9/11, latest, media watch
Comments 73

An Open Letter to the Huffington Post

Jess Brammer, UK Huffington Post
Chris York, UK Huffington Post

Dear Ms. Brammar and Mr. York:

I was the head information specialist serving the Medical Health Officers of British Columbia, Canada, for 25 years.

Your attack piece on Professor Piers Robinson and on the scholarly work of Dr. David Ray Griffin is the least accurate and the lowest quality published article I have ever seen.

I have assisted Dr. Griffin with 10 of his investigative books into the events of 9/11. In 2011 we decided to create the international 9/11 Consensus Panel to review and evaluate the official claims relating to September 11, 2001. The Panel we formed has 23 members, including people from the fields of physics, chemistry, structural engineering, aeronautical engineering, piloting, airplane crash investigation, medicine, journalism, psychology, and religion (For the full list, see here).

In seeking a consensus methodology, I was advised by the former provincial epidemiologist of British Columbia to employ a leading model that is used in medicine to establish the best diagnostic and treatment evidence to guide the world’s doctors using medical consensus statements.

The Panel methodology has produced, seven years later, 51 refutations of the official claims, which were published as 911 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation in September, 2018.

Each Consensus Point, now a chapter in this book, was given three rounds of review and feedback by the Panel members. The panelists were blind to one another throughout the process, providing strictly uninfluenced individual feedback. Any Points that did not receive 85% approval by the third round were set aside.

The Honorary Members of the Panel include the late British (and longest-serving) parliamentarian Michael Meacher, the late evolutionary biologist Lynn Margulis, and the late Honorary President of the Italian Supreme Court, Ferdinando Imposimato.

The Huffington Post drastically lowered its standards to publish this hit piece, and what influenced it to do so is a question worth pursuing.

Yours truly

Elizabeth Woodworth, Co-author with Dr. David Ray Griffin
9/11 Unmasked


73 Comments

  1. desillusioned norwegian says

    I belive Cristhopher Bollyn ( bollyn.com ) a quite capable investigating journalist, have it nailed down. Not Mossad, but some other israeli military entety var the main driving force. I HIGHLY recomend to check out his book on the subject, and his long presentation on ‘Tube…. if its still up.

  2. Loverat says

    One of the best ways of tackling the fakes of BellingCat and Huff Post is through humour and ridicule..

    Not sure if this link has been posted but it is a scream.

    BellingDog parody account. Quick – it’s been taken down a few times by Twitter already.

    Great fun.

    https://twitter.com/Bellingdawg

  3. I am wondering if any of the big names in 9/11Truth comment here. I’ve seen articles by many of them, but what I’m missing is a place where they can be chatted to and where they can talk publicly to each other about developments which would be so helpful at times to counter the constant stream of negativity and disinfo appearing about 9/11 still in the media. If not here is there a forum where we can find the likes of Kevin Ryan, Steven Jones, Niels Harrit, James Fetzer, Richard Gage, David Griffin and others?

  4. It is very encouraging to see the increasing levels of moral outrage and empowered fight-back being exhibited by people disgusted and determined not to put up with any more of the massive criminal lies.

    23
  5. TFS says

    Most people get hung up on the Who?

    Its enough to support the families in their quest for answers, and merely rip apart the Official Conspiracy Theory

    Being driven to finding out the ‘Who’ as to suggest Israels involvement leads down a path, that isn’t yet required, and which it laden with land mines such as cries of ‘Anti-Semitism’.

    If you want to go down that route, challenge the likes of Noam Chomsky on the Official Conspiracy Theory.

    Those that dismiss the Official Conspiracy Theory should challenge those that do (The Guardian), to answer questions, and on mass.

  6. Johny Conspiranoid says

    A controled demolition type explosion does not rule out Al Qaeda since they too could carry out such a demolition. As Antonym points out they tried already in 1993. Most likely the security services were covering up their failiures. That still leaves the question of the relationship of USG and Israel to Al Qaeda via their mutual allie KSG.

    3
    5
    • summitflyer says

      Please give us a scenario on how and when the so called Al Qaeda types had the opportunity to set the charges .
      That should be a hoot .

      23
      1
      • mark says

        And when they had the opportunity to tell “Lucky Larry” Silverstein to double the insurance on the WTC.

    • Maggie says

      @ Johny Conspiranoid,
      You do know that AlQaida was the data base of CIA mercenary assets working in the M.E? For the most part, young disenfranchised, disillusioned, hungry men, promised the earth if they would ‘work’ to free their country from the Russians. Headed by Osama bin Laden the CIA’s man, Tim Osman the asset.
      The terror story worked so well that the US Hydra used the threat of them to keep all the dumb Europeans on their toes whilst their rights were surreptitiously removed from them, without them even knowing or caring????
      Providing False Flag scenarios that had everyone poo-ing their pants begging the Government to protect them. . And the perps laughing up their sleeves.
      1993 was exactly that – a false flag!
      And OBL was not killed in Abbottabad. He died in a military hospital the year before.. And the seals who took part in the ‘charade’ were all assassinated a few months later.
      Please open the link and you will know everything.
      http://911truth.org/osama-bin-laden-myth/

      14
    • mark says

      1993 was a car bomb that killed a handful of people. 2001 was a Zionist terror attack that killed 3,000.

