Skip to main content

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."

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.


kenny said…
I'm really glad to see you writing again and what a great essay for the comeback.

Your key points of distraction, inoculation, opportunity cost and buying time for the next 9/11 and many more are spot on.

The perps are arrogant. The almost immediate use of "ground zero" was telling. I've thought for a long time that the use of mini-nukes would be the easiest and most efficient way to rig the buildings for demolition despite the argument that they would not use something so untested.

Thanks for your research. Much food for thought.

Do you mind if I re-post this in it's entirety for my 9/11 archives with a note that comments should be directed here? You are much more articulate than I am and I wouldn't want to speak for you.
A. Peasant said…
hi Kenny,
it's good to be back...

this is a long post but yeah, the sites i link to present the info so well. it's very clear. the disinfo appears in stark contrast. so i hope people learn about 911U and Don Fox. with the science in hand, it would be good if people can cut off the disinfo cycle on these diversionary side topics.

yes of course you can re-post this. thank you. and don't be selling yourself short! you're very articulate and among the longest running hardest working bloggers out there. i hope life has been treating you well.
kenny said…
Thanks Pez. I'm doing well and hope that you and your family are also.
A. Peasant said…
good to hear. yes we are also. i did a lot of thinking about opportunity cost this past year. made some changes. things are good.
Jody Paulson said…
Glad to see you're back, Pez! I missed your original, big picture insights. The way I deal with the 9-11 attacks is that I know I'm not personally smart enough to know exactly how they happened, but I *do* know what didn't happen, so I just try to get other people to see the simpler truth which is, "look folks, it didn't happen the way the mainstream media says it did, it couldn't have."

Yet sometimes it's important to make the fine distinctions because when someone pushes a certain theory that seems pretty stupid beyond the point of being honestly mistaken, its a fair question to ask why. But then, you can't discount the idea that most people that spread disinfo *are* honestly mistaken, but with new false flags happening every 6 weeks or so they've got us chasing our tails so much many researchers just fizzle out from exhaustion and frustration, or don't have the time to really look into each new distraction. It's like what Ron Susskind wrote:

The aide [to Bush] said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

Yeah, I'm getting pretty tuckered out with all these distractions myself. But we can't let ourselves give up completely. Is it a war of attrition against the truth? Is there a smarter way to go about things? I ask myself these questions every day. I think they're worth asking. Evil can only thrive when good people do nothing.
Switters said…
Welcome back AP! Excellent analysis of the winding path that the official narrative as well as the alternative narratives have taken the past 12 years. I like how you correlated modern game theory with mathematical algorithms now, a sort of social engineering computer program, to be wielded against humanity like a rubber mallet.
Perhaps it's because I'm a cynical optimist, that I believe that eventually, knowing *who really did it* will become a sign of awakeness, a symbol of someone who actually uses their critical thinking skills, and rejects the propagandists. A diamond in the rough, so to speak. And as this becomes attractive, more people will want to emulate that behavior, this enlightenment.
I think our best hope is with the young people, god help them, because (as we've discussed before) many people of a certain age will *not accept* anything except the official conspiracy theory, as told to them by their trusted beloved teevee anchors, no matter the evidence. (Television being the most powerful mind control device ever created and all)
Permission to tweet?
A. Peasant said…
hey Jody, excellent comment.

for a long time, all this time really, i had the same take on 9/11 -- that i didn't need to know the details as long as i knew the official story was wrong. that worked for me until these other psyops. some gatekeepers from the old 9/11 days have been recommissioned -- video expert people. i did not know much about this whole side of 9/11 research because i never "went there." it was actually this angle that helped me see that the video fakery issue was one whole piece of cloth across all the psyops.

i had that suskind quote in my piece but it got cut, so yeah, i agree completely. and i also agree that the vast majority of researchers are doing the best they can and making honest mistakes because there's just too damn much information to sort through. it's exhausting.

i had to stop. i felt i was being used somehow, couldn't articulate it. they are putting people on a hamster wheel.

