9/11, latest, video, videos

WATCH: Janette McKinlay, 9/11 Survivor at Ground Zero

Janette McKinley lived just a few blocks from the World Trade Center complex in NYC. When the towers collapsed on September 11 2001 the windows of her apartment were blown in and her home was drenched with the toxic dust. This dust was likely the cause of a malignant brain tumour that eventually killed her. In this unedited raw interview by Dylan Avery, subsequently edited for inclusion in his Loose Change film, Janette recalls the events of that day in vivid and very personal terms.

In a form of poetic justice it was the dust Janette saved from her apartment that permitted Dr. Steven Jones et al to discover what they claim is evidence for pre-planted explosives in the WTC towers


  1. Is anyone a lawyer? This page does not look serious at all to me. http://vealetruth.com/ William Veale was supposed to have represented April Gallop against Cheney, Rumsfeld and Myers who dismissed the claim on the grounds it was trivial.

    OMG! I just watched about half of the video. Janette is so obviously an actor. She starts off with the typical “actual truth” psyop line, “I thought it was a bomb”. How many times have we heard that one in the recent spate of staged events. She smiles all the way through, giving zero indication that she suffered through a horrible experience, and she trots out the lines about the commission being a joke and so on. It’s so damn obvious.

    I believe that to really get 9/11 it very much helps to have a certain steeping in all the recent staged events. The steeping helps you get a feel for all the hoaxery. It just becomes so obvious. Without having studied recent events I may never have cottoned on to the fact that 9/11 was a total and utter psyop and not just a half-psyop.

    • Admin says

      It becomes ever more urgent that you define what you mean. Right now you are behaving exactly like an agent paid to discredit with lunatic and poorly reasoned theories.

      • As I say, it helps to have a steeping in recent staged events and to know their hallmarks. Have you looked at Sandy Hook, Ottawa shooting, Manchester, Westminster, Las Vegas, San Bernardino, London Bridge, etc. If you haven’t then what I say might seem silly but if you have it makes much more sense.

        Staged events have hallmarks such as one I mentioned in another comment, spelling names in a variety of ways.

        They also have people say things that don’t quite add up or seem appropriate. Here William Veale says that April Gallop “apparently” helped other people after the bombing at the Pentagon. He’s her lawyer and he says “apparently”. Wouldn’t he know her story backwards? Of course, you could say he just says that because he doesn’t know for sure or it’s just a slip of the tongue but when you watch so many videos of these actors you just get to recognise where they say words that are not quite appropriate. https://youtu.be/7ssc_qru4jE?t=2m10s. Plus he just seems to ramble. He only has 10 minutes but what does he really say? He does not sound very lawyerlike and on the ball at all.

        So I have two hypotheses.
        1) 9/11 was a complete psyop
        2) They TELL us

        Evidence and reason to support these two hypotheses.


        There is no clear evidence of 3,000 dead and there is compelling evidence of vicsims. http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=482&sid=ea231247e3ecdab692c1b4b970191278.

        There is also “evidence” that one might judge as eminently “purportable”, eg, human fragments in dust and this evidence can be supplied by people such as Janette McKinlay.

        When 3,000 people die do you not think there should be some evidence that someone could point to and say this is clear evidence of someone who’s died?

        We have no reason to believe that the perps would want to kill 3,000 people and presumably it would be a massive headache to deal with the reasonable percentage of loved ones who would figure out the buildings came down by controlled demolition.
        We know that many drills were run on 9/11. They could easily have run evacuations in the buildings which may well have seemed real to many but obviously certain people in the know would be running them essentially as drills.
        The Firefighters for 9/11 Truth page looks like a front. As 343 firefighters were allegedly killed on 9/11 you’d think their Truth page would be quite strong. In fact, it is only those NOT involved on the day who have truth pages that seem convincing. https://www.ff911truthandunity.org/

        2) The pop-in/pop-out plane; Mark Walsh talking about the plane reaming through the other side, “structural failure” and Ground Zero within two hours of the buildings coming down; Larry Silverstein’s “pull it”; the pristine passport that fluttered down and despite its immaculate appearance managed to change ownership; the terrorists popping up alive.

        Can you tell me where my poorly-reasoned hypotheses are exactly?

        Can you answer these two questions:

        —Can you supply a reason for the perps to want to kill the 3,000 people in the buildings?

        —Do you think they could have faked it by limited damage on empty floors, making it look worse than it was, using CGI for the plane crash and perhaps other things or otherwise doctored footage and evacuating people before the buildings came down and, if so, do you think they would have done that?

        • PSJ says

          Oh my, Flaxgirl, your reasoning is anything but linear!

          Firstly, let’s agree to leave out all the other psyops (I don’t doubt they are that), simply because I have no data, and also because the fact one event may or may not be “staged” has no direct bearing on whether another unrelated event was.

          Secondly, let’s agree what we are going to consider evidence and what we are going to exclude.

          Subjective interpretations of subjective personal statements – are they evidence? No. Not in a scientific sense and only barely in a legal sense. Unless you’re a qualified forensic psychologist you can’t sit in the witness stand and have your opinion about what someone else’s words mean entered into the evidence record. And there’s a good reason for that – such personal, subjective interpretations can’t be measured or evaluated and are therefore meaningless as evidence.

          You are entitled to your personal opinion, sure, but let’s agree to exclude that as data, ok?

          Let’s exclude also any argumentum ad populum – ie “no one would do that WOULD THEY?” Same reason as above – what you or I may consider someone else would do is not evidence.

          Let’s stick to stuff that can be measured and compared, and maybe there’s some basis for discussion.

          Can we agree to that?

          • You’re absolutely right, PSJ, seemingly strange use of the word “apparently” by William Veale will not stand up in court as evidence of any kind. However, you nor anyone else has given me any reason whatsoever to believe the 3000-died story. Do you have any falsifiable evidence to convince me?

          • I think my mind naturally tends to a kind of Occam’s Razor-type thinking. It automatically goes into the mode of, “How does this piece fit with all the other pieces? Does this new piece recast my thinking about the other pieces? Do all the pieces now support more this hypothesis or that hypothesis?” That is why within a very short time of the cogs starting to turn while half-watching the William Rodriguez video on YouTube autoplay (seems so very random), I had no doubt that it was a double-psyop. All the pieces fit double-psyop so much better than single-psyop. It’s funny, the one thing I had so much difficulty reconciling with the single-psyop was Mark Walsh’s interview. He seemed so jolly and obviously the reporter would have to be in on it too and it just did not fit.

            Sure, I totally swallowed Bob McIlvaine (he actually produces tears – the only person I know in these events who does), the Jersey Girls, April Gallop, the auditors wanted rid of, Richard Grove and so many other things but it didn’t take long after suspecting the double-psyop to see how everything fits it so much better than they fit single-psyop. And there is simply no convincing contradictory evidence. It seems no one can produce falsifiable evidence for 3,000 dead people and that does not seem possible if 3,000 people were really killed.

            And then there’s the evidence of vicsims, there’s all the other staged events we’ve had over the last few years, and there is, of course, the very, very important questions:
            —Why would they kill 3,000 people in the buildings?
            —Wouldn’t the loved ones of 3,000 dead people be a complete nightmare to manage, especially when the evidence of controlled demolition is so strong?

            And they tell us of their hoaxery so loudly and clearly with the terrorists popping up alive, the pristine passport (changing ownership), Larry Silverstein’s “pull it”, the plane popping out the other side, etc

            It was a psyop and you only do what you have to and fake the rest.

            I believe the reason they wanted both the believers and the truthers to be “on the same page” as far as 3,000 dead were concerned is that we all have our paradigmatic line over which we will not cross. Believers would not cross the “US government cold-bloodedly killed 3,000 people in those buildings” line and, in truth, they’re right. They wouldn’t. It’s not their modus operandi – nothing to do with them being not so evil to do it – because, of course, they’re fine with their soldiers getting killed and suiciding and killing up to hundreds of thousands elsewhere – but they just wouldn’t conduct an operation like that except for very, very good reasons perhaps and they’re weren’t any. They had, in fact, a great anti-motive NOT to do it – dealing with all the loved ones of those killed.

            So perhaps if we just talk simple common sense here rather than getting all scientific about it, doesn’t double-psyop fit so very, very much better than single-psyop?

      • I find it ironic that everyone’s OK with the idea that the US government killed 3,000 people in cold blood in those buildings when they managed to fake the terrorists, the planes, the hijackings and the crashes and convince people that fire brought the buildings down but when you come out and say, “Hey, they’re not actually so evil – I just worked out they faked absolutely everything, including the 3,000 people dying by using clever propaganda aimed just at truthers – because, after all, they had no reason to kill them and dealing with the loved ones of 3,000 people would be an absolute nightmare,” I’m met with no agreement whatsoever with what, to me, is an eminently logical hypothesis which has evidentiary support. Instead, I’m told there is an “urgent” requirement for me to define what I mean. I simply do not understand why saying that people who were alleged to die, didn’t, is a very, very touchy subject. I simply do not understand it. It’s offensive either way so let’s drop the idea of offensiveness and just try to get the truth.

      • I can only assume, Admin, you haven’t done due diligence. When Manchester, Westminster, Charlie Hebdo and all the rest happened did you investigate them properly? I myself am not a diligent researcher. I’m a little on the lazy side. However, it only takes a few YouTube videos showing how these events are hoaxes to pick it up. You probably didn’t do that despite a number of commenters, including myself, saying these were staged events. You didn’t clarify for yourself that they were. Now that there’s this turnaround information that shows that 9/11 was, we could say, a double-psyop, you’re not mentally prepared for it. You think what I say is lunatic. It is not. It is perfectly reasoned and the 9/11 psyop is completely consistent with all the other ones except it has that nice little touch of being a double-psyop with its propaganda (using what we might term “double-agents”) aimed only at the anticipated truthers (of course, they’d figure out that people would get wise to the controlled demolitions – in fact, now it seems to me as if they pushed WTC-7 right in our face). You have to take your hat off to them.

        • Admin says

          flax – I’m not debating you or refuting you, I’m asking you to define what you mean. Which you refuse to do.

          Simple question – what do you think really happened on 9/11?

          • I’m very happy to tell you what I mean, Admin. I don’t know what you mean though by “tell you what I mean.” I thought I had told you.

            What I think happened on 9/11 was reasonably similar to the Manchester bombing. For the Manchester bombing they simulated a bomb with sounds of explosions and then had everyone exit the building away from the alleged bomb area so people who were there may well have thought a bomb went off and killed people but all that happened was the sounds of explosions. Then every single media outlet showed us exactly the same single blurry photograph of the alleged bomb scene which in no shape or form resembled the carnage described. So very, very, very basic. Amazing how easy psyops can be. I find it sad the way people defend these psyops so strenuously and passionately. For goodness sake, all you have to do is have a little look to see how utterly ridiculous they are.

            For 9/11 I’d surmise they did some damage on the empty floor where the alleged plane impact happened, set off some explosions and then evacuated all the people before the buildings fell – but I really don’t know what they did, it’s just an educated guess. The “jumpers” could have been filmed another day and were simply dummies. If you look at the smoke in the dummy footage it’s pretty sparse. In the case of the Pentagon everyone was probably in on it and there was simply no one where the bomb went off. Not too complicated really. The vicsim stuff afterwards I guess is a bit more complicated and they have to have people willing to carry on for years with their nonsense but perhaps it’s just a few days of the year here and there and I’m sure they get paid handsomely.

            For all I know they could have tried to make it more realistic and set off small bombs that genuinely covered people in dust or whatever but I doubt they’d do it that way. I think they really enjoy all the fakery.

            • I didn’t notice the headline of the Manchester bombing article with the the alleged image of the bomb scene:

              “Full of young girls wearing kitten ears was the softest target.”

              I mean, could they make it more obvious.

            • It just occurred to me how very low-budget the actual psyop was. Very conveniently the bomb “exploded” at the close of the concert so everyone just exited as they normally would have and wherever the bomb was alleged to have gone off was screened off. They did make quite a big effort with the crisis actors afterwards though. I find most of them completely nauseating but I do have a soft spot for Paula Robinson. I think she should get some sort of crisis actor award. UK Critical Thinker has done some great videos on Manchester but unfortunately his channel has been banned. You can get them on 153news.net which doesn’t play as well as YouTube but here’s Paula Robinson and her utterly ludicrous story on YT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AANMKu393LU

  2. Admit to what? I’m NOT wrong. I didn’t question if Dr. Wood was on Fetzer’s program. I question if she made that statement (which I still believe she didn’t). I would rather spend Summer sitting on my deck and enjoy the park* behind me than listen to Fetzer’s whining and gritty voice for 78 minutes. If you know the time stamp, please provide it and I will listen to your claim.


  3. [3,000 dead — and counting. The ongoing killing by the Bush regime’s 911 terrorist atrocity]:

    9/11 Victim Compensation Fund

    Reports conducted by the EPA [U$ Environmental Protection Agency — Hah! Hah!] led first responders and residents to believe there was no immediate danger from the dust that erupted after the twin towers collapsed. The EPA stated that the air in Manhattan was safe to breathe in as little as 2 days after 9/11.
    [Hence my call for honest public services in the Western World]

    Unfortunately, [in the real world] countless health issues have emerged as a result of people inhaling the resulting dust from the collapse of the World Trade Centers—mostly respiratory diseases including asbestos-related diseases like mesothelioma.

    The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act was signed into law in 2011 [by President Obomba] to help the victims of exposure to the toxins released on 9/11. The act pays tribute to James Zadroga, the first 9/11 responder to die from an exposure related illness. The act was approved for five years and will hopefully be renewed to continue helping 9/11 first responders and survivors who may develop an exposure-related illness in the future. [was renewed in 2015 after activist lobbying]

    Countless people have been treated under 9/11 health programs, and it is likely the program will need to be expanded in the future due to the latency period of development of cancers like mesothelioma.


    Born in 1971, New York City police detective James Zadroga was one of the many first responders to help at the World Trade Center after the [Bush / Cheney regime’s] terrorist attacks there on September 11, 2001. After his time at the WTC [explosive demolition] site, Zadroga started to experience respiratory problems. He retired from the force three years later because of his poor health. When Zadroga died in 2006, he was the first NYPD officer to pass away from health problems attributed to exposure to the toxic dust from World Trade Center disaster site.

