the reality-of-fakery last ditch effort

So I had to stop blogging and step back for a variety of reasons. I used the time gained to investigate some other corners of the internet, and some other issues, including 9/11. I had never devoted enough time to 9/11.

There is an opportunity cost to everything we do and pay attention to. Understanding is a process, a journey. We make mistakes, take detours, add data, then modify or firm up opinion as needed. One has to take risks to add value and move the personal and collective understanding closer to the TRUTH, which is the goal.

When a person who is honestly mistaken is confronted by the truth, that person either stops being mistaken or stops being honest. 911 University - College of Disinformation Recognition

The perpetrators of 9/11 have a different goal: to prevent discovery of the truth. They employ an army of minions to this end. They have many ways to encumber people. Sometimes it is obvious, and sometimes it is not. One can suspect but not be sure. It really comes down to seeing patterns over time. 

In order to be good at Disinformation Recognition, it is very helpful to be good at Pattern Recognition, and necessary to be able to look at things differently.  911 University - College of Disinformation Recognition

By diverting our attention and wasting our time, they obscure the truth about 9/11.


Let's resurrect this old comment from Blammo:

Blammo said...
I'll only mention this because it is related to AP's post about cognitive infiltration. Lawson's videos are excellent, but as I recall, his position on 9/11 is that without a 'smoking gun' we cannot say that Israel did it, or was involved, and that said smoking gun does not exist. I can imagine his motives for this are not necessarily sinister, but I cannot say for certain either way. There are lines people are mentally unprepared to cross for whatever reason.
What if the smoking gun does exist and has been found? We suppose that would Change Everything, and important people could get on with the exceedingly important work of holding the perpetrators accountable.

Or would they? Maybe, if they were compromised, they would fail to notice the smoking gun. Maybe things would just get really weird.

The truth about 9/11 is stunningly clear.

The smoking gun does exist.

You can also read about it here, at Don Fox's blog.

From 911U

Having first recognized the vast energy surplus accompanying the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11, and having then connected the dots on the evidence that points to widespread molecular dissociation at ""Ground Zero"", we now consider the possibility of the simplest and thus most likely potential source of the form of energy capable of accomplishing that feat: fissionless fusion energy, released from multiple very-low-yield thermonuclear devices.

That was a pyroclastic cloud of superfine particles -- molecules that had been blown apart by extreme temperatures. The superfine dust covering NYC contained the following elements: barium, strontium, thorium, uranium, lithium, lanthanum, yytrium, chromium, tritium -- signatures of a nuclear event.

Read the full explanation at those links. It's all there.

Shorter: NYC attacked with dozens of tactical nuclear weapons. Perps lead investigation.

911U website has been sitting there calmly for FIVE YEARS, answering questions. Don Fox will answer your questions also. This is where trolls go to die.

A brief synopsis of the past twelve years of 9/11 research:

1. The Official Conspiracy Theory -- 19 Islamic hijackers wielding box cutters did it with planes and jet fuel.  Theory falls apart like spit and toilet paper.

2. Nanothermite. See comment at 3:22 on 11/10/08
"Thermate did it" is a pathetic limited-hangout disinfo campaign; chemical reactions/explosions cannot account for the widespread (evidence of) molecular dissociation at ""Ground Zero"". That evidence points to the [brief] presence of temperatures hotter than the surface of the Sun, and chemical-reaction-based weaponry, such as thermate, just can't do that.

3. Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) - Judy Wood says no bombs involved. But Judy fails to prove existence of mystery weapon.

4. Video / photo evidence challenge! Due to the reality-of-fakery, you can't prove shit. Hah! [Additional evidence for the reality-of-fakery generously provided by the Citizens of Sandy Hook, Boston, and many others.]

The EVIDENCE shows the towers were destroyed with tactical nuclear weapons. Everything else is disinformation and cover.

Step 2 is to figure out who would have the means, motive and opportunity to rig these buildings with dozens of mini-nukes. Actually, people already compiled that list. And people have compiled the military drills. The problem, if we recall correctly, was that we didn't have a smoking gun. There were too many discrepancies. As long as there's no smoking gun, we don't move on to holding people accountable.

That's why the smoking gun does not exist. 


Last time I blogged, I was analyzing photos and videos of Boston Bombing and poring over time stamps, getting confused, etc. Yes there are agendas in play, and a lot has been written about those agendas (gun control, mental health, terrorism, etc.). But even that did not really add up to me. If it was only about the agenda, the attacks would have been more straightforward, more Gladio style. They could have simply killed people and started in with the agenda through their controlled media.

