Begin with the facts. The US government claims that 19 Arabs with boxcutters hijacked planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and that's all there is to it. This is a lie. Many qualified people have explained why it could not have happened the way it is supposed to have happened.
Robin Hordon is a former FAA Air Traffic Controller at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center. He says:
I knew within hours of the attacks on 9/11/2001 that it was an inside job. Based on my 11-year experience as an FAA Air Traffic Controller in the busy Northeast corridor, including hundreds of hours of training, briefings, air refuelings, low altitude bombing drills, being part of huge military exercises, daily military training exercises, interacting on a routine basis directly with NORAD radar personnel, and based on my own direct experience dealing with in-flight emergency situations, including two instances of hijacked commercial airliners, I state unequivocally; There is absolutely no way that four large commercial airliners could have flown around off course for 30 to 60 minutes on 9/11 without being intercepted and shot completely out of the sky by our jet fighters unless very highly placed people in our government and our military wanted it to happen.
Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) said
In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident...
The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view...
With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged.
Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army, said
As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.
Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) said
One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, "The plane does not fit in that hole." So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?
Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret) said
I started questioning the Sept 11, 2001 “story” only days after the event. It just didn't make any sense to me. How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn't the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767? The evidence just didn't add up.
At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.
I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!
Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?
I also personally knew American Airlines Captain “Chick” Burlingame, who was the captain of Flight 77 which allegedly hit the Pentagon, and I know he would not have given up his airplane to crazies!
And at the Shanksville Pennsylvania impact site, where is any of the wreckage?!!! Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole! Where is any piece of a crashed airplane? Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel? Where is any evidence at all?
When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official “story”.
Finally, for any detectives who may be reading this, here is something reminiscent of "the dog that did not bark in the nighttime." Commander Ted Muga, BS CE, U.S. Navy (ret) said
And also in all four planes, if you remember, none of the planes ever switched on their transponder to the hijack code. There's a very, very simple code that you put in if you suspect that your plane is being hijacked. It takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over. And not one of the four planes ever transponded a hijack code, which is most, most unusual.
What does that tell you? For Sherlock Holmes, this clue would be the key to the case.
Now, moving on to treason:
On September 12, 2001, in a meeting with his National Security Team, President Bush said
The deliberate and deadly attacks which were carried out yesterday against our country were more than acts of terror. They were acts of war.
In the Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 3, treason is defined as follows:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Put those two things together: treason consists in levying war against the United States, and the attacks of 9/11 were acts of war.
Of course it is assumed here that we are talking about Americans levying war against the United States. If foreigners wage war against the United States, that doesn't count as treason. If Americans do it, it's treason. If foreigners wage war on the US and Americans help them, that is treason for the Americans, but not for the foreigners.
This is not a rhetorical statement or a figure of speech, it is a fact. That's what treason is, by definition. However, most people don't know that the attacks were committed by Americans. They may suspect it, but they don't know it. The situation is still ambiguous in their minds.
There is going to be an Emperor's New Clothes moment, when somebody stands up and tells the truth, in such a way that it cannot be denied. Some people are already telling the truth, but not in a way that carries the necessary force. I have already quoted several examples. Here is another. Captain Russ Wittenberg is a former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. He has flown the actual two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93 and Flight 175). He said, among other things,
The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous.
This is true, but it's not obviously true. You have to think about it. You have to be willing to think about it. Captain Wittenberg was not there. He is just saying, based on his professional judgment, what could not have happened.
Sooner or later, someone who was involved will say what did happen.
As the old saying goes, murder will out.
People do have consciences. Sometimes it may not seem that they do, but they do. It's not easy to voluntarily confess to being an accomplice to murder, but it's not easy to live with guilt, either. Somebody is going to take a deep breath, step forward, and tell the truth about what happened on September 11, 2001. In the future that person will be remembered in the history books as a national hero, but at the time it won't be easy. Out of hundreds of people who are in a position to let the secret out, somebody will do it, and then the dam will break.
Everybody will know what happened, even if they don't want to know, even if they have been trying to ignore the evidence.
Daddy, why is the Emperor naked? - As soon as the little boy asked that question, everybody knew what they should have known all along.
When the truth comes out unambiguously, it will affect different people in different ways. For some people it will be a day of relief and vindication. For the ones who have been trying to defend the official story, it will be the most devastating day of their lives. It will be a worse shock than the 9/11 event itself.
