Why am I not hearing the endless rumble of jaws dropping to the floor?! (UPDATED!)

For those of you who have been regular readers of my blog it is no secret that after 8 years of doubts and confusion I have finally come to the conclusion that 9/11 was an “inside job”. I would refer those who are not aware of my fairly recent “conversion” to the “truther” camp and of the motives which caused it to my paper “How I became a dedicated 9-11 Truther” which you can download from here (this is actually a letter I wrote to a friend and it lays out why I strongly believe that there can be no doubt whatsoever about the fact that 9/11 was an “inside job”). Please do read it as I will write the rest of this post under the assumption that you have read my paper where I substantiate and reference the following facts:

1) The US government and corporate media do not have any explanations about how the WTC1 and WTC2 fell. NIST simply did not investigate the events which followed the “initiation of collapse”. In case you wonder what happened to the previously official version of the “pancaking” theory – NIST quietly dropped it. Let me repeat this once again. THERE IS NO “OFFICIAL VERSION” FOR THE COLLAPSE OF WTC1 and WTC2. None. Ziltch. Nihil. Notin’. Niente. As in “absolutely no nothing“. Got it?

You never heard about this?! I am not surprised. But it gets even better, watch this:

2) The US government admitted that WTC7 feel in free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. Why is that important? Simply because that means that a number of floors of WTC7 simply disappeared instantaneously and symmetrically from under the roof of WTC7. There is only one possible way to remove a section of a building instantaneously: by explosive power. Yes, the admission by Uncle Sam that the WTC7 feel for at least 2.25 seconds is an implicit admission that explosives were used. Let me repeat this one too: UNCLE SAM HAS DE-FACTO ADMITTED THAT EXPLOSIVES WERE USED IN WTC7.

Amazing, jaw-dropping stuff I would say, no? So why do I not hear the endless rumble of jaws hitting the floor all over the USA and the rest of the world? Maybe I should drive home the point even more forcefully? Ok, lemme try this:

Since Uncle Sam has admitted that only explosives can explain what was observed on September 11th, Uncle Sam has also admitted that he is guilty of that crime. No outside agency, nevermind some semi-mythical ‘al-Qaeda’ could have had access to a super secret building like WTC7. Only Uncle Sam could have rigged that building to bring it down in a few seconds.

I still do not hear the endless rumble of jaws hitting the floor all over the USA and the rest of the world…

The ‘official narrative’ (its not even a theory) about 9/11 is so full of holes that one could easily write a 100 pages long paper analyzing all the impossibilities populating literally every aspect of it: from the exploded and non-exploded residue of thermitic material found in huge amounts in the WTC dust, to the impossible telephone calls allegedly made from the hijacked aircraft, to the non-existing plane wrecks in DC and Shanksville, to the absolutely amazing biographies of the putative hijackers all of which seem to have been US government agents, to the role of Pakistan and Israel, to the ridiculous claims about recovered flight manuals, passports, letters, to the impossible flight profiles of the aircraft in DC and NY, etc. – none of it makes any sense at all. Every single one of these absolutely nonsensical parts of the official narrative deserves its own investigation and the good news is that it has already been done, very effectively, by the 9/11 Truth movement (my personal “9/11 electronic library” is currently at 22.6GB (!) of data, most of it high-quality research by very smart folks which have literally eviscerated all the absolute crap of the official narrative) Yet nobody seems to care.

Why?

In my training years I was taught that the process of intelligence revolves around three distinct phases, called the “three As”: acquisition, analysis, acceptance.

The first one – acquisition – is all about collecting the data and that has been comprehensively done by thousands of folks since 9/11. The second one – analysis – centers on the careful analysis of the collected data, and I would say that the 9/11 Truth movement has also done a superb job in that respect too. Which leaves the last one – acceptance – which is the process by which the intelligence community brings its conclusions to the attention of the decision makers. It is in this final aspect that the 9/11 Truth movement has largely failed, at least so far: amazingly, even though the truth about 9/11 is out there, only a couple of computer mouse clicks away – most people simply do not give a damn.

Worse, those who do not consider themselves as “truthers” often reflect an amazing degree of bigotry and hostility. These are the folks who refer to “truthers” and their theories as “cooks”, “garbage” and, my all-time favorite “conspiracy theories” (as if the official narrative is not one hell of an absurd conspiracy theory!). Why do these “skeptics” so naively accept an absolutely ridiculous official narrative and show such a vitriolic hostility towards those who dare question it?

David Ray Griffin wrote a brilliant open letter to the left-leaning wing of such “skeptics” entitled Left-Leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do You Really Believe in Miracles? which you can download from here. Please do take the time to download and read it, it clearly shows that it is not the “truthers” who believe in miracles, but the so-called “skeptics”. Griffin addressed his letter to left-leaning despisers, but he could have addressed it to the right-leaning despisers too – they are equally unwilling (or unable) to cope with the mind-boggling implications of the fact that 9/11 was beyond any doubt an inside job. Yes, the implications of this are truly appalling and, frankly, quite frightening and the aggressive reaction of the ‘despisers” is not so much a reflection of their careful analysis and subsequent rejection of the evidence as it is a reflection of their fear to take a hard look at reality. It is hard, if not impossible, to achieve “acceptance” when your audience is absolutely terrified by the implications of your analysis and conclusions.

The 9/11 Truth movement is composed of people who have all dared to think the unthinkable. Some from day 1, some, like myself, from roughly day 3000, but who all eventually dared to plunge in the cold waters of facts and logic no matter where this might lead them.

In contrast, I find that most skeptics, in particular of the aggressive “despisers” variety are really what I call “existential cowards” – folks who choose delusion over the painful facts of reality.

There have been attempts by some in the 9/11 Truth movement to appeal to the common sense of the “despisers”. One of my favorite ones is this video:

Yet, one would have to admit that these efforts have not yielded the results one could have reasonably expected. If anything, the more evidence the 9/11 Truth movement produces, the most vociferous hostility it gets from the “despisers”. So where do we go from here?

Social psychology has shown the many ways in which people can be lead to believe the exact opposite of what their own eyes are showing them (check out, for example, the research known has the “Asch conformity experiments“) or how figures of authority can elicit an amazing degree of obedience to “authority” (check out Milgram’s work on obedience to authority). Here I think of those who reject the evidence about 9/11 basically because Noam Chomsky or Ron Paul dismiss it.

We can, of course, find some solace in the words of Gandhi about how “first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win“, but I would not hold my breath for a final “victory” any time soon. Yes, there are some absolutely amazing people in the 9/11 Truth movement (the names of Richard Gage, Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin immediately come to my mind), but these are all specialists, our movement still lacks a unifying Gandhi who would have the authority to speak for all and loudly cry out “But he isn’t wearing anything at all!” when presented with the official myths and fairy tales about September 11th. Sooner or later such a person will appear, I believe, but in the meantime I say that we should just keep working on the already huge corpus of 9/11 research without expecting to ever hear the endless rumble of jaws dropping to the floor. Folks – it ain’t coming and we might as well get used to this unpalatable fact.

Looking at how long it took my own jaw to drop (8 years!) I find some solace in the idea that we will be able to convince people, although not en masse, but one by one, one jaw at a time. That should be the objective – small steps in the right direction while remaining steadfastly unaffected by the never ending stream vitriol and scorn from the existential cowards who are freaked out by reality.

Thomas Potter on June 08, 2018 · at 8:08 am EST/EDT

“Wherever a man commits a crime, God finds a witness. Every secret crime has its reporter.”
~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

9/11 Finding The Truth by Andrew Johnson – Audiobook

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvaxr0OSBw2DtOWulcA96d7sG2rsNyOgb

THE DIRECTED ENERGY COVER-UP TEAM

https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50694/images/Richard-DavidG-StevenJ.jpg

Other examples of Directed Energy (not necessarily used as a weapon) are radio waves, cell phone signals, TV remote control signals, wireless internet signals…etc.

