FACEBOOK
TWITTER
Peeling the 9/11 Onion: Layers of Plots within Plots
by Jim Fetzer (with Preston James)
One of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed and nothing can be known… nothing of significance, that is.– E. Martin Schotz, HISTORY WILL NOT ABSOLVE US (1996)
9/11 appears to have been a classic “false flag” operation in which an attack is planned by one source but blamed upon another. In this case, the evidence suggests neo-cons in the Department of Defense and their allies in the Mossad were actually responsible for the execution of the atrocities of 9/11. That story was buried, however, in a surfeit of alternative explanations for which the evidence was far more tenuous but which were of much greater political utility. And in each case, qualified experts uncovered evidence that induced sincere but false beliefs that they were “the real deal”.
The situation encountered with regard to 9/11 turns out to be far more sophisticated than the efforts that were made to divert attention from the conspirators in the case of the assassination of JFK, where “Track #1”, as we might call it, implicated Lee Harvey Oswald as “the lone assassin”. Track #2 suggested that he working for Fidel Castro and that Cuba had done it. Track #3 was redirected domestically to encompass the mob, while Track #4 targeted the Soviet Union. But these were superficial distractions for which most of the evidence was flimsy and inconclusive. 9/11 presents a greater challenge to unpack, because in this case, planted evidence was more extensive and appeared to be real.
Deep black covert operations, of course, are by their very nature shrouded in layers of secrecy, protected by the “need to know” and sensitive compartmented information (SCI). Since WWII, however, major covert operations have become increasingly sophisticated and new models have been developed which take full advantage of the extensive national security laws and practices guaranteed under the National Security Acts of 1947 and 1952. The experts who create these plots are specialists in PSYOPS, which entails accessing, stimulating and manipulating the subconscious minds of the target population as a single unit in order to create beliefs and instill motivations in the public mind that are necessary to support of their actions but would normally be viewed as unacceptable.
This is related to Abraham Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs”. When basic primal survival fears are activated in the “group mind” of the masses, this fear induces the motivation for a population to willingly give up their rights and liberty even for merely the promise of more protection from the boogeymen. This principal is the basis for successful PSYOPS. The use of multi-track intermeshed, deep-black covert operations also creates massive cognitive dissonance among federal investigators, private researchers and the public, which typically eventually results in folks abandoning the issue and going away in “quiet desperation”, which is the actual intended result of those who plan and activate them.
Deep Black/False Flag Ops
The “shroud of secrecy” they afford provides perfect cover to plan and carry out these sophisticated multi-track deep black covert operations and keep them secret–even from those operatives who are involved as well as the government’s own agents who do the investigations. The “national security” cover can be dropped on any matter that is at risk of being disclosed to the public and then can be invoked again at any time. Thus, alphabets who discover what really happened can be silenced and the media can be gagged with the delivery of a “national security letter”.
One of the greatest advances in deep black, false flag/stand-down covert operations has been the development of a new, more complex design, best referred to as “multi-track, enmeshed”. This involves using a complicated design with independent covert operations, each of which could individually do the job if they were actually “taken live”. These operations, however, are designed to be enmeshed at the nexus of the actual target, at which point some are de-activated and one or more taken live.
This can completely confound even the most seasoned investigators, thus creating so much conflict among researchers that these emergent conflicts between them provide the best cover possible for what was actually done and how it was done. Multi-track and interwoven deep black covert operations are therefore designed from the very start to obfuscate the actual operation that is selected and taken live, thereby denying most intel and government officials as well as the public any real knowledge of the actual operational purpose and information about the covert operation or why a particular covert operation was taken live as the predominant op.
As an illustration, when we attempt to peel the 9/11 onion, we discover there are at least five different alternative theories for which evidence has emerged, where each of them has sincere supporters who falsely believe that they have found critical evidence about that happened on 9/11. Each of these is actually one plot of many plots, which were deliberately contrived to creating sufficient confusion that everything about 9/11 turns out to be believable and nothing is knowable. Such deep black cover op designs can thereby provide sufficient “after the fact” cover to keep the truth buried in confusion forever.
Palestinians Did It
Cover Story #1: Palestinians Did It! Efforts were being made before the Twin Towers were destroyed to imply Palestinian responsibility for commandeering those planes and committing those crimes, which may have taken the lives of as many as 3,000 citizens and employees. Those who were watching closely saw archival footage of Palestinians rejoicing on a festive occasion being broadcast as though it were contemporaneous to convey the impression—meant to be indelible—that the Palestinian people had taken pleasure at inflicting misery on America.
An early report from CNN even asserted that the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine had claimed responsibility for 9/11—and that was before Flight 175 had hit the South Tower! So during that brief interval between the first hit on the North Tower at 8:46:40 and the second on the South Tower at 9:03:11, a propaganda operation to implicate the Palestinians was well under way. The immediate availability of this report and video footage indicates the direction in which responsibility for these attacks was originally intended to be cast
And that might have become the official cover story, were it not for observant residents near Liberty State Park in New Jersey who watched as five young men, dressed in Arab garb, filmed the destruction of the Twin Towers, cheering and celebrating, which came across as odd behavior, under the circumstances. When they were apprehended in a white van from Urban Moving Systems, the driver would inform the arresting officer that they were not the problem: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.”
They were found to have $4,700 in cash, box cutters, and foreign passports in their possession. Urban Moving Systems would subsequently be identified as a Mossad front. After 71 days of incarceration, the Dancing Israelis would be released and return to Israel, where three of them would go on TV there and explain that their purpose had been to document the destruction of the Twin Towers. Once they had been arrested, however, the story was quietly dropped. It was just too revealing that Israel had been profoundly involved in the events of 9/11.
Arab Hijackers Did It
Cover Story #2: 19 Arab Hijackers Did It. If these attacks could not be blamed on the Palestinians without revealing Israeli complicity, the fall back was effortless. We know “the official account”—that nineteen Islamic terrorists hijacked four commercial carriers, outfoxed the most sophisticated air defense system in the world and perpetrated these atrocities under the control of a guy in a cave in Afghanistan. It would turn out that 15 of the 19 alleged terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and none were from Iraq.
But that would not matter in the grand scheme of things, where Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld would push 9/11 as a justification for attacking Iraq. Not only was the public being fed false information about weapons of mass destruction and collusion with al Qaeda, but the national press was oblivious to the obvious question that remained unaddressed by government officials or the main stream media: If 15 of 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the UAE, one from Lebanon and Egypt, then why were we attacking Iraq?
Osama bin Laden with al Qaeda
Even our own FBI would eventually acknowledge that it had no “hard evidence” that Osama bin Laden had had anything to do with 9/11. But the range of evidence that exonerates al Qaeda and implicates the Bush/Cheney administration in these crimes has become as broad as it is deep. Elias Davidsson, for example, has shown that the US government had never produced evidence that the alleged “hijackers” were even aboard those four planes. Muslims. David Ray Griffin, the leading expert on 9/11 in the world today, has shown that the alleged phone calls from those planes were faked, where even our own FBI has confirmed that Barbara Olsen never spoke to her husband, Ted.
Leslie Raphael has offered reason after reason for concluding that the Jules Naudet film was staged. The evidence that no planes crashed in Shanksville or hit the Pentagon is beyond reasonable doubt, where others have shown that the videos of Flight 175 hitting the South Tower are fake, which may have been a brilliant stroke to generate dissension within the 9/11 Truth movement, since the truth of video fakery has proven to be politically divisive. The scientific evidence disproving the official account is also abundant and compelling. Given what we know now, anyone who continues to believe the “official account” of 9/11 is either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired.
Pakistan/Turkey/Saudi Arabia
Cover Story #3. The Pakistanis Did It. This track was based upon the supposition that well-financed Pakistani intel were able to buy expensive “K Street” lobbyists and gain influence with high officials in the government and Department of Defense, who had much to gain from a “staged terror attack” such as 9/11. It was the next layer of the onion to be peeled when and if the Arab hijackers story wouldn’t work any longer and was initiated by the revelation that Omar Sheikh, a British-born Islamist militant, had wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, allegedly the lead hijacker, at the direction General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). As Michael Meecher has observed, it is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. It certainly raises the prospect that the ISI was deeply involved and possibly responsible for the events of 9/11. Even if it were true, however, it cannot begin to account for the causal nexus that brought about 9/11 or identify those who were “pulling the strings”.
“Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers,” Meecher writes, “was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to “retire” by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn’t the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?” Although a number of reasons have been advanced for not taking this story seriously, Meecher mentions a number of sources who have information that might or might not implicate the ISI and expose those who were behind 9/11, the most important of whom appears to be former FBI translator, Sibel Edmonds, who has recently been speaking out.
Sibel Edmonds
Edmonds, a 33-year-old Turkish-American linguist, who is fluent in both Turkish and Azerbaijani, has tried to blow the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. While Sibel has been under gag orders forbidding her from testifying in court or mentioning the names of the people or of the countries involved, she has said. “My translations of the 9/11 intercepts included [terrorist] money laundering, detailed and date-specific information … if they were to do real investigations, we would see several significant high-level criminal prosecutions in this country [the US] … and believe me, they will do everything to cover this up”.
Revelations claimed to emerge from her case have been described as being explosive, including “that foreign operatives who were working in the translation department been tried to recruit her for their operations; that there exists a nuclear spy ring aided and abetted by high ranking US government officials who have been selling America’s nuclear secrets on the black market; that foreign language intelligence directly pertaining to 9/11 was deliberately withheld from FBI agents in the field; that Osama bin Laden had an ‘intimate relationship’ with the United Stages government right up until 9/11.” While most of this is probably true, the theory of the case that she appears to imply—that Turkey (with assistance from actors from Pakistan, and Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia) had been using Bin Laden and the Taliban as a proxy terrorist army to promote its own agenda—may be true in its own right, but based upon the totality of what we know now, does not begin to approach an explanation for the stand-down by NORAD, for example, or of how the demolitions were situated or the post-attack cover-ups.
The US “Let it Happen”
Cover Story #4: It was allowed to happen. The distinction between “LIHOP” (let it happen on purpose) and “MIHOP“ (made it happen on purpose) has been powerfully reinforced by the “Able Danger” contretemps. As a highly classified, anti-terrorist intelligence operation, Able Danger fell under Special Operations (SOCOM) and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) control. When claims arose that the US had had advanced knowledge of 9/11 and had allowed it to happen, a 16-month investigation by the Senate Intelligence committee reported in December 2006 that there had been no knowledge of the 9/11 attacks by US authorities.
The evidence, however, indicates that was not the case—and, indeed, that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated and staged by elements within the Department of Defense with help from their friends in the Mossad. As the 10th observance of 9/11 approaches, we know that there were a minimum of two independent deep cover covert operations which were operating on dual track, parallel and also interwoven. The first one was the creation and tracking—principally by the Mossad—of some “low tech” terrorist cells, which were set up, financed, and trained by US and other intelligence agencies.
“Able Danger” discovered this low-tech terror cell sub-track, which we can call “Track A”. The operation was designed to be discovered to create false cover, so that when 9/11 succeeded, it could be shown by information discovered by a bona fide intelligence group that this terror cell was responsible. That would be the role played by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, other members of the “Able Danger” team, and Coleen Rowley of the FBI in Minneapolis. Track A, however, was designed to be discovered and then the investigation stopped, creating the image of high-level US incompetence that had allowed this terror cell to succeed in hijacking aircraft with box-cutters and then flying those aircraft into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
When the folks from “Able Danger” swear that they uncovered “a real terrorist cell plot”, they are telling the truth. It was set up this way as a false track. When Coleen Rowley expresses frustration because she could not obtain a search warrant for the hard drive of Zacarias Moussaui because he was involved in this terror cell, she was telling the truth. But Track A was set up as a false track to be terminated before the 9/11 attacks to provide a convincing cover story for the highest levels of US intelligence and make the government appear to be merely hugely incompetent. After all, how could government officials of this incompetence have staged a successful and effective covert operation?
The US “Made it Happen”
Actual Story: The US “Made it Happen”. Track B, by comparison, was a high-tech track designed to use readiness exercises on 9/11, including some 17 anti-terrorist drills on 9/11 that disrupted communication and coordination between NORAD and the FAA, by taking some of them live and substituting high-tech weapons in order to target the Twin Towers and the Pentagon by that means. Track B involved the use of numerous different demolition means, including incendiaries and multiple modes of destruction, most of which alone would be insufficient cause for the detonation of the Twin Towers, which was arguably used to induce false leads confusing investigators and researchers.
A perfect example turns out to be the “hard science” 9/11 Truth group’s insistence that nanothermite was the principal element used in the demolition of the Twin Towers. This position, which has assumed a status akin to that of a dogma within the 9/11 movement, turns out to be unsustainable in light of research that has established that nanothermite is non-explosive—or, at best, a feeble explosive—and cannot have been responsible for blowing the towers apart, for ejecting massive steel assemblies hundreds of feet, or for the pulverization of concrete or the destruction of steel by means of shockwaves. To a bona fide explosives expert, the claim that nanothermite provided the explosive energy or enough shockwave velocity to perform these tasks had to be an obvious deception. If it was deliberately planted to divert research on 9/11 along an ultimately unproductive line, it may have succeeded beyond the wildest intel dreams as a classic “red herring”.
Another example, surprisingly, is the Pentagon attack, where some of those within the 9/11 community have argued strenuously for not going there, because the Department of Defense might spring a new video on the public that proves a Boeing 757 actually did hit the building. The evidence contradicting that contention is abundant and compelling, however, including the expert assessment of Major General Albert N. Stubblebine, USA (ret.), perhaps the world’s leading expert on image analysis and interpretation, who has concluded that no plane hit the Pentagon. When you take all the evidence into account, the case against a plane is staggering, but internal dissension has precluding using it— and other powerful proofs of governmental fakery —and has taken this evidence out of the public domain:
“From the photographs I have analyzed very, very carefully,” Stubblebine has explained, “it was not an airplane.” During an interview in Germany, he explained that there should have been wing marks on the façade of the Pentagon. “If it had wings, it would have left wing marks. [There are] those who claim that the plane tilted and hit the ground first and lost a wing. But airplanes have two wings, and he could not find indications of any wing in any of those photographs.” Regarding the Twin Towers, he added, “Look at the buildings falling—they didn”t fall down because of an airplane hit them. They fell down because explosives went off inside. Demolition. Look at Building 7, for God’s sake.”
Whistleblowing as Deception
The politics of 9/11, however, are far more murky than the science. So when folks from Able Danger swear that they uncovered a real terror cell plot, they are telling the truth. It was set up this way as a false track. When a Colleen Rowley expresses frustration because she could not get a search warrant for Moussaui’s hard-drive because he was involved in this terror cell, she is telling the truth. When a Sibel Edmonds is gagged by court order and tries to tell how certain how administration officials were communicating with this terror cell, she is telling the truth. Indeed, the effort to mislead our own experts even extended to Richard Clarke, who has explained that he himself had been given the false impression that, apart from a few analysts, the CIA had been unaware of what was going on prior to 9/11, which was intended to support the theory of US incompetence.
Clarke, who was the nation’s leading anti-terrorism expert, recently observed, “It’s not as I originally thought, which was that one lonely CIA analyst got this information and didn’t somehow recognize the significance of it,” Clarke said during an interview. “No, fifty, 5-0, CIA personnel knew about this. Among the fifty people in CIA who knew these guys were in the country was the CIA director. … We therefore conclude that there was a high-level decision inside CIA ordering people not to share that information. … It is also possible, as some FBI investigators suspect, the CIA was running a joint venture with Saudi intelligence in order to get around that restriction … These are only theories about the CIA’s failures to communicate vital information to the bureau … Perhaps the agency decided that Saudi intelligence would have a better chance of recruiting these men than the Americans. That would leave no CIA fingerprints on the operation as well.”
Indeed, as Ian Henshall has observed, if you substitute the Mossad for the Saudis, you have the explanation for the dancing Israelis, who were apprehended for filming and celebrating during the destruction of the Twin Towers and were released later under orders from Michael Chertoff, then an advisor Attorney General John Ashcroft and a dual US-Israel citizen, who would become Director of the new Department of Homeland Security—which leads directly to reports like those from Dr. Steve Pieczenik that 9/11 was indeed “an inside job” and studies like those from Alan Sabrosky, Ph.D., who has explain that 9/11 involved complicity between neo-con Zionists in the Department of Defense and the Mossad, where Israel had very powerful motives for 9/11 and, along with the Bush/Cheney administration, has been its primary beneficiary.
But Israel cannot have done this alone. The NORAD “stand down” and the attack on the Pentagon required complicity at the highest levels of the Department of Defense. And the benefits to the Bush/Cheney administration have likewise been enormous. As Patrick Martin has observed, “Without 9/11, there would be no US occupation of Iraq, putting an American army squarely at the center of the world’s largest pool of oil. Without 9/11, there would be no US bases across Central Asia, guarding the second largest source of oil and gas. And without 9/11, the Bush administration would have been unable to sustain itself politically, faced with a deteriorating economy and widespread opposition to its tax cuts for millionaires and social measures to appease the fundamentalist Christian Right.”
The Fourth Reich
Indeed, the extreme motivation of a small number of radical Israelis and their lobbies like AIPAC to manipulate US foreign policy in the Mideast may have created a huge future trap for them in their role as “classic cutouts”, which can be later exposed in a limited hangout admission in order to direct blame toward the Mossad and the small number of radical Jews involved, who do not represent most Jewish folks at all, thus directing blame away from from those who used them in their cutout role and who were actually at the top of the command structure. This limited hangout disclosure could then later be used to blame all Jews and add them to the large and growing Homeland Security watch-list list of possible domestic terrorists such as Muslims, fundamentalist Christians, returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, Constitutionalists and tax protestors, and member of any current social group that is trying to gain exposure and cessation of rampant government corruption and creeping tyranny of the government at all levels, which of course encompasses those dedicated to 9/11 Truth.
Richard Clarke, Anti-Terrorism Czar
It does not take a PSYOPS expert to discern the pattern here when Richard Clarke resuscitates the incompetence theory, according to which the US “let 9/11 happen”. Even on the assumption that he is sincere, we have a fall-back position intended to minimize concern for complicity by the Bush/Cheney administration and its friends in the Mossad—who, moreover, do not necessarily represent the highest level of control over the atrocities of 9/11. Because Clarke was in the crucial position of being the nation’s anti-terrorism czar, his affirmations about incompetence between agencies, such as the CIA and the FBI, come across to the public and can be widely promoted as admirable and courageous acts of whistle blowing, when their role in deceiving the public drowns amidst the anguish and concern that “if only we had done better” and “we must not let this happen again”, oblivious of the role that his reports are playing in burying the truth about 9/11.
We have now reached the point in America where any citizen or group wanting to obtain needed social justice, or the cessation of undeclared, unprovoked, and unConstitutional wars, in violation of international law and the UN Charter, are now placed on a secret watch list and considered as “potential domestic terrorists” by Homeland Security, which some—with ample justification—view as “The New American Gestapo.” If the US has been hijacked by offshore corporate and banking interests, which have their own anti-American agenda and are now in the process of Nazifying America, as some astute researchers have suggested, then certainly this could lead to a “Fourth Reich” run by offshore banks and large international corporations and we could see a replay of the unlimited persecution of minorities and special scapegoats such as specific groups such as Muslims, Jews and Christians who dissent from The New Tyranny.
So if you have wondered why covert operations like 9/11 are so difficult to unravel or why it is all but impossible to convince the feds who investigated it that this was actually a US false flag/stand-down/inside-job, deep-black covert operation, the answer to that question appears to be that the plan was designed from conception to obfuscate what happened, not only regarding the public but also the government’s own experts, who would be assigned to investigate them—and even to keep most of those who had an actual part in those operations in the dark, so only those at the highest levels of the government knew what happened and, even among them, only a few probably knew the full dimensions of the plan. The objective throughout, accordingly, has always been to keep the public in a state of uncertainly, where everything about these events is believable and nothing is knowable—which is the ultimate objective of disinformation.
Jim Fetzer, McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, is a former Marine Corps officer and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.
Preston James is the pseudonym of a Ph.D. in social psychology, who has become an expert on psy-ops, “false flag” and covert operations by the US government.
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=130929
Posted by Jim Fetzer on Aug 14 2011, With 0 Reads, Filed under Editors Picks, Of Interest. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
COMMENTS
To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback
fascinating
Jim, there are some good comments in this article. Some of the comments I don’t agree with such as the interpretation of the role of Mohamed Atta. At least two different stooges of the Mossad were impersonating Mohamed Atta.
From the article:
Indeed, the extreme motivation of a small number of radical Israelis and their lobbies like AIPAC to manipulate US foreign policy in the Mideast may have created huge future trap for them in their role as “classic cutouts”, which can be later exposed in a limited hangout admission in order to direct blame toward the Mossad and the small number of radical Jews involved, who do not represent most Jewish folks at all, thus directing blame away from from those who used them in their cutout role and who were actually at the top of the command structure.
Brian: The Mossad gets it major orders from the top levels of the Israeli government. 911 was an Israeli government operation and the Mossad planned it and carried it out. Netanyahu and Ehud Barack went on television on 911 and were seen all over the world telling the gullible masses that Osama bin Laden did 911 yet they provided no evidence.