Then the upheaval Zundel predicted will be upon us. This country will boil over.
When the upheaval comes, it will be a Red State thing. It will come from people who trusted George Bush. It won't come from Democrats who despised him all along, nor will it come from militia groups who are already disaffected from the whole system. I'm thinking of some reunion pictures a classmate sent me a couple of years ago. There is a picture of Bill S. He was big kid when I knew him, kind of a Viking type, and he is a big man now. He's an honest blue collar guy, a Texan in the best sense of the word. He was a Tank Commander in the Marines in Vietnam. He doesn't have much use for peace marches, and I don't imagine he writes checks to the ACLU. He has probably never questioned the official 9/11 story. When the Emperor's New Clothes moment comes, and he catches on that the man he trusted is a traitor, look out.
That's where the upheaval will come from - guys like him.
A lot of people may be uneasy about the direction the country is going, but they have no focal point for their anger. Globalization is too complicated to get a handle on. Treason, however, is a simple thing. All that pent up anger is going to find an outlet. When Bill S. comes at you with fire in his eye, you are in trouble. Bill and a million others like him are going to be boiling mad. When he knows he's right, he doesn't back down for anybody.
There will be men with badges on both sides of this.
Men who wear uniforms and/or badges are the ones who are really on the spot. They face the hardest choices. They have the most responsibility. They are supposed to defend the Constitution and enforce the law. When a crime has been committed, they are supposed to do something about it. That is their job. Now they have to decide whether to do their duty, or not.
Not all of them will make the right decision.
Not everybody has a conscience. Some people are absolutely cynical, and they will protect their boss to the bitter end. As far as they are concerned, the Constitution is just a piece of paper, and their oath to defend it is just a formality. In every police department, in every military unit, in every FBI office and Homeland Security office, everybody will have to take a stand: do you support your boss right or wrong, or do you bring the traitors to justice?
Do you adhere to the enemies of the United States, and give them aid and comfort, or not?
Misprision of felony is a crime. Giving aid and comfort to traitors is treason.
In a war crimes trial, "I was just following orders" is not a valid defense. The traitors and everyone who supports them are going to discover the meaning of the old song, I fought the law, and the law won.
Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer said recently,
After 4+ years of research since retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government. It is now time to take our country back.
Somebody from the FBI or Homeland Security may be reading this right now, and you too must take a stand: do you defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, or do you cover up the crime, and thus become an accessory after the fact?
It's time to take our country back - which side are you on?
The question is, how do we take our country back?
It cannot be done by setting up a confrontation between the people and the government. Change has to start within the government. I'm not talking about a coup. What I have in mind is to set the wheels of the law in motion. That is the only thing that could possibly work.
As I said above, somebody who was involved in 9/11 will step forward, and that will blow the whole thing wide open. The idea is to proactively make that happen instead of waiting for somebody's conscience to prod them into action. The way to make it happen is to investigate everybody who might have been involved. Find out who they are, specifically. Interview them. Keep doing this until you find somebody who can be persuaded to come forward.
I am addressing myself primarily to military and law enforcement personnel. Others, such as journalists and private investigators, could also contribute, but it's the uniforms and badges that have to lead the way.
The FBI in particular is the key to the whole thing. My impression is that the FBI is still basically an honest organization. The ratio of good cops to bad cops is higher there than anywhere. At least I hope so. The fate of the country depends on it.
This is where the "untouchables" concept comes from. The original Untouchables, led by Eliot Ness, were an elite group who decided that they would stand up to the corruption around them. They could not be "touched," i.e. corrupted by bribes or threats. What we have to do now is apply that idea in a situation where the stakes are infinitely higher.
As a preliminary step, you have to decide who, among your colleagues, can be trusted. This is like one of those situations where some cops have gone over to the other side (working with heroin dealers, for example) and the good cops have to root out the corruption. It's not easy. In this case it's even worse. In a drug investigation, you can usually assume that the corruption starts at the bottom and the guys at the top are honest. We can't assume that. In fact it's just the opposite - the corruption starts at the top. The problem is to determine how far the rot extends. Who is the most senior person in your organization who can be trusted? What about your immediate boss? His boss?
If you do what I am suggesting - investigate this case on your own and find somebody who will confess to involvement in 9/11 - you have to understand that the risks are very high. As Nathan Hale said, "I regret that I have only one career to lose for my country." Or something like that - what did he say, exactly? Do you remember?
He gave his life for his country, and you are afraid to do anything that would jeopardize your career?
