A documentary more powerful than Loose Change ... blows the lid off the Inside Job!

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Lord Sidious (here)
Look at the date that went to air. What do you think of that little gem?

I had seen perhaps 30 seconds of that clip before, but not this longer cut. Thanks.

The lies go several layers deep.

Searching for truth seems like being a geologist, exploring and drilling for oil or minerals deep beneath the ground, reading clues off seismograph recordings and the occasional exposed geological feature.

What did cause WTC 1, 2, and 7 to each collapse suddenly, Lord Sidious? I am confident it was not the two planes, nor the resulting fires, nor the various other ordinary bombs planted here and there to provide a distracting "fire works" show after the initial impact. Could the thermite have been sufficient -- I'm doubtful.

The violence and rapidity of the explosive ejection of dust (of what was formerly known as steel) during the collapses suggests a bigger, faster energy source. The heat below ground zero for months after suggests a more esoteric source for "the primary engine of destruction."

[Lord Sidious]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
I had seen perhaps 30 seconds of that clip before, but not this longer cut. Thanks.

You are welcome.

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
The lies go several layers deep.

Searching for truth seems like being a geologist, exploring and drilling for oil or minerals deep beneath the ground, reading clues off seismograph recordings and the occasional exposed geological feature.

What did cause WTC 1, 2, and 7 to each collapse suddenly, Lord Sidious? I am confident it was not the two planes, nor the resulting fires, nor the various other ordinary bombs planted here and there to provide a distracting "fire works" show after the initial impact. Could the thermite have been sufficient -- I'm doubtful.

The violence and rapidity of the explosive ejection of dust (of what was formerly known as steel) during the collapses suggests a bigger, faster energy source. The heat below ground zero for months after suggests a more esoteric source for "the primary engine of destruction."

I don't know what caused the collapses, but I do know that it wasn't aircraft. That in itself should be enough for anyone to question.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Lord Sidious (here)
I don't know what caused the collapses

Thank-you for your direct answer.

Posted by Lord Sidious (here)
That in itself should be enough for anyone to question.

Yes, certainly enough for that.

The curious engineer in me still wonders -- how did they do that?

[aikisaw]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
Well there you go… it was just a casual remark given you live in Pennsylvania, and low and behold what does aikisaw come back with,

“The government wanted to protect the property owner so they made him sell the farm to them. Then in an effort to "protect the public" they put a fence around it.”Some say the hole was 30ft x 20ft which is a Cessna 172 size hole. Then again perhaps they looked in the wrong hole.

So that’s good aikisaw, the farmer is now protected, the public protected but what about the public getting the truth? I suppose they had to fence that in as well; “to protect the public”.

I hope you got the sarcasm. The government did make them sell the farm to them. They wanted to keep it.

What I understand is the hole is too small as is the wreckage at site.

The local coroner said that their was no dna at the scene.

[Lord Sidious]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
Thank-you for your direct answer.

Again, you are welcome. I don't have it in me to beat around the bush, unless I am trying to get people to think for themselves and I don't see that you need that type of coaching.

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
Yes, certainly enough for that.

The curious engineer in me still wonders -- how did they do that?

We make the assumption that it must have been done with tech we know about, but what about tech that we don't know about?

[Teakai]

Posted by Riggaz (here)
The Twin Towers were designed to take the impact of a Boeing 707, are we supposed to believe that the designers thought the 707 would crash into the building with no fuel on board?
An aluminium plane cannot cut a steel framed building in half.

Absolutely, Riggaz, let alone come out intact the other side - which is one of the reasons I'm thinking hologram.

[Teakai]

Posted by Fred259 (here)

In my post I said Rockefeller (Standard Oil) are “fracking” to get every last $ out of the earth.

I would disagree, Fred. I think they are fracking so as to do maximum damage. As with the gulf stream oil 'spill', they want to damage the natural food resources and drinking water.

[Fred259]

QUOTE=Lord Sidious;114556]

They can indeed fly planes on remote control. Ironically, this system was designed to take over hijacked airliners, but on Sep 11, they used that to control the aircraft and crash them.
Anyone that believes there were pilots guiding the two planes into the WTC is seriously mistaken.
Why? Think about a military aircraft fitted with g suits to prevent redout and blackout in pilots. How many commercial aircraft have them?
How would the pilots on those two planes have avoided red out and black out pulling high g turns over New York city?

We have seen predator drones flown from California to Afghanistan and back again by a pilot on the ground in California, so this isn't some sci fi claim.


