Category Archives: nano-thermites

9-11Truth History Made in Danish Court

Print 

9/11 History Made in Danish High Court

From the expression on one judge’s face — a look of disbelief that 9/11 skeptics know quite well — it was obvious he had never before seen the video.

WTC 7 & Nano-thermite Evidence Admitted

By Josef Hanji

Copenhagen, Denmark — March 14, 2015

In an article titled “Madness in the Royal Library” published in the Danish newspaper Weekendavisen on December 7, 2012, journalist Søren Villemoes accused esteemed chemist Dr. Niels Harrit of being a “crackpot” for daring to conclude that the destruction of three World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001, was a controlled demolition.

Harrit, a 40-year professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and co-author of a scientific paper on the nano-thermite found in dust samples taken from Ground Zero, filed a libel lawsuit against both the newspaper’s editor, Anne Knudsen, and the offending journalist. After he lost his case in City Court on August 16, 2013, he appealed to the Danish High Court.

The High Court set a court date of March 12, 2015, for the case to be tried. Last month, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth informed Harrit’s supporters of the impending appeal and helped raise funds from those supporters to pay his legal expenses.

Below, we will describe how Dr. Harrit’s appeal fared.

The High Court session had it all — persuasive forensic evidence, courtroom drama, and the strong voice of a reputable scientist who expertly defended the basic laws of physics as well as the evidence of nano-thermite in the WTC dust. Though the verdict will not be known until April 9, it is clear to this observer that Dr. Harrit did an excellent job, not only solidifying his integrity and expertise in the eyes of the public, but also advancing the cause of the 9/11 Truth Movement in the process.

Though the High Court case was to convene at 9:30 AM, the court room was already 80% full by 9:00 AM. The 16 seats on the court benches quickly became 20 as people moved closer together. Four more chairs were brought in, but after they, too, were quickly occupied, other would-be onlookers were turned away. By the time the three judges entered the court room, it was filled to capacity.

The trial started with Dr. Harrit, who represented himself, asking the court to indulge him as he reviewed the City Court trial and verdict. He also requested the judges’ guidance in case he made any mistakes during the proceedings. In fact, the legal counsel he had received in advance from Danish attorney Mads Krøger Pramming, chairman of the Danish whistleblower organization Veron, made Harrit’s presentation mistake-free. This observer got the impression that, had he not chosen to study and teach chemistry, Dr. Harrit would have made a formidable lawyer.

On display was not only the intellect of a professor who inspires students but the prowess of a music and theater performer who impresses audiences — the latter talent developed in Harrit’s after-hours during many of his 70 years. Combining his classroom and stage skills, he proved himself a masterful speaker as he read the “Madness in the Royal Library” article aloud to the judges.

In it, Villemoes had written about a 2012 art exhibition at the Royal Library of Denmark that portrayed “The Armenian Genocide.” Calling it “madness” for the library’s director to have allowed the Turkish government to also tell its side of the genocide story, Villemoes went on to cite other examples of “madness”: the beliefs of creationists, Holocaust deniers, and 9/11 skeptics such as Dr. Harrit. Indeed, while Dr. Harrit’s reading was as compelling as listening to a great musician performing, it was his sincerity that caught everyone’s attention.

Finally, it was time for Dr. Harrit to present the first piece of new evidence. He projected a video of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse onto the wall of the High Court. As the video played the 6.5-second collapse of the 600-foot, 47-story building over and over, the professor described what was happening, and in so doing showed himself to be a logical scientist who naturally had questions about a phenomenon that was identical in appearance to a controlled demolition. From the expression on one judge’s face — a look of disbelief that 9/11 skeptics know quite well — it was obvious he had never before seen the video. Whether the other two judges had watched the collapse of WTC 7 before is hard to say; their faces were inscrutable. Making the judges watch WTC 7 fall again and again was what Dr. Harrit later called his biggest achievement of the day.

Dr. Harrit also presented various documents he had submitted as attachments to the case, including the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition (currently signed by 2,332 credentialed architects and engineers and 20,100 other supporters), the 2009 nano-thermite report he co-wrote with a team of scientists (“Active Thermitic Material Found In The Dust From The 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”), the AE911Truth-sponsored polls taken by professional pollsters in the USA and Canada (in both countries, roughly half of those surveyed believed, after being shown the collapse of WTC 7, that it either definitely was or most likely was a controlled demolition).

