Re: 9-11 Truth

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:28 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/19/2015

May 18, 2015 22:38:46 GMT said:
May 18, 2015 22:25:53 GMT lizardking said:
Loud booms were hear
why Free Energy is MAGICAL WUWU
Dr Judy Wood's and Tesla's work

Loud Booms were heard by NEWS MEDIA EYEWITNESS and on Manufactured Videos for the 911 Event, so YOU must
except the Videos as prima facie evidence, all of them, even the Magical Planes and Top Down Collapse.

Magical WUWU is something you can't produce, someone else has it, and you know all about it.

Judy Wood knows all about Telsa, and that makes the Magical WuWu real, just ask her.

Where's that Free Energy the Military uses, is it hidden?
Without Free energy would U.S. INC have dropped more than 88,500 tons of Iron Bombs on IRAQ?

Could you be wrong?

The whole point about Free Energy is that it has to be used in a very discreet way, or else their entire monopoly on oil and all other natural resources would end. If Free Energy were widely used and harnessed, the whole world would be able to power machinery at no expense. They cannot allow this, and that is why they very rarely use it in public. In fact, 9/11 might be the only time. An extraordinary solution to an extraordinary problem; how to rapidly remove two humongous buildings and the several other buildings surrounding them in a very short amount of time at the lowest possible cost, in a way which could be blamed on terrorists.

Any explosive based demolition would have led to the flooding of that entire area of New York, and the only other way to demolish them would have been the insurmountably expensive and painfully slow process of taking them apart, piece by piece, which would have taken several years and could not be blamed on terrorists.

"so YOU must except the Videos as prima facie evidence, all of them, even the Magical Planes and Top Down Collapse."

Why must I? Who wrote that rule?

You dismiss all of the 9/11 footage and photographs as CGI, and I already posted information debunking your thermite theory, based on after the event photographs and evidence collected at the WTC, therefore you have absolutely nothing to base your theory on. You do not know how the Towers collapsed because you do not believe any Eye Witness, any Video Footage, and any Still Image, so I really do not see how you can contribute anything worthwhile to this debate.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:29 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/19/2015

May 18, 2015 23:47:10 GMT @rayngryphon said:
I liked your comment because you express yourself so well.

But please read what I said. It is easy to refute her claims (not the physical sub micron evidence). Why, because Judy herself conflates her claims or inferences with the physical evidence, clearly mentoring a new logic to go along with a new melting point for steel and so on. Judy could not even tolerate the assault of being asked by Jim Fetzer to state her theory as to the very title of her book "evidence of directed energy weapons" (not perfect quote).

Dr. Judy is not the evidence.

She has knowingly or unknowingly used the physical evidence to fund a 911 free energy cult, which does nothing to support her hypothesis that is not a hypothesis and is offended at even being called an hypothesis as though the hypothesis is the evidence.

If it is so easy to refute her claims, PLEASE REFUTE THEM. I have asked you REPEATEDLY to post a rebuttal against her work, something you have FAILED to do.

Why are you asking me to read what you said? I have read everything you've said to me, multiple times, and most of it is nonsensical gibbersih and absolutely none of it is a clear countering to Judy's hypothesis.

"Have you read her book and are you willing to debunk it? Have you done that or are you going to do that?"

"Judy Wood is not going to acknowledge any of that evidence."

www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=397&Itemid=60

This is the MIRACULOUS excuse that A&E for 9/11 Truth have come up with in regards to debunking Judy's work. They are not even willing to bother, because she "won't acknowledge it." You might not be able to refute physical sub micron evidence, but they should be.

Jim Fetzer, the same man who quoted a Wikipedia article to debunk the Hutchison effect and was enthusiastic about Judy's work and said he had C.E.R.N people and international physicists on the edge of their seats over her research until they were aware of her affiliation with Hutchison.

www.drjudywood.com/articles/a/AJ/handling_truth.html

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/19/2015

May 19, 2015 0:20:38 GMT said:
May 18, 2015 23:55:40 GMT lizardking said:
Funny
you never expressed this opinion to Eric

My position has also been: CGI and Thermite on 911, with Fake videos fed to every news outlet, and Military Grade
smoke screen blanketing downtown.

In your theory, there needs to be Bombs Exploding, when they claim Planes and Diesel Fuel (Jet A-1) brought the
Buildings Down; TWO (2) Planes and Seven Buildings.

