The clear unequivocal conclusion is that 9/11 was an "inside job" wall to wall.....

http://warincontext.org/2010/10/16/chas-freeman-engaging-the-middle-east-after-the-cairo-speech/

The clear unequivocal conclusion is that 9/11 was an "inside job" wall to wall..... I would refer those who are not aware of my "conversion" to the "truther" camp and of the motives which caused it to the paper "How I became a dedicated 9-11 Truther" which you can download from here (this is actually a letter that lays out why I strongly believe that there can be no doubt whatsoever about the fact that 9/11 was an "inside job"). Please do read it as I will write the rest of this post under the assumption that you have read my paper where I substantiate and reference the following facts:

1) The US government and corporate media do not have any explanations about how the WTC1 and WTC2 fell. NIST simply did not investigate the events which followed the "initiation of collapse". In case you wonder what happened to the previously official version of the "pancaking" theory - NIST quietly dropped it. Let me repeat this once again. THERE IS NO "OFFICIAL VERSION" FOR THE COLLAPSE OF WTC1 and WTC2. None. Zilch. Nihil. Notin'. Niente. As in "absolutely no nothing". Got it?

You never heard about this?! I am not surprised. But it gets even better, watch this:

2) The US government admitted that WTC7 fell in free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. Why is that important? Simply because that means that a number of floors of WTC7 simply disappeared instantaneously and symmetrically from under the roof of WTC7. There is only one possible way to remove a section of a building instantaneously: by explosive power. Yes, the admission by Uncle Sam that the WTC7 fell for at least 2.25 seconds is an implicit admission that explosives were used. Let me repeat this one too: UNCLE SAM HAS DE-FACTO ADMITTED THAT EXPLOSIVES WERE USED IN WTC7.

Amazing, jaw-dropping stuff I would say, no? So why do I not hear the endless rumble of jaws hitting the floor all over the USA and the rest of the world? Maybe I should drive home the point even more forcefully? Ok, let me try this:

Since Uncle Sam has admitted that only explosives can explain what was observed on September 11th, Uncle Sam has also admitted that he is guilty of that crime. No outside agency, nevermind some semi-mythical 'Al-CIAda' could have had access to a super secret building like WTC7. Only Uncle Sam could have rigged that building to bring it down in a few seconds.

I still do not hear the endless rumble of jaws hitting the floor all over the USA and the rest of the world...

The 'official narrative' (its not even a theory) about 9/11 is so full of holes that one could easily write a 100 pages long paper analyzing all the impossibilities populating literally every aspect of it: from the exploded and non-exploded residue of thermitic material found in huge amounts in the WTC dust, to the impossible telephone calls allegedly made from the hijacked aircraft, to the non-existing plane wrecks in DC and Shanksville, to the absolutely amazing biographies of the putative hijackers all of which seem to have been US government agents, to the role of Pakistan and Israel, to the ridiculous claims about recovered flight manuals, passports, letters, to the impossible flight profiles of the aircraft in DC and NY, etc. - none of it makes any sense at all. Every single one of these absolutely nonsensical parts of the official narrative deserves its own investigation and the good news is that it has already been done, very effectively, by the 9/11 Truth movement (my personal "9/11 electronic library" is currently at 22.6GB (!) of data, most of it high-quality research by very smart folks which have literally eviscerated all the absolute crap of the official narrative) Yet nobody seems to care.

Why?

In my training years I was taught that the process of intelligence revolves around three distinct phases, called the "three As": acquisition, analysis, acceptance.

The first one - acquisition - is all about collecting the data and that has been comprehensively done by thousands of folks since 9/11. The second one - analysis - centers on the careful analysis of the collected data, and I would say that the 9/11 Truth movement has also done a superb job in that respect too. Which leaves the last one - acceptance - which is the process by which the intelligence community brings its conclusions to the attention of the decision makers. It is in this final aspect that the 9/11 Truth movement has largely failed, at least so far: amazingly, even though the truth about 9/11 is out there, only a couple of computer mouse clicks away - most people simply do not give a damn.

Worse, those who do not consider themselves as "truthers" often reflect an amazing degree of bigotry and hostility. These are the folks who refer to "truthers" and their theories as "cooks", "garbage" and, my all-time favorite "conspiracy theories" (as if the official narrative is not one hell of an absurd conspiracy theory!). Why do these "skeptics" so naively accept an absolutely ridiculous official narrative and show such a vitriolic hostility towards those who dare question it?