Next, the plaintiff quoted from the 2005 report published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which purportedly explained the collapse of The Twin Towers. He homed in on what he considers to be the most important footnote written since WWII — namely, footnote 13 on page 82.

First Dr. Harrit read it to the judges in English:

Blockquote tall Or

The focus of the investigation was the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the “probable collapse sequence,” although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the towers after conditions for the collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable.

Then he translated it into Danish. He went on to explain that the footnote was a prime example of “academic terror” in the NIST report. That is, not even a reader trained in physics and familiar with physics reports would be able to understand what this footnote said when reading it for the first time. The professor’s point was proved when the judge in charge of keeping the court protocols asked Dr. Harrit to translate the last sentence again.

Dr. Harrit pointed out that between the lines in this footnote NIST was actually admitting that there is no public theory on how the North Tower and South Tower were destroyed, nor is there an explanation of the collapse sequence, as the report stops at the moment the towers were about to go down. Upon hearing this explanation, the accused Søren Villemoes raised his eyebrows in seeming surprise and leaned back in his chair.

The day of 9/11 Truth evidence schooling for Villemoes and the judges had hardly begun. The plaintiff proceeded with the next bit of evidence: A screenshot from a Facebook update Villemoes had written the day after the City Court trial in 2013 showed him admitting that he had not been fair to Dr. Harrit.

After Dr. Harrit had presented his case to the High Court, it was time for the four witnesses to take the stand, one by one.

A young lawyer representing Villemoes (substituting for lawyer Søren Juul, who had handled the case in City Court) rose from his chair and started speaking. Acting nervous and seeming unprepared, he started asking Niels Harrit questions in a barely audible voice. He tried to make a case to the court that Dr. Harrit was saying the United States itself was behind the 9/11 attacks. To that charge, Harrit replied that he was a natural scientist and that he has conducted science-based presentations on the collapse of WTC 7 more than 230 times without ever pointing fingers at any suspects. “I believe in the rule of law,” Dr. Harrit said, “and there has never been any a legal investigation of 9/11 in court, making it impossible for a person like me, who believes in the law, to name anyone who should have committed the crime.”

Villemoes then took the stand. Harrit first asked the journalist about the 2013 Facebook comment he had made about not having treated the chemist with fairness. Villemoes answered that he had felt pity on Dr. Harrit after the City Court case. Next, Harrit brought up a statement Villemoes had made in City Court, in which he claimed to have seen Harrit’s lecture about WTC 7 but couldn’t remember where he had seen it. Villemoes answered that he now recalled the lecture had been on the Danish island of Bornholm. Harrit pointed out that he had given that lecture in June 2013, just two months before the City Court date. He remarked how odd it was that Villamoes couldn’t remember (in City Court) where he had seen it two months earlier but could now remember it (in High Court) one and a half years later. “For how long did you watch my lecture?” Dr. Harrit then asked. Villemoes replied that he had seen only five minutes of the 2½-hour long lecture — an answer that revealed his factual basis for criticizing Dr. Harrit to be exceedingly weak.

Villemoes twitter harrit fav

In City Court, Villemoes had claimed that the WTC dust in the nano-thermite report could have been unauthentic. That charge gave Dr. Harrit a reason to submit the WTC dust as evidence to the High Court. In so doing, Dr. Harrit verified the authenticity of his dust samples by pointing to two photographs on page 24 in the nano-thermite report, which showed the same kind of iron microspheres found in the dust by RJ Lee Group in 2003 and by the US Geological Survey in 2005. He then held before Villemoes a plastic bag with his own sample of WTC dust, dragging a strong magnet along the side of the plastic, trying to make a little rim of black particles gather near the edges of the magnet. On the first attempt, Villemoes failed to see the black rim. But on the second try, he said he could see it, and Dr. Harrit told him that, since we all know that magnets attract iron, this was the iron microspheres being separated from the dust particles not containing iron. This was proof that a thermitic reaction had taken place on 9/11, Dr. Harrit told Villemoes.