Those who want to cover up the evidence of what happen often falsely claim that Dr. Wood is talking about a specific weapon and a specific location of it (e.g. laser beam from outer space, or “spacebeams”). This disinformation campaign was initiated by Steven Jones on 11/11/2006 in a presentation he gave at the University of California, Berkeley.[ available here at 1:53:47 https://archive.org/details/liftingthefog_2006_11_11_session2 ], telling his audience that “Judy Woods (Dr. Wood) says it’s a laser or maser from space” while showing how difficult it is to hold his hand like a beam from space. Not only does Dr. Wood NOT SAY THAT, she actually RULES THAT OUT. The mechanism of destruction of a laser beam would be from heat and produce a bright and blinding light. But we know the buildings were not cooked to death. The term Directed Energy is used because energy is directed to do something different then it normally does and it is directed to do this within a certain geographic zone. [As a mental example, think of directing the binding energy of matter to repel instead of attract. A solid object would turn to atomic-sized dust. Direct this to happen within the WTC complex and not across the street.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

If you are worthy and willing to know the truth, read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? as I have. ♥

58 Comments

oldman on September 07, 2010 · at 3:06 pm EST/EDT

Agree completely! Our entire world visible through the media is a veil of lies- Government, Politics, Foreign Policy, Economics and fiscal matters. When a tiny handful of people control the media, why does this surprise anybody? Watch the recoil in horror in the face of any public declaration of this simple fact! You are the equivalent of a Holocaust denier. – a “the press is a free institution searching for the truth” denier. Even matters on which the hive has considered as secular sacred cow like global warming join the untouchables. If you want to get labeled as a cook. Wing nut. … you can privately talk about these things but not in a public forum, – even in a published letters to the editor context. – or Antiwar.com – or my beloved Pat Buchanan, Some things are too radioactive to speak about in public. What have we become in the world? Who could have predicted that a deracinated public would buckle and queue up on demand in the face of a media in the hands of the in crowd? The answer is that the country is too big. With smaller units, veins of independent thought can be nourished and achieve enough stature so the world media would need to either demonize the entity that dares to blaspheme, or open a true public debate on the issues, which they can’t and won’t ever do.
Snoopy on September 07, 2010 · at 7:22 pm EST/EDT

Rumsfeld a few minutes before the attacks on the Twin Towers: “we are going to be attacked but I don’t know where”. The video footage is on the Internet.
Was it an “inside job”? I don’t know, I prefer not to think about it.
Anonymous on September 07, 2010 · at 7:51 pm EST/EDT

People are not going to get their heads round the idea of 9/11 being an inside job regardless of the evidence. Mainstream culture has very effectively labelled dissenters as nutjobs and the majority will be too afraid of losing credibility. Also the idea of 9/11 being an inside job is pretty terrifying – if the powers that be are capable of murdering thousands of moneyed Republicans and corporate barons then the state is certainly capable of rubbing out any number of the little people should that prove necessary.

The 9/11 truth movement will be having conventions for the next thirty years but it will meet the same fate as those who question the JFK assassination. It will be the grassy knoll all over again.

robert
jack on September 07, 2010 · at 10:34 pm EST/EDT

One big problem with your 9/11 post, which I take it this is not the one you were talking about in the lead up to 9/11 you will be doing another more extensive one, is that it negates the various well established links to foreign jihadists documented by various foreign intelligence agencies since at least 2000 including Russia saying that there was an impending attack on the US using airlines.

Not to mention both financial and other evidence linking Atta and the other hijackers to established NGO’s and individuals that have been involved and linked to other terrorist attacks against western interests starting with the Embassy bombings in 98 after the establishment of literally a hand full of terrorists with Bin Ladin and leaders of other terrorist groups establishing a small movement to attack western interests in that same year.

Are you saying that no Muslims were involved in the 9/11 attack?

I don’t see how they could have expertly wired both WTC 1 & 2 for an internal explosion which takes hours in normal demolitions like you see in Las Vegas in one of the busiest building in the world without anybody noticing.
To pull of something that complicated would take weeks in advance to rig and raise some suspicious activities prior to 9/11 like shift in security procedures.

In my 9/11 post I will cover the main issues no one addresses (if the articles and links are still on the net) which puts everything in context.
- RockyRacoon on March 17, 2015 · at 11:00 pm EST/EDT
  
  One of the Bush family ran security for WTC7. For a few weeks before the event, trucks would pull up at around 3 am and work until 7 before things got hopping. Explosive sniffing dogs were taken off duty during this time. Yes those planes may have hit the towers by terrorists but that was the cover story. The fact that they did manage to hijack those planes and fly them into the towers without getting shot down….all resources were out doing drills…see Webster Tarpley for that. In any case I am not one who looks at every detail but between Architechs for 9/11 those drills that allowed our fighters to be absent and Cheney’s “the order stands” about NOT shooting down one of the hijacked planes…well. No skyscraper was ever brought down by fire in the history of human kind neither were any of the towers. They imploded.
  RR
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 08, 2010 · at 1:47 am EST/EDT

@jack: Are you saying that no Muslims were involved in the 9/11 attack?

No, I am not saying that at all. What I am saying that the putative “Muslims” (who spent their time whoring and drinking before 9/11) played exactly the same role as Marinus van der Lubbe in the burning of the Reichstag or Lee Harvey Oswald in the shooting of Kennedy.

I don’t see how they could have expertly wired both WTC 1 & 2 for an internal explosion which takes hours in normal demolitions like you see in Las Vegas in one of the busiest building in the world without anybody noticing.

You have clearly not taken the time to actually read my paper even though it contains the answer to your question. Still, I hope that you will read this:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/s9ibw4cpktd99be/Demolition%20access%20to%20the%20World%20Trade%20Center%20towers.pdf
- Paddy on May 03, 2016 · at 11:56 pm EST/EDT
  
  (I know this is late in this thread)
  In the end, as you clearly state in the letter you point to at the beginning of your post here, the way the feat was accomplished is important but ignoring that aspect does not in any way invalidate that the buildings were brought down using explosives and the official conspiracy theory does not hold water.
jack on September 08, 2010 · at 2:32 am EST/EDT

@VINEYARDSAKER

I tried to read it before posting my comment but I think the link is broken as when I clicked on it, it does not appear and get this error message.

“Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage.”

Can’t directly download it either.

I’ll try a different web browser to see if that makes a difference.

“No, I am not saying that at all. What I am saying that the putative “Muslims” (who spent their time whoring and drinking before 9/11) played exactly the same role as Marinus van der Lubbe in the burning of the Reichstag or Lee Harvey Oswald in the shooting of Kennedy.”

Do you mean they were set up outright to be at the wrong place at the wrong time or they where covertly encouraged to carry out the attack aided and abetted by the intelligence services and government who without their assistance would make it impossible to carry out?

I think all the information is there in regards to Bin Ladin and 9/11 and the whole Islamist movement but deliberately not put in context especially the alleged smoking gun video tape of Bin Ladin discussing the attack in Afghanistan and discovered by US special forces and information censored out by the mass media and news publications and websites.

You wouldn’t have a link to the full “smoking gun video” of Bin Ladin discussing it in Afghanistan. I would like to see the full video discussion on what Bin Ladin actually says.
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 08, 2010 · at 2:58 am EST/EDT

@jack: sorry to hear about your download issues. You definitely want to try using FireFox. Also, MediaFire being a free hosting service, they might have bandwidth problems. In fact, right now their page is not loading for me either, but it worked earlier today. Try tomorrow morning maybe. If you still cannot get the files, please send me your email address and I will send them to you directly.

Do you mean they were set up outright to be at the wrong place at the wrong time or they where covertly encouraged to carry out the attack aided and abetted by the intelligence services and government who without their assistance would make it impossible to carry out?

Well, I can only speculate but my feeling is that they were on board the planes which hit the buildings. I am not so sure that they were actually piloting them, but that is another issue. Bottom line, I am quite certain that the planes did hit the towers (at least WTC1 and WTC2) and that the US used al-Qaeda linked elements onboard these aircraft to build the myth about that being an al-Qaeda operation. Since clearly no al-Qaeda had the means to bring in tons of explosives in 3 buildings at the same time, that was Uncle Sam’s making.

Watch the movie Fabled Enemies:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2144933190875239407#

it will give you plenty of info about these 19 hijackers and their ties to Uncle Sam.

Let me know what you think about the movie, ok?
Bernard on September 08, 2010 · at 11:53 am EST/EDT

godalmighty you’ve joined the ranks of the kooks.

I dont know why I’m still subscribing.