David Ray Griffin wrote a brilliant open letter to the left-leaning wing of such "skeptics" entitled Left-Leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do You Really Believe in Miracles? which you can download from here. Please do take the time to download and read it, it clearly shows that it is not the "truthers" who believe in miracles, but the so-called "skeptics". Griffin addressed his letter to left-leaning despisers, but he could have addressed it to the right-leaning despisers too - they are equally unwilling (or unable) to cope with the mind-boggling implications of the fact that 9/11 was beyond any doubt an inside job. Yes, the implications of this are truly appalling and, frankly, quite frightening and the aggressive reaction of the 'despisers" is not so much a reflection of their careful analysis and subsequent rejection of the evidence as it is a reflection of their fear to take a hard look at reality. It is hard, if not impossible, to achieve "acceptance" when your audience is absolutely terrified by the implications of your analysis and conclusions.

The 9/11 Truth movement is composed of people who have all dared to think the unthinkable. Some from day 1, some, like myself, from roughly day 3000, but who all eventually dared to plunge in the cold waters of facts and logic no matter where this might lead them.

In contrast, I find that most skeptics, in particular of the aggressive "despisers" variety are really what I call "existential cowards" - folks who choose delusion over the painful facts of reality.

There have been attempts by some in the 9/11 Truth movement to appeal to the common sense of the "despisers". One of my favorite ones is this video:

Yet, one would have to admit that these efforts have not yielded the results one could have reasonably expected. If anything, the more evidence the 9/11 Truth movement produces, the most vociferous hostility it gets from the "despisers". So where do we go from here?

Social psychology has shown the many ways in which people can be lead to believe the exact opposite of what their own eyes are showing them (check out, for example, the research known has the "Asch conformity experiments") or how figures of authority can elicit an amazing degree of obedience to "authority" (check out Milgram's work on obedience to authority). Here I think of those who reject the evidence about 9/11 basically because Noam Chomsky or Ron Paul dismiss it.

We can, of course, find some solace in the words of Gandhi about how "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win", but I would not hold my breath for a final "victory" any time soon. Yes, there are some absolutely amazing people in the 9/11 Truth movement (the names of Richard Gage, Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin immediately come to my mind), but these are all specialists, our movement still lacks a unifying Gandhi who would have the authority to speak for all and loudly cry out "But he isn't wearing anything at all!" when presented with the official myths and fairy tales about September 11th. Sooner or later such a person will appear, I believe, but in the meantime I say that we should just keep working on the already huge corpus of 9/11 research without expecting to ever hear the endless rumble of jaws dropping to the floor. Folks - it isn't coming and we might as well get used to this unpalatable fact.

Looking at how long it took my own jaw to drop (8 years!) I find some solace in the idea that we will be able to convince people, although not en masse, but one by one, one jaw at a time. That should be the objective - small steps in the right direction while remaining steadfastly unaffected by the never ending stream vitriol and scorn from the existential cowards who are freaked out by reality....

Some people are more observant than others.....

churchofnobody.blogspot/ has noticed how we are being brainwashed in a particular way by TV.

He refers to a point scoring buzzer game with the panel given a list of set responses to various 'conspiracy' theories:

'That's just crazy', 'He'll be talking about UFO's next', 'Anti-Semitism!', 'They would never do it', 'That's just crazy', etc. (Next on ABC - Media Watch Death Cult Love-Fest!)

twelfthbough.blogspot/ has noticed (1) how no one claimed the mutilated bodies of the Mumbai 'terrorists' in the morgue. and (2) Headley's background.

Observant people will have noticed that the Saudi ambassador to the UK, Ghazi Algosaibi, told the BBC:

"We are worried that this has turned from a war against terrorism ... into a war of America or the West against Islam." (BBC -Saudi Arabia warns of West-Islam split)

B.RAMAN, has noticed that because of HEADLEY’S CASE: INDIAN DISTRUST OF FBI WILL INCREASE

Observant people will have noticed that the names that have been associated with the planning of 9 11 include Moslems, Catholics, Protestants and Jews....all working under the aegis of the threesome of terror/evils, CIA/MOSSAD/MI6/DIA/AMAN/BND....

