Why Cheney’s confession “We did 9/11” appears to be authentic



By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor


Former Vice President Dick Cheney surprised the world this morning during an interview in his luxurious Jackson Hole residence, when he admitted that the fourteen-year-old rumors that 9/11 was an inside job were actually true.

In an exclusive interview with The Hollywood Inquirer, Cheney explained that the only way to move toward a global Pax Americana was by engineering a “New Pearl Harbor.”

“When we assumed office in January 2001 and saw we were losing control of the world, we all panicked,” claims Cheney, obviously very emotional. “We didn’t know what to do. And Paul Wolfowitz, our strategist, suggested we rig up an attack on America as a temporary solution. The militarized police state was only supposed to last for a few years. But as time went by and nobody seemed to notice, we kept playing along.”

Cartoon-Cheney-ConfessesMr. Cheney alleges that the cabal did send out a lot of hidden messages through the years to prepare the population for the truth. Rumsfeld’s speeches have been full of references to “the missile that hit this building (the Pentagon)” and “the flight we shot down over Pennsylvania.”

Larry Silverstein, who helped finance the operation through insurance fraud, has repeatedly discussed “pulling” i.e. demolishing Building 7. George W. Bush himself has discussed watching a live Secret Service feed of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center. And Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly celebrated the success of the 9/11 operation.

“We felt guilty about the deception” added Cheney. “We wanted to tell the world the truth, but we we were afraid of the reactions it would provoke. We thought the whole planet was going to hate us for all the lies we had told, so we kept lying but sending subtle clues to relieve our consciousness.

When the first rumors finally began about the whole thing, we felt very nervous and started planting fake conspiracy stories – some of them containing true information, but with laughably lousy sourcing to ‘poison the well’ – in order to confuse the public into apathy.”

Cheney claims he finally decided to tell the truth, because he was afraid it was going to die with him. At age 74, with a bad heart, he is one of the few people who knows the big picture, and was afraid that after his death the real story would be buried forever.

From his home in Madison, Wisconsin, noted conspiracy expert Dr. James Fetzer stated that Cheney’s confession “appears to be authentic.” Fetzer argues that even though there is no such newspaper as the “Hollywood Inquirer,” and that the alleged interview was written as a parody and published on April 1st, the authenticity of the confession cannot be doubted, because most of what “Cheney” is purported to have said appears to be true.

All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. 
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.
About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. Jim, you say that you are practicing “inference to the best explanation.” You are not.
    The best explanation is still that the original Paul lives. Your forensic evidence has
    not been appropriately vetted. You have said that your forensic evidence
    would be admissible in court. It may or may not be depending on the court. But one thing is
    certain, the other side would have their own experts to cast doubt on your hypothesis.
    For you to be so sure of yourself without (apparently) having deeply explored what
    “the other side’s experts” would say about your evidence is troubling. The best inference
    considering the implausibility of your hypothesis is that your “forensic evidence” is not
    as much of a “slam dunk” as you think.

  2. http://www.threeworldwars.com/albert-pike2.htm
    “The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil…”
    Will all agenturs please raise your right hand and identify yourselves

  3. Jim,

    Let us take the case of Oliver Stone. JFK got him the conspiracist moniker and then he played on that reputation with his cameo in the movie DAVE wherein he comments how the fictional president played by Kevin Kline appears to not be the real president. Do you think that cameo appearance helped or hurt his reputation. It reminds me of the Terence McKenna talk in which he expresses horror at the fact that Allan Ginsberg was doing commercials for chino jeans. Ginsberg was reputed to have given the $20k he received away; however, the guy who was on trial for HOWL in 1957 hurt his reputation with people like McKenna. And then there was Jesse Ventura as a sitting Governor refereeing a WWF match. Christ! talk about demeanor!

    There is an aspect to what you are doing that you do not want to see. You are blind to what us little people have to deal with. Stop being a dilettante!

  4. Yes, agree to differ & move on! Although it has been interesting and entertaining. And I don’t think we even got around to talking about Manson was a patsy! As for whether you can ever agree about the validity of the source, I’m afraid it’s an epistemological debate, that never resolves.

    As I read in the Tao Te Ching, paraphrasing from the Ron Hogan version, Chapter 21:

    A researcher focuses on truth, nothing else, just truth.

    But how are you supposed to focus on something you can’t even see, and can never pin down?

    Just remember what Lao Tzu said:
    “It’s exactly like in The Matrix,
    There is no reality behind the pictures.”

    That’s the way it’s been,
    From the very beginning until now.
    Don’t ask me how I know,
    I just know.

  5. (Part 3 of comment) (Eric Clapton and) Mick Jagger and Ronnie Wood and George Martin and Pete Townsend and all Paul’s friends and acquaintances who knew both Paul and “faul” are just scared to death to speak about it. The absurdity is astounding. Moreover, they never let on, in any way, over many decades. Well, I guess you can find something here and there that adds fuel to your belief, but overall, they never let on at all. There’s never any uncomfortable hesitation from George Martin for example. And he is someone who would KNOW FOR SURE. They all seem to think that Faul is actually just Paul. So what must we do then with your “forensic evidence.” The great likelihood, in the face of the overwhelming likelihood of Paul’s continued existence, is that there is something fishy about your forensic evidence. I would bet that comparing photographs is a very tricky proposition. Different angles, different “editing” techniques (ways of altering photographs for various purposes) have to be considered, as well as different times when pictures were taken, and so on. I would bet experts could be found who would say the above, or something very similar. So, I am very doubtful your “forensic evidence” is as ironclad as you think. Because your proposition is HIGHLY unlikely to be true. It is also very bad form to cite hoax articles. I’m sorry but everyone knows that.

