What's new

SCIENCE OF 9/11

B

Banglar Bir

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Messages
7,805
Reaction score
-3
Country
United States
Location
United States
http://www.ae911truth.org/gallery/evidence.html
logo.png



EVIDENCE
On September 11, 2001, the three worst structural failures in modern history took place when World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7 suffered complete and rapid destruction.

In the aftermath of the tragedy, most members of the architecture and engineering community, as well as the general public, assumed that the buildings’ destruction had occurred as a result of the airplane impacts and fires. This view was reinforced by subsequent federal investigations, culminating in FEMA’s 2002 Building Performance Study and in the 2005 and 2008 reports by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

Since 9/11, however, independent researchers around the world have assembled a large body of evidence that overwhelmingly refutes the notion that airplane impacts and fires caused the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7. This body of evidence, most of which FEMA and NIST omitted from their reports, instead supports the troubling conclusion that all three skyscrapers were destroyed in a process known as “controlled demolition,” where explosives and/or other devices are used to bring down a building.



KEY EVIDENCE

  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.


Articles by AE911Truth

The following articles discuss and analyze the evidence for explosive controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC 7. While most of these articles are intended for a general audience, the articles under “Technical Critiques of the NIST Reports” are geared toward readers with greater technical knowledge.



World Trade Center Building 7



Twin Towers



Technical Critiques of the NIST Reports



Critique of Popular Mechanics



The Psychology of 9/11



Other Technical Articles

 
.
15 hard facts abouy 9-11.jpg


15 HARD FACTS $1000 CHALLENGE

Amazing video is not even 5 minutes long and blows the official 9/11 theory out the water.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1064447083642568

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1064447083642568





US fears Russian publication of satellite photos of the tragedy of 9/11
SOURCETO PRAVDA.RU

FEBRUARY 7, 2015.

US experts believe that despite the fact that US-Russian relations have reached the worst point since the Cold War, Putin is delivered to Obama only minor troubles. Analysts believe that this "calm before the storm." Putin is going to hit once, but he was going to beat strongly. Russia is preparing the release of evidence of the involvement of the US government and intelligence to the September 11 attacks. The list of evidence includes satellite images, the website secrets of the fed. com.

Published content can prove the evil intent of the Government to the people of the United States and the successful manipulation of public opinion. Attack planned US government, but spent her proxy. Since the attack on America and the American people looked like an act of aggression of international terrorism.

The motive for the deception and murder of its own citizens were the oil interests of US state-owned corporations in the Middle East.

The evidence will be so convincing that they fall on the previous cases to manipulate public opinion in order to achieve selfish private interests.

Russia argues that America is no stranger to expose and kill their citizens to achieve a pretext for military intervention in a foreign country. In the case of "the September 11 attacks," the evidence will serve as satellite imagery.

If successful, the consequences of Putin's tactics will be for the US government's most unsightly. Trust in government is undermined, in the cities will begin mass demonstrations, passing in the uprising, and paint a picture of American analysts.

And as the United States will look at the world political arena? The validity of the position of America as a leader in the fight against international terrorism will be undermined than immediately take advantage of rogue states and Islamic terrorists.

Do not be confused by such unsightly scenario, the actual development of the situation could be much worse, experts warn. http://www.pravda.ru/news/world/northamerica/usacanada/07-02-2015/1247485-0/





Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report
The following content is from an in-depth investigation of the conspiracy theories surround the attacks of 9/11, which was published in the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics. That cover story was expanded and published in August 2006 as a book titled Debunking 9/11 Myths. False Witness: Conspiracy theorists claim this photo "proves" the 9/11 attacks were a U.S. military operation.

From the moment the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?

Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.

Background

The 9/11 Lies Are Out There: Editor's Notes
Reasonable people are entitled to wish that our government had been better prepared and more alert. But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth—and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.
By James Meigs

Feb 3, 2005

http://www.popularmechanics.com/911-myths




Introduction

--> | Podcast | Book | FAQ | Sources

The Planes

Where's The Pod? | No Stand-Down Order | Flight 175's Windows | Intercepts Not Routine

The World Trade Center

Widespread Damage | "Melted" Steel | Puffs of Dust |Seismic Spikes | WTC 7 Collapse

The Pentagon

Big Plane, Small Holes | Intact Windows | Flight 77 Debris

Flight 93

The White Jet | Roving Engine | Indian Lake | F-16 Pilot

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion," the great Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York was fond of saying. "He is not entitled to his own facts."


It has been 10 years since the September 11 attacks. In that time, the American people have questioned why we were caught off guard and have demanded to know the whole story behind the events of that terrible day. But as a society we accept the basic premise that a group of Islamist terrorists hijacked four airplanes and turned them into weapons against us.

