9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

Thanks to the work of citizen investigators and patriots, we now know that the government’s version of the events of 9/11 is a tissue of lies.

Here are some of the things we have learned in the years following 9/11:

Bin Laden was working for the US government right up to 9/11. In all likelihood he died in 2001 despite the fact that the government continued to pump out videos featuring him whenever support for the war began to wane. Al Qaeda doesn’t exist either except as an asset of the intelligence agencies of the West and Israel. Adding to the absurdity is the fact that the spokesman for Al Qaeda is a American Jew whose grandfather was on the board of the Anti-Defamation League.

The purported hijackers were not devout Muslims. Instead they were patsies trained at US military bases and at flight schools connected to the CIA. Mohammed Atta, the supposed 9/11 ringleader, had a German CIA handler. He was a secularist who enjoyed cocaine, gambling, pork, and strippers. According to Atta’s father, Mohammed was still alive the day after 9/11. However his father stated that he had since been killed by US and Israeli forces. At least nine of the 19 alleged hijackers were alive after 9/11 and claimed that their identities had been stolen. Another of the alleged hijackers actually died the year before 9/11. Yet the government has failed to correct these errors or identify who really hijacked the airliners.

The three skyscrapers in the World Trade Center complex in New York were brought down by controlled demolitions. Bombs were heard going off by firefighters and policemen. Molten steel was seen pouring out of the buildings and found in the basements months after 9/11. Common office fires do not melt steel nor does jet fuel which is mostly kerosene. Nanothermates were found in the dust from the buildings – proof that they were brought down with explosives.  Nanothermites are not made in a cave in Afghanistan and the ‘terrorists’ did not have access to the buildings to wire them for demolition. The hijacked airliners were driven into the buildings to create the illusion that they brought down the towers. Security for the WTC was handled by members of the Bush family. The World Trade Center towers were heavily insured by Larry Silverstein – a Zionist with close ties to Israel’s leadership. Members of the Mossad were arrested filming and celebrating the destruction of the WTC. After being released and sent back to Israel, they went on Israeli television to say that they had been sent to ‘document’ the event. Other Mossad operatives were caught trying to penetrate federal installations, living in proximity to the hijackers, and on 9/11 were in New York in vans that police found had traces of explosives in them as well as boxcutters.

The US military had been rehearsing for a 9/11 scenario for at least a year before the event. Those exercises were later used to confuse military and FAA employees once the operation went live. Meanwhile operational command was being exercised elsewhere by Pentagon officials, CIA operatives, and Vice President Dick Cheney.

No passenger jet hit the Pentagon. Explosives were planted inside the building. The jet liner flew over the building at the same time the explosions went off. The explosives were probably set off when either a drone or a missile hit the building. Pentagon and government officials have yet to explain why the nation’s capitol was undefended for almost two hours, why none of the anti-aircraft missiles at the Pentagon worked that day, and why no jets were scrambled to defend either Washington DC or the financial center of America – New York.

Plans for imperial control of all resources in the Middle East were prepared by the Pentagon and described in the document: The Project for a New American Century. The document was a joint effort of the Anglo/American and Jewish establishment. The intelligence agencies of several different countries participated in pulling off the 9/11 attack. Israel, Britain, Saudi Arabia, Germany and other countries were involved. Everything was coordinated internally through a secret team composed of Pentagon, CIA, and FBI and NSA officials in collaboration with America’s financial and corporate leaders.

The plane that went down in Pennsylvania was shot down. The story of the passengers attempting to takeover the plane was a ruse to cover up the downing of the jet. It is likely that the plane was meant to hit Building 7 in New York which is why the building was already wired for demolition. When the plane was shot down in Pennsylvania, Building 7 had to be brought down anyway later that day.

Insider trading of airline stocks was later linked back to “Buzzy” Krongard among others. He had previously been Chairman of an investment firm that was acquired by Deutsche Bank. Deutsche Bank was one of the firms that purchased “put” options betting that United Airline stock would fall. After leaving the investment firm, “Buzzy” became Executive Director of the CIA under George Bush.

The mainstream media is complicit in the 9/11 cover up.  They have consistently failed to investigate it or reveal the burgeoning evidence that it was an inside job. When members of the 9/11 truth movement are interviewed, they are largely dismissed as lunatics or homegrown terrorists.

