Indeed, gripped by fear (of Terrorists, nukes, germs) they think you might take away their security blanket that can include denial (aka ignorant bliss), or the remedy (war on terrorists, injections/masks for germs).
It never ceases to amaze me, how even when asking logical questions or seeing the evidence in front of them, many still find an excuse or wilfully ignore it. Cognitive dissonance is a huge problem.
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
And the 9/11 "truth" movement was installed to have people NOT count past three when discussing the destruction on 9/11.
WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?
The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the β9/11 truth movementβ never touch onβ¦
Great job Proton,it certainly stirred up your comment section as I would expect. I donβt watch a lot of TV anymore besides to check occasionally what the latest narrative scripts are that the six oβclock actors are reading. I was amused to hear that the lead actor of the Apprentice USA recently called for the renewed focus on nuclear weapons development .. everything old is new again in the trauma based game. Watch for Substack authors to emerge with advice on how to construct a fallout bunker modern style, Iodine salesmen will come out of the corners of the supplement area to make sure the normies are stocked up on βnatural remediesβ for the impending nuclear apocalypse along with a coupon for a discount on personal gieger counters when you purchase the Iodine monthly subscription. Last night I happened upon a documentary coincidentally titled βA Clockwork Shiningβ. Long story short it describes in depth the story of propaganda filmmaker Stanley Kubricks career, from his start with βLolitaβ about child sexuality, βA Clockwork Orangeβ the βShiningβ, Eyes Wide Shut,all trauma based MK ultra/Monarch/Masoonic operations. As well his alleged βmoon landingβ film is also discussed. Interesting content.. also interesting to note why they would release these bread crumbs a year or so ago. They want us to know what theyβre up to.. in plain sight, yet very few see it. The trauma based operations continue, unabated, adapted to a modern society. The first commenter on this post made an interesting observation about the prevalence of televisions everywhere nowβ¦ and as an addition how absolutely affordable they have become even for the higher end 4k models. A Remote Viewer for everyone in every room of your home, to keep the propaganda machine running!
One last thing β¦The weaponization of Bud Light is definitely under appreciated, if you recall when they rolled out the he/she her/him whatever they were spokesmodel a few years ago, normies brains melted faster than thermite in the 9/11 discussion LOL.
Thanks for the great article Proton, brilliant work that brightened my day!
And the Bud Light trans thing, yes yes. I was just making a play on word sounds on the "-ite" for something that obviously doesn't destroy buildings. Good addition Woody!
Thank you and gave Petra your comment in the thread below.
The, "where did the people go" is a very moving post. I've seen lots of that footage before and was able to handle all of it ok until the part on Elton where upon seeing the "falling man", he repeats twice, "the photo is a beautiful tragedy". Only someone with special dark affiliations would react that way.
"Trauma-based mind control" is pretty much what I've been calling the "shock treatment" or the "shock effect"; it has been, and is, used in a wide range of operations:
I grew up in the 1950s and 60s (b. 1950), and I don't recall ever hearing anything about "duck and cover" during those years. I learned to read in late 1956 (picking it up very quickly), and I don't recall reading anything about it either. DDT, the end of phonics, and other such things I DO remember.
As an Air Force brat, my father being on active duty again (after WWII) from 1954 onward, the only explanations I can think of are that my schools, all either Air Force dependent schools or DOD-reimbursed public schools (based upon how many brats were enrolled) saw no value in duck-and-cover, or it was a hoax, or it was regional. Although we lived in Alaska, California, Illinois, Missouri, Washington (state), and Misawa (Aomori Prefecture, Honshu) Japan (not in that order), during my school years. I'm not certain that I didn't miss any, but that's a few regions. Was it an east/south thing?
Or a hoax like kids running behind the sprayers and later becoming paralyzed, attributed to the polio virus? I saw the kids running behind the sprayer trucks -- I watched from a distance within in our housing area on our Air Force base in Alaska in 1956-7 (lots of mosquitos requiring after-school spraying along with the kids) -- and there were a few kids with their braces and crutches in my classes at our on-base dependent's school there. That much actually happened. But "duck and cover"? No recollection.
You may be right CM. I donβt remember that much either. I think they floated this campaign out to reify the threat, just like they did with terrorism and viruses. It became clear it wasnβt working because 1. people didnβt see the threat from it and 2. it later began to fuel anti-war sentiment. I just used it in the post to start off showing a silly propaganda tactic and catch your attention.
Here you can see some excerpts from history.com which is also still fueling the nuke narrative on us now. Iβm sure history.com is an Intel front.
βTeachers in Detroit sang songs, told stories and played records while the children were in the βrefuge area,β while a teacher in Massachusetts, decorated the school bomb shelter as a βreading den.β
The juxtaposition of that kind of imageryβlet's read a book and tell storiesβwith the horrors of an atomic bomb, this leads a lot of people then and now to say, I don't think this is going to work.
Studentsβ responses to civil defense drills in schools would later fuel antiwar and antinuclear activism, on the part of both outraged parents and the students themselves.β
Great article. Many of us have known for years that the official narrative of 9/11 was BS. But there have been so many differing theories about what DID happen. My conclusion is that it was a planned government/CIA operation, and the Bush/Cheney regime was part of it, as was Mossad. Exactly how they pulled it off the way they did can be debated. A new recent documentary I watched is Codex 9/11. It's a very well done summary backed up with evidence.
But yes, the scary part was how the normies just totally bought the propaganda told them by the TV. And how they accepted the "we got to go get them now" mind set. Then of course, they accepted the "Patriot Act" that was already in place to be voted on.
I've reached out to the creator via DM on X and Telegram, emailed him and left comments in his X posts, so that he can correct the misinformation in his piece, but all I get is crickets.
