|Type 1||geopolitical, war|
|Type 2||muslim scare, terror|
|Place||NYC, Washington D.C.,|
|Numbers||9, 11, 911|
| • 1993 WTC bombing
• Military Intelligence Apparatus
| • US Invasion of Afghanistan|
• 2003 US Invasion of Iraq
Fakeologist Ab Irato wrote on his blog: 9/11 was a psyop (psychological operation), a military operation of [ab 2]. This operation was a total, complete event conceived years in advance and designed to be managed over generations.
- 1 The official story
- 2 The Research of Simon Shack and Cluesforum
- 3 Live Broadcasts on 9/11 - The Power of Imagery [CF 2]
- 4 The Artificial Imagery of the 9/11 Media Performance
- 5 The Vicsim Report
- 6 Conclusions of September Clues
- 7 The Rationale of 9/11
- 8 The September Clues Tour Guide
- 9 See also
- 10 References
The official story
19 terrorists with box cutters hijacked 4 planes. The 2 planes flew in each of the Twin Towers of the WTC complex, New York City. The third plane flew into the Pentagon, Washington D.C.. The fourth plane crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania because of heroes on board. Osama bin Laden was the mastermind of these attacks as diagnosed immediately afterwards in the mass media.
The Research of Simon Shack and Cluesforum
Live Broadcasts on 9/11 - The Power of Imagery [CF 2]
Television is - and has always been - a Weapon of Mass Distraction. The power of TV-imagery was the driving force behind the 9/11 deception.
Whenever a major news event is reported by the mainstream media, it will invariably be illustrated with photographs or videos in order to convey to the public some visual impressions of the event. Undeniably, the imagery connected with any given news story enhances our emotional relation to it. The way we relate to news imagery has an almost hypnotic effect on our psyche: we have come to consider the visuals of any given news story as proof of that news story’s authenticity. This is truly a ‘weak spot’ of our brains’ readiness for critical-thinking. Thus follows, unfortunately, that to challenge the authenticity of a catastrophic event shown on Live TV is way beyond what most people are willing to contemplate. However, the time has come for everyone to call television by its most appropriate, military-sounding name: "Weapon of Mass Distraction".
The 9/11 psyop relied foremostly on that ‘weak spot’ of ours. We all fell for the images we saw on TV at the time – understandably so, as the sheer horror of the proposed imagery generated a wall of outrage and fear – thick enough to discourage any critical review of it. In hindsight, we can only wonder why so few questioned the absurd TV coverage proposed by all the major networks. The picture at left shows a moment (at 8:59AM) of the four synchronized TV broadcasts of ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX: yet another indication that the 9/11 TV "LIVE" broadcasts were managed by one single, centralized studio. (see my audio analysis in September Clues E)
WHAT TELEVISION VIEWERS SAW ON 9/11
The 9/11 TV imagery (of the crucial morning events) was just a computer-animated, pre-fabricated movie. It featured for the most part what were meant to be “chopper shots” of the smoking towers - and very little else. The sum total of “Action Shots” (“Planecrash” and “Tower collapses”) amounted to little over 30secs of the entire morning's TV broadcasts ! Needless to say, much as the rest of the animation movie, none of these “Action Shots” depicted any sort of reality. Now, it may be difficult for many to understand why the 9/11 plotters needed to fake even the tower collapses; yet this was undoubtedly the most crucial aspect of the entire operation - and needs to be fully understood in its plain logic: The unprecedented WTC demolition job was far too risky an affair to be shown on LIVE TV - (or to let any amateur cameraman capture it on film). The 9/11 conspirators had no intention whatsoever to offer such a "pyrotechnical" spectacle to world scrutiny - just imagine how unspeakably foolish this would have been. Thus, in all probability, the oldest trick in the manuals of covert military ops was used: smokescreens. More recent technology deactivated temporarily all cameras within sight of the area. In reality, the towers were most likely enveloped in thick smoke (military obscurants) as they collapsed - and no real footage exists of that brief event. Thankfully - for all normal people of this world - the 9/11 planners hired a poorly skilled animation crew : in their efforts to simulate reality, their crass 'artistry' and countless mistakes provide ample and repeatable proof of the trickery - forever engraved in the TV archives.
WHY FAKE THE NEWS BROADCASTS?
