Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

How false flag attacks are manufactured by the world's elite.

Archive

Archive for December, 2015

December 30, 2015
Paul Craig Roberts

One hundred years ago European civilization, as it had been known, was ending its life in the Great War, later renamed World War I. Millions of soldiers ordered by mindless generals into the hostile arms of barbed wire and machine gun fire had left the armies stalemated in trenches. A reasonable peace could have been reached, but US President Woodrow Wilson kept the carnage going by sending fresh American soldiers to try to turn the tide against Germany in favor of the English and French.

The fresh Amerian machine gun and barbed wire fodder weakened the German position, and an armistance was agreed. The Germans were promised no territorial losses and no reparations if they laid down their arms, which they did only to be betrayed at Versailles. The injustice and stupidity of the Versailles Treaty produced the German hyperinflation, the collapse of the Weimar Republic, and the rise of Hitler.

Hitler’s demands that Germany be put back together from the pieces handed out to France, Belgium, Denmark, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, and Poland, comprising 13 percent of Germany’s European territory and one-tenth of her population, and a repeat of French and British stupidity that had sired the Great War finished off the remnants of European civilization in World War II.

The United States benefitted greatly from this death. The economy of the United States was left untouched by both world wars, but economies elsewhere were destroyed. This left Washington and the New York banks the arbiters of the world economy. The US dollar replaced British sterling as the world reserve currency and became the foundation of US domination in the second half of the 20th century, a domination limited in its reach only by the Soviet Union.

Read more

12/28/2015
911 Blogger

United Airlines personnel were subjected to a surprise training exercise 12 days before 9/11 in which they were led to believe that one of their planes had crashed. The exercise was so realistic that some of them ended up in tears or became physically sick. Consequently, on September 11, 2001, when two United Airlines planes were hijacked and then crashed, the manager who organized the exercise apparently thought his employees had mistaken reports about the terrorist attacks for part of an exercise and therefore told them, “This is not a drill!”

        A United Airlines Boeing 767

Furthermore, United Airlines had previously conducted other exercises that were based around scenarios resembling aspects of the 9/11 attacks, which may have caused its employees to be confused on September 11 over whether the crisis that day was real or simulated. The scenarios included hijackings and planes crashing into buildings.

We need to consider whether these exercises hindered the ability of United Airlines personnel to respond to the attacks on September 11. If they did, was this intentional? Did people involved in planning the 9/11 attacks help organize exercises that would lead to confusion on September 11, so as to increase the likelihood that the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon would succeed?

‘NO-NOTICE’ EXERCISE INVOLVED A PILOT INDICATING THAT HIS PLANE HAD CRASHED
The exercise held 12 days before 9/11 was arranged by Andy Studdert, United Airlines’ chief operating officer, who was based at the airline’s headquarters, near Chicago. Studdert has claimed that the exercise came about because he had been concerned that United Airlines hadn’t had to deal with a “real accident” in over 15 years and was therefore unprepared to respond adequately should one occur.

Around March 2001, he notified other managers at his airline that he intended to run a surprise exercise to address the problem. “One of these days, I’m gonna come in here and I’m gonna do a no-notice drill,” he told them. [1] (A “no-notice” drill is an exercise that is conducted without its participants being given any formal advance notice of when it will occur. [2])

Studdert ran this no-notice drill on August 30, 2001. [3] Only two people, apart from him, knew about it in advance: a pilot and a colleague of Studdert’s who Studdert has only referred to as his “safety guy.” (This “safety guy” may well have been Ed Soliday, United Airlines’ vice president of safety and security.)

After he arrived at work, Studdert told his “safety guy” to call the pilot of a United Airlines Boeing 747 that would be flying to Australia that day and tell him to simulate an emergency. Based on Studdert’s instructions, the pilot was told to call in during his flight and say his plane had experienced an “uncontained number three engine failure, rapid descent, decompression.” He was told that halfway through the word “decompression” he should stop talking and then remain silent. He was also told to turn off his plane’s transponder around the time he stopped talking to ground personnel. [4] (A transponder is a device that sends an aircraft’s identifying information, speed, and altitude to the radar screens of air traffic controllers. [5])