Sadly, the noble search for truth is now being hijacked by a growing army of conspiracy theorists. A few of these skeptics make a responsible effort to sift through the mountain of information, but most ignore all but a few stray details they think support their theories. In fact, many conspiracy advocates demonstrate a maddening double standard. They distrust every bit of the mainstream account of 9/11, yet happily embrace the flimsiest evidence to promote their wildest notions: that Osama bin Laden attacked the United States with help from the CIA; that the hijacked planes weren't commercial jets, but military aircraft, cruise missiles or remote-control drones; that the World Trade Center buildings were professionally demolished.

These 9/11 conspiracy theories, long popular abroad, are gradually -- though more quietly -- seeping into mainstream America. Allegations of U.S. complicity in the attacks have become standard fare on talk radio and among activists on both the extreme left and the extreme right of the political spectrum.

ASSAULT ON THE TRUTH: Three and a half years after 9/11, conspiracy theorists are trying to rewrite history.

Don't get me wrong: Healthy skepticism is a good thing. Nobody should take everything they hear -- from the government, the media or anybody else -- at face value. But in a culture shaped by Oliver Stone movies and "X-Files" episodes, it is apparently getting harder for simple, hard facts to hold their own against elaborate, shadowy theorizing.

Fortunately, facts can be checked. For our special report, PM compiled a list of the 16 most common claims made by conspiracy theorists, assertions that are at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario. These claims all involve fields that are part of PM's core expertise -- structural engineering, aviation, military technology and science.

We assembled a team of reporters and researchers, including professional fact checkers and the editors of PM, and methodically analyzed all 16 conspiracy claims. We interviewed scores of engineers, aviation experts, military officials, eyewitnesses and members of the investigative teams who have held the wreckage of the attacks in their own hands. We pored over photography, maps, blueprints, aviation logs and transcripts. In every single instance, we found that the facts used by conspiracy theorists to support their fantasies were mistaken, misunderstood or deliberately falsified.

Reasonable people are entitled to wish that our government had been better prepared and more alert. But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth -- and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.

Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.

To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM Editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.

In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.
 
.
Amazing video is not even 5 minutes long and blows the official 9/11 theory out the water.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1064447083642568

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1064447083642568





US fears Russian publication of satellite photos of the tragedy of 9/11
SOURCETO PRAVDA.RU

FEBRUARY 7, 2015.

US experts believe that despite the fact that US-Russian relations have reached the worst point since the Cold War, Putin is delivered to Obama only minor troubles. Analysts believe that this "calm before the storm." Putin is going to hit once, but he was going to beat strongly. Russia is preparing the release of evidence of the involvement of the US government and intelligence to the September 11 attacks. The list of evidence includes satellite images, the website secrets of the fed. com.

Published content can prove the evil intent of the Government to the people of the United States and the successful manipulation of public opinion. Attack planned US government, but spent her proxy. Since the attack on America and the American people looked like an act of aggression of international terrorism.

The motive for the deception and murder of its own citizens were the oil interests of US state-owned corporations in the Middle East.

The evidence will be so convincing that they fall on the previous cases to manipulate public opinion in order to achieve selfish private interests.

Russia argues that America is no stranger to expose and kill their citizens to achieve a pretext for military intervention in a foreign country. In the case of "the September 11 attacks," the evidence will serve as satellite imagery.

If successful, the consequences of Putin's tactics will be for the US government's most unsightly. Trust in government is undermined, in the cities will begin mass demonstrations, passing in the uprising, and paint a picture of American analysts.

And as the United States will look at the world political arena? The validity of the position of America as a leader in the fight against international terrorism will be undermined than immediately take advantage of rogue states and Islamic terrorists.

Do not be confused by such unsightly scenario, the actual development of the situation could be much worse, experts warn. http://www.pravda.ru/news/world/northamerica/usacanada/07-02-2015/1247485-0/





Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report
The following content is from an in-depth investigation of the conspiracy theories surround the attacks of 9/11, which was published in the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics. That cover story was expanded and published in August 2006 as a book titled Debunking 9/11 Myths. False Witness: Conspiracy theorists claim this photo "proves" the 9/11 attacks were a U.S. military operation.

From the moment the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?

Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.

Background

The 9/11 Lies Are Out There: Editor's Notes
Reasonable people are entitled to wish that our government had been better prepared and more alert. But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth—and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.
By James Meigs

Feb 3, 2005





Introduction

--> | Podcast | Book | FAQ | Sources

The Planes

Where's The Pod? | No Stand-Down Order | Flight 175's Windows | Intercepts Not Routine

The World Trade Center

Widespread Damage | "Melted" Steel | Puffs of Dust |Seismic Spikes | WTC 7 Collapse

The Pentagon

Big Plane, Small Holes | Intact Windows | Flight 77 Debris

Flight 93

The White Jet | Roving Engine | Indian Lake | F-16 Pilot

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion," the great Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York was fond of saying. "He is not entitled to his own facts."


It has been 10 years since the September 11 attacks. In that time, the American people have questioned why we were caught off guard and have demanded to know the whole story behind the events of that terrible day. But as a society we accept the basic premise that a group of Islamist terrorists hijacked four airplanes and turned them into weapons against us.

