Interesting post. I do think your option #3 is possible, but there are also some obvious objections - the biggest being the scale of the coverup. I think something on the size of Sandy Hook would be possible, albeit challenging, to pull off without any leaks. Something the size and scale of 9/11 - that’s a hell of a lot different. You’re talking about thousands of people involved and hundreds of firemen. The white collar workers where entire companies or organizations were wiped out - each and every one agreed to participate in the hoax? Thousands of people agreed to abandon their families and live under a new identity? Not one person said “no” and went public? I realize the CIA is capable of some crazy shit but this would be beyond the pale.
Wouldn’t it just be easier to kill everyone in the buildings and airplanes instead? Dead men tell no tales sort of thing?
In the end, the official narrative is obviously total BS. So whether everyone died or it was a full scale exercise it’s still the government(s) behind it. And it was used as a pretext for the Patriot Act and forever war. If the people died or disappeared I don’t think there is a big difference. Either they died unwillingly or willingly bailed on their families for some cash. Either way the government is at war with its citizens.
What you really need for an objection is clear evidence and you don't have any.
There's no coverup, I'm sure the people involved discuss 9/11 among themselves, it just doesn't go to the media in the same way that the Emperor's New Clothes event of 9/11 is discussed as being just that among those unblinded by the propaganda but doesn't make the media. Where's the coverup? It's all right under our noses - it's just people don't recognise it and trying to get alleged "truthers" to see that 9/11 was really a demolition job and glorified exercise rather than an "inside job" per se requires the same Herculean effort as telling the believers of the story that it's nonsense. "Truthers" won't have it, they won't have that the death and injury were staged even though they don't have a skerrick of clear evidence that it wasn't - and the propagandists, of course, predicted this scenario - they understand our inclination to believe this or that, how we change or stay in our beliefs, etc PERFECTLY. The "truthers" have dug their heels in. they are fully anchored in the "evil US government cold-bloodedly and callously killed all those poor people" narrative and they won't be coaxed out of it. All as according to plan.
"Thousands of people agreed to abandon their families?" We don't know exactly who were real people and who weren't, which whole families were in on it and which people may have wanted to simply "abandon" their family. We can only speculate so we shouldn't be making judgements based on speculations - not when we have masses of pieces of evidence to work with.
Easier to kill?
I find it interesting that people often put forward the "easier" argument. In psyops they don't do what's "easier" because whatever they want to do will be done and they will employ people to do it who ultimately are paid by the punters. We pay for the psyop so they don't care what's involved, they make it work however they want it to work.
The thing is, is it easier? We're told that Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) were hired to take away the rubble and the MSM also informed us that a bunch of suspicious dancing Israelis were caught in a roadblock in a white van containing explosives dust. Doncha love it? Yeah, I swallowed it hook, line and sinker initially but why would the MSM be telling us about Israelis and explosives dust to undermine their Islamic terror story? Why would they do that? I'll tell you why. In order to get the anticipated disbelievers of their nonsense story to think that "outsider" Israelis were hired to do the dastardly deed of bringing down the buildings with all those poor people in them. I KNOW that's why they told us because that's exactly what I reasoned and it makes perfect sense. They don't worry that the believers will puzzle over the "suspicious Israelis", they know the believers will simply ignore that part of the story while the disbelievers will latch right onto it and I believe in fact the media came out later and said it was nonsense or words to that effect anyway.
So if it wasn't a bunch of Israelis in a white van who brought the buildings down who was it? You don't think that CDI wasn't involved in the demolitions too, being a demolition company? You don't think that as the WHOLE of the WTC was demolished if not on the day eventually that CDI might have had something to do with that massive demolition, they weren't just involved in the cleanup?
So tell me how it's "easy" to get a demolition company who's proud of their safety record go, "Yep, OK, we normally try to ensure no one is hurt and injured but on 9/11 we'll make an exception for your terror story. We'll leave the buildings only partially evacuated before bringing them down."
The irony. You can propagandise and coerce health professionals to inject people with substances that will injure, maim and kill based on medical and scientific fraudulence dating from Pasteur but you cannot propagandise demolition professionals to only partially evacuate buildings before destroying them. Am I wrong? ... and it wasn't just demolition companies they had to involve, of course. Agency staff were obviously involved including firefighters - those ones who agreed to put their names to the fake testimonies for a start. ... and so many more people.
Quite a bit to chew on here. I'm not certain you are incorrect - it seems possible. It's been a while since I went far down this rabbit hole. Playing Devil's Advocate here, a least a bit.
Cantor Fitzgerald lost nearly all of it's workforce on 9/11, lost either by death or by witness relocation. All told, 658 of their employees disappeared. All 658 were actors? Did the CEO know this? Is he part of team demolition? Marsh, Inc. lost 295 employees. They are also all actors? Was the CEO in on it too? Is it plausible that 1,000 people between these two companies were all actors? In the case of Cantor, that the vast majority of the people on the payroll were actors? Has an evidence been presented, ever, by anyone, that would suggest this is the case?