(We both agree on this, no?)

After the Planes they use Secret Free Energy Weapons, and Zap those Buildings, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7; all while explosion are
going off, that way no one get wise to the Free Energy.

OK, I'll switch to your story about 911.

You don't have to adopt mine, but yours is certainly dead in the water.

No evidence of molten steel, no evidence of thermite. You can choose to ignore all of the witness accounts made after 9/11, all of the evidence proving the "Thermite" proposers attachments to Direct Energy Weapons and the absolute debunking of the thermite theory. I won't.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:33 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/19/2015

May 19, 2015 1:11:21 GMT lizardking said:
You brought racism and sexism into the conversation and told me to grow up, and then accuse me of being hostile. That's rich.

Nonsensical gibberish is the kindest way to describe your rambling comments, which once made valid points, but ultimately descended into absurd drivel.

Why are you defending Fetzer, a KNOWN shill who has spouted some of the most ludicrous theories I've ever had the displeasure of reading? Why do you agree with his views on Hutchison but choose to ignore his feelings on Judy and her research, apparently deserving of incredulous praise before she became involved with him?

There is ample evidence of Free Energy weapons. Melted glass panes are not the result of a simple controlled demolition. Witness accounts of laser beams are not the result of simple controlled demolition. I will also never be convinced by any theory that tries to speculate why the US government would inject their own CGI footage with suggestions of Free Energy or Directed Energy Weapons.

www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/Hutch%20Letters.pdf

If Hutchison is merely a man with a few videos of spanners, why did Los Alamos and U.S.A.I confiscate slides of his work?

I didn't know you were that sensitive. I'm not abusing anyone, but I will call someone out when they act like a shill.

------

May 19, 2015 1:11:21 GMT rayngryphon said:

Okay. :-) So, I agree that shillery and "nonsensical jibberish" (was that it?) do go hand in hand. Shillery could in this manner or for this reason include just about anyone or anything, according to the fairly liberal standards for reason in a modern society such as ours. True, most of us do not even get paid to propound and proliferate what someone or other merely wishes us to think or do or say. But I digress.

I don't want to make a big deal of it, but I proposed that comments you made (as I understood them) were sexist to Dr. Judy Wood and thus to everyone engaged (racist), her or her detractors, in rendering her perspective up to a certain credible standard, as though any criticism of her evidence/speculations (or her conflation of them as a rule protected by the refuge of her albeit exhaustive treatment of the physical evidence from any objection/personal attack) was an "attack" on Dr. Judy Wood. If she has been attacked, that is lamentable. But to take such a tack in every case of objections to her speculations is to abuse the truth, whatever it is - and this is where I take exception.

This is not even worthy of a response, yet again you are waffling on about off-subject topics because you cannot refute what I am saying, or any of the evidence that I am posting, as you admitted when you said you did not have time to post rebuttals. Try to stay on topic, and if you don't have anything to say about the subject at hand, why say anything at all?

I understand your arguments; you don't have any. How can I respond to them, when you never post any? Other than ropes and pulleys, what exactly have you said in this thread? The sci fi story was fun, you mentioned sexism at one point which made me laugh seeing as I am female, you incorrectly used the term racism and you blathered on about morals somewhere, all because you couldn't rebut any of the evidence that I posted.

You should not apologise to me, you should apologise to Dr Judy Wood and all of the other people brave enough to investigate Free Energy. You may mock and disrespect them in the process, but you have not rebutted anything that they have ever said, and you cannot, and you will not.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:35 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/19/2015

Posted by rayngryphon on 05/19/2015
Just stop reading my comments. I daresay we will all be able to bear the deprivation. Proof that though we all speak English we do not all speak the same language.

In a very short order you have gone from dismissing my character, what I write, how I write and now even presume to tell me what to write. Do people usually let you get away with that?

If our genders were reversed there would be no reservations about calling you a misogynist (if not a psychopath) Now it is personal, not because I care what you think of me but because I now seriously doubt your mental health.

If I had read your last comment earlier, I would not have been so easy on you.

Wow. This really is Shill behaviour. So because I believe in Free Energy, I'm now a psychopath, a misogynist, a religious zealot and mentally unstable. I will not respond to you again, but only if you do not misquote me, put words in my mouth, or viciously attack me and my character.

