Monday, March 25, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
PLEASE SUPPORT REVERE RADIO:
SUBSCRIBE to the RSS feed
DONATE to Scholars for 9/11 Truth:
---------
(Right-click on guest name to download mp3)
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F:
---
Cheney Says He Masterminded 9/11,
ReplyDeleteBut the Spinners Refuse to Be Spun
EINS Exclusive
April 5, 2013
NEW YORK: Their opinions may differ, but American politicians and pundits of all persuasions seem united in their resolve not to let Dick Cheney's bizarre, tongue-in-cheek 9/11 confession turn their world upside down.
Their troubles began when Mr. Cheney extolled his own role as a "primary architect of the events of September 11, 2001" last Monday at an impromptu press conference ostensibly called to promote his his forthcoming book tour. The former vice-president, looking robust and claiming to be fully recovered from recent health problems, surprised reporters with the "revelation" that the air attacks on New York and Washington were orchestrated by "a network of experienced covert operatives" under his command.
In Mr. Cheney's words, this "shadow executive" subverted a "Red Team" participating in US military war games. "They used the routine defense drills scheduled for September 11th as cover for a 'real-world' attack," Mr. Cheney said. "I can't say much more than that because as you can guess, we did our best to keep me out of the loop."
"By the time the day arrived, all I really had to do from the bunker downstairs was to make sure there was no interference from the genius at the top," Mr. Cheney said, in an apparent reference to Former President George W. Bush. Chuckling, Cheney added "The boys in the field were magnificent." A second team under separate command had been assigned to assure the destruction of the World Trade Center itself, Mr. Cheney said.
The intent of the action was to blame the resulting carnage on the "false flag" of the shadowy al-Qaeda network, itself originally a construct of Western and allied intelligence services, according to Mr. Cheney. "Our motive was to frighten Americans into supporting a long-planned global war of aggression, which we saw as necessary given geopolitical developments. We also wanted to remove all limits on executive power at home," he said. "The Islamic fundamentalists made for irresistible patsies, really straight out of central casting."
Mr. Cheney then directly addressed the startled press corps: "We knew the operation would leave a lot of loose ends, but we relied on you guys in the media to ignore those and patch up a telegenic narrative. "You came through, and the nation thanks you for it."
Refusing to take questions, Mr. Cheney then announced he was immediately returning to his current, "undisclosed" home location, where he intends to rest up before undertaking the grueling schedule of cross-country personal appearances that will await him when the tour begins May 1st.
(continued)
Traditional Critics Deliver Swift Riposte
ReplyDeleteAmidst the current political drive for legalizing gay marriage and banning assault weapons, plus heightened tension between the two Koreas, Mr. Cheney's traditional critics chose to show amazing levels of restraint. Neither current nor retired high-ranking Democrats, when contacted for comment on Mr. Cheney's "joke confession," would respond on the record at all, although several did make off-record comments that were variations on the phrase "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, included the former vice-president."
Virtually all Capitol Hill Republican leaders asked to comment also deferred, the exception being Arizona Senator John McCain. "This important new disclosure, he asserted, should finally spur the Obama administration to hurry up and prosecute a much more focused and vigorous war on terror."
When asked if the Justice Department had any obligation to conduct even the most cursory investigation into the details of Cheney's fantastic, April 1st claim of personal responsibility for the carnage of eleven years ago, McCain angrily shot back: "9/11 was a terrible tragedy for so many hard-working, ordinary people who lost their loved ones on that fateful day. They don't need to have those memories dredged up again by Attorney General Holder and others who have so clearly proven their incompetence elsewhere, from 'Fast and Furious' on down. This is no time to dwell on the past."
Democracy Vibrant As Ever, as Debate Among Sophists Proves
Intellectuals on the right greeted the Cheney jest with a touch of their own humor. "9/11 was a bold, geopolitically savvy move, and I can't wait to see what's coming next, on the Korean Peninsula," William Kristol of the now-disbanded Project for a New American Century said in an appearance on FOX NEWS.
"To save America, our leaders knew they had to go large," Kristol added. "Without 9/11, would people in this country have understood the threat in time? I have no doubt that history will now judge the vice-president as a man of sharp wit, as well as imposing foresight and courage."