The 9/11 TV broadcasts were designed to ‘sell’ a fictitious terror attack to the world– by replacing the real-life events of the day (the WTC demolitions) with fake imagery. The official story was quite surreal - as were the TV images of the day and the preposterous tale of 19 kids roundly outfoxing the US Air Defense. It is essential to judge with one's own eyes the broadcasts actually aired by ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC and CNN.
WHAT ABOUT THE "AMATEUR" VIDEOS?
All the other videos (endlessly replayed on TV) were released only later. They have all been extensively analyzed by scores of video analysts; each and every video snippet of "amateur imagery" has been methodically dissected and compared - and empirically proved to be nothing else than computer-generated fabrications.
BUT REAL PEOPLE ARE TIED TO THIS STORY!
Unfortunately, yes. In all likelihood, those involved deeply enough are coerced into maintaining a position that has been scripted for them. For now, we can assume nobody is comfortable being the first whistle blower about the operation because they would be alone against a globalist empire that controls the people's only source of information about its activities: the media. Would you be the first to speak out against such a monolithic force? It's one thing to be an independent investigator like ourselves. It is entirely another to break a "gag order" contract with the U.S. government. As for what to do if you know or suspect someone is in trouble because of the events of 9/11, you lost a loved one or know someone who did during that time, please see our advice in the F.A.Q.
HOW WERE PRIVATE VIDEOS IMPEDED?
In order for the 9/11 TV-deception to succeed, full visual control of the Manhattan area had to be in place. The existence of EMP/HERF technology is undisputable: only the hypothesis of it being used on 9/11 remains unverifiable. It is, however, a reasonable postulation supported by a series of electronic blackouts which occurred in NYC that morning. In any event, the logic of using EMP/HERF holds water and effectively explains the ruse with disarming simplicity: NO private photography of the real-life events was allowed: thus, the imagery aired by the TV networks feared no comparison and was passed off as reality.
The Artificial Imagery of the 9/11 Media Performance
The 9/11 image pool is riddled with glaring evidence of fraud and - more often than not - "advanced" 3-D imagery softwares which, in 2001, were less than perfect. You don't have to be a video professional to understand the many flaws of the 9/11 imagery. Here is comprehensive proof that the 9/11 image pool is but a database of fabricated imagery.
The Vicsim Report
- See: Main article: Vicsim Report, written by Hoi Polloi and based on the original research also by Hoi Polloi on [CF 3]
- See: Fakeologist Radio: Discussion about Missing SSDI Records [ab 3]
- See: Fakeologist Radio: Kham, Findings about the SSDI Missing Records, (Start at 46:00)[ab 4]
- See: Hoax Busters Call: Empty Towers[HB 2], Published on Nov 6, 2010
Eric Darton published in 1999 the most comprehensive 'biography' of the WTC twin towers. Please note that Darton is certainly no 'conspiracy theorist' - as his book only traces the towers' history from their birth up to 1999. However, it turns out to provide invaluable clues as to how the towers' tenants might have been 'controlled' - so to speak - after the first 1993 "Al-Qaeda" bombing. 'Divided We Stand' is also a treasure trove for anyone interested in the wheelings and dealings that - historically - have characterized these most cumbersome, asbestos-laced and strongly disliked buildings. I have synthesized the most interesting facts listed in the book; here they are - followed by selected extracts of "Divided We Stand":
1- THE TOWERS WERE A SHAMBLES FROM THE WORD GO:
"In 1985, when New York State moved most of its offices out, Dean Witter consolidated its operations in twenty-four floors of Tower 2 under a twenty-year lease. Visiting the brokerage and investment firm's offices and cafeterias, one invariably found them spotlessly maintained. But on adjacent floors, particularly those with multiple tenants, the paint was dingy, the carpets were stained, fixtures remained broken, and burned-out fluorescent lights went unreplaced, as did discolored ceiling tiles. And the listing of a company on the directory did not reliably indicate that a company was still there."
2- FOLLOWING THE 1993 BOMBING
50,000 workers were displaced and 350 tenants were RELOCATED OUTSIDE THE WTC. "The February 1993 blast in the basement of the World Trade Center killed 6 people, injured 1,000 others, displaced 50,000 workers, and threw 900 Vista Hotel and Windows on the World employees out of work, but it also provided a modest boost for the regional economy. This, at any rate, was the conclusion the Port Authority came to in an April 1993 report released six weeks after the bombing. (...) For the agency, this silver lining was due in part to the ease with which the 350 bombed-out trade center tenants could be moved into abundant vacant office space nearby."