The complexity is there for a reason: ongoing distraction, but on their turf of course: teevee & internet -- the places where they can most easily control the inputs: videos & photos. Garbage in, garbage out. Even the agendas are secondary and in service to the primary goal: distraction, especially because they create fear, which helps to shut down the frontal cortex.

Dutiful Citizen Researcher's Mission, should you choose to accept it: Examine the garbage. Sift through every piece. Take Your Time There's Plenty Of It and, importantly, It Never Ends.

There is a problem here specifically with the ongoing nature of the distraction. There is an opportunity cost to looking at this stuff, and that's the point.

The exercise continues as long as people spend valuable time analyzing these psyops --- frequently past the point where the cost / benefit analysis makes sense.

The perps who run these psyops and leave the clues around (and feed more in?) obviously benefit from this ongoing investigatory dynamic, otherwise they would suppress information as they clearly do when necessary. Why? Because all these discrepancies create space for their operatives to work among the researchers and buy more time for 9/11.  

It stands to reason that, if the smoking gun of 9/11 has been found and has been slowly emerging despite all efforts to suppress it, eventually the perps would be maniacally FEEDING psyops into the wood chipper to provide other bloody distractions, using multiple gatekeepers and operatives at critical gathering spots to keep it all looping around and AWAY from the smoking gun.

Maybe things would just get really weird? Yes. Check.

They will do this as long as they can, until they are ready for Plan B -- the next 9/11.


Of course, given that time is a finite resource, and the way everything tends to distract from everything else, every minute spent thinking about football, or sex, or food is another minute during which the monstrous lies of 9/11 remain safe from discovery by whomever is thinking those other thoughts. 911U

The best way to control the opposition is to lead it. Therefore, we would expect to find gatekeepers and trolls steering productive 9/11 discussions to 1) red herring theories of 9/11, or alternatively to 2) Sandy Hook and other topics centered on FAKERY, which again, is the perps' home turf. The gatekeepers would be mingling about with all the dedicated researchers.

We learned a new and fascinating concept called inoculation while studying the Sergei Magnitsky case. You can read a short description of inoculation from this book Psychology and Law: An Empirical Perspective.

"Inoculation involves giving targets a weak version of the opponent's argument, so that they will be easily able to construct counterarguments. The hope is that the targets will build up a bank of such ripostes, so that by the time that the opposition introduces his or her arguments, targets will be prepared to counter them."
It's a weak case that you want to lose. Since we all know so much about vaccines, I found the inoculation concept helpful in understanding it. 

Let's assume the perpetrators of 9/11 use inoculation. How would that look? As the research community gets near to an important piece of the truth, the perps advance a weak version and push it hard with select operatives, drawing people in. The idea and the operative may even become joined. When the idea gathers enough attention, the whole thing goes into a ditch, operative and all.

Think Ed Chiarini. He was perhaps the first guy to point out actors and drills (Giffords shooting). He made sense until he totally didn't, for instance claiming Kevin Costner is Jerry Sandusky. Why Ed, why? Poor Ed went off the deep end? Or, Ed was working. The weak version of the truth was discredited. Later, when the truth comes out about crisis actors, people remember Ed Chiarini and proceed with caution.

Notice that the perps need time for inoculation to work, and if successful, inoculation buys them time on the other side of exposure. The weak version of the truth must be introduced early enough so that the targets (researchers) can deconstruct and discard it. Notice that using inoculation assumes that the truth will eventually surface or already has somewhere, which the perps would know from their TIA surveillance. But they would still hold off starting inoculation on each detail until absolutely necessary, since it could backfire when people do their research and find... the TRUTH.

Manipulating the search engines would really help a lot.

We believe the TRUTH about 9/11 is that highly unconventional weapons ("tactical nuclear weapons") were used; and no planes were needed to destroy the towers. Planes, no planes... the planes debate has no bearing on molecular dissociation, pyroclastic flows, and signatures of a nuclear event (tritium, etc.).

I suggest these two very important truths were the subject of inoculation. Weak versions were rolled out  beginning around 2006 and gained more widespread traction around 2011 with the intention of being eventually discredited.

The 911U site started around the end of 2008. By 2011 Judy Wood gained prominence with her DEW theory, and around that time we also had more talk of "no planers." Ridicule ensued. If you go near these topics of exotic weapons or no planes today, you will meet resistance. Guaranteed. That is inoculation. You were supposed to reject these ideas. They were designed to be weak. The operatives pushing them were obnoxious, and all the more satisfying to reject.