You have shown yourself up repeatedly and you have dug yourself deeper and deeper with every one of your comments. Just remember, you started this, it is there for everyone to see, and you were rude, simply because I posted evidence that you could not disprove. There has been no rebuttal from you, all you have done is ranted and ranted and ranted. Go and tell your NWO shill masters that they need to do a better job if they're trying to suppress Free Energy, because you are fooling no one.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:36 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/20/2015

May 19, 2015 14:36:09 GMT @rayngryphon said:
Just for the record, I would be happy to learn just what happened to the WTC, whether it was some directed energy weapon or not. I just do not think that Wood-Hutchison are in any immediate danger of proving its existence. The sheer neuro-linguistic programming of her various dissertations on the subject (talks whose treatment of the physical evidence is so at variance with the hackneyed (and rhetorical) way she goes about making her hypothesis that is not an hypothesis (according to her, one she boldly displays on the cover of her excellent book but seems to feel immune to supporting, in no great departure from the generation of amateur scientists she has inspired, all of whom rush to her defence though theory and theorist were a damsel in distress instead of a theory like any need prove at the very least more robust a nature than the steel columns of the towers - extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence)).

The manner of their destruction was extraordinary. That it is so difficult to show how is not our fault but it is our challenge. I studied science for many years. It takes more than a few web searches and a chip on your shoulder. That the government has toys beyond our ken does not and should not serve to immunize anyone from making defensible claims or at least treating questions about them with respect for the truth if for nothing else. That is how theories develop. Otherwise, it is hopeless. A theory's critics are its best friends unless personal or conflicting agendas or issues intercede.

Free Energy was proven and patented, that is not in doubt. You obviously would not like to know what happened to the WTC buildings, because you will not even consider the possibility of Free Energy weapons, and instead you go against logic and reason and cling to a discredited theory.

Do you understand the very simple concept that thermite itself is not an explosive? That is a key argument against the controlled demolition/thermite theory, one which you refuse to acknowledge. Controlled demolition on its own cannot explain the extreme amount of oddities and unusual events that occurred that day. Seeing as you claim to genuinely want to understand what happened, why don't you actually bother reading the evidence that I posted with an open mind before you discredit it and mock it, simply because you were previously ignorant to the possibilities of free energy?

As Eric pointed out, you have an absolute misunderstanding of grammar. Please try to take the word "concise" into account when you make your comments, long windedness is not a positive trait. You do not understand how brackets should be used, so try to make your points in a way that actually make sense. You clearly jump from one idea to another to another, so take the time to properly edit your comment before you post it.

As for your credentials that you "studied science" for "many years"; thankfully I do not rely on your opinions and views. You yourself have said that you cannot rely on "mainstream science", despite this, you crap on Judy Wood and John Hutchison, not because you're rebutting their claims in any way, but simply because you do not understand their arguments, as you yourself said, you "don't have the time" to refute Judy Wood's evidence. It is not because you do not have the time, it is because you cannot refute it, and yet, you do have the time to ramble on about misogyny, racism, and any other subject, as long as it does not involve the evidence of the use of Free Energy technology on 9/11. That is very suspicious and shill like behaviour, and you very much remind me of the many shills we've seen before on this forum; one of the things that they all have in common is that they attack and ridicule Free Energy. In response to your little list of what it means to be a shill, read this article:

consciouslifenews.com/paid-internet-shill-shadowy-groups-manipulate-internet-opinion-debate/1147073/

Dr Wood has far more credentials than you, something that you refuse to acknowledge, she is far more intelligent than you, and I'll say it again, she is the only person to actually submit her evidence into a court of law against the United States government, so no matter what anyone else says, no other group of Truthers have had the guts to actually try and do anything against the government. For this, they should be ashamed, and we should be suspicious.

You asked me not to reply to you, and I agreed, as long as you did not viciously attack my character. I see that you have failed to abide by this very simple rule, so I will not respect your wishes.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:39 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/20/2015

May 19, 2015 16:02:02 GMT @rayngryphon said:
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
- Former CIA Director William Colby

''We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.''
William Casey CIA Director 1981

"For me, I am careful of low order occult propaganda always aims to save us from some evil or ignorance whilst grooming one in this manner to stake one's salvation on precepts, however old or arcane, secret or defamed, thus securing the office of human cognition and psychology for itself - that is the mystery of the mysteries, the antecedent of all government today."

