Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

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

Archive

Tag: Phony war on terror

Written by Mike Bondi, P.Eng.
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth
16 December 2014

ReThink911 Canada Holds Parliamentary Press Conference

An historic milestone in the 9/11 Truth Movement has been achieved by a dedicated group of activists in Ottawa, Ontario, with the presentation of a petition in the House of Commons requesting a “parliamentary review of the omissions and inconsistencies in the official United States of America 9/11 Commission Report.”

This is not the first time that Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has published news on the three-year effort to present this petition to the Canadian government. Back in February 2012, we reported that the petition for a parliamentary review of the destruction of the three WTC skyscrapers on September 11, 2001, had been given to members of Parliament in the hope that they would formally present the petition in the House of Commons. However, officials were not yet ready to tackle the numerous unanswered questions about 9/11. Again, in March 2013, we reported that a renewed effort to have the petition read in the House of Commons was impeded by Ottawa MP and foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar, because he “did not agree with it.” Still not ready.

A major development finally unfolded on December 3, 2014 when a Member of Parliament rose in the House of Commons “to present a petition, from petitioners in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and particularly in the Ottawa area, calling on the government of Canada to conduct a parliamentary review into the events that occurred in the United States on September 11.”

Mainstream media quickly picked up the story, predictably labeling the petition “a call to support a conspiracy theory.” Also unsurprisingly, the MP came under fire when she insisted that it was her duty as a Member of Parliament to present the petition to the government, even though she “does not agree with it.”

“The Canadian government can and must reset the course of history.” — Isabelle Beenen

Seeing — and seizing — an opportunity to speak to the nation, activists from across Canada responded swiftly. Elizabeth Woodworth of the 9/11 Consensus Panel and David Long of ReThink911 Canada organized a press conference, which was held at the parliamentary press gallery on December 10. Long, author of the petition and a 9/11 survivor, hosted the event and introduced three speakers, each of whom presented powerful and moving statements. Isabelle Beenen read the statement on behalf of AE911Truth; Dr. Graeme MacQueen represented the 9/11 Consensus Panel; and Bill Brinnier spoke on behalf of 9/11 victims and their families.

Media response following the press conference was quite a mix. Global News presented a full minute of Dr. MacQueen’s statement addressing deficiencies in the official 9/11 investigation, including the fact that testimony of over 150 eyewitnesses who had seen and heard explosions on 9/11 had been ignored. Other news sources provided the usual response, including assertions that “the official report explains that the molten metal [flowing from the South Tower just minutes prior to its collapse] was aluminum from the plane” – even though it couldn’t possibly be so.

“I want the truth. . . . We’re going to continue as long as it takes.” — Bill Brinnier

Brinnier, a New York architect whose best friend, World Trade Center construction manager Frank Di Martini, was killed in the North Tower, traveled to Ottawa from Kingston, New York, to make a plea on behalf of all of the 9/11 family members: “I am here today because, like so many other people touched by this unthinkable tragedy, I know that the official story of what happened on that day simply does not add up, and I want the truth.” Later, in the Q&A session with reporters, Brinnier, who is a board member of the New York City Coalition for Accountability Now, reiterated, “To believe that simple office fires could cause the collapse of a 47-story office building — that’s impossible.” He vowed to continue fighting for the truth about 9/11 “as long as I have breath in my lungs.”

Dr. MacQueen, a retired professor from McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, as well as founder and former director of the Centre for Peace Studies and author of the recently published book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy, noted, in response to follow-up questions after the press conference, that even a dismissive response to the petition from the Canadian government would not mean this historic initiative had failed. “It’s all part of the contest, which is heating up,” he observed.

Beenen, who has become one of the most active ReThink911 Canada supporters, presented AE911Truth’s case that “a thorough investigation by the Canadian government can and must reset the course of history and bring about a future of peace – based on a solid foundation of truth and justice. You are not alone. You have the full backing of not only the thousands of licensed/degreed architects and engineers for 9/11 Truth, but millions of citizens around the world who are aware of the truth about 9/11.”