3- AT THE END OF THE 90'S HUGE QUANTITIES OF OFFICE SPACE WERE ANNOUNCED RENTED - BY THE PRESS
"The Port Authority closed out the 1990s with a stream of press releases announcing the rental of unimaginably huge quantities of trade center office space to "cutting-edge" firms like Sun Microsystems. Yet around the complex a million square feet stood empty, and the buildings originally intended as great catalyzing chambers of world trade were, by degrees, transforming into a kind of disjunctive real estate layer-cake. One story above the carpeted, wood-paneled offices of a Japanese securities firm, a group of artists filled bare walls with boldly colored images and hung sculptures from the exposed ceiling girders of a vast echoing cavern. As part of a Lower Manhattan Cultural Council program that turned some of the vacant space in the towers over to artists rent-free, 40,000 square feet of concrete floor lay paint-spattered and strewn with the raw materials of a creative urge that has never been easily reconciled with the imperatives of a bottom line.
Conclusions of September Clues
- The 9/11 imagery was nothing but a Hollywood-style film production, complete with actors in the role of 'eye-witnesses' or 'firefighters', staged 'running crowds', 3D-compositing and special cinematic effects. The '9/11 movie' was split into a number of short clips and sold to the TV audience as 'newscasts'. The few clips featuring 'airplanes' (or dull silhouettes thereof) were computer-generated images - all of which in stark conflict with each other, as now comprehensively demonstrated in every imaginable manner, angle and method.
- No commercial airliners were hijacked or - much less - crashed into the WTC towers, the Pentagon or the Shanksville field. No valid/verifiable records exist for : their airport logs/schedules, their numbered parts, their alleged passengers. Their reported speeds at near sea-level as well as the absurd visuals of their total, effortless disappearance into the WTC façades defy the laws of mechanics and physics - and the absence of visible wake vortexes in the WTC impact imagery also defies the laws of aerodynamics.
- The World Trade Center Complex (9 buildings in all) were demolished with powerful explosives. No image-analyses of the tower collapses can help determine just what type of explosives were employed - since the videos are 3D animations and do not represent the real-life events. In reality, as they collapsed, the WTC complex was most likely enveloped by military-grade smoke obscurants. No real/private imagery exists of the morning's events - 'thanks' to electromagnetic countermeasures.
- No "3000" people were trapped in the top floors/nor perished in the WTC towers. Only one thing was more important to the perps than avoiding a mass murder of (thousands of) American citizens : to sell the notion that "bogeyman Bin Laden" killed (thousands of) American citizens. We have renamed the 'victims' of these psy-operations "VICSIMS" (SIMulated VICtims). In fact, our research has seen the same pattern emerge in all the so-called "Al-Quaeda Terror Attacks" around the world (LONDON 7/7, MADRID 11, BALI, MUMBAI, etc...). In all logic, the very last aggravation the plotters behind these false-flag operations wish to have, are scores of real families hounding them forever with real questions and real class actions. Hence: NO real terror victims = Logical PsyOp rationale.
The Rationale of 9/11
THE RATIONALE OF THE 9/11 HOAX by Simon Shack - January 1, 2010
If you have come to terms with the fact that 9/11 was a massive money-making scheme and - of course - a pretext to wage hugely profitable wars, the basic rationale behind this Grand Deception should, hopefully, become clearer. It is essential to consider all the variables which such an audacious false-flag operation would entail and what precautions its plotters must have observed: The Grand Deception plan was undoubtedly meant to be foolproof and, ideally, free of unnecessary elements of risk and opposition. There was simply no rationale for the 9/11 plotters to commit a mass murder of some 3,000, mostly white-collar professionals (brokers, bankers, financial analysts, etc.) whose families would likely have access to first-rate, ‘uptown’ legal assistance. Surely, killing that many people would have been an utterly senseless, self-inflicted aggravation on the part of the perpetrators. Since they could reliably rely on the fully compliant ‘top-brass’ of the mainstream media, they would have used this unique, exclusive asset to its full potential.
