News False Flag Attacks

[Anarchy]

Very quick start, need to get on the road.

The concept was summed up by Herman Goering, during the Easter break in the Nuremberg trials. I paraphrase:

" of course the people don't want a war! What does some poor slob off a farm want with a war? The best he can hope for is to come home in one piece...
Public opinion can be swayed, we tell the people that the nation is under attack, and accuse the pacifists of aiding the enemy "

A modern example of this came out around 1990, in several parts of Europe. It is generally known as " gladio" as it was discovered in Italy. I strongly recommend checking out the three part BBC time watch documentary about gladio. On youtube or via archive.org

Image quality is poor, but stick with it.

Gladio's worst atrocities included the Milan and Bologna railway station bombings, so similar scale to the current Paris attacks.

The timing and many features of the Irish ,"troubles " match with gladio, and there is significant evidence that has come out about security service involvement with paramilitaries on both sides, although no definite evidence of false flag attacks has yet emerged.

Please check the full transcript of Goering's words, and please bear them in mind whenever news of a terrorist atrocity emerges.

 

[Anarchy]

Even if the attacks in Paris weren't a false flag,

They certainly seem to be "...keeping the electorate in a constant state of alarm and hence clamourous to be lead to safety..." (H L Mencken)

A few weeks back I met an old gentleman who clearly had PTSD

He'd got it during his enslavement to the British state (conscription). He'd been posted to occupied Berlin in the 1950s

He told me about the immigration control

Of a couple who had tried to cross between zones, the husband, carrying the little boy had made it, the wife carrying the little girl, got machine gunned by the soviet guards. The gentleman had told the father that they would come back and try to save his wife.

They couldn't, and they listened to her agonised screams as she took many hours to die.

The young conscripts kept the man and boy hidden in a quiet part of the base, feeding him from their own rations, for about a year.

Eventually they were able to buy documents for them and smuggle them in an army truck, through the east, to West Germany, down to near the Dutch and Belgian borders.

The gentleman told me that a few years ago, he was along the often moved line on the map that separates "Poland" from "Germany". He saw a sroad sign for the village that the family had come from, and visited it.

One of the villagers was curious why an English motorbike had appeared in a village that no one visits, and quickly worked out that this was one of THE Englishmen, and took him to introduce him to the man's granddaughter, who is back living there.

One of the stories of the aftermath of too many people having fallen for the false flag operations that brought the NSDAP (Nazis) to power, and got them the wars that they craved. And the hatreds and grievances that they fed on.

Our current systems are not too different to the systems that the NSDAP sought to protect and perfect ( Hayek's " Road to Serfdom " and Mayer's "they thought they were free" discuss the systems and their similarities).

Back in 1989, people crossing from Hungary to Austria, lead to the taking down of the barbed wire between east and west.

Now, apparently having a new Berlin wall will protect us from terrorists, so we can continue to enjoy our [sensibly limited] freedom within it

Exactly what the soviets claimed for the wall wire and minefields That went in 1989 and 90.

For f*cks sake, history might not repeat exactly, but this is frighteningly familiar. Time to turn the lamestream media off and to start getting very sceptical.

 

[HypnoticallyChaotic]

I still remember 9/11, and how the buildings coming down looked an aweful lot like a demotlition crew's work rather than an actual explosion of said entire building. I was suspicious quickly, and I'd learned in school before that the trade towers had been built to withstand mother nature's worst. Do how exactly does jet fuel destroy steel beams and a sh*t ton of concrete without multiple explosions while bringing a large building down in on itself? It doesn't. The terrorist passport shown was undamaged. That thing would have been burnt beyond even forensic recognition in such a large fire. How does that get explained? False flag. Only logical explanation.

 

[Ed Norton]

They were designed to take the impact of a Boeing 707. There was very little concrete in the steel framed building. They cut many corners on the contruction. The structural damage combined with the jet fuel and other materials burning softened the steel to the point where it's integrity was lost. Collapse of the upper floors provided a large amount of momentum, collapsing the lower floors as if they were paper. Actually, I was shocked that they stood for so long.

 

[Anarchy]

Building 7 doesn't make sense with any explanation other than

First the BBC do a live report that building 7 has collapsed, with building 7 clearly visible, still standing in the background of the camera shot, as the reporter is speaking,

Then the building free falls into its own footprint, non of the several tens of heavy steel uprights topples or bows, they must all have been cut.

Even for a controlled demolition that day. How did anyone get a demolition Crewe mobilised to site, along with their shaped charges, get suitable plans showing the columns to be cut to the guys, get access to all of the columns (walls ripped out to give access to the steel itself, which probably required getting things like mini diggers to site and into the building).

Place the charges, wire up the rest, check the circuit, and get it fired

All in the time from the first jet going in ( if jets did go in) to the twin towers. I don't think it could be done.


There is a similar time problem with pan am flight 107 coming down over Lockerbie. I know that area pretty well. The locals say that American officials were there within one hour, and wanted to know where the drugs were... There's no where that was likely to have those sort of American security guys within one hours drive of Lockerbie,

And even that's assuming that they knew to begin driving as soon as the plane came down.

 

[Ed Norton]

There has been extensive engineering analysis of the collapse of WTC 7.

