Richard Gage on KMPH Fox 26 in Fresno, CA
The above link is to a clip to an interview by a Fox affiliated network. The Fox empire, owned by Rupert Murdoch, may as well be considered the stenographer for the Powers That Be (PTB). So, while you watch this video remember that this is the PTB communicating with us. If you’re a Truther, and accustomed to being ridiculed for your opinions regarding the events of 9/11/01, your eyes will bug out of your head: They’re copping to the controlled demolition theory.
None of this is news to me. All the physical evidence for controlled demolition of the THREE World Trade Center buildings (two hit by planes, one not) is there for anybody with half a brain and eyes to see. The official story about planes bringing down the towers cannot be true, unless the laws of physics were somehow lifted on 9/11/01, which, duh, they weren’t. Presuming the towers were brought down by controlled demolition, it means the buildings were prepped for 9/11 well in advance, because to demolish three buildings this size takes weeks of planning and a boatload of money. So who prepped the buildings for demolition? There are only a few logical ways to find the answer to this question:
1. Motive. Quo Bono? Who benefitted from all the events that took place after the attacks? Which documents were destroyed? Who got richer? Who got stronger? Who got weaker? Who died?
2. Means. Who had the money and the power to get the job done, including the power to keep the FBI from sniffing out the plot, and/or interfere with the military’s ability to respond to the attacks?
3. Follow the money. Who was behind the unusual trades that took place on Wall Street a few days prior to the attacks? Isn’t it interesting how the financing of 9/11 was accomplished via the Western financial system, and not the Muslim one(s)?
4. Elminate all the physical and logical impossibilities. What you are left with is likely the truth.
There is a lot of information about the events of 9/11; unfortunately much of it is well-poisoning, COINTELPRO and disinformation intended to mislead, confuse and discredit. Consequently, we thinking Truthers need to take all our information with a grain of salt, including new evidence that fits all of our preconceived notions. Something tells me the next few months or years are going to entail a wild, furious ride either with or against certain members of the PTB.
Apparently the PTB have chosen NOW for some of the truth is to come out now, but WHY???? Will the next explanation be the truth, or will it be another whopper? Are we going to be told who REALLY was behind the events of 9/11, or is some body, or some other group of people, about to be framed? One thing is for sure: Some of the most notable Truthers, General Wesley Clark and David Ray Griffin among them, are Rhoades Scholars and/or members of the Council of Foreign Relations or similar globalist organizations. For this reason alone I believe a “revelation” is forthcoming that will serve the globalist vision. Make of that what you may.
Somebody out there want to start a betting pool?
13 responses so far ↓
Alberto // May 29, 2009 at 4:04 am |
Building 7 comming down is a mystery… even the owner slipped and said they pulled it down. But trying to say the towers came down not due to the airliners is just plain retarded, and the tag line about the laws if physics being suspended is just moronic. Because you and all the conspiracy theorists are indeed physicists correct? Go build a tower that large with outside supporting columns and crash an airliner into it check back with us once the test is complete.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // May 29, 2009 at 4:49 am |
“Just plain retarded?” “moronic?” Nice, Alberto, your comment is not worth engaging, but for the sake of everyone else reading this comment thread, I’ll throw it out:
See those links I so conveniently provided? Betcha didn’t link to either of them. I suggest the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth for starters.
And for the record I am a mathematician of sorts, by trade. One does not need to be a physicist to understand logic.
RJ // May 31, 2009 at 3:03 am |
As unbelievable as it sounds, I read that Newt Gingrich had called the 93′ WTC bombing “the first time they bombed the towers”. I was present at a commencement address where Rear Admiral Busby (of gitmo detention fame) exclaimed “never would I have dreamed that someday I would be responsible for guarding the terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center on 9/11″.
The peer reviewed paper in Bentham Open is a big deal. Academic pressure from outside the US may be the catalyst for a prosecution, and somehow pinning controlled demolition on terrorists may be considered a viable option in neo la la land.
Seriously? // June 1, 2009 at 2:03 pm |
You are bat shit crazy. Not only for thinking the government brought down the Towers for “gain”, but also because you think being an ACCOUNTANT gives you any credibility as either a) a mathematician, or b) physics, either Newtonian or Theory (I know this because I AM physicist).
You seriously need to fight and get a grip on reality. You’re paranoid rhetoric has amused me to no end, but this? This would put you firmly in the contamination camp. It’s disrespectful to the survivors and to those who were lost. Perhaps you should stop thinking about your waist/boob/martini size and start educating yourself from sources other than FOX.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // June 1, 2009 at 2:20 pm |
Seriously . . . Seriously? You could not possibly be a real physicist: Your response does not befit a professional.
(Note to readership: “Seriously’s” comment is boilerplate psyops, check it out – he hit all the points! Crazy! Disrespectful! Straw man argument! Unverifiable claims to credibility!)
Seriously: Where in my post did I say “the government” (Which one? Which faction? WTF?) perpetrated the events of 9/11 for gain? Do you know what a straw man is? Go fight it at some other blog, because you bore me.
For those reading this thread who might be interested in what REAL engineers, physicists and architects are saying about the forensic evidence related to the events of 9/11, DO go check out those links! Also try the Patriots Question 911 website that I didn’t link to but should have (I’ll fix that when I get home tonight).
Shorter HPS: Don’t rely on my opinion, which by the way is officially: The Official Conspiracy Theory Cannot Be True, Due to the Newtonian Physics (thermodynamics). However, I Do Not Know What Really Happened, Because of The DisInfo.
Also, some of the most outspoken 9/11 truthers are survivors and relatives of those who were lost that horrible day. They’ve been screaming for a REAL investigation for 8 years.
Also: I am not, god forbid, an accountant. For those who care, I’m an operations research analyst for the Navy.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // June 1, 2009 at 2:36 pm |
What timing! Just tripped on this one this morning, wasn’t even lookin’ for it:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5004452n
In the course of the discussion, Cheney used the exact words “blew up the World Trade Center” in reference to the al Qaeda network which, according to the official version, masterminded the 9-11 operation but absolutely did not “blow up” the World Trade Center since that implies implanted explosives. So what’s the real story, Dicky?
This blurtout is reminiscent of Rumsfield’s own post-9/11 blurtout several years ago ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0 ) about how the plane that went down over Pennsylvania was SHOT down. Later on he claimed he “mispoke.” Remember that the official story was that the airplane crashed. The Pilots for 9/11 Truth organization have a LOT to say about that whopper.
Seriously? // June 1, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
Did I hit a sore spot? If we’re analyzing (and I’m assuming we are based on the rambling response which didn’t put forth any originality but relied instead on regurgitated information) the poor grammar and punctuation would be indicative of someone’s who’s been rattled.
And Thermodynamics – I get so much enjoyment when you plagiarize from the internet, incorrectly.
Don’t stop, you are cracking me up!
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // June 1, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
Oh no I’m not rattled at all: The poor grammar and punctuation were purposeful, simply my attempt at Gawker Media styled humor. Sorry if you didn’t get it. And bitch, please: I’m not interested in engaging you. How’s this for a badly written run on sentence? I’m not interested in pointless fecal-fling-fests with vampiric pay-per-psyop trolls in the bowels of my blog. I only responded to your barbs for the benefit of my regular readers, who (if interested) are (again) invited to click on the above links for serious scientific/forensic debate/info/whatever re: the 9/11 issue. This is my personal blog, where I post my personal opinions, so you are kindly invited to KMA. Seriously. Have a nice day.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // June 3, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
Well looky here! The supposed “chief architect/engineer” of the WTC, the one treated as the authority for the explanation as to why the towers collapsed, is outed as a fraud!
As it turns out, during the time he was SUPPOSEDLY chief-engineering the towers he was actually a college student in LA.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20261
wanderer // June 3, 2009 at 6:02 pm |
That dumbass never hear of freedom of speech?
Last time i checked, we are still allowed to have an opinion in this country. I may not believe in the same things you do, but I will and have for 28 years as active and reserve military defend your right to believe as you see fit. As for 9/11, I’m still looking at things. And if dumbass doesn’t like being called a dumbass, he can kiss my ass. : ) Sorry if I rambled but morons like that annoy me.
JC // June 3, 2009 at 8:56 pm |
I suppose this theory of “controlled demolition” would engorge my genitals more if it weren’t for Buzz, the janitor/handyman in my office building. (He’s sort of the Ty Cobb of janitors — really good at what he does but a real misanthrope of a redneck.)
I and just about every other service-sector cubicle commando in the building spent most of 9/11 in the closet that serves as Buzz’s “office.” As we watched the towers burn, on his impossibly anachronistic black-and-white TV, Buzz said, about a half-hour before the first tower fell, in his Ozark patois, “Them things is gonna come down. That jet fuel’s gonna make it so hot in ‘em, support columns is gonna go weak, and the floors is gonna pancake one on top the other, all the way down.” He didn’t stick around, to see if his assessment would be correct (he probably repaired to the basement, for his coffee-break toke).
Buzz isn’t an architect or an engineer, but when it comes to the behavior of structures, it’s been my experience that this disheveled, hygienically-challenged custodian knows more than they do.
About seven years ago, the geniuses who manage the building decided to construct an annex, in a field next to the parking lot. Buzz explained to the “consultants” from the firm they hired why the ground on the spot they’d chosen wouldn’t support a three-story building. (“It’s gonna end up like that Leanin’ Tower o’ Pizza [sic],” he told me.) They gave him a lot of condescending assurances and basically told him to be a good boy and get back to swabbing toilets. Two years after the annex was finished, the north edge of the foundation had sunk five inches, and the entrance foyer had more cracks in it than a proctology textbook.
Here’s what Buzz had to say about it all: “I don’t give a fuck.”
One of these days, I’ll have to join Buzz, in the basement, during his coffee break, and see what he thinks about the JFK assassination.
The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker // June 5, 2009 at 3:38 am |
Hey Wanderer: Don’t worry he was probably paid to be here. It’s pointless to engage trolls.
JC: Conspiracies are the last thing in the world that give me a sexual charge but whatever floats yer boat! Your janitor friend might be right about the pancaking phenomenon, but if the steel beams’ “melting” caused the building to fall from “pancaking” the collapse would have been slow and uneven, starting where the fires were hottest. It didn’t happen that way, so . . . It just didn’t happen that way.
Jim // September 20, 2009 at 5:08 am |
It’s pretty basic stuff according to physics. Energy takes the least resistance and the weakest parts, being the floors, should have pancaked liked they did BUT the central support beams should have remained upright or at least toppled over. To say that the center supports “caved in on themselves straight down defeats the purpose of them being built in the first place. You might as well say a tree can do the same thing but we all know that can’t happen without a little help from the inside of the tree being carved out first…