Ever since day one, the major hurdle for many people to even start considering 9/11 being an ‘inside job’ has been: “I can’t believe my own government would murder 3000 of their own people". Once that psychological obstacle is removed, it should become apparent that the whole operation consisted essentially of a covert demolition of a redundant, asbestos-filled building complex. To kill thousands of people in the process never was an envisaged proposition as it would have encountered severe resistance among the insiders involved. The second objective was to blame this destruction on a foreign enemy; an inanely fanciful, outlandish tale involving hijacked airliners used as missiles was concocted, to be supported by digital imagery and special movie effects. How this was done is thoroughly illustrated in my September Clues video analyses.
WHAT DIDN’T HAPPEN ON 9/11 ( the deceptive imagery )
No unauthorized, private imagery was captured on September 11, 2001. Most - if not all - of the imagery we have of that morning’s events is prefabricated and/or manipulated. The September Clues video research – and many similar independent studies - have amply demonstrated the unfettered complicity of the mainstream media – a disturbingly 'reliable' partner in crime. The 9/11 morning broadcasts were, by and large, digital computer-animations and all successive, so-called “amateur” video snippets (featuring crashing planes or collapsing towers) have likewise been methodically exposed as a series of poorly crafted forgeries. The defining time-windows of the day (tower strikes and tower collapses) were certainly not meant to be captured on film - much less aired on television: As it is, no real footage of the real-life morning events is to be found. To be sure, the existence of specific, military-grade technology able to achieve this precise aim is well documented. In all likelihood, electromagnetic weaponry (EMP/HERF) routinely employed in war zones was employed, causing the temporary jamming of all unshielded camera equipment *. With no real footage being captured, the TV networks could ‘safely’ broadcast their substitute, artificial imagery of the morning’s events.
WHAT DID HAPPEN ON 9/11 ( the tower collapses )
The ‘ground operations’ in Lower Manhattan called for a coordinated demolition of the entire WTC complex (9 buildings in all). Just what type of explosive forces caused this destruction is hotly debated among scientists galore – yet it is but a secondary and ultimately doomed endeavor - since there is no certifiably authentic rubble nor any authentic imagery to examine. We may however assume (as of the events’ timeline) that the demolition process started a full hour after the alleged “plane strikes”, leaving plenty of time to evacuate the area. The briskly displaced bystanders – as well as more distant eyewitnesses - would have had very slim chances to make out the precise dynamics of the collapses as, most plausibly, smokescreens (military obscurants) started blocking the WTC from view. The time-window of the Lower Manhattan evacuation was filled in with two convenient, yet blatantly phony Distraction Dramas: The Pentagon and Shanksville mock-events. These two diversions also helped sway the attention away from the absurd absence of helicopter rescues at the WTC. As it is, the improbable tale of 3,000 souls trapped for up to 100 minutes in the WTC top floors (with no rooftop rescues - “due to locked access doors") may have a simple explanation: The WTC towers were empty. To be sure, all photographs and video snippets depicting people (or silhouettes thereof) falling down the side of the WTC’s have also been comprehensively exposed as digital forgeries. Only time will tell whether anyone really was killed on 9/11 - and under what circumstances - but, as things stand, the bulk of available evidence suggests otherwise.
HOW MANY DIED ON 9/11?
Perhaps – and probably - none. A ‘fanciful’ contention? No. Not if measured against the thoroughly fanciful, grotesquely contrived and conflicting 9/11 ‘victim memorials’. A close scrutiny of the numerous available listings of alleged 9/11 victims provides countless indications that they are, by and large, outright fabrications. Most of them are still easily accessible on the Internet by the general public – yet some have been (‘mysteriously’) shut down. Of course, if it’s true that the WTC was fully evacuated, thus follows that the many memorials listing the 9/11 victims must, in turn, be fabricated too. As elaborated below, that is precisely what they appear to be. The 9/11 victim memorials simply do not stand up to scrutiny and comparison. The sheer bulk of inconsistencies and absurdities pervasive in those unseemly listings unveils their true nature : Just another piece of the Grand Deception. Let us see why, point by point :
MEMORIAL PROBLEMS(1): The totals’ nonsense
At a first glance at the various 9/11 memorials, we see that each and every one reports a different casualty toll. Here’s a selection of total figures, all ostensibly meant to represent official and definitive listings of all victims of 9/11 for WTC, Pentagon and 4 flights (minus the “19 hijackers”) :
SEPT11th memorial: “3.181” CNN memorial: “2.985” Wikipedia: “2.977” FOX News: “2812” La Repubblica ( Sept11,’09 ): “2.752” America Forever memorial: “2.467”
As absurd as this may seem, it is a fact that more than 8 years after 9/11, there is still no consensus whatsoever on the total death toll. Indeed, the first and last of the above-listed memorials show a discrepancy of a full 714 names! These are entirely verifiable figures – in full public view. Of course, even a discrepancy of only 2 or 3 victims should be considered unacceptable at this time. Let’s hope that the National 9/11 Memorial, currently under construction in Manhattan will finally reveal to the world the exact number of the 9/11 victims... Whatever that figure will be (and which names will be retained or discarded), the fact remains that for all of 8 years virtually all memorials have displayed wildly conflicting casualty tolls.
