48 Comments

All the Zionists complicit

May God deal with them all in this life and in the next

Expand full comment

No

Expand full comment

Freemasons. Illuminati.

Expand full comment

The Catholic Church will once we get a Pope.

Jews stole Vatican, our structures.

Catholic remnant reeling.

Rest, who followed, are apostates now. Great apostasy.

Catholic teachings - things done at most local level possible. Catholics DESPISE DESPISE NWO

Expand full comment

Great piece. Thanks! It is very obvious except to brain damaged simpletons that the "Dancing Israelis" were just an attention decoy. Intelligent people obviously understand that subterfuges are done for a reason and in fact bring the real perpetrators into closer focus. In the game, what is most hidden is what most reveals, what is most open, conceals and deceives. But the trail of clues, hints and premonitory symbols paradoxically discloses the true logic and ideology of "means justifying ends in an amoral universe."

Expand full comment

AHO!

In this case; Yes, Amen!

Blessings ~

Expand full comment

There's no doubt in my mind that Israeli intelligence played a role in the 9/11 psyop. However, this does not discount the likelihood that stories such as the "dancing Israelis" were planted to discredit 9/11 skeptics as well as to distract people's attention from the bigger picture. It also acts as way of making people point their fingers on one "bad guy" so they won't analyze all the facts and put 2-&-2 together to realize that this massive scam was approved, orchestrated, and covered up by NUMEROUS power-brokers, not just the Rockefellers or "the Jews" (such as the New York/New Jersey Port Authority and Larry Silverstein). Otherwise, there's no way to explain how such a massive project could succeed with no serious pushback.

Expand full comment
author

Again, it's a nice distraction away from the US MIS's involvement.

The 9/11 E-Team Psy-Op

Watch: https://rumble.com/v53vkdc-the-911-e-team-psy-op.html

Expand full comment
Aug 3·edited Aug 3Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

What's funny is the fact that FOX News is and has always been staunchly pro-Israel, which is yet one more reason to be highly skeptical of their report detailing Israeli intelligence involvement in 9/11 and their eavesdropping in U.S. telecommunications via companies like Amdocs. Such a report, at best, is nothing more than a controlled leak, in much the same way that Edward Snowden's disclosure of NSA spying, for example, was a controlled leak. It also isn't concrete evidence that Israeli agents rigged explosives inside the WTC complex or even financed the attacks, which I guess is why they decided to report on this instead of the more incriminating evidence proving their complicity.

Expand full comment

Funny you mention "The Ends Justify the Means"...

Exitus acta probat is engraved on one of the books held by one of the figures behind one of the Washington statues on the arch mentioned above...

Expand full comment

I was one of so VERY few on 9/12 that was saying We were lied to. At the time I was a civilian working on a military base with a couple of guys who were explosive experts, and on 9/11 They were discussing how the the "terrorists" got explosives into the building. The next day We were all stunned when We were told it was only jet fuel. The guys were mystified.

Me? I knew something was up beyond "terrorists" - or rather, the terrorists were not who They told Us They were.

Expand full comment
May 23Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

Good stuff. I wonder though why I can look up Nicholas Rockefeller and find numerous references including a photo that looks a lot like the guy Russo was pictured with. If that point is bogus, I must dig at the other ones. But good food for thought, thanks -

Expand full comment
author

Look at the date ranges for references to Nicholas Rockefeller you find on the net. And tell me what you find.

The clip I used is from a documentary 10 years ago...

Expand full comment
May 24Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

Allegedly born June 6, 1956, California, got his JD from Yale 1987 (after attending Oxford), Inactive status as lawyer in California, CFR member, fat guy with a cheesy mustache, does business in China, that all seems to match.

Or is he just a cut out, a fake character - most of the pages with info on him have the same crappy font; and he isn't listed in Rockefeller family lists. At this point, I'd say he is real. He does have a phone and p o box listed with the state bar of California.

James Corbett looked into him and decided he was real, and thought he might be a con man on the outer branches of the family, a fringe Rockefeller. BUT He looks a lot like David Rockefeller with a mustache. The ears are almost unmistakable. I wonder if he was an unannounced 7th child to the family - perhaps out-of-wedlock? Their sixth child was born in '52. That would give Nick a chip on his shoulder, which might have given him loose lips with Russo. That is my working hypothesis.

Expand full comment
May 24Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

I visited the Twin Towers as a tourist in 1995 and stayed up on the rooftop viewing area for quite a few hours as the afternoon faded, watching the long shadows the buildings cast across Brooklyn. These were huge constructions. Great views over Manhattan from up there.

