Jews conspire to spread a horrible contagion in America as lead up to microchipping the masses in their ideal world under antichrist
We all know the Jews have been “poisoning the wells” in Gentile nations since ancient times; often by just simply tossing the carcasses of their murdered Gentile enemies into them, especially ritually killed children; but in more recent times by much more sophisticated means. Something that’s a particularly popular pastime with Jewish settlers in the land of Israel today; and was doubtless first learned by the Jews from the Torah, which provides the account of the Philistines “stopping the wells” in Canaan with earth in the days of their patriarch Abraham.
Jews know all about this, and when they realize something evil they’ve done just can’t be lied about successfully any more, because it’s too well documented, they start to make all sorts of demented jokes about it, to try to subliminally baffle the goyim on the issue, which is doubtless why Jews have surreptitiously kept the Jew fool Borat’s “throw the Jew down the well” video in the top two or three searches for the word “Jew” on YouTube, for ages now. Don’t even bother to watch the lunacy, it’s honestly not worth it; and it’s a real shame to see Americans blindly giving him lots of giggles and applause at the end …
Also you get the silly Jewess in the following video saying “she loves viral, pandemic movies”; and both of these Jews seem to at least subtly betray knowledge of the Jews’ plot to spread a contagion among their Gentile enemies in America shortly … it’s just the way they come across. Either way, be sure all of the Jews as one wicked, dishonest unit know all about anything significant Big Jewry is about to do, anywhere, at any time … just like they all had foreknowledge of 9/11, but kept it a secret, until it was too late for the 2,000 plus Americans that died on the day …
Here’s the account of how the Jews tossed the ritually murdered body of “little Hugh” of Lincoln, England, down a well …
1255, Lincoln. A boy called Hugh was kidnapped by the Jews and crucified and tortured in hatred of Jesus Christ. The boy’s mother found the body in a well on the premises of a Jew called Jopin or Copinus. This Jew, promised by the judge his life if he confessed, did so, and 91 Jews were arrested; eventually 18 were hanged for the crime. King Henry III himself personally ordered the juridical investigation of the case five weeks after the discovery of the body, and refused to allow mercy to be shown to the Jew Copinus, who was executed.
But how will the Jews themselves, as the (hidden) perps of the imminent, heinous pandemic atrocity, not also be infected and undone? Well probably by arranging for the release of a strain of some virus or something that doesn’t attack people with certain types of DNA or certain weird genetic traits, which is certainly something the Jew has possessed since ancient times.
Now check out this article …
** Evil Israeli terrorists and radical Zionist extremists are conducting a long-term and systematic campaign to poison the wells in remote areas of Palestine. Even Israeli police are shocked by their actions. Everyday life is difficult enough for the resilient residents of these arid and war-ravaged lands, but water is essential for their survival — particularly the elderly, the sick, and young children. Many poor palestinians walk for miles through scorching rocky desert to reach their well, and then use what strength remains to carry heavy tubs of cool life-giving liquid back to their families to drink and wash with. ***
Settlers poison Palestinian well
A Palestinian village in the northern West Bank has appealed for pressure to be put on Israel to end the recurrent poisoning of their only source of water supply by Jewish settlers.
Last week, heavily armed settlers from the settlement of Yitzhar, near Nablus, vandalised and sabotaged the water supply on which the nearby village of Madama depends.
The latest poisoning is the seventh of its kind during the past three years, according to village officials. An Israeli army spokesman said the military is looking into the matter.
Yitzhar was established more than 20 years ago on confiscated land belonging to the people of Madama and is inhabited by Talmudic settlers seeking to expel non-Jews from Palestine and Israel.
Jewish settlements built on occupied Palestinian lands are deemed illegal under international law.
According to Madama’s local council head Ayid Kamal, Yetzhar has always been “a source of provocation, vandalism and organised terror”.
“They come in broad daylight and throw filthy materials like diapers and poisonous substances inside the spring’s source, and when we complain to the Israeli authorities, they tell us the army cannot do anything about it.”
Kamal said the ultimate goal of the settlers is to force the villagers to leave their land. Last year as many as 12 children in the village were diagnosed with liver infections and many others developed stomach pains as a result of drinking contaminated water.
The Yetzhar settlers also burned down standing crops belonging to the villagers, often in full view of the Israeli army.
Palestinian villagers, as well as some international aid workers, suspect there is connivance between the settlers and local Israeli army members.
The British charity Oxfam had repaired the water system at Madama, covering the natural spring’s mouth with concrete. However, every time new pipes are installed, the settlers smash them and contaminate the spring water by dumping hazardous materials, local residents said.
In two instances, settlers opened fire on Palestinians and foreign aid workers in the area.
An Oxfam spokesman said the charity would once again try to undo the damage.
“We want to help those helpless people, we hope the Israeli authorities will get serious with the settlers and stop their actions,” a spokesman said.
Also this one …
Another relevant aspect marking the 1990s was the increase of vandalism against the Ibrahimi Mosque: Anita Vitullo, a Jerusalem-based freelance writer and researcher, explains that “from 1967 until February 1994, the Islamic Waqf authorities documented fifty-five major incidents (in addition to a catalogue of daily harassments) involving Israeli military and settler violence against the mosque. These included the army dynamiting the Abbasid-era stairs and settler incursions such as poisoning the water system, arson attempts, theft, spraying chemicals on carpets, beating worshippers, and attacking them with tear gas and gunfire, petty vandalism, and desecrating the mosque.” The situation exploded in 1994 with the massacre in the Ibrahimi Mosque on 25 February when the American Jew settler Baruch Goldstein killed twenty-nine Muslims praying there. Goldstein belonged to Kach, the terrorist right-wing Jewish organization, and was its representative in Kiryat Arba’s local council.
Also this one …
Amnesty International has called on Israel to investigate the deliberate contamination of Palestinian farmland – allegedly by Jewish settlers.
The human rights group said that toxic chemicals had been spread on fields in the Hebron region of the West Bank.
Farm animals had died and farmers had been forced to quarantine their flocks, the organisation said.
It also demanded that Israel put an end to “increasingly frequent” attacks on Palestinians by West Bank settlers.
“These poisoning incidents appear to be part of a deliberate attack on the livelihood of Palestinian farmers in the West Bank,” said Kate Allen of Amnesty International UK.
“The Israeli authorities should mount a full investigation and bring the perpetrators to justice.”
The chemicals were spread on fields near the villages of Tuwani, Um Faggara and Kharruba in March and April, the group said.
Sheep, gazelle and other animals have been contaminated by the chemicals, and farmers livelihoods had been affected, the organisation said.
According to Amnesty, Israeli and Palestinian scientists who analysed the chemicals spread on the fields found two types of rat poison – one of which is banned in Israel.
Amnesty says that the Israeli authorities have made no attempt to remove the chemicals safely from the fields or to investigate the poisonings.
The villages affected are in a part of the West Bank that is under Israeli military control. Palestinian security services are forbidden by Israel from operating there.
Palestinians also complain of violent intimidation by Jewish settlers in the Hebron area.
In July 2004, Israeli police said they suspected Jewish settlers were responsible for poisoning a Palestinian well in the same area.
In fact the propensity the Jews have had for “poisoning the wells”, or surreptitiously providing something to corrupt a good source of something good to destroy Gentiles, is just as well documented as Jewish ritual murder and the Jews’ notorious love of money; and it has been something not a few of the finest researchers have more than adequately substantiated; and would endorse claims that the Jews plotted to burn Rome and blame Christians for it, started the Great Fire of London, and spread the bubonic plague in Europe, etc; not to mention the more recent introduction of fluoridated water by ZOG, the anthrax attacks after 9/11, and the AIDs plague—the later some argue has its source in the Jews themselves, who ostensibly have the highest HIV-positive rates per capita today.
No marvel then that the best Intelligence to hand indicates that the Jews intend to shortly spread a horrible contagion among the American people, and blame it on “some Arab guy in a cave” somewhere; so that they can introduce mandatory micro-chipping of persons in the country, as a precursor to carting away ‘dissidents’ and patriots to be incarcerated and tortured in their FEMA camps, and as ostensibly the only way to trace and contain the awful disease they’ve let loose to that end.
This imminent, mandatory mass micro-chipping of both Jews and Gentiles in the Jews’ evil, ideal antichristian world has of course been on Big Jewry’s drawing-board for some time now; and as such, it will also, of course, be a precursor of mandatory subcutaneous chipping in the right hand and forehead of all persons who want to trade with the Jews under Israel’s antichrist, just prior to the biblical last great social cataclysm.
Recommended further reading and viewing …
Just as they get you to focus on whites committing ‘racial crimes’ against blacks in the media they run, without telling you that they brought blacks to America to cause the racial strife; the Jews would, of course, also have you focus on the base, animal cruelty of the ordinary black African—which is, admittedly, bad enough—while trying to find out the truth about their crimes in black African states. For the Jews know that by that serpentine ruse they can, as the real perps of African atrocities, more easily continue to wipe out Christians and largely eliminate Gentiles, as a lead up to bringing in their ideal global despotic super-state under Israel’s antichrist.
Almost anyone who has taken even a cursory look at the way the world, as a system of politics, commerce, and religion, operates, will concede that the love of money is indeed the root of all evil; and that one only needs to just simply “follow the money” to find out the real truth on any controversial issue, especially if it looks like it might have a pecuniary advantage for someone and a geopolitical benefit for a nation, either up front or behind the scenes.
The foregoing maxim is certainly true when applied to the oil and mineral rich nations of Africa, which have resources the Jews have wickedly coveted; especially since some African states are Islamic. For Islamic African states are of course the militant enemies of the Jews; and with that the immediate neighbors of the fraud ‘democratic’ state of Israel, which is, of course, the (Talmudic) political hub of the Jews’ evil, ideal, antichristian world.
Examples of the Jews’ evil machinations that have sought to corrupt and overthrow reasonable and relatively righteous rule of African states are many; and notably the invasion of Libya by judaized ‘Nazi’ NATO in recent months. But in this post I want to take a look at what the Jews did to the innocent people of black African states, via their murderous proxy of the state of DR Congo.