You mention the Defense Department. Some Jewish Zionists and perhaps a Gentile or two may have helped the Mossad carry out the attack. I don’t like to go on the Internet and say specific people was involved in 911 but due to what happened, their jobs, their loyalty to Israel it’s fair to investigate some people, just to be able to rule them out. I think the ardent Jewish Zionists Perle, Wolofowitz, Feith and others should be investigated.
From Wikipedia:
The Defense Policy Board will serve the public interest by providing the Secretary of Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy with independent, informed advice and opinion concerning major matters of defense policy. It will focus upon long-term, enduring issues central to strategic planning for the Department of Defense and will be responsible for research and analysis of topics, long or short range, addressed to it by the Secretary of Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
Richard Norman Perle (born 16 September 1941) is an American political advisor and lobbyist who worked for the Reagan administration as an assistant Secretary of Defense and worked on the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee from 1987 to 2004. He was Chairman of the Board from 2001 to 2003 under the Bush Administration.
Perle chaired a study group that included Douglas Feith and David Wurmser that produced a strategy paper for the incoming Likud Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”. The paper’s main recommendations revolved around steering Israel away from Socialist principles, making efforts to become more self-reliant, “nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society”, and working more closely with countries such as Jordan and Turkey. It also stated the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq should be a key objective for the Israeli state, advocated armed incursions into Lebanon, and suggested Arab states should be challenged as undemocratic. Perle has on occasion been accused of being an Israeli agent of influence. It has been reported that, while he was working for Jackson, “An FBI summary of a 1970 wiretap recorded Perle discussing classified information with someone at the Israeli embassy,” writes Paul Findley (They Dare To Speak Out, Chicago, Ill, Lawrence Hill Books 1989).”He came under fire in 1983 when newspapers reported he received substantial payments to represent the interests of an Israeli weapons company. Perle denied conflict of interest, insisting that, although he received payment for these services after he had assumed his position in the Defense Department, he was between government jobs when he worked for the Israeli firm.”
Historically, the DPBAC has mostly served as a method for the Pentagon to leverage consulting expertise in the private sector. However, the DPBAC served a very powerful and influential role in foreign policy in the George W. Bush presidency. Former Chairman Richard Perle was an influence in the decision to go to war in Iraq, and Jack Keane was instrumental in the implementation of the Iraq War troop surge of 2007.
Paul Dundes Wolfowitz (born December 22, 1943) is a former United States Ambassador to Indonesia, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, President of the World Bank, and former dean of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.
He is a leading neoconservative.[5] As Deputy Secretary of Defense, he was “a major architect of President Bush’s Iraq policy and … its most hawkish advocate.”[6] Donald Rumsfeld in his interview with Fox News on February 8, 2011 said that Wolfowitz was the first to bring up Iraq after 9/11 attacks during a meeting at presidential retreat at Camp David. After serving two years, he resigned as president of the World Bank Group “ending a protracted and tumultuous battle over his stewardship, sparked by a promotion he arranged for his companion.”[7][8]
According to Shelemyahu Zacks, Jacob Wolfowitz “fought at the time for the liberation of Soviet Jewry. He was a friend and strong supporter of the state of Israel, AIPAC member and had many friends and admirers there.”
Douglas J. Feith (born July 16, 1953) served as the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy for United States President George W. Bush from July 2001 until August 2005. His official responsibilities included the formulation of defense planning guidance and forces policy, United States Department of Defense (DoD) relations with foreign countries, and DoD’s role in U.S. Government interagency policymaking.
Feith generally favors US support for Israel and has promoted US-Israeli cooperation. Along with Richard Perle and David Wurmser, he was a member of the study group which authored a controversial report entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,[17] a set of policy recommendations for the newly elected Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
Feith also served on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a think tank that promotes a military and strategic alliance between the United States and Israel.[18] Feith was one of the eighteen founding members of the organization One Jerusalem to oppose the Oslo peace agreement. Its purpose is “saving a united Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel.” He is also Director of Foundation for Jewish Studies, which “offers in-depth study programs for the adult Washington Jewish community that cross denominational lines.”
Brian: The Defense Policy Board was very powerful during the Bush years. I don’t know if Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith had anything to do with 911 but they should be investigated.
Yes, I am aware that many members of the Defense Policy Board were either Jewish or Zionists or both (since not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews). And I HAVE mentioned them by name. See, for example, “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda” (2008), http://tinyurl.com/45ltba or “Is 9/11 research ‘anti-Semitic’?” (2009), http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-9-11-Research-Anti-Sem-by-Jim-Fetzer-090615-95.html or “Are wars in Iraq and Afghanistan justified by 9/11?” (2010), http://noliesradio.org/archives/21621/ , where I explain those same points. What I am doing here is a bit more complex in explaining how false leads and disinformation are used not only to mislead independent investigators but even the feds own people–where what they have discovered it true but still misleading! So it’s not really the simpler question of who was involved but the more complicated one of how these ops are covered up by plots within plots. And it sounds nice but cannot be true that 9/11 was “100%” an Israeli op. It cannot have been done without complicity at the highest levels of the Defense Department and of the American government. Bush/Cheney/Rove were involved in this up to their eyeballs. The NORAD stand-down and the attack on the Pentagon would have been impossible without involvement by Gen. Richard Myers and many others like him. So I was glad when Alan Sabrosky, for example, modified his views appropriately here on VT.
Nah, you’re not telling the truth about Sabrosky, I proved that to you in another article of yours by offering a recent quote of his.
Excerpts from an article:
Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake
by Alan Sabrosky
I am also absolutely certain as a strategic analyst that 9/11 itself, from which all else flows, was a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation. But Mossad did not do it alone. They needed local help within America (and perhaps elsewhere) and they had it, principally from some alumni of PNAC (the misnamed Project for a New American Century) and their affiliates within and outside of the US Government (USG), who in the 9/11 attacks got the “catalytic event” they needed and craved to take the US to war on Israel’s behalf, only eight months after coming into office.
Brian: The Sabrosky article was published on June 28. Yes, I agree with Alan the Mossad had some help.
Regarding the Pentagon, perhaps you should read the statements by Norm Minetta regarding what he overheard Dick Cheney tell a subordinate as the plane approached the Pentagon. He may have given an order to let the plane proceed to the Pentagon. I don’t think Richard Meyers had to be involved in 911. Do to the hijacking exercises that day there was a lot of confusion.
And I posted an email I had sent to Alan asking if I had him right (about complicity between the Mossad and neo-cons), to which he replied that I had it right. You make pretentious claims to have shown me wrong have no basis, which I have already shown. As for Mineta (he spells it with one “t”), I put that story out to the public on “Hannity & Colmes” back in 2006–and not just once, but actually twice. So I think you need to do more homework. You have misrepresented me in relation to Alan and have no good reason to lecture me about Mineta.
jfetzer@d.umn.edu to asabrosky
show details Jul 15
Alan,
In response to a lengthy post by DJ, I posted this reply. I would like to know that I have your position properly defined here, since I would not want to misrepresent you. Some time back, I invited you to be my featured guest on “The Real Deal”. I would very much like to follow through on that, so I ask if you could be my guest on Monday, 1 August 2011, from 5-7 PM/CT, to discuss some of this, especially your recent articles, which I cite in this reply. We would have four 25-minute segments for discussion, with five minute breaks. Thanks.
Best wishes,
Jim
Here is the reply I mentioned above:
This is a very fine post, where I agree overwhelmingly with most of it. Alan Sabrosky has modified his position somewhat to acknowledge the role of the neo-cons, especially those in the Department of Defense, as having been in collusion with elements of the Israeli government and the Mossad. I think that is the right move, especially because, as I see it, the “stand down” of the US Air Force and the attack on the Pentagon itself could not have taken place without complicity at the highest levels of the American military, including the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. So the claim that it was “100% an Israeli operation” does not appear to be defensible, when all of the evidence is taken into account.
If I am wrong about this, I would be glad to be corrected, but it seems to me that the positions I outlined in “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda”, http://tinyurl.com/45ltba , and elaborated upon in “Is 9/11 research ‘anti-Semitic’?”, http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-9-11-Research-Anti-Sem-by-Jim-Fetzer-090615-95.html, are compatible with Alan Sabrosky’s most recent statements, “Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake”, http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/06/28/demystifying-911-israel-and-the-tactics-of-mistake/ and “Israel’s Hidden Faces”, http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/03/06/israels-hidden-faces-a-long-days-night-for-us-all/, both of which I greatly admire.
—————————————————————-
Alan Sabrosky to me
show details Jul 15
Jim – You have it correct & I*I would be delighted to be on the show.-Alan
Jim,
You wrote:
Alan Sabrosky has modified his position somewhat to acknowledge the role of the neo-cons, especially those in the Department of Defense, as having been in collusion with elements of the Israeli government and the Mossad.
Brian: As I mentioned that could be true about the Defense Department regarding the powerful Jewish Zionists in the Defense Department and perhaps a couple of Gentiles.
Read this again, from the Sabrosky article: I am also absolutely certain as a strategic analyst that 9/11 itself, from which all else flows, was a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.
A common definition of orchestrate: to compose or arrange (music) for performance by an orchestra. Yes 911 was composed by the Mossad.
I realize you know the definition of orchestrate I just put it here to enhance his comment.
Do you understand that, unless George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld had been committed to 9/11, it would not have happened? Do you have some aversion to acknowledging the complicity of ordinary Americans in the murder of 3,000 citizens? I don’t see the value of your game playing. It cannot have been a “100% Mossad operation”. It was a joint CIA/DoD/Mossad op, at the least.
Great article Dr. Fetzer and Dr. James!! Really good info here! I do have to take issue with one paragraph though.
You write:
“Indeed, the extreme motivation of a small number of radical Israelis and their lobbies like AIPAC to manipulate US foreign policy in the Mideast may have created huge future trap for them in their role as “classic cutouts”, which can be later exposed in a limited hangout admission in order to direct blame toward the Mossad and the small number of radical Jews involved, who do not represent most Jewish folks at all, thus directing blame away from from those who used them in their cutout role and who were actually at the top of the command structure. This limited hangout disclosure could then later be used to blame all Jews and add them to the large and growing Homeland Security watch-list list of possible domestic terrorists such as Muslims, fundamentalist Christians, returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, Constitutionalists and tax protestors, and member of any current social group that is trying to gain exposure and cessation of rampant government corruption and creeping tyranny of the government at all levels, which of course encompasses those dedicated to 9/11 Truth.”
I don’t really get this. I don’t really know of any serious 9/11 researchers, bloggers, ect. blaming all Jews as being responsible for 9/11. I and many others have said flat out that the Zionist Jews in the Bush administration, including Feith, Perleman, Wolfowitz, Libby, and many others, worked in conjunction with the Israeli Mossad to carry out 9/11. To me, the Jews and other non-Jew Zionists (and every single member of the US government is a Zionist; it’s a requirement for office/employment by the US government) in the Bush administration were actually involved more in the cover up and deception on 9/11, not actually carrying out the operation physically (which was done primarily by the Mossad/Israeli military, and perhaps other military/intelligence units in the US and foreign governments who assisted).
**Veterans Today is in serious need of an editor. Every single article published here, including this one, has numerous grammatical errors. I would be more than happy to help out in this department, if need be. I am not a veteran, but I am confident I could be of use. Let me know.
Jim, a good comment. Yes, I avoided discussion of British Zionism which is really an outgrowth of the Teutonic Knights and the Hanseatic League and the associated occult hierarchies that persist even to this present day because it can open up needless distracting debate. Technically the responder makes a good point. However, our point was that using these radical Jews as cutouts could LATER pose a danger to most Jews who are basically good folks and have had nothing to do with these occult related super-elites. The use of these radical Jewish cutouts can pose a needless risk to ordinary Jews who only want peace and would never participate in such mass murder as occurred on 9/11.
like playing chess on 4 levels instead of 1
One more thing- there is no doubt that criminal elements of the US government were involved in carrying out 9/11. BUT we have to understand that the US government is basically an Israeli colony: we have a Vichy government that is completely controlled by a foreign power through it’s lobby and agents that occupy all key positions of power and influence in the US government, media and banking sector.
Would you agree with that Dr. Fetzer
John, I have asked my co-author to respond to your longer question. There is no doubt that Israel has too much influence on our Congress and our foreign policy, especially, which is a travesty. Before 9/11, we had no enemies in the Middle East. Now we and our “gallant ally” are the most despised and reviled nations in the world–and justifiably so, because we are the world’s greatest aggressors. I don’t know how to quantify an answer to your question, but it is indisputable that Israel has WAY TOO MUCH INFLUENCE HERE.
The share sizes of the involvement in the implementation of the event does not correspond or represent their presence or interests as the planners of the event. This assumption is faulty. In other words determining “who” was involved that day does not directly lead us to “who” wanted it and planned it. Who is benefiting from it is what matters. Benjamin Freedman who was a top dog Zionist who attended the 1919 Versailles Treaty meeting is the only honest Khazar I know of that got sick of their sickness and converted to Christianity and warned US military in a speech delivered in mid 60s that Khazarian financial mafia is planning the wwiii based on wars between Christians and moslems. Half a century later we are seeing what he warned us taking place in front of our eyes like a bad joke.
My answer to John Friend would be: Yes, absolutely. We do not have an independent government to speak of “their interest” in creating an event like this. None of this helps them holding to power longer where there was no measurable threat to their rule before 911 anyway.
Yes, there is a difference between numbers of those involved and degree of control exerted over these events. I also agree that who benefits is the crucial question, where both Israel and the Bush/Cheney administrations benefitted immensely from 9/11, no doubt!
Jim,
Since their influence is far, far, above any legitimate representation, according to their composition of the population, we should start one aspect toward our recovery as a nation from the events of 9/11/01, by putting an END TO IT NOW, and the Federal Reserve (the primary source of their power) do you agree?
If I understand you correctly, my answer to your question is, “Yes!”
rotten neocon filthy slime! xxxx wolfowicz and feith in their homes!
I know that I’m not stupid, nor am I some bleeping genius, but I have an able and experienced sense of good journalism. In my opinion Dr. Fetzer, your article makes it all to convulated to follow. At this point in history we have enough evidence from various sources to not only accuse, but indict a number of known perpetrators. The money trail has nailed Silverstein and associates. The security company trail nails another bunch of zionists in Israel; Dick Cheney would need more than good lawyers if brought in and thoroughly questioned. Your article may offer explanations for how this complex operation was compartmentalized to protect operatives if something blew the operation before it went off, but now that the dust cloud and melted steel stares us in the face those details serve only to cloud.
Tom, to each their own. This article explains how deep black covert ops are planned with the built-in objective of misleading those who are going to investigate them, even when they are federal agents themselves. So it explains why Coleen Rowley and Sibel Edmonds and Richard Clarke could all SINCERELY BUT FALSELY have drawn mistaken conclusions about who was responsible for 9/11. And it also shows that there was a series of fall-back positions, where the Palestinians were the first choice, Arab hijackers the second, Pakistan / Turkey / Saudi Arabia third, before attributing it to American incompetence in order to steer away from the complicity of US intel and the Mossad. If you follow the track numbers, you can see that is how it unravels. Get what you can from it. We all learn different things at different rates.
Jim,
You sound like you’re about assigning blame as in a multiple car accident on who is liable for what % of the damage. We’re talking about pre-meditated murder in the first degree, with malice and forethought. There are many people we know were involved, including all the players mentioned along with those mentioned in the comments section. In the case of mass murder, far beyond any previous civilian intentional mass murder, we can start with these people and work from there.
And since they put torture on the books as legal, lets get started and work from there, if it gets more interesting, fine.
Yes, we are talking about the mass murder of some 3,000 civilians. But in order to assign blame and bring indictments, much less convictions in a court of law, we have to understand the evidence. The case was complex and, without sorting it out, we really have no idea what we are up against.
When basic primal survival fears are activated in the “group mind” of the masses, this fear induces the motivation for a population to willingly give up their rights and liberty even for merely the promise of more protection from the boogeymen
While many Americans watched the TV sets in horror as the ‘Twins’ imploded and came down, they were in a state of shock.
At that point, their frenzied minds were ready to be infected with who to direct their anger at; Muslim boogiemen who we later learned ‘hate us because we have too many freedoms.’
Within hours of the FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB, we were shown pics of the 19 alleged hijackers, so we could have a target for our rage and hatred and demand revenge.
And we’ve been on a killing spree ever since.
“This limited hangout disclosure could then later be used to blame all Jews and add them to the large and growing Homeland Security watch-list list of possible domestic terrorists”
The day Jews are added to watch lists, I will eat my hat. The watch lists specifically target those who have identified the Jewish usurpation of our government, banking system, economy, and law enforcement/military complex. That’s how came the high-profile militia incidents following the S&L crisis.
Out of curiosity, how much interest do you suppose the Jews in Kitat Konenut have elicited from the “homeland security” apparatus for their militia / paramilitary training activities on US soil?
Given the likelihood they will play a role in the next false flag event, I’d say they are not the least bit concerned.
BTW, their motto is, in typical countenance, “Keeping Jews safe, when no one else will!”
I think the reference to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is critical for understanding the psychological basis for how the 911 operation specifically and the terror threats in general are being used to manipulate the public. Maslow was quite correct in noting that people’s actions are governed by the most prepotent need they must generally actualize, and that they will give up less prepotent needs to realize more prepotent ones. The most prepotent needs are physilogical, which are survival needs like a supply of food, water, shelter, etc. next are safety needs. Then, if I recall, come belonging needs until you reach self-actualization needs at the top of his hierarchy.
The key point to notice is that 911 and all the so-called terrorist threats have threatened the regular realization of safety needs, and the government has sought to enable the public to satisfy them by proposing all sorts of policies and programs that threaten the higher level needs that are supposedly necessary to satisfy the more basic safety needs.
This is what the police ignoring the rioters in Britain has triggered so people are willing to accept all kinds of draconian measures to quell it in the future.
And aslong as the government effectively plays these cards, it will be difficult if not impossible to reach the public to resist the efforts being made to subjugate them
Carrying out this plot is, however, as old as the hills. For examples, he Romans did it by scaring the public with the Spartacus slave revolt.
Prien
My Cheers and Jeers on Your Post… A Call for Realism, Civil Disobedience, and Organized Stratagems for Knocking the Octopus Out Once and For All
Cheers for being the advocate of truth you are. You have more integrity and smarts in your pinky than most 911 researchers have in their whole catalogue of work. Cheers to you for taking on the freemasonry aspect of this crime, which while very apparent, does not seem to get the coverage it should. I think this piece is a well tempered argument that tells it like it is for the most part; it will only upset reactionaries or the very people you seem to be calling out.
Now for the Jeers and what I see as the real problem and solution.
I disagree about the way you are contrasting the current anti-war generation as if they are a soft, easily compromised naive group of individuals compared to the hardened Vietnam pack. The deeper insights into the way that played out is more subtle, and Nixon was privately trying to end the war against the wishes of the Opium dealing crowd that runs the show for real. Just a minor point, but let’s not buy into the whole myth as given to us by All The President’s Men, nor believe that what is missing now is that beleaguered college of cynical vets.
As someone in the younger generation, I can attest that there are many of disgruntled veterans from our two wars that are in the same heroic position as the Vietnam vets from your memory. And the younger civilian anti-war activists are far from being the MSNBC, latte drinking liberals that fall into the left-right paradigm. In fact, it is our generation that intuitively threw that paradigm out, correctly perceiving it as a control mechanism.
I agree with you that there is no ORGANIZATION in the 911 movement-at-large, at least in the monolithic sense, but the internet and hive mind culture that has adapted to our current political milieu has found a way to sort through all of the subterfuge. Yes, I am sure you have experienced this curious phenomenon, this strange peer review process done in a computer-like recursive fashion on the order of billions of recursions. Sure, if you stop here or there you might get a whiff of disinfo, but in the aggregate we are well ahead and have all but solved the case.
Yes, the case is solved. And if you don’t know, give me a shout out. Because like JFK, if someone tells you the jury is out, they are selling you something. And if someone gets harsh on any visual SFX tomfoolery, they are not only selling you something, but are dangerous. The real untold and shocking truth that millions won’t yet believe is the complicity from super-mega media cartels?
But how can this be you ask? If they know who did it, then how come nothing has happened and no one has gone to jail? In other words, why no hopey changey? Well, let me turn the question back on you. If you think ten years after 9-11 and no justice is bad, what can you and the Vietnam generation say about the coup d-etat and assassination of JFK on November 22?
Yeah, we all know who did that as well, and despite almost 50 years elapsing and most of the main players being dead, there isn’t a whisper about it. Amazingly, the mainstream media and no governmental body will rectify this position. If our government hasn’t come clean about JFK, we don’t really have a free and democratic government.
It’s About Playing as Hard as They Play (Sons of Liberty Style)
The younger generation is not apathetic, nor are they naive. In fact, quite contrary to the baby boomers, we are all very much “awake” and immediately saw even before 911 that we were not a true democracy since you can’t have that “national security state” and open government at the same time.
It will be 50 years soon since Kennedy was shot? Answer that crime and you answer all the others ones that came after. The questions is, are you ready? Are the readers of this blog ready? Are Americans ready to take the risks associated with ORGANIZING with a clear knowledge of the enemy and well honed strategy to take down domino after domino until the kingpins roll?
If they can assassinate a senator, I am surprised a savvy web 2.0 savant doesn’t just publish a list of names next to a list of donations for “clean-up work.”