    • re my prev post “[was renewed in 2015 after activist lobbying]”

      Lobbying means that we The Citizens must organize to make the life of Our MP more difficult than his / her Parliamentary Party whip can make it. They Work for You:


      The Problem
      While Federally-funded health care and medical monitoring for thousands of injured and ill 9/11 responders and survivors has been made permanent, the compensation program for those same responders and survivors will expire in 2020 even as we are expecting thousands more cancer cases from exposure to 9/11 toxins in the coming years.
      We must make sure that doesn’t happen.

      Who Are We
      Citizens for the Extension of the James Zadroga Act Inc. was created by the unions and groups that worked to get Washington to respond to the health crisis facing so many injured and ill 9/11 responders and survivors. Citizens for the Extension will be working in the coming years to make sure 911 Health Watch is permanent.


  4. Since the whole claim of thermite in the WTC dust is disinformation spread by Steven “Los Alamos” Jones it stands to reason the “dust samples” he used were part of the disinfo. Janette McKinlay was simply another operative.

    Dr Judy Wood is the only scientist who has brought genuine analysis to the science of 9/11. She lost her job for doing it and has been shunned. Jones “retired” with a pay rise and “professor emeritus” status.

    Jones was also complicit in destroying cold fusion in 1989. He was employed by the Department of Energy to discredit the work of Pons and Fleischmann

    • Admin says

      Do you have any evidence for any of these libellous claims? If you don’t produce any we’re going to take down this comment.

      • @Admin. Please, I am no Lawyer but — unless Admin fears the respondents may sue Off-G — pray allow EC’s pathetic and transparent libels on Steve Jones & Janette McInlay to stand. This feeble troll is a sign of desperation by the criminal conspiracy behind 911 — the days when the AZC who set up the Bush / Cheney regime to commit the horrendous crime on WTC, and call on World Class Liars like Tony B.L. to justify them, are past.

        edited by admin to correct name

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Is that you, Cass Sunstein? Or are you getting your missus, the fragrant Samantha, to do your dirty work?

    • Those who want to cover up the evidence of what happen often falsely claim that Dr. Wood is talking about a specific weapon and a specific location of it (e.g. laser beam from outer space, or “spacebeams”). This disinformation campaign was initiated by Steven Jones on 11/11/2006 in a presentation he gave at the University of California, Berkeley.[ available here at 1:53:47 https://archive.org/details/ liftingthefog_2006_11_11_ session2 ], telling his audience that “Judy Woods (Dr. Wood) says it’s a laser or maser from space” while showing how difficult it is to hold his hand like a beam from space. Not only does Dr. Wood NOT SAY THAT, she actually RULES THAT OUT. The mechanism of destruction of a laser beam would be from heat and produce a bright and blinding light. But we know the buildings were not cooked to death. The term Directed Energy is used because energy is directed to do something different then it normally does and it is directed to do this within a certain geographic zone. [As a mental example, think of directing the binding energy of matter to repel instead of attract. A solid object would turn to atomic-sized dust. Direct this to happen within the WTC complex and not across the street.]

      At the end of Chapter 20 in Dr. Wood’s book, she explains why playing “name the weapon” game is counterproductive. Name dropping trendy terms is not synonymous with understanding. The easiest example is HAARP. The full capabilities are classified. But people often name-drop the trendy term to APPEAR to know something. A tongue-in-cheek definition of HAARP stands for High Amplitude Advancement of Real Propaganda. They are just substituting “HAARP” for “Bin Laden.”

      In Dr. Wood’s book, the closest she comes to “naming a weapon” is merely describing what it creates: magnetic-electrogravitic- nuclear reactions (page 365). But as soon as someone starts talking about a name, people will stop looking at the evidence which is another form of a cover up.

      Early on, Dr. Steven Jones created a website he called “The Journal of Nine Eleven Studies” or J.O.N.E.S. It is referred to as a “peer-reviewed journal” but the only peer-reviewing was to screen out true scientific work and post what he wanted his followers to believe. For the first two years, it was primarily used to promote disinformation about Dr. Wood’s work. For example, Jones recruited a patent attorney for the oil and gas industry (James Gourley) to write hit pieces on Dr. Wood, refuting “ray beams from outer space.” This convinced his readers that “Judy Woods” must be talking about “ray beams from outer space” and that “such nonsense has been refuted.” Refuting false propaganda about Dr. Wood’s work does not refute Dr. Wood’s work — yet it creates the belief in the average person that Dr. Wood’s work has been refuted.

      Steven Jones and Greg Jenkins also claimed that it would take more than five times the world’s energy to destroy the WTC towers. Does that mean their thermite came from off planet or “outer space”? LOL Steven Jones used to ridicule Dr. Wood during his talks saying that “Judy Woods (Dr. Wood) needs to make calculations to see if it is even possible to turn the buildings to dust”. But any reputable scientist knows that calculations are not a part of observing empirical evidence. What are the calculations for, to prove the buildings are still there or if the buildings are gone? Why not just look? No assumptions needed with empirical evidence.

      The bottom line is that no one has refuted anything in Dr. Wood’s book nor can they. They only refute their own false propaganda about her book, not her book. Other detractors claim that “she hasn’t identified the weapon that was used so she’s got nothing.” To the contrary. The evidence is PROOF that there exists a technology that can do what was done. It happened. That is, the fact that the buildings mostly turned to dust in mid-air shows that there exists a weapon that can turn buildings into dust in mid-air. It happened.

      The sub-title of the book, “Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11” indicates that the book contains evidence of what happened on 9/11 and it is indeed evidence that a technology exists that can do what was done. But this technology does not have to be used for evil purposes. It can be used to provide free-energy to the world much to the demise of the oil and gas industry. That is, Dr. Wood is noting that the same technology that was used for evil can also be used for good. It’s a silver lining in the dark cloud… while also trying to stimulate thought about “what are we doing here? learning new ways to kill or to live”?

      • Admin says

        Judy Wood claimed the “star wars beam weapon” was located in space on Jim Fetzer’s radio show, November 11 2006. If she later retracted this idea that doesn’t mean it wasn’t current when Jones made his observation.

        “Space beam” seems a perfectly reasonable description for a laser or maser located in space, doesn’t it? Another question might be why Wood changed her hypothesis without acknowledging she’d done so, and indeed why she and her supporters tried to pretend she had never said what she did in fact say.

        • “Judy Wood claimed the “star wars beam weapon” was located in space on Jim Fetzer’s radio show, November 11 2006.” I don’t believe you. Give me the link.

          • Curvalicious Momma says

            Admin gave you the link. Are you going to admit you were wrong?

            • Admit to what? I’m NOT wrong. I didn’t question if Dr. Wood was on Fetzer’s program. I question if she made that statement (which I still believe she didn’t). I would rather spend Summer sitting on my deck and enjoy the park* behind me than listen to Fetzer’s whining and gritty voice for 78 minutes. If you know the time stamp, please provide it and I will listen to your claim.


              • Why are people obsessed about this? I was correct. Dr. Wood did not make a definitive claim the weapon was in space on Fetzer’ program. She didn’t have all the answers then. Why was Dr. Wood expected to have them?

                Jim Fetzer: “I must say I think we’re finding out Judy, what happened on 9/11. I’m just blown away by your work. This is the most fascinating development in the history of the study of 9/11 … I’m going to make a wild guess Judy; I’m going to presume that these [directed energy] beams had to be located in Building 7?”

                Judy Wood: “Nope. I don’t think so.”

                (It’s unlikely it was in building 7 because building 7 was destroyed the same way.)

                Fetzer: “Planes?”

                Judy Wood: “No … I think it’s very likely it’s in orbit.”

                Fetzer: “Oh Really?? Oh ho ho ho ho! Oh Judy. Oh my oh my oh my oh my. This is huge … this is huge Judy.”


                “I don’t think so” is not definitive.

                “I think it’s very likely it’s in orbit.” is not definitive.

                It’s likely here or there, but could be elsewhere.

                Why obsess over this? Why is that important? What we DO know is what it CAN do.

                In the next Fetzer “interview” Dr. Wood dug her heels in and lectured Fetzer about starting with WHAT happened, before you go to HOW “it” happened… etc. she had to repeat that a half dozen times in that “interview” with Fetzer.

                There is NO relationship between Dr. Wood and Mr. Fetzer. Dr. Wood was very wise to separate herself from Fetzer. It has also been established that Dr. Wood has not voluntarily communicated with Jim Fetzer since the end of February 2008.

                Whatever Fetzer’s motives, his zig zag behavior means he is in the way. His latest gambit pushes nukes as causing the destruction of the World Trade Center and boosts proselytizers like Chuck Boldwyn (‘Buddy Hackett on speed’ according to one wag). Nukes are outright impossible because kinetic weapons of any kind contradict already known facts. That puts the nuke/kinetic diversion on a par with Steven E. Jones’ defunct thermite scam. Shuck and jive, confuse and delay, obstruct and hinder, it helps the perps. Why does Fetzer behave this way? Got me. It’s not a lack of IQ points. Op? Poor judgment? Poor scholarship? Fetzer has admitted he has not read Wood’s magnificent volume showing us what happened and he continues to display his ignorance. Inexcusable. Does his ‘big tent philosophy’ interfere with separating wheat from chaff? Is he just wrong a lot like ‘luminaries’ Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, and John Maynard Keynes?


                • Thank you for acknowledging that Wood was indeed the first person to posit the the theoretical “Star Wars beam” weapon came from space. Perhaps now you will stop falsely claiming she never made such a claim?

                  • She did not make a definitive statement. “I think it’s very likely it’s in orbit.” is not definitive.

                    Frequently Asked Questions & Answers

                    1 The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain by a free fall speed “collapse.”

                    2 They underwent mid-air pulverization (dustification) and were turned to dust before they hit the ground.

                    3 The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.

                    4 The rail lines, the tunnels and most of the rail cars had only light damage, if any.

                    5 The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Bros. Road Runner and friends. There were reports that “The Gap” was looted.

                    6 The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.

                    7 The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up.

                    8 The demolition of WTC7 was whisper quiet and the seismic signal was not significantly greater than background noise.

                    9 The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.

                    10 The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.

                    11 One file cabinet with folder dividers survived.

                    12 No toilets survived or even recognizable portions of one.

                    13 Windows of nearby buildings had circular and other odd-shaped holes in them.

                    14 In addition to the odd window damage, the marble facade was completely missing from around WFC1 and WFC2 entry, with no other apparent structural damage.

                    15 Fuzzballs, evidence that the dust continued to break down and become finer and finer.

                    16 Truckloads of dirt were hauled in and hauled out of the WTC site, a pattern that continues to this day.

                    17 Fuming of the dirt pile. Fuming decreased when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat.

                    18 Fuzzyblobs, a hazy cloud that appeared to be around material being destroyed.

                    19 The Swiss-Cheese appearance of steel beams and glass.

                    20 Evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation, as demonstrated by the near-instant rusting of affected steel.

                    21 Weird fires. The appearance of fire, but without evidence of heating.

                    22 Lack of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. No evidence of burned bodies.

                    23 Columns were curled around a vertical axis like rolled-up carpets, where overloaded buckled beams should be bent around the horizontal axis.

                    24 Office paper was densely spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often along side cars that appeared to be burning.

                    25 Vertical round holes were cut into buildings 4, 5 and 6, and into Liberty street in front of Bankers Trust, and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6, plus a cylindrical arc was cut into Bankers Trust.

                    26 All planes except top secret missions were ordered down until 10:31 a.m. (when only military flights were allowed to resume), after both towers were destroyed, and only two minutes (120 seconds) after WTC 1 had been destroyed.

                    27 Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways, during the destruction of the Twin Towers.

                    28 The order and method of destruction of each tower minimized damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings.

                    29 More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it.

                    30 Twin Tower control without damaging neighboring buildings, in fact all seriously damaged and destroyed buildings had a WTC prefix.

                    31 The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared.

                    32 For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume.

                    33 The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings.

                    34 The WTC7 rubble pile was too small for the total mass of the building and consisted of a lot of mud.

                    35 Eyewitness testimony about toasted cars, instant disappearance of people by “unexplained” waves, a plane turning into a mid-air fireball, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions.

                    36 Eyewitness testimony of Scott-pack explosions in fire trucks and fire trucks exploding that were parked near the WTC.

                    37 There were many flipped cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex near trees with full foliage.

                    38 Magnetometer readings in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the earth’s magnetic field with each of the events at the WTC on 9/11.

                    39 Hurricane Erin, located just off Long Island on 9/11/01, went virtually unreported in the days leading up to 9/11, including omission of this Hurricane on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean was shown on the map.

                    40 Sillystring, the appearance of curious cork-screw trails.

                    41 Uncanny similarities with the Hutchison Effect, where the Hutchison Effect exhibits all of the same phenomena listed above.


          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            Get EC’s 35 comrades to upvote you.

      • @Phar. Nano-thermite is the obvious candidate for a Controlled Demolition job — and that is why the Bush regime’s Official Commission (chaired by AZC dual Israeli-U$ agent Philip Zelikow — see Ian Sheehy’s post above) carefully avoided looking for it.

        You should seek help for that verbal diarhea.

    • Harry says

      You must therefore not be aware an 18 month peer reviewed scientific analysis of dust samples from 4 locations around the WTC site was already carried out by a team of scientists led by Dr Niels Harrit phd. The research paper was published in the Banthem Open Chemical Physics Journal in 2009 and it concluded large quantities of Nano Thetmite was present in the demolition of the WTC.


      • Carroll Sanders says

        Or Harley Davidson Aluminum flake paint , or Laclade paint all match the data by Niels Harriet. No definitive samples were ever found and no follow up study By Mark Basile.

        • Admin says

          You are distorting things. The Harrit (not “Harriet”) et al paper is published and it makes its case. A follow up is not required. It’s now up to those who disagree to put up their own research as a rebuttal.

          Nine years later and no one has done this yet.

    • It’s starting to dawn on me that the level of disinformation is just so enormous that it’s best not to focus at all on things that aren’t particularly relevant and just stick with what is known to be true. What the perps love is disagreement between groups. Judy Wood may well be part of the psyop: having people follow her and people follow the nanothermite and people follow whatever else is EXACTLY what they want, just like the noplaners and the planers etc and the really big divide – the believers and the truthers.

