
Going back even further in history, virtually the entire communist project in world domination and terror — from the original Bolshevik revolution and the building up of Stalin, to Chairman Mao’s murderous takeover of China and Fidel Castro’s bloody rise to power in Cuba — has been facilitated every step of the way by Western globalists. For a good primer on the subject, check out Professor Anthony Sutton’s Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (1974, Arlington House). Not only is there very little credible evidence to suggest anything has changed, there are countless indications that Moscow continues to play its globalist-assigned role in the building of the New World Order and the accompanying merging of East and West.
How the Ukraine Crisis Fits In
Judging by events and tensions surrounding Ukraine, it would certainly appear — at least on the surface — as if Putin and the West are at odds with each other. (To understand what is really behind the events in Ukraine, William Jasper’s article “Ukraine: Unraveling the Planned Chaos” in the April 7 issue of The New American is a must-read.)
However, as countless senior-level Western globalists and New World Order strategists have made clear, crises and tensions between the various regions and blocs are crucial in the dialectical process — as observed recently in Ukraine, which is now on the road toward fully surrendering its sovereignty to the EU. Eventually, if all goes according to the globalist plan, empowered regional regimes such as the EU will all be merged into submission under a single global regime, likely spearheaded by the United Nations or some similar organization that would succeed it. So how do Putin and Ukraine fit in?
There are numerous complex agendas at work in Ukraine. But all of them advance globalism and ultimate convergence, as we shall show. Most importantly, perhaps, is how Putin’s aggressive actions in Ukraine — backing separatist rebels, annexing Crimea, and more — have brilliantly served the establishment’s strategy for world order. In fact, the Ukrainian fiasco perfectly follows globalist bigwig Henry Kissinger’s publicly outlined strategy for “competing regional units” on the road to global government.
For example, the growing tensions served a key globalist goal that otherwise would have been far more difficult to sell to the European public, which is increasingly weary and even outraged by never-ending political integration. In Eurasia, EU/U.S. bellicosity in Ukraine helped Putin justify his Eurasian Union machinations, such as justifying the need for integration against hostile super blocs. In Europe, meanwhile, Putin’s supposed militarism provided fresh justifications for surrendering even more power and authority to Brussels, giving impetus for building up a full-blown EU military and for Ukraine joining. In Brussels and Washington, the alleged threat posed by Putin has added renewed urgency to the push for transatlantic integration, too.
Ironically, many establishment mouthpieces on both sides of the supposed divide actually have acknowledged how successful tensions in Ukraine have been in spurring deeper integration and globalism despite growing public opposition. “You knew that even 25 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, nothing concentrates the Western mind like a Soviet-style land grab in Eastern Europe,” explained Michael Knigge, head of the editorial team for the establishment publication Deutsche Welle, a leading globalist mouthpiece in Germany. In an op-ed mockingly entitled “Thank You, Mr. Putin,” Knigge wrote: “Your power play does what we couldn’t: revive our two key projects. With your annexation of the Crimea you have thrown a much-needed lifeline to two fundamental Western projects: European integration and the transatlantic partnership.” Putin’s bellicosity has also fueled a renewed push to expand and deepen NATO, a United Nations subsidiary, while encouraging traditionally neutral states, such as Sweden and Finland, to join the controversial club.
How convenient. Is it likely that Putin, a ruthless Machiavellian and strategist, is simply a fool, and that his actions “accidently” strengthened his supposed Western nemeses? The chances of that are slim — after all, he did not rise to the top among cut-throats and psychopaths by being stupid, ignorant, or shy. Instead, behind the scenes, globalist forces are hard at work stage-managing geopolitical events to dupe the public. Again, Jasper’s article on Ukraine lays it all out. The imposition of sanctions by both sides advances the cause of regionalism as well, just as Kissinger, whom Putin refers to as a “trusted adviser,” described.
Russian Terror Troops in America as “Cooperation” Flourishes
Even while Putin has been deepening ties with U.S. enemies — the Iranian dictatorship and Castro’s regime, for example, are still listed as state sponsors of terrorism by the State Department — the Obama administration has unleashed an unprecedented level of bilateral “cooperation” with the Kremlin. In 2012, for example, for the first time in history, the Obama administration hosted Russian military forces on U.S. soil. The pretext: training together to battle “terrorism” — ironic to the point of absurdity, especially considering the critical Soviet and KGB roles in creating, arming, and training legions of terrorists around the world, a topic that has been explored in depth by this magazine.
“The Russian soldiers are here as invited guests of the U.S. government; this is part of a formal bilateral exchange program between the U.S. and Russia that seeks to develop transparency and promote defense reform,” Commander Wendy L. Snyder, U.S. Defense press officer for policy, told The New American in an e-mail at the time. “This is the first time that American and Russian special operations troops have participated in a bilateral exercise.”
While senior U.S. officials remained eerily quiet about the scheming, Russian officials were boasting. “The Russian Airborne Assault Force will contribute a special task group that will exercise with U.S. special service weapons,” said Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Colonel Aleksandr Kucherenko, explaining that the exercises would include joint raids on “an imaginary terrorists’ camp.”
In 2013, more news about Kremlin-White House cooperation was trickling out. Especially troubling: The U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) signed agreements to “cooperate” with Putin’s “Emergencies Ministry” (EMERCOM) in a wide array of fields, cooperating on everything from the drug war and agriculture to terror, science, “rule of law,” health, environment, energy, nuclear issues, education, culture, media, business, arms control, and more, according to the U.S. State Department.
By 2014, the Obama administration was quietly negotiating a pseudo-treaty with the Kremlin to share sensitive financial data on citizens with each other under the guise of finding “tax cheats” — part of the so-called Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) intergovernmental agreements invented by the administration and being exploited to create a global tax regime.
Putin and Kissinger: Two Globalist Peas in a Pod
Putin now openly cooperates with the highest echelons of the globalist establishment in the West. Last year, for example, Bloomberg reported on some of the myriad links between Putin’s government and Goldman Sachs, one of the premier globalist banking institutions listed as a corporate “founder” of the CFR. Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein also served on Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev’s “advisory committee.”
Separately, the Russian “Economy Ministry” had just hired the bank (described as the “vampire squid” by a prominent journalist) to help boost the nation’s image and attract more foreign capital. In Europe and the United States, of course, Goldman Sachs operatives are never far from the real levers of power, with many of them regularly appointed to lead national and regional governments, central banks, and more.
Top globalist individuals are more than close to Putin, too. In early 2012, Putin met with Henry “New World Order” Kissinger in Moscow to discuss what Putin’s spokesman described as “world affairs” with his “old friend.” According to Putin’s spokesman, Dmitri Peskov, the two establishment bigwigs had met on numerous occasions, including for a dinner at Kissinger’s home in New York. “He values everyone’s point of view, and especially such a wise man as Henry Kissinger,” Peskov explained to the New York Times, adding that Putin was interested in Kissinger’s “counsel” on “domestic politics, among other subjects.”
Last year, Putin’s “Foreign Ministry” even gave Kissinger, who was in Moscow at the time, an “honorary doctorate” in “diplomacy.” “You have not simply been doing diplomatic service or similar activities; you have been a global politician for almost your whole life,” Putin gushed. “You have many friends in Russia, both among our foreign policy veterans and among other people as well, who always pay great attention to your views on how the global political situation will develop. So giving you an honorary doctorate by the Russian diplomatic academy makes perfect sense.” Kissinger thanked Putin and noted that he had been visiting Russia regularly for the last five decades — most of which were marked by overt communist tyranny.
Apparently the mutual admiration between the two figures goes back decades, as Putin revealed in his book First Person. “Mr. Putin has cited Mr. Kissinger as a trusted foreign policy adviser,” the Times reported.
In 2007, Kissinger and former KGB terror boss for the Middle East Yevgeny Primakov were appointed by Putin to co-chair a bilateral “working group” of U.S. and Russian political insiders to deal with everything from terrorism to nuclear threats — two key tools in the toolbox of New World Order proponents. That “cooperation,” has expanded to unprecedented heights during the Putin-Obama era — quite an odd development for supposed “foes” allegedly working to counter each other.
In the end, unless the American people stop it, “cooperation” will become full-blown merger, with the world under the thumb of a global regime.
Unsurprisingly I agree with this article Veri just posted. It has been my analysis for quite awhile that the whole thing being presented as ‘current events’ in the media, and that includes much of the alternative media is simply a burlesque – a stage play covering for the machinations of the New World Order. That order is already in control and moving the pieces to it’s own desire, it has been in control for more than a century. That there will be a ‘Fruitiion Era’ in some untold “future” will be hard to distinguish from the march to that point. Things change so incrementally (Read that excerpt my Milton Meyer again..).
Essentially this IS the New World Order, a pantomime, a strategy of tension, history as a dialectic gyre that swirls on and on into oblivion.
This is the URL to the article veri posted above:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/19165-putin-s-east-vs-globalist-west-merging-into-a-new-world-order
\\][//
Here is an important character in the NWO agenda that needs to be highlighted:
John Jay McCloy [CFR] (March 31, 1895 – March 11, 1989), was a Wall Street lawyer and banker who served as Assistant Secretary of War during World War II, where he made many major decisions. After the war he served as president of the World Bank, U.S. High Commissioner for Germany, chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, and chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. He later became a prominent United States presidential adviser, served on the Warren Commission, and was a member of the foreign policy establishment group of elders called “The Wise Men.”
McCloy, part of the Warren Commission Conspiracy:
He was selected by LBJ to serve on the Warren Commission in 1963. Notably, he was initially skeptical of the lone gunman theory, but a trip to Dallas with CIA veteran Allen Dulles, an old friend also serving on the Commission, convinced him of the case against Oswald. McCloy brokered the final consensus — avoiding a minority dissenting report — and the crucial wording of the primary conclusion of the final report. He stated that any possible evidence of a conspiracy was “beyond the reach” of all of America’s investigatory agencies — principally the FBI and the CIA — as well as the Commission itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_J._McCloy
McCloy did a great deal of work for corporations in Nazi Germany and was a legal counselor to the major German chemical combine I. G. Farben. By the time he left for government service in 1940, McCloy earned about $45,000 a year and had savings of $106,000. His involvement in litigation over a World War I sabotage case gave him a strong interest in intelligence issues and in German affairs.[4]
In 1945, he and Stimson convinced President Truman to reject the Morgenthau Plan and not strip Germany of its industrial capacity.[18]-Wiki
From March 1947 to June 1949, John Jay McCloy served as president of the World Bank.
[…]
On March 17, 1949, McCloy and General Alvan Cullom Gillem, Jr. testified before the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services.
On September 2nd of 1949, John Jay McCloy replaced the previous five successive military governors for the U.S. Zone in Germany as the 1st U.S. High Commissioner for Germany and held this position until August 1st of 1952, during which time he oversaw the further creation of the Federal Republic of Germany after May 23rd of 1949. At the strong urging of the German government, he approved recommendations for pardoning and commutation of sentences of Nazi criminals, including those of the prominent industrialists Friedrich Flick, Alfried Krupp, and Martin Sandberger.[19] McCloy also granted the restitution of Krupp’s and Flick’s entire property. McCloy also pardoned Ernst von Weizsäcker as well as Josef Dietrich and Joachim Peiper, convicted of mass murder for their roles in the Malmedy massacre.[19] Some of the less notable figures were retried and convicted by the government of the newly independent West Germany.
. . . . . . .
Read his bio-history in that Wiki article. He along with the Dulles Brothers are prime movers and shakers of that era.
\\][//
There seems to be an acceleration from the Dark Side!
ZOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!
Canadian Parliament under lockdown after ‘multiple’ gunmen ‘KILLED soldier standing guard at the National War Memorial before opening fire in the Parliament halls’ –Journalists inside the building reported hearing dozens of shots and seeing a body on the ground 22 Oct 2014 A gunman has killed a Canadian soldier standing guard at the National War Memorial before multiple gunmen fired dozens of shots inside the halls of Parliament in Ottawa. Police have said there are ‘two or three’ gunmen inside the building and one of the gunmen has been killed, the Ottawa Citizen reported. Parliament was placed under lockdown after witnesses reported seeing a gunman climbing out of his car, grabbing a rifle, shooting the soldier in the abdomen and then running towards Parliament Hill. Ottawa police received a call at 9.52am that shots had been heard in Parliament, while journalists cowering inside said they heard dozens of rounds and could smell gunpowder in the hallways. After the building was placed on lockdown, police swarmed downtown Ottawa as other shootings were reported at the Rideau Centre mall and the Chateau Laurier Hotel. #FalseFlag
NORAD alert after Canada Parliament situation –NORAD increased number of planes on a higher alert status, ready to respond if needed 22 Oct 2014 In response to the ongoing situation at Canada’s Parliament, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, has increased its alert posture, CNN has learned. NORAD and Canadian law enforcement and Canadian authorities are in contact, an official told CNN.