Is that radical? Yes. It is it change? Change you can believe in.
And to all those who quote Ghandi in their calls to non-violence as the only option, lest we cede our rights, let me remind you that they shot Ghandi too. Do you want to live in a world where truth is literally banned from your lips at the end of a gun, all the while the silver haired foxes lie about it. And then watch as dumbed-down populations grows up around this artificial nightmare of cultural degeneration and mass psychosis?
The 9-11 movement biggest stumble was “asking for a new investigation.” Right. Hey, while we are at it, why not run the ballistics from Dealey Plaza and argue about that for another ten years.
No, the answer is to leave the Hegelian dialectic that can march on and on to ever more nuanced answers as to the complete description of those events, and instead enter the world of strategic action to mobilize political transformation. The goal is to recognize the chess match for what it is, and play to our strengths: the moral highroad, millions of supporters, and an already crumbling edifice in which we only need to leverage key liaisons that upon pressure will turn against the greater heavies.
On and on, the debate should not be about thermite or targeted energy blah blah blah… I don’t want to answer that question for my own nerdish curiosity, but because of its forensic value. But with enough evidence to be waaaay beyond grand jury indictments, it is not really about conspiracy debate. That is letting their framing take hold of our will. The opposite should occur.
Our will should hold them hostage (metaphorically of course). There are lots of guilty talking heads on television that wish they could tell the truth. Many more corporate CEOs and so forth are probably very quick to talk if they have a little fright, but instead they feel they have the power of propaganda on their side, and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. The people would be empowered by a confession, don’t you think? Instead of arguing if it is anti-semitic to call out Israel’s role, let’s have one of those guilty of misprision of treason roll on some of those big heads that are about to roll anyway…
(I don’t advocate violence in any way, but only encourage readers to think outside the box and frame positive action towards a goal in other terms than just waiting for an entire consensus to develop and law and order to just right itself. In a system as corrupt as ours, that can’t happen without a revolution, since we wouldn’t have anyone in congress. And instead of arguing about what people are shilling or not shilling, let the blogs of America be devoted to the methods by which we wrestle the behemoth from power and restore the Republic.)
My post above might have been directed to Mr. Duff’s blog, as I read his and yours together… so apologies for any confusion The opening compliment was towards your work) – Jim
Jim, I thank you for the compliment. I think that Gordon’s study and ours are highly complementary.
“Before 9/11, we had no enemies in the Middle East.” Oh really? Then some friends of ours shot up the Liberty?? With “friends” like those, who needs enemies?
Sure. I have featured Jeff Gates and
Mark Glenn and others as guests on
“The Real Deal” to discuss it. I did
not mean to obfuscate it. Check out:
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2010
Jeff Gates
Israeli influence on US foreign policy
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2010
Jeff Gates
GUILT BY ASSOCIATION
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 2010
Mark Glenn
USS Liberty
FRIDAY, JUNE 18, 2010
Stephen St. John
9/11, USS Liberty, JFK, more
where the archives are found at
http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com.
Larry, of course, had breakfast every morning at “Windows of the World” at the top of the North Tower, but not on 9/11. Nor did his daughter, who worked there, come in for work that day. It does make you wonder why!
as for 9/11, I think the rabbit hole is much, much deeper than most of us can even begin to fathom-
check out the research of Dr. Judy Wood- she points no blaming finger at any guilty faction (which is why she is probably still alive) but just scientifically explains the pulverization (and pulverized it was) of the WTC-
thermite?- maybe, but not exclusively-
research Dr. Judy Wood
Maybe Jim Fetzer is just simply PSYOPS dragging in all the commentrers to be evaluated for the Partiot Act and nothwithstanding seytting up another smokescreen because ther sure as hell are a lot of people not hanging out with Jim Fetzer on his “view” of 911 and whilst Audry puts it simplistically and reasonably so, thats about the simple truth of the matter….its not up to the “american public” they are largely out of it – its upto the bold and hungry for real justice…there are a lot of you out there but before you rush into anything take a look at what the late and apparently “accidented” Phil Schneider had to say – more about prison rail cars than just UFOs and Greys….that can be found on www(dot)apfn(dot)org…
Given my ongoing efforts to expose the chicanery at the core of 9/11 and to confront false theories that have been advanced to deal with it, why am I being accused of PSYOPS? That is about as dumb a claim as I can imagine.
There are bona fide PSYOPS going on within the movement, but I am not part of them. Try some of the following for real examples within the movement itself, not to mention “Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”
Do you think that false theories serve the cause of 9/11 Truth? I find some of this rubbish truly disgusting. If you have some evidence to produce, then produce it! This kind of “guilt by insinuation” is pure unadulterated chickenshit.
“The Company You are Keeping: Comments on Hoffman and Green ”
http://www.911scholars.org/Fetzer_9Feb2006.html
“What’s the matter with Jim Hoffman? Abusing logic and language to attack Scholars for 9/11 Truth”
http://www.911scholars.org/ArticleFetzer_14Jun2006.html
“Wikipedia as a 9/11 Disinformation Op”
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/07/wikipedia-as-911-disinformation-op.html
“The Misadventures of Kevin Ryan”
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/02/misadventures-of-kevin-ryan.html
Jim -there are Klingons off the starboard bow – and there is life out there but not as we know it…Jim….you do have a penchant for over reaction and assumptions…I did not accuse you of anything other than to suggest by your own definitions of the last 3 articles that you have written that you are purporting to various and some extraordinary definitions of deference that make you sound or read like you are trying to pull wool over our eyes—-you have your point of view and thats fine and dandy but there are others with more convincing views and evidence of a more persuasive kind yet you continue to perform the need to explain all you believe by intending to deny that there are possibly better and more accurate theories or realities.
Your no plane view is out of keeping with the visual,physical and coroborated evidence and I would agree that no plane hit the Pentagon and the planes that hit the tower were not those of the flights presented but surrogate planes sent in under remote control technology that would be more accurate than anyone suggesting that a couple of arabs with laughable pre-training could accomplish.
You ask a lot of peoples intelligents and assume that because you have a window via VT that your view must be eternally presented to convince many others that what you say are in fact,”the facts”…
Rest your case Mr Fetzer its had plenty of airing and get down to the serious elements of the issue which you seem to be circumventing with great waffles of your explanation of the above article which implies that all your readers should go back to school and receive the benefit of your explanations of what they already know – after all you have presented variously and copiously and I as part of the big jury am not convinced nor likely to be convinced by your conjecture as are many others even better informed than I…..there is no disrespect but equally there is no aquiesence….being that there is a vast body of infils and trolls all trying to disinform on 911 by your insistence you can equally be so considered and many have so commented.
Peter,
I have no idea what you are trying to tell me. You think I OVER-ARGUE my case? I don’t know what to make of that. And, as far as video fakery in New York is concerned, do you have an argument that shows what I have wrong? Here’s a summary of my views:
Jim Fetzer
August 13, 2011 – 5:51 am(Edit)
Well, let’s see where things stand, Anthony. So far as I can tell, you have yet to refute any of my arguments. Moreover, since, as I use the phrase, video fakery covers any use of video to convey a false impression–whether the events that it presents are faked and the video was not altered, as in the case of a hologram, or the events it presents were introduced into the video, as in the case of CGIs or video compositing–one decisive way to prove that a video is fake is that it presents events that are physically impossible. Consider:
(1) Impossible Speed: I claimed that the plane is traveling at a speed that is impossible for a standard Boeing 767. That this is the case has been confirmed by Pilots for 9/11 Truth. Even you, Anthony, have admitted that 560 mph, which is its cruising speed at 35,000 feet, is impossible at 700-1,000 feet. So not only am I right about this, but you have acknowledged that I am right. It is for this reason that you have talked about a “special plane”, modified to travel at a higher speed. A “special plane”, however, is still a plane, which is a physical object that cannot violate laws of physics and of engineering. Take another look at the entry and the floors that it was intersecting with.
(2) Impossible Entry: Even a “special plane” is still a plane, however, and cannot violate laws of engineering and of physics. We know from Newton that objects remain at rest or travel in straight lines unless acted upon by other forces. We know that the effects of those other forces will be imparted in the direction in which thye are applied. We also know that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The effortless entry of this “plane” into the building, given its design, intersecting eight (8) floors, is a physical impossibility. The plane should have crumpled, its wings and tail broken off, with bodies, seats, and luggage falling to the ground.
(3) Equal Distance/Equal Times: The argument that I found decisive when I began to investigate the possibility of video fakery is that the plane makes its impossible entry by passing its whole length into the building in the same number of frames that it passes through its own length in air. This is impossible unless a massive, steel-and-concrete building poses no more resistance to the path of a plane in flight than air. It has been confirmed in both Hezarkhani and Fairbanks videos. Covering equal distances in equal times implies equal speeds, which means that there is no diminution in velocity under conditions when its velocity should have dropped to zero.
(4) The Planted Engine: An engine component found at Church & Murray has been claimed to have come from Flight 175. However, as even you have acknowledged, it is not from the engine of a Boeing 767. Moreover, it is obviously planted. We have footage of FBI agents unloading something heavy from a van at that location. Since the part was there later in the day, they are obviously delivering it and not picking it up. It is under a construction scaffolding and sitting on an undamaged sidewalk. If the plane had been real, then why would it have been necessary to plant an engine? Not only does this not support video authenticity, it further confirms video fakery.
(5) Joe Keith: The equal distance/equal times argument, which implies no loss in velocity upon entry, was advanced by Joe Keith, who was a software engineer for Boeing and programmed the software for its shaker system. It is archived as, “Joe’s Law” (with a $5,000 reward for disproof) at Morgan Reynolds’ web site, http://nomoregames.net/2008/06/13/311/ Why you continue to dispute this is beyond me. You persist with the ad hominem that he wasn’t really an “aerospace engineer”, which appears to be baseless. More importantly, his argument stands on its own merits. It wouldn’t matter if he were a bar tender rather than a software engineer. I am taken aback that you can’t grasp this elementary point.
(6) Predictable Damage: The windows were only 18″ across, the support columns one meter apart. There were no windows between floors. Far less than 40% of the facade would have been glass. Steel and concrete are far more dense than aluminum. The effects of a plane hitting a stationary building at 560 mph would be the same as the building hitting the stationary plane at 560 mph. Imagine what would occur if a plane in flight impacted with one of those sections of the external support columns–or what would happen if a plane in flight were to collide with one of those steel trusses covered with 4-8″ of concrete? I’ve asked this repeatedly, but you have no answer.
(7) Why They Had to Fake It: They needed to coordinate the temporal sequence, so the explosions in the subbasements that drained the water from the sprinkler systems could be “explained away” as the effects of jet fuel falling through the elevator shafts. But it is difficult for an experienced pilot to hit a target 208′ across, even with multiple attempts. And they needed the plane to enter the building before it would explode to have a pseudo-explanation for the building’s “collapse”. None of that would have happened with a real plane, so they had to fake it. And they were still 14 and 17 seconds late with their “hits”, as Gordon Ross and Craig Furlong explained and as I elaborated upon in “9/11: Seismic Proof + Video Fakery = Inside Job”. I am baffled that you seem to be unable to understand all this.
Yes thankyou Jim for your repetitive argument-point of view…I did read all this carefully in its original form/article posted by yourself and of course the extensive tennis match with Antony – and such a repetition was not necessary but thanks for posting it with such speed and consideration – one could say the that the reply makes its impossible entry by passing its whole length into the comments box in the same number of frames that it passes through its own length in cyber space… such a speedy reply that one wonders if it came off the shelf . Thankyou for your time and consideration.
It didn’t come “off the shelf”, Peter, but IT’S RIGHT THERE IN THE COMMENTS. Yet many here simply ignore the force of the arguments I have presented. Those who understand them are not persisting with phony arguments. (Does you comment belong on another thread?) I don’t know what has become of Anthony, who seems to have fallen into the deep end of the pool, but I am trying to reach rational readers with the best arguments about this I have yet discovered. I don’t do well with sarcasm, so if you have a point to make, just make it. I deal with complex and controversial issues and, because of that, I am attacked all the time!
Jim Fetzer said:
“It cannot have been a “100% Mossad operation”. It was a joint CIA/DoD/Mossad op, at the least.”
################################################################################
While this statement is most likely technically correct, it’s misleading because the “U.S. government” has been completely subverted by “Israel” and its fanatical Jewish supremacist partisans.
IOW, the U.S. “alphabet agencies” involved were not independent actors who had a “choice”; they were merely pre-positioned Jewish supremacist assets, without which the crime wouldn’t have been able to go forward.
It’s more meaningful to say that 9/11 was planned and carried out by “Israel” and it’s fanatical Jewish supremacist partisans, WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF TRAITORS HOLDING CRITICAL HIGH LEVEL POSITIONS IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
I think you are trying too hard to find something to disagree with. Do you understand that, unless George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld had been committed to 9/11, it would not have happened? Do you have some aversion to acknowledging the complicity of ordinary Americans in the murder of 3,000 citizens? It cannot have been a “100% Mossad operation”. It was at least a joint CIA/DoD/Mossad op.
Do you understand that the Jews, who basically manipulate and control our whole national political process, specifically brought “Team Bush” to power, for the specific purpose of getting their PNAC agenda rolling? The evidence is simply overwhelming; e.g., don’t forget that Bush, before he was even in office a month, began his massive illegal spying operation. Bush hit the ground running. The whole thing was a setup.
As I’ve said many times before, “we” actually don’t have a government…what we have is some kind of Zionist whorehouse on the Potomac, masquerading as government.
Let’s face it the Jews never would’ve done 9/11 unless they knew they had Congress completely in their pocket (along with the other two branches, of course).
Our rulers in Washington don’t actually “govern” in any meaningful sense; rather, they “rule”, on behalf of our Jewish supremacist overlords. Their primary duties are the mass-murder of brown people all over the world in pursuit of global rule; obstructing justice; managing perception; and crowd control, all the while squandering the world’s wealth, looting the domestic economy and destroying the dollar.
##################################################################
“We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. NOTHING that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will forever destroy, because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which it is not in your nature to build.” (Maurice Samuel, “You Gentiles” p.155)
I think what really matters is that over 50% of americans do not believe the offical story. And over 1/3rd of americans see it as a false flag attack. This is significant. For no matter what the government and the media try to pull at least half of america will view it suspciously. They may try for another flase flag attack but it will not work. And to add to that matter these false flags give more poer to potential enemies. If there was a real attack that too would be viewed asd a false flag by the people.
so, the government has shot themselves in the foot. Even if we were actually attcked by a real enemy no one would believe them. They no longer represnt the people of the USA. They are illegitamte now.
I and many other people view ourselves as being governmentless. No actual government reprsents me. Therefore I have no loyalty to them.
I have the following questions for Dr Jim Fetzer:
1) Do you think that the US Govt is or is not infiltrated and/or controlled by AIPAC and Israel?
2) You stated that 9/11 was a joint op (Bush Govt-DoD-Mossad), which exclude completely the “Al-Qaeda Muslim Terrorists”, and I agree with you in that. If you were to express in % the share and/or responsibility of each one of said actors, what would be the % you will attribute to each one of them?
3) Who do you think profited/is profiting from 9/11, the USA or Israel?
4) Would you attribute the core responsibility of 9/11 to the Bush Adm. or to the Israeli Lobby (AIPAC-ASSETS-AGENTS-SAYANIM) and MOSSAD or were there other actors, we do not know about?
5) What do you think the American People should do to prosecute who ever was/is responsible for 9/11, and do you have any idea-suggestion about how to proceed to such effect or are there other means that can be used in other hold the culprits accountable for 9/11 horrendous crime and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq said staged event triggered?
That’s all, thank you.
1) Israel and AIPAC have entirely too much influence over Congress and our foreign policy.
2) About 50/50 (between US and Israeli officials and operatives; al Qaeda contribution zero).
3) About 50/50 again. Did you miss the part (5th paragraph from the end) where I address it?
4) There was a convergence of interests. I also believe the Pentagon hit was opportunistic.
5) Abolish electronic voting machines; public financing for federal elections; abolish lobbying
in Washington, D.C.; restore the draft; cease privatizing the government and its operations.
Our problems are systemic. If the American people ever understood what the Bush family
has done to this nation, they would be chased down the street and strung up (G.H.W.B.)
Dr Fetzer, Thank you for your answers.
1) I adhere totally to your position on mentioned above (point 5) ,
2) I did not miss the statement you referred in the 5th paragraph from the end of your post, just noticed that no explicit mention in it is made that Israel has benefited or is benefiting from 9/11 and/or the US war on-occupation of Iraq,
3) I would like, with your permission, to reformulate my first question: Should AIPAC and/or Israel have any influence on the US Congress-Senate debates and decisions or on any aspect of US domestic/foreign policy? If affirmative, why and to what extent?
Ideally, there should be no foreign influence upon the formulation of US foreign policy–apart from expert consultations that are required to insure that it is well-founded. The role of AIPAC has been studied extensively and the authors, instead of being celebrated for exposing its influence in massively warping US foreign policy, were severely attacked and publicly maligned. I am talking about the study by John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at The University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of International Relations at Harvard, both highly respected and accomplished scholars, who have summarized their findings here, “The Israel Lobby”, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby the longer and unedited version of which is available at http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011, or at http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=891198. The lobby exerted its massive influence to even force Harvard to remove its seal from the study, http://pierretristam.com/Bobst/library/wf-149.htm: “‘Israel Lobby’ study: Harvard to remove official seal from anti-AIPAC ‘working paper’”, by Shmuel Rosner, Haaretz Correspondent. WASHINGTON – Harvard University has decided to remove its logo from a study that denounces the pro-Israel lobby’s impact on American foreign policy, in order to distance itself from the study’s conclusions. The university also appended a more strongly worded disclaimer to the study, stating that it reflects the views of its authors only. The former disclaimer said merely that the study ‘does not necessarily’ reflect the university’s views.” That this was a “put up” job follows from the consideration that no study by any faculty member at any college or university “reflects the university’s views”. Only administrators are in the position to speak for their own institutions. Faculty are more akin to “independent contractors” who are hired for their competence and qualifications with regard to their areas of expertise. So anyone who doubts the domination EVEN OF DISCUSSIONS of US foreign policy by the Israel lobby should take this case as an instructive illustration.
Wish I could have posted this up where the discussion of my position(s) was taking place, but people should know that after reading a lengthy series of exchanges among Fetzer & others, I withdrew from that scheduled radio program, seeing it as entirely unproductive and potentially more than a bit misleading — rhetorical “black holes” not being my cup of tea.
You would make a better use of your time washing your car in the driveway. I believe Jim has no intention to come to a conclusion and prefers to endlessly collect and analyze data, an abuse of scientific principles. In a scientific research (in archeology, medicine, art history, ..), when the conclusion seems too far away, it is customary to set up a reasonable “hypothesis” and try to prove/disprove it as a short cut, as opposed to perfunctorily keep collecting data for years to come. The hypothesis regarding the who did 911 and for what purpose was set up at least seven years ago and documentedly proven to be true. Jim Fetzer purposely ignores it and stresses that the scientific way is that we need more data and more data and more data ……
What are you talking about, Art? I have addressed Israeli complicit many places, including “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda”, http://tinyurl.com/45ltba ,”Is 9/11 research ‘anti-Semitic’?”, http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-9-11-Research-Anti-Sem-by-Jim-Fetzer-090615-95.html and “Are wars in Iraq and Afghanistan justified by 9/11?”, http://noliesradio.org/archives/21621? In all of these cases, I name the names of those who appear to me to have played the major role on the part of the Department of Defense, especially. If you think I am wrong, then explain why; but do not attack me on the basis of your own ignorance about my positions. Do a little research. My views are not difficult to track down.
I am tired of researching. That is the whole point. Please read my post again. I am not “attacking” your “position”and am aware of your research. The fact that your many years of research has not served you to even tilt to a particular ‘direction’ is troubling. “Complicity” is not the answer. A 7/11 attendant might have been an accomplice too for his particular short term interest. I think time is up for many. Staying in the middle and rightfully identifying the many criminals involved, without a verdict, is just safe for every one. We have passed that point. This is not a thumb down for your valuable work. Not at all. But many including me are just tired of so much ‘valuable works’ but without an actionable conclusion.
Alan, How could you know that a discussion that had not taken place would be “unproductive and potentially more than a bit misleading”? My interpretation was that you simply did not want to confront me because I would have suggested that you have exaggerated the role of the Mossad and Israel in all of this, where Bush and Cheney had a great deal to benefit from all of this. Which I certainly continue to believe. And it was only after you had decided at the last minute that you were not going to come on the show the first time that you began to qualify your position ever so slightly, which I attributed to having read some of my articles. If you have a bone to pick with me, don’t be coy. Tell me what you think I have wrong. Explain my position (so I can tell if you have it right) and then explain what I have wrong. I can’t wait to hear more from you.
[...] http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/ Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. ← The Next Inside Job: A Nuclear 9/11 [...]
911 was planned and operated by the Israeli government.
I agree that Jewish Zionists control our national political process and brought Bush and all the Jewish Zionists in the White House and elsewhere for the purpose of initiating their PNAC agenda which comes from A Clean: A New Strategy for securing the Realm written by Jewish Zionists for Netanyahu years ago.
