9/11, latest
Comments 202

Lawyers for 9/11 families launch petition for new inquiry, citing “conclusive” evidence for explosives in WTC dust


On April 10 this year, the Lawyers’ Committee for 9-11 Inquiry, a group representing families of the 9/11 victims, filed a petition with the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York to demand a fresh investigation into 9/11. The Lawyers’ Committee claims to have conclusive evidence explosives were used to bring down all three of the WTC buildings that collapsed that day (WTC1,2 & 7).

flags at the 9/11 Memorial during ceremonies marking the 12th anniversary of the attacks – UPI/Chris Pedota /POOL

The petition cites many sources of hard evidence, beginning with two scientific papers claiming thermite (an incendiary) and nano-thermite (an explosive) have been found in the WTC dust. According to Activist Post the evidence cited is as follows:

  • Independent scientific laboratory analysis of WTC dust samples showing the presence of high-tech explosives and/or incendiaries in the form of thermite or thermate.
  • Expert analysis of seismic evidence that explosions occurred at the WTC towers on 9/11 prior to the airplane impacts on the WTC Towers, and prior to the building collapses.
  • Technical analysis of video evidence of the WTC building collapses.
  • Firefighter reports of explosions, and of seeing “molten iron like in a foundry.” The petition states that the presence of molten iron would require temperatures higher than jet fuel and building contents could create when burned, but consistent with the use of the high tech explosive and incendiary thermite or thermate.
  • The presence of previously molten iron microspheres, which have been established by electron microscope analysis of WTC dust samples, by both government and independent scientists, is another phenomenon that would be scientifically impossible based on the burning of jet fuel and office contents alone.
  • Video and eyewitness testimony of the ejection during the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 of heavy steel elements laterally from the buildings which would not be possible from a gravity collapse.
  • Scientific analysis, eyewitness testimony, and government reports confirming sulfidation and high-temperature corrosion of the steel found in the rubble after the collapse of the WTC towers and WTC 7, a phenomenon not expected in a jet fuel fire and gravity collapse but consistent with the use of thermate and high explosives.

From Architects for 9/11 Truth:

According to the 52-page petition, which is accompanied by 57 exhibits, federal statute requires the U.S. Department of Justice to relay citizen reports of federal crimes to a special grand jury. The unprosecuted crime alleged to have taken place on 9/11 is the bombing of a place of public use or a government facility — as prohibited under the federal bombing statute or 18 U.S.C. § 2332f — as well as a conspiracy to commit, or the aiding and abetting of, said offense…

Lawyers’ Committee Executive Director Mick Harrison expressed “cautious optimism” that the U.S. Attorney would fulfill his mandatory duty to present the reported evidence to a grand jury, his optimism based on the fact that the law offers the U.S. Attorney no discretion in whether to do so. However, in the event the U.S. Attorney does not bring forth the evidence to a grand jury, Mr. Harrison said, the petitioners reserve the option of bringing a mandamus action in federal court. A mandamus action, if successful, would compel the U.S. Attorney to fulfill his legal obligation.


202 Comments

  1. THE DIRECTED ENERGY COVER-UP TEAM

    IF YOU FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE, AND IN ALL PROBABILITY, RICHARD GAGE AND ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH IS A GOVERNMENT FUNDED DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN MEANT TO MOLD PUBLIC OPINION USING A TAX-EXEMPT NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION AS ITS COVER.

    “When an honest man, honestly mistaken, comes face-to-face with undeniable and irrefutable truth, he is faced with one of two choices, he must either cease being mistaken or cease being honest.” – Amicus Solo (Latin for “a lone friend”)

    If Richard Gage is using AE911Truth’s funds to buy Dr. Wood’s book, and Richard Gage is suppressing Dr. Wood’s work, one must conclude that the prime directive of AE911Truth is to suppress the evidence. Mr. Gage cannot refute the overwhelming, conclusive, and indisputable evidence contained in Dr. Wood’s book but only misrepresent it (i.e. promote disinformation about it). Science is not determined by popular opinion, but a psyop is. Referring to the sum of 2+3=5 as “a view” or as “an opinion” or “a theory” is how cover-ups work. It creates doubt where there is no doubt. Humanity has awoken. Those who are worthy and willing to open their eyes to the truth will read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood.

    Richard Gage and other Liars for 9/11 Truth
    http://tinyurl.com/911liars

    Image of check from Richard Gage for Dr. Judy Wood Book

    Form 990 ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9-11 TRUTH INC, Part I Summary, 1.) mission statement

    Our mission is to research, compile, and disseminate (some) scientific evidence relative to the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers, (not all 7, just 3 of the buildings) calling for a truly open and independent investigation and supporting others in the pursuit of justice. (Except Dr. Judy Wood)

    Form 990 ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9-11 TRUTH INC, Schedule A, Part II, Section A

    from 2008 to 2012 AE911Truth income was $1.365 million!!!

    http://www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/AE911%20Tax%20Return%20-%2026-1532493_990_201212.pdf

    If Mr. Gage was searching for the truth, then he would not be trying to deceive his supporters and the American people by claiming to present the best “scientific forensic evidence”, only to completely ignore the large sum of scientific forensic evidence that thermite does not explain. If a scientist or researcher only presented the evidence that supports their hypothesis while completely ignoring the evidence that countered their hypothesis, they could be stripped of their professional license or degree for presenting such an unscientific and biased fraction of the total sum of important physical evidence that demands consideration.

    Theory, speculation, and belief are not necessary to understand that a type of directed energy was used on 9/11, rather, only a detailed study of the empirical evidence from 9/11 is necessary. This also helps to illustrate a major difference between Dr. Judy Wood and other 9/11 self proclaimed researchers, as she did not start with theory or speculation and then begin researching to see if it was consistent with the evidence. Instead, Dr. Wood simply did what any objective, vigilant scientist would do, she gathered and studied as much of the empirical evidence from 9/11 as possible, assembling a monumental database of verifiable physical evidence that dwarfs the efforts of any other 9/11 “research”, including the unscientific ‘9/11 Commission Report’. After gathering and studying all of this important evidence, Dr. Wood arrived at the only logical, inescapable conclusion that explains all of this empirical evidence, a general category of weapon technology known as ‘directed energy weapons’ (DEW). It would be theory or speculation to go beyond that by trying to name a specific weapon technology or location, because that is not what the evidence allows us to irrefutably conclude. This is why the term is left as a general one, because that is the only logical, conclusive, and irrefutable conclusion that the evidence allows us to make.

    This download is the Foreword and book review of “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” by Eric Larsen, Professor Emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice 1971 – 2006 (35 years), plus the Author’s Preface.

    http://www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/Where%20Did%20The%20Towers%20Go%20-%20Dr%20Judy%20Wood.pdf

    Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book can give at least 10 reasons that rule out the theory by “AE911trutherd” that welding material destroyed the WTC. How many can you list ? Hint: the bottom of page 45, the top of page 171, the diagrams on page 81 and 84, the diagram at the bottom of page 11, and of course pages 122 to 127. The list is endless, actually.

    By reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?, you know from the EVIDENCE that the Twin Towers turned to dust in mid-air never hitting the ground.

    *Bombs don’t do that.

    *Thermite does not do that.

    *Thermate does not do that.

    *Nano-enhanced thermite does not do that.

    *Nano-thermite does not do that.

    *New-and-improved super-duper mini-micro-nano thermite does not do that.

    *Firecrackers do not do that.

    *Fire does not do that.

    *Nukes do not do that.

    *Megga nukes do not do that.

    *Milli-nukes do not do that.

    *Mini-nukes do not do that.

    *Nano-nukes cannot do that.

    *New-and-improved super-duper invisible shock free nukes cannot do that.

    *A wrecking ball cannot do that.

    *A slingshot cannot do that.

    *Missiles cannot do that.

    We know this because we know those things above involve Kinetic Energy and/or Thermal Energy and we know that the “dustification” was done without Kinetic Energy and without Thermal Energy. That is, “dustification” was not done with high heat (Thermal Energy) nor with some form of Kinetic Energy (wrecking ball, projectile, gravity collapse). The building was not cooked to death nor was it beaten to death. So Kinetic Energy Weapons (KEW) did not destroy the buildings nor did Thermal Energy Weapons (TEW) destroy the buildings. But we know that Energy was Directed somehow (and controlled within fairly precise boundaries) to cause the building to turn to dust in mid air. That is, some kind of (cold) Directed Energy that was used as a weapon (cDEW) had to have done this. Energy was directed and manipulated within the material such that it came apart without involving high heat (fire, welding materials such as thermite) and without having something fly through the air and hit it (bullets, missile, bombs, wrecking ball, a giant hammer, or many micro hammers)

    If this technology can manipulate energy to do something like this, it can also be manipulated to provide us with “free energy” (i.e. “off the grid”). Simply by looking at the cover of Dr. Wood’s book you can realize there must be a technology that can do this. This is evidence that such technology does exist. This is evidence that a technology capable of providing “free energy” (“off the grid”) exists. The whole world witnessed this which means the whole world can know that “free-energy technology” exists. This realization will change the world. This is probably the biggest reason why there is so much effort spent misrepresenting, distorting, and suppressing Dr. Wood’s research.

    Those that choose to focus on hearsay, speculation, conspiracy theories, or unqualified opinions while ignoring irrefutable factual evidence by avoiding it is what keeps a cover-up in place. Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of “9/11 Truthers” verses “The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory” while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence.

    Richard Gage is NOT a qualified forensic scientist. Dr. Judy Wood IS a qualified forensic scientist. AE911Truth is calling for a new investigation. This implies an admission that they are NOT qualified to conduct such an investigation of what happened. Otherwise, why are they calling for a new investigation instead of conducting one themselves — unless the intention is to knowingly distract its members and others away from the new investigation that has already been conducted? AE911Truth wants a new investigation? They already have one. It’s contained in a book called “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” Why is AE911Truth suppressing it? AE911Truth cannot lobby Congress. They are a 501( c )3 and are prohibited from lobbying Congress. Why didn’t AE911Truth submit their so-called “thermite evidence” to NIST? – Oh, that’s right. It’s a federal crime to defraud the government. Why hasn’t AE911Truth filed a Federal qui tam case? Because they haven’t blown the whistle on anything and they have no evidence and it is past the statute of limitation. So, why didn’t they support Dr. Wood’s Federal qui tam case that was filed instead of banning members who mentioned it? * — I guess they really didn’t want such a case to go forward. So they want “respect and compassion for all people” except for those named “Dr. Judy Wood.”

    AE911truth first opened their website about 3.5 weeks AFTER Dr. Wood submitted her Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST. She was the first to submit an RFC that blew the whistle on the contractors for the NIST report. Can you say “damage control” ? Then she filed a federal qui tam case that could have blown this whole case wide open, including putting people under oath – if there were enough supporters. Guess what? It became a policy in AE911Truth to ban those who discussed the work of Dr. Wood in an honest manor. ** Since Richard Gage, founder & CEO of AE911truth, bought Dr. Wood’s book in the spring of 2011 and read it, he can no longer use “plausible deniability” as a defense. Mr. Gage is knowingly leading people away from the truth about 9/11 and using AE911Truth funds to accomplish this task. So leading people away from the truth must be the mission of AE911Truth. How else could he justify using AE911Truth funds to buy this book? Who funds AE911Truth? Donations through the donation drives on his site have dried up. However, donating creates a psychological hold on the donor and they are less likely to leave the organization or question Mr. Gage. Dr. Wood is a teacher and promotes independent thinking. Perhaps this is why she does not ask for donations on her website or conduct membership drives for a “truth club” to keep everyone in lockstep, where members are issued a list of talking points to focus on so that they don’t go looking for the truth. Dr. Wood is just one person. Richard Gage brags about having a large membership in lockstep with him. So why is he so concerned about just ONE person and radiates such anger at Dr. Wood? The truth is powerful and it emerges through independent thought.

    The scientific method, as it came into being during the Enlightenment period, is a method of thought known as empiricism or as the empirical method. Under the terms of empiricism, all conclusions are, must, and can be drawn from observable evidence and from observable evidence only. Evidence must precede any and every conclusion to be drawn from it. Then, if sound logic governs in the relationship between evidence and the conclusion drawn from it, that conclusion will be irrefutable

    Scientists, as all know or should know, proceed in their thinking not according to belief or desired outcome but according solely and only to what the empirical evidence they have gathered, studied, and observed allows them to conclude or makes it inevitable for them to conclude.

    This is why Dr. Wood’s work is irrefutable. She only presents evidence and an analysis of that evidence. There is no use for a theory in forensic science. Either you know something or you don’t. That is why those in charge of a cover up don’t want people to look at the evidence in Dr. Wood’s book. Dr. Wood does not ask you to believe her. She only wants you to believe yourself and think for yourself and look at the evidence yourself and not argue about opinions of theories of speculation of ideas. That is what keeps a cover up in place. Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book know this to be true.

    On 9/11 over a half mile of vertical building height, containing nearly 150 football fields of floor space, was reduced to a near-level field of dust and debris, where rescue workers walked horizontally or rappelled into empty caverns to look for survivors. How was this possible given the standard laws of engineering and physics? The 9/11 Commission Report bypassed this central issue, as did the report of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Contrary to its stated objective of determining ‘why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed,’ the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) made the stunning admission that it did not investigate how the towers fell. Neither the standard view that the Twin Towers collapsed from fire nor the standard opposition view that they were intentionally detonated by thermite explosives explains the evidence, nor do they follow the laws of engineering and physics. Dr. Wood left Clemson to research the 9/11 conundrum full time, and she has focused her research strictly on physical evidence and scientific principles. WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? provides an understandable, credible, and photo-enhanced summary of Dr. Wood’s disturbing findings, which resulted in her lawsuit against the contractors of the NIST report.

    Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photomechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry.