Former German Minister Von Buelow Already Knew About Remote Control. In his interview with the German daily "Tagesspiegel" on January 13th, former German Secretary of Defence Andreas Von Buelow made the following statement:

"There is also the theory of one British flight engineer: according to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the pilots' hands, from outside. The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case..."

Not quite so much a theory as might first appear. When I released the above report about "Home Run" remote control in October 2001, I mentioned that one European flag carrier was aware of the technology, though at that precise point in time I thought it prudent not to name the actual airline:

"As long ago as the early nineties, a major European flag carrier acquired the information and was seriously alarmed that one of its own aircraft might be "rescued" by the Americans without its authority. Accordingly, this flag carrier completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its entire fleet, and replaced them with a home grown version. These aircraft are now effectively impregnable to penetration by Home Run, but that is more than can be said for the American aircraft fleet..."

The European flag carrier which completely stripped the American flight computers out of its aircraft was Lufthansa, the German national airline. Bearing in mind his former posts as Secretary of Defence and Minister of Science and Technology, Herr Von Buelow would have known all about this mammoth but secretive task.

How very clever (and discreet) of Von Buelow to sort of "drop the information" into the middle of an interview about the 9/11 attacks!
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/a...erun.html#ref1
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/a...s/homerun.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_von_Bülow

Wonderful Lord Sidious, you talk a lot of sense. I agree with you, the German pilots union refused to operate the B767 till the “Home Run” software and equipment had been removed. I was aware of this but like you earlier, I wanted to keep this information to myself.

Now I can see that you are a man of absolute probity, and so rather than hide my thoughts I have a question for you.

We agree that Lufthansa B767 does not have “Home Run” as this was removed, but what about the B767-300ER aircraft operated today by ELAL for example, do you know if they have “Home Run removed? This has been troubling me you understand.

Turning to your other question. I did look up the word “Constitutor” and this is a concern! I will be honest, this was news to me, but I have no legal schooling so will leave this to those who do. I do agree though it’s a concern.


Lord Sidious, our friend and fellow Avalonian Dennis Leahy posted this thread on the work of Jeff Prager.

This folks could be the final chapter 9/11 and above all it cant be debunked.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ions-About-911

[Lord Sidious]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
QUOTE=Lord Sidious;114556]




Wonderful Lord Sidious, you talk a lot of sense. I agree with you, the German pilots union refused to operate the B767 till the “Home Run” software and equipment had been removed. I was aware of this but like you earlier, I wanted to keep this information to myself.

Now I can see that you are a man of absolute probity, and so rather than hide my thoughts I have a question for you.

We agree that Lufthansa B767 does not have “Home Run” as this was removed, but what about the B767-300ER aircraft operated today by ELAL for example, do you know if they have “Home Run removed? This has been troubling me you understand.

Turning to your other question. I did look up the word “Constitutor” and this is a concern! I will be honest, this was news to me, but I have no legal schooling so will leave this to those who do. I do agree though it’s a concern.


Lord Sidious, our friend and fellow Avalonian Dennis Leahy posted this thread on the work of Jeff Prager.

This folks could be the final chapter 9/11 and above all its cant be debunked.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ions-About-911

Thanks Fred for the kind words. I want to know THE truth, I don't have time for games. As I get older, I am getting worse, I don't even have time to become impatient anymore!
The thing is, I would only be able to guess about the so called israeli airline as I don't know. Knowing what they are like and their paranoia, I would suspect that they have indeed removed the avionics and had their own put in.
As for that word constitutor, you should be concerned as that document, the constitution makes you and everyone else that thinks they are a citizen an indentured servant of those who would enslave all mankind.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Lord Sidious (here)
We make the assumption that it must have been done with tech we know about, but what about tech that we don't know about?

Interesting question ...

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Lord Sidious (here)
but what about tech that we don't know about?

As Donald Rumsfeld might way, what about tech that we don't know that we don't know about?

[Transdimensional Bean Pod]

I didn't read every page here, but I figured this deserved to be up here if it wasn't already.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ft5zjNtHANg

I watched both of these back when they were relatively new, and I recall thinking, 'well, that pretty much destroyed it'. Much like 'Screw Loose Change' did to THAT terrible piece of film.

Plus, I seriously doubt the 135 eye witnesses to the plane actually hitting the Pentagon were all lying.