There’s not going to be an attack on Iran either.
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 08, 2010 · at 12:01 pm EST/EDT

@Bernard: godalmighty you’ve joined the ranks of the kooks

actually, I joined the kooks about year ago :-)
Anonymous on September 08, 2010 · at 6:17 pm EST/EDT

Trouble is supporting the 9/11 truth movement will undermine your credibility with many other people. That’s why Chomsky and Amy Goodman won’t touch it. Maybe this is not how the world should be but it is how the world is.
Anonymous on September 08, 2010 · at 7:47 pm EST/EDT

The readers of this blog would do well to read the following articles by Andrew Marshall, describing the history of, and the reasons behind, the US / West’s wholesale creation of manipulable Islamic groups, which dates from the 1970’s, or even the 1920s, if one counts British funding of the Egyptian group that would come to be known as the ‘Muslim Brotherhood’.

The psyop preamble to 9 / 11 began in the 1970s and came to a head in the 1990s, with the radical neocon-infested PNAC’s publication of Renewing American Defenses. The goal was to create artificially radicalized Islamic groups which would sow the social chaos that would provide a pretext for Western military intervention in Yugoslavia, the Mideast and Central Asia. [see: Bernard Lewis and his ‘Arc of Crisis’ theory].

The US was well aware that it needed a useful, pliable tool to prepare the ground for hegemony over Central Asia and its rich hydrocarbon and mineral resources, in the post-Soviet era – to push back any Russian influence and prevent China from getting a foot in the door.

The encirclement of Russia and China, the only potential counter forces to US / UK global hegemony, has long been the ultimate goal.

So, although I’d agree that raising awareness of the lies surrounding 9 / 11 is important, it is much more urgent that people understand why a ‘new Pearl Harbor’ was necessary and where the US’s geopolitical goal of 100% military and financial dominance is taking humanity.

The following articles provide a good introduction.

The Imperial Anatomy of Al-Qaeda. The CIA’s Drug-Running Terrorists and the “Arc of Crisis” – Part I
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20907

The End of the Cold War and Strategy for the New World Order – Part II
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20944
.
Mar on September 08, 2010 · at 8:33 pm EST/EDT

@anonymous,
Your post helped make Saker’s point as to the fear aspect of most Americans in not seeking the truth, for fear of actually finding it and not being able to deal with it….

Press TV has been airing a documentary called
“Zero: An Investigation into 9/11”
Check it out….
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 08, 2010 · at 10:59 pm EST/EDT

@anonymous14:17:Trouble is supporting the 9/11 truth movement will undermine your credibility

True. But unlike Chomsky or Goodman I really don’t give a damn about what people think of me. I try to be honest, fact based and logical. And if some folks think that this makes me a ‘kook’ – so be it. The can always read the WSJ or The Economist and feel “serious” :-P

@anonymous15:47(jack?): I consider Bernard Lewis as a typical Zionist propagandist and all this “Muslim-centered” talk in the context of 9/11 as a smoke screen, no more. If you look at the behavior of the putative hijackers (whoring, gambling, drinking) you will see that they were not real Muslims at all. At best, they were patsies, used by the US and Israeli intelligence services to act as the ‘One And Only True Culprit’ (all in caps!) in 9/11 to better hide the role of the real culprits.
To chase the “Muslim trail” in 9/11 is as silly as for a bull to chase the red cloth the torero is shaking in front of the poor beast who would be much better off killing the torero.

God knows I hate Wahabism and I loathe the zombies who are brainwashed into that ideology, but I categorically refuse to blame 9/11 on them. That lets the real culprits off the hook.

@Mari: Your post helped make Saker’s point as to the fear aspect of most Americans in not seeking the truth

Mar – thanks for your supportive comment. You are right of course, but I don’t expect a person so full of certitudes and so devoid of even basic information to listen anything you or I might have to say. To call us ‘kooks’ serves exactly that purpose: to rationalize why you are not listening to somebody. That’s alright – this type of individual will always be out there. The good news is that they don’t matter too much, being passive followers anyway…

Cheers!

The Saker
jack on September 09, 2010 · at 1:01 am EST/EDT

@VINEYARDSAKER:

I only use the name jack or john never anonymous as it will get confused with people who also use it.

I watched a section of Fabled Enemies on Brasscheck TV before about the government access codes to military, airline, etc which I think if confirmed is the best proof that the government was involved in the 9/11 attack.

I will watch it tomorrow (it’s 2 am here in Britain) and tell you what I think from what I have seen so far it confirms my thesis of what happened.
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 09, 2010 · at 1:46 am EST/EDT

@jack: I only use the name jack or john never anonymous

Fair enough. My mistake and my apology for it.

I watched a section of Fabled Enemies on Brasscheck TV before about the government access codes to military, airline, etc which I think if confirmed is the best proof that the government was involved in the 9/11 attack

If my memory is correct, the 2nd part of Fable Enemies also looks into Israel’s likely role in all this. Make sure to watch the full thing.

Did you succeed in downloading the 3 files I wanted you to have (mine, Griffin’s and “Demolition access”)?

and tell you what I think from what I have seen so far it confirms my thesis of what happened.

I very much look forward to hear your views on this.

Good nite!

The Saker
Anonymous on September 09, 2010 · at 8:27 am EST/EDT

VINYARDSAKER:
@anonymous15:47(jack?): I consider Bernard Lewis as a typical Zionist propagandist and all this “Muslim-centered” talk in the context of 9/11 as a smoke screen, no more.

No, not ‘Jack’. My name is Dana :) I will sign my name in any future posts.

I didn’t make my point clearly. By no means was I implying that ‘Muslims’ were behind 9/11. And, yes, Bernard Lewis is an arch Zionist propagandist. It should be noted that he was also in the employ of MI6 for a number of years, and as a ‘respected historian’ of the Mideast, managed to work his way into the shadows of upper echelon Pentagon officials. He’s had a number of Whitehouse and Defense officials listening to his theories of ‘creative chaos’ mixed with the usual Zionist pro-Israel paranoia.

If you’ll read Marshall’s articles, I think you’ll understand better the point I was trying to make.

Al Qaeda is an umbrella term for a data base of western intelligence-trained operatives. The Taliban were trained by Pakistan’s ISI, in the 1990s, using CIA funding, funelled through Saudia Arabia. They’re both artificial, ‘Made in the west’.

It is thanks to the supine compliance of major media in covering these two groups over more than a decade prior to 9/11, stressing their violence and ‘sneaky’ ubiquitousness, that minds were prepared accept the preposterous idea that bitter Muslims pulled off 9/11.

Watch the following excerpt from a BBC Special broadcast the very night of September 11, 2001, from New York. The dust hadn’t even settled, and there we have Richard Perle, Ehud Barak [yes, he just so happened to be in NYC that day!], Frank Gaffney and a couple of others who remained unidentified, pointing the finger at Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda! — Note how Ehud Barak takes the opportunity to go through the whole long list of Israel’s ‘enemies’, whom he maintains were directly or indirectly involved in the attacks. In my view, this is as significant a ‘smoking gun’ as any; largely overlooked by the Truth movement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-VB4NWlXYM&

Zionists and US officials have been engaged in such an unhealthy incestuous bond since WWII that it’s difficult to discern whose interests are whose with regard to both foreign and domestic US policy.

In my view, 9/11 was an inside-outside job, with the US and Israel as ring-leaders, assisted possibly by a few CIA puppets, Pakistan and Saudi intelligence, serving as fronts for the operation.

The point I tried to make in my previous comment is that, while we sift through and debate details of the attacks, the Master Plan for the establishment of hegemony over Central Asia, indeed ‘full-spectrum global dominance’ in Pentagon parlance, procedes apace. Tragically, Iran is up for ‘Iraq-treatment’ next, as it is the last standing barrier to the complete containment of Russia’s southern border. A fully compliant Iran will ensure that its hydrocarbon resources and those of key neighboring countires will serve US/EU/Israeli interests only.

The US [EU and Israel’s] goal is to establish control over Central Asian petrochemical and mineral resources so as to be in a position to manipulate Russian and Chinese economic development. Brzezinski and others spelled this out most explicitly in the 1980s.

I do not mean to suggest that the Truth movement is a waste of time, but I do consider it URGENT that the movement’s energies be oriented towards the creation of greater awareness of the fundamental, ultimate purpose 9/11 served. The house is in full flame and we’re using our energies to try to understand what caused the fire as opposed to scrambling to put the damn thing out.

