I assume you all realize that my motive in bringing up (or reacting to) issues such as the RV women/Lou’s mindlessness, Joe’s inability to ‘remember’ his thievery, Walter’s flip flop, Barbra Honegger’s lecture (anomalies below), and so forth, are meant to go beyond, or beneath, the surface subject matter.
It doesn’t take much digging to find what’s under there: Deceit.
Deceit appears to be the default position for human beings in their doings with their fellows, and with themselves. A hard life’s experience — I am older than most of you and have put myself in many more compromising and hair-raising situations than any of you – has convinced me that you can count on this as a ‘law of nature’. (But as Rupert Sheldrake has pointed out, ‘laws of nature,’ as in, say, the speed of light, are more like ‘habits’, i.e., they can and do vary.)
If we open up our line of inquiry to the ‘alt media’ – where many of us get our sense of world affairs, of HTWRW – and if we look back at my contacts with dozens of them we find that each and every one displayed unambiguous indications of deceit. I cannot think of a single exception here…
They were way, way ahead of us…
As we’ve seen, human deceit can ‘go’ in two directions: Outwardly directed, as with the commenter calling himself ‘Hank’/’Robert Hansteen’/’Henry Hansteen’, and the inward sort, as with (I firmly belief) Walter and so many others. But can we be sure which sort we’re dealing with? Is it important? For now a simple Yes! Will have to do. (The Why being a whole other subject).
Which, as promised (pardon my delay but I’ve been on the road), brings us to Barbara Honegger, whose presentation I suggested in preparation for this post (and as a source of information).
In the course of two days (September 3rd and 4th) I had a multi-email exchange with Barbara, rekindling our conversations in 2014-15. Barbara made it clear she doesn’t want to be quoted (from emails), which for me is always a red flag that some sort of deceit lurks. I mean, in a conversation with a ‘fellow researcher,’ if a ‘conversation’ sticks to matters of fact and logic, and if getting at a ‘truth’ is the motive (as opposed to deceit in quoting, usually done via misleading context), why would anyone object to the passing on of literal words?
Referring to ‘big name truther’ Dr. Joseph Farrell in this post a while back I wrote….
…You’re a public figure, DOCTOR, in this alt media mess we have, aren’t you? Not only do I think it’s OKAY to quote a couple one-sentence emails that display your (apparent) ignorance of how the world really works, I consider it my DUTY.
You think this is about YOU, you egomaniacal dolt? I’m writing a series of essays regarding the fact that NO ONE from the SSP [Secret Space Program] conference has responded to my questions. NOT JUST YOU. Are you a limited hangout, Doctor? Or a useful idiot? Which one? It’s one or the other. Ditto the dozen others who refuse to deal with my questions. That’s the issue my essays deal with. Or haven’t you figured that out yet? IT’S NOT ABOUT YOU.
I got pretty cranky, didn’t I? Well, please echo the above sentiments regarding my exchange with Barbara Honegger. Here’s how it went, and there is no deceit in what I’ve left out; I’ve edited for attention span reasons only. Explanations/observations are in bold.
On September 3rd, I wrote:
Barbara,
Here’s my blog post for tomorrow, in which I discuss your presentation:
http://blog.banditobooks.com/a-short-one/
It won’t really be read by anyone until tomorrow. If you have any suggestions i’m all ears.
Re the South Tower and plane vs no plane (which I briefly mention), I have a list of reasons why I doubt a real plane of any kind was used but I’ll start with this: If a real plane hit the building, how did the gash as we see it get there? No real plane could have done the damage we see, not by the laws of physics. A real plane would have mainly splattered (given the thick steel load bearing columns on the facade, etc.) and fallen to the street. Why would the perps let that wreckage be right there on the street, to be examined, etc.)
These load-bearing columns are thicker than tank armor. Aluminum does not slice through…
(My next question will be re the planted jet engine. Stuff about the impossibility of the ‘plane’s speed will follow but it goes on and on.)
allan
I would also ask who the people were that told you the story about almost being killed by falling plane wreckage [this is in her Pentagon presentation]. Is it possible that they were lying or exaggerating?
Notice in her reply, Honegger does not deal with my facts/observations/logic at all. Or, as she would say, AT ALL.