"The greatest man-made technology on earth was and is the preponderance of images that divide and undermine our native and born cellular and social intelligence, our truly human existence."

I like how you respond to my mentions of Free Energy differently every time. You're throwing everything and the kitchen sink at free energy, why does it worry you so much? Is it because you are being paid to dissuade people from knowing about it, or believing in it?

We are not going to allow you to come onto this forum and spread your nonsense without taking it apart, critiquing it and exposing it for what it is. A load of waffle.

Free Energy is just as real as the "wind, sunlight and air" that you mentioned. It is infinite, and it exists all across the aether.

Yet again, you have the rhyme, but you don't have the reason. It doesn't matter how you string your sentences together, they have no substance. To try and argue that the Zionists created a false theory of Free Energy, simply so that in future, those calling them out would be misled is preposterous and truly hilarious. If that is the case, why do the Zionists go out of their way to avoid any and all mention of Free Energy? Who or what Tesla was connected to, is irrelevant. Tesla is irrelevant. All that matters is what he discovered or re-discovered. He was ruined by wealthy industrialists because they realised that his ideas would completely destroy their cartel and monopoly on the energy market. You claim that wind, air and sunlight are free, this preposterous lie is easily disproven; many of the world's leading energy conglomerates now charge money to install solar panels, wind turbines and other useless rip offs, simply as a way to squeeze even more money out of the people you label "Goyim." Free Energy would end this monopoly, and that is why they have to send so many shills onto every forum that has the "nerve" to mention it.

All you can do is hurl shit at our theory, but shit is not a rebuttal, and can easily be washed off.

I don't come onto this forum for your New Age babble, and I am sure that nobody else here does either, so please don't bore us with any more of your nonsensical gibberish. If I want to hear someone rant whilst promoting Zionism, I will just go and watch Alex Jones. It is interesting that you do not like to stick to the facts or ever mention any of the details, this is because you are scared of them. You know full well that your government sponsored NWO view of what happened on 9/11 and of Free Energy not existing cannot describe or explain away unique events like cars being burnt on one side but not the other, glass window panes melting but not cracking, and of vehicles being blown onto skyscraper roofs. These are only three of the many unusual events that I have posted links to. If you were serious, you would look at what I posted, go through it, and post rebuttals to it, but we all know that you will not do this, because you are simply a clown who has mistaken himself for a wordsmith. You will talk about anything, as long as it has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. Why don't you go and join UNreal at the shill-forum that is Fakeologist?

Do not come on here and try and control what we speak about. That is typical NWO authoritarian scheming of the sort that Acenci used to dabble in. I will say what I want to say, and I do not have any respect for you because of your behaviour. It is up to Eric to decide what is allowed on this forum, and Eric likes and agrees with my comments. Once more, I ask you, why don't you challenge Eric on this subject? The fact that you have not, speaks volumes.

Here are some easy ways to spot a Shill:

1. They promote the Holocaust as if it were real.
2. They try to control the way that discussions unfold.
3. They deny the existence of Free Energy and will not even consider it, and they throw their toys out of the pram if you have the nerve to even mention it.

You certainly tick two of these three boxes.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:40 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/21/2015

May 20, 2015 22:31:23 GMT @rayngryphon said:
Maybe try back here another time. Still the best forum on the net. Nor is it my forum, and I would not anyone think me thoughtless.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:41 pm

Posted by thesekininja on 05/23/2015
rayngryphon is a tad narcissistic, extremely verbose, and quick to challenge. But he is pretty clever, and oh my days does he crack me up.

I think we can all relate to his passion, if not his aggression and hypocrisy

"enigminometer" haha I wish I could post all the "enigminious" posts of his I've seen on here

Don't leave rayngryphon. Yours sincerely Thesekininja

And remember You Are Loved!

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:42 pm

Posted by lizardking on 05/23/2015

May 22, 2015 15:45:52 GMT thesekininja said:
rayngryphon is a tad narcissistic, extremely verbose, and quick to challenge. But he is pretty clever, and oh my days does he crack me up.