    • ivy says

      I heard Marvin Bush was in charge of security for the World Trade Center buildings.

      Imagine Al Qaeda preparing the building for controlled demolition; it’s a bit far-fetched! Perhaps more likely is that we simply call the wrongdoers, “Al Qaeda…” unless they aren’t Islamic militants in which case they “don’t exist” for sake of the narrative.

  7. Narrative says

    After 9/11 our sinister rulers kept on executing exactly what they were planning for prior 9/11.

    In this sense .. 9/11 didn’t change the course of history.

    • ..can be found here: https://ajl.smugmug.com/911/North-Tower-Exploding/

      Nice try, major fail. No planes nonsense has exactly nothing to do with legitimate 9/11 Truth. All no plane claims are based in disinformation intended to be as offensive as possible, [denying the victims on the planes even existed] and in hopes of mischaracterizing the 911 Truth Movement with loony conspiracism.

      12
      1
      • ALucientes, thanks for that very handy Link, a definitive summary of the Scientific Case. From the Scientific Case one can deduce Complicity of US Government Officials. What is now needed is the Criminal Case, to expose the guilty members of the Bush regime the same way that the Scientific Case has exposed the means by which they committed this, the most horrific crime in US history, against the Peo4le they were elected to protect.. If these political criminals are not traced and removed from the Body Politic then I believe the US as a Nation must surely sicken from within and die

    • milosevic says

      All the evidence you need…

      ho hum, here we go again.

      perhaps you could explain what you expect to happen when a 200-ton airplane crashes into a steel-framed skyscraper?

      should it just bounce off, like a basketball hitting a brick wall?

      like a rifle bullet hitting a steel plate?

      oh, wait…

  8. Loverat says

    You seriously have to wonder about the likes of Huffington Post and BellingCat and others.

    When you really think about it, they are enemies of the state – or at least enemies of the people.

    They are quite literally pushing us towards war with Russia. Their recklessness and irresponsibility is staggering.

    The only conclusion I can reach is that all these self proclaimed ‘experts’ have been set up and financed by the state to spread disinformation. For me, that makes them traitors of the highest order. Just like the White Helmets where the proof is overwelming that they were set up to destroy Syria and cause a blowback that will kill us all if they continue. The threat of NATO bombing Syrian forces around Idlib if Syria try to remove Al Qaeda (those who allegedly flew planes into the Twin Towers) The restraint of Syria and Russia the only thing saving us from nuclear wipeout.

    The letter is far too polite and suggests they had some standards once. Considering the risks these fools are exposing us to I think Huffingpost should be recognised for what they are.

    45
    • While the Huffington Post is a Liberal establishment mouthpiece, Eliot Higgins (Bellingcat) is a right wing loony people sometimes use as a conduit for information they want to put in the public arena. I have argued fruitlessly with him on many occasions when he went under the nom de plume “Brown Moses” (he’s a white man), his rambling “discourses” were always based on news he had gleaned elsewhere and embellished with self advertising opinion….like he was an important player who had the ear of the terrorists he supported in Libya, Iraq and Syria. He has an obsessive interest in military hardware and his claim to fame, I believe, was that he identified from a news photo, some weaponry used in Syria that supported the official narrative. He is not a journalist.

      15
      • milosevic says

        Eliot Higgins (Bellingcat) is a right-wing loony spooks sometimes use as a conduit for disinformation they want to put in the public arena.

        fixed that for you.

        He is not a journalist.

        Of course, that doesn’t in any way prove that he isn’t on the CIA payroll. All the best people are, these days.

        • mark says

          Bell End Higgins is funded by the Atlantic Council, Soros, and a number of other similar sources.

  9. Antonym says

    Where can I read the whole “911 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation” for free instead of $ 14.26 at Amazon?

    2
    8
    • Narrative says

      One of the options: ask the public library (if you still have one) in your area to stock it. To increase the chances of getting it, encourage people around you to submit the same request.
      Want to speed up the process? Get many blank “Suggestion for item” forms from the library, ask friends to fill them in, then collect to completed forms and take them back to the library.

      14
      1
    • Maggie says

      Hi Antonym, You will note that all books that have critical information are expensive. Like Carrol Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope – a history of the world in our time. There are some books that just have to be read and Quigley’s and David Rae Griffiths are two of them, regardless of cost.

      On the other hand perhaps you could go to the Library?

      10
      1
    • Elizabeth Woodworth says

      Books cost a lot to write and to print and to distribute. That’s why they are protected by copyright laws.
      The research in this book took 23 people 7 years to produce.
      You can borrow a copy from someone who paid for it! 🙂

      11
      2
  10. archie1954 says

    Until Americans are willing to question their own government and what it knew about 9/11, all the truth does is infuriate those elite and media types who wish the truth to remain buried and forgotten.

    27
    1
  11. Frankly Speaking says

    I’ve watched many documentaries about 911 and i also personally witnessed the BBC reporter with building 7 still standing on the horizon as she announced it had come down.

    I saw Cheney visibly shocked as he helped to carry an injured Pentagon employee to an ambulance. I don’t think he was involved. I don’t think the US government was involved. It was however a State sponsored attack:

    Ultra rght wing Israelis via Mossad or via a splinter or shadow group is where the evidence seems to point.