Hi, Allan —
Three needed changes to the blog post for tomorrow:
1) Need to delete the sentence in parentheses I’ve bolded
in the below as ‘Smoke Curtain’ is not about the WTC at all,
only the Pentagon:
Quoting my post: ‘Barbara is sure that at least one real airliner was used at the WTC and, it appears, is not amenable to changing her mind. (She’s quite adamant about it in her lecture.)’
[She then corrects my misspelling of her last name.]
Thanks, and can’t do any more now as I’m literally
producing the main worldwide 9/11 Truth Movement
Event again this year, in NYC, which will be on Monday
Sept. 10th beginning at 6:30 p.m. Eastern and will be
livestreamed at www.noliesradio.org — goes to 8:00 … (end email)
See the ends where wing tips ‘sliced’ heavy gage steel columns? Now look at the bird damage.
I answer right away:
Barbara,
so sorry about the spelling mistakes…
I’ll consider changing the wording re no planes and the WTC but I don’t see how it’s inaccurate or misleading as is. Let me give it a closer look and will get right back. You are quite adamant in the lecture, aren’t you? It seemed you almost got angry. [This is important and why I asked you guys to view the bit at the very end of her lecture, when she answers the guy with an accent. Go to 2:59:00 for the important exchange.]
allan
Barbara immediately replies with this:
What do You mean ‘adamant’ re at least the second WTC plane?
NOTHING on the WTC is in Smoke Curtain !! You HAVE to delete
that false sentence in parentheses …
Already we can see that something is not right with Barbara Honegger. First, as you should know by now, she
What a BIRD does to a plane wing.
does say what she blatantly denies saying, and, second, why the desperation? Third, if you wanted someone to do something, would you ‘yell’ at them, give them an order, especially when you are denying a transparent truth?
To which I wrote:
Wait a minute. I HAVE TO delete it? Because it’s inaccurate? Are you saying you don’t say: ‘I want to go on record in saying.... etc. ‘at least one plane hit the WTC.’ It’s right at the end, in the q and a. You actually say you want to go on the record. Here is the url [there are several mirrors of the lecture]:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fvJ8nFa5Qk
An apology is in order.
allan
Although she calms down, stops yelling, no apology is forthcoming. In fact, she continues to deny a fact that is right in our faces (her words in the video).
Allan, the sentence in the parentheses is false
because it says that I say that IN ‘Smoke Curtain’,
which I don’t because ‘Smoke Curtain’ isn’t about
the WTC … AT ALL … [she does yell after all]
Does anyone else from recent posts come to mind (the denial of inarguable facts)? Still, in my reply I ‘humored’ her:
Barbara,
Since your statement about ‘going on the record’ that a real plane hit the WTC was in the Q&A, I changed the wording to ‘She was quite adamant about this in her presentation.’ So ‘lecture’ is now ‘presentation’. A very, very, very fine distinction but I trust it eases your mind.
It would be very helpful to me – and you could make up for yelling at me and telling me WHAT TO WRITE IN MY BLOG!!!! — if you’d go ‘on the record’ (again) about how the South Tower was hit by a real plane, but please add an explanation of how the gash in the building was accomplished, and why the perps would let any airplane they used strew wreckage all over the streets (since little of any fly-able aircraft could have penetrated the facade), wreckage that would include many serial numbered parts of the aircraft. This would be ’embarrassing’ given the evidence that the aircraft labeled Fl 175 was no where near the WTC that day [as you imply in the Q&A]. As I’ve mentioned, this is the beginning of the list of ‘no real plane’ reasons… [my emphasis is because this point is inarguable and should put to rest the matter of ‘no planes’.]
Look again at some bird damage: Think a plane could cut through hardened steel?
Listen carefully to Barbara’s response to the questioner (at the end of her lecture): When he says a plane could not cut through the towers like a knife through butter, she interrupts, saying ‘Well, it didn’t.’ She then misdirects, saying she interviewed someone… blah blah.
Well, Barbara, if ‘it didn’t,’ then what caused the gash in the building? And just as importantly: Where is the damage caused by the plane you claim did hit the tower?