Most will remember that, in the days, weeks if not months following 9/11, the news media kept reporting what, admittedly, were speculative casualty figures ( the “20,000 victims" soon became “10,000”). Yet the first, official casualty toll was still a hefty “6,729” (New York Times). Then, a full 12 days after the event, mayor Giuliani went on record with an “estimated 6,333 victims”, a figure which was touted for some time before gradually - and inexplicably - dwindling to less than half that figure. How, one must ask, could it possibly take weeks to obtain reasonably accurate figures of the WTC tenants’ missing employees? Now, this was no tsunami sweeping unfathomably populated coastlines of Indonesia, Thailand or Sri Lanka; these were two confined building-collapses in civilized Manhattan! Undeniably, in the shocked post-disaster climate, the inflated death tolls effectively boosted the drama and the public outrage over the “murderous Binladen attacks”. However, as weeks went by, mayor Giuliani’s “6,333” estimate started raising a few eyebrows. In time, the news media came up with a ‘shocking news story’ : As the tale went, a horde of greedy, despicable fraudsters were usurping the 9/11 compensation funds claiming the loss of "non-existing, totally made-up relatives"
A long string of such scams were reported - & denounced with righteous outrage – for weeks on end. Ultimately, even though a whopping total of 400 such “callous con men schemes” were reported, it did little to account for – or even remotely explain – Giuliani’s previous “6,333” estimate (of September 23, 2001). The Grand Deception was already creaking and - unbeknown to most – initiating its own, inevitable collapse. Now, some people will argue that these wild inaccuracies were brought about by “the havoc and confusion” surrounding the 9/11 events. Fine. Let us not argue about it - and agree for now on at least one incontrovertible fact: Between the first official NYT death toll figure (6729) and the figure found on, for instance, the “America Forever” memorial (2467), we have a discrepancy/margin of error of 4262 ‘units’. These are plain and simple arithmetics. Lastly, let it be said that the vast majority of "9/11 victims" are NOT listed in the SSDI (Social Security Death Index). The few that ARE to be found listed on the SSDI are usually names that have been cited in the press, i.e. more 'prominent' and 'public' victims...
MEMORIAL PROBLEMS(2): The ghost names nonsense
So, how do these conflicting death tolls translate as one takes a close look at the various memorials? Does that mean we may find random, ‘ghost’ victims listed on some memorials, complete with tributes and obituaries, who are simply missing on others? Yes. Is there a significant amount of such nonsensical examples, such as to rule out ‘innocent sloppiness’ on the part of the various memorial curators? Yes. Let’s take a look, for instance, at the “Wall of Americans” memorial. At the very top of letter “A”, we find two people named “AALYIGH”.
Inexplicably, the two “AALYIGH”s (as indeed many other names) are found only in some memorials and are absent from others (such as CNN’s). Now, imagine for a minute that your surname is “Aalyigh”. Would you not try contacting (in over 8 years) the ‘offending’ 9/11 memorials and have them correct their listings? Who are the “Aalyigh”s? Or perhaps we should ask : why are the “Aalyigh”s to be found only in selected memorials? Is there indeed anyone called “Aalyigh” on this planet apart from Diana Aalyigh (Die-In-A-Lie?) and Justin Aalyigh (Just- In-A-Lie?). One may be tempted to surmise that some brave whistleblower was trying to tell us some truth about 9/11: “it’s all AALYIGH”. Interestingly, the Wall of Americans memorial has now been shut down. This is the message we may find on the blank Internet page which ‘explains’ its sudden closure:
Then, staying with letter “A”, there is the case of Mrs. “Cici AADA”, another of the many ‘ghost names’ to be found bouncing around the various 9/11 memorials. Now, if you google “AADA” you will bump right into the “American Academy of Dramatic Arts”.