    She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers in her areas of expertise. In the time since 9/11/01, she has applied her expertise in materials science, image analysis and interferometry, to a forensic study of over 40,000 images, hundreds of video clips and a large volume of witness testimony pertaining to the destruction of the WTC complex. Dr. Wood has conducted a comprehensive forensic investigation of what physically happened to the World Trade Center site on 9/11. And, based on her analysis of the evidence she gathered, in 2007, she filed a federal qui tam case for science fraud against the contractors who contributed to the official NIST report about the destruction of the WTC. This case was filed in the US Supreme Court in Dec 2009. To this day, Dr. Wood’s investigation is the only comprehensive forensic investigation in the public domain.

    *Chapter 31. AE911 “Truth” and Other Sites Again Censor The Evidence 04 Apr 2010
    AE911 – Silently Deletes A Petition Signer (pages 297 to 300) of 9/11Finding the Truth – A Compilation of Articles by Andrew Johnson Focused around the research and evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Wood

    http://www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf

    **In Appendix C, page 238, section C, (Refined searches) of Michael Armenia’s book, “Nanomanagement:The Disintegration of a Non-Profit Corporation”, the name “Judy Wood” is a search term used to disqualify a person’s affiliation with AE911Truth.

    Field Interference 013 AE911Truth: A Failure By Design

    We reported about Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (ae911truth.org) in episode 16 of our audio reports. We worked for them as their systems administrators for almost two years. As a high-level administrator inside the organization, I witnessed a stunning degree of mismanagement and I was privy to everything; including the stuff that nobody was supposed to see.
    http://healthwyze.org/index.php/component/content/article/590-the-shaky-moral-foundation-that-ae911truth-is-built-upon.html

    Like

    • The blog you link to is empty, and your prose style and post content is very similar to Andrew Johnson’s “Check the Evidence” site, which seems to be one of the few still relentlessly pushing the idea that Judy Wood is not only the sole voice worth listening to on the subject of 9/11 but that everyone who doesn’t agree with her is a CIA operative.

      Are you perhaps connected with Andrew/Judy?

      Liked by 1 person

    • It really doesn’t matter at this stage what exactly brought the buildings down, it was controlled demolition of one sort or another and what you’re saying is just timewasting, irrelevant distraction. So someone comes to read the article and is interested in the comments and they’re confronted with your long screed of conspiracy-minded blather. Think of the readers.

      Like

      • Mulga Mumblebrain says

        The lunatic theories are peddled to bring the real, plausible and evidence rich theories that refute the Official Version into disrepute through guilt by association. It’s a standard disinformation technique.

        Like

        • I know this happens, Mulga, but I think there are always those who genuinely believe seemingly-lunatic theories differing from the more “mainstream” anti-official theory. I, myself, tend to believe in “no planes” while those who believe there were real planes, even the nominated passenger airliners (the latter truly being madness as there is ample evidence showing they weren’t involved) may think “no planers” are crazy. It’s the way you go about expressing it though. I find it’s the ones I deem crazy who always post very long screeds that somehow end up at the top of the comments, putting people off reading them.

          Like

  2. I am very grateful that OFFG published this article: A Truly Positive Signal that facts are SACRED ! Having been eyewitness to many atrocious heavily orchestrated & censored ‘incidents’ (& from the ‘inside’ out), in our lives most recent & .. pertinent in history repeating, I can no longer countenance blind scientific ignorance or apathy !

    Since 9/11 , I have a ‘pro forma’ question with which I decide whether to engage in ANY conversation with someone, including the media, as a matter of principle: & if that person or media demonstrates immediate abject cognitive dissonance and lives/exists in a deranged state of TOTAL DENIAL and will not listen to ANY reason, they are immediately relegated & rejected as worthy of considering intelligent or competent enough to continue coherent conversation scientifically: and subjected to public ridicule by sticking to a few key scientific ‘structured’ points that they can NEVER answer, with which I demonstrate to other parties present that that person or media is absofurkin’lutely unfurkin’believably dumb and their “Opinion” is worthless, counterintuitive , & so wholly disingenuous that they seriously endanger the future of any &
    ALL SOCIETAL DEVELOPMENT in any sense .. anywhere ,
    especially if they are a media organ of any sort!

    THE Question remains simple, with clarity :-
    “Do you believe in the official version of horrific events on 9/11/2001 ? ”

    I am grateful in the name of ALL survivors, also those that perished (read murdered !) and their family members , that the OFFG takes this ‘Absurd Affair’ with people’s demons, deadly seriously: moreover, until this investigation is regulated & prosecuted scientifically, in some form or another, there will be NO societal development, other than an ever widening CHASM between those that have intelligence and scientific understanding of PHYSICS and those that live in LALA Land, who seem to think that LALA Land should rule the world & all collective societal futures ..

    SCIENCE RULES, not Bush & Blair and braindead idiots in LALA Land .. !

    and I will fight to my dying day against being ruled by unscientific LaLa’s with cognitive dissonance, out of my loyalty & solidarity with those that were murdered by men possessed by demons !

    NO more, O.M.O. ??

    Obscene Masquerading “OBSEBENE” >> Dostoevsky’s “The Possessed” (or “Demons”) , never more relevant or pertinent than now in the societal sense of developing the Science of Humanities, on solid foundations from ‘Ground Zero’ onwards & upwards ! as history & ‘Demons’ endeavour to repeat with much gassing to distract from reality, again: Dostoevsky’s masterpiece is an extremely painful, confusing & chaotic read .. therein lies the Art of his classic Literature, demonstrating the elementary betrayal & loss of any loyalty to oneself, (first & foremost) , let alone any loyalty to matters of intelligence on any & all principle , Science based .

    Liked by 1 person

      • Now you come to mention it, impossible to disagree .. 😉

        Somewhat ironic that you should respond to my comment, not least because I have much respect for your eloquence, as well as many of your points & your concepts for the demonstrable ‘inspiration’ of demonic evil actions & corrupted behavioural patterns of society today, that you endeavour to convey to others.

        At some point soon enough, we shall certainly come to discuss “the Stavrogin of our age”. (Duly logged, respect :), but, first I wanted to explain that the comment below from “Admin” to you, is worthy constructive criticism , which guys like you & I should never perceive as personal and a compliment to you that you did not over react .. Good days , bad days n’ all that, but what we have to remember is that whilst you & I are well and truly informed, also from an historical perspective & in a sense of philosophical ‘being’ , others are perhaps largely not so cognisant of history repeating and the very specific engineering involved, from Financial Markets primarily, but also Scientific engineering of Physics that most people find hard to grasp, lol, including someone ‘long in tooth’ , that you often refer to >>

        NOAM CHOMSKY 🙂

        Who never seems to mention ENRON & the very fact that all investigative files & SEC records of ENRON Pension Fund manipulations & derivative stock market speculation , were being held in WTC 7 !! rather inconveniently or conveniently, if you consider that the second largest company in the USA , that went Bankrupt, leaving 40,000 people’s pension funds high & dry, was merely the TIP of the Iceberg, & also immediately subsequent to the DOTCOM BUBBLE .. ! a phoney “War on Terror”, the ONLY viable distraction and shock therapy was a prerequisite precursor to the state declared Harbingers of War Blair & Bush, striking the 9/11 ‘balls up’ & ‘Curveball’ for a home -run on behalf of the glory boys team spirit for total control & dollar Hegemony on behalf of all Central Bankers .. Chomsky avoids this , like the plague and discussion re. Larry Silverstein ! it appears to me ..

        (If only you could hear me laughing & how .. 🙂 )
        He was always a smart guy, no doubt even as child, but he too has his limitations and who knows precisely his persuasions ?? And lifelong longterm objectives .. after his work for M.I.T. ? I will clarify that significant statement re. Science, at a more opportune & discreet moment in order not to detract from the requisite step by step process of prosecution of all things SYSTEMIC & persons criminally complicit , therein .. which ‘Admin’ will certainly appreciate.

        Step by step justice & closure for all directly ‘injured parties’, is likely a fine & balanced position for ‘Admin’ to take & a sound constructive way forward for OFFG to handle this whole Monstrous Deadly Media Affair (MDMA) with your concept of E.i. “Evil Incarnate” 🙂 , which is now being HEAVILY re-affirmed by the Zionist controlled Western MSM with Military Grade NERVOUS AGENTS (MGNA), & immoral numbskull totalitarian trolls designed to drive all to distraction , just sayin’ ..

        No worries philosophically speaking , coz’ humanity compounded & programmed equitably into A.i will expose & crush E.i , in the end and this moment is not far off, thus the present endeavours of the deep state on steroids, to avoid discussing 9/11 at all costs ! Band on the Run and as Bowie precisely predicted ..

        “You got five years, that’s all you got ..”
        Jivi Strav 🙂

        Like

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          I thought it was David Bowie who gave us ‘five years, that’s all you’ve got’, on Ziggy Stardust. As for MDMA, we used to filch it from a University psychology department before some swine commercialised it as ‘ecstasy’. Micron is in Austfailure at the moment, fomenting hatred against China. He could be a sort of inverted Stavrogin, not nearly as grandiloquent and charismatic as he imagines himself to be, and as his creators tell him he is, but I believe he sees himself as something far grander. Zeus, in fact. I really have to wonder if he is being facetious. It’s so hard to tell these days when self-deprecation is so very vital-once you can fake that, you’ve got it made.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            Sorry, I misread your post, Jivi(?). Of course it was the late, great, much lamented Bowie. I felt the prescience of that song from the first time I heard it.

            Liked by 1 person

          • FOCUS d’Mumblebrain for a moment .. Time is short , and running out for the ‘Band on the Run’ with ‘Mac’ WINGS & Wingers .. !! Deadly Serious Business ! Call 9/11 Financial !!!!

            CARDINAL GEORGE d’PEDOPHILE PELL (Chief of FINANCE for the NEVER AUDITED VATICAN BANK, with SWISS GUARD) is a major liability in terms of KNOWLEDGE .. Thus Macron is now in Australia, primarily .. !! And thus I was so interested to read here in the OFFG about the Catholic Church Affair in Thailand, from 1968, clarifying the Murder of Thomas Merton: particularly coz’ my brother lived in Udanthani for many years ..

            “The past is NOT dead, it is not even PAST .. ” get it ?

            Of course, Macron will also try to curry anti-Chinese feeling & propaganda, because the REAL WAR is that of controlling & REGULATING in international LAW, the programming of A.i >>

            Which is highly frightening for the deep state controllers of the information flow, in the West , who have been abusing & manipulating A.i. & people with same , since WW2 ..

            As long as they could control the mainstream media, & all communications systems , no problems: but today things have got out of hand & control: Logic Mugla ! The Chinese have developed the PHOTON internet >> Encryption ! verstanden ?? !

            Aaaargh , just got Cyber ‘attacked’ after writing a lengthy piece of connectivity for you .. from down here in the Border Zone to Turkey in the ‘Dreiländereck’ with Bg. & Greece, before I could copy/paste to file! Real frustrating ! Internet gone slow again now, (to prevent live streaming of migrants, a silent invasion, see Helena Smith BS reporting in Greece @theguardian :)! a constant NATO & Deep State game, suddenly breaking chains of communication. So, I have driven to a place where speedy transmissions are possible .. now copy/pasting bit by bit, binary innit’, and with old slow hackable Fibre Optic Cables ..!!

            My father in law was Chief of Investment & Securities @Bank Leu , after 42 years service and much Moral Deliberation & qualms, knowing full well every bent Cent & Swiss Rappe(r) ever moved anywhere at that bank , he wanted his Pension paid out in FULL, and advised them 3 years in advance, only to be suddenly coerced into early retirement & poisoned (imo, much worse than the Skripals!) , never getting to complete his court case against Bank Leu , that he would have unquestionably WON ! Not 5 months into early retirement, I had to ‘deal’ with his dead body, while women were grieving ..

            Point being, his insider knowledge of not just Tinpot African Dictators & Resources & sources , but also of dealings with the Vatican Bank with their SWISS Guard in fluffy clothing , that have an unlimited budget & license to protect and Serve SECRECY for E.i. by enacting assassinations or renditions, whichever serves their purpose & strategy better .. The Swiss guard are an ELITE SQUAD like the S.A.S, if not better than the S.A.S. all with Military Intelligence Training, (like myself) from a very young age ..

            We shall discuss Stavrogin another day, coz’ i have spent too much time following the MAFIA money back to its’ roots, both in Italy and here on the Balkans, where i live permanently, since 2004: AHEAD of NATO this time around ..

            Think ON, CARDINAL sinners like d’pedophile GEORGE PELL and the fact that the WORST thing to do , for A.i. & History , is to KILL him >> that’s what E.i. wants .. like with Osama Bin laden or Tariq Aziz or Thomas Merton .. & many many others.

            Albert Speer wrote “The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich”, (which i devoured as student): Speer’s son was the most major Architect of the recent re-build in SHANGHAI .. you can safely assume that the Chinese knew exactly who they were dealing with then & NOW, regarding the owners of western MSM. Their Navy is parked now in the Mediterranean , in order to observe ALL and secure their visions for the NEW SILK ROAD, without regional instability in future .. or any Zionist control.

            The Vatican Bank is obviously not ‘keen’ on this, nor Netanyahoo .. but, ‘luckily’ they have been resting on acrid laurels & they don’t yet have an operational PHOTON INTERNET communications network, which the Chinese can now already ‘do’ Antenna to Antenna over 1,200 Km on land or from SPACE !

            You cannot win anything in life or war, if you can’t communicate at the highest level of .. §1234567890-±!@£$%^&*()_+

            Work dat’ Mumble-brain

            R.i.P. Tariq Aziz, who should have been permitted to record his Christian secular history, like Albert Speer was permitted after WW2 .. and Cardinal George Pell should be permitted to record his history and knowledge from inside an extremely secure PRISON CELL : secured against E.i. !!