      This is what we know to be true:
      —9/11 was a psyop.
      —WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7 came down by controlled demolition – what exactly brought them down really doesn’t matter.
      —The footage of Flight 175 melting into the South tower is computer-generated imagery (CGI). Planes do not melt into steel frame buildings. That is a physical impossibility. Whether there was a real plane flying around that magically disappeared I do not know. Some suggest holograms. But it doesn’t matter whether there really was a plane in the vicinity or not. The footage that they show us of the plane crashing into the building is clearly CGI. From that simple fact we can safely infer that if there was a real plane flying around it didn’t crash into the building and have an impact on the building – they obviously just wanted people to see a plane and whatever they did to the building could all be done from inside.
      —There is no compelling evidence of 3,000 people dying. Dealing with loved ones of 3,000 dead when the evidence of controlled demolition is so very strong would be something the perpetrators would be loath to do unless they had a good reason. There is no reason presented for the perps wanting the 3,000 to die.

      • PSJ says

        What does a plane look like when it impacts a high rise building? Before we can say the footage was faked we need to look at comparable real footage, or at least a very good computer simulation. Until we do, we’re using argumentum ad populum (“everyone knows” X is true), which is NOT evidence.

        You could be correct, but without data we can’t draw conclusions.

        And there is the problem of the data that supports some form of plane impact, such as the oscillation of the towers, and the plane debris found at Ground Zero.

        Is it possible this was all faked? Sure, but show us why this is more likely (no, not why you THINK it’s more likely why, objectively, evidentially, it’s more likely).

        By the way, I agree with your first two points.

        • Lets look at this through the psyop lens.

          In this psyop what we can infer is that the perps’ agenda was to:

          —Bring down the buildings in the WTC (all the buildings were eventually destroyed and it seems not only as a result of the crashes of the twin towers and WTC-7, for example, WTC-6 was hollowed and WTC-5 was ablaze) – for what reasons I’m not sure (especially as it seems we have been fed propaganda about their reasons) but we can only infer that that is what they wanted.

          —Terrorise the population by making them believe that:
          ——19 terrorists had hijacked 4 planes to crash them into at least three iconic buildings and probably a fourth, a seeming attempt that failed due to people on the plane managing to stop the terrorists.
          ——these terrorist acts had caused the death of 3,000 people in the planes and the buildings.

          —Use this terror as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, bring in the Patriot Act, institute massive security measures, as well as, no doubt, a whole host of other things that would work to their benefit.

          All they really wanted to do for real in this operation was bring down the buildings. They didn’t give a damn about the terrorists or the planes and they didn’t want to kill the 3,000 people (or possibly only a select few). They just wanted people to be in thrall to their trauma-based mind control psychological operation.

          From a psyop lens we ask the question what did they have to do for real and what could they fake?

          —Buildings: Obviously, bringing the buildings down had to be real and they couldn’t be brought down other than by controlled demolition presumably which would be pretty hard to fake.

          —Planes: Having planes crash into buildings, however, could be faked and possibly couldn’t even happen for real. Pilots say that the low altitude meant the air pressure would be too high for the planes to go at the speeds stated (we’re assuming remote-controlled planes obviously). Also, as Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction, the far lighter planes would slam into the very heavy buildings, that is, there would be a collision, and thereby expose the fact that the planes hadn’t penetrated the buildings to cause their collapse and also expose from the wreckage that there were no passengers and no terrorists aboard. (I disagree that we need comparable footage. I think that the footage clearly breaks Newton’s Third Law of Motion. We know instinctively and from experience that in a collision between a sedan and a Mack truck it doesn’t matter which vehicle is going 200 kmh and which is stationary, the sedan will be worse off.)

          Thus, the alleged footage we’re shown of Flight 175 “melting” into the South tower:
          —is not consistent with what we expect from Newton’s Third Law of Motion
          —is perfectly consistent with CGI
          —fits perfectly with the operation of the psyop

          While there may have been wreckage, it is not convincing wreckage. There is simply nothing convincing about this alleged plane crash in any shape or form and it makes far more sense for the perps to fake it than do it for real. Then of course we have the Shanksville plane crash of which the following was said by witnesses:


          “This crash was different. There was no wreckage, no bodies, and no noise.”
          – Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller

          “I was looking for anything that said tail, wing, plane, metal. There was nothing.”
          – Photographer Scott Spangler

          “I was amazed because it did not, in any way, shape, or form, look like a plane crash.”
          – Patrick Madigan, commander of the Somerset barracks
          of the Pennsylvania State Police

          If we assume that no planes crashed then we can can see how they might on empty floors set off small bombs or suchlike that would have little impact on people in the rest of the building so they could be evacuated safely. In fact, if the plane is CGI then the rush of flame we see through the building could also be CGI and we cannot know what other footage they have pre-filmed and intercut such as the “jumpers”, for example. The “jumpers” could have been dummies and filmed on a different day. Very, very handy to perpetrate a psyop where the camera has to jump from the ground to 110 stories up.

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Thirty-five up-votes? A ‘flush mob’, perhaps.

    • @EC

      Are you seriously suggesting that the collapse of the three buildings, WTC 7 , WTC 1 & WTC 2, was NOT a series of CONTOLLED DEMOLITIONS ???

      Let’s keep this all nice and simple , eh ..
      Yes or No ? Controlled demolitions or not, simple science ! Your Binary conclusion .. ???

  5. Michael McNulty says

    Regarding 9/11 I was surprised to read just recently that the singer Donna Summer believed the lung cancer that killed her…she didn’t smoke…was from the toxic debris she breathed in that morning in the streets of Lower Manhattan.

    • @McNulty. Thanks for the info. The family spokesman did not mention which type of non-smoking lung cancer, saying that medical details are confidential. But if Donna’s cancer was really due to breathing in asbestos dust from the explosive demolition of WTC on 911 2001, then it most likely would have been Pleural Mesothelioma. This is a rare cancer, and a significant indicator of asbestos in the air; that is why I wrote to FlaxGirl it is important to have an honest epidemiological record of Pleural Mesothelioma incidence in Manhattan both before and after 911, right up to 2101.

      [Search domain http://www.asbestos.com] Pleural mesothelioma is a rare malignant cancer caused by asbestos. Almost 75 percent of cases form in the pleura, which is the soft tissue that covers the lungs.


      • vexarb, I do not mean to suggest that people are not dying agonising deaths of contaminants they were exposed to at Ground Zero. I find it hard to believe that people are not, however, that does not mean that they don’t have fake people pretending they are – these people can be used to propagandise whatever material aimed at truthers. With their psyops they generally mix fake into the real. There are fake witnesses mixed in with the real witnesses and fake whistleblowers mixed in with the real. It works a treat. I learnt this from Francis Richard Conolly’s film JFK to 9/11 Everything is a Rich Man’s Trick, where he points out the mixture of the real and fake witnesses with regard to the JFK assassination. This film was what awoke me to 9/11 and how the world is run generally. There’s an awful lot in that film that I still refer back to even though I’ve looked at so much else since. They’ve soft-censored this fantastic film – what a surprise! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Qt6a-vaNM&

      • And the piece de resistance fake witness is of course Mark Walsh who, two hours after the event, told us how he saw “the plane ream through to the other side,” knew that the buildings fell due to “structural failure”, and referred to Ground Zero, the point below the detonation of a massive bomb. Due to Newton’s Third Law of Motion that states that “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction” and because we instinctively know that in a collision between a Mack truck and a small sedan we don’t care which of the vehicles is travelling at 200km an hour or which is stationary, we’d choose to be in the Mack truck – we know that plane shown melting into the South Towers as was shown us on 9/11 has to be computer-generated imagery and they certainly do not ream through to the other side as was also shown us – the pop-in/pop-out plane.

        Strong evidence suggesting that no one died on 9/11:

        They TELL us they’re hoaxing us with witnesses such as the jolly Mark Walsh, the pop-in/pop-out plane, the 20 minute pre-announcement of WTC-7’s collapse, the terrorists popping up alive, the passport that fluttered to the ground and was said to belong to Mohammad Atta but then despite its ludicrously pristine condition was said to belong to Satam al-Suqami. They mash their hoaxery in our faces. They justify their hoaxing of us by TELLING us and if we’re too stupid to pick it up the fault’s on us and this saves them from karmic repercussions. They take this very seriously. Do not underestimate it.

        Although I knew this I still thought they killed people even though it really didn’t seem to add up because all the fake whistleblowers were outside my paradigm – I believed the fake whistleblowers. I didn’t get that, of course, the perps would know in advance that people would cotton on to the truth so just for us they devised their clever propaganda with their intimations of people wanted bumped off in the buildings and the whistleblowers. They want there to be a clear distinction between the crazy truthers who believe that the US government would kill the people in the towers and the innocent believers. They need that clear distinction.

        Even in the JFK assassination which was real they still give their clues with things like the rubbish rifle of the alleged assassin and probably other things that I can’t think of at the moment or don’t know. Power allows them to do EXACTLY as they please and rub it in our faces. But I really doubt they’d give the kinds of clues they’ve given for 9/11 if they’d killed all the people and it simply does not make sense.

  6. mikael says

    Yeah, I never have, nor will bother to read anything about Bin there or Bin that, forget it, that is just bullshit and even in the officiale FBI, BIn-whatever was ONLY to be taken in as an Surspect/vitness, do you understand, that is where its standing, the fact they killed him, dont alter shit, other then of course, an corps dont talk, it simply pays to wack people, why do you think the Joojos are doing it, it pays thats why.

    Again, this time I think we all know the tower story is something weird, things dont ad, and when they dont ad, or is incosivable with facts as free fal, I know they are just two things, either ignorant, witch is “understandable” but not acsptable, to people lying, there is no inbetweens here.
    I was “lucky”, since I worked night shift, and had some days off, and was home the day it happened, and watched it all, live, and even then they managed to f…. things up, incl BBC, but the thing this time, is Flight 92 ( do correct me if the name iis wrong, I write from my memory, whereas my wife would say, what memory, hehe, ber with me), very intresting because it was/is really, really bad played propaganda, acts slapped together to make more storys out of this wtih an airplain highjacking running simultaniously along with the “officiale” 9/11 scam.
    Remember this, now that we have become more familiary with Black Ops, or False flags, since do matters, and when it comes to this, people are scared to go outside the box.

    The so called crash site, of an entire comerisale airplain was not more than what I can make by farting against the ground and light it with an matchstick, and some, uh…. crap collected and spread out, was so riddicilously bad and that made my jaw drop, because the towers where happening along the same timeline, but the plains crash site never left my vision, I stil rememeber it.
    An rude awakening.

    And then we have the PentaGoons, it was an cruice missile not an bloody airplain.
    Remember this, the engine is usually made of and cosists by large of metals witch can sustain much higher temps than ordinary steal/aluminium whatever aloy, Titan is beyond that, forget it, and if non of their components was ever present, I know it was NOT an “comerisial jet” by any standard, that is the facts.
    And the explosion site it self, etc, it was an low flying cruice missile, and again, I have seen one my self, if you dont actually see whatever is flying, it sound like an big jet engine, its not, its just more efficient and make equally much noice compared to its relative size, do you understand me, its like an jet, except the size.
    Again, I have expirienced low flying jets right under the speed limit set over terain, wtich is just belove one mach.
    Yeah, once you hear the noice, it has already pased you, the noice comes after.
    Get it.

    The contradictions is one thing, pure lies another, fake events etc, all smeared iinto one event, the two towers.
    And nobody is that intrested in why did the USairfore standed down just that day, incl the flight so called high jacking.
    I dont belive diddly squat of their officiale version, and then we have the aftermath of this, terror event, witch have of course lead to more terror, luckily, for the wankees, witch coined their full spectrum dominance camuflaged with the scam called The war on Terror.

    Just asking.

    Have an nice day
    Do the math, 2 plains=3buildings.


  7. If only the Con-Artists of NIST were truly Architectural artists, interested in Ikebana, History & Science, then the global PTSD, (Perverted Twisted (Sodding)/Systemic Dissonance) would have been worked through by now:
    I quote:-

    “NIST responded that there was no “clear chain of custody” to prove that the four samples of dust came from the WTC site. Jones invited NIST to conduct its own studies using its own known “chain of custody” dust, but NIST did not investigate. ”

    No problem NIST ! USE YOUR own SAMPLES you firkin’ SCIENTIFIC MORONS, better said Liars !!

    No no no, reality definitely dictates that the NIST ‘chain of custody’ should be with ball & chain :-

    They are just plain LIARS that belong in Prison !

    However, Thank ‘feck’ for Ikebana Artists & Steven E. Jones of the BYU, exposing the Military Grade Explosive Agent, that was then in its’ height of testing & development , (though Thermobaric Weapons were not new), and New Hellfire Missiles followed immediately, after the testing of the substance & nano-particle mix, on the WTC Complex (by the MIC & Mossad Agents of Demonic Destruction & Demolition Jobs/ MMADDDj), with WTC 7 being their best Testing ground zero evidence; then almost straight onto War in Iraq with same Hellfire mix & bunker busting capability ..


    Thermobaric explosive effects are proven to devastate , especially within confined spaces, structures just disintegrate, due to the sudden heat & pressure waves that consume all oxygen in an expansive manner & ‘In confinement, a series of reflective shock waves are generated’ ..


    We are experts at destroying ourselves! as I proved to myself , when very young , on one alcohol infused Sunday night after the Bol d’Ors, lighting a huge fire with petrol & fuse.. I started to run & I literally flew faster than Mr. Bolt, a much discussed number of metres upwards (over 3 minimum 😉 ) and at least 15 metres in distance, landing like a sack of potatoes and all the hairs on my legs burnt off, by the scintillating experience of being within a Thermobaric explosive event .. , talk about ‘jumpy’, was subsequently rife amongst all witnesses .. (somewhat shell shocked all night long, ears still ringing from being well & truly ‘in the mix’ , d’balkydj ‘ijut’ 🙂 )

    But not a bigger idiot than the guys at NIST: who honestly speaking, should be subjected to a Thermobaric explosion , that ensures they be first incinerated , somewhat roasted , before the shock waves hit, & then being incarcerated for the rest of their days, & waterboarded until they name the person that commanded them to LIE to the Public in denial of all Science: and they should be stripped of all their scientific credentials, forever ..