Can you spell c-o-w-a-r-d ?
Who needs to be sought out and investigated: the air traffic controllers who were on duty on September 11, the fighter pilots who, on a normal day, would have intercepted the four errant airliners before they could do any damage, the FBI agents who confiscated the tapes of the Pentagon attack, the agents who sealed off the "crash site" in Pennsylvania, security personnel at the World Trade Center (who controlled access to the buildings after Silverstein bought them?), employees at Controlled Demolition, employees at United and American Airlines (they know what happened to the planes), employees at CNN, CBS, and other news media, eyewitnesses who were featured on the news on September 11, people who made videos of planes hitting the twin towers, families of the crew and passengers on the four flights...
This is a partial list, just enough to give you the idea. You should review the whole sequence of events in your own mind and make your own list. There are at least a thousand people who have a story to tell if anybody takes the trouble to ask. If you wait for people to step forward on their own initiative it may never happen, but if you keep probing, you will find someone who is willing to talk. After the first one comes out, others will follow.
To set the wheels of the law in motion, first you have to have at least one individual who can serve as the starting point - someone who has demonstrably committed a crime. Then you have a prosecutable case. In Watergate, the burglars were caught red-handed, so the starting point was given. It was just a question of who was giving the orders. This time no one was caught in the act. We have to find them.
The only thing I know for sure about 9/11 is that what is supposed to have happened could not have happened. I don't know what did happen, and I don't have any definite theory. There is no use speculating about it. The only way to find out is with old-fashioned detective work. Talk to people.
As soon as the lie starts to unravel, everybody is going to be scrambling to get on the right side. When somebody tells you not to ask questions, look him in the eye and know that you are looking at a traitor - and remember, he knows it too. You are on solid ground and he is not. You are going to win and he is going to lose. Obstruction of justice is a crime. He can't fight the law.
If you are in the FBI, do you remember the idealism and pride you felt on the day you joined? How much of that pride is still there?
Same question if you are in the Air Force, or NYPD, or any law enforcement agency.
Your job is to defend your country and/or enforce the law.
Do your duty!
March 21, 2010
Three years have passed since I wrote the Untouchables page. It has gotten more than 20,000 visitors so far.
There have been some new developments. First of all, "Bill S." (Bill Shands) died of cancer soon after I wrote this page, so we will never know what he would have done when he learned the facts about 9/11. He was a straight-ahead guy, and I like to think he would have done the right thing. Semper Fi, Bill.
On the level of physical evidence, the big news is the discovery of nano-thermite residue in the rubble of the Twin Towers. This is almost literally a smoking gun.
There are some questions we all have to answer:
1. Why did the Air Force let a plane (or something) crash into the Pentagon? Who gave the orders?
2. Where did that nano-thermite come from?
3. Why did Building 7 collapse?
4. Who were those dancing Israeli art students?
5. Michael Chertoff, dual Israeli/US citizen, former head of Homeland Security, says that 9/11 truth is equivalent to Holocaust Denial. Why would he say that? Why would he frame 9/11 as a Jewish issue?
Because it is a Jewish issue, or more precisely a Zionist issue.
When I spoke of treason, I still did not really have that concept clear in my own mind. It didn't quite come together for me until a month ago: 9/11 was an act of war, but not an act of war by George Bush. 9/11 was an act of war by Israel on the US.
It was not a case of Americans waging war on their own country, it was a case of Americans giving aid and comfort to the enemy. This is still treason, but not quite what I had in mind three years ago. Of course it could have been some of both.
Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at the U.S. Army War College, says
What we need to stand up and say is that not only did they attack the USS Liberty, they did 9/11. They did it. I have had long conversations over the last two weeks with contacts at the Army War College and the Headquarters [of the] Marine Corps and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100% certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period.
I have had some long discussions with people up there [Marine HQ and the Army War College]. And there are some really unhappy people... [Their reaction is] Astonishment. The first thing is astonishment. They didn't know. They truly didn't know, and these are not unintelligent people. They truly didn't know. And the next thing is rage. Real rage.
This is exactly what I predicted in 2007. Rage. This is the beginning of the upheaval I was talking about.