Sadly, the noble search for truth is now being hijacked by a growing army of conspiracy theorists. A few of these skeptics make a responsible effort to sift through the mountain of information, but most ignore all but a few stray details they think support their theories. In fact, many conspiracy advocates demonstrate a maddening double standard. They distrust every bit of the mainstream account of 9/11, yet happily embrace the flimsiest evidence to promote their wildest notions: that Osama bin Laden attacked the United States with help from the CIA; that the hijacked planes weren't commercial jets, but military aircraft, cruise missiles or remote-control drones; that the World Trade Center buildings were professionally demolished.

These 9/11 conspiracy theories, long popular abroad, are gradually -- though more quietly -- seeping into mainstream America. Allegations of U.S. complicity in the attacks have become standard fare on talk radio and among activists on both the extreme left and the extreme right of the political spectrum.

ASSAULT ON THE TRUTH: Three and a half years after 9/11, conspiracy theorists are trying to rewrite history.

Don't get me wrong: Healthy skepticism is a good thing. Nobody should take everything they hear -- from the government, the media or anybody else -- at face value. But in a culture shaped by Oliver Stone movies and "X-Files" episodes, it is apparently getting harder for simple, hard facts to hold their own against elaborate, shadowy theorizing.

Fortunately, facts can be checked. For our special report, PM compiled a list of the 16 most common claims made by conspiracy theorists, assertions that are at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario. These claims all involve fields that are part of PM's core expertise -- structural engineering, aviation, military technology and science.

We assembled a team of reporters and researchers, including professional fact checkers and the editors of PM, and methodically analyzed all 16 conspiracy claims. We interviewed scores of engineers, aviation experts, military officials, eyewitnesses and members of the investigative teams who have held the wreckage of the attacks in their own hands. We pored over photography, maps, blueprints, aviation logs and transcripts. In every single instance, we found that the facts used by conspiracy theorists to support their fantasies were mistaken, misunderstood or deliberately falsified.

Reasonable people are entitled to wish that our government had been better prepared and more alert. But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth -- and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.

Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.

To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM Editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.

In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.
 
.
Former NIST Employee Speaks Out, Says Building 7 Investigation Bogus, Govt ‘Denied Evidence’
Baran Hines November 30, 2016

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/fo...owser&utm_campaign=pushfeeds&utm_content=push

A former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has stepped forward and criticized the government agency for ignoring the scientific errors found in its report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) during the September 11, 2001, attacks. Peter Ketcham, who spent almost fifteen years working at NIST, described how the flawed investigation methods were significantly different from the normal standards used by NIST, in a letter to the editor of the respected Europhysics News magazine. Ketcham’s letter was published in the November 2016 issue and comes just months after the magazine’s August 2016 report examining the Building 7 collapse in detail, which has been downloaded over 350,000 times according to the website.

Peter Ketcham was a contributor to numerous scientific papers during his 14 years as a part of the High Performance Systems and Services Division and later the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division. Ketcham wrote that he felt compelled to speak out about the NIST WTC 7 investigation after reading the report for the first time in August 2016 and comparing the results with the conventional criticism from other professionals. The NIST report on WTC 7 was published in August 2008, more than 6 years after the attacks, and it concludes that the building collapsed after structural failure due to fires caused by damage from debris when the Twin Towers collapsed earlier in the day.

The root problem with the WTC Building 7 report is that NIST could not perform a definitive study under common standards of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) because it lacked the physical evidence. Most of the structural steel was removed and melted down beginning within days after September 11, and some beams were stolen as reported by Telegraph. NIST only had access to about 150 smaller pieces of steel, called coupons, cut from the whole sections of structural steel beams.

Due to the lack of remaining evidence, NIST instead generated computer models of the building’s structure to test collapse theories using simulated fires to recreate the conditions prior to failure. The conclusions of the report have questioned for these reasons by thousands of physicists, engineers, and architects in the 15 years since the attacks, as documented by the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911).

The inconclusive methods used for the report are what led Ketcham to speak out after watching documentaries which criticized the report’s conclusions. He noted in his letter that he was “furious” with himself for not knowing and also at NIST for covering up the problems. “How could I have worked at NIST all those years and not have noticed this before,” Ketcham wrote.

“The NIST I knew was intellectually open, non-defensive, and willing to consider competing explanations. The more I investigated, the more apparent it became that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, dismissing, and denying the evidence. Among the most egregious examples is the explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 as an elaborate sequence of unlikely events culminating in the almost symmetrical total collapse of a steel-frame building into its own footprint at free-fall acceleration,” Ketcham wrote.

The main pre-determined conclusion which Ketcham refers to is the theory created to explain why the 47-story building fell to the ground in about 12 seconds, which suggests the building suffered catastrophic failure in a short amount of time. NIST’s WTC 7 report concludes that fires led to the thermal expansion of long-span steel beams which supported the floors, causing one beam on the 13th floor to fall off of its seat. The report claims part of the 13th floor collapsed, triggering a chain reaction of floors failing around one specific vertical support column, which caused the building to fall in on itself.

