Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Questions For 9/11 Smarties

Normally I would repost the thorough investigation -- I thought -- I did years ago; however, I am no longer sure of what I saw that day. I know that makes me a heretic to some, but the search for truth demands that the questions be asked and investigation continue.

"Question 6 for 9/11 Smarties: How could two large wide-bodied aluminum jetliners crash into two large high-strength, low-alloy steel towers and then disappear inside the buildings?

 September 6th, 2013
By Elizabeth Young
911 is without a doubt the most written about, analyzed and discussed conspiracy in the history of mankind. Yes, even the official story, that 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, crashed airplanes into important buildings in the N.E. sector in the United States because they “hate our freedoms,” is a conspiracy between Osama Bin Laden (who isn’t even wanted by the FBI [1q]) and the Arab terrorists who the U.S. government claims hijacked planes and crashed them in to important buildings in the N.E. sector in the United States.

“Conspiracy” is a REAL word for a REAL act that has existed in human societies in all cultures throughout human history. If conspiracies did not exist, we would not have a word for it. The problem that we face today is that the US Government has arrogated to itself a singular role as a political pontificate that believes that it and its agents in the Justice Department, alone, constitute the only “person” (corporate person) on this Earth who is allowed to use the word “conspiracy” as it employs the charge of “conspiracy” every week in trials to put both guilty and innocent people in jail while deriding and discrediting all others who employ the word as “conspiracy theorists.” (Paris Flammonde) [2q]

There are inside, outside and even outside-inside stories (conspiracy theories) about what really happened on 911.

Test your knowledge of the September 11, 2001 stories and see if you can spot the Terrorist Job (the story), The Inside Job/Global Domination (the story behind the story), The Exotic Weapon story (another story behind the story) or The Metaphysical story (the story behind the story behind the story behind the story!).

 Question 6. Americans and the future Truthers who watched the 9/11 drama believe two large wide-bodied aluminum jetliners crashed into the massive steel Twin Towers. The picture on the left is Flight 175 that doesn’t decelerate or produce any plane wreckage as it disappears in a puff of smoke inside the South Tower. The "no-plane theory," promoted by Internet videos like 911 Taboo, claim that the image on the right taken by a news helicopter depicts a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a Layer Mask.
Whether or not you believe the "no-plane theory" there is an important question that needs to be asked: Why would the perpetrators bother to fake crashing planes into the Twin Towers, requiring them to fake all the crash videos as well, when it would be much easier for them to crash real planes into the Towers?

 Option 1 - The two terrorists (who learned to fly jumbo jets from reading the flight manuals found in the cars they didn’t rent) that piloted the planes (that are still flying and/or are for sale according to Jeff Rense) were reported alive as of 9/12/2001. Therefore, if you believe Arab terrorists from Saudi Arabia masterminded 9/11, the question of planes or noplanes is not relevant.

 Option 2 - The Neocons were concerned that no one would visit the Project for New American Century (PNAC) website and find out it was a MIHOP (Made it Happen on Purpose like a New Pearl Harbor).

The thinking went something like this: Real planes (with or without remote control/on-board computer guidance systems) flying at 470 mph (Flight 11/North Tower) and 590 mph (Flight 175/South Tower) would break up into a million pieces before they penetrated the buildings, unlike the images above. People might even believe it was Arab terrorists flying the planes and it wasn’t an Inside Job.

As one person accurately states: it’s the penetration that guarantees that no one will believe the “Arab Terrorists, hate our freedom” story.

Only a computer generated imagery (CGI) of planes would guarantee penetration into the Twin Towers before their fuel tanks exploded.



Option 3 - The Military Industrial Complex wanted to hide their Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) demonstration behind a fake terrorist attack on the Twin Towers. What if the military used two drone 767’s and one of them missed the target? The DEW demo would have to be cancelled. http://killtown.blogspot.com/2007/05/why-they-didnt-use-planes-to-hit-wtc.html

Option 4 - The use of Computer-Generated Video Graphics (CGI fakery) was an impediment to the discovery of the Metaphysical Test of the Earth. On 9/11/2001, TPTB engaged Mike Rivero, a.k.a. John Wenckus, to use fake and/or doctored TV images to create the illusion of real plane crashes at the WTC.