    They were operationally capable of everything that day. They were even caught documenting the event and admitted it on Israeli TV.

    They own the Deep State, they control the “liberal” interventionist media like the Huff and the Guardian. Any letters of complaint to those propaganda instruments are futile.

    19
    5
    • remorris says

      Rumsfeld. It was Rumsfeld the craven pretender
      Not the loathsome Cheney., Though it was Cheney ordered the stand-down from his underground lair;
      but, Rummy,
      making sure the kill was done in that particular wedge the day after he declared war on the Pentagon and where the accountants were investigating those missing trillions ‘Don’ went ‘to war’ over;
      and where critical questions about WHO the radar ‘friend’ was that Cheney vectored in,
      approaching well above VMO
      staff poised over the anti aircraft defence buttons..
      were obliterated;
      rummy., that disgusting fraud
      playing nursie while keeping well away from his centre of responsibility..
      giving time for his co-conspirators to consolidate the psyop.
      NEOCONAZION -> #1.amercian [sic] psyop
      the gatekeepers
      MUELLER for one
      as well as Israel and whoever tf else involved in this dark ploy
      ‘The Government???’, but they ALL know now and have no excuse not to..so,
      yes
      ‘The government’ collectively IS of this gigantic conspiracy.,
      because ‘they’, collectively, are still 17 years later, not doing anything about it.

      20
      1
    • summitflyer says

      Although I agree with the main line of your comment ,I seriously question whether the Israelis through the Mossad could have carried out this destruction without Us complicity. Cheney,Rumsfeld and a good smattering of their neoconscomrades.I gave you a thumbs up anyway.
      Cheers.

      14
      1
        • Thomas Turk says

          What planes are you mumbling about? The one with the L pilot who couldn’t solo a Cessna with 600 hours in his logbook, flying a 180ton jet better than a Top Gun.. to hit the Pentagon precisely where Naval Intel was located.. He skimmed across the lawn at ground level without the engines touching the ground. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek-Q0T9wK2g

          17
        • Yarkob says

          Antonym, stop posting wikipedia articles as some sort of authority on a particular subject or event..you may as well post some cartoons you drew..

          re: 1993 bombing of WTC, see here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html

          It’s a NYT article. Follow the links at the bottom, too.

          “They” tried it before. Yes. “They” isn’t Wahhabi Saudi elements, though..

          6
          1
        • Maggie says

          @Antonym
          The gains being the GOLD.
          Unknown to most people at the time, $650 million in gold and silver was being kept in Scotia Moccata Depositories Vaults on behalf of York Mercantile Exchange four floors beneath’ World Trade Centre 4,.as well as other precious metals Jewels and securities. Although rumour has it that it was $billions.
          Many trucks would have been needed to remove these, but only one crushed lorry was recovered in the tunnel running from 5 to 4.
          http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html

          Comex Metal Trading – 3.800 gold bars worth $220 million
          Comex Clients – 102 million ounces Silver at $430
          Bank of Nova Scotia – $200 million in Gold.
          It isn’t clear from the ‘Times Online’ article whether the $200 million in the Bank of Novia Skotia is part of the gold held by Comex for their clients.

          Question is: the person who authorised the removal of the gold, just before the alleged plane attacks, must have had prior knowledge???
          The removal proves prior knowledge of the( state sponsored) ”terrorist attack.”
          Where did the it all go?
          There are a number of explanations – a grand heist using the ‘attacks’ as a cover, or an insurance fraud,
          Why haven’t truck drivers come forward with comments and information?
          The clean up of the WTC was done in record time. Gulianni curtailed access of FDNY operatives and ramped up the pace. By the time that the ONLY study on the collapse of the WTC’s was published in 2002, the site had been scrubbed of all evidence.
          The World Trade Centre Performance Study called for further ‘research investigation and analysis,’ but the structural steel having being destroyed in the steel furnaces of India and China, no such research could be done because the evidence was removed within days and destroyed in the blast furnaces of India and China..

          There were NO Wahhabi Saudi elements involved in the flying of the planes, but could have been in the planning and sharing of the loot? Read about Bandar Bush or Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who was the Saudi Ambassador for years and the Imbecile Bush’s bosom buddy. He was the go between, supplying arms and gas to rebels in ALL the conflicts in the M.E. but was recalled after openly threatening Putin with terrorist attacks if he didn’t stop supporting Syria… then was recalled to Saudi, kept under house arrest and then disappeared, just like Kashoggi.
          https://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/syria-crisis/1456-saudi-king-chemical-weapons-syria.html
          https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-10/saudi-deep-state-prince-bandar-bin-sultan-among-those-arrested-purge-report
          http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32059.htm

          • mark says

            This probably went to the same place the missing 140 tons of Libyan gold went. Or where the Ukraine’s gold went after it was flown out in US cargo planes. One of life’s great mysteries.

        • mark says

          Of course your money is on the Saudis, or the pixies, or the fairies, or Father Christmas.
          It’s on anybody except the people who did it.
          Divert and deceive.
          Blame the Saudis. Blame the Oil Companies. Blame anybody. Manufacture some patsy like Lee Harvey Oswald or Bin Laden. Just don’t blame the real culprits.