After a short break, the court reassembled to carry on with the two last witnesses. One witness was architect Jan Utzon, who had worked on recent projects for the Sydney Opera House in Australia, which his father Jørn had designed nearly 50 years earlier. The other witness was a former colleague of Dr. Harrit, Per Hedegaard, who taught physics at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen.  Utzon had already taken the stand as a witness in City Court, where he represented AE911Truth and its signatories. Dr. Hedegaard was a new witness who purportedly had changed his position from being against the theories presented by Dr. Harrit to admitting that the official explanation of what happened to WTC 7 was in violation of Newton’s laws of physics.

Jan Utzon reiterated the testimony he had already given at City Court, telling the judges that no steel-framed high-rise has ever collapsed due to fire and that he had no doubts about the collapse of WTC 7 being a controlled demolition.

When Per Hedegaard finally entered the court room, he looked nervous and confused. Asked specific questions by Dr. Harrit, he was unable to give direct answers. For example, even though the looping video of the collapse of WTC 7 was shown a second time during the testimony of Utzon and a third time when he took the stand, Dr. Hedegaard said he could not see any violation of physical laws. While agreeing that the collapse of WTC 7 looked close to free-fall acceleration, he noted that it was too complicated for him to say for sure.

“But what does it mean when a building is falling 9.8 metres per second squared, Per?” Harrit asked. The professor of physics said he did not know. “This means the building is in free fall, Per,” Harrit elaborated. “And when a building is in free fall, is there then energy left to destroy the supporting structure?” Hedegaard’s answer was confusing. He talked about how energy moved faster than free-fall and suggested that WTC 7 could have fallen even faster than free-fall.

“But Per, you told me you had looked at the data, and that you supported it,” Harrit responded. Again, Hedegaard gave a confusing answer. The judge in charge of court protocols asked the witness what data it was that he actually supported. “Only the report,” he replied, referring to the nano-thermite report. “I read some of it, and it looked good.”

Hedegaard had earlier calculated, on his own, that at least 60 tons of thermite would have been needed to take down the Twin Towers, and on that basis he found it difficult to believe that controlled demolition had been used to level those two buildings.

Though Hedegaard did say he found the nano-thermite report “good,” his other answers were clearly not what Harrit had been expecting. An obviously disappointed Harrit told the judges he had no more questions for the witness.

Villemoes’ lawyer asked Hedegaard if he could support statements he had made about Harrit quoted in an article used in City Court — statements substantiating that Dr. Harrit was a “crackpot”. Hedegaard replied that he still agreed with his statements in the article, in which he had called Harrit’s theories “nuts.” That became the final answer from the last witness of the day.

After a lunch break, the High Court reconvened and gave both Niels Harrit and the lawyer for the accused Villemoes each 30 minutes to give their final statement, called a procedure.

Those who had seen the outstanding procedure Harrit gave in City Court 1 ½  years earlier now witnessed a procedure that was even more brilliant, displaying the skills of a top-drawer attorney. He named paragraph 267 of the Danish Criminal Code and Article 10, Sections 1 and 2, of the European Human Rights Convention, pointing out that should Villemoes be found not guilty, then the Danish criminal code is obsolete. All other libel cases tried in Danish courts, he said, have been decided based upon the occurrence of a factual basis for the utterance. Yet in this case, Harrit declared, “We have seen no facts from Villemoes showing any kind of factual basis for his claims. And this is why the court must find him guilty in libel, according to the law.”

Harrit referred to the historical court case against Galileo Galilei in 1633, where the accused was brought in front of the inquisition of the Roman Catholic Church and tortured until he renounced his belief that the earth rotated around the sun and acknowledged that the earth was the center of the universe.

When he concluded his procedure, there was no doubt that Dr. Harrit had made an impact upon the High Court. The three judges looked as if they approved the legal points he made, and both Villemoes and his lawyer appeared a bit shaken.

Villemoes’ lawyer, in his procedure, said there was no reason to put forward a factual basis for the statements his client made in the article, as it could be read in all the official 9/11 reports. His statement seemed weak compared to all the evidence brought forward during the day — evidence showing that it is more than reasonable to question the official 9/11 story about Osama bin Laden and the 19 alleged hijackers who, armed with box cutters, managed to carry out a highly coordinated attack on the world’s most advanced military power.