FBI raises alert posture after Canada shooting and ISIS chatter –FBI assisting Canadian authorities after shooting 22 Oct 2014 CNN legal analyst asks how it’s possible for a gunman to enter secure areas that people cannot typically access, when there are magnetometers and security screening? [Good question.] #FalseFlag
Canada Shooting: Parliament Building on Lockdown Amid Gunfire 22 Oct 2014 Heavily-armed police cleared Canada’s Parliament building today and are still searching for more than one suspect after three shooting incidents near the Parliament left a soldier wounded. Gunfire was heard inside Parliament. The gunfire prompted security force to hustle Prime Minister Stephen Harper to a “safe” place not at Parliament Hill, his spokesperson said. Ottawa Police said via Tw-tter the initial shooting took place at 9:52 a.m. at the National War Memorial of Canada, but that was just the beginning of the violent episode, which has now stretched into investigations in two other locations: Parliament Hill and the nearby Rideau Centre.
\\][//
A little follow up from a reliable source
Canadian Terror Wave: a Modern-Day Gladio
Global Research E-Newsletter via globalresearch.ccsend.com
Canadian Terror Wave: a Modern-Day Gladio
By Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, October 23, 2014
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/canadian-terror-wave-a-modern-day-gladio/5409455
As warned, after multiple staged incidents used to ratchet up fear and paranoia in the build-up to US and its allies’ military intervention in Syria and Iraq, at least two live attacks have now been carried out in Canada – precisely as they were predicted.
The first attack involved a deadly hit-and-run that left one Canadian soldier dead. AP would report in its article, “Terrorist ideology blamed in Canada car attack,” that:
A young convert to Islam who killed a Canadian soldier in a hit-and-run had been on the radar of federal investigators, who feared he had jihadist ambitions and seized his passport when he tried to travel to Turkey, authorities said Tuesday.
The second, most recent attack, involved a shooting in Ottawa injuring several and killing another Canadian soldier on parliament Hill. RT in its article, “Ottawa gunman ‘identified’ as recent Muslim convert, high-risk traveler,” would report that:
While the name of the Ottawa gunman is yet to be announced, a number of officials told numerous media that the shooter is believed to be Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a recent Muslim convert, allegedly designated as a high-risk traveler.
Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was born in Quebec as Michael Joseph Hall north of Montreal, two US officials told Reuters, claiming that American law enforcement agencies have been advised that the attacker recently converted to Islam.
AP sources also identified the man to be Zehaf-Bibeau. A Twitter account associated with Islamic State militants tweeted a photo they identified as the Ottawa shooter. The Globe and Mail reports that the shooter was designated a “high-risk traveler” by the Canadian authorities with his passport seized.
Clearly, both suspects were under the watch of not only Canadian authorities, but also US investigators, before the attacks.
Canada’s Attacks Were Predictable – Western Security Agencies are Prime Suspects
It was warned last month after security agencies staged scares in both the US and Australia, that suspects under investigation, being walked through planned terrorist attacks by Western security agencies as part of “sting operations” would inevitably be switched to live terrorist attacks.
In mid-September A Rochester man, Mufid A. Elfgeeh, was accused by the FBI of attempting to provide material support to ISIS (undercover FBI agents), attempting to kill US soldiers, and possession of firearms and silencers (provided to him by the FBI). The FBI’s own official press release stated (emphasis added):
According to court records, Elfgeeh attempted to provide material support to ISIS in the form of personnel, namely three individuals, two of whom were cooperating with the FBI. Elfgeeh attempted to assist all three individuals in traveling to Syria to join and fight on behalf of ISIS. Elfgeeh also plotted to shoot and kill members of the United States military who had returned from Iraq. As part of the plan to kill soldiers, Elfgeeh purchased two handguns equipped with firearm silencers and ammunition from a confidential source. The handguns were made inoperable by the FBI before the confidential source gave them to Elfgeeh.
It was warned that only an inoperable firearm stood between Elfgeeh’s arrest and his successful execution of deadly plans hatched by him and his undercover FBI handlers. This script, written by the FBI to entrap Elfgeeh, would be followed almost to the letter in live attacks subsequently carried out in Canada resulting in the death of two Canadian soldiers. Conveniently, both suspects are now dead and little chance remains of ascertaining the truth of who they were in contact with and how they carried out their deadly attacks.
With both suspects having been on both US and Canadian watch lists – it is very likely undercover agents were involved in either one or both cases. While many possibilities exist, Western security agencies should be among the first suspects considered as potential collaborators.
A Modern-Day Operation Gladio – Inducing Fear, Obedience, and Control
Before Elfgeeh’s entrapment and later live attacks in Canada, US policymakers and pundits had begun in earnest setting the rhetorical stage for eventual staged attacks. With serial beheadings failing to raise Western public support necessary for an expedient intervention in Syria, more insidious provocations appeared to be in the works. Setting the stage, a CBS/Associated Press story titled, “Former Deputy CIA Director: ‘I Would Not Be Surprised’ If ISIS Member Shows Up To US Mall Tomorrow With AK-47,” would claim immediately after the initial James Foley ISIS execution video that:
“The short-term concern is the Americans that have gone to fight with ISIS and the west Europeans that have gone to fight with ISIS could be trained and directed by ISIS to come to the United States to conduct small-scale attacks,” Morell stated. “If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised.”
Morell warned that over the long-term the extremist group could be planning for a 9/11-style attack that killed thousands of Americans.
The FBI has a long list of foiled terror plots of its own creation. More disturbingly are the plots they conceived but “accidentally” allowed to go “live.” One might recall the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. FBI agents, according to the New York Times, were indeed overseeing the bombers that detonated a device killing six and wounding many more at the World Trade Center.
In their article, “Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast,” NYT reported:
Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.
The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the informer said.
The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of hours of tape recordings Mr. Salem secretly made of his talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as in a far better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New York City’s tallest towers. The explosion left six people dead, more than 1,000 injured and damages in excess of half a billion dollars.
Considering the 1993 bombing and the fact that the FBI literally oversaw the construction and deployment of a deadly bomb that killed 6, it is clear that the FBI can at any time through design or disastrous incompetence, turn one of their contrived entrapment cases into a live terror attack. One can only guess at how many similar FBI operations are currently taking place within the United States involving ISIS sympathizers – any one of which could be turned into a live terror attack provided the weapons handed over to potential terrorists are functioning, just as the bomb was in 1993 when it was driven into the lower levels of the World Trade Center.
It is very likely that the recent attacks in Canada involved at least one “informant” working for the FBI. Because the FBI uses confidential informants to handle suspects, if a plot is switched ”live,” the informant will be implicated as an accomplice and the FBI’s covert role will remain uncompromised.
Image: The FBI has an impressive portfolio of intentionally created, then foiled terror plots. Its methods include allowing suspects to handle both real and inoperable weapons and explosives. These methods allow the FBI to switch entrapment cases “live” at any moment simply by switching out duds and arrests with real explosives and successful attacks. Because the FBI uses “informants,” when attacks go live, these confidential assets can be blamed, obfuscating the FBI’s involvement.
Everything from a mass shooting to a bombing, and even an Operation Northwoods-style false flag attack involving aircraft could be employed to provide Wall Street and London with the support it needs to accelerate its long-stalled agenda of regime change and reordering in both Syria and across the Iranian arc of influence. Readers may recall Operation Northwoods, reported on in an ABC News article titled, “U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba,” which bluntly stated:
In the early 1960s, America’s top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
In addition to Operation Northwoods, the public must also consider NATO’s Operation Gladio, and its larger “stay behind” networks established after World War II across Europe and at the center of multiple grisly assassinations, mass shootings, and terrorist bombings designed to demonize the Soviet Union as well as criminalize and crush support for left-leaning political parties growing in popularity in Western Europe. It would be determined that NATO’s own covert militant groups were killing innocent Western Europeans in order to effect a “strategy of tension” used to instill fear, obedience, and control over Western populations.
That the FBI and Australian authorities had coordinated staged security operations in tandem on opposite ends of the globe to terrify their respective populations into line behind an impending war with Syria, and now two highly suspicious attacks have been carried out using the very script Western security agencies were using to lead suspects through “sting operations,” suggests a new “Operation Northwoods” or “Operation Gladio” of sorts is already being executed.
Staged executions on cue by ISIS in the Middle East of US and British citizens at perfectly timed junctures of the West’s attempt to sell intervention both at home and abroad, and now live shootings just in time to heighten a new “strategy of tension” reek of staged mayhem for the sole purpose of provoking war. Could grander and ultimately more tragic mayhem be in store? As ABC News’ article on Operation Northwoods and the Military Channel’s documentary on Operation Gladio suggest, there is no line Western special interests will hesitate to cross.
With the West attempting to claim ISIS now has a “global” reach, the US and its partners’ attempts to obfuscate the very obvious state-sponsorship it is receiving will become exponentially more difficult. That the FBI is admittedly stringing along easily manipulated, malevolent patsies who at any time could be handed real weapons and sent on shooting sprees and/or bombings – and now apparently have been – Americans, Canadians, Europeans, and Australians would be foolish to conclude that their real enemy resides somewhere in Syria and not right beside them at home, upon the very seats of Western power.
Such a good summation here by Cartalucci!
The MO of the western strategy of tension is unmistakable. I found myself thinking of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by the FBI, even before Cartalucci mentioned it. That is the typical and definitive, profile of western intel – as articulated by a pilot on 9/11: “Is this real world or exercise?”
\\][//
Something funny happened on the way to the Yellow Submarine … everybody hopped up on hope & change are now hitting an all time low. What can you do when maniacs run the world?
Delusions of Utopia always tend to spawn the distopia of Hell on Earth.
\\][//
Excellent article and informative comments, as usual.
“Don’t you ever wonder about sound and vision?”~Bowie
And “Framing” … you know what Framing is, right? It is the ‘context’ a story is put into, a POV is implied or generated. ‘Deconstruction’ is the art, or process of revealing the Frame, by attention to the subtext as well as the text. The subtext is analysed as to the unexpressed assumptions that drive a text.
Epistemic reflection, thinking about your own thinking can be done in the same manner, deconstructing your own ‘story’ – analyzing your own unexamined assumptions: Refining how and why you know what you think you know.
\\][//
In other words, self-observation married to attention. Quite a challenge but absolutely essential if we are not to be sucked into the many available seductive beliefs.
Yes! Just so.
\\][//
Lester Bangs must be cackling hysterically in his grave!
President Obama has now graced as many covers of Rolling Stone magazine as Britney Spears…
President Obama is on the cover of the Oct. 23 issue of Rolling Stone magazine for a story titled “In Defense of Obama” written by economancer Paul Krugman. It’s his eighth cover since 2008.
There is not much to say about this. Saying anything ‘serious’ about the burlesque that is modern politics is not addressing modern politics honestly.
\\][//
On September 11, 2001, Michael and his seeing eye dog, Roselle, walked down 78 flights of stairs in the North Tower of the World Trade Center and survived.
Michael Hingson, is blind, has a guide dog Roselle and has to descend 78 stories on foot to get to safety.
. . . . . .
I saw the segment with Hingson on the Nat’l Geographic special ‘Remembering 9/11′. At the end of that interview Hingson recounts being safely out of the building and standing with a crowd of others, he says:
“I couldn’t see anything … suddenly there was the sound of bam, bam,bam, then BOOM! And the tower came down.”
This corroborates so many other ear witness testimonials of hearing the sounds of explosions just before the towers came down. Although Nat’l Geographic attempts to maintain the official narrative, this one interview appearing unedited as it is, rebukes the official story without the editors realizing it.
Just a couple of nights ago was the first time I had seen ‘Remembering 9/11′. It is actually a CD my mom had made and loaned to me sometime back.
It was really quite awful, blatant sappy emotion tugging pap geared to cause feelings of jingoistic “heroic patriotism” – it was obvious PR, and clearly propaganda meant to reinforce the official narrative.
The segment with Michael Hingson was very close to the end, and I was fed up with the whole thing, until I got to the end of his segment and realized what he had revealed. I was as surprised and delighted to catch that part. An important ear witness testimony of bombs going off before the onset of the global collapse of the tower as it exploded.
\\][//
1. Shanksville and the self-burying plane: Without a doubt, the single major area of 9/11 study that has received the least attention is the impossible tale of Flight 93, which is supposed to have crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The plane, so the absurd story goes, is supposed to have crashed into the field and buried itself in the “soft” soil with the hole covering itself in. That’s right, the government claims (without a shred of proof offered to the world) that the plane ended up completely underground. They had to dig the whole thing up (except for the drivers license of one of the alleged hijackers, which was suitably singed and found above ground). It’s really more accurate to say that most people – at least 99 out of 100 – have no idea that this is what the official story says. How many have a clue, for example, that the scar in the field that was supposedly made by the wings penetrating the ground could be seen in aerial photographs taken by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1994? The only thing added on 9/11 was the nice round crater in the middle that represented the supposed impact of the hollow, aluminum fuselage. And people actually believe this…
I do seem to recall reading those very words somewhere previously … Oh! Yea! of course these words from A. Wright actually appear at the top of this page and are in fact written by Craig McKee!
Huh, whattaya know ’bout that?