            Like

  3. Craig Murray: “I do not believe that the US government, or any of its agencies, were responsible for 9/11. It would just need too many people to be involved. Someone would have objected.” Maybe some people did object – and they are now sleeping with the fishes.

    In addition compartmentalisation can mean that nobody is aware of anything more than that which they need to know in order to carry out their small part of the operation. For example, apart from the shooters those taking part in the JFK assassination and cover-up could easily have been led to believe that they were participating in a security exercise. When it became clear that JFK had been killed those same people were simply fed the line that the lone nut and dreaded Russian/Cuban agent Oswald was the culprit. Thus everyone could go back to sleep, assured that nothing was rotten in the state.

    I think Craig is falling foul of the same temptation as many Americans. They adamantly do not want to believe 9/11 was an inside job, in spite of the evidence.

    Liked by 5 people

    • No question that it was an inside job. Partially burned passport found a block from the WTC when people who died in the towers could not be identified–they were pieces of bones. No airport pictures of alleged high jackers getting on the planes. No wreckage found of any airplanes at any of the sites. Osama bin Ladin never charged by the FBI. The laws of physics with free fall knowledge.

      Like

    • Astute comment.

      I transported the White House Communications Centre, to & from Davos regularly, back in the 90’s, up until and including the year 2000. One operates on a strictly need to know basis. Waiting & waiting , until being commanded.

      9/11 was directly subsequent to the ENRON collapse and the Dotcom bubble: and ALL records of the SEC investigation into ENRON’s Pension Fund manipulation & derivative stock market financial speculation , (which were just the tip of the proverbial iceberg) were in >>

      W. T. C. 7

      Like

        • The ticking Time Bomb was (& still is to a greater degree) Pension Fund Regulation, & their Executives: who have been systemically speculating for many decades, 1992 (inc.sending Trump into Chapter 11, once), 2000 2008 2016, with ever more complex ‘Derivative instruments’ with which to artificially re-stimulate sagging market performance & VALUES: amplified to extremes by the Dotcom Bubble, which manifested itself in the manipulations surrounding manic management excessssive behaviours & extreme speculation of ENRON Pension Fund Assets, by the most Senior Executives, across the Board: & of course , across the Boards of almost all Directors of all ‘Blue Chips’ , tracing all the way back to the owners of the Federal Reserve Bank .. Privately OWNED Central Banking of derivative asset market ‘management’ !
          FED’s Bad Designs investigation in WTC7!

          If the Twin Towers were not to have fallen on WTC 7 , then the Post Mortem Of ENRON’s failures , would have exposed all others to a similar Post Mortem of their Pension Fund Endeavours, LIABILITIES .. & VIABILITY in terms of Market Values, which were then & still are highly suspect, in construct.

          (Think ETF’s & the Chicago Exchange’s first Crypto-Currency Exchange Traded Fund, (most recent), in order to dilute & dissolve Bitcoin Buoyancy & Market potential, which was NOT under Central Bank control ! )

          The Guardian’s Scott Trust Pension Fund also examined, Logic 🙂

          Which was only a tiny 800 million quid fund, last time I looked 🙂 But, which still needs to survive to pay Alan Rusbridger’s pension, all the same .. as well as fund new hard drives & comply with Sovereign demands to keep quiet and put a not very clear clever or principled woman in his place, that will submit & comply to ‘Censorship’.

          Kat Viner does Woman a disservice daily @theguardian and it became truly evident, from the ‘getgo’ , that she failed to understand financial markets or the fascist illusion in which she partakes daily. At first i thought she was probably just naive .. However, Prior to the election of Guterres, it became clear that she was complicit with the political agenda of E.i. because Irina Bokova was unquestionably the best person & most qualified & suitable for the job and Bokova was enacting change both fiscally & culturally at the U.N. and had a proven Track Record for getting things done, & saving money , unlike the male fudge candidate Guterres !! He is ‘doctored’, & dictated to ..

          All credit still to Bokova, because the Systemic Destruction Of ANY Culture is now a Terrorist Act. Something significant & historic, & she should be inherently proud of, forever ..

          Viner truly proved her fully complicit mindset when it came to the US elections and even some of the Guardian Journalists were beginning to feel distinctly uncomfortable in the manner in which they had to report on HRC .. eh’ Dan **** ??

          Personally, in terms of ‘Judgement’ >>
          I wonder if we should include the destruction of Hard Drives and Private Email Servers as a Terrorist Act !? (often .. :))

          Abstract:
          Lol, what was fascinating for me, in this whole saga (given my grandfathers job of designing, engineering & building Radar & Radio installations for the M.o.D. from 1938-1947, also in Africa/Libya operating false flag ops. with German Jews, finishing in an Egyptian Pyramid monitoring our Israeli friends), was watching the whole of the White House Communications Centre in action, away from ‘home’ in the middle of Harsh Winter conditions in Davos, lol, it was HILARIOUS & EQUALLY FASCINATING & a privilege to be trusted to stand back in a corner, (out of the way), and study all the different types of electronics & their operators at work, like my Grandfather, in a Pyramid until 1947 ..

          Just Unbelievable StorieS for another day .. 😉 Xx-files (at least Al Gore’s daughter thought my driving was great & nodded off for a bit, like the complacent Swiss Police Boss, who came to hate me for highlighting the wholly complacent nature & professional ineptitude of the COMPLETE DARN CONVOY , which after some WTF cursing from me to the Woman boss of the whole Job & all Police inc. the CIA guys, everything happened the way it should , SECURELY 🙂 .. thankfully !

          Bwahahahaha 🙂 ) ) )

          Liked by 1 person

    • One thing I forgot to mention Ross: ENRON was the second largest company in the USA at the time: this should give you some indication of the scale & gravity of all failures in regulatory controls and the levels of imbalance in all Pension Funds, financially speaking , along with the need to Mask Marketeers Machinations & speculation, elsewhere ..

      40,000 people Ex-ENRON employees left with their hard earned pension fund high & dry, brought down to earth & financial reality, with a TRIPLE hit towards “Ground Zero” , when the very offices of the SEC investigating were destroyed & disappeared forever, as WTC 7 collapsed: as announced in ADVANCE of the collapse by the sainted BBC, streaming live, while WTC 7 was STILL standing in the frame, over the left shoulder of the “Compartmentalised” woman journalist ..

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Tom says

    It’ll be interesting to see what Craig Murray makes of Dr J Leroy Hulsey’s WTC7 Evaluation Report to be published later this year. This 40+ year veteran of forensic structural engineering stated quite categorically in September 2016 that fire did not bring down WTC7. His comments were based on his initial conclusions to his two-year forensic study at Fairbanks Alaska University.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. umberto says

    A couple of years after 9/11 I told an American friend, in London, that it had been “an inside job”, that I had come to that conclusion after spending hundreds of hours reading, researching it. He just stopped talking to me.

    One year later, he came back to London, stayed in my house, as usual, for a few weeks. Then, with a sense of urgency, he came to me and said: ” about that conversation we had last year, I want to tell that I now believe you were right.” Later in the conversation: “the sad thing is, I’m afraid the American people don’t care about it. Even if they realised it was an inside job, they wouldn’t care.” A few days later, I read that an opinion poll in New York City showed 67% of the population believed it was an inside job. To my knowledge that was the last time they were asked that question on poll.

    I’m saying this just to point out that this false flag was so outrageous that most sensible people find it truly unbelievable, incredible, unacceptable. They take it very personally, even in Europe. Much better to go into denial than to confront the fall out of having to accept even the possibility that they may be wrong in such a matter, to contemplate the possibility that their government officials (even the FBI and CIA, the Pentagon), their political leaders, media, Hollywood, and academics would collude in such crime. When that happens, if it ever happens, it’s bound to be a catastrophic earthquake in terms of their world view, belief system, even sense of self for those whose ego are much bound up with their national, cultural ego (vast majority).

    So, we need to have some patience with those people, and try to be informative, pedagogical, without being “superior”, or confrontational. If they are trolls, there’s no point, except exposing them; but it’s reasonable to expect that the vast majority of deniers are, of course, not trolls. They just need an education, which is not to say that they are open to it.

    Like

  6. Jimbo says

    As a nominal supporter of Israel all that “zio” talk make me nervous. I mean one big bomb and bye-bye Israel. Besides, bringing Israel into the 9/11 saga is mostly speculation based on the motive, how the 9/11 false flag war was a boon for the Jewish state, that it got its enemies off its back and on to Uncle Sam’s, and Netanyahu did not lie when he said 9/11 was good for Israel, like any catastrophe can be a benefit. But the event did happen in the USA with US military standing down and uncannily similar US military drills happening simultaneously and all that jazz. Let’s keep 9/11 conspiracy talk simple and not let anti-Israel feelings spoil the perfectly good case we have against the US get mired into the Israel-Palestine argument. Not that I can’t see a case to rule in or rule out Israel’s role in the event but the virulent “zionist” chatter ultimately hurts our case getting “normies” to see the truther side of things.

    A big endorsement for “The New Pearl Harbor” http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/sections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=167 and much appreciation for this site.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Rhisiart Gwilym says

      Anyone open to the – perfectly rational – idea that some clique of villains from the ruling ‘elite’ in the ziP (the racist, apartheid, serial-war-criminal zioentity-in-Palestine) were deeply involved in, and indeed were likely originators of, the 11/9 false-flag, can find no more authoritative, exhaustive, and strictly non-anti-semitic campaigner on the subject than Chris Bollyn. A bulldog investigative journalist of meticulous honesty and dedicated courage, who ploughs a lonely furrow far out on the edge even of the truth movement. For all who have the mental/emotional cojones to face up to even the most shocking and deeply-taboo realities of our time, his work is exhaustive, and highly persuasive:

      http://www.bollyn.com

      But be advised: Chris’s work is going to threaten bouts of cognitive dissonance in most people, even those of a properly sceptical bent who already disbelieve – quite rightly – the official Western cospithirry about 11/9. Nonetheless, if you can stomach his basic thesis, his careful investigative work is impressive. Though it found ready collaborators amongst the criminals of the USAmerican ruling ‘elite’, the 11/9 scam certainly seems to have had its original conception – and its early prosecution work – amongst the ziPpers. (Please forgive my quirky label for the foreign-settler racket in Palestine that we’ve all been propagandised to call the ‘jewish and democratic state of Israel’ (hah!), but I’m a firm believer in ‘The Rectification of Names’ (qv), so for me ziP is the only honest label of that monstrous crime-against-humanity. Oh, and ‘cospithirry’ is my piss-take version of the CIA-propagated, mindless, meaning-free, knee-jerk insult-phrase ‘conspiracy theory’…:))

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mulga Mumblebrain says

        I see that you follow Confucius in desiring that a wassail bowl remains a wassail bowl, and a terrorist thug a terrorist thug, even if Israeli.

        Like

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      I suggest you read Christopher Bollyn, or watch one of his videos re. Israel’s, or should I say the Israeli elite’s, plain responsibility for 9/11. I, too, worry that one bomb could wipe out Israel, which would be unfair for the decent Israelis, too harsh for all but the worst Israeli elite criminals, unjust for the Palestinians and Israel’s neighbours, and curtains for the rest of us, because Israeli elites have long promised to ‘..take the world down with us’, if they fear destruction. The only way to avoid that horror is for Israel to cease being a rogue, racist, aggressive, terror regime, and for the USA to cease protecting it as it acts in that manner.

      Like

    • vexarb says

      @Jimbo. Four pointers to Israel: 1. The Israelis caught clapping and dancing when the building fell down with people inside it, and driving a an unregistered van with a fake company name. 2. The Israeli “performance artists” photographed near something that could have been a demolition switchboard. Neither group was cr,ss examined, and neither have been heard from since. 3. An Israeli company was in charge of Airport Insecurity and Boarding Pass. 4. Where did all those tons of Military Grade Thermite come from? That stuff needs a US Army receipt which can be traced by US authorities — but not if it was supplied from IDF stock with connivance of the Yahoo regime.

      Uncle $cam and his favourite nephew, Little Izzie, (specifically, criminals at the top of those two regimes) were in it together.

      Like

      • Jimbo says

        As long time truther, I am quite aware of many of the Israel – 9/11 angles, the dancing Israelis, the art students, the moving company, the van in the tunnel, the Forward article, Bollyn’s work, etc., but as a Jew and a guy who, like Bollyn, has lived on a kibbutz, I love the place and it bugs me to hear it disparaged with invective and slurs rather than simply called Israel. It’s small potatoes, perhaps, but that’s me. And being whom I am I tend to favor 9/11 scholars who don’t stress the Israel angle like David Ray Griffin, Webster Tarpley, nor hardly if at all in the five hour New Pearl Harbor documentary. Perhaps I am proof of the potential for denial that so many of our friends and families exhibit. They won’t see the “truth” because it’s their ox being gored. Well, Israel is my ox. Thanks for letting me have my say.

        Like

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          Israel, as it has been since 1947, when it commenced ethnic cleansing the Palestinians through massacre and terror, is a very vile State. Israeli society once had many fine features, for the proper type of people, only,of course, the unexpelled Palestinians being and remaining third-class and barely tolerated. Moreover Israeli society in thissecond most unequal in the OECD, behind only the USA.
          Your ox is goring itself. If Israel is to have ANY hope of surviving in the long run, it must cease being insanely racist and aggressive. To follow Evil like Netanyahu into a war against Iran, Lebanon and Syria may even bring the day of judgment forward to very soon.