The judgment from the three High Court judges runs for four weeks from the court date, meaning the verdict will be announced on April 9, 2015, at 10 AM Denmark time. Coincidentally, this date is precisely 75 years after the 1940 German occupation of Denmark during WWII. On April 9, 2015, we will see whether the system of justice in Denmark protects the free speech of the common man or continues the deception that has plunged the world into an endless “War on Terror.” Hopefully, we will one day look back on this date as the occasion when the Danish High Court acknowledged that skepticism about the official story of 9/11 is a legitimate way of thinking and ordered that it be protected within the Danish laws of free speech.

Less than an hour after the trial ended, Dr. Harrit did this interview with www.911truth.dk, in which he gives his view of the High Court meeting.

Besides listening to that interview, you can visit Niels Harrit’s Facebook page, which details his contributions to the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Support from all over the world for this High Court case has been overwhelming to both Dr. Harrit and the 9/11 activists who helped raise awareness for this historical event. Thank you to all who have followed and supported his case. May justice be served.

Post by Josef Hanji
Advertisements

Is Scott Walker related to George Bush ? It’s The DUBBAYA.

scott

Is Scott Walker related to George Bush?

Fritz Springmeier | Bloodlines of The IlluminatiTHE WALKER FAMILY:An elite family tied in with the Bush family. Tonight I received the following questions: “Hey Fritz, does the Walker family fit into the Illuminati at all? As in Scott Walker. Is he related to George H. Walker Bush through ancestry? Just wanted to get your opinion on Scott.”

THE ILLUMINATI WALKERS.

The elite Walker & Bush families are intertwined, and this can be seen especially with their attendance at Yale, and their membership in the Order of Skull & Bones. At least ten important members of the presidential Bush family have gone to Yale. Likewise, if we count Davis R. Robinson who married Suzanne Walker, then at least ten of the important elite Walker family have gone to Yale University. 15 of the Walker family became members of the Order of Skull & Bones, at least 7 have been members of the CFR, & at least 3 mmbrs of the Cosmos Club. When George H.W. Bush was initiated into S&B, he was joined with classmate Samuel Sloane Walker, Jr. George H.W. Bush (King Geo. 1) nominated his cousin John M. Walker, Jr. to a Federal judgeship. But not all of the elite Walkers are necessarily of the same bloodline. Walker is a surname that comes from Scotland, England, the lowlands (Neth. & Belg.) & Germany. One of the prominent Walkers is Darren Walker, a black banker, who has been v.p. of the Rockefeller Foundation, pres. of the Ford Foundation, and an advisor for Rockefeller Philanthropy.

WALKER HISTORY.

I have not done special genealogy research on the Walkers, which would be required to discover possible distant relationships between different lines. The first prominent Walker of the bloodline associated with the Bush family was David David (D.D.) Walker, who made a fortune during the Amer. Civil War. His son, known as Bert, was George Herbert Walker. I will call him Bert…and Bert was an exceptionally greedy unprincipled man, who scared his sons to death & was called by them a “tough bastard” as well as other names. He’d do anything for money. Bert as a banker foreshadowed the Bushes in the Silverado S&L scandal. Bert pillaged the Missouri Pacific Railroad causing an Enron type scandal which resulted in a congressional investigation. In the end, FDR had to reorganize the railroads and place them under the ICC. Prescott Bush married Bert’s daughter Dorothy, and they named their first son (our first Bush pres.) after Bert. Two Walkers were special assistants to the president: Ronald Hugh Walker and Jenonne R. Walker. I know of 5 Walkers who were bankers, incl. Charles Edward Walker, who was an advisor to the Fed. Reserve Bank of Phila. I only know of one Walker who was in military intelligence.

SCOTT K. WALKER.

WALKERun copy

Like all his Fascist buddies and ruling class corporate criminals, Scott K. Walker-Bush has a passion for Fascist Fashion. See the season sneak peak of the Red, Right & White Wing Nut Party’s new STUN (G)UN  Look for 2016. (See TOTALLY UN-COOL) at Puppet Master’s Slave Market : https://johneagleland2.wordpress.com/

Besides being judges, ambassadors, & congressmen, a number of Walkers have been governors of GA, FL, IL, UT and WI. Scott is governor of Wisconsin, and was born to a preacher in Colorado Springs and a mother named Patricia Walker. Scott went from obscurity to political stardom overnight—which to me suggests connections, but I am lacking any connecting details between him & the branch that is close to the Bushes. In 2010, George Bush Jr., while ex-president, went to Beloit, WI & referred to Scott Walker as his “cousin” but what he meant by that is up for discussion. Scott is a Republican like the Walker-Bush families & has been a close friend of George W. Bush as well as one of his campaign helpers. Geo. Jr. has said lots of silly nonsense comments so who knows what the real blood connection is between the Scott & George. For sure they are close friends. (And by the way, Scott never went to Yale or Harvard.) While I can answer that some of the Walkers have been Illuminati, I am unable to answer if or how Scott K. Walker might be related to that branch. That could be an interesting genealogy project for someone.