A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm from Wikipedia:
Ian Buruma wrote in August 2003 in the New York Times that[10]:
“Douglas Feith and Richard Perle advised Netanyahu, who was prime minister in 1996, to make ‘a clean break’ from the Oslo accords with the Palestinians. They also argued that Israeli security would be served best by regime change in surrounding countries. Despite the current mess in Iraq, this is still a commonplace in Washington.
Daniel Levy described the paper and the influence its authors came to yield on US foreign policy[11]:
“In 1996 a group of then opposition U.S. policy agitators, including Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, presented a paper entitled ‘A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm’ to incoming Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The ‘clean break’ was from the prevailing peace process, advocating that Israel pursue a combination of roll-back, destabilization and containment in the region, including striking at Syria and removing Saddam Hussein from power in favor of ‘Hashemite control in Iraq.’ The Israeli horse they backed then was not up to the task. Ten years later, as Netanyahu languishes in the opposition, as head of a small Likud faction, Perle, Feith and their neoconservative friends have justifiably earned a reputation as awesome wielders of foreign-policy influence under George W. Bush.”
Commentator Karen Kwiatkowski [1] has pointed to the similarities between the proposed actions in the Clean Break document, and the subsequent 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Patrick J. Buchanan,[5] in reference to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the report, wrote that “Their plan, which urged Israel to re-establish ‘the principle of preemption,’ has now been imposed by Perle, Feith, Wurmser & Co. on the United States.”
.John Mearsheimer wrote in March 2006 in the London Review of Books that the ‘Clean Break’ paper
“called for Israel to take steps to reorder the entire Middle East. Netanyahu did not follow their advice, but Feith, Perle and Wurmser were soon urging the Bush administration to pursue those same goals. The Ha’aretz columnist Akiva Eldar warned that Feith and Perle ‘are walking a fine line between their loyalty to American governments … and Israeli interests’.”
Brian: Bush was a blackmailed stooge for Israel. 911 was done for Israel to carry out the agenda from A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm and for the TAPI pipeline. Do a Google search TAPI pipeline, Afghanistan Bollyn.
Jim, I placed this in a Gordon Duff article and here it is:
Bush didn’t do 911. I have mentioned numerous times if you look at the absurd actions of Bush that day it’s obvious he was not involved in 911. He acted like a feckless, imbecile. Why would he do that? Why would his supposed 911 helpers let him do that? If he was involved then he knew what day the attack would occur on. He attracted a lot of suspicion to himself and ruined his reputation. The Jewish Zionists in the White House set him up. Get serious.
You need to learn more about the Mossad and the Israeli agenda for the Middle East.
Bush could not have remained expressionless when Andrew Card leaned over and told him, “America is under attack!”, unless he was in the know. There is no other plausible explanation for his actions. They did not brief him extensively because the man is a mental midget. He blew it “big time” when he spoke (twice) in public fora about thinking, “Man, what a terrible pilot!”, when he watched the first plane hit the North Tower. Once a second plane had hit the second tower–going by the reports in the media, not whether these hits were faked–it would have been preposterous to have such a thought, since these hits were (by that point in time) clearly deliberate. So I think you are wrong and I am right. He had to be clued in, but not fully informed, to play his role. Even at that, he, I would agree, played it very poorly.
You’re being silly. He a read a book about a pet goat to kids for about eight to nine minutes after the second tower was hit instead of protecting the nation from other possible attacks. He did practically nothing after he left the school. Don’t you realize if he were part of 911 he would have acted like a Commander and Chief in order to not look suspicious to people? He would not have planned to made a fool out of himself. He was very concerned about his legacy. What a horrible, absurd plan.
He didn’t act very surprised because he knew the first tower was already hit although at they time he didn’t know if it was an attack or an accident. He stated at first he thought it might be an accident.
I strongly agree with Jim Fetzer on this point.
Bush’s actions/inactions and body language gave it all away. Bush was expecting it. That much is obvious.
Bush sold his soul (whatever little bit of it he had left) to the Jews for a taste of power. Bush is a malignant narcissist capable of easily deceiving himself. Bush was in it up to his ears, as was Cheney of course.
nelson
any sensible person should see the same thing
Thanks Nelson_2008. Brian is being highly subjective in his interpretation. They had to give Bush a role, because he was still the President of the United States. I agree it was a limited role. Did Brian miss this–because I find all this enthusiasm for blaming it completely on Israel to be utterly indefensible:
“Clarke, who was the nation’s leading anti-terrorism expert, recently observed, “It’s not as I originally thought, which was that one lonely CIA analyst got this information and didn’t somehow recognize the significance of it,” Clarke said during an interview. “No, fifty, 5-0, CIA personnel knew about this. Among the fifty people in CIA who knew these guys were in the country was the CIA director. … We therefore conclude that there was a high-level decision inside CIA ordering people not to share that information. … It is also possible, as some FBI investigators suspect, the CIA was running a joint venture with Saudi intelligence in order to get around that restriction … These are only theories about the CIA’s failures to communicate vital information to the bureau … Perhaps the agency decided that Saudi intelligence would have a better chance of recruiting these men than the Americans. That would leave no CIA fingerprints on the operation as well.”
“Indeed, as Ian Henshall has observed, if you substitute the Mossad for the Saudis, you have the explanation for the dancing Israelis, who were apprehended for filming and celebrating during the destruction of the Twin Towers and were released later under orders from Michael Chertoff, then an advisor Attorney General John Ashcroft and a dual US-Israel citizen, who would become Director of the new Department of Homeland Security—which leads directly to reports like those from Dr. Steve Pieczenik that 9/11 was indeed “an inside job” and studies like those from Alan Sabrosky, Ph.D., who has explain that 9/11 involved complicity between neo-con Zionists in the Department of Defense and the Mossad, where Israel had very powerful motives for 9/11 and, along with the Bush/Cheney administration, has been its primary beneficiary.
“But Israel cannot have done this alone. The NORAD “stand down” and the attack on the Pentagon required complicity at the highest levels of the Department of Defense. And the benefits to the Bush/Cheney administration have likewise been enormous. As Patrick Martin has observed, “Without 9/11, there would be no US occupation of Iraq, putting an American army squarely at the center of the world’s largest pool of oil. Without 9/11, there would be no US bases across Central Asia, guarding the second largest source of oil and gas. And without 9/11, the Bush administration would have been unable to sustain itself politically, faced with a deteriorating economy and widespread opposition to its tax cuts for millionaires and social measures to appease the fundamentalist Christian Right.”
For a bit of fun, but then again, who knows?.
Iamgine Bush has been sent off to play with the kiddies….he may know something then again he may not, he just knows something is up.
So he gets the reports on the towers and what is he thinking/
“Oh Fuck what have they done and whats next. Shit, here I am reading a story about a pet goat and I have been told to shut up. Bet that f#@*n Cheney set this pet goat story up to let me know that I am just a f&%$# goat. Shit, someone tell me what to do next..arseholes!”.
I’m about the only one that didn’t get fooled by the Jewish Zionist plan to make Bush look extremely suspicious on 911. People are too stubborn to admit they got fooled. AIPAC ran the White House on 911 and they told Bush what to do that day.
So Bush thought to himself well I know what is going to happen on the day of September 11th so I will do absolutely nothing and look extremely suspicious to the world. Get serious. Him and his pals would have planned out an appropriate series of responses. Oh my.
“He acted like a feckless, imbecile. Why would he do that? ” He wasn’t acting, Brian!
Brian, “Jim” isn’t worth your time. He’s the worst kind of shill there is. A mind control disinfo agent who has been exiled by the JFK and 9/11 communities. Anthony Lawson wrote in article in Rense about VT going downhill citing Fetzer as a good reason and I agree. I still think there are good people here and in the comments section but there is clearly some sort of op going on here. Commenters like myself are getting smeared by other commenters as ‘COINTELPRO’ which is laughable considering my writing style.
What are you talking about, Smitty? I have addressed Israeli complicity many places, including “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda”, http://tinyurl.com/45ltba ,”Is 9/11 research ‘anti-Semitic’?”, http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-9-11-Research-Anti-Sem-by-Jim-Fetzer-090615-95.html and “Are wars in Iraq and Afghanistan justified by 9/11?”, http://noliesradio.org/archives/21621? In all of these cases, I name the names of those who appear to me to have played the major role on the part of the Department of Defense, especially. If you think I am wrong, then explain why; but do not attack me on the basis of your own ignorance about my positions. Do a little research. My views are not difficult to track down.
Jim’s response to you is the cut n paste from his response to me (which might have been the cut n paste from his responses to others). So you and I might not be the only ‘ignorants’ here. When I alerted him that the parts the accomplices played on 911 day is no representation of who planned it, he agreed, but yet refuses to identify the planners because of the existence of other accomplices!! 911 was not a horrible domestic terrorist act. It was a linkage from one phase to another in the global geo political rearrangement. It is troubling to see some one at his academic caliber, does not (intend to) see that from all the demonstrable involved criminal parties only one party has the ideological platform and global strategic planning which has the capability to organically link and run thru centuries. When even Khomeini knew “they plan for a century ahead” why would some one like Jim Fetzer refuse to even acknowledge the existence and global strategy and power of the Judaized Khazarian empire? Does Bush have transgenerational plans for global management? Does CIA? Does DoD?
Art, each of us is limited by their own background, knowledge, and competence. Preston and I are doing what we can to clarify and illuminate the PSYOPS dimension of 9/11, which was a multi-layered, complex, and intricate arrangement of false leads and disinformation intended to obfuscate and obscure who was responsible and how it was done. Some appreciate what we have done; others, such as yourself, apparently do not. If you have a superior study of the events of 9/11, then I suggest you elaborate your position and submit it to VT for consideration for publication. Lay out your take on all of this. Perhaps then we can learn more from you.
For the last time, Jim. I have never trivialized or disrespected your research. Let me give you an example that from your familiarity with how the process of securing a PhD degree works, should help clarifying my point. A PhD program student produces tons of valuable data during his 3-5 year research work. However, he must identify the pieces of data that shapes the final picture (dissertation), which normally means scrapping more than half of his data. Were the scrapped data wrong or useless? Of course not. They just did not play a direct role in forming a solid conclusion (that was not known in the beginning). He will not be awarded with the degree if he cannot go thru the pain and ruthlessly trash half of his work in the service of building the final meaningful story no matter how long and how valuable piles of scientific data he produced. He cannot demand a degree because how hard and how long he worked to produce so much vital information. He must demonstrate that he understands WHY he did the research before qualifying as a leader in solving a problem.
Your research on 911 intricacies is highly appreciated by many, including me. But as long as you are unwilling to identify the most important pieces of your research for a solid conclusion, your line of thinking must not be given the seal of approval for a leadership position in 911 movement. A valuable ‘contributor’? Absolutely. As you said, “each of us is limited by their own background, knowledge, and competence”.
I don’t get this. I and founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth (2005) and published THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007) with contributions from experts on different aspects of the case. I have also produced the DVD, “The Science and Politics of 9/11″ (2007). I have also given presentations about 9/11 around the world (in Athens in 2006, in Buenos Aires 2008 and 2009, and in London 2010). The first document that is presented on the Scholars web site at http://911scholars.org is entitled, “Why doubt 9/11?”, where I present what I take to be the twenty most important refutations of the official account we have established. Check it out at http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=46 As for my most important recent work, most of it has been published here on VT, where you are commenting on what may well be the most important of all of my research.
No offense, Jim, but is this another cut-n-paste post that is supposed to play the role of a generic response fit for any comment that you are unwilling to engage? Right after I mention a PhD student //.. cannot demand a degree because how hard and how long he worked to produce so much vital information. He must demonstrate that he understands WHY he did the research before qualifying as a leader in solving a problem// you go ahead and do just that?
Listen, I earned my own Ph.D. and what you are describing did not fit candidates in the history and the philosophy of science. I have a life to live apart from pointless posts. Why you are making these is just a bit beyond me. If you have a point, make it in plain and simple language. Otherwise, you are coming across as a complete waste of time.
Jim, I placed this in a Gordon Duff article and here it is:
Bush didn’t do 911. I have mentioned numerous times if you look at the absurd actions of Bush that day it’s obvious he was not involved in 911. He acted like a feckless, imbecile. Why would he do that? Why would his supposed 911 helpers let him do that? If he was involved then he knew what day the attack would occur on. He attracted a lot of suspicion to himself and ruined his reputation. The Jewish Zionists in the White House set him up. Get serious.
Do some research on Bush, the Booker elementary school and a book about a pet goat. Bush was set up by the Jewish Zionists in the Whitehouse to look suspicious for the alternative theory people.
From Jim: Do you understand that, unless George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld had been committed to 9/11, it would not have happened?
Brian: Cheney and Rumsfeld may have helped the Mossad. Do you realize how ridiculous it is for Bush ,Chaney and Rumsfeld to kill a vast number of innocent civilians in the Twin Towers in order to invade the Middle East, an operation which is a major factor in destroying the financial health of this nation? All they had to do was hit the Pentagon or a business building in San Francisco, blame Al Qaeda and the American people would have gone a long with an invasion of the Middle East. 911 crushed our economy, no reason to do that.
If Cheney and Rumsfeld were involved the Jewish Zionists running our government probably just told these stooges that just the Pentagon would be hit.
Brian…Bush was involved and was given his role because he was a stooge president to begin with – it was all part of the plan…however is it not all clear to everybody that the plan was a lousy plan in the first place with such obvious errors, cover-ups blatant lies from beginning till now, where-in a whole industry of shills,trolls, disinfo artists and the like were going to maintain a charade for as long as possible so that the perpertrators could stall for time and get the real plan which seems to be in your paragraph…
Brian: Cheney and Rumsfeld may have helped the Mossad. Do you realize how ridiculous it is for Bush ,Chaney and Rumsfeld to kill a vast number of innocent civilians in the Twin Towers in order to invade the Middle East, an operation which is a major factor in destroying the financial health of this nation? All they had to do was hit the Pentagon or a business building in San Francisco, blame Al Qaeda and the American people would have gone a long with an invasion of the Middle East. 911 crushed our economy, no reason to do that.
I suggest that; being the issue that the american taxpayer shells out those billions to Israel would it not seem absurd to blatantly bite the hand that feeds you to the tune of 30k per capita per annum?…or is the evidence clear enough that to destroy america and its economy means to destroy the world economy as every country has got its dick up the a…s of everyone else and that the collapse of this fragile house of cards will serve no good what-so-ever in the form of a world takeover by an absurd little country and its religious elite wherein the consequences will be so overwhelming that there is the distinct possibilitry that this little country will actually cease to exist irrespective of their nuke hoard – the absolute armageddon .
If we are all in an agreement that this is the case, then what need have we for any other truth – its entirely irrelevant the Fetzer article because it could only be described as a smoke screen – the real issue is the collapse of america and the world economy which under the circumstances would not be retrievable because of the ecological damage that has aforeto been done.
There is no logic in the action and if there is to be no logic then there is to be no discourse since the boat is at the lip of the waterfall….now all that remains is the last great and culminating conflict…despite their bunkers, they are on a losers streak too. If there are views that there exists the technology to survive this apparent armageddon – that underground enclaves will hang on till the pestilence above has abated and that there are after all UFO/Aliens in tow with this abysmal destruction and some report clear evidence of such, then I repeat the Fetzer material is totally irrelevant apart from being temporarily academic in subjectiveness as there is quite obviously no objectiveness in his presentation….though of course he will continue to argue this with the instant copy and paste that has heretofore been mentioned…
I will leave it there and just ask Gordon at the same time if he/VT, EVER presented the Phil Schneider story…it has relevance here.
Seems to me that most posters are determined to have their opinion elevated in this complex discussion. A column about column responses might be a good read. I would need to scroll back, but somebody mentioned the names that light my lamp—Cheyne and Rumsfeld. They both had power and motive. Bush is a fool from power-brokering family. Talmudist drive to enslave every last goy also has a big % in blame game. the destruction of those towers and all those lives changed the world, and we probably will not see justice done without a crack team of financed vigilantes. Can it be done? makes for great screenplay.
Thanks so much Jim Fetzer and Preston James for this earnest, thoughtful, patient, and refreshingly honest long view of the situation. I am especially grateful for your exposure of Richard Clarke’s new round of mendacious dissembling. When news of his criticism of Tenet came out last week, I searched high & low for critical commentary that could expose this for the cynical manipulative operation that it is. Yours is the only voice of reason on this as far as I can see. The critical question is what is the endgame that is even more pernicious, more repressive, more darkly evil than the seeming one that we have experienced for the last ten years. I think that we will all have our illusions shattered once again in the very near future.
Thanks again for your courage, conscientiousness, and creativity in confronting these dark mysteries.
Thank you, Kevin. I really cannot abide some of those who are posting here, who seem determined to deny either my role in attempting to expose falsehoods and reveal truths or what we have discovered about 9/11, as a very sophisticated, multi-track black op. I appreciate your very reasonable response, especially about the role of Richard Clarke in his most recent attempts to revive the “we let it happen” caricature.
One of the hardest things I ever had to do in my life, was to come to grips with the breadth and depth of the corruption and the demonic wickedness that is Washington DC.
Yes, 9/11 itself was bad enough, but it’s actually been (1) the breadth and the depth of the cover-up of 9/11; (2) the subsequent, completely unopposed orgy of senseless bloody violence; and (3) the clear road ahead, clearly leading to complete political, moral, economic, and physical self-destruction, that drives the point home.
Every time I thought I’d seen the bottom, they showed me something worse. Now I realize there is no bottom…there’s simply no limit to their wickedness. What we’re dealing with here is pure evil. And if people don’t start resisting the satanic beings pulling the strings, we’ll all be consumed…as their agenda will ultimately require all of our “rights”, all of our assets, probably even our lives.
[...] Infiltration and Derailment Peeling the 9/11 Onion: Layers of Plots within Plots Chatter: 9/11, Fringe Science and [...]
Peeling the 9/11 Onion: Layers of Plots within Plots
38Share
by Jim Fetzer (with Preston James)
One of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed and nothing can be known… nothing of significance, that is.– E. Martin Schotz, HISTORY WILL NOT ABSOLVE US (1996)
9/11 appears to have been a classic “false flag” operation in which an attack is planned by one source but blamed upon another. In this case, the evidence suggests neo-cons in the Department of Defense and their allies in the Mossad were actually responsible for the execution of the atrocities of 9/11. That story was buried, however, in a surfeit of alternative explanations for which the evidence was far more tenuous but which were of much greater political utility. And in each case, qualified experts uncovered evidence that induced sincere but false beliefs that they were “the real deal”.
The situation encountered with regard to 9/11 turns out to be far more sophisticated than the efforts that were made to divert attention from the conspirators in the case of the assassination of JFK, where “Track #1”, as we might call it, implicated Lee Harvey Oswald as “the lone assassin”. Track #2 suggested that he working for Fidel Castro and that Cuba had done it. Track #3 was redirected domestically to encompass the mob, while Track #4 targeted the Soviet Union. But these were superficial distractions for which most of the evidence was flimsy and inconclusive. 9/11 presents a greater challenge to unpack, because in this case, planted evidence was more extensive and appeared to be real.
Deep black covert operations, of course, are by their very nature shrouded in layers of secrecy, protected by the “need to know” and sensitive compartmentalized information (SCI). Since WWII, however, major covert operations have become increasingly sophisticated and new models have been developed which take full advantage of the extensive national security laws and practices guaranteed under the National Security Acts of 1947 and 1952. The experts who create these plots are specialists in PSYOPS, which entails accessing, stimulating and manipulating the subconscious minds of the target population as a single unit in order to create beliefs and instill motivations in the public mind that are necessary to support of their actions but would normally be viewed as unacceptable.
This is related to Abraham Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs”. When basic primal survival fears are activated in the “group mind” of the masses, this fear induces the motivation for a population to willingly give up their rights and liberty even for merely the promise of more protection from the boogeymen. This principal is the basis for successful PSYOPS. The use of multi-track intermeshed, deep-black covert operations also creates massive cognitive dissonance among federal investigators, private researchers and the public, which typically eventually results in folks abandoning the issue and going away in “quiet desperation”, which is the actual intended result of those who plan and activate them.
Deep Black/False Flag Ops
The “shroud of secrecy” they afford provides perfect cover to plan and carry out these sophisticated multi-track deep black covert operations and keep them secret–even from those operatives who are involved as well as the government’s own agents who do the investigations. The “national security” cover can be dropped on any matter that is at risk of being disclosed to the public and then can be invoked again at any time. Thus, alphabets who discover what really happened can be silenced and the media can be gagged with the delivery of a “national security letter”.
One of the greatest advances in deep black, false flag/stand-down covert operations has been the development of a new, more complex design, best referred to as “multi-track, enmeshed”. This involves using a complicated design with independent covert operations, each of which could individually do the job if they were actually “taken live”. These operations, however, are designed to be enmeshed at the nexus of the actual target, at which point some are de-activated and one or more taken live.
This can completely confound even the most seasoned investigators, thus creating so much conflict among researchers that these emergent conflicts between them provide the best cover possible for what was actually done and how it was done. Multi-track and interwoven deep black covert operations are therefore designed from the very start to obfuscate the actual operation that is selected and taken live, thereby denying most intel and government officials as well as the public any real knowledge of the actual operational purpose and information about the covert operation or why a particular covert operation was taken live as the predominant op.