You say, "'Truthers'" won't have it, they won't have that the death and injury were staged even though they don't have a skerrick of clear evidence that it wasn't". Can you name the logical fallacy here? I find it interesting that you present a pretty common logical fallacy at the beginning of the article and use a different one in the comments. Thou shall not commit logical fallacies.
The demolition part is also interesting. I think the event was a controlled demolition of all 3 buildings. Let's say that is the case. There are only a handful of companies on Earth who could pull a controlled demolition of that scale off. So one of the companies was definitely involved. Let's say it was CDI. If people were killed or if people were relocated, they are still involved in a coverup - no? So either way, they are guilty. Could the people working on the controlled demo be told that no one would be harmed in the demo? Sure. What happens when the job is done and people ARE harmed, are they going to speak out later? That depends on how many times they went to places like Epstein Island. Maybe they got MK Ultra'd after they were finished.
I do still think it's a lot easier to kill 3,000 people than to relocate 3,000 actors. Either way, the mechanics of such an operation involve a cover up. The cover up for killing 3,000 people is much smaller than the cover up including 3,000 actors.
I'm open to the possibility. I still like the post, it's an interesting idea. I do think the topic needs a lot more depth. Are you creating this theory alone? Is there any further reading?
There are so many things to really wonder about, CK, and I have to say, I'm like, "How did they pull this or that off? How did they do it?" But I follow the quote from Arthur Conan Doyle:
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
With regard to the companies in the towers - I think we can safely infer they were TOTALLY in on it. The thing is when 9/11 becomes a mere demolition job in the guise of an exercise in the guise of a real terror event everything changes, doesn't it?
There was a site, Let's Roll Forums, which disappeared but you can still find odd pages in archive.org. On this site I remember reading that not long before 9/11 Cantor Fitzgerald fired all their staff on the grounds of economic problems, hired agents to take their place and then after 9/11 rehired the old employees. This is an old Let's Roll Forums page I found on archive.org which tells the story of an alleged CF jumper, Bernard Pietronico, whose body was found a long time later ... that has very little credibility.
"Can you name the logical fallacy here? I find it interesting that you present a pretty common logical fallacy at the beginning of the article and use a different one in the comments. Thou shall not commit logical fallacies."
No I can't name the logical fallacy, I like to think I don't fall into them, you'll have to tell me, CK.
"Could the people working on the controlled demo be told that no one would be harmed in the demo? Sure. What happens when the job is done and people ARE harmed, are they going to speak out later? That depends on how many times they went to places like Epstein Island. Maybe they got MK Ultra'd after they were finished."
I find this highly improbable but the point is that there is zero clear evidence of death and injury and loads of PURPORTED evidence that is completely unconvincing. Lots of people were made up, OK, so we're not starting with 3,000 relocated people and some of them would already have died. Right off the bat we KNOW that 265 people did not die in planes, we KNOW that the planes were faked, OK? and we have ZERO evidence of the alleged passengers being killed another way. They could have been but we have no evidence of it.
There is no evidence, CK, of death and injury other than claims and purported evidence that doesn't stack up. That is all there is. There is absolutely nothing compelling about the real death and injury part of the narrative.
There is one thing we have to give the perps. They are scrupulous in undermining their narrative by presenting the clear facts underneath their propaganda. They could have faked the death and injury so much more convincingly ... but they didn't ... they undermined it at every turn. There is nothing that a believer in death and injury can brandish that favours real over fake ... and that being the case there is simply no case for real death and injury outside a few targeted individuals and accidents.
Who is to say that a government that is capable of planning and pulling off such an event did not pre-plan the event years in advance, create companies, staff them with ghost employees that would all later perish (simply have actors or agents play the role of grieving friends and family later), etc. This goes for airline pilots, passengers, Pentagon personnel, police, firefighters, etc.
Is it not possible to train government employees or agents to demolish buildings using explosives? Do only demolition companies have the assets and the ability to do that? Is it beyond reasonable that certain agencies (which are undoubtedly secret) of our government have agents that would participate in such a scheme? How many of us actually know someone who died on 9/11 in the towers, Pentagon, or on any of the planes?
I have to say I find it very intriguing what happens to these people and how many of their inner circle they tell if a single person. I'm friends with a woman with twin daughters who - amazingly - were each friends with a person in two different psyops - a policewoman allegedly shot in a psyop in Queensland and a person allegedly killed in a bus accident in the Hunter Valley in NSW. OK, it's just me saying these events were psyops [EDIT: actually others also say Qld one was] but they had all the clear hallmarks. In the case of the bus accident psyop I realised only after I thought the NSW accident was a psyop that "bus accident psyops" are a thing and people have pointed out bus accident psyops in Russia, Canada and the US so not so strange that we had one in Australia.