I think we can all relate to his passion, if not his aggression and hypocrisy

"enigminometer" haha I wish I could post all the "enigminious" posts of his I've seen on here

Don't leave rayngryphon. Yours sincerely Thesekininja

And remember You Are Loved!

If you actually read his replies to me, he said nothing clever. He kept promising rebuttals to Judy Wood but never came through and just posted long winded novels and links to his previous comments, and then called me a religious zealot and a sexist psychopath. Is that really the kind of member you want to invite back?

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:43 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 05/23/2015

May 22, 2015 15:45:52 GMT thesekininja said:
rayngryphon is a tad narcissistic, extremely verbose, and quick to challenge. But he is pretty clever, and oh my days does he crack me up.

I think we can all relate to his passion, if not his aggression and hypocrisy

"enigminometer" haha I wish I could post all the "enigminious" posts of his I've seen on here

Don't leave rayngryphon. Yours sincerely Thesekininja

And remember You Are Loved!

I am sorry to stop the love-in, but the only reason that he left was because his suspicious behaviour would have lead to him being banned eventually otherwise (he was already on 'strike two').

He does come across as intelligent at first, but then it becomes apparent that he actually just spouts out meaningless and off-subject waffle. It is not actually intelligent to be as diffuse as possible. He intentionally speaks in a way that could not be further from concise, simply to waste our time. Remember; time wasting is one of the key goals that these Shills have.

I have never seen so many words mean so little.

Rayn intentionally opposes and attacks Free Energy, because he is hired to do so. It is classic Shill behaviour to join a forum, agree with most of the conversations, ingratiate yourself with the Admin, but then oppose whatever it is you have been hired to oppose; in this case the work of Judy Wood, Free Energy as a concept and Tesla's other work.

In summary, don't come back Rayn, you are not loved here, and we have had enough of your rambling nonsense. Good riddance.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:47 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 06/06/2015
I knew that this was coming: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/september-11-attacks/11653706/US-report-claiming-Saudi-Arabia-financed-911-attack-redacted-by-Bush.html

Now they are trying to misdirect the truth movement towards the idea that Saudi Arabia financed the attacks. This will probably eventually lead to them even admitting that certain rogue elements of the US Government were involved, as a way of trying to cover up the fact that in reality, it was all planned and organised by the NWO/Zionists.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:47 pm

Posted by susie on 06/09/2015

May 18, 2015 23:31:53 GMT lizardking said:

Why do ALL of the TRUTHERS attached to the 9/11 movement have affiliation with Directed Energy Weapons? Why are they trying to dissuade truthers from the view that it was Directed Energy Weapons or Free Energy?

Because most are controlled opposition. If the world knew of free energy all hell would break loose on those who have imprisoned us with their markets of oil etc. They are the biggest companies in the world and free energy would demolish them financially. It is their cashcow which was propped up by dinosaur fables and panic that it could all diminish with knowledge that oil is really abiotic and energy can be harnessed from our atmosphere.

Dirty bastards club has almost run the truther movement and freedom community by controlling its leaders and misguiding its devotees.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:48 pm

Posted by Observicus on 06/09/2015
This technology and similar frequency manipulation is being used more widely than people are aware.
A programmed aerial laser could easily zap out a precise pattern of a crop circle for example.

The image below is WTC5 showing the obstructed dissociation ray effect at A.

9-11 Truth - Page 2 2nm3a5z

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:50 pm

Posted by schpankme on 06/14/2015

May 18, 2015 23:31:53 GMT lizardking said:
Why are they trying to dissuade truthers from the view
that it was Directed Energy Weapons
or Free Energy?

I just had my apple cart upset today when Simon Shack claimed 'we are Flat Earth Nuts or NASA Shills', all the
while ignoring the evidence for Flat Earth, and then promoting Magical Ball Earth nonsense.

I need to reevaluate my 911 position, because my attitude is; if you lie to me about one thing, you will lie to me
about other things.

I've watched two Dr Judy Wood videos today, do you recommend any supporting work by another Direct Energy
author, related to 911?

Dr Judy Wood:
Evidence of breakthrough energy technology on 9/11
Dr. Judy Wood - The Amazing 9/11 Facts

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:51 pm

Posted by lizardking on 06/15/2015
Unfortunately, it seems that Judy Wood, John Hutchison and Andrew Johnson (who runs the website: checktheevidence.co.uk) are the only major people involved in the 9/11 truth community who in any way promote the use of DEW on 9/11.