AIRLINE’S CRISIS CENTER WAS OPENED DURING THE EXERCISE
The exercise took place in the afternoon. At around 2:00 p.m., Studdert’s secretary rushed into Studdert’s office and said a Boeing 747 had lost contact while flying over the Pacific Ocean. In response to the news, Studdert ran to the United Airlines operations center. [6] The operations center, located in a building adjacent to the headquarters building, was a room about the size of a football field in which a few hundred people worked, tracking planes and pulling up information relating to the airline’s flights. [7]

United Airlines’ normal procedure when there was a crisis involving one of its planes was to isolate that aircraft and move the handling of it to the crisis center, so as to avoid disrupting operations in the rest of the system. Located just off the operations center, the crisis center was “a terraced, theater-like room that resembled NASA’s Mission Control,” according to journalist and author Jere Longman. On one of its walls, a large screen displayed the locations of United Airlines’ flights. Other screens showed CNN and other television news channels. [8]

After reaching the operations center, Studdert opened the crisis center so his personnel could respond to the simulated emergency from there. [9] This was a major action. “Opening a crisis center in an airline is the single most significant thing you do,” Studdert has commented. When the crisis center was opened, Studdert said, everyone at United Airlines had “a second job, and that second job is to either run … the rest of the airline or act to support the crisis.” It meant 3,000 employees were “put on an immediate activation.” [10] Once the center had been opened, a representative from every division of the airline’s corporate structure was required to report there and carry out specific predetermined duties. [11]

DEVASTATED EMPLOYEES THOUGHT THE SIMULATED EMERGENCY WAS REAL
Around the time Studdert opened the crisis center, employees in the operations center genuinely thought one of their planes had crashed. They presumably believed hundreds of people had died in the catastrophe. Some of them were extremely upset. “There [were] people throwing up in the hall; there [were] people crying; there [were] people just staring out the windows,” Studdert recalled.

And yet, despite this disturbing response to the simulated crisis, Studdert let his employees believe one of their planes had crashed for 30 minutes. He then went on the crisis center’s communications link, which, he described, “has got 170 stations and people all over the country, all over the world,” and revealed that the apparent catastrophe was just simulated. “This has been a no-notice drill,” he announced. “There is no event. Everything’s fine.” [12]

There was a furious response to what Studdert had done in the following days. The exercise was deemed inappropriately intense and emotionally damaging. “I had the board members calling; I had the unions demanding I be fired; I had people telling me I’m the most evil person in the world,” Studdert recalled. [13] Some airline employees “wanted to kill me,” he said. [14]

Studdert’s exercise must surely have been unprecedented in how realistic and intense it was. It seems unlikely that the exercise would have elicited such a severe response if United Airlines had conducted anything like it before. How curious it seems that United Airlines personnel were subjected to such a dramatic simulated emergency less than two weeks before September 11, when they had to respond to a genuine emergency involving two of their aircraft.

Read more

The Obama administration is waging war all over the world – without congressional authorization

by Mel Gurtov
December 28, 2015
Antiwar.com

The death of six US soldiers in Afghanistan on December 21 at the hands of a Taliban suicide bomber brings to 21 the number of US combat deaths there in 2015. Once again we must confront the question of national purpose in waging war without debate or declaration. Like all other battlefield deaths in the Middle East, the Obama administration rationalizes these latest as being part of “training, advising, and assisting,” not combat. But those are merely code words for direct interventions that Congress has not authorized since 2002, in clear violation of restrictions the War Powers Resolution of 1973 places on presidential power.

There will be plenty more casualties in the Middle East for years to come, and not just because of the seemingly permanent US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. Consider two recent news items. According to a plan not yet formally approved, the Pentagon wants to create a worldwide string of “hubs” as staging areas for Special Operations forces to strike quickly against terrorists. Second, most members of Congress are unwilling to introduce and debate a bill authorizing the Obama administration’s use of force in the Middle East and beyond. Thus, there is no end in sight to the US at war, both because the Pentagon has found the perfect enemy and because no one in Congress is willing to stand up to it.

Read more

Pepe Escobar
24 Dec, 2015
RT

A F18 Super Hornet © Mark Wilson / Reuters

In his seminal ‘Fall of Rome: And the End of Civilization,’ Bryan Ward-Perkins writes, “Romans before the fall were as certain as we are today that their world would continue forever… They were wrong. We would be wise not to repeat their complacency.”