— Dana
Anonymous on September 09, 2010 · at 9:22 am EST/EDT

VINYARDSAKER:
@anonymous15:47(jack?): I consider Bernard Lewis as a typical Zionist propagandist and all this “Muslim-centered” talk in the context of 9/11 as a smoke screen, no more.

No, not ‘Jack’. My name is Dana :) I will sign my name in any future posts.

I didn’t make my point clearly. By no means was I implying that ‘Muslims’ were behind 9/11. And, yes, Bernard Lewis is an arch Zionist propagandist. It should be noted that he was also in the employ of MI6 for a number of years, and as a ‘respected historian’ of the Mideast, managed to work his way into the shadows of upper echelon Pentagon officials. He’s had a number of Whitehouse and Defense officials listening to his theories of ‘creative chaos’ mixed with the usual Zionist pro-Israel paranoia.

If you’ll read Marshall’s articles, I think you’ll understand better the point I was trying to make.

Al Qaeda is an umbrella term for a data base of western intelligence-trained operatives. The Taliban were trained by Pakistan’s ISI, in the 1990s, using CIA funding, funelled through Saudia Arabia. They’re both artificial, ‘Made in the west’.

It is thanks to the supine compliance of major media in covering these two groups over more than a decade prior to 9/11, stressing their violence and ‘sneaky’ ubiquitousness, that minds were prepared accept the preposterous idea that bitter Muslims pulled off 9/11.

Watch the following excerpt from a BBC Special broadcast the very night of September 11, 2001, from New York. The dust hadn’t even settled, and there we have Richard Perle, Ehud Barak [yes, he just so happened to be in NYC that day!], Frank Gaffney and a couple of others who remained unidentified, pointing the finger at Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda! — Note how Ehud Barak takes the opportunity to go through the whole long list of Israel’s ‘enemies’, whom he maintains were directly or indirectly involved in the attacks. In my view, this is as significant a ‘smoking gun’ as any; largely overlooked by the Truth movement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-VB4NWlXYM&

[cont … ]
Sean on September 09, 2010 · at 10:32 am EST/EDT

I accept that 9-11 was an inside job. The coalescence of so many wild improbabilities and coincidences into the real and actual needed for the official “conspiracy theory” to have any validity would require the personal intervention of a diety.

But I still have problems with the controlled demolition theory. It is logically consistent with observed reality and certainly a possibility, but seems wildly improbable and also unnecessary to the overall goal of getting the US involved in a war. Suckering some gullible Muslims into flying a plane into the side of the buildings would have been sufficient as a casus belli, while bringing the buildings down with controlled demolition way too involved and risky. It would have been really hard to pull off.

On the other hand, no other theory comes close to explaining how three massively tall buildings could collapse symmetrically at near free fall speed into neat little piles rather than toppling over or collapsing in stages.

So I’m left very confused and uncertain.

BTW, for those interested in watching Flash movies like “Fabled Enemies” at their leisure and with it being easy to fast forward to different parts, you can download these movies with a Firefox add-on called DownloadHelper.

http://www.downloadhelper.net/

The best program for viewing these downloaded videos is VLC which has versions for Mac, PC and Linux:

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 09, 2010 · at 1:46 pm EST/EDT

@Dana:Al Qaeda is an umbrella term for a data base of western intelligence-trained operatives. The Taliban were trained by Pakistan’s ISI, in the 1990s, using CIA funding, funelled through Saudia Arabia. They’re both artificial, ‘Made in the west’.

I totally agree. 100%

In my view, 9/11 was an inside-outside job, with the US and Israel as ring-leaders, assisted possibly by a few CIA puppets, Pakistan and Saudi intelligence, serving as fronts for the operation.

Yes. Again, this is also the conclusion I came to.

The point I tried to make in my previous comment is that, while we sift through and debate details of the attacks, the Master Plan for the establishment of hegemony over Central Asia, indeed ‘full-spectrum global dominance’ in Pentagon parlance, procedes apace. Tragically, Iran is up for ‘Iraq-treatment’ next, as it is the last standing barrier to the complete containment of Russia’s southern border. A fully compliant Iran will ensure that its hydrocarbon resources and those of key neighboring countires will serve US/EU/Israeli interests only.

Understood and, again, I fully agree with these conclusions too.

I do not mean to suggest that the Truth movement is a waste of time, but I do consider it URGENT that the movement’s energies be oriented towards the creation of greater awareness of the fundamental, ultimate purpose 9/11 served.

Yes, but how to you do that without first making it clear to all that “9/11 was an inside-outside job, with the US and Israel as ring-leaders, assisted possibly by a few CIA puppets, Pakistan and Saudi intelligence, serving as fronts for the operation”? It seems to me that if we can prove that 9/11 is an inside/outside job (I like that term very much) we can bring down their entire plan. There is not hard proof that they have a “the Master Plan for the establishment of hegemony over Central Asia, indeed ‘full-spectrum global dominance” but we DO now have proof that WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 were brought down not by planes, but by explosives. Should we not hammer in that point over and over and over and over again?

What do you see as the appropriate logical sequence in unmasking the Empire’s real nature and plans?
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 09, 2010 · at 1:48 pm EST/EDT

@Sean: Suckering some gullible Muslims into flying a plane into the side of the buildings would have been sufficient as a casus belli, while bringing the buildings down with controlled demolition way too involved and risky. It would have been really hard to pull off.

I agree and I do not have ‘THE’ answer. However, the fact that I do not have the answer does not change the reality of what we all can clealry see about what happened that day. My best guess is that brining WTC7 down was essential to hide the all the documents relating the Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld admission on 9/10 (a day before 9/11) that over 2 TRILLION (not million or billion, but trillion with a ‘T’: $2,000,000,000,000!) could not be accounted for by the Pentagon. Ditto for the 3000-4000 Security and Exchange Commission investigation files which were conveniently lost in the destruction of WTC7 (including all the files about the Citigroup and WorldCom investigations (“Citigroup Facing Subpoena in IPO Probe”. The Street. http://www.thestreet.com/markets/matthewgoldstein/10036925.html. “Federal Agencies: Re-Creating Lost Files”. New York Lawyer. 2001-09-14. http://www.nylawyer.com/login.php?source=/news/01/09/091401b.) Since it is REALLY hard to hit WTC7 and the building was not a symbol, they had to hit WTC1 and WTC2. Furthermore, only a full collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 could somehow explain the collapse of WTC7, hence the sequence. That, combined with the fact that the buildings were old, nicely insured, and needed major work probably made a neat collapse something which greedy folks like Silverstein would want. But, of course, these are only speculations. That is what an independent investigative commission would need to establish.
- Niru on February 15, 2016 · at 12:39 am EST/EDT
  
  The loss of files in WTC7 – these days, wouldn’t all files be held as electronic media and be backed up at remote sites? That is standard practice at corporate level (I worked in IT). A disaster recovery plan requires data to be held in remote sites, and even local data is stored in multiple copies (RAID disks) to ensure if one copy fails there are other readable copies.
  