“It’s all part of the contest, which is heating up.” – Dr. Graeme MacQueen

September 11th survivor David Long, who heard the explosions, recalled, “I saw . . . within the first minute or two . . . streams of molten metal coming out of the buildings. I thought there were bombs in those buildings. Everything I saw told me that there were bombs.”

“The government of Canada would be saying it is acceptable to insult the victims.” – David Long

He also explained that because “the US Senate released a report on CIA torture the same day [December 10], we touched on that in the press conference, since evidence obtained through torture was used to make the government’s case in the official 9/11 report. This critical information means that apparently Canada accepts evidence obtained through torture, since it accepted the official account of 9/11 given by the US government,” commented Long — despite the fact that such evidence is not considered reliable in any court of law. He went on to say that any response from the Canadian government that dismissed the significance of the evidence presented to Parliament would conflict with the fact that 9/11 victims themselves presented the petition. “In effect, the government of Canada would be saying it is acceptable to insult the victims.”

The Canadian government is required to reply to a petition within 45 calendar days of its presentation. Absent a reply, a committee designated by the MP who presented the petition is required to investigate the failure to respond. Perhaps Canada is now ready to grapple with the truth about 9/11.

The myth of democracy – exposed

by Justin Raimondo
December 15, 2014

It was a sneak attack. As the stream of borrowed money that funds the Regime was threatened with a (temporary yet embarrassing) cutoff, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Oceania), inserted what Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan) calls a “novel” provision into H.R. 4681, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 – one “that for the first time statutorily authorizes spying on U.S. citizens without legal process.”

The resolution was headed for a perfunctory vote by acclamation but the ever-vigilant libertarian Amash insisted on a roll call vote, putting the culprits on the record – and mobilizing 45 Republicans and 55 Democrats to vote an emphatic “Nay!”

H.R. 4681 is now the law of the land – and the implications are ominous.

Previous legislation, including the PATRIOT Act, at least attempted to create a halo of “legality” around the Surveillance State by requiring some procedural folderol prior to despoiling the contents of our email in-boxes. That this ritual was to occur in secret, with the “court” 98.9 percent certain to take the government’s side, is beside the point – the point being that all pretenses have been dropped. The idea that the government must answer in court to the charge that it is overstepping its constitutional authority has been overthrown – and with it our old republic. Citizens have become subjects – and all with the stroke of a pen.

That the penumbra of “law” was always a smokescreen for the rapacity inherent in all governments is something us libertarians could have told you – indeed, have been telling you – and yet one can hardly fault the skepticism of both liberals and conservatives. After all, don’t we have a Bill of Rights? Isn’t this still America?

The answer to both questions is no. The irrefutable evidence for this is contained in section 309 of H.R. 4681. As Amash points out:

“To be clear, Sec. 309 provides the first statutory authority for the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of US persons’ private communications obtained without legal process such as a court order or a subpoena. The administration currently may conduct such surveillance under a claim of executive authority, such as E.O. 12333. However, Congress never has approved of using executive authority in that way to capture and use Americans’ private telephone records, electronic communications, or cloud data.”

Read more

Former UK Ambassador Describes What Happens to People with Integrity Who Have the Misfortune to End Up in Government Positions

December 15, 2014
By Craig Murray, 
Former British Ambassador To Uzbekistan
Daily Mail.co.uk

In the summer of 2004, I warned Tony Blair’s Foreign Office that Britain was using intelligence material which had been obtained by the CIA under torture. Two months later I was sacked as the British Ambassador to Uzbekistan on the orders of Downing Street, bringing to an end my 20-year diplomatic career.

When I then went public with the news that Uzbek territory was part of a global CIA torture programme, I was dismissed as a fantasist by Mr Blair’s henchmen. Now finally, a decade later, I have been vindicated by last week’s shocking Senate Intelligence Committee report.