Here’s some history on Congo (DR Congo) …
The Democratic Republic of the Congo is often referred to as Congo. However, in order to distinguish it from the neighbouring Republic of the Congo to the west, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is sometimes referred to as DR Congo, DRC, or RDC, or is called Congo-Kinshasa after the capital of Kinshasa. It also borders the Central African Republic and South Sudan to the north; Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi in the east; Zambia and Angola to the south; the Atlantic Ocean to the west; and is separated from Tanzania by Lake Tanganyika in the east. The country has access to the ocean through a 40-kilometre (25 mi) stretch of Atlantic coastline at Muanda and the roughly 9 km wide mouth of the Congo River which opens into the Gulf of Guinea.
The Second Congo War, beginning in 1998, devastated the country, involved seven foreign armies and is sometimes referred to as the “African World War”. Despite the signing of peace accords in 2003, fighting continues in the east of the country. In eastern Congo, the prevalence of rape and other sexual violence is described as the worst in the world. The war is the world’s deadliest conflict since World War II, killing 5.4 million people since 1998. The vast majority died from malaria, diarrhea, pneumonia and malnutrition.
The Democratic Republic of the Congo was formerly, in chronological order, the Congo Free State, Belgian Congo, Congo-Léopoldville, Congo-Kinshasa, and Zaire (Zaïre in French). Though it is located in the Central African UN subregion, the nation is also economically and regionally affiliated with Southern Africa as a member of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
But to get a fuller picture, one needs to go back to the early 1960s, when UN and Congolese troops attacked the independent African state of Katanga, so that the country’s substantial mineral wealth would fall into the hands of the Jewish industrialists and financiers who’d had acolytes in high places serving them to achieve that end.
For UN and Congolese troops started a war in the anti-communist state of Katanga, as a result of UN ‘peacekeeping’ operations in the Congo from 1960 to 1963. “Blue beret beasts” and Congolese troops broke into homes, and bayoneted old folk, women, and children; and they callously bombed schools, churches, and hospitals; and machine-gunned on sight the many officials, ambulance drivers, and policemen trying to maintain the relatively righteous existing law and order.
As a result of the atrocities of invasion, the pro-Christian state of Katanga was subjugated to the pro-Jewish puppet regime of Central Congo, ruled by Mobutu Sese Seko, one of the most brutal of contemporary dictators. One-third of the world’s known diamonds have been found in the Congo, making the country a significant source of gems for the Jewish De Beers cartel. The United States was stockpiling industrial diamonds during Sese Seko’s reign; but American citizens couldn’t deal directly with De Beers, because it had been indicted during World War II for violating U.S. antitrust law. So Mobutu did De Beer’s diamond deals through the Jews’ CIA operative Maurice Tempelsman, a Jew of Orthodox background and notorious as the closest friend and most trusted financier of the Jewess Jackie Kennedy toward the end of her life.
Israeli diamond traders now control more than 50 percent of the DR Congo’s diamond exports; and they brokered deals with Congolese leader Laurent Kabila that included diamonds for Israel in return for arming and training Kabila’s troops.
Here are more details, without direct mention of the Jews and their acolytes as the hidden perps …
In May 1960, a growing nationalist movement, the Mouvement National Congolais or MNC Party, led by Patrice Lumumba, won the parliamentary elections. The party appointed Lumumba as Prime Minister. The parliament elected Joseph Kasavubu, of the Alliance des Bakongo (ABAKO) party as President. Other parties that emerged included the Parti Solidaire Africain (or PSA) led by Antoine Gizenga, and the Parti National du Peuple (or PNP) led by Albert Delvaux and Laurent Mbariko. (Congo 1960, dossiers du CRISP, Belgium) The Belgian Congo achieved independence on 30 June 1960 under the name République du Congo (“Republic of Congo” or “Republic of the Congo” in English). Shortly after independence, the provinces of Katanga (led by Moise Tshombe) and South Kasai engaged in secessionist struggles against the new leadership. Most of the 100,000 Europeans who had remained behind after independence fled the country, opening the way for Congolese to replace the European military and administrative elite.
As the French colony of Middle Congo (Moyen Congo) also chose the name “Republic of Congo” upon achieving its independence, the two countries were more commonly known as “Congo-Léopoldville” and “Congo-Brazzaville”, after their capital cities. Another way they were often distinguished during the 1960s, such as in newspaper articles, was that “Congo-Léopoldville” was called “The Congo” and “Congo-Brazzaville” was called simply “Congo.”
On 5 September 1960, Kasavubu dismissed Lumumba from office. Lumumba declared Kasavubu’s action “unconstitutional” and a crisis between the two leaders developed. Lumumba had previously appointed Joseph Mobutu chief of staff of the new Congo army, Armée Nationale Congolaise (ANC). Taking advantage of the leadership crisis between Kasavubu and Lumumba, Mobutu garnered enough support within the army to create mutiny. With financial support from the United States and Belgium, Mobutu paid his soldiers privately. The aversion of Western powers to communism and leftist ideology influenced their decision to finance Mobutu’s quest to maintain “order” in the new state by neutralizing Kasavubu and Lumumba in a coup by proxy. A constitutional referendum after Mobutu’s coup of 1965 resulted in the country’s official name being changed to the “Democratic Republic of the Congo.” In 1971 it was changed again to “Republic of Zaïre.”
On 17 January 1961, Katangan forces and Belgian paratroops – supported by the United States’ and Belgium’s intent on copper and diamond mines in Katanga and South Kasai – kidnapped and executed Patrice Lumumba. Amidst widespread confusion and chaos, a temporary government was led by technicians (Collège des Commissaires) with Evariste Kimba. The Katanga secession was ended in January 1963 with the assistance of UN forces. Several short-lived governments, of Joseph Ileo, Cyrille Adoula, and Moise Tshombe, took over in quick succession.
The new president Mobutu Sese Seko had the support of the United States because of his staunch opposition to Communism —[note that this is a Jew sponsored lie, because Congo was itself in reality a pro-communist state]. Western powers appeared to believe this would make him a roadblock to Communist schemes in Africa.
A one-party system was established, and Mobutu declared himself head of state. He periodically held elections in which he was the only candidate. Relative peace and stability was achieved; however, Mobutu’s government was guilty of severe human rights violations, political repression, a cult of personality and corruption. (Mobutu demanded every Congolese bank note printed with his image, hanging of his portrait in all public buildings, most businesses, and on billboards; and it was common for ordinary people to wear his likeness on their clothing.)
Corruption became so prevalent the term “le mal Zairois” or “Zairean Sickness” was coined, reportedly by Mobutu himself. By 1984, Mobutu was said to have $4 billion (USD), an amount close to the country’s national debt, deposited in a personal Swiss bank account. International aid, most often in the form of loans, enriched Mobutu while he allowed national infrastructure such as roads to deteriorate to as little as one-quarter of what had existed in 1960. With the embezzlement of government funds by Mobutu and his associates, Zaire became a “kleptocracy”.
In a campaign to identify himself with African nationalism, starting on 1 June 1966, Mobutu renamed the nation’s cities: Léopoldville became Kinshasa [the country was now Democratic Republic of The Congo – Kinshasa], Stanleyville became Kisangani, Elisabethville became Lubumbashi, and Coquihatville became Mbandaka. This renaming campaign was completed in the 1970s.
In 1971, Mobutu renamed the country the Republic of Zaire, its fourth name change in 11 years and its sixth overall. The Congo River was renamed the Zaire River. In 1972, Mobutu renamed himself Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendu Wa Za Banga (roughly translated as The Great Unstoppable Warrior who goes from Victory to Victory, Leaving Fire in his Trail.
During the 1970s and 1980s, Mobutu was invited to visit the United States on several occasions, meeting with U.S. Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. In June 1989, Mobutu was the first African head of state invited for a state visit with newly elected President Bush. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, however, U.S. relations with Mobutu cooled, as he was no longer deemed necessary as a Cold War ally.
Opponents within Zaire stepped up demands for reform. This atmosphere contributed to Mobutu’s declaring the Third Republic in 1990, whose constitution was supposed to pave the way for democratic reform. The reforms turned out to be largely cosmetic. Mobutu continued in power until the conflict forced him to flee Zaire in 1997. Thereafter, the nation chose to reclaim its name of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, since the name Zaire carried such strong connections to the rule of Mobutu.
Rwandan/Ugandan invasions and civil wars
Main articles: First Congo War, Second Congo War, and Kivu Conflict
By 1996, tensions from the neighbouring Rwandan Civil War and Rwandan Genocide had spilled over to Zaire. Rwandan Hutu militia forces (Interahamwe), who had fled Rwanda following the ascension of a Tutsi-led government, had been using Hutu refugees camps in eastern Zaire as a basis for incursion against Rwanda. These Hutu militia forces soon allied with the Zairian armed forces (FAZ) to launch a campaign against Congolese ethnic Tutsis in eastern Zaire.
In turn, a coalition of Rwandan and Ugandan armies invaded Zaire under the cover of a small group of Tutsi militia to fight the Hutu militia, overthrow the government of Mobutu, and ultimately control the mineral resources of Zaire. They were soon joined by various Zairean politicians, who had been unsuccessfully opposing the dictatorship of Mobutu for many years, and now saw an opportunity for them in the invasion of Zaire by two of the region’s strongest military forces.
This new expanded coalition of two foreign armies and some longtime opposition figures, led by Laurent-Désiré Kabila, became known as the Alliance des Forces Démocratiques pour la Libération du Congo-Zaïre (AFDL). They were seeking the broader goal of ousting Mobutu and controlling his country’s wealth. In May 1997, Mobutu fled the country and Kabila marched into Kinshasa, naming himself president and reverting the name of the country to the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
By 2008 the Second Congo War and its aftermath had killed 5.4 million people.
A few months later, President Laurent-Désiré Kabila thanked all the foreign military forces that helped him to overthrow Mobutu, and asked them to return back to their countries because he was very fearful and concerned that the Rwandan military officers who were running his army were plotting a coup d’état against him in order to give the presidency to a Tutsi who would report directly to the President of Rwanda, Paul Kagame. This move was not well received by the Rwandan and Ugandan governments, who wanted to control their big neighbour.