          Like

        • Rand T says

          Jimbo — While there is a lot of evidence that Israeli ‘operatives’ knew that 9/11 was coming, it seems nearly impossible to put together a plausible scenario of an ‘inside job’ which was not run out of the White House by the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld junta.
          The Israelis were controlling NORAD? The Israelis were running U.S. military ‘games’ on 9/11? The Israelis were making sure the CIA and FBI didn’t put 2 and 2 together? The Israelis were providing security at the Twin Towers? Dulles Airport? (No, that was Marvin Bush’s company.)
          The Israelis were managing the 9/11 Commission Cover-up? (No, Bush insider Philip Zelikow)
          The Israelis and Saudis may have played their roles but if there really was an “inside job” — it has USA stamped all over it.

          http://911truth.org/911-commission-report-571-page-lie/

          Liked by 1 person

        • @Jimbo. “My country right or wrong” is not real patriotism. By glossing over the defects of “my ox” — even when he goes out and gores people — you are not doing Uncle $cam’s favourite nephew a favour. Quite the contrary: you are encouraging the little fellow to continue in his bratish behaviour.

          Quite seriously; as you correctly say: ” I mean one big bomb and bye-bye Israel.” So I ask, do you really think it wise to leave Little Izzie alone and unsupervised playing with his 200 big bombs — a gift from doting Uncle $cam?

          “By sparing the rod and you will spoil the child” — Proverbs 13:22

          Like

        • Jen says

          Jimbo, just keep in mind that most slurs actually aren’t aimed at most Israelis but at their government who may or may not truly represent the interests of Israeli people.

          If you left Israel a long time ago, the country may have changed a great deal to the extent it may no longer be the country you once knew. You can either remember Israel as it once was (and could have been still) or you can try to help create a new and better Israel where the opportunity affords.

          Like

        • milosevic says

          I love the place and it bugs me to hear it disparaged with invective and slurs rather than simply called Israel.

          But what do you find loveable about it? What proportion of that society is NOT fascist and racist? Why would you, presumably a decent, reasonable person, want to associate yourself with that mass-murdering, ethnic-cleansing, genocidal fascist s***hole?

          Like

      • Mulga Mumblebrain says

        One small quibble. The ‘celebrating Israelis’ were heard from again, after they were simply released despite failing polygraph tests. They appeared some time later on Israeli TV, where one admitted being a MOSSAD agent.

        Like

  7. Perhaps, the world needs to consider who could have done the dirty deed. The relevant facts, not widely discussed, point to one and only one culprit: Israel and the Jews in high places in the US.

    Like

  8. bill says

    If deliberately through this petition the vast majority of critics of the official story can be brought on board that indeed Saudi Arabia ( not Iran) was the hidden hand using a Controlled Demolition then the petition will probably proceed.The “Truth Movements” are actually part of a sophisticated controlled opposition/ cover up and have long been an integral part of a much wider and constantly growing limited hangout of many law suits involving too as centrepiece Prince of Myths Philip Zelokows intentionally redacted 9/11 Commission Report pages which will point the finger there…Its unlikely that this petition is seen as stable enough to bear the weight of the real perpetrators so it will just be left in the long grass.Something else is likely planned when the time is right….

    Like

    • Rhisiart Gwilym says

      Beware the diversionary ‘Saudi-Arabia dunnit’ false-meme. It’s true that most of the designated patsies amongst the ’19 jihadi Arabs’ were Saudis; and it’s true that the passports and visas for them to go to the US were swindled into being in the US embassy in Riyadh, but the Saudis were very minor players in the scam. The main perpetrators were USAmericans and ziPpers (citizens of the zioentity-in-Palestine); members of the ruling ‘elites’ in those two states.

      Like

      • Mulga Mumblebrain says

        The ’19 Sordids’ were the patsies, the Oswalds, Sirhans, Rays, Chapmans of the plot. ANY study of their activity, their behaviour, their lack of flying ability etc, tells you that. And how the Sordid could have wired THREE WTC buildings for their controlled demolition is NEVER explicated. Indeed this is the first time I’ve seen any accusation that it was the Sordids who were responsible.

        Like

      • milosevic says

        the Saudis were very minor players in the scam.

        There’s very little evidence to suggest that they were even minor players, as opposed to Mohamed Atta (Egyptian) and Ziad Jarrah (Lebanese), who seem to have been recruited as knowing (Atta) or unknowing (Jarrah) patsies.

        The Two Ziad Jarrahs

        Hijack ‘suspects’ alive and well

        Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

        The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

        Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World Trade Centre on 11 September.

        His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and on television around the world.

        Now he is protesting his innocence from Casablanca, Morocco.

        He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He has contacted both the Saudi and American authorities, according to Saudi press reports.

        He acknowledges that he attended flight training school at Daytona Beach in the United States, and is indeed the same Waleed Al Shehri to whom the FBI has been referring.

        But, he says, he left the United States in September last year, became a pilot with Saudi Arabian airlines and is currently on a further training course in Morocco.

        Abdulaziz Al Omari, another of the Flight 11 hijack suspects, has also been quoted in Arab news reports.

        He says he is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and that he lost his passport while studying in Denver.

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

        Notice that this explains the standard Chomskyite objection to 9/11 being a US government operation: “If the US government had organized 9/11 as a pretext for the Iraq war, they would have blamed it directly on Iraqis, rather than Saudis and Yemenis.”

        Because of the starvation blockade of Iraq following the 1991 Persian Gulf Massacre, there were few (or none) Iraqis attending US flight schools whose identities could be plausibly stolen and framed up as fake hijackers.

        There were, however, plenty of other Arab-state nationals in that category. Their passports and identifying information were stolen while they were in the US (as above), and their names were added to the list of Evil Moslems Who Cause Steel-Framed Buildings to Collapse Through the Sheer Force of Their Malevolence.

        Those who were still present in the US on 9/11/2001, like Atta and Jarrah, were quickly vaporized, while those who had already returned to their home countries were left to present the Emperor’s New Clothes argument that since they were apparently still alive, they obviously couldn’t have crashed Boeing 767s into the World Trade Center.

        To no avail whatsoever. Reality is what the government says it is. To believe otherwise is Thought Crime. Thought Crime is death.

        The 9/11 organizers assumed, probably on the basis of extensive psychological warfare research, that a large majority of Americans would be too stupid, ignorant, and racist, to be able to distinguish between citizens of Iraq and Saudi Arabia, or even between those countries themselves.

        This assumption turned out to be spectacularly correct. Reality is what the government says it is.

        Like

        • milosevic says

          The Two Ziad Jarrahs

          Note the odd fact of 9/11 patsy Ziad Jarrah being present in two different places at the same time, so reminiscent of JFK patsy Lee Harvey Oswald.

          Note to people with spooky associations: if you ever discover that you’ve been in two different places at the same time (say, New Orleans and Mexico City), assume that you have developed an Evil Twin, and are being pre-framed for some false-flag atrocity.

          Like

    • No one is going to believe Saudi Arabia was behind the controlled demolitions. Are you kidding? Which country has the smarts for that? Come on.

      Like

  9. Martin Hawes says

    In Building 7 we are faced with the extraordinary coincidence that the only case in history of a skyscraper collapsing solely due to fire (NIST’s assessment, not mine) occurred on the very same day and in the very same place as the 911 ‘attacks’. Building 7 was not hit by a plane and fell at freefall acceleration – the same rate as a chunk of concrete falling in empty air.

    NIST initially denied that Building 7 fell in freefall, claiming it could not have done so as this would imply it had lost 100% of its structural integrity. Thanks to the efforts of physicist David Chandler, NIST was later forced to admit that the building did in fact fall in freefall for 2.4 seconds. Their final report identifies the rate of acceleration as equalling that of gravity in NYC to within 0.1%. The building essentially turned to rubble before it hit the ground.

    NIST’s explanation of Building 7’s almost perfectly symmetrical collapse was that a partial fire-induced structural failure in one corner of the building led to a total internal collapse of its steel frame, leaving the outer faces of the frame magically unblemished until these too finally succumbed to gravity. If you can believe that, you can believe anything.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Rhisiart Gwilym says

    Those of us who have spent the past sixteen-plus years delving about in the matter of 11September2001 are by now used to the regular trickle of people, apparently in the grip of unbearable cognitive dissonance distress, who immediately start throwing irrational emotional tantrums and ad hominems as soon as the fact – word chosen advisedly – that 11/9 was a false-flag crime is asserted.

    Some people just have this personal glitch. Treat them with patience, sure; but still: brush them aside. Never get too embroiled in their hysterical – word chosen advisedly – chop-logicking. Experience advises that it’s a quagmire of endlessly-proliferating wasted effort that properly should be conserved for the actually-worthwhile work of getting the truth out. This involves pushing forward the essential scientific, legal, and forensic-investigative work that is so notable by its complete absence in the official Western response to the atrocities. None of that work has ever been done by the official agencies whose duty it actually is: they have demonstrated total, politically-driven dereliction of that public-service duty; and in the case of NIST serious, demonstrable scientific dishonesty to boot.

    Quality truth-seeking outfits such as Off-Graun are well rid of the unfortunates whose response to truth-seeking about 11/9 is immediate hysterical cognitive dissonance. Let ’em flounce off in high dudgeon if they wish. They have nothing useful – or intellectually honest – to contribute to the discussion. Not until the poor sods escape their fatal emotional-irrational handicap.

    Like

      • Rhisiart Gwilym says

        Of course, Ivan. It’s a basic duty of everyone, in fact, to maintain open-minded scepticism about everything; especially anything that the corporate-media hacks and the pocket-politicians assert.

        However, the twin to the duty to doubt is the duty to find – and to face up to – the available real evidence about any contentious matter. The knee-jack shouters of ‘Cospithirry! Yah-boo! La-la-la! Not listening to you!’ are absolutely not doing that. They’re saying: ‘There is no doubt! The official explanation [that’s the official cospithirry, of course] is true! And you’re mad and sick and malevolent for thinking otherwise!’ Not exactly open-minded scepticism, is it? Hysterical cognitive dissonance is my preferred, carefully-considered, time-tested description of it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Except in cases where there’s no doubt, namely, the collapse of WTC-7 by controlled demolition. The case for fire is very, very obviously fraudulent and the collapse exhibits all the unique characteristics of controlled demolition.

        Like

        • grandstand says

          I lost a friend who dubbed me a conspiracy theorist for doubting the official explanation of 911. And I only doubted – I did not venture an alternative explanation. It emerged during our argument that he, a very intelligent scientist/philosopher, did not know that a third building had collapsed. There are none so blind …

          Like

          • Hertog Jan says

            “a very intelligent scientist/philosopher, did not know that a third building had collapsed.”

            Over the last sixteen years I lost several friends like that, all of them well-educated, liberal, European journalists. “I would know, if there had been a third building…” is what they told me, one after the other. “I am not a specialist,” is the excuse used by a few of them, after they had but no choice to face the fact that a third building had collapsed on that fateful day. Not a specialist, although they will write (as journalists usually do) on almost anything else.

            Sixteen long years, and counting.

            Like

            • One good thing about the long period of waiting is that all the research is just waiting there to be pushed out and so many people are familiar with this research so it will be hard for them to do a bullshit coverup with everyone waiting to pounce. But perhaps they’ll find a way to do it. Time will tell. The bad thing is that by the time it happens and people are prosecuted so many people will probably already be dead or close to it.

              Like

              • vexarb says

                @flaxgirl. Don’t worry that succesful criminals “will die with a smile on their faces”. They are the reason why Justice Eternal built Hell.

                Like

            • Mulga Mumblebrain says

              Why did they need a third building to collapse? The first two were proof positive of dirty work afoot.

              Like

              • Because there was much compromising material and documents in it, and there also was then NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani’s command center.

                See:

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tenants_in_7_World_Trade_Center

                See also:

                Published on 2 May 2015

                The Documentary, The Men In Building 7 WTC. The most taboo subject in corporate media history, 9/11. In the Salomon Brothers Building, also known as WTC Building 7, there was an emergency bunker for the mayor and a bomb proof command center on the 23rd floor.

                Like

        • Jimbo says

          Hold on. I am less convinced of the Building 7 truther side of the story than I used to be having seen a debunking video where it clearly shows a massive amount of fire shooting out from many floors on the side of the building where NIST said the column failed. This fire scene is never seen in the truther videos. It is on the fire side where you can see the front windows break first, the penthouse collapse and then see that side sag. It looks possible that the rest of the building was dragged into this nearly central weak spot and the whole thing came down. While there is still a massive amount of info which indicates 9/11 was an inside job I don’t think Building 7 is the grail of 9/11 Truth.

          Like

          • @Jimbo. Ordinary fire from wood or paraffin — no matter how big a fire of this sort — is not a suspect, on purely a Bayesian grounds: there are hundreds of statistics of fires in high rise buildings (the latest one in Kensington, England) but zero statistics for ordinary fires bringing down a high rise. On the other hand there are hundreds of statistics for high rises brought down by controlled demolition with explosives — hence Explosives are the first suspect. There is “Irrefutable Evidence of Explosives in the WTC rubble.” Lawsuit is based on that evidence.

            “And what were they going to do with the Grail once they had found it, Mr.Tennyson?” — Max Beerbohm.

            Like

          • The thing to focus on is the MANNER of collapse, Jimbo. It makes not a jot of difference what was going on in the building pre-collapse – roaring fire, weakening of steel, substandard structure, damage, etc. It’s the manner of collapse displaying the unique characteristics of implosion-style controlled demolition that tells us:

            explosions pre-collapse (to weaken the building) and explosions during collapse (to bring it down)
            kink in middle at top just as it begins to fall (this reflects the weakening of the central columns first to make the building fall in on itself)
            sudden onset of destruction
            straight-down, symmetrical collapse through path of greatest resistance including actual free fall acceleration into building footprint
            pyroclastic-like clouds of pulverised concrete (the clouds include the gases from the incendiaries used which is why they look similar to the clouds from volcanic eruptions)
            limited damage to adjacent structures
            complete collapse and dismemberment of steel frame
            molten steel (aftermath)

            Liked by 1 person

            • milosevic says

              straight-down, symmetrical collapse through path of greatest resistance including actual free fall acceleration into building footprint

              Like

      • Mulga Mumblebrain says

        Absolutely. The paucity of the ‘arguments’ proffered by the denialists is so blatant that they are self-defeating. And they are repeated ad nauseam in the preferred Goebbelsian manner, despite repeated refutation, any indicator.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      The hysteria is a dead giveaway that the Zionists are feeling threatened. Hasbara Rule Number One-go hysterical as early as possible. Remember to screech ‘blood libel’ as loud and as often as possible.