My experience has been that rage interferes with my judgment. When I am in a rage, I am not thinking clearly. You can bet that the Israelis are going to take advantage of any lapses of judgment. They saw this rage coming a long time ago. There were some very smart psychologists involved in the planning of 9/11. They knew the illusion would only last a few years. They knew the moment would come when Americans at the highest level of the military would see through it. Now, while the "not unintelligent" Americans, as Dr. Sabrosky would say, are finally catching on to what's happening, and going through their astonishment and rage, the Israelis are planning several moves ahead.
They want us to be enraged. That has been part of the plan all along.
This situation calls for strategic thinking at the highest level. It remains to be seen whether the "not unintelligent" Americans are capable of any such thing. Their education has been dumbed down every step of the way, they have practically lost the ability to distinguish between what is real and what isn't, and now they are going to play chess against Kasparov. This is going to be yet another case of the bull charging the matador's flag while the matador calmly steps aside. It has taken the generals almost a decade to catch on that they were attacked by a foreign country - a country that pretends to be an ally - and that there are traitors in their midst. Even worse, many of them have not even begun to catch on. They have not even reached the stage of astonishment and rage. They are still in denial. And of course some of them (especially in the Air Force) know exactly what happened on September 11, but they are on the wrong side.
This does not bode well for America's future.
It is very late in the game, and we are playing catchup. The other team is five points ahead, the clock is running down, and we are nowhere near the goal line. This is one of those occasions that calls for perfect concentration and a supreme effort. Maybe you can remember a time when you were in a desperate situation, and still came through.
The original Untouchables concept is still valid. The first step is to find at least one individual who was involved in 9/11, and persuade them to come forward and confess. Pull the curtain aside so everybody can see what happened. Get the whole thing out in the open, so much so that it is impossible for anyone to still be in denial. When someone confesses, that will bring all arguments to an end. At that point we will all be on the same page, and we can proceed from there.
The last thing we need is for somebody to go off half-cocked. If you are enraged, cool off. Nothing can be done until everybody knows what happened on September 11. The Emperor's New Clothes moment has to come first. The Israelis want somebody to go off half-cocked. They are counting on it. If it doesn't happen - if cooler heads prevail - their plans will be in disarray.
Dr. Sabrosky made his remarks in a conversation with Phillip Tourney, a survivor of the attack on the USS Liberty, and Mark Glenn. It came to my attention a few days ago when somebody posted a video on Youtube. The video I saw has already been removed. People keep reposting it, and Youtube keeps removing it (why?), so the address changes from day to day. Go to Youtube and enter Sabrosky in the search box, and you should be able to find it. If not, there are other sources:
Frankly I am a little dubious about his claim that Mossad "did it". That is an oversimplification. The events of 9/11 are much more ambiguous than the attack on the USS Liberty. It's pretty obvious that the Israelis did not come over here and destroy buildings all by themselves with no cooperation from the Americans, both military and civilian. The more I think about it, the more mind-boggling it is that this could have happened.
The exact role Israel played in 9/11 remains to be determined. That is one of the things we will find out in the course of the Untouchables investigation. In any case it is clear that Americans gave and continue to give aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States.
Psalm 5:
You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil With you the wicked cannot dwell The arrogant cannot stand in your presence You hate all who do wrong You destroy those who tell lies The LORD abhors bloodthirsty and deceitful men.
March 31, 2010
This is no longer just for law enforcement and military personnel. Anybody can be an Untouchable.
The original Untouchables idea was to investigate everybody who was involved in 9/11, and find somebody who will say what happened. I assumed that the uniforms and badges would lead the way. It is still up to them to lead the way, as far as their own people are concerned. The rest of us are not in a position to investigate and confront FBI agents and Air Force officers. It's up to the FBI to clean its own house, and likewise for the Air Force.
But a lot of other people were involved in 9/11, and anybody can investigate them.
Last summer, Wired magazine sponsored a contest. A writer, Evan Ratliff, "disappeared" and tried to start a new life with a new identity. The game was to find him.
The idea for the contest started with a series of questions, foremost among them: How hard is it to vanish in the digital age? Long fascinated by stories of faked deaths, sudden disappearances, and cat-and-mouse games between investigators and fugitives, I signed on to write a story for Wired about people who’ve tried to end one life and start another. People fret about privacy, but what are the consequences of giving it all up, I wondered. What can investigators glean from all the digital fingerprints we leave behind? You can be anybody you want online, sure, but can you reinvent yourself in real life?
It’s one thing to report on the phenomenon of people disappearing. But to really understand it, I figured that I had to try it myself. So I decided to vanish. I would leave behind my loved ones, my home, and my name. I wasn’t going off the grid, dropping out to live in a cabin. Rather, I would actually try to drop my life and pick up another.