Both political parties are complicit in the cover up. Despite numerous requests to government officials to hold a real investigation, members of both parties have continued to stonewall the public. Repressive legislation aimed American citizens, free speech, and access to the internet have been the only response from Washington. However they are only following orders from Wall Street and the bankers. They are the ones who have enabled the American empire because of dollar being the world’s reserve currency. The deal with American politicians and the military would be that the government could borrow as much money as it wanted as long as it paid interest to the central bankers. In return both parties would have all the financial resources they wanted to create a welfare-warfare state while enriching individual politicians. This accounts for America’s strong support of Israel because it is Jewish bankers who founded Israel and who make up most, but not all, of the central bankers. The joint efforts between the Anglo/American and Jewish elite in the Middle East and Asia have several objectives. To control the oil, gas, and mineral resources in that area in order to control the world’s economy. To provide backing for the dollar which currently is not backed by anything. And last to eliminate Israel’s enemies so that greater Israel can be created.

In summary, there is no war on terror.  There are no Al Qaeda boogiemen.  There are no fanatical Muslims that “hate our freedom.”

There is instead a war to terrorize Americans and the people of the world into obedience. The world’s elite have had a long standing plan to establish one world totalitarian rule and the 9/11 event and phony war on terror ’terrorism’ are programs for bringing this plan to fruition.

That leaves the people of the world with a choice. Either come together to fight these hyenas or be enslaved forever. We have no other choice.

Site Administrator’s note: United Flight 175 was supposed to have hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York at 9:03 am. However research by Pilots for 9/11 Truth shows that flight 175 was still airborne after the crash.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

From Pilots for 9/11 Truth

UNITED 175 IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) – Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this “texting” system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it’s location and vice versa. ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier? Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of “Woody Box”, who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred.

These are the ‘text’ (ACARS) messages in question -

The format for these messages is pretty straight forward. To limit the technical details, we will explain the most important parts of the messages, however, for full Message Block Format Code standards, click here. The remote ground station (MDT in the message below) used to route the message to the aircraft, the time and date in which the message is sent (111259, meaning the 11th of Sept, at 1259Z or 0859 Eastern), the flight number (UA175), and the tail number of the airplane in which the message is intended (N612UA), are all highlighted in red. The underlined date and time is when the message was received by the airplane.

This message was sent on Sept 11, at 1259Z (8:59AM Eastern) to United Flight 175, tail number N612UA, routed through the MDT remote ground station (Harrisburg International Airport, also known as Middleton).

DDLXCXA SFOLM CHI58R SFOFRSAM
.SFOLMUA 111259/JER
CMD
AN N612UA/GL MDT
– QUSFOLMUA 1UA175 BOSLAX
I HEARD OF A REPORTED INCIDENT ABOARD YOUR ACFT. PLZ VERIFY ALL
IS NORMAL….THX 777SAM
SFOLM JERRY TSEN

;09111259 108575 0543

This message was sent on Sept 11, at 1303Z (9:03AM Eastern, the time of the crash) to United Flight 175, tail number N612UA, routed through the MDT remote ground station (Harrisburg International Airport, also known as Middleton).

DDLXCXA CHIAK CH158R
.CHIAKUA 111303/ED
CMD
AN N612UA/GL MDT
– QUCHIYRUA 1UA175 BOSLAX
– MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
HOW IS THE RIDE. ANY THING DISPATCH CAN DO FOR YOU…
CHIDD ED BALLINGER

;09111303 108575 0545

This message was also sent on Sept 11, at 1303Z (9:03AM Eastern, the time of the crash) to United Flight 175, tail number N612UA, routed through the MDT remote ground station (Harrisburg International Airport, also known as Middleton).

DDLXCXA CHIYR CH158R
.CHIYRUA 111303/AD
CMD
AN N612UA/GL MDT
– QUCHIYRUA 1UA175 BOSLAX
– MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
NY APROACH LOOKIN FOR YA ON 127.4
CHIDD AD ROGERS

;09111303 108575 0546

This message was sent on Sept 11, at 1323Z (9:23AM Eastern, 20 minutes after the time of the crash) to United Flight 175, tail number N612UA, routed through the PIT remote ground station (Pittsburgh International Airport).

DDLXCXA CHIAK CH158R
.CHIAKUA DA 111323/ED
CMD
AN N612UA/GL PIT
– QUCHIYRUA 1UA175 BOSLAX
– MESSAGE FROM CHIDD -
/BEWARE ANY COCKPIT INTROUSION: TWO AIRCAFT IN NY . HIT TRADE C
NTER BUILDS…
CHIDD ED BALLINGER

;09111323 108575 0574

If one references the standard message block codes linked above, you will notice that a “Technical Acknowledgement” section should be present in ACARS messages. What this means, is that the ACARS system can confirm if the sent ‘text’ messages have been received or not without requiring any crew input to manually acknowledge the message was received. Similar to an email which may have bounced back, or your cell phone telling you that your text message failed to send, this automatic technical acknowledgement would let the reader know the message failed receipt, or if it were received. An ACK or NAK should be present denoting received or failed, respectively, according to standard message formats. Unfortunately, these standard codes are not available in the above messages. However, according to a Memorandum For The Record(2) quoting United Dispatcher Ed Ballinger, the second time stamp on the bottom of the message, at United Airlines, is the “Technical Acknowledgement” from the airplane that the message has been received -

Mr. Ballinger stated that the ACARS messages have two times listed: the time sent and the time received. He stated that once he sends the message it is delivered to the addressed aircraft through AIRINC immediately. He is not aware of any delay in the aircraft receiving the message after he sends it.