      Like

    • milosevic says

      hysterical cognitive dissonance

      This characterization corresponds exactly with my experience.

      Notice that the ones who become truly hysterical are almost invariably people who consider themselves to be leftists, or “progressives”, of some sort. Right-wingers just sneer condescendingly, and call you a “conspiracy theorist”, or some other standardized slur, as if that settles the argument.

      It seems to me that at this (extremely) late date, “left-wing” 9/11 Deniers must be aware that there are compelling reasons to doubt the official 9/11 faery tale. At least subconsciously, they recognize that serious engagement with the evidence would leave them with two options —

      — publicly acknowledge the obvious false-flag nature of the event, and suffer negative consequences in their comfy middle-class careers and social lives

      or

      — admit, at least to themselves, that they are fundamentally self-serving hypocrites, and continue to uphold the fake pretexts for domestic fascism and imperial warfare

      Neither of these options being acceptable to such people, they prefer to pretend, even to themselves, that the issue does not exist, and that they are something other than propaganda agents for imperialism. They made this decision a long time ago; it’s now too late to back away from it, even as the fraud reaches Emperor’s New Clothes proportions (“ISIS”), because that would be an open admission of their hypocrisy and intellectual cowardice, for all these years, while millions of people in the third-world neo-colonies died.

      And then along come these awful “9/11 truthers” (now socially-marginalized people, if they weren’t always so), with their “evidence”, and “facts”, and “demolition videos”, and force these nice Guardian-readers and Hillary-voters to confront the essential hypocrisy of their entire self-concept and mode of existence.

      Hence the hysterical cognitive dissonance.

      These people are irretrievable. At this late date, there is no excuse for their self-serving negligence. They are idiots, cowards, fakes, shills, or some combination thereof.

      Fuck them. Instead of wasting your time, and subjecting yourself to their screaming, spittle, and insults, talk to “normal” people instead, who can honestly claim ignorance because, unlike the fake “left”, they never before made any pretence of being informed about what was really going on in the world.

      Like

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      The only law suit that Zionist ‘judges’ in New York allowed through found that IRAN (!!???) was responsible for 9/11. Don’t expect any ‘justice’ from the US system.

      Like

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          It doesn’t. It was just a statement of fact, not a reply to your useful information. Sorry to confuse matters.

          Like

              • Robbobbobin says

                I am minding my own business.

                Whether a respondent in any constructive discussion adds a new angle to another’s point, or coherently tries to refute it, or similarly moves the conversation forward, then they enhance the collaborative development of insight into the matter under discussion for everyone, participating or lurking.

                On the other hand, when they simply drop in a non-sequitur that does not even comprise an implied ironic or sardonic comment on the previous poster’s attitude, as you have acknowledged your loose cannon wildcard comment to be, then it amounts to nothing more than destructive noise that detracts from everyone’s concentration, hence everyone’s understanding (and so is that everyone’s business) and, more importantly, it – to varying degrees – not only diffuses or even completely vitiates the other poster’s input quite as effectively as removal by a moderator could, but it also implicitly, also to varying degrees, also denegrates the other poster and their input personally.

                So I’ll rephrase. Stop being such an arsehole; it’s generally offensive in itself, it’s socially destructive, and its effective muting or silencing of the voice of others by noisy, aimless redirection is a downright disgraceful display of self-important self-indulgence.

                Liked by 1 person

                • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                  Robbo, in my opinion your comment is hysterical hyperbole. My original comment, although not connected to Vierotchka’s interesting link, was certainly apposite to the entire discussion here. And when she was baffled by its connection to her link, I apologised for any confusion. I really think you protest too much, but I will endeavour to live up to your high standards of positional etiquette in future. I rather think you lost it towards the end, by the way.

                  Like

                  • Robbobbobin says

                    “Robbo, in my opinion your comment is hysterical hyperbole.”

                    Takes one to know one.

                    “I rather think you lost it towards the end, by the way.”

                    My misspelling of ‘denigrate’? Fair cop.

                    Like

                    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                      No-your quite ridiculous litany of my moral crimes, ie ‘offensive’, ‘socially destructive’, ‘..effective muting or silencing of others by noisy, aimless, misdirection’, ‘..a downright disgraceful display of self-important self-indulgence’. Not even a little over the top for the grave offense of going off on a tangent, but still germane to the general discussion? Actually, on re-reading, the penultimate paragraph is pretty histrionic, too, in my opinion.

                      Like

    • vexarb says

      @Vierotchka. Interesting indeed; there are a lot of true patriots in the USA, one of them being Scott Ritter (who might actually have written something for them if I remember correctly). The word Patriot has been much misused by propagandists (Patriots Act, Home Land Insecurity Act, etc) nevertheless, much as I respect Dr.Johnson and admire EM Forster, patriotism is more than the Last Resort for Scoundrels, and not every patriot is a thicky. Unfortunately there seems to be a sort of Gresham’s Law: false patriotism devalues the genuine article as counterfeit money devalues the currency.

      Like

  11. Those voices immediately questioning the “credibility” of this site for daring to post reference to an actual real world lawsuit challenging the official story of 9/11 speaks volumes about the war against “reason” which is being waged, and references directly back to the previous article by C.J. Hopkins. Hopkins whole point is that to question the official narrative is to move from acceptable “normal” society, into the realm of the “extremist” the “abnormal” simply by utilizing “reason” rather than blind faith in the official narrative.

    I have followed the work of the now 3,000 strong Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth for some time now. This is a group of professionals with everything to lose and nothing to gain who have put their careers on the line for one specific reason. If these 3 buildings disintegrated into thin air according to the government’s “official story” – then there are no safe steel concrete structures on the planet. Simple as that. Everything about modern architecture and construction would have to be re-evaluated. To suggest that architects and engineers morph into “conspiracy theorists” by voicing this real-world concern of course speaks much more to those who condemn such inquiry, then those who suggest its logical necessity. My personal opinion is that you can tell the ethical integrity of a site by whether it will allow such questions and inquiry regarding 9/11, or whether it studiously avoids them. Thank you for reinforcing my faith in this website.

    Like

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      The ruling elites in the West lie about virtually everything, so why not the ‘New Pearl Harbor’ that the Zionist neo-conservatives so presciently predicted would be needed to provoke US popular support for the Zionists’ ‘Clash of Civilizations’ project to destroy ALL Israel’s neighbours with maximum blood-shed and destruction. Next stop, Iran, over which the Zionists’ and their Sabbat Goy stooges’ slavering is becoming quite unseemly.

      Like

      • Every topic you discuss becomes another opportunity to air your evident obsession with “Jewishness/Goyim.” Your language is alienating. Your failure to see that not helpful. This article is about the families of 9/11 victims seeking redress. A little respect may be in order.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          As I am convinced that the Israeli elite were responsible for 9/11, I cannot see how my mention of ‘Zionism’, NOT Jews or Jewishness, is not perfectly apposite. As in a previous admonition where I was accused of harping on about ‘Jewish’ matters, but pointed out that seven of my eight mentions were of Zionists, not Jews, I believe this criticism to be quite unjust, and not a little sinister. Do you wish to go the whole hog and accuse me of being an ‘antisemite’?-it is an accusation I would be happy to refute. I will cease using the expression ‘Sabbat Goy’ from now on, and use ‘collaborators’ or ‘stooges’ instead.

          Like

          • milosevic says

            What do you estimate the khazar/goyim ratio in this picture to be? Of course, to imagine that this happens in any way other than cohencidence, or has any effect on the policies advocated, would be anti-semitic.

            Like

            • Mulga Mumblebrain says

              I don’t do the Khazar thing, actually. Of course we know that the Khazars converted to Judaism,and became among the antecedents of the Ashkenazi, but there are numerous other roots of the Jewish people. You might as well call them ‘Africans’ like the rest of us. The neo-conservatives, who still totally control US foreign policy, are, indeed, overwhelmingly Rightwing Zionist Jews, many former Trots and many acolytes of the sinister Leo Strauss, the great friend and collaborator, at times, with Carl Schmitt, the chief propagator of Nazi ‘jurisprudence’. They are very powerful and very dangerous, and are all criminals, in my opinion, because of their role in driving the aggressions and genocides of the War of Terror against Islam.

              Like

              • Of course we know that the Khazars converted to Judaism,and became among the antecedents of the Ashkenazi

                No we don’t, because it never happened.

                Like

                • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                  I’m very much afraid that you have been misinformed. Read Shlomo Sand-it’s intellectually invigorating. And what difference does it make, to anything?

                  Like

                  • I manifestly know far more than you on that subject. There is zero, zilch, nada, no evidence that the Khazars converted to Judaism, only fiction.

                    Like

                    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                      You, manifestly, THINK you know far more than I do on that subject.

                      Like

                    • Raphael Patai describes the Khazars in the field of Turkmen people with some Mongoloid admixture. After major advances in DNA sequence analysis and computing technology in the late 20th and early 21st century, a plethora of genetic research has been conducted. The Yiddish scholar Alexander Beider looks at genetic studies as often as possible.

                      According to Martin B. Richards, presently available genetic studies, including his own study on maternal Ashkenazi lineages, all refute the Khazar theory. The claim that Ashkenazis has a whole place of origin from Khazars has been widely criticized. Using four Jewish groups, one being Ashkenazi, Kopelman et al found no evidence to the Khazar theory.

                      While the consensus in genetic research is that the world’s Jewish populations (including the Ashkenazim) share substantial genetic ancestry derived from a common Ancient Middle Eastern founder population, and that Ashkenazi has no genetic attribution attributable to Khazars, at least one study authored in this period diverges from the general view of the Khazar theory.

                      Counter-evidence exists to the Khazar hypothesis claiming that the male lineage of Ashkenazi Jews originates from an ancient (2000 BCE – 700 BCE) population of the Middle East who spread to Europe. DNA studies of Ashkenazi Jews concluded that their male lineage was founded by ancestors from the Middle East and that they share this paternal ancestry with Sephardic Jewish populations. Genetic studies show that the male lineage of Ashkenazi Jews bears a common genetic heritage which originates in the Near East, and that they bear their strongest resemblance to the peoples of the Fertile Crescent . A study of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA by Martin B. Richards of theUniversity of Huddersfield found no maternal lineages attributable to Caucasus. Richards summarized the findings on the female line as such:

                      “None of the mtDNA came from the North Caucasus, located along the border between Europe and Asia between the Black and Caspian seas. But still tenacious, hypotheses: that most Ashkenazi Jews can trace their roots to the mysterious Khazar Kingdom that flourished during the ninth century in the region between the Byzantine Empire and the Persian Empire. ”

                      Like

    • milosevic says

      My personal opinion is that you can tell the ethical integrity of a site by whether it will allow such questions and inquiry regarding 9/11, or whether it studiously avoids them.

      You mean Counterpunch, Democracy Now, and Zmag are all full of shit?

      Damn.

      Like

  12. FobosDeimos says

    I am not “handled” by anybody and I resent your insult. I genuinely thought that this site was inhabited by intelligent people, not by fanatics ready to believe in fairy tales only because they are “anti-US”. Good bye. Finally, please read what Craig Murray has to say about all this. I hope you will not question Murray’s integrity.

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post/

    Like

    • rtj1211 says

      You can repect Craig Murray in many ways without agreeing with him on everything…..

      Like

    • Thomas Prentice says

      The OPERATIVE WORD in Craig Murray’s *** 2010 *** statement is “BELIEVE” — a FAITH-BASED ASSERTION — rather than, say, “KNOW” — and the OPERATIVE FACT is that Murrary has *** NOT *** read either the filing OR examined the exhibits. And NEITHER HAVE YOU.

      The SECOND operative fact is that the filing does NOT PLACE BLAME on the government OR the Saudis or the Israelis or anyone else. The filing demands a grand jury investigation into an unprosecuted crime reported by the public.

      Who could POSSIBLY be AGAINST a GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION into this UNPROSECUTED CRIME? OR ANY OTHER UNPROSECUTED CRIMES?

      Oh. You. Because YOU are the TOTAL MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE AND KNOW ALL, OMNISCIENT, ALL-MIGHTY. EVERLASTING. GOD YOU ARE. Amen.

      RE: Craig Murray, 2010: “I do not BELIEVE that the US government, or any of its agencies, were responsible for 9/11.”

      Like

    • archie1954 says

      Craig Murray simply opines that the government wasn’t involved. He does not categorically say it wasn’t. Involvement may have been primarily doing nothing and allowing some foreign plot to succeed. It doesn’t have to be hands on. Regardless, I prefer to believe scientists and engineers over journalists. 3000 engineers say it isn’t possible under the circumstances related to the public as being the cause. That’s enough for me. There were simply too many circumstances that occurred to make the 9/11 explanation believable. The worst was the ability of 19 mountain men to defeat the huge intelligence community in the US together with NORAD and all military agencies. Just the fact that the military happened to be carrying out a full scale test of their security systems that day, leaving the skies clear of such security is way too circumstantial. The renewing of the buildings insurance policies just before the destruction, the fact that the buildings had to come down sooner rather than later because of their asbestos content, the destruction of WTC 7 without being hit, the fact that the area of the Pentagon that was destroyed just circumstantially held the accounting department working on the missing 2.3 trillion dollars and all were killed, the lack of a real investigation and the lack of concern for preserving the crime scene and the evidence included in the rubble, the forcing of an investigation against the wishes of the then president, the refusal of the president to appear to be questioned about his knowledge of what happened without Cheney being present with him, the lack of evidence of the destroyed aircraft on the Pentagon lawn, the list goes on and on. Something is rotten in the State of Denmark and smells to High Heaven in both Washington and New York!