at this point, i think the answer is to take a quick look at each new psyop and move on. i don't see a lot of value added to dissecting them in minute detail. if you've seen one, you've seen them all.

and you are smart enough to understand 9/11. check out either Don Fox or 911U. both sites do a great job explaining it. i suck at science and i get it well enough. that's another thing -- they made it into such a mystery but it's not. all their advantages depend on deception and hiding information.
A. Peasant said…
hullo swits! good to see you too...

game theory -- yes. just imagine how they have the search engines in pocket. every time someone googles certain terms, they know it. they can see exactly where their prey (the truth) is on the web. that's what the metadata is for -- to track the truth. and use the search engines to scrub it at the same time -- it must make things pretty straightforward for the game theory software i imagine. control the variables and you can solve the problem of where to put the operatives.

you can tweet it if you think it will help. ?? i don't know. i have a twitter acct but i don't use it, so yeah, sure, wtheck.

bholanath said…
So heartening to have you back, coming on so strong and solid! one of those Hindu goddesses with eight arms wielding multiple symbolic forms of truth-weapons LOL.
Thank you for your exhausting work on behalf of all of us who refuse to give up in the face of overwhelming weapons of mass distraction including those high-tech algorithms.
I believe there are many who have a pretty good idea of the "who", due to evidence of put-options, security companies, dual-nationals, stuff like Black Eagle Trust [], qui bono, follow the money, etc etc. Now if the "how" gains more light, awareness may increase to a bothersome degree, but as we all know, they are usually 10 steps ahead in having plans for all contingencies. Still, very surprised that they've only been using the "fake dead kids" scenarios for so long, and not brought out the big National Trauma 2.0 as yet.
Looking forward to further input and comments from this excellent community. We really have to stay completely uncompromising in our gut-trusting and discernment, otherwise we're screwed.
A. Peasant said…
bho, omg. i just have to say, i missed all of you guys so much. so many great minds, so many real people.

huge smile on me for your compliment, jeez! ;D not deserved but i will take it with one of my two mortal hands!

EXACTLY with the good idea of the who, and the issue has been the how. and yes, it's out there, and it has been out there for years. they just don't have a lot of gas left in the tank. this is the thing. they are on the run. their position is completely defensive. if enough people realize that, we can wrap it up quickly. people need to stop living in fear of these assholes. they are bagged and they are on the run. people need to turn off the teevee and use that thing on top of their neck.

xo bho. good to see you.
Penny said…
Hey AP

when you come back, you come back big...

I have spent a fair bit of time reading your links etc.,

but, I need to roll them around in my brain a bit
and am under the weather today

I mostly wanted you to know I am glad to see you back and in fine form.
You have been missed

A. Peasant said…
a comment from Zahir Ebrahim, of Project Human Beings First.

Your entire essay is brilliantly summed up in this pithy statement of the former White House occupant's key advisor to the New York Times in 2004:

“We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” (Ron Suskind, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)

And that truism is part of every single crisis that is intended to be harvested by the history's actors, be it manufactured, synthetic, or natural. Its ex post facto “study” is designed, ab initio, to occupy the type-2 and type-3 crowd (Ref. Mein Kampf and Hitler's classification of the public mind where type-1 of course is the mainstream masses who believe anything, ).

So yours is the most appropriate advice for us all: “Your time and your attention are extremely valuable. Believe it. Use them wisely.”

The public (and we too are indeed only that; we are not the history's actors) simply cannot undo the “imperial mobilization” once it is seeded in a fait accompli, by keeping themselves occupied studying the shit left behind by "history's actors" --- because of precisely the points you have made.


A. Peasant said…
Ezra Pound had that in mind, I can only surmise, when he coined the phrase “Technique of Infamy” --- oh wait, may be that phrase is my summary of what Ezra stated: invent two lies, not one, and keep people busy studying which one of them is true! I extended that diabolical idea to: “invent multiple lies”, in order to match the complexity of the Information Age in our Technetronic Era where freedom of speech abounds to instill in the public mind the idea that they have an “informed opinion” with opportunities to express them.

