The Phaserl


Jim Fetzer Goes Full Tilt 9/11 ‘NO PLANES’ Nutter: WHY? When So Many FACTS Are On Our Side… WHY??

[Ed. Note: With so many FACTS on the side of 9/11 Truth, the ‘NO PLANES’ theory has always struck us as the absolute height of DISINFO. Given the endless list of FACTS one could cover, we wonder why James Fetzer would choose to discuss this most fringe aspect of the 9/11 event at all, much less in a brief public TV interview. Please leave your thoughts below.]

from PressTV News Videos:

The September, 11 terrorist attacks in the US were a “deliberate hoax” and “massive deception” by neoconservatives in the Pentagon, in cooperation with US and Israeli intelligence agencies to take the US into war on behalf of Israel, James Fetzer the co-founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth says.

Help us spread the ANTIDOTE to corporate propaganda.

Please follow SGT Report on Twitter & help share the message.

15 comments to Jim Fetzer Goes Full Tilt 9/11 ‘NO PLANES’ Nutter: WHY? When So Many FACTS Are On Our Side… WHY??

  • James Apice

    As a commercial pilot with over 12000+ hours (9000 turbine) I can say that there is very little to dispute with James Fetzer’s argument.

    • SGT

      hmm, well thanks for your input James, appreciate a pilot’s perspective. I still think that as far as 9/11 truth goes, this topic is the fringe of the fringe designed to make newbies think ‘truthers’ are crazy – and worse, allowing for the mockingbird media to point to interviews like this as a way to malign all of the rest of the movement and the FACTS.

  • Sam

    Don’t think anyone really needs to go down that plane/no plane rabbit hole like he does because it does sound very whacky….”a
    rope tied to a landing gear” …never heard of that one! Why not simply stick to the architects and engineers science of bldg collapse and especially as it pertains to bldg 7…perhaps the hyper excited Fetzer is trying too hard to make something of a name for himself by interjecting where he need not go?????

    • SGT

      appreciate the post Sam, sometimes I think Fetzer treads dangerously close to disinfo territory which has given me pause about him in the past – though most often he is near the bulls eye.

    • Emmanuel Goldstein

      Plane or no plane Dr. Wood has ruled out destruction by ANY FORM OF KINETIC AND/OR THERMAL ENERGY. Mr. Gage, like Mr. Fetzer, have no interest in the truth.

      “When an honest man, honestly mistaken, comes face-to-face with undeniable and irrefutable truth, he is faced with one of two choices, he must either cease being mistaken or cease being honest.” – Amicus Solo (Latan for “a lone friend”)

      If Richard Gage is using AE911Ttruth’s funds to buy Dr. Wood’s book, and Richard Gage is suppressing Dr. Wood’s work, one must conclude that the prime directive of AE911Truth is to suppress the evidence. Mr. Gage cannot refute the overwhelming, conclusive, and indisputable evidence contained in Dr. Wood’s book but only misrepresent it (i.e. promote disinformation about it). Humanity has awoken. If you are worthy and willing to open your eyes to the truth, read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood.

      Richard Gage and other Liars for 9/11 Truth\

      Image of check from Richard Gage for Dr. Judy Wood Book

      AE911Truth vs Dr. Judy Wood


      Form 990 ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9-11 TRUTH INC, Part I Summary, 1.) mission statement

      Our mission is to research, compile, and disseminate (some) scientific evidence relative to the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers, (not all 7, just 3 of the buildings) calling for a truly open and independent investigation and supporting others in the pursuit of justice. (Except Dr. Judy Wood)

      Form 990 ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9-11 TRUTH INC, Schedule A, Part II, Section A

      from 2008 to 2012 AE911Truth income was $1.365 million!!!

      If Mr. Gage was searching for the truth, then he would not be trying to deceive his supporters and the American people by claiming to present the best “scientific forensic evidence”, only to completely ignore the large sum of scientific forensic evidence that thermite does not explain. If a scientist or researcher only presented the evidence that supports their hypothesis while completely ignoring the evidence that countered their hypothesis, they could be stripped of their professional license or degree for presenting such an unscientific and biased fraction of the total sum of important physical evidence that demands consideration.