The contest was announced on August 14. It didn't take long for the game to get started.
When Sarah Manello heard from a friend about the search for Ratliff, she couldn’t resist. A researcher based in Rochester, New York, Manello had long worked with private investigators, digging up information for defense attorneys and tracking down missing people. She quit a few years ago after growing increasingly dissatisfied with the industry’s tactics. But her skills remained intact. The initial question she posted on Twitter, under the handle @menacingpickle, was private investigation 101: What was Ratliff’s middle name?
The first trickle of discussion among Manello and other hunters appeared by the morning of August 16, 36 hours after news of the hunt was posted on Wired.com. The next day it had grown into a deluge. On Twitter, anonymous users dedicated to Ratliff’s pursuit sprouted by the hour: @VanishingAct01, @FindEvanRatliff, @EvanOffGrid, @FinderofEvan, @FindThatMan, among others. They organized around the Twitter tag #vanish, which, when placed in a post, allowed the growing horde of investigators to exchange theories, clues, and questions. They created Web sites and blogs and flyers and even a telephone tip line. A programmer in St. Louis, Michael Toecker, started a Facebook group called “The Search for Evan Ratliff.” A week later it would have nearly a thousand members. (A countergroup designed to help Ratliff, founded by a banker in Cincinnati named Rich Reder, garnered a few dozen.)
Before the month was up, they found him.
The same thing could be done with the 9/11 investigation. Among all the people involved, who can be tracked down? What happened to the pilots, for example? Assuming they did not die in plane crashes, where are they? What about the passengers? The air traffic controllers? Journalists whose bosses instructed them to kill the story? The bosses themselves? Employees at Controlled Demolition? Employees at the airlines? All these people could be tracked down just like they tracked Evan Ratliff. Once we know who they are and where they are, it's just a matter of persuading some of them to talk. It only takes one, to begin with. In the case of pilots and passengers, they wouldn't even have to talk. All they have to do is appear in public. The fact that they are still alive speaks for itself.
In some cases, we already know who they are and where they are. Dan Rather, for example. He was reporting on September 11. He showed a tape of Building 7 collapsing, and he said "Amazing, incredible, pick your word. For the third time today - it's reminiscent of those pictures we have all seen too much on television before where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down." He could see what was happening even as it happened. Afterward, however, he never pursued this line of thought. Can he be persuaded to come forward now and tell everybody what happened? If somebody asked him why he did not do his job as a journalist, what would he say? The reason is obvious, but would he say it?
I don't know who his boss was at the time, but it should not be hard to find out who he was and where he is. But then what? How do you persuade him to say that he ordered all the reporters on his staff to kill the story? It would be up to the FBI to talk to him, but we cannot depend on the FBI to do its job. So I don't know what happens when we find these people. But the thing is, if we find hundreds of them, somebody will talk, and it only takes one to get things started. There is always a weakest link. Some of them have already thought about coming forward, but the moment never came. They are just waiting for somebody to ask.
Others might be less willing, but under intense public scrutiny, with a spotlight shining on them, they would not be able to stand the moral pressure.
Who knows, maybe Dan Rather is just waiting for somebody to ask. He has a conscience. He has always prided himself on being an honest reporter. He once said he would rather die than be wrong. He no longer works for CBS, so he doesn't have to worry about getting fired. There is nothing stopping him from saying what he knows, but for some reason he has not done it. I don't know if his first loyalty is to the U.S., or to Israel. Maybe he himself doesn't know. That is a decision he and all other journalists will have to make as events unfold. It's going to take a lot of soul-searching.
It would not have to be Dan Rather. Any TV news anchor could do it. First they present a story about Building 7 or nanothermite. Then they say "The policy at this station is that we are not allowed to report this story. That is why I am reporting it. I want everybody to know that the policy exists. This may be my last time here." That would put the station management on the spot. If they go ahead and fire him or her, that just confirms what was said. It would be an epiphany for everybody who watches that news broadcast. It would have repercussions far beyond. Of course in today's economy, giving up one's job is no small thing. But if several did it at the same time, it would be almost impossible to fire them.
I don't know if there are newscasters with enough honesty and courage to do that, but if it happened, it would be very close to the Emperor's New Clothes moment. It would be just one step away. If a newscaster (or several) presented some facts about 9/11 and got fired, then everybody would know that something is being covered up. We still would not know exactly what happened, but we would know that they are not allowed to tell us. Getting that out in the open would be a big step.