  6. CONTINUING (this is all part of the preceding comment)

    But those are very small things. There are enormous reasons for considering your hypothesis wildly implausible, indeed ridiculously unlikely. I won’t go into it except to say there is the friends and family issue, as well as the talent issue. And also the relative importance of the band issue. Yeah, they were a huge pop band who made a ton of money for their record label, EMI I think. So per you, they found this guy who looked like Paul, who miraculously happened to be as talented as him, and who miraculously sang extremely similarly to Paul, with HIGHLY comparable vocals that are VERY difficult to imitate. They also taught him to play bass left handed at a very high level. This “Faul” also just happened to be English too I guess with a Liverpudlian dialect presumably. It is miracle on top of miracle. Actually it is just absurd.

    By the way, if they really wanted to keep the Beatles together, shouldn’t they have “disposed of” Yoko? Just wondering.

    Anyway, the friends, acquaintances, family issue also makes your scenario INCREDIBLY IMPLAUSIBLE. What a massive conspiracy for a mere pop band, regardless of whether they were raking it in. And if they were so important, why were they “allowed” to break up just a few years after “Faul”? There goes new product from your “cash cow.”

    And I guess no one is talking because they were all paid off or threatened with immediate “termination with extreme prejudice.”? Eric Clapton and

  7. Jim, you look at album covers and random doodles (and presumably song lyrics) and read into
    them “messages” about McCartney’s death. This is so amateur, and frankly dopey as hell. I am
    discouraged that you can’t (apparently) see this. That stuff is not “evidence” of any sort, and
    only has meaning (in terms of Paul’s supposed death) for those who have already made up their
    minds that Paul died. For the rest of us it is beyond silly.

    It is so ludicrous to go into song lyrics, but since you talk about “billy shears” I will briefly explore
    the lyrics for you. “The singer’s going to sing a song and he wants you all to sing along, so may I
    introduce to you, the one and only billy shears, sgt peppers….” and then the singer “Billy Shears”
    sings “With A Little Help From My Friends.” That singer is Richard Starkey, aka Ringo Starr. So it
    doesn’t even make sense contextually. Billy Shears should be Ringo! But anyway, the whole thing is
    ridiculous. It’s a friggin’ concept album. They are pretending. McCartney, excuse me “Faul” (lol) has
    discussed many times how he thought pretending they were different characters would allow them to explore different lyrical and musical ideas. “It’s not me it’s that other guy doing it.” The idea was to free them up artistically.

    While we are on song lyrics, I guess “Let It Be,” which references mother Mary, is not in any way
    an allusion to Paul’s mother, named Mary, having died of cancer when he was a boy. After all, it was written by “Faul.”

  8. For myself, people who already face a daunting wall of doubters, miscreants, disinfo artists and hasbara should not indulge in topics that can only blow up in their faces like trick cigars.

    Every time Jim talks about Apollo or Paul McCartney or any subject that tarnishes participants in the eyes of people who seriously seek truth, he hurts his cause. If one were to take Billy Meier seriously, then this one armed Swiss truck driver who says he has enjoyed life long contact with people from the Pleiades should not be making replicas of Pleaidian starships in his barn and filming them suspended from strings on fishing poles. In other words: DON’T DO STUPID THINGS IF YOU WANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
    You want a comic interlude, go to a Joe Rogan or Patton Oswalt concert. Read some JP Dunleavy or Mark Twain. Stop shi*ting where you eat.

  9. Jim – I cannot adequately express the amount of respect I have for you & the work you’ve done on so many fronts to expose the machinations of the NWO elite that has humanity by the throat – you are a bona-fide hero!

    However – let’s all take a breath here! 1st of all, you admit it took you 3 yrs to finally come to grips w/ the prospect that Paul died & was replaced. You’re giving your reading audience less than 3 days to come to the same conclusion! That it might be a lot easier to accept that Osama bin Laudin & Saddam Hussein were replaced than a pop star back in ’66 – you gotta admit it’s a heck of a stretch esp w/ Ringo’s statemt posted to an illegitimate site. The forensics presented are impressive & compelling – does anyone’s appearance change so much in less than year unless you’re the President of the US?!!

    What troubles me the most is the Divide & Conquer aspect raising its ugly head! You & Barrett are a formidable team. Remember the forces of evil will use every tool available to them to take down their adversaries.

    Please accept that some of us still have doubts – doubts that can be eliminated w/ more evidence that you say you already have. Gladly prove the doubters wrong w/o name calling/insults which doesn’t do anything to advance truth.

    Love you & give the Lie what it deserves – The TRUTH!

  10. There’s a rumor going round that Cheney didn’t survive his heart transplant operation & was actually replaced by a look-alike psychopath – easy peasy since they’re ALL already identical on the INSIDE! I got this 100% substantiated rumor straight from Sorcha Faal! Alex Jones is SO jealous!

    Thanks for the laugh Kevin – INQUIRING minds really DO want to know!

Comments are closed.