You want to watch and learn from the gold standard documentary covering the WTC, the hoodwinks at Shanksville and the PentaCON?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Thanks, yeah there may be a better link somewhere. The part I got from that site though was this about, 3, 6, and 9:
"The number nine was consecrated to the Spheres and the Muses. It is the sign of every circumference; because a circle or 360 degrees is equal to nine, that is to say, 3+6+0=9. Nevertheless, the ancients regarded this number with a sort of terror; they considered it a bad presage"
A 20-year memorial documentary produced by Chris Hampton, dedicated to exposing the real truth about what happened on 9/11 by referencing interesting numerological symbology...
You may have heard of "One World Or None", the book that the globalist satanic cabal published soon after the destruction of Japan to announce their intent to hold the world hostage...
Check out the names of the authors, a very instructive list.
I'm puzzled, PM. You know that the footage of the building destructions is faked and they pushed multiple streams of propaganda for how the buildings came down including fire, controlled demolition, DEWs, thermite and nukes?
Hi Petra, I stand by the info in the post and the links. Why don't you post your concerns to 9.11 Revisionist who made multiple comments here and see where that could lead? But yes, I am always open to some perturbation in explanations and do not guarantee that anything I have written is 100% without need for correction.
I'm sure we both agree that beyond the official "fire" the rather numerous methods of destruction have been manufactured as propaganda to have us disbelievers fragmented on the subject. So with your and others' support of DEWs and my and others' support of CD and Disbeliever X's support of nukes, etc we're fragmented exactly how the perps want us to be. It's a little galling, no, to be behaving in exactly the way they want us to, isn't it? But we cannot help it. You stand by DEWs, I stand by CD. They understand us better than we understand ourselves :).
I know you're not interested in further discussion, PM, and I'm not expecting a response but the implications of your question didn't occur to me until now so I'm answering it.
"Footage of ALL three building destructions is faked" is not necessarily the same as "ALL the footage of the three building destructions is faked", because "footage" on its own might mean only SOME footage.
However: if we see clear fakery of SOME footage, unless we have clear evidence of reality of the rest of the footage we have nothing to say that it is real and every reason to infer it is all fake. It's a bit similar to the "death and injury were faked" argument. I can't say with certainly that ALL death and injury were faked, however, what I can say with certainty is:
--- there is clear evidence of fakery of injury and death
--- there is no clear evidence of injury and death
thus I say death and injury were fake with the caveat that there may have been some that occurred.
With regard to the buildings, we have no verified evidence of DEWs bringing down buildings in action elsewhere so we have nothing to say that the buildings came down by DEWs if we can see that at least some of the footage is faked. We can't say, "What we see of the building destructions cannot be what all the other propaganda streams say (thermite, nukes, controlled demolition) and DEWs is the best fit," when we can see that at least some of the footage is faked and nothing to say any of it is real.
From my POV there is no visual evidence we can rely on to say what brought the buildings down. I say it was controlled demolition because:
1. CD is the only known way for high rise steel frame buildings to come down.
2. Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) is clearly involved in 9/11 and achieved three of its four world records in large demolition projects in the three years prior to 9/11.
3. Bringing down the towers by a method with no known precedence seems improbable in the extreme.
Ok thanks. You have some points, I keep telling you to ask Revisionist. I can tell you that lack of debris and lack of seismic thud rule out CD. About the vids, I have multiple friends and family some who escaped from WTC, who say dustification-looking destruction is what they saw on the ground that day. But true, what is 100%? The ML is also not 100%. You use inferences and indirect info/deductions.
πDid you notice that on every thread you need to have the last word? Challenge yourself to stop now or just say thanks and thatβs it. Iβve lot of other problems to solve(ｑο½₯Οο½₯ｑ)οΎβ‘
You asked a question and I answered it, PM. I've been there done that with Revisionist. He banned me from his site. You're the one putting forward the theory so I"m discussing it with you (or trying to) but as you don't wish to discuss it further i shall say not one word more at least not in your comments. I could say more in response to things you've just put forward but I won't. I don't really understand your need to curtail discussion regardless of how busy you are however i shall stop right here if that's what you want.
In principle I like how you apply your logic to questioning issues, however you tend to do it not thoroughly enough.
If you're going after CD thesis, you should be asking yourself what's the most obvious proof of such demolition? It's definitely the sound signature of an explosion, a thump that can be heard and sometimes felt. Since you're also implying that the TV footage can't be trusted, there's only one way you could confirm your thesis -by direct witnesses and their testimonies. I'm on tangent here, but there should be some 20-30 explosions heard or felt, signatures of the explosions strategically placed so that the towers would really collapse into its own footprint (as can be concluded by the fact that all the structures in near vicinity were in majority intact).
Then there's another issue with the CD thesis. If it was explosive that brought them down, there should be definitely larger blocks of material visible in the ruins after the dust settled. But there were no large blocks of material to be seen. This also implies nearby buildings would have been probably more damaged by the falling towers' pieces, which clearly didn't happen.
So how can you explain these two anomalies? In my reasoning, you can't. I've seen some YT videos in the past, where some individuals claimed to have heard a large explosion just before the towers collapsed. But there should definitely be more than just one or two heard to bring such large structure down. Right? So either they didn't hear them or the CD thesis collapses.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. Not knowing the details is actually irrelevant - the towers are definitely missing in the picture. And I think it is safe to conclude from there that the only conspiracy here is that of the US government against their own people (and consequently the entire world).
Thanks for your good logic Vexman. The only tweak I would make is that it is really, "The US govt in alliance with most every other govt as part of the one-world govt, that itself is controlled by a greater power structure, is against the common people of the world. The quest of this power structure is to change and control all the assets of the planet, including people themselves."
" ... signatures of the explosions strategically placed so that the towers would really collapse into its own footprint (as can be concluded by the fact that all the structures in near vicinity were in majority intact)."
