Scholars Repudiate Official Version of 9/11

[michelle]

Former Fed analyst questions M1 currency component spike prior to 9/11

March 22, 2007 – William Bergman worked at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago from July 1990 until early 2004. He served as an economist for eight years, and then moved to a senior analyst position in a new department researching financial market and payment system risk policy issues. In late 2003, he was asked to consider an assignment in the money laundering area. Bergman accepted the assignment, underwent a background check, received credentials affording access to confidential banking information, and began working in the area. He was told that he was “part of the fight against terrorism” and that he “had been asking good questions.”

One aspect of the assignment to the money laundering area was for Bergman to develop a paper that, if accepted, could serve as a reference source for the Federal Reserve System.

Bergman decided to begin his new assignment by developing a 40 question Q&A in order to introduce himself and anyone else new to the money laundering area to the topic. He thought that the Q&A could serve as a primer that dealt with the fundamentals, including some history on money laundering, recent legal developments in the area, and the role of banking regulators.

After submitting his draft to a supervisor, Bergman received approval of his work and was told that it could be considered as a reference. However, in his Q&A, Bergman left one question without an answer. That is to say that Bergman submitted his 40 question Q&A with 40 questions, but only 39 answers. The supervisor that reviewed the draft told Bergman that he should continue his work by answering the only remaining unanswered question in the draft.

What prompted the unanswered question that Bergman incorporated into his draft? Bergman had noted that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve had issued supervisory letters to the 12 Reserve Banks in the weeks after September 11, 2001 urging scrutiny of suspicious activity reports in tracking terrorism activity and financing. However, Bergman also noticed that the Board of Governors had issued a similar letter, albeit one that did not refer explicitly to terrorism, on August 2, 2001[1]. According to Bergman, terrorism and terrorist financing were known to be part of ‘suspicious activity’ however, and the August 2, 2001 supervisory letter clearly called for scrutiny of suspicious activity, which implies and includes the tracking of terrorism activity and financing. The unanswered question on Bergman’s 40 question Q&A asked why the Board had issued the August 2, 2001 letter – a very fair, logical, and important question that has yet to be answered to this day.

Given the fact that the supervisor gave him the green light and directed him to find the answer regarding the August 2, 2001 supervisory letter, Bergman decided that the best method to discover the answer was to contact the staff of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve directly. In December 2003 he called the Board and inquired about the meaning and motivation behind the August 2, 2001 letter. Within two weeks his assignment was abruptly terminated and his credentials canceled.

Bergman explains:

At the time I was also looking into and asking questions about currency flows. I thought these questions were worth pursuing, and was planning to raise them when I made the above-noted phone call to the Board of Governors. The currency component of M1 (Federal Reserve Notes circulating outside of banks) rose especially rapidly in July and August 2001. In fact, up to and including August 2001, that month (August 2001) was one of the three fastest growing months for the currency component of M1 since 1947, on a seasonally adjusted basis, even on the heels of significantly above-average growth in July 2001. Much of the July-August surge (over $5 billion above-average) seems to have been in the $100 denomination. Among other explanations, persons aware of any imminent terrorist attacks and concerned about possible asset seizures such as those that arose after the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis and the 1998 embassy bombings could have been trying to liquidate their bank accounts in July and August 2001. The money trail could provide important clues about people aware of, if not responsible for, the attacks. I looked at some internal data bearing on this issue that was available to anyone within the Federal Reserve’s internal computer network; after going back to look at this important data again a week or two later, it was no longer freely available, but password protected.

Approximately one month after his money laundering work was terminated for what was described at the time as an egregious breach of protocol attributed to his contacting the staff of the Board of Governors, Bergman’s department was absorbed into another department, and his 14-year employment with the Federal Reserve ended. Bergman was told that the elimination of his position at the Federal Reserve had nothing to do with him personally – that it was an organizational matter. He was offered and accepted a severance package, and left the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank in March 2004.

Whether inquiring about the unusually high put options placed prior to 9/11 on airline companies such as American and United, or the World Trade Center Complex insurance companies such as Axa, Allianz, along with other insurance companies of interests, put options that then most likely made the insiders billions of dollars as a result of these companies’ stock values plummeting after 9/11, or about an unusual spike in the currency component of the M1 in July / August 2001 that appears to be $5 billion denoted in $100 bills – and what the reader is left with is more evidence that prior knowledge of 9/11 was rampant in the United States and that the event could have been prevented but was instead, enabled and exploited.

And what about the August 2, 2001 supervisory letter? What prompted it? Sadly, Americans are once again left with trying to determine for themselves - because nobody entrusted to uphold the rule of law free from passion or prejudice is willing to launch a thorough and purposeful criminal investigation - who knew what, and when.

Prior knowledge of 9/11 without action and / or effort to prevent the events from unfolding is at minimum – criminally negligent homicide – a felony. For many within the U.S. government and foreign intelligence community, as well as the banking cartel, for the entire wide-ranging set of un-indicted co-conspirators, justice waits, but must prevail.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, SR 01-18 (SUP), Suspicious Activity Report Database, August 2, 2001, www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/srletters/2001/sr0118.htm, [Accessed March 21, 2007]

Source: www.muckrakerreport.com/id378.html

[michelle]

New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon
Thu Jun 21, 3:01 AM ET

Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77, which The 9/11 Report claims hit the Pentagon. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.

Madison, WI (PRWEB) June 21, 2007 - A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. "We have had four lines of proof that no Boeing 757 hit the building," said James Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. "This new study by Pilots drives another nail into a coffin of lies told the American people by The 9/11 Commission":

The new society, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained its 2002 report on American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 that, according to the official account, hit the ground floor of the Pentagon after it skimmed over the lawn at 500 mph plus, taking out a series of lamp posts in the process. The pilots not only obtained the flight data but created a computer animation to demonstrate what it told them.

According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/), there are major differences between the official account and the flight data:

a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.
b. All Altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.
c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.
d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.
e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.

As Robert Balsamo, co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, observes, "The information in the NSTB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001." The study was signed by fifteen professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience. They have made their animation, "Pandora's Box: Chapter 2," available to the public at video.google.com/videosearch?q=Pandora's+Black+Box%3A+Chapter+2 .

According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (http://911scholars.org), this result fits into the broader picture of what happened at the Pentagon that day. "We have developed four lines of argument that prove--conclusively, in my judgment--that no Boeing 757 hit the building. The most important evidence to the contrary has been the numerous eyewitness reports of a large commercial carrier coming toward the building. If the NTSB data is correct, then the Pilot's study shows that a large aircraft headed toward the building but did not impact with it. It swerved off and flew above the Pentagon."

Fetzer, who retired last June after 35 years of teaching courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, expressed pleasure over the Pilot's results, which, he said, has neatly resolved the most pressing issue that remained about the Pentagon. He added, "We have previously developed several lines of argument, each of which proves that no Boeing 757 hit the building," including these four:

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.

(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor". At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.

(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level--physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows. The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.

Members of Scholars have contributed to a new book that analyses the government's official account, according to which 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacked four commercial airliners, outfoxed the most sophisticated air-defense system in the world, and committed these atrocities under the control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan. Entitled, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007), it includes photographs of the hit point before and after the upper floors collapsed, the crucial frame from the released videos, and views of the clear, smooth, and unblemished lawn.

"Don't be taken in by photos showing damage to the second floor or those taken after the upper floors collapsed, which happened 20-30 minutes later," Fetzer said. "In fact, debris begins to show up on the completely clean lawn in short order, which might have been dropped from a C-130 that was circling above the Pentagon or placed there by men in suits who were photographed carrying debris with them." The most striking is a piece from the fuselage of a commercial airliner, which is frequently adduced as evidence.

James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995. "It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact." Fetzer has been so impressed with his research he has invited Hanson to submit his study to Scholars for consideration for publication on its web site, 911scholars.org.

"The Pentagon has become a kind of litmus test for rationality in the study of 9/11," Fetzer said. "Those who persist in maintaining that a Boeing 757 hit the building are either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired. Unless," he added, "they want to mislead the American people. The evidence is beyond clear and compelling. It places this issue 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

###

Scholars for 9/11 Truth
JAMES FETZER
[phone]
E-mail Information
Trackback URL: prweb.com/pingpr.php/Q291cC1NYWduLVRoaXItQ291cC1UaGlyLVplcm8=


Source:
news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20070621/bs_prweb/prweb534642_1

[evelyn]

I note the following, not from "Scholars . . . ", simply for the record. There are a number of respected journalists who seem amazingly blind in several important areas. All glimmers of hope are to be celebrated.


Robert Fisk: Even I question the 'truth' about 9/11
news.independent.co.uk/fisk/article2893860.ece

[michelle]

Neo-Cons Enlist Bin Laden's Help To Counter 9/11 Truth

Discredited Pentagon-affiliated IntelCenter to release another dubious tape right when Bush needs it most, Osama pops up hours after new Zogby poll shows Americans want new 9/11 investigation for second time running

Prison Planet | September 7, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

The U.S. government, via its closely affiliated IntelCenter front, is to release a new tape of Osama Bin Laden on the sixth anniversary of 9/11 in a desperate ploy to counter 9/11 truth and a new Zogby poll that again proves the majority of Americans are highly suspect of the official story.

A pre-released image shows an apparently older looking Bin Laden with a dyed dark brown beard, meaning the individual in the tape is either a body double or the terror master has been using Grecian Formula 16 in between his dashing from cave to cave across the mountainous Pakistani border region.

But whether you think it's Bin Laden or not is really beside the point, if Bin Laden was dead it would be necessary to perpetuate the myth anyway, the thing to bear in mind here is that Osama has never failed in ensuring his tapes get released at the most politically opportune times - not for 'Al-Qaeda' - but for the Neo-Cons and the Bush administration.

In addition, the security services and IntelCenter have been caught on numerous occasions doctoring Bin Laden tapes and passing off footage they filmed as originating from Al-Qaeda, as well as claiming that 6-year-old footage is new material. Their credibility on this issue has been shot to pieces again and again and only the supremely naive or the witting dupe would lend any credence to the authenticity of this new tape.

First and foremost, in the same vein as the History Channel hit piece , the tape is an attempt to rescue the tattered and torn credibility of the official 9/11 fairy tale, as well as providing a media distraction to obfuscate the 9/11 truth events that kick off today at ground zero and continue on into next week's anniversary.

A new Zogby International poll released yesterday shows that 51% of Americans (up from 45% last year) want Bush and Cheney to be directly investigated for their actions on 9/11 and 67% fault the 9/11 Commission for their failure to probe the anomalous collapse of WTC 7.

Hours after the release of the poll Bin Laden pops up and promises us a new editorial comment. Coincidence? Precisely the same thing happened last year. On May 23rd 2006, a Zogby poll was released showing nearly half of Americans wanted a new 9/11 investigation. The very next day, Bin Laden popped up to reinforce the official version and threaten new attacks. Can lightening strike twice in the same place?

The Osama tapes are about as genuine as a used car salesman convention, and have been proven fraudulent on countless occasions. They are nothing more than crude propaganda unleashed in a desperate move to put the genie of what really happened on 9/11 back in the bottle.

For those who still scoff at the notion that the Neo-Cons would be behind the release of the tapes, consider the fact that the Pentagon admitted that they undertook a "propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq," Musab Al-Zarqawi, which was targeted at the "U.S. home audience" and that the discovery of the program was followed by the release of a video tape featuring....you guessed it - Musab Al-Zarqawi.

The Washington Post even described how the Pentagon had concocted fake Al-Zarqawi letters boasting about suicide attacks and leaked them to Dexter Filkins of the New York Times, who splashed them on the front page the next day.

If the Pentagon had no qualms about faking communications from other Al-Qaeda leaders and passing them off as real to the U.S. media, then why would they refrain from doing the same with the Bin Laden tapes?

In our previous groundbreaking investigation , we exposed IntelCenter, the middleman between "Al-Qaeda's media arm" and the press, and the organization that routinely obtains the tapes, as little more than a Pentagon front group staffed by individuals with close connections to Donald Rumsfeld and the U.S. war machine.

Computer analyst Neal Krawetz discovered last month that the As-Sahab logo (the alleged media arm of Al-Qaeda) and the IntelCenter logo (a U.S. based private intelligence organization that "monitors terrorist activity") were both added to the Al-Qaeda videos at the same time. Though Krawetz re-affirmed his conclusion in an interview with Wired News, after the fact became public, he mysteriously recanted.

Krawetz original analysis, before he was obviously pressured to withdraw it, clearly suggests that IntelCenter is directly manufacturing the tapes and that "As-Sahab" is a contrived hoax to promulgate the myth that the tapes are coming from Al-Qaeda.

IntelCenter's denial of of this whole episode should be taken with a pinch of salt, for it was Ben Venzke's company that knowingly re-released 6 years old footage of Bin Laden that many quarters of the media treated as new. IntelCenter itself had released the same footage in October 2003 and it still appears dated as such on their own website .