  I agree that motive and plan are the key issues to look at rather than proof which I am sure was well covered up.
  - mmiriww on February 15, 2016 · at 2:50 am EST/EDT
    
    Heck man they lost the Gold held in those buildings! But I heard the evidence were held there and were lost. Cant make backups of evidence and if Hillary can loose backups now, 15 years ago they were not as advanced in backups.. Also the 1 or 2 trillions that were misplaced by the pentagon.. Those were lost too..
oldman on September 09, 2010 · at 2:36 pm EST/EDT

What makes this whole thing – 911- easier to understand is that binLadin and the millitant Zionists really have the same objectives in the limited sense that the want a war of civilizations with the West, of course believing this war will upset the status quo which both these groups find non acceptable. Zionists want the US in the foxhole with Israel so Israel can embark on s program of Manifest Destiny in the middle east. binLadin etc want this war because they find encroachment of the West on current Muslim strongholds (saudi srabia) to an abomination, as well as our support for stooge regimes in countries bordering Israel, Egypt, Jordan … So with the convergence of interests, the tip of the sword was Muslim, but the shoulders that trust the blade was Likudnick/Neocon axis. Both these groups want to “get it on” with a war of civilizations because things are not moving fast enough in the current trajectory of foreign policy alignment. Thats why Mossad was watching the Hijackers in Hollywood FLA while they were learning to fly- sort of. And reported too late with non actionable details to the US. Thats why the “dancing Israelis” gave each other high fives as the towers burned. When the US becomes at war with 1.5 Billion Muslims, both sides of the axis from hell will rejoice, expecting what will evolve from there to be to their liking.
Anonymous on September 09, 2010 · at 4:25 pm EST/EDT

There’s no question but that the Empire wants to seize control of the Middle East and Central Asia so as to dominate the world’s energy supplies. In economic terms the US is bankrupt and if the only reason to hold dollars were to buy goods and services made in the US the dollar would plummet. It is vital that the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency and China’s Achilles heel is that the US Navy can block Chinas oil imports by sea. The Straits of Malacca are one obvious chokepoint so are the straits of Hormuz. Indeed Hillary threatened China to go along with Iranian sanctions by saying that otherwise Israel might attack Iran and the Straits would then be closed, cutting off China’s entire oil supply.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are potentially an alternative energy corridor by land between Iran and both India and China. That in my opinion is the real reason why Uncle Sam is in Afpak and why he won’t be leaving any time soon.

9/11 was a godsend for the Empire. It doesn’t prove that 9/11 was an inside job but certainly the motive was there.

China is an ally of Pakistan and I believe played a key role in helping Pakistan to acquire a nuclear capability. India appears to be in the American orbit.

There are two vast economic and military blocs shaping up. Oceania (US,UK,Canada,Australia,New Zealand)Israel and India versus Eurasia (Russia, China, Pakistan) Both sides possess such huge nuclear reserves that a direct war between them is unlikely. More likely is that the Fourth World War will be fought with proxy wars in the Third World just as the Third World War (Cold War) was. It may have been called the Cold War but it got pretty hot in parts of Asia and Africa.

In the long run Eurasia will overtake Oceania. Personally I am all for several poles of power in the world rather than just one. A unipolar world spells tyranny no matter who the hegemon is. Plus several poles of power gives small countries like the UK more room to manoeuvre. The danger is that Oceania will try and solve the problem of its relative economic decline by military means.

Which brings us back to 9/11. I must confess until recently I regarded the 9/11 truthers as pretty much kooks. Having been presented with hard evidence I’m more of an agnostic. It’s hard to believe that the shadow statet could be quite so depraved as to murder several thousand of its own people in a false flag op. Bear in mind that those working in the WTC towers were some of the richest and most influential people in the land. Not to mention a direct hit on the Pentagon.

robert
Anonymous on September 09, 2010 · at 4:26 pm EST/EDT

There’s no question but that the Empire wants to seize control of the Middle East and Central Asia so as to dominate the world’s energy supplies. In economic terms the US is bankrupt and if the only reason to hold dollars were to buy goods and services made in the US the dollar would plummet. It is vital that the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency and China’s Achilles heel is that the US Navy can block Chinas oil imports by sea. The Straits of Malacca are one obvious chokepoint so are the straits of Hormuz. Indeed Hillary threatened China to go along with Iranian sanctions by saying that otherwise Israel might attack Iran and the Straits would then be closed, cutting off China’s entire oil supply.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are potentially an alternative energy corridor by land between Iran and both India and China. That in my opinion is the real reason why Uncle Sam is in Afpak and why he won’t be leaving any time soon.

9/11 was a godsend for the Empire. It doesn’t prove that 9/11 was an inside job but certainly the motive was there.

China is an ally of Pakistan and I believe played a key role in helping Pakistan to acquire a nuclear capability. India appears to be in the American orbit.

There are two vast economic and military blocs shaping up. Oceania (US,UK,Canada,Australia,New Zealand)Israel and India versus Eurasia (Russia, China, Pakistan) Both sides possess such huge nuclear reserves that a direct war between them is unlikely. More likely is that the Fourth World War will be fought with proxy wars in the Third World just as the Third World War (Cold War) was. It may have been called the Cold War but it got pretty hot in parts of Asia and Africa.

In the long run Eurasia will overtake Oceania. Personally I am all for several poles of power in the world rather than just one. A unipolar world spells tyranny no matter who the hegemon is. Plus several poles of power gives small countries like the UK more room to manoeuvre. The danger is that Oceania will try and solve the problem of its relative economic decline by military means.

Which brings us back to 9/11. I must confess until recently I regarded the 9/11 truthers as pretty much kooks. Having been presented with hard evidence I’m more of an agnostic. It’s hard to believe that the shadow statet could be quite so depraved as to murder several thousand of its own people in a false flag op. Bear in mind that those working in the WTC towers were some of the richest and most influential people in the land. Not to mention a direct hit on the Pentagon.

robert
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 09, 2010 · at 4:50 pm EST/EDT

@robert: 9/11 was a godsend for the Empire. It doesn’t prove that 9/11 was an inside job

absolutely true. and, besides, blowback for US imperialism and support for Israel is a much simpler, and elegant, explanation.

I must confess until recently I regarded the 9/11 truthers as pretty much kooks

Same here. And have you ever seen the real 9/11 kooks in action? Its even worse. I once went to a speech my Amy Goodman when suddenly in the middle of her (very interesting) presentation a 9/11 kook began screaming “why do you not admit that 9/11 was an inside job!?!?!?!?!” over and over and over again. Frankly, I was hoping that somebody would punch the guy who was pissing off everybody with his obsession. Or listen to somebody like Alex Jones? Does he not remind you of Dubya? Jones is far smarter, for sure, but the looks, the squinting eyes, the wannabe macho voice…

Having been presented with hard evidence I’m more of an agnostic.

See, this is were I cannot follow you. Since, as I mention, there IS NO MORE “official” version, the “9/11 truth & explosive demolitions” theory is the ONLY GAME IN TOWN. And, please keep in mind, that a “theory” is not a narrative or a hypothesis. A theory is a complete model which explains the observed facts in a way congruate with scientific knowledge (something the official narrative NEVER did; this is why they had to very quietly dump it).

It’s hard to believe that the shadow statet could be quite so depraved as to murder several thousand of its own people in a false flag op. Not at all. Remember Operation Cyanide and the Liberty. Or Pearl Harbour for that matter. Or the planned Operation Northwoods.

Bear in mind that those working in the WTC towers were some of the richest and most influential people in the land. Some, but clearly not enough of them to stop it.

Not to mention a direct hit on the Pentagon What is the highest rank of all the officers killed in the Pentagon?
Anonymous on September 09, 2010 · at 5:59 pm EST/EDT

I agree Saker, you make a good case that I can’t argue with. I just have trouble getting my head round the enormity of it all. Also I’m not an engineering expert so I simply don’t know whether the pancake theory makes sense as opposed to explosives.

You can simply believe that the shadow state knew the Al Qaeda lunatics were about to do a major hit on the US mainland and simply allowed it to go ahead. I find it easier to believe that than that they would take the risk of using explosives on the buildings even if they did get rid of a load of awkward documents in the process.

One thing we can agree on is that the Al Qaeda operatives were patsies just like Oswald. They achieved the opposite of their intentions enabling the Empire to invade the heart of the Islamic world and slaughter God knows how many Muslims in the process.
Anonymous on September 09, 2010 · at 6:16 pm EST/EDT

@ oldman

Quote: “When the US becomes at war with 1.5 Billion Muslims, both sides of the axis from hell will rejoice, expecting what will evolve from there to be to their liking”.

What ‘axis from hell’, whose liking? The sole aggressor is the US, bent on global dominance. The world’s 1.5 billion Muslims have been sucked into a global media propaganda/politically driven vortex which has produced a popular western acceptance of Islam as an innately violent belief system. Nonsense!

Anti-Islam phobia is a product of the City of London, the Privy Council, Wall Street, the European Central Bank and their corporate, media, military-industrial intelligence networks.

Best remedy is to listen to what your Muslim neighbor may have to say.

— Dana
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 09, 2010 · at 6:58 pm EST/EDT

@anonymous13:59:‘m not an engineering expert so I simply don’t know whether the pancake theory makes sense as opposed to explosives.