    Shame on NIST ! You have destroyed all international credibility of any good people in the USA , presently, and now the whole of the rest of the world, cannot rest until this 9/11 matter is settled Scientifically , with you NIST Nazi Mofo’s behind bars , first: that we we may move on up the ladder to the Agents of Mossad and their part in all this obviously ZioNazi distraction & confusion: all to cover up the true AshkenNazi actions that were being investigated & hidden within WTC 7 >> which was the Real Target, due to the SEC investigation of ENRON: not just their pension fund manipulation , but their collusion with Monsanto & GEC to manipulate & engineer the Weather successively over many years, in order to buy up Lands & Farmers on the cheap in the ‘Dust Bowl States’ , investing subsequently in a derivative fashion , with certitude, in GMO’s &&& .. turning water into wine at Corporate Will & discretion.

    For some strange reason , Balkydj finds that there is a huge amount of cognitive dissonance, & resistance around this subject of Geo-engineering and ZioNazi Weaponised Weather strategies, in tandem with plain scientific denial from the state contracted weather guys & gals , as well as many other governmental depts. , when it is a well proven part & nano-particle today of command strategy ..

    Weather wins Wars .. be that a war with military or finance > simple

    The only War one can never win with the Weather, today
    is this huge great big Phoney ‘War on Terror’ ..

    Stop financing Terror: starting with NATO isolating the AshkenNazi Apartheid Arrogance of Israel, sanctioning Israel & get a legal grip on ‘maddog’ Murdoch’s pressTITutes & Co. , via Leveson 2.


    Oh, and once again, anybody who thinks that the 9/11 official fairy story is over, done & dusted, without any further mention of nano-particles & thermite & what was obviously controlled demolitions, I truly mean anybody & everybody in denial of this, should have their right to vote rescinded , until they have hand written and signed a letter of apology one thousand times, addressed to all children, in any school with kids will do, that also confirms that they were / are the subject of complete cognitive dissonance, in denial of all science and the fact that they were morons to think that they can get away without caring about talking shit for the rest of their lives, worse than children,
    therefore back to school for DETENTION ..

    Seems only fair 😉

    Starting with disMay ! remove her from office / rescind her right to vote, coz’ she is clearly “bonkers” and she must go back to school IMMEDIATELY, to prove her sanity and hand write said note in detention , two thousand times, in her case, for setting an extra bad example to children > logic 🙂

    In fact: All voting in every EU Nation should be suspended until we have a European wide referendum that says:

    “Do you believe that 9/11 was the result of controlled demolitions or not”
    “Yes or No” Pure & Simple ..

    If you answer “No”, back to school with disMay ,
    The question being way more important than any petty Brexit bull ..

    Prioritise investigating ‘The Phoney War on Terror’ in Europe, starting with 9/11, coz’ we have to start somewhere, somewhen, even though the Trans-Atlantic Terror International Politic TTIP , began long long before ..

    TTIP 9/11: the A B C of Zionazi Apartheid Ashkenazi Arrogance, or the A – Z , whatever way you want to describe it , Ashkenazi Zionazi forces are unequivocally guilty and behind the TTIP Politic of TERROR !

    This matter is of Primary importance: first & foremost for the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and if they the NATO bosses, cannot handle the enquiry intelligently and NATO officially doesn’t accept that controlled demolitions WERE unequivocally the case, then NATO must be immediately disbanded and European Sovereign Nations must all disconnect completely militarily from


    No more MONEY for NATO MORONS !

    D’Yankee Ashkenazi Zionazi Terror Organisation YAZTO, should stand alone,
    as mind control gamers of geopolitics & geoengineering and Europeans can get on with

    Getting REAL & dealing with the real sponsors of the War on Terror , & ending dollar hegemony ..

    Indeed , it would be fair to say that the real War on Terror begins right here , right now, starting with pinpointing NATO Head ‘Nutters’ , specifically any of whom are in denial of the controlled demolitions of
    WTC 1 + 2 + 7 !

    Starting with Jens Stoltenberg: a simple question for a simple Norwegian in a position of collective responsibility ..

    Dearest Jens,

    Do you believe WTC 7 & 1 + 2 were controlled demolitions ?

    Yes or No ! ?

    And if he answers wrongly SACK HIM immediately > Simples !

    und so waiter , step by step , any denial , must be firmly removed ..

  8. rilme says

    Lots of comment here. I have one word to add: “israel”.

    Jews, the “is”, and zionists were all over 911. NORAD was stood down. Dov Zakheim was everywhere. Cui bono?

    I have spoken.

  9. King Kong says

    Funny as th e resident trolls are trying hard to take over, Yes I call on you Flaxgirl, a typical stooge if I ever saw one.

    • Admin says

      No ad hom please. Keep to discussion of the subject.

  10. bill says

    it would seem incredible that some group which had devised such a massive,history-changing event as 9/11 would NOT have a thorough, ongoing,hugely-financed cover-up,and strategy with a range of fall-backs and limited hangouts long in place, if necessary to last decades nor would not have considered the rather paltry need to satisy live witnesses to every incident, but on the old arguments rumble seemingly without even a thorough examination of ALL THE EVIDENCE which is exactly what keeps the lid on it all….” the best way to control the Opposition is to lead it ourselves”

  11. Some people here are of their rockers. They harm non MSM news greatly with their fucking lunacy ideas, their idoitic involved conspiracies, talmudic and what not.
    Why dont you go and read your Tarot cards ? Conspiracies excist, but many of the postings here are simply insane and loony.

  12. King Kong says

    My comment was entirely about the event. It happened. Who or whom was behind it, I do not know. What I know is that it all facts added are something is improbable, it is not natural.
    The events at 9/11 in most circumstances defies scientific research, and no one has yet explained the residue from nano termite. No one. My sisters in laws (?) are quite confident in the official explanation, and will not hear anything else. And I will not trouble them, they are old and needs peace somehow.
    But facts are undeniable, and the Evil Empire stands in the middle, and has not credibly refuted anything.
    The US today is a dictatorship, cleverly disguised as a democracy (HA!) , where you can choose your brand of bought of politicians. Coool ehh?
    Do it the Baader Meinhoff way, kill politicians that that lie.

  13. wardropper says

    This sort of discussion can so easily distract from the core of the matter and have us doubting the evidence of our own eyes an ears.
    Reminds me of a quote from ‘The Exorcist’: [Father Merrin to Father Karras]
    “Especially important is the warning to avoid conversations with the demon. We may ask what is relevant but anything beyond that is dangerous. He is a liar. The demon is a liar. He will lie to confuse us. But he will also mix lies with the truth to attack us. The attack is psychological, Damien, and powerful. So don’t listen to him. Remember that – do not listen.”
    I don’t particularly mean the “do not listen” part, but we do need to consider who it is we are listening to, and what they might stand to gain by encouraging us to see things their way.
    Personally, I consider the media silence on WTC7 that very day to be ample proof that a very large narrative was being manipulated in order to confuse us. This page would seem to indicate a certain amount of success on that score too…
    It also strikes me as essential and totally logical to suspect any further so-called ‘information’ from the same media sources.
    Let’s not forget that the truth is far too appalling for any government to dare admit at this stage, although after 20 or 30 years, they might not care at all who knows it.

    • Yonatan says

      What exactly happened on the day, who was involved, who knew beforehand and did nothing, etc, etc, to a certain extent, was and is not irrelevant. The real issue is that the Deep State was ready and prepared (with the their pre-existing 750+ page USA PATRIOT Act, etc) for the ‘new Pearl Harbor’ as conceptualized by PNAC. As Karl Rove said, the Deep State will create a ‘reality’ (911 was al Qaeda), and the ordinary people can discuss and dissect it but the Deep State will move on and create a new ‘reality’ (Saddam Hussein has WMD). Rinse and repeat.

      One key factor following 911 is that the event in itself wasn’t sufficient for the US PATRIOT Act to be passed. It took the anthrax false flag against key reporters and US lawmakers opposed to its passage for the law to be rammed through. The anthrax attack has been disappeared.

      • wardropper says

        I pretty much agree with everything you say, but some of the things you mention as not relevant do actually become relevant if one looks ahead to some sort of possible mechanism for stopping future ‘Deep States’ in their infantile tracks.
        This is no ordinary carelessness we’re dealing with here.

      • @Yonatan. The anthrax hoax disappeared the day after it did its work. When the anthrax story was broadcast on the Beeb I remember saying to my wife that it should not take more than half an hour of gene sequencing to show trace where the sample came from. The deafening silence on its provenance next day confirmed that the anthrax samplse must have come from a lab in the U$A. Like the present silence on St.Theresa’s Novichok proves it came from Porton Down.

  14. King Kong says

    Postulating that there were no victims of 9/11 is rubbish and simply cruel. Postulating that no planes hit the towers is likewise rubbish. Most people who witnessed the events unfolding, myself included, know what we saw. And know what we heard been said. I know a person who was on the spot, a tourist, and I trust what she has told me (14 days after the attack), people died, many people, she saw people falling, people crushed, people waving from windows the towers on fire and then she decided to get out of there. She was due for a trip to the top of the towers, she had an American boyfriend who invited her to see his workplace. He did NOT make it. He died trapped near the top, in tower one, along with many others. Although she, at the moment of the collapse, “not close” (4 kilometers away) she told me of gossip, talking in the crowds, about “explosions” or loud repeated systematic booms.
    At the time when she told me this, it did not “connect” , I think everyone, across the globe were mildly catatonic, shell shocked, by the enormity of the act.
    I think 3 years passed, both my parents died within 11 months, and I saw the first questions raised, and then slowly my friends story, became focus.
    I am today in no doubt, that this event was in some way orchestrated, building 7 is pure fairy tale ( I am a civil Engineer also), but the in foot collapse of the 2 towers is also doubtful, the building was insulated with asbestos (Whatever else about asbestos, it is the best flame insulator ever), the in foot collapse would require an equal weakening in the mass produced steel, which is completely bollocks! Yes on a space shuttle, absolute equal strength, is certified, not on a office building.
    In my opinion, Tonkin Bay, USS Liberty, is produced again, this time in widescreen, HD, with unknowing guest hosts on major TV networks……
    Please, the Evil Empire struck again, this time time “the sacrifices are worth it”, it was “only” US citizens who paid the price. Unbelievable : Check “Operation Northwood”, GestapoGoogle it.
    Two rules of “Inter-netting” :

    1.Follow the money
    2. One coincidence : ok, two coincidences: Hmmmmnnnn, three coincidences: Fuck off!

    PS. The person present at Ground Zero is my sister.

    • No disrespect King Kong but your sister could be a disinformation agent who keeps her work very private and so, of course, could you. Now that I’ve woken up to the propaganda that is directed at the truthers what you say seems to be in that format. It reads a bit like a checklist: the money! the previous false flags! the explosions! the buildings came down by controlled demolition (I’m a civil engineer)! BUT the people really died – my sister was there. Can you say anything convincing to show that you aren’t a disinformation agent?

      • Admin says

        But then the same could be said of you, and of me, and of everyone. Maybe the buildings were never really there (did you ever see them?). Maybe the “dust” was a lie.

        Don’t you see this is the ultimate self-destruction of the Truth movement?

        People died. They are still finding pieces of human bone on the roofs of adjoining buildings.

        • “They are still finding pieces of human bone on the roofs of adjoining buildings.”

          So they say and we know that “they” lie, lie their heads off, in fact. So the fact that they say they’re still finding pieces of human bone doesn’t really mean anything at all, does it? If they had staged deaths that’s exactly what they would say, isn’t it?

          They say that the twin towers and WTC-7 came down from fire. I take it you don’t believe that so why do you assume the human bone story to be true?

          I believed that people died for 4 years after awakening to the fact of inside job so now believing that they didn’t is not a belief I rushed into. But then suddenly all the pieces came together. We know that 9/11 was an inside job and we know that they stage events pretending people died when they’re only drills and we know they ran many other drills on 9/11. They would have no reason to want those 3,000 people dead – all the relatives and other loved ones of those dead people who would recognise the Emperor’s New Clothes events of the day would start kicking up hell so there is absolutely no good reason for them to want to kill those 3,000 people. None whatsoever. Killing the 3,000 people would make absolutely no sense at all. Perhaps if they HAD to kill them to execute their staged event they may have considered it but why would they have to? Why not just stage a couple more evacuation drills?

          And then we can see the propaganda aimed at truthers to make them believe people died. The when-you-look-back-in-hindsight strangeness of the PNAC document, the strangeness of Richard Grove attending a very important meeting only to get stuck in traffic, the strangeness of April Gallop taking her baby son to her desk before taking him to the child care centre and so on.

          Here are some Y/N questions. Do you believe that:
          — it is certain that 9/11 was an inside job (regardless of outside involvement)? If not, what makes you doubt it?
          — the perpetrators had no good reason to kill the 3,000 people?
          — relatives and other loved ones of 3,000 dead people would provide a massive headache for the perpetrators?
          — they could have staged the event by avoiding killing the 3,000?
          — there is reasonable evidence of vicsims?
          — there is not particularly convincing evidence of 3,000 dead people?
          — the following could easily be part of a propaganda campaign directed at truthers to make them believe people died
          ——the PNAC document
          ——William Rodriguez, alleged janitor and “last man out” of the North tower before it fell who said he experienced explosions before the building fell but who also rescued “hundreds” and received awards for bravery
          ——Richard Grove, who, due to “traffic”, missed the crucial meeting where he was going to confront the wrongdoer in the company he was sacked from and where all his colleagues died
          ——Bob McIlvaine, whose son Bobby, died in the lobby before the building collapse. Bobby was a graduate in African-American literature but had somehow scored a job with Merrill Lynch as an assistant VP in Media Relations. He specialized in investment banking and was in regular contact with members of the financial press covering Wall Street and global finance.
          ——The Jersey Widows (they love special names) who nearly had Henry Kissinger fall off his chair when they questioned him about the Bin Laden family being a client.

          • Admin says

            So you think the perps are happy for it to be known the US govt deliberately blew up the buildings, but don’t want us to know no one died?

            Why? Surely, the reverse would be true? If no one died the perps are only guilty of deception, not the slaughter of 3,000 innocent people.

            In fact you could argue the REAL psyop is the one that has convinced you no one died, thereby absolving Cheney etc of the crime of mass murder.