The organization was also behind the so-called "laughing hijackers" tape , which was passed off as originating from Al-Qaeda's media arm, but was later exposed as being secret surveillance footage filmed by U.S. intelligence in 2000.

At upwards of $4,000 dollars a year in intelligence packages that are sold on their website, IntelCenter has a lucrative financial motive to keep the supply of Al-Qaeda tapes rolling.

For the Bush administration and the Neo-Cons, the tapes are routinely delivered on a silver platter at the most politically expedient moments, and a fresh injection on behalf of Bin Laden for the flagging war on terror on the 6th anniversary of 9/11 is precisely what Bush needs to help keep U.S. troops in Iraq until the next election, as Bush is quoted as holding out for in his own recent biography.

The last Bin Laden tape, despite later being proven as re-hashed footage originally filmed in 2001 that was actually released on two separate occasions before, emerged right at the time when the 6 months "wait and see" period after the surge was up and was used to mandate the endless occupation of Iraq.

Whether it's to justify a war, win an election or divert from a scandal, Bin Laden can always be relied upon to come up with the goods and save Bush's bacon.

Both Kerry and Bush attributed the President's 2004 re-election to Osama Bin Laden's appearance in a video tape just days before the vote. Veteran newsman Walter Cronkite mused that the whole farce was a Karl Rove orchestrated set-up.

On the eve of the Iraq war during Colin Powell's infamous presentation to the UN, an audio tape in which bin Laden claimed he was allied with Saddam Hussein surfaced, a gift-wrapped present for the Neo-Cons who had consistently been proven wrong in their assertion that there was a connection between Iraq and 9/11.

Ayman Al-Zawahiri appeared right on cue at the exact same time two years running , days before the State of the Union, to slam Bush as a "butcher" and a "failure." Like his right-hand man Osama, Al-Zawahiri's timing is impeccable! Right when Bush needs to reinforce the fear of the shadowy enemy each January to mute his critics before the big speech, Al-Zawahiri pops up with the goods.

Though such transparent and debase propaganda is still more than enough to fool the remnants of the semi-retarded, kool-aid drinking, Neo-Con cheerleaders out there, many Americans with more than three brain cells to rub together are starting to realize that they have been led on one almighty goose chase, and that no amount of fuzzy "Bin Laden tapes" are going to hold back the stampede of truth that at this time concentrates at ground zero - namely the protest actions and events taking place at ground zero over the next five days in the name of 9/11 truth.

Source:
www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/neo_cons_enlist_bin_laden_help_counter_911_truth.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three minute segment of the latest CIA-produced bin Laden video
07 Sep 2007
Go To:
www.liveleak.com/view?i=f54_1189196761

[michelle]

Remembering 9/11

Let us on this day mourn for those who tragically lost their lives on 9/11. And let us commit that their lives not be lost in vain, but become the basis for a new America of peace and justice. America must regain the moral high ground in our efforts to recover from 9/11.

Let us not forget the world was with America in our sorrow on September 11, 2001. The world was prepared to unite with America in a cooperative effort to challenge terrorists who attempt to disrupt civil society. Instead, the Administration used 9/11 as an excuse to attack a nation that did not attack us. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, or with Al Qaeda's role in 9/11. Iraq did not have the intention or the capability of attacking the United States. Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. Yet the Administration deliberately and falsely conflated 9/11 with Iraq, with the cooperation of an unquestioning media.

As a result, nearly 4,000 of our brave soldiers have lost their lives, and tens of thousands have been permanently injured in combat in Iraq. The subsequent occupation has fueled the insurgency and will continue to result in more troop losses until the United States leaves. Also, nearly one million innocent Iraqis have lost their lives as a result of this war. This violence against an innocent people is a tragedy of immense proportions. It is also a violation of international law, and those who authored this war must be held accountable for their actions.

Americans will spend close to $2 trillion in Iraq by the time the costs of this war are totaled, but the longer term costs have included the undermining America's moral authority in the world, the separation of America from the nations and the peoples of the world, and the destruction of a domestic agenda which is being deferred while we borrow money from China to fight the war in Baghdad.

We need to call those who used 9/11 to take us into war against Iraq to an accounting under the U.S. Constitution, U.S. law, and international law. We must soon begin a period of truth and reconciliation in our own nation. We must have forums of open dialogue throughout the country where we can come together to remember who we were before 9/11, to share our personal narratives of the times when we felt most secure, most in love with our nation, most trustful of our democratic institutions. We must recover our capacity for civic action. We must reclaim our nation. The only way we can do that is to tell the truth.

Dennis Kucinich


Please visit Dennis' thread here at the FH Forum:
airdance.proboards50.com/index.cgi?board=news&action=display&thread=1166019736&page=4

[michelle]

Elizabeth Kucinich: My Husband Would "Absolutely" Consider Running With Ron Paul
Posted by Adam Howard, AlterNet at 6:21 AM on November 24, 2007.

The Democratic underdog's wife weighs in on Ron Paul and whether or not the events of 9/11 deserve a new investigation.

The video to your right was shot backstage after the Democratic debate in Las Vegas. In this segment Dennis Kucinich's wife Elizabeth talks about being open minded to teaming up with Ron Paul but also talks about how in a Kucinich administration the investigation into what happened on 9/11 would be reopened. Click on the video to your right for more.

Adam Howard is the editor of PEEK.
Go to: www.alternet.org/blogs/video/68745/

[michelle]

Kucinich to Investigate 9/11 Insider Trading
"I'm not afraid to ask questions about 9/11"

Aaron Dykes / JonesReport.com | February 20, 2008

Congressman Dennis Kucinich revealed that he is initiating an investigation into the insider trading that took place leading up to 9/11, particularly in regards to put options placed on American Airlines and United Airlines stock.

Kucinich said that he had personal questions about the implications insider trading had.

"I've indicated a long-standing interest in gathering information and trying to get to the bottom of exactly what happened with respect to all the stock activity that took place preceding 9/11." Kucinich said.

Kucinich said it was the bizarre record-level put options that caught his attention initially. The odd trades heavily indicate prior knowledge of the September 11 attacks and have raised a number of questions that Kucinich hopes to probe.

"First of all, I'm not afraid to ask questions about 9/11," Kucinich told the Alex Jones Show.

"From my own personal standpoint, I've had long-standing questions about why this volume, why those airlines, why that time, who made the buys, why did they buy them, who told them to make the buys, who was involved? There are questions there that need to be answered as part of an effort to get to the truth," Kucinich said.

He made clear he was not yet pointing the finger. "I don't know what happened. I'm not alleging anything here. But I sure want to find out how it happened."

But Kucinich hopes that inquiries in a committee hearing would clarify the information and answer questions.

"I think we need to talk to the people who were involved in making those transactions in order to try to figure out why they were made, for example, American Airlines and United Airlines stock." Kucinich said.

At least two FBI agents have been previously charged for their smaller roles in the insider trading. The NY Times has reported on the cases, but larger coverage of the issue has been largely ignored by the mainstream media, and no larger probe has been underway until now.

Kucinich has also promised to hold hearings on the health of 9/11 first responders. He has already met with a number of rescue workers to hear their stories and is in the process of bringing forth information to committee.

The Congressman warned, however, that his seat has been hotly contested by 'Cleveland corporate interests' who have sunk millions into defeating Kucinich. He pleaded for help to win his local election, but remained steadfast.

"I can't be bought and I can't be bossed." Kucinich said. "I'm going to keep speaking the truth, I'm going to keep seeking the truth, and as long as people are there to support that, I'll be in Congress."

To find out more about Kucinich's Congressional race and/or help his campaign, visit www.Kucinich.us.


From:
www.jonesreport.com/article/02_08/200208_kucinich_trading.html

[michelle]

Trailer: Zero

(First Minute Unforgettable - The first minute of this video will shake you.)

ZERO has one central thesis - that the official version of events surrounding the attacks on 9/11 can not be true. This brand new feature documentary, featuring presentations from intellectual heavyweights, Gore Vidal and Nobel Prize Winner, Dario Fo, explores the latest scientific evidence and reveals dramatic new witness testimony, directly conflicting with the US Government's account. In the words of Italian daily newspaper Il Corriere de la Sera "What results is a sequence of contradictions, gaps and omissions of stunning gravity". Dubbed "the bomb of the Rome Film Festival" in 2007, Zero is the first 9/11 film to bridge the mainstream gap. Decision makers are starting to sit up and listen to its message, including the European Parliament where the film screened in February 2008. The importance of this film can not be overstated, if its thesis is correct, the justification for declaring the war on terror is built on a series of outrageous lies.

Go To:
youtube.com/watch?v=crexHTut23c&feature=related

[michelle]

George W Bush Authorized 911 Attacks Says Government Insider

Tuesday, 20 May 2008 06:20
Pakistan Daily

Keep in mind when reading this, that the man being interviewed is no two-bit internet conspiracy buff.

Stanley Hilton was a senior advisor to Sen Bob Dole (R) and has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades. This courageous man has risked his professional reputation, and possibly his life, to get this information out to people.


The following is from his latest visit to Alex Jones' radio show.


Note: All honor to Stanley Hilton for risking his life so that we may know the truth of 9/11.


The Bush Junta Unmasked


"This (9/11) was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder." --Stanley Hilton


Alex Jones interview of Stanley Hilton, attorney for 911 taxpayers' lawsuit


AJ: He is back with us. He is former Bob Dole's chief of staff, very successful counselor, lawyer. He represents hundreds of the victims families of 9/11. He is suing Bush for involvement in 9/11. Now a major Zogby poll out - half of New Yorkers think the government was involved in 9/11. And joining us for the next 35 minutes, into the next hour, is Stanley Hilton. Stanley, it's great to have you on with us.


SH: Glad to be on.


AJ: We'll have to recap this when we start the next hour, but just in a nutshell, you have a lawsuit going, you've deposed a lot of military officers. You know the truth of 9/11. Just in a nutshell, what is your case alleging?


SH: Our case is alleging that Bush and his puppets Rice and Cheney and Mueller and Rumsfeld and so forth, Tenet, were all involved not only in aiding and abetting and allowing 9/11 to happen but in actually ordering it to happen. Bush personally ordered it to happen. We have some very incriminating documents as well as eye-witnesses, that Bush personally ordered this event to happen in order to gain political advantage, to pursue a bogus political agenda on behalf of the neocons and their deluded thinking in the Middle East. I also wanted to point out that, just quickly, I went to school with some of these neocons. At the University of Chicago, in the late 60s with Wolfowitz and Feith and several of the others and so I know these people personally. And we used to talk about this stuff all of the time. And I did my senior thesis on this very subject - how to turn the U.S. into a presidential dictatorship by manufacturing a bogus Pearl Harbor event. So, technically this has been in the planning at least 35 years.


AJ: That's right. They were all Straussian followers of a Nazi-like professor. And now they are setting it up here in America. Stanley, I know you deposed a lot of people and you've got your $7 million dollar lawsuit with hundreds of the victim's families involved.


SH: 7 billion, 7 billion


AJ: Yeah, 7 billion. Can you go over some of the new and incriminating evidence you've got of them ordering the attack?


SH: Yes, let me just say that this is a taxpayers' class action lawsuit as well as a suit on behalf of the families and the basic three arguments are they violated the Constitution by ordering this event. And secondly that they [garbled] fraudulent Federal Claims Act, Title 31 of the U.S. Code in which Bush presented false and fraudulent evidence to Congress to get the Iraq war authorization. And, of course, he related it to 9/11 and claimed that Saddam was involved with that, and all these lies.


AJ: Tell you what, stay there. Stanley, we've got to break. Let's come back and get into the evidence. BREAK


AJ: All right my friends, second hour, the anniversary of the globalist attack coming up. It's an amazing individual we have on the line. Bob Dole's former chief of staff, political scientist, a lawyer, he went to school with Rumsfeld and others, he wrote his thesis about how to turn America into a dictatorship using a fake Pearl Harbor attack. He's suing the U.S. government for carrying out 9/11. He has hundreds of the victims' families signing onto it - it's a $7 billion lawsuit. And he is Stanley Hilton. I know that a lot of stations just joined us in Los Angeles and Rhode Island and Missouri and Florida and all over. Please sir, recap what you were just stating and then let's get into the new evidence. And then we'll get into why you are being harassed by the FBI, as other FBI people are being harassed who have been blowing the whistle on this. So, this is really getting serious. Stanley, tell us all about it.