On the left, some seemed to miss the calendar date of the Cheney disclosure and proceeded to seriously question the alleged facts proffered. "That's just not how the intelligence world works," said covert operations expert David Corn. "It's ridiculous to see Cheney, who has no formal command over the US military, as some kind of James Bond villain who could pull off an attack on that scale all by himself. He's just a forgotten old man holed up in a cave somewhere, and now he's reaching for the political Viagra."
Chip Berlet, a frequently scathing observer of the "paranoid corrosion" of American politics, stated that "Cheney is a right-wing conspiracy theorist who has lied many times in the past. He lied about weapons of mass destruction and the 9/11 link to Iraq. Why should progressives trust him when he claims something even more outrageous?"
(continued)
The moderators of DemocraticUnderground.com, a popular, ultra-liberal internet forum, announced the site would maintain its policy of transferring all threads linking to news of Mr. Cheney's supposed confession to a specialized forum devoted to 9/11-related issues, called the "Conspiracy Dungeon" by many of the members.
ReplyDeleteSnopes.com, a website that specializes in debunking urban legends, published a page linking to several videos, allegedly of the late Osama Bin Ladin, in which the former al-Qaeda leader describes his own orchestration of the 9/11 attacks. "Bin Ladin confessed to this crime many years ago," said Barbara Mikkelson, Snopes' veteran editor. "Cheney's belated jump on the bandwagon changes nothing about that."
Mostly, however, the heavyweights of punditry devoted little attention to an issue they privately characterized as "old news."
"Everyone from Bangalore to Silicon Valley knew 9/11 was a smashing success for its instigators," according to Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, who said he had not considered mentioning the matter in his column. "Why chew up crucial mental RAM about it now, when Korea and Iran are on a horse that's gone nuclear, and shiny new smartphones are ka-zapping that news to all five corners of the flat world, a hundred Google-times faster than before?"
Syndicated columnist Maureen Dowd discerned a pattern of fear-mongering by the out-of-power Republicans. "Just when we as a nation had grown comfortable with the idea of an omnipresent, shadowy foreign enemy never resting in its determination to kill us all suddenly, anywhere and by any means, ex-Boss Cheney has to go and tell us the real enemy is inside our own government," Ms. Dowd wrote. "All he ever does is raise new specters to keep us frightened."
Fringe Eccentrics Provide for Additional Rustic Color
Even 9/11 conspiracy buffs sought to downplay the transparent ruse, with many noting that Mr. Cheney had said nothing they have not already claimed for years.
(ends)
Copyright © 2013 EXECRABLE INTELLIGENCE NEWSWIRE SERVICE, LLC. All rights reserved. If you can't recognise satire, this disclaimer will be of no assistance.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy blog post for this show can be found here.
ReplyDeleteIF the 9/11 Truth Movement is going to have ANY truth in it then the first place to start is to come to grips with the FACT that the WTC buildings were NUKED!
Steve Jones and Judy Wood are gatekeepers and it's long past time to put them both in the rear view mirror.
jim, you should try reading khalizovs work. you will find that he answers all the questions you continually raise regarding your inability to understand the collapse mechanisms involved in his theorising. i did read it (twice or three times-and watched the youtube series of videos) and it was, like judy woods work, damn convincing - until i came to learn that both their analyses were based on faked images. then you begin to see these scripts to accompany the visuals (and the author plants) for what they are; deceptions put in place and designed to take you exactly where the perpetrators always wanted you to go!
ReplyDeletedidn't you do a show with evelyn ?? detailing the demolition software available to the perpetrators for 9/11? and it has been shown again and again that computer generated imagery featured heavily in all footage purporting to represent actual events on 9/11. what the hell is wrong with you?
any and all 'information' coming from any and all (perpetrator controlled) official or government sources is to be viewed as suspect in the extreme.
fakery fakery everywhere
and we lap it up.
Jim interviewed Khalezov a couple of years ago. 150 kt nukes 100 meters deep at Ground Zero is preposterous.
DeleteHere is the crater from the Storax Sedan nuclear test which was a 104 kt nuke 190 meters deep. 150 kt would have left an even bigger crater.
No massive craters were observed at Ground Zero so Khalezov's theory can be rejected.