This is primo disinformation, no matter who made it.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Posted by Transdimensional Bean Pod (here)
I didn't read every page here, but I figured this deserved to be up here if it wasn't already.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ft5zjNtHANg

I watched both of these back when they were relatively new, and I recall thinking, 'well, that pretty much destroyed it'. Much like 'Screw Loose Change' did to THAT terrible piece of film.

Plus, I seriously doubt the 135 eye witnesses to the plane actually hitting the Pentagon were all lying.



This is primo disinformation, no matter who made it.

Good post. People should watch that video.

[Zook]

Officer Lagasse could not have misremembered what he saw wrt the jetliner's position as he was standing on the Northside of Citgo. And that is why his testimony cannot be impeached.

Let's follow the logic train. One, Lagasse thought that he was confirming the government's fable of jetliner impact when he talked to CIT. He is a government sympathetic witness.

Clearly, Lagasse was ultimately incorrect in his assumption of jetliner impact (e.g. Northside approach makes that impossible as previously argued in this thread). But he was correct to assume in realtime that a jetliner would impact because the jetliner was heading low towards the Pentagon and there was a giant fireball that was seen at approximately the same time as flyover.

Two, Officer Lagasse was incorrect when he told CIT that he was at the front pump on the North side of Citgo; a security video reveals that he was actually at the back pump, both pumps located on the North side of Citgo. Ergo, the security video conclusively establishes Lagasse's position on the Northside of Citgo. This memory error (front pump vs back pump) is well within the bounds of human memory error. What is not within the bounds of human memory error is Lagasse's placement of the jetliner to the Northside of Citgo. If the jetliner had been to the South side as is claimed by the obviously confused debunkers in the video that TransDimenPod provides, then its view would have been blocked (from Lagasse) by the station itself (e.g. due to the overhang over the front and back pumps!!) This overhang is crucial to understanding what Officer Lagasse could and could not have seen ... and could and could not have remembered!

Ergo, Lagasse's testimony alone establishes the Northside of Citgo jetliner approach. This can then only mean jetliner flyover because the dynamic Northside approach profile - now frmly established - is incompatible with the static Pentagon damage profile (e.g. Pentagon hole is at an opposite incidence angle, among other things).

I feel sorry for those who've lost their mental acuities. Everyone associated with the making of TransDimenPod's so-called debunker video (link reposted below) are agents of disinformation. And those who promote it have allowed themselves to be hoodwinked, in the best case scenario. We'll leave it at that.

beginDisinformationAlert
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ft5zjNtHANg
end

[Fred259]

Posted by EYES WIDE OPEN (here)
Good post. People should watch that video.

Yes it’s a good video. If you want your 10 minute fix of 9/11 mumbo jumbo watch the video.


If you want to really understand 9/11, why it was done, by whom, and who profited, how this affects you, your family, your job and sadly your liberty then read this report.

The mumbo jumbo video is 10 minutes long.

The report will take you 6-8 hours to read (4 Sections).

The decision is yours.


https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ions-About-911



Sarah McClendon: “ What will the people do if they ever find out the truth about Iraq-gate and Iran contra?


George HW Bush: “Sarah, if the American people ever find out what we have done, they will chase us down the street and lynch us”


Ronald Regan: “If such a story gets out, we’ll all be hanging by our thumbs in front of the White House.”




“The revelation that almost every high ranking elected and non-elected appointed official in the US and global governing racket has had or does have some level of connection, direct complicity or entanglement in the very complicated and convoluted events that both preceded and followed the events of 9/11 indicate with much clarity that a new investigation is not going to be forthcoming, ever”. – Jeff Prager. Author.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
Yes it’s a good video. If you want your 10 minute fix of 9/11 mumbo jumbo watch the video.

Hmmm, never heard facts and evidence called mumbo jumbo before.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ft5zjNtHANg

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
.


If you want to really understand 9/11....,

If you really want a new investigation into 9/11, why not spread this around rather than unpovable speculation about hologram jets created by theoretical weapons systems....

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2011...hrooz-sarshar/

The Witnessed & Documented “Kamikaze Pilots” Case

In a public statement issued today (see below), members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee demanded a prompt response from the former Chairman and Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission regarding Former FBI Language Specialist Behrooz Sarshar’s censored testimony to the Commission. The press release was prompted by recently released documents related to the interviews conducted by the 9/11 Commission published at Cryptome.org, in particular the “Memorandum for the Record” containing the Commission’s interview with Mr. Sarshar. The memorandum, after establishing Mr. Sarshar’s credibility and vaguely referring to his documented and witnessed testimony regarding specific tip(s) provided to the FBI in April and June 2001 regarding planned imminent “Kamikaze Pilots” attacks targeting major cities in the United States, leaves out the entire testimony. This testimony was also entirely left out of the Commission’s final report released in July 2004.