SH: Yeah, we are suing Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Mueller, etc. for complicity in personally not only allowing 9/11 to happen but in ordering it. The hijackers we retained and we had a witness who is married to one of them. The hijackers were U.S. undercover agents. They were double agents, paid by the FBI and the CIA to spy on Arab groups in this country. They were controlled. Their landlord was an FBI informant in San Diego and other places. And this was a direct, covert operation ordered, personally ordered by George W. Bush. Personally ordered. We have incriminating evidence, documents as well as witnesses, to this effect. It's not just incompetence - in spite of the fact that he is incompetent. The fact is he personally ordered this, knew about it. He, at one point, there were rehearsals of this. The reason why he appeared to be uninterested and nonchalant on September 11th - when those videos showed that Andrew Card whispered in his ear the [garbled] words about this he listened to kids reading the pet goat story, is that he thought this was another rehearsal. These people had dress-rehearsed this many times. He had seen simulated videos of this. In fact, he even made a Freudian slip a few months later at a California press conference when he said he had, quote, "seen on television the first plane attack the first tower." And that could not be possible because there was no video. What it was was the simulated video that he had gone over. So this was a personally government-ordered thing. We are suing them under the Constitution for violating Americans' rights, as well as under the federal Fraudulent Claims Act, for presenting a fraudulent claim to Congress to justify the bogus Iraq boondoggle war, for political gains. And also, under the RICO statute, under the Racketeering Corrupt Organization Act, for being a corrupt entity. And I've been harassed personally by the chief judge of the federal court who is instructing me personally to drop this suit, threatened to kick me off the court, after 30 years on the court. I've been harassed by the FBI. My staff has been harassed and threatened. My office has been broken into and this is the kind of government we are dealing with.


AJ: Absolutely and now it has come out - five separate drills of flying hijacked jets into buildings that morning - which you told us about before it even broke in the Associated Press. They were trying to get out ahead of you. You talked about how you interviewed military people who were told it was a drill that morning. Then to get out ahead of that, the news finally reported on it. Now, we've learned that all these operations - I want to get into that, I want to talk about the new incriminating evidence of ordering it and how they had drilled on this, how Cheney was in the bunker controlling this. That has even come out in the mainstream news but they won't release the details of that, Stanley. But what type of FBI harassment are you going through? SH: First of all, my office was burglarized in San Francisco several months ago. Files were gone through and some files were seized - particularly the ones dealing with the lady that was married to one of the hijackers. Fortunately, I had spare copies in a hidden place so nothing disappeared permanently. But more significantly, FBI agents have been harassing one of my staff members and threatening them with vague but frightening threats of indicting them. And it's just total harassment. They have planted a spy, an undercover agent, in my organization, as we just recently discovered. In other words, these are Nazi Germany tactics. This is the kind of government you have in this country. This is what Bush is all about.


AJ: Stay there, Stanley, Bob Dole's former chief of staff. We'll come back after this quick break. Please stay with us. BREAK


AJ: All right, eight minutes, 25 seconds into the second hour. Stanley Hilton, political scientist, lawyer, Bob Dole's former chief of staff, is suing the government for 7 billion dollars for carrying out 9/11 and for racketeering. And he joins us now. During the break, I first really did the big interview with Stanley Hilton after I saw him attacked on Fox News. And that interview got massive attention. And then he kind of went underground for a while because a judge, we're going to talk about that, ordered him to not do any more interviews. And now he's back doing interviews. He's had his office broken into, FBI threats and harassment. Bottom line, he has deposed military individuals, wives of hijackers, you name it, it was a government operation. It has even come out in mainstream news, a piece here, a piece there. They had drills on 9/11, that's why NORAD stood down. Cheney was in control of the whole thing. Stanley Hilton has now gotten documents about how Bush ordered the whole operation. And I'll tell you right now, his life is in danger, folks. And he's got so much courage. He went to school with these neocons at the University of Chicago. He wrote his thesis on how the government could use terrorist attacks to set up martial law. He is the man for the time and folks wondered why he disappeared for a while and just did his lawsuit and wasn't doing interviews, it was because he was ordered to. Stanley, can you get into that for us?


SH: I did an interview with you, Alex, about a year and a half ago, and literally two weeks after that, I was contacted by the emissary of the chief judge of the federal court where I have the lawsuit. And I was warned not to publicize it but to keep it quiet and threatened with discipline. And it remained quiet until a couple of months ago and then I got on the air on some programs and some publicity and July 1st, I was threatened directly by the chief judge here, threatened with court discipline. This particular judge has been circulating communiqués to the other federal judges seeking anything negative she can get against me to try and discipline me after I've been on the court here for 30 years with no disciplinary problems at all. This is suddenly happening. And her assistants who are on the committee of the court met with me on July 1st in Palo Alto, California, and threatened me directly. They handed me a copy of the lawsuit and said that the judge wants me to dismiss this. What's this? She doesn't like the content of it. This is politically incorrect. This is outside the norm. I said I represented more than 400 plaintiffs, how am I going to dismiss this case? And they threatened me directly and they said, "the next time you'll be disciplined." And also they've threatened me not to go public, etc. And this is just outrageous.


AJ: It's all color of law. No direct orders, just all in your face.


SH: They sent a letter out, and of course they deny it's because of the political content of the suit but they told me directly on the phone that it is because of this suit and this judge is very, very angry, apparently has been in contact with Ashcroft's Justice Department. I got a call from Ashcroft's Justice Department a few months ago about this, demanding that I drop the suit, threatening sanctions and all kinds of things. I refused to drop it. AJ: Now let's go back over, you had them break into your office, harassment. Let's go over that in detail.


SH: My office was broken into about 6 months ago. The file cabinets - it was obvious they had been rifled through. Files were stolen. Files dealing with this particular case and particularly with the documents I had regarding the fact that the - some of these hijackers, at least some of them were on the payroll of the U.S. government as undercover FBI, CIA, double agents. They are spying on Arab groups in the U.S. And, in effect, all this led up to the effect that al Qaeda is a creation of the George Bush administration, basically. That the entity that he called al Qaeda is directly linked to George Bush. And all this stuff was stolen. Fortunately, I had copies. But this was just part of the harassment. The FBI has also been harassing some of my assistants and has planted a spy in our midst. And it is just outrageous that these Nazi tactics are being used - and the obstruction of justice, these people are criminals. And that's what's happening under the tremendous pressure here to just drop it. Or to shut up now and just go away.


AJ: Now, let's talk about what they want you to drop. Let's talk about, without giving names, the people you deposed, what really happened, the picture you've got. You said earlier that Bush ordered this, they were simulating this which they now admit there were simulations on that morning. Let's go over what they don't want you to talk about, Stanley.


SH: We have evidence both documentary as well as witness sworn statements from undercover former FBI agents, FBI informants, etc., that other officials in the Pentagon and the military and the Air Force that deal with the fact that there were many drills, many rehearsals for 9/11 before it happened. Bush had seen this simulated on TV many times. He blurted this out at a press conference in California a few months after 9/11 where he said he had, quote, seen the first plane hit the first building on the video. And that's not possible because there was no official video of that. There was one of the second plane not the first one. He had seen the first one. We do have some incriminating documents that Bush personally ordered 9/11 events. It was well planned. A FEMA official has admitted on tape that he was there the night before - September 10th, that is


AJ: And now Mayor Giuliani, a few months ago in the 911 Commission, admitted that - Tripod II. They had their whole command post already moved out of Building 7. Now, this is very, very important. This is a key area of this whole event. You said months before it came out on the CIA's own website and the Associated Press, you said I deposed people. They said there were drills that morning and exactly what happened, happening - that was the smoke-screen for the stand-down. And then to get out ahead of it, the CIA comes out and said yeah we were running a drill that morning. Now, we've learned that five, possibly six, were confirmed. Five of these - one drill with the exact same thing happening that actually happened, at the exact same time in the morning. That's why NORAD stood down with 24 different blips on the screen. You've said this. You brought this up first. Now, I know you can't get too much into detail but can you tell us how you learned of this?


SH: I have interviewed individuals in NORAD and the Air Force. I personally toured NORAD many years ago around the time that I worked for Dole. I'm very familiar with the operations at Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs, where NORAD is. Individuals that work in NORAD as well as the Air Force have stated this, off the record, but the point is, yes, this was not just five drills but at least 35 drills over at least two months before September 11th. Everything was planned, the exact location


AJ: But five drills that day.


SH: That day, that day, and Bush thought it was a drill. That's the only explanation for why he appeared nonchalant


AJ: We also had NORAD officers and civilian air traffic controllers going, "Is this part of the exercise? Is this a drill?"


SH: Yes.


AJ: On the tapes and in TV interviews, they thought it was, quote, a drill.


SH: That's right. That's exactly what I said long before it became public. I've known about this since earlier in March of '03, as I stated before. This was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder. And now, obstruction of justice by attempting to use a federal judge and FBI agents to inhibit a legitimate civil lawsuit in this country, in federal court. Even a chief judge in this court tried to harass and threaten me personally for representing legitimate plaintiffs. And they got Clinton for allegedly lying under oath about Paula Jones and now - look what's happening now. And Ken Starr used to be across from me in Duke Law School in the early `70s and it´s interesting that he got away with trying to get Clinton impeached, so we have a far worse criminal sitting in the oval office today - somebody guilty of mass murder as well as obstruction of justice.


AJ: Well, I mean look, they say they never heard of a plan to fly planes into buildings - said it all over television - Rice, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft. And then we find out they were running all these drills that morning. Even if they weren't involved, that proves they were liars about ever hearing of such a plan.


SH: Well, I'm trying to take their depositions - I've been trying to take their depositions for months. They've been trying to object to it. They will have to admit they were either lying then or now. It's clearly perjury either way. They are liars and perjurers; that's what they are. These are the people that we have running this government and, of course, they knew about it. How are they going to claim now that they didn't know about these drills? Their idea is that nobody knew anything. It's the old know-nothing mentality. And how anybody considers this believable is beyond me.


AJ: All right, now people ask how could a huge organization, how could the AWACs, how could the military let this happen; whereas before, if your Cessna got off course for five minutes, they would launch F-16s on you. It's real simple. It's what Stanley Hilton said here a year and a half ago. It's what came out in the news after that. The military, good people, were told this was all a drill. And it was not a drill. And ABC News admits that Cheney was in control of [?] out of the White House [?] and that he ordered the military to quote "do something." Our inside sources from Hilton and others say it was a stand down and they admit they will not release that under national security. Stanley?


SH: Well they are going to admit it, they're going to release it in the court case because if you demand it under subpoena powers and they must release it. And part of our lawsuit is brought in the name of the U.S. because under the federal fraudulent [Claims Act], we accuse the Bush Administration of presenting a fraudulent claim to Congress. And under the statutes of Title 31 of the U.S. code, they must release this information. That's why they are trying to threaten me, harass me, invade my office, steal my files, commit blatant obstruction of justice and other crimes to try and prevent a legitimate civil suit from exposing these criminals and their acts of treason and mass murder.


AJ: I think you need to publicly tell folks that you are not planning suicide. Would you like to tell folks that?


SH: (laughs) I'm not planning suicide. I've got family and I'm not planning that but I don't like the threats I'm under - but I can tell you this, it's taking a toll emotionally on me and my staff. And particularly, when you get a threat from the chief judge of your own court.


AJ: Why have you decided to go public again after a year of being under the radar? SH: Because the more and more evidence that I've been adducing over a year and a half has made it so obvious to me that this was now without any doubt a government operation and that it amounts to the biggest act of treason and mass murder in American history. I mean George Bush makes Benedict Arnold look like a patriot. He makes Benedict Arnold look like George Washington. I mean that's what we have - a criminal and a traitor sitting in the White House pretending he's a patriot, wrapping himself in the flag. And it's pretty disgusting because the other side of the so-called opposition, the Kerry camp is just saying nothing because they're afraid to speak.


AJ: Stay right there. We'll be right back.


BREAK


AJ: Stanley Hilton will be with us for another 15 or 16 minutes. Then he's got to go into court. Bob Dole's former chief of staff, political scientist, lawyer, represents 400 plus plaintiffs - most of them victims of 9/11. When I was in New York last week, everybody I was talking to, I mean 90 plus percent of them at ground zero - "I had family, I worked in the buildings, my son's a Navy Seal - he called the night before and said don't go to work." You know, all of this, and then now they never had any idea - and it turns out they had all these drills - and one drill of hijacked jets flying into the World Trade Center and Pentagon at 8:30 in the morning. That morning - come on people! And Stanley Hilton brought all this out on this show before it was in the mainstream news. And I was talking to him during the break. I mean, the harassment, the moles, the threatening of his staff, the judge threatening him. Stanley, let's get specifically into the documents that you have now got that they have now been robbing you for, that you luckily, thank God had copies. Specifically, Bush ordering this. Can you get into that for us - ordering 9/11? SH: National Security Council classified documents which [garbled] and it's was part of a series of documents that were involved with the drill documents. This was all planned - they had it on videotape. These planes were controlled by remote control, as I stated previously a year and a half ago, there's a system called Cyclops. There is a computer chip in the nose of the plane and it enables the ground control, the military ground control, to disable the pilot's control of the plane and to control it and to fly it directly into those towers. That's what happened. It's also a technology used on what's called the Global Hawk, which is an aircraft drone - a remote- controlled aircraft. And they were doing it. We are talking about National Security Council classified documents that clearly indicated that [garbled] had a green light to order this to go and this is no drill. These drills that were running were clearly a dress rehearsal and this was a government operation. You wonder why these people are trying to threaten people and trying to intimidate people who have written this suit, I guess if you murdered 3000 of your own citizens, in conjunction with the corrupt Royal family of Saudi Arabia as Bush did. And if you then waste billions more on a worthless garbage war in Iraq, I guess you've got something to worry about and you want to threaten people to prevent it from coming out.