            After all, why do the people who claim things like “no planes” and “no one died” get far less vitriol from the MSM than those producing hard evidence of controlled demolition? Did any of this gang ever lose their job or get vilified in the media?

            Maybe because the “no one died” gang are the real disinfo people?

            That’s the problem with these kinds of hypotheses, they are unfalsifiable and therefore unending in their evolution.

            • Mark Gobell says

              Admin : After all, why do the people who claim things like “no planes” and “no one died” get far less vitriol from the MSM than those producing hard evidence of controlled demolition? Did any of this gang ever lose their job or get vilified in the media?


              That assertion is very difficult to quantify, let alone prove …

              Simon Shack’s work with September Clues and 9/11 Vicsims predates the current “nobody died” paradigm, which is a relatively recent phenomenon, frequently occurring since the Sandy Hook farce.

              There is abundant evidence that some “characters” in some scripts are invented, or at least are false representations of real people, who may already be deceased before the alleged crime, or in some cases, like Sandy Hook, are real people who are still alive.

              The widepsread repetition of the “nobody died” mantra, I suspect might be part of Cass Sunstein’s Cognitive Infiltration strategy.

              The effect of which is largely do discourage further research, because it’s all fake, so why bother ?

              We are now in the era of “fake news” so why should the scripts & narratives be any different ?

              To be clear and to avoid any further OffG vitriol, I do not endorse “nobody died” in the 9/11 crime because I have not sufficently researched the reported circa 3000 victims.


              Re : “No planers” getting “far less vitriol”, apparently …

              The Spectator : Meet the No Planers

              Screw Loose Change : Meet the No-Planers

              International Skeptcis ( sic ) : 9/11 No Planers who claim no planes struck the WTC, and think all the video is fake

              etc etc

              The reader may or may not be aware that the “9/11 no planes” thesis caused the greatest amount of “vitriol” within the 9/11 truth movement.

              Apart from the Holocaust taboo, I can recall no greater controversy in 9/11 conspiracy circles.

              The legacy media in print and Mike Rudin’s BiBiC Conspiracy series were also all over the issue.

              To me, it is very odd that most folk know that Hollywood productions are, in many cases, not to be taken literally, but when they have “seen something with their own eyes” on the “TV News”, it is real and anyone claiming anything other than that becomes a fruitloop, nutjob …

              It’s like the Piltdown Man hoax never even happened …


            • Ian Sheehy says

              Please everyone, just watch a Chris Bollyn Q&A and all is settled. He spent 12 yrs looking into 9/11, helped to find the evidence of thermite along with Dr Stephen Jones. His Phd was on Israel/Palestine and he knew the history of Zionist terrorism to gain their objectives. Add the Yinon Plan and involvement of scores of Zionists in the cover up and it’s clear that it was a US Zionist/Israeli Zionist construct and event. I’ll let Chris Bollyn add the many names and events/proof which complete the case.

              • Ian Sheehy says

                Once you add Ronald Lauder to Silverstein (chats to Netanyahu for yrs)plus Chertoff, Zelikow, the neo cons of Wolfowitz, Dov Zakheim, Feith etc. To deny Zionism control of 9/11 is ridiculous. Plus the Israeli defence minister, Shaul Mofaz, being the 1 non US member of the Neo con group in Jan 2002 when they were deciding on US foreign policy. Who dealt with the families looking for 9/11 truth? It was Israeli agents Alvin K Hellerstein originally then Kenneth Feinberg and Sheila Birnbaum dealt with those holding out for the truth.

                • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                  As Ariel Sharon allegedly shouted at Shimon Peres during an argument-‘We, the Jewish people, control America’. The latest evidence, the Harpie Haley screeching in Israel’s defence as the US exits the UN Human Rights body, thereby raising its moral credibility mightily. It is actually becoming tragi-comical under the reign of Trump.

            • wardropper says

              But then, even if 3,000 people were not slaughtered, we still have no right to forget the escalation in Iraq following 911, which has led to a far greater number of people (not Americans, of course) being slaughtered there…
              While Libya, Syria and others on the list follow.
              At any rate, the 3,000 is either verifiable or it is not.
              I live too far away from the US to be able to talk to anybody who was near, or involved in, the actual event, but there are plenty of people who lived right next door. Those are the people we should be asking. Who knows, perhaps a large number of them will turn out to be literate and articulate…?
              Go for it, guys.

              • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                Get with the program-no-one was killed in Iraq! It’s all for show, I tell you!

            • So you think the perps are happy for it to be known the US govt deliberately blew up the buildings, but don’t want us to know no one died?

              Why? Surely, the reverse would be true? If no one died the perps are only guilty of deception, not the slaughter of 3,000 innocent people.

              There is logic in your question but there is also another logic. The logic is that the force for the truth of controlled demolition is very strong. A&E9/11Truth are doing an excellent job on that (although I think their organisation must be infiltrated) so that is a tide they cannot stop and perhaps they predicted that that truth would out. So to keep the whole thing alive they have to try to keep people believing that people died. If that leaks out beyond the truthers then they’re screwed. If people think no one died perhaps they’re much more likely to think it was an inside job but as long as it is believed that people died they simply won’t believe that it could possibly have been their own government who was responsible. Does that make sense?

              Bearing in mind that 9/11 was a psyop, a trauma-based mind control psychological operation, you don’t kill people unless you have to. It makes absolutely no sense for the perps to have killed the 3,000 people and I don’t see why they would have had to for the purposes of their operation. They could simply have faked it with evacuation drills as they faked everything else. There is evidence of vicsims, nothing convincing of 3,000 dead people and you can see how they targeted truthers with propaganda to make them believe that, indeed, the perps had reasons to target people in the buildings. As well, they have disinformation agents pushing people dying – people who admit to controlled demolition but also push that people died.

              The logic screams no dead people and the evidence is certainly not convincing that there were dead people.

              • And just to add – there seems to be a great taboo about suggesting that someone didn’t die once it’s suggested they did. People find it offensive. The power elite rely heavily on this taboo. If you say that someone didn’t die when someone says they did and, in fact, the person did die, you simply got it wrong. In the quest for truth we should not allow that taboo to get in our way. The alternative is just as offensive.

                • PSJ says

                  Just as a gesture toward the possibility you MIGHT be wrong and MAY therefore be insulting people whose loved ones really died, how about we all agree to avoid the ugly and rather childish word “vicsims”?

                  • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                    When I first saw the ‘no victims’ garbage concerning the Sandy Hook tragedy, I wondered if it was just lunatic paranoiacs on the loose. However I now tend to think it is a psy-ops ‘cognitive infiltration’ scheme to discredit all those who question the ‘Official Versions’ of all the various false-flags. Next we’ll hear that KAL007 was a hologram that fooled the Rooskies, the USS Liberty was never attacked AT ALL, and Kim Jung-un is really Schlomo McTavish from Hoboken.

                  • As far as I know, there are two methods they employ to fake deaths:
                    —they make people up (Sandy Hook perpetrator Adam Lanza, for example)
                    —they say people died who didn’t (Sandy Hook children, for example)

                    “Vicsim” is the term they use for the first kind (although, funnily enough, it wouldn’t apply properly to Adam Lanza because he was the alleged perp not a victim). What do you recommend I use for “vicsim” to indicate a “made-up person” that does not give offence? On 9/11 I believe the majority would have been the made-up type of death with a few faked ones but I haven’t looked at it closely enough

                    For those who think Sandy Hook was real I have offered $5,000 to anyone who can come up with 10 points favouring “real” over “staged” event and I have done my own exercise. One person who desperately believes “real” has attempted to refute my 10 points (which, I point out, offers no reward) but he hasn’t, despite lengthy exchanges, managed to come up with a single point that favours “real” for Sandy Hook. The fact is that the power elite stage their events so that we cannot claim they don’t, in fact, give us signs that they are staged. Sandy Hook is an excellent example with all the smiling parents, the triage tarps being walked over with no victims, the obviously photoshopped pictures, the fund-raising sites being set up before the event and on and on. To believe Sandy Hook you must accept that there isn’t one thing about it that clearly distinguishes it as real from staged, moreover, to believe it you must accept massive difference in expectations from what you would expect when 26 people are massacred at a school.

                    When I heard about Sandy Hook in 2012 I knew nothing of psyops and false flags. Nothing at all. Interestingly, although I didn’t pay much attention to it and simply thought of it as a terrible tragedy, two things struck me although I didn’t make anything of them at the time:
                    —Adam Lanza’s face looked very strange – which now makes sense as it is claimed he wasn’t a real person and he doesn’t actually look real
                    —I read that police went around to his house on a very good lead that he was keeping guns and yet they didn’t go in and search and there was no good reason given for why they didn’t conduct a search. In hindsight I realise this is just one of their stories they tell us that doesn’t add up.

                • 9/11 was a movie. We don’t know what was real and what wasn’t. They interspliced fake footage with real footage. However, I don’t think they claimed people died in the dust but only in the collapses of the towers and the bombings. Is there any convincing evidence of people dying in those situations?

                  • PSJ says

                    9/11 was only a movie for those of us lucky enough to be many miles away and watching on TV. For those who were there it was real life, and death.

                    Have you talked to any of the people who lived through that day? Have you interviewed them? Analyzed their testimony? Found reasons to dismiss it? Have you talked to any of the few remaining firefighters still alive? Have you sat with a guy struggling to breathe even with the help of pure oxygen, trying to get enough breath in his lungs to tell you about what he saw that day, the anger he feels?

                    Did you speak to Janette McKinlay, or any of the people like her? Did you ask Bob McIlvaine if his son REALLY died?

                    I feel as if this event is, indeed, a movie to you, or a video game maybe. An intellectual exercise anyway, much divorced from reality.

                    I strongly suggest you ground yourself and reach out to those who were involved (or who claim they were, in your parlance!). See how you feel after talking to a man who says he lost his son that day and still mourns him, or even holding a parcel of that dust in your hand after you have proved to yourself it has people in it.

                    9/11 wasn’t a movie, flaxgirl, and those who say it was are perhaps choosing a way of dealing that denies truth.

                    • I’m not an investigator, PSJ, I’m an analyst. The interesting thing about psyops is that the truth is right there before your eyes, they just use psychology to misdirect you so that you don’t see it properly. Once you work it out that’s it. Can you not see that the logic of the operation simply does not include killing the 3,000 people? It’s a psyop. They want you to believe a whole lot of things and they make you believe those things generally without having to kill people. They could have staged the deaths of 3,000 people, couldn’t they? So that is, of course, what they would have done. Killing 3,000 of your own citizens like that just doesn’t fit. Sure, they’ll kill thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands in the Middle East and send lots of soldiers off to war on false pretences but they just wouldn’t kill the people in the buildings. It doesn’t make sense.

                • @rilme. Thanks for the Lancet link. “According to two studies published Thursday in the British journal Lancet, these rescue workers continue to struggle with respiratory illness, etc …”.


                  So the criminals in the Bush / Cheney regime, who are undoubtedly behind 911, not only killed 3,000 people directly by explosive demolition but also continue to kill and maim people indirectly through Chemical Pollution of Manhattan. Janette’s cancer may well be one among the Lancet’s report of 30% increase in cancer rate — possibly from exposure to thermite-pulverised fluorescent bulbs (mercury, beryllium), and heavy metals (lead, copper) as well as afore-mentioned asbestos.

                  Tenth Anniversary of 9/11 Brings Threat Of Mesothelioma, Awareness of Asbestos Exposure


                    • @Mark Gobell. Thanks for the Link. They report Tritium well below radiation threshold, it could have come from smashed Luminous Watches and the like.

                    • Mark Gobell says

                      vexarb : it could have come from smashed Luminous Watches and the like …

                      and the “aircraft” EXIT signs and weapon night sights from the WTC armoury too, apparently …

                      It was determined that 3 million gallons of water were hosed on site in the fire-fighting efforts between 9/11 and 9/21 (the day of the tritium measurement …

                      all those luminous watches eh vexarb …


            • I will answer your question again a little differently.

              Why? Surely, the reverse would be true? If no one died the perps are only guilty of deception, not the slaughter of 3,000 innocent people.
              In fact you could argue the REAL psyop is the one that has convinced you no one died, thereby absolving Cheney etc of the crime of mass murder.

              What you’re basing your reasoning on is that the perps would be at some point OK for their crimes to go to court and be charged with deception. No, no, no, no, no. They don’t want the crime to go to court EVER, they want to keep it away from court.

              I hypothesize that how they can do that best is to keep two distinct groups:
              —the truthers (with certain factions – the no planers/planers and perhaps a couple of other divisions)
              —the believers

              They are all about different groups disagreeing with each other – we know that they ensured there would be massive disagreement over whether planes crashed into the buildings or not. Being in disagreement always weakens groups.

              The believers won’t believe the truthers for a number of reasons but probably a major one is that they baulk at the US government killing their own people in cold blood in the buildings. In fact, they’re right to baulk. I very much doubt the US govt would do that – not because they’re good guys, of course – but just because it wouldn’t be part of their modus operandi. I always had a problem with it but I simply thought they must have because I knew the buildings came down by controlled demolition and there was evidence of people dying from people such as Bob McIlvaine and the Jersey Widows and it also seemed reasonable because we’ve been fed propaganda that people in the buildings were targeted.

              Please simply answer me these five questions, Admin.

              Can you think of a reason they would want to kill the 3,000 people in the buildings?
              Wouldn’t it be a lot easier to get people to participate in the event knowing that they weren’t killing the people?
              Do you think that it would be highly problematic to deal with the loved ones of the dead?
              Do you think that they could have avoided killing people by staging building evacuations and ensuring that any damage did not affect those in the buildings?
              Isn’t the most logical conclusion, without strong evidence of dead people, that they didn’t kill the 3,000?

          • PSJ says

            Oh, Flaxgirl, you seem like a very sincere person and you take the trouble to think about all this, which is so commendable, but do please see how perilous it is to embark on this particular speculation. As I said above, the consideration of if you’re right must also be weighed against the ethical question of what if you’re wrong.

            For that reason alone don’t you think any question of whether or not people died should be approached with maximum respect and allowance for error? And that such words as “vicsims” should be put aside, because if by any chance wrongly applied, then a small crime has been committed against decency.