Behrooz Sarshar worked as a GS 12 language specialist with Top Secret Clearance at the FBI Washington Field Office. After leaving the FBI in 2002, he provided his testimony on “Kamikaze Pilots” to several Congressional offices and investigators, including staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Committee’s leading Democrat at the time, Senator Patrick Leahy, and the Justice Department’s Inspector General Office. The congressional sources familiar with Mr. Sarshar’s case and briefing found him and his report credible:

A former Grassley investigator says he found Sarshar credible, too. “We thought he was a pretty credible guy,” said former Senate Judiciary Committee investigator Kris Kolesnik.

In April and June of 2001 a long-term FBI informant told two FBI agents from the Washington field office that his sources in Afghanistan had provided him with information regarding a terrorist plot to attack the US in a suicide mission involving airplanes. Mr. Sarshar acted as an interpreter at both meetings after which the case agents filed a report (on 302 Forms) with their squad supervisor, Thomas Frields. Here is what Mr. Frields told the reporter when questioned about the case:

Frields, now retired from the bureau, says the case is too “sensitive” to discuss.”It involves very sensitive matters that took place while I was an on-duty agent, and I have absolutely nothing to say,” said Frields, reached at his Washington-area consulting office.

The 9/11 Commissioners had initially refused to interview Mr. Sarshar. He was one of several witnesses from the intelligence and law enforcement organizations with relevant testimonies and reports who were denied access to the commission (the ones that we know of). It was only after pressure from members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and memorandums from the congressional offices that the commission reluctantly agreed to interview Mr. Sarshar. However, his entire testimony was omitted from their final report. According to a Chicago Tribune investigative reporter even FBI Director Mueller appeared baffled by the Commission’s lack of inquiry into this particular case:

FBI Director Robert Mueller, who expected to be asked about the case during an appearance before the commission in April, was surprised when the commissioners never raised the question, according to aides.

I do not expect to see any satisfactory explanation from the commission in response to this public statement issued by the 9/11 family members. In this case they certainly cannot hide behind their usual lame secrecy or classification mantra. Mr. Sarshar provided several testimonies and briefings to official bodies where neither the facilities nor the officials were considered secure or in possession of clearance. I was present during at least four of those meeting where the briefings were recorded and transcribed. In two of these meetings several members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee were also present. In fact, during my short tenure with the Bureau, I was briefed about this case by not only Mr. Sarshar but other firsthand witnesses, and I saw the actual 302 forms filed with the unit’s squad supervisor (FBI language specialists get to keep a copy of their reports/forms). Further, I personally briefed the 9/11 commission investigators on the details of this particular case, which is confirmed by the commission’s memorandum:

Members of the Family Support Group requested that the Commission meet with Mr. Sarshar, Dan Marcus arranged for a meeting with Mr. Sarshar. The meeting became an interview and was recorded. Sibel Edmonds, another former FBI translator, provided information concerning Mr. Sarshar during her interview with Chris Healey and Lance Cole on February 11, 2004.

I believe not only the families of the September 11th attacks but every American has the right to know about this case. They need to know that this significant report was completely censored by a quasi commission, that this is one of many cases that were omitted from this staged and rehearsed show to pacify the public’s need to know, and that there never was any real investigation into this horrific event used in reshaping not only our country, but the entire world. Based on my discussion with the family members who issued the following public statement, the commission will be given two business days to provide them (and the public) with answers to questions raised by this bold and appalling omission. If no response is forthcoming, on Wednesday, February 2, I will publish Mr. Sarshar’s verbatim testimony here at Boiling Frogs Post. With that said, here is the public statement by the 9/11 family members issued today:

For Immediate Release: January 31, 2011



Statement of September 11th Advocates
Regarding
FBI Translator Behrooz Sarshar’s Redacted Testimony
To The 9/11 Commission
January 31, 2011


The 9/11 Commission’s mandate was to provide a “full and complete accounting” of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and recommend how to prevent such attacks in the future.

As family members who actively fought for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission and served on The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission (FSC), we find it appalling that once again we must question the thoroughness and credibility of the 9/11 Commission and its Final Report.