The twins went to the funerals of these people and they are certainly not in on the psyops. Their mother is totally accepting of psyops as a thing but there's no way she would countenance that her daughters were friends with people who agreed to participate in this manner ... but I think it's a simple fact they did. As soon as it gets personal people go, "Oh no, that person wouldn't be in a psyop." It seems way too many people are ready to sell their souls. What I want to know is where do they all disappear to? There's so many of them.
Who said they had a choice? They get rounded up as they leave the house in the morning and sent off to Antartica. Then everybody thinks they died in the collapse.
Probably nobody dies in these psyops otherwise it would be hard to recruit crisis actors and to maintain the organizations behind them. Crisis acting many people would be willing to do, especially if they be 'true believers' in the cause (i.e. gun control), but murdering is where too any would draw the line.
"Probably nobody dies in these psyops otherwise it would be hard to recruit crisis actors and to maintain the organizations behind them."
Precisely.
"Who said they had a choice? They get rounded up as they leave the house in the morning and sent off to Antartica. Then everybody thinks they died in the collapse."
LOL. I doubt that happened to anyone but who knows? I'd say there's a wide variety of the people involved, including people wanting let off crimes and those who just want to disappear from their families. A comment on my article about the Manchester bombing.
"I have a cousin who lives in Greater Manchester and an ex-colleague of his reckoned his son was at the event. However, 1. his son was seen at a pub at the same time the explosion went off, wearing an Iron Maiden t-shirt, yeah, metal fans love that r'n'b love, miles away from the event, 2. the police drop'd their case against him shortly afterwards for fraud, 3. his dad got a new car (SUV), which he couldn't afford previously being on minimum wage."
Look The United States is a bottomless cesspool of lies. Until these lies are acknowledged and all involved are outed and prosecuted then America will NEVER EVER be the kind of country we originally signed up for. I however believe it will never happen. We will fall and all those who continue to lie will be served their just desserts in hell not in this world.
Dalrymple's 'a society of emasculated liars is easy to control' is, of course, any tyrant's wet dream. it can only happen with more or less sophisticated indoctrination tools and technology, i.e. (mass) media, postmodernist art and television/computer/iPhone screens. yet here we are, so many of us still able to understand and point out the flaws in the narrative. kudos for your work!
A LOT of people have woken up to the truth that the Towers were mostly turned to dust before hitting the ground on September 11, 2001.
They have also realised that they should count past three and that the 9/11 orphans, WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 as well as the anomaly with the Bankers Trust building, blows the distraction narratives of jet fuel, explosives, thermite or nukes out of the water...
So, now what?
What to do with this information that has rocked your world?
Would anyone agree of their free will to participate in a terror exercise if they are aware that they will have to live under a fake identity afterwards? Would they have been threatened into agreeing?
I'm sure there's a wide variety of reasons but I doubt that coercion would be needed as people will be offered incentives they value such as money and also some would absolutely love to disappear for various reasons I'm sure. But in certain cases perhaps coercion is used - who knows?
Professor Gloria Moss has written a wonderful article about the Great Fire of London in 1666 showing it was a psyop too and we can see lots of parallels and connections to 9/11.
You know the funny thing? Only a few people allegedly died in the fire but I wondered if those deaths were also staged. There was a story about the family of the owner of the bakery where the fire allegedly started, William Farriner (who was put under a little suspicion - just one of the many typical threads of propaganda pushed out to confuse and mislead because he was surely in on it) escaping narrowly from the fire over the rooftops but, we're told, the maid baulked with fright and perished. I'm like, "Oh yeah, really?" Sounds like a story.
We're also told that a famous playwright whose work is still in print, James Shirley, and his wife both died on the same day a month after the fire in a refugee camp set up for those who lost their homes due to "fright and exposure". I wondered about that. He and his wife died on exactly the same day and despite connections with the king they were left to languish in poor conditions? So I puzzled. Did he perhaps owe money? You'll never believe it. I looked up his work and found he'd written a play, The Gamester.
Yes there could be three options for what happened on 9/11. In my opinion it was for a goal of surveillance and control of the population via legislation like the patriot act and second to emotionally charge the people so they accept a war in the Middle East. But who’s to say there wasn’t another reason to collapse the twin towers, more important to the perpetrators than war and control? And if there are three possible explanations of 9/11 maybe there is a fourth? Or 5th? What is a given is 9/11 changed the world. I believe it was related to RFK murder and more. Someday if the truth ever surfaces.....
Three buildings collapse at free fall speed, obvious as day explosives were placed in the buildings, controlled demolition, and still the apologists for the empire gossip about who said what when never asking who placed the explosives in the towers. Shying away from the hard questions doesn’t reflect well on one’s character, but that’s okay if that’s okay with you. Best.
I look at this way, the digital analysis: 1) the official story is true, or 2) the official story is false. At that level of analysis there are no other choices.