            I can’t answer to Sandy Hook. I know nothing about the case and I can recognize an absence of data, but for 9/11?

            Other people beside the government have examined that dust. The USGS did, NIST did, and private people have.

            There’s human remains in the dust, flaxgirl. In the fine particulate as well as in the coarser stuff. That’s hard evidence people were blown up in the building. Not just blown up, ripped apart at an almost cellular level, atomized if you like.

            Here’s what you need to do, and anyone needs to do before being justified in saying no one died in those buildings.

            Read the reports on the dust by the USGS, NIST, and by the private citizen who have examined the dust and written up their results, I’m sure you know who they are.
            Find an alternative non-human source for their claimed findings of human tissue, bone fragments etc.
            Write up your alternative explanation and publish it. Maybe here at OffGuardian, or in one of the 9/11 scientific outlets.

            The human remains in the dust is the most basic, fundamental evidence that people died on 9/11. Deal with that before presuming to go any further or to use offensive words such as “vicsims.”

            Isn’t that minimum diligence required here? I think so.

            • There may well have been human fragments in the dust – added later. Do you have any links you can provide to this alleged evidence?

              • PSJ says

                Well, here is one “mainstream” study.


                But I think it’s important you do that research yourself. You are making the assertion no one died. That puts the onus on you to provide the data to support the assertion.

                Its important we adhere to scientific and analytic methods, no?

                If you go to the Journal of 911 Studies or to the articles on AE911Truth you’ll find details of other dust analyses.

                There are human remains in the dust, gathered from different locations, at different times by different people.

                There were human remains in the dust gathered by Janette McKinlay! Do you suggest she or someone else added those to the sample after the fact?

                That’s becoming absurd, flaxgirl, as I am sure you appreciate.

                • I’m afraid, PSJ, that 9/11 was a massive psyop so where evidence looks as if it could easily be fabricated we have to be extremely circumspect. The NIST reports were extremely fraudulent so why should we believe the one you link to? And I’m afraid there’s evidence that Janette McKinlay is part of the psyop. As Mark pointed out in his comment her name is spelt differently in various places. Spelling names differently here and there is a classic hallmark of psyops. I noticed actually with Pasquale Buzzelli’s name, the guy who “surfed” down 15 floors of the North Tower, that within the article they spelt his surname once with only one el. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2198838/9-11-Survivors-Pasquale-Buzzelli-survived-surfing-wave-falling-debris-speaks-miracle.html

                  It wasn’t me who made the first assertion. It was the media. They told us that 3,000 people died. Where’s the evidence? If the best you can do is a link to a document that claims there was an amount of human remains in dust it’s hardly convincing is it?

                  My claim is that there is absolutely no logic in the perps killing the 3,000 people, there is evidence of propaganda specifically aimed at truthers to persuade them that people died, there is no compelling evidence of the 3,000 deaths and some quite compelling evidence of simulated victims.

                  • Admin says

                    With respect, flax, this is the unfalsifiable hypothesis again. There is physical evidence that has been produced to show human remains in the dust. Of course it COULD be faked, but you need to show evidence it is, or might be, before making that claim. If we are allowed to simply say “that could be faked” as a reason for dismissing evidence we can effectively use that argument to dismiss any evidence about anything, can’t we?

                    • So what you’re saying is that 3,000 people could have been killed and the best that be come up with is unfalsiable evidence? That’s OK with you? Do you not think that only unfalsifiable evidence is evidence in itself?

                    • It’s not me that has to come up with proof, it’s those claiming and believing that 3,000 died. Are you telling me that because the media has told us that 3,000 died it must be true and that it’s up to those who don’t believe it to provide proof that people didn’t die? Why do you take the media story as the default when we know that so many other things that they told us about 9/11 is completely false? Why is it up to others to prove it this alleged fact wrong when there are so many good reasons to suspect its falsity the major one being that it would be such an easy thing to fake and we are talking about a psyop here. Where in the agenda of this psyop would be written, “Let’s kill 3,000 people in the buildings because …????” Surely you want evidence for what you believe and if the best evidence is unfalsifiable are you going to believe it when you know that so much else told by the media about 9/11 was lies?

                      I can easily do an Occam’s Razor exercise favouring the hypothesis that no one died but I’m just curious to see what evidence people who so strongly believe the 3,000-died story can come up with.

                    • Admin says

                      Are you saying

                      1.NO ONE was blown up inside those buildings


                      2.LESS THAN 3,000 people were blown up inside those buildings?

                      It’s a very crucial difference, so let’s clear that up first.

                    • Admin, I can only infer that the fact that you ask me whether I think no deaths or less than 3,000 means I haven’t made my argument clear. I’ll try again.

                      9/11 was a massive psyop

                      In a psyop they get you to believe certain things by made-up story and fakery of terrorists with boxcutters “crashing” planes into buildings and buildings crashing to the ground due to the faked plane crashes.

                      Part of the psyop is also that you believe that those nasty terrorists managed to kill 3,000 people with their terrible plane crashes.


                      The logic of a psyop is that you fake everything and you only kill people if you want to or if necessary.

                      So the questions are, “Did they want to kill the 3,000 people or, if they didn’t, was it necessary?”

                      The answer to both those questions is a resounding no. We have no reason to believe that they would want all the 3,000 people to die and they fake deaths for morning, lunch and dinner.

                      However, they want you to believe that the people died. This is most important, regardless of whether you’re an anticipated truther who recognises controlled demolition or whether you’re a continuing believer in the whole story. So for the anticipated truthers they have to ensure that they won’t start to suspect that no one died by instituting a propaganda campaign that includes disinformation indicating that the perps wanted people dead in the buildings, fake whistleblowers and angry loved ones of victims.

                      Psyop logic dictates no deaths (or just a few of selected people they wanted rid of)

                      Then we have evidence to suggest no deaths:
                      —obviously fake witnesses, eg, Mark Walsh, who seem rather jolly after such a terrible event
                      —only unfalsifiable evidence of deaths, eg, human bones in dust
                      —fake whistleblowers (William Rodriguez, April Gallop just to name a couple) and fake angry loved ones of victims (Bob McIlvaine, Jersey Widows) – I haven’t looked at these people closely at the moment although I think a very cursory look at William Rodriguez would reveal him clearly to be a fake semi-whistleblower (he heard explosions before the North tower came down, however, he also won awards for bravery and I believe there’s quite a few problems in his story).

                      So, admin, it seems to me that all you have as evidence for 3,000 deaths on 9/11 is unfalsifiable evidence, the type of evidence you have so little time for, and you have zero reasons to offer for 3,000 real deaths to be what the perps wanted to happen.

              • Evidence Checker says

                Flax, I believe you are being addressed by Prof Steven Jones himself. PSJ can confirm or deny it, but his previous comments on cold fusion and his prose style make it look likely to me.

                What an honour for OffG.

                But if it is he, don’t hold your breath waiting for a straight answer to a straight question!

                • Admin says

                  If PSJ, whoever he/she may be, wanted his/her identity known he/she would have made it public. Maybe focus on the issues here and not the identities of who may be speaking or their perceived failings

                  • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                    Does that mean that I cannot call the BigB(oppa) ‘Brenda’, to get on friendly terms?

                • moriartys left sock says

                  If you’re correct and the renowned Steven Jones (discoverer of thermite in the WTC dust, dismissed from his teaching post at BYU for saying he believed the towers were brought down by controlled demolition) is commenting here I for one appreciate his input. And if he chooses not to “out” himself I believe that’s more than understandable considering the vicious attacks he’s undergone over the last ten or more years.

                  If PSJ is indeed he or someone else makes no difference though. It’s what he says that counts, not who he is.

                  So, what’s your point EC?

              • @FlaxGirl. Sorry, I meant to give you 1 downvote but pressed the UP button and could not erase it. So, to balance the score, I gave you 10 downvotes for your many posts above, which show nothing but a subconscious desire to exercise excessive cruelty on a dead horse. (I presume that, by writing ‘I am an analyst’ you mean a psychiatrist).

                If Admin can correct my mistake, only 1 downvote for Flax because normally she is a good Girl, she is.

                NOTE FROM ADMIN: we can’t alter the number of up or down votes, unfortunately

                • When I say analyst I mean I use the hard work of others’ research and put it together in ways that can make better sense of it. There’s people calling others “disinfo agents”, there’s the massive work on the vicsims, there’s the massive work on the buildings and the planes. Then it all hits me that, of course, the perps would know that people would catch on to the buildings and the planes and that they would have propaganda developed just for us.

                  • Dear Flax, I admired your news analysis up till this point — but there comes a time when paper alone proves counter productive. There is more than enough paper in this case.

                    “A moderate house of cards the greatest wit, / Though he can start it, cannot finish it”. — Goethe, Faust, trans. Louis McNeice

                    It is now time for the 911 case to be moved to trial, before an honest court in the real world. If the Western World cannot provide such an honest court (Nurenberg style?) to track down the criminals in the Bush regime together with their international co-conspirators, then the Western World is in deep trouble.

                    • Mark Gobell says

                      veaxarb : It is now time for the 911 case to be moved to trial, before an honest court in the real world. If the Western World cannot provide such an honest court (Nurenberg style?) to track down the criminals in the Bush regime together with their international co-conspirators, then the Western World is in deep trouble.

                      The non-Zionic / Masonic world is indeed in grave trouble.

                      The 911 trial idea is a good idea, although the “Nuremberg Process” were not “trials” as we know them, but International Military Tribunals.

                      If the 911 Military Tribunals followed the Nuremberg Military Tribunals model, we could invent new laws to apply to those 911 crimes, that were not laws when the crimes were committed …

                      We could also constitute the 911 IMT like the Nuremberg IMT and apply the “Nuremberg principle” where “the normal rules of evidence do not apply” …

                      We could also get a few notables to sign a few affidavits and then apply the “Nuremberg judicial principle” and declare whatever crime we choose as being self evident, because it happened … because we said it did …

                      Proposing the “Nurembegr Process” as a model for a proper judicial process is just laughable nonsense.

                      But, since we have precedent, then I second your proposal …


      • Frankly Speaking says

        Yeh, we know, the Earth is flat too.

        911 certainly happened, there is NO doubt, at least in any healthy brain. The genuine questions are, who did it, why, and how exactly.

      • King Kong says

        Please go and FO. I know what my sister saw and the trauma she went through following it. Your postulations about her being a foreign agent are so insane I would do you bodily harm if I met you. I n fact it makes me angry.
        You are a conspiracy nut, that does nothi g to resolve this case (or any other) your comments are general trope idiotic, lunatic and in all deference of facts.
        I have pictures of this person who died, I still at x-mas speak with his parents. They lost a son and their one link is me and my sister.
        Go and die under a bridge.
        I am angry.

    • Mark Gobell says

      King Kong : Check “Operation Northwood”, Gestapo Google it.

      There is good evidence that the just-in-time release of the “Operation Northwoods document” on 30 April 2001, is also part of the planned ruse to provide “evidence” for the slogan, “9/11 was an inside job”, itself part of the psyop to blame it all on Bushco …

      The “Operation Northwoods document” was first presented to the world by James Bamford in his book Body of Secrets and the document leads directly to Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA as it’s source …

      The “Northwooods provenance” is covered by the French researcher, Laurent Guyénot’s in his most recent book, From Yahweh to Zion: Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land…Clash of Civilizations.

      Laurent Guyénot’s 3 part article : La double imposture du 11 Septembre / The double imposture of September 11 is infromative :

      Laurent Guyénot : Part 1 : https://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/La-double-imposture-du-11-Septembre-29074.html

      Laurent Guyénot : Part 2 : https://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/La-double-imposture-du-11-Septembre-29162.html

      Laurent Guyénot : Part 3 : https://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/La-double-imposture-du-11-Septembre-29204.html

      Re : Northwooods : Extract from google translation of Part 3

      The famous series of films Loose Change (2005) will contribute even more to direct the protest movement towards the hypothesis of drones stolen from the AA11 and UA175 airliners, and at the same time on the track of the American military-industrial complex. One of the most effective arguments of the three young Jews who produced this film (Dylan Avery, Corey Rowe, and Jason Bermas) parallels Operation Northwoods early in the film. This is a false-flag operation to fabricate a casus belli lying against Cuba. General Lyman Lemnitzer, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , introduced him in 1962 to Kennedy Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who rejected him. The project included a wave of terrorist acts falsely attributed to Cuba and the explosion over Cuban waters of a charter plane supposed to carry American students on vacation. The explosion was preceded by radio distress messages indicating an attack by a Cuban fighter. The actual passengers would have been secretly transferred to another plane, but a national funeral would be arranged for them. Operation Northwoods was revealed to the public by James Bamford in May 2001, in his book Body of Secrets [ 17 ]. It suffices to prove that in 1962 already, the US military apparatus was capable of turpitude similar to 9/11, at least in theory.

      There is, however, reason to wonder about the astonishing coincidence of the revelation of the Northwoods project by James Bamford four months before 9/11, and the advertisement it received immediately on ABC News. For his book Body of Secrets , James Bamford has benefited, says his publisher, from ” unprecedented access to Crypto City [NSA HQ] , senior NSA officers, and thousands of NSA documents [ 18].], All thanks to Michael Hayden, director of the NSA from 1999 to 2005. In other words, it was Hayden who provided Bamford with his sources, including, one can assume, the Northwoods memorandum. We do not know where he found it since this memo is supposed to be the copy found in Lemnitzer’s personal papers. Who is Michael Hayden? Today, he co-directs the Chertoff Group, the security consulting firm of former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff (son of a rabbi and a Mossad pioneer) [ 19 ]. Moreover, Hayden, who in 2001 is generous with Bamford in classified documents, is in 2013 a strong supporter of the imprisonment of journalists who leak documents “secret defense”.

      One must therefore reasonably suspect that advertising around Northwoods was calculated to pre-condition the protest movement on September 11th to the Inside Job thesis involving the Pentagon. Some even suspect that the document is a fake. [ 20 ] After all, Robert McNamara, to whom it was intended, said not to have ” absolutely no memory [ 21 ].” If it is listed on the website of the National Security Archive Project of George Washington University [ 22 ], it is only, it seems, because Bamford or Hayden provided them with a copy. I personally believe that this Northwoods operation project, now universally known in the 9/11 Truth movement, never existed. Making false secret archives is an easy practice and certainly more common than is believed in the information war; it is relatively low risk, because who will believe the one who will deny the authenticity of the leaked document? It should be noted that Bermas and Avery, who are so big of an operation that, in any case, has never been put into practice, do not breathe a word about the attack on the USS Liberty , which had place, and treat any person evoking the Israeli track as anti-Semitic.