The Empire of Chaos, today, is not about complacency. It’s about hubris – and fear. Ever since the start of the Cold War the crucial question has been who would control the great trading networks of Eurasia – or the “heartland”, according to Sir Halford John Mackinder (1861–1947), the father of geopolitics.

Russia says Turkish leadership involved in illegal oil trade with #ISIShttps://t.co/0tt7cvgyrhpic.twitter.com/4ggMhPdIDI
— RT (@RT_com) December 2, 2015

We could say that for the Empire of Chaos, the game really started with the CIA-backed coup in Iran in 1953, when the US finally encountered, face to face, that famed Eurasia crisscrossed for centuries by the Silk Road(s), and set out to conquer them all.

Only six decades later, it’s clear there won’t be an American Silk Road in the 21st century, but rather, just like its ancient predecessor, a Chinese one. Beijing’s push for what it calls “One Belt, One Road” is inbuilt in the 21st century conflict between the declining empire and Eurasia integration. Key subplots include perennial NATO expansion and the empire’s obsession in creating a war zone out of the South China Sea.

As the Beijing-Moscow strategic partnership analyses it, the oligarchic elites who really run the Empire of Chaos are bent on the encirclement of Eurasia – considering they may be largely excluded from an integration process based on trade, commerce and advanced communication links.

Beijing and Moscow clearly identify provocation after provocation, coupled with relentless demonization. But they won’t be trapped, as they’re both playing a very long game.

Read more

Dec. 24, 2015
RT

The Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff has been indirectly providing Syrian military with intelligence on Islamic extremists fearing the Obama administration’s agenda to oust Bashar Assad will engender total chaos in Syria. A new investigation in the London Review of Books by renowned American journalist Seymour M. Hersh exposes the divide between the US top brass and the politicians in the White House when it comes to dealing with Islamic extremists in Syria and Iraq.

Read article

Administrator’s note: They are saving them because they want them alive. Creating your own enemy serves the agenda of advancing militarism.
————————————————————————————————————————————————

Saving their sworn enemy: Heartstopping footage shows Israeli commandos rescuing wounded men from Syrian warzone – but WHY are they risking their lives for Islamic militants?

Elite Israeli troops rescue wounded Syrians from the world’s worst war almost every night
They have saved more than 2,000 people since 2013, at a cost of 50 million shekels (£8.7million)
Many are enemies of Israel and some may even be fighters for groups affiliated to Al Qaeda
MailOnline embedded with Israeli commandos stationed on the border between Israel and Syria
Dramatic video filmed by MailOnline and the Israeli army shows these operations taking place
Israel says that the operation is purely humanitarian but analysts believe Israel also has strategic reasons

By Jake Wallis Simons
Daily Mail.co.uk
Published: 8 December 2015, Updated:16 December 2015

Under cover of darkness, an Israeli armoured car advances down the potholed road that leads to Syria. As it crests a small hill, the driver picks up the radio handset and tells his commanding officer that the border is in sight.

He kills the engine. Ten heavily-armed commandos jump out and take cover, watching for signs of ambush. Then five of them move up to the 12ft chainlink fence that marks the limit of Israeli-held territory.

On the other side, on the very edge of Syria, lies an unconscious man wrapped like a doll in a blood-drenched duvet. The commandos unlock the fence, open a section of it and drag him onto Israeli soil.

But this wounded man is not an Israeli soldier, or even an Israeli citizen. He is an Islamic militant. And his rescue forms part of an extraordinary humanitarian mission that is fraught with danger and has provoked deep controversy on all sides.

MailOnline has gained unprecedented access to this secretive and hazardous operation, embedding with the commandos to obtain exclusive footage, and interviewing the medics who are obliged to treat Syrian militants, some of whom openly admit that they intend to kill Israelis.

Danger: Israeli commandos are carrying out similar rescues every night – but their government’s motive for authorising the extraordinary missions is unclear

The casualty – who doesn’t look older than 20 – is losing blood fast. He has been shot in the intestines and the liver, and has a deep laceration in his left ankle.

After putting him on an emergency drip, the commandos stretcher him back to the armoured car and head back to Israel.