NIST used computer modeling to generate the experimental environment from Building 7’s construction plans. However, professionals have criticized NIST because they have not released the models to the public for peer review. The models and methods have been questioned in many ways. However, the initial cause of the collapse receives the most scrutiny as researchers proved NIST did not accurately model the steel’s connection at the stated point of initial failure. NIST left out multiple smaller design elements shown in the construction plans which would have built a stronger connection in the computer model.

The resulting model simulation was released in a video by NIST. However, it shows the beam that failed is twisting in ways that are different from the physical properties of the steel’s connection. Researchers have shown that the NIST theory is significantly different from the possible sequences based on the construction plans and video evidence for multiple reasons.

NIST’s report on Building 7 has generated an increasing amount of controversy in academic circles and led to AE911 funding a study using computer models, which is still ongoing at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. Researchers and activists have also been working to investigate the inconsistent methods.

 
.
Akemy Ben Mandy

-pz5JhcNQ9P.png



The lies of the Iraq war resulted in the murder and displacement of millions of people. What we have today is not watch dog media but lap dogs.

Salina Yussof D corporates n bankers created d problem, they blamed it on ISLAM n muslims n their solution is to invade destroy displace n murder millions of Innocent Palestinians n Syrians!!! Then u hv so so many brainwashed idiot americans swallowing all their craps n lies n think they're great free americans!!! Wen are u idiots ever gonna wake up????

Ajit Aim Because US has less intelligent people . . ? ! : )

9-11.jpg
 
. .
I explored a source named debunking911.com once and was impressed by the magnitude and quality of material in it that debunk each conspiracy theory related to 9/11 in an extremely convincing manner. Unfortunately, that website is down at the moment, due to unknown reasons. I hope that it is restored soon. Luckily, some of its content is on YouTube and accessible. Here is a footage from this source that debunks claims of controlled demolition with convincing evidence and a bit of common sense:


Here is an independent footage of collapse of WTC-7; it contains live evidence of structural failure.


Here is a much closer look at WTC-7 before its collapse. You can see that the building had caught fire and it was spreading at a rapid pace:


Those fires caused the collapse of that building.

Some people have gone too far to blame American government for this tragedy. They present half-bakes theories to support there case. These people are thirsty for personal fame; facts be damned.

American government can be held accountable for negligence at maximum. However, to blame it for orchestrating a tragedy of this magnitude, and in the largest financial hub of the world, is disingenuous.
 
Last edited:
.
One thing about conspiracy theories is that they never go away regardless of how much evidence you show. To this day, people still believe the assassination of President Kennedy was some vast conspiracy. Same with 9/11. It will be here forever and ever...as will this thread.
 
.
How Did They Know? Examining the Foreknowledge of Building 7’s Destruction
Click to expand...
No mystery here, though some explanation is in order. The structural strengths and weaknesses of the Twin Towers were subjects of discussion pre-9/11 in one of my engineering classes. It was probably in the textbook. I remember quite explicitly the professor's statement that the TT could take a hit from the small aircraft that were around when it was designed but not the larger ones that were on the market when it was completed. And if it was used in my engineering class as an example, there's no reason to think it wasn't used in others. The WTC had already been attacked once before in 1993, and at least one of the 9/11 terrorists had graduated in architecture.
 
.
LeGenD said:
I explored a source named debunking911.com once and was impressed by the magnitude and quality of material in it that debunk each conspiracy theory related to 9/11 in an extremely convincing manner. Unfortunately, that website is down at the moment, due to unknown reasons. I hope that it is restored soon. Luckily, some of its content is on YouTube and accessible. Here is a footage from this source that debunks claims of controlled demolition with convincing evidence and a bit of common sense:


Here is an independent footage of collapse of WTC-7; it contains live evidence of structural failure.


Here is a much closer look at WTC-7 before its collapse. You can see that the building had caught fire and it was spreading at a rapid pace:


Those fires caused the collapse of that building.

Some people have gone too far to blame American government for this tragedy. They present half-bakes theories to support there case. These people are thirsty for personal fame; facts be damned.

American government can be held accountable for negligence at maximum. However, to blame it for orchestrating a tragedy of this magnitude, and in the largest financial hub of the world, is disingenuous.
Click to expand...

It's amazing how people say "It's obvious that it was a controlled demolition". Yet as your video shows controlled demolitions cause some seriously loud explosions as they occur. Yet video with sound footage from right at the base of the towers as they are falling you hear nothing. Of course maybe the military has silent explosives!!! Yeah that's it!!
 
.
cloud4000 said:
One thing about conspiracy theories is that they never go away regardless of how much evidence you show. To this day, people still believe the assassination of President Kennedy was some vast conspiracy. Same with 9/11. It will be here forever and ever...as will this thread.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree and they always require an ever expanding cast of villains to make them work. Conspiracy nuts use the opposite of the scientific method. Instead of gathering and evaluating evidence that will lead them to a conclusion, they start with the conclusion that they already want so desperately to believe in and then pick a bit here and there to satisfy their belief.