      To summarize, if you are credulous, you believe that airliners have built into the Twin Towers, and you are accusing Al Qaeda. If you are skeptical, you look closely at these planes (with In Plane Site ), and you see military planes: you accuse the US government and you shout Inside Job . In both cases, you got fooled. The truth is elsewhere, beneath these two false banners. Discovering it takes you into the unfathomable mysteries of mind manipulation, and you are not sure of coming back from it.


      Laurent Guyénot was on Kevin Barrett’s radio show recently discussing his book, 9/11 and Northwoods.



      MP3 : Northwooods discussion begins at 13:13



      The “Operation Northwooods document” is here :

      Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962

      In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”

      Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba [includes cover memoranda], March 13, 1962, TOP SECRET, 15 pp.



      I was taken in by the Operation Northwoods psyop too, imo, most of the 9/11 truth movement was too.

      I may not be recalling this accurately and cannnot find a reference atm, but, IIRC, in response to the 9/11 truther claims, a UK journalist went to the US archives to check on the Northwooods document. He reported that it was indeed “true”. I thought it was Duncan Campbell ?


      “This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. ”

      The Nazi’s appointed Joseph Goebbels as Reich Minister for Propaganda on 13 March 1933

      13 March 1933 is the same day that the “Anne Frank” narrative begins …


      • Admin says

        So, the Operation Northwoods stuff was released in order to provide people with the ammunition to show 9/11 was an inside job, as part of a grand scheme to fool everyone into believing it wasn’t an inside job?

        Can’t we do better than this, people?

        • Mark Gobell says

          The mantra : “9/11 was an inside job” is described by the late Victor Thorn as “quite possibly the greatest example of Israeli propaganda ever devised” …

          I agree.

          The “Bush did it ” and “Inside job” mantras of Michael Moore et al, precludes “external job” does it not ?

          “Inside job” infers that the 9/11 crime was perpetrated by the US government under it’s direct control of it’s own agencies.

          Most folk, even a 9/11 ignoramus can understand that message.

          There is nothing complicated or difficult to understand about this scenario, imo …

          I suppose it’s acceptance depends upon one’s own position on the “inside job” construct.

          Why do “we need to do better” Admin ?

          Would the reason be so that your own understanding of the 9/11 crime, remains in tact and unchallenged ?


          • Admin says

            Mark – it was a polite way of suggesting your need to peel the “conspiracy onion” is somewhat in advance of your need to be rational.

            So, you are now claiming 9/11 WASN’T an inside job, and doing so in the name of being a Truther?

            How is it any more plausible Mossad did this without help from the US establishment than it is al Qaeda did the same?

            Great example of Trutherism consuming itself.

            If you’re not deliberately trying to discredit everything from alternative history to climate scepticism, you should probably reconsider the effect you’re having by making the kind of pronouncements you make here. We do need to be politically aware do we not?

            • Mark Gobell says

              I note that you have not answered my question Admin and now you are expecting me to answer yours. Not the best way to have a discussion …

              MG : Why do “we need to do better” Admin ?

              MG : Would the reason be so that your own understanding of the 9/11 crime, remains in tact and unchallenged ?

              If I have understood your rather cryptic “suggestion” in the light of your subsequent “clarification”, you are suggesting that the negation of the contrived mantra : “9/11 was an insde job” is an irrational proposal ?

              Admin “So, you are now claiming 9/11 WASN’T an inside job, and doing so in the name of being a Truther?”

              What do you mean by “inside job” ?

              Admin : “How is it any more plausible Mossad did this without help from the US establishment than it is al Qaeda did the same?”

              So now “inside job” becomes “help from the US establishment” ?

              Before we go any further, I think you really do need to define what you may mean by “inside job” …

              I have got one of the tee shirts with “9/11 was an inside job” blazened on the front from years ago, when, like many other “sheep” in the “9/11 truth movement”, I was convinced that the US Gov attacked the US.

              My current position has shifted from my initial / earlier position(s), as a result of being open to new information …

              We were all duped by the 9/11 crime Admin, including you by the sounds of it …

              The idea that the perps would not have considered the “reaction” to their crime and therefore would not have planned for it’s aftermath, ownership / leadership of the “9/11 truth movement” etc., is, imo, the only irrational proposal here …


              • Admin says

                So now “inside job” becomes “help from the US establishment” ?

                Yes. What else does it mean?

                The idea that the perps would not have considered the “reaction” to their crime and therefore would not have planned for it’s aftermath, ownership / leadership of the “9/11 truth movement” etc., is, imo, the only irrational proposal here

                Agreed, in fact we are running a short series on that very issue later this year. But the idea you misdirect a movement by pointing it in the right direction makes little sense.

                • Mark Gobell says

                  “But the idea you misdirect a movement by pointing it in the right direction makes little sense.”

                  “The right direction” presumably, since you do not define it, being your own understanding of the 9/11 crime … vis the “Inside job” slogan …

                  Therefore, because you are, wedded to an idea, any other proposal becomes irrational …

                  Not circular logic at all …


            • Mark Gobell says

              What does this mean ?

              “If you’re not deliberately trying to discredit everything from alternative history to climate scepticism, you should probably reconsider the effect you’re having by making the kind of pronouncements you make here. We do need to be politically aware do we not?”

              Also, since you mention “Al Qeada”, do you have any evidence that such an organisation ever existed ?


              • Admin says

                For heaven’s sake, Mark. I don’t have time to laboriously explain everything I say to you multiple times. Your theories are counter-rational and unsourced. That’s a problem for us here. However you’e free to keep posting them.

                Of course al Qaeda exists, it’s a database of US assets in the ME.

                • Mark Gobell says

                  For heavens sake Admin, I don’t have time to laboriously try to understand everything you post, even though I have asked you to explain yourself …

                  Your theory about the US government attacking it’s own people is counter-rational and unsourced.

                  That’s not a problem for me as you are free to think whatever you like.

                  What is a problem for me, is that I do not understand your posts. So I ask for clarificaiton and now you say you are too busy …

                  Not the best way to have a discussion.

                  If you are relying on the alleged “Northwooods document” as “antecedent evidence” for the “inside job” assertion, then, as my reply to King Kong illustrates, there is much to doubt about it’s provenance…

                  Re: “Of course al Qaeda exists, it’s a database of US assets in the ME.”

                  So, Princess Tony’s former Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook magically finds his way into the Graun, the day after the London 777 bombings, to deliver some crucially timed “truth” by telling us that :

                  The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means

                  “Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally “the database”, was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden’s organisation would turn its attention to the west. ”

                  And that’s a wrap is it ?

                  Al Qaeda exists. The modern “faux terrorism paradigm” is all “unexpected blowback”.

                  Case closed ?

                  I think not.


                  • Admin says

                    You’re arguing against a ghost of your own creation. Move on.

                    • Mark Gobell says

                      I think not.

                      “arguing against a ghost of your own creation” is exactly what you are doing.

                      You are objecting to others having an alternative opinion about the “9/11 was an inside job”, contrived dogma.

                      You characterise that as “irrational”.

                      You are also asked to clarify your cryptic use of the English language, but you are too busy to do so, even though you can find the time to make other posts.

                      You accuse me of other things, but so far at least, refuse to back up those accusations with any evidence.

                      Your objections to anyone challenging your own, deeply embedded idea that, “9/11 was an insde job”, is your “ghost”, not mine …


                    • Just to add on a slightly different tangent. My belief is that they knew that a significant percentage of people would recognise controlled demolition so they simply go with that. They have their disinformation agents right along with that clear truth, however, how they misdirect is making us believe that people died. I don’t quite understand it but they don’t seem to be too worried about the controlled demolition – it’s just so damn obvious so how can they really be so worried in any case – but they really want people to believe that the 3,000 died. I don’t know exactly why it’s so much more threatening for them for complete hoax to be exposed rather than just inside job but that’s the way it seems to me.

            • Ken Kenn says

              The idea since the incident is not to peel an onion layer by layer to get to the truth, but to add layers to the onion in order to hide it more.

              For what it’s worth, Building 7 looks like a classic controlled demolition but Buildings 1 and 2 were literally blown UP – as in the direction of the blasts. These heavy steel beams were launched upwards in an arc – they didn’t collapse ( as in fall straight down ) as they should have done if explosives and nano thermite was used.

              The plane crashes may have been used to disguise the initial noise ( the most important initial damaging explosions ) at the base of the towers but I can’t say that as a fact. The fact is that Newtonian Laws
              were broken that day – so the experts had best re-write the Physics books.

          • I’m afraid I don’t really get the big distinction between “inside job” and “inside/outside” job. I think most people think that a number of countries were involved, and “inside job” is simply a term that distinguishes the perpetrators of the crimes of the day from 19 guys with boxcutters. Of course, Israel was involved – I’d say few doubt that – but we also know Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were too and it would be very remarkable if the UK weren’t in some way. Obviously, Jane Standley pre-announcing WTC-7’s collapse is significant. And I vaguely read countries in Central Asia were involved. I mean, it’s humongous. To my mind the whole misdirection thing is not to do with which countries were involved but to ensure we think that people really died but I’m not sure why it’s so important to them.

          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            I rather fancy it was a joint enterprise by the MOSSAD, various sayanim and the ‘Continuity of Government’ crew led by Cheney. I cannot see any two of these three doing it themselves. The Zionists for the ‘Clash of Civilizations’ war on Islam they needed for their Oded Yinon Plan ambitions to be realised, the sayanim for YUGE!! profits and Cheney et al for the control of Middle Eastern hydrocarbons, ‘…the greatest material prize in history’.

            • Ian Sheehy says

              Let’s stop arguing about different interpretations of previous actions and act in a scientific manner. Follow the trail of evidence. As I mentioned, Chris Bollyn, immediately tarnished as an anti semite for suggesting Israeli involvement was attacked on his property by plain clothes federal agents. He fled to Sweden in fear for his life. He had massive knowledge of how Israel has historically used terrorism from its inception, including the King David hotel bombing, the USS Liberty, mass murder in Deir Yassin by Lehi etc. Ariel sharon, Yitzhak shamir, Menachem begin, Shimon Peres were all terrorists.
              The WTC complex was privatised off via Zionist Ronald Lauder to Zionist Larry Silverstein in July 2001. He then doubled the insurance and added a terrorism insurance.He was absent on 9/11 even though he was there every day since gaining ownership. Michael Chertoff was the lead prosecutor at the time. Philip Zelikow (Israeli national) was put in charge of the commission report, after Kissinger was forced out due to everyone knowing his bias. The facts go on and on concerning Zionist involvement. Please open your eyes and ears & watch a Bollyn presentation, plus Corbett report and AE4911 truth.
              I never went along with this Jewish/Zionist conspiracy thing until about 6 mnths ago, but once you dig into things, in this case, 9/11 was absolutely for Israeli interests in demonizing Muslims, breaking up ME countries, and hoping to create ‘Greater Israel’ in agreement with the 1982 Yinon Plan.

              • Mulga Mumblebrain says

                Absolutely, but the MOSSAD and the local sayanim could not have undertaken the operation without the assistance of allied Sabbat Goyim, plainly headed by Cheney and Rumsfeld, the ‘Continuity of Government’ head honchos since the 1980s. The neo-conservatives who planned the whole ‘Clash of Civilizations’ War on Islam, and who so presciently predicted that a ‘New Pearl Harbor’ would be needed to get the rabble on side, were nearly all Zionist Jews, many acolytes of the Judaic supremacist philosopher, Leo Strauss. But they do not, yet, totally control all the aspects of the US Government, so they needed goy accomplices, whose ambitions melded with theirs.

                • Ian Sheehy says

                  Absolutely. There are huge numbers of non Jews involved in the cover up. Giuliani for one major example. The Christian evangelicals are as bad as anyone. Neither them nor Zionists are ppl of faith imo, they are white supremacists. They have different ultimate aims though.

        • Mark Gobell says

          So, the Operation Northwoods stuff was released in order to provide people with the ammunition to show 9/11 was an inside job, as part of a grand scheme to fool everyone into believing it wasn’t an inside job?

          Quite possibly yes.

          Whay is that interpretation difficult to understand ?


          • Mark Gobell says


            I have just re-read your post an my reply to it now needs to be changed :

            So, the Operation Northwoods stuff was released in order to provide people with the ammunition to show 9/11 was an inside job, as part of a grand scheme to fool everyone into believing it WASN’T an inside job?


            I had not read this bit properly :

            “as part of a grand scheme to fool everyone into believing it WASN’T an inside job?”


            That’s just twisted. Wherever did you get that from ?

            I thought your post read :

            So, the Operation Northwoods stuff was released in order to provide people with the ammunition to show 9/11 was an inside job, as part of a grand scheme to fool everyone into believing it WAS an inside job?

            Quite possibly yes.

            Why is that interpretation difficult to understand ?


            • Admin says

              This discussion is over. Move on please.

              • Mark Gobell says


                You accuse me of things I have not done and refuse to answer questions on anything you post.

                You also have, so far, refused tp provide any evidence for your baseless fantasies and now, presumably in your role as “Admin”, tell me to shut up …

                How very grown up of you and OffG …

                I’m sure your attitude detracts from the stated OffG “cause” …

                Whenever you can spare the time Admin, please post the evidence you have for accusing me of things I have not done.

                Or, alternatively, whenever you can spare the time and muster the requisite character, you could just just apologise for making unfounded accusations …


    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      One of the obvious tactics of the Deep State perpetrators of the various false flags committed to drive the rabble into a proper jingoistic frenzy is the lurid conspiracy theories that serve to discredit by association all the plain facts of the matter, that point, unerringly, to a common or garden conspiracy of the type that elites have engaged in for centuries. So you get ‘mini-nukes’, ‘holograms’, ‘no victims’, ‘death-rays’, blah, blah, blah, all intended to discredit the truth of controlled demolition in the public mind. Mind you the question of what hit the Pentagon and what disappeared down a small hole in Pennsylvania are much more intractable questions, but what happened, and why, and by whom for what purposes, in New York is pretty clear.

