rigorousintuition.ca

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/92.html

Now, couple this with the BBC jumping ahead in the script.

Now, couple this with the BBC jumping ahead in the script.

...and jump to the most unlikely conclusion imaginable, no doubt.

All pretty circumstantial. No real proof of anything.

I always thought this was a very signifigant chunk of the puzzle.

Sure it's all pretty odd but can be explained away pretty easily.

First witness - they'd simply claim that was a genuine account.

Jerome Hauer - Was in NYC at the time, so why not? Already some chatter previous in intelligensia and media about Bin Laden.

One guy had the sense that such was the reason for the collapse. Video claimed he authoritarily spoke on the reason for the collapse.

and so on...

Meet Jerome Hauer, 9/11 Suspect Awaiting Indictment

http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/2007/ ... iting.html

orz wrote:

Now, couple this with the BBC jumping ahead in the script.

...and jump to the most unlikely conclusion imaginable, no doubt.

And what might that be?

Very interesting stuff here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeiMj7lqqRQ

11:11 wrote:Very interesting stuff here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeiMj7lqqRQ

I heard this on Tarpley's show which I started listening to recently, mainly for his take on economic matters, which he seems to have a good handle on.

All this in-fighting amongst the 911 truthers seems to have really escalated with the Kennebunkport Warning, which Tarpley penned, several anti-war activists signed, and then those activists withdrew their signatures a few days later with various excuses that sounded disingenuous at best. Some of the 911 truth types sided with the anti-war activists, and others with Tarpley. Now there are bad feelings and slanderous accusations going back and forth.

I honestly don't follow this stuff enough to know what the hell is going on. But I saw a posting by Kevin Ryan on 911blogger the other day, which I scan from time to time. Kevin Ryan is against Tarpley, but Kevin Barrett is in favor of Tarpley -- and they at least had a rather civil disagreement -- but, my sense is that these people are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Tarpley's escalating the tensions as well by naming names on his radio show. He's got some good points, granted, and it does make me quite suspicious of some of these various players and their agendas. Cointelpro or whatever.

It's all enough to want to make me stop paying attention to ANYTHING 9/11. A big success for the infiltrators, I suppose, if that's what they are.

Here's a link to the Kevin Ryan posting -- the comments from Kevin Barrett are below and I tend to agree with Barrett. But notice how the majority of voters at 911blogger are against Barrett and Tarpley (each comment gets voted with points, pro and con).

We Don't Need Any More Warnings
by Kevin Ryan
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11427

9-11... Who really did it?

Suspected 9-11 Criminal Coconspirators

http://www.whodidit.org/cocon.html

http://www.whodidit.org/

How Could They Keep It Secret?

Most people assume that for insiders to have pulled off 9-11 would have taken so many people that someone would have talked by now.

First of all, it seems likely that there were as few as roughly 140 people who were intimately involved in the details of 9-11. On this site, you can see pictures and a short bio of the 90 people who are highly likely to be the top criminal coconspirators guilty of the planning, execution, and subsequent cover-up of the treason and mass murder that took place on 9-11.

As far as why no one has confessed, look at it this way: everyone involved in 9-11, even those only involved in the cover-up, are guilty of crimes for which they could possibly receive a death sentence if convicted. If that isn’t enough incentive to remain silent, i don’t know what is! How many times has a criminal ever confessed to a crime for which they were not even a suspect?! Criminals will only confess if they’re convinced they’ve been caught and they’re willing to make a deal for leniency if they reveal their cohorts.

Furthermore, when you read the names on the list of suspected perpetrators, you’ll see right away what a tight-knit little group it is. If there were even a shadow of a doubt about someone’s loyalty, they would not have been invited into this cabal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_for_Peace

Axis for Peace is an initiative of Voltaire Network to set up an "anti-imperialist" intellectual movement capable of opposing neoconservatives. Its political line recalls that of the Non-Aligned Movement.9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA gained a following. On October 7, 2006, Amazon.com's top non-fiction book reviewer, Robert David Steele, called it "the strongest of the 770+ books I have reviewed here at Amazon." Tarpley speaks at length about the themes in his book during an interview in the film Oil, Smoke, Mirrors.

Starting March, 2006, Tarpley had a weekly talk radio show called World Crisis Radio for Republic Broadcasting Network. Following a split between Wes Perkins and John Stadtmiller in January 2007, Tarpley apparently left RBN and moved to Genesis, where he presents the Thursday edition of World Crisis Radio. The format remains as a "world intelligence roundup", quite similar to his RBN show.