The big question is: will they all stay united?

I once asked a teacher in an international school about who were the worst behaved kids.

The teacher said that some Moslem kids cheated in exams, some Catholic kids were cruel mafia types, some Protestants kids were thugs and some Jewish kids were manipulative and disruptive.

The bad guys usually work together, but, sometimes, in a crisis, they fall out.

What do the following have in common?

David Rockefeller, Reinhard Gehlen, Heinrich Himmler, George W. Bush, George Tenet, Henry Kissinger, Michael Chertoff, Rupert Murdoch, Tony Blair, Prescott Bush, Licio Gelli, J. Edgar Hoover, Joseph Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Giscard d’Estaing, Allen Dulles, Oliver North, George H.W Bush and William Casey.

Reportedly, they have been members of the Knights of Malta or have been awarded high honours by the Knights of Malta.

So, Jews and Catholics and Protestants can work together.

But, will they stay united?

Website for this image

On 9 11, the following people met General Mahmoud Ahmad, who was head of Pakistan's ISI and the financier of Mohamed Atta: Porter Goss of the CIA, Marc Grossman of the US State Department and Richard Armitage Deputy Secretary of State.

On the morning of 9 11, at the Ritz Carlton hotel in Washington, Shafiq bin Laden, brother of Osama, was meeting Reagan's former secretary of defense Frank Carlucci and James Baker III, secretary of state under Bush Sr.

The bad guys work together....?

What happens if the Catholics begin to think that they are under attack by the Jews?

What if the rulers of Pakistan, IRAN, Saudi Arabia and Turkey come to believe that there is a CIA-Mossad plan to destroy their countries?

The bad guys at the very top may feel that they can dispense with the Moslems and the Catholic Church.

Or the bad guys at the very top may feel they can continue to manipulate both.

Who is at the very top - Catholics? Protestants? Jews?

Definitely some kind of an alliance.....all working under the aegis of the threesome of terror/evils, CIA/MOSSAD/MI6/DIA/AMAN/BND/DGSE....

...

1. (A)

(B)

(C)

Which of the above is Domenico Prochilo, reportedly arrested in Siderno in Calabria in Italy, in July 2010, in connection with 'Ndrangheta (Mafia) activities?

Siderno is home to one of the 'Ndrangheta's biggest and most important clans, the Commisso 'ndrina, heavily involved in the global cocaine business and money laundering. [6]

The parents of CIA boss Leon Panetta, Carmelo Frank Panetta and Carmelina Prochilo, both come from Siderno.

2. Alan Duncan, who worked, from 1982 to 1988, for Marc Rich. Alan Duncan's domestic partner is James Dunseath.

To which small secretive organisation, set up by a former Prime Minister, have all of the following been linked:

Alan Duncan (UK Minister for International Development), William Casey (former Director CIA), William Colby (former Director CIA), Allen Dulles (CIA), Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, George Soros, Paul Volcker, Stephen Lander (MI5 boss) , Richard Nixon, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Giulio Andreotti (linked to P2), Prince Turki Al-Faisal, Otto von Habsburg, General Richard Stilwell (linked to Operation Gladio),

(A) The Knitting Circle

(B) The Pinny Circle

(C) The Pinay Circle

3.

"To the casual observer she might look like nothing more than a drugs baron’s moll, happily flaunting her wealth and power."

The girl with the golden gun (from the private collection of Saddam) is the daughter of which one of the following:

(A) Joaquin 'Shorty' Guzman

(B) Britain’s MI6 spy chief Sir John Sawers

(C) the Pope.

4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWYvar7VC3g&feature=player_embedded

Which is correct:

(A) Mark Regev was born Mark Freiberg in Melbourne.

(B) Benjamin Netanyahu speaks with a Boston accent.

(C) Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by a Jew.

5.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME_NpnH7jDc&feature=player_embedded

Which is correct:

(A) The BBC is run by the people who carried out the inside job of 9 11 attacks......

(B) 'Taliban nuclear documents' found by BBC reporter John Simpson were identical to a spoof article published in 1979 as a humor piece by The Journal of Irreproducible Results.

(C) The BBC broadcast an invented story that Indonesian communists were planning to slaughter the citizens of Jakarta.

.