As an illustration, when we attempt to peel the 9/11 onion, we discover there are at least five different alternative theories for which evidence has emerged, where each of them has sincere supporters who falsely believe that they have found critical evidence about that happened on 9/11. Each of these is actually one plot of many plots, which were deliberately contrived to creating sufficient confusion that everything about 9/11 turns out to be believable and nothing is knowable. Such deep black cover op designs can thereby provide sufficient “after the fact” cover to keep the truth buried in confusion forever.
Palestinians Did It
Cover Story #1: Palestinians Did It! Efforts were being made before the Twin Towers were destroyed to imply Palestinian responsibility for commandeering those planes and committing those crimes, which may have taken the lives of as many as 3,000 citizens and employees. Those who were watching closely saw archival footage of Palestinians rejoicing on a festive occasion being broadcast as though it were contemporaneous to convey the impression—meant to be indelible—that the Palestinian people had taken pleasure at inflicting misery on America.
An early report from CNN even asserted that the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine had claimed responsibility for 9/11—and that was before Flight 175 had hit the South Tower! So during that brief interval between the first hit on the North Tower at 8:46:40 and the second on the South Tower at 9:03:11, a propaganda operation to implicate the Palestinians was well under way. The immediate availability of this report and video footage indicates the direction in which responsibility for these attacks was originally intended to be cast
And that might have become the official cover story, were it not for observant residents near Liberty State Park in New Jersey who watched as five young men, dressed in Arab garb, filmed the destruction of the Twin Towers, cheering and celebrating, which came across as odd behavior, under the circumstances. When they were apprehended in a white van from Urban Moving Systems, the driver would inform the arresting officer that they were not the problem: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.”
They were found to have $4,700 in cash, box cutters, and foreign passports in their possession. Urban Moving Systems would subsequently be identified as a Mossad front. After 71 days of incarceration, the Dancing Israelis would be released and return to Israel, where three of them would go on TV there and explain that their purpose had been to document the destruction of the Twin Towers. Once they had been arrested, however, the story was quietly dropped. It was just too revealing that Israel had been profoundly involved in the events of 9/11.
Arab Hijackers Did It
Cover Story #2: 19 Arab Hijackers Did It. If these attacks could not be blamed on the Palestinians without revealing Israeli complicity, the fall back was effortless. We know “the official account”—that nineteen Islamic terrorists hijacked four commercial carriers, outfoxed the most sophisticated air defense system in the world and perpetrated these atrocities under the control of a guy in a cave in Afghanistan. It would turn out that 15 of the 19 alleged terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and none were from Iraq.
But that would not matter in the grand scheme of things, where Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld would push 9/11 as a justification for attacking Iraq. Not only was the public being fed false information about weapons of mass destruction and collusion with al Qaeda, but the national press was oblivious to the obvious question that remained unaddressed by government officials or the main stream media: If 15 of 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the UAE, one from Lebanon and Egypt, then why were we attacking Iraq?
Osama bin Laden with al Qaeda
Even our own FBI would eventually acknowledge that it had no “hard evidence” that Osama bin Laden had had anything to do with 9/11. But the range of evidence that exonerates al Qaeda and implicates the Bush/Cheney administration in these crimes has become as broad as it is deep. Elias Davidsson, for example, has shown that the US government had never produced evidence that the alleged “hijackers” were even aboard those four planes. Muslims. David Ray Griffin, the leading expert on 9/11 in the world today, has shown that the alleged phone calls from those planes were faked, where even our own FBI has confirmed that Barbara Olsen never spoke to her husband, Ted.
Leslie Raphael has offered reason after reason for concluding that the Jules Naudet film was staged. The evidence that no planes crashed in Shanksville or hit the Pentagon is beyond reasonable doubt, where others have shown that the videos of Flight 175 hitting the South Tower are fake, which may have been a brilliant stroke to generate dissension within the 9/11 Truth movement, since the truth of video fakery has proven to be politically divisive. The scientific evidence disproving the official account is also abundant and compelling. Given what we know now, anyone who continues to believe the “official account” of 9/11 is either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired.
Pakistan/Turkey/Saudi Arabia
Cover Story #3. The Pakistanis Did It. This track was based upon the supposition that well-financed Pakistani intel were able to buy expensive “K Street” lobbyists and gain influence with high officials in the government and Department of Defense, who had much to gain from a “staged terror attack” such as 9/11. It was the next layer of the onion to be peeled when and if the Arab hijackers story wouldn’t work any longer and was initiated by the revelation that Omar Sheikh, a British-born Islamist militant, had wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, allegedly the lead hijacker, at the direction General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). As Michael Meecher has observed, it is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count. It certainly raises the prospect that the ISI was deeply involved and possibly responsible for the events of 9/11. Even if it were true, however, it cannot begin to account for the causal nexus that brought about 9/11 or identify those who were “pulling the strings”.
“Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers,” Meecher writes, “was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to “retire” by President Pervez Musharraf. Why hasn’t the US demanded that he be questioned and tried in court?” Although a number of reasons have been advanced for not taking this story seriously, Meecher mentions a number of sources who have information that might or might not implicate the ISI and expose those who were behind 9/11, the most important of whom appears to be former FBI translator, Sibel Edmonds, who has recently been speaking out.
Sibel Edmonds
Edmonds, a 33-year-old Turkish-American linguist, who is fluent in both Turkish and Azerbaijani, has tried to blow the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. While Sibel has been under gag orders forbidding her from testifying in court or mentioning the names of the people or of the countries involved, she has said. “My translations of the 9/11 intercepts included [terrorist] money laundering, detailed and date-specific information … if they were to do real investigations, we would see several significant high-level criminal prosecutions in this country [the US] … and believe me, they will do everything to cover this up”.
Revelations claimed to emerge from her case have been described as being explosive, including “that foreign operatives who were working in the translation department been tried to recruit her for their operations; that there exists a nuclear spy ring aided and abetted by high ranking US government officials who have been selling America’s nuclear secrets on the black market; that foreign language intelligence directly pertaining to 9/11 was deliberately withheld from FBI agents in the field; that Osama bin Laden had an ‘intimate relationship’ with the United Stages government right up until 9/11.” While most of this is probably true, the theory of the case that she appears to imply—that Turkey (with assistance from actors from Pakistan, and Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia) had been using Bin Laden and the Taliban as a proxy terrorist army to promote its own agenda—may be true in its own right, but based upon the totality of what we know now, does not begin to approach an explanation for the stand-down by NORAD, for example, or of how the demolitions were situated or the post-attack cover-ups.
The US “Let it Happen”
Cover Story #4: It was allowed to happen. The distinction between “LIHOP” (let it happen on purpose) and “MIHOP“ (made it happen on purpose) has been powerfully reinforced by the “Able Danger” contretemps. As a highly classified, anti-terrorist intelligence operation, Able Danger fell under Special Operations (SOCOM) and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) control. When claims arose that the US had had advanced knowledge of 9/11 and had allowed it to happen, a 16-month investigation by the Senate Intelligence committee reported in December 2006 that there had been no knowledge of the 9/11 attacks by US authorities.
The evidence, however, indicates that was not the case—and, indeed, that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated and staged by elements within the Department of Defense with help from their friends in the Mossad. As the 10th observance of 9/11 approaches, we know that there were a minimum of two independent deep cover covert operations which were operating on dual track, parallel and also interwoven. The first one was the creation and tracking—principally by the Mossad—of some “low tech” terrorist cells, which were set up, financed, and trained by US and other intelligence agencies.
“Able Danger” discovered this low-tech terror cell sub-track, which we can call “Track A”. The operation was designed to be discovered to create false cover, so that when 9/11 succeeded, it could be shown by information discovered by a bona fide intelligence group that this terror cell was responsible. That would be the role played by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, other members of the “Able Danger” team, and Coleen Rowley of the FBI in Minneapolis. Track A, however, was designed to be discovered and then the investigation stopped, creating the image of high-level US incompetence that had allowed this terror cell to succeed in hijacking aircraft with box-cutters and then flying those aircraft into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
When the folks from “Able Danger” swear that they uncovered “a real terrorist cell plot”, they are telling the truth. It was set up this way as a false track. When Coleen Rowley expresses frustration because she could not obtain a search warrant for the hard drive of Zacarias Moussaui because he was involved in this terror cell, she was telling the truth. But Track A was set up as a false track to be terminated before the 9/11 attacks to provide a convincing cover story for the highest levels of US intelligence and make the government appear to be merely hugely incompetent. After all, how could government officials of this incompetence have staged a successful and effective covert operation?
The US “Made it Happen”
Actual Story: The US “Made it Happen”. Track B, by comparison, was a high-tech track designed to use readiness exercises on 9/11, including some 17 anti-terrorist drills on 9/11 that disrupted communication and coordination between NORAD and the FAA, by taking some of them live and substituting high-tech weapons and in order to target the Twin Towers and the Pentagon by that means. Track B involved the use of numerous different demolition means, including incendiaries and multiple modes of destruction, most of which alone would be insufficient cause for the detonation of the Twin Towers, which was arguably used to induce false leads confusing investigators and researchers.
A perfect example turns out to be the “hard science” 9/11 Truth group’s insistence that nanothermite was the principal element used in the demolition of the Twin Towers. This position, which has assumed a status akin to that of a dogma within the 9/11 movement, turns out to be unsustainable in light of research that has established that nanothermite is non-explosive—or, at best, a feeble explosive—and cannot have been responsible for blowing the towers apart, for ejecting massive steel assemblies hundreds of feet, or for the pulverization of concrete or the destruction of steel by means of shockwaves. To a bona fide explosives expert, the claim that nanothermite provided the explosive energy or enough shockwave velocity to perform these tasks had to be an obvious deception. If it was deliberately planted to divert research on 9/11 along an ultimately unproductive line, it may have succeeded beyond the wildest intel dreams as a classic “red herring”.
Another example, surprisingly, is the Pentagon attack, where some of those within the 9/11 community have argued strenuously for not going there, because the Department of Defense might spring a new video on the public that proves a Boeing 757 actually did hit the building. The evidence contradicting that contention is abundant and compelling, however, including the expert assessment of Major General Albert N. Stubblebine, USA (ret.), perhaps the world’s leading expert on image analysis and interpretation, who has concluded that no plane hit the Pentagon. When you take all the evidence into account, the case against a plane is staggering, but internal dissension has precluding using it— and other powerful proofs of governmental fakery —and has taken this evidence out of the public domain:
“From the photographs I have analyzed very, very carefully,” Stubblebine has explained, “it was not an airplane.” During an interview in Germany, he explained that there should have been wing marks on the façade of the Pentagon. “If it had wings, it would have left wing marks. [There are] those who claim that the plane tilted and hit the ground first and lost a wing. But airplanes have two wings, and he could not find indications of any wing in any of those photographs.” Regarding the Twin Towers, he added, “Look at the buildings falling—they didn”t fall down because of an airplane hit them. They fell down because explosives went off inside. Demolition. Look at Building 7, for God’s sake.”
Whistleblowing as Deception
The politics of 9/11, however, are far more murky than the science. So when folks from Able Danger swear that they uncovered a real terror cell plot, they are telling the truth. It was set up this way as a false track. When a Colleen Rowley expresses frustration because she could not get a search warrant for Moussaui’s hard-drive because he was involved in this terror cell, she is telling the truth. When a Sibel Edmonds is gagged by court order and tries to tell how certain how administration officials were communicating with this terror cell, she is telling the truth. Indeed, the effort to mislead our own experts even extended to Richard Clarke, who has explained that he himself had been given the false impression that, apart from a few analysts, the CIA had been unaware of what was going on prior to 9/11, which was intended to support the theory of US incompetence.
Clarke, who was the nation’s leading anti-terrorism expert, recently observed, “It’s not as I originally thought, which was that one lonely CIA analyst got this information and didn’t somehow recognize the significance of it,” Clarke said during an interview. “No, fifty, 5-0, CIA personnel knew about this. Among the fifty people in CIA who knew these guys were in the country was the CIA director. … We therefore conclude that there was a high-level decision inside CIA ordering people not to share that information. … It is also possible, as some FBI investigators suspect, the CIA was running a joint venture with Saudi intelligence in order to get around that restriction … These are only theories about the CIA’s failures to communicate vital information to the bureau … Perhaps the agency decided that Saudi intelligence would have a better chance of recruiting these men than the Americans. That would leave no CIA fingerprints on the operation as well.”
Indeed, as Ian Henshall has observed, if you substitute the Mossad for the Saudis, you have the explanation for the dancing Israelis, who were apprehended for filming and celebrating during the destruction of the Twin Towers and were released later under orders from Michael Chertoff, then an advisor Attorney General John Ashcroft and a dual US-Israel citizen, who would become Director of the new Department of Homeland Security—which leads directly to reports like those from Dr. Steve Pieczenik that 9/11 was indeed “an inside job” and studies like those from Alan Sabrosky, Ph.D., who has explain that 9/11 involved complicity between neo-con Zionists in the Department of Defense and the Mossad, where Israel had very powerful motives for 9/11 and, along with the Bush/Cheney administration, has been its primary beneficiary.
But Israel cannot have done this alone. The NORAD “stand down” and the attack on the Pentagon required complicity at the highest levels of the Department of Defense. And the benefits to the Bush/Cheney administration have likewise been enormous. As Patrick Martin has observed, “Without 9/11, there would be no US occupation of Iraq, putting an American army squarely at the center of the world’s largest pool of oil. Without 9/11, there would be no US bases across Central Asia, guarding the second largest source of oil and gas. And without 9/11, the Bush administration would have been unable to sustain itself politically, faced with a deteriorating economy and widespread opposition to its tax cuts for millionaires and social measures to appease the fundamentalist Christian Right.”
The Fourth Reich
Indeed, the extreme motivation of a small number of radical Israelis and their lobbies like AIPAC to manipulate US foreign policy in the Mideast may have created huge future trap for them in their role as “classic cutouts”, which can be later exposed in a limited hangout admission in order to direct blame toward the Mossad and the small number of radical Jews involved, who do not represent most Jewish folks at all, thus directing blame away from from those who used them in their cutout role and who were actually at the top of the command structure. This limited hangout disclosure could then later be used to blame all Jews and add them to the large and growing Homeland Security watch-list list of possible domestic terrorists such as Muslims, fundamentalist Christians, returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, Constitutionalists and tax protestors, and member of any current social group that is trying to gain exposure and cessation of rampant government corruption and creeping tyranny of the government at all levels, which of course encompasses those dedicated to 9/11 Truth.
Richard Clarke, Anti-Terrorism Czar
It does not take a PSYOPS expert to discern the pattern here when Richard Clarke resuscitates the incompetence theory, according to which the US “let 9/11 happen”. Even on the assumption that he is sincere, we have a fall-back position intended to minimize concern for complicity by the Bush/Cheney administration and its friends in the Mossad—who, moreover, do not necessarily represent the highest level of control over the atrocities of 9/11. Because Clarke was in the crucial position of being the nation’s anti-terrorism czar, his affirmations about incompetence between agencies, such as the CIA and the FBI, come across to the public and can be widely promoted as admirable and courageous acts of whistle blowing, when their role in deceiving the public drowns amidst the anguish and concern that “if only we had done better” and “we must not let this happen again”, oblivious of the role that his reports are playing in burying the truth about 9/11.
We have now reached the point in America where any citizen or group wanting to obtain needed social justice, or the cessation of undeclared, unprovoked, and unConstitutional wars, in violation of international law and the UN Charter, are now placed on a secret watch list and considered as “potential domestic terrorists” by Homeland Security, which some—with ample justification—view as “The New American Gestapo.” If the US has been hijacked by offshore corporate and banking interests, which have their own anti-American agenda and are now in the process of Nazifying America, as some astute researchers have suggested, then certainly this could lead to a “Fourth Reich” run by offshore banks and large international corporations and we could see a replay of the unlimited persecution of minorities and special scapegoats such as specific groups such as Muslims, Jews and Christians who dissent from The New Tyranny.
So If you have wondered why covert operations like 9/11 are so difficult to unravel or why it is all but impossible to convince the feds who investigated it that this was actually a US false flag/stand-down/inside-job, deep-black covert operation, the answer to that question appears to be that the plan was designed from conception to obfuscate what happened, not only regarding the public but also the government’s own experts, who would be assigned to investigate them—and even to keep most of those who had an actual part in those operations in the dark, so only those at the highest levels of the government knew what happened and, even among them, only a few probably knew the full dimensions of the plan. The objective throughout, accordingly, has always been to keep the public in a state of uncertainly, where everything about these events is believable and nothing is knowable—which is the ultimate objective of disinformation.
——————————————————————————–
Jim Fetzer, McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, is a former Marine Corps officer and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.
Preston James is the pseudonym of a Ph.D. in social psychology, who has become an expert on psy-ops, “false flag” and covert operations by the US government.
There are many disinformation agents set up by the establishment to confuse people. but at the same time many Americans react in a very clever way when confronted with the truths. they respond in a very similar manner. just like the mainstream media using the phrase “conspiracy theory” people try to discredit the truth or express their displeasure upon hearing about 911 truth. sometimes they get so irritated that they are unable to control the anger. isn’t it very basic human nature that ” truth hurts”?
“Look at Building 7, for God’s sake.”
This is the only mention of WTC7 in the whole essay. And there is no mention of it in any of the comments. I think this essay is just more subterfuge and I’m beginning to think VT is also subterfuge. A first year investigator on the Meeteetse, Wyoming police force could have picked up the trail starting at WTC7 and gone directly to the culprits. I’m still amazed that so many people who look to be intelligent and honest can be so obviously corrupt and dishonest. And if you’d like to take a look at it “today”, look at how they have Photoshopped Ron Paul completely out of the the Republican primary. Who is “they”? In the case of Ron Paul, it seems to be virtually everyone.
Todd Marshall
Plantersville, TX
The article wasn’t about what everyone knows about 9/11, such as WTC-7, which has received voluminous publicity, but about aspects of 9/11 that practically no one knows. I think you should not get your nose out of joint when you read articles that you do not appear to understand. This is attempting to put the PSYOPS aspect of 9/11 into perspective. (I agree about Ron Paul, by the way. I am a big fan and have been disgusted at the way the media has ignored him, which, according to some accounts, has been quite deliberate. That has to be the case. He is too great a threat to the establishment to even acknowledge he exists!)
It sickens me to see how evil the so called elites are. they have no morals at all. the people suck too. they are apologists for the satanic elites. when they have no way to hide the truth, they admit it and claim that it’s for greater good. would the elites sacrifice one of their own for greater good? none of the high profile politicians or bankers died in 911 attack even though it was the financial center of the world. people vote for these criminals over and over. people know all the truth even though they pretend not to.
Good story…Jim.
The article mentioned Pakistan and Pakistani intellegence. Was Pakistani intellegence really involved? How did 9/11 benefit Pakistan? If anything 9/11 is the worst thing for Pakistan. Other than Afghanistan and Iraq as war zones, the country that suffered the most with its Army and Intellegence is Pakistan!
I agree that Pakistan had little or nothing to do with 9/11. But a false trail was created to implicate Pakistan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia in order to mislead serious investigators about those who were responsible, where we agree that this appears to have been a CIA/DoD/Mossad operation, which had very intricate PSYOPS aspects, which we address.
Great thought provoking artricle, Jim ~ the Pandora’s box of 9/11 is slowly opening and your contributions are indeed appreciated.
Brian…Bush was involved and was given his role because he was a stooge president to begin with – it was all part of the plan…however is it not all clear to everybody that the plan was a lousy plan in the first place with such obvious errors, cover-ups blatant lies from beginning till now, where-in a whole industry of shills,trolls, disinfo artists and the like were going to maintain a charade for as long as possible so that the perpertrators could stall for time and get the real plan which seems to be in your paragraph…
Brian: Cheney and Rumsfeld may have helped the Mossad. Do you realize how ridiculous it is for Bush ,Chaney and Rumsfeld to kill a vast number of innocent civilians in the Twin Towers in order to invade the Middle East, an operation which is a major factor in destroying the financial health of this nation? All they had to do was hit the Pentagon or a business building in San Francisco, blame Al Qaeda and the American people would have gone a long with an invasion of the Middle East. 911 crushed our economy, no reason to do that.
I suggest that; being the issue that the american taxpayer shells out those billions to Israel would it not seem absurd to blatantly bite the hand that feeds you to the tune of 30k per capita per annum?…or is the evidence clear enough that to destroy america and its economy means to destroy the world economy as every country has got its dick up the a…s of everyone else and that the collapse of this fragile house of cards will serve no good what-so-ever in the form of a world takeover by an absurd little country and its religious elite wherein the consequences will be so overwhelming that there is the distinct possibilitry that this little country will actually cease to exist irrespective of their nuke hoard – the absolute armageddon .
If we are all in an agreement that this is the case, then what need have we for any other truth – its entirely irrelevant the Fetzer article because it could only be described as a smoke screen – the real issue is the collapse of america and the world economy which under the circumstances would not be retrievable because of the ecological damage that has aforeto been done.
There is no logic in the action and if there is to be no logic then there is to be no discourse since the boat is at the lip of the waterfall….now all that remains is the last great and culminating conflict…despite their bunkers, they are on a losers streak too. If there are views that there exists the technology to survive this apparent armageddon – that underground enclaves will hang on till the pestilence above has abated and that there are after all UFO/Aliens in tow with this abysmal destruction and some report clear evidence of such, then I repeat the Fetzer material is totally irrelevant apart from being temporarily academic in subjectiveness as there is quite obviously no objectiveness in his presentation….though of course he will continue to argue this with the instant copy and paste that has heretofore been mentioned…
I will leave it there and just ask Gordon at the same time if he/VT, EVER presented the Phil Schneider story…it has relevance here.