A coincidence, perhaps. However, since a number of characters rotating around the 9/11 saga (Gary Welz, Bob McIlvaine, Donna Marsh O'Connor, etc) have been exposed as professional actors, one may reasonably wonder whether this also could be the work of a heroic whistleblower. The fact remains that “Cici (See-See?) AADA" and both the “AALYIGH”s are only to be found on a few 9/11 memorials – and are simply missing on others (most notably the CNN memorial).
There are plenty more examples of ‘ghost names’ appearing only in selected 9/11 memorials. To list them all in this article (with comprehensive cross-comparisons between all the lists) is not realistic and would surely be a tedious read. So let’s just compare three alphabetical groups (Q, X, Y, Z) which contain moderate amounts of names (so that the reader may easily check out these facts personally). Below is a list of 9/11 memorials; for each one we have the number of people listed under the surname initials “Q”, “X”, “Y” & “Z”:
MEMORIAL PROBLEMS(3): The prosaic nonsense
A common aspect of the various 9/11 memorials are the consistently sappy and contrived tributes supposedly posted by families, co-workers and friends. We are talking about thousands of brief writings which, of course, require some steady patience to sift through. However, and for what it’s worth, I can personally testify that it’s hard to find any 9/11 tribute graced with any ring of authenticity. The prevalent impression is that they are written by the same person – or at best – by a gang of bored, unimaginative novelists. Naturally, some will retort that this is a ‘subjective’, personal interpretation; I can only encourage everyone to spend some time reading those tributes for themselves. Taken together, those tributes read like an endlessly reshuffled concoction of mawkish and tear-jerking rhetoric. I’m confident that anyone armed with a critical mind – and a healthy sense of humor - will actually enjoy sifting through these tributes as an eye-opening, entertaining and slightly surreal experience. Best of all, this ‘enjoyment’ comes with an odd sense of relief and appeasment as one gradually comes to realize that:
1. The 9/11 memorials are all in conflict with each other. 2. The 9/11 memorials are anything but credible tributes to real victims of a real terror attack. 3. Perhaps, in the light of these facts, few - or nobody - died in the “9/11 attacks”.
(Author’s appeal: I welcome anyone asserting to be a family member of a 9/11 victim to come forward with documentation – such as would be admissible in a court of law - of their loved one’s existence and passing. I can be reached on my private e-mail posted on the contact page.).
MEMORIAL PROBLEMS(4): The portrait-morphing evidence
Three main observations can be drawn from a methodical cross-scrutiny of the many 9/11 memorials which feature portraits of the “victims” – henceforth referred to as “entities":
1. Most of the “entities" found in the memorials are represented with two - and no more than two apparently different portraits.
2. When two seemingly different portraits of a given entity are compared, they reveal more often than not striking similarities in facial expression, pose, angle/perspective, lighting, reflections.
3. Striking similarities are also observed between separate, often alphabetically adjacent entities of same or different sex. While a few such cases might be expected in a list of 2500+ portraits, the sheer frequency of such instances featuring seemingly ‘cloned’ facial attributes cannot reasonably (in a statistical sense) be ascribed to ‘coincidence’ or ‘happenstance’.
Naturally, this topic needs to be visualized by the reader since it deals with photographic issues. Please see our illustrated article for image-supported descriptions of this issue: The Memorial Scams. (Other interesting issues related to the metadata - or ‘exif’ data - embedded in all the .jpg picture files will, in time, be comprehensively expounded and added to this article.) Finally, for a comprehensive study of the 9/11 memorials, please download and read the “Vicsim Report" by Hoi Polloi: Vicsim Report page.