As it is 22 years old now, and years of discovery of facts and evidence, the only logical possibility is that the official story is false. All facts and evidence contradict the official story, sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The Official Conspiracy Theory is invalid.
Analysis from this point on must recognize that fact. Other theories may certainly be advanced, but they must comport with the facts .
Yes but how much of the official story is false? We know the buildings didn't come down for the reasons stated and many of us recognise the alleged passenger airliners didnt crash but what else is false? I'm not sure why you're so unwilling to click a link and take a look at a new way of viewing the events of 9/11. I GUARANTEE that you believe part of the story to be true ... which the evidence shows is, in fact, false ... and the reason you think it's true is due to the propaganda campaign targeted to the anticipated disbelievers. If you're not willing to take a look, so be it.
No element of the official story is true. I divide into 2 broad categories--the structural engineering part at WTC, and the aviation part there and elsewhere. I did click on your link, and while your points and questions are good, but 22 years later they are mostly irrelevant. There WERE a few play actors involved, but the people inside the towers were not play actors. As to the actual numbers of dead, you might be right, but today that is irrelevant.
We can continue the conversation, but in the meantime you should read the book The Woman Who Wasn’t There by Robin Gaby Fisher. Published by Simon & Schuster in 2012 it is the story of Tania Head.
Because I am in aviation, I and other aviators can only laugh at the absurdity of the aeronautical claims of the official narrative. A&E For 911 Truth and common sense show the absurdity of that part of the official narrative.
When demolition companies demolish buildings they evacuate them first right? Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) - who we're told took away the rubble - are proud of their safety record. Regardless of whether they had a hand in bringing the buildings down (though I think it's a pretty safe bet they did, don't you?) or not they certainly KNEW how they came down. So how do you think CDI was persuaded to participate in or be an abetter in the destruction of only partially evacuated buildings? The perps only wanted us to BELIEVE their terror story they didn't want it for real.
Whether CDI and the Loizeaux brothers were players or not, I don't know. That too is ultimately irrelevant. The perpetrators of this event were agents of evil, so they do not care about killing people.
Your last sentence is silly. Neither you nor I are privy to the exact motives of the perps, to exactly what they wanted. You and I can only judge the facts and evidence and speculate about motives.
They told us that CDI were players in that they cleaned up the rubble and - as I say - they would have known that the buildings came down by CD even if they weren't involved in that endeavour. So either way they participated - they aided and abetted. I'm not sure how you think the orchestrators got all the people who were obviously in on it - the media, the demolition professionals, etc to just go OK, "Yeah, OK we'll be in on the murder of our fellow citizens in those buildings for your terror story." It is so beyond nonsensical.
I'll readily admit that I find it shocking that they have been committing wholesale slaughter with the jab and all the other measures during lockdowns, etc, that does shock me ... but I can see how they do it on the back of over a century of fraudulent science ... but there's no way to fit into reality having demolition professionals and all the others involved in leaving people to die in buildings when there was absolutely no necessity for it in terms of their terror story. They didn't need people to die in planes - they faked their deaths - so what a priori says they didn't do the same for the buildings people? It just makes no sense.
And we have evidence that they didn't kill them from all angles. The lack of injured in the hospitals, the nonsensicalities of the firefighter testimonies which completely undermines their reality. It just goes on and on. And we have truther-targeted propaganda encouraging them to maintain their belief in real death and injury. I'm really not sure how much evidence you want and why you cannot blow away the magic propaganda dust to see what's underneath.
I'm guessing I'm much older than you--I will be 76 next month. Because of that I'm more jaded and cynical than you, and I did my time in the US Army, so I understand fully the meaning and implications of "inside job".
Having 'lost my religion' decades ago, I cannot help but see this event and the Plandemic as being manifestations of the Good v. Evil dynamics as described in the Bible.
In addition to reading the book about Tania Head, you should also seek out the writings of Christopher Bollyn. IMO his perspective is unique as he is married to an Israeli woman. His investigation of the events of the day and the following times is excellent.
Great explanation of the dilemma Petra!
Thanks, PM!
I just realized, when the story has a fear aspect, the audience will accept absurdities rather than challenge their reality. Excellent lesson for us.
'absurdities' like the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security :-(
Interesting post. I do think your option #3 is possible, but there are also some obvious objections - the biggest being the scale of the coverup. I think something on the size of Sandy Hook would be possible, albeit challenging, to pull off without any leaks. Something the size and scale of 9/11 - that’s a hell of a lot different. You’re talking about thousands of people involved and hundreds of firemen. The white collar workers where entire companies or organizations were wiped out - each and every one agreed to participate in the hoax? Thousands of people agreed to abandon their families and live under a new identity? Not one person said “no” and went public? I realize the CIA is capable of some crazy shit but this would be beyond the pale.