There were nukes at Ground Zero but they were low-yield neutron devices. Probably in the .01 kt range - not 150 kt.
The Storax Sedan nuclear test was done in sand. The WTC tower demolitions were done in metamorphic (hard) Manhattan bedrock. The dynamics would have been completely different: the "crater" could have amounted to nothing more than the relatively small hole in the footprint that appears in photos (not faked, as far as I know) and was well-documented, because more than 90% of the explosive pressure from the particulate surge would have been opposed by the interior chamber surfaces well below ground level. Picture the effect of a Panzerwerfer on a tank: small entry hole, big deadly explosion inside the tank, which I was taught in my ROTC courses was a result of the Venturi Effect. The version of "Finnish scientist" misses the point of deep burial of the device, so I fail to see why it impresses anyone. Khalezov's version stands undiscredited.
DeleteBill,
DeleteThere are many reasons Khalezov's theory fails. One that stands out is the toasted cars. Check out Ted Twietmeyer's post on Rense's website. Ed Ward states that most of the damage to the cars was done by neutrons. We can see by the angle that the source of the neutrons is clearly above ground. That's the end of Khalezov right there.
Don, that's a good point about the "toasted" cars. Incidentally, Judy Wood says she invents terminology, or uses unaccustomed terminology, to avoid planting false assumptions; but the word 'toasted' clearly puts one in mind of intense heat, which she wishes to dismiss. The vaporization of engine blocks is a little hard to take: why weren't the frames vaporized, too? And why were there seemingly no signs of the blast in sections of FDR Drive's understructure? I recall hearing or reading another speculation about the cars: that they were towed into place from elsewhere (the vicinity of the WTC? a junkyard?) and that some of them were missing engines to begin with.
DeleteA pyroclastic upsurge from an underground nuclear detonation would have the characteristics of a plasma, producing intense ionizing radiation, I would think - although I'm stepping a bit beyond my expertise here. Was it really neutron radiation that accounted for the effects? I don't think we're at a point yet where we can be certain as to what a buried nuclear device or an elevated mini-device (or devices) could do. There seem to be problems with both, although I would count it certain that nuclear blast(s) were in evidence. Thanks for all your painstaking work!
By the way, I mistakenly wrote Panzerwerfer for Panzerfaust above. A Panzerfaust worked on the same principle as a modern RPG.
Bear in mind that I've got Ed Ward in my Inbox on a regular basis so that has raised my nuke IQ considerably.
DeleteHere is what Ed said in an email last year "I believe some of what Tweitmeyer attributes to EMP was done by neutrons – in particular his linear evaluations (angle computations) would seem more neutron than EMP. EMP should tend to flow around – seems to be a correlation of dust cloud carrying EMP. So the linear blockage of cars protecting other cars would seem to be more appropriate for neutrons."
The engine blocks (made of aluminum) appear to have been melted by EMP in the dust cloud and the linear damage does indeed seem to be caused by neutrons. So what Ed is saying is that neutrons are going to go in a straight line and EMP will flow around.
Yes high energy fast neutrons can do a lot of damage. That's why there so few bodies found at GZ: most of the people were completely vaporized. Engineers estimate that 1/3 of each tower was vaporized.
There were mini-nukes above and below ground that destroyed the Twin Towers. The bombs that damaged the vehicles were clearly above ground. The nukes below ground took out the foundations of the buildings and were responsible for the elevated temperatures at Ground Zero for 6 months after 9/11.
Good point about the cars - they may have been towed from somewhere else. I've seen that theory in a couple of different places. Although there are toasted cars at the Pentagon too and I think a mini-nuke went off there as well.
Thank you for listening to the shows and doing some homework! This material is complex but if you put in a few hours of work you can understand it. This is the type of info really needs to get out to the 9/11 research community.
A great deal of my homework is listening to dedicated researchers such as yourself. We don't seem to have an open-and-shut case yet, but I think we're closing the distance to one at an accelerated pace. Jim Fetzer's Real Deal blog has played a major role in drawing the evidence together in one place.