Consequently, Rwandan troops in DRC retreated to Goma and launched a new militia group or rebel movement called the Rassemblement Congolais pour la Democratie (RCD), led by Tutsis, to fight against their former ally, President Laurent-Désiré Kabila. To counterbalance the power and influence of Rwanda in DRC, the Ugandan troops instigated the creation of another rebel movement called the Movement for the Liberation of Congo (MLC), led by the Congolese warlord Jean-Pierre Bemba, son of Congolese billionaire Bemba Saolona. The two rebel movements started the second war by attacking the DRC’s still fragile army in 1998, backed by Rwandan and Ugandan troops. Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia became involved militarily on the side of the government to defend a fellow SADC member.
Kabila was assassinated in 2001 and was succeeded by his son Joseph, who upon taking office called for multilateral peace talks to end the war. In February 2001 a peace deal was brokered between Kabila, Rwanda and Uganda, leading to the apparent withdrawal of foreign troops. UN peacekeepers, MONUC, arrived in April 2001. The conflict was reignited in January 2002 by ethnic clashes in the northeast, and both Uganda and Rwanda then halted their withdrawal and sent in more troops. Talks between Kabila and the rebel leaders led to the signing of a peace accord in which Kabila would share power with former rebels. By June 2003 all foreign armies except those of Rwanda had pulled out of Congo. Much of the conflict was focused on gaining control of substantial natural resources in the country, including diamonds, copper, zinc, and coltan.
DR Congo had a transitional government until the election was over. A constitution was approved by voters, and on 30 July 2006 the Congo held its first multi-party elections since independence in 1960. After this Joseph Kabila took 45% of the votes and his opponent, Jean-Pierre Bemba took 20%. The disputed results of this [Jew orchestrated] election turned into an all-out battle between the supporters of the two parties in the streets of the capital, Kinshasa, from 20–22 August 2006 . Sixteen people died before police and the UN mission MONUC took control of the city. A new election was held on 29 October 2006, which Kabila won with 70% of the vote. Bemba made multiple public statements saying the election had “irregularities,” despite the fact that every neutral observer praised the elections. On 6 December 2006 the Transitional Government came to an end as Joseph Kabila was sworn in as President.
The fragility of the state government has allowed continued conflict and human rights abuses. In the ongoing Kivu conflict, the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) continues to threaten the Rwandan border and the Banyamulenge; Rwanda supports RCD-Goma rebels against Kinshasa; a rebel offensive at the end of October 2008 caused a refugee crisis in Ituri, where MONUC has proved unable to contain the numerous militia and groups driving the Ituri conflict. In the northeast, Joseph Kony’s LRA moved from their original bases in Uganda (where they have fought a 20-year rebellion) and South Sudan to DR Congo in 2005 and set up camps in the Garamba National Park. In northern Katanga, the Mai-Mai created by Laurent Kabila slipped out of the control of Kinshasa. The war is the world’s deadliest conflict since World War II, killing 5.4 million people.
In 2009, people in the Congo may still be dying at a rate of an estimated 45,000 per month, and estimates of the number who have died from the long conflict range from 900,000 to 5,400,000. The death toll is due to widespread disease and famine; reports indicate that almost half of the individuals who have died are children under the age of 5. This death rate has prevailed since efforts at rebuilding the nation began in 2004.
The long and brutal conflict in the DRC has caused massive suffering for civilians, with estimates of millions dead either directly or indirectly as a result of the fighting. There have been frequent reports of weapon bearers killing civilians, destroying property, committing widespread sexual violence,causing hundreds of thousands of people to flee their homes or otherwise breaching humanitarian and human rights law. An estimated 200,000 women have been raped.
So when you read of the on-going atrocities in the DR Congo, always remember to blame the Jews for them in the first instance, and not the base animal instincts of the ordinary and gullible black men they’ve used to serve their ends. Evidence of Jew orchestrated atrocities in the DR Congo are provided in the following GRAPHIC images that prove the Jews’ ancient and ongoing vindictive hatred for innocent Gentile humanity does indeed know no bounds …
Yep, I’ve done another 9/11 post, because I believe it’s still the key to exposing and undoing the Jews’ evil machinations in the US federal government and its agencies. The whole false flag op was taking things just too far, too quickly, for the wicked Jews to get away with; and even at this late date the conscience of the American people is being seriously stirred, and too many are now being brought out of their slumber for the matter not to see a righteous and truthful conclusion, very soon.
Did you know that Bill Cooper was killed shortly after predicting the events of 9-11? Bill Cooper had a radio program, and he broadcast in June of 2001 that a false flag operation would shortly occur, and that Osama Bin Laden would be blamed. In November of 2001, just two months after the Jews’ 9/11 false flag op, he was killed by police. Was he silenced, like the dozens of others put on the Jews’ hit list after the event?
“Cooper’s detractors labeled him a conspiracy theorist because of his publications, a charge Cooper did not deny, arguing this:
Investigation of the alleged Internal Revenue Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has disclosed a broad, premeditated conspiracy to defraud the Citizens of the United States of America.
“Examination of the United States Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, the Statutes at Large, Congressional Record, the Federal Register, and Internal Revenue manuals too numerous to list, reveals a crime of such magnitude that words cannot adequately describe the betrayal of the American people. What we uncovered has clearly been designed to circumvent the limitations of the Constitution for the United States of America and to implement the Communist Manifesto within the 50 States. Marx and Engels claimed that, in the effort to create a classless society, a “graduated income tax” could be used as a weapon to destroy the middle class. Through the clever use of language, the government promotes the fraud.
Now check out this excerpt …
On September 11, 2001, shortly after the terror attacks, author, radio show host, and our generation’s truth-telling trailblazer, William Cooper, began his broadcast by saying:
Ladies and gentlemen, this is William Cooper, and Alan Weiner has asked me to take the, uh, take the microphone on this, . . this probably worst day in the history of the entire world. For what we’re witnessing now today is most probably the herald of the, at least, the redefinition of freedom, and most probably it’s death.
Cooper, obviously shaken by the sheer act of terror, had more reason to be trembling with fear than the average American because he had predicted that such an event would happen almost three months prior. Specifically, he warned that the controllers of the United States government would stage a false flag attack on American citizens and then blame it on Osama Bin Laden. “I’m telling you,” said Cooper on his June 28 broadcast, “be prepared for a major attack. But it won’t be Osama Bin Laden. It will be those behind the New World Order.” He went on to say, “I wonder what Osama Bin Laden’s targets are supposed to be? And if this doesn’t materialize in the next two or three weeks, it will eventually materialize, because they haven’t succeeded in getting the guns out of the hands of the American people, nor have they succeeded in taking our freedoms away. And so I can tell you with a certainty they must do something terrible.”
Cooper was America’s vigilant guardian before and on the day of 9/11, when a NORAD training exercise that went by the same name as “Vigilant Guardian,” caused enough confusion to disable America’s defenses. Even before he made his declaration of an impeding government-orchestrated attack within the United States, Cooper was considered the “most dangerous radio host in America” by then President Bill Clinton, a label just as true as when Henry Kissinger called Daniel Ellsberg the “most dangerous man in America,” after he leaked the Pentagon papers. But Cooper didn’t just blew the whistle once, he sounded the horn every day on his radio show “Hour of the Time,” which was in his stewardship from May, 1992 until November 5th of 2001, the day of his death.
His life, both on and off the radio, is littered with meaning, and serves as a reminder that not all of us were fooled on 9/11, in fact, one man exposed the machinations of the criminals in charge long before the attacks actually took place, and fervently tried to alert his countrymen.His warning will go down in history as undoubtedly heroic, legendary, mythical, and his voice will be remembered as immortal for as long as men live.
…. “We are truly now at this moment a nation of sheep. And ladies and gentlemen, I assure you that sheep are always led to the slaughter. But it does not have to be that way. There is tremendous power in knowledge. There is also tremendous power in secrecy. Take away that secrecy, you make sure that you’re informed, and you can change things. And stop fighting with each other.”
The accuracy and potency of his statements are unparalleled by anything that was said on that day, or since. The state of things suggest that the day will come when William Cooper will no longer be considered as America’s lost treasure, but recognized as its indescribable hero, who refused to abandon America in her most crucial hour.
So you’re still in denial about the truth of 9/11, huh? But did you know that even the 9/11 commissioners and other officials closely involved in the investigation, cow towing to the Jews and their acolytes so they don’t lose their secular comfort zones, don’t for a moment believe the government’s lie?
The truth is most people worldwide, that have heard of it, don’t believe the official 9/11 story; and the way the American people bought into the lie of it for wicked ulterior reasons, often centered on a love of the Jews’ money, and by that betrayed those murdered by the Jews on the day, are not hidden in the eyes of those who’ve made even a cursory honest examination of the event.
In fact a whole host of mental health professionals in America and abroad are now conceding that questioning the official 9/11 story is not at all “conspiracy theory” lunacy, but in fact “the sane thing to do” …
According to this article, Many mental health professionals have concluded that the official version of 9/11 is false, and that those who believe the official version suffer from defense mechanisms.
Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Lester Grinspoon, MD
Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, as well as Radiology, at Duke University Medical Center D. Lawrence Burk, Jr., MD
Board of Governors Distinguished Service Professor of Psychology and Associate Dean of the Graduate School at Ruters University Barry R. Komisaruk
Distinguished Professor in the Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, Professor of Medicine in the Department of Internal Medicine and Distinguished Professor of Global Health in the College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Michael D. Knox
Professor Emeritus, Psychology and Neuroscience, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Michael Gabriel
Professor of Psychology at University of New Hampshire William Woodward
Professor of Psychology at University of Essex Philip Cozzolino
Professor of Psychology at Goddard College Catherine Lowther
Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California Institute of Integral Studies Ralph Metzner
Professor of Psychology at Rhodes University Mike Earl-Taylor
Retired Professor of Psychology at Oxford University Graham Harris
Retired Psychiatrist. Former Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Jefferson Medical College. Former Major, U.S. Army Medical Corps, Vietnam Veteran 7 years service, Jon Bjornson, MD
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Nebraska and licensed Psychologist Ronald Feintech
PhD in clinical psychology from Texas Tech Michael Green
PhD in educational psychology Brent Igo
PhD psychologist Paul Johansson
PhD psychologist Gail Maudal
Ph.D. Clinical Neuropsychologist Richard Welser
Psychiatrist Carol S. Wolman, MD
Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz
There are many other mental health professionals who also agree with these people.