    • … Cheney visibly shocked as he helped to carry an injured Pentagon employee …

      LOL. As remorris says it was Rumsfeld and what I saw on his face was a smug smile, nothing of shock about it. That was no injured Pentagon employee. Death and injury were staged on 9/11. If you believe it was real, please provide a single piece of evidence in the visual record that shows any compelling sign of death or injury for the 3,000 alleged dead and the 6,000 alleged injured. If you cannot find one please provide a reason that you believe that it is possible to have a situation of real death and injury for 9,000 people without a single compelling piece of evidence in the visual record. This webpage provides both compelling reason and evidence for staged death and injury on 9/11. https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/3000-dead-and-6000-injured-a-lie.html

      What I’d like to know is who was the master propagandist(s) who came up with pushing out:
      — the PNAC plan to make everyone think that the power elite were ready to sacrifice US citizens’ lives at any cost for their agenda of global supremacy
      — the obvious truth of controlled demolition/government involvement with the various disinformation agents who bleat on about their loved one/colleague dying or rescuing “hundreds” of people
      — having the FDNY fire commissioner give instructions for first responder oral histories to be taken shortly after 9/11, then pretending to keep them secret to finally release them at the time when truthers had started to wake up to controlled demolition, knowing that all those who perused the oral histories would be focused on the controlled demolition and not on the anomalous lack of mention of the 343 firefighter colleagues who’d allegedly died or any of the other alleged dead or injured, or rescue operations (perhaps there was some mention of this but it would have been very little).
      — dancing Israelis and van driven by Israelis containing explosive dust stopped in a roadblock to give the idea that even if it were an inside job, the actual dastardly deed of killing all the people in the buildings by controlled demolition was conducted by “outsiders” thus giving the deed more plausibility.

      I swallowed it all and now it all seems so ridiculous.

      • milosevic says

        Death and injury were staged on 9/11. If you believe it was real, please provide a single piece of evidence in the visual record that shows any compelling sign of death or injury for the 3,000 alleged dead

        sure, tell us again about how they were throwing 11-foot tall dummies out of the burning WTC, just for laughs.

        the PNAC plan to make everyone think that the power elite were ready to sacrifice US citizens’ lives at any cost for their agenda of global supremacy

        I suppose you think that the 7000 US troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the tens of thousands crippled, maimed, and brain-injured, are all fake, too. The US ruling class are all great humanitarians, after all; they wouldn’t hurt a fly.

        various disinformation agents

        I guess you’re well-informed on that issue, anyway.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzKI9TBR-XQ

        • Milo, the paradigm of “fakery” seems alien to you.

          sure, tell us again about how they were throwing 11-foot tall dummies out of the burning WTC, just for laughs.

          Please link to footage that shows this. The footage I’ve seen shows smoke that looks as if it’s very controlled, as if it’s being pumped out at regular intervals and is not particularly noxious. Example: https://youtu.be/n6FmpDuwszQ?t=8

          Can you see the enormous advantage in having action at the top of very tall buildings which you cannot see in context? They cut from the top of the building to the ground but couldn’t it all be trickery and what they cut from has no relation to what’s on the ground? But then even if it were, as I say, the smoke could easily be pumped artificially and present no great problem to those at the windows – similar to the cloud you described as “pyroclastic” chasing people down the street but which to me looked very white and quite diffuse – not the cauliflower-type clouds we see from the buildings’ destructions. You cannot simply swallow everything you see, milo. You need to pay closer attention. 9/11 was a movie, not a real sequence of events – the only real events were the building collapses. They were the only real events in the whole thing.

          BTW, as I’ve already indicated, I have revised my opinion on the size of the 11-foot dummies. There is no reason to think they were other than normal-sized dummies.

          Please show me something that looks incontrovertibly real, milo, incontrovertibly real, that cannot fit “faked”.

      • PSJ says

        Hi flaxgirl, I asked you a couple of questions on another thread which you didn’t answer, so, being of a lazy frame of mind today, I dug that old comment out and am reposting it here in case you feel like responding this time:

        You believe “perps” DID pull three buildings down and DID use explosives to do so, I take it, and DID allow people to breathe in the toxic dust and get sick and die as a result? And you believe they DID use this false flag as an excuse for launching wars in the ME that murdered millions more people.

        You accept all this is true, correct?

        However you think they emptied the buildings of people before bringing them down, and prevented any firefighters from going in so that there would be no immediate casualties.

        They then pretended there WERE thousands of immediate casualties, including faking names, photos and back stories and paying some brave fool to throw mannequins (11ft tall?) out of the floors above the impact sites, and paying crisis actors to pretend to be grieving widows, parents etc and sue the federal govt in various ongoing lawsuits.

        They did this, in your view, in order to better control the crime scene and aftermath. Because genuine grieving families might cause trouble.

        That’s fair enough as a coherent argument. But a couple of questions immediately arise.

        1. What about the families of the people who undeniably DID die from inhaling the toxic dust? Why are they not just as much a potential problem?

        2. What about the fact there ARE alleged family members making a fuss? How is this (supposedly) fake fuss benefitting anyone?

        3. Who put the human remains in the dust? (they’re there, they really are).

        4. How can your hypothesis be falsified?

        • Apologies, PSJ, I missed your question earlier.