As shown here, all of these "Truthers" have connections to the DEW industry.

Also, "Simon Shack/Hytten's Brother was Sponsored by Bin Laden group in the 1980's"

www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2361265#p2361265

There are some good videos made by amateurs if you search YouTube though.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:53 pm

Posted by susie on 06/17/2015
www.facebook.com/groups/204951699608374/?ref=browser

www.facebook.com/groups/193815570726181/?ref=browser

www.facebook.com/groups/911TruthMovement/?ref=browser

www.facebook.com/groups/1940281549444156/?ref=browser

here are 4 Facebook groups that deal specificially with Dr. Wood's work.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:54 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 07/03/2015

Here is an interesting analysis of Bush's movements on 9/11:

It looks very likely that the original plan was to murder the President, but that he somehow managed to outfox them (if he can outfox you, you must be pretty thick Very Happy

).

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:56 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 07/04/2015

Jul 3, 2015 17:29:41 GMT susie said:
I dont see that happening since Bush is as deep in the Communist bunker as it gets. And Saudi butt buddies abound. They were all instrumental in carrying that shit out.
Dirty Bastards Club written all over that day, Satanic sacrifice for their god. Pfft!!

You may well be right, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were going to sacrifice Dubya in order to get Cheney into the White House. They are so evil that Bush Snr. would not object to the murder of his son, and had they killed him, can you imagine how much they would have gained? The Towers and Pentagon bombed and the President murdered? The Patriot Act could have been even more draconian.

It is worth remembering that they will happily murder Presidents if they need to.

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:57 pm

Posted by lizardking on 07/10/2015

Jul 9, 2015 13:52:38 GMT shemmings said:
I am sorry, but why are we discussing how the buildings came down when the entire event was prerecorded and all CGI? A&E AND Dr. Wood are ALL misdirects. None of what we saw that day happened by means of the video we saw. It is ALL theatre. Shack is winning this argument and proven the case beyond any doubt, in my and others opinion. The evidence is overwhelming. Looking at video and/or still shots of that day is useless as it is all CGI.

You think A&E and July Wood are misdirects, but not the man with connections to the Bin Laden family?

On the last page I made this comment:

Also, "Simon Shack/Hytten's Brother was Sponsored by Bin Laden group in the 1980's"

Besides, even if someone could prove that all of the footage was fake, so what? We would still be left with two empty slots of land where the Twin Towers were, and we would still be able to speculate how they were removed based on that fact and after the event photographs, evidence gathered at the scene, witness statements, seismic data and so on.

Please read through the thread before you dismiss our entire debate. The CGI theory has been mentioned on more than one occasion, and I have linked to the website with rebuttals to at least several of the 'video fakery' claims.

www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=349&Itemid=60

Perhaps Simon Hytten’s slow but sure “building up” of a following around September Clues can itself be seen as yet another “perception management” operation – perhaps this time made easier by the very convoluted nature of the video anomalies he originally set out to illustrate (i.e. it really does make you reconsider what is real and what is not)."

by Thinkforyourself Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:58 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 07/26/2015
The Congressional report on torture confirms that Al Qaeda was not involved in the attacks of September 11

Publicly released excerpts of the report of the Senate Committee on the CIA’s secret torture program reveal a vast criminal organization. Thierry Meyssan has read for you the 525 pages of this document. He found evidence of what he has been saying for years.

Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on December 9, 2014, released an extract of her classified report on the secret program of torture by the CIA. [1]

Presentation of the report

The declassified portion corresponds to only one-twelfth of the initial report.

The report itself does not address the vast removal and sequestration system that the US Navy had put in place during the terms of President George W. Bush; a program that has led to worldwide kidnapping and sequestration of more than 80 000 people aboard 17 flat-bottomed boats stationed in international waters (these ships are: USS Bataan, USS Peleliu, USS Ashland, USNS Stockham, USNS Watson, USNS Watkins, USNS Sister, USNS Charlton, USNS Pomeroy, USNS Red Cloud, USNS Soderman, USNS Dahl MV PFC William B Baugh, Alex Bonnyman MV, MV Franklin J Phillips, MV Huage Louis J Jr, James Anderson Jr. MV). It is content to study 119 cases of human guinea pigs subjected to psychological experiments in Guantánamo and fifty secret prisons from 2002 to late 2009, a year after the election of Barack Obama.