The ‘gash problem’ is a separate issue from the provably faked video and is never brought up by govt shills out to misdirect (like ‘Hank’ and his other identities). Since we know that an aluminum plane cannot cut through load-bearing steel columns, then the gash was created by cutting charges. This leaves the question of accounting for the damage done by ‘a real plane.’ Where is this damage? Nowhere, because there was no real plane. (Hey, ‘Hank’: got an answer to this?)
In the above exchange, Honegger also says that a faked video tells us nothing about what hit (or did not hit) the WTC that day. Sorry, but it does tell us something. It tells us they are hiding something about the ‘plane impact.’ Raising your voice and waving your arms doesn’t change that.
Substantively, this was the end of our exchange. Repeated emails asking for an explanation of the gash in the South Tower went unanswered.
But what does it mean that we can dump Barbara Honegger in with the others I’ve dealt with on this blog? Who is she deceiving, us or herself? Is she an agent of the state or a… since I dislike ‘useful idiot,’ let’s use ‘unwitting participant’ (UP).
Near the end of his film, ‘An American Psy Opera,’ Ace Baker explains the reasons for not using real planes.
I’m pretty sure it’s the latter, although, as I say in a previous blog, Honegger is up to her eyeballs in a psy op. One indication that she’s only lying to herself is her Pentagon presentation. The PTB in general try to steer ‘truthers’ away from the subject, given that ‘no plane’ (jetliner) is so utterly obvious, and that the deceptions there had to have been perpetrated by occupants of the building, while the WTC (and Pennsylvania) can be ‘denied,’ even after the exposure of all the facts. (Hey, Osama could have done it!)
As I’ve done my best to explain, the whole ‘no planers as nutcases’ meme is directed (or misdirected) at the real issue, i.e., direct media collusion in the op, especially including the planning. They’ve done well and continue to hammer away, with puppets like ‘Hank/Henry/Robert Hansteen’, who for years have peppered me with shit like this, from ‘Hank’ (in a comment):
And even though you push blatant, bat-shit crazy, no-plane disinformation that makes truthers look like deluded nut jobs and does a lot of harm to the 9-11 truth movement… The evidence proves beyond any and all doubt that one plane hit each tower, and *every* credible, qualified, and respected 9-11 researcher is in agreement on that proven fact. Then he goes on about how maybe the Pentagon really was hit by a plane and that Truthers should assume this, and so forth…
Ace Baker’s film proving ‘no planes’ must be answered in detail, not cherry-picked. Barbara, you’re up.
Need I even mention it?: If it’s ‘bat-shit’ crazy, how do you explain the gash (and the whole undamaged plane entering the building before ‘blowing up’)? Although I cannot vouch for any of the folks in this video by ‘Ace Baker,’ it does as good a job as any I’ve seen at explaining what should be obvious to a ten year old.
[Cherry-picking the above video will not do. If Ace is correct about one thing, the ‘no planes’ game is over.]
In repeating the ‘no planes is bat-shit crazy’ crapola all over the Net for the past two decades, the lies/misdirection manage to seep into real peoples’ psyches, when in reality the one place the perps are truly vulnerable is in those fabricated videos. Honegger’s questioner (right at the end) truly nailed it. What you see in the various South Tower videos is utterly and obviously impossible (as ably shown in the above video).
That the ‘Truth Movement,’ from the very beginning, not only avoided the issue but made it a anathema – banned from most truther sites – is a dead giveaway that the Movement was built from the ground up by the perps themselves.
[I’ll not repeat again the reasons why we know the ‘9/11 opposition’ was planned far ahead, way before the event itself…]
Honegger’s angry reaction to a ‘no planer’ also tells me she is only ‘in on it’ as a unwitting participant (UP); she doesn’t know that the ‘no plane’ conflict is part of the psy op. The Upper Level Truthers – and I’ll not try to name names (except for one) since I haven’t examined everyone – from the start made it a ‘strategy’ to avoid ‘looking crazy’ to the average person (by telling them not to believe TV special effects, a suggestion which seems entirely reasonable), apparently ignoring the irony of ‘Truthers’ dodging the obvious, in-our-faces ‘truth’ that airplanes can’t defy the laws of physics to begin with.