Just like the JFK assassination. Virtually every conspiracy theory has to have Oswald as a shooter or a patsy, as some part of the assassination. There is simply too much evidence of his involvement to ignore. Just one, single, point; Oswald only got a job at the Texas School Depository building because when he was visiting his estranged wife and kids that were staying with friends, some neighbours from down the block happened to be by for coffee and heard Oswald complaining that he might have a job at the airport, but would have to commute a long way to get there from his boarding house. The neighbours had a relative who worked at the Depository building, much closer to Oswald's room, and suggested they could get him a job...which he took advantage of and got.

It sounds insignificant except that it renders 99.9% of all JFK conspiracy theories to be impossible. How could any conspiracy theory work when Oswald got his job with his prime sniper's position, (before President Kennedy's team even planned his rout for approval or even finalized what Texas cities they would visit.), by a shear fluke of meeting total strangers, who were investigated by the FBI, police, reporters, etc., and were just a typical Dallas couple living in a suburban neighbourhood?

The answer is, no conspiracy theory can make that work..which is why in those theories you will never read or hear of that fact. It's........inconvenient to the conspiracy nut.

It's the same with 9/11 theories. They don't like to see or read interviews and stories with family members who died in those planes, who talked with their loved one's who described in chilling detail, what was happening to them. They don't like to see or read stories of the survivors and first responders of those in the WTC buildings, because they know what happened to them and it was no controlled demolition. Now of course, one can always find the "outlier" exception just as you will find a few who swear they saw a gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas, but the overwhelming evidence in both tragedies is that things usually are just as they appear to be. An organization called Al-Qaeda, planned this operation for some time, got their terrorist cell in place, and carried it out. As you suggest, there will always be people who need to believe something else. Who's whole world view depends on an alternate theory, but life and death are far simpler than their make-believe world.
 
Last edited:
.
The Major Purveyor of ‘Fake News’ is the CIA-Corporate Complex
By Wayne Madsen
Global Research, December 01, 2016
Strategic Culture Foundation 28 November 2016
Region: USA
Theme: Intelligence, Media Disinformation
In-depth Report: U.S. Elections






cia-400x266.jpg


http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-major-purveyor-of-fake-news-is-the-cia-corporate-complex/5559619

The US corporate media, its strings pulled by the modern version of the Central Intelligence Agency’s old Operation MOCKINGBIRD media influencing operation, is laughably accusing Russia of generating «fake news» to influence the outcome of the American presidential election. In a November 24, 2016, article in the CIA-connected Washington Post, reporter Craig Timberg reported: «Russia’s increasingly sophisticated propaganda machinery — including thousands of botnets, teams of paid human ‘trolls,’ and networks of websites and social-media accounts — echoed and amplified right-wing sites across the Internet as they portrayed Clinton as a criminal hiding potentially fatal health problems and preparing to hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers». The Post’s article is worthy of the CIA-generated propaganda spun by the paper at the height of the Cold War-era MOCKINGBIRD.

Contrary to what the Post reported about right-wing accounts of Hillary Clinton’s ties to «a shadowy cabal of global financiers, the vanquished Democratic presidential nominee and her husband, via the slush fund known as the Clinton Foundation, was closely linked to a variety of «shadowy global financiers», including those who serve as executives of Goldman Sachs and J P Morgan Chase. The Clinton cabal was more at home in the gatherings of the secretive syndicates of the Bilderberg Group, Bohemian Club, and the Council on Foreign Relations than they were at labor union and student meetings.

The Post was clearly fed its poorly-sourced and anecdotal-based article on Russian «fake news» by the usual suspects of Russia-bashers and CIA mouthpieces, including The Daily Beast; former US ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul; Rand Corporation; George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs; the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia; and a website called «PropOrNot.com» or «Is It Propaganda Or Not?», which is linked not only to George Soros-funded anti-Russia websites but also to conveyors of CIA disinformation like Snopes.com. The Post article is nothing more than an advertisement for PropOrNot.com, which bills itself as a «Propaganda Identification Service, since 2016».

The media influencing operation targeting Russia appears to be an outgrowth of the US State Department’s Counter-Information Team of the Bureau of International Information Programs. The team, established under the George W. Bush administration, was a resurrection of the Cold War-era US Information Agency’s (USIA) Bureau of Information, which was designed to counter «Soviet» disinformation. The truth of the matter was that many of the news reports from TASS, Radio Moscow, and Novosti, branded as «Soviet disinformation» by USIA, were, in fact, truthful reports on CIA covert operations, including political assassinations, biological warfare, and weapons and narcotics smuggling. Today, the media mouthpieces for the CIA and Soros replace Soviet-era media outlets as their main targets for derision with RT television and Sputnik News.