You do not need to be an engineer to realize that the “Pancake theory” as been OFFICIALLY DROPPED by NIST.

QUOTE:

NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon

UNQUOTE

source: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

As I said, we do not have two competing theories. We have, on one side, a fairy tale with NO theoretical basis at all, and on the other, a theory which is grounded in literally thousand of observed phenomena AND which is fully consistent with the laws of science and our understanding of physics.
jack on September 09, 2010 · at 8:34 pm EST/EDT

The problem with just dismissing it as an inside job and those that negate any Bin Ladin involvement is that it negates international investigations and court cases never address in the mass media or information censored out when it is reported or given false narratives or the videos release since 9/11 like the smoking gun video in Afghanistan of Bin Ladin discussing the operation by simply claiming it was not him and that it was a double with his face digitally enhanced on it.

I think the simplest reason is that the US and Britain knew that the hijackers were going to do a traditional hostage airline hijacking situation and rehearse for it to happen but unexpected to them and a certain foreign intelligence agency Bin Ladin recruited pilots in the cell

So on one hand the terrorist did not even know it turned into a suicide mission with secret directive from Bin Ladin to the pilots on the mission and on the other the US and other intelligence were also thinking it was just a traditional hijacking with a clear political objective unbeknown to the majority of those involved in the conspiracy that it was a suicide mission which would be used to launch war against Iraq.

Who they are we don’t know? Not Atta that’s for sure.

I don’t know if I will be able to post my 9/11 article before 9/11 as it is very hard to find articles and links to the Chechen connection.

For example before 9/11 on the 10th the US registered a call from the hijackers to the Panski Gorge in Georgia.

Yet I can’t find any articles on this so if anybody can find any post it here.

Also Greg Palast acquired secret FBI memo from the FBI office in Washington DC that months prior that the Whitehouse cancelled an investigation into Abdullah Bin Ladin who since the Balkans wars has been financing terrorism and is the major financier of Chechen terrorism financing the camps in Afghanistan (Russia even made reference to this it press release concerning the start of the second Chechen war) who since the Bosnian war Atta has been working through his Benevolence fund and 3 of his organisations are indicted in the 9/11 law suit which Atta and the others near while residing in the US.

I you want to understand 9/11 and US foreign policy since the mid 1970’s read Brzezinski’s book The Grand Chessboard which essentially and the people since the original Afghan war in 79 directing US foreign policy in key positions like Morton I. Abramowitz.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Morton_Abramowitz

Although not listed in the source watch file on him he was also instrumental in Washington officially recognizing Xinjing as independent East Turkmenistan by the US state department.

http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2008/07/court-documents-shed-light-on-cia.html
VINEYARDSAKER: on September 09, 2010 · at 8:53 pm EST/EDT

@jack:just dismissing it as an inside job and those that negate any Bin Ladin involvement

I don’t remember anybody saying that. At least not here. Speaking for myself, I am not *negating* Bin Laden’s possible (but not yet established!) role, I am just putting it into a different context.

I see Bin Laden and the entire al-Qaeda as an extension of the covert branch of the CIA, so I am not in the least surprised that somebody, though not necessarily the CIA “as an agency” would have used them for 9/11. One possibility is that when those who did 9/11 became aware of the Bojinka-like plan of al-Qaeda to smash some planes into the WTC they decided to “piggyback” their own operation on top of this plan. Whatever may be the case, I am definitely not excluding a role for OBL and the rest of the Wahabi zombies in this plan. But I know, I KNOW, two things:

a) the planes did not bring the towers
b) OBL & Co. could not rig the towers with explosives

As for the rest, I am very open to the discussion of what role precisely, if any, OBL and al-Qaeda played in all this.
Celabelle DeCadix on May 24, 2014 · at 6:17 pm EST/EDT

“Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky won’t touch 9/11 because they think it would undermine their credibility.”

Oh yeah. Well, their credibility is *zilch* with me because of that. If anything, they were the people who could have taken a stand, who could have made a real difference. They showed they can’t. For this, I have lost trust and I am highly suspicious of what issues they chose to talk about, and in what terms, and I can observe their biases and I’m thinking, they are not on our side. They are on their “own me” side, shills for the entities they claim they want to debunk.

And conversely, it makes the Saker all the more credible to me. :)
Macon Richardson on May 24, 2014 · at 10:10 pm EST/EDT

Saker, the original link you give in this article as well as David Ray Griffin’s are no longer active. Mediafire claims them to be missing. Can you republish this article with live links?

By the way, welcome aboard! Me, I was onboard by the moment the twin towers collapsed. My comment to a companion at the time was that “this was scripted in Hollywood.”
- Skeptic on February 25, 2015 · at 1:23 am EST/EDT
  
  I have to disagree about Amy Goodman and Chomsky. They don’t have to fight every fight. I noticed they have more exposure lately and it is very valuable to have those voices heard more widely. They are human and they have their own limits and/or strategic thinking. I find this absolutist demand of people engaged in public discourse to adhere to some litmus test of correctness ridiculous. Where are those perfect people and how much influence they have?
Macon Richardson on May 24, 2014 · at 10:33 pm EST/EDT

Megaupload link does not work either.
Steiger on February 26, 2015 · at 1:56 am EST/EDT

Why doth treason never prosper? For if it prosper none dare call it treason. The interesting observation is that secret ballts and secret states go hand in hand. Lysander Spooner observed this many years ago.
epi on February 26, 2015 · at 11:18 am EST/EDT

Problem is, truth gets obscured by the smoke from too many guns.

I think there are two steps that distinguishes 911 truth from a normal criminal investigation.

1. Establishing the official narrative as false. This is the easier part, then we can conlude that we are lied to and that wars and an oppressive security state are based on this lie.

2. The second part is about how, who and why where wildly different theories clash, creating a mess of any broad consensus. Pursuing a conversation about this with a fence-straddler is very difficult without first completing step 1.

A possible third step, justice, remains an elusive goal.
Benjamin Winters on March 10, 2015 · at 3:29 am EST/EDT

Hi Saker. Thanks for this. “Truther” since 2007. The most interesting information is how the attack seems to have been targeted to cover up CIA money laundering involving counterfeit 10 year government bonds. Have you seen this documentary? I think it summarizes the evidence quite nicely;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFd3YTJYNBY
Vovka on March 10, 2015 · at 8:41 am EST/EDT

First of all, I’m terribly sorry for posting this five years later. I’ve read your article and now I’m itching to put my thoughts into words.

I think, one of the main problems of “Truthers” is that they themselves do not fully understand what kind of government they live under. Here, a rather indicating phrase from this very article: “To think the unthinkable.”

You can’t expect ordinary people to hear you, while while you yourselves find it hard to believe.

“Events” like 9/11 are hardly unique for American history. In fact, they are a common way for American establishment to influence the public opinion. To name a few:

– USS Maine incident
– RMS Lusitania incident
– Pearl-Harbor attack
– Gulf of Tonkin incident (officially branded as a false flag)
– Operation Northwoods (failed planned false flag)

In greater detail here: http://dentv.ru/content/view/o-sobyitiyah-11-sentyabrya-11-let-spustya/

In Russian, sorry. The author is a Russian histirian and a history of capitalism scholar, Andrey Fursov (Андрей Фурсов). He has some interesting ideas you might want take a look into.

Here, in Russia, we have a kind of “anti-media paranoia” (thanks to lame late Soviet propaganda) and a great deal, if not the most of the people, who are interested in international politics did not doubt 9/11 was an inside job from the day one. In fact, Mikhail Hazin (translations of his articles are being posted on this blog) in his analysis of the 2000’s crisis wrote something in the lines of “…to deal with the problems, american establishment needs some large-scale incident, a terrorist attack…” the day before actual 9/11 attacks.

It’s just business. As Marx said, there’s no crime capital would not turn to for a 300% profit. You can imagine what it would do for the global domination and unlimited resourses.

P.S. I really like this blog, it’s nice to see people in the West use their brains to filter the media noise from the Big Brother.
WorkingClass on March 13, 2015 · at 12:56 pm EST/EDT

I have been following you for a year or so and have not joined any discussion untill now. I was an enlisted man in the United States Army from July 1965 to July 1968. I am now calling for artillary on my own position. We, the American working class, are being overrun.