As we know the footage is faked my guess is that the Twin Towers didn't come straight down as depicted but were toppled (at least slightly) into the (completely evacuated) WTC.
This thought came to me when I noticed the slight toppling of the top floors of the tallest building at Meena Plaza in Abu Dhabi.
Note: Now when I look at Meena Plaza it doesn't look as if there is toppling but in one video I watched it really did seem as if there was slight toppling and I think there is even if from some perspectives it doesn't look like it.
If they fully evacuated the WTC which it makes sense they would have done I think then toppling into it (at least slightly) also makes more sense, no? (WTC-7 wasn't within the WTC footprint and I think it's likely that after using all the manpower to evacuate the WTC proper they probably moved onto WTC-7 to evacuate it for its destruction later in the day.)
I will certainly admit to being a lazy researcher, Vexman, however, what I believe is characteristic of me but not so much many others is that I'm always willing to change my mind and always respond to reasonable challenges to my thinking thus after years of pushing the same argument I'm reasonably confident that it is correct because nothing has come along to reasonably challenge it while generally only more stuff tends to confirm it ... but - as I say - always willing to change my mind. I'm a little mystified I must say by the reasonable popularity of the DEWs hypothesis as by the time I got to "9/11 truth" in 2014 I found so much debunking of it that I never seriously considered it as a possibility.
Re TESTIMONIES.
The 9/11 story is massively curated so testimonies mean nothing, Vexman. What I find rather amusing but also sad is that 9/11 scholar, Graeme MacQueen, was massively led astray by controlled opposition group, A&E9/11Truth, on the 118 firefighter testimonials. He - with the help of CO agent, Ted Walter - produced a document, 118 Witnesses: The Firefightersβ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers, BUT DIDN'T NOTICE that the testimonies are full of Revelation of the Method nonsensicalities. I did though, in fact, it wasn't a case of noticing, I predicted it.
After I started to realise how many-layered the 9/11 propaganda campaign was I thought, "I bet those firefighter testimonies are fake." I mean, how could they not be if people weren't left behind in the buildings? And sure enough, when I applied that trusty psyop lens ...
Interestingly, I engaged with an FDNY worker who started work with the FDNY after 9/11 but is the colleague of one of the firefighters whose testimony is one of the 118, Mike Morabito. The FDNY guy simply cannot believe his colleague would have participated in this way even though he admits the story Mike told him personally didn't really add up. I added an analysis of Mike's testimony after engaging with FDNY guy.
Just as at least some of the imagery of all three tower destructions is clearly fake, the same applies to the rubble. When we know SOME of it is fake at least how do we know any of it is real? What can we point to? Also, what can we be sure of knowing in terms of expectations of how much steel there should be and what it should look like?
What I stick to in the first instance (and explains why I believe the moon landings and so many other psyop analysts don't) is the irrefutable facts and when the irrefutable facts seem to very convincingly favour an hypothesis and there is nothing that contradicts it I go with that.
What I consider irrefutable facts:
--- There is fakery for ALL purported methods of destruction, including what I believe was the method used but nevertheless still believe was the method, controlled demolition. In this situation, the purported evidence itself is of little help, there's nothing to grab onto evidence-wise, we have to use other information.
--- Controlled demolition is the only known method for bringing down high-rise steel frame buildings
--- The family company Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI), who we are told submitted a cleanup plan for the WTC 11 days after the big day, was clearly involved in the psyop. Mark Loizeaux pushed the propaganda that molten steel was seen by one of his contractors at the WTC.
"I didn't personally see molten steel at the World Trade Center site. It was reported to me by contractors we had been working with. Molten steel was encountered primarily during excavation of debris around the South Tower when large hydraulic excavators were digging trenches 2 to 4 meters deep into the compacted/burning debris pile. There are both video tape and still photos of the molten steel being "dipped" out by the buckets of excavators. I'm not sure where you can get a copy."
--- In the three years prior to 9/11, CDI achieved three of their four world records in large building demolition projects.
Judy Wood has collected and shared a ton of clear photo evidence indicating microwaves, and your comment is just adding more uninformed 9/11 noise to an already massive amount.
Many cowboys (Israel's best friends) will never recover from the fact that someone dared attack their cuntry, probably the same folks who think they "won" the war in Vietnam.
"Judy Wood has collected and shared a ton of clear photo evidence indicating microwaves ..."
She's a faker. You do get that they have pushed out propaganda for FIVE DIFFERENT METHODS OF COLLAPSE, right?
1. Controlled demolition
2. DEWs
3. Nukes
4. Thermite
5. Fire
And for every single one - fakery.
I must say I'm mystified by how people accept Judy Wood's stuff as gospel while happy to recognise that fakery and propaganda are pushed out for all the others. Why are DEWs considered so special when we've never seen them in operation bringing down buildings outside 9/11?
Controlled demolition is the only known method for bringing down high rise steel frame buildings so that's the one I plump for.
I pretty much stick with the 9/11 work by Christopher Bollyn. The biggest thing is whodonit and why. This is what needs to be shared with people who still believe the original gubmint narrative.
After that, one can spend as much time as they like debating thermite, lasers etc.
You have a point that many people don't even realize it was a false flag, and to realize that they do need to know why it was NOT a destruction due to planes/fires.
βMany can realize it was a way to get resources and geopolitical power in the ME, but they will never get the ritualistic nature of 9.11, the population haircut it gave the region, nor the end game, nor the power structure of the world.
βSo you can try but it will only go so far.
βUnderstanding it was clearly not controlled demolition, nor a collapse, and was due to DEW does have its value because DEWs can and have caused multiple kinds of disasters in the last yrs and will cause more.
I steer clear of the term false flag because of the implication that it was the accusers who committed the crime rather than the accused when, in fact, the crime is either partly or wholly staged. I always use "psyop" as the term fits better.
