Thank you, Petra, for giving some publicity to the late Gerard Holmgren. An original thinker who was very good at seeing through BS.
Let me add a link to 911 Closeup, which, as I'm sure you know, was Gerard's original site. The original webpage is long gone, but a copy of it is available all in one place at the web archive, in case anyone want to explore it.
Thanks so much for the link, Tim. I've added it to the list and may delete a couple of the other links as I can see they refer to pages that are on that site that have been captured as images by Steve De'ak. I'll just figure out what's best. Actually, I didn't know that was his site so I'm glad you let me know and that it's still there intact in an archive - no doubt the perps want to keep a record of the history of 9/11 Truth ... just as we do :)
It would have galled him so much that a tribute was paid to him headed by controlled opposition agents extraordinaire, Jim Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds. I think he may have wasted a little of his breath on arguing with agents and should have just called them out instead ... but perhaps back then he wasn't familiar with that phenomenon [EDIT 11/09: Reading pages on his site he clearly was]. I have to say it sometimes is a little difficult to determine who are the paid agents and who are the so-called "useful idiots." Oh my goodness, do useful idiots abound. I had a lot of advantages coming to 9/11 Truth late I think as "controlled opposition" was very well recognised by the time I got there.
❝For conspiracy theorist Steven Lightfoot, however, there was more to the case than just King’s chunky prescription sunglasses. He argued that Raegan and Nixon wanted Lennon dead because of his anti-war stance. I suppose that’s possible, but the chances of them hiring an unknown writer with poor eyesight and bad posture to carry out the assassination are pretty thin. I mean, come on, hiring a writer to murder a political enemy is like hiring Julio Santana to write Harry Potter fan fiction.
So yeah, as conspiracy theories go, this one is pretty puny. If King had murdered John Lennon, I doubt he would have so readily referenced his lyrics in The Shining, the title of which is supposed to have been inspired by Lennon’s single ‘Instant Karma’, which includes the line “we all shine on”.
Unless, of course, King was trying to imply that Lennon’s soul was trapped in the ghoul-infested hotel. Oh my God, it all makes sense. You’ll have to excuse me, I’ve got a manuscript to write.❞
I have to admit I'm a bit lost in space on it all now, I was in the nanothermite camp, but now knowing that James Corbett is cozy with AE911 Gage I'm weak kneed. The planes and CG story seems robust though.
I'm set on the false flag nature of demolition-insurance payment (was Silverstein's insurance co in on it?)-war, but could DEW be used in the pulverization demolition? The vid I sent you with bldg 7 furiously and strangely smoking from one side is hard for me to figure out. Best for me to admit being lost than choose a faulty narrative so fast. I have to admit I'm not a 9.11 expert and hope you guys can work it out for us!
Have you watched Simon Shack's September Clues and/or Olga and Slava Klimova's 9/11 Fraud and Terror Agenda which uses some material from Sep Clues?
Simon Shack's theory is that they didn't even show us the real demolitions of the buildings. I think that theory may well apply to the twin towers but they showcased WTC-7 from seven vantage points and I really think that looks like the real deal ... but not entirely sure. Doesn't really matter though. Weren't you the one who said the buildings was just like "bioweapon" stuff and it was really about the planes?
All the smoke coming out of WTC-7 could easily simply be the typical fake smoke they use in so very many of their ops, eg, Mogadishu 1993 (Black Hawk Down - they always make movies out of their ops)
Smoke? Yeah, smoke'n'mirrors smoke. Placing any importance on smoke is just ludicrous. Whoever that woman is talking about WTC-7 smoke I would strongly suspect is a controlled opposition agent pushing one of their innumerable red-herring BS stories.
I highly recommend the 1-hour film by Olga and Slava Klimova. It's the best one-hour you'll spend on a 9/11 video.
Yes I saw Shack and it feels right to me. The DEW guy shows that really few tower pieces fell, all pulverized. I hear your opinion clearly. Both you and the DEW guy seem easy to talk to, you can write him directly and sus it out because I don't have the depth you guys do.