The 767 series isn't exactly a shrinking violet but, on that, let me preempt you regarding the 'impossible speeds' since I have heard that many times. Any jet aircraft has way more than enough thrust to accelerate to Mach one and beyond, at middling altitudes, say around 25000 ft, and that has happened several times in history by accident and once on purpose. When a DC-8 was taken to M 1.0 in a controlled dive from 50000 ft. At lower altitude they can exceed the maximum operating speed, Vmo, by very significant amounts. Also, some say that at the speeds flown that the aircraft would have had a structural failure, well not necessarily. Firstly, there are flight test speeds that exceed Vmo by a specified margin, Vdf, if you want to know more, see 14 CFR part 25. Now beyond that speed it's no man's land and there's a great risk of structural failure but it's not known exactly when that will occur, unless the test pilots were suicidal but it doesn't mean that structural failure is certain.

As far as the initial impact, recall from physics that kinetic energy is proportional to the velocity squared, so the impact at those speeds expended a tremendous amount of kinetic energy on the structure. But there's always structural redundancy in buildings so that the building is safe and complies with codes so that additional deformation by the burning material
was necessary to effectuate a total collapse. With building 7 which was very close to the towers there had been fires burning for several hours weakening the structure until collapse was inevitable. I've been very close to the WTC and the proximity of that building to towers 1 and 2 implies that severe damage will have the inevitability taken place from the collapse of the first two towers. The events leading to the structural failure of the buildings was wholly unforeseen by the design engineers and therefore not codified, it was not completely predictable what would occur unless it occurred and it did occur.

The 'Freedom' Tower is designed to post 9/11 specifications and it does
in fact have a central core of ultra high strength concrete, with a yield strength in compression of around 10000 PSI. But fortunately the door for another similar attack is closed due to new, and in many cases secret procedures, that will prevent such an attack, not the least of which is the change in the old procedures of cooperation with hijackers. Now pilots are instructed to fight back, if the reinforced doors are breached and the passengers don't stop them or air marshals and many other layers of protection.

When preparing a controlled demolition, in order for it to be successful, as much of the internal structure of the building must be removed, sheet rock wiring, other nonstructural material etc. Then the building is generally strategically weakened by removing or otherwise cutting support columns when possible, even with all of this preparation, failures have occurred. Controlled demolition takes tremendous preparation, it would not go unnoticed, I mean unless the victims were complicit in the destruction :rolleyes:

Some conspiracies, I can almost understand why people would believe them but this is one that I never will understand, I mean I'd even accept the possibility that Tupac and Biggie are in an undisclosed location before I accept 9/11 theorists.

 

[Anarchy]

I'm only questioning building 7, not the twin towers.

It was of far more orthodox construction than the towers.
Although it may have taken debris, it did not take a direct hit by a plane.
The office fires were of limited extent, and were largely out by the time of the collapse.

If 7 was structural failure, it requires near simultaneous brittle failure of all of the supporting elements.

Very fluky If it did occur spontaneously, even with explosives, it's easy to get part of a building refusing to go, or toppling instead of collapsing straight down.

I think it has been admitted that it was a controlled demolition (might be wrong on that, the various admissions denials etc have me confused and out of date).

If it was demolished deliberately, there's the problem of the timing, which was the point to my previous post.

 

[Ed Norton]

The NIST report is probably the only choice regarding forensic examination of the structural failure of WTC 7. The building had some quite unique design features.

 

[void]

Very quick start, need to get on the road.

The concept was summed up by Herman Goering, during the Eas...

For the reader, here is the full quote above mentioned by Hermann "the Sadist" Goering (may he rot with no peace)

• "Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.
• But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along:(, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.
  Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.
  Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy.
• :( All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
  • In an interview with Gilbert in Göring's jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)"
  • Source:Wikiquote

 

[void]

...though he was an evil MFer and I despise him, he was correct about the ease with which the masses can be controlled by well placed deceit. The technique which he refers to is the norm of governance and is nearly 100% successful. Naturally, the masses have no clue about said deception nor would they care enough to act if they became aware.

 

[Anarchy]

Thanks Void.
I'm normally posting from a tablet that I haven't worked out how to cut and paste with.

Bringing that disgusting strategy into this weeks news. The British politicians were debating ( perhaps grandstanding for cameras and microphones would be a more accurate description) yesterday the bombing people and homes in Syria.

The current squatter in 10 downing street, refused to apologise for calling those who disagree with his plan to bomb people, "Terrorist Sympathizers"

The implication was also made that there was a choice between bombing people in Syria and terrorist attacks occurring in Britain.

Yet bombing people in Syria was claimed not to increase the risk of terrorism in Britain.

To a cynic, that sounds very much like a threat of false flag attacks in Britain, if the vote goes the wrong way.

Incidentally, a pair of Turkish politicians spilled the beans a few months ago that Turkish operatives had been letting off nerve gas in residential areas of Syrian towns.

 

[Anarchy]

I can see there's something in the US that's getting a lot of news coverage.

Real or homeland security street theatre?

Here are some examples to compare it to:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment-fake-terror-plots

Link Removed

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/lights-camera-entrapment-homeland.html