Almost every night, Israeli troops run secret missions to save the lives of Syrian fighters, all of whom are sworn enemies of the Jewish state.

Israel insists that these treacherous nightly rescues are purely humanitarian, and that it can only hope to ‘win hearts and minds’ in Syria. But analysts suggest the Jewish state has in fact struck a deadly ‘deal with the devil’ – offering support to the Sunni militants who fight the Syrian ruler Assad in the hope of containing its arch enemies Hezbollah and Iran.

‘My dream is that one day, the Red Cross will say, thanks guys, we’ll take it from here, you go back to your unit and take care of injured Israelis,’ said Lieutenant Colonel Itzik Malka, commander of the medical branch of the Golan Brigade.

‘I am proud of what we are doing here, but it is a great burden. For every Syrian in hospital, there is one less bed for an Israeli. One day we will have to make a choice between an Israeli life and a Syrian one. When that happens it will be hard, but I have to say my first duty will be to Israelis.’

Read more

Viral 9/11 Truth-Debunking Blacksmith Gets It All Wrong
by Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

Much hay has been made in recent days about a YouTube video posted by a blacksmith named Trenton Tye, who tries to debunk the theory that the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 were destroyed by controlled demolition.

Within the first two days of being posted, Tye’s video received five million views and was covered by the Washington Post, the Daily Mirror, and the Huffington Post — the latter with the celebratory headline, “Metal Worker Shuts Down 9/11 Truthers… With His Pinkie.”

In fact, Tye’s attempt to disprove controlled demolition by heating a half-inch piece of steel to 1,800°F and bending it like a “noodle” is way off. He seems to think the controlled demolition argument goes like this, “Fire can’t melt steel, so the buildings couldn’t have collapsed from fire.” He couldn’t be more mistaken.

The only reason that melting steel is discussed at all is because government officials, engineers, first responders, and others observed large amounts of molten metal (requiring temperatures of more than 2,800°F) in the debris of all three buildings.

Tye’s sixth-grade-level demonstration that structural steel loses strength at 1,800°F does nothing to address the presence of molten metal at Ground Zero. If anything, Tye proves that the fires in the World Trade Center could not have generated the molten metal that witnesses saw. What did? The only plausible explanation is thermite, an incendiary that can be used to cut through structural steel.

Putting aside the molten metal, Tye’s demonstration is wholly irrelevant for the simple reason that the fires in the World Trade Center could not have heated the structure anywhere near as high as the 1,800°F to which Tye heated his piece of steel using a furnace.

Jet fuel fires reach temperatures of around 1,500°F only under optimal conditions. In open air conditions like the WTC buildings, they burn at around 600°F. Even according to the government agency that investigated the disaster, there is no evidence that any of the steel was heated to the point where it would lose its strength.

There have been literally hundreds of hotter, larger, longer-lasting fires in steel-frame high-rises over the last century, and never has one caused the total collapse of a building. Tye’s simplistic logic implies that many of these infernos should have led to a total collapse. Of course, none has — and that also goes for the three steel-frame high-rises that were destroyed on 9/11.

That this YouTube video has become an overnight sensation testifies to the alarming lack of journalistic rigor and scientific acumen with which the media has approached the debate surrounding the World Trade Center destruction on 9/11 — and to the rampant misinformation that has followed.

We encourage anyone who thinks there might be some validity to Tye’s confused science experiment to visit AE911Truth.org and to read our most recent publication, Beyond Misinformation: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7, for real expert analysis of the evidence.

By Philip Giraldi
December 22, 2015
The American Conservative

Nearly everyone claims to want to do something about ISIS, but nothing ever happens. In reality, the only powers directly affected by ISIS that are willing to fight are Iran and Syria, with a little help from Lebanon’s Hezbollah. Pessimistic intelligence assessments prepared for the Pentagon warn that there are multiple agendas being pursued by almost everyone else claiming to be involved in what has been misnamed a multinational coalition. Iraq, a frontline player in the conflict, has been hampered by a dysfunctional and corrupt military that just cannot make headway against the more resolute ISIS fighters, even with U.S. air support. Indeed, ISIS reportedly benefits from more than a sprinkling of renegade Sunni former officers from Saddam Hussein’s disbanded army.