      Like

      • milosevic says

        obviously, you just don’t understand how coincidences work.

        Like

    • Harry Stotle says

      Craig Murray’s article lacks credibility because it fails to ask even rudimentary questions about what the forensic evidence actually tells us, or why there was such a huge effort to subvert subsequent investigations, for example by employing an arch neocon like Henry ‘nobel peace prize’ Kissinger to head the official 9/11 inquiry (before relatives started asking awkward questions about his close relationship with rich Saudis, forcing him to stand down).

      Murrays claims about shoddy structural engineering are especially risible given that no similar structure has behaved in the same way before or since. He says, for example. that ‘aftershocks’ caused WTC7 to fall even though this occured some 7 hours after the planes hit the twin towers, and the building collapsed on its own footprint in exactly the same way as the other two.

      Its a bit feeble to link to an article that has no substantive counter arguments to the mass of evidence pointing to controlled demolition. Admittedly its harder to say exactly what did happen (especially given the time lag since the attack) but anybody with more than two neurons can see that the official version of events is a fantasy that would be considered too far fetched even for a third rate spy film.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Rhisiart Gwilym says

      Craig is a damn good, honest man, and something of a Scottish (and more widely) national treasure. I’m even more reverently respectful to the mahatma Noam Chomsky. But – alas! – demonstrating human fallibility, as we all do, without exception, they’re both starkly wrong about the 11/9 perpetrators. Neither of them appear to have done any adequate due diligence into the accumulated evidence-mountain that 11/9 was a false-flag inside-job. They both pronounce their conclusions from positions of inadequate actual knowledge of the subject and faulty a priori ‘reasoning’. Shame. Still, we’re all similarly vulnerable to such irrational glitches, even the best of us. And I continue to respect them both highly for all the stuff that they do get right.

      Like

      • Harry Stotle says

        “Neither of them appear to have done any adequate due diligence into the accumulated evidence-mountain that 11/9 was a false-flag inside-job.” – agreed, and their obvious lack of knowledge reveals itself in their ill-informed commentary (both saying the same thing essentially, that 9/11 was too big to be an inside job).

        Moral of story – even our most influential gatekeepers are capable of school boy howlers, especially when they fail to follow basic principles of criminal investigation such as basing any conclusions on evidence rather than pre-determined narrative (such the US would not commit mass-murder against their own people).

        Like

        • The interesting thing is that it seems the number of murdered wasn’t nearly as large as claimed – see http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsims_photo-analyses.shtml. While this website suggests there may have been no victims there certainly were. For one thing, the perpetrators wanted a number of people dead in the buildings (see Jeremy Rys’s film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk) and there were definitely unintended casualties, notably, Bobby McIlwaine, who died from an explosion in the lobby of one of the twin towers and whose father, Bob McIlwaine, is a very prominent truther and one of the family members referred to in the article. A lot of people suggest that the “jumpers” were, in fact, dummies and included to maximise the traumatic effect of the psyop. I’d say this was a hybrid false flag/false flag hoax and the perpetrators probably persuaded many people to participate by persuading them that no one would be killed even though some people were. Of course, the fact that it was a lower number killed pales into comparison when you consider the tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths of Afghans and Iraqis as well as the ongoing agonising slow deaths of so many first responders and other workers at Ground Zero.

          Like

          • Thinking about it, they needed to make it seems as though a pretty high number died. If not many had died suspicion would have been directed much more readily to the government I think but the large number directed suspicion away from them and, at the same time, increased the traumatic effect. Masters of the Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological Operation.

            Like

          • MLS says

            If the jumpers were dummies that would necessitate someone inside the buildings throwing them out! You’d need a lot of bonus incentives to get anyone signing up for that job.

            What number of people provably died that day? is it profitable to quibble?

            September Clues are interesting in some ways but also batshit nuts about some of their claims.

            Like

            • This is an interesting post on the Israeli art students and strange framed dummies. I don’t see a problem with people throwing dummies out.
              http://www.markdotzler.com/Mark_Dotzler/WTC_Artists.html

              There was a huge amount of fakery in this operation … just as in so many others. Elias Davidsson’s book, Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11: Counterfeiting Evidence, focuses on the complete lack of evidence of the Muslim hijackers and the fakery associated with the planes and the phone calls.
              https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?12101-Elias-Davidsson-s-HIJACKING-AMERICA-S-MIND-ON-9-11-Counterfeiting-Evidence#.WuhVLciFO70

              I think the number of dead is extremely important if the number who died happens to be significantly smaller than the number stated, 300, say, compared to 3,000. Extremely important. The traumatic impact is quite different and as I indicate in my earlier comment, the higher the number, the greater the sense of preposterousness that it might be the government and thus the more suspicion is directed away from it. I will agree though when you think of all the people who’ve died indirectly from 9/11, the difference is probably negligible.

              Like

              • Carey says

                “I don’t see a problem with people throwing dummies out.” Maybe I’m missing something here, but wouldn’t the people
                doing this alleged throwing have died in the collapse? That doesn’t make sense to me.

                Like

                • Why would they have died? The alleged jumpers haven’t died at this stage as the buildings haven’t collapsed yet. I have a sneaking suspicion that a lot of footage we see wasn’t filmed on the day or somehow not filmed in time sequence. How easy to edit – show ground level and switch to top floors and back again.

                  Like

          • I wonder why Mr. Rys promotes Mr. Gage’s disinformation? But then, the uninformed opinion of a 35-year-old two time felon is meaningless and irrelevant.

            At 10:23 p.m., Jeremy Rys (Alienscientist), 1 Cherry St., was put in custody on an arrest warrant. Police went to his home at 9:15 p.m., and his family said he was not home. Police received a call from Rys who said he forgot his phone charger when he went to work, and will call his probation officer in the morning. Dispatch called probation who asked for Rys to be picked up by police.

            https://web.archive.org/web/20140807121440/http://patch.com/massachusetts/mansfield/police-log-road-rage-incident-involving-ax-reported-xfinity-center#.U-NtwmO8bYM

            Like

            • What is the point of this comment? Do you think that Jeremy’s road rage affects his credibility on 9/11? My logic doesn’t work along those lines. A claim of “disinformation” with no specification is of no value to me. What is this disinformation you refer to?

              Like

    • I do not question Craig Murray’s integrity, nor that of Noam Chomsky. I question their knowledge of Hard Science ie, Physics, Chemistry and Engineering.

      Like

      • The thing is, vexarb, you don’t need very much knowledge of those fields at all. I certainly don’t have it so that’s where you have to be rather suspicious. If people with far less knowledge than these two can figure it out, why can’t they? And they can use expert knowledge as we all have, it’s not as if they only have to rely on their own. I’m not familiar with Craig Murray but you really have to wonder in Chomsky’s case. The guy is so very much more familiar with the evil of the military-industrial complex, etc – he should be one of the first to cotton on to 9/11.

        Like

  13. FobosDeimos says

    I am sorry to see that this site seems to be endorsing such a sad lunacy. I follow with interest Off-Guardian’s valuable and courageous reports on the many truely criminal endeavours of the declining Empire and its pathetic minions, but surely there must be a point where you draw the line. Not out of self-censorship or some other moralistic impulse, but out of simple and good old fashioned logic. The victims’ families have every right to desperately seek other answers, but the rest of the world and brave journalists such as you, have the obligation to tell the truth and call this 9/11 fable for what it is. For a summary of the many solid rebuttals to this sad story, you may be interested in checking Rational Wiki’s entry at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/9/11

    Liked by 1 person

    • The only firmly established truth about the triple building collapse on 9/11 is that currently no one knows how it happened. The official report acknowledges this, as does FEMA and NIST. All we have are competing theories. Some of those theories are endorsed officially by the government, some are not. Nothing is proved. And many important questions remain unanswered.

      OffG supports full disclosure of the documents and physical evidence and an open inquiry in a bid to finally resolve this issue and establish which of the theories can be proved as fact. We fail to comprehend why anyone could find this to be a problem.

      Like

      • I disagree. The fraudulence of the fire explanation is self-evident. In the case of WTC-7, NIST dismissed investigation of the most obvious hypothesis, controlled demolition, on a fraudulent basis: there were no sounds of explosions loud enough. There were loud sounds and, in any case, there were many other signs of controlled demolition. They also fraudulently claimed ignorance of molten metal.

        There was absolutely no evidence for fire as cause, none at all, while everything about the collapse of WTC-7 was consistent with the characteristics of controlled demolition – whether nukes were involved or whatever, doesn’t matter, it was still controlled demolition. The collapse of WTC-7 by “fire” is the greatest case of the Emperor’s New Clothes the world has ever seen and while further investigation of the collapses needs to be done, there is simply no reason to suspect any other cause than controlled demolition. The twin towers also collapsed by controlled demolition but their situation is a little more complex.

        Like

        • You actually aren’t disagreeing at all, you’re simply taking the point further :-). No need to find arguments where there aren’t any

          Like

          • I actually am disagreeing because your statement is “the only established truth is X” while I say there is an established truth that WTC-7 came down by controlled demolition (of the classic, implosion kind). That is truth that we do not need to go to court to establish. We can find out more information about it, certainly, but we know that it came down by demolition that was controlled by whatever types of incendiary and explosive devices. And we certainly know it did not come down from any uncontrolled cause such as fire or damage. The physics of the collapse tell us.

            Like

            • Rhisiart Gwilym says

              I agree with Flaxgirl that the controlled demolitions are already proven conclusively. The high-quality technical investigative work already done by the truth-seeking community of volunteers establishes that as certainly as anything ever can be. And that one fact – sic! – alone demonstrates that the atrocities had to have been an inside job. No other perpetrator candidates had the clout to make sure that the three buildings were rigged for demolition; only some ruling ‘elite’ USAmericans and ‘Israelis’ (some of them dual-nationals) were in the necessary positions of power to make sure that the building-preparations happened on schedule, and then worked with the real-time controlled, hands-on skilled precision that they did on the day.

              Like

      • FobosDeimos says

        I am sorry, but this undermines the credibility of this site. To me the 9/11 “controlled demolition” conspiracy theory is on par with flat earth theory and “fake moonlandings” theory. Bush is already a war criminal in his own right. You don’t need to embarass yourself by propagating this wild theory to prove that the US is a dangerous bully.

        Like

        • MLS says

          Gaslighting. Unless he offers some sort of argument that isn’t based on “haha you’re dumb”, I vote we ignore him.

          Like

        • Frankly Speaking says

          It’s expert architects and engineers who are rebutting the official line. These people are not conspiracy nuts but educated and experienced professionals. This site has every right and possibly a duty to report this.

          Like

        • rtj1211 says

          Controlled demolition could have occurred without Dubya controlling it. How do you suppose JFK got assassinated?! Cheney and Rumsfeld have far mor evidence against them….

          Like

        • Thomas Prentice says

          TOTAL GASLIGHTING BY A CHRONIC COMPLAINER, flinging HIS character defects outward so he doesn’t have to face them; whattadeal he can slur other people instead.

          Like

        • archie1954 says

          Wild theory? Only to someone who won’t believe the truth no matter were it leads!

          Like

        • milosevic says

          To me the 9/11 “controlled demolition” conspiracy theory is on par with flat earth theory and “fake moonlandings” theory.

          “Flat Earth theory” and “Fake Moonlanding theory” aren’t even on par with each other, never mind the 9/11 false flag.

          How could you possibly imagine that the US government faking the moon landings is of the same order of impossibility as that the earth is flat?

          You’re just an establishment shill. Reality is whatever the government says it is. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

          Like

    • Solid rebuttals? Forgive me for not looking Fobos but I’ve done too much research to know they cannot be solid.

      I’ve done a 10-point Occam’s Razor exercise on the collapse of WTC-7 favouring the “controlled demolition” hypothesis over the “fire” hypothesis put forward by NIST and I’ve offered $5,000 for an equivalent exercise with favouring of hypotheses swapped. I’ve also made the judging rule that responders can choose their own structural engineer to validate their 10 points. Can’t get fairer than that, can you? Not a single bite so far although I’ve engaged with a number of vociferous supporters of the “fire” hypothesis.
      http://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/5000-challenge.html

      It’s so interesting. All the fire supporters do is try to poke holes in the controlled demolition argument but when it comes to providing even a single point supporting fire they’re left gasping like a fish – they have absolutely zero to support fire … for a very good reason. There is nothing to support it. The best they can come up with is the incredibly lame, “There was fire in the building,” which, of course, is meaningless as many high rise steel frame buildings have been on fire, much more so than WTC-7, in fact, and they stood very, very strong regardless. In fact, outside 9/11 and the alleged collapse by fire of the Plasco building in Tehran no high rise steel frame building has ever collapsed from fire.

      How NIST fraudulently got to fire was this: they dismissed the most obvious hypothesis, controlled demolition, on the basis that there were no sounds of explosions “loud enough”. There were, in fact, loud sounds of explosions although as the cutting charges were of a sophisticated heat-based type rather than explosive-based the sounds weren’t necessarily as loud as in other demolitions. Apart from explosions though there were many other signs of controlled demolition including: symmetry, collapse through the path of greatest resistance, near free fall and partial free fall of 2.25 seconds and molten metal. None of these characteristics apply to an uncontrolled collapse by fire.