Tarpley is a member of the world anti-imperialist conference Axis for Peace, of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and of a research Netzwerk of German 9/11 authors founded in Sept. 2006.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 4397009347

A little off topic here, but the same phenomenom of 'planted' witnesses was observed at the scene of the Columbine massacre(4/20/99), leading to a prearranged conclusion of just two lone gunmen who went bezerk because they were bullied:



www.jessicaseigel.com/art...bine.shtml

"In one case, the joke was on reporters. A certain "Mike Smith," who claimed to be a point guard for the Columbine basketball team, regaled journalists at the park with vivid accounts of how school officials ignored the hostility between the trench coat clique and bullying jocks who taunted the outcasts as "gays" and "inbreeds." The Philadelphia Inquirer and USA Today prominently quoted "Smith." Then, the Drudge Report and Rivera Live quoted Smith being quoted.

"Inquirer national correspondent Richard Jones learned that "Mike Smith" does not play point guard for Columbine from a Denver Rocky Mountain News reporter, whose son actually had played that position. In fact, no one named "Mike Smith" was enrolled at Columbine High School. "It was your worst nightmare," says Jones. "The story had the ring of truth. You don't think someone would lie to see their name in the paper."

"Instead of printing a separate correction, the Inquirer buried a paragraph in its next-day story that read: "One teenager apparently tried to mislead reporters, identifying himself to the Inquirer, USA Today and a Colorado paper as Mike Smith..." After a query from Brill's Content brought the error to USA Today's attention, the paper printed a separate page-three correction branding "Mike Smith" an impostor, but did not address the substance of his quotes.

"Because "Mike Smith"'s account was so juicy, at least one news organization went to great lengths to locate him. A Dateline associate producer huddled curbside one night under an umbrella in the cold, asking teenagers entering and leaving the park, "Do you know Mike Smith? Do you know Mike Smith?" She never did find him."

------
I checked the master index and the student/staff location list. There is indeed no 'Mike Smith.' This guy sounds like the typical disinfo agent: deliberating sowing a false version of events that colored the media accounts. Now who felt the need to send down a false witness to hype the discredited "bullied" hypothesis?


Another example:

14012
witness to cnn interview on tv, emailed his tip to investigators:

"On Tuesday afternoon, CNN showed a local news reporter interviewing a student. ...Something was very strange about this boy. He said that he knew the two* boys well. He was too rehearsed in his speech. He was not upset and he did not look like he had ever been in the school during the shootings. He was not shook up or scared, but he knew or lead you to believe that he knew just what was going on in the school while he was being interviewed. ... He just was too cool, too pat in his speech."

*there were actually seven



/

The movie represents quite well what went through my mind on that terrible day.

As I was managing several "news" chatrooms on 9/11, with everyone pasting links or (mostly) typing what was being broadcast on whichever radio and TV source they happened to be monitoring, I felt ill-at-ease: my generally quite rational friends-for-years seemed to be parroting one another without any questions asked. And without answering my questions.

Throughout the day, and the next, I hoped some entity would soon claim the attacks (thus putting an end to the fairy-tale CT being repeated), though increasingly fearing MORE acts of terror before those responsible would make themselves known. Right after the 2nd impact, I drew up a quicklist of possible suspects. It did not include OBL, Al-Q'aeda, anything muslim-related or the US government, for that matter.

After a fortnight the fear diminished, only in favour of more unsettling worries: why had no substantial info whatsoever been released after the initial wild guesses? Why did the most critical of minds suddenly lose their ability to question mere rumors? Persistently and progressively? In terms of achievement surpassing the impact of the actual attacks (regardless of perpetrator).

The movie doesn't provide "the" answer - in the asking lies it's virtue. If only as an example for those who can do better - or as a starting point for those who habitually (or since 9/11) don't question what they're being fed. Thanks OP for posting the movie link.

Haven't read thread updates (here) yet, but just wanted to say that these bastads totally bamboozled me. I have been into conspiracy since 1981, and I bought the lie. I remember Bill Cooper from day one saying it was an inside job, and I didn't believe him! Their evil mind fuckery got me. It took me a few months before the fog lifted.

This has got to be the biggest, most daring psyops ever created. It is astounding how deep it goes, how big it is, how diabolical. All to the backdrop of the murder of 3000 people.

To recap: They traumatize us, insert the programming, then follow it with emotional appeal. Straight out of fucking Tavistock, the masters of mind control.

The BBC screw up is a HUGE clue as to how high this goes, and who was behind it.

FEMA includes media mouthpieces as part of their 'event management' capabilities.
They were in NYC doing excercises on the ground so that's why there were media handlers creating a convenient coherence on camera so soon.

There probably would've been some there pronto even if the excercises weren't going on at the time. Media mind management is job 1 of the shadow government that grabs the wheel in a 'national security event.'

More media complicity (accessories after the fact, to MURDER and CONSPIRACY):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgJuHNfk7no