I suppose that by pasting the words down here again Mr Wright wants to highlight the overwhelming unlikelihood a coincidence of this magnitude is – that is the airliner just happening to dive straight down into a mine shaft that would simply swallow the whole plane. And even more amazingly leaving a trail some six miles long of debris from said plane as if it had in fact blown up midair! So we have a dual purpose plane, one that can dive into a prefab hole and bury itself neatly, and can also be blown asunder in the skies high above!
Yes indeed 9/11 was a day of high magic and miracles all ’round:
Gravity in a localized area in Manhattan became Jupiter-like in it’s strength, sucking three skyscrapers to earth like so much kindling!
And airplane flew into the Pentagon, magically changing its trajectory instantly on impact!
The whole military establishment was at the Mad Hatters Tea Party during the entire proceedings, and none of them lost their head!
Hell! The list is so long it is literally innumerable, and needs a deep cellar to hide it away from public eyes.
Let us thank Mr Wright for the reminder.
\\][//
While we are retracing…our recent conversation regarding Nat.Geo.“Witless : PentagonDC 911″ clip of D.I Porter GOSS, being interviewed the morning of 911 interrupted by distant explosion, then a fast approaching low flying turbofan. attributed officially and unofficially to an interview outside the Capital Building sometime around or after 10.am. The possibility of another large explosion and low flying commercial type turbofan around the Capitol building in Washington DC at or about 10.am. has not been corroborated as yet. Please let me know if it has been.
Provenance so far. GOSS.
>Nat Geo outsourced the making of ‘Witness Pentagon 911’ to Siskell Jacobs in Chicago.
NatGeo say: ”The only number I have for that is that it was from contract 7 on that program. I have no other reference numbers. On the acquired footage log for the program it has a column for Contract # and beside the Peter Goss footage it says 7. “
>Gregg Jacobs of Siskell Jacobs, says : “The clip is a CBS News clip, which I believe means that it was licensed by the BBC, which at the time was represented by Thought Equity,T3M Denver.
(>T3M) T3Media Denver, state: “
The links in contract 7 Nat Geo had digitised for their project by T3 for “Witness: Pentagon” were:
http://www.t3licensing.com/license/clip/2B10AC050_001.do
http://www.t3licensing.com/license/clip/2B10D215C_xxx.do
http://www.t3licensing.com/license/clip/2B10AC050_s01.do
One clip from their project was not digitised. : 2B10AFF84_001”
2B10AFF84-001″ cost $88.00 to see. It was basically 40 minutes live camera on tripod overlooking a leafy street watching people wandering lazily around a rooftop over the way. It may have been filmed on 911, it may have been filmed in Disneyland but one thing for sure. It was NOT GOSS ducking an approaching fan jet.
The employee working the contract for T3 – now left that position – sais : “ However, I can’t say that I recall providing that footage (although it has been a few years).”
No luck yet CBS or BBC. Neither the makers, presenters, nor outsourcers of that documentary have provenance of that clip.
And people stop taking your calls after a while.
fremo,
I would say that understanding just who and what Porter Goss is would be a big clue as to why all information on this incident of the clip of D.I Porter Goss being interviewed the morning of 911 has been relegated to the Memory Hole.
The article below gives a penetrating of Goss as well as his benefactor Bob Graham. Remember it was this pair who chaired the 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry. Goss was also publicly against further inquiry into the event, speaking against the appointment of a bipartisan committee.
His history goes all the way back to Operation Mongoose, the covert U.S. project to displace Cuban leader Fidel Castro. As those who have studied the JFK assassination know, this operation was turned around to be a part of that. So Goss is obviously a deep long term insider with much blood on his hands… and one of the “Untouchables”.
http://digwithin.net/2014/03/16/28-missing-pages/
\\][//
Yep. Daniel Hopsicker introduced GOSS in Barry and the Boys, so no illusions there.
There’s no business like ‘Terrorism’ for sustaining the Police State.
“Blowback” is a form of modified limited hangout.
http://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2010/07/23/government-101/
\\][//
Boilingfrogs : blowback. xx
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2014/11/01/bfp-roundtable-takes-on-islamic-terror/comment-page-1/#comment-15168
The term “BLOWBACK” was popularized by Christopher Simpson in his 1988 book of that title.
The book was in the main about ‘Project Paperclip’ with it’s revelations of official Amerikan involvement and collaboration in using, shielding and supporting Nazi war criminals.
Having read the book (I have an original hard cover) back then, I did not see the issue as in anyway excusing the perpetrators of this outrage. But the term “blowback” has become a term of excusing such crimes and excesses, as I said above – as a limited modified hangout, that is making the excuse in the lie that such consequences were not a part of the agenda in the first place.
In reading Simpson’s book, I didn’t get the impression at all that these people collaborating with saving the Nazi high command were at all naive, or didn’t understand the consequences of their actions. It was clear to me that the US system was as Machiavellian and mired in Realpolitik as the Nazi regime.
I think it was the spin put on the book (and the term blowback) in it’s reception that took the word, making it into the disingenuous newspeak item it is now. The acts of Paperclip were too well documented by Simpson to deny – so what was needed in the official PR, was to frame it as “short sighted” – which is the same bullshit excuse we get over and again about “Intelligence mistakes”.
As Sibel notes so passionately in the roundtable with Corbett et al,
“Fool me once shame on you – Fool me twice shame on me!”
(Something little Georgie Bush couldn’t get out of his mouth without a stumble bee stinging his tongue).
\\][//
Is That All There Is?
I remember when I was a little girl, our house caught on fire
I’ll never forget the look on my father’s face as he gathered me up
In his arms and raced through the burning building out to the pavement
And I stood there shivering in my pajamas
And watched the whole world go up in flames
And when it was all over I said to myself
“Is that all there is to a fire?”
Is that all there is, is that all there is?
If that’s all there is my friends, then let’s keep dancing
Let’s break out the booze and have a ball
If that’s all there is
And when I was 12 years old, my daddy took me to the circus
The greatest show on earth
There were clowns and elephants and dancing bears
And a beautiful lady in pink tights flew high above our heads
And as I sat there watching
I had the feeling that something was missing
I don’t know what, but when it was all over
I said to myself, “Is that all there is to the circus?”
Is that all there is, is that all there is?
If that’s all there is my friends, then let’s keep dancing
Let’s break out the booze and have a ball
If that’s all there is
And then I fell in love
With the most wonderful boy in the world
We’d take long walks down by the river, or just sit for hours
Gazing into each other’s eyes, we were so very much in love
And then one day, he went away and I thought I’d die, but I didn’t
And when I didn’t, I said to myself, “Is that all there is to love?”
Is that all there is, is that all there is?
If that’s all there is my friends, then let’s keep
I know what you must be saying to yourselves
If that’s the way she feels about it, why doesn’t she just end it all?
Oh, no, not me, I’m not ready for that final disappointment
‘Cause I know, just as well as I’m standing here talking to you
That when that final moment comes and I’m breathing my last breath
I’ll be saying to myself
Is that all there is, is that all there is?
If that’s all there is my friends, then let’s keep dancing
Let’s break out the booze and have a ball
If that’s all there is
\\][//
Craig, I am at work so do not have time to carefully read all the comments. However, I would like to add to your excellent list the question: What happened to all the plane passengers? Were they fakes, were they dupes, where they removed at an airport, bused off and killed?
My apologies if I’ve repeated someone here.
Jean Bush,
There have been theories floated here on T&S on the topic of “What happened to all the plane passengers?
Unfortunately this is one of those subjects that seem to have many well reasoned hypotheses, but no firm evidence to make a solid determination.
There is some circumstantial pieces that seem to point to them being removed at an airport with a hanger run by NASA, processed there and then the trail ends there …???
There were reports of Barbara Olsen being somewhere in Eastern Europe after the event.
As far as I can tell, this is an issue that only the perps could clear up – and they have not been compelled to speak. One doubts at this point that they ever will be.
Perhaps you have a theory worth offering?
\\][//
Thanks, hybrid, but I do not. I’m sure all speculation has been well covered. If they existed at all, they are now dead; if they were hoaxes, then it doesn’t matter.
If I’ve confused you, sorry, I’m Cartier McCloud on my WordPress site and was fiddling around with my name and avatar so CC I am from now on.
That is a lovely gown CC. Nice to meet you.
\\][//
Well, thank you, hybrid. Nice meeting you, as well. An intelligent and kind man is rare, indeed.
To the person making the claim of a large percentage the first responders deathly sick and dying from some not quite on quorum identified (i.e nuked) 9/11 building take down induced malaise. Where I grew up, a couple to three as the crow fly’s miles away was a plant that was big into manufacturing stuff primarily from asbestos. Many times above the average chronic pulmonary problems including lung cancer and other toxin induced illness’s.
Look it up, company’s name’s Johns Manville, Pretty sure they got pulled down somewhat in the mass class action suit against them.
It’s “13” years on down the line.
The twin towers were condemned to a several billion cruzaro$ overhaul, primarily to remove all the asbestos insulation which includes ventilation shafts, water lines, sewage lines, massive electrical conduit etc. Be my guess, it’d be cheaper to blow it up, or down into the buildings their own footprints. They ain’t that good at nukes yet, witness Fukushima but the mutherfukers got chemical or elemental reactive’s down to science.
That’s my bet.
Yes indeed Veri,
The toxicity of the WTC dust is well understood. It is chemically as caustic as Drano. There are absolutely no indicators that there was any radioactive elements in that dust.
\\][//
A Further Note on the Extreme Toxicity of the WTC Dust Due To Its Nano-Particulate Nature:
RJ Lee report:
“Additionally, WTC Dust can be differentiated from other building dust on the basis of its unique composition and morphology. WTC Dust Markers exhibit characteristics of particles that have undergone high stress and high temperature. *Asbestos in the WTC Dust was reduced to thin bundles and fibrils as opposed to the complex particles found in a building having asbestos-containing surfacing materials. Gypsum in the WTC Dust is finely pulverized to a degree not seen in other building debris. Mineral wool fibers have a short and fractured nature that can be attributed to the catastrophic collapse. *Lead was present as ultra fine spherical particles. Some particles show evidence of being exposed to a conflagration such as spherical metals and silicates, and vesicular particles (round open porous structure having a Swiss cheese appearance as a result of boiling and evaporation). -Materials transformed by high temperature (burning). These transformed materials include: spherical iron particles, spherical and vesicular silicates, and vesicular carbonaceous particles. These heat processed constituents are rarely, if ever, found together with mineral wool and gypsum in “typical” indoor dusts.”
Asbestos can cause some types of lymphoma and the towers were full of it.
\\][//
I worked for a lawfirm that did asbestos cancer cases from the shipyards in Los Angeles. One of the reasons “they” brought the towers down was it would have cost billions of dollars to get rid of the asbestos.
“One of the reasons “they” brought the towers down was it would have cost billions of dollars to get rid of the asbestos.”
That is correct! I read a study detailing the technical difficulties of wrapping the whole of each tower, building scaffolding around them and taking them apart a section at a time. It was deemed unfeasible and prohibitively expensive.
I understand that this study has since been scrubbed from the web. I would have to look for it again to be certain of that detail,
\\][//
Here is an article discussing the asbestos problem and the removal plans:
http://911blogger.com/news/2006-11-26/destroyed-records-pre-911-wtc-estimated-asbestos-removal-and-demolition-plans
\\][//
I’m not suggesting by any means that this should belong in a top ten list, but I’ve never even heard it mentioned till lately . . . And it certainly deserves mentioning. (Advance note: I don’t understand why she makes such a strong, emphatic point of voice recognition when Silva’s name is already listed for both events . . . )
http://youtu.be/5P_qU2J8DvU
On 09.11.2001 I was in my home office juggling finances so that I could continue to live outside the matrix. I had become disgusted with having to “go along to get along” in the Corporatocracy and was continually being singled out for non-compliance, not being a “team player”. I didn’t like being abused. (work till 11pm, wait ½ hour off the clock for manager to come with keys to let the prisoners out into the dark parking lot so he could stand at the doorway not watching us all get safely to our cars, and be required to return by 5am the next am, “against the law”, I said, “shut up and be a team player”, they said, for a rah-rah virtual meeting with the Minor Illumaniti, a televised charade from upon their yacht so as to show us all what we could have if we would just try hard enough, complaining that we had “done great, but not quite good enough.”, “Go team go!!!!! Gimme an H!…”. I had taken it as long as I could. I was fully vested.
I happened to have been born in that unique era where I started gainful employment at exactly the same time as when everything started going to “dustification” in the Whole Wide World; but I only sensed it because, no matter what I did, I could never seem to get ahead.
My first awareness of inflation was at a very young age. Bubble gum pieces suddenly got quite a bit smaller, but were still a penny. That will date me for sure.
I was feeling it that day too, but with a sense of pride because I had escaped. I had taken my fully-vested pittance and run. I wasn’t playing it safe. I wasn’t playing it their way anymore. I was gardening in my yard. I was trying to develop a business; mind you, flying by the newly freed seat of my pants. I didn’t care if I crashed and burned. I was FREEEEEEEE!