Check out these interviews with mental health professionals …
Also these other vids on Bill Cooper’s prediction of 9/11 to bring some of you back up to speed on the issue …
The Jews have understandably become heavily demonized and deranged, since they rejected God’s Son Jesus and the truth of the gospel in the first century; and they’ve gained notoriety for their weird propensity to call black white, good evil, and Israel’s antichrist the Christ of God since that time, as a cover-up and to quiet a guilty conscience. Worse still, they’ve adopted the Luciferian maxim that the end of an evil ideal Jewish world under antichrist will justify the last two millenniums of wickedness the Jews have perpetrated, while in dispersion, under the wrath of God for the crime of the Crucifixion.
The Jews have of course used the Magen David as a quasi-messianic stellar symbol to conjure demons; but what’s not so widely known is that they’ve also superstitiously used an evil, forked-tongued venomous beast like a fiery serpent or red dragon as a talisman to ostensibly ward of ‘the evil’ of their Gentile enemies they’ve found themselves scattered among under God’s wrath for the crime of the Crucifixion. Especially the Jews in the high cabal or synagogue of Satan in Jewry, who’ve revived the serpent worship of the ancient tribal Israelites and have surreptitiously ruled the international Jewry from at least as early as the second century.
In fact serpent worship is as old as the first man and woman put on the planet by God in a garden, in the region of Eden, in what is now Iraq, when they took advice from a creature of that sort, possessed by the devil or fallen angel Satan. It was next notably adopted and fostered by the base Edomites who dwelt in a land that was characterized by dragons and serpents in biblical times (Mal. 1.3). Serpent worship then passed from the Edomites to the Edomitish-Amalekitish Hyksos kings who invaded Egypt and reigned there as dragon kings, shortly after the exodus of the Israelites under the Hebrew patriarch Moses, circa 1491 BC; and hence just after the land of Egypt had been desolated by the plagues Jehovah had sent to punish the idolatrous indigenous people who were persecuting the Israelites.
The serpent worship of the ancient Israelites was based on the worship of the serpent their patriarch Moses out upon a pole to save the Israelites from serpents; and while the serpent worship of the high cabal in Jewry has similar connotations, it’s really a revival of the serpent worship of the Amalekitish Hyksos kings of Egypt.
Arthurian legends Asian style …
Even the Jew dominated global pharmaceutical drug trade, and the medical profession and its various agencies, have adopted the Judaized Mosaic symbol of a serpent on a pole, which derives from the biblical episode of Moses lifting a brazen serpent up on a pole to save the Israelites from the bite of fiery serpents in ancient times …
A symbol not to be confused with the winged caduceus or staff of Hermes, which has esoteric affinity with the cult of the ouroboros or serpent’s circle that the synagogue of Satan in Jewry has been obsessed with since it came on the scene in the second century …
There’s also Christ “made to be sin for us” (i.e., sin=serpent) on the cross, to save us from our sins, which is the biblical antitype of the serpent of brass Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites under the old legal dispensation. Hence we understand that veneration of a cross, and especially a crucifix, by the judaized Orthodox and Roman Catholic Christian factions is really antitypical and effectively a revival of the Israelite’s idolatrous worship of the brasen image of a serpent Moses put upon a pole, that was practiced in Israel just prior to the reign of King Hezekiah …
The synagogue of Satan’s veneration of the serpents worshipped by the Edomitish Hyksos kings of Egypt, and at least superficially the serpent Moses put upon a pole to save the Israelites from serpents, is mentioned in their Protocols, where they celebrate “the cycle of the symbolic snake, by which we symbolize our people“.
The judaic cult of red dragon serpent worship has also been surreptitiously passed on by Jews of the Diaspora to pagan people of diverse nations, as a sign of subjection of those nations to the kabbalistic g-d of the Jews, who is of course the biblical “great red dragon Satan”. Most notably to superstitious pagan Asians, who’ve actually used a caricature of a fiery red dragon in festivals and art, etc, to ostensibly ward of evil like the Israelites of old.
Jewry’s high cabal’s worship of serpents is really worship of the biblical great red dragon Satan who has of course been the kabbalistic g-d of the Jews, since they betrayed God’s Son Jesus and rejected the gospel of their salvation in the first century.
Even the judaized, lukewarm Christians in the false sects of Christendom, especially those of the lunatic Pentecostalist persuasion, have been deceived by the Jews’ worship of serpents; and they’ve reworked in terms of the idiotic drama recorded in the following videos …
Recommended further reading and viewing …
The Jews’ god, that old serpent the devil and Satan, must be very cunning; and he has probably got YOU fooled with the Jews, if the critters in this vid are anything to go by …
A phantast (also fantast) is a dreamer and visionary; and when applying it to persons like David Icke and Greg Hallett, it should doubtless include the connotations of someone who has received esoteric knowledge of the profound sort, often from higher (angelic and quasi-angelic) beings in the ethereal. Interpretations of events and ideas by phantasts often at least superficially appear to be almost bizarre; but they’re never easily absolutely controverted, and are always strangely attractive, like mice to cheese or metal to a magnet.
Having said that, phantasts can sometimes be exposed as erroneous by hard facts, like the no planes theory of 9/11 can be by viewing photographs of bits of the planes that survived the event, and in a deductive way by arguing that if there were no planes where the hell are all the missing passengers on the flights today. I don’t go with everything Greg Hallett has said about 9/11, anymore than I would go with everything that David Icke has ever propounded as fact about it. But I do like the way Greg is a bit more definite than Icke and others of his ilk, about the Jews and the mossad being the primary perpetrators of the heinous crimes committed on the fateful day.
Check out these videos of the interviews James Fetzer had with Greg Hallet, that include references to the Jews and the mossad as the chief perps of the 9/11 atrocity, in the third and fourth in the series …
The “Anonymous Physicist” has new ideas on the nuclear demolition of the towers of the WTC. In destroying the World Trade Center on 9/11/01, the U.S. regime (and those who control it) once again wanted to employ a plan that allowed for their coveted “plausible deniability.” As an aside, the plausibility is usually for the American masses. Anyone who is able to think and change usually has more than enough clues to get pretty far into the truth.
Now only nuclear devices and their concomitant EMPs fit all the evidence—along with conventional explosives used in a subordinate manner. But this ultimate truth must be hidden. Just as the regime still hides the likelihood that it nuked its own sailors in the Port Chicago explosion in 1944.
The “Powers That Be” (PTB) knew the “plausible” ruse that they would put out. It would be the pseudo free fall time for the bogus planes/fuel/gravity/pancake hypothesis. The perps desired that WTC1 and 2 have top-down “collapses”. The PTB also always have their disinfo agents waiting in the wings to come out when enough people see that the official ruse is NOT plausible.
With the analogous JFK assassination, when enough people saw that the patsy Oswald (himself CIA/ONI) could not be the culprit shooting from behind, as the fatal shot was from the front; the PTB put out a “Babel” of CONTROLLED alternatives: Mafia, LBJ, Cubans, Grassy Knoll, rogue elements, etc (some of which were involved). All of that was to hide the horrifying, ultimate truth that the alleged government protector did it—- as has been discussed by Spooked previously.
With 9/11, the Babel of planes/fuel/gravity, thermite/thermate, DEW, car bombs in the basement, and surely more to come, was waiting when a critical mass of people rejected the (always) ludicrous, official, “investigation” conclusion. The massive, rapid outward—as well as downward and upward—explosions of the two towers, the toasted cars (but not paper), and popping ceiling lights (Ondrovic—see below), the micron-sized dustification of tower contents, the levels of tritium and heavy metals, the underground molten steel and high temperatures weeks and months later, all can only be accounted for by nuclear devices and their EMPs. The fact that the explosions are simultaneously outward, downward and upwards means we have a spherical blast wave, such as occurs with a nuclear device.
The anonymous Finnish military expert—- to whom all real 9/11 truth seekers are indebted—- appears to believe that only one fusion device in the 1-kiloton range was used in each tower. This may be so, but it should be debated. I believe the evidence indicates several fusion bombs went off during the destruction of the two towers.
In fact, the dimensions of the towers likely required several nukes. The towers are much taller than their other two dimensions. A single large nuclear, spherical blast wave large enough to destroy a tower’s complete height would have been too powerful to be contained in its other two dimensions. The results would have been seen and (more) catastrophic. So several smaller nukes likely were needed, and used. I believe also that there is much evidence that WTC 3, 4, 5, 6 also were taken down with internal nuclear devices.
WTC7 appears to have been imploded with conventional demolition methods as videos show no concomitant vaporization, nor massive chunks expelled outwards during “collapse,” nor any internal spherical holes as in WTC6 and WTC3 (in between the “collapses” of the two towers).
Accurate analysis may forever only be possible by the perps themselves. This is because of many factors including the immense variation in the possible power, number, and type of nuclear devices used, false evidence (doctored videos, photos, witnesses, media, government reports), complexity of a nuclear explosion, inclusion of non-nuke elements in the “collapses” etc. For completeness, I note that William Tahil, a technology consultant, claims that his research leads to the conclusion that each tower had a nuclear fission reactor underneath it that was forced to criticality. He has a free summary, and offers a full report (for purchase) that I have not read.
In initiating discussion of the possible details of the nuclear devices used on 9/11, I note that the number and energy release of these devices are perhaps the most relevant parameters. Spooked has published government documentation of nukes as small as just pounds of TNT, or about a millionth of a kiloton.
I go along with the Finnish expert that fission-free fusion devices were likely used. The Finnish expert states that a 1 kiloton (TNT equivalent) basement fusion device was used on each tower. I believe that a total of 1/10th of that amount was more than sufficient, including the power needed for vaporization/dustification of each tower’s contents. I believe this 1/10th kt total energy per tower occurred in several blasts (per tower), and in just one per other WTC buildings (possibly 3, 4, 5, 6). I believe that WTC7 did not have a nuclear device used during “collapse,” but could have had one just afterwards to vaporize evidence as all the federal alphabet agencies were in that building, and it would have been a likely planning/command center for 9/11 with a lot of evidence to definitively “lose.”