      Theory, speculation, and belief are not necessary to understand that a type of directed energy was used on 9/11, rather, only detailed study of the empirical evidence from 9/11 is necessary. Situations like this are rare in science, where there is so much empirical evidence that one can bypass theory and speculation to draw an irrefutable conclusion from the evidence. This also helps to illustrate a major difference between Dr. Judy Wood and other 9/11 researchers, as she did not start with theory or speculation and then begin researching to see if it was consistent with the evidence. Instead, Dr. Wood simply did what any objective, vigilant scientist would do, she gathered and studied as much of the empirical evidence from 9/11 as possible, assembling a monumental database of verifiable physical evidence that dwarfs the efforts of any other 9/11 “research”, including the unscientific ‘9/11 Commission Report’. After gathering and studying all of this important evidence, Dr. Wood arrived at the only logical, inescapable conclusion that explains all of this empirical evidence, a general category of weapon technology known as ‘directed energy weapons’ (DEW). It would be theory or speculation to go beyond that by trying to name a specific weapon technology or location, because that is not what the evidence allows us to irrefutably conclude. This is why the term is left as a general one, because that is the only logical, conclusive, and irrefutable conclusion that the evidence allows us to make.

      This download is the Foreword and book review of “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” by Eric Larsen, Professor Emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice 1971 – 2006 (35 years), plus the Author’s Preface.

      Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book can give at least 10 reasons that rule out the theory by “AE911trutherd” that welding material destroyed the WTC. How many can you list ? Hint: the bottom of page 45, the top of page 171, the diagrams on page 81 and 84, the diagram at the bottom of page 11, and of course pages 122 to 127. The list is endless, actually.

      By reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?, you know from the EVIDENCE that the Twin Towers turned to dust in mid-air never hitting the ground.

      >Bombs don’t do that.
      >Thermite does not do that.
      >Thermate does not do that.
      >Nano-enhanced thermite does not do that.
      >Nano-thermite does not do that.
      >New-and-improved super-duper mini-micro-nano thermite does not do that.
      >Firecrackers do not do that.
      >Fire does not do that.
      >Nukes do not do that.
      >Megga nukes do not do that.
      >Milli-nukes do not do that.
      >Mini-nukes do not do that.
      >Nano-nukes cannot do that.
      >A wrecking ball cannot do that.
      >A slingshot cannot do that.
      >Missiles cannot do that.

      We know this because we know those things above involve Kinetic Energy and/or Thermal Energy and we know that the “dustification” was done without Kinetic Energy and without Thermal Energy. That is, “dustification” was not done with high heat (Thermal Energy) nor with some form of Kinetic Energy (wrecking ball, projectile, gravity collapse). The building was not cooked to death nor was it beaten to death. So Kinetic Energy Weapons (KEW) did not destroy the buildings nor did Thermal Energy Weapons (TEW) destroy the buildings. But we know that Energy was Directed somehow (and controlled within fairly precise boundaries) to cause the building to turn to dust in mid air. That is, some kind of (cold) Directed Energy that was used as a weapon (cDEW) had to have done this. Energy was directed and manipulated within the material such that it came apart without involving high heat (fire, welding materials such as thermite) and without having something fly through the air and hit it (bullets, missile, bombs, wrecking ball, a giant hammer, or many micro hammers)

      If this technology can manipulate energy to do something like this, it can also be manipulated to provide us with “free energy” (i.e. “off the grid”). Simply by looking at the cover of Dr. Wood’s book you can realize there must be a technology that can do this. This is evidence that such technology does exist. This is evidence that a technology capable of providing “free energy” (“off the grid”) exists. The whole world witnessed this which means the whole world can know that “free-energy technology” exists. This realization will change the world. This is probably the biggest reason why there is so much effort spent misrepresenting, distorting, and suppressing Dr. Wood’s research.

      Those that choose to focus on hearsay, speculation, conspiracy theories, or unqualified opinions while ignoring irrefutable factual evidence by avoiding it is what keeps a cover-up in place. Diverting the public to arguing between the two false choices of “9/11 Truthers” verses “The Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory” while ignoring the facts is classic perception management designed to hide and obscure the evidence. (Chanting “9/11 Was An Inside Job!” is equivalent to chanting “Yes To Fascism!”)