To turn those things into dust was no small feat. Jet fuel or thermite just ain't gonna cut it.

It took black technology. But how did they know it would work at that scale? They must have tested it prior.

Expand full comment
author

Re: "They must have tested it prior." - Read my David Icke article and listen to the testimony of Dean Warwick in the article.

Expand full comment

Is it possible that they might've used "DEW" explosives to cause much of the damage seen that day at the WTC complex? Even though they apparently didn't use conventional detonators to destroy the Twin Towers or WTC 7 (mainly to avoid detection from outsiders nearby), it's reasonable to assume that they had exotic explosive weaponry at their disposal by 2001. With the extensive funding allotted to their "black budgets", anything is possible.

Plus, since much gov't info about DEWs is classified, who's to say such technology is strictly relegated to space lasers or beams from satellites? For all we know, this kind of technology can come in various forms such as "explosives" or highly reactive substances.

Expand full comment
Aug 3Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

This event was non-chemical. It happened at the atomic or subatomic level. It was something unique. Maybe the OKC bombing was a rehearsal? 😃

Expand full comment
author

Similarities of OKC, WTC, Shanksville and the PentaCon is what?

Water features...

Described in more detail in the documentary, 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality.

Watch: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html

Expand full comment
Aug 3·edited Aug 3

Then again, I never said they used chemical explosives. Just that may've used DEW-based incendiaries. As I said previously, I'd imagine that such technology would take on various forms, and what I proposed would be no different.

And yes, I suspect the OKC bombing psyop was a "rehearsal" drill for this event. Same can be said for the '93 WTC bombings.

Expand full comment

They rigged up a Hollywood fireball to simulate the impact of the planes “crashing” into the towers. Gasoline & sawdust. Hi-tech:).

Expand full comment
author

There was no kinetic or thermal mechanisms in play.

Watch 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality this weekend.

Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html

Expand full comment

Or whatever was witnessed that day fitting either or both criteria was simulated or faked.

Expand full comment
May 24Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

Farrell does some good research but he really has a blind spot when it comes to no planes. He won’t go there.

Expand full comment
author

Most 9/11 "truthers" don't want to go there.

If you haven't yet - Check out 9/11 Planes Research: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/

Expand full comment

holy heck--this is compellin' stuff--I had no idea about all the planted symbolism but waiiiiit.... Miss McGee's viddeyo had me thinkin' about the (great) ol' punk band 999 (pre-911 of course) whose 2 biggest hits have uncannily relevant lyrics... dang! from "Emergency" (of course Emergency in the US is 911) we git this:

Raiders strike but where

Panic in the air

Running scared oh I'm so scared

It gets you everywhere

Heard it on the news

Rebels get accused

Fighting for another cause

But why and where and whose

Carry out their plan

Release us if you can

What's your worth to a pile of earth

You're just another man...

https://genius.com/999-emergency-lyrics

There's more--an' their other big hit Homicide also has lyrics could apply--after all 911 was a homicide...

Conned all along! (Would be interestin' ta see if the Tavistock wreck-hurd companies were behind 999 too--lots behind the labels--of course we normies had no idea!)

Expand full comment
author

If you want to get into symbolism and numerology around 9/11, I think you'd enjoy:

9/11 Alchemy - A Big Idea

Link: https://rumble.com/v4irvwr-911-alchemy-a-big-idea.html

Expand full comment

cool, thanks muchly! I'll take a look-see!

Also: the image of the 2 towers dead-eye in the Wash Sq. arch:

https://tinyurl.com/yzd9cbk8

And... mebbe this is too too but the idea of two columns, later in ruins, seen thru an arch looks a lot like this York Rite Masonic imagery ta me:

https://tinyurl.com/yckajyv5

Expand full comment

ps No Nick Rockefeller? I think Russo wuz tellin' the truth about what he heard... fwiw...

https://www.geni.com/people/Nicholas-Rockefeller/6000000046719106821

http://nicholasrockefeller.net/

"He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Institute of Strategic Studies, the Advisory Board of RAND, the Corporate Advisory Board of the Pacific Council on International Relations, the Board of the Western Justice Center Foundation, and the Central China Development Council and has served as a participant in the World Economic Forum and the Aspen Institute. He also serves as a director of the Pacific Rim Cultural Foundation, and is a member of the boards of visitors of the law schools of the University of Oregon and of Pepperdine University. Nicholas’ China practice includes transactions with China’s largest banks, energy companies, communications entities and real estate enterprises as well as with China’s principal cities and leading provinces. He was chosen as a board member of the Central China Construction and Development Commission and as a director of the Xiwai International School of Shanghai International University. He has appeared numerous times on CCTV and other China media.