AJ: I mean let's look at this. Not only are there dress rehearsals, they are smoke screens so the good military stands down and doesn't know what's happening. But it's now coming out, even in mainstream news, that yes these drills were going on. Yes, and some of these drills, quote, passenger-type jets were under remote control - this is decades old technology. In 1958, NORAD was [ ] old jets and using them for target practice. Decades ago they flew jumbo jets from LA to Sidney Australia. So since that's going on, everybody knows that. And it's the same MO. Just like the first World Trade Center [bombing] where they get two retarded men who followed this blind sheik who had a tiny mosque above a pizza parlor. And they set them up as the patsies. Then the FBI cooks the bomb, trains the drivers. This informant goes, "You're not going to bomb the building? They go "Yeah, we're letting it go forward." He tapes them to protect themselves. The two retarded gentlemen, thank God, didn't park it up against the column, as the FBI instructed them to do, so it didn't bring down the tower - because you have to be right up against the column. That doesn't happen. Yet, it's the same thing with 9/11. You've got these CIA agents, these Arabs, who were trained at U.S. military bases, Pensacola Naval Air Station - mainstream media, out creating their legends for this background. They're on board the aircraft. My military sources say nerve gas kills everybody on board the plane - nerve gas packets. Then they fly the planes into buildings. From your inside sources, is that accurate?


SH: It's one of the things that we are looking into - that nerve gas or something else disabled people. It's possible. I can't say for sure to be honest with you


AJ: All you know is they were government agents and they were on board and the planes were remote controlled.


SH: Yeah, it was basically a smokescreen. I mean, the events of the hijackings, how someone snuck in those cutters, it was a plant. It was like a classic decoy. I've got some military background. And it's called decoy. It's a decoy operation. You make the people focus on the decoy to avoid looking at the real criminals. So they are focusing on these so-called nineteen hijackers and saying, "Oh, it must have been these Arabs. When, in fact, the guilty person is at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue - sitting in the oval office. That's the guilty person. That's the one who authorized it. There is only one man who could have authorized this operation and that's Bush. And anyone at NORAD will tell you as I have been told personally at NORAD in the war control room, there is only one man who has the power to do this kind of thing and that's Bush. Even though many believe he's a puppet. And I think in many ways he is. The fact of the matter is where was [ ] Cheney, Rumsfeld and these other traitors. The fact is Bush personally ordered and he's guilty and liable and he's going to be re-elected apparently because the media's asleep and [garbled] for Bush. AJ: Well, the media is owned by the same military industrial complex that carried out the attacks.


SH: Yeah, the media is only interested in maintaining the official government fantasy that this was a little lone Arab. These Arabs couldn't even steer that plane down a runway.


AJ: Stay there Stanley, final segment coming up. BREAK


AJ: Mr. Hilton, when you talk to these FBI agents, when you talk to these military men and women, what's their attitude? They've got to be pretty freaked out to have the big picture and know what actually happened on 9/11.


SH: Yes, you know it's like clouds just before a thunderstorm in the sense that they are sort of pregnant with rage. They are just enraged at the criminal politicians who have perverted and misused the government to murder its own citizens and pursue these dubious political ends. And many of them, in increasing numbers, are willing to talk and will talk under subpoena - but only under subpoena because the official party line of the government is shut up and don't talk to the trial lawyer. But more and more, they are very outraged that part of the government has done this to its own people, to its own people. I mean you have to go back to Stalin to see something - not even Hitler did this to his own people. You have to look at Stalin who murdered the Kulaks, the Russians for his own dubious gains. Also we've got - we have a Stalinist mentality in this country. And, if these people pose as patriots and wrap themselves in the flag, it's disgusting. I wanted also to point out that the Japanese television network, Asahi, is going to be airing a special on primetime tomorrow, on September 11th. They interviewed me for eight hours a couple of weeks ago. I'll be on that. I wish - of course, the America media don't care so they are not going to care. But in Japan, people are very serious in interviewing me and others. And we have a website now, called deprogram.info, if more people are interested: www.deprogram.info. But the other thing, I just wanted to say that if anything happens to me - and I don't know why - because I'm being threatened here now. And it seems you can't bring a case in this country anymore against criminals in power without being threatened. And this is how they operate. The stakes are pretty high when you've got a world historical level of treason and fraud by this government against it's own people. I guess this is what you have to expect.


AJ: Stanley, the globalists, the new world order crowd, definitely intend to carry out more terror attacks. I know they would have carried out more attacks if we wouldn't have done what we've been up to, if you wouldn't have been out there boldly speaking out and many others. And then their electronic Berlin wall has a bunch of cracks in it now. Thanks to good people like yourself and many others who are speaking out and telling the truth. But do you think that they may carry out what they've been hyping - a suitcase nuke attack, a biological release to try to smokescreen all of this? I know it's a catch 22, you've got to expose the murderers. We've got to get the word out on this but some government people that I've talk to say, "Yeah, but if you do that, they are going to go even more hard core and must totally try to take over." But I say regardless, they are already doing that. So what do you say to that?


SH: Well, yeah, I think they have an agenda. They have contingency plans. I think they are laying low now because there are an increasing number of people, like myself, who are openly challenging them and accusing them of criminal conduct. I think they would have done it again if we had not spoken up. I think they're planning, what they would like to do is silence any dissenters. That's why we are trying to get the Patriot Act declared unconstitutional in this lawsuit also.


AJ: Let's talk about polls. In the beginning a patriot is a scarce man, hated and feared, but in time when his cause succeeds, the timid join him, because then it costs nothing to be a patriot. You are one of those guys who hit the barbwire for us, or figuratively jumped on the hand grenade for America. But when you've got a Zogby poll, who is highly respected, half of New Yorkers believe that the government was involved. When you have a Canadian poll, 63% on average believe that the U.S. government was involved. And some groups, as high as 76% in polls believe the government was involved. European polls, two- thirds show the same thing. We have German defense ministers and technology ministers and another member of their government now, three of them going public, known conservatives, and progressives. You have an environment minister, Michael Meacher, saying that if they didn't do it, they sure as hell knew what was going on. Look, if anybody who is a thinking person looks at the evidence, their official story is impossible. Then you investigate and they are involved in it. Comments to this massive awakening and what's happening.


SH: Well, I think that's why they want the Patriot Act to suppress political dissent. They have to, they're anticipating, they are not dumb individuals. I know these people personally, Wolfowitz. These are criminal individuals but they are smart and so they anticipated political dissent. And that's why, like the Nazis, their forebears, and their blood brothers, the Nazis and the Stalinists, they're all for political repression. Every corrupt and criminal government has done this - they suppress their own people: Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Mao Tse-Tung, that's why we have the Patriot Act. So it's hand in hand. They had it planned to go right up to September 11th, this was all part of the plan. You have to do it. It was part of my senior thesis. You must follow through the terrorists attacks with a political suppression mechanism in the law. And that's why they want Patriot I and Patriot II and their plans are to continue launching more terrorist attacks to justify even more repression. The goal is to make this a one party dictatorship in this country, to pursue their dubious ends with their blood brothers like the Saudi Royal family. And also, historical blood brothers, such as the Nazi Germany and the Communist Russian. That's the goal


AJ: You've got to go in just a minute or two. But I wanted to also tell you about New York. Sound cannons that are used in Iraq, they're against us. Men in black ski masks. 41,000 police, accredited media being arrested randomly. Children being arrested, people in wheelchairs, 2000 plus people put in a camp with barbwire fences inside with no bathrooms. You had to have permission to go to the porta-potties. Police screaming at you. It had nothing to do with terrorism. They are openly setting the precedent for martial law.


SH: Well, that's right, the word terrorist is now being overly broad and overly defined [garbled] and also, you know, it's like the word communist was used for anything during the McCarthy witch hunt. And anybody can be called a terrorist by Bush's definition. But the irony is that the number one terrorist in the world is living at the White House at the oval office today. That's the real irony. For sheer hypocrisy, I think he deserves the world prize and ought to be in the Ripley book, Believe It or Not, and the Guinness book of world records for sheer brazen chicanery and fraud.


AJ: Let me ask you a question on this because this is the experience that I had. Watching television, watching the killers, watching those that are guilty, stand up there as our saviors is incredibly painful. It's like watching Ted Bundy being the judge at his own trial. I mean it is just painful to know who these people are. To see them putting America in a shredder. Now we are going to have forced psychological testing of every American, forced drugging, you know Pan-American unions, I mean it's just all happening, it's in our face, Stanley.


SH: Yeah, it's very disturbing and as one who has studied the theory and concept of dictatorships, I personally interviewed Albert Speer, who was Hitler's armaments minister. I interviewed him in 1981 in Munich. And I've studied the psychology and history of totalitarianism and there is no question that it's very frightening. And it has, today, with high technology, albeit for the first time in history, the chance of having a world empire dominated by corrupt, technologically oriented government - an elite government. And they've got now what people like Napoleon and Hitler didn't have, which is the technological means to dominate not only their own country but others - the world.


AJ: The answer is to expose them as the terrorists, to show how PNAC [Project for the New American Century] said we need helpful Pearl Harbor events, to show how Northwoods called for the exact 9/11-style attacks, to show their own plans. And to force people to face this horror. What are they going to do in a year or two when 80% of us, not half of us, know the truth?


SH: Well, that's why they want repression and, then again, the ancient old diversion, launch another terrorist attack to get people to pitch it away. I mean who knows what they'll do next. I mean their capacity for ingenious creation of these events is sort of unraveled. I mean there is no limit. My guess is they are going to try another stunt - maybe a stunt just before the election to justify getting Bush reelected. Although it seems like he is running against a straw man or a ghost right now, anyway. But, my guess is they'll try some other tactic to get people's attention away from 9/11 if it gets to be too much attention. What you really want is for the public to just lose interest because the public - and it's like remember the Alamo, you know, people don't forget things like that. To me it's like the Alamo, remember 9/11, that ought to be the slogan for this outrageous act of treason. That's what it is. It's not


AJ: We are at a crossroads, I don't think they anticipated this much resistance, Stanley.


SH: Yeah, I hope they are truly wrong and as incompetent as they are corrupt and guilty. That means their incompetence is exceeded only by their corruption and their guilt. And eventually, if enough people are going to get outraged enough, these people in the bureaucracy and in the civil service and our military, and eventually we can get people under subpoena these individuals will be exposed.


AJ: Stanley, their whole operation hinges on us being naïve and not recognizing evil. This is what they got with Hitler and others. People couldn't recognize evil so they continued to repeat succumbing to it. We are recognizing it this time. We are putting our lives, our treasure, our future on the line for freedom because we cannot let these blood-thirsty control freak terrorists capture us and use us and turn us into the empire and have a draft and use us as their slaves to invade the planet. And that's their PNAC plan. Stanley Hilton, I know you've got to get to court. God bless you. I want to thank you for being here with us today. Can we get you back on next week?


SH: Sure, just give me a call.


AJ: God bless you my friend. Any closing comments?


SH: My closing comments would be, I think people ought to just think about the consequence of having someone like Bush in the White House and the danger for the future that these sorts of individuals pose. This is not just a historical event of the past. This is part of the plan and the camera is still rolling. They have an agenda. These individuals are extremely dangerous. They are armed and dangerous. They pose a clear and dangerous threat to every freedom-loving person not only American but in the whole world.


AJ: You are absolutely right Stanley Hilton. They have captured the government. They have not captured the peoples' minds and they are counting on us not facing up to it.


SH: And they are counting on the repressive Patriot Act and threats and chief judges and FBI agents threatening people who are exposing them. That's what they are counting on.


AJ: But you're not backing down are you, my friend.


SH: No, I'm not


AJ: Well, we all stand with you, my brother, and God bless you.


SH: All right. Thank you.


Last Updated ( Tuesday, 20 May 2008 07:05 )

Source: tinyurl.com/3oww6n

[michelle]

Lawmaker takes 9/11 doubts global
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
By JOHN SPIRI
Special to The Japan Times

In a September 2003 article for The Guardian newspaper, Michael Meacher, who served as Tony Blair's environment minister from May 1997 to June 2003, shocked the establishment by calling the global war on terrorism "bogus." Even more controversially, he implied that the U.S. government either allowed 9/11 to happen, or played some role in the destruction wrought that day. Besides Meacher, few politicians have publicly questioned America's official 9/11 narrative — until Diet member Yukihisa Fujita.