          1. I have no comprehensive answer for the toxic dust because I do not see how people could not be very adversely affected by it – and I do wonder why people are not suing the government for it – in large numbers. Nevertheless I still think that part of the toxic dust information is, in fact, truther-targeted propaganda which is all part of “evilness of the perps” message – the PNAC document is another part of the “evilness” message. For example, I believe that Janette McKinlay, who speaks of handfuls of dust she collected and we’re told died due to dust exposure, is/was a disinformation agent. All the photos we see of the alleged injured who would have been crisis actors, for example, may well have been taken at different times and the dust we see on them may not be the dust from the buildings but other non-toxic dust. However, the buildings did come crashing down and no matter what precautions were taken, I cannot explain how first-responders (many of whom will know that the buildings came down by controlled demolition) would not have been adversely affected and are not jumping up and down about it – but this applies real death or injury or fake right? Of course, we simply don’t know what might be propaganda, for example, first responders claiming that they were told the dust was OK and didn’t wear the requisite safety gear – all this could be propaganda, however, I think despite whatever possible information could be propaganda surely there would be adverse effects. The toxic dust issue is the only thing I feel cannot be explained by my hypothesis (but then it’s hard to explain for real death and injury too) – everything else can and certainly can explain it better than the alternative hypothesis that people really were killed and injured.

          2. The people making a fuss are part of the truther-targeted propaganda campaign. The perps want everyone, truthers and believers alike, to believe the big lie of real dead and injured. While truthers believe that lie they will be hamstrung in pushing out the truth because “inside conspiracy” and “US government cold-bloodedly killing and injuring the people in the buildings and the planes” are the two major pieces of the 9/11 puzzle that simply do not fit together – they repel each other like magnets. The perps cleverly anticipated the truthers and the obvious truth of controlled demolition so rather than try to futilely suppress that obvious truth they capitalised on it, transforming it into a magical propaganda asset. Of course, trying to persuade people that it was a complete hoax is no easy task either but obviously the perps know that real death and injury works better as a lie than the truth of complete hoax.

          3. I have no idea who put the human remains in. That would be pretty simple to do, though, wouldn’t it, and they can always have a lab in on it.

          4. Information that shows conclusively that the 3,000 alleged to have died, did not die. This would require investigation. I’m not an investigator so I can’t do it. However, Ersun Warncke did look at the records in the SSDI and found that there were no death certificates on record for a large number of the 3,000 people (see Point 4 at link below).

          I have done a 10-point Occam’s Razor exercise favouring staged death and injury and I’ve also issued a $5,000 challenge to provide an equivalent exercise favouring real. No one has responded to the challenge, however, I know someone has tried and failed – so far – and really, should it be that hard? If death and injury were real on 9/11 shouldn’t it be easy to come up with 10 points that favour that reality?
          https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/3000-dead-and-6000-injured-a-lie.html

          • And just to add, when we realise that death and injury were staged, the event transforms from dastardly crime to (covert) Full-Scale Exercise comprising all the drills we knew about and just that few extra involving evacuation from the buildings. Just like that! It’s no longer this terrible crime but a Full-Scale Exercise, if conducted covertly, where all the top people in the agencies and a number of others knew EXACTLY what was going on and collaborated in it. They were just doing their job like the Nazis were. Same old, same old.

          • … Ironically, in the case of the Nazis they really killed people whereas in the case of 9/11 it was a case of the opposite … the killing happened, of course, but later and elsewhere.

          • milosevic says

            part of the toxic dust information is, in fact, truther-targeted propaganda which is all part of “evilness of the perps” message – the PNAC document is another part of the “evilness” message.

            So according to you, the perpetrators of 9/11 are not evil. Well, isn’t that convenient.

            Presumably, that implies that the Iraq War and all the other things that required The New Pearl Harbor Attack as a pretext are also the purest essence of goodness. I guess America really is the Indispensable Country, as they say on TV.

            • Oh dear, milo, you simply make wrong inferences from what I say. No, they’re still the same old evil, for goodness’ sake, it’s just that they push out their evilness as a form of propaganda targeted to the truthers to make us believe that they had no problem with killing the people in the buildings as part of their agenda for global supremacy.

              They didn’t not kill the people because they weren’t so evil but firstly, because, in very tenuous theory, 9/11 wasn’t a “crime”, it was a covert Full-Scale Exercise in which all the agencies involved collaborated. They wouldn’t kill people in that situation … and they love to fool and hoax us, especially the truthers. Can you see their evil hooting at how we all focused on the controlled demolition and ignored the very, very obvious fakery of the dead and injured? Can’t you see it? Killing the people in the buildings would not be their modus operandi. I simply don’t get why you don’t get that, milo. It is so very, very obvious. I know it took me ages myself to catch on, especially when you consider I knew about all the other staged events which have very similar hallmarks (except for truther-targeted propaganda), but when I finally caught onto the truther-targeted propaganda, it made so much sense. Everything made so much more sense when the truth of staged death and injury was revealed to me. The moment I cottoned onto “truther-targeted propaganda”, I searched for the images of the dead and injured and face-palmed. OMG! The “injured” were so obviously participating in drills.

              • Admin says

                Does it occur to you that persuading Truthers that no one died is the best way of diffusing the push for truth? You may have been scammed into believing exactly what the “perps” want you to believe.

                • It hasn’t occurred to me, Admin, however, if you can provide evidence suggesting it should, I will certainly give the notion due consideration. Do you have any evidence, as it seems your question is purely of a speculative nature and I tend to base considerations on evidence, not on mere possibilities.