According to the above statement made by Mr. Ballinger, all of the above messages were received by the aircraft.

The 9/11 Commission has claimed which messages have been received by the aircraft. According to a another Memorandum For The Record (MFR), four ACARS messages were sent between 8:59AM and 9:03AM on the morning of Sept 11, to United Flight 175. The MFR reads as follows(3) -

1259:19Z A dispatcher-initiated message that reached the plane but not crew acknowledged stating “I heard of a reported incident.”
1259:29 Additional dispatcher-initiated message
1259:30 Additional dispatcher-initiated message
1303:17 Rogers-initiated message not received by the aircraft

The first message at 1259:19Z, as stated, was received by the aircraft, but not crew acknowledged, which is not required as technical acknowledgements are automatic. This is referring to the message noted above sent through MDT by Jerry TSEN (First coded ACARS message at top). The second (1259:29Z) and third messages (1259:30Z) referenced in the MFR were not provided through the FOIA. The last message (1303:17Z) referenced in the MFR is claimed to not have been received by the aircraft according to the 9/11 Commission. However, all we have is their word, which contradicts the statement made by Ballinger and the Technical Acknowledgement time stamp. The coded Rogers initiated ACARS message is included above, third from the top. Of course, the 9/11 Commission cannot admit if the last message was received by the airplane as that would immediately indicate to anyone that the airplane did not crash into the South Tower at 09:03am.

It is interesting to note that the Commission ignores the 9:03am ACARS message sent by Ed Ballinger routed through MDT (second ACARS message printed above), yet claims the 9:03am message sent by Rogers as not being received. Based on sequential numbers of the messages themselves, it is clear Ballinger’s 9:03 message was sent before the Rogers message (0545 for Ballinger message, 0546 for Rogers, printed on bottom of the message), yet the Commission ignores Ballinger’s message. Why would they ignore Ballinger’s message, yet acknowledge Rogers? Is it because Ballinger’s message was received by the airplane and they realized that an aircraft cannot receive an ACARS message at that distance and such low altitude? This message is more evidence the aircraft was in the vicinity of Harrisburg, and not NY. At least 3 ACARS messages were routed through MDT between 8:59 and 9:03am, and received by the airplane, according to the technical acknowledgement time stamps at the bottom of the messages.

The last message sent at 9:23AM, routed through Pittsburgh, has been completely ignored by the 9/11 Commission as well. Although important to know whether the messages were received, it is equally if not more important to understand how they are routed, received or not.

ACARS Networks are based on ARINC Standards for communications in the United States. ARINC is a provider of the communication protocol for ACARS networking. As ACARS networks are to Cell Phones, think of ARINC as perhaps a Verizon or AT&T. When a message is sent from the aircraft, or the ground, the message needs to be routed through remote ground stations as described above. Many remote ground stations (RGS) are located throughout the world. Here is a diagram of some of the stations located in the Northeast USA.

Link to the rest of the article 9/11 Aircraft Airborne Well After Crash

United Flight 93 was also airborne well after its supposed crash in Shanksville United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash – According To ATC/Radar

By Kevin Ryan
October 30, 2011

When Underwriters Laboratories fired me for challenging the World Trade Center (WTC) report that it helped create with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), it said “there is no evidence” that any firm performed the required fire resistance testing of the materials used to build the Twin Towers. Of course, that was a lie.

With this experience in mind, I checked to see how many times the 9/11 Commission Report used the phrase “no evidence,” and noted in particular the times the Commission claimed to have “found no evidence” or that “no evidence was uncovered.” I discovered that the phrase “no evidence” appears an amazing 63 times. An example is the dubious statement — “There is no evidence to indicate that the FAA recognized Flight 77 as a hijacking until it crashed into the Pentagon (p 455).”

Of these 63 instances, some variation of “we found no evidence” appears three dozen times. This seems to be an unusually high number of disclaimers begging ignorance, given that the Commission claims to have done “exacting research” in the production of a report that was the “fullest possible accounting of the events of September 11, 2001.”