DeleteBefore too long, we should have a central clearing site with a name something like "9/11 conclusions". We can't determine the truth by majority vote, but we could provide a survey of how many adherents stand in the various camps. We could also offer surveys with (expanding) lists of objections to each theory, or to major claims of each theory, and let users vote in support of them. A vote would require a link to at least one blog site or website where the voter (using whatever anonymity they required) defended the camp and/or argued their objection. We could then see how close we are to consensus and how much work we need to do to bring die-hards along. If I weren't so lazy, I'd start working on such a central clearinghouse (assuming someone hasn't done it already).
A shame to hear Fox still peddling the long-debunked misinformation that shoes were "melting."
ReplyDeletehttp://beforeitsnews.com/9-11-and-ground-zero/2013/03/debunking-molten-metal-2439630.html
"The fires were very intense on the pile, the heat was very intense. In some places you couldn't even get onto it. In some areas where you could walk, you'd travel another five feet and then you could just feel the heat coming up and you would have to just back off. You'd say to yourself, "I can't see a fire, but I can feel the heat, so something's wrong here," and you'd back off.
DeleteThat was one of the concerns we had about putting equipment on the pile, because the operators were sitting eight or ten feet up above the debris pile in their cabs and couldn't feel the heat. But they're carrying a hundred gallons of diesel fuel, hydraulic hoses, and other flammables, and there was nothing to stop the heat from wrecking the machine. If they got stuck in a place where the heat was so intense that it set his machine on fire, that operator wasn't going to make it out.
We were so lucky. We didn't lose anyone. We lost a lot of equipment, mostly due to collapses, but didn't have any piece of equipment catch on fire or anything like that. But hoses melted, and there was a lot of damage to tires- some of them melted just from being too close. I mean, the bottom of your shoes would melt on some of the steel. Some of that was so hot you could feel the hair on the back of your neck start to burn when you walked by. There were cherry-red pieces of steel sticking out of the ground. It was almost like being in a steel-manufacturing plant. You just couldn't physically go near that stuff.
Every time a grappler grabbed a piece of steel and shook it out, it would just fan the fire, like a fan in the fireplace. All of a sudden there'd be smoke billowing out.
The Army Corps of Engineers eventually supplied us with infrared aerial shots of where the heat was. It was like looking at the blob. The fire was moving under the pile. One day it would be here, it would be 1,400 degrees, the next day it would be 2,000 degrees, then five days later it wouldn't register over 600 degrees."
Charlie Vitchers from the book Nine Months at Ground Zero:
The Story of the Brotherhood of Workers Who Took on a Job Like No Other
Dentist recalls days as a 1st responder on 9/11
DeleteBy Donna Domino, Features Editor
Surreal street scenes
Dr. Dongieux eventually got a ride to ground zero. As he neared the World Trade Center, he saw surreal street scenes.
"When I arrived at the site, on one of the side streets, one of the first things I saw was one of the plane tires and part of the landing gear in the middle of the street," he remembered.
As he got closer to the Twin Towers, he sometimes walked over steel planks thrown down by the collapsing buildings that were serving as makeshift walkways.
Beyond the planks, he saw a deep, smoking cavern -- the devastated floors of shops and parking garages below the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center.
"We were walking on these planks and there were fires that were burning underground, so we walked on these steel planks through ground zero to the Millenium Hilton hotel, where we ended up treating victims that first night," Dr. Dongieux said. "These planks were really, really hot. They melted the bottoms of my shoes."
10 Things You Didn't Know About Timberland Boots
DeleteBy Karizza Sanchez | Jan 19, 2013 | 9:57 am
Timberland delivered boots to Ground Zero rescue workers on 9/11.
All eyes were on New York City on 9/11. To help, Timberland pulled its Timberland Premium Waterproof boots from its stores and delivered them to Ground Zero for the rescue workers, whose shoes reportedly melted
MIT remembers sacrifices made on September 11
DeleteBy Maggie Lloyd
CONTRIBUTING EDITOR
September 13, 2011
That’s where the MIT Police came in. Through the MIT Activities Committee, Vossmer helped organize three trips down to New York City, coordinating dates and times for when volunteers could finally arrive and what to bring. The bellies of the busses were stuffed with supplies donated by the MIT community, including winter coats, jeans, and boots.
“They desperately went through work boots,” Vossmer said. The heat from smoldering metal beams at Ground Zero would simply melt the shoes if a volunteer stood in place for too long.