As your essay suggests, the core constructs behind the multiple lies which evidently take on a life of their own once deployed in the public mind, are fabricated to accompany the acts of the history's actors by design. These are turned into popular beliefs by the superior intellect of the Mighty Wurlitzer. Type-1 accepts these beliefs as part of engineering consent. The type-2 and type-3 are diabolically run on the treadmills that are designed to get no where by offering them opposing beliefs, but which also lead to maintaining the consent just engineered by preventing its derailment. That constitutes the Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent – from which no one can escape.

I acutely get your good advice. But the fable of the tiny songbird has continued to preempt me. Here is the fable:

'When the Prophet Abraham (in the Orientalist's spelling) was being thrown in the fire by the tyrannical ruler Nimrod, all creation was in tremendous angst.

Even the stones spoke out against the tyrant.

Every moral creature endeavored to the rescue of Prophet Ibraheem (in Muslim spelling) to put out the fire.

To the extent that a tiny songbird picked a droplet of water in its minuscule beak and started to fly over the fire.

An Angel of God asked the little songbird:

“Surely you are not going to put out the fire with that droplet(!), and surely the high flames will consume you! – what do you think you are doing?”

The tiny songbird replied:

“yes, you are right, and I know that my tiny droplet will not save the Ulul-Azam (Great Prophet) of God. But I bring to the endeavor of standing up to this evil tyrant whatever I am capable of, and this tiny droplet is all I am capable of.”'

The journey in the path of the songbird, as viewed from effectiveness, and all other temporal angles, is only a waste of time. And sifting through piles of falsehoods and lies to uncover the truth is only a tiny step in that journey. And that truth, is as you say! In the age of universal deceit, to learn that truth is surely a revolutionary act --- a tad necessity before one can speak it --- and while that truth may be impossible to uncover at some levels, the moral imperative of the songbird itself transcends and dwarfs it.

Best wishes,

Zahir Ebrahim

A. Peasant said…
thank you very much Z.

we are all little songbirds, doing what we can.

A. Peasant said…
hey Pen,
thanks so much. i have missed you also, all of you. such fine minds and spirits. i am blessed to be welcomed back by such wonderful people.

sorry you are under the weather, Pen. get better soon. !!

the links are really good. all thanks to Don Fox and the people at 911U. i hope they get a boost in their readership.
Penny said…
Hey AP:
it's odd/interesting that you come back with a 9/11 piece-
briefly there was a time when I spent way to much time on that incident
-recently there was a building demolition in europe that reminded me of building 7
the name of the country escapes me right now..

I am inclined at this time and have been for some time to focus less energy on the false flags.

I realize at this time there is a big kerfuffle over Sandy Hook
I am staying right out of it.
And all the other incidents such as Boston bombing etc.,

Here is why?

My default position after 9/11 is whatever is happening, whatever we are being told is not correct.
Is not true

I realize even this can be used against me-but- it's pretty much where I am at.

IMO- and I am only speaking for myself... the elites psychos have the power to create and control these psyops- therefore they create the desired outcome and are the beneficiaries of these outcomes. So, I don't want to spend to much time tearing their psyops apart.

And really, you only need a few anomalies to know something ain't right..

like for 9/11-
you have building 7- smoking gun IMO
-the put options/stock market profits
-afterwards you see all the promotions
you know this is for a job well done

We know the elites do this type of stuff to drag us along, to get us to support their shit. And quite frankly to keep us under control.
This is done largely through fear.
Fear forces us to look to the government-daddy- for security and makes us dependent on them for that security, which they are all tooo happy to provide to us

If you know what I mean?

Maybe more will come to mind

The idea of inoculation is very intriguing.
And I see you mention the fear manipulation- I went back to read again this am, with a less woozy head
That is sort of the kicker isn't it?
If the fear,fear,fear, fear meme is being pushed...... your being had.