I’m still what I think of as free. I’m doing it as much my way as is humanly possible. Time is freedom. Time to follow Truth and Shadows. Time for listening to all these smart people talk and struggle to find the truth. I want to know what the Truth is. Why things have to be so hard. Why I have to pay for a medical plan I don’t want; for a defective product that will break as soon as I try to use it. That isn’t what I want; I want preventive medicine with a functional doctor, not something that uses me to profit.
So what I think is missing from this discussion is, what should we all be doing to not be complicit with TPTB? How are we going to stop them? How can we cut them off at their knees? How can we keep them from taking us all the way down?
Permaculture garden, Grow your own food. Use it up. Wear it out. Make it do. Or do without. Make so little money, you don’t have to pay taxes to support the MIC. Don’t buy their defective products and their Whole Wide World. Flintstoneville for me, thank you kindly.
One of the most powerful weapons they used on collapsing/pancaking/nano-thermiting/taking down/blowing up/dustifying the WTC (The World As We Thought We Knew It) was religion. That isn’t being discussed. When did all the books get burned? Inflation is a weapon. If we are so distressed trying to survive, who wants to do research? Poverty is a weapon. Why are we splitting hairs over words and wisdom as to how it happened still and not taking affirmative action to quit the status quo. All of us. Is it time for Anarchy? I think so. How can we accomplish that?
09.11.2001 My TV was on in my master bedroom sanctuary suite when it finally infiltrated my home office financial manipulating shenanigans, and my peace, to the point that I finally had to go see what my instincts were immediately telling me was a Hollywood Production. I wasn’t surprised AT ALL. I didn’t feel alarmed. It made perfect sense to me. I didn’t know how they had done it; but it was as clear to me as the purple rose bush in my front yard that “They” had done it. It’s the way thing had always been being done by “Them”. They did it however They wanted to do it, regardless of its impact on us. Actually, specifically because of what impact they wanted it to have on us. I “knew” that.
Here’s some fodder for the flames of how it might all be piecing together?: http://wakeup-world.com/2012/09/24/the-electromagnetic-war-on-humanity/
Ms. SpoolTeacher,
Thanks for the great article on Microwave Warfare on Humanity.
I really enjoyed your prologue as well, thank you.
\\][//
Correction to the date 09.11.2011 when the TV infiltrated my peace. Of course I meant 2001. Sorry. Edit, re-edit, edit again and still miss things. Oops.
I’ve made the correction on the original comment.
Thank you, Craig.
I see I’ve stumbled upon another disinformation site masquerading as a forum of people looking for and discussing the “truth”.
It’s very telling that Dr. Wood (not Woods) is the only topic in this article which is subjected to special rules about what can and can’t be discussed. If you’ve uncovered some evidence that refutes the evidence and CONCLUSION (not theory) that that evidence supports – then present it as an introduction as to WHY the topic of Dr. Wood is being censored. Else, don’t present yourself as someone who’s first loyalty is to the truth.
“Her work doesn’t fit with other theories” is a woefully insufficient explanation.
Mercy! Another one. The BS meter needle has already been bent on the top peg past any kind of redemption. You’re way late in the game to be pushing Dr. Judy Woo Woo nukie Doo Doo
The topic of Judy Wood has not been censored on this site as a whole (I did a post on her in 2012 that features hundreds of comments). But I have prohibited it on certain comment threads because there are people who contribute here who would derail any discussion by raising the DEW issue. It is my right as the creator of this blog to stop that from repeatedly happening. I don’t see the benefits of the Truth Movement fighting over Wood’s non-theory since we all agree that the three World Trade Center towers were brought down in some type of demolition. I feel the same way about the mini-nuke position. Anyone who supports Wood or the nuke theory is welcome to publish articles on their own blog or any other site that is open to that.
Thanks for the reply.
I respect your right to run the blog as you see fit and for you allowing me to criticize it. I was pointed here by a member of the truth movement. We were engaging on a different site and he was unable to debunk the fact that Dr. Wood’s evidence refutes traditional CD.
He wanted me to come here and debate because he thought I would find more formidable opponents here. But, it appears the book is closed on Dr. Wood’s work here.
I have read through several dozen comments critical of Dr. Wood – both here and on the one other article (for which comments are closed) but did not find anything compelling enough for me to dismiss her evidence.
I would be grateful, and I would consider my time here well spent, if you could provide the most compelling argument / evidence that convinced you that Dr. Wood should be dismissed or at least diminished.
I vow not to use this as a launching pad for a debate on Dr. Wood’s work. Thanks in advance for anything you care to offer.
I seek the truth, peace.
Have you checked out the link to Dr. Gregory Jenkins’ paper on the implausibility of DEW being used on Nine Eleven? I think you will find the arguments and science irrefutable.
Have you ever investigated the amount of energy required to “dustify” steel? And the fact is, as I saw myself when I was at the site in 2001, there was a tremendous amount of steel, not “dustified,” that was being carted away by hundreds of trucks, so the premise that all the steel was turned to dust is simply wrong.
Why not read this article about the amount of energy required, and other issues, with DEWs such that it is impossible for that technology to have been used. And I love that Judy Wood supporters resort to the description of all others who do not believe in the DEW hypothesis as “disinfomation” when clearly Wood’s hypothesis itself is provably disinformation designed to discredit the movement to find truth, and cause it to be ridiculed by others not willing to do a little independent research.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200702/Implausibility-Directed-Energy-Beam-Demolish-WTC-by-Gregory-Jenkins.pdf
Here is my strategy: I try not to stay wedded to any one interpretation of the cause of the 9/11 events, including some of what I regard as likely ones, like controlled demolition of 1, 2, &7. Most people have been scared off of even looking at the evidence. What I do instead is question the biggest and most improbable conspiracy theory of all–that 19 guys with box cutters brought the greatest security system in the modern world to its knees. I simply ask if my interlocutor buys the Official 9/11 Report. That usually gets them. No rational person can possibly buy the conclusions of the Report. Then I ask them to support a new investigation by a truly independent, powerful, unbiased committee. No honest person can refuse that. I especially try to push this idea at any appropriate opportunity I find to comment on the writings of my progressive heroes who ought to know better. Folks like, Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky, Glen Greenwald, Michael Moore, Chris Hedges, etc. These folks have to understand that we will support them if they at least call for an investigation.
Look up “Gaslighting” sometime. We have a whole society that has been gaslighted with regards to 9/11!
I agree with that, except that WTC7 is so obvious that it is hard not to use it. Here is a statement, actually written by Paul Craig Roberts, along the lines of what you wrote, that I often use:
“Let’s take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy. The official truth is that a handful of young Muslim Arabs who could not fly airplanes, mainly Saudi Arabians who came neither from Iraq nor from Afghanistan, outwitted not only the CIA and the FBI, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies and all intelligence agencies of US allies including Israel’s Mossad, which is believed to have penetrated every terrorist organization and which carries out assassinations of those whom Mossad marks as terrorists.
In addition to outwitting every intelligence agency of the United States and its allies, the handful of young Saudi Arabians outwitted the National Security Council, the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times in the same hour on the same morning, air traffic control, caused the US Air Force to be unable to launch interceptor aircraft, and caused three well-built steel-structured buildings, including one not hit by an airplane, to fail suddenly in a few seconds as a result of limited structural damage and small, short-lived, low-temperature fires that burned on a few floors.
The Saudi terrorists were even able to confound the laws of physics and cause WTC building seven to collapse at free-fall speed for several seconds, a physical impossibility in the absence of explosives used in controlled demolition.”
Paul Craig Roberts
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Conspiracy-Theory-by-paul-craig-roberts-110620-169.html
I really admire Paul Craig Roberts. I’ll bet he has paid a price for his candor.
Yes I’ve looked at this. And I promised the owner of this blog that I would not launch into a debate about Dr. Wood’s research.
I will say this, I have looked at Dr. Jenkin’s attempt to discredit Dr. Wood’s research. It follows the same pattern of all the other attempts I’ve seen to debunk her work. Step 1. Ignore the salient point of Dr. Wood’s research: There is evidence that clearly refutes the possibility that either a gravitational collapse or conventional CD were responsible for the destruction of the towers. Step 2. Misdirect. Get folks caught up in doing calculations that are irrelevant to the evidence and conclusion supported by Dr. Wood’s work. Step 3. Dig in and become indignant.
I’ve also come to the conclusion that Alex Jones and his crew have been part of this PsyOp since the beginning. “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – V.I. Lenin.
Peace and Truth.
“I will say this, I have looked at Dr. Jenkin’s attempt to discredit Dr. Wood’s research. It follows the same pattern of all the other attempts I’ve seen to debunk her work…. 2. Misdirect. Get folks caught up in doing calculations that are irrelevant to the evidence and conclusion supported by Dr. Wood’s work.”~Sitting_Duck
. . . . . . .
Dr. Jenkins, calculations are hardly “irrelevant to the evidence”. They in fact explain the physics of 9/11 by the evidence at hand. The problem is that you don’t grasp physics well enough to understand Jenkins’ explanations. He has addressed all of Wood’s assertions and shown the blundering errors of her “non-conclusions”.
As I have pointed out before Mr Duck, the best rebuke to Wood’s pseudoscience is the full grasp of the physics of chemical explosive demolition. As I have directed you to that information posted on my blog, I won’t repeat it here for the umpteenth time.
\\][//
I don’t believe you’ve ever pointed me personally to information on your blog regarding the physics of chemical explosive demolition. You took the the time to pen two paragraphs of ad hominem attacks against Dr. Wood and myself, surely posting a link is not an arduous task by comparison.
Good NLP, though – attempting to de-credential Dr. Wood for example.
Here you go Mr Duck;
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/controlled-demolition-and-the-demise-of-wtc-on-911/
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/disinformation-dew-nuke/
\\][//
You people had better wake the hell up! 9/11 is DEAD! THIS is who was behind it as well as everything else. You’re wasting time arguing.
https://cartiermccloud.wordpress.com/
They’re planning to kill you! Wake up!
What is the point of this ridiculous post? Mr. McCloud, Zionists were involved in the events of 911, but they were not the only ones, and not all Jews are Zionists. And yes, there are many Jewish actors and actresses. BFD.
It’s MISS McCloud to you. Read over the entire website, you people are barking up the wrong tree. Better look at the forest. Zionism is a political movement, it has nothing to do with what the Jews believe; go to the bottom of my site and work up. It’s the JEWS who are going to kill us. Wake up!
Jean Bush aye? Any relation to the two Nazi presidents by that last name?
\\][//
You are a fuckin’ idiot McCloud. This is nothing but Nazi bullshit you are spreading.
One needn’t be a Jew to be a Zionist. It is the credo of “might makes right”; not race, ethnicity, nor religion.
No doubt ‘they’ are planing on killing us – you just don’t know who ‘they’ really are.
\\][//
And you’re a fucking asshole. The jews have been planning to kill us long before zionism was invented. Wake the fuck up. I see you still believe in the holocaust hoax. Try this on for size and see if you can make an intelligent comment after you read it; you obviously are too stupid to go over the postings on my site.
http://www.holohoax101.org/
And that goes for the rest of you ass kissing jew lovers.
Jean Bush, I have studied these issues long enough to know the difference between someone who opposes Zionism, and someone who has lost their bearings and become a Jew Hater.
I advise all to read Douglas Reed’s THE CONTROVERSY ON ZION, to get a full & honest perspective of Zionism and it’s ancient roots. It was the House of Levi that became the infamous scribe in their so-called “captivity” in Babylon where the book Deuteronomy. In Hebrew this means “the second book” however it was the first to be penned. When the rest of the tribes of Judea rebelled against such sacrilege; the use of letters and symbols, the Scribes wrote Genesis, as an excuse, a made up story to put their tribe at the top of the list of “the Chosen”.
As in all things political – and this was political maneuvering, it is the Priesthood, the leadership who manipulate the minds of the “lesser brethren” who are no more in the know than the ignorant TVZombies of modern Amerika.
Your errors are those of a simpleton who cannot parse the subtleties of language and history.
\\][//
I am not interested in your prissy explanation of zionistic voodoo. THIS is what the jews have planned for us. Look it up.
age 84:
THE MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF ST EINSTEIN:
To the Jews, the establishment of the Jewish State heralds the appearance of the Jewish Messiah and the Jews’ prophesied complete dominance over all other Peoples followed by the other Peoples’ judgment and then extermination. ……. The establishment of a Jewish Kingdom to rule and ruin the Earth is the expressed purpose of Judaism and the attainment of these goals is the only reason that racist Jews have kept their people segregated from the rest of humanity for some two thousand five hundred years.
They remain separate so that they can eventually rule and utterly destroy every other group of human beings. It is their “divine” wish and sole purpose. And they believe that when they have accomplished these horrific goals, God will bless them with a “new earth” and a new spirit and a new heart and will cover their dry bones with a new flesh, as promised in the Jewish apocalyptic nightmares of Isaiah and Ezekiel. This “new earth” will not suffer Gentile life. These Cabalistic Jews, and their Christian dupes who have been schooled to believe in the “Rapture,” intend to destroy the world so as to provoke God to create the “new earth”. They do not fear the genetic harm they ae deliberately causing humanity, nor do they fear the environmental harm they are causing, because they believe that these will hasten the arrival of the Jewish Messiah and the appearance of a “new earth.” The Zohar, I, 28a-b, states:
“At that time every Israelite will find his twin-soul, as it is written, ‘I shall give to you a new heart, and a new spirit I shall place within you.’ (Ezek.xxxvi, 26), and again, ‘And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy’ (Joel III, 1); these are (28b) the new souls with which the Israelites are to be endowed, according to the dictum, ‘the son of David will not come until all the souls to be enclosed in bodies have been exhausted’. And then the new ones shall come.”