The first time I saw the collapsing towers on the teevee I knew they were not brought down by crashing airplanes. I have been a truther from day one. But I don’t talk about it any more. People who refuse for whatever reason to acknowledge the truth are simply defective. They may get their eyes open in eight years or twenty eight years but nothing I say will speed that mysterious process. We emerge from the matrix when we are ready.

I appreciate your consederable talent, industry and devotion to truth. Please keep up the good work.
- Vineyard Moderator - K.K. on March 13, 2015 · at 1:30 pm EST/EDT
  
  Welcome to The Saker’s land. On the main page, right sidebar, all the way near the bottom, you will find an excellent collection of 9/11 analysis, if you want a refresher. But we don’t talk of it anymore, you are right. It is urgent to talk of what is happening today. Please stay and join in.
Suzanne Majo De Kuyper on March 27, 2015 · at 10:48 pm EST/EDT

I was living in the Boston, Massachusetts, USA , in the Berkley Young Women’s Christian Association residence in 2001, on 9/11, and for years later. I began reading the New york times daily, cover to cover every single morning after 9/11, until I moved abroad in May of 2005, having been waiting for an affordable flat in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Having set up a trust to manage my costs of living in Netherlands I moved over, sending my boxes of belongings by boat. They going first to Britain. in December of that year, my Netherlands bank account was empty at the time the December rent was to be paid. Finally reaching my Boston banker she announced my accounts were closed, furthermore the Citizen’s Bank would never ever allow me to open another account with them “because of what you have done!” I left, sent my belongings still in England to Boston, and moved back to same the YWCA. I returned to Amsterdam in 2006 with all my trust funds in cash and a new Mac computer. Computing since 1998, 1999, with many years of typing classes, I began reading and writing to two news e-lists I was invited onto. By the end of 2006 i was beginning what I do now, analyse the news, write what I see, how I see it and why. I began getting extraordinary prime news. One was a double blind research paper on a 2006 analysis of the ‘dust’ and debris left at the base of the crater that was where the WTC had stood. I clearly pointed to being a False Flag as the buildings, which I watched being built, were filled with Thermite, an explosive that burns at heat levels that can and do melt steel. The Thermite was ignited by the plane crash, fed by the plane fuel, and since it was built into all the buildings to bring them down immediately, smoothly, they came right down, a loud crashing, popping noise emanating at each floor as the thermite melted the steel joints and pillars so the burning would continue on down to the base.
Lyma on March 30, 2015 · at 8:41 pm EST/EDT

There is an excellent book on 9-11 as an inside job – “Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil” by Mike Ruppert.

Here is a short excerpt from a review:

The attacks of September 11, 2001, were accomplished through an amazing orchestration of logistics and personnel. Crossing the Rubicon discovers and identifies key suspects—finding some of them in the highest echelons of American government—by showing how they acted in concert to guarantee that the attacks produced the desired result.

Crossing the Rubicon is unique not only for its case-breaking examination of 9/11, but for the breadth and depth of its world picture—an interdisciplinary analysis of petroleum, geopolitics, narcotraffic, intelligence and militarism—without which 9/11 cannot be understood.
lyma on April 02, 2015 · at 1:08 am EST/EDT

Another great book about 9-11 is “The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11–and America’s Response” by Paul Thompson
Miller on April 17, 2015 · at 8:01 pm EST/EDT

Have followed your blog off and on since Maidan started. I am not sure exactly when I became a “truther”, at the time I figured USA had made plenty of enemies the hard way and was only a matter of time before someone hit back.

Forward to invasion of Iraq – the country that had been subjected to a decade of sanctions and aerial bombardment had somehow reconstituted several advanced weapons programs, the dictator who was a mortal foe of the radical Islamic movement had somehow seen his way to join forces. “This is madness”, my country has lost its collective mind. The talking heads are all chatting away, having detailed discussions based on obvious lies.

Up till then I hadn’t even known a third building had fallen, the attacks happened while I was at work, and by the end of the day I’d stopped listening to the news. I stumbled over AE 911 truth and was astonished at how easily the entire govt narrative blew away in the lightest of airs.

I fear much as with Buddhism, having to awaken as individuals to this truth will always keep the numbers relatively small as a percentage of the whole. There are some who see, and some who have but a little dust covering their eyes. Speak of it in its time, all that is needed is for a curious individual, no matter how initially skeptical, to look at the facts closely – the official story reveals itself as a fantasy once inspected.
anonymous on April 22, 2015 · at 3:21 am EST/EDT

the way the Malaysian plane tragedy happened in Ukraine space and blame was put on Russians within two hours but still black box was allowed to be picked by russophobe england which hid the investigation for two months tells that anything is possible when they can do that sort of day time robbery then they can plane 9/11 too.
Niru on February 15, 2016 · at 12:25 am EST/EDT

I couldn’t down the files you mention in the article. Is there anywhere else I can find them?
shmem on March 28, 2016 · at 7:50 pm EST/EDT

I never became a truther, because when I saw the WTC towers collapse, my first thought was “wow, what an amazing job, bringing these tall buildings down into their own footprint”.
I witnessed a controlled demolition (well, not in person, just on tv) and never had any doubt of that fact. I was studying architecture at that time.

I saw the collapse of the south tower first and got to know about the plane crashes only later, at the next of the endless repetitions of the events that day. Wait, what? The collapse was caused by the plane crashes? Immediately it struck me:

If they ever get along with that absurd explanation, then these events will be a turning point in history. It will mean that from that day on, world politics of the biggest military power on earth will be openly based on lies – thruth, integrity, morality, advance of mankind do no longer matter. And getting along they did. The lie was too big to fail.

I say openly based on lies, because even my father, a former high school teacher in biology and chemistry, one who knows about oxidation, melting temperature of steel, kerosene burning temperature and so on, believed in the official crackpot story of pancaking floors, even if it was against all science he knew (not even to speak of science I had from my studies).

Why? I learned of the Asch conformity experiments from your writing (big thanks!), which gives hints, but I cannot answer this question, he’s to find out himself – but what deeply disturbed me was to have to accept that my father (the smartest person ever as every father is, unless you hate him) was already convinced which in this context means, by latin root and by effects: that he was defeated in his impetus to tell right from wrong, an maybe in his ability to do so, too.

For me, that is the bottom line of it all.

I did research and skim the intermet after 9/11. On an old hard disk of mine of that time, there might be sitting a document somewhere which for the life of me I cannot find on the internet any more – a decree of the Port Authority of New Jersey and New York dated mid to end seventies (or eighties? I don’t remember)….

…which rules that buildings on lower Manhatten which surpass a certain height have all to be rigged with devices able to bring them down in a controlled manner on emergency, to prevent damage of neighbouring buildings in case of e.g. structural failure. Which sounds sensible.

That document might be fake – hell, it would be a very elaborate one. Anybody up to look into skyscrapers still in place?

Thanks, VINEYARDSAKER, for helping people to keep on their feet and never let go of truth.
Graham on July 18, 2016 · at 10:23 am EST/EDT

Thanks for your thoughts, as an alternate news source you are very informative, and I regularly read your blog, as I do wolfstreet.com for the financial picture too.

On reading your WTC1/2/7 letter – for which I came to the same conclusion BTW, one thing struck me today – WTC was indeed the ‘smoking gun’, but of course we have to ask – why did they leave a smoking gun?

The answer is simple – they didn’t, flight 93 crashed in Shanksville on the way back – that was the plane destined for WTC7, but due to some (navigation?) problem never made it. I suspect it ran out of fuel as it turned much too late.

The plan was always the trinity, the father, mother, son (represented by WTC1, 2 and 7 to all be taken out by ‘planes. So ironically the collapse of WTC7 reinforces the fact that WTC1 and 2 were taken down by explosives because it went down that way even when its plane failed to arrive.

Plane 93 was WTC7’s plane, perhaps that’s why the security around the crash site was legendary – to stop the drone being identified.
ditchner on June 07, 2018 · at 3:11 am EST/EDT

I’m posting a link below to a video that proves what happened on 911. Not by whom or by what mechanism but simply and amazingly what happened. It’s 20+ minutes and you may find that you did not truly realize what happened until watching it even though you thought you did. Here is what happened:

The Towers turned to dust in mid-air. All building materials and contents, human included, were in an instant turned from their solid states to various states of molecular disintegration much of which was deposited across Manhattan in the form of dust particles. This was not vaporization but a process that, so far, defies explanation.
:
The video shows super slow motion video of enormous chunks of building material disappearing before your eyes as it falls to the ground trailing dust. At 4:10 the remaining core columns, the strongest steel supports in the buildings, go from solid to dust before your eyes within seconds which was really much quicker in real time.