                  I wonder what you make of the argument I have provided for staged death and injury. Do you find it in any way persuasive?

                  • Admin says

                    The same “evidence” you cite in support of fake deaths can also be used in support of fake fake deaths. None of it is evidence, it’s just subjective reading based on a priori assumptions about the intentions of the “perps.” Anyone can make a case for almost anything by that means.

                    • PSJ says

                      Can’t really improve on this devastatingly succinct summary by Admin. It would have taken me many more words to say half as much.

                    • So they hid all the evidence for the real 3,000 deaths and the real 6,000 injured away and just presented us with fake, fake dead and injured? I have to say it’s not compelling and without evidence I’d wonder why you’d entertain that possibility. How much does evidence mean to you, Admin? It doesn’t really seem to mean a lot as far as I can tell. You seem to like to dwell in fanciful speculation.

                    • Admin says

                      There is evidence for the deaths – you just a priori dismiss it all as being fake. The point – which seems to elude you – is that this kind of entirely circular reasoning can be used as “evidence” for any set of assumptions you want to make.

                    • It’s easy to assert that there’s evidence, Admin – obviously there’s purported evidence but purported evidence can be proven to be false. What I’m asking for is CLEAR evidence on the visual record for one of the 9,000 people who were alleged to have either died or been injured on 9/11. If you cannot provide a single piece of clear evidence for one of these 9,000 people, it means you are happy to accept that there is no clear evidence for either death or injury of 9,000 people on 9/11.

                      But wait! There is evidence that the purported evidence is false. As stated in my previous comment, there’s the SSDI anomalies, etc. And all purported visual evidence could easily fit faked, there’s nothing that suggests it couldn’t fit faked but some suggesting it doesn’t fit real.

                      So what you seem to be perfectly OK with, Admin, is not a skerrick of clear evidence on the visual record for 9,000 people of death and injury plus a number of anomalies suggesting the purported evidence is false.

                      So you’re OK with all that. I hope you will allow that it’s perfectly reasonable for me not to be.

                    • I just saw PSJ’s response. Oh my goodness. What planet do you people live on? There is not a single piece of clear evidence on the visual record for 3,000 dead people and 6,000 injured. Hello? Hello? Does not that mean anything to you both? Do you think it’s possible for real death and injury for 9,000 people without clear evidence on the visual record for a single one of those 9,000 people. That’s a possibility in your world, is it?

                      And then we have the “last man suffering burns” exiting hospital who displays no signs of burns but only of vitiligo.

                      And then we have the very, very serious anomalies in the SSDI.

                      And then we have the 118 “oral histories” of the first responders that only allude to controlled demolition but make no mention of rescue operations, their 343 dead colleagues or anything related to death and injury. The firefighters website for 9/11 truth and unity is also very muted.

                      And then we have Bob McIlvaine’s son Bobby with his arm “around” his dad except it’s floating in the air and is too short for a real arm.

                      And then we have the ridiculous survivor stories.

                      Please provide one single piece of evidence that supports the claim of 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured. Just.a.single.piece. Please.

                    • What you don’t seem to do in your judgement process, Admin, is put bits of information together and weigh the bits on one side with the bits on the other side.

                      I don’t claim that all evidence is fake a priori, what I say is:

                      — There is no evidence that shows signs of applying only to “real” death and injury which of itself is a sign that death and injury are faked. What I’d expect to see (but you don’t?) for 9,000 people is visual evidence that looks compellingly real. Sure, there could be some people in bandages where you simply cannot know but for a whole 9,000 people I’d expect to see compelling evidence that tends to very much suggest real and not suggest “could easily be fake”.

                      — There is highly anomalous visual evidence presented such as the scene in front of the Pentagon with all the IV bags.

                      — There’s such a dearth of visual evidence for 9,000, such a dearth.

                      — There’s the anomalous either “dead” or “not showing any compromise to the body”. We’re hardly shown a dead body but we’re to believe that 3,000 people died but nor are we shown anyone suffering compromise to the body. It’s either dead, bones crushed to fragments, or a bandage wrapped around a leg or arm.

                      And then SSDI anomalies, etc

                      Can you please apply more thought to your judgement of this matter. Can you not see how none of it adds up?

        • And just to add one more thing, PSJ. 9/11 and other staged events are done “hidden in plain sight”. They are Emperor’s New Clothes affairs so I believe that Occam’s Razor is the perfect tool to make a case for staged over real. You don’t need falsifiable evidence. You can make your case simply by presenting a number of points favouring the “staged” hypothesis and show that the equivalent exercise simply cannot be done for the “real” hypothesis. The perps are scrupulous in ensuring that they do not present realistic dismembered limbs or anything of that nature and, in fact, overegg their events with deliberate ridiculousness, smiling loved ones, etc so Occam’s Razor is the perfect tool. Of course, if you wish to take the matter further, other things need to be done but simply as an exercise in showing that the event is staged rather than real, Occam’s Razor suffices magnificently.

    • BigB says

      Surely you mean Rumsfeld? Cheney was in a bunker beneath the White House.