But they're still out there. Still operating. Some of them even got promotions for the good work they did. Yes indeed. And if you see any other half-baked explanations for 9/11 that are so obvious no one could even recognize them for twelve years, like for instance det cord...? Heads up. That bears a remarkable resemblance to an inoculation for the problematic heat-of-the-sun temperatures that caused molecular dissociation on 9/11, but it does nothing to explain lingering pools of molten steel and signature elements of nuclear reactions. Not to burst anyone's bubble or anything.

Tactical decisions about when, where and how to conduct disinfo are presumably made using game theory algorithms. This may be one of the main reasons the NSA sends all our "metadata" to Israel, the world experts in game theory -- to plug into the algorithms. Just guessing.
"Israeli strategists rely on game theory models to ensure the intended response to staged provocations and manipulated crises. With the use of game theory algorithms, those responses become predictable, even foreseeable—within an acceptable range of probabilities. The waging of war “by way of deception” is now a mathematical discipline...The displacement of facts with beliefs lies at heart of how Israel, the world’s leading authority in game theory, induces other nations to wage their wars." http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2009/08/28/how-israel-wages-game-theory-warfare/

Obviously, the people who supplied and installed the mini-nukes on 9/11 would be the ones directing the inoculation schedule so they can get away with it as long as possible -- preferably forever if that can be arranged somehow.


As it turned out, during my blogging hiatus I listened to a lot of radio podcasts. I listened to dozens and dozens of shows by James Fetzer and also Webster Tarpley. I invested my time. I found Don Fox via Fetzer. I also read lots of things at Veterans Today. I was trying to suss out what is going on in the faction world, the shadow government, the great battle behind the curtain. So I went right to the intelligentsia, knowing what they are, and listened to what their best and brightest had to say; and of course, to what they didn't have to say.

Along the way of listening to Fetzer and generally enjoying his shows, I eventually wandered into the comments one day last month, on one of these 9/11 discussions. Oh dear. Cue the giant hookah-smoking caterpillar on a mushroom.

"Who ARE you?"

There arose around this mini-nukes theory the (heated) issue of Simon Shack and the September Clues videos, and the related Clues Forum, where the "expertise" is all about video and photo analysis. And sure enough, the conversation about the [smoking gun] mini-nuke theory could not proceed because -- if I grok the reasoning correctly -- the presence of faked videos and photos in the 9/11 anthology meant somehow that all the evidence was tainted, and therefore, REGRETTABLY, you just could not solve the riddle about what happened on 9/11. 

Sorry kids, but due to the reality-of-fakery, we can't see no smoking gun!


Really? From the first comments, people began pointing out the problem: Perhaps this is a waste of time, this fakery detour? In light of all the stunning evidence about molecular dissociation and elevated levels of tritium, etc., why do we have to obsessively focus on the video discrepancies, twelve years later?

No matter. 200+ comments ensued, which looked like something out of Twenty-Five Ways to Suppress Truth, The Rules of Disinformation, by H. Michael Sweeney

12. Enigmas have no solution.  Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve....
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule.  Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant  and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications. 

Et Cetera. The mother lode. I could do a whole expose on the chicanery and pettifoggery of the operatives in those threads, and speculate on why it's allowed, but that's another subject.

And of course, this all applies to Sandy Hook and Boston Bombing, as well as other psyops. Were the crimes designed with contingencies, so the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications? Yes. So all these discussions start to become linked together, and it's really easy for topics to jump around from one psyop to another. It becomes really easy to change the subject -- great turf for gatekeepers. Bearing in mind, all this cross-checking complexity about videos and photos wastes a lot of time better used to analyze other things, and my friends, that is the point. Opportunity cost.

They are stalling. The last three years especially, since 2011, has been their last ditch attempt to throw up a giant pyroclastic cloud of HOT AIR, reality-of-fakery bullshit discussions that never end and never get anywhere. Anything to keep the smoking gun of 9/11 obscured for One More Day.

All this time they've gained, all this distance from the crime of 9/11, what have they done with it? No doubt they have prepared the next 9/11, and they can start the whole thing up again from scratch.

Remember, Rumsfeld fessed up that the Pentagon had "lost" $2.3 trillion. But of course, he knew it wouldn't matter the next day. The next day was 9/11.

Your time and your attention are extremely valuable. Believe it. Use them wisely.

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.