I think false flag is a term invented by those in power to mislead.
Ok, you may be right. "False flag psyop" could be better. Still it is a false flag because the Terrorists with AlCIAda flags are just patsys under the US (Globalist) flag.
Noo one believing Christopher Bollynβs presentations about βSolving 9/11β notices nowhere does he point a serious finger at SAIC and ARA and the 21 other NIST subcontractors, that were part and parcel of the bigger cover-up that started as soon as the dust settled.
You can also not disregard that A LOT of people knew that something was going to happen that day, as a lot of researchers have gone into depth on the insider trading, people not going to work the day, the war games and so much more bluff around WHAT happened to the Towers.
I would argue that Bollyn takes the attention away from the NIST subcontractors and the technology used on 9/11, that can free us from this false scarcity world we live in.
I also suggest you work through my following breakdown.
Unmasking Ryan Dawson's - Empire Unmasked Redux
A FOUR HOUR rehash of information we all are well aware of already
"Israel did it!" is propaganda to make us believe:
--- Outsider Israelis did the dastardly deed of bringing down the buildings with all those poor people in them - when as is always the case with controlled destructions the buildings were evacuated prior
--- A limited number of countries were involved when every man and his dog were. Australia's PM, John Howard, was paying a "surprise" visit to Washington on the fateful day and two refugee boat events were staged in Australia in August and October sandwiching 9/11 in the lead up to the November federal election. Obviously, it had been determined for Howard to get back in 2001 and creating a terror/ fear of borders being encroached situation favours the incumbent. For whatever reason they thought it best to have Hiward at the helm to ensure Australia supported the US in Iraq.
You have many good points BR. Almost everyone was a normie at one time, luckily we have come out of it. The reason being we were suspicious of governments since kids. and we were receptive to learn more. While politicians look and act disingenuous and/or nutty, normies stubbornly hold onto the fear narratives told to them from these very same lying clowns. The best way to describe these normies is like an octopus stuck in a jar., or people stuck in a cube. Now you know why there are so many black cube sculptures that decorate cities. They are a symbol of locking your mind up so you can't see.
All the Abrahamic religions have this cube mind control brain in a box thing imbibed in them. A minority of Jews you see in Western cultures called orthodox do as you noted, the The Mecca pilgrimage goes around a huge black cube, and Jesus is nailed to a cube that is opened up (4 vertical sides and 2 horozontal sides). Being nailed means still stuck in it. All these religions have numerous pagan symbols and pagan derived rituals. Cubes, are related to Saturnism (Satanism). You have to wonder if they have been bred to worship Satan subliminally (there are many sites to read and ponder). They certainly have gone off fighting each other again and again, maybe that was the point about making them to begin with, divide and conquer. Ingenious isn't it.
I'm giving "nuclear bombs" a probability of existing at... Approaching zero. Like actual planes on 9/11.
Excellent work, little proton!!!
Nice to hear from you as always AS!
π€ π π€
Indeed. The world is run by psychos yet anyone trying to point that out to the victims (aka βnormiesβ) is attacked. The irony.
Indeed, gripped by fear (of Terrorists, nukes, germs) they think you might take away their security blanket that can include denial (aka ignorant bliss), or the remedy (war on terrorists, injections/masks for germs).
It never ceases to amaze me, how even when asking logical questions or seeing the evidence in front of them, many still find an excuse or wilfully ignore it. Cognitive dissonance is a huge problem.
This is a toxic codependent relationship in which the addiction to the thrill-chill of fear (pick a "monster") remains a central tenet.
It takes a substantial amount careful attention and investment to undo the consequences of a long term abusive relationship.
Reality is a fine priceless wine, best imbibed one sip at a time
Hi Proton - Great article, as always.
Just a few additions on the 9/11 narratives put out in the ongoing psyop that was 9/11.
DONATE TODAY for 9/11 Disinformation
Where is the money going?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/donate-today-for-911-disinformation
A Breakdown of Jonathan Cole PE's 9/11 DEW Disinformation
A follow up on his Where the Towers Went
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/a-breakdown-of-jonathan-cole-pes
A whole industry has been created - A whole "truth" movement, to have people NOT look at the evidence presented TO COURT in 2007, all whilst they are gaslighting good intentioned truth seekers with stories of remote-controlled planes or drones, CGI TV video fakery, bombs, and thermite for a controlled demolition or even buried or mini nukes.
Making sure people NEVER look at the anomalies with the 9/11 orphans, buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Bankers Trust building, because if people do, they will immediately see the problems with the 9/11 truther narratives that are being SOLD to them.
Good intentioned truth seekers are FUNDING the greater cover-up of the truth of what happened on 9/11. Have a listen and read their court filings.
Dr Reynolds' case was for the fraudulent plane impact reports: https://nomoregames.net/2011/06/12/request-for-correction-by-nist-for-its-invalid-wtc-jetliner-animations-and-analyses/
Dr Wood's case was for the destruction at the WTC complex: https://www.drjudywood.com/wp/court-case-qui-tam/
9/11 FACTS that hurt people's feelings
43 FACTS that cannot be explained due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-facts-that-hurt-peoples-feelings
Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist
Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/david-hughes-on-the-importance-of
The Suspension of Newtonian Physics on 9/11
A Plane conversation with Dr Morgan Reynolds & 9/11 Revisionist
Article & Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-suspension-of-newtonian-physics-0c6
Thanks for writing in and the good info.
And the 9/11 "truth" movement was installed to have people NOT count past three when discussing the destruction on 9/11.
WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?