      That brave act of defiance from Rumsfeld was for the cameras. At the time, he was in dereliction of duty, which in itself was the act of a traitor. He was the acting POTUS, all decisions had to go through him, and his walkabout delayed any response, breaking the chain of command.

      http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=22260

      You should also know that Cheney and Rumsfeld were Papa Bush’s boys, esconced in the ultra-secret Continuity of Government (COG) planning for 25 years. Those contingencies were implemented that morning, the constitution suspended, the Patriot Act and permanent preemptive revenge wars continue to this day. Rumsfeld was not in dereliction when it came to implementing the pre-planned response. Coincidence, I think not.

      http://www.journalof911studies.com/dick-cheney-john-yoo-and-cog-on-911/

      6
      1
    • Frankly Speaking says

      Sorry, had a braint fart, not Cheney, but Rumsfeld, as others have pointed out.

  12. harry stotle says

    “The Honorary Members of the Panel include the late British (and longest-serving) parliamentarian Michael Meacher, the late evolutionary biologist Lynn Margulis, and the late Honorary President of the Italian Supreme Court, Ferdinando Imposimato.” – what do such luminaries know compared to a hack pushing the official line through a platform controlled by big business?

    Its interesting, isn’t it – despite a mountain of forensic saying otherwise none of the corporate media have been brave enough to break ranks. This makes their churnalists either;
    thick?
    corrupt?
    or, amoral?

    29
    • wardropper says

      Thick?
      Corrupt?
      Amoral?

      It’s a new breed of politician comprising all three.
      They are instantly recognizable, and, once recognized, get the most prominent jobs, since their employers also possess exactly the same qualities, and warmly appreciate them.
      The common denominator of these qualities is money and mindless power.

      16
      1
    • rtj1211 says

      Whether you agree with the conclusions of Piers Robinson or not, he lays himself open to challenge by teaching different storylines, rather than dissecting Establishment ones. Unless the smear includes factually incorrect assertions about his traching methods.

      As a teacher of aspiring journalists, his first role should be to instil discipline in interrogating evidence:
      1) Storyline presenting Establishment facts: read it and identify, then distinguish between: recorded facts; witness statements; media footage; and storyline conclusions.
      2) Corrobate facts presented and seek out dissenting views, if any exist.
      3) Identify key requirements for presented conclusions to be true.
      4) If conclusions are inconsistent with established facts, science etc, highlight that.

      So, for 9/11:

      1) It is historical fact that two airliners hit the North and South Towers of WTC, that both buildings collapsed within their own footprint at speeds approaching freefall and that a third building, WTC7, collapsed in a similar manner without being struck by any airliner.
      2) Multiple witness statements from first responders spoke of explosions prior to collapse and the chief engineers who designed the Twin Towers testified under oath that the buildings were designed to withstand impact of a 707 airliner.
      3) Trading activity prior to 9/11 saw unprecedented activity in various option trading markets consistent with insider prior knowledge of the attacks to come.
      4) Demolitions experts have testified that the WTC collapses were entirely consistent with controlled demolition and scientists analysing dust from Ground Zero found nanothermite residues, which are found in particularly potent explosive detonation packages.

      As a teacher of journalists, you now ask your students this question: given this information, what theories can you come up with which might explain what happened?

      This is not indoctrination, it is rigorous enquiry being shaped by possibilities to be investigated, narrowed down and possibly eliminated from enquiries.

      The four possibles are:
      1) The official narrative: fires caused by airline impact weakened the steel core structures, leading on to collapse. WTC7?
      2) The airline impact was a diversionary tactic, media sensationslism, allowing controlled demolition using nanothermite to táke place under plain cover. WTC7 did not need airline impact misdirection.
      3) Ditto to 2), except other secret technology was used instead of nanothermite.
      4) Both nanothermite and other secret technologies jointly brought down the Twin Towers.

      At this point, as a teacher you guide your students to the official narrative and say: ‘show me that the official story CANNOT be true, then we examine other alternatives.’ That way, you are not a conspiracy theorist, you are an investigative journalist who has disproved the Establishment storyline.

      This is how I would teach journalism students.

      They would have to ask themselves tough questions like these:

      ‘Whose testimony is more reliable: the Chief Engineers who designed WTCs as a private commercial build, or NIST scientists contracted to investigate on behalf of the White House?’

      ‘Was WTC7 designed so badly that it could not survive the impact of a commercial airliner into a neighbouring building, let alone into its own structure?’

      ‘If nanothermite was not used as an explosive, what was the source of the nanothermite in Ground Zero dust samples?

      ‘If insider trading did not occur, how rare an event was the trading pattern observed (a 20 year event, a 100 year event, an event never seen in the history of US trading exchanges?)’

      ‘If WTCs were not demolished using explosives, what alternative explanations exist for the sounds of explosions heard by so many independent witnesses?’

      In other words, you do not start from the conclusion, you start from the premise that the Establishment story is true but test it rigorously through demanding understanding of key facts and witness statements, however uncomfortable that process may be.

      Only if you reach a position that the Establishment story is not credible should alternative answers be sought.

      14
      • My only question regarding the controlled explosion theory is “What about the fire fighters who were in the foyer, they used it as a command post?” I saw a documentary filmed by the Naudet brothers, the firemen did evacuate from the lobby eventually but wouldn’t they have seen that the building was wired to explode?