A pattern of ignoring whistleblowers persisted throughout the Commission’s tenure, even though Governor Kean, the Chairman, promised the FSC that no credible witnesses would be turned away. The list of whistleblowers that should have been interviewed by the 9/11 Commission included former and current intelligence agents, analysts, translators and others. It was only after repeated attempts by the FSC that former FBI translator, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, was finally interviewed by them. The “Memorandum for the Record” containing this interview was just released on January 1, 2011 (http://cryptome.org/nara/behrooz-sarshar.pdf).

According to previously published sources, in April 2001 Mr. Sarshar, in his position as FBI interpreter/translator, attended a meeting between a long-term, reliable FBI asset and two additional FBI agents from the Washington Field Office. That FBI asset told the two FBI agents that his sources in Afghanistan had information of an al-Qaeda plot to attack America in a suicide mission involving planes. It would appear that when Mr. Sarshar filed his reports within the Bureau, they were titled “Kamikaze Pilots”.

After leaving the FBI in 2002, Mr. Sarshar provided the same information to various Congressional offices and investigators, such as staffers for the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senator Patrick Leahy. The Justice Department’s Inspector General also interviewed him.

Thus, we were shocked to find that Mr. Sarshar’s relevant information was missing from the “System Was Blinking Red” section of the 2004 Final Report issued by the 9/11 Commission. Now, six and a half years past the publication of the Final Report, the transcript of Mr. Sarshar’s interview has been released with all of its substance redacted. In light of the fact that the majority of his information does not meet the standard for classification, which is to protect “sources and methods”, it is unclear as to why that information was blocked. Covering up incompetence, or worse, malfeasance, is not a valid reason for classification. So, what happened to Mr. Sarshar’s warnings once he filed his reports? This is exactly the type of essential information the Commission should have used in order to write its final report and issue recommendations. How does the Commission justify omitting information from a credible source within one of our own intelligence agencies?

By their own admission, a large portion of the 9/11 story was based on the tortured, third party interrogations of Khalid Sheik Mohammad, the alleged “Mastermind” of the 9/11 plot. Does this make any investigative sense? What criteria did the Commission use to determine whom they would interview and whom they would ignore? One must wonder how many others were similarly omitted. It also seems that the nation’s intelligence agency(ies) had information that included kamikaze pilots and planes being used as weapons. So how does the Commission reach its absurd conclusion that 9/11 was a “failure of imagination”?

Based on just these facts alone, one could surmise that the Commission was more intent on conforming to a predetermined storyline rather than a truthful compilation of the facts revealed through an objective, thorough and effective investigation, that left no stone unturned.

As the public has a right to know this information, we request that the transcript of Mr. Sarshar’s interview be immediately declassified. Furthermore, we respectfully request that the former Chairman, Governor Thomas Kean, Vice-Chairman, Mr. Lee Hamilton and the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Mr. Philip Zelikow, promptly answer the questions herein.


# # #


Patty Casazza
Monica Gabrielle
Mindy Kleinberg
Lorie Van Auken

[Fred259]

Posted by EYES WIDE OPEN (here)
Hmmm, never heard facts and evidence called mumbo jumbo before.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ft5zjNtHANg

Well yes I agree so, let’s just agree.

Would it be possible to produce “one fact and one piece of evidence” that supports whatever it is, you are trying to say.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
The report will take you 6-8 hours to read (4 Sections).

The decision is yours.


https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ions-About-911

I took a quick look at the reports and wanted to see who had written them. As I was typing the authors name into google, googles predictive text gave me several options. the second of which was "jeff prager holocaust". Some very dodgy reults followed. Seems jeff is also a holocaust revisionist like the other guy was. Type it into google yourself. Seems odd this is the second time this has come up. Just saying is all.
May Love and light illuminate your way.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Fred259 (here)
Well yes I agree so, let’s just agree.

Thats funny. I think you missed my point. Anyway, gotta dash!

[Fred259]

[QUOTE=EYES WIDE OPEN;117199]

I took a quick look at the reports and wanted to see who had written them. As I was typing the authors name into google, googles predictive text gave me several options. the second of which was "jeff prager holocaust". Some very dodgy reults followed. Seems jeff is also a holocaust revisionist like the other guy was. Type it into google yourself. Seems odd this is the second time this has come up. Just saying is all.

You just need to read the report and form an opinion. The link was provided. You don’t need to go looking into Google and the holocaust, and what this guy said and that guy, just read the report, and it tells you who did it, why it was done, and who profited.

Thank you for your kind thoughts, I affirm a large light has illuminated my way.