      Then they simply made up an explanation to suit. They claimed there was a “hot spot” at column 79 where “thermal expansion” pushed a girder off its seat – a phenomenon unknown outside the collapse of WTC-7. This led to collapse of the column which further led to a global collapse across the building – another phenomenon also unknown outside the collapse of WTC-7. There is zero evidence to support this explanation. NIST did no forensic investigation and the explanation is purely in the realm of speculation and theory, moreover, theory that is not based in physical reality. It is ludicrous in the extreme.

      edited by Admin at request of comment author

      Liked by 1 person

      • FobosDeimos says

        OK. So an army of demolition experts worked for weeks inside the twin towers, placing the charges, extending the necessary cords, etc. in full view of thousands of employees, security guards and others, even though the WTC had been targeted only eight years before. And two huge airplanes were crashed in broad daylight, seen by millions on TV just to cover up the patient work of the demolition workers. It’s all painfully ridiculous, I am sorry to say.

        Like

        • MLS says

          You don’t reason from conclusion to evidence, you reason from evidence to conclusion. If there is prima facie evidence of explosive demolition then there was or could have been explosive demolition, regardless of what you or I or anyone finds plausible. That’s the way science works.

          Liked by 4 people

          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            The familiar fragrance of hasbara assaults my nostrils when I read Fobos.

            Like

          • Thomas Prentice says

            FLAX, you are really tiring. Point made. Go get a life. This is about demanding a GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION into an UNPROSECUTED CRIME. Save it for the Grand Jury.

            Like

            • Thomas, my first comment merely expressed hope that this filing would lead somewhere and would have stayed at that except for comments appearing that I don’t agree with. While you may think certain commenters should simply be ignored I feel they should at least be given some reply.

              There is a vast body of knowledge and a significant number of experts who have spoken publicly on 9/11 and we can only hope that this knowledge and these experts or those of similar ilk are utilised in the grand jury investigation should it come to pass. To a reasonable degree we know already WHAT happened, we really do not need an investigation to know that the buildings came down by controlled demolition. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have done a wonderful job with that and there is simply no other cause of collapse that fits.

              I think it’s important to recognise the important information we already know especially as there is no guarantee that an investigation will even happen as it hasn’t happened for JFK, RFK or MLK and no doubt other important crimes. And so many investigations are complete bullshit such as the Hutton Inquiry into David Kelly’s death for example.

              What we don’t know is WHO exactly did what (although even some of that we do know a bit about) and I wonder if we ever will.

              I really would love to know if any kind of aeronautical machine hit the buildings.

              Like

              • milosevic says

                I really would love to know if any kind of aeronautical machine hit the buildings.

                Of course it did, unless you believe the government has some secret technology that can project giant holograms into open air.

                Like

                • But what about live video editing? And in one video, Flight 175 looks as if it melts into the building which is not a physical possibility. See video below.
                  youtube.com/watch?v=PW6iOJiYdHQ

                  Like

                • Actually, I’ve studied 9/11 for a number of years now and it’s just hit me.

                  THE TWO BIGGEST LIES OF 9/11
                  – There were no plane crashes into the towers or at Shanksville (doubt at Pentagon either)
                  – The number of people killed was much lower than stated

                  NO PLANES INTO THE TOWERS OR AT SHANKSVILLE (DOUBT AT PENTAGON EITHER)
                  – The video below shows Flight 175 melting into a building using CGI
                  youtube.com/watch?v=PW6iOJiYdHQ

                  There was obviously no plane crash at Shanksville
                  youtube.com/watch?v=-2_em8G6DJE
                  In these two videos the “witnesses” of the plane crashes are obviously actors.
                  youtu.be/b9QN3AkydYY?t=47s
                  youtube.com/watch?v=hxQ2-DcZuR4

                  NUMBER KILLED MUCH LOWER THAT STATED
                  It seems incredible that people would be willing to be “crisis actors” in such an event but when you realise that the number killed was limited to a large degree to only those wanted murdered with a few “collateral damage,” getting people to act may not have been so difficult. Perhaps they were told that no one would die, that it was all fake and then when, inevitably, the actors discovered that some people were killed, they were told it was just accidental. I do not know but there were obviously actors used in 9/11, no question about it.

                  September Clues shows how a lot of people who allegedly died were “vicsims”.
                  http://www.septemberclues.info/vicsims_photo-analyses.shtml

                  September Clues suggests that nobody may have died but family members of victims demanding answers are obvious evidence that people died and Jeremy Rys’s film explains who was wanted killed and why.
                  youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk

                  Reasons for killing only a small number and inflating it
                  – generally in a covert operation they don’t genuinely kill more people than necessary because obviously they want to limit the family members making a fuss and demanding answers. Bob McIlvaine, father of Bobby McIlvaine, killed as he was entering the north tower by an explosion in the lobby before the building collapsed, is one of the family members involved in filing the petition and a great thorn in the side of the perps.
                  – they couldn’t limit the dead to the people they actually killed because it may be obvious that those killed were targeted and in that case rogue elements within government and their cronies will fit “perpetrator” much better than Muslim terrorists
                  – inflating the number helps to push suspicion away from the government because the higher the number the more preposterous it would seem that a government would do it to their own people
                  – the pretended higher number increases the traumatic impact and feelings of hostility to the pretended perpetrator increasing support to go to war

                  If this massive psyop weren’t so evil you couldn’t help but admire its execution.

                  Like

                  • September Clues also allege the three towers were actually demolished the day before without anyone noticing and that holograms or video or something was used to simulate the plane crashes, fires and collapses on the day. They produce absolutely no hard evidence for that or for the idea of “vicsims”, so it’s somewhat premature to draw conclusions. A few weird pics do not a bunch of “vicsims” make, and frankly such suggestions, even if not potentially offensive, are far less useful than focusing on using the physical evidence of demolition to push for a new inquiry.

                    Frankly this is just what the debunkers want the “truthers” to focus on.

                    Like

                    • Just because a person is wrong about one thing doesn’t mean they’re wrong about another. The thing is, limiting the number of people killed to only those wanted murdered as much as possible makes perfect sense. Look at all the trouble Bob McIlvaine is causing from his son being killed in the lobby as he was entering the North Tower. No one wants to kill more people than necessary which explains why now most of the staged events are complete hoaxes with no one killed or injured but they wanted people killed so they killed them and a few more were killed as “collateral damage”. They probably had to kill some people because if they didn’t kill anyone it would just be too obvious, but conveniently they wanted some people dead anyway.

                      However, I agree, as far as PROOF goes, that the focus should be on the demolition of the buildings – we don’t need more than that to start. I’m just stating what now seems obvious to me. It think, it’s good to indicate more of the whole picture if you have some idea of it.

                      Like

            • @doubting Thomas Prentice. Flaxgirl has a life — and her contributions to establishing Objective Truth are a significant part of that life. “Point made” indeed — and who made it? Flax and thousands of Truthers like her, your “tiresome” people who simply won’t Let Sleeping Dogs Lie.

              Liked by 1 person

              • I really appreciate that, vexarb, although there may be a grain of truth in Thomas suggesting I get a life. He’s not the only one to say it :). Nevertheless, he’s not obliged to read my posts and, as I’m not saying things he doesn’t agree with presumably, I’m not sure why they bother him.

                Like

          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            Israeli military sappers, aka ‘art students’ could have managed it easily.

            Like

          • @flaxgirl. Thanks for that link, but the sound cut out after the man had introduced himself as a professional demolition engineer.

            I have heard similar testimony elsewhere, but that was before the Social Media took up Self Censoring.

            Please carry on the good work.

            Like

            • Thanks, vexarb. The video works fine for me so perhaps your computer decided to take a rest. You might want to try again.

              Like

              • @flaxgirl. Yes, works now. Tom Sullivan, one of the Righteous Yanks. Like Scott Ritter, does his job, is proud of doing it well, and won’t allow anyone to push him into a position where he will say in public that nonsense is sense. The salt of the earth; the sturdy tree which stands upright in a jungle of Creepers.

                Glad you admit that you also need to “Get a Life”. Don’t worry, in the Long Run the truth simply takes over because truth is grounded in reality. But in the meantime I admire the clarity with which you demonstrate that an Arts graduate can master a technical argument (Let me guess: after listening to Tom Sullivan, I guess you no longer regard the atomic bomb as a suitable tool for Classical Controlled Demolition. No?).

                Liked by 1 person

        • intp1 says

          You dont need an army an army of explosive loaders 4 people in the building with security clearance, ostensibly working on an IT and/or elevator work could quietly get through that in a month. Once you accept that the goal of senior security officials was not to stop it it becomes entirely possible. The loint is, per your previous replier, you dont start from ” I dont understand how the people around the crime would have done it, You start with evidence , then follow that to how and why. You dont invent an incedulous lie that defies physical laws of nature because you cant bring yourself to overcome cognitive dissodence. Only uneducated Neanderthals would entertain that. And that is an inzult to Neanderthals.

          Like

        • mog says

          @fobosdeimos
          I am just going to quote what MLS wrote becuase it is such a precise response:
          ‘You don’t reason from conclusion to evidence, you reason from evidence to conclusion. If there is prima facie evidence of explosive demolition then there was or could have been explosive demolition, regardless of what you or I or anyone finds plausible. That’s the way science works.’

          Those given official responsibility for scientifically investigating these events could easily have followed standard procedure and falsified the demolition theory by testing samples of steel and dust. They didn’t.
          Others, who did, found confirming evidence.
          Evidence of the ‘what’, is what this law suit is about, not speculative musings about the ‘how’. That would be for a subsequent investigation.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Yes, and the thing is there are questions to make one ponder on both sides. How did the barely-trained 19 Muslim terrorists armed with boxcutters wrest control of four planes from military-trained pilots and navigate them through the most restricted airspace in the world without being molested by a single fighter interceptor?

            You can’t have the implausibilities battle it out, you must put the blinkers on and focus on the evidence.

            Like

            • milosevic says

              How did the barely-trained 19 Muslim terrorists armed with boxcutters wrest control of four planes from military-trained pilots and navigate them through the most restricted airspace in the world without being molested by a single fighter interceptor?

              They didn’t.

              The hijackers, Moslem or otherwise, are an unnecessary hypothesis. The aircrews and passengers were gassed shortly after takeoff, and then the airplanes were flown to their targets by pre-programmed autopilot.

              Except for Flight 93, where a team of CIA/Mossad contractors were inserted to terrorize the passengers, and generate the cellphone calls upon which the entire Official Story depends. A prototype cellphone repeater (as are now commonplace) was specially installed in the airplane to facilitate this.

              This essential task having been accomplished, the airplane was then molested by a fighter jet, as evidenced by the fact that the wreckage came down along an 8km path.

              See how much simpler than the Official Story that is?

              Like

              • You couldn’t autopilot a flight plan as complex as that. You can autopilot flying to a simple set of co-ordinates, but you would need manual control to achieve flying a plane into the WTCs. It’s theoretically feasible you could remote control the plane, but autopilot is impossible.

                Like

                • Published on 9 Mar 2010

                  According to the chief of Japans Democratic Party who says that the 9/11 hijackers are alive and that 9/11 was a complete hoax. Dr. David Ray Griffin is a professor and author who wrote The New Pearl Harbor Revisited and he says that he agrees; the World Trade Center was a hoax.

                  Like

                • milosevic says

                  You can autopilot flying to a simple set of co-ordinates, but you would need manual control to achieve flying a plane into the WTCs. It’s theoretically feasible you could remote control the plane, but autopilot is impossible.

                  On this point, you are quite mistaken. Boeing and NASA were already testing, prior to 2001, enhanced-GPS autopilot systems which were capable of autonomously landing a large aircraft at an airport. It is rather obvious that a successful landing requires a greater degree of precision and control than would be needed to simply crash into a building the size of the World Trade Center towers. See the following article from the Journal of 9/11 Studies for an extensive discussion.

                  Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems

                  Once this possibility is considered, the hijackers become an unnecessary hypothesis, as I said above. They are only needed to terrorize the passengers to generate the cellphone calls which are the entire basis for the Official Story, and the non-fake calls seem to come only from Flight 93, which probably not coincidentally, missed its appointment with WTC-7. The other planes can have been autopiloted since shortly after takeoff, when radio contact with their human pilots was lost. No human hijackers are necessary.

                  Even in the case of Flight 93, the terrorists DON’T NEED TO KNOW THAT THEY ARE GOING TO DIE THAT DAY. They can be some gang of CIA or Mossad contractors who specialize in pretending to be Arabs. They can be told that their job is simply to disable the flight crew and terrorize the passengers, while the autopilot flies the plane to some secret airport, after which they will be handed their million-dollar payoffs and new identities in Argentina. Oops.

                  Do you see how much simpler that theory is, than either the ridiculous Official Story, or false-flag accounts which still assume the need for highly-trained pilots, willing to sacrifice their lives for whatever purpose they have been led to believe the operation is intended to serve?

                  THE HIJACKERS ARE AN UNNECESSARY HYPOTHESIS. We don’t need to assume that they actually existed, other than as fictional characters in the official Terror War mythology.

                  Like

                  • Flight 93 missed its appointment with WTC-7? I don’t understand, Milosevic. There was no crash of Flight 93. You’re the one that posted the Hoodwinked at Shanksville video.

                    Like

                    • I don’t doubt it, vierotchka, however, just as physics tells us that the buildings didn’t come down by fire, it also tells us that planes didn’t crash into the buildings.

                      Planes would collide with the building not penetrate it. People think that the velocity of the planes would push them through but this is not how the physics of crashes works. Two colliding objects experience the same force in a collision regardless of their initial speed and mass and it is the lower-mass object that will suffer more because of its inability to withstand the larger acceleration resulting from the interaction. You see a dump truck travelling at 60 mph in this video and yet it collides with the concrete wall and disintegrates when it hits it because it’s not as strong.