Seriously, I have no depth but what I have is a basic understanding of how psyops work and I don't think others do; even when they know the principles in theory they don't really seem to take them to heart. Now you're probably going to tell me that you don't believe in the moon landings. They are one thing I do believe and I really believe so very little these days, eg, I don't believe in that earthquake in Morocco that supposedly just happened, but I believe in the moon landings and I think if you don't believe them then you don't get psyops because the moon landings show no signs of being a psyop. However, let's just say they decided to fake the moon landings but not use the usual psyop MO - why hasn't any disbeliever called attention to that? Why doesn't a SINGLE disbeliever say, "They didn't use the psyop MO for the moon landings but we know they were faked nevertheless for reasons X, Y and Z." They don't look at events through the psyop lens as I do. I always look for the signs of psyop ... and if I don't see them I think, "OK, real," and if I see them I think, "OK fake." It's just so simple.
With regard to demolition, there is simply no reason for them not to use the tried and true methods ... and what they love doing is having people chasing their tails and arguing over absolute nonsense ... as you yourself pointed out, PM!
I understand your logic. I just have to admit I havn't done a deep dive on a lot of topics as I have other priorities, moon landing is one, and I'm still learning psy-op science but getting better. 9.11 is full of data and measurements that should lead to truths, but it seems to me they hide or obfuscate the real data. So if possible I want to use real data to evaluate things-the no virus is easy because they have papers you can read and debunk. Still growing!
I found this remembrance/tribute site where people who knew Gerard posted messages. There are also some videos of him playing the blues. He was a good guitarist and seems to have been a very down-to-earth bloke.
One person,Peter, wrote: "Gerard started teaching me guitar this year. I learned so quickly off him, he gave me such confidence to keep playing and didn't laugh or ridicule, at me being a newbie, a true teacher. So sad to see him get ill so quickly and pass, I believe I must have only spoken to him a week or so before he died. I am buddhist. I hope his next rebirth is a light and happy one. Peace Gerard and to his family and friends Peter"
Fabulous, Tim, thank you so much. I knew I'd seen a tribute site to him but it didn't show up ... that's google for you and serves me right for using it. Yes, certainly people really appreciated him for a number of his qualities. I took some photos from it and made a little frieze at the top of the post and have put links to his site and tribute page at the top (as well as at the bottom).
On 9/11, most of us saw war the perps meant us to see. It wasn't until 2004 that I was alerted to the story being not as it seemed, after which I became an avid "truther" for about five years, after which my enthusiasm waned.
Ever since I read and heard Gerard Holmgren explaining why they didn't use planes , I've considered "no planes" to be the most reasonable explanation. But this put me at odds with more conventional conspiracy theorists, who claimed no planes was a distraction and a ruse to make everyone who questions the official narrative look stupid.
Interestingly, the link I gave you doesn't appear on my Google search. I found it through Yandex. So it is being actively buried, which means somebody doesn't want too many people reading it.
And when you read what's on the site, you'll find that he's said some unflattering things about both Jim Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds.He labels both of them plagiarists and worse. On reading it today, my impression is he thought they were both frauds but Fetzer was the worse offender.
I also remember reading something Reynolds wrote before Holmgren died about Reynolds having invited Holmgren to a conference in the US and Holmgren declining to get involved despite Reynolds' encouragement. So I think we can conclude that he didn't like the smell of the organized 9/11 truth movement.
Given that Holmgren died so young, and so quickly, while Fetzer and Reynolds are both still with us, my intuition tells me that he may have been gotten rid of. Although I have no evidence to back up that hunch.
I don't know much else about Gerard Holmgren apart from that he was a musician and that he has a more famous brother David, who was one of the originators of the permaculture concept. Interesting, David has a Wikipedia entry, but Gerard is not mentioned in it. So again,I conclude that somebody doesn't want too many people knowing about Gerard.
When you realise how psyops work (it took me about 6 years after my first awakening in 2014) no planes is a total no-brainer.
1. Propaganda works better the less it corresponds with reality.
2. They didn't want planes they only wanted us to believe in them.
3. Real planes wouldn't have worked for their narrative.
4. They make it obvious (as they always do) that they didn't use real planes.
There is absolutely no reason on God's earth why they would have used real planes - it would be against every tenet of psyop MO and would make zero sense.
9/11 is 100% infested with controlled opposition agents and those who are "genuine" have been completely taken in by them. You cannot get through to them. I find it sad to see recently-departed scholar Graeme MacQueen with his arm around controlled opposition agent Ted Walter in the upcoming propaganda film, Peace, War and 9/11 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt28757454/. Grrrrrr! Graeme was completely corralled into combing through the 118 firefighter "oral histories" to find all the oh-so-incriminating references to explosions and similar. Oh my goodness! Explosions! But the explosions etc are just red herrings.
The most important things about the "oral testimonies" are:
--- there is zero orality about them - where are the recordings? What were the transcripts based on if not recordings?
--- they are full of nonsensicalities, eg, a route to the WTC (located at the southern tip of Manhattan) from a firestations on the Upper East Side via Second Ave, Houston and West Side Hwy when the east side FDR Dr would be much more convenient and there is no southbound turn from Houston. See https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/nonsensicalities-in-the-911-firefighter
--- there is zero reference to any of the alleged deaths of 343 of the firefighters' colleagues
The "oral histories" are complete fakes! Graeme was also completely on the wrong track with the alleged Post 9/11 Anthrax Attacks. They were complete fakes too.
Thank you, Petra, for giving some publicity to the late Gerard Holmgren. An original thinker who was very good at seeing through BS.
Let me add a link to 911 Closeup, which, as I'm sure you know, was Gerard's original site. The original webpage is long gone, but a copy of it is available all in one place at the web archive, in case anyone want to explore it.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090309212103/http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml
Thanks so much for the link, Tim. I've added it to the list and may delete a couple of the other links as I can see they refer to pages that are on that site that have been captured as images by Steve De'ak. I'll just figure out what's best. Actually, I didn't know that was his site so I'm glad you let me know and that it's still there intact in an archive - no doubt the perps want to keep a record of the history of 9/11 Truth ... just as we do :)
It would have galled him so much that a tribute was paid to him headed by controlled opposition agents extraordinaire, Jim Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds. I think he may have wasted a little of his breath on arguing with agents and should have just called them out instead ... but perhaps back then he wasn't familiar with that phenomenon [EDIT 11/09: Reading pages on his site he clearly was]. I have to say it sometimes is a little difficult to determine who are the paid agents and who are the so-called "useful idiots." Oh my goodness, do useful idiots abound. I had a lot of advantages coming to 9/11 Truth late I think as "controlled opposition" was very well recognised by the time I got there.
What is the matter with you people? Everyone knows Steven King killed John Lennon . . . you need to see Lightfoot's van in California . . . https://lennonmurdertruth.com/stephen-king-murderer/
. . . OMFG . . .
❝For conspiracy theorist Steven Lightfoot, however, there was more to the case than just King’s chunky prescription sunglasses. He argued that Raegan and Nixon wanted Lennon dead because of his anti-war stance. I suppose that’s possible, but the chances of them hiring an unknown writer with poor eyesight and bad posture to carry out the assassination are pretty thin. I mean, come on, hiring a writer to murder a political enemy is like hiring Julio Santana to write Harry Potter fan fiction.
So yeah, as conspiracy theories go, this one is pretty puny. If King had murdered John Lennon, I doubt he would have so readily referenced his lyrics in The Shining, the title of which is supposed to have been inspired by Lennon’s single ‘Instant Karma’, which includes the line “we all shine on”.
Unless, of course, King was trying to imply that Lennon’s soul was trapped in the ghoul-infested hotel. Oh my God, it all makes sense. You’ll have to excuse me, I’ve got a manuscript to write.❞
https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/conspiracy-theory-stephen-king-killed-john-lennon/
They, of course, will never mention the possibility that Lennon faked his death.
"Fruit cakes in a fruit loop", great info.
Just FYI and just out today:
https://911revision.substack.com/p/building-7-the-real-truth-cut
Absolutely love the "fruit loop" theme.
Re 9/11Revision: Please don't tell me, PM, you think this is anything other than horseshit.
I have to admit I'm a bit lost in space on it all now, I was in the nanothermite camp, but now knowing that James Corbett is cozy with AE911 Gage I'm weak kneed. The planes and CG story seems robust though.
I'm set on the false flag nature of demolition-insurance payment (was Silverstein's insurance co in on it?)-war, but could DEW be used in the pulverization demolition? The vid I sent you with bldg 7 furiously and strangely smoking from one side is hard for me to figure out. Best for me to admit being lost than choose a faulty narrative so fast. I have to admit I'm not a 9.11 expert and hope you guys can work it out for us!
Have you watched Simon Shack's September Clues and/or Olga and Slava Klimova's 9/11 Fraud and Terror Agenda which uses some material from Sep Clues?
Simon Shack's theory is that they didn't even show us the real demolitions of the buildings. I think that theory may well apply to the twin towers but they showcased WTC-7 from seven vantage points and I really think that looks like the real deal ... but not entirely sure. Doesn't really matter though. Weren't you the one who said the buildings was just like "bioweapon" stuff and it was really about the planes?
All the smoke coming out of WTC-7 could easily simply be the typical fake smoke they use in so very many of their ops, eg, Mogadishu 1993 (Black Hawk Down - they always make movies out of their ops)
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/battle-of-mogadishu-1993.html
Smoke? Yeah, smoke'n'mirrors smoke. Placing any importance on smoke is just ludicrous. Whoever that woman is talking about WTC-7 smoke I would strongly suspect is a controlled opposition agent pushing one of their innumerable red-herring BS stories.
I highly recommend the 1-hour film by Olga and Slava Klimova. It's the best one-hour you'll spend on a 9/11 video.
https://archive.org/details/911FraudAndTerrorAgendaEarthlyFireFlies.org
Yes I saw Shack and it feels right to me. The DEW guy shows that really few tower pieces fell, all pulverized. I hear your opinion clearly. Both you and the DEW guy seem easy to talk to, you can write him directly and sus it out because I don't have the depth you guys do.
Seriously, I have no depth but what I have is a basic understanding of how psyops work and I don't think others do; even when they know the principles in theory they don't really seem to take them to heart. Now you're probably going to tell me that you don't believe in the moon landings. They are one thing I do believe and I really believe so very little these days, eg, I don't believe in that earthquake in Morocco that supposedly just happened, but I believe in the moon landings and I think if you don't believe them then you don't get psyops because the moon landings show no signs of being a psyop. However, let's just say they decided to fake the moon landings but not use the usual psyop MO - why hasn't any disbeliever called attention to that? Why doesn't a SINGLE disbeliever say, "They didn't use the psyop MO for the moon landings but we know they were faked nevertheless for reasons X, Y and Z." They don't look at events through the psyop lens as I do. I always look for the signs of psyop ... and if I don't see them I think, "OK, real," and if I see them I think, "OK fake." It's just so simple.
With regard to demolition, there is simply no reason for them not to use the tried and true methods ... and what they love doing is having people chasing their tails and arguing over absolute nonsense ... as you yourself pointed out, PM!
I understand your logic. I just have to admit I havn't done a deep dive on a lot of topics as I have other priorities, moon landing is one, and I'm still learning psy-op science but getting better. 9.11 is full of data and measurements that should lead to truths, but it seems to me they hide or obfuscate the real data. So if possible I want to use real data to evaluate things-the no virus is easy because they have papers you can read and debunk. Still growing!
I found this remembrance/tribute site where people who knew Gerard posted messages. There are also some videos of him playing the blues. He was a good guitarist and seems to have been a very down-to-earth bloke.