Nicholas is a graduate of Yale University and of Yale Law School. "

also... a fair amount 've stuff on the fella--

https://yandex.com/search/?text=nicholas+rockefeller&lr=21411&search_source=yacom_desktop_common

on the CFR website: https://www.cfr.org/membership/roster (search / scroll)

IMHO David (waaaay higher up on the Rocky-feller food chain) would not spend one nanosecond with a Brooklyn Jew (Russo) whose father wuz in the "schmatta" bizness sellin' underwear (we call 'em garmentos here)--this is humble beginnin's an' Russo stayed a salt-of-the-Earth New Yawker... began as a music manager an' club booker-- I promise ya that even tho' her produced in Hollyweird (where such humble beginnin's were a-ok, that's how the biz started), NO WAY would the hoi poloi Rockefellers spend 5 minutes with this kinda guy. (Yup, the Rockefellers had humble beginnin's too--but a century earlier an' they erased more or less all caste-marks) Just my 2 cents!

Expand full comment

Too many coincidents to ignore. Linking tomorrow @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/

Expand full comment

one more "clue"--

The SIX day war--6/6/67 (666 6+1)--two months after David appeared on the magazine cover with his watch an' the Tarry-TON towers... (they got "lit" like cigarettes!)--a war of airstrikes... hmmm, did the RockyFellers have their hands in that pot too? International "projects"....? (one hand warshes t'other?)

Expand full comment

I’m sticking with Israel and Mossad. The result of 9/11 was a war in the ME and the removal of Saddam. Qui bono.

Expand full comment
author

Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.

The order of crime solving is to determine

1) WHAT happened, then

2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then

3) WHO did it. And only then can we address

4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).

Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.

You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.

You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.

If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it (they hate us for our freedoms); before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.

Many people have speculated as to who committed the crimes of 9/11 and/or how they did so. But without addressing what happened, speculation of this kind is nothing more than conspiracy theory, a phrase that also describes the 19 bad guys with box cutters story we were given before noon on 9/11/01.

Dr Wood’s research is not speculation and she’s been the closest to getting to the bottom of the who dunnit.

Dr Wood did a forensics investigation of what happened to the WTC complex on 9/11/01.

She does not address who did it, nor am I concerned with that question right now.

Before issues of that kind can be addressed, we must first determine what happened.

By definition, research that is purely empirical cannot be about and has nothing to do with conspiracy theory of any kind.

The fact that others (in the mainstream media, the alternative media, and the so-called 9/11 truth movement) promote various theories about 9/11 is irrelevant to Dr Wood’s research. On the other hand, to determine what happened, we must address all of the available evidence.

Anyone declaring who did what or how they did it before they have determined what was done is merely promoting either speculation or propaganda.

The popular chant, “9/11 was an inside job,” is, scientifically speaking, no different from the chant that “19 bad guys with box cutters did it.” Neither one is the result of a scientific investigation supported by evidence that would be admissible in court.

Neither identifies what crime was committed or how it was committed.

There are a lot of coincidences with regards to the build-up, on the day and the days after 9/11. There are suspects as to who might have had some sort of involvement in the events of 9/11, but for now it’s all they are. Suspects.

Dr Wood sued 23 NIST subcontractors who were tasked with security and clean up at ground zero. These companies also helped write reports that made up the scientifically flawed, 10 000 NIST report. Two of the main defendants in the case were ARA and SAIC, who specialise in psychological warfare, weather manipulation and directed energy weapons, DEW.

If Dr Wood’s 2009 US Supreme Court Case wasn’t railroaded by the judge, she would have been able to depose these 23 companies and in so doing, would have been closer to determining exactly HOW and then we’d get a lot closer to WHO and WHY.

But we can have our suspects for now, but we need hard evidence to convict.

Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/

Expand full comment

Terrific analogy of the past presentation to and for the masses - Get the BS out before the actual truth, so there are no questions as the hook, line and sinker are set in motion. Preconceived.

Expand full comment
author

You should read these two free e-books...

1. 9/11 – Finding the Truth - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf

2. 9/11 – Holding the Truth - http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/911%20Holding%20The%20Truth%20-Andrew%20Johnson%20-%202017.pdf

Here is another analogy...

There has been a murder - Three detectives arrive at the scene.

A body lies on the ground, with a knife and a tyre iron close by.... Two of the detectives decide the cause of death is either due to being stabbed to death or blunt force trauma (both won’t be able to prove this conclusively in a court of law) ... They run off to go look for their suspects and to bring someone to book...