The extracts of the report do not indicate the criteria by which these human guinea pigs were chosen. They merely state that each prisoner denounced the following, while indicating that the confessions were not extorted but learned. In other words, the CIA sought to justify its choices by making denunciations ex post facto.

In the initial report, the names of the CIA agents and contractors involved have been replaced by pseudonyms. In addition, the declassified extracts were widely censored, mainly to clear the names of foreign accomplices of the CIA.

The content of the report

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5009-317a2

I read the entire 525 pages of excerpts from the public report. However, I am far from having drawn all the information because much research is needed to interpret the redacted passages.

Conditioning sessions were performed in fifty secret prisons under the responsibility of "Alec Station", the unit of the CIA in charge of tracking Osama bin Laden. Infrastructure, staff and transport were the responsibility of the CIA’s Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation Group. The sessions were designed and carried out under the supervision of two contracting psychologists who established a firm in 2005. The conditioning techniques employed were authorized at the highest level, without specifying that these tortures were intended to condition and not to extract information.

Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Justice John Ashcroft, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell and CIA Director George Tenet attended meetings on this subject at the White House. They attended simulations at the White House and watched recordings of some sessions; records that were subsequently illegally destroyed. These meetings were obviously designed to implicate these personalities, but it is not possible to determine which of them knew for what these techniques had been used.

However, in June 2007, Condoleezza Rice was personally briefed by the CIA contractor who supervised the experiments. The National Security Advisor authorized the continuation of the experiments, but diminished the number of authorized tortures.

The publicly available excerpts of the report contain a detailed analysis of how the CIA lied to the other branches of the Bush administration, the media and Congress.

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5012-3963c-3-6545b

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5012-3963c-3-6545b

James Mitchell and Bruce Jensen, supervisors of the CIA conditioning program. Mitchell was appointed Mormon bishop in 2012, but he was forced to resign when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints learned about his activities.

The experiments of Professor Martin Seligman

The public extract from the report confirms that the CIA conducted experiments based on the work of Professor Martin Seligman (theory of "learned helplessness"). They were not intended to obtain a confession or information, but to inculcate a narrative or behavior in the subjects.

Most of the quotes that the press has extracted from the report are confusing. Indeed, the CIA speaks of "conditioning methods" under the name of “non-standard means of interrogation”). Out of context, we can assume that the term "interrogation" means the search for information while it actually denotes conditioning sessions undergone by the subjects.

All the names of the torturers were censored in the declassified extracts. However, we recognize Bruce Jessen under the pseudonym "Grayson Swigert" and James Mitchell as that of "Hammond Dunbar." From April 12, 2002, the two men oversaw the program. They were physically present in secret prisons. In 2005, they organized themselves into a commercial company, Mitchell Jessen & Associates (referred to as "Company Y" in the report). From 2005 to 2010, their firm was paid $81 million. Subsequently, they were used by the Army to conduct a behavioral program on 1.1 million US soldiers.

In May of 2003, a senior CIA officer informed the Inspector General of the Agency that the work of Professor Seligman was based on torture practiced by North Vietnam to obtain "confessions for propaganda purposes”. The officer put the conditioning program into question. His information was not followed up on. Moreover, he made a small mistake by citing North Vietnam; Seligman’s research was based, like the North Vietnamese practices, on Korean work.

How torturers protected themselves

According to the Senate Committee, the CIA’s torture program was ordered by President George W. Bush, September 17, 2001, six days after the attacks. He had intended only to give extraordinary means to investigate the attacks of 11 September 2001. However, this program was immediately developed in breach of some President’s instructions. Therefore, from the attacks, the CIA, unbeknownst to the White House, sought to manufacture fraudulent evidence falsely attesting to the guilt of al-Qaeda.

President George Bush and parliamentarians were deceived by the CIA who got authorizations to practice certain forms of torture by masking their true purpose and misrepresented inculcated confessions as if they had been extracted under torture.

When, on September 6, 2006, President Bush admitted to the existence of the secret torture program of the CIA, he defended the practice, arguing that it had yielded information that saved lives. It was based on the false reports of the CIA and he was unaware that it manufactured evidence instead of searching for it. From that point, the Atlanticist media descended into barbarism and debated the merits of torture by presenting it as a necessary evil.

The torturers ensured legal cover for themselves by asking for permission to practice from the Department of Justice. But it took no action on the legality of the methods used (isolation, confinement in a small box, staged funeral, use of insects, etc.) and not on the program as a whole. Most lawyers allowed only particular postures ignoring their psychological consequences when combined. All authorizations were collected in August of 2002.

CIA officials who authorized these experiments have indicated in writing that the human guinea pigs were to be incinerated if they succumbed during conditioning or they should stay locked up for life if they survived.

"Confessions" fabricated

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5022-8dd7c

Let’s be clear: the Senate Committee does not say that the confessions of CIA detainees are legally incorrect because they were obtained under torture, it states that the CIA did not question the detainees, but it conditioned them to confess to acts of which they knew nothing. The Commission states that the CIA agents did not even look to see what the detainees had confessed during previous interrogations with the authorities who arrested them. In other words not only has the CIA not investigated whether al Qaeda was involved in the attacks or not, but its action had no other purpose than to generate false evidence attesting to the involvement of al-Qaeda in the attacks of September 11.

The Senate Committee did not discuss whether the confessions of the human guinea pigs were extorted or inculcated, but after explaining that supervisors were conditioning experts and not interrogators, the Committee explains at length the fact that none of these "confessions" has allowed us to anticipate anything. It demonstrates that the CIA lied by claiming that they had helped prevent further attacks. The Commission does not write that information on al-Qaeda in these confessions is fabricated, but notes that it all was verifiably false. In doing so, the Commission explicitly refutes the arguments that were used to justify torture and implicitly cancels the testimonies which were used to link al-Qaeda to the attacks of Sept. 11.

This report confirms, officially, several items of information we presented to our readers and that contradict and invalidate the work of Atlanticist think tanks, universities and the media since September 11, both in regard to the 2001 attacks themselves and with regard to al-Qaeda.

Following the publication of excerpts from this report, it appears that all the evidence cited in the report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the September 11 attacks connecting these to al-Qaeda is false. There no longer exists to date a shred of evidence for attributing the attacks to Al Qaeda: There is no evidence that the 19 people accused of being airline pirates could have been found that day in one of the four planes, and none of the former members of Al Qaeda’s testimonials confessing to the attacks is genuine [2].

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5011-7c592-3-87304

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5011-7c592-3-87304

Martin Seligman, the designer of the CIA conditioning program.
The report confirms what we revealed in 2009

In October 2009, I published a study on this subject in the Russian magazine Odnako [3]. I argued that Guantanamo was not an interrogation center, but a conditioning centre. Also I was putting personally calling Professor Seligman to task. A year later, the article having been translated into English, US psychologists led a campaign to ask Martin Seligman for an explanation. In response, he denied his role as a torturer and launched legal proceedings against myself and the Voltaire Network in both France and Lebanon where I lived. Ultimately, Professor Seligman instructed his lawyers to stop the procedures after we published one of his letters followed by an explanatory text. [4] Martin Seligman sued all those who treated this subject, such as Bryant Weich of the Huffington Post [5].

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5010-a323b-3-cb441

9-11 Truth - Page 2 1-5010-a323b-3-cb441

John O. Brennan was deputy director of the CIA (2001-05) and, as such, director of the National Anti-Terrorist Centre. He was the main architect of the secret program for fabricating confessions under torture. In 2009, he became adviser to President Barack Obams on Homeland Security issues. He was appointed CIA director in 2013.

And now

Senator Diane Feinstein bravely managed to publish part of her report, despite the opposition of the current CIA director, John Brennan, formerly in charge of controlling the torture program.

President Barack Obama announced that he would not pursue any of the perpetrators of these crimes, while defenders of human rights are fighting to have the perpetrators brought to justice. It’s the least we can do.

However, the real issues are elsewhere: Why did the CIA committed such crimes? Why did it fabricate confessions to link al-Qaeda artificially to the attacks of September 11? And therefore, al-Qaeda being unrelated to the attacks of Sept. 11, who has the CIA therefore sought to protect?

Finally, the CIA program involved only 119 human guinea pigs, what do we know about the 80,000 secret prisoners of the US Navy?

Thierry Meyssan