So Barbara — like so many others dealt with recently in this blog – after nearly two decades of mind control (by her ‘truther’ associates) is easily able to doublethink her way around the ‘gash’ problem (in itself a Q.E.D. for fabricated imagery), and all the rest of it. (Aside from the Ace Baker video, see my Walter video and much of Simon Shack’s ‘September Clues’, although from my experience Simon himself is a deep plant, one giveaway being his claim that no one died that day and that all footage was fabricated. In this way he discredits himself while ‘revealing the method.’)
Look closely then ask a high school physics teacher about aluminum cutting steel.
But hey, we’re dealing with fanatics/psychopaths, so motive-mining can be iffy. But in terms of ‘plants’ in ‘the movement,’ I’ll give you an interesting example. If you go to the ‘Lawyer’s Committee for 911 Inquiry’ website recommended by Honegger, you’ll find ‘Truther Dad’ Bob McIlvaine on the front of the imbedded video; Bob is an advisor to the project, as is Barbara Honegger.
Do a YT search for ‘Bob McIlvaine’ and you’ll find virtually endless videos going back to the earliest days of The Truther Movement. He’ll be going on and on about his son, Bobby, who was killed that day, and so forth, and copiously weeping in every one.
On the lawyer’s site, they will link you to an interview conducted by Richard Hoagland; Barbara is in it, McIlvaine too, plus the bevy of lawyers who, they say, are tying to bring evidence of explosives at the WTC in front of a grand jury. This is the event Barbara says she is producing. Fine? No, not really.
Actor Bob McIlvaine: He’s everywhere in Truther shit, including Honegger’s ‘lawyer’ site.
In 2009 I did extensive research on the ‘victims of 9/11,’ especially from the WTC. I’ll not go into detail here, but what I found was that the vast majority of WTC ‘victims’ are not ‘real people.’ I don’t know how many died that day, but I can tell you that by using the various ‘9/11 Memorials’ as a starting point, I had difficult time at first finding any victims who actually existed as real human beings. Using the Social Security Death Index (SSDI), for example, I at first found no 9/11 ‘victims’ listed, out of about a hundred tries.
Addendum: Since 2009, everything regarding the issue of 9/11 simulated victims (vicsims) has changed. Websites and exposés have been scrubbed, and the SSDI has likewise been altered to make searches difficult. There was a YT video that showed how the vast majority of the 9/11 memorial photos were paste ups, and many of the names-of-deceased were ‘clever’ in-jokes. That video is gone, or at least I can’t find it. I hate to recommend Simon Shack’s website, Cluesforum.info – I believe it to be a ‘deep’ psy op – but it will give you an idea of the depth of the ‘victim deceits.’
For us, here and now, my point is that ‘Truther Dad’ Bob McIlvaine is an actor, has been from day one. Since this is a detail, I’ll give you the short version of how I know this. I drove out to suburban Pennsylvania in 2009 to interview Bob for my film Water Time; spent four hours with him, much of it with Bob on-camera. He did his weeping routine (as he does in every video you will find). It was very moving.
Just one example: Why the reversal, why the phony backdrop and why not a better photo?
At the end, as I was wrapping up, I asked Bob if I could use photos of Bobby in my film; the only one I ever saw was online and of poor quality (as are almost all the ‘victim’ photos in the memorial sites).
Bob did not have any photos of his dead son. At the time I shrugged it off; maybe I was embarrassed for Bob. His home was obviously long-lived in, with plenty of art, knick-knacks, and so forth. He had no excuse for not having a photo of his son in his home.
It took a while but I finally looked into it and could find no evidence that Robert G. McIlvaine, Jr. ever existed. I started with his alma mater, Princeton. An alumni website search came up empty. I called the registrar, thinking there might have been a mistake in the alumni computer records. No such student ever attended Princeton. I even tried his supposed roommate, ‘Andre Parris,’ who is quoted in various memorials. No such student.
I’ll not list all the ways I tried to find ‘Bobby’ — as I say, this is a detail in this post – but you can listen to McIlvaine being interviewed by Richard Hoagland (an obvious State/NASA disinfo agent, but that too is a story for another day). This link is via the Lawyer’s website Barbara gave me.
Just one more (most are like this): Why the need for photoshop? The family couldn’t supply a better photo for the memorial?