MEMORIAL PROBLEMS(5): The “VIP” Vicsims
Some of the more prominent ‘casualties’ of 9/11 - such as “Flight93-hero Todd M. Beamer”- have long been exposed as stolen identities from previously deceased namesakes . The Barbara Olson story also turned out to be a fraud when Ted Olson (George W. Bush’s solicitor general) was caught altering 3 times his tale of her alleged phone calls from “Flight77”. Similarly, “the 9/11 victim number 0001”, Father Mychal Judge, was another faith-based saga for devout believers: At least three different versions of the causes/circumstances of his death were published by the news media – and the evacuation of his corpse from the WTC has also been exposed as another staged photo-op. In other words, the stories surrounding the 9/11 “VIP" casualties are riddled with so many questions as to be divested of any sort of credibility. With such an abundance of deceptive, media-promoted bunkum, it is perfectly reasonable to question every single official newsstory to emerge from the events of September 11, 2001.
PONDERING QUESTIONS OF STRATEGY AND OPPORTUNITY
One question which naturally emerges from the study of the 9/11 memorials is : “Even if many ‘victims’ identities appear to be entirely made up by a computer database, could it still mean that a number of real people were killed on 9/11?” Or did 9/11 claim no victims at all?
If we are to apply a logical thought-process to this particular issue, we need to look at questions of strategy and opportunity which the perpetrators must have prefigured. Surely, any sensible investigation must start by defining the type of crime that is being investigated. By defining the scope and the objectives of the crime, we should be able to rule out what the perpetrators themselves would have ruled out, in terms of unnecessary risks and liabilites. Was 9/11 designed as a barbaric murdering spree or was it more of a gigantic bank robbery? Let us make an’ educated guess’ and say that the latter is the case.
Bank robberies are considered terrible failures by the robbers themselves in the event of any bystander, guard/police officer getting killed; the sole objective of a bank assault is that of stealing money – never that of commiting murder. The penal aggravations of manslaughter is most unwelcome to any professional gangster – a grave mistake to be carefully avoided. To be sure, there was no ‘added-value’ for the 9/11 perpetrators to commit a mass murder of some 3,000, mostly white-collar professionals. As we have seen, a large amount of alleged “victims" appear to be mock-up identities. Of course, precisely how many remains to be verified. Yet, consider this: if 300 deposit-boxes are emptied by a gang of bank robbers and fingerprints are found in just thirty boxes, would they be suspected only for robbing those thirty? Or would a court of law assume that they also robbed the other 270?
The idea that nobody was killed on 9/11 is, usually and predictably, rejected offhand by many folks as ‘outrageous’ or ‘unbelievable’. Others will accept that some simulation took place - but that a number of real people must have died. So let us imagine an ‘intermediate’ scenario of, say, 1000 people being killed that day. If this were true, an immediate problem emerges: what if those 1000 families, at some stage, discovered that the other 2000 families were untraceable/non-existent? It is quite unlikely that the 9/11 planners would have run the risk of such a dire, worst-case scenario: Imagine a horde of angry families filing an avalanche of suits and the court orders that would follow, all demanding access to public records and official verifications! Truly a recipe for disaster… Surely, the 9/11 plotters didn’t want any of that? Thus, we may reasonably assume that every precaution was taken to ensure that NO civilian lawsuits might ‘spoil the show’; in all logic, the assassination of any number of people on 9/11 was a definite no-no, a stupid and senseless aggravation to be avoided at all costs. The chief directive of the Grand 9/11 Deception plan may well have been: “Zero casualties”.
“TOO MANY” PEOPLE INVOLVED?
The almost unlimited resources of the 9/11 planners allowed for a multifaceted simulation which certainly involved a great many people by any conspiracy standards – only a few of which needed to be fully briefed about all details of the plan. A recurring objection skeptics keep raising is that “too many people had to be involved, therefore it would have been impossible to keep them all quiet.” Not so. Allow me to set forth a brief personal perspective on this issue: As the son of an idealist Norwegian sociologist who pluckily ‘fought’ the Sicilian Mafia with a typewriter, I often like to remind people of the concept of “omertà”; in Sicily, tens of thousands of honest citizens know perfectly well the names and whereabouts of the Mafia bosses – yet they are kept silent for decades with bribes and fear. Historically – and this is a nigh undeniable fact - cold cash and hot threats have never failed to put a lid on people’s mouths.