Don’t believe it? This is taken from the Jews own Holidays:
http://www.messengers-of-messiah.org/NewPDF/PropheticSignificanceRH2015.pdf
Watch these dates:
September 23, 2015 – April 18, 2016.
Well we certainly get our share of psychopathic lunatics here on T&S.
This Jean Bush/cartiermccloud schizo is just the latest to grace us with her blithering nonsense.
It seems like about four or five times a year that one of these yankrods stumbles on the campfire here to preach and rant fire&brimstone woowoo.
I suggest this crackpot take her ravings to StormTrooper, where she will be comfy with her NeoNazi brethren. I’m not wasting any more time on this bullshit.
\\][//
POST REMOVED
Cartier McCloud spews her insanity on FB as well: https://www.facebook.com/cartier.mccloud.1
I agree with the purpose of this article which is to sew up divisions among the efforts to bring the perps to justice. However once we get to the point of a new, unrestricted and honest investigation ALL of these topics need to be examined VERY thoroughly. The MOST IMPORTANT issue is the notion of aircraft striking the WTC. In my career I heat, melt , machine and IMPACT metals. Its what I do. I KNEW the morning it happened these materials behave in no such way. My hair has been standing on end ever since I saw the 2nd so called ‘impact’. The ‘live’ footage is so horribly flawed it defies any logic to even discuss. The important point to make is this: The media could not have nor would they have a reason to produce those horribly flawed videos as the events unfolded. This proves CLEARLY that the MSM outlets are involved in the planning and implementation as well as the cover up. Can you say ‘malice aforethought’?
“The ‘live’ footage is so horribly flawed it defies any logic to even discuss. The important point to make is this: The media could not have nor would they have a reason to produce those horribly flawed videos as the events unfolded.”~David Brown
I Take it this is advocation of the ‘Video Fakery School’ … No dice:
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/disinformation-video-fakery/
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2014/02/04/911-disinformation-no-planes-theory/
\\][//
The first item on the list is false information:
1. Shanksville and the self-burying plane: Without a doubt, the single major area of 9/11 study that has received the least attention is the impossible tale of Flight 93, which is supposed to have crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The plane, so the absurd story goes, is supposed to have crashed into the field and buried itself in the “soft” soil with the hole covering itself in. That’s right, the government claims (without a shred of proof offered to the world) that the plane ended up completely underground. They had to dig the whole thing up (except for the drivers license of one of the alleged hijackers, which was suitably singed and found above ground). It’s really more accurate to say that most people – at least 99 out of 100 – have no idea that this is what the official story says. How many have a clue, for example, that the scar in the field that was supposedly made by the wings penetrating the ground could be seen in aerial photographs taken by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1994? The only thing added on 9/11 was the nice round crater in the middle that represented the supposed impact of the hollow, aluminum fuselage. And people actually believe this
Then on the fifth item he complains about guess what? Spreading false information:
5. The workings of disinformation: There is no question that the 9/11 Truth Movement has been under assault from agents, infiltrators, and shills since very early in its existence. It is also clear that this assault has had a damaging effect on the movement. As a result, it has become essential that we discuss and come to understand how disinformation works, how it is being used against us, and how best to react to it (and when not to react at all).
Disinformation, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is:
“The dissemination of deliberately false information, esp. when supplied by a government or its agent to a foreign power or to the media, with the intention of influencing the policies or opinions of those who receive it; false information so supplied.”
DELIBERATELY false information.
So when someone who purports to be a 9/11 truther shares information that he or she knows to be false, this is disinformation. This does NOT mean that all incorrect information and poorly supported arguments are disinformation.”
Craig McKee and Christopher Bollyn need to publicly retract the bogus claim that the Shanksville gash had been there since 1994. The damage done by the continued spreading of this false rumor is evident: it is repeated by lazy truthers everywhere, but it is NOT true.
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Google-Earth-Shanksville-Myth.png
Steve, I would agree that the scar is not the same one from 1994, and I will remove that reference. Beyond that, however, I am concerned about your rather nasty habit of attacking everyone else in the movement. And I don’t mean criticizing or correcting; I mean attacking. In this case, you take 448 words to state that one fact is incorrect. And you quote me making a comment “someone who purports to be a 9/11 truther” as if to say that I and Bollyn do not qualify as truthers because of this point about Shanksville. You say this cause evident damage but I wonder about the damage from you attacking Christopher Bollyn very harshly along with other prominent researchers who you think haven’t embraced your research to the extent you expect. I don’t think your attitude is helpful in any way. When I see truthers attacking other truthers out of proportion to their alleged offences, I wonder why.
Craig,
Thank you for removing the reference but it would help reverse the damage done to the truth to have a retraction.
As a dedicated truther it is not an attack for me to point out that the way Bollyn manipulated the image from 2001 (so that the size and orientation matched the one from 1994) is evidence of a deliberate deception.
I’m sorry if you don’t think my attitude is helpful. How would you suggest I confront truthers who have been spreading false information while bemoaning truthers who spread false information? If you don’t want to be confronted for spreading false information, perhaps you should spread more true information.
Steve
Steve,
As far as I am concerned, I have retracted it, and quite visibly given our exchange. When a newspaper prints a retraction it does not even appear in the same edition as the original statement. While I agree that incorrect information should be corrected I think you’re overstating the damage caused. I understand that you won’t agree.
I see that the “attitude” I objected to persists in your second comment. Your reference to “spreading false information” implies some kind of intent on my part. There is none. Hence my use of “attack.” And your concluding flourish – “If you don’t want to be confronted for spreading false information, perhaps you should spread more true information. – is quite disingenuous of you. I have written somewhere in the area of 175 articles since I entered the 9/11 truth movement containing many thousands of facts. Your condescension notwithstanding, I have spread a great deal of “true information.” In fact, this comment is a distortion on your part. Perhaps you would like to repair that damage and show us all a good example.
Craig,
A couple months back when I first provided you with the evidence that Bollyn deliberately manipulated the image size and orientation of the photograph with the intent to deceive, and that the damage of his deception is evident in the way his false information is repeated by lazy truthers everywhere, you could have retracted your statement at that time. But you didn’t.
Propagandists can also claim to spread mostly true information, that’s how controlled opposition works. Complaining about my attitude doesn’t help your position.
Steve
Steve,
First of all, propagandists do not “claim to spread mostly true information.” Perhaps you want to revise that statement. And what is your point anyway? Are you calling me a propagandist? Are you calling me controlled opposition? Besides finding fault with just about everyone in the movement, you seem to be very good at insinuation. In fact, I’m becoming more and more suspicious of your agenda.
Craig,
I appreciate your correcting the record about the Shanksville gash, thanks.
I’ll tell you what my agenda is – no need to be suspicious – it is to expose the truth about what happened on 9/11. I find it very difficult to do so when everywhere I go I run into self righteous truthers spreading the same false information that has been discredited for many, many years. All it takes is for a little fact checking and the disingenuous are exposed – they are the ones who will never correct the record.. You don’t have to be controlled opposition to repeat false information.
What do you think my agenda is, anyway?
Steve
“How would you suggest I confront truthers who have been spreading false information while bemoaning truthers who spread false information?” Simple. Expose truthers who do not affirm the Twin Towers’ controlled demolition as very ignorant, very dumb, or very hypocritical. Handle truthers who do with much more deference, even if you think that you have proved that they have spread false information.
Thinking of it, this could be an important aspect of Craig’s “more” items #4 and #5. If and when 9/11-cognizant leaders manage to agree to disagree on most unessential aspects of 9/11 knowledge and of 9/11 activism while agreeing on the essential finding that the most formidable terrorists in history are the team of experts who blew up the Twin Towers with people inside, 9/11 Truth may progress much faster.
In the meantime, discerning 9/11 activists will simply have to learn to downplay 9/11-cognizant opinion-makers who berate their colleagues, while reserving their vitriol for the numerous watchdogs that should but will not bark, starting perhaps with anti-war scholars and Muslim institutions.
Love,
Daniel,
I’m not sure who you’re addressing here, the guy who was cautioning us against disinfo in the same article where he was spreading disinfo, or the guy who confronted the guy spreading the disinfo. Isn’t it incumbent on us all to check the sources and verify the facts? If this was a court of law and I was caught spreading false information, wouldn’t my credibility be in doubt about any other claim I make? Why doesn’t that apply to truthers such as the one who originated this rumor?
Steve
Steve,
You are very impressed with yourself, aren’t you? Your agenda appears to be to trash everyone else in the movement.You talk about the damage that can result from incorrect information being spread but I think you are doing much more damage with your sweeping attacks. Everywhere you go you find self-righteous truthers spreading false information? Really. Despite your reassurances, my suspicion of your motives grows with each new comment.
Unless I misunderstood, you are now accusing me of “spreading disinfo”? Deliberately false information? Either back up your claim that I am deliberately spreading false information or retract that statement.
Craig,
What I hear you saying is that you’re impressed with yourself.
Can you be specific about these “sweeping attacks?”
As far as I can tell I stick to the facts. It is when presented with the facts that contradict the beliefs of others that I AM ATTACKED.
It isn’t an attack to identify someone spreading bad information. It isn’t an attack to mention the fact that the AE911T fellas have a half-million dollar annual budget but won’t examine the evidence that can explain how it was done and who did it. It isn’t an attack to notice that the “it’s all fake” crowd eliminates all the evidence that can explain how it was done and who did it too. It isn’t an attack to notice that the “DEW” crowd doesn’t have an answer for what cut the holes in the tower, the hole in the Pentagon or the gash at Shanksville. It isn’t an attack to notice that the “mini-nuke” crowd starts their investigation at the END (the destruction), not at the beginning (the impact damage.)
You didn’t misunderstand, Craig – you WERE spreading disinformation. Whether it was deliberate is anyone’s guess but if it wasn’t then what was it that prevented you from some basic fact-checking?
Steve
Steve,
Disinformation is deliberate by definition. Or do we not define the word the same way? If you are accusing me of deliberately using false information, then please back that up. Otherwise take it back. It’s simple. You say “it’s anyone’s guess” whether I was deliberately pushing false information – please explain how it is remotely responsible to insinuate that someone is being dishonest when you have nothing but a “guess”? I thought you were all about facts and evidence, not guesses.
I wonder how long you’d like to continue discussing this one piece of information. I conceded your point immediately after you made the comment, but for some reason you want to continue to take shots at me. Why would a sincere truth seeker keep pushing that point once it has been conceded?
Back up your statement or take it back.
Craig,
I thought we already went over this. No, I was not accusing you of deliberately spreading disinformation. I was accusing you of passing-on bad information from someone who apparently was deliberately spreading false information – you don’t have to be controlled to be spreading false info. But in this case it’s easy to identify the guy who deliberately spread the bad information – and it wasn’t me. Why don’t you direct your ire at the guy whose false information you were repeating? You could have avoided all this by checking his work.
Steve
Steve,
I thought we’d been over it, too, but you wrote:
“You didn’t misunderstand, Craig – you WERE spreading disinformation. Whether it was deliberate is anyone’s guess…”
and then,
“No, I was not accusing you of deliberately spreading disinformation.”
Nevertheless, I will accept your revised position. And you’ve made the “fact-checking” point now several times. If you have nothing new to add we can end this discussion here.
Craig,
If you must know I agreed with much of your article, especially item 4 :
“In fact, we should be thinking of new and creative ways every day to shine a light on 9/11.”
A couple years ago I started just such an initiative with the 9/11 Crash Test project. I’m surprised you didn’t mention it in your article, was it because of my “attitude” (and if so, how petty of you) or was it because the project discredits the whole plane meme? Personally I think it’s because the existence of such an initiative wasn’t counted on when the perpetrators were organizing their controlled truth movement, so it paints the faux truthers into a corner of either supporting the project or ignoring it. Guess which route most truthers chose? I doubt it was dislike of my “attitude” that kept the truth movement from supporting the 9/11 Crash Test project, heck nobody knew me when I started it – so again, why wasn’t it mentioned as one of the new and creative ways the truth movement can shine light on 9/11? What could be better than rocket-sleds, jet wings, explosions and intrigue in the spirit of Mythbusters as a device for gaining attention with the mainstream?
So if it was simply personal dislike of me that kept you from mentioning the 9/11 Crash Test project, that is unfortunate. But I am well aware of my reputation within the truth movement, so it is fortunate that Pablo Novi is there to put a smiley face over my storm cloud. Here is an interview with the 9/11 Crash Test Project director, Pablo Nov where he outlines his vision for the 9/11 Truth Movement and its role in leading the world to a ceasefire both on the ground and on the Web, You know Pablo – unlike you and me Craig, he is able to set his personal dislike aside. Please listen to this radio address and let me know if you think you can work with him (not with me, of course.)