Go to about 24 minutes in to hear him – after nearly two decades of constant media-weeping – repeat his routine. Do you believe a real person, after all these years, would still weep on cue at the mention of his ‘son’? The man is an actor. That he has been at it this long tells us the lengths the PTB will go to, to make fools of us all.
McIlvaine’s presence on the committee also begs the question of Who else is a plant? (The lawyer site also links to an interview conducted by — who else? — James Corbett, still another State plant (as Honegger herself agreed in a previous post). Does it ever end?
McIlvaine’s presence also begs this question: Since McIlvaine has worked closely with virtually all the ‘big names’ in the Truther Movement and since I’m not the smartest person on the planet, i.e., it should be ‘common knowledge’ that the man is an actor, what does this tell us about The Truth Movement itself?
Addendum: If you’re wondering why the PTB would plant actors like McIlvaine, let alone the likes of Simon Shack – who have theoretically ‘spread the word’ about ‘9/11 as inside job’ — the answer lies in the occult ‘morality’ of the perps. They must tell us what they’ve done: When, as surely is the case so far, we do nothing about their heinous crimes, they are ‘exonerated’ from guilt, the added bonus being that we look as weak as they believe we are.
As far as Barbara Honegger et al.’s efforts go, wanna bet that no grand jury ever hears the evidence of explosives in the WTC? I’ll give you odds! Something will somehow fuck up… another proof of how helpless we are…
Okay, this is getting long-winded. Sorry it was a day late as your 9/11 Anniversary Gift, and sorry for the bad news about the Truth Movement, but even a little bit of actual truth is better than a phony movement designed to make us look foolish.
Allan
Oh, speaking of phonies, I almost forgot about our commenter, ‘X’. I wanted to speak to him by phone (to verify who he is) but he wouldn’t do it. Why? Because his wife was nearby and she ‘doesn’t approve’ of his research.
He didn’t want to show me his other forums because the comments would not jibe with those here.
In our email exchange X was apparently unaware of the irony of being the possessor of ‘profound’ and ‘deep’ knowledge about HTWRW while being unable to ‘wake up’ his own wife.
He also refused to link me to other forums/blogs that he contributes to, while giving no actual reason for not doing so. This was my big question, for reasons you can figure out. X failed miserably.
I’ll not ban him from comments. Not yet. It might be amusing to hear what he has to say… when he has the time and when wifey isn’t around….
HTWRW ….
How The World Really Works???
Answer: Yes, but with emphasis on the REALLY.
So talking about no planes and nukes is crazier than accepting the science fiction fantasy that two planes made of aluminum could penetrate two buildings made out of high grade tempered steel.
Not to mention the fact that the planes would have self destructed before hitting the towers because they were flown beyond their physical limits. See Intercepted:
https://youtu.be/-Laaq44SDgg
Also how do explain the high levels of Tritium found at WTC?
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf
Tritium is only used in nuclear devices as a yield booster.
He said she said we they and how
did deception come manifest
on our brains here and now
can we ever find answers
buried deep in our souls
of the darkness that lies there
that needs to be told
most are not ready
this journey to take
but incumbent upon those who continue this quest
is to know things unknowable
is it all just a test.
Lovely, jnan, keep’em comin’.
James Perloff seems to be inline with Allan. I don’t know if he has been looked at here cause I kind of scan through 9/11 stuff but I looked at his video last night being this post was coming and found something perhaps Allan hasn’t. Which is evidence, unless invented, that shows a techno-bit on Holography from the military. He says planes but not any into the buildings.
bit: Quoting the Air Force’s own description:
The holographic projector displays a three-dimensional visual image in a desired location, removed from the display generator. The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception management. It is also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary.
Capabilities:
Precision projection of 3-D visual images into a selected area
Supports PSYOP and strategic deception management
Provides deception and cloaking against optical sensors
https://jamesperloff.com/2017/06/30/911-simplified/
Just in case Allan catches it. It cost me a Hughes Net token.
Thanks, drud. I’ll give that one a look.
Glad to see your link to Ace Baker.