Wouldn’t it just be easier to kill everyone in the buildings and airplanes instead? Dead men tell no tales sort of thing?
In the end, the official narrative is obviously total BS. So whether everyone died or it was a full scale exercise it’s still the government(s) behind it. And it was used as a pretext for the Patriot Act and forever war. If the people died or disappeared I don’t think there is a big difference. Either they died unwillingly or willingly bailed on their families for some cash. Either way the government is at war with its citizens.
What you really need for an objection is clear evidence and you don't have any.
There's no coverup, I'm sure the people involved discuss 9/11 among themselves, it just doesn't go to the media in the same way that the Emperor's New Clothes event of 9/11 is discussed as being just that among those unblinded by the propaganda but doesn't make the media. Where's the coverup? It's all right under our noses - it's just people don't recognise it and trying to get alleged "truthers" to see that 9/11 was really a demolition job and glorified exercise rather than an "inside job" per se requires the same Herculean effort as telling the believers of the story that it's nonsense. "Truthers" won't have it, they won't have that the death and injury were staged even though they don't have a skerrick of clear evidence that it wasn't - and the propagandists, of course, predicted this scenario - they understand our inclination to believe this or that, how we change or stay in our beliefs, etc PERFECTLY. The "truthers" have dug their heels in. they are fully anchored in the "evil US government cold-bloodedly and callously killed all those poor people" narrative and they won't be coaxed out of it. All as according to plan.
"Thousands of people agreed to abandon their families?" We don't know exactly who were real people and who weren't, which whole families were in on it and which people may have wanted to simply "abandon" their family. We can only speculate so we shouldn't be making judgements based on speculations - not when we have masses of pieces of evidence to work with.
Easier to kill?
I find it interesting that people often put forward the "easier" argument. In psyops they don't do what's "easier" because whatever they want to do will be done and they will employ people to do it who ultimately are paid by the punters. We pay for the psyop so they don't care what's involved, they make it work however they want it to work.
The thing is, is it easier? We're told that Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) were hired to take away the rubble and the MSM also informed us that a bunch of suspicious dancing Israelis were caught in a roadblock in a white van containing explosives dust. Doncha love it? Yeah, I swallowed it hook, line and sinker initially but why would the MSM be telling us about Israelis and explosives dust to undermine their Islamic terror story? Why would they do that? I'll tell you why. In order to get the anticipated disbelievers of their nonsense story to think that "outsider" Israelis were hired to do the dastardly deed of bringing down the buildings with all those poor people in them. I KNOW that's why they told us because that's exactly what I reasoned and it makes perfect sense. They don't worry that the believers will puzzle over the "suspicious Israelis", they know the believers will simply ignore that part of the story while the disbelievers will latch right onto it and I believe in fact the media came out later and said it was nonsense or words to that effect anyway.
So if it wasn't a bunch of Israelis in a white van who brought the buildings down who was it? You don't think that CDI wasn't involved in the demolitions too, being a demolition company? You don't think that as the WHOLE of the WTC was demolished if not on the day eventually that CDI might have had something to do with that massive demolition, they weren't just involved in the cleanup?
So tell me how it's "easy" to get a demolition company who's proud of their safety record go, "Yep, OK, we normally try to ensure no one is hurt and injured but on 9/11 we'll make an exception for your terror story. We'll leave the buildings only partially evacuated before bringing them down."
The irony. You can propagandise and coerce health professionals to inject people with substances that will injure, maim and kill based on medical and scientific fraudulence dating from Pasteur but you cannot propagandise demolition professionals to only partially evacuate buildings before destroying them. Am I wrong? ... and it wasn't just demolition companies they had to involve, of course. Agency staff were obviously involved including firefighters - those ones who agreed to put their names to the fake testimonies for a start. ... and so many more people.
Quite a bit to chew on here. I'm not certain you are incorrect - it seems possible. It's been a while since I went far down this rabbit hole. Playing Devil's Advocate here, a least a bit.
Cantor Fitzgerald lost nearly all of it's workforce on 9/11, lost either by death or by witness relocation. All told, 658 of their employees disappeared. All 658 were actors? Did the CEO know this? Is he part of team demolition? Marsh, Inc. lost 295 employees. They are also all actors? Was the CEO in on it too? Is it plausible that 1,000 people between these two companies were all actors? In the case of Cantor, that the vast majority of the people on the payroll were actors? Has an evidence been presented, ever, by anyone, that would suggest this is the case?
You say, "'Truthers'" won't have it, they won't have that the death and injury were staged even though they don't have a skerrick of clear evidence that it wasn't". Can you name the logical fallacy here? I find it interesting that you present a pretty common logical fallacy at the beginning of the article and use a different one in the comments. Thou shall not commit logical fallacies.