In January 2008 Fujita, a member of the Democratic Party of Japan, asked the Japanese Parliament and Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda to explain gaping holes in the official 9/11 story that various groups — including those who call themselves the "911 Truth Movement" — claim to have exposed.

Fujita, along with a growing number of individuals — including European and American politicians — are leading a charge to conduct a thorough, independent investigation of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.

"Three or four years ago I saw some Internet videos like 'Loose Change' and '911 In Plane Site' and I began to ask questions," Fujita said in an interview, "but I still couldn't believe this was done by anyone but al-Qaida.

"Last year I watched more videos and read books written by professor David Ray Griffin (a professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology at Claremont Graduate University who wrote the most famous Truth Movement book, 'The New Pearl Harbor') about things such as the collapse of World Trade Center No. 7. This building, which was never hit by an airplane, collapsed straight down. Between the videos showing the way it fell, and the numerous reports of explosions, many are convinced that this building was demolished."

Fujita's presentation to the Diet and Fukuda focused a great deal on yet another aspect of 9/11 that now quite a few around the world find extremely suspicious: the Pentagon crash.

"I don't think (a) 767 could have hit the Pentagon," Fujita reckons. "There is no evidence of the plane itself. Almost nothing identifiable was left on the lawn or inside. The official story says the entire plane disintegrated, but the jet engines in particular were very strong (two 6-ton titanium steel turbine engines). And the damage to the building is much smaller than the size of the supposed airplane. The official claims just don't fit the facts."

While some label that claim "wacky" and label critics of the official 9/11 story "conspiracy theorists," Fujita has impressive company. For one, former Maj. Gen. Albert Stubblebine, who was commanding general of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security until 1984, is quoted on the "Patriots Question 911" Web site as saying, "I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, 'The plane does not fit in that hole.'

"So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?"

Fujita urges the Bush administration to put the issue to rest simply by showing videos that show the plane that hit the Pentagon. Instead, only a few grainy images have been released to the public. More disconcertingly, many videos taken by surrounding businesses were confiscated by the FBI immediately after the Pentagon explosion.

The Pennsylvania crash, like the Pentagon explosion, also yielded virtually no recognizable plane parts at the crash site. Rather, small pieces of debris were found up to 10 km away. The official story — that the plane "vaporized" when it hit the ground — is inconsistent with the evidence left by every other plane crash in the history of aviation.

Plane crashes always yield plane fragments, Fujita explained, which can be identified by the plane's serial number, but that's not the case for the four planes which crashed on 9/11. Strangely, the U.S. government managed to produce passports and DNA samples of individuals killed, but no identifiable plane parts. In an online article entitled "Physics 911," 34-year U.S. Air Force veteran Col. George Nelson notes, "It seems . . . that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view."

Fujita has largely relied on the voluminous amount of video and written material published in books and on the Internet, including the "Patriots Question 911" site, on which hundreds of allegations are leveled against the official story by senior officials from the military, intelligence services, law enforcement, and government, as well as pilots, engineers, architects, firefighters and others.

While not many other Japanese have taken an interest in this story, a few notable individuals besides Fujita have disputed the U.S. government's version, including Akira Dojimaru, a Japanese writer living in Spain. In his book, written in Japanese, "The Anatomy of the WTC Collapses: Flaws in the U.S. Government's Account," he uses photos, drawings and blueprints of the WTC buildings to back up his claim that buildings one and two could not have fallen in the manner they fell due to the plane crashes and subsequent fires. "And even if it was conceivable that they could fall due to the damage that day," Dojimaru wrote in an e-mail, "they never would have collapsed horizontally, and would have scattered steel beams and smashed concrete much farther than 100 meters."

For Fujita, it was Dojimaru's meticulous research, combined with the aforementioned Web sites, that convinced him the official story was nothing more than a house of cards.

One book that Fujita found unconvincing was the "9/11 Commission Report."

"The head of the 9/11 Commission is close with (U.S. Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice and (Vice President Dick) Cheney. One commission member (Sen. Max Cleland) resigned, saying the White House did not disclose enough information."

On Democracy Now's radio show in March 2004, Cleland even went as far as to say, "This White House wants to cover it (the facts of 9/11) up."

More recently, a New York Times article in January quoted Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission, as saying that "the CIA destroyed videotaped interrogations of Qaeda operatives," and concluded that that "obstructed our investigation."

Following the lead of Fujita, Karen Johnson, a conservative Republican senator from Arizona, has publicly voiced her doubts about 9/11 before the U.S. Senate. Inspired by Blair Gadsby — who on May 27 started a hunger strike to bring attention to the 911 Truth Movement — Johnson, like Fujita, is encouraging politicians to conduct a thorough, independent investigation.

Fujita, who worked for more than 20 years for the international conflict resolution NGO group MRA and the Japanese Association for Aid and Relief (AAR), has become something of a global cause celebre since his extraordinary questioning at the Diet. In February 2008, he participated in a conference at the European Parliament led by EMP Guilietto Chiesa calling for an independent commission of inquiry into 9/11. While in Europe, he met with NGOs from 11 European countries to discuss 9/11.

One month later Fujita spoke at the "Truth Now" conference in Sydney, Australia. One focus of these meetings was the Italian documentary "ZERO," whose release will mark the first time the 9/11 movement's message has moved from the "cyberworld" to public venues. Fujita has also spoken about his 9/11 doubts on two U.S. radio shows, one hosted by Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, and another by Alex Jones of infowars.com.

He is also making ripples in Japan. Fujita was featured in a March 2 article by well-known critic Takao Iwami on "How to deal with doubts about 9/11" in the Sunday Mainichi weekly. He was also featured in a March 26 Spa! magazine piece headlined, "European conference discusses 9/11 doubts."

However, not everyone is enthralled with Fujita's bold line of questioning.

"One person showed strong anger towards me," Fujita noted, "and another (Japanese person) threatened my life. A few others advised me to be extremely careful."

Still, Fujita says, the vast majority — around 95 percent — have been positive.

"One man said, 'You're a true samurai.' Another man came all the way from Okayama in western Japan to thank me personally. And among other Parliament members, I received only words of encouragement and support."

While in Europe, Fujita met British former MP Meacher, who dared to question the official story when it was still considered gospel. Time, the Iraq war and well-sourced online videos are emboldening many people, including politicians, to step out of the cyberworld and voice their doubts in newspapers, magazines, theaters, and — most importantly — government chambers.

"Now Blair is gone, and Bush will soon be gone," Meacher told Fujita. "Our time

Source: search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20080617zg.html

[michelle]

Fabled Enemies trailer
August 11th, 2008

Fabled Enemies is unlike any 9/11 documentary ever put together. Rather than focusing on the physical anomalies at the World Trade Center and Pentagon, this film follows the intelligence ties of Osama Bin Laden, the alleged hijackers, and those who were actually detained on 9/11. The movie delves deeply into the roles of separate Nations that were involved in supporting the 9/11 attacks. From Israel to Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, and even the United States itself, no one is spared in this scathing expose that pulls no punches. Sit back and get ready to learn how members of the FBI had their investigations into Bin Laden obstructed and shut down, how the hijackers were trained at US bases, that military drills crippled our defense and facilitated the attacks, how the Shadow Government was actually activated that day, and much much more. Join Alex Jones productions and Jason Bermas one of the creators of Loose Change, in his Directorial debut on September 1st , as he loads new ammo for the Infowar.

From: www.loosechange911.com/blog/?p=183

Fabled Enemies trailer
From: infodocurama
Joined: 1 year ago
Videos: 37
The 9/11 documentary by Jason Bermas and the team at Alex Jones Productions.

Coming to the Infowar September 1st.
www.infowars.com/
www.prisonplanet.com/
www.fabledenemies.com/

[michelle]

Reflections on 9/11
Tuesday 09 September 2008
by: Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Tribune Media Services


September 11, seven years later. It is an anniversary that we should mark with prayer, with lowered voices and sober reflection. September 11 was the most serious attack on America since Pearl Harbor. We must not forget.

But bluster is not remembrance. We must take clear stock of where we are and what we must do, for much has been lost over these last seven years.

Seven years ago, the world rallied to our side. "Nous sommes tous Americans" - we are all Americans - read the headlines in French newspapers. Our allies joined the attack on al Qaeda and its Taliban allies in Afghanistan. We enlisted local allies to help lead the successful attack. Al Qaeda's leaders fled to the mountainous territories on the Pakistan border. The UN nations joined in collective effort to identify and track down those committed to terror.

But rather than staying focused on that threat, America chose instead to invade Iraq, driven by the hubris, fears and grudges of the Bush administration. That war of choice has been one of the worst debacles in our history. Every assumption, every argument justifying it turned out to be wrong. There were no weapons of mass destruction. Saddham Hussein was an opponent of, not an ally of the religious extremists of al Qaeda. The war and consequent occupation was not financed by Iraqi oil money.

And the costs have been staggering. We squandered the support of our allies. We suffered over 30,000 casualties and still counting. We wasted over $1 trillion dollars, with the direct costs rising at more than $10 billion a month. We stained our reputation in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our scorn for international law was echoed by Putin in Georgia. We strained our own military. Our invasion strengthened Iran's hand in the region. And it weakened our support for the fledging government in Afghanistan, allowing al Qaeda, according to US intelligence reports, to reconstitute itself and pose once more a serious threat of attack on the US and its allies. Now, al Qaeda and its Taliban allies threaten not just Afghanistan, but Pakistan itself, a country that, unlike Iraq, really does possess nuclear weapons.

The whole notion of the war on terror, a report by the conservative Rand Corporation concludes, has been counter-productive. It inflates our enemies, providing them with global credibility, and it distorts our task. The real job of fighting al Qaeda - now a metastasized network of extremist cells whose greatest strength is the willingness of some to commit suicide - is overwhelmingly a matter of intelligence gathering and cooperation, of police investigation and tracking, of disrupting financial and travel arrangements, and of course, of winning a global conflict of ideas, painting them not as a global behemoth which they are not but as the extremists that they are.

And we ignored Dr. King's realization that a society focused on war abroad would be less able to deal with its own problems at home; that the bombs dropped on foreign battlefields would explode also in the neglect of America's cities. If we had invested that $1 trillion in conservation and new energy, we would have generated jobs and growth here at home, made ourselves less indebted abroad and less dependent on foreign oil. We surely would have been better able to deal with the economic downturn we now face.

The current bluster about "winning the war" ignores all this. It's hard to proclaim victory in a war that should never have been fought. And in fact we're a long way from a "victory" in Iraq, if that is defined as President Bush and John McCain say, as leaving behind a stable, democratic government that is a secure American ally. Even this week, General Patraeus has suggested delaying further troop drawdowns. The Shiite dominated government is aggravating, not solving the political divide with the Sunni tribes that have helped to create the current decline in violence. The economy is still a shambles. The Kurds are still seeking independence. If we stay until these tensions are settled, we will stay for years, if not decades.

Will we get some straight talk on Iraq? Will we fundamentally revise our wrong-headed strategy on the threat posed by al Qaeda? At their convention, Republicans, as in 2004, sought to make the war a partisan club, and reduce the debates to taunts. Americans deserve better. But it will be up to citizens to demand this of their leaders and of the media.

Source: www.truthout.org/article/reflections-911

[michelle]

The Unspeakable Truth of 9/11
by P.A. Buchanan - September 11, 2008

or the 'dots’ you are not supposed to connect.

The following is a compilation from mainstream media reports and other investigative research available on the web. (see also Paul Thompson, The Terror Timeline, 2004) Most of it never again repeated, clues, 'dots’ never connected:

- The World Trade Center needed repair since the late 1980s, some $200 million in renovations and improvements, mostly related to removal and/or replacement of building materials declared health hazards since the Towers were built. The WTC was labeled an "asbestos bombshell". In fact, the Port Authority thought of the WTC as a dinosaur, trying several times to get permits to demolish the buildings for liability reasons. The PA was turned down. The asbestos problem was no secret. The sole reason the complex was still up on 9/11/2001 was the cost of taking the Twin Towers down floor by floor. www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?pid=173207

- Larry Silverstein, a New York property tycoon purchased a 99-year lease for the entire WTC complex just 6 months prior to the 9/11 attacks. That was the first time in its 33-year history the complex had ever changed ownership. Mr. Silverstein, who must have known about the asbestos problem, made a down-payment of $124 million on this $3.2 billion complex, and promptly insured it for $3.6 billion. He also covered the complex against "terrorist attacks". In the contract Mr. Silverstein was also specifically given the right to rebuild the structures if they were destroyed. Mr. Silverstein's first order of business as the new owner was to change the company responsible for the security of the complex. The new security company he hired was Securacom (now Stratasec). George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin's cousin, Wirt Walker III, was its CEO. According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines - two key players in the 9/11 attacks. Following the attacks, Mr. Silverstein filed two insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy ($7.2B), based on the two ˜ in Mr. Silverstein's view ˜ separate attacks. The insurance company, Swiss Re, paid Mr. Silverstein $4.6 Billion, still a princely return on a relatively paltry investment of $124 million. Incidentally, it's worth noting that one of Mr. Silverstein's closest friends, a person with whom it's said he speaks almost daily by phone, is none other than former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It was also Mr. Netanyahu, who back in 1986 coined the phrase The War on Terror. www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=15459

- Back in October 2000, about 11 months prior to September 11, 2001, a former Israeli Defense Force member and veteran of the 1973 Yom Kippur War overheard a conversation in Hebrew in New Jersey, "The Americans will learn what it is to live with terrorists after the planes hit the twins in September. The Arabs are so stupid. They don't even imagine that we are using them." www.muckrakerreport.com/id387.html

- On 9/11 at least two Israel-based employees of the instant messaging service Odigo received warnings of an imminent attack in New York City more than two hours before the first plane hit the buildings. Odigo had its U.S. headquarters two blocks from the WTC. The Odigo employees, however, did not pass the warning on to the authorities in New York City. (Washington Post, 9/27/01) Odigo, like many Israeli software companies, is based and has its Research and Development center in Herzliya, the small town north of Tel Aviv, which happens to be where the headquarters of Mossad, Israel's intelligence service are located.