The lone detective left at the crime scene decides to do an independent forensic investigation of the room, where the body has been found and starts putting pieces together.

A short while later the other two detectives call the detective at the crime scene on the phone, to boast they both already have a suspect apprehended - one for the knife and one for the tyre iron....

There is only one problem...

Whilst doing the lone investigating of the crime scene, the detective found no blood on the knife or the tyre iron.... There is no bruising to the body and no injuries to the head. No stab wounds either....

The body has a bullet hole in it...

Now - When looking into the events of September 11, 2001.

When you talk thermite, nukes, or DEW - Who is the detective that investigated the crime scene whilst the other two were running around apprehending innocent people due to making the wrong assumptions, that did not fit the evidence found at the crime scene?

Answer:

The detective that investigated the crime scene and was able to conclude what the murder weapon was, because a conclusive body of evidence is way better than a theory or belief, that will hold no water in a court of law, when you want to charge your suspect of a crime.

Once you have charged someone and taken them to court for the wrong crime – You cannot open a case against them again, remember that.

Expand full comment

Well aware, been awake since birth (nearest pin point) more than 60 yrs. I have viewed these books, thnx. The evidence in the case of corruption in the world is astounding and overwhelming!

My fox, pushes n pulls me up, out, over, back, forth and around through, in and out of all of the rabbit holes - My mind is W(holy) open to any and all ideas, which may pass my way.

Blessings ~

Expand full comment

While in my formative years, if I were to lie or even look at someone as though I were lying, I would receive the horse whipping of my life. Needless to say, first time out, I understood what it meant to be with sound morals, integrity - In the instances of these horse shitters, there should be a scaffolding on the town square,. One for all to bare witness, and to create the understanding of morals, integrity, and ethics, by means of a sound thrashing which would be felt through decades of their lineage, so as not to be done over!

Done twice, with no mercy.

Expand full comment

I gotta admit, when I found out the the Rockefellers were an instrumental part of getting the WTC complex built a few months ago, I was instantly questioning. The Rockefellers have quite a past, one that comes to mind is the 1918 'pandemic'. Yep, Rockefellers were involved with the bacterial meningitis shots that, in my opinion, was the real culprit of the deaths during that time. There were some people questioning another man involved named Frederick Gates maybe being related to Bill Gates, but I haven't dived into that rabbit hole just yet

Expand full comment

One has to wonder if they built the towers to the specs they called for, for instance the steel being up 100k psi at higher floors, the exterior columns that is. Structural engineer Leslie Robertson once said in an interview that 'they' (who is they?) greatly overstated the safety factors of the towers. Who is 'they' and what in the heck does that mean? Also, he mentions after 9/11 how the towers, specifically #7, turned to sand from it's destruction. Than when asked what his opinion was as to what happened, he rejected even having one, which I thought was strange considering he was a structural engineer. Maybe he is controlled opposition, maybe he was part of the whole op. Maybe he was giving us clues without sacrificing his life to what really happened and who was responsible. I just find it bizarre that a structural engineer would make such statements

Expand full comment

Dr. Wood free book.

Internet archive is So ooo good

https://archive.org/details/where_did_the_towers_go/mode/1up

Expand full comment
author

Why Not a PDF or Electronic Version?

It has been asked why there isn’t an electronic (PDF, iPad, Kindle, ePub etc) version of the book… Well, there are several reasons.

The main argument is that if you do want to know the truth, then you will commit yourself to reading a physical book.

With an electronic book, there is arguably more of a tendency for the reader to skim read or “dip into sections.” Getting a physical, hardback copy of a book is not as easy or as cheap as getting an electronic version.

The reading experience – and process – is different and one can argue, then, the reader would sincerely want to know the truth about what happened to the WTC complex on 9/11.

The book should leave you in no doubt.

Read this article by Andrew Johnson: https://checktheevidence.substack.com/p/helping-people-understand-where-the

Expand full comment
Aug 4Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

You really need to listen to my mate The Bernician. Go to the first part of the interview for the entire run down on 9/11.

https://www.thebernician.net/alec-zeck-interviews-mob-on-the-way-forward/

Expand full comment
author
Aug 4·edited Aug 4Author

Does he talk of the use of DEW on 9/11, or the work of Dr Judy Wood?

Expand full comment
Aug 4Liked by 9/11 Revisionist

He details who commissioned the job plus much more info that he got from the wife of Kissengers right hand man.

Expand full comment