The demolition part is also interesting. I think the event was a controlled demolition of all 3 buildings. Let's say that is the case. There are only a handful of companies on Earth who could pull a controlled demolition of that scale off. So one of the companies was definitely involved. Let's say it was CDI. If people were killed or if people were relocated, they are still involved in a coverup - no? So either way, they are guilty. Could the people working on the controlled demo be told that no one would be harmed in the demo? Sure. What happens when the job is done and people ARE harmed, are they going to speak out later? That depends on how many times they went to places like Epstein Island. Maybe they got MK Ultra'd after they were finished.
I do still think it's a lot easier to kill 3,000 people than to relocate 3,000 actors. Either way, the mechanics of such an operation involve a cover up. The cover up for killing 3,000 people is much smaller than the cover up including 3,000 actors.
I'm open to the possibility. I still like the post, it's an interesting idea. I do think the topic needs a lot more depth. Are you creating this theory alone? Is there any further reading?
Thanks for interesting subject matter.
There are so many things to really wonder about, CK, and I have to say, I'm like, "How did they pull this or that off? How did they do it?" But I follow the quote from Arthur Conan Doyle:
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
With regard to the companies in the towers - I think we can safely infer they were TOTALLY in on it. The thing is when 9/11 becomes a mere demolition job in the guise of an exercise in the guise of a real terror event everything changes, doesn't it?
There was a site, Let's Roll Forums, which disappeared but you can still find odd pages in archive.org. On this site I remember reading that not long before 9/11 Cantor Fitzgerald fired all their staff on the grounds of economic problems, hired agents to take their place and then after 9/11 rehired the old employees. This is an old Let's Roll Forums page I found on archive.org which tells the story of an alleged CF jumper, Bernard Pietronico, whose body was found a long time later ... that has very little credibility.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190306122859/http://letsrollforums.com/cantor-fitzgerald-jumper-bernard-t26495.html
"Can you name the logical fallacy here? I find it interesting that you present a pretty common logical fallacy at the beginning of the article and use a different one in the comments. Thou shall not commit logical fallacies."
No I can't name the logical fallacy, I like to think I don't fall into them, you'll have to tell me, CK.
"Could the people working on the controlled demo be told that no one would be harmed in the demo? Sure. What happens when the job is done and people ARE harmed, are they going to speak out later? That depends on how many times they went to places like Epstein Island. Maybe they got MK Ultra'd after they were finished."
I find this highly improbable but the point is that there is zero clear evidence of death and injury and loads of PURPORTED evidence that is completely unconvincing. Lots of people were made up, OK, so we're not starting with 3,000 relocated people and some of them would already have died. Right off the bat we KNOW that 265 people did not die in planes, we KNOW that the planes were faked, OK? and we have ZERO evidence of the alleged passengers being killed another way. They could have been but we have no evidence of it.
There is no evidence, CK, of death and injury other than claims and purported evidence that doesn't stack up. That is all there is. There is absolutely nothing compelling about the real death and injury part of the narrative.
There is one thing we have to give the perps. They are scrupulous in undermining their narrative by presenting the clear facts underneath their propaganda. They could have faked the death and injury so much more convincingly ... but they didn't ... they undermined it at every turn. There is nothing that a believer in death and injury can brandish that favours real over fake ... and that being the case there is simply no case for real death and injury outside a few targeted individuals and accidents.
Who is to say that a government that is capable of planning and pulling off such an event did not pre-plan the event years in advance, create companies, staff them with ghost employees that would all later perish (simply have actors or agents play the role of grieving friends and family later), etc. This goes for airline pilots, passengers, Pentagon personnel, police, firefighters, etc.
Is it not possible to train government employees or agents to demolish buildings using explosives? Do only demolition companies have the assets and the ability to do that? Is it beyond reasonable that certain agencies (which are undoubtedly secret) of our government have agents that would participate in such a scheme? How many of us actually know someone who died on 9/11 in the towers, Pentagon, or on any of the planes?
I worked with a guy who said his friend died at the Pentagon.
I have to say I find it very intriguing what happens to these people and how many of their inner circle they tell if a single person. I'm friends with a woman with twin daughters who - amazingly - were each friends with a person in two different psyops - a policewoman allegedly shot in a psyop in Queensland and a person allegedly killed in a bus accident in the Hunter Valley in NSW. OK, it's just me saying these events were psyops [EDIT: actually others also say Qld one was] but they had all the clear hallmarks. In the case of the bus accident psyop I realised only after I thought the NSW accident was a psyop that "bus accident psyops" are a thing and people have pointed out bus accident psyops in Russia, Canada and the US so not so strange that we had one in Australia.
The twins went to the funerals of these people and they are certainly not in on the psyops. Their mother is totally accepting of psyops as a thing but there's no way she would countenance that her daughters were friends with people who agreed to participate in this manner ... but I think it's a simple fact they did. As soon as it gets personal people go, "Oh no, that person wouldn't be in a psyop." It seems way too many people are ready to sell their souls. What I want to know is where do they all disappear to? There's so many of them.