What would have been the right range of energy for the desired events while maintaining “plausible deniability?” Or the illusion of that– many people go into a deep state of denial, just begging for any ludicrous “big lie” from their government (as Hitler noted). Too large a nuke and you would instantly vaporize the towers and maybe surrounding areas (and lose the bogus gravity/pancake theory). Too small a nuke and you wouldn’t have “shock and awe,” nor insure total (pseudo free fall) collapse and vaporization of the buildings’ contents which was apparently desired—- always destroy the evidence, and kill the witnesses. This was apparently aided by the taking of much (radioactive?) material by China—- a supposed adversary—but another indication of the actual, global control of the PTB. Other material including human remains went into road pavement. Was all this, including the human remains, radioactive?
The fission devices that went off at the Trinity/Alamogordo site, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki were said to be of the order of 10-20 kilotons of TNT. Such devices yield great fluxes of neutrons and gamma rays. Also resultant are air pressure blasts, and tremendous heat of the order of 100 million degrees. Modern devices are “steerable” in terms of desired percentages of these output parameters. The “radius of total destruction” in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was about one mile in each city. Total destruction includes vaporization of buildings and people nearer to the hypocenter or ground zero. The fate of buildings and people near the hypocenter of a nuclear device is indicated by this: “The Shima hospital, the hypocenter of the [Hiroshima] atomic bomb was vaporized, along with all her patients.” Farther away from the hypocenter, the so-called shadow people left their shadows on buildings as the people vaporized, but not the buildings. Other people still further away, but not vaporized, were left in a charred condition. Farther away still, survivors had burned, or torn away skin. Are all these reasons why we are not allowed to see any photos of any human remains from 9/11?
We cannot expect every single, murdered person to have been completely vaporized. Photos of body parts in morgues have also not been allowed to be seen by the public. Indeed EMT Patricia Ondrovic has seen the body parts in the city morgue. Is this part of the redactions to her statement?
Returning to the parameters of the nukes of 9/11, given the energy, the destruction radius and other parameters of Hiroshima and its comparison to WTC1 or 2, the Finnish expert concluded that a single 1-kiloton, underground nuke was used. I conclude that likely several nukes per tower were used—- but totaling 1/10th of a kiloton per tower. One key in my analysis is the number of times we suddenly see massive chunks of building expelled outwards like the trajectories of large chunks of earth seen in (above-ground) photos of underground test nukes. Remember WTC 1 and 2 destruction events look more like the Nevada nuclear tests than the Hiroshima bomb.
This video even appears to show a central mushroom cloud at the end of it. The similarity to underground test nukes means that any and all nukes were set off at least several floors below any extant levels. A nuke per floor was not needed or desired. Rather I see this tremendous outward exploding of large chunks of WTC 1 and 2, about two or three times per tower. But remember, what we see is soon obscured by dust/debris, and that other buildings also prevent us from seeing much of the bottom half of each tower’s destruction.
In discussing this aspect, it is important to realize I write now of powerful outward explosions of massive chunks—- often appearing to emanate from the center which indeed was the likely location of the nuke(s). These outward explosions need to be distinguished from the “peeling away”—- and then falling– of the outer structure (sometimes in very large chunks) of the towers. IMO, this peeling away occurred because there no longer was any inside structure at that level at that time! (The remaining, succeeding, inside top portions looked like the final photos of the inside of WTC6.) There would still be some outward-vectored force all along the outer structure at all times due to heat and over-pressure inside, causing the peeling-away of the outer structure observed. But I refer to the large chunks that suddenly were flung to great distances. The videos seem to indicate that this happened 2-3 times per tower, and again we do not see most of the bottom half.
However I note that the well-known collapse/vaporization of the remaining steel core after WTC1 fell is seen at the same time that we see the so-called “nuclear glow.” Notice how this glow from the WTC1 (nuclear) demolition (seen on the left side) causes the whole background to brighten at one point, and then how the camera is panned to the right so as to no longer video what they were showing in the first place! Was this a “cleaner nuke”—see below—inadvertently captured because there was no building to contain it? Again it would be good (from the perps’ viewpoint) to vaporize any remaining people and building contents (evidence) just after final “collapse.” So I believe about 4-6 nukes per tower were used. Each one would have a radius of about 10-15 floors, or a diameter of about 20-30 floors. Nukes would be placed strategically (centrally?) to try to vaporize the strong 47 beam steel core—- the sturdiest and most heat-resistant part of the towers’ structure—- and therefore likely the last to get vaporized.
However I now make the assertion that completely doing away with the 47 beam steel support core was not necessary! Why? With a nuclear device that vaporizes most of the inside [which will soon be micro-particles floating around outside], there would be little left of the inside to need support! While preferable to do away with as much of this 47 steel beam support as possible without “over-nuking” everything, it was therefore not essential for its entirety to be vaporized. Indeed we may see that some of this support–up to about the 60th floor (the “spire”)– remained after “collapse” of WTC1– and was then itself likely nuked/vaporized, during the “nuclear glow”. Why was there a need to vaporize the left-over support beams? Because, as my argument above asserts, 100% obliteration of these beams is more necessary for the bogus “collapse” mechanism, than for the actual, nuclear destruction mechanism!
The perps would want maximum use of each nuke for its full diameter. Pre-planted conventional explosives (thermite/thermate/other, or very tiny nukes) were used to initiate each tower’s visible collapse, at the appropriate floor (where earlier conventional, shape charges had simulated plane dimensions, and provided initial shock and awe in their fireballs)—- for public consumption. A properly, pre-placed nuke subsequently went off in each top part, centered in each separated top part after initial demolition began at the appropriate floor. Remember the floors that were “hit” were in fact just exploded as part of the plan, so nukes were pre-placed in the centers of the pre-known dimensions of the top tower parts for their subsequent vaporization. These nukes and top vaporizations were initiated shortly after the demolitions began at the “plane-hit” levels. This could explain the kinking noted by Spooked in the WTC2 top corner. The nuke has caused some loss of integrity (from neutrons or even direct heat) in the structure at that point (and other less visible points), shortly before vaporization. Kinking is also a sign of wave interference as wave energy builds up at corners, and the kink is near a corner. The fact that there was a 30 story part of the tower that was tilted and about to fall “badly” is part of the “beauty” of the nuking of the towers (from the perps’ viewpoint). This was not likely supposed to happen. But they simply vaporized their error! This is also analogous to the dipping of the radio tower of WTC1 before the top piece accordions into itself, then vaporizes.
The radio tower is in the center, and a centrally placed nuke’s spherical blast wave (causing loss of structural integrity) will reach a point directly above it before it would reach all around the building to start the “accordioning” of the entire visible circumferences. This is part of what I call the inside/out effect which occurred along with the top/down effect. Now the two tower tops had vertical lengths of about 18 and 30 floors, not counting the radio tower (very little of which was found at Ground Zero, like a great deal of the towers). A key factor is that the nukes (not counting any underground ones) are always several floors beneath remaining building levels when they go off. Otherwise—if the nuke was at the surface of the remaining building at that time—- building parts would have been expelled to great distances, perhaps many miles away. Also we might have seen more visual evidence of the nuking.
Perhaps this is consistent with the “nuclear glow” seen at the end of WTC1 “collapse”, as there was little or no building left (only debris clouds) at that time to obscure this. Was the glow from a final nuke that also collapsed/vaporized the remaining/standing steel core? A decision as to whether, or not, to use more nukes towards the end of each tower’s destruction—- when smoke and debris would shield the state of the remaining building could have been facilitated by helicopters, planes, even satellites overhead, which could have scanned the site—- using wavelengths that see through smoke—- and directed more nuclear (or conventional?) explosions (especially at the lower levels or ground), as needed.
Because there was no plane crash excuse for WTC 3, 4, 5, and 6, probably “underpowered nukes” were used inside these buildings. WTC 4, 5, and 6 were each 7-9 stories high. The PTB wanted to claim that these edifices were damaged by falling parts of the two towers. So these buildings were not vaporized in near total fashion, as were the two towers. Their outer shells were left over. But the large, nearly, spherical hole in WTC6, and its deep underground hole, are indications of a likely internal, nuclear spherical blast.
In particular, I think that on-scene, EMT, Patricia Ondrovic’s statements to Killtown and her heavily redacted interview with the WTC task force indicate that she saw—- right next to her—- EMP [Electromagnetic Pulse] effects from a nuke set off in or near WTC6. I refer to her observations of ceiling lights popping in the lobby of WTC6, and the cars just outside catching fire at this same time. Indeed the EMP-induced heat on one car door near her, caused it to rapidly expand and explode off the vehicle and hit her. Her interviews indicate that the overheard, commencing, rumbling collapse of WTC2 (further away from her) occurred just as she saw WTC5 and 6 start to explode (”collapse”) right near her. The timing Ondrovic states here indicates that WTC2, WTC5, and WTC6 had nukes go off inside each one simultaneously. Fortunately for her, as I noted above, these (WTC 5, 6) explosions were “underpowered,” and left much outer structure standing, and she was far enough away from WTC2 to be able to run away from the area and survive.
WTC7, the possible planning/command center with its plethora of federal agents, was special. No nukes, at least not above ground. I suggest that it was NOT a faux pas that Silverstein, on public TV, admitted they “pulled it” with conventional demolition! But the regime tried to “take it back” when a public outcry began over that admission!
WTC3, the 22-story Marriott Hotel, may have also had a nuke vaporize most of its top floors, or this one may have been destroyed by falling debris? Let us analyze this. A picture of WTC3 after the first WTC2 collapse, but before WTC1 collapse, indicates WTC3 had its own “underpowered” internal nuclear spherical blast wave damage it, a la WTC6.
The final state of WTC3 reveals about three floors remaining and does not show the massive parts of WTC2 that allegedly fell on WTC3.
Did the nukes going off in WTC 2 vaporize these chunks before they hit WTC3? Did the nukes of WTC1 cause the outer shell of WTC3 to later vaporize? Did after-collapse nukes do this? Should we call these “cleaner nukes” in analogy to how the regime sends in its “cleaners” to remove evidence after one of their agents has performed some nefarious deed?
Now I must include some related and important issues. Were deep underground nukes set off a few seconds before the start of visible “collapse” as audio and video indicates? Included herein is the supposed vaporization of the underground 50 ton steel press. Some of the testimony on this however comes from William Rodriguez who I cannot trust because of his apparent deep background. He was a TV magician cum janitor cum press agent cum janitor—cum hero! And he was not in his usual place (high up) at his usual time that morning.
