Monday, August 27, 2007

The Two Hats of ICT's Don Radlauer

The two articles reproduced below discuss different aspects of the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks. The first article is important because the author, Don Radlauer, is an employee of the Israeli-based Institute for Counter Terrorism(ICT), and he presents himself as an experienced pilot authoritatively describing the alleged nature and alleged feasibility of the official conspiracy theory(OCT) version of the attacks. In the second article Christopher Bollyn cites a report by "Don Radlauer, an expert in stock options and derivatives" on 9/11-related insider trading.

The Hijackings: A Pilot's View

Don Radlauer

ICT Consultant

September 13, 2001

In order to try to unravel the events leading up to Tuesday's catastrophic terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington DC, we give here a summary of the flight paths of the four doomed flights. The analysis is by a pilot who has accumulated many hours of flight over the Eastern United States.

Flight Summaries

United Airlines Flight 175

UAL Flight 175 took off from Boston’s Logan Airport at 7:58. Its planned route was south-west to northwestern New Jersey, then a gentle right turn to follow a more westerly course towards Los Angeles International Airport. The plane followed this route until the point where it was to bear right; instead, it turned left about 45 degrees to travel southwards towards central New Jersey, then made a sharp left over Middlesex County to approach New York Harbor from the south. This plane hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center at about 9:05 AM.

Note that Flight 175's legitimate pilots must have been in control until about the time the plane crossed the northern New Jersey border; up to this time the plane had followed its planned route, including turns that the hijackers would not have had the navigational skills to make (and which were not essential in order to fulfill their mission). Also, note that the hijack did not occur until a point at which a passenger on the left side of the plane would have had a clear view of the Twin Towers. From this point on, it was easy to navigate the airplane by this obvious landmark – and target.

The hijackers of this flight clearly knew that its route would take it within about 50 miles of Manhattan – close enough to use the Twin Towers as a visual landmark. Thus, they could sit back and wait until they had a clear view of their target. One obvious conclusion is that the hijackers had taken the flight before and knew the visual characteristics of the flight path.

American Airlines Flight 11

American Flight 11 took off from Logan just after UAL 175, at 7:59. Its planned route was almost straight west through Massachusetts and New York, proceeding on to Los Angeles International. About 60-70 miles west of Boston, the plane began to deviate to the north of its planned route. About 50 miles into New York State, the plane turned sharply left and followed the Hudson River valley down to New York City, impacting the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8:45 AM.

The planned route of this flight would bypass Lower Manhattan at a distance of at least 100 miles; in even slightly hazy conditions the hijackers knew that they couldn't count on a view of their target. Instead, they planned in advance to use the Hudson River as their landmark and fly right down its valley to their target. As this valley is easy to find and follow, the hijackers didn't need to keep the legitimate pilots around beyond the climbout period – and thus they took control of the plane at an earlier stage than the hijackers of UAL 175 did.

Again, the hijackers would have needed to have taken this flight before, since familiarity with the route normally taken would be essential in order to know when to take control of the plane and how to find their target. The Hudson River Valley is an obvious landmark, requiring no particular navigational skills to find and follow towards New York City. This is probably one reason why the hijackers apparently took control of Flight 11 much earlier than was the case with UAL 175 – there was no significant risk of getting lost without a 'real' pilot. I would hazard a guess that the take-over occurred fairly soon after takeoff, shortly before the point were the plane began to drift northward from its planned route. The minor deviation would not have been of any concern to the hijackers; they knew that they had only to continue in a generally westerly direction and they would pass over the Hudson River valley.

United Airlines Flight 93

UAL 93 left Newark International Airport at 8:01, enroute to San Francisco. Its planned route was basically west across northern New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and northern Ohio, and on to the West Coast. Just before reaching Cleveland, Ohio, the plane made a 180-degree turn to the left and proceeded east-southeast to fly just south of Pittsburgh and past it towards Pennsylvania's southern border with Maryland. The plane had evidently already been flying erratically and at a low altitude for some time before it crashed, nose first, in Stony Creek Township eighty miles from Pittsburgh, at 10:10 AM.