                      Here you see Flight 175 melt into a building just like the “real” CGI example presented. Planes do not melt into very heavy 110-storey steel frame buildings.
                      youtube.com/watch?v=PW6iOJiYdHQ

                      These people are obviously actors
                      youtu.be/b9QN3AkydYY?t=47s
                      youtube.com/watch?v=hxQ2-DcZuR4

                      In the first video, the guy says “I don’t know who was at the controls or what was going on in the plane but it was not a bomb.” He’s just watched the crash and he’s denying it was a bomb?

                      In the second video the guy says “I saw this plane come out of nowhere and just ream right into the side of the twin tower exploding through the other side”. Yeah, right. Yes, there is “footage” of the nose of the plane out the other side. Completely and utterly impossible. Have you seen the nose of a plane when it’s hit a bird? It’s very fragile. It is not going to go in one side of the steel frame building and come out the other side. With the nose pop out they’re really rubbing it in.

                      And they need actors to “witness” the plane crashes? What more evidence do you need?

                      Like

                    • One of my nephews was living in Man hattan at the time, and he was there, outside, when it happened – he saw both planes fly towards the towers and crash into them. He is no actor and never was interviewed. We were on the phone immediately after it happened and he told me how he saw the planes crash into the towers. He is not a liar.

                      However, I reckon the planes were “fine-tuned” to enter the towers at precise locations and explosives were synched with the planes to “help” them enter the towers. I think the explosives were placed in such a way so as to have the shape/silouhettes of the planes, aluminium wings and all.

                      There definitely was kerosene inside the towers as a result of the crashes, even though most of it exploded outside at the exit point of the planes.

                      I saw the whole thing live as it happened, and my immediate intuitive thought was “auto-goal” (a soccer term for when a player shoots the ball into the goal of his own team), meaning in this instance “inside job”.

                      From that day on and for several years I researched the subject intensively and extensively. The official version is, in my rather well-educated opinion, absolute bunk.

                      If burning kerosene could melt or weaken steel and aluminium, no airplane could possibly fly, the engines would melt and the plane would fall.

                      Like

                    • OK, I believe your nephew too. I think your theory about the fine-tuning sounds plausible and, in fact, in an article in OffG I wrote on Noam Chomsky I, myself, asked, “Is it a bomb exploding simultaneously creating a hole for the plane to slip in?” But then I thought better of it and thought, “Naaah,” however, it really does seem to be a reasonable explanation because a plane would definitely collide unless the plane itself perhaps had some special kind of penetrating explosives or suchlike or, as we both moot, the building exploded in the right shape for the plane. The “footage” of the plane melting into the building though is definitely CGI.

                      The fakery upon fakery does my head in – so they have an actor speaking obvious lies to make us think there simply wasn’t a plane and yet, it seems, there really was.

                      I bet I go to my grave without knowing the secret … but then so many others I’ll never know either.

                      Like

                    • What struck me at the time was that the outer steel columns where the silhouette of one of the plane’s entry point were bent outward and not inward. I have that photo on one of my “decomissioned” computers (I have about seven of them, stored in my cellar along with a vast number of other objects) where I have archived a great many photos from 9/11. I have tried to find that photo online today, but it no longer is there.

                      Like

                    • Has your nephew ever written down his experience? The number of witnesses who saw both planes and documented the fact is pretty small, I would urge him to preserve his recollections for posterity. In fact we would be very happy to publish anything he wrote here.

                      Like

                    • Not that I know of. After I told him that I thought it was an inside job, he got furious with me and cut off all contact with me. I don’t know where he is now, nor how to contact him.

                      Like

                    • Hmmm, I have to say, vierotchka, that that does slightly compromise my belief in your nephew although at the same time I wouldn’t accuse him of lying. Perhaps he happened to be looking towards the buildings at the time and saw them in “retrospect” because he “knew” they’d hit. All I can say is that on further reflection, looking at your photo I do not see how any plane entered that hole. And I also treat as extremely suspicious that the people we see on video claiming to have seen them are obviously actors – there may be other videos of genuine witnesses but I haven’t seen them. There’s also the CGI, however, that doesn’t mean that an aeronautical machine did not somehow go into the building, it may be that simply because whatever it was did not look like an airliner they used CGI. I think I have to go with “no planes” but at the same time keep an open mind – it’s not foolproof like the buildings.

                      Like

                    • I think that my nephew, born and raised in America and an American citizen, like the majority of Americans at that time who were deeply traumatized by that event, could simply not conceive of or entertain the thought that 9/11 was an inside job. The slightest hint of it being an inside job caused a huge and deep emotional trauma on already highly traumatized Americans, hence the extremely powerful denial and angry reaction. Symptomatic of a very painful form of cognitive dissonance. It is understandable, especially as all the TV channels broadcast the videos over and over and over again for weeks on end, thus driving and reinforcing the trauma as deep and powerfully as possible. When people are in that state of shock and trauma, that is the time when they are totally vulnerable to suggestion and when brainwashing is most effective. I saw that very reaction in a vast number of Americans. It is only relatively recently, many years after the event, that more and more Americans are coming round to the possibility that it was an inside job – they have had the time to heal somewhat, and are less defensive.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    • Yes, I’ve seen the argument about the destruction pushing outwards before. What a mystery.

                      Like

              • That’s a likely theory, milosevic, although I don’t know that you can state that with certainty. I’d be very surprised if all those passengers died. But I wasn’t really asking the question, I was just showing how you can always pull out an equally implausible aspect to the other side of the argument but people tend to only think the seeming implausibilities in the explanation they oppose count. Implausibility is a poor reason to judge things in any case because often things only seem implausible because we’re missing some key information.

                Liked by 1 person

                  • milosevic says

                    This is because there never were any hijackers, other than a CIA/Mossad squad sent to terrorize the Flight 93 passengers. The Official Story hijackers are simply Arab-country nationals who had their passports and identities stolen while they were studying in the United States.

                    This is also why there are no Iraqis among them: due to the starvation blockade of that country, there were no Iraqi flight students in the US whose identities could be stolen. But that’s no problem for the 9/11 organizers, because most Americans are too stupid to distinguish between various Arab nationalities, anyway.

                    Like

      • FobosDeimos says

        I am not “handled” by anybody and I resent your insult. I genuinely thought that this site was inhabited by intelligent people, not by fanatics ready to believe in fairy tales only because they are “anti-US”. Good bye.

        Like

      • intp1 says

        I agree that what happened is not known to us but the evidence is overwhelming that the official, Commision version is abouft as likely as an intervent ion from a parallel universe. A
        universe where fundemental laws of Physics are turned up side down and buildings that stay standing according to those laws, on that day only, 3 of them did not.

        Like

    • mick Fletcher says

      Rational Wiki is one of the most irrational places on the web. It is the voice of the establishment.

      Like

      • milosevic says

        It is the voice of the establishment.

        — as is the entire “sceptics” industry, especially on medical and political subjects. Being a shill for the establishment apparently pays fairly well, once you make a name for yourself.

        Like

    • Joerg says

      @FobosDeimos
      O, my God, FobosDeimos! Why are You Conspiracy-Theorists always so resistant to research, facts and simple but pure logic??!!
      You are even worse than those religious fanatics of the middle ages!
      Sadly You, like many others, follow this GEORGE-W-BUSH-COMSPIRYCY-THEORY, which goes: “Some Arabs went into an Afghan cave an conspired to hijack some commercial airplanes in order to ….”.
      Why don’t You, FobosDeimos, at least take one look at those debunker-theories (falsely called themselves “conspiracy-theories” although they are only DEBUNKING this George W. Bush conspiracy theory) and why don’t You at least accept hard facts?

      For starters look here: https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/there-were-no-commercial-plane-crashes-on-911/ . A fine article although forgets to mention this fact: As documented in the video “Loose change” some years ago, the chief of the civil air control of New York, after the
      collapse of both Towers, to the surprise of his staff at their radar monitors grasped for all tapes of the recordings of the radar surveillance of that morning and then destroyed this evidence in a shredder.

      And there is no doubt POSSIBLE that the FBI and the judicial apparatus of the Union as well as those of the states New York and Washington D. C. are behind this massive crime of 911. This because they never even once(!) searched for – not to speak of prosecuted – those responsible for this massive amount of produced fake optical material.
      Remember “Sandy Hook”, FobosDeimos? When the sheriff there warned that anyone, who spread ‘false information’ would be merciless prosecuted? Of course it is a crime in any country to produce false evidence for a crime!
      For these massive forgeries on 911 see here: http://www.imagenetz.de/f6abbd0bf/THE-FAKE-EVIDENCE.pdf.html

      By the way, FobosDeimos: Like George w. Bush also Adolph Hitler wanted to have war. And like Bush he also staged the “Gleiwitz Incident” with faked optical material in order to convince the then Germans that Poland must be attacked.
      If You, FobosDeimos, and I would have lived in Nazi-Germany and if I than had been sceptical to this government conspiracy theory, You’d probably had called me a “traitor” – or even worse!!!!

      edited by admin to fix link

      Like

      • milosevic says

        he also staged the “Gleiwitz Incident” with faked optical material in order to convince the then Germans that Poland must be attacked.

        I thought the Nazis dressed some political prisoners in Polish uniforms, shot them, and then photographed the bodies.

        What’s fake about that?

        Like

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      ‘Rational Wiki’??!! It is to laugh, after clearing up the vomit. The Zionists operate the most extensive propaganda machine in history, and covering up the real perpetrators of 9/11 is of maximum import. If you REALLY believe the preposterous ‘Official Version’, then I fear for the stability of your mind. I guess you also believe that Oswald shot JFK from the front, despite being far behind him, and Sirhan shot RFK from behind despite being some metres in front of him. You also, no doubt, have pictures of Kuwaiti babies thrown from their incubators, samples of Saddam’s WMD in their hiding places inside, say, Iran, and Vietnamese torpedo boats attacking peace-loving US ships, minding their own business, in the Gulf of Tonkin.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ivan says

      I agree that 9/11 skeptics often give the impression that they disregard available evidence (but perhaps such are also the ones endorsing uncriticallly the official version). I am not convinced by the rationalwiki you cite: look at their section on false flags, for example (on the same page you link to).

      I have never tried to look very much into the issue myself, but maybe you would agree that there were some strange aspects about 9/11 even if you accept the official version of events (passports of the hijackers found near WTC etc).
      I cite the article “Uncle Sam’s lucky finds” of the Guardian from 2002 (yes, it was apparently different then from what it is today):

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/mar/19/september11.iraq

      Like

      • Oh my goodness, what a find of finds! Of course, it wasn’t Atta’s passport in the end but Satam al-Suqami’s. How did they screw that up … or do you think it was just one of their many ludicrous changes-in-the-story clues for us to pick up on … on top of the ludicrous passport find in the first place? They do love to rub it in.

        Like

    • @fobosaletheia. A true Believer who was not merely a Troll would have presented something objective as rebuttal of the Truther case; something like this:

      “The buildings could not have been brought down by nanothermite because the 911 Commission of Experts took hundreds of samples of dust and rubble from all around the area, and examined it very carefully with the best available electron microscopes in the best laboratories — but they could not detect a single nanometre of nanothermite in all those hundreds of samples.”

      Or, “Thermite is used for welding because its flame is intense enough to melt steel; but the 911 Commission of Experts looked very carefully for signs of molten metal in the area below the building, and found none. Neither did any firemen witness molten metal while the buildings were collapsing”.

      You see? objective rebuttal by a Rational Believer.

      Or a Simple Believer would simply trust in the Faith: “I cannot believe that anybody in the Bush/Cheney regime could have been so wicked as to blow up their own citizens as an excuse to start a war”.

      But you, fobosdeimos, do neither; you simply insult the intelligence of us Truthers. Like Peer Gynt, you might be a Troll without knowing it.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Just as is the case for Skripal and Douma and their false flag war-initiating nature, people can with certainty expect Trump, May, Macron, Merkel, Netanyahu, etc. to offer zero rational response to this major legal development over 9/11. Their continuing silence on these ultimate matters is surpassing deafening as a descriptive – suggesting an evolutionary, higher intensity, unprecedented level of dangerous, ignorant, and self-defeating intentional deception.

    Like

  15. I do so hope this goes somewhere. One of the crims is on his deathbed now. I wonder how many more will go to their graves with big smiles on their faces (some no doubt already have) before justice is served, if it ever is.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      I have more chance of flying, backwards, to the Moon, than that the truth will EVER be allowed to reach the drones concerning 9/11. The truth, that the USA’s ‘dear friend’, on whom they lavish billions and billions in free money, tribute to their political control in the USA (and ALL the West, now)and who they protect from International Law concerning their multitudinous crimes against humanity, attacked the USA in order to provoke a ‘War on Terror’, in fact a War of Terror against the Islamic states of the Middle East, to their supposed advantage, and to slake their elites’ blood-lust, would cause a VERY NASTY SITUATION, indeed, to develop.

      Like

      • milosevic says

        Oh, stop with your silly conspiracy theories. You probably believe the zionazis attacked the USS Liberty without US government permission. How could the Israeli Art Students have kept the multi-trillion-dollar US air-defence system on the ground for two hours, while four airplanes which were known to have been hijacked, flew around the country crashing into things?

        Obviously, only the US government can make that happen. As for the Official 9/11 Faery Tale, about the Nineteen Moslem Fanatics Who Could, it doesn’t even merit cynical laughter.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          The MOSSAD had US collaborators, plainly including Rumsfeld and Cheney, long the capi of the ‘Continuance of Government’ shadow administration. There was also sayanim assistance at the WTC towers themselves, richly rewarded with insurance blood money. That is quite a powerful collaboration.

          Like

  16. summitflyer says

    The disclosure that 9/11 was caused by explosives will blow the existence of the cabal/deep state wide open .
    Most of us know who was responsible for the destruction of the 2 towers and bldg #7 and it was not the Arabs with boxcutters that highjacked the planes.
    Lets clear the air as this would force many to finally wake up .

    Liked by 1 person

.....................

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s