It was the objective of the conspiracy to create an almost impenetrable barrier to the discovery of the Metaphysical Catechism or Test of the Earth's energy.
Testimony of Mike Rivero

Bugliosi: Good morning Mr. Rivero, please tell the jury what you did before launching your website www.whatreallyhappened.com for the CIA, and whether you are also known as John J. Wenckus.

Rivero: Yes, I went by the name of John Wenckus when I worked for NASA.

Bugliosi: You have admitted your part in the conspiracy to produce the faked plane impacts with the World Trade Center using CNN Video Fakery/Cartoon CGI.

What technical expertise qualified you for the task?

Rivero: I spent 25 years as a photo imaging expert analyst for NASA. During that time, I consulted in Hollywood on Sci-Fi projects and created the special effects for Star Trek, Stargate and the ABC hit miniseries “Lost.”

Bugliosi: Please summarize for the Jury CGI Video Fakery and the no-plane issue.

Rivero: The objective of the faked airplane crashes was to prevent discovery of the Metaphysical Catechism.

TPTB suffer from OCD when it comes to their metaphysical struggle with the Earth; they don’t leave anything to chance. A real and present danger existed. What if the Earth prevailed (which it did on 9/11), and the profane (middle class) found out about the conspiracy to use humans to weaken the Earth with environmental damage by living in a consumer society?

Then people would stop shopping, watch The Story of Stuff and then go out and form sustainable living communities like Portland City Repair. If that happened in 2001, the TPTB would have been defeated long before October 29, 2008. The Power of Community, Why was I born? Why are we here?

So, the designers built into the test a “gotcha.”

Bugliosi: Explain.

Rivero: They knew a scientist, like Dr. Judy Wood, would come forward and debunk Steven Jones. Dr. Wood has presented a compelling case for the collapse that explains the 1,400 cars that were toasted in inexplicable patterns and the dip of the Earth’s magnetic field at the precise moment of the supposed first plane “impact.” Furthermore, she calls attention to the presence of Hurricane Erin off the coast of New York on 9/11.

In other words, the test was designed to ensure that no one would listen to Dr. Wood.

Bugliosi: How was that accomplished?

Rivero: They used computer-generated video graphics to fake the plane crashes into the North and

South towers, a.k.a. the no-plane theory.

Bugliosi: I’m having trouble. What do no-planes have to do with the no-controlled demolition of the Twin Towers?

Rivero: Actually, everything and nothing.

We knew that investigators would quickly realize the physical impossibility of jumbo jets, being largely aluminum, penetrating the steel frames of the towers.

Look at this image of the second impact, taken from a news helicopter which shows a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a layer mask.
We knew that even an amateur researcher would figure out that digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in the news reports and subsequent amateur videos, so then we “had” them.

Bugliosi: I am not sure the jury is following your logic.

Rivero: Everyone on the team realized a legitimate investigator or truth seeker has integrity and a duty to report everything they discover, even if it has no relevance or importance to the events under investigation.

When the investigators reported on the impossibility of a Theory of Controlled Demolition, they would also have to report that no planes were flown into the Twin Towers. [12b]

Look at this statement from Morgan Reynolds:

“There were no planes, there were no hijackers. I know, I know, I’m out of the mainstream, but that’s the way it is. How could two large wide-bodied aluminum jetliners penetrate massive steel towers and disappear with no deceleration visible, no plane wreckage visible in gashes and none knocked to the ground below the impact zone?”

Reynolds knows he is out of the mainstream and he knows the issue is irrelevant to his discovery that controlled demolition could never explain the collapse of the Twin Towers.

But once he put his no-plane (foot) in his mouth, it became the hyper-straw man by which ALL of Reynolds theories could be attacked. [13b] Below are some typical attacks at legitimate researchers who put their no-plane in their mouth:

Crackpot theories like “no-planes, pods, energy weapons, holograms,” etc., were all looked at by many of us many years ago; we found there to be no truth to any of them and deemed them disinfo.