Who said they had a choice? They get rounded up as they leave the house in the morning and sent off to Antartica. Then everybody thinks they died in the collapse.
Probably nobody dies in these psyops otherwise it would be hard to recruit crisis actors and to maintain the organizations behind them. Crisis acting many people would be willing to do, especially if they be 'true believers' in the cause (i.e. gun control), but murdering is where too any would draw the line.
"Probably nobody dies in these psyops otherwise it would be hard to recruit crisis actors and to maintain the organizations behind them."
Precisely.
"Who said they had a choice? They get rounded up as they leave the house in the morning and sent off to Antartica. Then everybody thinks they died in the collapse."
LOL. I doubt that happened to anyone but who knows? I'd say there's a wide variety of the people involved, including people wanting let off crimes and those who just want to disappear from their families. A comment on my article about the Manchester bombing.
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/manchester-bombing.html
"I have a cousin who lives in Greater Manchester and an ex-colleague of his reckoned his son was at the event. However, 1. his son was seen at a pub at the same time the explosion went off, wearing an Iron Maiden t-shirt, yeah, metal fans love that r'n'b love, miles away from the event, 2. the police drop'd their case against him shortly afterwards for fraud, 3. his dad got a new car (SUV), which he couldn't afford previously being on minimum wage."
Look The United States is a bottomless cesspool of lies. Until these lies are acknowledged and all involved are outed and prosecuted then America will NEVER EVER be the kind of country we originally signed up for. I however believe it will never happen. We will fall and all those who continue to lie will be served their just desserts in hell not in this world.
The whole world has been infected unfortunately.
Dalrymple's 'a society of emasculated liars is easy to control' is, of course, any tyrant's wet dream. it can only happen with more or less sophisticated indoctrination tools and technology, i.e. (mass) media, postmodernist art and television/computer/iPhone screens. yet here we are, so many of us still able to understand and point out the flaws in the narrative. kudos for your work!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives, door no 2 – thermite, door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to. https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/
9/11 The Plane / No Plane debate settled.
Most probably the best distraction of WHAT happened on September 11, 2001
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-the-plane-no-plane-argument
A LOT of people have woken up to the truth that the Towers were mostly turned to dust before hitting the ground on September 11, 2001.
They have also realised that they should count past three and that the 9/11 orphans, WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 as well as the anomaly with the Bankers Trust building, blows the distraction narratives of jet fuel, explosives, thermite or nukes out of the water...
So, now what?
What to do with this information that has rocked your world?
Read: https://911revision.substack.com/p/ive-woken-up-to-dustification-on
400+ video's organised under various playlists covering all the talking points regarding 9/11
Link: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7
It's set up as a learning hub for someone like you...
Highly recommended watching;
1. 2012 Presentation: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/911---Dr.-Judy-Wood-Evidence-of-Breakthrough-Energy-on-911-B---full-2h-seminar:4
2. 9/11 Observable Evidence series: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/9-11-Deprogramming-series:6
3. 9/11 Alchemy Series: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/9-11-Alchemy-Series:d
4. 9/11 & Muddling up the search for truth: https://odysee.com/@911revisited:7/9-11-Gatekeepers:a
You're welcome...
Thanks.
Would anyone agree of their free will to participate in a terror exercise if they are aware that they will have to live under a fake identity afterwards? Would they have been threatened into agreeing?
I'm sure there's a wide variety of reasons but I doubt that coercion would be needed as people will be offered incentives they value such as money and also some would absolutely love to disappear for various reasons I'm sure. But in certain cases perhaps coercion is used - who knows?
Professor Gloria Moss has written a wonderful article about the Great Fire of London in 1666 showing it was a psyop too and we can see lots of parallels and connections to 9/11.
https://off-guardian.org/2019/09/01/the-great-fire-of-london-cui-bono/
You know the funny thing? Only a few people allegedly died in the fire but I wondered if those deaths were also staged. There was a story about the family of the owner of the bakery where the fire allegedly started, William Farriner (who was put under a little suspicion - just one of the many typical threads of propaganda pushed out to confuse and mislead because he was surely in on it) escaping narrowly from the fire over the rooftops but, we're told, the maid baulked with fright and perished. I'm like, "Oh yeah, really?" Sounds like a story.
We're also told that a famous playwright whose work is still in print, James Shirley, and his wife both died on the same day a month after the fire in a refugee camp set up for those who lost their homes due to "fright and exposure". I wondered about that. He and his wife died on exactly the same day and despite connections with the king they were left to languish in poor conditions? So I puzzled. Did he perhaps owe money? You'll never believe it. I looked up his work and found he'd written a play, The Gamester.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gamester
"The play is noteworthy for its realistic and detailed picture of gambling in its era."
Doncha love it?
Very interesting, you are a detective indeed!