  15. Frankly Speaking says

    Thousands of architects and engineers can’t be wrong. No other proof required.

    • Frankly speaking, people trained in the “hard sciences” who have to deal with objective reality are less likely to be wrong about the causes of failure of structures than journalists, politicians, lawyers and other craftsmen whose main tool is words. But what drives A&Efor911Truth is more important than their professional discipline; they are driven by respect for the truth — the same drive that motivates the people who set up Off-G, and most of the people who write here. Remember that the official 911 Commission contained some “hard science” experts — but it was chaired by a top politician from the Bush regime, who probably cowed them into submitting that ridiculous document; even so, many professionals resigned from the Committee in disagreement — but their reasons for disagreement with the regime line were gagged by Official Secrets with heavy penalties for disclosure.

      “The first casualty in War is Truth” — and 911 was the Gulf of Tonkin false flag for Uncle $cam’s war against the remaining countries in the MENA who had not submitted to the AZC; countries whose banks and whose gold reserves were not yet owned by Rothschild, whose hydrocarbon and water reserves belonged to the state and not to Rothschild-affiliated global companies like BP / Enron / Shell. The people at the top of those companies, and the politicians whom they bribe, value Money above Truth, above Humanity. The vast herd of Humanity is like other vast herds which roam the planet — preoccupied with finding food, sex, shelter for their brood, and generally staying alive. That leaves a small, statistically almost invisible, handful of humans who rejoice in their God given gift of Reason, and respect Truth because the Truth is their God (even if they are atheists). Such are the Engineers and Architects for 911 Truth — and their word is backed by the Laws of Nature.

    • Ian Sheehy says

      I said the shiz about architects and engineers before yet you got 7 thumbs and I got 2! Haha. Read shiz mo fo’s. I mean peace. Love all you guys. I just need insecure praise!

  16. PSJ says

    I hope people who say no one died on 9/11 will watch this and consider other similar testimonies and re-think.

    • There is strong evidence to suggest that no one died on the day or, at least, almost no one, assuming no one died accidentally or a very small number were targeted. Certainly, the number who’ve died since whether it be from invasion of the Middle East, post-service suicide, suicide or other death due to the evil in general that 9/11 has led to, is vast, but that does not mean no one died on the day and that, in fact, just like all the other drills on 9/11 the collapses of the buildings and the alleged plane crash into the Pentagon were a form of drill, too.

      Although I was exposed to the material suggesting no one died awhile ago, I simply glossed over it, thinking that there was clear evidence that people had died from seeming whistleblower-people such as Bob McIlvaine, the Jersey Widows, April Gallop, Richard Grove and several others but just in the last week or so it’s hit me that these people must all be actors/disinformation agents. It’s ironic. There I am thinking the rest of the population is so indoctrinated by propaganda and here I am, four years on from being woken up to 9/11 and only just realising that they had propaganda developed aimed purely at the truthers – specially for us – nice of them, no? The perps knew that people would catch on to the Emperor’s New Clothes events of WTC-7’s collapse and planes melting into buildings. Of course, a certain number would do that – so they were at the ready with all kinds of things to misdirect us:
      —the PNAC document of 2000 stating that what was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world’s resources was “some catastrophic and catalysing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. I mean, as if they’re going to publish a document like that a year before they commit the act unless they have a specific agenda. No hint, of course, of documentation relating to 9/11 operations has ever seen the light of day.
      —information to make us believe that certain groups of people were wanted rid of by the perps, for example, the auditors who’d just moved into the Pentagon.
      —Bob McIlvaine and the “Jersey widows” (who so cleverly unseated Kissinger as the director by so pertinently questioning him about the Bin Laden family being a client) agitating so desperately for a commission where all their questions went unanswered.
      —I just saw Mark’s comment below about Janette’s name. Yes, I believe it’s quite possible that some, if not all, of the agonising deaths made public are fabricated but I would have thought with the amount of dust that occurred on 9/11 some people really would be dying from it. I wonder if the $1 billion quote to remove asbestos from the twin towers was fabricated. What do you think?

      I swallowed it all hook, line and sinker. So clever … or we’re all very stoopid.

      • @FlaxGirl. Three of your questions could readily be answered — but only if we could rely on the honesty of professionals who represent public services for the U$ regime. The ridiculous evidence-free assertions in the official 911 report, and in similar post-911 govt publications show that govt agencies in the West have succumbed to political intimidation by criminal regimes (e.g. reports on the Skripal case fabricated by the Ulic4K regime).

        An honest public service would tell you:
        1. How many people on 911 said they were going to the WTC and never returned.
        2. Whether the WTC building was really declared a public danger because it had been flame-proofed with asbestos.
        3. Whether the clouds of white dust seen exploding from the WTC buildings carried enough asbestos into the air of Manhattan to cause a significant rise in the epidemiological incidence of an asbestos-related Lung disease (namely, Pleural Mesothelioma) during the past 17 years and for the next 80 years.

        The wells of truth have been poisened, and the Western World is sick.

        • Mark Gobell says

          vexarb : “The ridiculous evidence-free assertions in the official 911 report”

          The “9/11 Commission Report”

          Philip Zelikow was the executive director of the 9/11 Commission.

          Philip Zelikow, a self-described expert in “the creation and maintenance of public myths,” wrote the 9/11 Commission Report in chapter outline before the Commission even convened.

          Zelikow, architect of the Bush Doctrine of framing criminal wars of aggression as “pre-emptive wars,” is the co-author of an astonishingly precognitive 1998 Foreign Affairs article speculating about the likely political and cultural consequences of a massive Pearl Harbor style event such as the destruction of the World Trade Center – a catastrophe that, he said, would split time into a dimly-remembered “before” and an Orwellian “after.”


          The Corbett Report : 9/11 Suspects: Philip Zelikow


          The 9/11 Commission report’s main protangonist, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, ‘I was responsible for 9/11, from A to Z’, and much more besides, is alleged to be the chap in Guantanamo who is alleged to have been “waterboarded 183 times”.

          183 = 3x 61 = 3x P( 18 ) = P( 6+6+6 ) + P( 6+6+6 ) + P( 6+6+6 ) >666 666 666

          “Waterboarded 183 times” is a Kabbalistic lie …

          It had to be, because KSM is also a Kabbalistic lie …

          There is, reportedly, some doubt that the person reportedly lifted from the house in Rawalpindi, reportedly on 1 March 2003 is in fact KSM, whomever he might be …

          This reported “snag” represents the classic tactic of providing the “conspiracy community” with some “meat on the bone”, in which to sink their alleged investigative teeth while being wholly misdirected …

          The magician, through misdirection, gets his audience to concentrate on the wrong hand, while lifting their wallet with the other …

          “KSM’s” reported arrest on 1 March 2003 is an INClusive :

          = 666 months, 666 weeks, 666 days

          since Adolf Hitler became Reich Chancellor on 30 January 1933 …

          “Omar Saeed Sheikh” aka “Mustafa Ahmed al-Hisawi” was also reportedly, arrested on 1 March 2003.


          August 2004 : The UK’s Operation RHYME – The “Smoke Detector Dirty Bomb”, Gas Limos Project aka 2004 financial buildings plot.

          The Kabbalistic, “9/11 Commission Report”, contains references to one “Issa al Britani.”

          These “Issa al Britani” references were subsequently converted into a “real” UK terrorism plot, Operation Rhyme, allegedly Dhiren Barot’s dastardly plan to blow up London tube & Thames river tunnels with limousines loaded with gas bottles and to let off a “dirty bomb” manufactured from 10,000 smoke dectectors and to blow up financial buildings on Wall Street …

          Operation RHYME : “Neither Rhyme nor Reason” from Shakespear’s A Comedy of Errors ?

          … a play about, mistaken identity, puns and word play …

          Not so much of a comedy for Dhiren Barot, but was he, unwittingly, playing the role of Dromio and the script attributed to the chap who is alleged to be KSM, being read for the false creation of Antipholus ?

          Dhiren Barot vis Esa al-Hindi vis the alleged confessions from the chap who is alleged to be KSM, who has alleged that a chap called al-Britani was sent to case financial buildings on the US east coast ?

          “The confused Dromio, sure that he hasn’t said what Antipholus thinks he said, finds “neither rhyme nor reason” in the accusation—that is, neither order nor inherent sense.

          The confusion, though neither knows it, is due to the existence of twin Antipholuses and Dromios;

          Farcical episodes of mistaken identity account for the entire plot of the play. ”


          “The confused Dhiren Barot, sure that he hasn’t done what KSM says he has done, and sure that he is not the al-Britani that the false KSM says he is, finds “neither rhyme nor reason” in the accusation – that is, neither order nor inherent sense.

          The confusion, though neither knows of the other, is due to the creation of a false KSM and a false al-Britani.”

          A deliberately constructed script of two false identities, accounts for the entire Operation Rhyme plot.


          The 9/11 Commission’s staff reports are similarly constructed and provide many more nodes to the “9/11 Hijackers” narrative.

          Monograph on 9/11 and Terrorist Travel

          That the US and the entire world was hijacked on 9/11 is not in doubt.

          The claim that 19 Muslims armed only with “box cutters” hijacked four passenger airliners on 9/11 and caused the “collapse” of the NYC buildings, is demonstrably false.

          Including the alleged 20th hijacker, Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged 1+19 9/11 hijackers have all been selected for their roles, based on their real or otherwise birth dates.

          The majority of the alleged, “9/11 hijackers”, are Kabbalistcially linked to prominent Nazis, thus forming the basis for the perennial “complaint”, the Nazi WW2 Holocaust narrative…

          “Patsy perps” are always selected for their roles using the Kabbalistic method.

          It is always thus, in the faux terrorism scripts, the contrived “shootings” etc., far more than most would ever magine …


          • Mark Gobell says

            KSM : Khalid Shaikh / Sheikh Mohammed : PNAC : Frank Carlucci

            When not referencing the self-evident Nazis, the narrative’s Kabbalism points elsewhere …

            PNAC’s Frank Carlucci was born on 18 October 1930

            Reportedly, on 17 November 2000, the US authorities issued an international arrest warrant for the narrative’s nominated “9/11 mastermind”, KSM …


            INClusive =

            = 666 months, 666 weeks, 666 days


          • Mark Gobell says

            KSM : Khalid Shaikh / Sheikh Mohammed : PNAC : Donald Kagan

            PNAC’s Donald Kagan was born on 1st May 1932


            June 4, 2002 : Khalid Shaikh Mohammed Is Publicly Identified as 9/11 Mastermind


            The photo of Mohammed on the right has been flipped to better compare it. [ Source: FBI ]

            Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) is publicly identified as the “mastermind” behind the 9/11 attacks.

            He is believed to have arranged the logistics while on the run in Germany, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. In 1996, he had been secretly indicted in the US for his role in Operation Bojinka ( see January 6, 1995 ), and the US began offering a $2 million reward for his capture in 1998 ( see January 8, 1998 ), which increased to $25 million in December 2001.

            An international warrant for his arrest was issued in November 2000 ( see November 17, 2000 ).
            [ Associated Press, 6/4/2002; New York Times, 6/5/2002 ]

            According to the New York Times, “In recent months, American counterintelligence officials have identified a small group of other al-Qaeda lieutenants as the crucial figures behind the Sept. 11 attacks” aside from KSM.

            They include :

            Mohammed Atef ( who is already deceased )

            Abu Zubaida

            and Ayman al-Zawahiri. [ New York Times, 6/5/2002 ]

            There are conflicting accounts of how much US investigators knew about KSM before 9/11.

            He is Pakistani, although he was born and raised in Kuwait. [ CBS News, 6/5/2002 ]

            He is an uncle of Ramzi Yousef, the bomber of the World Trade Center in 1993. [ New York Times, 6/5/2002 ]

            In April 2002, captured al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida confessed that KSM was the 9/11 mastermind ( see April 2002 ).

            It is not known how much US intelligence knew about KSM’s link to the 9/11 attacks prior that, although at least some was known see ( December 2001 )).


            From PNAC’s Donald Kagan born on 1 May 1932

            to KSM “identified as The 9/11 Mastermind” on 4 June 2002 is :

            INTerval =

            = 666 months, 666 weeks, 666 days


          • Mark Gobell says

            “9/11 Hijackers narrative” : “Salem al Hazmi and Abdulaziz al Omari arrived in NYC” : Larry Silverstein

            WTC owner Silverstein Properties, Larry “Pull it” Silverstein was born on 30 May 1931


            The 9/11 Commission’s staff reports are similarly constructed and provide many more nodes to the “9/11 Hijackers” narrative.

            Monograph on 9/11 and Terrorist Travel

            The Muscle Hijackers

            PDF Pages 8 to 9

            In late April 2001, the muscle hijackers started arriving in the United States, specifically in Florida, Washington, DC, and New York. They traveled mostly in pairs and were assisted upon arrival by Atta and Shehhi in Florida or Hazmi and Hanjour in DC and New York. The final pair, Salem al Hazmi and Abdulaziz al Omari, arrived New York on June 29


            From Larry Silverstein born on 30 May 1931

            to “9/11 Hijackers narrative” : Salem al Hazmi and Abdulaziz al Omari arrived in NYC on 29 June 2001 is :

            INClusive ISUAF =

            = 666 months, 666 weeks, 666 days


            Note : The date calculator cannot show INClusive date arithmetic where more than one date component is used, so two URL’s are required :

            URL1 : https://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadded.html?d1=30&m1=5&y1=1931&type=add&ay=&am=&aw=666&ad=666&rec=

            URL2 : https://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?d1=30&m1=12&y1=1945&d2=29&m2=6&y2=2001&ti=on

            ISUAF = If Smaller Units Added First


    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      An attack on Christianity-by Talmudic Judaism?

  17. Grafter says

    Nothing but total disgust for the American nation sleepwalking through their own history. Oblivious as to the criminal behaviour of their own government. A cancer on this small planet and those who endorse their actions are no better.

    • Harry Stotle says

      Certainly no tradition or appetite across the US MSM to examine the behaviour of their rulers.

      Some would still be in denial even if photos were produced of Cheyne, Rumsfeld and Bush planting nano-thermite at the WTC.

      Monbiot and Co prop up the 2 planes 3 towers myth this side of the pond.

Comments are closed.