- Also on 9/11/2001 five "Middle Eastern men" were arrested in New Jersey by the FBI after having been seen on a roof top videotaping and celebrating the explosive collapses of the WTC. "It looked like they knew what was going to happen." (Bergen Record, 9/12/01) It was later confirmed that the five detained men were in fact agents of the Israeli military intelligence, Mossad. Their "moving van" from a Weehawken, N.J. company called Urban Moving Systems tested positive for explosives. Another employee of Urban Moving Systems, reported that the majority of his co-workers were Israelis and were joking on the day of the attacks. The employee said, 'I was in tears, and these guys were joking, and that bothered me.’ These guys (Israelis) were like, "Now America knows what we go through." www.whatreallyhappened.com/sears.html

Dominic Suter, the Israeli owner of Urban Moving Systems, fled in haste after 9/11/2001, or was allowed to escape, to Israel before FBI agents could interrogate him. (Forward, 3/15/02)

The arrested five Israelis were released after spending just 71 days in U.S. custody. The Assistant Attorney General in charge of criminal investigations at the time was Michael Chertoff, the current head of the Dept. of Homeland Security. Chertoff, the son of Israel's first Mossad agents, facilitated the 9-11 cover-up, is thought to be a dual national. www.whatreallyhappened.com/sears.html

One of the released Israeli agents later told Israeli radio that they had been sent to "document the event".
(ABC News, 6/1/02)

- Carl Cameron of Fox News wrote an extensive 4-part report about Urban Moving Systems and the five Israelis. While it is no longer available at the Fox site, it has been saved in various archives on the web. www.antiwar.com/justin/pf/p-j062402.html

He was also told by an unnamed US official "Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information."

- Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) was quoted saying: "I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted not just in financing - although that was part of it - by a sovereign government. It will become public at some point when it's turned over to the archives, but that's 20 or 30 years from now."
www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=bob_graham

- Investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to 'pursue or even suggest Israeli spying. is considered career suicide’. (Fox News, 12/12/01)

- Another FBI official said to Cameron: "While I agree with you, if I say anything about US geopolitical interests with Israel, I might as well clean off my desk." Indeed, Carl Cameron of Fox News, himself is no longer willing to address the issue, comment or even acknowledge anything about his own research into the subject.

As to Osama bin Laden's so-called 'confession video’, Hani Sebai, a British electronics specialist talking to the BBC, called it 'a clear fabrication, a classic cut-and-paste job, using an Osama wedding video’. In an in-person interview given to the Pakistani paper Umat that was also broadcast on BBC, bin Laden denied any involvement in the 9/11 attacks. There would indeed be little incentive for someone to disavow a deed of this magnitude, for which he would be praised, to which he is supposedly dedicated to carrying through. (Ralph Schoenmann,Taking Aim, 7/12/2005)

The official investigation under the control of the neocon Philip Zelikow thwarted any attempt at discovering the truth behind the attacks. Any questioning of the official narrative, be it by victim relatives, architects, engineers, physicists or other patriotic Americans can simply be silenced as crazy 'conspiracy theory’.

www.911truth.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.ae911truth.org/

The implication of the Arabs in the 9/11 attacks with the full support of the Zionist-controlled mass media gave the Israelis the perfect opportunity to sear the image of the 'Arab terrorist’ onto the American psyche.

Former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was asked a day later what the attacks in New York and Washington would mean for US-Israeli relations. He said, "It's very good". Then he corrected himself, adding: "Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy for Israel from Americans". (New York Times, 9/12/01)

"From national networks to small-town newspapers, the view that America's terrible taste of terrorism will finally do away with even modest calls for the restraint of Israeli military attacks on Palestinian towns has become an instant, unshakable axiom. Now, support for Israel in America is officially absolute." (Village Voice, 9/19/01)

Whether Israel and its allies here just allowed it to happen or were involved in the planning and execution, their motive was correctly identified by Neil Mackay in the Nov. 2, 2003 issue of the Scottish 'Sunday Herald‚:

"to bind America in blood and mutual suffering to the Israeli cause ".

That's exactly why you won't see these connections in the mainstream media, this is the truth that is really unspeakable.

From: therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/the-unspeakable-truth-of-911/

also from: www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9326

[michelle]

9/11: Energy budget and molecular dissociation of the World Trade Center (WTC) by Independent scientist Leuren Moret//
CANADA: Transcript of Judy Woods Interview with Richard Syrett Fri Sept 19, 2008 on CFRB 1010 AM Radio’s - The Richard Syrett Show



Energy budget and molecular dissociation of the World Trade Center (WTC)
by Independent scientist Leuren Moret

BERKELEY, CA - Sound science is the only approach to understanding what happened at the WTC on 911. The energy budget of molecular dissociation required to "disappear" two tall buildings as they collapsed is the answer to what happened on 911 at the WTC. Until the energy budget is addressed, which would be required to turn two buildings into nanoparticles (which are invisible and are permanently suspended in the atmosphere), the discussion continues to be based on bathtub chemistry and steam engine physics which will never give any answers to the sophisticated and exotic energy technologies now available for "special projects". Steven Jones told me in Vancouver at the 911 conference that his particle samples came from within 25' of the WTC buildings. Well anyone knows the settling velocity of particles is related to size, and nanoparticles have such a small settling velocity that motion of air particles keeps them permanently suspended - therefore Jones samples are the BIG CHUNKS and the huge volume of nanoparticles produced simply disappeared into thin air. He didn't even sample them because it requires extremely sophisticated equipment such as charged plates to collect them on... filters don't do it. The investigator must have an advanced background in nanoparticle physics and quantum dynamics... and that is the key to what happened at the WTC on 911.

I am a Livermore lab whistleblower. I watched directed energy beam experiments being conducted in the atmosphere, from the laser facility at LLNL in the middle of the night, from my house in Livermore when I was working at LLNL. Until space weapons capabilities and HAARP are taken into consideration to explain the molecular dissociation (into nanoparticles) of two very large buildings, as well as the 4th generation nukes that were used to break down the structural integrity of the buildings, then the answers are coming from a noisy room of opinions. Opinions are not science. No one has explained the presence of levels of uranium, tritium, and the presence of deuterium in the air monitoring conducted and reported by Dr. Thomas Cahill for 5 months after 911 at the WTC - which began after Oct. 5. He reported the highest concentration of metals and nanoparticles ever measured in US air samples. The question is, why did the Dept. of Energy (Steven Jones
former employer at Los Alamos nuke lab) ask Dr. Cahill to voluntarily do air monitoring specifically AFTER Oct. 5, and why did DOE want that air monitoring done for 5 months. Cahill received no funding for a very expensive and extended study.

What we know from the Israeli bombing of Lebanon with 5000 US depleted uranium bunker busters, is that the bomb craters also had deuterium and high levels of U235 present as well as very high radiation reported for the first 3 weeks which dropped off quickly because it was neutron activation products. The 4th generation nukes that the US stuck into the bunker busters are the size of matchboxes I was told by Dr. Chris Busby who had the bomb crater samples tested at the British govt. radiation lab. So that takes it back to the time gap from Sept. 11 to Oct. 5 when DOE did not want air sampling data collected. Why?

The energy budget required to destroy the integrity of the structure and the molecular dissociation of two huge buildings has to be the focus of any investigation of 911 at the WTC. So far it has not been considered.

BIO of Leuren Moret:
peaceinspace.blogs.com/nuclear_free_zone/2007/05/leuren_moret_bi.html



CANADA: Transcript of Judy Woods Interview with Richard Syrett
Fri Sept 19, 2008 on CFRB 1010 AM Radio’s - The Richard Syrett Show
www.cfrb.com
www.drjudywood.com/

Richard Syrett: Judy Wood who is a very controversial person in the 9-11 truth movement. 
She’s been sort of looked at as sort of the straw man in terms of being sort of way out there on
what some might (not myself), what some might call the lunatic fringe in terms of her theories in what might have brought down the Twin Towers. She believes it was Starwars type technology, as Starwars as an SDI, as Starwars as a particle beam, a beam energy laser type device .
Speaker # 2 (Spkr 2): Wow.
RS: that brought down the Twin Towers. She will join us in the first hour of the show, in the first half really. In the second half, Matthew Connolly who is an assistant professor at Columbia University will be here to talk about the myth of overpopulation and the struggle to control world population for all the wrong reasons.
(Skip some introductory dialog.)

RS: This is the Richard Syrett show on News Talk 1010 CFRB.
(Skip some unrelated dialog)
RS: Now, first off. A very compelling and controversial 90 minutes, I can assure you. 
When I first came back to CFRB, every Monday night I did a show dedicated to 9-11, and for various reasons, I didn’t have Dr. Judy Wood on the program on any of those Mondays. I talked to Jim Hoffman, I talked to James Fetzer, I talked to Barry Zwicker, Alex Jones, of course, Jim Marrs why didn’t I talk to Judy Wood, and I think maybe I was a little bit afraid of what she had to say because in some quarters for those who cling to the official narrative of 9-11 that’s been force fed to us like pabulum, Dr. Judy Wood presents them with somewhat of a straw man’s argument. She’s held out there as
being way out there on the lunatic fringe. Did you see what Dr. Judy Wood said last night. The Twin Towers were brought down by some sort of Star Wars technology.’ Ha ha ha. And then I talked to people
like John Hutchison, the founder of the Hutchison Effect. And I talked to former TV weatherman, Scott Stephens, who has dedicated his life investigating extreme bizarre weather anomalies and scalar technology. I talked to Joseph Farrow, author of Secrets of the Unified Field. And suddenly what Dr.20Judy Wood has to say doesn’t seem so out there, and I’m delighted to have her on the program and I’m thrilled that she agreed to come on. Dr. Judy Wood, welcome to the Richard Syrett Show, NewsTalk 1010, CFRB.
Dr. Judy Wood (JW): Thank you very much for having me.
RS: In that rather laborious introduction the idea that you’re obviously, I’m guessing,
are cognizant of the fact that some perceive you, maybe some even in the 9-11 truth movement are afraid of you because of what you have to say. For them, let’s face it, it’s far more easier to digest the fact that let’s say Steven Jones is correct, you know, that there were prepositioned precision cutter charges placed in the World Trade Center towers rather than this, you know, hocus pocus world of directed energy weapons.
Is that an accurate assessment, that you’ve been sort of pigeon holed that way by both sides, those in the truth movement and those outside it?
JW: Yeah, but I don’t pay a lot of attention to that. I’m just looking for the truth and
looking for what caused this horrendous event. It’s a pretty amazing event that happened.
No matter which way you look at it, to have seven buildings go poof that day.
RS: And we should. I failed to mention your credentials and they are significant.
A mechanical engineer with research interests in experimental stress analysis,
structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. You’re a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics, co-founded that organization’s Biological and Systems Materials division, and you are currently serving on that organization’s composite materials technical division. And let’s plug the web site as well, www.DrJudyWood.com.
RS: All right. We’ve got that out of the way.
What is a directed energy weapon?
JW: Well, my definition of it is energy that is directed and used as a weapon.
RS: It’s that simple.
JW: Yes, that’s my definition. And I use a very generalized definition because we don’t know what this gizmo is.
We don’t what the name of it is. It needs a category, and it’s not a kinetic energy device. In other words, something doesn’t go boom with chunks going flying. Something doesn’t physically do something by contacting it. Energy is involved here.
RS: And when we come back because we’re going to break here a moment when we come back, I’ll get you to explain I guess what the telltale signs were for you when you looked at the images, the video, the stills, or the eyewitness testimony. What were the telltale signs that told you a, this wasn’t brought down by planes, b, they weren’t brought down as Steven Jones contends – prepositioned cutter charges.
Judy Wood, Doctor Judy Wood, on the Richard Syrett Show. Stay with us on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
RS: Dr. Judy wood is with us. This mechanical engineer believes that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by a directed energy weapon, whatever that might mean. Now before I get you to tell us what the telltale signs were, Judy, the fingerprint here.. what is it your contention that Building 7 as well as the north and south Towers were brought down in this manner?