The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the β9/11 truth movementβ never touch onβ¦
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/what-exactly-happened-to-all-7-buildings
World Trade Center, September 13, 2001
When all civilians -- including most journalists -- were forbidden to enter the area.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/world-trade-center-september-13-2001
Great job Proton,it certainly stirred up your comment section as I would expect. I donβt watch a lot of TV anymore besides to check occasionally what the latest narrative scripts are that the six oβclock actors are reading. I was amused to hear that the lead actor of the Apprentice USA recently called for the renewed focus on nuclear weapons development .. everything old is new again in the trauma based game. Watch for Substack authors to emerge with advice on how to construct a fallout bunker modern style, Iodine salesmen will come out of the corners of the supplement area to make sure the normies are stocked up on βnatural remediesβ for the impending nuclear apocalypse along with a coupon for a discount on personal gieger counters when you purchase the Iodine monthly subscription. Last night I happened upon a documentary coincidentally titled βA Clockwork Shiningβ. Long story short it describes in depth the story of propaganda filmmaker Stanley Kubricks career, from his start with βLolitaβ about child sexuality, βA Clockwork Orangeβ the βShiningβ, Eyes Wide Shut,all trauma based MK ultra/Monarch/Masoonic operations. As well his alleged βmoon landingβ film is also discussed. Interesting content.. also interesting to note why they would release these bread crumbs a year or so ago. They want us to know what theyβre up to.. in plain sight, yet very few see it. The trauma based operations continue, unabated, adapted to a modern society. The first commenter on this post made an interesting observation about the prevalence of televisions everywhere nowβ¦ and as an addition how absolutely affordable they have become even for the higher end 4k models. A Remote Viewer for everyone in every room of your home, to keep the propaganda machine running!
One last thing β¦The weaponization of Bud Light is definitely under appreciated, if you recall when they rolled out the he/she her/him whatever they were spokesmodel a few years ago, normies brains melted faster than thermite in the 9/11 discussion LOL.
Thanks for the great article Proton, brilliant work that brightened my day!
And the Bud Light trans thing, yes yes. I was just making a play on word sounds on the "-ite" for something that obviously doesn't destroy buildings. Good addition Woody!
inb4 Petra comes with her 9/11 nonsense
Appreciate the chuckle. Itβs 1 am for us so Iβm sure to wake up to some interesting comment from Petra tomorrow.
Have Petra read this piece of mine...
Where did all the people go on 9/11?
Over 1100 people seemed to have vanished into thin air...
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/where-did-all-the-people-go-on-911
Thank you and gave Petra your comment in the thread below.
The, "where did the people go" is a very moving post. I've seen lots of that footage before and was able to handle all of it ok until the part on Elton where upon seeing the "falling man", he repeats twice, "the photo is a beautiful tragedy". Only someone with special dark affiliations would react that way.
Indeed that statement from Elton is creepy...
Writing a follow up to "Where did all the people go on 9/11?", that's a LOT more graphic and will not be suited for sensitive viewers and readers.
Article will drop next week...
A "Magic" collection indeed! :)
"Trauma-based mind control" is pretty much what I've been calling the "shock treatment" or the "shock effect"; it has been, and is, used in a wide range of operations:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-shock-treatment-and-its-kin
I grew up in the 1950s and 60s (b. 1950), and I don't recall ever hearing anything about "duck and cover" during those years. I learned to read in late 1956 (picking it up very quickly), and I don't recall reading anything about it either. DDT, the end of phonics, and other such things I DO remember.
As an Air Force brat, my father being on active duty again (after WWII) from 1954 onward, the only explanations I can think of are that my schools, all either Air Force dependent schools or DOD-reimbursed public schools (based upon how many brats were enrolled) saw no value in duck-and-cover, or it was a hoax, or it was regional. Although we lived in Alaska, California, Illinois, Missouri, Washington (state), and Misawa (Aomori Prefecture, Honshu) Japan (not in that order), during my school years. I'm not certain that I didn't miss any, but that's a few regions. Was it an east/south thing?
Or a hoax like kids running behind the sprayers and later becoming paralyzed, attributed to the polio virus? I saw the kids running behind the sprayer trucks -- I watched from a distance within in our housing area on our Air Force base in Alaska in 1956-7 (lots of mosquitos requiring after-school spraying along with the kids) -- and there were a few kids with their braces and crutches in my classes at our on-base dependent's school there. That much actually happened. But "duck and cover"? No recollection.
You may be right CM. I donβt remember that much either. I think they floated this campaign out to reify the threat, just like they did with terrorism and viruses. It became clear it wasnβt working because 1. people didnβt see the threat from it and 2. it later began to fuel anti-war sentiment. I just used it in the post to start off showing a silly propaganda tactic and catch your attention.
Here you can see some excerpts from history.com which is also still fueling the nuke narrative on us now. Iβm sure history.com is an Intel front.
https://www.history.com/articles/duck-cover-drills-cold-war-arms-race
βTeachers in Detroit sang songs, told stories and played records while the children were in the βrefuge area,β while a teacher in Massachusetts, decorated the school bomb shelter as a βreading den.β
The juxtaposition of that kind of imageryβlet's read a book and tell storiesβwith the horrors of an atomic bomb, this leads a lot of people then and now to say, I don't think this is going to work.
Studentsβ responses to civil defense drills in schools would later fuel antiwar and antinuclear activism, on the part of both outraged parents and the students themselves.β
Great article. Many of us have known for years that the official narrative of 9/11 was BS. But there have been so many differing theories about what DID happen. My conclusion is that it was a planned government/CIA operation, and the Bush/Cheney regime was part of it, as was Mossad. Exactly how they pulled it off the way they did can be debated. A new recent documentary I watched is Codex 9/11. It's a very well done summary backed up with evidence.
But yes, the scary part was how the normies just totally bought the propaganda told them by the TV. And how they accepted the "we got to go get them now" mind set. Then of course, they accepted the "Patriot Act" that was already in place to be voted on.
I suggest you read my write-up....
Decoding "CODEX 9/11"
A great wake up call for normies, but lacking in research diligence for seasoned researchers. A great opportunity wasted.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/decoding-codex-911
I've reached out to the creator via DM on X and Telegram, emailed him and left comments in his X posts, so that he can correct the misinformation in his piece, but all I get is crickets.
You want to watch and learn from the gold standard documentary covering the WTC, the hoodwinks at Shanksville and the PentaCON?
Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.
Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.
The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.
The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.
The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.
Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.
Here is a 20-minute video that most can follow: https://rumble.com/v5jnndx-understanding-the-911-evidence.html
Thanks! The link near "Yes, but now add 67+2 (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and you get 69. Oh, a Masonic number!" does not say anything about that number: https://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/symbolism/numbers.html
Thanks, yeah there may be a better link somewhere. The part I got from that site though was this about, 3, 6, and 9:
"The number nine was consecrated to the Spheres and the Muses. It is the sign of every circumference; because a circle or 360 degrees is equal to nine, that is to say, 3+6+0=9. Nevertheless, the ancients regarded this number with a sort of terror; they considered it a bad presage"
A 20-year memorial documentary produced by Chris Hampton, dedicated to exposing the real truth about what happened on 9/11 by referencing interesting numerological symbology...
9/11 Alchemy - A Big Idea
Link: https://rumble.com/v4irvwr-911-alchemy-a-big-idea.html
Nuke Proof
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_IruM3zdzs
This was so tall so it could maximize making Londoners ill with some nasty.
Duck or cover, suckers....
You may have heard of "One World Or None", the book that the globalist satanic cabal published soon after the destruction of Japan to announce their intent to hold the world hostage...
Check out the names of the authors, a very instructive list.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1274402366i/1681403.jpg
Apocalypse 9/11
"They have as king over them the angel of the abyss; his ame in Hebrew is Abaddon (destruction) and in Greek Apollyon (destroyer)."
Poor McArthur, asking for nooks and getting removed from command instead.
I'm puzzled, PM. You know that the footage of the building destructions is faked and they pushed multiple streams of propaganda for how the buildings came down including fire, controlled demolition, DEWs, thermite and nukes?
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/911-the-moviehttps://petraliverani.substack.com/p/911-the-movie
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/toppling-the-towers-why-five-purported
Hi Petra, I stand by the info in the post and the links. Why don't you post your concerns to 9.11 Revisionist who made multiple comments here and see where that could lead? But yes, I am always open to some perturbation in explanations and do not guarantee that anything I have written is 100% without need for correction.
Regardless of whether you stand by the info do you recognise that the footage of all three building destructions is faked?
Is: footage of all three building destructions is faked
the same as
All the footage of the three building destructions is faked?
But pls ask Revisionist as you know I only give you short answers.
I'm sure we both agree that beyond the official "fire" the rather numerous methods of destruction have been manufactured as propaganda to have us disbelievers fragmented on the subject. So with your and others' support of DEWs and my and others' support of CD and Disbeliever X's support of nukes, etc we're fragmented exactly how the perps want us to be. It's a little galling, no, to be behaving in exactly the way they want us to, isn't it? But we cannot help it. You stand by DEWs, I stand by CD. They understand us better than we understand ourselves :).
Pls see this comment above:
"9/11 Revisionist
Have Petra read this piece of mine...
Where did all the people go on 9/11?
Over 1100 people seemed to have vanished into thin air...
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/where-did-all-the-people-go-on-911"
Seriously? The buildings were evacuated. It's all fake.
I know you're not interested in further discussion, PM, and I'm not expecting a response but the implications of your question didn't occur to me until now so I'm answering it.
"Footage of ALL three building destructions is faked" is not necessarily the same as "ALL the footage of the three building destructions is faked", because "footage" on its own might mean only SOME footage.
However: if we see clear fakery of SOME footage, unless we have clear evidence of reality of the rest of the footage we have nothing to say that it is real and every reason to infer it is all fake. It's a bit similar to the "death and injury were faked" argument. I can't say with certainly that ALL death and injury were faked, however, what I can say with certainty is:
--- there is clear evidence of fakery of injury and death
--- there is no clear evidence of injury and death
thus I say death and injury were fake with the caveat that there may have been some that occurred.
With regard to the buildings, we have no verified evidence of DEWs bringing down buildings in action elsewhere so we have nothing to say that the buildings came down by DEWs if we can see that at least some of the footage is faked. We can't say, "What we see of the building destructions cannot be what all the other propaganda streams say (thermite, nukes, controlled demolition) and DEWs is the best fit," when we can see that at least some of the footage is faked and nothing to say any of it is real.
From my POV there is no visual evidence we can rely on to say what brought the buildings down. I say it was controlled demolition because:
1. CD is the only known way for high rise steel frame buildings to come down.
2. Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) is clearly involved in 9/11 and achieved three of its four world records in large demolition projects in the three years prior to 9/11.
3. Bringing down the towers by a method with no known precedence seems improbable in the extreme.
Ok thanks. You have some points, I keep telling you to ask Revisionist. I can tell you that lack of debris and lack of seismic thud rule out CD. About the vids, I have multiple friends and family some who escaped from WTC, who say dustification-looking destruction is what they saw on the ground that day. But true, what is 100%? The ML is also not 100%. You use inferences and indirect info/deductions.
πDid you notice that on every thread you need to have the last word? Challenge yourself to stop now or just say thanks and thatβs it. Iβve lot of other problems to solve(ｑο½₯Οο½₯ｑ)οΎβ‘
You asked a question and I answered it, PM. I've been there done that with Revisionist. He banned me from his site. You're the one putting forward the theory so I"m discussing it with you (or trying to) but as you don't wish to discuss it further i shall say not one word more at least not in your comments. I could say more in response to things you've just put forward but I won't. I don't really understand your need to curtail discussion regardless of how busy you are however i shall stop right here if that's what you want.