Over 500 pages it details the CIA’s brutal abuse of Al Qaeda suspects, who were flown around the world to be tortured in a network of secret prisons. One of these was in Uzbekistan, where the US had an air base.

The CIA programme included both torture they conducted themselves and torture conducted for them by allies. Shamefully, the torture-by-proxy details remain classified to protect America’s gruesome ‘allies’.

The CIA were flying people to Uzbekistan to be tortured, usually via their secret prison at Szymany in Poland. The Uzbeks were doing the actual torture, sometimes with CIA members in the room.

Aside from the moral dimension, the Senate report confirmed my repeated view that intelligence gleaned from torture is useless. When I was Ambassador, one secret file I was sent contained CIA information which named a member of Al Qaeda. The man turned out to be a Jehovah’s Witness.

In 2003, I attended a meeting at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), where I was told by officials that it was not illegal for us to use intelligence from torture as long as we did not carry out the torture ourselves. I was also told at the meeting that this intelligence was ‘useful’ – and that policy came directly from the then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.

Read more

Written by Craig McKee
Saturday, 13 December 2014
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

The original “9-11 Questions” by artist Anthony
Freda is now owned by the 9/11 Museum, though it
is not clear whether its curators intend to ever
display it in public.

To call it unlikely would be an understatement.

A work of art that challenges the official account of 9/11 has been accepted into the permanent collection of the 9/11 Museum in New York City. And surprisingly, the piece was created by an artist who is best known for his illustrations in the mainstream media.

Anthony Freda — who has contributed provocative political art to publications like The New York Times, Time, Rolling Stone, Esquire, The New Yorker, and Playboy — says he has no idea why the museum would accept his painting, titled “9-11 Questions.”

“I still can’t figure out what is in the museum’s mind letting me in there, because literally every part of my being is fighting against the official narrative that they are trying to promote,” he said in an interview. “The thing that fascinates me, and they admitted this, is that this is the only piece in the entire collection that questions the official narrative in any way.”

Freda met with museum staff for 90 minutes to donate the art and to answer questions about the images it contains. The entire exchange was filmed for a documentary called Behind Truth Art, which is planned for release in 2015. (This 30-minute preview shows highlights of the meeting.)

Museum officials told Freda that “9-11 Questions” will rotate with other works on display and that it may also be included in traveling 9/11 art shows organized by the museum. But he concedes that museum officials, now that they own it, can do whatever they want with the piece — including locking it in a vault forever.

Freda created the work eight years ago, when The Village Voice commissioned him to illustrate its article “Fakes on a Plane,” which was intended to “gently make fun” of online 9/11 documentaries like Loose Change and the people who believe them.

Read more

The same memo Bush used to wall himself off from the details of CIA torture is keeping Obama’s drone war alive.

By Marcy Wheeler
December 12, 2014
Foreign Policy.com


On the second day of Barack Obama’s presidency, he prohibited most forms of physical torture. On the third, a CIA drone strike he authorized killed up to 11 civilians.

Those two data points explain one of the most remarkable aspects of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s summary of its report on torture and also likely point to what should be the report’s larger lesson: the purported absence of presidential leadership behind either the torture or the drone programs.

The 525-page executive summary of the Senate’s report, which was released to the public on Tuesday, Dec. 9, provides the most comprehensive description of the torture conducted as part of the CIA’s rendition, detention, and interrogation program in support of the war on terror. (The full 6,000-page report will remain classified for decades.) The summary portrays brutal torture that was also largely counterproductive for intelligence-gathering purposes. It depicts a program so badly managed that the CIA lost count of detainees and on more than one occasion detained and tortured the wrong suspect.

But the most disturbing part of the report might not be the gruesome abuses or the gross incompetence. At least we can hope those are in the past. The biggest problem for the future that the report reveals consists of claims about the ignorance of President George W. Bush (and to a much lesser extent, Vice President Dick Cheney) about key parts of the program.