After nearly 11 minutes of video you will, likely, be asking what could have been the cause. But that is not the purpose of the video. It is to show you what happened, and that it does!

At 10:50, Peter Jennings of ABC news reports “…..and as we just look at this there’s one other thing, we have not resolved an answer to this but Jackie Judd, our correspondent in Washington has sent me an email just a short while ago and she really speaks to what has been puzzling Enormous Numbers (emphasis mine) of us “We see all this video, these live pictures of where the towers used to stand but the question is, WHERE IS ALL THE RUBBLE?, It seems so flattened, how could so much steel and concrete just vaporize? DID IT ALL TURN TO DUST?”” Yes, Jackie Judd, it did all turn to dust. At the very end of the video Peter Jennings again brings up the puzzling mystery of the amazing lack of rubble and his on scene correspondent, George Stephanopoulos, said that he was told that “all of it simply fell down into the ground and was pulverized, evaporated”. I suppose George’s explanation cleared it all up for them because by the next day ABC and all the rest of the networks stopped asking about the lack of rubble.

The final 12 minutes show the shocking result. There wasn’t nearly enough rubble, just as Peter Jennings had reported. Because, if the buildings turned to dust in mid-air then you would not expect much rubble below but you would expect Manhattan to be covered in dust. Isn’t that exactly what happened?

The 911 “truth” movement has agreed upon a thermitic mechanism when thermitic material was discovered as a component in the dust. But thermite melts steel (does not turn it into dust) and produces blindingly bright light. Here there was no light, but darkness, and although there are mythical tales of large pools of underground molten steel that remained in liquid form for months (how would that be possible?) I challenge anybody to produce a single video of such a pool. The dust that was the building and its contents within seconds enveloped scores of unfortunate pedestrians below. They were not burnt because the process that produced the dust did not require heat. The pedestrians were humiliated and covered head to toe in thick dust, but none of them complained of heat.

Here is a red pill moment for you. Watch the following video. Seeing is believing. Or don’t (take the blue pill) and keep believing it was thermite.

https://youtu.be/m4Z87cKe3Y0%5D

Ditchner
Thomas Potter on June 08, 2018 · at 8:08 am EST/EDT

“Wherever a man commits a crime, God finds a witness. Every secret crime has its reporter.”
~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

9/11 Finding The Truth by Andrew Johnson – Audiobook

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvaxr0OSBw2DtOWulcA96d7sG2rsNyOgb

THE DIRECTED ENERGY COVER-UP TEAM

https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50694/images/Richard-DavidG-StevenJ.jpg

Other examples of Directed Energy (not necessarily used as a weapon) are radio waves, cell phone signals, TV remote control signals, wireless internet signals…etc.

Those who want to cover up the evidence of what happen often falsely claim that Dr. Wood is talking about a specific weapon and a specific location of it (e.g. laser beam from outer space, or “spacebeams”). This disinformation campaign was initiated by Steven Jones on 11/11/2006 in a presentation he gave at the University of California, Berkeley.[ available here at 1:53:47 https://archive.org/details/liftingthefog_2006_11_11_session2 ], telling his audience that “Judy Woods (Dr. Wood) says it’s a laser or maser from space” while showing how difficult it is to hold his hand like a beam from space. Not only does Dr. Wood NOT SAY THAT, she actually RULES THAT OUT. The mechanism of destruction of a laser beam would be from heat and produce a bright and blinding light. But we know the buildings were not cooked to death. The term Directed Energy is used because energy is directed to do something different then it normally does and it is directed to do this within a certain geographic zone. [As a mental example, think of directing the binding energy of matter to repel instead of attract. A solid object would turn to atomic-sized dust. Direct this to happen within the WTC complex and not across the street.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

If you are worthy and willing to know the truth, read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? as I have. ♥
- Mevashir on August 10, 2019 · at 1:19 am EST/EDT
  
  I’ve been a truther since 9-12-2001.
  
  And I call it the 9/11 Zionist Terrorist Charade.
Mevashir on August 10, 2019 · at 1:22 am EST/EDT

The following is a true story. In August 2006 I was doing a 9:11 truth Outreach as an international media convention in Boulder Colorado. On my third day circulating among the media people, a Fox News cameraman took me aside and said “Son you are wasting your time.” When I asked him why he answered, “Because everyone in the media knows 9/11 is a whitewash SNF a cover-up but the media owners in New York City will not allow us to pursue the truth!”
Arioch on March 30, 2022 · at 9:31 am EST/EDT

> Uncle Sam has also admitted that he is guilty of that crime

Not sure it was the crime. Or, it is much depends upon WHOSE crime and WHAT ACTIONS were criminal.

“Patriot Act” and all the conspiring against freedom – the crime, for sure.

Some guy pressing the button to initiate detonation – probably not a crime.
He had a damned choice between uncontrolled fall (with miriads of victims inside WTC7 and all around) and controllad collapse (with victims EVERYONE inside yet ONLY them).
Could he divine the last second before the uncontrolled collapse?
And when under duress? And when all the people he could officially refer too would ensure him that uncontrolled fall is real risk, and he would hold the bucket when it happens.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

You had 8 years to make up your mind and look for expertise all around the world, he probably had only 8 minutes and had no engineering expertise to borrow from.

I’d speculate that wearing immediate implementors shoes pressing the button actually was the responsible decision, from what he could know at the moment.
rert on January 20, 2023 · at 6:38 pm EST/EDT

Before I really start the comment: Saker, the Google doc is inaccessible without logging into a Google account, and I don’t have a working one. Would you mind sharing your letter in a more accessible place?

Now that that’s done, I’m generously going to assume people are still reading this comment section. :) I searched the comments for the thesis I’m about to post, but didn’t find anything. So, please welcome a brand new 9/11 conspiracy theory:

What if big buildings in Manhattan and throughout USA (and EU?) have PREPLACED explosives, that are meant to pull a building quickly in case of an emergency?

Consider the option that a big skyscraper in the middle of a city lists to its side for whatever reason. Earthquake? Then, the big tower crashes to its side. What is going to happen? It’s going to hit the tower next to it. Is that tower going to survive being hit from the side? Or is it going to list and crash to the side too? What happens to the third tower, that gets hit by the second tower? The fourth tower? If nothing gets done, you could have an entire line of buildings crash to their sides like dominoes. In the worst case, you could have a wedge, if one building brings down more then one building (crashes into a corner?).

So how do you prevent such a scenario? Well, one option would be to PREEMPTIVELY place explosives in ALL buildings and have them be remotely triggerable. Then, if the building lists too much, you pull it. You’re the hero, you saved the rest of the city. :)

This is realitively straightforward to verify IRL, but the verification could return a false negative so you need to be careful. Basically, to verify this, you dig through some random buildings in Manhattan and elsewhere and see if they have explosives preplaced. Easy.

So then, *assuming* the explosives are preplaced as a matter of FEMA policy, they can be used to pull the WTC at a moments notice. The initial attack could have then been pulled off by al-Qaeda but the subsequent events would have been the work of FEMA or a comparable agency.
dragon52 on January 20, 2023 · at 9:48 pm EST/EDT

I came to the conclusion early on that the we need to suspend our belief in Newtonian physics to accept the official story, but I also look at it from the angle of a pilot.

I recall in the immediate aftermath of the day that the high-jackers had trained in small Cessna aircraft, were poor students and only interested in learning how to control a plane in-flight and took no interest in takeoffs and landings. That should have raised an alarm somewhere.

So then I’m supposed to believe that a low hours, poor pilot is going to step into the left-hand seat and take over the controls of a complex 757 airliner. Then he’s going to descend 30,000 feet in under 10 minutes while making two left hand (descending) turns and make a perfect hit on a target that was 200 feet wide.

Then his mate does a similar job on the other tower.

Simply ain’t gonna happen.

The flying into the Pentagon by a low-hours pilot is also preposterous for a couple of extra reasons.