What happens if a large flux of neutrons, gamma rays, pressure, heat etc. reaches another, unexploded mini-nuke? Will the latter still go off somewhat as planned—- i.e., have its own chain reaction– or will it fizzle? If it goes off, what percentage of its maximum potential will be realized? Would it at least be interfered with and compromised, probably to a significant level? Or could it have been sufficiently shielded? Is it not likely that only non-interfered, or “virgin” nukes would be used? The perps would want to have things go as much as possible exactly the way they want. This would be unlike conventional charges which could have one trigger the next etc. I would imagine that the placement of mini-nukes would be such that one would be out of the range of affecting the next one. But I cannot know this for sure. But this is what I have assumed in this discussion.
However we need to examine this matter of “left-over” nukes that may have been “compromised.” What if some nukes, maybe even one or more final “cleaner nuke(s)” destroyed the integrity of the shielding of “left-over” nukes? It is indeed possible that sub-critical components subsequently interacted and would then release significant energy for some time! They could well act like the nuclear reactor proposed by William Tahil (above). This idea seems to be far more likely (and feasible) than his hypothesis that the perps had surreptitiously built two underground nuclear reactors there. One or more compromised nuclear fusion (or possibly even fission—if Tahil’s take on the government’s report is correct)—- bombs, with their sub-critical, but now interacting, components releasing significant amounts of energy and heat at their locale(s) could indeed be responsible for the high temperatures (and molten steel) seen at the WTC weeks and months after 9/11. This also dovetails with reports of “unexploded micro-nukes” being removed from the Oklahoma City bombing by federal agents—after being placed there and used by other federal agents! Bill Deagle, M.D. has reported that one military agent, and patient of his, told him: “We removed two undetonated softball sized micronuclear bombs [from the Murrah building].”
Perhaps even the “nuclear glow” seen in the CNN footage—which I note is sustained for some time, as the camera pans away from it—- is the initiation of a nuclear reactor-like event (caused by a “cleaner nuke” or earlier demolition nuke, or even conventional explosives) and undergoing a limited criticality event like the “tickling the dragon’s tail” experiments—performed at Los Alamos. Massive visible blue light emission (as well as neutrons and gamma rays) resulted when criticality was attained in this limited fashion. I believe that with all the other materials exploding, some could even have acted as “control rods” yielding a sustained, pseudo-nuclear reactor. And there could have been several unexploded nukes “left-over” in each tower. Or even a single nuclear device could have had its components blasted to several locales. But never forget, the massive heat released when a nuclear reactor goes awry is why they called it the “China Syndrome.” The heat released (in theory) could melt all the way down to China!
The above discussion of possible interactions of pre-planted, mini-nukes leads to the matter of the outer structure demolition. With this aspect, there may well have been interacting conventional (or other) explosives. But before we delve into this, it must be noted that what occurred, or was observed, in this regard was likely done for public consumption. What happened inside was not directly observed—- with the possible exception of some events like the “nuclear glow” that shone through. We must also realize that the videos and photos promulgated of the outer destruction of the two towers may be as doctored, as are nearly all the videos of the two alleged “plane hits.” The regime wanted to make it “plausible” that a rapid, pseudo-free fall, pancaking occurred.
People who have analyzed the public videos of WTC 1 and 2 outer structure “collapses”/demolitions report a 10 floor per second “collapse.” This is presumably for that first second. I note that this is much faster than simple, gravitational collapse would allow in that first second (16 feet.) After the initial “collapse” has started, dust and debris and other buildings soon obscure things. Those right there videoing had to stop and leave as fast as they could. But if the times for total collapse of the towers are about 10 or 11 seconds, and we have about 100 floors involved (as I am not counting separated top parts of the towers which seem to be disappearing shortly after initiation of final events.) Thus we apparently have an approximately constant outer floor demolition rate of about 10 floors downward per second throughout.
We need to examine the possible mechanisms for this and how this outer structure demolition dovetails with the inner, nuclear demolition hypothesis. Were pre-planted conventional (or even tinier nukes?) used to blow out the (visible) outer structure of each floor while the inside was being vaporized with nukes? Did these presumably outer building conventional explosives interact with each other, or the nukes? One possibility is that an explosive in the outer structure of the floor above reached, and then triggered, the explosive in the outer structure of the floor just below it, and so on. Could these charges have been placed in or at the outer structure soon before 9/11/01, or even when the buildings were erected–- for those who know “ultimate truths”? There are so many possibilities—- including a visible (yet “disconnected”) “standard” demolition for the outer structure. But always remember, my central hypothesis here is that the towers were demolished primarily by hidden, internal, nuclear devices. The outer structure demolition events were created– or faked– for public consumption and “plausibility.” One could even argue that this issue is a side-show to distract from the nuking of the towers, and likely several other WTC buildings.
There may even have been precedent for this. Dr. Deagle’s military expert’s revelation to him even indicates that the OKC bombing may have been, in a way, the blueprint for the WTC bombing, as follows: The expert indicated that the truck’s conventional bomb went off at the same time the micro-nukes were detonated, and acted as cover for the micro-nukes. Numerous explosives experts had separately stated that the truck bomb could not have had sufficient explosive power to do the damage observed. My hypothesis for the WTC tower bombings also has conventional explosives being used as cover for more massive damage done by simultaneous nuclear devices. I assert that what was happening inside—- nuclear detonation(s)—- caused the collapses, regardless of what any outer explosions did, or were faked to appear to have done.
This may even be consistent with the towers’ demolitions actually beginning with the large explosions– apparently in the sub-basements of the towers– recorded several seconds (see above) before the visible “collapses” began near the tops. In the final analysis, I assert—- as per the above detailed nuclear mechanism—that even if there were no outer structure explosions, the outer structure would have “peeled away” anyway because of what was occurring inside.
Finally in writing this WTC nuke hypothesis, I have left it somewhat in the chronological order that it was written. In this light, I have seen video evidence that appears to clearly supersede some of the ideas above. However, I will leave those in, as it is still possible that numerous things were used by the perps to confuse the issue, or for later release when the time suits them, and for completeness for future researchers. But this video—- which also fits the geometry of the situation—- is one of the clearest of the initial destruction of WTC1, and appears to fit a nuclear demolition only—- i.e., conventional explosives appear not to have been needed or used.
This video (if genuine) indicates that a central, nuclear, spherical blast occurred at the central level of the bogus plane hit—- about the 98th floor or so. Now imagine many lines (representing blast energy) radiating away from this nuclear bomb center at the same time. The shortest distance—- or time—- to the outer structure occurs occurs along the horizontal level with the bomb, which is, as per the above, about the 98th floor. (This can also be imagined as a sphere inside WTC1 whose horizontal diameters just touch the inside of the tower at the 98th floor.) Next to reach the outer structure would be the radii just above and just below this floor. Again, the next radii after this to simultaneously reach the outer structure would be two floors below and two floors above this 98th floor. Thus we would have succeeding downward exploding outer floors at the same time that we would have succeeding upward exploding outer floors.
But (rising) smoke, and debris quickly obscure things. As the visible “wave” of exploding outer floors travels downward, the top piece of WTC1 accordions into itself and vaporizes. This accordioning rate appears to be at the same rate as the rate below the “hit” level. Also, gravity would not have much effect on these rapid explosions (and these ideas) if the 10 floors per second “collapse” rate for that first second is accurate. So it appears that no separate nuke was essential for destroying the top pieces. The nuke used at “collapse” initiation was sufficient to both vaporize a significant part of the tower both below and above the “plane hit” level, and the video shows this. As above, this nuke had a diameter of about 30 floors, and likely two more were needed and used, not counting any cleaner nukes. Also I believe “extras” were in place at points along the height of the towers, and near the base for use as needed.
Summary and Conclusions:
This article has attempted to elaborate on how nuclear devices demolished the WTC towers, and to explain related phenomenon observed at that time, and afterwards. While the immense complexity, removal of evidence, and alteration of evidence makes certainty quite impossible, the above analysis indicates the following scenario may be the most likely. After a certain amount of time for (the bogus claim of) melting the steel support, the towers were demolished (as were other WTC buildings with concomitant EMP evidence), with internal nuclear devices, most likely mini-fusion bombs. The demolitions began in each tower with a nuclear device going off at the “plane hit” level. The geometry and the video evidence indicate several more were used per tower, and that a cleaner nuke was used at the end.
This article is also perhaps the first to provide a plausible explanation for the remarkable high temperatures and molten steel , observed for weeks and months after 9/11, at the WTC. The explanation given here is that one or more non-exploded, nuclear devices lost their integrity from the effects of other nuclear devices going off. These “affected” nukes attained some criticality akin to a nuclear reactor, and gave off high heat for weeks and months afterwards. This nuclear scenario hypothesis appears to be consistent and complete; and has no need for other things such as thermite, or directed energy beam weapons, or other exotica.
The author hopes that this article will initiate comments, corrections, improvements, and much needed discussion and action. Shills should always remember that the perps who placed the nukes were likely the first to be eliminated on 9/11. The author wishes to thank Spooked for his helpful ideas during the writing of this article, and for posting it.
It is hoped that people never forget that this horrific event was nothing less than a wanton, nuclear holocaust perpetrated against nearly 3,000 people by their so-called government. And used as an excuse to murder countless more thousands of human beings who had nothing to do with the events of 9/11/01.
Recommended further reading and viewing …
Everyone knows that no serious attempt was made by the U.S. government to stop the hijacked 9/11 planes in the air, despite the fact that NORAD had daily scrambled jets that could’ve intercepted them in about 10 minutes. In fact a civilian air traffic controller had to literally pick up a phone and notify the U.S. armed forces of the missing planes on the day; and vice president Cheney knew of an imminent plane strike on the Pentagon, and White House foreknowledge of plane strikes on the towers and the Pentagon was even inadvertently leaked to the public by the conspirators on TV and the Internet.
CIA/Mossad commissioned military weapons experts brought down the Twin Towers with mini-nukes; and the Jew Shabtai Shavit, a former Director General of Israel’s Mossad, was disingenuously made a member of the New York City Fire Department Task Force for Future Preparedness Against Terrorism as a cover-up.