The WTC demolitions are proven and the official 9/11 airliner tales are proven hogwash. This article, the beneficiary of work by many other investigators, proves it. I await the replies of Hoffman and other apologists to reestablish the official, albeit impossible, airliner stories. I expect little more than obfuscation. What really happened? I do not know. What is clear is that the government is lying about the four reported Big Boeing crashes.

I don’t like these theories because they require a level of technology in excess of what’s needed to do the job. Global Hawk + nanothermite = Job Done.

The no-planers actually create the disinfo they peddle, so they’re otherwise known as disinfo artists. Several of them have grievances with the 9/11 Truth movement, so that is the likely reason they create the disinfo and try to pass it off as “9/11 Truth” to make the movement look bad.

The 9/11 Truth Movement served the dual purpose of vectoring genuine truth seekers to dead ends and branding those who questioned authority and the true nature of reality (the Theory of Controlled Demolition) as insane.

The Truthers, who saw “there was no break in the building wall between the port engine and fuselage when the 757 allegedly hit the North Tower,” were threatened with violence and banned from conspiracy theory websites.

Everyone else in the “Truth” community kept quiet and accepted Professor James Fetzer’s explanation:

“It’s Tactical. Even if they (the advocates of No Plane Theory) are right, it hurts the movement. Many feel that there is so much evidence of government complicity beyond the issue of big passenger jets that diverting attention to the one thing most people believe that they “saw” is not to our tactical and strategic advantage.”

Bugliosi: Whoa, that’s a lot to take in!

Rivero: Yes, but, if you think about it, you have to appreciate the lengths TPTB were willing to go to, to keep anyone from finding out about the metaphysical struggle. Below is my favorite ad hominem attack:

What it boils down to is that not a single legitimate research organization in the 9/11 Truth movement supports any of these crackpot disinfo theories. Not scholars, pilots, architects and engineers, lawyers, firefighters, 9/11 bloggers, Loose Change, you name it. Nobody supports these fringe theories. [all “illegitimate” organizations run by the CIA]

[End of Rivero testimony from 9/11 Breaking News: Nikola Tesla Testifies at NY Grand Jury on 9/11]

Did you know that Pictures of Mini Nukes at PakAlert Prove 9-11 was a Metaphysical Catechism (Test)?

Stay tuned: Question 6 coming tomorrow.

Question 1 for 9/11 Smarties: What really happened on September 11, 2001?
Question 2 for 9/11 Smarties: Where did the energy come from on September 11, 2001?
Question 3 for 9/11 Smarties: Why was The 2001 Invasion of Iraq called off on September 11, 2001?
Question 4. Why was Building 7, that wasn’t hit by a plane, demolished in what appeared to be a Las Vegas Hotel demolition type collapse 8 hours after the second tower collapsed
Question 5 for 9/11 Smarties: What are Hurricane Erin and the "dip" in the Earth’s magnetic field doing in the 9/11 Picture?

--MORE--"

""I, His Royal Majesty 'Mikey" Rivero, Proclaim You Are An IDIOT!"

 I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, have sent out this proclamation to inform my subjects that if you do not agree with ANYTHING I proclaim, then you are an idiot and probably need psychiatric help.

When it comes to the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero agree with the official government explanation that a Boeing 757, made out of mostly aluminum, crashed into the Pentagon and smashed thru SIX WALLS of heavily reinforced concrete and that the anti-aircraft missile batteries that presumably ring the building, didn't not track and destroy the incoming 757.

I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero will use my alternative news blog to make fun of you uppity bastards who have the NERVE to disagree with His Royalness on anything, but mostly when you don't agree to the 'official' government explanation of WHAT REALLY HAPPENED to the Pentagon on 9/11.

I will make snarky comments about those who dare use their minds to actually think for themselves by making such proclamations as these:

The "Pod People" And The Plane That Crashed Into the Pentagon

(Which contained this comment: 1. The perpetrators have to get rid of the plane and the passengers anyway. Why NOT crash them into the Pentagon? What it to be gained by a deception? Why take the risk of a swap?)

Then pray tell your Majesty, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED at Shanksville, PA that day? Or do you believe the 'official' explanation that the ground 'liquefied' and swallowed 100 TONS of a Boeing jetliner?