JW: Yes, and I just submitted some comments to NIST about that. Some pretty incriminating things.
RS: You are involved currently in a federal suit against NIST, are you?
JW: Correct. On their reports for Towers 1 and 2 well, the contractors for their reports for Towers 1 and 2.
RS: All right. Now, let’s delve in to the actual evidence here. When you looked the images, the videos, the photographs, you heard the testimony what led you to believe that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by a directed energy weapon and not commercial aircraft or, as Steven Jones contends, some prepositioned cutter charges?
JW: Well first, let’s observe. The building. It went away. There wasn’t enough rubble pile left. In a regular controlled demolition, bombs in the building I call it, you end up with a rubble pile with chunks, big chunks, little chunks, in-between size chunks. You don’t end up with just solid powder. And also, there is heat involved with that, and I saw no evidence of heat anywhere.
Paper unburned. I think we all remember paper all over Manhattan.
RS: Yes.
JW: Tons of it. This is bizarre. It is next to a car that appears to be burning, but the paper is not burning.
RS: Even with the initial blast, would not some paper be jettisoned out of the windows in advance of the flames, before the flames would have a chance to consume them? I don’t know. I’m not an engineer.
JW: Right. If paper shot out the window, how much paper can there be? We didn’t really see paper snowing out the window for the amount we see all over the place.
RS: All right.
JW: But, yes. It did get tossed out some of it
RS: So in the absence of charred or the absence of heat
JW: didn’t see heat you just see a rubble pile at ground level the rescue workers had to walk horizontally or rappel down into empty caverns.
RS: Yes, if the pancake theory were correct, and the idea that one floor collapsed on another and the increasing weight you know you would have like a stack of records for those who still remember vinyl. You used to be able to stack four or five records on a player and if they were all to collapse, you would have a pile four or five records high. But you’re right, we didn’t see huge chunks.
We saw as if the actual building, each floor, before it was allowed to collapse upon the next, was merely pulverized, pulverized into this powder.
JW: Right. And you could see it happening mid-air. You see the steel I call them wheat chex, those prefab three-column-wide, three fourths tall sections of the outer walls.
They’re flying through the air and they never hit the ground. It’s like they dissolve or melt like ice cream on the way down. They just turn in to dust. They trail dust, and there’s no big thuds. And that actually was another clue. The ground shook for less than 8 seconds.
RS: Okay. Why is that significant?
JW: It takes 9.22 seconds to drop a ball of the roof and have it hit the pavement down below.
RS: Okay. That’s yeah that’s pure Newtonian physics, right?
JW: Right.
RS: Freefall speed.
JW: Right, but the ground only shook for 8 seconds or less.
RS: You mean the building collapsed in 8 seconds?
JW: The ground shook.
RS: Okay. I’m not sure why that is significant.
JW: Well, I’m not saying it collapsed. It went away.
RS: Ah. Okay. I see what you’re
JW: It went poof. It went away.
RS: The evidence that the ground did not shake for more than 8 seconds according
to the Columbia University seismology lab. And that seems pretty bizarre, you know,
for this quarter mile tall building.
RS: So let’s assume you say it went away if it were to have collapse,
it would had to have collapse certainly in no less than freefall speed,
which would be remarkable in itself, and that’s 9.2 seconds, but actually the ground only shook for 8.8 seconds, which is greater than freefall speed. You’re saying that according to Newtonian laws, that is absolutely physically impossible.
JW: If it were to collapse in that amount of time.
RS: Yes, it were to have collapsed. Yes.
JW: But you know that powder doesn’t make a thud when it hits.
RS: Oh, I see what you’re saying. Ah. Yes. Okay.
JW: So the upper floors maybe they were one hundred percent turned to powder,
and so it was the lower floors where actually anything hit the ground. If you look around the adjacent buildings,
you don’t see any I call them stab wounds you know, pieces of projectiles going through windows and so forth above the eighteenth floor. Out of 110 stories, you only have falling debris hitting buildings up to the eighteenth floor.
RS: So is it possible that the first 18 floors were brought down by cutter charges and the remaining floors were brought down by directed energy. Is that what you are suggesting?
JW: No, I don’t think you know why worry about starting a fire under water when you don’t need to it just makes it harder. It’s not impossible; it just makes the job harder because you have more unknowns than you need. If you’re using one thing, why use something else?
RS: Understood. Let me take a time out here. We’ve got news waiting at the bottom of the hour. Dr. Judy Wood is with us and we are continuing to discuss whether or not a direct energy weapon was responsible for the North, South and Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex. The Richard Syrett Show on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
BREAK
RS: Dr. Judy Wood is with us. She believes that directed energy weapons were responsible for bringing down
the north and south Towers plus Building 7 on 9-11. Let’s go back to our discussion, Judy, some of the telltale signs. You mentioned lack of heat. We had plumes of paper being ejected from windows, landing on the street and none of them were on fire or burning. We have the lack of scarring around the World Trade Center complex, that is, you know, large projectiles being thrown out of the building and then impacting, you know, the other buildings, surrounding buildings, above the eighteenth floor.
JW: And there’s the seismograph information. The ground didn’t shake for more than 8 seconds. Even more so, the impact it made was equivalent to the bottom 20 stories of Tower 1 and the bottom 16 stories of Tower 2.
RS: So in other words, as you say, the top 90 plus floors simply disappeared, went away.
JW: Right.
RS: Okay. Any other telltale signs before we move on.
JW: Yes, there are the toasted cars. I call them toasted cars. They’re toasted as in their history’, not necessarily cooked. I use unique terms when I don’t know the exact phenomenon and don’t want to bias my observations. I just assign a name. Okay. Toasted cars. They’re totaled. They’re toast.
RS: Okay.
JW: They looked scorched and there’s paper next to them that is not burning. The cars are glowing.
And whatever it is, it seems to like engine blocks more than the sides of a car. It like door handles. So if you showed me a car from a regular car fire and a car from 9-11, I could tell the difference.
RS: It likes door handles and engine blocks but not necessa rily the skin of the car.
JW: Right.
RS: That’s interesting. All right.
JW: And it also removes the windshields. There’s absolutely not a trace of windshields left.
RS: It melts them?
JW: Well, they’re just gone. Maybe they turned to dust.
RS: Okay
JW: Like the marble facade in front on WFC 1, 2, and 3. Those are the buildings on the west side of the street.
 All the marble just disappeared off the facade.
RS: It just disappeared.
JW: Yes, it’s gone, just the marble.
RS: Was it pulverized or you mean there’s no accounting for it whatsoever? No trace of even powder?
JW: I don’t know if powder was there or not. You look at the pictures and all that facade is gone. Just the marble facade, not the rest of the building.
RS: Okay.
JW: And also the windows. There are circular holes, the windows. And I think we all know you throw a baseball through a window, it doesn’t make a round hole.
RS: No, it just breaks the entire pane of glass or it leaves a jagged top or bottom or some portion of
JW: a spider web looking thing.
RS: Okay. Circular holes where?
JW: In adjacent buildings across the street.
RS: Okay, that’s interesting.
JW: In WFC buildings, there are round holes.
RS: A lot of them? Dozens? Hundreds?
JW: Yes. Breakage is kind of strange. Or if the building had double pane windows,
one of the panes was gone, but the other pane wasn’t.
RS: All right. This is all very interesting and it is perplexing these phenomena that you’re talking about, but how does that in your mind add up to directed energy?
JW: Well, lots of __?____waves do that to windows. But if you look at one more. I guess there are two ah ha moments. One was this cop car over on FDR Drive. With my background in interferometry, the pattern I saw on the car reminded me of constructed or destructed interference.
RS: Okay. Those are very big words and someone who got through basically grade 11 science First of all, your back ground in interferometry ?
JW: Interferometry.
RS: Interferometry. What is that?
JW: Interfering beams of lights. If you interfere two coherent beams of light, you get walls of constructive and=2 0destructive interference. __?__In space, you have light / dark, light / dark, and then sinusoidal shades in between.
RS: So the pattern on the squad car on FDR drive shows you what?
JW: That it was something that would be explained by interferometry where it looks toasted one place and one millimeter to the right it’s in pristine condition with a new wax job.
RS: Okay.
JW: it’s things like that that wouldn’t exist in a regular car fire.
RS: No, I wouldn’t think so as a lay person. All right. Another break awaits.
BREAK
RS: Directed energy weapons. Was such a device used to bring town the World Trade Center towers, Building 7, the north and south Towers. Dr. Judy Wood, a mechanical engineer, believes it happened just that way. Now the only question for me is, because for many of you listening now, you may be thinking wow, you know what, this is getting too far out there. We’re talking about what is it - Star Wars. Come on now.’
But the only question that we need to answer really is - Is this technology possible and does somebody possess it, and everything else falls in line from there?’
And before we get to that, what kind of energy source are we looking at here that would be able to do something like this. Pulverizing some 200 floors plus Building 7, we haven’t accounted for that 200 floors into a fine dust? What kind of energy source? What kind of power would be needed, Dr. Judy Wood?
JW: It’s the kind of power, the kind of effect, not the magnitude of it. One more feature that was really ground breaking for me, pun intended maybe, is that when the dust fell, it was coarse, it landed, and then began breaking down further, and became so fine it started wafting up.
JS: How do you know that?
JW: Pictures. Fifteen minutes after Tower 1 went poof, just north of Tower, you’re up wind, you see a clear blue sky and the dust has landed, but then now you see stuff start to come up. That fine of dust could not have landed already.
RS: Ah. Interesting. So it fell to the ground in a coarse manner and then continued to break down once it hit the ground.
JW: Right. So that’s a really weird process. It’s not like you put an energy beam and fry it. That’s the biggest misconception.
RS: Ah. Have you seen anything like this before?
JW: Yes, and I think you have too. I started looking for what could cause this and I came upon the work of John Hutchison
RS: Yes.
JW: and he does this on a very small scale, just goofing around, not, definitely not anything in terms of weapons. But the U.S. government has entered his lab and videotaped it for four months in 1983, I believe.
RS: Yes, the Hutchison Effect for those who are not aware we’ve had John on the show many times. He was unceremoniously removed from his apartment / lab in, I guess, New Westminster, British Columbia. Was he stumbled upon some sort of effect that could bend metal bars, that could levitate heavy objects, all at essentially the flip of a switch? Using well I guess, his lab looks like a Nicola Tesla garage sale So what do you mean that you’ve see this with John Hutchison’s Effect.
JW: He is of course well known for levitation, and if you look around the World Trade Center, you see flipped cars next to trees that are fully covered with leaves.
RS: That’s not possible?
JW: It’s pretty strange to see cars in the right place, just upside down. It was quite a few of those and if it was a big gust of wind, I don’t think it would have tossed cars over without, you know, at least scarring them up some.
RS: Ah. Understood.
JW: It just looks like they’re parked upside down.
RS: Oh, 20I see. They’re perfectly pristine but they’re upside down.
JW: Right. There is one of them where its underside looks like it’s from the showroom floor. It looks like a brand new car.
RS: Interesting. Okay
JW: It was the upside down cars that were in good shape, and the cars that were right side up were toasted. And there was something that caught my eye in reading up about John Hutchison’s work is that you get lift or disruption. In other words, the molecules either can come apart or they tear themselves apart.
RS: Those are the two effects that he reported using when he engaged his device
JW: This is what others have reported about his work. The disruption meaning that the metal, you know, starts doing something funny.
RS: It either bends or I think in some cases, yes, it became rubbery or very brittle and just smashed apart.
JW: Right.
RS: Okay. So you saw traces of this at the crime scene, so to speak?
JW: All of the various phenomena, I listed at the crime scene I had done that first,
and then I found Hutchison’s work and said oh my gosh it’s just a one-to-one correlation.’ And so there’s an article about that on my web site where it’s comparing, you know, my photos from Ground Zero and then John’s stuff. It’s a one-to-one match.
RS: DrJudyWood.com DrJudyWood.com Okay, so you say again it’s not necessarily that the amount of power behind such a device, it’s the type of device or weapon itself. So what are we talking here then?
JW: Well, field effects.
RS: Field effects, as in the unified field’?
JW: Yes.
RS: Ah.
JW: There are various types of fields that can interfere and if you look at what John Hutchison does, it’s different kind of fields that he interferes.
RS: All right. We need to take another time out. We’ll come back and one again
we just talked about the unified field with Joseph Farrow we may be
heading back down to some familiar territory here, and this is getting very very interesting. 
If you got a line, please hold on to it. I will warn you it will probably be
right after the news at eleven o’clock, and if you haven’t jumped on board,
please do so [phone], StarTalk Star 8255 toll-free from out of town 1-800 -561 CFRB ,
the Richard Syrett Show along with Dr. Judy Wood. Stay with us on NewsTalk 1010.
BREAK
RS: Welcome back. Dr. Judy Wood is with us. It is her theory that the Twin Towers and
Building 7 were brought down by a directed energy weapon, not prepositioned cutter charges, as Steven Jones contends or using thermite. Let’s work in a call because we’re coming up on the news at the top of the hour and I want to get some input here from people. What do you think of what Dr. Judy Wood is saying? Jim is in Toronto.
Good evening, welcome to News Talk 1010.
Caller Jim in Toronto: Good evening Richard and to Judy. Judy, I saw a documentary on military hardware, modern versions of hardware which is absolutely fantastic,
and what you’re talking about was in the actual documentary, and they had an aircraft on remote control flying and they fired this weapon. Now you only see the left side, or the right side of the individual, the army person doing the testing, and it just broke the aircraft in pieces. They did the same thing on a missile that was just on the launch. It did the same thing. It broke in pieces. What puzzles me is what you’re saying there it sounds like they must have had it set up inside and outside in the third building20that went down, just to eliminate the evidence of what was going on, which comes to what you’re talking about.
JW: Well, I am saying that there are field effects. There’s interference of different energy forms in that region, not necessarily something fired from like a gun.
RS: Are we talking again about Einstein’s Unified Field theory, some aspect of that?
JW: Yes, and the fields that John Hutchison interferes there’s something very similar to that that was present in New York City, in the area on 9-11.
RS: Now when you say interferes you mean as in the old Scott Stephens,
the former weather man from Poncatello, Idaho, who is now with WeatherWars.info
says just like in Ghostbusters don’t cross the beams. You cross the beams and that creates interference waves?

