Hello James
Here’s my first of the new year. Online with illustrations and live links at:
-Ron West
link › ronaldthomaswest.com
"The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than a history of crime" -Voltaire
9/11 Addendum
Before we delve into the dilemma of twin valid but seeming mutually exclusive realities, it does to examine reality itself as a mutating phenomenon. To begin, I'll point to experience of my own; an inability to recapture in virtual reality [on the internet] a clear image I recall from youtube some 8 to 9 or so years ago. There was a reasonable video in good resolution, not high definition when close-up, but good enough the party who'd uploaded it was able to zoom in [expand] the shot several times and freeze frame it. What the closest frozen [now a still] shot created demonstrated was, so-called 'Flight 175' had 1) a pod, clearly a pod, attached using pylon(s), to the right underside of 2) a cargo jet (no row of passenger windows.) It must have been taken down quickly, I couldn't find it again although I recall trying to find it shortly after; and these days, searching the net, there is no such footage, in fact what footage there is, is entirely different angle and poor resolution...
...the footage I'd seen was from entirely different location or behind Flight 175 looking head on into the south tower, with no commentary and no attribution. But the above 'extra equipment' segment from 'The Ripple Effect' is still worth a watch.
Did I actually see what I remember? I have no reason to doubt the veracity of my memory but should question myself nonetheless and can easily project others would have doubts. This recalls Thomas Paine:
“It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication — after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him"
Whether you should believe as I have related is entirely up to you. Insofar as questioning myself, did I dream it? Many people have difficulty distinguishing between something similar to 'dream' (memories playing tricks on us) from 'reality' and illusionists play on this frailty of human psychology everyday. Intelligence agencies have entire departments devoted to manipulating peoples' reality by exploiting this phenomenon.
But then, there are so-called 'evidence based' realities where facts are, or have been, close at hand with interpretations by multiple professionals, and these professionals have considered the 'evidence' in concert with the other professionals (in the same or closely related field) who place similar values or interpretations on the same or related evidence, to arrive at a consensus. This is not necessarily reality per se but is a form of creating collective reality more or less specific to that group and for those outside the group which embrace that particular group's findings.
So, what then, when two groups of highly trained professionals, from very different fields, look at a macro-body of evidence and come to startlingly different conclusions? Seeming mutually exclusive conclusions? It happens. And it happens to groups of intelligent people.
Now, when a group of intelligence and law enforcement professionals are convinced al-Qaida, based on what they know to be sound evidence with multiple confirming sources, flew planes into the twin towers, and a group of architects and engineers, based on what they know to be sound evidence, confirmed by multiple engineering principles, are convinced plane strikes are not what brought the towers down and consequently box-cutter wielding Arabs could not have been responsible for 9/11, what is happening?
To begin, innate primate behavior (humans are primates and anthropologists see this same behavior in our closely related chimps) demands each group's social cohesion be preserved. Accordingly, both groups have staked out their territory and there is little trespassing. In this case, there is also little cross-cultural examination, shared between the groups, precluding common undertaking of resolving the competing portraits of the 911 event. Without this opportunity at 'brain-storming' what the actual issues might be, there is stasis.
However 'intelligence' is the 'softer' science than engineers relying on principles of physics, with much greater risk the interpretations could be off-mark, no matter behavior profiles, multiple sources and wiretaps point to the 'Arabs' (primarily Saudis) as the responsible parties. With this in mind, it is interesting to deconstruct a relevant portion of Thomas Drake's interview (transcript at the link) with Paul Jay and the Real News:
The Man Who Presumed Too Much?
Playing on the Real News title 'the man who knew too much', we'll look at some unscientific assumptions made by Drake, but first I'll give a short summary of this portion of the interview (video, above.) It is established that, prior to 911, there was adequate intelligence to round up key al-Qaida players who were established (beyond a reasonable doubt) to have communications with al-Qaida (central) abroad, as well Saudi intelligence, and were training to fly planes. It is also established that Dick Cheney had ordered the intelligence agencies (including FBI) NOT to focus on terrorism. More than this, Cheney had established his own clandestine back channels, within the American intelligence apparatus, to independently know what was happening even as he took action to 'kneecap' those very intelligence services ability to perform their respective missions via normal channels. As well, Drake asserts Cheney utilized this undermining of intelligence to allow 9/11 be brought off. Now...
JAY: Same thing. Coleen Rowley I've interviewed. And maybe we'll link to her interview so you can find them as we're doing this. She said in the interview, 'cause I asked her a somewhat similar question, she said the FBI was specifically told, don't prioritize terrorism, by Cheney. That was actual instructions, that this is not the priority of our administration, which is part of why she says they couldn't get the FBI's attention, to really pay attention to what they had found in Minneapolis.
...Paul Jay backs a Drake assertion but Drake replies with patent absurdity...
DRAKE: That still doesn't matter, though. I realize that's a huge factor in terms of saying it isn't, but you're obligated under the Constitution to provide for the common defense. If you have information that rises to a level that says something is happening and it's going to be really bad, you've got to share it, you've got to bring in the key people, you've got to take action to prevent it. That's the whole point. Now, if you—I have argued this. I've said this before. That whole process was subverted by Cheney and company.
...what Drake has just done is to hold a technocratic assemblage, built on bureaucratic principle, to a high constitutional ideal that doesn't so much as exist outside of his own head in the intelligence agency environment; necessarily overlooking 1) the so-called National Security Act of 1947 had become foundation that saw built 2) a ‘color of law’ scheme where a now patently faux constitutional order is become artificial or thespian event for 3) a consolidation of fascism of which the NSA is a structural prop. Demanding (this was Snowden's misapprehension as well) technocrats in such an environment be constitutionally literate and motivated to a degree they can over-ride instructions with ideals their employment had been designed to subvert from the get-go, is more than a peculiar narcissism, it is oxymoron.
Now, the presumption just gets worse. The new 'Pearl Harbor' Cheney desired, to consolidate power in the executive office, is somehow going to take an 'unknown form' but recall Drake himself doesn't seem to realize the NSA itself is part and parcel of the anti-constitutional order:
DRAKE: So the system—what I'm saying: the system itself was essentially set aside. The secret channels were the ones that were utilized. And they [Cheney's people] knew much better than anybody else that something big was going to happen. They didn't actually know exact time or date. There was actually more than just passing evidence that they'd [al-Qaida] wanted to do what ultimately happened much earlier. They just weren't able to make it all happen. We know about all the test flights..."
How is it Drake can, in certain terms, state Cheney's people didn't know what or when, only they waited for something big? Because Cheney said so? Certainly Cheney has not. This is a PRESUMPTION. But because Drake is a 'constitutional narcissist' (read the entire series transcripts) as opposed to a realist that should be able to step out of his bubble of perception and understand his National Security Agency is, in and of itself, a structure antithetical to constitutional order; his ability to grasp what is actually happening would in any case suffer severe perceptual strictures. Recalling we have (these days) a few thousand architects and engineers have been willing to stick their necks out and dispute planes brought down the twin towers on 9/11, what should Drake have been looking at in relation to the known facts of al-Qaida learning to fly planes and Cheney providing the same cover?
Likely (almost certainly, in this investigator's mind) it went down something like this: al-Qaida believed they would be able to target, with small planes, American symbols like the Oval Office or other highly symbolic targets but actually had been set up as a patsy for "The Enterprise", also pulling in Bandar bin Sultan and the Saudis, as further insurance, with the so-called '28 pages' pointing away from the real culprits. Meanwhile, these next paragraphs by Mark Gorton are a good match to events set out in my own work, the excellent work of Jeff Sharlet, and the observations of a former Pentagon liaison to the CIA, L Fletcher Prouty:
“George H. W. Bush was such a pivotal deep politician because he bridged two separate worlds. He was a deep CIA insider, a lifelong intelligence operative, and he also came from an elite family and was intimately tied to the East Coast business elite. His father, Prescott, had been managing partner at the Wall Street investment bank Brown Brothers Harriman and also a US Senator. The Bush and Rockefeller families were very close. George H.W.’s grandfather Samuel had been business partners with John D. Rockefeller’s brother, and over the generation the Bush and Rockefeller clans had remained close. Empowered with these dual networks, George H. W. Bush could work within the dark nether-realms of the intelligence community, as well as, the Republican power elite
“Despite his decades long involvement as a deep CIA insider, Bush was falsely brought in as an outsider who could reform the CIA. Bush’s real job was to staunch the flow of secrets out of the CIA and prevent the exposure of the truly explosive evil truths of the now multiple Coups d’état executed by the CIA.
“The Enterprise was a massive 5000 person large hierarchical criminal organization with George H. W. Bush as its CEO. The Enterprise was a multifaceted criminal conglomerate that ran a large number of criminal activities including: drug trafficking, arms trafficking, savings and loan fraud, securities fraud, oil and gas fraud, insurance fraud, and real estate fraud. Embedded within the national security infrastructure and protected from prosecution by corrupted enforcement agencies like the SEC, FBI, DEA, ATF, etc., The Enterprise embarked on a massive criminal romp.
“I have seen no evidence directly linking George H.W. (Poppy) Bush directly to the 9/11 attacks, but just as physicists can detect the presence of a black hole by the actions of other bodies around it, so the massive force of George H. W. Bush in the 9/11 op can be inferred. Many people extremely close to Poppy Bush were actively involved in the 9/11 op, including: his son oldest son, George W. Bush; his youngest son, Marvin Bush; Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Prince Bandar, the Iran Contra network, and the BCCI network.”
-Mark Gorton
Yet to be determined is Mossad's role, but we know these groups, The Enterprise and MOSSAD, both, are infected with radical, apocalyptic-messianic forms of Zionism (see the Doug Coe link at this article's conclusion and the linked "related" section beneath that.)
Meanwhile, here's a large jet plane flown by remote control (video) (story) in 1984:
Screenshot; plane taking off, flown remotely:
Screenshot; pilot remotely flying the large jet:
Now, considering the hard science of a few thousand architects and engineers (2,963 as of this composition) disputing planes brought down the towers, does it matter whether I recall correctly the (now non-existent) video of a cargo jet, with pod attached, I began this article with? Or, is that a wrong question? Should the question rather be what is high profile whistle-blower Thomas Drake's mental state that he cannot see through his technocratic culture's myopia and his own narcissistic bias?
link › ae911truth.org
Lastly, do NOT miss the significance of this photo of George H.W. Bush with his (and his son's) spiritual guru:
“You know Jesus said ‘You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that’s what they taught the kids. Mao even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn’t murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom”
–Doug Coe
“I would … like to single out Doug Coe, who has been such a guiding light in all of this”
–George W Bush
*
Related:
link › ae911truth.org
America's Deep State (a foundational history of the George H.W. Bush criminal cabal within the USA's structure)
Sociopaths & Democracy (a wider, updated view of the George H.W. Bush conceived-chapter of our "Deep State")
Deep State V (economics & counter-insurgency, the war-profiteering cycle enriching America's present day Deep State players)
Profits of War (assessment illustrated via Iran-Contra, projected to 9/11, IsrŠ°eli cooperation with a cell of 'The Enterprise' or the CIA operational sector, historically a George H.W. Bush fan club)
*
link › jameslafond.blogspot.com
Books by James LaFond
The Mind of Mescaline Franklin
The Awakening of a Paleface Ethnocist
There's several in this video @ 6:45. There's another at 8:45. I think the one you're talking about is at 9:34. I remember the video you speak of I think.
hooktube.com/watch?v=AgqTix5ZrYs
The single most important piece of information telling us 9-11 was an inside job is the fall of building 7. Building #7 on 9-11 fell the same speed as a rock dropped IN AIR for roughly 108 feet. Now the building fell the same speed as the rock in air, gravity is the same for the building and the rock, the rock fell through just air, so the building had to be supported by JUST AIR to fall the same speed. Well we all know the building wasn't floating in the air the only explanation is that it was demoed. We all know the building wasn't floating in the air and the fires were never big enough, only three or four floors, to boil away all the columns in over ten floors into a gas. Therefore the bottom was removed or demoed for it to fall like it did. There's no other possibility.
Here's an astoundingly good short video by a mechanical engineer on the other buildings. It probably one of the best I've seen. It's very to the point and sticks to the facts as can be seen.
hooktube.com/watch?v=ABuCO5ifeIE
I found a better one.
hooktube.com/watch?v=ECGzunbIjjg
The video is by luc courchesne. Search for his name on hooktube.com
lots of videos.
Whatever impacted both towers wasn't a passenger plane. There is no visual evidence of wake vortex. The smoke plume just lazily rises. Flight 175 just disappears into the building, which doesn't conform with reality.
youtube.com/watch?v=mOolYTcz8xo
Dr. Judy Woods, whether you buy her DEW thesis or not, has done an excellent job of reviewing the strange debris in the wake of the attack. Something quite unique went down that day.
@Sam:
Building 7 does indeed have conventional controlled demolition written all over it. But the damage on WTC 1 and 2 is so anomalous (hundreds of thousands of tons of micronized steel, glass, etc.) that it points to cutting-edge technology only the military could possess. Kinetic energy doesn't explain the vast production of nano-particles (presumably part of the cause of 9/11 sicknesses).