The route this flight took after it turned away from Cleveland strongly suggests that its hijackers were intending to attack a target in or near Washington, D.C. There is convincing evidence that there was a struggle between the hijackers and a small group of passengers (and possibly crew). This may account for some of the erratic flying that was reported, as well as the plane's eventual crash in an area well clear of anything that might have been the hijackers' intended target. Had this plane been flown successfully to Washington, D.C., it would have arrived there at around 10:30.

Assuming this hijacking was planned as meticulously as the ones directed at New York targets, the hijackers were presumably using Cleveland and/or the shore of Lake Erie as their indicator that it was time to make their move.

American Airlines Flight 77

American Flight 77 left Dulles International Airport at 8:10. Its planned route would take it over northern Virginia and West Virginia, towards Los Angeles International. Just after turning south and crossing the Ohio-Kentucky border, the plane's transponder (which makes it more visible and identifiable on radar, as well as reporting its altitude to controllers) was turned off; so its exact flight path is not known. At 9:40 AM, the plane crashed into the ground next to the west side of the Pentagon.

A pilot on the ground was quoted as saying that the plane was in a power-dive when it hit the ground. In other words, the hijacker-pilot had spotted his target and was accelerating toward it. In the case of a plane of this size, it is a great deal easier to navigate a plane straight and level into a tall building, as happened at the World Trade Center, than it is to crash precisely into a target close to the ground. The hijacker guiding AL 77 was more than likely intending to bring the plane down onto the Pentagon itself, which would have resulted in far greater devastation. There has been some speculation in the media that the Pentagon was not the intended target of this plane. From the air, the Pentagon is a very visible landmark, which the hijackers could be certain of finding and targeting quite easily. Given the ease of targeting the Pentagon and its role as the center of the United States military, I don’t think there is any reason to assume that it was not the target. If the plane was indeed accelerating as it hit, this would tend to support the contention that the Pentagon was the intended target.

General Conclusions

All the hijacked flights took off within a twelve-minute span, and all were fully fueled for a transcontinental flight. Clearly the terrorists carefully selected a set of flights that met these two requirements. It is also clear that, at least in the case of the two flights targeted at New York, the hijackers must have taken the same flights at least once before, in order to familiarize themselves with the routes that would be taken and the landmarks they would use to decide when to attack, and to navigate towards their target.

In the case of UAL 175, at least one of the hijackers was probably sitting on the left side of the plane to act as a "spotter"; when s/he got a clear view of the Twin Towers, it was time to take over the airplane.

Thus a study of previous flight manifests would be advisable; it is likely that at least some of the hijackers' names - assuming that they had registered under their own names – appear as passengers on the same flights on previous dates. It is also likely that some of the hijackers will be found to have been among the passengers sitting on the left-hand, southward facing, side of United Flight 175.

Revealing 9-11 Stock Trades Could Expose The Terrorist Masterminds

by Christopher Bollyn
A transparent and thorough investigation of suspicious trades before Sept. 11 could expose the masterminds behind the attacks by revealing who knew and profited from advance knowledge—if only the government wanted to.

Manipulators with inside information made huge profits on sophisticated trades as the stocks of the airline and insurance companies plummeted in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 disaster. The inside information was so precise that experts have concluded that it could have only come from those who masterminded the terror attacks.

This money trail is the closest investigators have come to “a smoking gun” and could lead directly to those who planned the attacks. But with the notable exception of Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D.-Ga.), Congress has yet to demand a thorough and open investigation.

In the days following the terror attacks, suspicious and unusual stock trading activity indicated that people used inside information to make huge profits. The money made from the trades done with apparent inside information has been estimated at up to $15 billion worldwide.

The Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT), located in Herzliya, Israel, published an article, “Black Tuesday: World’s Largest Insider Trading Scam?” on Sept. 19, 2001.

Author Don Radlauer, an expert in stock options and derivatives, provided details of the types and volumes of the suspicious trades and said: “Obviously, anyone who had detailed knowledge of the attacks before they happened was, at the very least, an accessory to their planning; and the overwhelming probability is that the trades could have been made only by the same people who masterminded the attacks themselves.”

Radlauer pointed to the timing, specificity, size and unusual nature as indicative that the trades had been done with inside information.

Tracing the transactions to their real source, Radlauer said, would be difficult because “the trading is sure to have been done under false names, behind shell corporations, and in general to have been thoroughly obfuscated.”

Radlauer concluded: “This doesn’t mean that unraveling the threads of these transactions will be impossible, but it probably won’t be quick or easy.”

The American exchanges that handle options and derivatives trades, primarily the Chicago Board of Options Exchange (CBOE) and the NYSE, know on a daily basis what levels of put options are purchased.

“Put options” are highly leveraged bets that a given stock’s share price will fall.

Conspicuous spikes

Among the most conspicuous spikes in trading activity were the huge increases in “put options” placed on the two airlines involved in the hijackings of Sept. 11, United Airlines (UAL) and American Airlines.

There was a 9,000 percent jump in United Air Lines (UAL) put options between Sept. 6 and Sept. 10, with a huge spike 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack.

American Airlines saw a 6,000 percent jump in put options above normal the day before the attacks. However, there was no similar trading activity on any other airlines, according to market reports.

The brokerage houses that had offices in the WTC, Morgan Stanley and Merrill-Lynch, saw 27-fold and 12-fold increases in the purchases of put options on their respective shares between Sept. 7 and Sept. 10.

“The afternoon before the attack, alarm bells were sounding over unusual trading in the U.S. stock options market,” the CBS program 60 Minutes reported on Sept. 19. As investigator Michael C. Ruppert of From the Wilderness, an Internet news site, says: “These trades were certainly noticed after the attacks.”

There was also an unusually high volume of five-year U.S. Treasury note purchases prior to the attacks, including one $5 billion trade, The Wall Street Journal reported Oct. 2. “Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the U.S.,” the report said.

“This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you’ve ever seen in your entire life . . . this would be one of the most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind if it was a coincidence,” Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg Business News said Sept. 20.

No U.S. or foreign agency has announced arrests or developments in the investigation of these trades, the most telling evidence of foreknowledge, Ruppert wrote April 22. The former chief of enforcement at the Securities and Exchange Commission, William Mc Lucas, said regulators would “certainly be able to track down every trade, where the trade cleared, where the trade was directed from.”

Experts from the Convar Company in Pirmasens, Germany, are using their “blue laser scanning” technology to retrieve data from the damaged computers of banks, telecommunication companies, and other tenants from the WTC. This technology can even retrieve the original data from hard discs that have been deleted and written over five times.

Peter Henschel, director of Convar, said: “not only the volume, but the size of the transactions was far higher than usual for a day like that.”

Henschel told AFP that “up to the last moment,” between the time that the first tower was hit until the second tower collapsed, there was an “unusual” increase in trading volume of “between 5 and 10 times the normal volume.”

One data recovery expert, Richard Wagner, has estimated that more than $100 million in illegal transactions appeared to have rushed through the WTC computers before and during the disaster.

Saturday, August 25, 2007

History Channel: A Conspiracy of 9/11 Errors

This first video is part of a GNN production called UA 93: The Road to Shanksville.

Susan McElwan's GNN Testimony

I was just driving along here. It was a beautiful day. I had the window open; had the stereo on, and when I got up here, almost to the stop sign, this small white plane - at the time, that's what I thought it was - went over top of me.

It was so smooth and it just glided over me, just like that [tilting hand to show and almost vertically banking turn.] And then I ducked, and when I looked up again, then it was the spoiler - which is what I call it - and it was tipped like this [rocks hands back to indicate tipping front up and back down] so I could really see the spoiler.

And then it just banked to the right, then went over and down behind those trees.

We got to watching it on TV and they kept saying that it was a large plane, like a 757. And I was like, no, what I saw was no jet [we assume she is intending 'jumbo jet']. That would have blown me off the road, if it went over me, you know, that close. I sad, na, that wasn't it.

So, like I said, at about 11:30 that night, the FBI came; wanted to talk to me. They kept asking me how big the plane was. And I said the plane, you know, it was small, it wasn't much bigger than my van, that I saw, and it went over top of me. And he says, "you don't know what a 757 looks like". And I said, you know, don't be condescending to me. You know, if you don't want to believe me that's fine, but what I saw, I though I should report, and you aught to know there was something else in the air at the same time this was going on, and you want to make sure it was ours and not somebody else's.

And that's when he did seem to get a little nicer. Told me it was a white Lear Jet. Somebody was taking picture. I said: before the crash? And he says: "Well we gotta go". And that was the end of it.

Susan McElwan Per, 9/11/02

Susan Mcelwain, 51, who lives two miles from the site, knows what she saw - the white plane rocketed directly over her head.

"It came right over me, I reckon just 40 or 50ft above my mini-van," she recalled. "It was so low I ducked instinctively. It was travelling real fast, but hardly made any sound.

"Then it disappeared behind some trees. A few seconds later I heard this great explosion and saw this fireball rise up over the trees, so I figured the jet had crashed. The ground really shook. So I dialled 911 and told them what happened.

"I'd heard nothing about the other attacks and it was only when I got home and saw the TV that I realised it wasn't the white jet, but Flight 93.

I didn't think much more about it until the authorities started to say there had been no other plane. The plane I saw was heading right to the point where Flight 93 crashed and must have been there at the very moment it came down.

"There's no way I imagined this plane - it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look.

"It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven't found one like it on the internet. It definitely wasn't one of those executive jets. The FBI came and talked to me and said there was no plane around.

"Then they changed their story and tried to say it was a plane taking pictures of the crash 3,000ft up.

"But I saw it and it was there before the crash and it was 40ft above my head. They did not want my story - nobody here did."

Mrs Mcelwain, who looks after special needs children, is further convinced the whole truth has yet to come out because of a phone call she had within hours from the wife of an air force friend of the family.

"She said her husband had called her that morning and said 'I can't talk, but we've just shot a plane down,' " Susan said. "I presumed they meant Flight 93. I have no doubt those brave people on board tried to do something, but I don't believe what happened on the plane brought it down.

"If they shot it down, or something else happened, everyone, especially the victims' families, have a right to know."

After examining the numerous witness accounts, news reports, photographs and videos of the crash site and visiting the crash site in person, we have concluded that United Airlines Flight 93 was almost certainly shot down. It was very likely destroyed in two stages. While flying at altitude, it was probably hit by one or more sidewinder missiles fired by Lieutenant Colonel Rick Gibney of the 119th Fighter Wing of the North Dakota Air National Guard. Popular Mechanics in their astonishingly inept article Debunking 9/11 Myths, and even more so in the subsequent book of the same title, makes a failed attempt to argue that Gibney could not have been near Shanksville at the time of the alleged shootdown, and in North Dakota 47 minutes later.

A bit of investigation and arithmetic should persuade the reader that an F-16 does have such capabilities. Pay close attention to the fact that Popular Mechanics never directly address the account reported by Colonel de Grand-Pre. They first modify it by adjusting the assumed engagement time to coincide with the officially proclaimed final impact time. The fact of the matter is that an F-16 is fast enough to do what Colonel de Grand-Pre reported to Alex Jones. It is also likely that the advertised maximum speed of the F-16 is not its true maximum.

For unexplained reasons Google removed this video once.

This second video exposes the utter ineptitude and negligence of the History Channel's producers of The 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction, as well as that of the Popular Mechanics authors who are providing commentary. An additional example not made clear by the context of these videos is the fact that several news reports spoke of debris falling as far away as New Baltimore PA. We were told by Nevin Lambert at the temporary memorial near Shanksville that debris was found as far as 12 miles away from the crash site. When we inquired as to whether this was only paper and other light materials he specifically said that the debris consisted of "all kinds of airplane parts".

This third video provides insight into the kind of aircraft that was explicitly identified by at least one eyewitness near the impact crater, and is certainly consistent with Susan McElwain's description.

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Miss America, Dick Cheney and the New Pearl Harbor

Taken in isolation this may not seem to amount to much, but given the bigger picture is seems likely to have been no mere coincidence that the mention of Dick Cheney and Pearl Harbor was made at 08:50:30 shortly before the program cut to NYC where WTC 1 had been hit at 08:46:30.

See: PNAC's Rebuilding America's Defenses "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Video of UAL 175 Leveling-out of a Steep Dive

Another Video of UAL 175 Leveling-out of a Steep Dive

Air Traffic Controller Describes UAL 175 "Power-Dive"

Lewis Paul Bremer III on Washington DC NBC4 TV 09/11/01

Google removed this three times, and blocked it once

For reasons yet to be explained, Google has repeatedly removed this video from their server. In the first week that it was up, it had 1,474 views before it was removed. It caught fire recently and received about 5000 hits in a matter of a few days before it was taken down again. The evident pattern is that it is not removed as long as it is getting little attention.

This is a mind-boggling interview with Lewis Paul Bremer III (who ended up as the pro-council of Iraq.)

On 09/11/01 Bremer was the Chairman and CEO of Marsh Political Risk Practice which had offices in the WTC as did its parent company Marsh USA. They had a total of 1,700 employees assigned to the WTC. Bremer, himself, had an office in the South Tower. Nonetheless, this "counter-terrorism expert" makes no mention of any of this only three hours after the first plane flew directly into seven of the eight floors of WTC 1 occupied by Marsh USA. He is here on television prognosticating about who will turn out to be the culprits, with calm detachment. What is wrong with this picture?

The opinions of Emad Salem and Andreas Strassmeir would be of interest in this matter.

Full Transcript

Lewis Paul Bremer: Nat'l Commission on Terrorism

Gentzler: We want to turn now to a guest who is
joining us in the studio. It's Paul Bremer. I want to make sure
I'm getting your name right because I'm just meeting you. You're
a terrorism expert?
Bremer: Counter-terrorism, I
Gentzler:And can talk to us a little bit about
who could...I mean there are a limited number of groups who could
be responsible for something of this magnitude. Right?

Bremer: Yes, this is a very well planned, very well
coordinated attack, which suggests it's very well organized
centrally. And there are only three or four candidates in the
world really who could have conducted this attack.

Vance:Bin Laden comes to mind right away, Mr. Bremer.

Bremer: Indeed, he certainly does. Bin Laden was
involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center, which had
as its intentions doing exactly what happened here, which was to
collapse both towers. He certainly has to be a prime suspect.
But there are others in the Middle East. There are at least two
states, Iran and Iraq which should least remain on the list

Gentzler:What kind of coordination? How could something
like this be put together.

Bremer:First of all, you've got to find some people
who are willing to die. And then, of course, they have to find
ways around what we thought was pretty good security at our
airports. We haven't had a hijacking in a long time. Let alone
four. So there had to be good coordination. There has to have
been coordination in the whole planning of the attack. The
people, if they were not Americans, they needed visas to get into
the United States. They needed false identities to by Airline
tickets. They needed cars to get to the Airport. There's a whole
lot of stuff that had to happen here.

Gentzler:With as many resources as our government, and
our allies' governments around the world devote to studying
terrorism, and knowing what's going on, and what they're planning,
you have to wonder how something of this magnitude, how this could
take place without any warning or any hint that it was coming.

Bremer:Well, first of all, the intelligence against
terrorists is the hardest intelligence to gather. Basically, you
have to have a spy in the terrorist group who's willing to talk to
you, for whatever reason. It's the hardest intelligence there is
to... The National Commission on Terrorism which I chaired last
year, made as our key recommendation much more effort to try to get
terrorist spies, informing on their colleagues to us.

Every time there is a major terrorist attack, it is
automatically, of course, an intelligence failure. That's by
definition. But I'm sympathetic to the problem about how you get
good intelligence on these people. It's not easy. There is an
intelligence failure here. There is a massive security failure,
where we have four airplanes being hijacked on the same morning.
Two from Dulles Airport it appears. So there's a lot of lessons
that have to be learned. First we have to find out who did

Vance:Mr. Bremer, I want to speak to that for a second.
When the Oklahoma City incident occurred, the immediate response
from a lot of people was that it came from some Arab terrorist
group. Is there any reasons why we aught to be cautious about that
kind of an assumption on this particular incident, on these

Bremer:Well, of course. What you have to work with at
this stage, since we don't have any hard intelligence, apparently,
we don't have any forensic evidence, is motivations and
capabilities. And so when I list four potential groups I'm working
mostly from motivations and proven capabilities in the past.
[That] doesn't mean you can exclude that some other group
could have come out of nowhere and done this. But, at least as a
working hypothesis in the first chaotic hours here after this
attack, you have to start somewhere. And you have to start with
what you know about the past and which groups have motives.

Vance:One of the things that the President said today
from Florida, early on, was that the United States will respond to
this, and he left it at that. Is it to be assumed that the first
thing we have to figure out is to identify precisely who it is
we're going to respond against?

Bremer:Of course. Basically we has sort of a four
stage operation. First we've got to hope and help we can save as
many people ... as possible. Stabilize the situation at the
Pentagon and in New York. Secondly we need to get to work in
trying to identify the perpetrators. And then, thirdly, we come to
the question about retaliation. And fourthly, which goes along,
all along, at the same time is what are the lessons we learned?
What did we learn about the intelligence failure? What did we
learn about the security failure? And who do we move forward in
the future on these areas.

Vance:I don't recall anything like this. Pearl Harbor
happened a month before I was born, and I hear my parents talk
about it all the time as a seminal event in their lives all the
time. I am not aware of anything like this in the United States
before. Americans are now, I think it's fair to say, really
scared. Should we be?

Gentzler:This is a day that will change our lives,
isn't it?

Bremer:It is a day that will change our lives. It's
a day that the war that the terrorists declared on the United
States, and after all they did declare a way on us, has been
brought home to the United States in a much more dramatic way than
we've seen before. So it will change our lives.

I do think it's important, and I'm sure the President and
his colleagues when they start talking about this, it's important
to hit some ballance. The American way of life is not threatened
by these people, unless we threaten it ourselves. If we start
throwing away the democratic freedoms and the civil liberties that
are at the heart of our society, that's what their after. And
that's what we can't allow to have happen. And we've got to go
about our business. People have got to move around.

I was diverted on a plane this morning. I was trying to get
to New York, and wound up in Baltimore. I in a way was sort of at
least relieved to see business as usual going on between people.
We have to go on with our lives. It's not to say we don't take it
seriously. We take it very seriously. But it's not something
where we can all jump in a foxhole somewhere and hope the world
doesn't come and bother us. We have to find a ballanced response.
One that makes it absolutely clear, as the President said this
morning, that we're not going to tolerate this act of war. This
will have consequences for the people who did it. Very, I hope
very severe consequences. The most sever military response we can
come up with. But we also have to remember that we've got a way
of life to protect, and that this is not an existential threat to
the United States.

Gentzler:Paul Bremer, thank you.

Vance: We appreciate it, Mr. Bremer, thank you very

Gentzler:We should make it clear that there has been
no claim of responsibility ...
understand. this point to, uh, for
any of these incidents.

Friday, August 17, 2007

CIA Analyst Ray McGovern Digs Deeper into 9/11

Retired CIA Analyst Ray McGovern discusses the possibility of vice president Cheney issuing a stand-down order that allowed the 9/11 attacks to succeed, on a national talk radio program.

Thursday, August 09, 2007

Extreme Heat and Molten Steel in WTC Rubble

Witness Accounts of Extreme Heat and Molten Steel in WTC Rubble

Evidence of molten steel and high temperature fires in the rubble. The lead engineer of the NIST report, (official building collapse report) John Gross, denies the existence of molten steel. Note, the narrator talking about molten steel in the middle of this short film is Kevin Spacey from a PBS documentary "America rebuilds" aired in 2002. After the emergence of Larry Silverstein admitting Building 7 was pulled, the documentary suddenly went out of print.

The suggestion in the video that the underground fires were started by burning jet fuel and produced molten steel is utter nonsense. There had to be a heat source well in excess of anything that could have legitimately been in the buildings or on the airplanes.

Ironworkers Express Amazement at WTC Destruction

You couldn't have paid a demolition company to take 'em down straighter.
The grapplers were pulling stuff out, big sections of iorn that were literally on fire on the other end. They would hit the air and burst into flames, which was pretty spooky to see.

The Vehmgericht does not endorse the website advertised in this video.

Firefighter 1: You would get down below and see, molten steel. Molten steel running down the channel rails. Like your in a foundry.Like lava. Firefighter 2: Like a volcano.

Firefighter John Schroeder on Explosions Inside WTC

This 40 minute interview with FDNY's John Schroeder about the event's of 9/11 is solid confirmation that the buildings were destroyed by more than jet fuel.

00:03:22: The Fruit Guy Didn't Show
00:05:00: First Impact
00:05:43: The street was on fire instantly
00:07:20: Elevator explodes at lobby level
00:09:40: "Mayday! Second plane!"
00:10:15: 3rd floor stairwell collapsed
00:10:30: 3rd floor burned body in a closet
00:17:00: Any doubts in the official story? "Without a doubt."
00:20:10: Elevator explosion 5 minutes after impact. Explosions in the lobby
00:24:30: "I'm here to say my piece...It's time. Let 'em do whatever they wanna do."
00:25:40: Describes the collapse
00:26:20: "Tower 1 was commin' down from the interior on us"
00:28:30: People in Tower 2 sent back to work

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Cheney Hid CFR Membership from Constituents

It's good to be back at the Council on Foreign Relations. As Pete mentioned, I have been a member for a long time, and was actually director for some period of time. I never mentioned that when I was campaigning for re-election back home in Wyoming – (wry grin, audience laughter) – but it stood me in good stead.

Why might it be, we ask, that Richard Bruce Cheney would not want his constituents to be aware of his involvement with the CFR if it is such a laudable and worthy organization?

No Box-cutters Needed

This video provides a hint as to how a plane could be flown into a building "like a cruise missile with wings"

This is the other half of the equation.

Mike Walter Describes Pentagon Impact

We believe Mike Walter is being truthful in his account of what he saw.

9/11 Psyop 101 - Seeding the Myths

Two major 9/11 anomalies have been thoroughly documented, specifically:

1) The stand down of US air defense on the morning of 9/11 that permitted commercial jet aircraft to fly erratically and in restricted air space without challenge

2) Overwhelming physical evidence that World Trade Center buildings #1, #2, and #7 were brought down by controlled demolition

A third significant anomaly has not been discussed, let alone acknowledged: the reporting by the major US TV news networks in the first few hours immediately after the attacks.


1. MSNBC presented an elaborately detailed story about the lifestyle and anti-US philosophy of Osama bin Laden - while both towers were still burning and long before Bin Laden had been accused by anyone.

2. Fox News featured a "man in the street" eye witness who explained in strangely formal language the science behind why the towers collapsed when most engineers and firemen were utterly baffled and in shock by what had just taken place.

3. CBS featured a Bush administration insider (and not identified as such) as a guest who actively worked to dissuade Dan Rather (and viewers) from speculating that there must have been explosive charges placed in the buildings for them to have collapsed the way they did.

How was it that these stories - based on no fact, no research and no inquirry - appeared in full blown form so quickly on US news networks and then became part of the core myths of what happened on 9/11?

Were these stories prepared in advance?

There's an old intelligence saying that once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, but three times is enemy action.

Because most of these clips ran only once and were not repeated after they'd done their job, it made it difficult, if not impossible, for viewers to analyze them critically.

Now, thanks to the magic of video tape and a few people who immediately started taping the news after the attacks, we have this important evidence that at the very least these attacks appear to have been anticipated and prepared for by forces that have the ability to exert strong influence over the output of the newsrooms of major US news networks.

We encourage the reader to investigate Jerome Hauer. The video, Who Killed John O'Neill offers a good crash course on the 9/11 conspiracy

Monday, August 06, 2007

Six Seconds of Molten Reality

This short video clip is stunning. At first I didn't even realize where the molten metal was because I thought it was simply sunlight ... all » shining on the road. The video lends considerable support to the contention of Dr. Steven E. Jones and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice that thermate was used in large quantities to demolish all three World Trade Center Towers.

Media Suppression of Iraqi Pre-war Truth

This PBS expose discusses how the mainstream press shilled the Neocon false intelligence.

Pre-War Intelligence Failures (Cheney, Feith and the OSP)

Congressional testimony regarding how the Pentagon Cabal stove-piped bad intel to the White House via Cheney. The name Feith is spoken, but Wolfowitz, and Perle are not mentioned, though they were certainly party to the crimes. Rumsfeld is named by office. Familiarity with The 'Clean Break' Plan: A Conspiracy Of Theories is essential to understanding this treachery.

The War on Dummies for Druglords

Alex Jones explains the real significance of the "war on drugs". Of particular interest are the comments of Terry Reed attesting to personally witnessing complicity between William Jefferson Clinton and George Herbert Walker Bush in drug smuggling.

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

The Israel lobby - The influence of AIPAC on US Foreign Policy

An episode of the Dutch documentary program "Tegenlicht" about the Israel lobby in the USA.

This new documentary (April 2007) was created as a result of the controversy created by Mearsheimer and Walt's "The Israel Lobby" article. Featuring interviews with Mearsheimer, geostrategist Lawrence Wikerson, Richard Perle, historian and critic Tony Judt, John Hagee, former Congressman Earl Hilliard, Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch, Michael Massing and Daniel Levy.

We call to the reader's attention the irony of Richard Perle's denial that there is any evidence to suggest that some people within the US power structure might be putting Israel's interests ahead of US interests. Observe that Richard Perle is listed as the Study Group Leader for the authors of A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000

Another point of interest is the role of John Hagee, author of FROM DANIEL TO DOOMSDAY The Countdown Has Begun, which is available at We couldn't make this stuff up if we tried.

PNAC Rebuilding America's Senses

Professor Steven E. Jones presents physical evidence pointing to the use of thermate to destroy the World Trade Center

The Assassination of John F. Kennedy Jr.

Murder by Manchurian Candidate

Overwhelming, jaw-dropping evidence of foul play in the death of John Kennedy Jr., all based on official government documents: - the search of the crash site was delayed an incomprehensible 15 hours; - there was, indeed, a flight instructor on the plane, whose body is missing; - it is clear that someone on that plane committed suicide, shutting off the fuel control valve before plunging the plane into the sea. - The prime suspect, George W. Bush, though very publicly running for president, disappeared the day of the murder, and stayed missing for 3 days. 104 minutes

This video is nowhere nearly as conclusive as Hankey's JFK II. Nonetheless, he makes a very strong case for foul play, government insider complicity, media insider complicity and the usual suspects. As for who financed Hitler, the reader may be surprised to learn that the former German Chancellor Heinrich BrĂ¼ning had this to say to Churchill in a letter: I did not and do not even today, for understandable reasons, wish to reveal that from October 1928 the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi Party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith, and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany.

The 'Clean Break' Plan: A Conspiracy Of Theories

YouTube:"This video has been removed due to terms of use violation"

An audio recording of the presentation is available on the IRmep Audio page. The audio file is 08/29/06 - "The Clean Break Plan: A Conspiracy of Theories?" Grant Smith

Three Documents Defining Current Foreign Policy

PNAC's Rebuilding America's Defenses(PDF)

Strategy Forces and Resources for a New Century

This is the infamous document produced in 2000 by the Project for the New American Century Which gave us the term A new Pearl Harbor. It lays out a geopolitical strategy whereby the defense apparatus of the United States of America is to be commandeered for use in a campaign of global imperialism.

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

Here's a taste:

Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism, the starting point of which must be economic reform. To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can:

  • Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, "comprehensive peace" to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.

  • Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians, including upholding the right of hot pursuit for self defense into all Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society.

  • Forge a new basis for relations with the United States—stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.

  • This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT, that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make. The body of the report is the commentary explaining the purpose and laying out the strategic context of the passages.

2002 United States National Security Policy(PDF)

This is the document which advocated a shift in US military philosophy from defensive military strategy to pre-emptive aggressive warfare.