The report doesn’t describe events in which the White House is known to have been — or almost certainly was — involved in. The report states, for example, that Thailand (which the report refers to as “Detention Site Green” to obscure a widely known fact) “was the last location of a CIA detention facility known to the president or the vice president.” The report also states that the CIA first briefed Bush on interrogation techniques on April 8, 2006. “[T]he president expressed concern,” the report helpfully explains, “about the ‘image of a detainee, chained to the ceiling, clothed in a diaper, and forced to go to the bathroom on himself.’”

In other words, the report leaves the impression that Bush remained ignorant of the goriest details of the torture his administration conducted — for almost two full years after pictures from Abu Ghraib showed abuses just as graphic.

But there are places where the White House’s involvement should be included. For example, when the report discusses how John Yoo, then in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, adopted a “necessity defense” in the 2001 memos finding the torture legal, it says nothing about the role David Addington, Cheney’s counsel, played in the process. That is despite the fact that Addington testified to Congress in 2008 that he helped to put the language about the necessity defense back into the memos. The Senate’s report thus leaves out one event in which Cheney’s office is known to have been involved.

Read more

Paul Craig Roberts
Dec. 11, 2014

Readers have asked for my take on the CIA torture report. There is so much information and commentary available that it is unnecessary.

Igor Volsky provides a concise summary.

President George W. Bush signed off on torture and then told the gullible people that “this government does not torture people.” The torture was horrific. The CIA even tortured its own informers. Two American psychologists who designed the torture program were paid $81 million.

CIA torturers received cash awards for “consistently superior work” when their innocent victims died.

The US government involved 54 countries in its torture program. The rendition program sent detainees to other countries where they were tortured in secret “black sites.’

Obama tortures also.

Those Americans who committed crimes as horrific as any in history have been given a pass by Obama. No accountability for their crimes. This finishes off the rule of law in America, which was already on life support.

CIA Torture Report Sparks Worldwide Condemnation
Even Nations That Participated Were Shocked How Far It Went

A history of the CIA’s Torture program.

Former president of Poland admits that Poland hosted a CIA torture prison:

Read more

December 6, 2014
by Kevin Ryan

Politicians and pundits often use terrorism to promote the interests of their financiers. This fear mongering goes hand in hand with attempts at military profiteering, population control, and the concentration of political power. What many are beginning to discover is that deception is integral to the success of the terrorism business. That is, the official accounts of terrorist events are typically fraught with omissions of fact and the concealment of clues that point to the involvement of more powerful people. The success of these false accounts reveals important aspects of human nature and points to ways in which thoughtful people can help to overcome such challenges.

There will always be a few people greedy enough to lie to others for personal gain, but we can live with this. What we can’t live with is large numbers of people lying to themselves because habitual self-deception is fatal. Long-term successful lies require motivated liars but also willing listeners and when millions or billions of citizens engage in such duplicity they make it difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to survive.

Political-manipulation

It’s common to see people blaming the government or the media for lying and taking advantage. That’s not surprising because, in general, politicians are highly evolved lying machines and the media is rewarded for telling the majority what they want to hear in ways that promote business interests. But what is really needed to overcome that pattern is to examine how lies told by authoritative sources are accepted so easily, making it possible for some to exploit this weakness.

All people lie to themselves. We lie to justify our past actions, to promote ourselves relative to others, and to protect our self-image. The psychological biases and defense mechanisms behind these lies have been studied and are well documented.

Here are a few of the known psychological biases.

Self-serving bias
: The tendency to take credit for success and blame external factors for failure
Egocentricity bias: The tendency to exaggerate the importance of one’s role in past events
False consensus bias: The tendency to believe that most people share one’s opinions and values
Assumption of uniqueness: The tendency to overestimate one’s uniqueness
Self-righteous bias: The tendency to regard oneself as having higher moral standards or greater moral consistency than others have
In-group / out-group bias: The tendency to view members of groups to which one belongs in a more positive light than members of groups of which one does not belong

Examples of known defense mechanisms are as follows.