Of course, what is relevant or irrelevant must be measured relative to an aim, objective or goal. I think Peter’s responses to Brian about Bush and Cheney and the need for a dramatic, traumatizing event–a “new Pearl Harbor”, as the PNAC document describes it–are all well and good. But what Preston James and I have done is clearly NOT IRRELEVANT if someone wants to understand the PSYOPS dimensions of 9/11, which was a complicated, multi-track, disinfo-embedded OP. I have been puzzled by other comments that, like this one, imply that a study like ours has no value unless it directly contributes to the prosecution of those who were responsible or is otherwise “action oriented”. Unless we have a clear, well-founded understanding of what happened on 9/11 and why it has been so difficult to sort out–where even our own investigators have been provided with real evidence of false leads–then attaining that goal appears most unlikely. So I would argue that some of you, including Peter, need to take a broader view of what we have done and of why it matters to them.
We’ve waisted ten years already, there is more than enough evidence to have a new investigation, but a lot of witnesses have died, and will die before that happens.
David Ickes book Alice in Wonderland, and the World Trade Disaster is a great read on what was going on at the time in NORAD.
Lots of money was made by the people that done this, or had a part in it. 240 Billion in Bonds redeemed with no one knowing who got the money during 2 week period with no record keeping, 200 Million put up for the buildings 2 months prior, and 7 Billion paid for insurance money, 2.5 Trillion when Pentagon Accounting department was destroyed still missing, Gold stored underneath WTC missing, Financial Records destroyed at WTC Trading Companies, unlimited war on Terror costing Trillions, unlimited shipments of Oil from Iraq with no meters on pumping stations, and I am sure I am forgetting some others.
Bottom line, I could care less who’s at fault, but what are we going to do about it ? Right now, the NWO has created a Caesar Position, that use to be President,but one that can rule by edict, and rubberstanping only Super Congress, and Senate. So, we use that to our advantage, and put Ron Paul in the office. He ends the Fed, repudiates the 1.5 Quadrillion in Derivatives, prints interest free Treasury Currency, that Kennedy had set up, ends the foreign engagements, and brings back the troops. Hell, whatever he can do puts us farther ahead of where were at now.
I also like Ron Paul, who seems to me head and shoulders above the other candidates. But that is no reason not to understand what happened on 9/11 when it is analyzed as a multi-track, complex PSYOP, which is the purpose of our study. Nothing we have explained precludes pursuing those responsible if we have sufficient legally admissible evidence to bring indictments and secure convictions, which requires establishing linkage between those events and those who perpetrated them. We are attempting to clarify the big picture of 9/11 with respect to its complexity and multiple false leads, which was considerable.
Paul scares me because he has taken on neocon rhetoric in order to, what he believes, reestablish the GOP base…..of flat earthers and maniacs.
This will cripple any chance he has of going after the Fed.
g
Well, I have a friend who is devoted to Ron Paul and we discuss him all the time. Ron Paul as a speaker is very concise and to the point. Since he is opposed to these wars abroad and wants to dramatically cut the defense budget as well as abolish the FED and restore Constitutional government, I personally do not see any elements of “neocon rhetoric”. And he is most certainly NOT attempting to reestablish a GOP base. In fact, those who are prominent in the GOP are afraid of Ron Paul because he does not defer to the tradition sources of GOP support, including the bankers and investors.
Jim, there has not been a day that has went by since JFK where I have not thought about some aspect of that event. I would love to know what really happened on 9-11. They, who ever they are, probably started planning it right after the failed attempt in 93, after they analyzed the failure of that. I mean the official story of 9-11 is their greatest hoax ever. It makes the lone gunman, and 6 million seem like scientific fact !
Of course we have to talk about it, it was just this morning after working all night that I wrote what I did. Hell, there are so many strange things about that case, the 20 dollar bill I think it was that folded up to portray the WTC burning, printed in 96, The UFO filmed at the WTC by that news helicopter, that was around the level where the planes hit. You, Gordon, and I are all around the same age, and have experienced what America has become since Nov,22nd 1963, and we all don’t like it.
Gordon, I don’t know if Ron Paul is the final answer, but he has been consistent about his beliefs. I know were not doing him any favor by putting him in the Top Slot, for we have seen what the moneyed trusts have done to Lincoln, and Kennedy when they took on the Banksters. We’ve seen time, and time again the Globalist can stage a event, and make it the official truth for years upon years with nothing coming up against it.
It’s took me a life time to realize that history as taught to us, is a total lie, and I understand how others cannot see that, for the time it took me too see that. I weep when I read Ingrid Zundels stories of her life, understanding the horror she lived through, and the pain to just have a fair accounting of that time.
Gordon, I love your site, and appreciate the work your doing. Jim, I enjoy your articles, and thought your Wellstone video was right on. The Internet is a fairly new thing, I’ve only been on it since the winter of 2003/4. Others in this country even less time. I think about how different OUR history would have been if we had it for say 100 years. This is one thing we must protect. Free, and Open communications without a middleman to communicate with each other on a human basis. It is the Silver Bullet, or Holy Water to those running roughshod over humanity, and the one thing that we must defend going forward, or God help us all. Thank you both for all your hard work.
Thank you for such a thoughtful post, MPrck. I am sure that Gordon appreciates it almost as much as I do.
Seems like our biggest job here is protecting our own freedom of speech from an army of gatekeepers pretending to be our friends.
My Christmas card list gets shorter each day. The more backbone and respect for freedom I demonstrate, my own standards of course, the more I am accused of heresy.
I can’t even imagine what things would be like if the threats i got were from credible enemies or if the promises of reward were from those with real largess…like those who own our government.
Journalism is worse than swimming in a toilet.
Gordon,
At least your swimming very well and now and then a politician flusshes it when he is finished, for you to get a breather. (:-}]
‘your’ should be “you’r’. in case someone noticed!
Ned, Don’t you mean that “your” should be “you’re”, since you’re correcting your own spelling?
Yea OK and ‘ flusshes’ should be flushes…….I think!
Jim, are you on the look out for more misinformation from Mike Rudin’s programs on the BBC under the tilte “The conspiracy Files”. Seems that the word is out that they are trying to debunk the thermate theory for the tenth anniversay programs. See Kevin Ryan at 911blogger.com.
Rudin was at it in 2008 with various programs on 911 and building No 7 etc. Just search ‘BBC the Editors’ and look up the titles. One effort of Rudins brought in 5,555, or so. comments with no answers from Rudin.
Then usually, the ‘Australian Betrayal Commision’ (ABC), paid for by the taxpayers, rehashes the BBC programs without apology, on their propagnada channels..
By the way, the correct spelling for ‘cheque’ is cheque!! Drop the ‘check’. (;-}]
What the world needs is public inquiries into the role of the controled mass media, plus the BBC and ABC in giving aid, comfort and protection to the real mass murderers on 9/11.
The recent hacking scandal with Rupert’s News mob, that is provoking an inquiry, is small change compared to the persistent campaign by the mass media to cover up for the mass murderers on 9/11. Aiding and abetting comes to mind.
Ned, this is an interesting post, especially because you refer to Kevin Ryan’s concern that the BBC is going to “debunk” the nanothermite story. T. Mark Hightower and I, alas, have already done that, so if the BBC tackles the misleading information that has been promoted by Kevin Ryan himself, among others, they will be reporting accurately on one of the great fiascos of the 9/11 movement.
The BBC and Mike Rudin himself were here a couple of months ago and interviewed me for four hours for this new program. Mark and I had not yet published about nanothermite, but I have been a long-time critic of the exaggerated claims that have been made about it. If you missed it, check out “Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?” I am going to take a look at the earlier “Conspiracy Files: 9/11″ piece and say more.
Ned, I have just watched the latest BBC “Conspiracy Files: 9/11″ production, where Mike Rudin was here and filmed me for four hours. I was wearing a blue shirt and was very relaxed, so they only used a brief clip of me now and instead reverted to footage that Guy Smith had filmed years ago when he was here for eight hours. I was wearing a red shirt and, at times, expressed my anger at the way in which the public is being played for saps by the government and its agents. See this new one at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6680224505086911340
If I entertained any lingering illusions about the BBC being on the “up and up”, they have been destroyed completely by this production. Dylan Avery and Alex Jones were also featured with me in the earlier piece, where, once again, they seem to have recycled some of their footage from their earlier interviews. The most telling aspect of BBC’s deceit and deception is having displaced the evidence about the Pentagon that I was talking about with other evidence, much of which was planted or fabricated, as though THAT was the basis for drawing my conclusions.
That was very clever, since, if you took what they showed at face value, then I was obviously off-base. But I explained to them exactly what I was talking about, including that the actual hit point was on the ground floor, not the second floor, and that it was only about 10′ high and 16-17′ wide, where there were two cars, two spools of cable, a chain-link fence, and a series of unbroken windows but no massive pile of debris, no wings, no tail, no bodies, seats or luggage. They even took advantage of the fact that Dylan himself had mislocated the hit point in “Loose Change”.
If you compare the evidence that I was talking about as the basis for my reasoning, which I’ve presented many times in public forums, including in several articles, such as “What didn’t happen at the Pentagon”, http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-didnt-happen-at-pentagon.html “Seven Questions about 9/11″, http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/05/inside-job-seven-questions-about-911/ and other presentations, including “Are wars in Iraq and Afghanistan justified by 9/11?”, which can be found at http://noliesradio.org/archives/21621 then the enormity of the BBC’s duplicity becomes apparent.
Indeed, there are several indications of consciousness of guilt in this documentary, such as not showing Flight 175 effortlessly passing into the building. The remarks of the pilot of the C-130 flying around the Pentagon at the time are also interesting, since he reports seeing a plane head toward the building, yet apparently did not warn the Pentagon that it was coming. And those who think about the features of the collapse of WTC-7–all the floors falling at the same time with a kink at the top and all that–might well realize that the destruction of the Twin Towers was entirely different, where each of their floors remained stationary until it was blown apart, all from the top down.
So I am glad you brought it up. But the nanothermite fiasco, I am sorry to say, was home-grown by prominent members of the 9/11 movement, including Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan. As I have explained about the research of T. Mark Hightower, “Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth commuity?” http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/05/has-nanothermite-been-oversold-to-911.html and, here on VT, “Is ’9/11 Truth based upon a false theory?”, we have only ourselves to blame for making nanothermite the centerpiece of our purportedly “scientific research” on the Twin Towers. If we can’t clean up our act, then, alas, there really is no “9/11 Truth” movement.
I should be “Johnny” as in come- lately. @Gordon- the comments around here of recent are the toilet.
@ The rest- Dr Fetzer made a brief remark a while back that set of the fire-storm when he said “..media complicity.” Fox is Murdoch is not GOP but is what Ailes us. CNN does fake news dating back to Gulf I scud attack in Saudi Arabia, CBS tosses Dan Rather for outing Bush Jr as AWOL even as Rather was questionable in reporting on JFK hit as if Daddy Bush appreciated the latter but took issue with the former, ABC and NBC should stick to made-up docudramas and selling bling to poor using tax money manna or smashing windows to pay for it. The media is complicit before, now, and on 9/11.
@ Dr Fetzer – more good writing. Why do so many pray to their Jehovah that you will tag the Jew as the sole culprit? Are they going to expect you to blame the Jew solely for body odor because they sweat thinking you won’t? What’s so difficult with understanding the Jew as a person and Mossad and others is the same thing as a Catholic and a pedophile priest. Give me a break from the incessant all-Jew-all-the-time-bashing, I get it, the money, the Rothchilds, the ad nauseum of your whining about Hollywood.
A play within a play. Goodwork, good Dr. .
Multiple forks in the road to lead the posse who, each in their own right believes they got it, they got it, but the trail leads themback to a place where they shoot at each other instead of at the bad guys.
You are dead on. Media complicity. Neo-con’s get their war. Intelligence agencies get to claim mass confusion for not knowing. Money gets laundered during the chaos of wall street. Records on everything from Ruby Ridge to Waco to OK City to Enron to Marc Rich get destroyed. IRS investigation records get destroyed. Naval Intelligence investigation into Pentagon corruption get destroyed.
What they thought they did was give the bloodound a shirt with skunk scent on it to prevent a real hunt. You took what others tried to do to another level. And you get? Christ knows it ain’t easy?
Anthony Lawson cry-babies on Rense that VT sold him out by letting a liar like yourself have a voice. VT then has become a sell-out. Dis-info central with Duff as the station master. Are the two of you shamed of yourselves and willing to plea bargain with Lawson or do you demand a jury trial by fire with Lawson as Torquemata the interrogator and prosecutor?
No planes. I, personally, am tired of my intelligence being insulted by those who haven’t figured that out yet. Damned tired. No planes. I would believe there were planes if it were Fantasy Island and Herve was pointing at the twin towers shouting, “The plane, the plane!” And Khan in another life appeared to watch while looking his absolute best Latin-man woman-pleasing best. The liitle guy was the side show and the show was fake. Just like 9/11.
For you and Gordon I can only hope you have stamina because the Luddites don’t seem to be fading in numbers. Like I said. Christ, you know it ain’t easy. I thank you for the pittance that’s worth.
WTF. Is this a IDF computerised robot ?
Denny, Thanks for this post, which is quite brilliant. How anyone could think this was done without media complicity is beyond me. But it also defies belief that so many here could be so naive and incapable of thinking things through when Preston and I have laid out a map is beyond me. Every now and then, someone sees through the subterfuge and hits the nail right on the head, as you have done here. Jim
@ Denny Cautrell
“…CBS tosses Dan Rather for outing Bush Jr as AWOL…”
That’s not the way that I remember it. Rather was set up — fed faked documents. He should have noticed that they were not typewritten, and he didn’t. He went with the story. CBS feigned embarrassment and fired Rather for his incompetence.
No, it was a bit more complex than that. Rather had confirmed the contents of the fitness report with both the commanding officer who wrote it and the secretary who had typed it. The content was genuine. But it had been secretly retyped using a typewrite face that was not available at the time. Those who heard that the document was fake assumed incorrectly that its contents were false. This is the kind of cover-up that comes from the fertile mind of Karl Rove and Karen Hughes, whom I believe pulled it off.
Oh dear Jim, you have fallen into the well-prepared trap of “the blame game” and the very complexity you hope to unravel by detailing it.
A&E for Truth (I am a member) stay away from as much of that as possible, especially by mainly focussing on WTC 7 … it is the “smoking gun” which no plane hit, which clearly came down in near free-fall and which the NIST inquiry totally ignored.
Let’s treat this case as if it was that of a serial killer – which it is – when you simply cannot and do not attempt to indict on every killing. You just pick the one case with the strongest evidence/weakest defence.
I present this: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bbc_wtc7_videos.html?q=bbc_wtc7_videos.html
There is plenty more available.
I do not understand what’s wrong with some of us trying to sort out the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. How can anyone be held responsible if no one plays “the blame game”? Your position, I am afraid, is simply incoherent. We all know that WTC-7 is the simple and obvious proof that events in New York were not as has been claimed. We all know it was a CD. But 9/11 was a far more encompassing and multi-layered operation than the public, much less members of VT, understand. So Preston and I are doing what we can to explain it for the benefit of those who care. As for A&E, I like Richard Gage and we get along fine. We had lunch together when he spoke in Madison recently. But he, like David Ray Griffin and most of the other participants in the movement, has been taken in by the nanothermite myth. If you haven’t already read it, don’t miss “Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”, right here at VT: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/17/is-911-truth-based-upon-a-false-theory/ Jim
The thing is, Jim, we all know who the probable culprits are, but they are as slippery as eels, so it is useless going after them directly (the blame game).
Maybe I used the wrong analogy of a serial killer and an actual trial; it is more like an inquest into determining whether a person died of natural, or unnatural causes … because WTC7 certainly did not fall due to natural causes.
Pin that down – it does not rely on nanothermite, whether or not that is a ‘myth’.
Divide and conquer eh!
It’s rather like Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”, with sundry ‘liberation factions’ sqabbling over moot points, whilst the Romans observed in amused contempt.
The awful ‘beauty’ of WTC7 is that it is/was a controlled demolition job.
No aircraft involved. No nanothermite necessarily involved. Silverstien on record of having said, “Pull it.”
So you have a quarrel just because you believe that nanothermite is a myth.
Maybe it is.
Go ahead Jim. Disengage with Richard Gage and David Ray Griffin. Sow dissent and play into the hands of the PTB.
Pilots for Truth (I used to be a member) have factionalized things by asserting that a plane did not hit the Pentagon.
Maybe they are correct, just like you may be correct that nanothermite was not involved in the free fall of the Twin Towers.
Why argue and factionalize, when it is virtually impossible to deny that WTC7 came down with controlled demolition? Doubtless that is why the “official enquiry” would not touch it.
It is the Achiles Heel … the VERY weak spot. But by all means throw up distractions.
No wonder that someone, earlier on, suggested you might be “counter intelligence”.
I do not believe you are, but you might as well be.
Please try not to take offence, but your ‘thing’ about nanothermite is irrelevant, so what is your point?
Is it that nanothermite is solely of military production and application … and that the military could not possibly be involved?
Pilots for Truth maintain that no aircraft could have possibly been flown in such a way as to hit the Pentagon … tad of vested interest?
What does it bleedin’ matter! We all have common ground in knowing it was all “an inside job”, whomever was “on the inside”.
At this point that does not matter.
Nail WTC7 first and then you might get “the whole truth” later on.
My position is far from incoherent.
Neither is yours, incidentally … but only for someone with an already wide grasp. For others it is too much to handle and, probably, seemingly incoherent.
Moral? Keep it as simple as possible … as in the video I posted. Have you watched it?
I will now have a look at your link.
Gerry,
Re; Your penultimate line.
The saying is; ‘KISS’ meaning “Keep It Simple Stupid’. Then the jusge and jury are less likely do be confused!
You are correct, it should be kept in mind by all.
I just don’t get it, Gerry. Either you care about truth or you do not. If nanothermite cannot have done what has been claimed on its behalf, then it can’t have done what some have claimed. The point is not to separate myself or Mark from Richard Gage or David Ray Griffin, both of whom I admire, but to insist that a “9/11 Truth” movement should at least be based upon truth! Surely that is not too hard to grasp. And if we don’t know what happened and how it was done, there is not much chance we will be able to prosecute or convict anyone for those crimes, because we will be unable to link them. I hope you will give this just the least bit more thought.
This is not as rhetorical and or shallow as it might at first seem:
Pontius Pilot asked of Jesus, “What is truth?’ No answer.
It was/is a philosophical question, which I have resolved along these lines (thanks essentially to Socrates/Plato).
Truth, like Beauty, Justice, etc., is an Idea or Essence. Or an ideal, if you like, though that falls short of the fact, as David Hume pointed out, “We could have no idea of a substance, if it was not for our passions and emotions.”
Facts are FAR more important than “truth”.
In a court of law a person is asked to “tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth”, so in all sincerity various people step up to say what they truly believe, though differing accounts are given of any particular event – like you and others do about 911.
The job of a jury – and hopefully non-corrupt judge – is to sort through any number of sincerely felt, trus testimonies and get at the facts, without prior prior belief that whomever should be convicted.
I now see where you are coming from, having given the matter more thought, as you asked me to.
You seem to be dead-set on jumping the gun … convicting before due process.
That may or may not happen – given that the entire system is corrupt – but there is no chance at all when you effectively act as a witness for the PTB, by effectively standing up in court and saying that the whole case brought by A&E is flawed, because of your strong feelings (basically) that nanothermite could not do whatever.
Answer me this:
If A&E do actually manage to get a new inquiry going into WTC7, will you appear as a witness for the government in “debunking” A&E minor evidence that nanothermite had some part to play?
It is your “truth’, Jim, that this matters, rather than the fact that WTC7 collapsed in free fall.
Your “truth” is actually purely subjective … I can wheel-in Kant, Descartes, Jung and many others Jim, such as Adam Smith, Ricardo and Marx on the economic front.
Meanwhile KISS.
“Keep it simple stupid.” As Ned neatly summarized things.
My first paper as a graduate student was entitled “Toward a Theory of Facts” about the meaning of that word. “Facts” are most adequately understood as true assertions (statements, propositions) or as assertions (statements, propositions) whose truth has been verified. The word “true” (or “truth”) is most adequately understood as a property (predicate, quality) that applies to an assertion (statement, proposition) when it reflects the way things are or what is the case. “Snow is white” (in English), for example, is true just in case the subject we call “snow” has the property we call “white”, which has to be relative to a specific language with fixed meanings.
Another way to explain the meaning of “truth” is to observe that an assertion (statement, proposition) is true when it corresponds to reality, but the meaning of “reality”, in turn, is the way things are or everything that is the case. The definition of truth, moreover, has to be separated from our criteria for (what we take to be) true, which depends upon the coherence of our beliefs regarding the evidence (observations, measurements, and experiments) and the rules of reasoning we employ in evaluating them. Broadly speaking, those rules are the subject matter of the discipline called “logic”, where two broad branches, deductive and inductive, require differentiation.