In 2013, Amazon signed a $600 million contract with the CIA to provide cloud computing services to the agency. Amazon’s owner, Jeff Bezos, also happens to own The Washington Post. Considering the long close relationship between the newspaper and the CIA, the Post is the last media outlet that should be writing about fake news. In 1981, the Post published a fake news story about a 7-year old heroin addict named «Jimmy». Not only was the story fake, but the Post’s assistant managing editor, Bob Woodward of Watergate infamy, submitted the fake Jimmy story to the Pulitzer Prize award committee. The Post reporter who wrote the piece, Janet Cooke, did receive a Pulitzer but had to return it after the story was deemed to be fake. Cooke was fired by the paper but Woodward, a longtime US intelligence mouthpiece, kept his job. So much for The Washington Post and fake news.

In its piece on «fake news», the Post linked to a «blacklist» of alleged «fake news sites» maintained by the mysterious PropOrNot.com. A November 25, 2016, article in Fortune magazine by Mathew Ingram rightfully criticized the Post’s reliance on PropOrNot.com for its story. Ingram wrote: «PropOrNot’s Twitter account, which tweets and retweets anti-Russian sentiments from a variety of sources, has only existed since August of this year. And an article announcing the launch of the group on its website is dated last month».

It is very likely that PropOrNot.com is a creation of The Washington Post’s cloud computing business partner, the CIA. PropOrNot.com calls itself a group of «concerned American citizens with a wide range of backgrounds and expertise, including professional experience in computer science, statistics, public policy, and national security affairs». There are more than enough CIA employees who possess such «professional experience».

PropOrNot.com published a list that would make disgraced Senator Joseph McCarthy, the purveyor of «red lists» of Communists in the 1950s, very proud. PropOrNot.com lists 200 sites, which it claims are «routine peddlers of Russian propaganda». On the list are Strategic Culture.org, globalresearch.ca, drudgereport.com, counterpunch.com, wikileaks.com, wikileaks.org, wikispooks.com. zerohedge.com, and truthdig.com. RT.comand Sputniknews.com also appear on the list. Not on the list are media outlets that have notoriously engaged in fake news reporting. These include The New York Times, USA Today, NBC News, CBS News, The New Republic, CNN, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Outrageously, the blacklist includes USSLIBERTYVETERANS.org, a website maintained by survivors of the willful and unprovoked 1967 Israeli air and naval attack on the US intelligence ship «USS Liberty» in the eastern Mediterranean. The attack killed 34 American Navy sailors and intelligence personnel and the website, in part, is dedicated to their memory. The inclusion of the Liberty veterans’ website strongly suggests the involvement of pro-Israeli shills, all neoconservatives, who nest within a number non-profit think tanks in Washington, DC and may be associated with PropOrNot.com.

The inclusion of some white nationalist «hate sites» on the PropOrNot.com list is reminiscent of the tactics of the misnamed «Southern Poverty Law Center» (SPLC) in Montgomery, Alabama. The center is neither «Southern» or suffering from poverty since it has $175 million in the bank and owns two buildings in Montgomery, both of which have been dubbed by critics as «Poverty Palaces». The Washington Post often quotes SPLC officials in attacking president-elect Donald Trump and his advisers.

PropOrNot.com utilizes a very subjective methodology to come up with its black list: «it does not matter whether the sites listed here are being knowingly directed and paid by Russian intelligence officers, or whether they even knew they were echoing Russian propaganda at any particular point: If they meet these criteria, they are at the very least acting as bona-fide ‘useful idiots’ of the Russian intelligence services, and are worthy of further scrutiny». And who does PropOrNot.com propose for placing other websites on its blacklist and putting them under «further scrutiny?» Perhaps they want the CIA, National Security Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, or US Cyber Command to engage in harassment in violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Other alleged «Russian propaganda» websites included on the blacklist are infowars.com, intrepidreport.com, intellihub.com, informationclearinghouse.info, corbettreport.com, moonofalabama.org, floridasunpost.com, opednews.com, oilgeopolitics.com, gatesofvienna.net, blackagendareport.com, mintpressnews.com, ahtribune.com, thefreethoughtproject.com, consortiumnews.com, washingtonsblog.com, asia-pacificresearch.com, filmsforaction.com (which advances the rights of Native Americans), thirdworldtraveler.com, and activistpost.com.

Many of the blacklisted websites have something in common: they supported Trump for president. The Washington Post heartily endorsed Hillary Clinton for president, which makes the blacklist appear to be, in part, nothing more than sour grapes on the part of the Post and its unnamed «experts» working for PropOrNot.com.

PropOrNot.com also managed to salt its list with a few obvious fake news websites, including www.superstation95.com, which purports to be a New York FM radio station; baltimoregazette.com; and veteranstoday.com. This has the effect of tarnishing the legitimate sites on the list by associating them with fabulists and cyber-grifters.

Two members of the Ronald Reagan administration, Director of the Office of Management and Budget David Stockman (davidstockmanscontracorner.com) and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy Paul Craig Roberts (paulcraigroberts.org) find their websites on the blacklist. Also blacklisted is former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (ronpaulinstitute.org).