        1
        1
      • Elizabeth Woodworth says

        The new book, “9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation,” (https://www.amazon.com/11-Unmasked-International-Review-Investigation/dp/1623719747) follows a parallel model to this journalism model.

        In each of the 51 official claims about 9/11 it examines, it first presents the referenced claim, and then presents documentation to show that each of these claims is either incorrect or at best dubious.

        The 51 Consensus Points developed by a team of 23 panelists over a 7-year period were subjected to a rigorous review and feedback best-evidence methodology that is used in medicine.

        This is why the resulting book, which has been selling faster than it can be printed, is so dangerous to the forces that are trying to shore up the official story.

        HuffPost was at one time a reasonable news outlet, but in 2011 it was purchased by AOL, which was in turn purchased by Verizon in 2015. Now HuffPost is a pillar of the US media corporatocracy, which supports militarism, perpetual war, and oil as its dominant energy source. The 9/11 hoax aided all three, and the US media will do anything to keep people believing that it was real.

    • RealPeter says

      Harry, the majority of MSM journalists may be thick, corrupt AND/OR amoral, but as regards the 911 event, I think they go along with the official narrative simply out of the fear of being laughed at as crazies by their workmates and peers if they openly question the Official Truth. It takes courage to swim against the tide. And, while the 19-guys-with-boxcutters explanation doesn’t really wash, there seems to be no clear alternative, just a lot of big question-marks.

      At present, Western MSM are losing ground everywhere, with people becoming increasingly skeptical of their desperate propaganda. Hence this website, for example.

  13. I recently finished the book “911 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation,” and recommend it along with anything else on 9/11 written by David Ray Griffin, or by the international group: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Not only don’t the various official “narrative” lines hold up under scrutiny regarding things like the hijackings, failure of fighter jet interceptions, the culprits, the methods, the flightpath gymnastics, etc., neither does the actual physics of the building collapses. The defense of the official story is of course critical to the very credibility of the entire Western oligarchy – which is of course why we must never stop challenging their “official lies.”

    42
    • mark says

      We all know 9/11 was a false flag hoax.
      Arguing about which particular Neocon functionary was more or less responsible is all very interesting, but it’s like pondering how many angels can dance on a pin head.
      It doesn’t really matter. What does matter is the obvious proven fact that this was a Zionist/ Mossad operation.
      Consider the long, long catalogue of similar operations/ hoaxes/ false flags.
      Skripal Russiagate The Syrian Gas Hoaxes White Helmets Bana Dusty Boy MH17 Libyan Viagra Rapists Iraq WMD Iraq Incubator Babies Red Brigades Red Army Faction Operation Gladio Bejgian Supermarket Shootings Bologna Rail Station Bombing USS Liberty Lavon Affair Operation Northwoods Tonkin Gulf JFK Other US Assassinations The 1956 Suez Conspiracy Iraqi Synagogue Bombings . Many, many, many others.
      Most of the recent “terrorist attacks” in the US, UK, France, Belgium. Germany.
      This has been going on for decades.
      From the USS Maine in 1898. The Bayonetted Belgian Babies, the Raped Belgian Nuns, the Crucified Canadian Prisoners, the Human Bodies Turned Into Soap. The Lusitania.
      This is just a very short list.
      We have been lied to consistently for decades, for generations, by officialdom and its servile MSM. Most of the official narratives and the accepted historical record have been shown to be false, simply lies.
      Very little of what we have been told is true. Can we believe anything we have been told, and is generally accepted, is actually true???
      Even things that have been regarded as factual, like Global Warming or the Holocaust?
      Why should we believe anything? Maybe these are just hoaxes as well. Maybe they never happened, or have been exaggerated and misrepresented beyond recognition. You have to keep a completely open mind, question everything, and accept nothing at face value. Everything else we think we know is probably false as well.

      19
      2
      • Thomas Turk says

        Global warming hoax was exposed in The UK Telegraph under ClimateGate, that showed the Temperature readings were falsified or from thermometers placed on rooftops near air-con outlets or on black tarmac car-parks, and many from locations where no such equipment existed. Lies told us..np more snow in US, UK Winters, Ice cap melted, sea levels up, Temp up. I live in Europe so can’t comment on the Holo-cast.

        6
        2
      • summitflyer says

        What yo say is probably a very good safe bet .I see you have been around for a while also .We have been lied to and more than that the liars are doubling down.

        • mark says

          Everybody has known for a long time that the “news” peddled by the MSM was slanted and any inconvenient facts were just airbrushed out.
          But the very open and brazen lying and crude propaganda of the past few years is a relatively new development. This is extremely crude and doesn’t even come up to the standards of Goebbels and the old Soviet Union. It is a sign of desperation on the part of the ruling elite. They have just doubled down and thrown caution to the winds. This is an extremely risky strategy on their part and will blow up in their faces. The MSM has now lost all the credibility and authority it once had. Nobody really believes the endless lies any more. The Deplorables are in open revolt in the US, UK, and all over the Continent. Events are moving rapidly. When a system loses legitimacy, it can collapse overnight like a pack of cards, like Eastern Europe in 1989. That’s where we are right now. You have to expect the unexpected. The final straw that breaks the camel’s back will occur completely without warning someone would never have expected.

Please note the opinions expressed in the comments do not necessarily reflect those of the editors or of OffG as a whole