Wednesday, April 4, 2012

9/11: It's not the crime, it's the coverup!

Truth Jihad Radio Wed. 4/4/12, 3-5 pm Central, American Freedom Radio (archived here.) Call-in: (402) 237-2525 or post your questions to my Facebook page.

First hour: Dan Noel of Orange County 9/11 Truth and 911BabyStep.com says what's truly astonishing about 9/11 is not so much that insiders explosively demolished the whole World Trade Center complex, including three massive skyscrapers, while falsely blaming "hijacked planes"...attacked the Pentagon with bombs and (maybe) a missile, leaving nothing remotely resembling a big plane crash scene...and absurdly claimed that an empty fifteen foot hole in the ground in Shanksville, PA was the site of a fourth "plane crash."

The really remarkable feature of 9/11, Dan says, is not the crime, but the coverup. How can the media be made to report things that obviously did not happen, even according to their own footage and initial reports? How can such an in-your-face fraud, evident to anyone with eyes, fail to be reported by those whose job is to seek out and report facts? How can 19 innocent young identity-theft victims be falsely convicted by the media, despite the complete lack of evidence that any of them were even on the alleged flights, and abundant evidence that they were not? In short, how could such an insane, obscene media coverup possibly be orchestrated?

Let's ask Dan!

Second hour: Jim Fetzer discusses issues raised in his latest articles. Questions raised in this interview include:

*Does the term "video fakery" cover all uses of video to create a false impression of events? (If so, pretty much everything on TV is "video fakery.") Or should it be reserved for allegations that videos were technologically altered by computer animation, editing, and so on?


*How were the extant videos of planes hitting the World Trade Center towers produced?

*Is it reasonable to hypothesize that a classified nanothermitic composite explosive was partially or perhaps even entirely responsible for the explosive demolition of the Twin Towers?
If not, what is the best explanation for the residue of unexploded nanothermite chips in the World Trade Center dust?

10 comments:

  1. Remote Control Take Over (RCTO) of the jets is a better explanation than a missile. It explains everything, including dead bodies and DNA at the Pentagon. The "hijackers" were just passengers, confidential informants on their way to their next assignment in LA. The Pilots' communications and navigation was taken over so they could not steer or call for help. Add voice-morphed calls, and you have a complete explanation of how they did 9/11.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree that this is the simplest M.O. But it seems unlikely that: a) the big airliners could have flown with sufficient reliability and accuracy at the speeds that were clocked b) the lack of evidence for big airliner crashes would be as extreme as it is if big airliners had indeed crashed in DC and PA; and c) videos of what happened at the Pentagon would be seized and suppressed, as they were, if they showed a big passenger airliner hitting the building.

    So the facts force us to suspect that the superficially more plausible theory may be wrong, while the superficially less plausible one may be right.

    As for the reasons they'd use precision military attacks rather than actual remote-hijacked-passenger-jet crashes, these could include: Taking out designated targets with minimal collateral damage; achieving total control over the process and minimizing possible glitches; and perhaps most importantly, using superficially implausible methods, perhaps including extremely advanced top secret technologies, would be the single best way to ensure the coverup worked, by making the truth so outrageous that it would be easily dismissible on a priori grounds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1st hour was good.

      2nd hour with Fetzer- I think his line in the first segment said it all WRT his game, paraphrasing: "Nanothermite has been a distraction, which has prevented us from doing real research for 6 years..."

      I think the exotic theories FetzerCo peddle any time they get a platform, are the red herrings designed to prevent the movement from making real headway, instead being invited to take FetzerCo's bait and become an exotic-theory debating society over unanswerable questions of no relevance to the ultimate goal of bringing the perps to justice and ending the war on terror hoax. The exotic theories also serve as scarecrows deterring noobs from further investigating 911 & "waking up" generally.

      Face it Kevin, Fetzer remains a shill. From his controlled demolition of the original Scholars.. group, to his on-air orgasm with guest Judy Wood when ostensibly first hearing her exotic theory, "oh Judy! oh Judy! oh my!..." and nowdaze he filibusters any platform he gets breathlessly insisting that we need to focus on these exotic theories.

      I figured his handlers were trying to rehab him when he posted that article at rediscover911.com arguing that investigating Israel's role in 911 is valid and not anti-semitic-yada-yada. But that looks now to have been a flash in the pan, as now the fruits he bears are a disservice to the movement-- no accident I'm afraid! I think Anthony Lawson's critique of Fetzer was spot on!

      Kevin, how about if you have Fetzer on again, you agree to talk practical approaches to waking noobs up, and bringing the perps to justice? No more bloviating on about exotic theories which "insult the intelligence" of noobs and turn them away.