Melted boots, faded batteries: supply depot has it covered
DeleteSeptember 19, 2001 Posted: 4:47 PM EDT (2047 GMT)
By Beth Nissen
CNN Correspondent
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Serving as supply central for ground zero, a parking lot outside the Javits Convention Center in Manhattan is stacked with donated goods from across the country, sorted and distributed by a battalion of volunteers.
They include Cris Carnicelli, who was, until last Tuesday, a waitress in a World Trade Center restaurant.
"This place has become essential. Anybody who's coming here to get supplies is going down to ground zero. And we know that," Carnicelli said.
The center depot is well stocked with a number of necessities for emergency efforts. A group of police officers might walk out with filter masks, flashlights and batteries. But other requests are harder to fill.
There is a request for 30 respirators but Carnicelli finds there are none of the type. The depot is short of air filters that can remove asbestos, which some fear swirls around the smoldering remains of the twin towers.
Depot coordinators print daily updates of the most critical shortages. On today's most-needed list: cell phone chargers, asbestos-grade respirators and boots.
Some of those sifting through ground zero reportedly need a new pair after every few hours. Nelson Santiago, an unemployed demolition worker, said he has seen hundreds of ruined pairs of work boots.
"Some of them come torn in half. Some of them break down in half. And some of them will be, like, wasted on one side or the other. Melted, because of the heat," he said.
Judy Wood denies explosives, denies high heat and above all she denies nukes. Judy Wood will NEVER mention the names of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz or Giuliani as being responsibile for 9/11 and the ensuing coverup. Instead Judy and the cult spend all of their time attacking other researchers.
ReplyDeleteHowever there is a mountain of evidence for explosives both conventional and nuclear and very high temperatures at Ground Zero for 6 months after 9/11. Judy Wood is a gatekeeper.
Ken Adachi's characterization of Noam Chomsky is apropos for Judy Wood. Is Judy "merely a gatekeeper, feigning the role of muckraker and champion of injustice, while all the time carrying water for the very power structures that she claims to rail against? Is she really exposing government collusion in criminal and treasonous behavior, or is she containing the limits of that exposure within certain 'acceptable' corridors of public discourse?"
"merely a gatekeeper, feigning the role of muckraker and champion of injustice, while all the time carrying water for the very power structures that s/he claims to rail against?"
ReplyDeleteJim, by now you know that the Simon Shack crowd feel this way about you, primarily because you reject the possibility of the videos AND the planes BOTH being fakes, plus your refusal to look deeply into the Shacksters' well-documented proofs of massive VICTIM fakery via Photoshopping and bogus bios.
Yet, I certainly give you credit for your openness to TALKING about such issues, as signified by your repeated request for Simon to be a guest on The Real Deal. His repeated refusals constitute a loss for all of us "truthers".
Well, some of those additional forums of fakery may be true. I am doing what I can and I have a hard time being faulted for not doing even more! Some of these charges completely ridiculous given my history of exposing governmental complicity in the assassination of JFK, the atrocities of 9/11, the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone, and the fakery of Sandy Hook. I can't do it all.
Deletedon, from memory khalizov claims the hard surrounding granite groundrock directed the blasts upwards on the path of least resistance. something akin to a cannonball out of a cannon, the walls of the cannon representing the granite surround.
ReplyDeletehave you any comments to make regarding 9/11 video and victim fakery?
Khalezov's theory simply can't account for the gross observable evidence: the Towers were destroyed from the top down and the inside out. Mini-nukes placed in the core columns and detonated sequentially from top to bottom explain what happened PERFECTLY.
DeleteI'm not a video/plane guy so I don't have anything of substance to add to that discussion. I would say that no commercial plane crashed anywhere on 9/11. Was it fake planes or fake videos or some combination thereof I really have no idea.
I have a FT job. I do some outside projects as well to try to make a couple of bucks. My 9/11 research is confined to what actually brought the buildings down. Whether the planes or the videos were faked doesn't matter in that context. Real planes couldn't be the cause of the destruction of the buildings. And of course neither could fake planes and fake videos.
I think that the US government/intel community nuking skyscrapers in NY is historically significant. That info needs to get out to the public so that's what I spend my limited time on.