If I can think of more worth saying I will come back
but you have done a super duper job
A. Peasant said…
morning Pen. i am glad you are feeling better.

i do know what you mean about spending time on these psyops. it's a sort of trap. that was my sense of it last spring when i stopped blogging. it was made much worse by proximity to events. my brother was dating someone from the next town to sandy hook, so that was a no go area. and with boston i was surrounded with many people who were hook line and sinker into it. i would be interested if others who live in an area where one of these psyops goes down also experienced the horrible immersion of being surrounded by people who have given their minds over to the collective. it is very disturbing. the choice is basically be a pariah or stfu.

your priorities have been spot on with syria.

anyway, the important thing about 9/11 that i hope to convey is that it was a nuclear event. not a collapse, not a demolition. they EXPLODED the buildings with the people inside using highly advanced, tactical nuclear weapons. when viewed in that light, looking at the evidence of course, it becomes a different sort of act of war. and also, clearly, the narrative identifying the perps must change.

the idea that NYC was attacked with nukes in broad daylight, in a premeditated manner, would get people's attention on any other day.
Penny said…
Hey AP

" the choice is basically be a pariah or stfu"

that is really tough, I can understand that

just curious, has talk changed now that time has passed?

that initial traumatizing shock wearing off might allow people to be receptive
I don't know?
I must be a born cynic, lol.

to the nuclear event, I have to read more of the stuff you linked, it is a concept I have previously seen but never delved into.

thanks for the compliment on Syria
the sad thing on getting so involved in the destabilization is that as I said to ziad
i let the syrian people steal my heart....
I think what must have helped them is they have large and extensive family support
something totally destroyed in NA
and coming apart in Syria
tragic really
A. Peasant said…
Pen, the Syrian people have certainly been an inspiration for all those who believe in the resistance. it's quite amazing how they have beat the odds thus far.

has talk changed here? a little i guess. i find that most people (normal) will admit they find things off about the whole situation if the conversation comes up. but it's not like they will go look into it.

the more interesting dynamic i notice is among those who have the personality pathologies. they seem to view things like this as opportunities for attention, for drama, for networking, for personal gain of some sort. they are the ones who do the "enforcing," if you know what i mean. of course it is all in the name of brotherly love and charity, of course.
Greg Bacon said…
Interesting theory about the mini-nukes, but the only ones who really know what happened on 9/11 are the scum-eating shitheads that pulled off that FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB that was orchestrated by Israel, funded by the FED and those 'Too Big to Fail' Wall Street casinos, aided generously by traitors in the WH, the Pentagon, the CIA, FBI and the NSA.

Who knows, maybe a combination of thermite/thermate was used on certain floors to weaken the Towers, then the mini-nukes set off to turn thousands and thousands of tons of concrete and steel into pulverized dust?

Those piles of burning WTC debris that lingered on for weeks and weeks after the event are an interesting subject.

But so are the 1,400 or so vehicles near the WTC that were scorched almost beyond recognition, signifying a hellacious heat event, only possible with the power of a nuke.

Another angle that most neglect to look into is the destruction of WTC 6, that appears to have been exploded from within.

That sneaky 'al CIA Duh' was able to gain access to WTC 6 to set HE and also, to steal hundreds of millions--maybe billions--in gold and silver from WTC 5 is amazing, simply amazing!

All of this 9/11 truthing reminds me a two quotes from Ben Franklin:

"Little strokes, Fell great oaks."


"We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately."

Welcome back, the cause needs your rapier like wit and shining intelligence!
A. Peasant said…
Hey Greg, good to see you too!