Deductive logic concerns relationships between assertions when the truth of one or more assertions guarantees the truth of another. If the assertion, “Jack and Jill went up the hill” is true, for example, then, since that assertion implies the conjunction of the assertions, “Jack when up the hill” and “Jill went up the hill”, if “Jack and Jill went up the hill”, then it must be true and follows deductively that “Jack went up the hill”. If it is true that “Jack went up the hill” and also that “Jill is usually with Jack”, then we can infer inductively “(Probably) Jill went up the hill”, but the truth of that inference is not guaranteed by the truth of those premises, which merely render them probable.
None of this is subjective, which means that you are wrong. And it fairly astonishes me that you are claiming that it is. Given this post, I can infer inductively that you have never studied logic and have no idea what you are talking about. As someone who is dedicate to the discovery of the truth about 9/11, moreover, I cannot support a false theory about 9/11. The statement, “Nanothermite is explosive”, for example, is true just in case that which is called “nanothermite” has the property attributed to it (of being explosive), which is not the case. That claim, therefore, is false. The proof that substantiates that conclusion has now been published by Mark Hightower and me.
At the time of Socrates, there were others known as “Sophists” who taught the art of rhetoric. The Sophists were skilled at arguing all sides of any assertion (statement, proposition) without regard for its truth. They could argue for false claims with the same degree of skill and apparent dedication as they could for true ones as experts at the art of persuasion. What distinguished Socrates from them was that he was dedicated to discovering the truth and nothing but the truth–and as much of it as he was able. I agree with Socrates and not with the Sophists, which tends to be true of most philosophers, where modern-day Sophists are often referred to as “lawyers”.
So you are mistaken to believe that “truth” is purely subjective. If nanothermite has a detonation velocity of 895 m/s, but pulverizing concrete or destroying steel by means of shockwaves would require a detonation velocity of 3,200 m/s in the first instance or of 6,100 m/s in the second, then it cannot be the case that nanothermite shockwaves can destroy concrete or steel. When TNT has a detonation velocity of 6,900 m/s and nanothermite is less than 13% as powerful, to call nanothermite a “high explosive” is false. Why you want to support a false theory about 9/11 is a question about you I cannot address, but I am on the side of those who are pursuing the truth about 9/11.
Your reference to the “KISS” principle, which, like Occam’s Razor, suggests that simpler theories ought to be preferred to more complex, has a qualifier, namely: simpler theories are preferable to more complex theories when they are equally able to account for the available relevant evidence. There are many simpler theories about 9/11 than what Preston and I have elaborated here, but they do not appear to be capable of explaining all of the available evidence, where the official account of 19 Islamic terrorists hijacking four commercial carriers, and perpetrating these atrocities under the control of a guy in a cave in Afghanistan may be the simplest but cannot explain all the evidence.
believe if ye must. believe in complexity over simplicity. believe that an operation of the dimensions presented in this article, which would require a very large number of actors, could be pulled off and none of the participants would ever talk. hey i know, black ops murdered them all. because people talk. that’s what people do. one must suspend reality for a harry potter story. the only thing missing from the post is references to space aliens and holograms from planet zombie. no one believes the official story, since it was designed to cover up the incompetence of fools. if one is a true believer in the fantastic or a convoluted rendering of fancy, go for it. prove it. without proof all that remains are fairy tales.
This is a very simple-minded and ignorant post. The author must be unaware that all of the evidence we cite was in the public domain. If he thinks that we are fabricating anything, that would be a tough sell. Does he think that the CIA/DoD/Mossad is going to pull off something like this and allow the truth to be discovered? Simpler theories are preferable to more complex only when they are able to explain all of the evidence. Simpler theories, in this case, cannot do that. Welcome to the complex reality of multi-track, deep-black, covert PSYOPS.
Conspicuous by its absence here has been much discussion of the DoD role in 9/11.
In fact, I haven’t seen any.
Somehow the generals have managed to keep their names out of the news, but no group has prospered like the top brass since 9/11, with three wars, and counting.
After Pearl Harbor, Kimmel and Short were made the scapegoats even though they had been kept in the dark about the approach of Kido Butai, but no generals have been called on the carpet to explain the military’s failures on 9/11, which were catastrophic.
Similarly, Bush’s obvious gaffe about watching the plane crash on TV has been allowed to pass, as has his failure to take any action after Card’s whisper.
How about it, VT? Was the military involved that day, or not? Why didn’t the Air Force show up?
If you read the comments and even the article more closely, I think you will see that I cite the CIA/DoD/Mossad as those responsible for 9/11. Indeed, in this respect, I tend to differ from others, such as Alan Sabrosky and Christopher Bollyn, whom I admire, who tend to cast responsibility exclusively on the Mossad. For reasons I have explained here and elsewhere, that does not appear to me to be correct.
Carol Valentine, Dick Eastman and others have been all over NORAD’s failure to intercept since mid ’02, calling attention to Gen. Myer’s pathetic testimony at his own confirmation hearings on 9/13/01, as well as later statements by NORAD commander Gen. Eberhart, but I have seen nothing comparable here.
Citing the DoD is a start, but that’s taken us a decade.
We know that evidence was destroyed that held interviews with the FAA controllers. I believe that evidence might show that the FAA notified NORAD properly, but NORAD failed to act in the same manner that the Pentagon failed to defend itself.
The top brass – some of ‘em – were in on it up to their fruit salad.
Here is a paragraph from the next to last section of our study, which addresses this issue:
But Israel cannot have done this alone. The NORAD “stand down” and the attack on the Pentagon required complicity at the highest levels of the Department of Defense. And the benefits to the Bush/Cheney administration have likewise been enormous. As Patrick Martin has observed, “Without 9/11, there would be no US occupation of Iraq, putting an American army squarely at the center of the world’s largest pool of oil. Without 9/11, there would be no US bases across Central Asia, guarding the second largest source of oil and gas. And without 9/11, the Bush administration would have been unable to sustain itself politically, faced with a deteriorating economy and widespread opposition to its tax cuts for millionaires and social measures to appease the fundamentalist Christian Right.”
What are you on about lawrece?
Sure I think that a starting point is to keep things as simple as possible, but, to the extent that your post makes any sense at all, it is based in gross ignorance.
I once worked on the fringes of top secret things and you obviously do not have a clue about how nothing much gets out.
At its simplest (just for you) the vast majority of people just want to keep their jobs, so keep their mouths shut. After that it gets more complex.
All
First time here
This is an excellent analysis and a rare one at that!
(((3)))
PS: Link of the week: http://winner-foodservice.com/hi-res/Winner-logo-Adobe-RGB.jpg
@ Jim.
I have read http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/17/is-911-truth-based-upon-a-false-theory/
I already knew that thermites are not explosives, so I was anticipating some alternative explanation, or hypothesis for how cut steel members got ejected as they clearly were. However nothing was on offer, except for a vague reference to Judy Wood, who I find very hard to believe … in any case, neither could her theory account for the ejections.
Why not just admit to not knowing, rather than have an entirely negative dispute?
It does cross my mind that it is not valid to compare the demolition of WTC7 with 1 and 2, because they were of different construction and much taller. Beyond that I have no more clue than you do, nor anyone at this stage.
One thing I am certain of is that at least 90% of people either can’t, or cannot be bothered to understand the fine detail which, for me, somewhat resembles Scholastics of the Middle Ages arguing about how many angels could sit on the head of a pin.
This why I say to package things in a form which most people can easily grasp, as A&E are doing by concentrating mostly on WTC7.
As I am in Australia, quite old and disabled, I cannot be heavily involved, but I do know what works for most people, e.g. showing some footage of WTC7 coming down, especially because most people only know about WTC 1 & 2.
This is the way the MSM works, e.g. short, dramatic scenes with minimal commentary.
No use fighting against this. The vast majority of people switch off quite quickly.
Well, I have made no secret that we do not know how the Twin Towers were destroyed, but we do know that it required a very different mode of demolition than WTC-7. Here is an outline of some of the differences between them, which I have discussed most explicitly in “An Analysis of the WTC on 9/11″, which is archived on the Scholars forum at http://911scholars.ning.com, where you can enter that title and you will have access to it:
………… WTC-1 & WTC-2 / WTC-7
Sequence: Top down / Bottom up
Floor motion: Stationary / Falling together
Mechanism: Pulverization / Controlled Demolition
Time/Speed: About 10 secs. / About 6.5 secs.
………………… (~ free fall) / (~ free fall)
Remnants: No pancakes / Pancakes
………… (below ground level) / (5-7 floors)
They display substantial difference even in gross appearance. Their modes of destruction thus appear to have been different. If WTC-7 was brought down in a classic controlled demolition– as virtually all sides agree–then WTC-1 and WTC-2 were not.
The phrase, “controlled demolition” still applies, since they too were brought down by a demolition that was under control. I am not concealing that we don’t know. I believe I emphasized it in “The Debate over 9/11 Truth: Kevin Ryan vs. Jim Fetzer”, http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/06/the-debate-over-911-truth-kevin-ryan-vs-jim-fetzer/
It appears to me that we are dealing with some unconventional mode of destruction, which may have involved mini-nukes (3rd or 4th generation, fission or fusion), lasers, masers, plasmoids, or some other form of directed energy. While I believe that Judy Wood has done more to display the full range of effects that have to be explained by an adequate theory, I am not yet convinced that she has figured it out.
Gerry,
G’ay!
If you really like analysing 9/11 a bit more and past the obvious proof that the official conspiracy theory is BS, may I suggest that you raise above the obvious and examine some very interesting aspects of 911.
Do a search of the three papers by E. P, Heidner;
‘E.P Heidner- 9/11-commsiiion-report-revised-december-2008′ and
‘E.P. Heidner-9/11commsion-report-revised-december- 2008-collateral’
‘E.P.-heidner-9/11commsion-report-revised-december-2008.collateral-1′
They are at the scrbd site.
Applying ‘KISS’ it is really quite simple as set out in Heidner’s theses and fits in with Fetzer’s plots withing plots.
As a teaser; Now what happened on 9/11? Airplanes, buildings etc drew everyone’s attention. But the real 9/11 was the closure of the SEC and the undocumented financilal launderings that were put through.
Everyone was distracetd and have been ever since as the ‘firewalls’ put up by the real culprits have held in place by means of misinformation whilst anaylsis and debate rages about how buildings were demolished. Who cares how, they were, we know that they were, the official story is nonsense. We should be pressing against the next ‘firewall’ they have set up to delay and obfuscate the questuioning.
When you raed Heidner note his reference to the Nugan Hand Bank in Sydney……Heidner fails to mention (he probably did not know) that the former chief Magistrate in NSW, when released form jail on other charges, was charged in the early 1980′s with conspiracy to steal Phillipines government gold bullion……….nothing more heard but who were the other conspirators??.
Think!? 9/11 was a bank heist and destruction of the investigators at the ONI into money laundering, gold bullion theft, drug dealing and arms dealing by black ops since the end of WW11, as a start.
The ONI office was coincidently wiped out at the Pentagon and Cantor Fitzgerald was wiped out at the WTC, the Enron and other prosecution files were destroyed in builidng 7 and the gold bullion in building 6 was on its way out in a heavy loader in a tunnel underneath the sites.
Got your interest?
By the way, Aussie councils with investments to tens of millions of dollars in the failed subprime mortgae derivitives flogged by lehmans are helping to pay for 9/11.
Now, do we see the real purpose in all the obfuscation and misinformation by those delaying a 9/11 invvestigation?
Spot on there Ned Matey,
The Biggest crime on Sept 11 was NOT the murders of 3000 innocents by state sponsored terrorism, NOR was it the 7.2 billion $ insurance scam to demolish aging superstructures and claim insurance money on it, NOR was it the massive administrative and defensive incompetence that these criminals are attempting to paint.
No Siree. The Biggest crime on Sept 11 was the organised and preplanned Gold bullion looting of the Bank of Nova Scotia, combined with the wholesale destruction of Federal evidence in forthcoming insider trading scandals (in WTC 7) and the trillions made since in Afghan opium and iraqi oil sales worldwide as an end result.
Since then, the pillaging and plundering has only gotten worse, 9-11 was both the catalyst and the signal for the global looting as modern day godless vikings to begin.
See the video from last year about another Canadian bank with all its gold bars missing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNSakO8Z11o
and
http://bobchapman.blogspot.com/2010/04/scotia-bank-vaults-found-empty-of-gold.html
Gold was stolen from, underneath WTC 5 to the tune of 650 Billion dollars worth with only 120 million recovered of the stolen bars. *( And that was at 2001 prices of $240 an ounce.)
These criminals have so much untold wealth they can buy any court or law enforcement system or even ANYONE they want to. Even 9-11 truthers it seems can be bought and sold these days.
Sad as it is, against this anti-human type of demonic agenda we may well need divine assistance in overcoming the swollen impetus and criminality and greed that has been allowed to breed.
So how did people not even notice this?
EASY – By Misdirected attention. That is precisely how they have managed so much criminality in such a short decade of greed. While we were busy watching upwards towards the smoke, the Wombles of Bush manor were doing their dirty business underground. Misdirection helped them get away scot free also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhsmAISqo6U
We are today being bombarded with information and media saturation. New DVD’s are costing less than ten bucks each and the gaming industry is projecting sales of upwards of 65 billion$ in software as young ones play their life away learning how to be nintendo drone pilots for future wars.
Ever wonder why we have so much distraction? Because these criminals know while you are busy paying taxes, playing games, watching youtube videos, and watching lady gaga concerts, they can basically do what they like with little or no major public outrage.
One of Professor Fetzers better articles in recent years for sure.
Regards
Steve Johnson
Hi Ned.
I have some familiarity with your references.
Nugan Hand brings back memories, but it all goes back much further to when the Whitlam Government got dismissed, e.g. “The Falcon and the Snowman”.
Corruption has been embedded for a very long while. FAR too much of a tangled web to untangle.
@ Jim.
You induce that I have never studied logic. Wrong, as a matter of fact.
You assert that I am generally wrong and that, by implication, you are right.
I would have put this reply to your thinly veiled castigation of me at the foot of your response to what wrote, but a reply option was not available.
But ‘thanks’ for the lecture on “Philosophy 101″ … did that and more at the Universty of Western Australia.
I have moved on since then.
I will not bother you again, because splitting hairs is pointless and you do not understand Occams Razor.
Well, I taught logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning for 35 years–and you could have fooled me. Your remarks about truth are as sophomoric as they come. Why don’t you check out my co-authored GLOSSARY OF EPISTEMOLOGY/PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, for example, my SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE, or AI: ITS SCOPE AND LIMITS, where I discuss truth and Occam’s Razor? I have no idea what your views are in general, so I have certainly not implied that you are “generally wrong”; but on the nature of truth and of Occam’s Razor, there is no room for doubt.
So you say.
I will glean you this much.
My first essay on Descartes (who is the epitome of doubt/uncertainty) got rejected; so I went to Professor Graves – the head of the Philosophy Department at UWA – who said that my essay was actually brilliant, but that it could never be accepted in English/American schools.
He said that I should go to Paris or Berlin, if I wanted to get a “pass”, but I stuck with the course anyway and just took the cynical approach of “logical positavism” (assumedly your kind of approach).
Crudely speaking I am an “existentialist” … hence Socrates/Plato, Husserl, Schopenhauer, Descartes, Hume and Kant, for instance.
My way of thinking has a 2500 years of pedigree, whereas yours has maybe 100 years.
I did say that I would not bother you again, but I cannot resist taking you on.
Do you understand Kant’s “phenomenal world”?
Do you understand Descartes’ “Method of Doubt”?
Do you understand that the scientific method is to doubt everything and to only admit the most probable?
You, it seems, have zero doubt that nanothermite was NOT significant during 911.
How do you know? Have you got any dust samples? If so: have you had them tested?
Well no, you have not.
Logic, both common and formal (e.g. the simple if, then) tells only that you have some kind of personal axe to grind … maybe that, as an ex-member of the military you find it hard to accept that factions of the US military were involved.
I am sure that you are a “good American” and served out of best intents in whatever war situations … Vietnam? But, logically, it has not worked out, has it!
The Washington Empire is in steep decline, both overseas and on the US mainland – which is the primary empire carved from the defeat of the native population and the Spanish/Mexican Empire.
No room for doubt that this is so?
Do you know that the word ‘science’ (from Latin) just means ‘knowledge’?
Do you know that the word ‘philosophy’ is actually a Greek phrase: philo (love of, or desire for) ‘sophia’ = knowledge or wisdom.
Did you know that wisdom is a special form of knowledge, i.e. knowledge put to the test of experience, observation and repeatabilty. A core component of what is generally regarded as ‘science’ for anyone reasonably well informed.
Experience dictates that all empires reach their apogee, and then implode/collapse … as is happening now, as a matter of fact.
Admittedly there is a possibly solipsistic problem with ‘facts’, as Berkely illustrated and which Kant expressed as, “We can never know the world-in-itself.” But all we have to go on is the “phenomenal world” that Kant described that is grounded in our fundamental senses of ‘time’ and ‘space’.
Come to think: I will post an essay I once wrote ….
http://gerryhiles.hubpages.com/hub/Natural-Philosophy-Science
I have never bothered to follow this up, because everything is now falling apart, e.g. financially, wars, Fukushima and so on.
Anyhow you kinda sucked me in, Jim, for possibly final shots at what I once thought important.
At least I have now given you more substance to what my “views are in general” … they are not “as sophomoric as the come”. Thanks for the insult. Now explicate Plato, Descartes and Kant, if you can.
If we need any more proof of your sophomoric approach, here it is.
I also taught courses in the history and philosophy of science, the
history of philosophy, and the theory of knowledge. This is neither
the time nor the place for a tutorial in philosophy. Why don’t you do
yourself a favor and pick up a copy of my co-authored GLOSSARY
OF EPISTEMOLOGY/PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE? More than one
graduate student has told me that they only survived to earn their
degree because they had a copy. It might also do you some good!
@ Jim
Please do not SHOUT with capitals. That does not bode well.
I wasn’t shouting. Book titles are commonly capitalized so their character as title is apparent.
I worry about you, if you can’t understand something this simple. It is called “a convention”.
Thanks be to God that I skipped philosophy and chose archeology where one can see and feel the evidence.
I saw three high rise steal structured buildings come down in near free fall speed. No 7 at free fall at commencement for an admitted 2.5 seconds.
The official ‘fire did it’ is BS, so let us get on with a proper investigation fullstop.
Any problem with that Jim?
Well, it depends what you mean by “come down”. There were
significant differences between them: WTC-7 was a classic
controlled demolition. All the floors fell at the same time at
about free fall. You could see the demolitions work their way
across the bottom, up the side; there was that characteristic
kink from blowing one support column early; and when it was
over, there was a debis pile equal to about 12% of its height.
The Twin Towers were blown apart from the top down. All of
their floors remained stationary, waiting their turn to be “blown
to Kingdom Come”, in Morgan Reynolds’ memorable phrase.
They also came down at about free fall speed. But when it
was over, apart from some steel segments flown outward and
away, there was no pile of debris: they were destroyed below
ground level. These were demolitions under control, but were
not classic controlled demolitions. It depends what you mean.
Jim please, do you join in the demand for a new investigation into the collapses now as wanted by the ‘ae’ people or not?
If so did you tell Rudin that for his BBC program? If not why not?
I signed their petition long ago. I support A&E and like Richard Gage. But I cannot condone the use of a false theory even to promote a worthy cause. Surely we can base the 9/11 Truth movement on theories that are true! And of course I had had several conversations with Mike Rudin even before he showed up here, explaining that I had been disillusioned by the program they produced after Guy Smith had been here and filmed me for eight hours. I gave Rudin dozens of proofs that the official account is false and had told him that, if the BBC was interested in the truth about 9/11, then I would be glad to assist and they could produce a blockbuster! I was naive to think that they would do anything like that. Now I can attest to the disinformational practices of the BBC, which I have seen “up close and personal”. I don’t remember specifically if I said anything about the A&E petition. What good do you think it would have done if I had? I can’t recall nanothermite being much of a topic when they were here and I don’t think that nanothermite was even in this latest hit piece. Tell me: Do you believe that the 9/11 Truth movement should be based on false theories because it’s such a worthy cause? We might call it “lying for Truth”!
Jim, thank you for the reply and clarification.
You refer to the truth movent being base on a lie.
I feel that you are mirroring the Cass Sunstein methodology and examined by Griffin in his book
Cognitive infiltration.
A police officer does not fail to investigate a crime just because persons
propose differing and even contradictory information. He Investigates and sorts out truth from fiction and awaits the result.
So let’s get on with the frigging investigation and let a proper inquiry
do their investigation.
Kiss kissee kiss ha!
forensic evidence from red herrings and does not to worry about
the truth from fiction, forensic evidence from red herrings and philosophical crap.
Last line after ‘ha’ are in error…..bugger these minute IPhones!
Ned, is nanothermite explosive? can it pulverize concrete or shatter steel with its shockwaves? Once we know that “explosive nanothermite” is a myth, we cannot continue to assert it without perpetrating a form of deception that qualifies as a lie. Lying occurs when you make an assertion that you know to be false yet you do so deliberately with the intention to mislead. Now that it is known that nanothermite is not a high explosive, to continue to talk or to act as though it were is a form of lying. That is why I’ve asked you if you believe that the 9/11 Truth movement should continue to perpetuate this myth and why I have suggested we could call it “Lying for Truth”.