      Delete
    2. Re: "I think Anthony Lawson's critique of Fetzer was spot on!" - here's Lawson's article fleshing that out:
      http://rense.com/general94/vtrn.htm

      Lawson did this great podcast interview with Carolyn Yeager last summer, where they spend a lot of time discussing Lawson's assertion that Fetzer should be removed from the Veterans Today writer lineup as he's a "proven liar". Show was entitled, "The Heretics’ Hour: Is the 9/11 Truth Movement Stalled?" and can be heard here:
      http://tinyurl.com/d47jara

      A couple weeks earlier, you (KB) had Lawson on your show, entitled "Anthony Lawson blasts Jim Fetzer, Veterans Today" - as I recall though, there was some audio problem which made Lawson very difficult to hear, anyhow here's your blog entry for that:
      http://tinyurl.com/6uzpnpr

      Incidentally, I "allow for the possibility" that any or all of the "exotic 911 theories" could be spot on, or BS, and all points in between. I take the same attitude towards organized religions, and ET-beings walking among us!

      Point is, these questions are de facto unknowable (short of credible new disclosures), and thus as a "political decision", I assert that devoting energy towards discussing exotic 911 theories is a dead-end alley politically, they give MSN-etc fodder for ridicule/dismissal, they deter noobs from further research, & they suck oxygen from the movement which would be better directed towards the cause of a real investigation & justice for the perps. I'm convinced that Fetzer/handlers agree, ;)

      Delete
  3. I am a fan of your broadcasts, so your response is an honor. To elaborate, a) if the planes were pre-fitted by a covert ground crew with enhanced computerized remote control that would explain the reliability and accuracy at high speeds. b) if the Pentagon plane had explosives in the wings and engines timed to blow up just prior to impacting the wall that would explain the smaller-than-expected hole and lack of wing marks. The motive would be not to do too much damage, just enough. A partially fragmented plane would hit the wall more like gravel than a brick. Explosives pre-planted in the building during construction would provide the 45 degree directional damage. c) If plane went off the planned course passing north of Citgo and hit at a near 90 degree angle, photos would have to be seized. They are hiding the wrong approach angle, and pre-impact explosion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To Kevin Barrett and James Fetzer,

    Dear Sirs,

    As I was listening to a recent interview of James Fetzer by Kevin Barrett (TRUTH JIHAD RADIO 04/04/2012) I couldn’t help myself getting frustrated. I decided to present a different approach to the 9/11 issue.

    I have some background in computer animation, when I view this clip (please pause on second 41) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E6CnWrGeaY (see attached image)
    I see this “airplane” mainly inside the building (the wings are inside) only the tail section is visible and I see clearly that the building is not damaged. The wall where the wings entered is undamaged it “healed” itself.

    In 3D computer graphics this is typically what happens when you have a 3D model (could be any object an airplane, a box, a flying cat etc) flying through another 3D model, the software (in this case) does no simulate real world impact so object one goes through object two without any damage to either and in this case it does not obey the laws of physics that is - it would have to “slow down” upon impact. (among other things)

    I’m sure most 3D animators viewing this scenario would agree that this is 3D computer animation combined with real video footage or in your words “video fakery”. (where is 3D animators/video professionals for 9/11 truth).

    With probably hundreds of broadcast quality video cameras aimed at WTC on Sept the 11, 2001 why one is not able to find a single CLEAR image/clip of a passenger airplane (767) in any of the hundreds of videos or images on the web.

    I have seen (youtube) footage of building exploding without being hit by an airplane.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B65M_smGewo

    An airplane going through the building and its nose coming out the other end. (image attached) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBpTWYUgvcM at 0:16 seconds

    In all clips of airplane hitting a building Newton’s law is not obeyed, and the “airplane” image is black and unclear, when viewed slowly (frame By frame) some elements periodically disappear for a frame or two (wings, tail etc) this is very much the by-product of the computer animation process, nobody views computer animation one frame at a time, it’s meant to look right when played in “real time”.

    In my own humble in the Naudet Bros video (WTC1 North Tower Plane Impact on 9/11 – Naudet) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk
    I once again a scene that’s not consistent with physics or reality. (Airplane speed, sound is not right etc.)

    Here is 9/11 Airplane Affidavit By John Lear, Son Of Learjet Inventor http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1935/777/9_11_Airplane_Affidavit_By_John_Lear,_Son_Of_Learjet_Inventor.html

    Conclusion:
    In ALL video clips showing an airplane hitting the WTC south tower on 9/11/2001 the airplanes are computer generated (objects) and were added to the live footage.
    This is COMMONLY done in the video/broadcast production industry, it is SIMPLE!

    In identical footage we see the WTC south tower blowing up without being hit by a commercial airliner. (767)
    The TV anchor does not mention an airplane only an explosion while we SEE IT.

    In these scenes the “airplane” objects Do Not obey the laws of physics.
    Commercial airliners are made of aluminum alloys and actually become dented/damaged by the impact of BIRDS!

    The 3 buildings came down whether hit by an airplane or not (Building 7)

    No need to go over the Pentagon/flight77 it really is self explanatory.

    I think it is paramount to make the process of delivering this massage as SIMPLE as possible.
    Let’s not get caught up in details, the proof is in the videos, WTC buildings DID NOT come down because they were hit by commercial airliners. I think for the sake of the CAUSE it is not important at this point how the buildings came down, (more like evaporated – NO COLLAPSE!) or who did it, who benefitted and another zillion assumptions.

    Please use this presentation anyway you like.

    I welcome your response.

    All the best with your mission.

    Bjorn Johansson
    Toronto Canada
    bjornagain2020@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  5. I asked Rob Balsamo to come on the show to respond to Jim's criticisms. Rob wrote back:
    Kevin,

    Jim doesn't deserve a formal response. My time is more valuable than dealing with bullshit on any level which may deem such an argument valid.

    But you are more than welcome to read my replies in our forum, and share them on the air.

    http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21931

    Regards,
    Rob Balsamo
    Co-Founder
    pilotsfor911truth.org
    Full member list at http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core
    Photos here http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots

    ReplyDelete
  6. RE the reference made in the first hour, also discussed several shows ago (date/guest?) regarding Britain allegedly having some public campaign to encourage people to drink at home rather than in pubs (where heaven forbid they might discuss things with their neighbors rather than being fed information safely & one-way through the matrix propaganda apparatus), I did a quick search for some sort of MSM story substantiating that claim.

    I didn't find said MSM story (not saying one or more don't exist), but did find this discussion forum thread enlightening:

    "UK Drinking - at home vs. the pub?"
    http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=177499

    ReplyDelete
  7. SOUNDS LIKE THE MINIONS ARE OUT TO BLIND SIDE OB1. FETZER IS AN OAK TO YOUR (SAP)LING MEASURE OF INTEGRITY. HE IS A FLAMETHROWER INTELLIGENCE TO YOUR CANDLE IN THE PAYMASTERS WIND. SHILLING IS BIG INDUSTRY SINCE 911 THE JUDEO MASONIC BIG EVENT. HAIL PIKE! GOOGLE, 3 WORLD WARS LETTER AND SEE WHAT'S TO COME. MAKE SURE YOUR TELL MOSSAD, OOOPS.. SORRY KEV, MAKE SURE YOU TELL KEVIN OUR LOYAL AMERICA WHO DOESN'T CARE THAT AS A MASTER METALLURGIST I CAN TELL YOU WITH CERTAINTY THAT AN ALUMINUM TUBE CANNOT SLICE THROUGH CONCRETE AND STEEL LIKE THAT. HAHAHAHAH SHAME ON YOU. YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY PAST THAT SCOLDING DOING ANY GOOD SO KICK IN THE RIGHTEOUS INDIG, AND GO FULL MONTY. HAHAHA
    BESIDES, IF IT WAS A "NOSE OUT" EVENT. IT WOULD A. LEFT AN EXIT HOLE..HAHAHA GIVE ME A BREAK..THAT'S INSANE NEGLIGENCE TO HAVE SO MANY SHOWS WHEN THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE TO GET THE PEOPLE TO SEE. BUT THEN AGAIN, PAYMASTER COMES IN...DUDE..SHHHH. IT'S A SECRET, BUT IT'S YOUR OWN MONEY THEY'RE PAYING YOU WITH...ANYWAY...SORRY BUT'S SO DEVIOUS, MA MUST BE PROUD, DOWN TO HER CLOVEN FEET. HAHAHAHA B. THAT WOULD IMPLICATE THE MEDIA IN THE MOST ROCK SOLID WAY. THAT'S WHY JONESTOWN GOES MELTDOWN WHEN NO PLANERS TRY TO BREAK THE GRIP OF THE WORLDS ENEMY....BUT WE CAN'T HAVE THE TRUTH OUT, WHY DO THAT WHEN YOU'RE SUCH A ROGUE OUTLAW SCOLDING THAT GOVERNMENT SPECTOR, HUH? THERE IT IS!...NOPE....NOPE....IT'S OVER THERE....NOPE....HEY.....IT'S THERE BEHIND THIS, NO NO NO NOT THIS, BUT THAT.....I HAVE TO GO....ALL THE SINCERITY IS JUST TOO RICH FOR ME. THEY ATTACK FETZER, ALTHOUGH I'M SAD IT TOOK HIM THAT LONG TO SEE A DAMN ALUMINUM CAN CANNOT SLICE THROUGH THAT TYPE AND SIZE OF STEEL, HELL, IT WOULDN'T DO THAT TO TELEPHONE POLES. ANYWAY. WELCOME ABOARD. YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE IN THE "MOVEMENT" I WOULD TRUTH. DO YOU ALL KNOW WHO INVENTED COPPER WIRE? TWO TRUTHER SHILLS FIGHTING OVER A COPPER SHEKEL IN PAYMENT FOR 911 GATEKEEPING. TAKE CARE BARABAS.

    ReplyDelete
  8. approval? wow! Talk about drunk on the blood of the gullible. I'm throwing away this zero and get a real hero. hahhahahahha Just my cheezing on your insane gatekeeping. I won't tell.

    ReplyDelete