Interesting theory about the mini-nukes, but the only ones who really know what happened on 9/11 are the scum-eating shitheads that pulled off that FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB that was orchestrated by Israel, funded by the FED and those 'Too Big to Fail' Wall Street casinos, aided generously by traitors in the WH, the Pentagon, the CIA, FBI and the NSA.

exactly. even these criminals are probably compartmentalized for safety, keeping secrets from each other.

such a big operation. the building 6 piece is very interesting. deep hole in the ground there. there sure was a lot of evidence that disappeared when these buildings were destroyed, just like the Murrah Bldg had those FBI files that were tragically lost. then some white van showed up i think the next day with a dozen black suited unidentified swat goons and they took whatever files that remained from the Murrah Bldg out of the nearby post office where they had been moved for safe keeping. poor people at the PO just had to stand and watch. a tough story to find online but i've come across it once or twice.

no evidence. they love that one.

i would suppose they used many sorts of explosives and methods to get rid of so much stuff. that way when the evidence shows up in the dust, like thermate, it's a nice little half-truth.

this is new today:

A. Peasant said…
this is a comment from Zahir, he is having trouble getting through the booger-patrol.

Hi. I spent some time reading the website 911 University that you uncovered. It is pushing yet another HOW modality, the Fusion-without-Fission nuke modality, as the primary weapon system for the demolition of WTC-1 and WTC-2.

This obsession with the HOW I had previously unpacked and sent to all the actors that this 911 university has so eloquently debunked. I think however that same unpacking equally applies to this yet another new modality advocate.

With your permission m, I just wanted to leave a link to a letter I had written several years ago to the 9/11 leaders whom this website has debunked. It is my response to this 911 University's advocacy of their own pet HOW modality. The exact same arguments apply to them.

But to this website's immense credit, it also has a political science corner which is excellent. It is the only website among all the 9/11 truth HOW exponents, as far as I know, that betrays any political commonsense.

Nevertheless, their focus on the HOW and advocating yet another one, is still the same (perhaps only unwitting) red herring.

[also see:]
Excerpt from
A. Peasant said…
my response to Zahir:

yes i can believe they have kept *part* of the method secret. perhaps several generations of technology removed from what we know as benchmark nuclear technology. for example, they may have some nuclear triggering process that is theoretical, as 911U posits. we can't be sure of course. nonetheless, to say that we can't draw any conclusions because they can manufacture evidence, etc., i don't think so. there is still a lot to look at, photos, dust samples, testimony. they can mix things in and take things out, but they can't hide everything that they did in broad daylight.

is it difficult to solve? yes. is it unsolvable? no. i think that is an important distinction. they used some technology, nuclear based. it may be exotic but it's not from another planet. the outlines of it can be discerned.

again, this piece that came out today is along the same lines of analysis:
Anonymous said…
Great blog post brother! If we had more bloggers like you we could turn this thing around in short order! is a great site. The main points people can take away from that site are that thermonuclear bombs blast things into very small particles (which is what we saw on 9/11) and that Steve Jones and Judy Wood are full of it.

September Clues are also full of it. Look for a debate between Simon Shack, OBF myself and Jim Fetzer on John Friend's show in early March. Unfortunately John Friend has fallen for the Sept Clues "it was all faked" BS.

Perhaps after the debate Shack and OBF will lose their last Friend...
A. Peasant said…
oh hey! thanks Don. i am happy to help in any way i can. (btw i am a sister not a brother haha)....

agreed on the 911U site. i also like it because it's just very focused on the one issue and the various disinfo facets operating around it. people can spend an hour there, as i did, and cover a lot of ground.

beware of john friend. perhaps before your time, but there's a background with him in these parts of the blogosphere. many people consider him a spook of some flavor, military, disinfo. you can read up on it here:

and you can also see this post of mine and the comment section here:

nobody is brilliant, but about six months after this happened, a disastrous liaison took place & he stopped blogging. friend, the new kid on the block with his golly-gee-whiz-i'm-just-a-country-boy-from-omaha, sure, was quickly set up with a radio show and big important friends over at AFP.

a phrase i coined for exactly these "lucky" breaks: top fucking talent.

fetzer's comment section has been ruined in less than two months by these operatives and trolls. you are in the shark tank, Don, as i'm sure you know. please be careful. Kenny of the sideshow reposted my post and there was a troll over there with the same old BS "legal" arguments and pushing shack. they love this Rule of Law shit. no court will accept blah blah blah.