The blacklist highlighted by The Washington Post appears to be more of a censorship target list developed for the not-to-be Hillary Clinton administration. For the Post to engage in blacklisting other press outlets merely because it does not care for their news content is shameful beyond belief. If any outlet should be ordered to cease its operations for not acting in the public interest, it is The Washington Post for grossly distorting the news and misleading the public from the end of World War II to the present day.

If one wants «fake news» the intelligence-corporate complex is the place to go. From corporate media reports about bogus Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the Pentagon’s hiring of British public relations firm Bell Pottinger to create fake news stories about terrorist attacks in Iraq to the use of a group called the «White Helmets» that pumps out fake stories regarding the Syrian government, the corporate media is full of «fake news» fed to it by an omnipresent US intelligence-run psychological warfare infrastructure.

The original source of this article is Strategic Culture Foundation
Copyright © Wayne Madsen, Strategic Culture Foundation, 2016
 
Last edited:
.
US Govt Just Legalized Operation Mockingbird — FBI Can Now Impersonate The Media

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/09...ockingbird-fbi-can-now-impersonate-media.html

TOPICS:Claire BernishFBIMedia

SEPTEMBER 23, 2016

By Claire Bernish

FBI agents conducting undercover investigations have now been given the green light to impersonate journalists, the Justice Department determined last week — effectively legalizing the government’s most notorious propaganda program, Operation Mockingbird.

Last Thursday, the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General published what’s become the subject of outrage for journalists, civil and constitutional rights advocates, and legal experts — “A Review of the FBI’s Impersonation of a Journalist in a Criminal Investigation.”

Allowing agents to infiltrate media organizations for any reason threatens to utterly undermine public trust, kill the very concept of journalistic integrity, and throttle the flow of information from sources and whistleblowers concerned with the legitimacy of journalists they contact.

As shocking as the finding sounds, it only validates the practice — in fact, the report centers around a case from 2007 in which an FBI agent pretended to be an Associated Press journalist to identify an elusive suspect online. At the time, the FBI “did not prohibit agents from impersonating journalists or from posing as a member of a news organization,” the report states.

But even the ubiquitous, mainstream AP — whose outlet became an unwitting pawn for the agency — sharply criticized the DOJ’s announcement.

“The Associated Press is deeply disappointed by the Inspector General’s findings, which effectively condone the FBI’s impersonation of an AP journalist in 2007,” Associated Press Vice President Paul Colford said in a statement cited by US News. “Such action compromises the ability of a free press to gather the news safely and effectively and raises serious constitutional concerns.”


In 2007, a high school student near Seattle emailed a series of bomb threats to his school, but his use of proxy servers thwarted police efforts to learn his identity — so they asked for assistance from the FBI’s Northwest Cybercrime Task Force.

Agents devised a plan, and, as the Intercept summarized, “An undercover agent sent the student email impersonating an editor for the Associated Press. The email included links to a fake news site designed to look like the Seattle Times.”

When the student followed the links, malware revealing his actual location installed itself.

It wasn’t until an ACLU technologist accidentally discovered copies of the bogus news stories in 2014 — buried in pages the Electronic Frontier Foundation obtained from the FBI via a Freedom of Information Act request in 2011 — that the plot to pose as journalists came to light, generating massive controversy and consternation.

Furthering the contempt, FBI Director James Comey penned a letter to the editor of the New York Times defending the agency’s impersonation, dismissively stating “we do use deception at times to catch crooks, but we are acting responsibly and legally.”

The Associated Press and Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press didn’t believe either the veracity or legality of Comey’s statement, and sued the FBI to disclose documents relating to the practice — ultimately obtaining a redacted memo in which the agency acknowledged the agents violated the FBI’s own guidelines. However, the memo also stated that violation, under the circumstances, was not “unreasonable.”

A review was launched by the OIG, but Thursday’s conclusion simply confirmed the FBI’s previous finding it had done nothing wrong — and may proceed with future journalistic deception.

How to Disappear Off the Grid Completely (Ad)
In June this year, the FBI firmed up its rules for when an agent can pretend to be a journalist — but the added rules haven’t quelled the ire.

As long as agents receive approval from the head of the FBI field office, the Undercover Review Committee, and the deputy director of the FBI — who then must meet with the deputy attorney general — they are free to pose as journalists during undercover investigations.

“We believe the new interim policy on undercover activities that involve FBI employees posing as members of the news media is a significant improvement to FBI policies that existed,” states the inspector general.

But no one outside the FBI or DOJ’s Office of Inspector General who grasps the grievous threat to free speech and press — or the potential slippery slope law enforcement co-opting the media represents — agrees anything short of an abolishment on the practice could be acceptable.

“The FBI guidelines adopted in 2016 in response to this incident still permit the FBI to impersonate news organizations and other third parties without their consent in certain cases, and fail to address the host of other dangers associated with FBI hacking,” Neema Singh Guliani, ACLU legislative counsel, said in a statement cited by US News.