President Bush even had the cheek to initially appoint the Jew Henry Kissinger to head up the 9/11 Commission; and another Jew, Philip Zelikov, was appointed the Commission’s executive director. The commission’s final report was so obviously utterly corrupt that if the American people don’t prosecute the hypocrites that concocted it, they’ll deserve the horror of the false flag op the Jews have in mind for them next.
Flights 11, 175, 93, and 77 were all commandeered and redirected by Muslim dupes on 9/11. But downloaded SATCOM data reduced the planes to auto-pilot/remote controlled missiles for much of the flights, and enabled the low IQ suicide jockeys in the cockpits to hit the towers and Pentagon building with the precision shown on the day.
Base Muslims were prepared by the CIA to commandeer the planes, and fully supported by the U.S. federal government from the time they entered them and right up until they died. But the real identity of all of them hasn’t yet been released into the public domain.
The only glitch in the Jews’ horrific orchestrated 9/11 terror op was the passengers’ courageous attempt to take control of the 93 flight from Newark. Something NORAD tried rectify, by sending out three F-16s to shoot the plane down, when they realized it might not hit the Capitol Building in D.C. as planned; and so that at least a semblance of credibility for U.S. air security would be provided on the day.
One of Flight 93’s engines was taken out by an F-16’s heat-seeking missile; and debris from the missile’s impact knocked a large hole in the fuselage, forcing the CIA’s suicide jockeys in the cockpit to abort their flight-plan and nose-dive the doomed plane into the ground near Shanksville, in Pennsylvania.
Now check out this article … I’ve added the images and vids, etc…
Former Air Traffic Controller Robin Hordon speaks out on 9/11, NORAD, and what should have happened on 9/11.
Within three hours of the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Robin Hordon knew it was an inside job. He had been an Air Traffic Controller (ATC) for eleven years before Reagan fired him and hundreds of his colleagues after they went on strike in the eighties. Having handled in-flight emergencies and two actual hijackings in his career, he is well qualified to comment on what NORAD should have been able to achieve in its response to the near simultaneous hijacking of four domestic passenger carriers on the morning of September 11th, 2001.
“There had to be something huge to explain why those aircraft weren’t shot down out of the sky. We have fighters on the ready to handle these situations twenty-four-seven. We have NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) monitors monitoring our skies twenty-four-seven. We have a lot of human beings, civilian and military, who care about doing their jobs.”
I spoke to Mr. Hordon one afternoon at a coffee shop in Bremerton, Washington.
“You have to understand the emotions, the duty, the job of an ATC. We are paid to watch aircraft go across the country.”
It’s clear that Hordon is passionate about the subject. A lot of people are. The dark questions that the attacks have left lingering in the national psyche have been recorded. 49% of New Yorkers believe that the government had something to do with 9/11. Following an interview with Charlie Sheen, a CNN poll revealed that 82% of respondents believed that there was “a government cover-up of 9/11.” Jay Leno asked Bill Maher on The Tonight Show about the fact that 37% of Americans (according to Scribbs-Howard) believe that the government was involved in some way with the attacks (Maher was definitely not one of them).
As far as the “emotions, the duty, the job” of an ATC is concerned, Hordon puts it this way:
“Imagine yourself at a circus, a fair, a crowded sports event. You have in your hand your little child of five or six, you’re amongst hundreds of people and you turn around and see that your child is gone. How do you feel at that moment? You feel panicked. You feel that this is the worst thing possible, so what you do is you engage. When ATCs lose an aircraft, all hell breaks loose. They flip right into motion. We take action and do not wait for other things to happen.”
As a former member of the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization), Hordon’s years as an ATC are particularly relevent to 9/11 researchers.
“I was a certified ATC in Boston west-bound departures, the routing that AA11 and UA175 followed on 9/11. I know it like the back of my hand.”
He even received a letter of commendation for his role in dealing with an actual hijacking. When it became clear that there hadn’t been a systems failure of any kind on the morning of September 11th, Hordon was certain that something had gone terribly wrong within the upper echelons of authority. A pilot (third level air carrier) as well as an ATC, he is well versed on in-flight emergency protocol. He is also adamant that if these procedures had been followed on 9/11 not one of the hijacked planes would have reached their targets.
“I’m sorry but American 11 should have been intercepted over southwest Connecticut—bang, done deal.”
“It’s routine. At Otis AFB we would have practice exercises two or three times a year. We’d flush aircraft, get the B-52’s up, get the tankers up, get the fighters up. Just out of Otis there’d be twenty, thirty fighter jets. And on 9/11 there were plenty of fighters as well. They were just diverted over the ocean, tied up in drills, etc.”
The vast majority of air incidents are simple communications or routing failures, common mishaps that are easily remedied. Nonetheless, when a problem does arise, it is treated as an emergency and interceptors are scrambled.
“This is exactly what’s written in our manuals. We alert our immediate supervisors, we get another set of eyes on the scope. We have, two feet away from us, a little button that says ADC, Air Defense Command [nowadays NEADS (Northeast Air Defense Sector)]. Bing, hit the button. ‘Hey, this is me at the Boston Center air space. I just lost a target or I have an erratic target. He is twenty-five miles west of Keene, last reported at such-and-such location.’”
Pilots use similar checklists when responding to problems with their airplanes:
“If I lose an engine in a multi-engine aircraft I know exactly what to do. I start to control the aircraft to fly with one engine, I’ll shut the ailing engine down, I’ll get the aircraft trimmed up. It’s check, check, check.”
Hordon is not persuaded by those who make excuses for the lack of military response on 9/11. U.S. air defenses have been on hair-trigger alert to defend the nation from attack since the early sixties. The idea that, on the morning of 9/11, there was an inexplicable wave of incompetence on the part of his former FAA “brothers in arms” offends him deeply.
“The pilots are in their ready rooms, the planes are in open-ended hangars. You have frontline players, pilots and controllers. I’m there, I’m watching. The pilot is there, he’s flying. We have direct air defense command communications. That’s the way it’s been for fifty years.”
The unfathomable delays seen in military action on 9/11 are inconceivable to those who have painstakingly investigated the matter—and for a man who worked for years keeping air travel over the U.S. safe.
“Military pilots would have their asses off the ground faster than you could imagine. I know how quickly our systems can respond. Why would you design a system that responds slowly to an emergency?”
Claims by authorities that, once a hijacked aircraft’s transponders have been turned off, the plane becomes virtually invisible to radar, is another sore point for Hordon.
“Bottom line, these aircraft were always radar monitored, we were always in communication with them, even if they were hijacked. The only way you can lose an aircraft these days is for the plane to flat out blow up.”
Since any genuine air attack would not likely announce itself as such, NORAD radar has to be able to detect anything. But there’s nothing stealthy about an enormous Boeing passenger liner, whether its transponder is operating properly or not.
“That aircraft is represented on their radar scope from the time it takes off to the time it lands. Even little puddle-jumpers out of our local airports. NORAD tracks all these aircraft. They have the world’s most sophisticated radar.”
After eleven eventful years as an ATC, Hordon naturally reacted with shock when he first heard that fifty years of tried and true in-flight emergency protocol was abruptly altered in June of 2001, just two months before the attacks.
“Rumsfeld put a third party in between the ATC and the Air Defense Controller responsible for scrambling interceptors —the Pentagon.”
He speculates that:
“the phone calls went from the FAA to the Pentagon and were not answered. Therefore the Pentagon never reached down to the ADC base to release the aircraft. The Boston Center’s ATCs got so frustrated with the non-answer from the military that they finally said, ‘get these guys going anyways.’ That’s the way it’s been for fifty years. We scramble aircraft. We don’t wait for OK’s from third or fourth parties.”
The no-show status of the U.S. military on the morning of September 11th, 2001, has understandably become the single most compelling point that 9/11 researchers, writers and activists use to support their claims of complicity on the part of the U.S government (and its military and intelligence apparatus) in the attacks. When even those who condemn “conspiracy theory” in regard to 9/11 have questioned the military’s conduct that morning, it’s clear that this anomaly is worthy of intense concern and diligent investigation. Whatever the case may be, there are no doubts that history’s largest and most technologically advanced military was apparently caught completely off guard by four huge hijacked passenger jets that were in the air for almost two hours on the crystal clear morning of 9/11.
9/11 researchers have spent years speculating about what exactly did happen in the cockpits of the hijacked jets on 9/11. Theories run the gamut, from duplicate aircraft taking over the flight plans of the hijacked planes to passenger jets being remotely commandeered in mid-air. Naturally, the technical complexities involved in operating a huge commercial passenger jet can only be fully conveyed by someone with extensive aviation training and experience.
“For years, they have been improving what the common person will call an autopilot. The modern term is a flight director. You can program a flight director basically for your entire flight, before and after you take off.”
Flight directors—high-tech navigational computers—are used in commercial aircraft because they are always sensing every factor that affects an aircraft’s flight (wind speed and direction, fuel weight, atmospheric conditions, etc.) and instantly make the adjustments necessary to sustain the most efficient and economic operation of the plane.
“The Boeing 707 Series, I believe, were the last series of aircraft built where you actually controlled the plane using wires or cables. There are no cables anymore. What we have now are electronic or hydraulic sensors that transmit information to servos and other control devices that apply pressure to the control surfaces.”
The fact that the operation of modern aircraft is primarily computerized essentially makes the controls hackable, either from onboard or, if the proper receivers are installed in the plane, from a remote location.
“Internally the aircraft had to have a separate receiver unit built into it; separate windows of access into the flight director and an ability to disengage the manual controls in the aircraft and take it over with all of the pre-determined information.”
Hordon adds an important caveat:
if a flight director was redirected during a flight, the new flight-plan would not necessarily be communicated to those on the ground.
Obviously, the training required to alter a flight director’s routing is substantial. But, as a student pilot learns to operate increasingly sophisticated aircraft, this knowledge becomes available as needed. Hordon believes that if the hijackers really did take control of the cockpits this may well have been what they were studying in the flight schools they attended.