Steve
http://www.911truthdialogue.com/pablo-novis-address-to-the-world-must-hear/
Steve,
I said my list was not exhaustive, and I invited all to suggest their own items for either list. And yet you call me “petty” IF I left your project off because of personal dislike. I assure you I have never given you or your personality a second thought. Also, when I published this article I had no idea how hostile you are to so many of the “self-righteous” truthers who you think peddle disinformation.
Anyone who has followed this blog for any length of time knows that I always articulate the reasons for the positions I take and never oppose an interpretation of the evidence based on any personal animosity. Having said that, you are not helping yourself to gain acceptance for your project with your approach. You should consider having Pablo do all your talking for you.
Craig,
Thank you for removing the false information that the Shanksville crater was visible in the 1994 photograph. I apologize for my incendiary delivery and I hope it won’t prevent you from working with Pablo and the other calmer heads in the 9/11 Crash Test project in the future.
Sincerely,
Steve De’ak
You are not sure who I’m addressing here? I am addressing you. Incidentally, I write so other readers may gather advice too.
Check sources? Verify facts? Good ideas! I would complement them with calls to evaluate the likelihood of allegations, double-check logical inferences, and focus teaching and activism on what is essential rather than important. This would dampen the many silly intra-9/11 squabbles over interesting but secondary questions such as those surrounding the Mossad’s role, the airborne phone calls, or the Twin Towers’ airplane impacts.
Since you are pushing the need to “confront guys who spread disinfo,” I’ll focus on my recommendation to use much respect when doing so to “guys”–and gals for that matter–who affirm the Twin Towers’ terrorist controlled demolition. On the contrary, spread all the condescendence and spite you are capable of on the imbeciles and the professional con artists who peddle Osama bin Laden’s fanatical hijackers’ responsibility for the execution of 9/11. To be more effective, try to do so in a way that people who have no clue about Building 7 will understand that you are right with minimal intellectual effort.
Re-reading your last two sentences, you seem to be calling for a court-of-law-type drive to doubt the credibility of anyone you have caught spreading false information. This is not a bad idea. You may want to primarily apply it to the innumerable bully pulpits that should but did not and will not affirm 9/11 for the self-evident and transparently covered false flag that it is. This would arguably be a very good step forward for 9/11 Truth and humanity, as it would unite 9/11 activists against their common most formidable enemy: the huge, diverse, tight-knit, worldwide, powerful, evil community of the 9/11 censors.
If you have enough energy left after this exercise, by all means repeat it for the tiny pulpits that affirm the Twin Towers’ controlled demolition but promote some information that you have falsified. Just do so humbly and respectfully.
Love,
Daniel,
It is not an attack to direct attention to the evidence at the scene of the crime (where every criminal investigation should begin.) It is not an attack to notice that the most popular truth organizations (the four camps) when confronted with said evidence are the ones who attack ME rather than address the EVIDENCE. This evidence makes it clear what caused it and who the most likely suspects are so I can’t help but wonder why an alleged truth movement would bend over backwards to avoid addressing the writing on the wall, as it were.
Peace,
Steve
You have not attacked other 9/11 leaders or activists, even though you could invoke good reasons to do so? But they have attacked you, even though they have no good reason to do so? This is unfortunate. You may want to humbly and respectfully ask them to stop. Or take the high road, ignore them, keep showing the way, wonder if you could tweak your methods of working so as to reduce the impact of their attacks, patiently wait for discerning 9/11 activists to follow your lead, and take it easy if your ideas are too much of a paradigm shift for them.
Building on my earlier points, have you attacked the 9/11 censors? You would have excellent reasons to do so. Have they attacked you? If not, maybe you have not attacked them hard enough.
Further building on my earlier point, one advantage of 9/11 activism is that we can neglect to correct each other’s mistakes. The 9/11 censors and fanatics master that art and have the resources and bully pulpits that we don’t have. We can count on them to ridicule and demonize any conspiracy theory that would become popular while not being compellingly true. The reverse truth is that 9/11 activists who reach out with less-than-evident information and less-than-straightforward conclusions expose themselves to nasty hit pieces, as even a mediocre local reporter can earn kudos by trashing them for imagining technologies or cherry-picking testimonies or ignoring video evidence or etc. Hence a very down-to-earth call to 9/11 leaders to avoid bickering at each other and limit their introductory outreach to undisbelievable information, like Building 7’s destruction’s video resemblance to a controlled demolition’s.
Love,
Daniel,
If the evidence is addressed then there is no need for bickering. I began the 9/11 Crash Test project as a way to unite the truth movement behind our common cause of Peace. It proposes using the scientific method to eliminate a major stumbling block within the truth movement, the question of whether the planes were real. If they were not real then the only conclusion that can be reached is that the media were and are part and parcel to the success of the whole operation. If the media are involved (and by that I mean all the mainstream and most of the “alternative” media, including the Internet), then this conspiracy is exponentially larger than most common-folk can fathom. If the media are involved (they are) then the people who control the media are involved.
It is of paramount importance that the media’s role in this caper remains hidden for if it became known that our trusted fifth estate is anything BUT, then all bets are off. People might actually turn off the TeeVee and start thinking for themselves – that will never do which is why the “no planes” conclusion must be hidden behind “DEWs”, or “Israel Dunnit”, or “Holograms” ,or a “Reinforced Plane”, or “everything was fake – our masters can fabricate totally fake worlds out of whole cloth, nothing to see here, best go back to work.”
Steve
“If the evidence is addressed then there is no need for bickering.” If the evidence is not addressed, then is there a need for bickering? If so, who would need to bicker, at whom, how, why, what for?
To get back on topic, you are not advocating intra-9/11 bickering as a condition for 9/11 to progress, are you? You are not asking Craig to insert it in his top 10 to-do list, are you?
Love,
Craig,
I was at the 9/11 Museum last month. I noticed that the museum describes the alleged Flight 93 hijacker’s singed ID as a “non-state-issued ID,” so it wouldn’t be a driving license.
Adding to the improbability of such “evidence” escaping destruction when the plane “tunneled” (the museum’s description) into the ground is the fact that the remaining (unburned) half of the ID contains the alleged hijacker’s photo and name.
Brooks, I didn’t know about the “non-state-issued” ID. I’ll check into that. But I agree that it’s completely unbelievable, as is the idea of a plane hit the ground and “tunneling” underground.
“There was also recorded a magnetic field shift on earth at the time the tower got the road runner effect. It all leads to DEW’s im afraid.”~This is a claim constantly made by supporters of Judy Wood’s DEW story. It is as baseless as any of their other so-called “proofs”:
“The Earth’s magnetic field shifts constantly, the field surrounding the Earth changes over time, with shifts occurring most prominently in low latitudes in the Western Hemisphere. The fast-moving magnetic patches that occur near the equator drift approximately 10 miles (20 kilometers) per year. These changes are driven by intense regions of activity in the core, the cause of which scientists have been at a loss to explain.Relying on more than 400 years of data, including more than a decade’s worth of continuous global satellite observations, Aubert’s team was able to create the first model to explain the westward drift.Gravity aligns the inner core and the mantle, the layer between the core and the outer crust, forcing liquid metal in the outer core into enormous rotating vortexes known as gyres. These gyres can reach as large as 1,700 miles (2,700 km) deep within the mantle, while smaller gyres occur closer to the surface. As these gyres are concentrated at low latitudes, core convection expels them and pushes them westward, the model shows.”
http://www.space.com/23131-earth-magnetic-field-shift-explained.html
\\][//
“1. Shanksville and the self-burying plane: Without a doubt, the single major area of 9/11 study that has received the least attention is the impossible tale of Flight 93, which is supposed to have crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.”~This Article
This is one area of 9/11 research I have spent little time on. But recently I have been confronted with Debunkoids with challenges to prove the official narrative false. After several rounds with one of these stooges, I finally took some time to look closely at the so-called evidence at the site of the alleged plane crash:
This is an aerial photo of the claimed impact site of Flt 93 taken years before: The pre-existing trench is visible in this 1994 U.S.G.S (United States Geological Survey) map of the reclaimed mine:
https://i0.wp.com/wtc7lies.googlepages.com/Shanksville1994Aerial.jpg
The candid world has been asked to accept some very extreme coincidence theories pertaining to the events of 9/11, but the “crash site” at the old strip mine outside of Shanksville is utterly beyond belief. The pre-existing trench is visible in this 1994 U.S.G.S (United States Geological Survey) map of the reclaimed mine. The crater was made directly in the middle of the trench. What is represented as “the wing scars” in the official narrative, are EXACTLY the same scar as in the 1994 U.S.G.S map of the reclaimed mine.It is obvious to the lucid observer that someone created a “crater”, likely by backhoe, and then dumped a bunch of debris into it, adding a very shallow gouge to attempt to give the impression of the stablizer (tail) of an aircraft.
Anyone who can accept this obvious fraud is delusional, and any other arguments by them must be dismissed as rantings from the cuckoo’s nest.
\\][//
just saw this on facebook, came here and see that there are already so many comments!. mine will be the 355th. good story. i will follow the advice here:
4. Excessive cynicism about the future of 9/11 Truth: it’s an uphill battle and it won’t be won in a year or two. And yes, the deck is stacked against us. But we have to see the positives in small victories and keep pushing forward. Telling each other that it’s hopeless and that we’re tired of making this argument or that argument is not going to help us achieve our goals. If you’re tired and fed up with fighting, take a break. Recharge the batteries. Don’t discourage others from the efforts they are making.
Well, you’ve proven to me that there are benefits to reposting articles from past months on Facebook. Some people will read them who missed them the first time.
Ah yes, a repost! I just figured that out on a re-visit here when i saw the date of the first comment. Had been wondering why I hadn’t been notified of the “new” article. Thanks for the reply/confirmation.
Why do any “sincere truther” want to explain to other truthers why it is a bad thing to jump on the no-plane at the Pentgaon claims? Because it is, because it supported by no witnesses, because it divides the truth movement and because it let Dov Zakheim and Boeing scott free from being asked about the craft that hit the Pentagon.
I am a sincere truther and I ask any “truther” who says that “no plane hit the pantagon”:
Do you really want to claim that all the witnesses who saw A PLANE hit the Pentgagon are all lying? Don’t you think it’s a little bit weird that NO witnesses who were there outside the Pentagon to have a clear view have said that they did not see a plane?
Why do you want to ignore the about three witnesses who talked about a 737 when instantly interviewed – which even slipped through to MSM and then cutt off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zEmVsUnaOg
Can you decide whether it is ok to say that a 757/Flight 77 didn’t hit the Pentagin but some other special type of (black op) Boeing/plane must have hit did, or do you want to make the rule that everyone who are convinced that SOME PLANE – which of course was not Flight 77 flown by Hani Hanjour – hit the Pentagon are all dis-info agents?
jeppeseverin,
You obviously do not grasp the argument made here. Your comments are utterly irrelevant to the position held here.
\\][//
I for one felt jepperseverin’s comments were relevant to the discussion. Challenging the ‘position held here’ is always valuable when done in the spirit of free an open inquiry. Such challenges should be encouraged. Is that not what folks who stand for ‘Truth’ should encourage? Why limit debate?
“Challenging the ‘position held here’ is always valuable when done in the spirit of free an open inquiry.”~deboldt
The first step in challenging a position is to understand that position. Would you not agree debolt?
Is it my responsibility to give a detailed account of what that position is, when this entire blog is filled with detailed enumeration of that position?
Perhaps you can give a proper digest of what our position on the Pentagon is. Give it a shot.
\\][//
Let’s be clear that there is no “official” position held by this site. I am on record about what I think happened at the Pentagon, and it’s natural that other like-minded people would want to participate in the discussion also. But anyone who wants to contest my conclusions in a genuine and constructive way is welcome.
Craig,
I think that it is obvious that there are a group of regulars here that share your view as to what happened, in particular at the Pentagon.
You may no wish to call this the “official view” of Truth and Shadows, but there is a common denominator that hold the views of CIT, and Pilots For 9/11 Truth, as generally the position taken here.
I do not wish to discourage debate. Far from it, but I don’t want to start as square one with every newcomer that posts and opinion here.
Let them study the site and get a sense of what has already been written here.
These are MY opinions, personally myself.
\\][//
I agree with Hybrid-no need to have to “debate” this subject anytime someone new joins the discussion. It’s been done here, there, and everywhere.
Indeed, Niko. Here, there, and everywhere.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vZ-qkCqk1Y
If eyewitness accounts are so trustworthy, what’s going on with these below? These are all actual quotes from “eyewitnesses” and they are all markedly different. Some saw the wings dig up the ground, others saw nothing at all. Some heard the metal go through the building. Others saw the plane cartwheel, others saw it explode. One guy wondered why there were no aircraft parts or debris.
This is just a small sampling. Eyewitness accounts are inherently unreliable, and the weakest form of evidence. That is why the lack of physical evidence is so compelling.