NBC Censors Edward Snowden’s 9/11 Comments

Published on May 30, 2014

Statements made by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden regarding the 9/11 terror attacks were edited out of his NBC Nightly News interview with Brian Williams Wednesday in what appears to be an attempt to bolster legitimacy for the agency’s controversial surveillance programs.

Read Snowden’s comments on 9/11 that NBC didn’t broadcast

Published time: May 30, 2014 17:13
Edited time: June 01, 2014 19:51

This NBC News handout video frame grab shows an NBC News Exclusive interview with Brian Williams and Edward Snowden, excerpted from the May 28, 2014 TV primetime special. (AFP Photo / NBC NEWS / Handout)

This NBC News handout video frame grab shows an NBC News Exclusive interview with Brian Williams and Edward Snowden, excerpted from the May 28, 2014 TV primetime special. (AFP Photo / NBC NEWS / Handout)

Tags

​Only around a quarter of the recent NBC News interview with former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden made it to broadcast, but unaired excerpts now online show that the network neglected to air critical statements about the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

When the four-hour sit-down between journalist Brian Williams and Snowden made it to air on Wednesday night, NBC condensed roughly four hours of conversation into a 60-minute time slot. During an analysis of the full interview afterwards, however, the network showed portions of the interview that didn’t make it into the primetime broadcast, including remarks from the former National Security Agency contractor in which he questioned the American intelligence community’s inability to stop the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

In response to a question from Williams concerning a “non-traditional enemy,” Al-Qaeda, and how to prevent further attacks from that organization and others, Snowden suggested that United States had the proper intelligence ahead of 9/11 but failed to act.

“You know, and this is a key question that the 9/11 Commission considered. And what they found, in the post-mortem, when they looked at all of the classified intelligence from all of the different intelligence agencies, they found that we had all of the information we needed as an intelligence community, as a classified sector, as the national defense of the United States to detect this plot,” Snowden said. “We actually had records of the phone calls from the United States and out. The CIA knew who these guys were. The problem was not that we weren’t collecting information, it wasn’t that we didn’t have enough dots, it wasn’t that we didn’t have a haystack, it was that we did not understand the haystack that we have.”

“The problem with mass surveillance is that we’re piling more hay on a haystack we already don’t understand, and this is the haystack of the human lives of every American citizen in our country,” Snowden continued. “If these programs aren’t keeping us safe, and they’re making us miss connections — vital connections — on information we already have, if we’re taking resources away from traditional methods of investigation, from law enforcement operations that we know work, if we’re missing things like the Boston Marathon bombings where all of these mass surveillance systems, every domestic dragnet in the world didn’t reveal guys that the Russian intelligence service told us about by name, is that really the best way to protect our country? Or are we — are we trying to throw money at a magic solution that’s actually not just costing us our safety, but our rights and our way of life?

Indeed, the director of the NSA during Snowden’s stint there, Gen. Keith Alexander, reportedly endorsed a method of intelligence gathering in which the agency would collect quite literally all the digital information it was capable of.

“Rather than look for a single needle in the haystack, his approach was, ‘Let’s collect the whole haystack,’” one former senior US intelligence official recently told the Washington Post. “Collect it all, tag it, store it. . . .And whatever it is you want, you go searching for it.”

In recent weeks, a leaked NSA document has affirmed that under the helm of Alexander, the agency was told it should do as much as possible with the information it gathers: “sniff it all, know it all, collect it all, process it all and exploit it all,” according to the slide.

“They’re making themselves dysfunctional by collecting all of this data,” Bill Binney, a former NSA employee-turned-whistleblower himself, told the Daily Caller last year. Like Snowden, Binney has also argued that the NSA’s “collect it all” condition with regards to intelligence gathering is deeply flawed.