The number of times these “no evidence” disclaimers appear in the report is doubly amazing considering how infrequently some of the most critical witnesses and evidence are referenced. For example, the FAA’s national operations manager, Benedict Sliney, who was coordinating the FAA’s response that day, appears only once in the narrative (and twice in the notes). And the FAA’s hijack coordinator, Michael Canavan, appears only twice in the narrative, with neither of those citations having anything to do with Canavan’s assigned role as the key link between the military and the FAA, a role whose failure the Commission says caused the attacks to succeed. Similarly, the testimony of FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, who says Bin Laden worked with the U.S. government up until the day of the attacks, is mentioned only once in the notes. William Rodriguez, the WTC janitor who has publicly testified to basement level explosions, is not mentioned at all despite having given testimony to the Commission.

It seems a good idea to look more closely at the instances in which the attorneys, myth experts and military intelligence operatives who wrote the 9/11 Commission Report said that they did not find evidence. Here are a few of the most interesting examples.

“We found no evidence, however, that American Airlines sent any cockpit warnings to its aircraft on 9/11.” p11
Concerning the hypothesis that one of the alleged hijackers was sitting in the cockpit jump seat since takeoff on Flight 93: “We have found no evidence indicating that one of the hijackers, or anyone else, sat there on this flight.” p12
Within minutes of the second WTC impact, Boston Center asked the FAA Command Center (Benedict Sliney’s team) to advise aircraft to heighten cockpit security, but the Commission said: “We have found no evidence to suggest that the Command Center acted on this request or issued any type of cockpit security alert.” p23
With respect to requests to warn aircraft to heighten cockpit security — “While Boston Center sent out such warnings to the commercial flights in its sector, we could find no evidence that a nationwide warning was issued by the ATC system.” p455

These first four examples highlight the little discussed fact that the 9/11 Commission did not explain how any of the alleged hijackers entered the cockpits of any of the four hijacked planes.

Link to the rest of the article The 9/11 Commission claims that “we found no evidence”

Book Review by Thomas C. Fletcher

David Ray Griffin in his new book, 9/11 Ten Years Later: When State Crimes Against Democracy Succeed, takes stock of what we know, after the passage of a decade of intensive grassroots research and analysis, about what really happened that day, and of the present state of the 9/11 truth movement – its strengths and its weaknesses, and how it can move forward most effectively. The book is a combination of important lectures given by Griffin in the last few years, revised and updated for publication, and of completely new essays on key topics, such as the strong evidence that the phone calls from the hijacked airliners must have been faked, and the powerful consensus about the Pentagon events that has been achieved by the movement.

The first four chapters highlight the strongest evidence that 9/11 was an inside job and the clearest implications of that evidence: the lack of evidence that Muslims attacked the US on that day (making clear that the ten-year-long series of wars on Muslim nations is morally and legally unjustified); the multiple occasions on which the laws of physics were miraculously inoperative in the destruction of the World Trade Center, if the official account so ferociously defended by erstwhile critics of government like Bill Moyers, Robert Parry, Alexander Cockburn and many others is to be believed; and the extraordinary case of World Trade Center (WTC) 7′s classic demolition, which has been assiduously covered up by the mainstream media and government agencies (its collapse was never even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report, and the final report on its destruction issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in November 2008 was fraudulent).

Chapter 5, “Phone Calls From The 9/11 Planes: Why They Are Not Authentic,” examines all the evidence that has been discovered regarding phone calls from the hijacked airliners. The phone calls have been a crucial part of the official story of the day’s events, purportedly establishing that the planes were hijacked by Arab Muslims and that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. But after a careful, critical analysis Griffin is forced to conclude that the phone calls were not made from the planes. First he shows that there is no evidence that the alleged hijackers actually were ever onboard any of the planes, and further, that the failure of any of the eight pilots to “squawk” the hijack code into their transponders is “strong evidence that the official story about the 9/11 planes — that the cabins were taken over by hijackers – is false.” He then shows that the calls to Deena Burnett, which registered on her caller ID as calls from her husband Tom Burnett’s cell phone (he was a passenger on board Flight 93), could not have been completed because cell phone technology in 2001 was not capable of completing calls from airliners at high elevation. Griffin concludes the calls had to have been faked, and suggests that they were faked by voice morphing, already a well-established technical capability at the time. After examining the claims made for many other calls, including those for Barbara Olson, wife of then Solicitor General Ted Olson, which were the basis for the claim that Flight 77 was still in the air and subsequently crashed into the Pentagon, Griffin concludes that “the evidence that the ‘calls from the planes’ were faked is strong, … far stronger than the evidence for the view that the calls were made by passengers and flight attendants, describing the activities of Middle-Eastern hijackers.”