A limited number of people were needed to pull off the 9/11 hoax – a hoax which relied on an incalculably larger budget than any smalltown Mafia hit. Needless to say, the US executive branch also firmly controls all key government-appointed agencies, an asset no criminal organization could ever dream of. Most importantly, every single major news corporation has been, in the last 50 years or so, thoroughly infiltrated and co-opted by the higher echelons of power. Today, their globalized monopoly of world news makes them the single most powerful persuasion-machine ever known to mankind. In fact, their unchallenged control of information was a crucial player in the 9/11 plan: Most lower-level operatives involved in the execution of the plan were induced - much as the average ‘Joe Public’ - to believe in the televised version of the events.
Hence, the “too-many–people-involved” argument fails on two counts:
1: It is effectively disproved by historical precedents.
2: It does not account for the wide, unprecedented range of assets available to the 9/11 planners.
UPHOLDING THE 9/11 MYTH : ACTORS AND ACTRESSES
To uphold and perpetuate the myth of the 9/11 victims, a grand ‘travelling circus’ was set up since day one and is still maintained to this day : A bunch of actors and actresses play the role of “mourning family members”, all of which get constant, extensive press coverage. An early team of ‘9/11 widows’ gained instant international fame: They were credited of ‘forcing’ the government to set up the 9/11 commission: The so-called “Jersey Girls” were portrayed as ‘left-wing activists’ who asked ‘inconvenient questions’. Of course, it was all a comedy of smoke and mirrors, a dog and pony show for public consumption. Here’s their Hollywood-style movie promoted on the “PRESS FOR TRUTH” website:
“The Jersey Girls” accomplished absolutely nothing in the way of obtaining serious answers from the government. Their role was ostensibly to enact and ‘give a face’ to the (non-existent) ‘grieving 9/11 families’. According to some 9/11 researchers, they are now living in luscious mansions even though they notoriously declined to collect monies from the 9/11 compensation fund. The “Jersey Girls” have gradually been ‘phased out’ from public visibility to make room for another set of “grieving mothers & widows”. Today, their roles are filled by the likes of Mary Fetchet, Carol Ashley & Carie Lemack:
THIS IS WHAT THEY DO : Improving Americas Security Act What is their role and who do you think might be their handlers?
The pictures these women wear on their chests are in fact the very same we can find in the many 9/11 memorials. Incidentally, Mary Fetchet is the founder of the very active and prominent “VOICES OF SEPTEMBER 11 memorial” . Mary allegedly lost her son Brad in the World Trade Center collapse. As many “9/11 victims”, most available pictures of Brad Fetchet are of very poor quality – and most show him in his childhood days. There seem to be very few portraits of Brad as a young adult.
Below is a reasonably sharp picture of Brad (“dancing with grandma”). It should be clear to anyone that this is a crude copy/paste job of Brad's face over an older gentleman with pronounced neck-wrinkles. The ‘matrix’ used for this sloppy montage is clearly extracted from the ubiquitous, familiar picture of the young “Brad Fetchet” to be found in all the memorials:
Sally REGENHARD is yet another “activist mother” cast in the role of “truth warrior” (Jersey Girls-style), brandishing ‘accusatory’ signs in public events - much as a heckling, hippie street protester ... On those occasions, Sally also tearfully carries along pictures of her alleged 'lost son':
However, there’s a problem with Sally’s story: there are very few pictures of her son ‘Christian’ – and most of them are obvious composites of the same ‘master portrait’. Below, we have three of them. I don’t think many comments are needed here - judge for yourself…
In conclusion, a whole lot of actors were (and still are) employed to sell the 9/11 Hoax to the public. From the short performances of alleged “eyewitnesses to crashing airplanes” seen on the 9/11 TV broadcasts, to the fake whistleblowers (such as Willy Rodriguez and Sibel Edmonds) - and all the way to the alleged “mourning family members” - all are just a bunch of 3rd rate actors and actresses willing to play out the Grand Deception Game for a fat pile of cold cash. Let us hope that actors of the caliber of Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal are not also part of the ‘game’. They both happen to be directors of the NATIONAL 9/11 MEMORIAL AND MUSEUM ...
A massive propaganda effort has relentlessly hammered into the public psyche the official September 11 saga. Countless lucrative films and documentaries have been produced over the years, casting actors in the roles of "real survivors and family members of the tragedy". Please watch my analysis of "911Hotel", a particularly crass propaganda film: PROPAGANDA911
The September Clues Tour Guide
- Vicsim Report
- Hoax management
- Narrative management
- List of psyops
- History of PsyOps Technology
- Conspiracy narrative
- Conspiracy theory