Elsewhere, the duplicity is more openly on display. The Saudis would prefer to see ISIS in Syria rather than Bashar al-Assad, whom they regard as an Iranian proxy. They support ISIS secretly, while they are pretending not to, and have focused their military effort on bombing Yemen. Ditto for the Gulf States, most particularly Qatar, home of the United States Central Command. Jordan, nervous about its own internal security, reacted when its pilot was publicly burned to death but has since largely dropped out of the fight except as a venue for the failed U.S. effort to train “moderate” militants.

Read more

Divide, Conquer, Colonize

by Dan Sanchez
December 22, 2015
Antiwar.com


As US-driven wars plummet the Muslim world ever deeper into jihadi-ridden failed state chaos, events seem to be careening toward a tipping point. Eventually, the region will become so profuse a font of terrorists and refugees, that Western popular resistance to “boots on the ground” will be overwhelmed by terror and rage. Then, the US-led empire will finally have the public mandate it needs to thoroughly and permanently colonize the Greater Middle East.

It is easy to see how the Military Industrial Complex and crony energy industry would profit from such an outcome. But what about America’s “best friend” in the region? How does Israel stand to benefit from being surrounded by such chaos?

Tel Aviv has long pursued a strategy of “divide and conquer”: both directly, and indirectly through the tremendous influence of the Israel lobby and neocons over US foreign policy.

A famous article from the early 1980s by Israeli diplomat and journalist Oded Yinon is most explicit in this regard. The “Yinon Plan” calls for the “dissolution” of “the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula.” Each country was to be made to “fall apart along sectarian and ethnic lines,” after which each resulting fragment would be “hostile” to its neighbors.” Yinon incredibly claimed that:

“This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run”

Read more

12/20/2015
by Kevin Ryan
Source

Eleven years ago, I initiated a discussion about the fact that jet fuel fires could not have melted steel at the World Trade Center. The government agency investigating the WTC destruction responded by holding “some of its deliberations in secret.” Although it’s not a secret that jet fuel can’t melt steel, due to propaganda from sources like The Washington Post and The Huffington Post, Americans often get confused about what facts like that mean to any national discussion. In a nutshell, what it means is that the molten metal found at the WTC, for which there is a great deal of evidence, cannot be explained by the official 9/11 myth.

No one thinks that jet fuel fires can melt steel beams—not even The Posts’ new science champion, who doesn’t bother to actually use jet fuel or steel beams to teach us about “retarded metallurgical things.” Instead, he uses a thin metal rod and a blacksmith forge to imply that, if the WTC buildings were made of thin metal rods and there were lots of blacksmith forges there, the thin metal rods would have lost strength and this would be the result. If you buy that as an explanation for what happened at the WTC, you might agree that everyone should just stop questioning 9/11.

This absurd demonstration highlights at least two major problems with America’s ongoing struggle to understand 9/11. The first is that there was a great deal of molten metal at the WTC. Those who know that fact sometimes share internet memes that say “Jet Fuel Can’t Melt Steel Beams” when they want to convey that “Thermite Melted Steel at the WTC.” The second major problem is that certain mainstream media sources continue to put a lot of energy into dis-informing the public about 9/11.

Sources like The Posts, The New York Times and some “alternative media” continue to work hard to support the official myth of 9/11. That effort is not easy because they must do so while providing as little actual information about 9/11 as possible. The dumbing down of the average citizen is a full time job for such propagandists. Luckily for them, American students receive almost no historical context that encourages them to think critically or consider ideas that conflict with blind allegiance to their government. When it comes to the WTC, it also helps that almost 80% of Americans are scientifically illiterate.

As media companies attempt to confuse the public about 9/11, they must avoid relating details that might actually get citizens interested in the subject. For example, it’s imperative that they never mention any of these fourteen facts about 9/11. It is also important to never reference certain people, like the ordnance distribution expert (and Iran-Contra suspect) who managed security at the WTC or the tortured top al Qaeda leader who turned out to have nothing to do with al Qaeda. In fact, to support the official myth of 9/11 these days, media must ignore almost every aspect of the crimes while promoting only the most mindless nonsense they can find. Unfortunately, that bewildering strategy becomes more obvious every day.

Better Tag Cloud