We are going to have to fight a second War of Independence, this time against Israel. They have already fired the first shot.
The Mossad motto is: By deception we wage war. Deception is their basic weapon. Honesty is our basic weapon.
There are no bystanders here. Choose a side.
If you had been there when Israel attacked the USS Liberty, which side would you be on?
If you are one of the ones who wears a uniform or badge, the first step for you is to ask your colleagues: Is your first loyalty to the U.S., or to Israel? Actually the very first step is to ask yourself that question. Then ask your colleagues. If they answer evasively, well, then you know how things stand. A couple of years from now, that question will be asked and answered under oath, in congressional hearings, like in the early 1950's. Joseph McCarthy was not an attractive man, but he was right that there were traitors in the government, and he was right to make an issue of it. This time it's a lot worse.
Everybody is either Untouchable, or not.
Mr. Chertoff is correct that 9/11 truth is "in the same category as Holocaust Denial". The link is to a YouTube video. After watching this, it is clear that the enemy is not ten feet tall. Michael Chertoff is a very bright man, but he makes mistakes too. Tying the Holocaust to 9/11 was a strategic blunder that will have incalculable consequences. I have known since 1997 that there were no gas chambers, and I have known for a few years that 9/11 was a hoax, but the connection between them was not obvious to me until Michael Chertoff pointed it out. After seeing this YouTube video, things started falling into place in my mind. The 9/11 lie and the genocide lie stand and fall together. They come from the same source and serve the same interests. They are parts of the same illusion. When part of it goes, all of it goes.
The genocide lie is the main thing that gives the Israelis a stranglehold on the United States and other western countries. We are not going to be able to take our country back until we pop the genocide illusion once and for all. But the 9/11 illusion has to be popped first.
The Untouchables 9/11 investigation will take longer to get started than the Wired contest, but once people start hearing about it, things will happen very fast. The number of investigators will go from a handful to thousands in a short time. The game should be over in a few months.
The Emperor's New Clothes moment is coming.
I can be reached here: diogenes ---at--- geniebusters.org
April 25, 2010
When I started doing some investigating, I found that a lot has already been done.
I discovered Christopher Bollyn's site. This is a gold mine. Exploring his site has been a somewhat humbling experience. He connected the dots a long time before I did. He knows vastly more about 9/11 than I do. He has pretty much dug out the whole story.
However, I don't agree with everything he says, particularly about the FBI. I understand how he feels, considering what he has been through, but it is just wrong to lump everybody together. My view is that some FBI agents have gone bad, but some have not, and even the ones who have gone bad may change their minds when they realize the gravity of the situation. There are only a few outright psychopaths. Almost everybody has a conscience. Not quite everybody, but almost everybody. People may do reprehensible things, but if you call them on it, they feel shame.
When they were 10 years old, and their granddad asked them "What do you want to do when you grow up?", they did not say "I want to betray my country." That was not their boyhood ambition. That was not their intention when they joined the FBI. Giving aid and comfort to people who attack the United States was the last thing on their minds. Now it turns out that that is exactly what they are doing. When this fact sinks in...
Some of the most absolute Untouchables are men who have not always done the right thing in the past.
"The rain fell, the rivers flooded, the winds hurled themselves against that house, but it did not collapse, because its foundation was on bedrock."
Only a few build their house on the rock.
August 9, 2011
Dr. Alan Sabrosky contributes to Veterans Today. If you go to their website and put "Sabrosky" in the search box, several articles and videos come up. This one is notable: "Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake". He says
People often ask about some new evidence or proof tying 9/11, in whole or in part, to Israel. Now I understand that there can never be absolute proof for some people barring a public confession from one of the Israeli planners or their American supporters, and that, I suspect, we will never obtain – although some of the statements made later in Israel by three of the Israelis arrested in Bergen, NJ filming the burning Twin Towers comes very close to that: One stated categorically that “our purpose was to document the event,” which should leave little doubt that they knew in advance of the attacks, whether or not they themselves personally had any further role in them.
We are going to get "a public confession from one of the Israeli planners or their American supporters" (probably the latter). The whole point of the Untouchables project is to obtain such a confession. Actually I think the first confession will come from a prominent journalist who "stood down" and did not report the story as he saw it. Somebody is not going to be able to keep still. Somebody is going to have to speak up.