      Richard Gage is NOT a qualified forensic scientist. Dr. Judy Wood IS a qualified forensic scientist. AE911Truth is calling for a new investigation. This implies an admission that they are NOT qualified to conduct such an investigation of what happened. Otherwise, why are they calling for a new investigation instead of conducting one themselves — unless the intention is to knowingly distract its members and others away from the new investigation that has already been conducted? AE911Truth wants a new investigation? They already have one. It’s contained in a book called “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” Why is AE911Truth suppressing it? AE911Truth cannot lobby Congress. They are a 501( c )3 and are prohibited from lobbying Congress. Why didn’t AE911Truth submit their so-called “thermite evidence” to NIST? – Oh, that’s right. It’s a federal crime to defraud the government. Why hasn’t AE911Truth filed a Federal qui tam case? Because they haven’t blown the whistle on anything and they have no evidence and it is past the statute of limitation. So, why didn’t they support Dr. Wood’s Federal qui tam case that was filed instead of banning members who mentioned it? * — I guess they really didn’t want such a case to go forward. So they want “respect and compassion for all people” except for those named “Dr. Judy Wood.”

      AE911truth first opened their website about 3.5 weeks AFTER Dr. Wood submitted her Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST. She was the first to submit an RFC that blew the whistle on the contractors for the NIST report. Can you say “damage control” ? Then she filed a federal qui tam case that could have blown this whole case wide open, including putting people under oath – if there were enough supporters. Guess what? It became a policy in AE911Truth to ban those who discussed the work of Dr. Wood in an honest manor. ** Since Richard Gage, founder & CEO of AE911truth, bought Dr. Wood’s book in the spring of 2011 and read it, he can no longer use “plausible deniability” as a defense. Mr. Gage is knowingly leading people away from the truth about 9/11 and using AE911Truth funds to accomplish this task. So leading people away from the truth must be the mission of AE911Truth. How else could he justify using AE911Truth funds to buy this book? Who funds AE911Truth? Donations through the donation drives on his site have dried up. However, donating creates a psychological hold on the donor and they are less likely to leave the organization or question Mr. Gage. Dr. Wood is a teacher and promotes independent thinking. Perhaps this is why she does not ask for donations on her website or conduct membership drives for a “truth club” to keep everyone in lockstep, where members are issued a list of talking points to focus on so that they don’t go looking for the truth. Dr. Wood is just one person. Richard Gage brags about having a large membership in lockstep with him. So why is he so concerned about just ONE person and radiates such anger at Dr. Wood? The truth is powerful and it emerges through independent thought.

      The scientific method, as it came into being during the Enlightenment period, is a method of thought known as empiricism or as the empirical method. Under the terms of empiricism, all conclusions are, must, and can be drawn from observable evidence and from observable evidence only. Evidence must precede any and every conclusion to be drawn from it. Then, if sound logic governs in the relationship between evidence and the conclusion drawn from it, that conclusion will be irrefutable

      Scientists, as all know or should know, proceed in their thinking not according to belief or desired outcome but according solely and only to what the empirical evidence they have gathered, studied, and observed allows them to conclude or makes it inevitable for them to conclude.

      This is why Dr. Wood’s work is irrefutable. She only presents evidence and an analysis of that evidence. There is no use for a theory in forensic science. Either you know something or you don’t. That is why those in charge of a cover up don’t want people to look at the evidence in Dr. Wood’s book. Dr. Wood does not ask you to believe her. She only wants you to believe yourself and think for yourself and look at the evidence yourself and not argue about opinions of theories of speculation of ideasŠ That is what keeps a cover up in place. Those of us who have read Dr. Wood’s book know this to be true.

      On 9/11 over a half mile of vertical building height, containing nearly 150 football fields of floor space, was reduced to a near-level field of dust and debris, where rescue workers walked horizontally or rappelled into empty caverns to look for survivors. How was this possible given the standard laws of engineering and physics? The 9/11 Commission Report bypassed this central issue, as did the report of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Contrary to its stated objective of determining ‘why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed,’ the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) made the stunning admission that it did not investigate how the towers fell. Neither the standard view that the Twin Towers collapsed from fire nor the standard opposition view that they were intentionally detonated by thermite explosives explains the evidence, nor do they follow the laws of engineering and physics. Dr. Wood left Clemson to research the 9/11 conundrum full time, and she has focused her research strictly on physical evidence and scientific principles. WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? provides an understandable, credible, and photo-enhanced summary of Dr. Wood’s disturbing findings, which resulted in her lawsuit against the contractors of the NIST report.

      Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photomechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry.

      She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers in her areas of expertise. In the time since 9/11/01, she has applied her expertise in materials science, image analysis and interferometry, to a forensic study of over 40,000 images, hundreds of video clips and a large volume of witness testimony pertaining to the destruction of the WTC complex. Dr. Wood has conducted a comprehensive forensic investigation of what physically happened to the World Trade Center site on 9/11. And, based on her analysis of the evidence she gathered, in 2007, she filed a federal qui tam case for science fraud against the contractors who contributed to the official NIST report about the destruction of the WTC. This case was filed in the US Supreme Court in Dec 2009. To this day, Dr. Wood’s investigation is the only comprehensive forensic investigation in the public domain.

      *Chapter 31. AE911 “Truth” and Other Sites Again Censor The Evidence 04 Apr 2010
      AE911 – Silently Deletes A Petition Signer (pages 297 to 300) of 9/11Finding the Truth – A Compilation of Articles by Andrew Johnson Focused around the research and evidence compiled by Dr. Judy Wood

      **In Appendix C, page 238, section C, (Refined searches) of Michael Armenia’s book, “Nanomanagement:The Disintegration of a Non-Profit Corporation”, the name “Judy Wood” is a search term used to disqualify a person’s affiliation with AE911Truth.

      Field Interference 013 AE911Truth: A Failure By Design

      We reported about Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth ( in episode 16 of our audio reports. We worked for them as their systems administrators for almost two years. As a high-level administrator inside the organization, I witnessed a stunning degree of mismanagement and I was privy to everything; including the stuff that nobody was supposed to see.

      Richard Gage and AE911Truth sleep in the same bed with convicted sex offenders?

      Manuel (Manny) Badillo from the conference “Investigate Building 7: A Call to Reexamine the Most Important Event of Our Time,” held March 26, 2011

      US Marine John P DiMatale speaks at Rethink911 Times Square Event 9-11-13

      Wake up sheeple. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Big Brother only has as much power as you grant him. Independent thought is powerful. After reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Charlie Pound of the U. K. produced the song WAKE UP THIS YOUR ALARM! Unless you enjoy being fleeced, leave the opinion herd and read Dr. Wood’s book too. It has been over 13 years since a secret technology was used to create terror and mass murder for the sake of imperialism and hegemony based on a fiat money system in its death throes. What are we as a people left with? A published scientific forensic investigation that concludes a type of Directed Energy that was used as a weapon “dustified” the World Trade Center complex and a group of shadowy people determined to suppress that evidence by any means. This is the sad reality that we live in. Wake up!
      © 2012 Music, Lyrics, & Vocals by Charlie Pound

      BTW…Those who ridicule and marginalize Dr. Judy Wood are promoting the fascist police state that Edward Joseph “Ed” Snowden is alerting us to…

      Fascism Anyone?

      Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not. (Remember that fascist regimes have elections too. Covering it up with a red, white, and blue sticker doesn’t make fascism any less despicable. When are people going to wake up and start using the “F” word?)

  • Hal

    Once you see it, it becomes very apparent. Planes could not have pierced those buildings in such a fashion.

  • Rick

    I agree with Hal. Where is the debris from a plane crashing into a steel building? The images do not coincide with reality.

    I’ve listened to Dr. Fetzer extensively, and though he has some quirks (as do many of us)I would never consider him as one promoting disinfo. If one really looks at the INFO presented by Dr. Fetzer and others, what is being said about the planes and the images of planes becomes absolutely obvious. Please take a deeper look into the subject, examining all the evidence and judge for yourself – regardless of how nutty the conclusions may sound. I am convinced,nNo commercial jetliners crashed that day.

  • Kim

    For the first time Sean, I respectfully disagree, Mr. Fetzer is a brave soul and would not even go there if not in his heart true.
    The whole thing is beyond belief and I can understand those with their head in the sand.
    But and this is what troubles me the most what happened to the passengers on these alledged aircraft, makes me shudder to think!

  • Thomas

    I usually avoid the no planers theory as it sounds so whacko but
    the impossible speeds , the cartoon cut out shape of impact ,
    the lack of deceleration and the lack of debris one would expect
    on impact keeps smacking me in the face . Projected hologram
    is the only answer that seems to fit the evidence . I believe they
    used technology way beyond our understanding to commit this crime.
    The Pentagon damage is not consistent with any 767 impact .
    I would like to see a 767 wing on a rocket sled impacting a steel frame
    to see if we can replicate the damage done at the towers , that to me
    would have more value than a billboard in Times Sq. So many disinfo
    agents out there its becoming difficult to trust anyone on this. My head
    says Judy Wood has got it spot on , she also avoids the no planer talk
    but gives a wry smile to the suggestion its physically possible.

  • Brian

    This is a losing narrative. Not because it’s not possible but because it’s the hardest one to prove with all the conflicting info that is swirling around out there. WTC7 is the weakest link…hammer that one and stay on target!

    • Sam

      I agree wholeheartedly.

      The thought that arguing about smoke and mirrors, holograms, missing debris, tethers, puppets, and what not, is more hocus pocus than actual well understood physics. Numbers applied in the well established universally understood physics formulas as used by the A&E do not lie, period.

  • Thomas

    The sum is greater than the hole(sic)
    While wtc 7 is an obvious attack point so is the Pentagon imo
    2.3 trillion missing one day and all the records wiped out the next.
    3 rings punched through (6 reinforced walls) by an aluminum tube
    that was larger than the hole it created. No video evidence released
    to prove a plane attack, no luggage, seats or wreckage of any substance
    the Norman Mineta testimony and the head of all military intelligence
    Maj Gen Stubblebine stating no plane hit the building.
    Impossible plane speeds and inch perfect precision from pilots
    who couldnt control a Cessna, 5 lamposts hit that didnt rip the wings off
    and flight path data that didn’t correspond with eye witness reports.
    I believe thermite is disinfo as it would have lit up wtc 1,2 and 7 like a firework,
    and it cannot account for the spire turning to dust. I believe nukes are also disinfo
    as the 14 firemen in stairwell B who survived would not have survived any nuke.
    Thermite may have been used but only to mislead us. If the 28 pages of info are
    released and point to Saudi then the thermite story will be blamed on them and an
    excuse to invade Saudi will get the green light. The west control all the oil and Israel
    gets to wipe out the Islamic world, sound like a plan ?

  • leia

    This is NOT disinfo. It’s the ultimate “ha ha” from the masters to fool even most of the “non-sheeple”. Open yout minds and think! Many first witnesses did NOT see any planes. They saw an explosion only, a missle or “something”. Then fake witnesses were brought in (or witnesses who repeated what they were told).
    The rabbit hole goes deep. There was no plane at the pentagon and no plane in Shanksville. What makes you think there were planes at WTC? Certainly we know that the “plane” damage did not cause the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. It was a top down demo. (Opposite of WTC 7.) You can see the charges go off top down, ejecting debris out. In fact, they wanted the buildings down and the explosives took care of that. The planes were for shock value only. There was no real structural damage that could have been caused by a mostly aluminum plane. In reality, if real planes hit the towers. Perhaps the engines would have gone in, but you would have seen crumpling on the outside and most of the aluminum falling down in a heap. There would be no “nose out” and no wing penetration. The video is absurd! The video is not real period. Yes… the videos shown on the news are not real. If planes did hit the towers that is not real video of it.
    So why was there a cartoon plane shape on the side of the buildings? There were explosives planted in the facade in a plane shape. You can see the “plane” hole did not go all the way through, meaning there were still still beams intact behind the aluminum facade, so where did the plane go? Analysis of hit 1 shows the “plane hole” appeared after the fireball, not when the plane hit (before the explosion). Translation: the facade damage was after the charges were exploded.
    One last point..the pilots for 911 truth use the pentagon, just as the architects use building 7. It’s the lowest hanging fruit that the sheeple might be able to grasp. Do you think the AE911 truth doesn’t know WTC1 and 2 were not demoed? Of course they do. They know that even if a support column was taken out the load would have been shifted to the other 3 colums. That was the beauty of the architecture. They use building 7 because it’s fall it’s the hardest to explain, a classic demolition and they don’t want to cloud the picture with “plane” damage. Similarly, Pilots for 911 truth know that real planes were not used at WTC either. They choose the pentagon because it’s the easiest for people to grasp.


    Sean, I love ya but you’re wrong on this one. Throw the image of any impact video up on a HDTV and watch it. Slow it down, if you need to and watch frame by frame. Those videos are fake and they didn’t do a good job faking them. You can realize this without even bringing up Newton’s 3rd Law of Motion — in which it makes no difference whether (a plane) aluminum strikes steel at 500mph or if you were to swing a building like a baseball bat into a plane. A flying beer can is not going to just pass through steel. I don’t know what hit those towers but it was not Flight 11 or Flight 175.

    Television is a very powerful weapon and it is obviously being used against us. 911 and specifically the planes are a perfect example of how this medium is exploited. The mainstream media can virtually shit on a plate and the public will not only gobble it up but debate whole lies with religious fervor.

    As to the debate of WTC7 being used to wake up the general public… At this point, the general public believes the official story of 911 because they want to believe it. Most people have too much invested in their lives or realities to destroy it all with questions that challenge their core beliefs or current existence… Such as the questions raised by WTC7, the Pentagon, TV Fakery, etc. Unfortunately, most people won’t wake up or care until this tragedy personally affects them and is translated through hunger or a boot stomping on their face. The point is that 911 is such a monumental lie… People apparently choose to believe the lie out of convenience. Unfortunately, not even the video of WTC7 falling into its footprint cannot change this. How do we best present the truth? Just speak the truth as you know it and let the chips fall where they may.

    Sean, thank you for all the great posts but I disagree with you here. I look forward to your interviews and would suggest that the questions you have in regard to Jim Fetzer be asked directly. Whether or not, you consider inviting Fetzer as a guest on SGT Report; I hope you will take a closer look into this subject because I truly believe that your heart is in the right place. If you believe planes hit those buildings… It is only because you have yet to realize the true depth and extent to which you are lied to on a daily basis. Most people would live a much happier life without such realizations but since you’re all ready awake to Sandy Hook… You might as well dive into this subject and take a good look.

  • Gar

    I have to disagree that the “no planes” scenario is dis-info, or even a fringe issue. Evidently airplanes were a significant element to the perpetrators. A thing is either true or not, regardless of what others might think. To proceed as if planes were involved when they were not is by definition dis-info.
    The work that the architects and engineers have presented is truly valuable; however, the audience they appeal to is probably smaller or at least not the same as those who might object to the notion that an aluminum object can so easily penetrate concrete and steel, especially without any wreckage remaining on the outside of the structure. We know from Sandy Hook about the use of actors. There was a good deal of acting taking place on 9/11 as well. Somehow or other, by a hologram or doctoring of the videos, we’ve been given an illusion of airplanes. Why were no planes scrambled that day? because there weren’t any to chase. Consider: without planes, Arabs, and box cutters, we would not have the Patriot Act, all the airport “security”, fear mongering, etc.; and without those terrible Arab hijackers, how could we have gone after Afghanistan and Iraq in such kneejerk fashion. If Americans really knew the truth of who actually was behind 9/11 they would likely rally around an action against Israel instead of its neighbors, or even our own government which you could say is essentially an Israeli asset.
    No matter how fantastic, some explanation is always presented for “enough of the people” to, yes, gobble up. Another time it was a magic bullet, then a man on the moon. Ridiculous, but plausible enough to most, sadly. The “airplanes” of 9/11 were and are a major element designed to cover up the truth.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>