Khalezov's report (of a purported Soviet study) does account for a top-down, inside-out destruction of the towers. The ultra-heated particulate surge went to a predictable height, tearing out the building interiors along the way; then the ultra-hot particulate, along with debris which it had driven to the apex, collapsed onto the building footprint. The particulate surge might also have exploded water or gas tanks in the buildings (following one of Judy Wood's suggestions), and the tremendous heat alone would have pushed material out in a lateral direction. Several mini-nukes at various floor levels have no advantage over this scenario; even worse, consecutive detonation of several mini-nukes might have risked the detonation mechanism's being compromised by preceding detonations (from EM radiation and fission-level heat).
DeleteHere is a link to my interview with Dimitri Khalezov: http://nwopodcast.com/fetz/media/Jim%20Fetzer%20Real%20Deal%20-%20Dimitri%20Khalezov.mp3
ReplyDeleteMy 2 cents:
ReplyDeleteMr Fox appears to be just another 9/11 "scientist" whose "research" and "proofs", involved the use of photographic and video evidence that has never been thoroughly examined for authenticity beforehand, either by himself, or by someone with a background in that particular skill.
These photos/videos used by Mr Fox have instead, for unstated reasons, and in direct violation of the standard scientific methodology/protocol, been automatically assumed to be genuine right from the beginning of his 9/11 "investigations".
THIS BEHAVIOR EXHIBITS A COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, IN MY OPINION.
Mr Fox , no differently from the other 9/11 "scientists" , is in total denial of standard scientific protocol in his ongoing initial unjustifiable assumption regarding the authenticity of the photographs and video clips he has used to formulate his hypothesis, no differently than has Judy Wood:
http://www.onebornfrees911researchreview.blogspot.com/2013/04/911-scams-junk-science-of-dr-judy-wood_6336.html
, and Richard Hall:
http://www.onebornfrees911researchreview.blogspot.com/2012/11/total-911-video-fakery-vs-richard-halls.html
This is not science, but pure fantasy/speculation on the part of these three "scientists" [Fox, Wood, Hall] , and the other 9/11 "scientists" [i.e. Jones and Khalezov].
There are probably even more of these clowns out there in the woodwork too , it never ends :-)
regards obf.
OBF,
DeleteDid you actually listen to this show and view the blog post Jim Fetzer Real Deal Appearance 3/25/13: Evidence of Ternary Fission at Ground Zero that accompanies it? The purpose of this show was to demonstrate that the USGS DUST SAMPLES prove that NUCLEAR FISSION occurred at Ground Zero. No video or photographic evidence is required to prove ternary fission occurred at Ground Zero.
Please site the time of the interview where I state that videos and photographs are required to prove nuclear fission.
Are you stating that nuclear fission at Ground Zero is pure fantasy/speculation?
Are you denying that pyroclastic dust clouds covered Lower Manhattan on 9/11?
Judy Wood's whole non-theory relies on photographic evidence.
Ed Ward, Jeff Prager and myself base our case on USGS dust samples and the DOE water sample evidence. Do not lump us in with Judy Wood and Steve Jones.
And who appointed you the sole arbiter of which videos and photographs are faked and which aren't?
Moron.
"Amidst the current political drive for legalizing gay marriage and banning assault weapons"
ReplyDeleteF-that perverse "current political drive." So-called "gay" marriage should be banned and so-called "assault weapons" (personal defense weapons when fed/state/gov agents possess them) should remain legal.
Don said:
ReplyDelete"Jim interviewed Khalezov a couple of years ago. 150 kt nukes 100 meters deep at Ground Zero is preposterous."
Yeah sure, Don, "preposterous." Just like the molten steel and fires burning for several weeks at ground zero caused by normal fires several stories above. Sure thing, pal. Give my regards to Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
WLP,
DeleteGreat job picking up on all the points raised in the interview! Especially the part where I talked about how the underground nukes caused elevated temperatures at Ground Zero for 6 months!
Seriously do you know how big a 150 kt nuke blast is? Check out the HYDESim simulator. The bomb that flattened Hiroshima was 16 kt. What would 450 kt of nukes done to NY/NJ?
DUH!!!