There is an overwhelming amount of evidence which has been brought to public attention since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, casting doubt on the official story, which when held under scrutiny offers only contrived fantasy. Documentaries like Loose Change, Zeitgeist, 9/11 Road to Tyranny, 9/11 in Plane Sight and many many more have been on a mission to bring us startling questions with answers occulted by high level government officialdom.
This isn’t the first time Russia has threatened a release of evidence to negate the official story put out by the US Government. This time though I believe the soil is just right for these seeds of truth to take ground, hopefully being the first of many that will spur corrective actions to take place in our systems of government. This of course will have to bring into question many other government programs and their ultimate intentions – it’s no wonder the people in power don’t want to talk about it.
As Gordon Duff reported here Tuesday – and as discussed on today’s False Flag Weekly News (posted above – click here for story links) – Russian President Vladimir Putin is preparing the release of Russian satellite photos and other evidence showing that 9/11 was a false-flag operation by treasonous elements of the American national security community.
The original story reporting Putin’s threat was published by Pravda on February 7th. According to Duff, that story has been confirmed by a reliable source who has actually seen some of the photos during a visit to Moscow. VT sources insist that this is NOT merely a shot across the bow of the US government. Putin, these sources say, is genuinely planning to release the 9/11 material.
These historic photos are expected to show:
* That none of the passenger airliners allegedly used as weapons on 9/11 actually crashed where we were told they did; and:
* That the World Trade Center demolitions were conducted using extremely high-energy weapons. [Judy Wood’s research provides a great deal of evidence to support this assertion]
“The sh*t has hit the fan!” exclaimed one highly knowledgeable VT source.
Russia’s classified 9/11 dossier has been held in reserve against the day the Russians feel a vital national interest – such as their survival as a free and independent nation – is at stake. That day, it appears, has either finally come, or is approaching so fast that the impending launch of the “truth bomb” is being prepared.
Russia’s satellite photos and other evidence are currently serving a strategic role analogous to that of nuclear weapons. They are primarily a deterrent – a last-ditch ace-in-the-hole whose main role is to deter and dissuade the enemy from going too far.
But unlike nuclear weapons, the “truth bomb” will not kill anyone; and its use against the US would first and foremost harm the 9/11-complicit faction of the American power structure, while helping the non-complicit faction regain control and adjust the course of the ship of state away from the icebergs. While risky (the 9/11 bomb could indirectly lead to Israel contemplating or even exercising its Samson Option) and therefore anathema to risk-averse elites, Putin has apparently decided that the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks.
If and when the Russians finally release their 9/11 dossier, the cataclysm that ensues will stand as a milestone in the march of one of the signal trends in modern warfare and geostrategy: the weaponization of truth. While lies have been weaponized since time immemorial, in the form of propaganda, disinformation, false signals, and so on, truth has rarely been in a position to fight back.
Today, the weaponized big lies of the Zio-American Empire – like the empire itself – are over-extended and vulnerable. The stage is being set for a David’s slingshot of truth to bring down a Goliath of lies. To understand how 9/11 has backfired, let’s review the past few decades of history.
During the 1990s, the neoconservatives (and even some realists like Zbigniew Brzezinski, who has since repented of the way his views were used to justify 9/11) believed a New Pearl Harbor would bring invaluable benefits to American geo-strategy. According to their analysis, famously expressed in Brzezinski’s The Grand Chessboard(1997) the US was “too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad.” In The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski stated that the US would increasingly find it “difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” He ominously noted: “The public supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.”
The obvious solution: A New Pearl Harbor that would convince the American people they were under massive external threat. The neoconservatives, with their Israeli friends, were glad to oblige. The result was 9/11: The event that was supposed to enable a “New American Century.”
But the New Pearl Harbor backfired, for several reasons.
First, the “direct external threat,” alleged Arab and Muslim extremism, was bogus. The Arab and Muslim world, with its vast energy reserves and economic growth potential, should have been a US ally, not an enemy. And the religious element in Arab-Muslim civilization was especially conducive to friendship with the US, since the US and the Islamic nations are the last monotheistic cultures on earth. It would have been in the US strategic interest to be a strong ally of the Muslim world against European secularism, Russian and Chinese post-communism, and Hindu extremism. The deal should go something like this: America protects the genuine independence, including the religious values, dignity and autonomy, of its fellow monotheists; and in return gets a say (thoughnot total control) in oil pricing and policy.
But thanks to a false flag that turned the US against Islam and Muslims, America chose precisely the wrong enemy. While Israel has benefitted mightily from the US war on Islam, America has been digging its own grave by wasting its substance, even its sanity, on a fight against a phantom.
Secondly, rather than uniting Americans behind their leaders in a “good fight” against the nation’s enemies, 9/11 has greatly exacerbated the fractiousness and mistrust of leadership that makes it hard for the US to conduct foreign policy. Polls show that 36% of Americans (over 100 million people) think 9/11 was an inside job, while a whopping 84% or so don’t believe they are getting the full truth about 9/11 from their government. Confidence in government is at record lows, and the sickening feeling of having been lied to is largely responsible for the US military’s inability to win wars – and for the rash of troop and veteran suicides that are far more lethal than any enemy army.
So 9/11, the neoconservative New Pearl Harbor, has hollowed out America, not strengthened it. The false-flag attack on New York and Washington has left the US morally and financially bankrupted, without a functioning Constitution, fragmented in every conceivable way, lacking domestic and international legitimacy, and no longer in a position to be even a first among equals, much less a self-styled sole superpower.