Much has been made by 9/11 researchers about the seemingly limitless incompetence of the 9/11 hijackers as pilots—amateur aviators who could barely operate light aircraft. This odd fact has led many conspiracy advocates to speculate that the nineteen alleged hijackers may have been merely a gang of patsies or “Oswalds,” groomed by their handlers to take the fall for the attacks without their knowledge or involvement. Some researchers even speculate that these “terrorists” never actually boarded the planes at all. Although this theory may sound outlandish to many, it is however supported by the astonishing fact that none of the hijackers’ names appear on any of the published passenger manifests. But Hordon believes that, if the hijackers really were on the planes and did indeed take over the cockpits as reported, their ability to actually fly the aircraft to their targets is a distinct possibility.
“If anybody thinks that these flight directors weren’t sophisticated enough to be programmed to go to these exact, specific coordinates—WTC One and Two—they’re wrong. It has nothing to do with pilot competence.”
Hordon believes that it would be relatively easy for the hijackers to reroute a commercial jet’s flight director to hit any location with great accuracy, as long as they had acquired the proper training. This is apparently one of the few accurate scenarios portrayed in the Hollywood movie Flight 93, a film Hordon otherwise dismisses as elaborate propaganda designed to deceive the public and sell the official story. This point is intriguing when you consider the fact that a book recently published by the editors of Popular Mechanics magazine—Debunking 9/11 Myths—specifically claims that the hijackers of UA Flight 93 stormed the cockpit, took over the controls and drove the plane by sight, a method that PM and its army of expert technicians and specialists have nicknamed “point and go.” Besides representing a bizarre departure from Hordon’s expert analysis, PM’s “point and go” theory also contradicts the scenario dramatized in Flight 93. Although it’s difficult for many people to believe that such a lack of consensus exists among the “experts” who support the official story, this is really just one of many examples where this kind of unfathomable contradiction has occurred.
Some theorists have speculated that homing beacons may have been transmitting signals to Flights 11 and 175 from within the Twin Towers—all the hijacked planes had to do was follow these signals to their destinations. Although he doesn’t necessarily subscribe to this theory, Hordon elaborates on it as a possibility:
“When a commercial jet approaches its destination, the flight director interfaces with transmitters located at the end of a runway and makes the adjustments. All the pilots have to do is sit back, monitor the controls and watch the airplane land itself, even in “zero-zero” conditions [no ceiling height or visibility].”
This combination of computerized onboard controls and what is essentially a homing signal from the flight’s destination is called “coupling,” a technological dance performed by aircraft thousands of times a day at airports all around the world.
Often criticized by detractors for speculating about the use of “Buck Rogers”-style aviation technology in the attacks, 9/11 researchers are nonetheless vindicated by Hordon who believes that such speculation may not be so outlandish after all. Referring to elaborate experiments done by the military decades ago that involved the remote control commandeering of aircraft, Hordon responds:
“In the seventies, they were extremely sophisticated with aircraft. Could they commandeer an aircraft in mid-flight right now? Absolutely, in a heartbeat. Clearly the technology is there. It’s been there for a long time.”
It only seems reasonable that if this technology were the most efficient, reliable and discrete means to guarantee the success of such an elaborate operation, the conspirators wouldn’t hesitate to make full use of it.
Rumsfeld slips up and says Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania …
The question of whether or not the hijackers piloted the planes themselves or if control of the aircraft was taken completely out of their hands by operatives from a remote location has always been central to 9/11 researchers. But, to Robin Hordon, it’s, at best, a moot point:
“My answer to you is it’s irrelevant. It’s irrelevant whether the hijackers were real and were actually in the aircraft or whether the aircraft was commandeered by external forces. It could have been either one. One way or another, somebody other than U.S. certified airline pilots took over that aircraft, whether it be a terrorist sitting in the cockpit or someone outside the cockpit” …
A common notion to which many defenders of the official account cling (including such notables as Noam Chomsky) is the idea that any conspiracy as vast as 9/11 would have had to involve hundreds, perhaps thousands of people, all in-the-know and willing to go to the grave with their secrets. But well researched claims—that many sizable covert operations have indeed been kept from the public in the past; that state of the art technology can drastically reduce the number of people required for any given “op,” and that systemic “compartmentalization” of duties can effectively exploit many people’s involvement without their knowledge—have convincingly refuted this assertion. In addition, the ability of higher-ups to intimidate and silence potential whistleblowers after the fact is formidable. Naturally, Mr. Hordon has a thing or two to say on the subject.
“I think we all have to agree that, one way or another, the U.S. military was involved in the attacks. The advantage that Rumsfeld had is that he can classify, reshape, make available, make unavailable any information that he wants, at any time and deny that information to the public for any reason, especially national security.”
Hordon believes that one facet of the plan that the conspirators could not control was the individual integrity of the civilians in the FAA—dedicated professionals who would not likely remain silent if they had witnessed something unusual during the attacks. Number one on Hordon’s list are the air traffic controllers: “What part of this whole thing is missing? Is it not the voice tapes from the civilian ATC’s? They had to devise a way to take the loose lips group, the civilian guys, and disengage them. If they are allowed to testify exactly as to their normal protocol behavior, they’re going to prove that the military were the culpable ones.” When he was in the FAA, Hordon was certified as the operator in his facility tasked to secure relevant data after an air emergency; if not entirely because of public safety concerns, certainly for liability reasons. “Whenever we had an incident, an emergency, on-air trouble, some type of a near ‘mid-air’ or a breakdown in aviation rules, we would immediately take the voice tapes and secure them. We would immediately take the radar data on that controller’s scope that day and secure them. Whenever there was an incident, all of the information, all of it was secured. Period.”
Despite this rigid protocol, there have been shocking accounts of ATC records being seized shortly after the attacks and kept far from public scrutiny. Hordon believes that these ATC recordings have either been destroyed or mutilated.
“The reason that they’re not giving us this early-on information is because they want to paint a picture of confusion, and they had to somehow get the civilian eye-witnesses out of it.”
Although the 9/11 Commission, desperate to deflect the public’s attention away from official quarters, scapegoated the FAA for incompetence in regard to the attacks, Hordon believes that the real confusion originated in the Pentagon, a theory that jibes well with the timely and suspicious change in air defense protocol mentioned above.
“The FAA has given us the computerized information about the aircraft being tracked. What the FAA has not given us is the internal tapes from the sectors in the Boston Center who were controlling this aircraft.”
If there were one point Robin Hordon would like to impress most upon 9/11 Truth researchers and activists it would be that the truth about the non-performance of U.S. air defenses on 9/11 lies in a careful examination of the first few minutes after the planes were known to have been hijacked.
“The first fifteen minutes are the key. I have done the math. If we had scrambled some aircraft five or six minutes after we saw this huge deviation, the fighters from Otis would have intercepted American 11 over southwestern Connecticut or just south of Albany, NY. The federal government and the military, for extremely serious reasons, are keeping the public focused on after American 11 hits the tower. But the real focus for 9/11 researchers should be what NORAD was doing five minutes after American 11 lost its transponder and went off course.”
Whatever criticism Hordon may have for NORAD and the Pentagon, it certainly doesn’t extend to the individuals on the frontlines of our nation’s civil defense:
“These are military fighter pilots. These are good guys. They figure stuff out. What do you think the pilots are doing? Ordering coffee and donuts? No. They are up there, their blood is pumping, they are thinking one thing: ‘My country is being invaded. This is why I stand on the ready in the waiting room down at Otis AFB; so that I can get up and defend my country.’ Do you think they’re going to get on the tail of American 11 when it was heading straight for the WTC and let it hit? No. What they’re going to do is say ‘OK, there’s going to be some bodies and shrapnel…boom.’ They’re going to take that risk.”
One of Hordon’s more ambitious proposals for the 9/11 Truth movement is that a support network be developed for the aid and protection of its single most important resource, whistleblowers.
“What the 9/11 movement should do is band together and develop safe lives for whistleblowers.” Legal counsel, moral support, even physical protection could do much to inspire those who are considering stepping forward with potentially explosive insider testimony about the attacks.
Hordon would also like to see young people being told the truth about politics, history and the world in their schools. “The people who are our greatest assets are the kids in high school. If the military is taking advantage of the susceptibility of high school kids to seduce them to kill people, the peace movement needs to offer alternatives. We need to make available, at the end of the high school years, alternatives of thought in regard to the world’s economy and control apparatus.” Hordon’s plan, though idealistic, is not without a certain opportunism:
“I want to go to high school kids because it’s a two for one proposition. First, their ears are wide open. They’re skeptical about this government right now and they’re plugged into the internet. Second, if we give them material to bring home, it winds up on the kitchen table. And what happens when parents find contraband that’s come into the house? They read it. It’s two for one.”
Many 9/11 activists believe that their work on issues related to the attacks has greater potential for true social transformation than any other single issue, and Hordon emphatically agrees.
“I think that this 9/11 thing is the quintessential opportunity to expose all of the infecting poisons; more than Iran Contra weapons for hostages, more than rampant militarism, more than Watergate, more than Enron, more than the dark side of the world’s financial institutions, more than any other similar kind of thing. I think that this is pretty much their last gasp, and the reason is very simple; the internet. We’re going to catch’em.”
Activists with a sense of humor are always a breath of fresh air. After his stint as an ATC, Hordon worked for years at the comedy club Catch a Rising Star in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Something must have rubbed off:
“We have two parties in this country; we have republicans and we have republicans dressed up in blue drag. And when we get the blue outer clothing off of the fake democrats, they stand there in their red Armani underwear.”
Hordon respects humor as a formidable weapon for activists. As an artistic coordinator for up and coming comedians, he once worked with some of the most talented and successful comics of our time including Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David. Some of the political comics he once coached are regulars on Air America Radio. Of the reigning powers-that-be, he has this to say:
“They know they’re done with 9/11. They know they’re cooked. They’re just throwing boxes of nails in the road behind their car as it speeds away and they’re hoping that all our tires get flattened. But it’s not happening. They know they’re pretty much done.”
Grounded and well informed, Robin Hordon is not a typical pie-in-the-sky progressive, and he likes what he sees happening around him.
“There’s so much good work being done. There’s such a cool pattern now and there’s so many kids coming up who know not to believe the stories they’re being told.”
His greatest hope is that these young movers and shakers shun the roads previously taken by their less politically savvy forebears.
“Sixty percent of our elected officials are millionaires. Until we change that, we are going to struggle to make our democracy better. And I think that, you now, democracies are OK. I think it’s a pretty good plan. I think we should try to get one.”
Recommended further reading and viewing …