Please, your Majesty, I am just a humble peon, don't toss me into a dungeon for daring to use my brains to ask logical questions.

If I could be so bold, your Highness to inject some TRUTH here about the FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB of 9/11, you won't 'lop off my head,' will you?

Flight 93 disappeared into the crater without leaving a trace. Leverknight, an active member of the Air National Guard, was assigned by the editor to handle my questions. His answers were quite incredible. About the disappearance of the plane, Leverknight said, “It [the ground] liquefied.” One of the plane’s massive engines, he said, “bounced” off the ground and was found at a very considerable distance — in the woods.

"We haven't seen anything bigger than a phone book, certainly nothing that would resemble a part of a plane," said Cpt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police.
His Majesty will also make more condescending statements about those who disagree with the 'official' 9/11 Commission findings that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, like this one:

For the no planers/missile penatards, shut the fuck up, you make us all look retarded

I WILL NOT tolerate any dissent from my views, even those of Pentagon EYEWITNESSES, like April Gallop, who said:

Me: April, did you hear any warning alarms go off before the Pentagon was hit on 9/11?

AG: No I did not.

Me: What type of warning alarms would you normally expected to go off in the case of an attack on the building?

AG: While I worked at the Pentagon. At random times, there would be drill exercises utilizing an alarm for us to evacuate the building.

Yet on that particular day no alarm. [This is] especially [odd] considering the fact of what had already taken place at the World Trade Center.

AG: ...But here is my statement for the record.

I was located at the E ring. From my inside perspective, with no knowledge of what had actually happened on the outside, it did sound like a bomb. And we had to escape the building before the floors, debris etc collapsed on us.

And I don't recall at anytime seeing any plane debris. Again, I don't know what plane debris would look like after hitting a building. But I would have recalled unusual looking pieces similar to plane parts.

... When I review the pictures regarding the Boeing, in my opinion, the hole didn't appear to be big enough for the 757...

I didn't know it was a plane until I was informed at the hospital. If I wasn't informed I would have never believed it. I walked through that place to try to get out before everything collapsed on us . . . surely we should have seen something.
I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, will put my hands over my ears and scream repeatedly, "I CAN'T HEAR YOU," when another Pentagon eyewitness, Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) makes the following statement:

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner....

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...
These 'eggheads' at "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" will soon be dispatched to the chopping block, even if they are scientists, engineers, architects, psychologists, emergency workers, and educators.
A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer, who spent many years in Aerospace, including structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9 feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly perfectly cut circular hole in a reinforced concrete wall, with no subsequent damage to the rest of the wall.. (If we are to believe that somehow this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this sixth final wall.)

EXIT HOLE IN PENTAGON RING-C

American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, is alleged to have punched through 6 blast-resistant concrete walls, a total of nine feet of reinforced concrete before exiting through this hole

It is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean cut circle, period.  When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with an explosive shaped charge. An explosive shaped charge, or cutting charge is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is referred to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind the initial shaped charge to enter whatever has been penetrated.

You can call me a "tin hat", crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused by a Boeing 757.
This too, I command thee to ignore, since it came from a firefighter and everyone knows you can't trust those who you trust to save your life :)

Lt. Robert Medairos, "First Incident Commander at the Scene" declared: "My first thought was I couldn't believe what happened and they said it was a plane and I didn't see any pieces of any plane and I couldn't believe that a plane hit the building."

9/11 stealth:First Witness on the scene, Lieutenant Robert Medairos: Didn't See Any "Plane" Pieces ABC 15.25 9/13

His Royal Majesty will also ignore that then Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld stated: "Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center."

This I also issue an Imperial edict to my subjects to ignore:

In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

In 2006, The Washington Post reported... "Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission..."
I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, will also ignore the video evidence released by the FBI showing something hitting the Pentagon, but the film moves so fast and is so grainy, one can't really tell WHAT REALLY HAPPENED to the Pentagon on 9/11:

Both Official Pentagon Clips - Plane or Missile?