I am not a fan of Sunstein and I like Griffin’s book. I published an article about cognitive infiltration some time back, “Birds of a Feather: Subverting the Constitution at Harvard Law”, in OpEdNews back on 22 January 2010: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Birds-of-a-Feather-Subver-by-Jim-Fetzer-100121-980.html Like you and David, I am completely opposed to the deceitful and duplicitous techniques that Sunstein is proposing, which are corrupt to the core. And I have published articles like this one explaining why it’s wrong. I think that you just might like this piece, which concludes with the following paragraph and links:
“Joseph Lawler has observed the profound irony of attacking conspiracy theories by proposing a conspiracy to defeat them! That Cass Sunstein is a member of the Obama administration in a regulatory capacity and has even been mentioned as a possible nominee for the Supreme Court reflects an astounding example of cognitive dissonance. Like other officials of the government, that would entail an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Given his position on the First Amendment, not only could he not swear such an oath without committing perjury but his role in subverting the principles upon which this country was founded make him one of those who qualifies as an enemy of the document he was swearing to uphold.”
Nah, not biting…let the readers make their own assessments. Bye.
Jim, agreed Sunstein is a ……………………………!
I do not have to express an opinion on thermite or even termites.
People would otherwise have survived if the buildings were nof ‘blown up’ and murder committed, that is a crime so let a proper investigation commence now.
The truth can then be discerned. If you are really worried about lies go and attack the government lies as we all wish to. I have no further comment.
In case you haven’t noticed, this article–as well as “9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda”, “Is 9/11 research ‘anti-Semitic’?”, “Was 9/11 ‘an inside job’?”, “Why doubt 9/11?”, and many of my others–IS an attack on the US government and its friends in the Mossad who were responsible for 9/11. I am taken aback that you seem to be unable to appreciate that we have to unravel how it was done and sort out the many theories that have been advanced about who was responsible, as this article does, to figure out who was responsible.
Alright one more time, I have a proper keyboard at hand.
Re your last sentence.
Finding out who is responsible…yep, no doubt thing to do, but it will not be achieved without a proper commision with search, arrest and subpoena power etc…the full gambit.
Recently I appeared for someone brought before a sought of governemnt inquiry..can’t say anything, it is all a secret.
We had to answer all questions and could be prosecuted and jailed if any answers were false or misleading and it woud be contempt not to answer. By the way, they may as well be investigating the peoper way to shell a peanut. I think 9/11 is slightly more significant!!
Now how about that Jim? First, force the US government to have the equivalent of a ‘Royal Commission’ with simiilar powers.
Call the first witness: Mr Richard Cheney. “Now Mr. Cheney answer these questions please………….”. “Next; Mr. George Bush………….”. “Next; now ‘youg man’ ,why did you report to Mr. Cheney ‘incomming’ thrice [ref; Norman Mineta] and whose /what orders were you referring to when you asked the VP; ‘do the orders still stand sir’…and, and”
You would not miss that for the world would you Jim?
So what are you waiting for? Enlightenment? a St Paul experience? Give us a break, get on with the investigation.
Alternatively the US could adopt the Gonzales Bush administration approved method in dealing with ‘enemy combatants’. (you know those bastards who are far more dignified than; home grown murdering treasonous traitors and those giving aid, comfort and protection to them)
Mr. Cheney lie down on this board please and Mr Ventura will have 30 minutes with you,…… After all they did it to KSM 83 times in one month and Hello! He admitted everything about 9/11 “………..from Ay to Zee”. as reported. By the way when is his trial comming up? I would love to see him explain how he arranged the US airforce standown who supplied whatever was used to ‘blow up’ the buildings, how he paid for the stuff, how he managed to get through all the security, close down the security cameras for a period with the wtc powerdown, who placed the stuff and, and, and, ad nauseum.
Be a beut trial Jim…bring it on. “Oh dear we can’t, we will look sillier than we already do…ssshhhish”
How about the Israeli method…just go and shoot who we think is responsible or who might be a threat. Sound good?
Jim, do you have any apprecaition how rediculous (and evil greedy warmongers) the US people appear to the rest of the world? Is their not any pride? If so, get the damm investigation under way as many decent americans are demanding and stop chasing rabbits….we know the official government conspiracy theory is ‘Hogwash’. [e.g. refer; Bob Bowman at patriotsquestion9/11.com.
Then you can hang all your rabbits before the Commsion of inquiry for gutting and a public reading of the entrails.
Ned, I don’t get this. You seem put out with me, but I am an investigator doing research on 9/11. I am not a prosecutor. I think it would be great to have a formal inquiry with the kinds of powers you describe, but I have no idea how to bring that about. I am doing what I can to present and evaluate the evidence about what happened so we can have a high degree of assurance in pursuing this further. I you have ideas about how to do that, great! But I have no idea why you think that that responsibility would fall to me.
You have no idea how to bring about a formal inquiry!
Hey, Mr. Fetzer, you’re (spelt correctly?) an intellectual and an investigator with some contact and some clout no doubt. Perhaps if you prioritise how to get an inquiry under way that would be a better use of time then hunting rabbits.
Get the prosecutor and official investigator to chase the rabbits, bring them home and you can read the entrails as well as the commision of inquiry.
Inded you can suggest who to subpoena to give evidence and what should be asked of them.
You have done some great work, but you are not getting anywhere with anything to show for it at the moment…… just talk, theory and speculation.
The ‘ae people’ and their supporters have brought home the scientific bacon on building 7, so lets us get the inquiry underway.
The old saying; ‘thou shalt (shall?) know them by their deeds’ can be compared with; ‘thou shall know them by their wise efforts and results’ ,seems appropriate.
I take it that you would have contacted the lawyers for KSM, if he is alllowed any, and offered publicly to present your material to the Star Cahmber hearing his case….Now that would be something to spur on the interest in the triall.
By the way, when is it being heard? Oh! No information, well there you go, just love the land of the just and the free, don’t we?
Jim,
I forgot to add that you might get some pointers on how to get an inquiry under way by consulting with those, who at least had some partial success.
Try the ‘Jersy Girls’, they have some ‘True Grit’!
I am a scholar, not an attorney! My colleagues and I are attempting to sort out what happened on 9/11 and how it was done, who was responsible and why. There are many 9/11 organizations that are better positioned than I to take the kind of steps that you suggest. I admire The Jersey Girls, Judy Wood, Ph.D., and those making other kinds of contributions. If you have the knowledge, background, and resources to pursue them, then do it! We will continue to do research that will substantiate your legal case. Get off your butt and do it yourself! Go for it! Good luck!
I take it that your scholarly mind has not discerned that I live in Australia and I am not a US citizen.
So America; you get of your butts and get an investightaion under way.
I have contributed money and time in Australia at personal expense…I would not visit the US fascist state in a pink fit to pursue your suggestion.
Yesterday, another Aussie soldier died in Afghanistan…America, go tell his family that it was worth a US corporate’s oil pipeline.
By the way, search ‘War is a Racket’ by Smedley Butler and the interview by Ex NATO chief Wesley Clark with …?…on about 3rd March 2007, wherein Clark told the interviewer that in September 2001 he was told at the Pentagon that America was going to war….. to do 7 countries in 5 years…..ending with Iran.
That is getting close and it is all based on the lies of 9/11 to get the average Western citizen suckered by deceit to go and kill and thieve for the American Reich…..best of luck America…..the American Macho male has been out done by some Girls from Jersey. If it were not for them getting the Commmision and the then realisation that the Commission was to protect mass murderers, then the 9/11 movement might not have been as successful as it is now.
It was the realization that the Commision was just one great big lie that woke me up. I had formed a view back in early 2004 but it was Griffin,s ’9/11 Commission; Omissions and Distortions’ in 2005 that was the icing…for, when people lie there has to be reason…that being to protect mass murderers and their supporters in the US who have then being responsible for the invasions and killing of Million (?) or more.
The US administrations since at least 2001 have simply been the most evil and deadly in the world….I would have thought that even a scholar might be inclined to concern himself with trying to correct that by…not theorising…just getting the prosecution/investigation under way to determine the facts. Jim you can theorise all you like, indeed ask around those you suspect and ask them; “did you have any involvement in carrying out or planning or covering up the mas murders on 9/11″? They would spit in your eye…the only way to get the answer is to subpoena them cross examine them, place documemnts before them and continue with others and detect the inconsistencies. Even do a deal with some to get to the top echelons,
Theorising is necessary but is only useful for a limited time…after that, one is juts banging one’s head against a wall.
By the way, thermate does not ‘explode’! Well theorise on the posibility that there was a combination of materials place in the towers some exploded and others cut through the vertical columns..Just a thought. Now how will we find out? For a start subpoena those miserable people ‘dancing’ on a removalist van celebrating, as Americans jumped to their deaths from 100 stories and firefighters werer murdered whilst just doing their job.
How about the investigation forcing the release of the Bush/Cheney interview with the Commission. How about forcing the rrelease of the FBI intelligence report on arrested foreigners and spying set ups. How about subpoenering all the videos from the Pentagon, how about forcing the relevant airlines to produce all the service records of the relevant aeroplanes and compare the parts with those found at all the sites.
Do I take it that in your scholarly investigation into who, why, and how your going to manage to get a peak at that materilal, for example?
Get the evidence Jim, by forcing a proper invdestigation..If the girls can do it, surely you and your friends and scholars can lobby hard to do the same.
What my “scholarly mind” has discerned is that you seem to have no appreciation for the concept of a division of labor. I am an expert in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning. My great strength is that I bring those abilities to the study of significant and controversial political events, such as JFK and 9/11. Very few students of either have the kind of background that I represent. Yet I realize full well that I am not an expert in all of the disciplines that matter to understanding complex events like these, which is why I created a research group including a world authority on the human brain (who was also an expert on wound ballistics), a Ph.D. in physics who is also an M.D. and board certified in radiation oncology, a physician who was present when JFK was brought into Trauma Room #1 (and two days later was responsible for the treatment of his alleged assassin), a legendary expert on photographs and films related to the assassination, and yet another Ph.D. in physics, this time with a specialization in electromagnetism, the properties of light and the physics of images in motion. We were able to reconstruct the case from the ground up, discovering that the X-rays had been altered, another brain had been substituted, and the home movies of the assassination, including the Zapruder, had been altered to conceal the limo stop and change the appearance of the wounds to make them look more like ones that would have resulted from shots fired from behind. In founding Scholars for 9/11 Truth, I took a similar approach in bringing together experts from different disciplines–including pilots, physicists, engineers (aeronautical, mechanical, structural, and so forth)–in a collaborative effort to sort out the evidence and figure out how it was done. We have had many achievements, including discovering 20 major points of refutation of the official account, which can be found summarized in the upper-left-hand-corner of the Scholars home page, http://911scholars.org, under the heading, “Why doubt 9/11?”
In addition, I have done hundreds and hundreds of interviews on radio and television, organized the first conference for Scholars here in Madison in 2007, edited the first book from Scholars, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007), and produced its first DVD, “The Science and Politics of 9/11″ (2007). I was featured for 3.5 hours in a major television program in Athens in 2006, which was broadcast worldwide by satellite, flown to Buenos Aires (twice) in 2008 and 2009, where I was the principal speaker at The International Symposium on 9/11 Truth and Justice held at The National Library of the Republic of Argentina, and organized a symposium, “Debunking the ‘War on Terror’”, held at Friends House in London on 14 July 2010, featuring my friend, Kevin Barrett, co-founder of Muslims for 9/11 Truth; Gilad Atzmon, celebrated jazz musician and outspoken critic of Jewish identity politics; and hosted by Ken O’Keefe, the hero of the Freedom Flotilla, who disarmed several Israeli commandos when they came aboard his ship. You can find my presentation at The National Library on the Scholars home page, http://911scholars.org, and the London symposium featuring my “Are wars in Iraq and Afghanistan justified by 9/11?” and the rest at http://noliesradio.org/archives/21621. You write as though I were some kind of slacker who is not doing enough to bring truth and justice to the fore, when I am doing everything I can do with the resources at my disposal. I am not an attorney and am not well positioned to take that on, as I have previously explained. But I have identified those I regard as responsible in several articles and multiple presentations. So if you want to harass me, be my guest, but don’t expect me to suggest there is any justification for your complaints. And when you raise the issue of nanothermite, it makes my skin crawl. If you want to form “Liars for 9/11 Truth”, do it, but don’t expect me to join. Our hands are full just trying to sort these things out, much less having to disabuse ourselves of false theories.
Jim,
If you read the 5th paragraph of my note on 21st August at 10.22 above, you will observe that I appreciate that you have done great work…you do not have to prove it.
But it is time to put that work before a new investigation and that investigation will only come about by public demands through lobbying legislators, as did the Jerssey Girls.
You confirm you have impressive collegaues friends and contacts who can be requested to join in demands of the legislators that there be a proper investigtion.
Nothing will happen until then, meanwhile we will just sit around like college freshmen drinking port to 4 am, theroising on some obscure subject.
Jim, the port bottle has run dry.
I note that your skin ‘crawls when nano thermite is raised. it does not with me and I do not have crawling skin when someone says ‘no thermate’ or Muslims did it or it was an inside job or the Jesuits did it or whoever. I don’t kow one way or the other, so why get so upset with me?. It is a matter to be sorted out by the competing theorists supported with scientific evidence at the proper investigation together with appropriate questiong of those who obviously should be able to contribute via their positions etc., to the circumstances of the crime.
As for the possibility of ‘joining liars for 9/11 truth’. No I do not wish to. I will await the ‘truth’ when the invstigation is complete and then bring out the knitting.
It makes my skin crawl because you are implying that we are better off with a false theory than the truth. That, I thought, was our problem with the government: it has lied about 9/11 and not told the truth. If we promote false theories when when know they are untrue, we are no better than they. We must put science and truth ahead of PR and politics. I would have no idea how to launch a law suit, if I had the resources to do that. As I have previously observed, you seem to think that unless I am doing everything by myself, what I am contributing comes to naught. I would like to see those responsible brought to account, but I am a scholar, not an attorney. Others are going to have to bear that burden, which would be an ineffectual way for me to contribute to this cause, when I have well-honed research skills but no knowledge, ability or resources to launch a law suit. Is that OK with you?
Any implication that we are better offf with lies is just not justified.
I mentioned soemwhere up above that a police investigator will get lies and conflicting information combined with theories.
The theories and speculations can be found on the station whiteboard as submitted by his/her crew.
Fact is lies are filtered by investigations and cross examination etc….hopefully!
Some of yours might be there and some might come from Ggoofey, nevertheless they have to be tested. (some people suggest that fire brought down the three buildings even!)
By all means apply your scholarship to the problem as you wish, it will/should be taken into account.
I just want a proper murder investigation, nothing will be achieved until it happens and ends and I can get on with my knitting as the blade falls.
There is nothing untoward in seeking your ardent support for such an investigation.
Well, I appreciate this post, Ned. It makes a lot more sense than some of your earlier commentaries. I certainly SUPPORT carrying this case as far forward as we can. But, frankly, the judiciary in this country has become something of an abomination. The judges in New York who are involved in 9/11 do not appear to me to have truth and justice foremost on their minds. Judy Wood’s Qui Tam lawsuit is an instructive example.
Well there you go: the problem also lies with the US judiciary as well!.?
May I suggest that you search; “Lawyers and the third Reich’. (no time for me at moment) you will find a summary of a book on the subject and one comment refers to the fictional conversation in the film, Trilal at Nuremburg, when Spencer Tracey speaks with a German judge who asks something, from memory like; ‘Where did we go wrong” and Spencer replies; “when you condemned the first innocent man”. Could he be referring to the beheaded simpleton ‘commie’ who did not burn the Reischstag? That of course brought in the ‘German’ Patriot Act and other obscenities in legislation………………as has the US.
Of course that was only one of Hitler’s ‘false flags’. Then again we have plenty of our own ‘culminating’ in 9/11. The next one will be a real humdinger!
Now what say; KSM is the US example of the ‘commie’ and the Muslim people are another, in general.
Sorry to say that when the judiciary (and the politicians) are corrupt in your country then your people are cactus……just living, as the Germans did in the mid 1930′s…Naive stupid dumbos who did not get off their butts to ensure that matters were corrected.
As for lawyers, is not Professor Cass Sunstein an ex professor from the Harvard Law School and he now runs the department of Informatiopn and regulatory affairs. {ref: Ggriffin; Cognitive Infiltration] I think you have a problem and that is why it is imperitive that a proper investigatin be underway NOW. Your time is fast getting to 1939!
The people have to be motivated by the desire not to end up as the Germans did…you can help..
As for lawyers generally; they are just as thick and controlled here and when tested outside their expertise in some particular aspect of the law, coud not find the toilet roll in an outside dunny……but I have hasd some successs, now , if only they would manage to wipe themselves.
Put your theories with all the others on the station whiteboard for the proper investigation. Have you tried sending out a letter to every AG in the US, outining the possible scenarios and seeking an investibgation. Surely, you can obtian many academic signatories who will support a proper investigation withourt committing to, how, who and why……yet!
YOU DON’T KNOW there are problems with the judicial system, especially in New York? Have you paid any attention to the 9/11-related law suits there and what has become of them? I am afraid you are one of the masses of the gullible who will believe anything they are told by our government. I am surprised that you are not here defending the “official conspiracy theory” of 19 Islamic hijackers and those planes!
Your first line is presumptous and impertinent and based on no knowledge of what I have been observing since early 2004.
Try a dictionary and look up ‘facetious’ .
To suggest I have been ‘gullible’ is unfounded (at least since early 2004) and the unfounded allegattion indicates more about you then of me.
I am well aware of the numerous”allegations’ against the US judicial system and some players in it when it comes to actions by 911 truthers seeking information via freedom of information suits and others seeking compensation etc.,
If the case/s has been reported at 9/11 blogger particularly, as I have read every thing published on blogger since about 2005
Perhaps you would like to borrow my print-out (about 2′ high) of the Heidner papers referred to in one of the posts above….I had to carry it around for a week to get through it all….you might find them an interesting read and put it up on the whiteboard with all the other theories. If I had a whiteboard sticker I would put it up as a posibility for precise examination….talk about plots within plots!..Dan Brwon could not even compete with Heidner. But then again I know of some matters metioned by Heidner and I can add to them…so at least I know that Heidner has some credibility and this thesis could have legs..
(For other readers who want to look, just search; E.P.-Heidner-911commision-report-revised-december- 2008……plus, add ‘collateral’ and ‘collateral 1′, to see the two smaller reports of 53 and 56 pages..start with the latter two reports..I suggest.)
It is a mystery to me, as to what your presumptions, uninformed judgements, uniformed conclusions and attempted insults in relation to me, are meant to achieve. You trying to bait me to expose more? Nah! No more!.
Egad, Ned! What did I do to set you off? You made a remark that implied I was performing some kind of diversion or fakery in pointing out that the judiciary, especially in New York, has been biased against 9/11 law suits! Now you come back and proclaim yourself an expert on judicial bias in relation to 9/11 lawsuits! I have no idea what to make of this–and your diatribe against me is not going to impress anyone.
Jim, I decline to bite .l Ieave it to the readers of the commenst…been illuminating!.
On August 17, 2011 – 6:15 am,
Jim Fetzer wrote:
The Air Force’s failure to intercept the planes was the part of the plot most critical to its success. It is the sine qua non of the entire affair.
If the Air Force shows up, none of this goes down.
We need to know why the Air Force didn’t show up. That knowledge would help us crack this case wide open.
The Air Force has an Inspector General for just this purpose.
Who pulled the mission statement of the fighter squadrons at Andrews AFB on 9/12/2001?
Andrews AFB is only a taxi-ride away from the Pentagon and DC. Its failure to launch aircraft to prevent the attacks is another key to the plot.
Off we go into the wild blue yonder,
Climbing high into the sun;
Here they come, zooming to meet our thunder,
At ‘em boys, Give ‘er the gun! (Give ‘er the gun!)
Down we dive, spouting our flame from under,
Off with one helluva roar!
We live in fame or go down in flame. Hey!
Nothing’ll stop the U.S. Air Force!
(Words & music by Robert MacArthur Crawford, 1899-1961)
But on Black Tuesday, September 11, 2001, something did stop the U.S. Air Force.
Today, we’re chasing snipe while the ducks who sat are still sitting.
Red herrings, snipe hunts, wild goose chases…
Sitting ducks.
Choose your targets carefully.
This is an important point. In the second edition of 9/11 SYNTHETIC TERROR: MADE IN THE U.S.A., Webster Tarpley identifies as many as seventeen (17) anti-terror drills that were taking place, which completely nullified normal relations between the FAA and NORAD and made any response to the alleged hijackings virtually impossible. Since this would have been difficult for 19 Islamic terrorists to have arranged, we have consider whether it is more probable that they were incredibly luck in their choice of dates to commit these crimes or that the DoD managed these arrangements to insure there would be no interdiction or discovery that these were “phantom flights”. This is one more important proof that 9/11 was an inside job. For more, see “Why doubt 9/11?” at http://911scholars.org in the upper-left corner.
The exercises offer no valid excuse for the USAF’s failure to launch aircraft in time to prevent the attacks of 9/11.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_operations_and_exercises_on_September_11,_2001
[...] 1964 – The Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which phantom North Vietnamese ships fired non-existent torpedoes, which President Johnson used to justify a full scale American invasion of Vietnam. See http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/14/peeling-the-911-onion-layers-of-plots-within-plots/) [...]