Chapter 6 discusses Vice President Dick Cheney’s changing account of his whereabouts and activities at key times during the morning of 9/11. After admitting on national TV five days later that he had been present and in charge in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) in the basement of the White House before the Pentagon was attacked, he changed his story in November and claimed he did not reach the PEOC until after the Pentagon attack. Griffin shows that the 9/11 Commission Report upheld Cheney’s otherwise unsupported second account, which absolved him of responsibility during two key incidents, the Pentagon attack and the destruction of Flight 93 in Pennsylvania. He shows further that much evidence, ignored by the Commission, contradicted Cheney’s second story, including Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta’s testimony before the Commission, Counterterrorism Czar Richard Clarke’s published account of the morning, and reports from ABC News on the first anniversary of 9/11, all of which the Commission buried without mention.

The gem of the book is the seventh chapter, “The Pentagon: A Consensus Approach.” In this very detailed analysis Griffin shows that the 9/11 truth movement has developed a complex, broad-based refutation of the official story of what happened at the Pentagon (that “the Pentagon was attacked by American Airlines Flight 77… under the control of al-Qaeda”). He examines fourteen facts which have been established by independent researchers, upon which there is universal agreement, and any one of which is enough to demolish the official account. Griffin argues that the movement should concentrate its Pentagon energies on further strengthening and advocacy of these points of agreement, and avoid dissipating time, energy and trust on a question which has taken up much of these resources in recent years, the question of “what hit the Pentagon?” He shows that this question is unanswerable with the evidence available; only a genuine investigation of the 9/11 attacks will enable it to be answered.

Chapter 8 illuminates the psychology of resistance to the truth about the 9/11 events which is so widespread, arguing that the real faith of the nominally-Christian US is “nationalist faith.” The critique of the official story laid out by the 9/11 truth movement is literally unthinkable for many, even for devout Christians whose religion calls upon them to avoid all kinds of idolatry, including nationalism. Griffin concludes that “[w]hen Christian faith is subordinated to faith in American goodness … it becomes a blinding faith, producing Christians with eyes wide shut.”

The subtitle of the book indicates that the 9/11 attacks, in being a false-flag operation carried out by elements of the US government, were a “State Crime Against Democracy” or SCAD, with the primarily political purpose of imposing policies by force upon the country, and that the failure to carry out a genuine investigation, arrest the perpetrators and reverse the policies adopted by the government after 9/11 means that the operation has succeeded. But only to this point in time: the future is still open. Griffin provides in a powerful conclusion (Ch. 9, “When State Crimes Against Democracy Succeed”) suggestions for how the 9/11 truth movement can continue to press forward to the necessary investigation of the 9/11 crimes and the reversal of the tragic course taken by the US while under the control of the criminals.

This superb book is written with the usual clarity, logic and argumentative power readers have come to expect from David Ray Griffin, which he has now employed in ten books on the 9/11 attacks. 9/11 Ten Years Later: When State Crimes Against Democracy Succeed continues his advance at the cutting edge of 9/11 truth, and should be read by everyone who wants to take stock of what the movement has achieved and how to press on into a future in which illegal, immoral wars have been stopped and the country’s democratic ideals reaffirmed.

The Time to Talk Show looks at September 11, ten years on and the persisting questions which, left unanswered, suggest the truth is not being told. 9/11 commentator John Bursill defines the issues.

The Corbett Report
September 11, 2011

Those who believe that they have been told the truth about 9/11 often believe so because of their ignorance of of the official story. The establishment and the media love to portray the government’s version of 9/11 as a coherent, monolithic and universally accepted body of documented facts, but nothing could be further from the truth. The information that contradicts the official story is sometimes contradictory and often convoluted, but we will never arrive at the truth and achieve justice for the victims of 9/11 if we don’t begin the process of asking the tough questions about the official story…and demanding answers.

In this special documentary edition of The Corbett Report, below are 35 points of dispute with the “official” version of 9/11 along with a list of documentation sourcing all of the clips in the episode.

35 Reasons to Question 9/11

On September 6, 2011, the appellant’s opening brief was entered before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in the matter of Monaghan v. Department of Justice, dismissed earlier this year by the U.S. District Court of Nevada. This action seeks the release of numerous FBI records regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, including the actual audio recording obtained from the cockpit-voice-recorder for United Airlines Flight 93, plus Pentagon and Shanksville, PA crash scene evidence collection records.

Much thanks to those who have generously donated to this effort.

DOWNLOAD BRIEF: