You can’t ask for better than this. My old friend (and I do mean he’s really old but sharp and pithy as ever), Ray McGovern, provides an engaging and stimulating hour briefing on the current situation between Russia and Ukraine and, more importantly, gives you the critical history essential to understand what is going on today. The video lasts a little more than an hour and you will be happy you took the time to watch.
Ray was the CIA briefer for the first President Bush during the dissolution of the Soviet Union and helped President Bush understand Mikhail Gorbachev. Watch the video and you will appreciate why President Bush listened to this man (sort of).
Thank you. I have been following Ray for a long time. He is the real deal and a true American hero.
I am thoroughly convinced by the videos of the exploding collapses of the twin towers and the classic controlled demolition of Building 7, as well as the wall of the Pentagon having no hole before its collapse due to fire, with no plane parts in front of it, that 911 was an inside job. Yet McGovern, at least he used to, supports the fantasy that 19 men who could not land a single engine plane flew them in high precision paths to strike all BUT building 7 and it was all preventable. What is both your and his position on 911? Here is my 5 minute summary. https://www.bitchute.com/video/0nwR88z9Etiu/
You won’t like my answer. I have friends at DEA who saw the plane fly by their building and hit the Pentagon. If you know anything about how buildings are imploded (I’m friends with one of the nation’s leading explosive experts who does this kind of work) there is no way the World Trade Centers could have been wired up without anyone noticing. And the work to do so would have taken more than a month. Folks like you keep giving the CIA too much credit for being competent. Having worked with them, first as an officer, then as a contractor indirectly, their reputation as a screwed up organization is well deserved.
So you take eyewitness’s accounts which can be corrupted, bribed, over facts.
Facts: there is no engine left at pentagon. Airplane engines are indestructible. Even if it was burned, there is a lump of metals. Ever seen a plane crash debris: full of chairs and luggages and airplane parts. The airplane hitting the hard earth.
At the pentagon: nothing.
Your friends at DEA probably convinced themselves that they saw the plane the same way religious fanatics see angels.
there are several well documented airplane crashes where the plane came down hard and fast and there is basically nothing left but tiny shreds of metals and plastics. Nothing is indestructible, especially not airplane engines. Where do you people get these provably false notions?
so you are part of the on location investigation team that day ? or just parroting nonsense from conspiracy sites as your mind got suckered into another 9-11 lies.. The hijacking operating was organized by someone , it is better to seek the “who behind it” instead of arguing over nonsense like no-plane , its a missile , its a hologram , its demolition pack , its underground SAD ..
the disinformation of 9-11 is precisely spread around to disguise the fact that some grp inside USG worked with the arabs to do just this.. This is classic intelligence work muddling the facts so discussion centered on the “how” instead of the “whodunit”
the oft derided CIA suddenly become so competent to pull massive demolitions on public buoldings.. yeah right..
buntalanlucu,
I can accept that there could be a small team from some government project that would put an operation into action that would attack Americans on American soil. I think it is unlikely, but, I suppose, possible. However, what these CTists are talking about is not a small team. Their fevered imaginations have come up with a scheme that would necessarily involve a large core team and then an even larger number of support elements who would be able to put 2 and 2 together if they were kept in the dark. I do not think it even worth contemplating that so many would go along with the plot, let alone not come forward after the fact. I mean, if you were one of the dozens necessary to wire the buildings, fire a missile at the Pentagon, etc, etc and you weren’t sure about the orders you were following when, say, planting the explosives or firing the missiles, then on 9/12 you would sure know what you were duped into doing. Again, it is a massive insult to men and women in uniform to believe that none would come forward. That is true of all of the witnesses, many military, who saw the plane fly over and hit the Pentagon. In fact, a good friend of mine, now and at the time, was working at the Pentagon. He wasn’t there on 9/11, but he was there on 9/12 and he saw the airplane parts outside the building. He didn’t see inside because he was only there to access some of his material which was in a different section of the building and he was not part of the investigation. The whole CT thing is incredibly stupid, IMO.
As you say, if there was US Govt involvement it would have to be a handful of operators facilitating terrorists, or detecting the terrorist plot and looking the other way. Even those possibilities, I think are remote. No one needed to encourage or facilitate Bin Laden/AQ. They were already on the war path and already committed several serious acts of terrorism. What they did to pull off 9/11 required no assistance. It was simple to slide past US immigration laws, as millions are currently doing, learn the rudiments of flying well enough to hit their targets and then exploit weak airport security. Airplanes had been hijacked in the US for decades prior to 9/11 by all manner of less sophisticated criminals.
Yes, there was one or two FBI agents that raised concerns over foreigners, possibly fitting the terrorist profile, learning to fly, etc. and yes, those concerns were ignored, but that is easily explained by bureaucratic incompetence. Stuff like – ignoring an agent’s concerns or theories – that happens every day. Just this time, ignoring resulted in a disaster. Usually, the resulting screw-ups are of far lesser magnitude.
There is 0 evidence that 9/11 was anything other than terrorists – sworn enemies of the US – taking advantage of the government’s lack of imagination, lack of resources and bureaucratic incompetence.
Larry, firstly, let me say how much I appreciate your insights and great efforts to honestly explain events to people who do not have the knowledge and experience you possess. I often share your posts widely to do my small part in promulgating the truth.
So, please receive my next comment with this in mind: the events of 9/11 can in no way be explained by official reports. Eye witness accounts from friends – however much they may believe what they say – is in no way an adequate response to the counter evidence provided from numerous other sources.
In any case, I look forward to continuing reading your great work.
Aluminum under certain conditions can act explosively. The plane crashed (approximately) at 400 km/h into a high-strength structural steel mesh that literally pulverized, grated the plane into thousands of aluminum particles that could have explosive behavior when exposed to burning kerosene. It is possible that a good part of the fireproof coating of the structural steel of the tower had disappeared, leaving the metal exposed to high temperatures >500° C, but I do not think that the rest of the structure was stripped of its protection against fire, assuming overloads perfectly. If the structure is exposed for more than five minutes to temperatures >500°C it collapses. So it could be a combination of explosive aluminum + high temperatures. Take a good look at the videos where rivers of liquid aluminum flow from the Towers.
Garbage. You only have to look at structural design and the gauge of the steel used. The building was designed to take a hit by a 707 which is of comparable mass to what apparently hit the buildings. Also buildings don’t collapse into their foundations as they did unless the internal resistance to collapse is removed.
Mistake.
The explosive effect of aluminum was never taken into account and…absurd, it did not collapse on its foundations, the building collapsed hundreds of meters high. The mass of a 747 would not have collapsed the building because it is practically a very thin aluminum tube, only the engines would have had a somewhat more noticeable effect because they are more massive.
In the videos that are seen on the Internet, you can clearly see tongues of liquid aluminum, which may suggest that the fine aluminum particles had an explosive and high-temperature behavior that terribly affected the structure.
The strongest part of the skyscraper is in the heart of the building, in the stairwell and elevator shaft. If this part is badly affected, the building collapses and collapses hopelessly. Aluminum dust explosion is a hypothesis.
A few weeks ago a local building built in the early 20th century caught fire and collapsed. The result looks a lot like the results of 9/11. Turns out buildings are designed to collapse inward it seems. Almost engineered that way. But who could be responsible for that. Aliens, CIA, Tri Lateral commission? My theory its done by this mysterious group called civil engineers. But I keep getting told thats a fringe conspiracy theory.
Right. There are several videos readily available of burning buildings collapsing pretty much just like the towers did on 9/11. Why would a building necessarily fall sideways. None of the armchair physicists ever explain it. They just “know” it to be true. What these people call “the official narrative” explains how and why the towers fell like they did.
Prior to 9/11 no steel framed building had totally collapsed into its own foot print, at free fall speed, with accompanying pyroclastic flow.
On 9/11. 3 went down.
Not forgetting formation of thermite residue and clear evidence of molten steel.
WTC7 which was not hit by a plane or any significant debris, and also housed the offices of various gov agencies including the people looking into Pentagon Trillions of dollars ‘lost’ also collapsed. in Addition showing clearly a central ‘kink’.
Fact of matter is that on 9/11 several hitherto (until then) immutable physical constants temporarily ceased to operate, including the melting point of structural steel, the value of ‘g’ [gravitational constant], laws of conservation of momentum.
Where are the middle frames of the pentagon videos from the barrier cameras?
Why have they not been released to this day?
Where did engines and undercarriage parts of UA77?
cf Lockerbie pictures of all the debris from a 747 that fell from about 2 miles up.
What did Cheney mean by “the order stands?”
Why did the NIST leave out consideration of the central steel cores (~47 ?) in their risible report. A blunder that would have a junior school report given an F-..
So much unanswered even now.
They had the month. Fort about that time the towers were undergoing “cable renovation”, where the security was pulled out while workers went in every night, the work was not allowed to be observed by anyone on the outside. My brother worked in the North Tower and was aware of this work going on. Fortunately he was visiting me in Florida on that day
yeah sure they take a month to wire the buildings – all that risk – then they threaten all of the work by crashing airplanes into the buildings. That is stupid. Sorry, but it is. What was the point of the airplanes? Bombs and terrorists go together like peas and carrots. Why not just say the terrorists blew up the buildings. Afterall, terrorists had attempted it once already in 1993 (or was that the government conspiracy team too?).
Ever work in demolitions or communications? The first thing that happens when the environment becomes full of big objects moving around (like tanks, trucks, etc) is that wires get broken. It’s actually a big problem and it is ubiquitous. The alleged secret black ops team would be handpicked psychopaths who had no problem killing thousands of innocent Americans and they would have military background, presumably. They would know about the risk of damaging all of their carefully and covertly laid wiring with the crashing jumbo jets. Btw, psychopaths are not known for their ability to be team players.
Just because *you* lack the background to understand the physics involved in the collapse of the buildings, doesn’t therefore mean that they didn’t fall per the official investigation. There are many topics on which I only possess cursory, at best, knowledge of. I tend to keep my mouth shut when those topics come up, lest I be a fool and waste people’s time.
i agreed to all your points except one. you are too naive if you think a black ops team will have conscience enough not to hurt innocents. As with most intelligence operations in all nations , these groups are not officially sanctioned by govt and they move under the radar but have the expertise to organize 9-11 with contact or help from the insiders. And these are temporaey units that will be untraceable and disbanded once the ops done.
it is rather common style of deniable ops , as of the use of foreign friendly intelligence assets to do harm inside CONUS. This time a group of select and highly experienced people are chosen for this task. And this is not the first time or the last time such unofficial group are made behind the govt.
I am an engineer and understand well the dynamics of steel, I can read a stress strain curve of steel and tell you that the plane scenario is just not possible. The thermodynamics don’t support the plane/jet fuel/office fires taking down the buildings, there is simply was not enough energy in the fires to raise the temperature of the all that steel to the critical point of failure. The math does not work.
Larry, some constructive criticism.
First of all,3,533 Degreed and licensed Architects & Engineers disagree with your assessment that the planes brought down the towers. Their training, expertise, and work experience is in that field, yours is not.
https://www.ae911truth.org/
Second, your asserting that the CIA did not bring the towers down is misdirection because it avoids the assertion that SOMEBODY did verses the planes. However, considering the resumes of: the Dulles brothers, James Jesus Angleton, Helms, plus a score of former SS members that constituted the original make-up of the CIA, it would be a safe bet they were involved.
Third, incompetent? I am tired of hearing that same assertion about this administration. The collapse that is going on is engineered. The incompetence claim is a cover. The CIA needs the incompetence claim. Because, if it is engineered, it would be properly classified as treason.
Finally, there is the meeting at the “Red House” concerning the movement of massive amount of funds under the control of the SS out of Germany. Wall Street assets, the Dulles brothers, were key in that effort.
Those 3,500 architects, etc do not all – if any – have experience with that kind of structure. They certainly have no experience with that kind of structure being hit by speeding jumbo jets full of fuel. But more importantly, 3.5K is a tiny number of the total architects, engineers, etc. You can find a fringe kookoo group among any set of professionals, especially if the pool of professionals is large to start with. Some percent of people are just weird, crazy, have personality disorders, are self-interested enough to sell book and otherwise capitalize on tragedies. Interesting that you conspiracy theorists have no problem asserting that hundreds or thousands of witnesses and professional investigators are lying out of self-interest, but you are unable – more like unwilling – to conceive that the fringe groups you like to cite might be lying to sell whatever they are selling, raise money and/or out of some antisocial personality traits.
Dear Mr Johnson, thank you for answering. I have nothing but respect for you.
Did you look at the video? Please explain what happens in the video.
I was talking to a group on a tour in Vienna. The woman said she saw the plane hit the Pentagon. I pressed her and she changed her story to say her friend told her he saw the plane hit the Pentagon. I showed her the pictures of the Pentagon before the roof collapsed. She said it was not the Pentagon at all. I showed her where the picture came from and she quit talking to me. Eyewitness testimony is widely known to be unreliable. People remember what they are expected to have seen, want to be an eyewitness to significant events.
In the videos anyone can easily see that the Twin Towers floors are EXPLODING, not collapsing. The Top of the building above the “impact” leans over and then dissipates in front of our eyes – no “pile driver” at all, which is the official story.
As for building 7, it was NOT hit be an airplane, though debris from the twin towers probably did hit it and start some fires. Its collapse is perfectly symmetrical. Random fires could not have caused that. If that was all it took, they wouldn’t pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to demolition contractors to do what they could accomplish with a few random fires.
NIST has disavowed its own paper on the collapse of building 7.
I never said the CIA did it. I don’t know who did. What I do know is that never in history has a tower exploded like the twins did; and building 7 looks exactly like a controlled demolition.
Please watch the video and explain what you think happened.
sincerely,
jimmy
and we are expected to believe you ? a stranger who got banned in many other blogs like saker’s and matraynov’s for rudeness , insults and spreading FUD?
and you cited a “random” woman who may or may not exists (highly probable only a made up characther in your mind) to support your case ?
why not just believe in John Lear the ex CIA contract pilot who think theres no planes but missiles with plane hologram covering the missiles ? after all John Lear is real person compared to your “imaginary woman” and john lear worked with CIA before..
it is just sad so many peopke vehemently arguing without real knowledge or without experience on the ground , they all watch some videos and think they know everyting..
meanwhile the question “who behind it” never got asked because stupid people like you constantly blather on nonsense
You are falsely accusing me. I was never rude, I never insulted anyone, and I never spread and FUD. Show me the posts where I did. I never lied on any post in my life. Did you watch the video? Please tell me exactly how what the cameras show us happened occurred. I was not banned by Discus in the discussing on Martyanov. Other posters falsely claimed I was “spamming” to keep my posts off. That was eventually overturned by Discus. What happened was I offered constructive criticism that Mr Martyanov should appologize or at least explain why his strong assertions that Russia would not invade were wrong. Mr Martyanov loves to rant on about what “idiots” the people in State and various others are wrong and how they never admit it. If we are to be believed, we must admit our mistakes too. If we censor, we are no better than they. So watch the video and then tell me exactly where I am wrong. Your post was nothing but unsupported accusations and slurs
Hi Larry,
Do you find it all suspicious that the 9/11 hijackers were able to enter and remain in the U.S. for a time while training on how to pilot aircraft? Is U.S. immigration that lax?
Yes, it is that lax. Why do you believe it is controlled? When you enter the country there is no requirement to list where you’ll live and there certainly is no system for checking up on such info if required. Hell, look at the current flood of illegal immigrants. I really don’t understand why you believe the US government is competent.
Larry he is a troll. Look at the name ding a ling. That is what the left and you ex bosses think of you. Your theories are like his supposed theory. It’s an insult.
Dude, there *were* airplane parts in front of the Pentagon and inside of it. Pics of this are readily available to general public.
Of course, if your mind is already hopelessly set that it was a government insider operation, I guess you’ll just ignore the obvious and/or claim the pics are faked by conspirators. Also, stating that all of the witnesses who saw airplanes are just liars is as insulting as it is ridiculous. So a government that is challenged to get basic stuff right suddenly becomes so all powerful and effective, that it can hundreds (maybe thousands) of otherwise honest, hardworking, everyday Americans to lie about an attack on the country – and to pull off a massive secret attack? Sure. Whatever.
Here is a very thorough rebuttal to all of the 9/11 conspiracy theories.
Of course the CTs around here will simply ignore or claim the whole thing is a CIA disinformation operation. Sharing for those who are not totally immersed in the CT Koolaid
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL006F86029C08F6D4
sorry, one more point – why would an “insider conspiracy” care about a controlled demolition? These would be psychopaths that are willing to crash airplanes, destroy building and kill thousands of innocent people that they are sworn to protect, but they’re worried about making sure the towers are going to fall straight down? Why not just randomly blow up the buildings and blame the destruction of the same terrorist group that tried to blow up the towers in 1993. If buildings near the towers are also destroyed as collateral damage, why would the psychopath conspirators care? In fact, debris from the airplanes did damage other buildings. It could have been even greater collateral damage.
Ever ask yourselves that?
No, of course not.
at that time, I read quite some books about 9/11. There really many many strange things in the official version about the 19 highjackers.
example Pentagone: the are a lot of observation cameras in all the area. but I haven´t seen any picture yet, which clearly shows a Boeing flying into the Pentagon.
the only one wich could be seen.. camera very far away – you can see something flying to the pentagon, but not recognize what it is.
I had a discussion at that time with a relative. He laughed at me, because I did not believe the official version.
but then he told the following: he was watching the share of a big insurance company, which then was one of the most affected by 9.11.
On the morning of 9.11 in Europe: at that time still nothing had happened in the USA: the stock price of this share fell strongly and nobody knew why.
There were also strange operations before 9.11 with put options on companys which were strongly affected by 9.11. This was never pursued.
I don´t know who is behind all 9.11. And i will not developp any theory.
All I know is: it certainly was not the job of these 19 arabs.
I hope someday truth will come out.
again you assumed the perpetrators are capable of empathy to the victims. and these people will protect ‘innocents’ they ‘sworn to protect’.
there always people who will do these things for their ideology or for money , why assume these are evil people ? even the german soldiers who become rapist and murderer in the eastern front when they return home they behave normally among german citizens.. Is there really a switch between acting as animal or human ? no , there’s nothing separating the brutal animal and the human being .. these people will turn into murderous animals even to their ‘fellow americans’ if their mind set to it for whatever reasons.
there’s always people who willing to go far to do what it takes , like Jim Jones and his cohorts who murder everyone willing or unwilling with poisonus kool aid
Did you watch my video compilation? Your YouTube video alleged rebuttal has been debunked. Watch my video and debate the facts in it.
Eric, there used to be a website called Patriots for 9/11 truth, and a sister site called Pilots for 9/11 truth, both now memory holed. One of the people on that site, was Lt Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, an Air Force PhD in physics if I recall correctly, who was stationed at the Pentagon, and observed the crash site immediately afterwards. What she said of what she saw on that day, was nothing like what she would have expected to see if a plane had struck the building, but exactly like what she would have expected to see if it has been hit by a missile. She said there was nothing on the lawn which evidenced airliner debris.
There is also the testimony of Major General Albert Stubblebine, who in this linked video, gives his credentials – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDoCLobUhuc
In my initial search for his video, the return came back that it had been removed due to hate speech! Now the one I linked above, is not the same interview I originally saw, but it makes the same point.
As I said about those disappeared websites mentioned above, there were many US high ranked, highly qualified US former service personnel, who totally rejected the official account of what brought the towers down.
One former military pilot, who later flew civil airliners, including of of those brought down on 9/11, said of one of the planes, I don’t recall which one, that the manner and speed at which it was flown into the tower was such that, and i’ll quote from my memory, so it’s at least pretty close to what he said – I couldn’t do it, and I’m damn sure those hijackers couldnt’ do it. This was a pilot with many hours flight time in civil large jets. I tried the same thing on FlightSim with a 737 at the same speed, and it’s almost impossible to hit such a small target at that speed. Other pilots spoke of the high banking and steep decending turn of the plane alleged to have hit the Pentagon, evidence of which was a simulated video derived from FAA data, as an extremely difficult manouver, which even the most skilled pilots would have difficulty performing. Bearing in mind that the alleged hijackers had little skill on equivalent of Cessna 72 which they were training on, it seems a safe bet that they didn’t have the skill to pilot 767’s (I think that’s what was supposed to have hit the Pentagon) Also bearing in mind, the flight school these guys were training at, said that they weren’t really interested in how to land the plane, just how to get it airborne. They didn’t even have ppl licences for Gods sake. For all the reasons above, the official answers don’t answer the questions posed. So we still don’t know what happened that day, but we can high confidence that what we are told happened, didn’t.
Kwiatkowski had seen actual missile strikes on a reinforced structure like the Pentagon? And she had seen airplane crashes on the same kind of structure? How the hell would she have an opinion worth giving the time of day? What billet was she filling at the Pentagon? Did it have anything to do with physics, bombardment of reinforced structures? Airplane crashes? When did she actually look at the lawn? What part of the lawn did she have access to? You have no idea.
As for the can’t fly an airplane into buildings at that speed gambit, what are you saying? That the airplanes, that tens of thousands saw in person in NYC and millions saw on tv, were holographs? Because someone did fly them into the towers at that speed. Sorry you can’t replicate on your game boy. I guess if you can’t do it, no one can. Sorry, but I don’t trust your memory of what the pilot said or even his reality.
Eric,
I share your frustration in trying to reason with facts with people who have already made up their minds. Like you, I like to stick with observable facts.
In answer to your questions, I actually found links to those articles quoted through very indirect searches. By the way, I notice you made no mention of Maj Gen Albert Stubblebine in your response. Anyway, here are the links for your consideration; you will I hope agree, that given the cv’s of these military and civil aviation people, that they hardly wear tin foil hats.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
http://911scholars.org/
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http%3A%2F%2Ftwilightpines.com%2Fimages%2Fpurduesimulation.doc&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK
Note that none of these people offer prescriptive accounts of what happened on that day. What they do say is that the official 9/11 Commission report does not account for what happened, a fact admitted to by its authors.
Again, only alllegations. Here is an actual picture of the Pentagon after the “crash”. https://www.sott.net/image/s20/418765/full/pentagon_before_collapse.jpg
There is no hole big enough for an airliner to have gone through. Windows are intact. There is no tail section, no wings, no baggage, no bodies, like every other plane crash, except the alleged one in Penn and one in a Miami swamp, certainly not against a hardened site like the Pentagon.
And, once again, you have only character assassination and insinuations. Have you yet bothered to look at my video? https://www.bitchute.com/video/0nwR88z9Etiu/
You summarily, cavalierly dismissed it. Address the points in it.
Actually, the hole in the wall matches the fuselage of the plane. Also, you ignore the photos of the pieces of the aircraft found on the grounds of the Pentagon. And where are all of the passengers who were on the plane?
+ the light posts knocked down by the airplane’s wings on the way into the Pentagon. A missile can’t knock down poles like that.
Incidentally, I never said that aircraft didn’t hit the WTC. What I said was that flying them manually, without directional assistance such as an instrument landing system localiser, was extremely difficult to pull off, even for seasoned civil airline pilots. Now, there have been claims, how reliable I have no idea, that there were in fact directional systems in place in the towers to guide the planes to their targets.
Razor,
I don’t know anything about flying airplanes and I’m not going to act like many here and pretend I do and make definitive statements based on what my favorite YouTube – the one that confirms my predispositions – has to say. I have read/heard that all of the flying done by the terrorists that day was well within the skillset they would have obtained in the course of their flight studies. You say otherwise. I don’t who is correct. There is no evidence of a localizer (e.g. not one found in the wreckage, no signals on the recovered black box).
I realize this is a futile effort, but here goes. The pilots were murdered by the radical Islamic terrorists. They were stabbed. The recordings of their deaths make it very clear what was happening. What evidence do you have to support your specious suggestion that “directional systems” were in place guiding the planes in?
The alleged cover up about what happened at the WTC and the Pentagon has more to do with covering for the Bush Administration’s total failure to act on the intelligence about the upcoming attack. That is the whitewash in the report on 9-11.
It’s raymcgovern.com and not .org
Response to Eric Newhill and Larry Johnson here, as there is no reply link under their replies to me.
Eric, my response to your initial reply to me seems to have been lost somewhere in the ether. I suggested that for some reason you did not refer to Maj Gen Albert Stubblebine.
Here’s a link which includes his findings re the Pentagon attack. It also includes many other high ranking and highly qualified retired US military including former top gun pilots who later had long careers in civil aviation with many flying hours experience. In fact, one of them ridicules the idea that the hijackers could fly sophisticated aircraft with just training on Cessna 172/182.
The site also includes Lt Col Karen Kwiatkowskis testimony re the Pentagon just after the attack.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
I also include 2 other links for your consideration;
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http%3A%2F%2Ftwilightpines.com%2Fimages%2Fpurduesimulation.doc&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1b79jp
Your second reply to me betrays a mindset that prefers ridicule to having to challenge your critical faculties and your set views on this tragedy. I find that surprising, as I have always found your comments intelligent and cogent. As to your comments about knowledge of flying airplanes, you don’t need such knowledge when the relevent info is provided by professional pilots on that website above. They are the unquestioned experts on these matters. I refer particularly to the statement of Captain Russ Wittenberg from that website patriotsquestion911.com
I hardly believe you would claim the senior military figures, and experts in their respective fields on this site are tin foil hatters. They have the most impressive CV’s, or resumes, as you say on your side of the pond. I suggest also reading the statement of Commander Ralph Kolstad on that site as to the hijackers capabilities:
“At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.
I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!”
To Larry,
I have no evidence of radio directional beacons in the WTC, as I said in my earlier contribution, just that I had read that suggestion being made. I made no claim as to its accuracy. I am however deeply impressed by those US ranking and highly experienced professional service people. Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t conceive of these people being wild eyed conspiracy theorists.
Razor,
I wasn’t going to say anything more on this topic. We have all done a fine enough job of obscuring Larry’s post; an excellent interview with Ray McGovern, who is worthy of respect and very much worth listening to.
However, the damage is already done and I was thinking about why these conspiracy theories bother me so much. Turns out there are several reasons. One of which is that they defy logic based on observable facts; a pet peeve that bothers even more me when people insist on a reality they create based on that approach. Another is that the CTs are arrogant (“I alone have the truth that you sheeple can’t handle or can’t conceive of”). Yet another is that they are designed to undermine our society. Finally, CTs are highly insulting to many groups of people. The latter is what I will focus on here for posterity’s sake.
9/11 CTs are an insult to the victims on the airplanes and their families. What you, Stumbblebine and others are de facto saying is that the passengers and crews of the airplanes didn’t die. Rather, somehow, they were all in on the conspiracy. They are now presumably living in some foreign country, having abandoned their families, loved ones, friends, careers, etc for money (? or whatever). Or perhaps they were tricked by the CIA and mass executed in some airport hanger or something like that. Before being executed and disposed of, the CIA made them send desperate final commos to their families. Maybe the families were in on it too? Do you realize how awful it is to suggest that, not to mention being insane.
Perhaps incrementally worse is the insult extends to the brave souls who fought the hijackers on the plane that crashed in Shanksville. One story about that flight stands out in my mind; a young woman who, like the rest of the passenger, had learned about the trade towers and, knowing what her fate was to be, called her mother to say a heart wrenching good bye. According to you and Stumblebine, she’s a liar too, now, probably, living on an island in the Caribbean sipping Bahama Mamas and laughing all the way to the bank, screw her mother.
The CTs further insult all of the witnesses who, for example, who reported seeing an airplane flying into the Pentagon. They’re all just cowards and liars, apparently.
Then there are all of the first responders, like those who reported to the Pentagon to address the fires and to attempt to rescue survivors. There are photos of those first responders and airplane parts (some with identifying serial numbers) simultaneously on the lawn outside of the Pentagon. Also, the first responders meticulously searched for, and found, scraps of remains of the passengers and crew within the building among the wreckage of the building and, yes, airplane parts. So they are cowardly liars too. Not so cowardly to prevent them going into the carnage of a burning building, of course, but they watched the conspirators plant all of the airplane parts and went along with it.
The there are countless people, like flight controllers who picked up the flight on radar, who are also cowardly liars going along with the conspiracy. Every investigator on the case – there were many – are among the cowardly liar brigade (or has it grown to a division or army at this point?).
All because a handful of professionals don’t understand some points because they’ve never experienced them before and they are too arrogant to admit that their expertise has limits. For example, Hani Hanjour – who piloted into the Pentagon – was an FAA certified commercial pilot. Some other pilot doesn’t believe that such an aircraft could be flown into the Pentagon? Well obviously such a plane can be. The doubter never tried it, thankfully, because he is a commercial pilot and not a Kamikaze. Apparently, when not worried about the safety of passengers and crew, a trained pilot can accomplish all manner of dangerous maneuvers. Maybe the doubter doesn’t like being outflown by a jihadist hijacker?
That little group of professionals, a miniscule minority of the total in their respective fields, is simply arrogant enough to run their mouths based on the notion that if they are incapable of understanding a scenario, then the scenario could not happen. They have no problem stating such a thing with absolute certainty and it is what, at base, they are all saying. That is not objective and it is not scientific. Everyone is lying, corrupt and wrong, except them.
Dude, I wish I would have written this.
A couple of cocktails at my fav watering hole and it was like, “Wait a minute. This is more than a mere academic debate”. But also, a couple of cocktails and spelling, grammar, etc. go to hell. That edit function sure would be nice for those of us who fret about such things 🙂
A final thought (really). I’ve been analyzing “stuff” most of my adult life. Still am and am well paid to do it. In fact, I’m in charge of a team of analysists. I both manage and mentor. Well paid to do it. Arrogance, bias, egocentrism, superiority complexes, laziness, inability to discern and, especially, a quick mouth are your enemies. Humility, patience, the ability to listen to other interested parties, careful quiet thought, hypothesis testing and common sense are your allies. Learned those lessons the hard way.
A skyscraper does not collapse like the Twin Towers if the fire has not reached the interior of the structural core.
This may be due to the fact that the doors that connect to the stairwell are category M45 or M60, that is, they are designed to resist fire for 45 or 60 minutes until they are destroyed, and only under normal fire, not by thousands of liters of kerosene. Burning, however the elevators do not have that fire protection and it is possible that the kerosene spilled there creating electrical fires (all the installations pass through the service shaft including the elevators) A fire of >500° C only needs 5 minutes to reduce the structural strength of steel to less than half. The temperatures for the steel calculation hypothesis are about 20°C or 30°C. If the steel in the skyscraper’s core softens, the building plummets.
This is a great video.
Tragic that these knowledgeable and objective voices are struggling to get heard.
It is a great video. Watched it last night. Ray McGovern laid out the chronology very well and gave perceptive insight.
I really appreciate the video. Thanks!
Jeez Larry, you’ve sure set the cat among the pigeons with your comment.
And you’re correct about people having ridged views too, despite the evidence.
However, I’m certain Mr Skorpion9mm has the inside running on truth in this marathon.
And no, I’m not about to provide links, dyofr.
Here’s some of what I know.
1 The towers were clad in aluminum siding, fastened with rivets, however the steel rivet shank part caused corrosion and in the late 90’s the siding was falling off. Look out below!
2 Impossibly expensive to replace.
3 The only rational option was to demolish all the buildings, not just 1, 2 & 7
4 The lift columns were the central structural element.
5 It took several months for the lifts in the three buildings to be ‘upgraded’.
6 Newspapers of the day reported on frustrations of ongoing lift ‘maintenance’ work causing lengthy delays.
7 The dancing ‘tradesmen’ had explosive residues in their vehicles.
8 Were recorded celebrating as the buildings came down
9 Arrested but released & left town for the safety of a small mid east country.
Most importantly though
10 After the ’93 basement bombing, the towers were state-of-the-art re-engineered and retrofitted to withstand all manner of conceivable impacts, everything checked and ticked off, aircraft impact included.
11 Eight years later, on the morning of the big day, a key person from that team of engineers, said to someone I was married to, in a four eye conversation, that the collapse was “absolutely impossible”. Totally believable if you knew said nameless persons resume ! Not a govt employee or person with an opinion.
Mr Skorpion9mm, I’m glad for you and your family.
Since someone mentioned Maj Gen Albert Stubblebine …
Aside from the fact he retired in what? 1984, he was an intel officer who it appears truly believed in psychic warfare. So much so, he got the U.S. military in on it.
Also, it appears he was told, in essence, to retire due to this.
I mean, I liked listening to Art Bell, but using such things to help support the argument is not helping … at all.
The video was excellent; an informed, high quality presentation. I definitely got a lot out of it. Thanks.
Just a brief comment on the 9/11 situation.
I personally do not venture an opinion on that matter.
However, it is worth noting that a man who deserves considerable respect on matters of intelligence has expressed quite strong views contrary to the general consensus.
That man is the late Albert Stubblebine,
who was the CG (Commanding General) of the U.S. Army’s Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) from 1981 to 1984.
To see some of what he said,
Google Stubblebine 9/11.
Perhaps Stubblebine is wrong, but he certainly deserves more consideration and respect than the average man popping off on this.
On second thought, videos such as this
https://youtu.be/LsGcIkevyHM
of planes hitting the buildings,
also the telephoned messages from the unfortunate doomed passengers in those four planes,
would seem to all but prove the standard explanation.
But even so, General Stubblebine’s words are of interest, to me at any rate.
The general who ran the military remote viewing program?
Yes, indeed so.
He evidently felt that at least worth exploring.
People back then did worry about the Russians getting ahead of us in one important area or another.
I don’t believe that invalidates all his views.
You don’t get selected to be CG INSCOM, and l retain that position for over three years, without having considerable credibility, I would think.
As to his later views on the paranormal,
should such views invalidate everything he has said?
Perhaps I am being too forgiving, but I think not.
Keith,
Yes. I know who Stubblebine is. He’s a wack job. That is not because he was into psi, remote viewing, etc. I actually know that those things are real. My knowing is based on both personal experience and participation in some of the science.
Stubblebine went off the deep end. His rational faculties deteriorated to the point where he was drooling and rambling. Maybe he was headed that way before the psi stuff, but he certainly lost his mind afterwards. Dementia may have had something to do with it. He certainly wasn’t in on the 9/11 investigation as he was long retired by then – and discredited. I think there are even some videos on YouTube that show him being mentally impaired. Hard to believe that someone trying to convince another of the validity of 9/11 CTs would use Stubblebine as a source. Really, the convo ends at that point as far as I’m concerned.
Does Mr. Johnson have an opinion to offer on the work of Douglas Valentine on the CIA? I’ve seen a couple of interviews with him that were intriguing, but I have not yet read his books.
Please note that this question is separate and has nothing to do with the ongoing debate regarding 9/11. I do not know what Valentine thinks on the matter.
Who is Douglas Valentine? Never heard of him.
As to the OP, a great and thoughtful inside view of what would have been know within the CIA in the long, long run up to February of this year.
The Russian red lines are widely known, understood and have been that way for years.
Whatever this mess is, it is not a failure to collect information, intelligence or intent.
The Firm did it’s job and pasted it on to the customer.
When the customer buys the full meal deal, they sometimes toss out the little packets of ketchup if they have other plans.
PS. wow 50+ posts and still in ground effect,
I’ll stay out of it.
Just going to say it this way, you cannot trust anything, the news, the gossip of your friends, and especially the crud that’s on the internet. All of it designed to get you to a certain viewpoint.
A simple internet search of Ralph Kolstad, be it captain or commander, will reveal lots of links, yet I found only 1 to a legitimate news site. Yes, I know the news can be propaganda and weaponized, but generally that is very evident when they still do the JournoList thing of parroting each as if that makes it all true.
“Something isn’t adding up quite right,” said Capt. Ralph Kolstad, an official of the Allied Pilots Association, which represents American Airlines pilots.”
That’s from 1995 …
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1995/12/22/survivors-found-in-andes-crash/18822678-76a6-4476-b0e9-13e7939df10e/
One would think that Kolstad would have at least a wiki page for being a US Top Gun Pilot who believes 9-11 was an inside job. I mean General Stubblebine does and he retired in 1984.
This is his website listing his books. I’m not necessarily trying to promote the site, but I thought this the best way to answer your question. Thank you for your response.
https://www.douglasvalentine.com/index.htm
Thanks greatly for bringing this excellent video of McGovern to our attention.
There is a playlist of Ukraine-related videos from John Mearsheimer, Ray McGovern, you, and such as Jack Matlock and Scott Ritter:
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZlQy6FlDBO0aDDh34weAdQUmxaDR0
I would point out in particular a joint video of Mearsheimer and McGovern on that playlist:
https://youtu.be/ppD_bhWODDc
which includes in its Q&A some very interesting comments from Matlock:
https://youtu.be/ppD_bhWODDc?t=59m55s
Somehow the copy of the link to the playlist left out a few characters.
The correct link (hopefully) is below:
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZlQy6FlDBO0aoDtDDh34weAdQUmxaDR0
Here’s the thing regarding 9-11 and pretty much everything else including what’s opined on this site by Johnson …
Question everything. Do not take anyone at their word. At the same, use logic and common sense. It’s hard when we know our government has lied to is, along with the media.
The coverup of 9-11 is mundane as Johnson pointed out. It’s all mundane. Always has been.
The problem we have is that we cannot trust our government which allows this stuff to feed and grow.
My point is not to discount other theories, but he judicious.
Sovereign citizens, for example, love to conflate civil and criminal process and laws. They make good points on the surface, but under scrutiny these points make no sense and/or are direct, purposeful attempts at “logical” appeal that is emotional, but unsound and not based on any legal foundations.
Yes, question everything, but not everything is nefarious or at least to the scale believed.
Dear Mr Johnson, thank you for answering. The nose of the plane is very thin, has little mass, would not have made that hole. The Engines, their mounts and wing struts are the heaviest. The engines hang down way below the nose. There are NO engine holes, either in the building nor in the ground where they would have hit first. There are windows intact where the wings and tail would have hit. There is NOT much debris on the ground at all. The newscasters observed and commented on this. The tail section is missing, the part that always survives. You cannot fly an airplane at 400 mph or higher at the level at which the alleged nose impact happened due to ground effect. Many pilots have confirmed this. The visual evidence is overwhelming: NO airliner hit that building.
As for aluminum explosions, show me where those have happened and the details of how they happened.
And what about building 7?
And the very observable explosions in the twin towers?
sincerely,
jimmy
Please tell me what happened to the passengers? With respect to Building 7, it was on fire. How do I know? One of the firefighters dealing with it is a friend and was there. There was no explosion bringing it down. The fire caused it.
Thank you, Mr Johnson, for your reply. As for the Pentagon, “our” position is that no airliner hit the Pentagon at all or there would have been an outline of the heavy duty wing struts, the heavy duty engine mounts, and the heavy duty engines through the building wall, especially since your sides claims that the thin, light nose section penetrated the wall; It is aerodynamically impossible to fly an airliner at max speed that close to the ground; there are no gouge marks in the ground in front of the alleged impact point from the low hanging engines.
I do not know what happened to the passengers. However, “we” do know that the alleged hijacked airliners, all coast to coast flights, were extremely lightly loaded with passengers compared to all the other coast to coast flights that day. “We” also know that many of the passengers, it not all, were government employees and contractors. I remind you of “Operation Northwoods” https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf where the Joint Chiefs planned to blow up airliners that had been filled with black ops personal masquerading as students, but secretly landed, before the planes were to be destroyed by allegedly “Cuban Migs”. They also planned to kill innocent civilians on the streets and blame it on the Cubans. I have not brought up the Pennsylvania plane where there were impossible calls from passengers (cell phones will not work at airliner speeds and altitudes, proven by many tests and admitted by the airlines). I was not an insider on this crime. I do not KNOW what happened to the passengers. I can use Operation Northwoods as proof of concept. I could posit that the planes were landed secretly, like Operation Northwoods would have, and they were all murdered. What’s a few more hundred when they killed around 4,000 in the towers? But my accurately telling you and proving what happened to the alleged passengers in no way affects the visual evidence as I stated above in first sentence after the greeting.
I already admitted there were fires in building 7. But the pictures from the front side clearly show that on that side they were small and few. Yet the building came virtually perfectly down into its own footprint. That is physically not possible. As I said earlier, building owners pay hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars for controlled demolition experts to do what we say happened to Building 7. If just a few or even extensive fires on one side would do that, they would not spend that money. There are videos showing gas and dust coming out of building 7’s basement before the collapse. Building 7 was not exploded down like the Twin Towers. If you watch classic controlled demolitions, like I show in my video, you do not see many or huge explosions. As for your comment that it would have taken weeks to plan and plant the charges, that IS our point – 911 was planned months ahead. Silverstein replaced the WTC security contractors with George Bush’s brother’s firm 6 months before. Silverstein said, on tape, that they “pulled” the building, a controlled demolition term for bringing down a building with explosives. It was later said that he meant that they pulled all the personnel out. I am not mind reader so maybe he just didn’t know what that term meant. We do know that 6 months before, Silverstein insured the building for double indemnity in case of a terrorist attack and collected a huge profit.
As for your claim that the fire caused it, the National Instituted of Standards and Testing had to withdraw their claim that fires caused it. Even their original claim/model of what happened up to before the collapse was withdrawn due to obvious flaws.
It is not up to me to prove what happened. The burden of proof is on the government. “We” have shown that what the government claims to have happened is impossible; that the observed facts belie that fantasy.
I again remind you of the observed and heard explosions of the Twin Towers. Those cannot be explained as a collapse.
Thank you again for reading and considering this all.
I will still respect and listen to you no matter what your final position on 911. You are very right on so many things. I learn from you every day.
Sincerely
jimmy
You clearly take cartoons too seriously. Do you think an airplane hitting a reinforced structure (stone, concrete, steel and kevlar) like the Pentagon, is going to leave a clean cut airplane silhouette hole like Wile E Coyote does when his ambush of Roadrunner backfires and he is propelled into a canyon wall?
Like most everything that CTs assert, you are simply wrong about no wing impacts on the Pentagon. Here is the damage one would expect – if one didn’t stagnate after forming their view of physics from Saturday morning cartoons: http://911review.com/articles/stjarna/eximpactdamage.html
“Operation Northwoods” was a proposal, not an operation. It never happened. So it can’t be a template for anything that did actually happen. I believe those who proposed Northwoods were fired/relieved of command because the whole thing was deemed evil and unacceptable.
Cell phones don’t work on aircraft? Really?
Oh, also, there was an obvious gouge mark on the ground from one of the airplane’s wings. There were light posts knocked down by the airplane’s approach.
That word you CTists keep using “can’t”, I don’t think it means what you think it means.
In reply to your reply to your own post, IF the wing had hit the ground, it would have spun, skewed the airplane, torn off the wing. The heavy, dense engines hang way below the fuselage and would have dug a trench. And again, you make slurs and character assassination against me rather than argue the points and presenting evidence.
Not true. And you need to stop this crap. I’ve indulged your bullshit enough. Eric presents his arguments in a logical, factual manner. You are the one ignoring facts. I keep asking about what happened to the passengers on the plane that hit the Pentagon. You refuse to address that. Instead, you go off into some evidence-free claim that they were executed and buried somewhere. If you want to comment about the war in Ukraine, fine. Anymore on this 9-11 bullshit and I will delete you. Enough!!
oh heck, while I’m at it, it’s funny that you can’t conceive that maybe the airplane was both tilted slightly and at a slightly higher altitude as it came across the lawn such that the engines wouldn’t scrape the ground, but the wing tip would, as the gouge in the ground demonstrated.
It’s funny that you can’t conceive that light weight aircraft aluminum doesn’t leave a perfect cutout image when impacting a super reinforced structure.
“It is aerodynamically impossible to fly an airliner at max speed that close to the ground” Really? Great, then unless the aircraft is coming down pretty much nose first, there should never be an airplane crash. An out of control aircraft just gets close to the ground and then, like magic, lifts back up into the air!
Use some common sense, man.
The lightweight aircraft aluminum wings made a perfect outline on the TWIN towers, which were hardened to withstand a direct impact from a heavier, denser aircraft.
The aircraft were alleged to have come in low and direct at the Pentagon. The pictures of whatever hit the Pentagon from the parking gate show this and an aircraft much smaller than an airliners. You have alleged that the aircraft wings cut down light polls a good distance from the Pentagon. Those light polls are not thousands of feet tall, not even hundreds. You can’t have it both ways.
Recommended shoulder patch for the 5th Special Conspiracy Theorist Group
https://www.ebay.com/itm/334329921080?chn=ps&var=543323254063&_trkparms=ispr%3D1&amdata=enc%3A1uY2OPPsuR6Ccyk2uFOnzZg90&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&itemid=543323254063_334329921080&targetid=1584739238054&device=c&mktype=&googleloc=9030238&poi=&campaignid=15275224983&mkgroupid=131097072938&rlsatarget=pla-1584739238054&abcId=9300697&merchantid=113781126&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI8Oemv_H2-AIVMnxvBB2-awxNEAsYAiABEgJrdPD_BwE
I promise this is the last I will say on this topic, but I feel I need to flesh out the Northwoods thing. Ever heard of a brain storming session? i.e. “here’s an objective – get Castro and make Cuba friendly again. How can we do that? Let’s hear proposals. Nothing is off the table.”
Proposals are then approved for presentation at the next level. Yes, Northwoods is a sick and wrong proposal in every way, but some people are literal. If it might work, it needs to be heard. Thems the orders.
Putting Northwoods out to a committee that is attempting to be thorough in no way suggests that it would ever be operationalized. More importantly, it in no way suggests that it *could* be operationalized. That is key. There was no feasibility testing. No risk/benefit analysis, etc. It was just an idea that someone came up with b/c they were ordered to come up with ideas. Then the idea and the proposer were shot down.
I know CTists like to quote Northwoods and make the leap that such things are SOP for the US govt – and that 9/11 was just another Northwoods. I don’t see the connection. False flags are as old as kingdoms and war itself. That the US would come up with a false flag proposal should be no revelation. It doesn’t mean anything. Just because there are false flag operations doesn’t mean that everything is a false flag operation; especially if the model for the alleged false flag is merely a brain storming session proposal that never got a serious work-up.
The flip side is that terrorists and terrorist attacks are real things too. Why does the false flag template take control of some people’s minds over the terrorist template? That to me is the interesting question. I have some answers, I think, but I’m done.
Once again you offer only slurs, character assassination and assertions. Operation Northwoods was signed and seriously proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to SoD McNamara who rejected it. It was not some back room fantasy by some random spook. Your assertion that it could not be a template for future operations because it didn’t get carried out is absurd on its surface.
While Mr Johnson puts forth the idea that others have stated, that the nose of the alleged airliner penetrated the building, and there is a matching hole in the third ring, that is ridiculous since the nose is thin and light weight. There are NO holes from from the heaviest, densest parts, the engines, engine mounts, wing struts and landing gear! There is only superficial damage to the building that your link alleges were caused by wing struts, engines, mounts and landing gear, with INTACT windows in between.
The essential part of the original video is available again here:
https://odysee.com/@geopol:a/tomahawk:13