The neoconservatives, whose top priority has always been Israel, are in a panic. Their only hope is to flee forward into ever-bigger wars. That is why Netanyahu is so desperately lobbying for a war on Iran that would set the Middle East, and perhaps the whole world, on fire. And that is why such neoconservatives as Victoria Nuland are pushing for a war with Russia that would in all likelihood go nuclear.
World War III is the last desperate hope for the neoconservatives and their Likudnik allies. Such a war would usher in martial law, enable the suppression (or at least continued obfuscation) of the truth about 9/11, and save the neocons from treason trials, and Israel from dismantlement.
Though Putin doesn’t want to play his ace in the hole, the 9/11 truth card, until he absolutely has to, the moment of truth may have finally arrived. As soon as it becomes absolutely clear that the US is never going to back off from its attempt to turn Ukraine into a hostile NATO base; that the economic war on Russia has reached a point of no return; that the neoconservative “flight forward” into World War III is inevitable…
…at that point, no sooner and no later, Putin will slap his 9/11 truth card down on the table and let the chips fall where they may.
If he plays it too soon, he is taking unnecessary risks.
But if he waits too long, the move will lose its impact. (Once World War III is underway, 9/11 truth from the Russian government will be dismissed as propaganda, and censorship under martial law will turn the truth bomb into a dud.)
I believe the moment of truth is at hand. Strategically, Putin needs to play his 9/11 truth card now.
The Pravda story, confirmed by VT’s inside sources, suggests that the card is about to be played.
Source:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/12/putin911bomb/
Few people ask WHY the burning cars around WTC on 9/11 were never filmed. Well they might have looked like a fireworks display.
Firework # 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hZCfs_4pos
Firework # 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdz-gRERgY4
great data!
I agree that only exotic weaponry can account for the ""Ground Zero"" damage, but consider the DEW (Judy Woods) claims unwarranted and gratuitously complex and vague, probably intentionally so (ie, noise), to not only stoke the enigma and stifle resolution but also to make any other discussion in any similar direction seem like the rantings of "yet another one" who seems intent on blurring the lines between reality and "science fiction".
DEW proponents seem to believe that it is no more of a problem to direct than to produce the enormous amount of energy necessary to mostly annihilate a large skyscraper in less than half a minute. I disagree, based upon general technological principles and also multiple reasons to believe that the destructive energy was released at ""Ground Zero"" by fissionless fusion devices, also known as tactical nuclear weapons, that had been placed inside the buildings — a technologically simpler explanation which better fits the evidence.
I would also note that the DEW proponents remain inconsistently and thus strangely mute regarding the best visual evidence in support of the use of DEWs at ""Ground Zero"": the incredibly brief bright burst of light which preceded/accompanied the intersection of an aircraft the government claims to have been Flight 11 with the North tower wall (1). For those DEW proponents to go out of their way to connect invisible dots while willfully blinding themselves to visible ones calls into question whether their behavior is truly motivated by an honest desire for full disclosure of all the lies of 9/11. I think not.
Great points, but i think there are a few logical errors. Firstly, just because Judy does not provide an easy to swallow theory, does not mean she is a disinfo agent. Secondly, a Tactical Nuclear device is a 'simpler explanation' but is it the right one… just because a theory fits doesn't make it true. The big issue with Tactical nuke is lack of heat. and even the best tactical nukes create massive amounts of radiation and heat, which are not present at ground zero; granted there could be undisclosed nukes which are capable of this, but simply based on the evidence, i find it highly improbable.
Judy offers the data, without a the bias of a theory attempting to explain it. this modality of investigation does not sit well with those who cannot analyze a thing on their own, and as such it has become unpopular with those that have little to no rational processing (not pointing fingers at you, just a general observation).
As for DEW proponents, as you say, willfully denying evidence, i have not seen that before, nor am I claiming as much. Personally I am just seeking to understand what happened, and putting ALL the data on the table for that purpose. If there is data which calls something into question, i want to know about it.
What I can say for sure, is that no one theory as to the cause seems to consider all the facts… that I HAVE personally reviewed. I can hardly claim to be omniscient on this score, hence my desire to keep an open mind about any and all things that surface.
No heat? What about the ponds of still molten steel in underground that survived despite the vast amount of water the NYFD hosed onto the whole site? Sure the Nano-Thermite folks have clearly demonstrated that it can be easily deployed to slice through very thick steel, and that the Thermate or Thermax commercial formulas containing elemental sulfur (and NOT sulfur compounds) lower the melting point of steel which would account for the strange washing away of beam thickness and even to the point of creating holes.
My humble opinion is that a nasty mix of devices were used and that all the researches are probably onto some portion of the truth (except those NIST liers).
Dr. Alan N. Sabrosky's suspicion that most all the flag rank folks in Washing know the Mossad did 9/11, is well worth exploring further, and anything that ties back to a Cambridge school's lab across the street from a business that didn't actually lose its founder on 9/11, also deserves attention.
A South African like T&R commission with the power to grant immunity to and provide lifetime safety for those who KNOW what happened and completely spill everything they know could be a key step in restoring our beloved USA to sanity and honor and respect by a global community that now sneers at us for being Israel's well trained thug ready to destroy America and spend our blood and treasure to do Israel's bidding.