In principle I like how you apply your logic to questioning issues, however you tend to do it not thoroughly enough.
If you're going after CD thesis, you should be asking yourself what's the most obvious proof of such demolition? It's definitely the sound signature of an explosion, a thump that can be heard and sometimes felt. Since you're also implying that the TV footage can't be trusted, there's only one way you could confirm your thesis -by direct witnesses and their testimonies. I'm on tangent here, but there should be some 20-30 explosions heard or felt, signatures of the explosions strategically placed so that the towers would really collapse into its own footprint (as can be concluded by the fact that all the structures in near vicinity were in majority intact).
Then there's another issue with the CD thesis. If it was explosive that brought them down, there should be definitely larger blocks of material visible in the ruins after the dust settled. But there were no large blocks of material to be seen. This also implies nearby buildings would have been probably more damaged by the falling towers' pieces, which clearly didn't happen.
So how can you explain these two anomalies? In my reasoning, you can't. I've seen some YT videos in the past, where some individuals claimed to have heard a large explosion just before the towers collapsed. But there should definitely be more than just one or two heard to bring such large structure down. Right? So either they didn't hear them or the CD thesis collapses.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. Not knowing the details is actually irrelevant - the towers are definitely missing in the picture. And I think it is safe to conclude from there that the only conspiracy here is that of the US government against their own people (and consequently the entire world).
Thanks for your good logic Vexman. The only tweak I would make is that it is really, "The US govt in alliance with most every other govt as part of the one-world govt, that itself is controlled by a greater power structure, is against the common people of the world. The quest of this power structure is to change and control all the assets of the planet, including people themselves."
Just to add:
" ... signatures of the explosions strategically placed so that the towers would really collapse into its own footprint (as can be concluded by the fact that all the structures in near vicinity were in majority intact)."
As we know the footage is faked my guess is that the Twin Towers didn't come straight down as depicted but were toppled (at least slightly) into the (completely evacuated) WTC.
This thought came to me when I noticed the slight toppling of the top floors of the tallest building at Meena Plaza in Abu Dhabi.
Note: Now when I look at Meena Plaza it doesn't look as if there is toppling but in one video I watched it really did seem as if there was slight toppling and I think there is even if from some perspectives it doesn't look like it.
Meena Plaza - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/LSToxDC0hBM?feature=share
If they fully evacuated the WTC which it makes sense they would have done I think then toppling into it (at least slightly) also makes more sense, no? (WTC-7 wasn't within the WTC footprint and I think it's likely that after using all the manpower to evacuate the WTC proper they probably moved onto WTC-7 to evacuate it for its destruction later in the day.)
I will certainly admit to being a lazy researcher, Vexman, however, what I believe is characteristic of me but not so much many others is that I'm always willing to change my mind and always respond to reasonable challenges to my thinking thus after years of pushing the same argument I'm reasonably confident that it is correct because nothing has come along to reasonably challenge it while generally only more stuff tends to confirm it ... but - as I say - always willing to change my mind. I'm a little mystified I must say by the reasonable popularity of the DEWs hypothesis as by the time I got to "9/11 truth" in 2014 I found so much debunking of it that I never seriously considered it as a possibility.
Re TESTIMONIES.
The 9/11 story is massively curated so testimonies mean nothing, Vexman. What I find rather amusing but also sad is that 9/11 scholar, Graeme MacQueen, was massively led astray by controlled opposition group, A&E9/11Truth, on the 118 firefighter testimonials. He - with the help of CO agent, Ted Walter - produced a document, 118 Witnesses: The Firefightersβ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers, BUT DIDN'T NOTICE that the testimonies are full of Revelation of the Method nonsensicalities. I did though, in fact, it wasn't a case of noticing, I predicted it.
After I started to realise how many-layered the 9/11 propaganda campaign was I thought, "I bet those firefighter testimonies are fake." I mean, how could they not be if people weren't left behind in the buildings? And sure enough, when I applied that trusty psyop lens ...
Interestingly, I engaged with an FDNY worker who started work with the FDNY after 9/11 but is the colleague of one of the firefighters whose testimony is one of the 118, Mike Morabito. The FDNY guy simply cannot believe his colleague would have participated in this way even though he admits the story Mike told him personally didn't really add up. I added an analysis of Mike's testimony after engaging with FDNY guy.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/nonsensicalities-in-the-911-firefighter
Re RUBBLE
Just as at least some of the imagery of all three tower destructions is clearly fake, the same applies to the rubble. When we know SOME of it is fake at least how do we know any of it is real? What can we point to? Also, what can we be sure of knowing in terms of expectations of how much steel there should be and what it should look like?
Faking the rubble - https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?t=489
What I stick to in the first instance (and explains why I believe the moon landings and so many other psyop analysts don't) is the irrefutable facts and when the irrefutable facts seem to very convincingly favour an hypothesis and there is nothing that contradicts it I go with that.
What I consider irrefutable facts:
--- There is fakery for ALL purported methods of destruction, including what I believe was the method used but nevertheless still believe was the method, controlled demolition. In this situation, the purported evidence itself is of little help, there's nothing to grab onto evidence-wise, we have to use other information.
--- Controlled demolition is the only known method for bringing down high-rise steel frame buildings
--- The family company Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI), who we are told submitted a cleanup plan for the WTC 11 days after the big day, was clearly involved in the psyop. Mark Loizeaux pushed the propaganda that molten steel was seen by one of his contractors at the WTC.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.alien.visitors/c/-Nz_7DpwH58/m/TiVwcAaQ798J
"I didn't personally see molten steel at the World Trade Center site. It was reported to me by contractors we had been working with. Molten steel was encountered primarily during excavation of debris around the South Tower when large hydraulic excavators were digging trenches 2 to 4 meters deep into the compacted/burning debris pile. There are both video tape and still photos of the molten steel being "dipped" out by the buckets of excavators. I'm not sure where you can get a copy."
