Dachsie
11th June 2014, 07:33 AM
I am going to just use this thread to post some miscellaneous things I am picking up here and there about 9-11. I was from 9-11-01 a person who knew that it was a false event. I read every book, every article, watched every video, and participated in numerous discussion forums. I demonstrated on the streets every Saturday for one full year. (I had started looking in to the false nature of what we have always been told about history and events, etc. in about 1998 and I knew about the sinking of the Maine, the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor and other major false flag events so I had no trouble accepting 9-11 as false event from day 1.)
Anyway, I am still interested in 9-11 but I see that Dr. James Fetzer and others have moved on to other false flag events, and there sure are plenty of them grabbing our attention these days.
Also I think people are somewhat burned out by 9-11 discussions which never seemed to have led anywhere. The discussions and arguments still are going in the same old circles.
9-11 is very important as it provides a key to understanding the patterns and common characteristics of all latter-day false flag events. I think 9-11 had features that false flag events before that did not have. I guess the main big change in the environment for 9-11 and later events was the role of the media and the flourishing of the Internet with many well-done websites and discussion forums and YouTube (mainly) videos. Also, it was clear that from the beginning the 9-11 truth "movement" was highly controlled and manipulated from the very beginning. It all brought "controlled opposition" groups and people into a new very sophisticated format.
___________
Anyway, here are a couple of things I picked up today, June 11 2014, from Rense.com. It is kind of odd that Rense posted these two quite old 9-11 articles, both from MyCatBirdSeat site today. I have not thoroughly evaluated that site, but there is something not right about it. In other words, I think it may be some kind of agenda site or disinfo site.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/07/demystifying-911-israel-and-the-tactics-of-mistake/
Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake — Alan Sabrosky
Alan Sabrosky July 18, 2012
Now this Jewish man is saying 9-11 was done by Israel and the Mossad.
But what is odd is that he makes this statement.
Here is the crucial passage from the article.
"What is not open to debate, however, is that WTC-7 — the third tower to collapse that day, and the only one not hit by a plane — absolutely was brought down by a controlled demolition, as anyone not trying to shield the attackers knows from a real-time video of its collapse. That is, WTC-7 went straight down into its own footprint in seconds without any visible catastrophic external trauma, which means only some catastrophic internal trauma could have brought it down. And if it had been wired for a controlled demolition, then so were the other towers (WTC-1 and WTC-2) that collapsed. That gives the plane impacts a gruesome cosmetic role, designed explicitly to conceal the true cause of the collapse of the buildings, while shocking the public into something akin to numbness."
So Dr. Sabrosky claims, rather illogically or unscientifically I would say, that the if WTC Building 7 had been wired for and destroyed by a conventional controlled demolition, then the Twin Towers were destroyed by the exact same method. Dr. Sabrosky applies the word "collapsed" to all three buildings.
"That gives the plane impacts a gruesome cosmetic role"
Now that is a good observation in one way. The "planes" played a cosmetic role, that is, they were just covering up. They had nothing whatsoever to do with what effected the destruction of the Towers. But Dr. Sabrosky seems to take for granted the actual use of some kind of "planes" and that those "planes" made "impacts." That is another example of false reasoning that seems to support the "real planes" idea, and that idea, though an idea lying in ruins now, is the idea that Dr. Steven Jones and the nanothermite gang wanted to hold on to for dear old life for several years. Maybe Dr. Sabrosky is subtly still holding on to real planes and real impacts for the purposes of supporting Dr. Steven Jones / nanothermite idea too.
The controlled demolition for all three buildings could very well include the planting of nanothermite along with the wiring of all three buildings and again, that is how the now popular controlled demolition for all three buildings supports and upholds the faded nanothermite / Steven Jones theory.
Somehow the Steven Jones / nanothermite meme is subtly still being followed as a part of "the script." I seriously doubt Dr. Steven Jones' script and that is why I have serious questions about Dr. Alan Sabrosky's script and think that it may not be about the truth at all but only be about supporting the official story of the current 9-11 truth "movement."
Dr. Steven Jones is establishment all the way. He is an agent in my opinion and has never been about the truth. I do not care if nanothermite was found in the dust. So were a lot of other important things found that he concealed or just most unscientifically "forgot" to mention in all his so-called peer reviewed studies on 9-11 WTC dust.
______
So Dr. Sabrosky is basically pushing the planted / wired explosives controlled demolition theory for all three buildings, even though the "evidence" we have, of various kinds, indicate that Building 7 appeared to be a controlled demolition but the Twin Towers appeared very very different in how they were destroyed. Yes, it is possible all three buildings were destroyed by the same method, but the appearances were so very different that it seems very weak reasoning to just automatically say the Twin Towers had to have been destroyed by wiring and conventional controlled demolition, IF controlled demolition was indeed the method used on Building 7.
______________
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2013/08/was-911-an-inside-job-or-a-mossad-job/
Was 9/11 an Inside Job, or a Mossad Job?”
Laurent Guyenot August 20, 2013
I will have to go over this article more, but it purports to tell us the truth about the Mossad's role in 9-11. So far, all such efforts have not been good efforts. They have failed. So I will just have to see if a better job is done here of showing firm connections between the Mossad and the plotter and planners of 9-11.