Repression: Motivated amnesia
Projection: Misattributing some aspect of oneself to someone else
Disavowal (or denial): Disbelieving a true memory or perception
Reaction-formation: Representing an attitude or emotion as its opposite
Rationalization: Attributing mental states to false reasons
Acting out: Precipitately acting to preempt conscious awareness

These are ubiquitous aspects of human psychology—not specific to any cultures or geographic regions. All people lie to themselves to some degree in these ways. Such lies are, without a doubt, largely activated by the unconscious mind but, as Freud noted, almost all of life is a matter of unconscious activity. The conscious mind, or the remembered present, is less involved in, and less capable of directing our lives than most people realize.

Humans developed this tendency to self-deceive through natural selection. Self-deception evolved as a way to better deceive others. Of course, deception of others was an evolutionary advantage whenever there was a limited availability of certain necessities, like food and mates. In response, detection of deception became an evolutionary advantage, as people learned to detect subtle physical clues in the deceiver. Furthermore, individuals who could successfully lie to themselves were naturally selected because they were less likely to give themselves away when lying to others. It seems that self-deception arose in conjunction with lie detection, with the two traits evolving in a sort of early arms race.

The evolution of language allowed for the skills of deception to overtake the skills of detection. The higher, linguistic consciousness facilitated more overlap between mental images due to the uncertainty, or play, in the meaning of terms. The power of language and semantics also gave way to a higher consciousness where internal concepts like the self-image originated. The imbalance between skills of self-deception and skills for detecting self-deception was enhanced by this increased level of uncertainty, and by the higher priority given to the self-image over other internal images.

We all strive to maintain a positive self-image and the increasing amount of time and energy devoted to this task is presenting risk to our real selves. In fact, we seem to defend our self-image as much or more than we defend our actual physical selves and this involves engaging in what Jean-Paul Sartre called “bad faith”. Since the self-image is not real, lying to protect it wastes energy and lowers our chances of being able to respond to any real challenges in our physical environment.

Politicians regularly co-opt our self-image by appealing to our sense of national identity and claiming to speak for it. When selling or promoting a policy, they wrap themselves in the flag. The biases and defense mechanisms noted above come into play when our personal identities are linked to our national identity. Using claims of an elusive, external threat, as with terrorism, government and media can manipulate these tendencies to frame and control the mindset of the average citizen. It all begins with self preservation, whether real or imagined.

In the United States the political system is carefully controlled to provide only two identities—Democrat and Republican. Once chosen, that simplisitic identity functions as a handle by which citizen viewpoints can be more easily controlled. Americans often don’t realize how little difference actually exists between the two parties. Moreover, politicans and media would have more difficulty manipulating a public that identified itself with more than two political viewpoints.

Similarly, each belief and opinion we adopt adds something to our self-image and creates something more to defend. Those who want war for their own purposes frequently utilize differences in religion to inflame the target populations and divert attention away from the real, usually resource-related, motivations. In more simple ways, our opinions on the subject of the day represent positions that, once made, pose risk to our identity and make it difficult for us to change our minds.

Our self-image must fit into an ever-changing mental environment or worldview. Today the rate of input from television and internet media forces people to make rapid adjustments to either their worldview or their self-image in order to maintain their mental “place in the world.” To complicate things, the media are now operated by only a few corporate interests and the internet is at increasing risk of becoming a closed, controlled-message system.

The mental environment of most people is changing and being manipulated very rapidly, with little predictability relative to the changes humanity has seen in the past. At the same time corporate interests are pursuing a power grab strategy that places the survival of the average person at a very low priority. Add to this a climactic evolutionary mental imbalance that indicates that we can no longer tell if we’re lying to ourselves, and we find ourselves in a dangerous predicament.