View the white missile with black ring around its nose: 4:57 in the second clip. We are looking for a 757 plane in this video, which is more than twice as long as the Pentagon is tall. The FBI says it is here. Did you see it? Whatever is in the first clip is way too short to be a 757. And you can't see what it really is because it is behind a pillar. All I see is the missile in the second clip.

My realm will also ignore more evidence, like this: "9/11 Commissioner slips up, says missile hit Pentagon."

Former 9/11 Commissioner Tim Roemer slips up and says a missile hit the Pentagon on 9/11

HRM Rivero does not have time to explore the web page of "Pilots For 9/11 Truth," as these professional pilots say that the aerial maneuvers made by the alleged pilot of Flight 77, Hani Hanjour, who couldn't learn to speak English fluently (required for pilots) and who couldn't even learn how to fly one of the world's most simple aircraft, a single-engine Cessana, was able to pilot one of the world's largest and most complicated jets, the Boeing 757 using skills that pilot with thousands of hours in the cockpit, say they couldn't perform, a 330-degree spiral dive maneuver into the Pentagon.

I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, promulgate the above to be the LAW in my kingdom, which covers the entire universe and if any of you peons dare to use your own thought faculties and come to a different conclusion about WHAT REALLY HAPPENED to the Pentagon on 9/11, I hereby proclaim you who dare to think for yourselves and not worship at my feet, to be fools and idiots and that you SHALL turn your lowly self into the nearest mental health facility to be observed!

I will also steal a phrase from former President George W. Bush, and say, "If you're not agreeing with me, then you're against me!"

CNN Pentagon reporter on 911 LIES about what he saw Media lies 9/11 Conspiracy

Nearly 1 1/2 years later CNN reporter Jamie Mcintyre now recants what he saw that day at the Pentagon. He says, "I was there and I can tell you a plane definitely hit the Pentagon". His earlier statement says "it did not appear a plane had crashed anywhere near the Pentagon."

I, HRM "Mikey' Rivero, will not stand for foolishness like this story, "FBI Withholding 84 More Tapes of Pentagon on 9/11," since it defies me and my royal proclamations.

P.S. Even though HRM Rivero lives in one of the world's most luxurious and expensive places to live, the island paradise of Hawaii, His Royalness is in need of some of YOUR hard-earned cash, so could some of you fools, "AHEM", I mean subjects, send me some dough?

Real 9/11 Truthers realize you must allow for dissension in the ranks, since the only ones who know WHAT REALLY HAPPENED on that fateful day are the NeoCons and Zionists who pulled off that act of treachery.

To use a popular alternative news site like WRH to call people names, infer that they're crazy and need to be on anti-psychotic meds just because you don't agree with HRM Rivero and the government 'hasbara' in the 9/11 Commission report doesn't advance the truth movement, in fact, it does just the opposite; it sends it reeling backwards using one of the oldest tricks around, the 'Divide and Conquer' strategy.

More Thoughts

The Space Shuttle Columbia blew up at an altitude of around 220,000 feet, yet a "... ground search in parts of Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas recovered crew remains and many vehicle fragments."

And a Space Shuttle is much smaller than a Boeing 757, in fact, they use, or did use a Boeing 747 with the shuttle strapped down to the top, to transport the shuttle.

See pics of that here.

Yet a Boeing 757, weighing around 100 TONS (200,000 POUNDS) we're told crashed into the Pentagon and all that's left is this puny piece of twisted metal?

The ones pushing the official lies from the "9/11 Commission" are the ones obstructing the Truth Seekers.

The ones that stand in the way of the search for 9/11 TRUTH are the ones who are suspect, not the ones seeking truth.

Decide for yourself. Don't let those seeking to obscure the REAL TRUTH intimidate you by calling you 'Pentards,' 'pod people,' or "Kool-Aid' drinkers.

--MORE--" 

He has hit upon something that has bothered me for a long time, too.

I link WRH and his comments a lot; however, that does not mean I believe everything he says. Even if he is a deep background controlled-opposition outlet, he does have to put out some truthful information. You take what you need and move on.


I'm not trying to be divisive or muddy the waters. I'm just trying to get at the truth.
Posted by at
Labels: , , ,