One person’s take is indicative of the mindset that wants so much to believe the storyline, but can’t locate the physical proof to support the belief: “Actually, there’s considerable evidence of the aircraft outside the E ring. It’s just not very visible.”
“my brain could not resolve the fact that it was a plane because it only seemed like a small hole in the building,” he said. “No tail. No wings. No nothing.” DeChiaro, Steve
”I thought, ‘This isn’t really happening. That is a big plane.’ Then I saw the faces of some of the passengers on board,” Cissell said. While he remembers seeing the crash, Cissell remembers none of the sounds.
“Everything was calm,’ Bowman said. “Most people knew it was a bomb.
“I could actually hear the metal going through the building.”
“It was an American Airlines airplane, I could see it very clearly.(…) I didn’t see the impact. (…) The sound itself sounded more like a thud rather than a bomb (…) rather than a loud bomb explosion it sounded muffled, heavy, very deep.
Paul Begala, a Democratic consultant, said he witnessed an explosion near the Pentagon. “It was a huge fireball, a huge, orange fireball,” he said in an interview on his mobile phone. He said another witness told him a helicopter exploded.
Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it’s wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke.
“The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear. The devastation was horrific.
“You could almost see the people in the windows,” he said as he watched the plane disappear behind a line of trees, followed by a tall plume of black smoke.
The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick.
The plane approached the Pentagon about six feet off the ground, clipping a light pole, a car antenna, a construction trailer and an emergency generator before slicing into the building,
The plane penetrated three of the Pentagon’s five rings, but was probably stopped from going farther by hundreds of concrete columns. The plane peeled back as it entered, leaving pieces of the front of the plane near the outside of the building and pieces from the rear of the aircraft farther inside, Evey said.
Amazingly, the plane pushed through the outermost “E Ring”, and drove deep into the interior, its nose coming to rest just inside the “C Ring.”
The airplane traveled in a path about like this, and the nose of the aircraft broke through this innermost wall of C ring into A-E Drive. QUESTION: One thing that’s confusing — if it came in the way you described, at an angle, why then are not the wings outside? I mean, the wings would have shorn off. The tail would have shorn off. And yet there’s apparently no evidence of the aircraft outside the E ring. EVEY: Actually, there’s considerable evidence of the aircraft outside the E ring. It’s just not very visible.
On its way in, the wing clipped. Our guess is an engine clipped a generator. We had an emergency temporary generator to provide life-safety emergency electrical power, should the power go off in the building. The wing actually clipped that generator, and portions of it broke off. There are other parts of the plane that are scattered about outside the building. None of those parts are very large, however. You don’t see big pieces of the airplane sitting there extending up into the air. But there are many small pieces.
As I stepped onto the highway next to the triage area, I knelt down to tie my shoe and all over the highway were small pieces of aircraft skin, none bigger than a half-dollar.
Right before the plane hit the building, you could see the silhouettes of people in the back two rows. You couldn’t see if they were male or female, but you could tell there was a human being in there.”
The plane was a two-engine turbo prop that flew up the river from National. Then it turned back toward the Pentagon. We thought it had been waved off and then it hit the building.
Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.
“We saw a huge black cloud of smoke,” she said, saying it smelled like cordite, or gun smoke.
All in all, I probably only had the aircraft in my field of view for approximately 3 seconds. The aircraft was at a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon. It was “clean”, in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no apparent landing gear deployed.
I cannot understand how that plane hit where it did giving the direction the aircraft was taking at the time. As most know, the Pentagon lies at the bottom of two hills from the west with the east side being next to the river at 14th street bridge. One hill is at the Navy Annex and the other is Arlington Cemetery. The plane came up I-395 also known as Shirley Hwy. (most likely used as a reference point.) The plane had been seen making a lazy pattern in the no fly zone over the White House and US Cap. Why the plane did not hit incoming traffic coming down the river from the north to Reagan Nat’l. is beyond me
The wings came off as if it went through an arch way leaving a hole in the side of the building it seems a little larger than the wide body of the aircraft. The entry point was so clean that the roof (shown in news photo) fell in on the wreckage.
Jarvis, who was around the corner from the disaster, tried but failed to see the plane when he left the building. “There was just nothing left. It was incinerated. We couldn’t see a tail or a wing or anything,” he says. “Just a big black hole in the building with smoke pouring out of it.”
The nose penetrated into the portico. And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere. . . . It was very sort of surreal.”
One of the aircraft’s engines somehow ricocheted out of the building and arched into the Pentagon’s mall parking area between the main building and the new loading dock facility, said Charles H. Krohn, the Army’s deputy chief of public affairs. Those fleeing the building heard a loud secondary explosion about 10 min. after the initial impact.
“The plane went into the building like a toy into a birthday cake,” he said. “The aircraft went in between the second and third floors.”
It sounded like the pilot had the throttle completely floored. The plane rolled left and then rolled right. Then he caught an edge of his wing on the ground.” There is a helicopter pad right in front of the side of the Pentagon. The wing touched there, then the plane cartwheeled into the building.
I saw the remains of the engines in the North parking lot of the Pentagon as well as melted aluminum and other debris left from the aircraft.
This is a hole in — there was a punch-out. They suspect that this was where a part of the aircraft came through this hole, although I didn’t see any evidence of the aircraft down there. (…) This pile here is all Pentagon metal. None of that is aircraft
Dissecting pieces of the puzzle.
Pentagon attack, the attack conveniently took out some of the records and accounting servers of the military, one day after Donald Rumsfeld declared that the military could not account for 2.3 trillion dollars of spending.
85 cameras no footage of a plane; the blackbox of that so called plane?
Where is the evidence from the blackboxes from the 2 planes that crashed into the towers, their are witnesses that saw the blackboxes recovered from the debris and go straight into the hands of the FBI.
The Fact that the WTC towers were full of asbestos, 400 tons of asbestos used when the towers were constructed. How much would it cost to remove all the asbestos from those mammoth buildings? NYPortAuthority sells the properties to Larry Silverstein, July 24 2001, who will now be responsible for the asbestos removal. Coincidentally, because of the sale, Silverstein puts a large amount of insurance for terrorists attacks. Where he sought to get 7Billion dollars for the 2 seperate attacks; it was settled on at 4.55B. purchased for 3.2 Billion. Not a huge profit, but what would have cost millions to renovate, were turned to rubble from the attacks. Silverstein has a clean slate to build his new buildings
What deserves more attention, why is the largest crime scene on American soil, rushed to be removed and put in a landfill? There was no extensive investigation, there is plenty of evidence that something was arry when we know that molten metal was found as ground zero rubble was being removed.
Out of sight out of mind; those that lost loved ones, it will never be out of mind. Those that seek the truth, it will never be out of mind.
Those who believe the lies are afraid of the truth, and cannot fathom that this was a Black Flag operation. The general population does not look at all the facts, if you look at all the facts it starts to add up. Most dont even realize that WTC7 a 47 storey building fell, hours after that day.
What I also find hard to believe is evidence seems to be harder to find, removed from the internet
Scary
It is not so hard to believe that evidence is getting harder to find on the Internet. Any content on the Internet only stays where it is as long as hard drives of servers don’t crash or are recovered when they do, and where people continue to live and pay their bills and decide the information is still valuable to them. When people die, retire, lose their jobs, decide to reorganize their information, or get bored, information is frequently lost. Of course there are many cases where the intelligence agencies have removed content, but the Internet itself is not that stable. Our civilization is more fragile than many realize.
Honestly, if and when I bring up 9/11, I usually start with asking what a conspiracy theorist usually lacks-any observable evidence. Then I point to the cold hard facts about Newton’s laws being broken by an otherwise stable buiding that in a rapid onset manner, destroyed itself through path of greatest resistance. No explanation can explain how Newton’s second and third law did not apply that day. Other observable evidence, molten steel, verification that over 1000 victims have not been identified, etc.
I then ask who the conspiracy theorist is? You, the person that thinks a gravational collapse explains all this?
I say be weary of anyone who claims to be a truther that directs you away from actually evidence (no-planers, etc)
Or, who always cites Sandy Hook, moon landing, JFK, etc when discussing 9/11. It tells me they are the “If one thing is a false flag then everything must be” type. Where or not it is actually true, pick your battles and focus. Don’t sound like a crazy guy.
And stay clear of the “Jews did 9/11” guy. You think only jews were involved? No Christians? This is bigger than ones faith, bigger than either political party. And while we are at it, unless one has observable evidence as to who did it, just don’t go down that road and stick to the facts.
Brighton said:
“…..stay clear of the “Jews did 9/11”…”
Christopher Bollyn has proven beyond doubt that 9-11 was a Jewish job from start to finish:
http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book/
“This is bigger than ones faith”
Jew isn’t a religion…..it’s a race.
If you apply for citizenship in occupied Palestine, they don’t question you on a Talmudic catechism…..they check your DNA.
Of course they had a lot of useful idiot, bribed, blackmailed and corrupted Goyim here and there, but the planning, execution and mass media cover-up was and is in Jewish hands. (No Goy need apply)
9-11 was an inside-outside job.
Sockpuppet2012 said:
“Jew isn’t a religion…..it’s a race.”
“If you apply for citizenship in occupied Palestine, they don’t question you on a Talmudic catechism…..they check your DNA.”
How about a racist religion?
captivescientist said:
“How about a racist religion?”
Or a racist “religion”.
I understand that Mosad could be involved. But at this time it is hard to say “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Furthermore, citing Bollyn will get you no where if you want to get the word out and have people listen. You can’t even mention supporting a two-state solution with out being called an anti-semite. What makes you think your word would be picked up by any media when you say Jews did 9-11. It will not. Is the goAL not to bring the issue to light? I think so. But you kill your chances when not bringing up visiable, and measurable direct evidence. And Jews are a race? not hardly. Compare the DNA from the 4 of the 5 dancing Israelis to mine. It’s not gonna come up Jew for them, but not me. They are whiter than me. You think red hair, blue eyes is gonna point to the middle east as an origin. And the point you made about checking DNA, it would be more of an issue with finding out if your genes fall within the spectrum of other Palastines than it would be about coming up “Jew or not”. There is no clear boundaties when it comes to “race” , it is a spectrum. there is more differences within a “race” than between “races”. Have you ever took a college course?
Brighton said:
“I understand that Mosad could be involved. But at this time it is hard to say “beyond a reasonable doubt””
The Israeli Mossad, Military and Government, along with traitorous Jews in the U.S. Government, Military, Intelligence and Mass Media did and covered-up and continue to cover-up 9-11.
They also employed some useful idiot Goyim for window dressing.
Bollyn proved who did it far beyond a reasonable doubt; he proved it conclusively.
The wholly Jewish controlled mass media have promoted the fraudulent “war on terror” in which millions of innocent people have died, and continue to die.
“Furthermore, citing Bollyn will get you no where if you want to get the word out and have people listen”
That depends on what “word” you want to get out, and who you are trying to reach with the information.
“You can’t even mention supporting a two-state solution with out being called an anti-semite”
I don’t mind being called an anti-semite.
The more I’m called an anti-semite, the more I know I’m speaking truth.
Truth is anti — “semitic”
“What makes you think your word would be picked up by any media when you say Jews did 9-11”
I don’t expect the mass media to ever publish the truth about 9-11 because the whole mass media of the Western world and beyond is owned and controlled by the perpetrators of 9-11.
“Is the goAL not to bring the issue to light?”
What “issue”?
“But you kill your chances when not bringing up visiable, and measurable direct evidence”
Nonsense! ….. For the last 11 years I’ve been leading people to:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
and…..
http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book/
Don’t be afraid to name the perpetrators, Brighton…..and don’t cover-up for them.
I am not. But the perpetrators also included so called “Christians”, or Whites that are not Jewish. And may even included muslims. So it was not just Jews, and even if it was, which it was not, it was not some mass conspiracy by ALL Jews as if everyone of them were in on it. Remember, many secs of Jews are anti-israel, such as orthadox Jews. So to just simply say Jews is a major dis-service to what would other wise be allies.
Also, we are, as mentioned in my original post, diverting focus away from first hand evidence. One of what could be many examples, is video of wtc 7. Or even molten metal pouring out twin towers, or video testimony of witnesses describing explosions before planes hit, so on aND so on.
If you really want to advance 9/11 truth, focus on the undisputed evidence (41% of victims un-identified, twin towers goING against newtons laws, peer-reviewed articles on nano-thermite in dust, etc) and direct them but not force them to conclude who PERPETRATORS were.
Because they, like me, honestly will question your agenda otherwise.
Brighton said:
“…..the perpetrators also included so called “Christians”, or Whites that are not Jewish. And may even included muslims”
Did you miss the part where I said:
“They also employed some useful idiot Goyim for window dressing”
“So it was not just Jews….”
At the planning stage, which had to have taken years, if not decades, all the top conspirators had to be Jews.
I don’t believe any Goyim would be trusted with such information, risking death-bed confessions, or a pang of conscience that might cause them to sabotage the plan.
All the people who rigged the Buildings for demolition had to be loyal Jews in the Mossad, the Israeli Military and explosives and demolition experts…..I just can’t see Christian Zionists with their Scofield Bibles tucked under their arms while they’re placing explosives in the buildings.