it's so bogus. i cannot believe how many people get sucked into it. a bunch of narcissists and sociopaths and they need to be locked out of the discussions, period. no apologies necessary. censor them or they will DESTROY any place that normal people try to talk, and i think fetzer's blog is a classic example.

i was considering doing a follow up post on their common features and arguments, because as obvious as it seems to me, i feel that it may not be obvious enough. on the other hand i don't want to spend my time on them because they are such a blight on humanity.

bholanath said…
John Friend is a racist, white supremacist whiner, christian/western-"culture" fanatic riding the 'get the joos' train to some imaginary 'top-fucking-talent' big-top fame, along with a host of other new-kid frauds on the cyber-block. IMHO.
People should avoid getting sucked into these idiots' worlds, even if there's a smidgen of truth in their spewings.
A. Peasant said…
hey bho. yeah i never bought him. there are people who blog for satisfaction, and some are very dedicated, and there are people who are working. there are patterns of behavior. i always considered him to be working, and that has been absolutely confirmed. who does he work for is the interesting question.
nobody said…

I haven't read a word but I had to race to the comments to say how glad I am to see you back. Bloody marvellous - three cheers for everyone's favourite peasant woman!

The thing is, I'm back to a library connection so I've had to save to desktop so I can take it home and read when I get there. It's the old routine, ha ha.

Hmm, why don't I drop you a line and tell you what I'm up to? I'm very, very close now and I only had to travel 2000 klicks to get there. Just one short step to go...

best regards and hope you're well.

...etc. etc.

Ayah! What's this? No more anonymous comments! Oh alright then, fine. Time to start being me again. No point putting off the inevitable.

Mind you I wouldn't do this for anyone else you know...

Ciao ciao.
A. Peasant said…
hullo there my favorite pirate! glad to see you and please do send me word.

i hope you still like the post after you read it haha...

yes i had to do away with anonymous commenting because those days are over. the operatives that run around these days are pure poison sociopaths who probably get paid in perverse sexual favors, judging from their intense motivation to derail any and all productive discussions of 9/11.

there has even been a little expose written of them here:

very good except for the conclusion:

But Erin Buckles of the University of Manitoba, the study's first author, actually isn't sure that fix is a realistic one. "Because the behaviors are intrinsically motivating for sadists, comment moderators will likely have a difficult time curbing trolling with punishments (e.g., banning users)," she commented by email. "Ultimately, the allure of trolling may be too strong for sadists, who presumably have limited opportunities to express their sadistic interests in a socially-desirable manner."

ORLY? classic brilliant conclusion from a psychologist that we just have to allow sadists to abuse us.

hmm. I Think Not.
nobody said…
Hey AP,

I did like your piece. Very much. I went back and re-read that John Friend thing you mentioned above and found that my head was not far from yours, even back then. By way of 911 being used as a test-bed for advanced technology, that is.

And whilst I never actually embraced Judy Wood I thought that some variation of what she was on about was a distinct possibility. And for me this was bolstered by the fact that every time a no-planes discussion took place DEW's had to be mentioned. This was invariably done with with an implicit eye-roll, i.e. Judy Wood made no-planers look sane. But I prefer to turn this on its head. I think the no-plane meme exists to make the idea of 911 as a technological test-bed look absurd.

It's not of course. In fact, looked at globally such a hitherto unseen tech would seem inevitable. My analogy for this is the F-16. Thus: in 1915 we had the Sopwith Camel. Thirty years later we had the Spitfire. Thirty years after that we had the F-16. Each one of these was a prodigious leap over the previous. And yet here we are now, forty years after the F-16's appearance in 1975 and we're still using them as frontline aircraft. It's almost as if science has stood still.

And yet we know full well that technological advances only ever accelerate. So why have whole fields of endeavour ground to a halt? Why do we find the idea of mini-nukes absurd?