One person,Peter, wrote: "Gerard started teaching me guitar this year. I learned so quickly off him, he gave me such confidence to keep playing and didn't laugh or ridicule, at me being a newbie, a true teacher. So sad to see him get ill so quickly and pass, I believe I must have only spoken to him a week or so before he died. I am buddhist. I hope his next rebirth is a light and happy one. Peace Gerard and to his family and friends Peter"
https://respectance.com/tribute/gerard-holmgren
Fabulous, Tim, thank you so much. I knew I'd seen a tribute site to him but it didn't show up ... that's google for you and serves me right for using it. Yes, certainly people really appreciated him for a number of his qualities. I took some photos from it and made a little frieze at the top of the post and have put links to his site and tribute page at the top (as well as at the bottom).
On 9/11, most of us saw war the perps meant us to see. It wasn't until 2004 that I was alerted to the story being not as it seemed, after which I became an avid "truther" for about five years, after which my enthusiasm waned.
Ever since I read and heard Gerard Holmgren explaining why they didn't use planes , I've considered "no planes" to be the most reasonable explanation. But this put me at odds with more conventional conspiracy theorists, who claimed no planes was a distraction and a ruse to make everyone who questions the official narrative look stupid.
Interestingly, the link I gave you doesn't appear on my Google search. I found it through Yandex. So it is being actively buried, which means somebody doesn't want too many people reading it.
And when you read what's on the site, you'll find that he's said some unflattering things about both Jim Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds.He labels both of them plagiarists and worse. On reading it today, my impression is he thought they were both frauds but Fetzer was the worse offender.
I also remember reading something Reynolds wrote before Holmgren died about Reynolds having invited Holmgren to a conference in the US and Holmgren declining to get involved despite Reynolds' encouragement. So I think we can conclude that he didn't like the smell of the organized 9/11 truth movement.
Given that Holmgren died so young, and so quickly, while Fetzer and Reynolds are both still with us, my intuition tells me that he may have been gotten rid of. Although I have no evidence to back up that hunch.
I don't know much else about Gerard Holmgren apart from that he was a musician and that he has a more famous brother David, who was one of the originators of the permaculture concept. Interesting, David has a Wikipedia entry, but Gerard is not mentioned in it. So again,I conclude that somebody doesn't want too many people knowing about Gerard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Holmgren
When you realise how psyops work (it took me about 6 years after my first awakening in 2014) no planes is a total no-brainer.
1. Propaganda works better the less it corresponds with reality.
2. They didn't want planes they only wanted us to believe in them.
3. Real planes wouldn't have worked for their narrative.
4. They make it obvious (as they always do) that they didn't use real planes.
There is absolutely no reason on God's earth why they would have used real planes - it would be against every tenet of psyop MO and would make zero sense.
9/11 is 100% infested with controlled opposition agents and those who are "genuine" have been completely taken in by them. You cannot get through to them. I find it sad to see recently-departed scholar Graeme MacQueen with his arm around controlled opposition agent Ted Walter in the upcoming propaganda film, Peace, War and 9/11 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt28757454/. Grrrrrr! Graeme was completely corralled into combing through the 118 firefighter "oral histories" to find all the oh-so-incriminating references to explosions and similar. Oh my goodness! Explosions! But the explosions etc are just red herrings.
The most important things about the "oral testimonies" are:
--- there is zero orality about them - where are the recordings? What were the transcripts based on if not recordings?
--- they are full of nonsensicalities, eg, a route to the WTC (located at the southern tip of Manhattan) from a firestations on the Upper East Side via Second Ave, Houston and West Side Hwy when the east side FDR Dr would be much more convenient and there is no southbound turn from Houston. See https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/nonsensicalities-in-the-911-firefighter
--- there is zero reference to any of the alleged deaths of 343 of the firefighters' colleagues
The "oral histories" are complete fakes! Graeme was also completely on the wrong track with the alleged Post 9/11 Anthrax Attacks. They were complete fakes too.
And these people have the audacity to call us "tin foil hatters". If that isn't proof that they're the crazy ones, I don't know what is.