They would never be trusted to do that unless they were doing an application of some kind where they were fooled into thinking they were doing something else.
“…..it was not some mass conspiracy by ALL Jews as if everyone of them were in on it”
That’s a Red Herring and a Strawman.
I never said every Jewish baby and grandmother was “in on it”.
I’m not saying all Jews are perpetrators…..I’m saying almost all of the 9-11 perpetrators, at the planning and execution levels, are Jews.
At the cover-up stage, there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands of stupid, useful idiot Goyim, along with Blackmailed child molesters and otherwise threatened people in Congress, the Senate, in intelligence agencies, law enforcement and the Military.
Also morally corrupt, intellectual midgets who act as talking heads on every news station.
Yes…..it is a massive Jewish conspiracy to commit False Flag terror attacks and blame them on Muslims, to get the U.S. Military to destroy Israel’s enemies in the Middle East, and to get Christians and Muslims to hate each other instead of the real perpetrators.
“Remember, many secs of Jews are anti-israel, such as orthadox Jews”
How many of them are 9-11 truthers?
How many of them say: “Israel did 9-11”?
“So to just simply say Jews is a major dis-service to what would other wise be allies”
They will NEVER be allies of the truth of 9-11.
“Also, we are, as mentioned in my original post, diverting focus away from first hand evidence. One of what could be many examples, is video of wtc 7. Or even molten metal pouring out twin towers, or video testimony of witnesses describing explosions before planes hit, so on aND so on”
Please explain how naming the perpetrators is diverting attention from how it was done.
I could easily say that endless nitpicking on how it was done is diverting attention away from WHO did it, and WHY!…..I have heard that said more than several times…..at least tens of times, and I tend to agree to some extent.
Is focusing on molten metal diverting our attention away from the lack of debris at the Pentagon?
Is focusing on explosions diverting our attention away from the tensil strength of aircraft aluminum?
“If you really want to advance 9/11 truth, focus on the undisputed evidence (41% of victims un-identified, twin towers goING against newtons laws, peer-reviewed articles on nano-thermite in dust, etc)”
Who in their right mind could care less whether 41% or 53% or 19% or 80% of the victims were unidentified?
What does that prove?
What difference does it make?
“…..and direct them but not force them to conclude who PERPETRATORS were”
How do you know what I’ve been doing for the last 11 years, Brighton…..and how do you “force” someone to conclude something?
Isn’t it the evidence that “forces” conclusions?
Not to mention, if you had ever read Bollyn’s book and website you would have known that Bollyn covers Richard Gage, Steven Jones, Niels Harritt, nano-thermite, molten metal, explosions, Building 7 and a host of other aspects of 9-11.
When people want to know how I know 9-11 was an “inside” job…..I direct them to AE911Truth, Steven Jones, Niels Harritt, David Chandler, Jonathan Cole and the Experts Speak Out videos, and especially the obvious controlled demolition of Building 7.
When they ask me who I think did it…..I direct them to Christopher Bollyn.
“Because they, like me, honestly will question your agenda otherwise”
I don’t care if you question my “agenda”, Brighton, because I seriously question yours.
Do you question Bollyn’s “agenda”?
Do you think he’s trying to “divert” attention away from how 9-11 was done?
Do you think Bollyn is trying to sabotage the 9-11 Movement?
You’re not even aware of the contents of Bollyn’s book, website and videos.
Here is a video of Christopher Bollyn interviewing Steven Jones way back in 2006:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM6qcgHBDGw
I’ve seen more recent videos with Bollyn and Jones talking together that were not just audio interviews.
Bollyn covers Flight 93 and the Pentagon also, although I wish he didn’t.
As Bollyn says:
“Solving 9-11 ends the fraudulent War on Terror”
Bringing the perpetrators to justice will end the mass murder of millions of innocents.
Here is a video featuring Kevin Barrett, Richard Gage and Christopher Bollyn; it was just published a week ago — Feb. 24, 2017:
Kevin Barrett focused on “False Flags” before and after 9-11.
Richard gave his usual presentation which is devastating to the official conspiracy theory.
From the video description you can see why Brighton might want people to steer clear of Christopher Bollyn:
Christopher Bollyn is an American journalist who has investigated the events of 9-11.
He helped Professor Steven E. Jones in the spring and summer of 2006, when Jones found solid evidence of Thermite in the dust of the Twin Towers.
The discovery and discussion of Thermite in the demolition of the World Trade Center led to serious trouble for both Jones and Bollyn.
Christopher Bollyn and Professor Jones look at 9-11 data at BYU in the spring of 2006.
Dr. Jones and Bollyn were both attacked in August-September 2006.
The evidence indicates that they were attacked because of their research into the use of Thermite in the destruction of the World Trade Center.
In August 2006, Bollyn was attacked at his home in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, by a heavily-armed three-man team of undercover police that had been prowling around his house for several days in a row.
The result of the police assault on Bollyn was that he was falsely charged with assault and resisting arrest; both misdemeanor charges. He pled innocent and went through a four-day trial in which the police openly lied and presented false evidence. Bollyn’s evidence, on the other hand, was not allowed to be presented and his expert witness was not allowed to testify.
After the seriously flawed trial, Bollyn was found guilty of both charges and faced sentencing from the same judge who had overseen the trial. Rather than submitting themselves to injustice the Bollyn family left their home near Chicago and moved to Europe in June 2007.
He then wrote a set of books based on his 9-11 research entitled Solving 9-11: The Deception that Changed the World.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZQKZhSPWM0
I’m not saying all Jews are perpetrators…..I’m saying almost all of the 9-11 perpetrators, at the planning and execution levels, are Jews.
At the cover-up stage, there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands of stupid, useful idiot Goyim, along with Blackmailed child molesters and otherwise threatened people in Congress, the Senate, in intelligence agencies, law enforcement and the Military.
Also morally corrupt, intellectual midgets who act as talking heads on every news station.
Wow. That was pretty long. Pretty large percent of your post. To bad this story, based on the story you created in your head has no direct evidence to back it up. But please, continue to focus on it. Really helps enlighten others.
And 41% of victims unidentified, one of just a few examples I used, is important. Because it is not representative of a gravitational collapse. But yeah, lets focus on proving a negative as it concerns the Pentagon, and not focus on a comprehensive analysis of why the twins did not collapse due to fire.
But really, question me on wanting to proceed scientifically with no major bias. I surely feel your way is better, concentrate on being anti-semetic, and everything else will fall into place. Wonderfum
Thanks for this video sockpuppet. I remember the shills got pretty upset when Gage went there the first time – http://911blogger.com/news/2012-02-25/911-what-really-happened-and-why-richard-gage-and-kevin-ryan-present-nation-islam-saturday-feb-25
However in the comments Steven Jones had this to say:
“Indeed, the more I reflect on the matter, it seems that it would have been more-or-less OK at my university if I had spoken of WTC7 and demolition and explosives — as long as I did not point to any one OTHER THAN Muslims … or point the finger at Cheney (I often quoted Secretary of Transportation Mineta re: lack of air defenses and Cheney’s role).
Is not pointing the finger at Muslims finally the central message of the official 9/11 narrative? with various Muslim nations therefore in the cross-hairs?
I have a sense that we may build bridges with our Muslim brothers, or build animosity. The choice is ours.
And I am totally opposed to a pre-emptive attack on Iran!”
Thank you, captivescientist!
That was a great comment by Steven Jones.
911 Blogger.com said:
“Richard Gage, founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Kevin Ryan, editor for the Journal of 9/11 Studies will make presentations for the Nation of Islam on Saturday, February 25 / 10 AM at the Rosemont Convention Center in Chicago. This speaking engagement coincides with the Savior’s Day activities running from Feb. 24-26”
It wasn’t Kevin Ryan…..it was Kevin Barrett.
It was Kevin Barrett, Richard Gage and Christopher Bollyn.
Maybe there was more of the program that I missed, but I just can’t imagine Kevin Ryan adding anything to that incredible presentation…..talk about a hard act to follow!
It was the first time Richard Gage made a presentation there, in 2012. It’s good that Kevin Barrett and Christopher Bollyn got to provide a broader context this time around.
The full video from back then is here:
https://www.noi.org/911-what-really-happened-and-why
Kevin Ryan talked about various things outside the WTC. He said there is ongoing controversy over the Pentagon but didn’t really push an impact scenario. Afterwards, he said:
“This weekend I spoke to thousands of decent people who listened and tried not to jump to conclusions. That was a nice change.”
Which I appreciated given the vitriol directed against the NOI from some at 911blogger.
So, you STILL haven’t read Christopher Bollyn’s Book and Website!
http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book/
How does 41% unidentified bodies prove a non-gravitational collapse?
Do you think watching the towers explode like erupting volcanoes might be an indication that it wasn’t a gravitational collapse?
Your anti — “semite” accusation rolls off me like water off a duck’s back.
Truth is anti — “semitic” ….. if it wasn’t, the Jewish controlled mass media would have long ago exposed the perpetrators of 9-11 and ended the fraudulent “war on terror” that only benefits Israel by destroying Israel’s neighbors.
Here’s one cure for disinformation:
http://www.bollyn.com/the-antidote-for-disinfo/
Here is your logic:
Jews main and only significant perpetrators of 9/11
Not all Jews were in on it, but all Jews are to be hated for it
My question is: Have you always been anti-semetic?
If so, 9/11 is not about getting the word out about the details provided by many intellectuals who have shown via video, audio, witness or experiments that the official story is bogus. It is about confirming your anti-semetic views.
Did you notice the moderators comment to my OP. That was respectful and he brought up that many angles of getting at Truth is valid. That is a responsible comment.
But you, you just can’t stand the fact that I mentioned not wanting to turn potential ears away by starting out with “Jews did 9/11”.
Why are you wasting your time and mine trying to convince me to hate all Jews for a crime a handful created (along with non-jews). Why not be anti-white, and anti-men why you are at it.
Now you’re getting into comedy.
That’s a real funny comment.
So, you STILL refuse to look at Bollyn’s evidence ….. you have your head buried in the sand.
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bVBQm1qhOk
I was banned from wtcdemolition.com for a post that was just a link to the Wikispooks ‘Israel did it’ page, which is apparently their most visited. I had found the link on 911forum.org.uk, and hadn’t actually read it, but assumed WTCD would be interested one way or another. The owner said the ‘Star of David’ over the photos was like the Nazis, and with the hearsay about a Jewish cemetery he thought it was Zionist propaganda. He didn’t allow my response, and later removed the thread, such as it was. It was the first time I had mentioned Israel (at least by reference) on a site that claimed ‘Zionists did it’.
They put a notice on the front page saying “Attention: This is a Kosher ZIHOP Site”, but it points to the wrong post (about WTC7 and Wikipedia). It was the ‘Israel did it’ link that got me banned and prompted the disclaimer.
Here:
http://wtcdemolition.com/blog
http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/3361
That’s funny!
“Posting or linking to content that is, or is intended to overtly or subtly appear anti-semitic will lead to one’s account being blocked without appeal”
In other words “Truth is not allowed”
Because, apparently, truth is anti — “semitic”.
wtcdemolition.com seems to be a limited hangout, controlled opposition website.
i got booted off wtcdemolition.com a few years ago, without warning (altho the guy who runs it claimed he always provided warnings, which was b.s.), for (foolishly) expressing my spiritual beliefs in a 9/11 context. not sure if wtcdemolition.com is a limited hangout or a controlled opposition website, but it certainly smells fishy over there. i think there were like 3 or 4 regular participants there at the time, hardly any traffic at all. i have no idea what the deal is there now. that wtcdemolition.com experience occurred soon after i had gotten blacklisted at 911blogger for ridiculing one of the regulars there who said we should accept the official version of what happened at the pentagon unless we have proof positive to the contrary. even tho i was not up on the pentagon issues at the time (via the National Security Alert film, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o) i was like, “what? accept the official version? you call yourself a Truther?” both excommunications turned out to be positive experiences, because i searched for another outlet and eventually found Truth and Shadows, which is so obviously the best 9/11 Truth site by far.
Yes, I remember that Dennis. The owner was being egged on by a founder member of the Brand New Heavies. Crazy days!
I tried to put forward an argument in your favor at the time, something about the prevalence of Christianity in American politics, but I knew they weren’t going to buy it. They pick and choose their ‘logic’. I disagreed for a few reasons:
– Pointless and mean spirited – you weren’t spamming threads or tying spiritual beliefs into an explanation of 9/11 etc.
– Is a great way to alienate everyone in the name of some kind of logical purity. I’d had enough of hating on the ‘big tent’ at 911blogger.
– Used to attempt to discredit extremely credible allies e.g. General Albert Stubblebine (RIP)
Brighton, you said
“Why are you wasting your time and mine trying to convince me to hate all Jews for a crime a handful created (along with non-jews).”
I’m not sure sockpuppet actually said that! I think perhaps the point is they did it *because* they were/are Zionist Jews. Which of course is not to say all Zionist Jews would have done it either.
“Why not be anti-white, and anti-men why you are at it.”
Do you think some people are born Jewish?