When I was a kid atoms were comprised of photons, electrons, and neutrons. Then in high school each of those was comprised of, I don't know... muons, gluons, whatever. And each of those in turn comprised of even smaller particles.

Okay, so why do we imagine that the atom bombs of the forties and the hydrogen bombs of the fifties would be the final word in regards to nuclear weaponry? That's nuts. Only a fool would believe such things. Of course there will have been advances.

And what with technology being the thing that elevates ordinary humans to what was once the province of Gods (flight and telephony for instance) it would stand to reason that the elite would hate the concept of godlike powers for the hoi polloi. They always did but there was nowt to be done for it. But I think now the time has arrived whereby they can be that best of all things: proper gods, the kind worshipped by fearful masses. Now that's a god.

The death cult have clearly learned the lesson of Prometheus. No more sharing of godhood. It's theirs, they're keeping it, and they'll do anything to stop others not just getting their hands on it but even knowing that it exists.

To that end all stops will be pulled out. Who did 911? In the face of godhood it's a penny-ante question dangerous only because it might lead to the question of 'how'.

Too long comment! Off I go now.

ciao ciao

Switters said…

I was going to post this as "off-topic", but after catching up on the recent comments, it seems appropriate.

Creighton loudly proclaims Greenwald/Snowden to be a psyop, but I think this is still worth noting.

How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations by GG

One more interesting bit that i heard about last week was the "failure" of a plan to plant operatives at broadcast networks. (Didn't a high-up cia guy admit they did that 30/40 years ago?)

And finally, what I found interesting about this article was that it had received almost *13k+* shares on fb and twitter. "Kiev attitude" being promoted in 'Merica now?
A. Peasant said…
not too long nobs, excellent comment.

agreed about the mysterious gap in technology. i've noticed it many times and written about it. they have things, these things are fantastic, and they are not going to tell us about them. but they will SHOW us their toys -- in a way -- by making giant buildings disappear, making giant hurricanes do 90 degree turns in cold water, making UFOs in the sky, etc. and then they will tell us a story in their populist media to plausibly explain. and then their operatives will get online and sow a thousand red herrings (to Switters point) for the conspiracy crowd. yup.

just add in the control of the search engines and TIA coverage of the people who twig onto the game, and it's just another day at the office for our "masters," who in fact can do nothing without all this extra help because they're really dumb as stumps and don't have an ounce of creativity or access to any except by theft.
A. Peasant said…
hey swits. probably the comments at that greenwald piece are worth wading through. i mean of course it's all true and it's been very obvious for a long time, but yeah it's great that people are catching on. not a moment too soon (mordant laughter).
Switters said…
Read an interesting comment at Taki's that I thought I'd share, since I hadn't considered it.

"Re: Snowden's data dump, I cannot fathom why the US Gov't didn't do a "we can neither confirm nor deny", maybe along with a hint or two that his info contained disinformation (e.g. "you don't think we'd have trusted him with that"). Instead, they gave him instant credibility by reacting the way they did."

They DID give him instant credibility, didn't they? Hmmm.
A. Peasant said…
absolutely. i am with tarpley on this one. it's a limited hangout. he revealed nothing new. it's all been out there and they just cherry picked a few items and act like it's a revelation.
Switters said…
The comments at Greenwalds site are, to me anyway, a dead giveaway that the place is not legit.
After reading the first dozen or so, my mind began to wander...wondering if there was a program somewhere that could build generic comments by just throwing words and phrases together, without really saying anything. ;-)
Anonymous said…
I have heard the name thrown around, who is this Snowden guy anyway? It sounds familiar.

John Freund and his clique, I can always imagine broadcasting from Argentina with the offspring of Eichmann, Bormann and the Fuhrer in the back grounds with hands lifted exclaiming those who will not struggle do not survive.

FBI records have been published by the way and clearly spell out Adolph went to Argentina with the help of Dulles. He finished it out in the Andes eating at a good Italian restaurant, with frequent contact with the royals and the good church.