________
Of course, both articles contain much truth, but the overall agenda or pattern that may exist in these two old articles from the same website posted oddly today, 6-11-14, on Rense.com, is something that seems to be presenting itself to me, and that means they are not about truth, but about agendas.
Anyway, I am still interested in 9-11 but I see that Dr. James Fetzer and others have moved on to other false flag events, and there sure are plenty of them grabbing our attention these days.
Also I think people are somewhat burned out by 9-11 discussions which never seemed to have led anywhere. The discussions and arguments still are going in the same old circles.
9-11 is very important as it provides a key to understanding the patterns and common characteristics of all latter-day false flag events. I think 9-11 had features that false flag events before that did not have. I guess the main big change in the environment for 9-11 and later events was the role of the media and the flourishing of the Internet with many well-done websites and discussion forums and YouTube (mainly) videos. Also, it was clear that from the beginning the 9-11 truth "movement" was highly controlled and manipulated from the very beginning. It all brought "controlled opposition" groups and people into a new very sophisticated format.
___________
Anyway, here are a couple of things I picked up today, June 11 2014, from Rense.com. It is kind of odd that Rense posted these two quite old 9-11 articles, both from MyCatBirdSeat site today. I have not thoroughly evaluated that site, but there is something not right about it. In other words, I think it may be some kind of agenda site or disinfo site.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/07/demystifying-911-israel-and-the-tactics-of-mistake/
Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake — Alan Sabrosky
Alan Sabrosky July 18, 2012
Now this Jewish man is saying 9-11 was done by Israel and the Mossad.
But what is odd is that he makes this statement.
Here is the crucial passage from the article.
"What is not open to debate, however, is that WTC-7 — the third tower to collapse that day, and the only one not hit by a plane — absolutely was brought down by a controlled demolition, as anyone not trying to shield the attackers knows from a real-time video of its collapse. That is, WTC-7 went straight down into its own footprint in seconds without any visible catastrophic external trauma, which means only some catastrophic internal trauma could have brought it down. And if it had been wired for a controlled demolition, then so were the other towers (WTC-1 and WTC-2) that collapsed. That gives the plane impacts a gruesome cosmetic role, designed explicitly to conceal the true cause of the collapse of the buildings, while shocking the public into something akin to numbness."
So Dr. Sabrosky claims, rather illogically or unscientifically I would say, that the if WTC Building 7 had been wired for and destroyed by a conventional controlled demolition, then the Twin Towers were destroyed by the exact same method. Dr. Sabrosky applies the word "collapsed" to all three buildings.
"That gives the plane impacts a gruesome cosmetic role"
Now that is a good observation in one way. The "planes" played a cosmetic role, that is, they were just covering up. They had nothing whatsoever to do with what effected the destruction of the Towers. But Dr. Sabrosky seems to take for granted the actual use of some kind of "planes" and that those "planes" made "impacts." That is another example of false reasoning that seems to support the "real planes" idea, and that idea, though an idea lying in ruins now, is the idea that Dr. Steven Jones and the nanothermite gang wanted to hold on to for dear old life for several years. Maybe Dr. Sabrosky is subtly still holding on to real planes and real impacts for the purposes of supporting Dr. Steven Jones / nanothermite idea too.
The controlled demolition for all three buildings could very well include the planting of nanothermite along with the wiring of all three buildings and again, that is how the now popular controlled demolition for all three buildings supports and upholds the faded nanothermite / Steven Jones theory.
Somehow the Steven Jones / nanothermite meme is subtly still being followed as a part of "the script." I seriously doubt Dr. Steven Jones' script and that is why I have serious questions about Dr. Alan Sabrosky's script and think that it may not be about the truth at all but only be about supporting the official story of the current 9-11 truth "movement."
Dr. Steven Jones is establishment all the way. He is an agent in my opinion and has never been about the truth. I do not care if nanothermite was found in the dust. So were a lot of other important things found that he concealed or just most unscientifically "forgot" to mention in all his so-called peer reviewed studies on 9-11 WTC dust.
______
So Dr. Sabrosky is basically pushing the planted / wired explosives controlled demolition theory for all three buildings, even though the "evidence" we have, of various kinds, indicate that Building 7 appeared to be a controlled demolition but the Twin Towers appeared very very different in how they were destroyed. Yes, it is possible all three buildings were destroyed by the same method, but the appearances were so very different that it seems very weak reasoning to just automatically say the Twin Towers had to have been destroyed by wiring and conventional controlled demolition, IF controlled demolition was indeed the method used on Building 7.
______________
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2013/08/was-911-an-inside-job-or-a-mossad-job/
Was 9/11 an Inside Job, or a Mossad Job?”
Laurent Guyenot August 20, 2013
I will have to go over this article more, but it purports to tell us the truth about the Mossad's role in 9-11. So far, all such efforts have not been good efforts. They have failed. So I will just have to see if a better job is done here of showing firm connections between the Mossad and the plotter and planners of 9-11.
________
Of course, both articles contain much truth, but the overall agenda or pattern that may exist in these two old articles from the same website posted oddly today, 6-11-14, on Rense.com, is something that seems to be presenting itself to me, and that means they are not about truth, but about agendas.