--- In the three years prior to 9/11, CDI achieved three of their four world records in large building demolition projects.
https://www.controlled-demolition.com/world-records/
Judy Wood has collected and shared a ton of clear photo evidence indicating microwaves, and your comment is just adding more uninformed 9/11 noise to an already massive amount.
Many cowboys (Israel's best friends) will never recover from the fact that someone dared attack their cuntry, probably the same folks who think they "won" the war in Vietnam.
"Judy Wood has collected and shared a ton of clear photo evidence indicating microwaves ..."
She's a faker. You do get that they have pushed out propaganda for FIVE DIFFERENT METHODS OF COLLAPSE, right?
1. Controlled demolition
2. DEWs
3. Nukes
4. Thermite
5. Fire
And for every single one - fakery.
I must say I'm mystified by how people accept Judy Wood's stuff as gospel while happy to recognise that fakery and propaganda are pushed out for all the others. Why are DEWs considered so special when we've never seen them in operation bringing down buildings outside 9/11?
Controlled demolition is the only known method for bringing down high rise steel frame buildings so that's the one I plump for.
I pretty much stick with the 9/11 work by Christopher Bollyn. The biggest thing is whodonit and why. This is what needs to be shared with people who still believe the original gubmint narrative.
After that, one can spend as much time as they like debating thermite, lasers etc.
You have a point that many people don't even realize it was a false flag, and to realize that they do need to know why it was NOT a destruction due to planes/fires.
βMany can realize it was a way to get resources and geopolitical power in the ME, but they will never get the ritualistic nature of 9.11, the population haircut it gave the region, nor the end game, nor the power structure of the world.
βSo you can try but it will only go so far.
βUnderstanding it was clearly not controlled demolition, nor a collapse, and was due to DEW does have its value because DEWs can and have caused multiple kinds of disasters in the last yrs and will cause more.
I steer clear of the term false flag because of the implication that it was the accusers who committed the crime rather than the accused when, in fact, the crime is either partly or wholly staged. I always use "psyop" as the term fits better.
I think false flag is a term invented by those in power to mislead.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/are-false-flags-a-thing
Ok, you may be right. "False flag psyop" could be better. Still it is a false flag because the Terrorists with AlCIAda flags are just patsys under the US (Globalist) flag.
Noo one believing Christopher Bollynβs presentations about βSolving 9/11β notices nowhere does he point a serious finger at SAIC and ARA and the 21 other NIST subcontractors, that were part and parcel of the bigger cover-up that started as soon as the dust settled.
You can also not disregard that A LOT of people knew that something was going to happen that day, as a lot of researchers have gone into depth on the insider trading, people not going to work the day, the war games and so much more bluff around WHAT happened to the Towers.
I would argue that Bollyn takes the attention away from the NIST subcontractors and the technology used on 9/11, that can free us from this false scarcity world we live in.
I also suggest you work through my following breakdown.
Unmasking Ryan Dawson's - Empire Unmasked Redux
A FOUR HOUR rehash of information we all are well aware of already
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/unmasking-ryan-dawsons-empire-unmasked
"Israel did it!" is propaganda to make us believe:
--- Outsider Israelis did the dastardly deed of bringing down the buildings with all those poor people in them - when as is always the case with controlled destructions the buildings were evacuated prior
--- A limited number of countries were involved when every man and his dog were. Australia's PM, John Howard, was paying a "surprise" visit to Washington on the fateful day and two refugee boat events were staged in Australia in August and October sandwiching 9/11 in the lead up to the November federal election. Obviously, it had been determined for Howard to get back in 2001 and creating a terror/ fear of borders being encroached situation favours the incumbent. For whatever reason they thought it best to have Hiward at the helm to ensure Australia supported the US in Iraq.
You have many good points BR. Almost everyone was a normie at one time, luckily we have come out of it. The reason being we were suspicious of governments since kids. and we were receptive to learn more. While politicians look and act disingenuous and/or nutty, normies stubbornly hold onto the fear narratives told to them from these very same lying clowns. The best way to describe these normies is like an octopus stuck in a jar., or people stuck in a cube. Now you know why there are so many black cube sculptures that decorate cities. They are a symbol of locking your mind up so you can't see.
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Ffrdfhvvwqx271.jpg
All the Abrahamic religions have this cube mind control brain in a box thing imbibed in them. A minority of Jews you see in Western cultures called orthodox do as you noted, the The Mecca pilgrimage goes around a huge black cube, and Jesus is nailed to a cube that is opened up (4 vertical sides and 2 horozontal sides). Being nailed means still stuck in it. All these religions have numerous pagan symbols and pagan derived rituals. Cubes, are related to Saturnism (Satanism). You have to wonder if they have been bred to worship Satan subliminally (there are many sites to read and ponder). They certainly have gone off fighting each other again and again, maybe that was the point about making them to begin with, divide and conquer. Ingenious isn't it.
I suggest you work through these two plane related discussions;
9/11 Truth Movement Planes Propaganda - Podcast - 7th March 2025
When the 9/11 truther planes narratives do not fly
Podcast: https://rumble.com/v6q6eo8-when-the-911-truther-plane-narratives-do-not-fly.html
The Suspension of Newtonian Physics on 9/11
A Plane conversation with Dr Morgan Reynolds & 9/11 Revisionist
Interview: https://rumble.com/v6sciwf-the-suspension-of-newtonian-physics-on-911.html
"When the 9/11 truther planes narratives do not fly..." :-))
Great comment, well written, I appreciate your perspective.