JW: Right, depends on what types of beams, at what angles and what strengths and so forth. Yes, it’s interfering different beams will do something extraordinary.
RS: So this technology this is just not theoretical I mean Einstein was talking about this, what, a hundred years ago. I know that people like Nicola Tesla sort of picked up on it and others. But you’re saying that this is not theoretical.
They have harnessed this technology and they have weaponized it. Do we know this for a fact?
JW: Well, I know that the technology exists because I saw it. Now John Hutchison but again, John Hutchison never would use it as a weapon.
RS: And obviously at a much smaller scale so somebody must have perfected it.
JW: Now to supersize it, we need a huge Tesla Coil.
RS: All right. We will supersize it when we come back. We’ve got news at the top of the hour. 
 Dr. Judy Wood stays with us. Now DrJudyWood.com is the web site and we’ll also 
tell you how you can get involved in perhaps demanding a new 9-11 investigation.
That and much more in my conversation with Dr. Judy Wood when the Richard Syrett Show continues.
Stay with us here on NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
BREAK
RS: Right now, we continue to speak with Dr. Judy Wood, mechanical engineer,
with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, and optical methods. We’re talking about the possibility that directed energy weapons brought down the Twin Towers on 9-11.
Interesting quote here sent to me by a listener. It’s incredibly apropos so I’ll share it with you now. This death beam, Dr. Tesla said, will operate silently but effectively
at distances as far as a telescope could see an object on the ground and as far as the curvature of the earth would permit it. It will be invisible and will leave no marks behind it beyond evidence of destruction. An army of one million dead annihilated in an instant, he said, would never reveal, could not reveal even under the most powerful microscope just what catastrophe had caused its destruction. I thank you to Amy for sending that in. Dr. Judy Wood, we’re talking about a Tesla type death beam in your estimation?
JW: I don’t know about a death beam, but an energy field of some sort and about supersizing it.
RS: Yes. Tesla coils. We’ve seen the Tesla coils for those who have looked at pictures
of John Hutchison’s former lab in British Columbia. He had Tesla Coils. So we’re talking about very large Tesla coils.
JW: Well, if you look at a big Tesla coil, it’s got this big donut-shaped thing on the top and then a column with wires wrapped around it going up to it. It looks very much like the structure of a hurricane.
RS: Yes.
JW: Did you know that there was a very large hurricane right outside of New York City on 9-11?
RS: I had not heard that.
JW: It was known to be even bigger than Katrina and was aimed right for New York City. For four days, it was going northwest, past Bermuda, heading straight for New York City, stopped right outside of New York City on the morning of 9-11, made a U turn, headed out of town that afternoon.
RS: All right. That’s interesting. Hurricanes don’t normally come anywhere near that vicinity.
JW: And for no one to have been told. I’ve got the snapshots from the morning news.
They show that area of the ocean, but it doesn’t show this, you know,
this big pinwheel that should be out there.
RS: I missed that report. Where did you get that report, that there was
a hurricane headed for New York on the morning of 9-11?
JW: I was looking at the plume, the nature of the plume, and decided I wanted some, you know, some better pictures from up above, and went looking for weather satellite images, and oh my gosh, what is this thing?’
RS: How far off shore?
JW: Oh, well, the outer bands were at the end of Long Island and on Cape Cod.

RS: And this was, you’re saying, was what have you had a meteorologist look at it
to determine are we talking about Category 5, 4?
JW: It was a 3 the day before, and it had been downgraded but it spread out,
like a figure skater puts their arms out and they slow down. It had spread out to, you know, five and a fourth miles in diameter.
RS: Is that the fingerprint. Is that the fingerprint of the energy weapon?
JW: Well, I believe it’s part of it. Did you know there was thunder reported at JFK airport, Newark airport, and LaGuardia airport? All sides, you know, of Manhattan.
RS: Thunder?
JW: Thunder. And
RS: And I’m guessing if I think back to that day that it was a pretty clear day.
JW: Right. It was dry thunder.
RS: And those reports come from?
JW: The National Weather Service.
RS: They reported thunder?
JW: Yes, I’m sorry, those were airport reports.
RS: Okay.
JW: the individual airports.
RS: All right. So you add these things up I mean, a hurricane 500 miles off shore
JW: no, 500 miles in diameter
RS: Oh, sorry, 500 miles in diameter
JW: It was about 500 miles off shore, the eye of it, but, you know the outer bands, but the field effects reach outside of the outer bands.
RS: Okay.
JW: We can sense a storm coming, especially people with arthritis, they feel it.
RS: Sure.
JW: They sense the field effects. So the fact that there is thunder in the vicinity all around Manhattan,
that was enough to say that there are field effects there.
RS: Now, the hurricane that was offshore, would that be as a result of the activation of this directed energy weapon or ?
JW: I believe it was part of it. It’s the big Tesla coil.
RS: Does that mean that it was coming from that direction?
JW: I believe that the hurricane, however it was there, and I believe it was manufactured,
that it was creating part of the field.
RS: The hurricane was creating part of the field?
JW: Yes, the field effect from the hurricane were part of the field.
RS: So then how but a hurricane is a huge storm and
how would that be directed on three buildings within the World Trade Center complex?
JW: Like when John Hutchison does his work, he interferes different types of energy fields.
RS: Okay.
JW: And if you have exquisite control you know, you have several different energy fields interfering, and then you can get a trigger beam that will set it off in a particular place.
RS: A trigger beam
JW: Yes, a trigger beam, you know, the field effects within an area and
then they need just one last little component, and then, boom, there goes something,
or, I believe the _______?building?__ was disintegrated over time..
RS: like taking a magnet and focusing the sun’s rays on a particular location?
JW: Or any catalyst. ..? . a catalyst that’s already there.
You’re thinking ?....potentially between two plates. You know, it’s ready to arc and
you just one little something in between and boom, there goes the arc.
RS: This again, not theoretical. You’ve seen it in a smaller scale in Hutchison’s lab,
but is it possible that someone would have this technology on such a large scale? Is it technically possible?
JW: Well, if this thing was designed if they, you know, however that hurricane got there,
and the fact that we weren’t told about this hurricane had the potential of, you know,
large storm surges, and if it goes right outside New York City and parks there.
Manhattan is what, twenty feet about the water table
RS: Yes.
JW: It’s going to get flood out. Aren’t you going to tell people they need to evacuate in case the hurricane comes ashore?
RS: Right.
JW: So that to me, you know, confirms that there is some kind of weather control, 
to be so confident that you don’t need to alert people.
RS: Have you talked to Scott Stephens about this? Do you know Scott Stephens?
JW: No. I know of him.
RS: WeatherWars.info I mean he’s talking about just exactly this using, I guess, scalar technology. Is that the appropriate term here? Scalar?
JW: It could be. I’m not that familiar with exactly how they make these hurricanes,
but they’re too organized and I think there’s something about the eye the pentagon shape?
RS: Yes, that’s exactly right. He talks about the geometric patterns within these storms.
I mean he basically delivered his last weather cast in Pocotello Idaho back in 2005.
Once he woke up to what was going on and what kind of technology they had, and now he just sees, again, the telltale signs of manufactured weather everywhere. I mean not just the big things he says they’re not just doing the big things. They’re doing everything.
RS: You ought to check my website. The Erinseries. Hurricane Erin was the name of it. E R I N. It goes there just like it went up to a chalk line. Stops, makes a U turn and then heads back out of town.
RS: DrJudyWood.com All Right.
One final time, I’ll come back and talk a little bit more about, this is absolutely mind blowing.
Directed energy weapons. Did they bring down the Twin Towers.
Back with more of the Richard Syrett Show, NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
BREAK
RS: When Carlos Allende was crossing the Atlantic on his way to Algiers in October of 1943, he and at least a thousand men witnessed the USS Eldridge become invisible to the human eye, not to radar, to the human eye. That was the source of the legend of the Philadelphia Experiment, also known as Project Rainbow. Now, think of it, if they could do that in 1943, and we’re not talking about the rumors of teleportation let’s assume that didn’t happen, but if it simply became invisible to the human eye If they could do that in 1943, my word, what kind of technology do they have 65 years later? It would be mind boggling. I don’t think our imagination could even fathom what the powers that be have. 
Do they have a directed energy weapon utilizing giant Tesla coils to create hurricanes and
also make the Twin Towers disappear? Dr. Judy Wood says so.
Let’s grab a quick call before we say goodnight to Judy and Jim in Otobico. Welcome to NewsTalk 1010 CFRB.
Caller Jim in Otobico: Hi Richard. How are you guys doing? Another phenomenal show.
RS: Thank you
Caller Jim: Richard, I’m just curious your guest from about a week ago and you’re the gentleman was talking about 9-11 and he was talking about the fact that the towers were shut down by Marvin Bush’s security firm on the 8th and the 9th, and there are two questions I have, really. One, do you think this igniter, I guess, could be potentially set up in those two days when the buildings were shut down and completely in their control with no access by anybody else? And also, if so, what was the size or the category size of this hurricane that was offshore at New York? I’ll take the answer offline.
RS: All right. Thank you, Jim. Judy?
JW: The hurricane was a Category 3 but it had been downgraded that morning because it slowed down, but it was bigger for the overall energy, you know, larger area. One other thing I’d like to mention is there’s an abrupt shift in the earth’s magnetic field with each of the events on 9-11, a build-up, a change in the magnetometer readings, and an abrupt change of direction of those curves. That’s kind of interesting too.
RS: And that’s probably worthy of another half an hour which we don’t have.
I do want to give you a little bit of time to talk about on DrJudyWood.com,
sort of a clarion call for people interested in launching another 9-11 investigation.
I know there are those up here in Canada that would like to see that, but what are you trying to do down in the States?
JW: Well, I am conducting an investigation and I’ve taken legal action as well.
RS: You’re taking this to court?
JW: Yes, well the contractors for NIST who helped in the cover up of this horrendous crime, and some of these contractors are manufacturers of directed energy weapons.
RS: And how do you know that.
JW: It’s on their websites
RS: Ah.
JW: Their test facilities, their, you know, warehouse.
RS: How can people help you?
JW: Gee, write to me and ask. Let it be known what’s going on.
RS: All right, but in terms of your legal case, this is costing money, I’m guessing.
JW: Yes. Yes.
RS: Who’s helping you with that?
JW: Nobody so far. Well, a couple of people have, small scale, but yes anything would be very helpful there.
RS: So again, it’s DrJudyWood.com.
JW: And at the top of that web page, there is about the legal case and if you go to that page, there’s a data entry thing where you can email that way or contact me.
RS: All right, and when is that legal case supposed to happen?
JW: Well, it’s ongoing. There are different activities happening in it right now.
RS: All right. Listen, I know that you’ll probably be in the midst of it later next month.
That’s why we had you on tonight. I thank you for your time.
I’m hoping that we can talk again=2 0before Christmas and get maybe some details in how this case is going. I wish the best of luck. You’re a brave woman. This information is absolutely mind blowing and not easily dismissed
JW: Thanks.)

VIEW/COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE:

peaceinspace.blogs.com/911/2008/11/911-energy-budget-and-molecular-dissociation-of-the-world-trade-center-wtc-by-independent-scientist-leuren-moretcanada.html