Yes there could be three options for what happened on 9/11. In my opinion it was for a goal of surveillance and control of the population via legislation like the patriot act and second to emotionally charge the people so they accept a war in the Middle East. But who’s to say there wasn’t another reason to collapse the twin towers, more important to the perpetrators than war and control? And if there are three possible explanations of 9/11 maybe there is a fourth? Or 5th? What is a given is 9/11 changed the world. I believe it was related to RFK murder and more. Someday if the truth ever surfaces.....
Three buildings collapse at free fall speed, obvious as day explosives were placed in the buildings, controlled demolition, and still the apologists for the empire gossip about who said what when never asking who placed the explosives in the towers. Shying away from the hard questions doesn’t reflect well on one’s character, but that’s okay if that’s okay with you. Best.
Good stuff - I'm subscribing... :)
I look at this way, the digital analysis: 1) the official story is true, or 2) the official story is false. At that level of analysis there are no other choices.
As it is 22 years old now, and years of discovery of facts and evidence, the only logical possibility is that the official story is false. All facts and evidence contradict the official story, sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The Official Conspiracy Theory is invalid.
Analysis from this point on must recognize that fact. Other theories may certainly be advanced, but they must comport with the facts .
Yes but how much of the official story is false? We know the buildings didn't come down for the reasons stated and many of us recognise the alleged passenger airliners didnt crash but what else is false? I'm not sure why you're so unwilling to click a link and take a look at a new way of viewing the events of 9/11. I GUARANTEE that you believe part of the story to be true ... which the evidence shows is, in fact, false ... and the reason you think it's true is due to the propaganda campaign targeted to the anticipated disbelievers. If you're not willing to take a look, so be it.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/911-the-false-dilemma-propaganda
No element of the official story is true. I divide into 2 broad categories--the structural engineering part at WTC, and the aviation part there and elsewhere. I did click on your link, and while your points and questions are good, but 22 years later they are mostly irrelevant. There WERE a few play actors involved, but the people inside the towers were not play actors. As to the actual numbers of dead, you might be right, but today that is irrelevant.
We can continue the conversation, but in the meantime you should read the book The Woman Who Wasn’t There by Robin Gaby Fisher. Published by Simon & Schuster in 2012 it is the story of Tania Head.
Because I am in aviation, I and other aviators can only laugh at the absurdity of the aeronautical claims of the official narrative. A&E For 911 Truth and common sense show the absurdity of that part of the official narrative.
When demolition companies demolish buildings they evacuate them first right? Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) - who we're told took away the rubble - are proud of their safety record. Regardless of whether they had a hand in bringing the buildings down (though I think it's a pretty safe bet they did, don't you?) or not they certainly KNEW how they came down. So how do you think CDI was persuaded to participate in or be an abetter in the destruction of only partially evacuated buildings? The perps only wanted us to BELIEVE their terror story they didn't want it for real.
Whether CDI and the Loizeaux brothers were players or not, I don't know. That too is ultimately irrelevant. The perpetrators of this event were agents of evil, so they do not care about killing people.
Your last sentence is silly. Neither you nor I are privy to the exact motives of the perps, to exactly what they wanted. You and I can only judge the facts and evidence and speculate about motives.
They told us that CDI were players in that they cleaned up the rubble and - as I say - they would have known that the buildings came down by CD even if they weren't involved in that endeavour. So either way they participated - they aided and abetted. I'm not sure how you think the orchestrators got all the people who were obviously in on it - the media, the demolition professionals, etc to just go OK, "Yeah, OK we'll be in on the murder of our fellow citizens in those buildings for your terror story." It is so beyond nonsensical.
I'll readily admit that I find it shocking that they have been committing wholesale slaughter with the jab and all the other measures during lockdowns, etc, that does shock me ... but I can see how they do it on the back of over a century of fraudulent science ... but there's no way to fit into reality having demolition professionals and all the others involved in leaving people to die in buildings when there was absolutely no necessity for it in terms of their terror story. They didn't need people to die in planes - they faked their deaths - so what a priori says they didn't do the same for the buildings people? It just makes no sense.
And we have evidence that they didn't kill them from all angles. The lack of injured in the hospitals, the nonsensicalities of the firefighter testimonies which completely undermines their reality. It just goes on and on. And we have truther-targeted propaganda encouraging them to maintain their belief in real death and injury. I'm really not sure how much evidence you want and why you cannot blow away the magic propaganda dust to see what's underneath.
I'm guessing I'm much older than you--I will be 76 next month. Because of that I'm more jaded and cynical than you, and I did my time in the US Army, so I understand fully the meaning and implications of "inside job".
Having 'lost my religion' decades ago, I cannot help but see this event and the Plandemic as being manifestations of the Good v. Evil dynamics as described in the Bible.
In addition to reading the book about Tania Head, you should also seek out the writings of Christopher Bollyn. IMO his perspective is unique as he is married to an Israeli woman. His investigation of the events of the day and the following times is excellent.