They’ve got so much collection capability but they can’t do everything. They’re probably getting something on the order of 80 percent of what goes up on the network. So they’re going into the telecoms who have recorded all of the material that has gone across the network. And the telecoms keep a record of it for I think about a year. They’re asking the telecoms for all the data so they can fill in the gaps. So between the two sources of what they’ve collected, they get the whole picture,” Binney said.

Although NBC neglected to play Mr. Snowden’s remarks to Williams in which he questioned the efficiency of modern intelligence gathering under the guise of being a counterterrorism tool, it did air on television other remarks from the former contractor concerning the terrorist attacks.

It’s really disingenuous for the government to invoke and sort of scandalize our memories to sort of exploit the national trauma that we all suffered together and worked so hard to come through to justify programs that have never been shown to keep us safe, but cost us liberties and freedoms that we don’t need to give up and our Constitution says we don’t need to give up,” he said in an excerpt broadcast on air.

7.7K1.6K292

September 29, 2014

BREAKING: 9/11 False Flag Validated in Edward Snowden NSA Data Dump 10

STATE OF THE NATION

Russia Disseminates, Snowden Validates, NSA Evidence Corroborates New 9/11 Data Dump

    “This 9/11 data dump is so radioactive the US Government will likely collapse.  The world will never be the same when nations everywhere see this report!”
    – Veteran 9/11 Investigator

edward-snowden-NSA-911-false flag

Veterans Today - James Preston

UPDATE:  Published on Sep 30, 2014

By Preston James

This video was part of a longer clip in a recent VT Radio show, of which I’ve removed about 40 minutes, to focus on the section, which drills down to a now-infamous alleged Russian “data dump” shared with Gordon Duff, Senior Editor of Veterans Today about the “real” perpetrators and methods and means used in the 9/11 attacks.

This information was supposedly given to him to share to the public at-large, in reprisal for the US government’s economic sanctions against Russia, ever since Crimea and East Ukraine voted overwhelmingly to secede from the US-NATO-installed regime in Kiev, however, one veteran 9/11 researcher claimed on Pakalert Press: “This 9/11 data dump is so radioactive the US Government will likely collapse. The world will never be the same when nations everywhere see this report!”

Some names are familiar, others I’ve never been connected to these historic events. There are definitely many surprises, here – but it certainly makes more sense, on several levels, than the treasonous and absurd Official 9/11 Report.

Duff stops short of naming names, but their job descriptions give them away. What might be most shocking are how many names often associated with the attacks are absent, in what has been promised to be an ongoing series of similar Russian data dumps.

Last week, UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s call, during his address to the UN that, just as the murderous and “warped worldview” of ISIS must be stopped, so must the words and websites of peaceful 9/11 and 7/7 “Truthers,” which he termed to be just as dangerous as “Nazis or KKK recruiters,” as he unveiled a plan to use a full assault on dissenting views by forming a Commission to fight “So-Called Non-Violent Extremism,” while allowing that “Some will argue that this is not compatible with free speech and intellectual inquiry.”

Indeed: dangerous to the perpetrators. The coincidence of this toady’s statements with this data dump should not be lost on anyone.

Original Post

When Edward Snowden opted to stay in Russia after fleeing the USA little did he know that the NSA treasure trove he absconded with would serve as the basis for so much 9/11 revelation.  The existence of this extraordinary cache of NSA evidence documenting criminal activity conducted at the highest levels of government has empowered Russia to reveal 9/11 Truth with unimpeachable authority.  Hence, the Kremlin now conducts periodic and strategic data dumps concerning the real facts surrounding the events of 9/11.

The Kremlin has permitted the release of earth-shattering material which is generally known on the internet as 9/11 Truth.  The world is starving for such unvarnished and genuine truth in view of the fact that those false flag attacks have been systematically utilized by the real perpetrators to wage war against nations near and far.

That’s all about to change in 2014.

With the dissemination of the most recent round of 9/11 Truth, the guilty state actors have been painted into the corner … WITH NO WAY OUT.  When a nation such as Russia, which possesses an intelligence apparatus second only to the USA, provides high integrity information and data pertaining to the 9/11 false flag operation, and Edward Snowden is backing it up with NSA-generated hard evidence, how can the real perps possibly squeeze out of that corner?   *** Continue

911-twin Towers Crime Scene