“The Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press is deeply troubled by today’s disclosure,” David Boardman, RCFP steering committee chairman, wrote in a statement last Thursday, “that the FBI believes that there is a place in this country for federal agents to impersonate journalists. Such a policy can seriously damage the public’s trust in its free press and the ability of journalists to hold government accountable. We urge the Justice Department to take seriously the need for reform and the importance of protecting the integrity of the newsgathering process.”

Anyone with cursory knowledge of the U.S. government’s nefarious programs to control its citizenry will undoubtedly see similarities between the FBI’s fake journalism plot and the post-World War II CIA propaganda campaign, Operation Mockingbird.

To ensure support for its operations and views, the CIA clandestinely recruited American journalists and media outlets, funded the creation of student and cultural organizations, launched purely propaganda-based print media, and, ultimately, worked its way into political campaigns and employed similar methods abroad.



Mainstream outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post, CBS, and many others, actively and willingly disseminated propaganda disguised as news — through suppression, censorship, and selective focus, etc. — in the interest of the government.

Mockingbird covertly influenced national opinion for years, nefariously planting the CIA’s narrative on the unwitting collective public mind before finally being at least partially exposed over a decade later. It wasn’t until a congressional investigation in 1975 the putative full extent of the program was revealed. Although the CIA claimed it would no longer recruit journalists and media organizations into its folds, Mockingbird has oft been rumored never to have stopped.

Besides the revelations in this article concerning the FBI, documents revealed the government actively tried to influence public thought about WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, in 2011.

It would seem Mockingbird endures to this day — and whatever premise the government claims as reason to become the American media — the public remains, for the large part, its oblivious, captive audience.

Claire Bernish writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.
 
.
That is what happens when someone spends too much time at the rear end of Internet . Person's mind rot and he starts blabbing about weird conspiracy theories , Illuminati , new world order , greater Israel , elder of zion etc etc etc .

hqdefault.jpg
 
.
9/11 Free Fall 10/9/14: Jeff Long– Operation Mockingbird insider

Published on Oct 11, 2014
Former member of Air Force Intelligence Jeff Long discusses his own involvement in Operation Mockingbird, the U.S. government’s disinformation campaigns, and how the government and media create the “official stories” behind events like 9/11.


9/11 - Anatomy of a Great Deception - Complete Version

vengencefrom1979
Published on Sep 16, 2014
More info at http://www.ae911truth.org/

Should you like to buy your own copy of 'Anatomy of a Great Deception' you can do so here: http://www.agdmovie.com/movies/the-an...

David Hooper's youtube page : https://www.youtube.com/user/TruthFig...

The Anatomy of a Great Deception is a quasi-political, spiritual docu-thriller following businessman-turned-filmmaker, David Hooper as he deals with the emotions of his own investigation into the events of 9/11. The fast pace and the filmmakers commentary on coping with the emotions involved in finding truth, sets the film apart. "Even though, I didn't know it at the time, work on this film started in February 2011. Back then I was a regular guy trying to live the American dream, with three kids and a wife, who was pregnant with number four!"

"It started with an innocent question about 9/11. And that lead to more innocent questions. And after a while, I completely changed my opinion of the official story of that day."

"That was a very hard time in my life. It felt like my world was turned upside down. I couldn't stop researching. I was unemployed. And I was running out of savings. I tried talking about it, but felt like no one was listening. At the time, my wife didn't even believe me . . . nor did my friends and family. No matter what I tried, nothing worked."

"So, to preserve my sanity and save my marriage, I began putting this film together. I had no idea any of this would ever happen because I simply made it for my wife, my sister and a couple of dear friends. I made it to speak to them directly, to get them to open their eyes. And it worked, because just all my friends and family that have seen it have changed their opinion about 9/11, maybe all by the time you read this!"

"As time went on, I realized there are millions of people, like me, who've had a hard time talking about the truth of 9/11 with people in our lives. As I further understood that and continued getting requests to see the film, it began to evolve into a bridge for all us, no matter where we stand on 9/11."

"Mostly, the film is meant to be an effective introduction to the controversies of 9/11 for those of us who still have no idea there are any controversies. If this issue is going to ever get into the spotlight, it'll need a catalyst and I hope this film can do it."

 
.

Similar threads

Pakistan Space Agency
Traitor Imran Khan found guilty in May 9 Jinnah House attack case, bail cancelled
Replies
0
Views
212
Pakistan Space Agency
Pakistan Space Agency
Mega_Man
After 9/11 pager bombing is the biggest terrorist attack and first in cyber terror attacks
2
Replies
18
Views
869
ThunderCat
ThunderCat
beijingwalker
US Steel, once a symbol of America’s economic might, is now for sale in the bargain bin
Replies
1
Views
416
beijingwalker
beijingwalker
P
Vivek Ramaswamy: I ‘don’t believe’ the 9/11 Commission report
Replies
3
Views
442
Azadkashmir
Azadkashmir
Menthol
Putin Ally's Ominous Threat of 'Nuclear' 9/11 Ahead of Attack's Anniversary
Replies
0
Views
374
Menthol
Menthol

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom