In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy.

You only have to know two things.

One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.

It is hard to image a more far-fetched story–except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/09/11/the-11th-anniversary-911-paul-craig-roberts/

The photo bucket dump argument pathetic really since no one really buys the official version of 911, at least not anyone I know does except the usual dim witted types or super brainwashed patriots

We have a saying in America Mr Conrad, if it looks like duck walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its probably a duck.

Does anyone know if they have ducks in Switzerland or that former penal colony we call Australia?

Please stick to the topic if you have nothing to contribute please do ignore this topic.

Please stick to the topic if you have nothing to contribute please do ignore this topic.

court victory for protestor



Moral Victory for Protestor who says BBC 9/11 Coverage was False

Campaigner and film maker Tony Rooke claimed a moral victory today after a UK court gave him a conditional discharge even though he has refused to pay his BBC license fee. Over 100 supporters from as far away as Denmark and Norway cheered in front of the court house as independent media people conducted interviews and photographed the crowd. Court officials had booked their largest room for the case but were at a loss to find that well over 50 people could not be fitted in.

Tony said: "I am taken a back and hugely grateful for all the support." He is asking for at least one person to take up the campaign by refusing to pay or taking other legal action (see below).

Rooke argued that the BBC's coverage of the 9/11 terror attacks in New York has been so distorted that it amounts to giving aid and comfort to the unidentified terrorists who demolished three World Trade Centre buildings in 2001. Two hijacked planes were flown into the famous Twin Towers and a third tower WTC7 collapsed later in the day. The attacks were used as the pretext for a decade of wars and the introduction of police state measures across the NATO countries. Vast personal fortunes were made by White House and CIA officials who failed to thwart 9/11.

The official 9/11 story was promulgated by the US media within minutes of the first collision, based on anonymous sources in the Bush White House. Despite a mass of new evidence coming to light in the intervening years the story has never changed and holds that the destruction was entirely caused by a band of Muslim fanatics, they succeeded without any help, and were organised by the notorious Osama Bin Laden who it is admitted was once a CIA agent. A man described as Osama Bin Laden was captured, assassinated and deposited in the ocean by US forces in Pakistan two years ago.

Sceptics say that the collapse of WTC7 must have been the result of something more than limited fires and damage from the Twin Towers, hit by the two hijacked planes. Argument has revolved around the speed of the collapse. In the BBC Conspiracy Files series, which endorsed every aspect of the official 9/11 story, it was stated that the building did not collapse at free fall speed, but later US officials were forced by video evidence to admit that it did just that.

A large group of over 1500 architects and engineers known as AE911 say that free fall collapse implies that the building had all its supports removed at the same instant which can only happen with a controlled demolition. Tony Rooke's legal argument is that in failing to correct their free fall misinformation and many other misstatements of fact, the BBC are a party to covering up the terrorists who organised the controlled demolition of WTC7.

The BBC has also failed to publicise the finding of Richard Clarke, head of counter terrorism at the White House in 2001. Two years ago Clarke made a bombshell announcement: in the weeks before 9/11 a secret "decision" must have been taken at the CIA to over rule FBI officers who wanted to arrest some of the people who according to the official story went on to commit the attacks. Clarke says that if this decision had not been made the 9/11 attacks would not have happened. Before Clarke went public the BBC programme makers were adamant this was a "conspiracy theory". Afterwards they failed to give it any prominence and failed to reinterview any of the officials who, if Clarke is right, must have lied to them.

Back in Horsham Magistrates Court campaigners have been planning future tactics. Tony Rook's victory, helped by lawyer Mahtab Aziz, implies that the BBC has a case to answer, but expert witnesses including Danish associate professor Niels Harrit were not called due to legal technicalities. However the District Judge would have read their statements before the hearing and taken them into account.

Conditional discharges are often used in political cases to indicate that the accused, though technically guilty, occupies the moral high ground. In addition the case provides a yardstick that can be raised by future campaigners. On the other hand because he has not been convicted, Tony cannot appeal and force the courts to scrutinise the highly questionable activities of the BBC as a conduit for CIA propaganda.

It's now essential for Tony's campaign that at least one person should take up the baton, refuse to pay their licence fee and appeal any conviction. Anyone interested should contact him at
rookietone@hotmail.com

Lets do a recap.

Bush and Cheney both refuse to go under oath to the 911 commission, Fact.

Bush tries to stonewall 911 from being investigated. Fact.

No one held accountable for the biggest failure since Pearl Harbor. Fact.

911 commission disowns own report. Fact.

911 information classified. Fact.

again I stand by this only a rube or a shrill can buy into 'Official" version of 911.

Seriously? the fact are classified no grant money is available those who do the research do so at their own expense. No one except a rube or shrill buys the official version of 911.

A court like this?

On February 25, in the small town of Horsham in the United Kingdom, there will be a rare and potentially groundbreaking opportunity for the 9/11 truth movement. Three hours of detailed 9/11 evidence is to be presented and considered in a court of law where the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) will be challenged over the inaccurate and biased manner in which it has portrayed the events and evidence of 9/11.

Over the last 16 months, BBC has been challenged strongly by individuals in the UK over two documentaries that they showed in September 2011 as part of the tenth anniversary of 9/11, namely ‘9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip’ and ‘The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On’. Formal complaints were lodged with BBC over the inaccuracy and bias of these documentaries, which, according to 9/11 activists, was in breach of the operating requirements of BBC through their ‘Royal Charter and Agreement’ with the British public.

This document requires BBC to show information that is both accurate and impartial. These complaints were supported by the US-based educational charity Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), which submitted detailed scientific evidence to BBC to buttress the complaints. The evidence focuses in particular on the confirmed free-fall of WTC 7 and NIST’s 2008 admission of this fact. In addition, over 300 AE911Truth petition signers supported these complaints by sending letters to BBC, requesting that BBC show this evidence to the public.

As a continuation of this process with the BBC, documentary film maker Tony Rooke has decided to take a personal stand on this issue. People in the United Kingdom are required to pay an annual TV licence fee which is used to fund BBC’s operations. Tony has refused to pay his TV licence fee on the basis of specific anti-terrorism legislation.

Section 15 of the UK Terrorism Act 2000, Article 3, states that it is offence to provide funds if there is a reasonable cause to suspect that those funds may be used for the purposes of terrorism. Tony’s claim is that BBC has withheld scientific evidence which demonstrates that the official version of the events of 9/11 is not possible and that BBC has actively attempted to discredit those people attempting to bring this evidence to the public. According to Rooke, by doing this, BBC is supporting a cover-up of the true events of 9/11 and is therefore potentially supporting those terrorist elements who were involved in certain aspects of 9/11 who have not yet been identified and held to account.

http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2013/02/23/the-911-truth-movement-goes-to-court-in-the-uk/

This book by John Farmer?
The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.php

I can show it to you but cant make you read it or understand it.

In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy.

You only have to know two things.

One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.

It is hard to image a more far-fetched story–except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/09/11/the-11th-anniversary-911-paul-craig-roberts/

What part of logic is hard for you to understand?

In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy.

You only have to know two things.

One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.

It is hard to image a more far-fetched story–except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/09/11/the-11th-anniversary-911-paul-craig-roberts/

The Secret Service at Booker Elementary: The Dog That Did Not Bark

The Sarasota Herald Tribune announced Bush's visit to Booker Elementary on September 8th, giving the 9-11 planners three days to include Bush as a target for a diving jetliner. Nobody could have safely assumed he was not a target. The Booker Elementary video shows the Secret Service did not rush in to remove the President to a secure location, or at least to the safety of the armored Presidential Limousine. That's their job. That's what they do in the case of a real surprise attack with many unknowns. They don't do anything else.

But the Secret Service did nothing.

If the events of 9-11 were truly a surprise to the United States Government then there is no way the Secret Service could have known there wasn't a hijacked or stolen plane heading towards Booker Elementary School that very second.

Radio Transmissions of WTC 2 Firefighters

Firefighters reported only isolated pockets of fire on the 77th floor immediately before the collapse, so where was the all-consuming inferno?

New York's Office of Emergency Management Issued a WTC Collapse Warning

How did the OEM know something that firefighters in WTC 2's impact area didn't?

World Trade Center 2: There Was No Inferno

Stanley Praimnath's office on the 81st floor of WTC 2 was a bullseye hit for Flight 175. Mr Praimnath survived and was rescued by Brian Clark who came down from the 84th floor. Their survival proves there was no inferno in WTC 2. Both have given interviews to the BBC, e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14766882. None of their interviews mention a raging inferno.

World Trade Center 1: There Was No Inferno

At 9:05 am Patricia Alonso was on the 95th floor of WTC 1 speaking to her husband on a mobile phone. If fires brought down WTC 1 then this area of the building should have been an unsurvivable fiery hell - the core of the building would have required a phenomenal amount of heat to fail as it did.

Woman Waving From WTC 1 Impact Area

More evidence there was no inferno at the core of WTC 1.

The "Truss Theory": A Fantasy Concocted to Conceal a Demolition

NIST has had two attempts at explaining the the WTC collapses with a "truss theory". Both explanations are fatally flawed because they say the twin towers were held together with little more than 5/8" bolts.

WTC 2: Cutter Charges and Cover-Up

Many firefighters' oral histories describe the sound of cutter charges detonating as WTC 2 collapsed. This is verified by a video. The original video soundtrack has been changed to eliminate these sounds.

Shaped Charges and the World Trade Center Collapses

Why were high velocity explosives detonating in the vicinity of the World Trade Center?

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition

Fox News: "Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall."

9/11/2001 radio broadcast: "...I was just standing there, ya know... we were watching the building [WTC 7] actually 'cuz it was on fire... the bottom floors of the building were on fire and... we heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder... turned around - we were shocked to see that the building was... well it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out... it was horrifying... about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that."

Video Evidence of an Explosion at the Base of WTC 1

A video shows two perspectives of WTC 1's collapse. The inset video shows the camera shake at roughly six seconds. Five seconds later the main video shows dense white smoke appearing at the building's base. Seconds later the building collapses.

The Ground Zero Fires Were Not Conventional Fires

The smoke rising from the wreckage of the WTC for months after the collapses contained no soot, it was a dense white. All videos of the WTC wreckage show this white smoke. This points to the fires being caused by a chemical reaction, that reaction being thermite.

How Did the WTC Fires Burn for Months?

It took millions of gallons of water over a period of five months to extinguish the fires in the WTC wreckage. Neither jet fuel nor burning office equipment can account for this. Thermite can.

Thermite and the WTC Collapses

A thermite reaction generates large amounts of ultraviolet radiation.

On 27 September, the officials ordered 2000 gallons of [Pyrocool FEF], which when added to water produces a slippery, low-viscosity foam. ... Berger adds that "Pyrocool also contains two powerful ultra-violet absorbers."

9/11 WTC Explosions: The Official Collapse Theory Implodes

Numerous videos documenting events as they happened at the WTC on 9/11. Many reports of bombs and explosions.

"...there are all kinds of reasons we thought [the 9/11 Commission was] set up to fail. We got started late. We had a very short time frame, indeed we had to get it extended. We did not have enough money. They were afraid we were gonna hang somebody, that we would point the finger."

War Games: The Key to a 9/11 USAF Stand Down

9/11 Commission Testimony: There was a young man who came in and said to the vice president "The plane [Flight 77] is 50 miles out" [from Washington], "The plane is 30 miles out", and when it got down to "The plane is 10 miles out" the young man also said to the vice president "Do the orders still stand?", and the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary?"

9/11 Pentagon Eyewitness Accounts

The suggestion a missile hit the Pentagon is nothing more than a straw man to discredit the 9/11 truth movement.

The 9/11 Anthrax Frame-Up

In October [2001], press reports revealed that White House staff had been on a regimen of the powerful antibiotic Cipro since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Judicial Watch wants to know why White House workers, including President Bush, began taking the drug nearly a month before anthrax was detected on Capitol Hill.

The Afghanistan War was Planned Months Before the 9/11 Attacks

"To be truthful about it, there was no way we could have got the public consent to have suddenly launched a campaign on Afghanistan but for what happened on September 11." - Tony Blair. July 17, 2002
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_facts.html

Of all the rumors floating around about just why Pope Benedict XVI is hanging up his camauro, one has taken on a life of its own. According to several well-placed vaticanisti--or Vatican experts--in Rome, Benedict is resigning after being handed a secret red-covered dossier that included details about a network of gay priests who work inside the Vatican, but who play in secular Rome. The priests, it seems, are allegedly being blackmailed by a network of male prostitutes who worked at a sauna in Rome’s Quarto Miglio district, a health spa in the city center, and a private residence once entrusted to a prominent archbishop. The evidence reportedly includes compromising photos and videos of the prelates--sometimes caught on film in drag, and, in some cases, caught ‘in the act’.
http://news.yahoo.com/did-cross-dressing-priest-sex-ring-bring-down-174300640--politics.html

Imagine if this was a Muslim religion guilty of these horrible crimes. The public would be whipped into a frenzy by the 24/7 propaganda outlets and we would be off to another war

midst growing efforts by international law advocates to arrest and prosecute Pope Benedict for the Church's cover-up of child sex crimes, Vatican officials have announced they will give the retiring Pontiff sanctuary, arguing that otherwise he would be "defenseless" - a feeling likely familiar to the Church's many victims of sexual abuse. A week before his resignation, the Pope reportedly heard from an undisclosed European government that the International Tribunal into Crimes Against Church and State (ITCCS) had called on "all people of conscience" to "disestablish the Vatican," and seek Benedict's and others' arrests for crimes against humanity. Their call comes as part of an upcoming Easter Reclamation Campaign that also seeks to seize the assets of the Church under international law. In addition, the New York-based Centre for Constitutional Rights has requested, on behalf of the Survivors' Network, an international inquiry into the Church's sheltering of pedophile priests. Pope Benedict is reportedly scheduled to meet next week with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano to request immunity against allegations of child rape. We don't really wish him well; we simply wish him what he legally and morally deserves.

"We call upon all citizens and governments to assist our efforts to legally disestablish the Vatican, Inc. and arrest its chief officers and clergy who are complicit in crimes against humanity and the ongoing criminal conspiracy to aid and protect child torture and trafficking."

http://www.commondreams.org/further/2013/02/19

The only "conspiracy" I see is the vatican trying to cover up for pedophiles

Facts.

On Wednesday, the Pope accepted the resignation of Bishop John Magee, an Irish bishop, for his failure to report child-molesting priests to police. Last week, the Pope issued an unprecedented letter to Ireland addressing the 16 years of church cover-up scandals there. But he has yet to say anything about his handling of an abuse case in Germany.

In that case, Ratzinger approved the 1980 transfer of Rev. Peter Hullermann to a psychological treatment center to receive treatment for pedophilia. Ratziner, then a cardinal, was the archbishop of Munich and did not report Hullermann's alleged abuse of boys to German police.

Since January, more than 300 former Catholic school students and others have stepped forward with abuse claims and the church has seen it's poll numbers fall drastically.

According to Stern magazine, Only 17 percent of Germans polled said that they still trust the Catholic church, compared to 29 percent in late January, just before the first abuse cases there were made public. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/24/pope-sexual-abuse-lawrence-murphy_n_512483.html

A blogger at the post says it best.

Why can't the UN impose sanctions on the vatican, no fly zone, and cut off imports. They will crumble due to starvation in a few months, or meet the will of the world, and disclose all their documents. this just feels like war crimes against children.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=ytff1-yff13&p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2F2010%2F03%2F24%2Fpope-sexual-abuse-lawrence-murphy_n_512483.html%20&type=

Thought I had seen it all now your defending people who defend and cover up for pedophiles.

Please feel free to point out any lie or hate.

I find it laughable that whenever anyone criticizes the government of Israel the cruel charge of antisemitism is hurled at them.