As thoughtful people work to monitor and reveal deception related to terrorism and other crimes, an effort to get to the root of these problems is needed. To overcome the challenges of deception there is an urgent need to understand and educate on human limitations, including self-deception and uncertainty in communications.

http://digwithin.net/2014/12/06/terrorism-deception/

By Patrick J. Buchanan
December 9, 2014


On Dec. 8, 1941, Franklin Roosevelt took the rostrum before a joint session of Congress to ask for a declaration of war on Japan.

A day earlier, at dawn, carrier-based Japanese aircraft had launched a sneak attack devastating the U.S. battle fleet at Pearl Harbor.

Said ex-President Herbert Hoover, Republican statesman of the day, “We have only one job to do now, and that is to defeat Japan.”

But to friends, “the Chief” sent another message: “You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bit.”

Today, 70 years after Pearl Harbor, a remarkable secret history, written from 1943 to 1963, has come to light. It is Hoover’s explanation of what happened before, during and after the world war that may prove yet the death knell of the West.

Edited by historian George Nash, “Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover’s History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath” is a searing indictment of FDR and the men around him as politicians who lied prodigiously about their desire to keep America out of war, even as they took one deliberate step after another to take us into war.

Yet the book is no polemic. The 50-page run-up to the war in the Pacific uses memoirs and documents from all sides to prove Hoover’s indictment. And perhaps the best way to show the power of this book is the way Hoover does it — chronologically, painstakingly, week by week.

Read more

5 December 2014
by John Pilger

Why has so much journalism succumbed to propaganda? Why are censorship and distortion standard practice? Why is the BBC so often a mouthpiece of rapacious power? Why do the New York Times and the Washington Post deceive their readers?

Why are young journalists not taught to understand media agendas and to challenge the high claims and low purpose of fake objectivity? And why are they not taught that the essence of so much of what’s called the mainstream media is not information, but power?

These are urgent questions. The world is facing the prospect of major war, perhaps nuclear war – with the United States clearly determined to isolate and provoke Russia and eventually China. This truth is being turned upside down and inside out by journalists, including those who promoted the lies that led to the bloodbath in Iraq in 2003.

The times we live in are so dangerous and so distorted in public perception that propaganda is no longer, as Edward Bernays called it, an “invisible government”. It is the government. It rules directly without fear of contradiction and its principal aim is the conquest of us: our sense of the world, our ability to separate truth from lies.

The information age is actually a media age. We have war by media; censorship by media; demonology by media; retribution by media; diversion by media – a surreal assembly line of obedient clichés and false assumptions.

This power to create a new “reality” has building for a long time. Forty-five years ago, a book entitled The Greening of America caused a sensation. On the cover were these words: “There is a revolution coming. It will not be like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual.”

I was a correspondent in the United States at the time and recall the overnight elevation to guru status of the author, a young Yale academic, Charles Reich. His message was that truth-telling and political action had failed and only “culture” and introspection could change the world.

Within a few years, driven by the forces of profit, the cult of “me-ism” had all but overwhelmed our sense of acting together, our sense of social justice and internationalism. Class, gender and race were separated. The personal was the political, and the media was the message.

In the wake of the cold war, the fabrication of new “threats” completed the political disorientation of those who, 20 years earlier, would have formed a vehement opposition.

In 2003, I filmed an interview in Washington with Charles Lewis, the distinguished American investigative journalist. We discussed the invasion of Iraq a few months earlier. I asked him, “What if the freest media in the world had seriously challenged George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and investigated their claims, instead of channeling what turned out to be crude propaganda?”

He replied that if we journalists had done our job “there is a very, very good chance we would have not gone to war in Iraq.”

Read more

corbettreport
Published on Dec 2, 2014

TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: http://www.corbettreport.com/?p=12947

‘Operation Gladio B’–the continuation of the old NATO Gladio program–covers a tangled web of covert operatives, billionaire Imams, drug running, prison breaks and terror strikes. Its goal: the destabilization of Central Asia and the Caucasus. In this presentation to Studium Generale in Groningen on November 19, 2014, James Corbett lifts the lid on this operation, its covert operatives, and the secret battle for the Eurasian heartland.

Better Tag Cloud