Ace Baker has a newer site:
http://acebaker.blogspot.com/
and The 9/11 Airplane Video Composites
http://911composites.wiki-site.com/
What a strange world we live in. Clearly there is an entire hidden mystery society within society. The mystery of iniquity. The dark side is hidden. Millions are involved in this hidden world. How many are straight up reprobate psychopaths and how many are fractured , mind controlled, split personalities, MPD’s, whose different identities are brought on stage as the situation and need dictates. How many no longer have a unified, one mind identity, with which to speak “the truth” about themselves, the world, or anything. How many have identities which while on stage, do not have self awareness they are a fractured soul, an alter, a constructed controlled puppet playing its role. These sorts can exhibit true sincerity, appropriate emotions, and a genuine public face as long as they stay in character, without even having awareness their true identity and self is broken into pieces , hidden inside their own fractured minds. When someone gets close enough to impose logic into the stage show, it can cause damage control alters to appear. The mask slips so to speak. These alters are brittle, fragile, if subjected to logic or reality it can cause a public meltdown and reality crash.
How many are just fully aware straight up psychopath skilled actors? Seems that level of acting ability in some areas (e.g. McIlvaine’s role) would be a fairly rare talent. Maybe he is a fractured soul whose actors are called as needed, and perform fully convinced of their “truth” , unaware of their fractured alters.
The limited hangout/shill/actor vs useful idiots is an either/or, black/white, classification is not only hard to get your head around for many individuals (‘Truther Dad’ Bob McIlvaine, , Barbara), but may be a false paradigm where most are in a grey area being neither an actor or a useful idiot but something somewhere inbetween. Trying to figure HTWRW by analysing people on this false/limited choice is very confusing. Just like actors get into their roles in order to better do their job, many who deceive us are mind controlled, they present programmed alters, little pieces of what left of shattered individuals, who are as deluded as the powerful delusions they send.
Looking at this puzzle from the angle of mind control is the missing piece and the hidden device, the esoteric knowledge/invention, behind the unbelievable delusions and mass loss of any concept of reality.
What have those psychiatrists, psychologists, been up to, and what secrets are hidden inside the secret world of sorcery/science/psychiatry/psychology, individual and mass mind control .
p.s. Hank, Frank, and X, commenters are obvious sad little shills.
Although a bit of topic, Marsh’s comment made me immediately think of “The Greenbaum speech”. It can be watched as a video or read in print. If you are not familiar with it, you should be, it is quite a lecture. http://www.whale.to/b/greenbaum.html
Very perceptive. Never looked at this stuff before, (till now was to far out for me to consider), but the more I learn about the lies and delusion around us, this has the potential to make sense out of no(n)sense.
I ordered “controlling the human mind” and have read/watched what I can find about this crazy field. When every thing else is eliminated, what remains, however improbable, must be the truth?
Marsh, well-written, well thought-out. Thank you. Gradually exploring this
‘Alice in Wonderland’ world we’re in, I try not to get swallowed up in all the
mind-swirling surprises and explanations, to keep two feet on the ground back in the daily humdrum ‘reality’ of regular life. I have hints and clues on a few places, but not a perfect ‘Bible’ – still have to think, stay open. Besides the massive collection at http://whale.to/ there are http://prouty.org/ and of course,
http://educate-yourself.org/ . A lot there, perhaps too much for some, but if you have an interest, from planes and buildings, to banking and staying healthy, you’ll likely find something. Me? Right now, I just want to have healthy soil for the garden. Real focused challenge, harder than I thought. Going for special worms, clay. Oh, and a couple of adolescents with a horrible skin ‘disease’. Want them to be normal kids, no problem, not sick. All this wild searching can have positive practical purposes, applied, so you can look back at your life as worthwhile.
Thanks for the links.
Welcome. Couple more. Peter at http://serendipity.li/ (others have linked here)
and Henry at https://www.henrymakow.com/ . And Henry’s legit, a decent guy, a very smart man, relentless – just wish he’d write some humour. Fearless,
no baloney. There must be way more. Stopped hunting a decade ago, turned off the boob tube, let go of the Net, stopped talking and went out for long walks. Good luck.
Yes, Marsh, the grey areas are on my mind too, as are the ‘shattered’ souls you speak of (so many of the H-wood ‘names’ are of this sort). Bob McIlvaine, for example, could be a troubled soul who took it upon himself to ‘create’ a dead son and thereby travel the world and becoming ‘someone important.’ There was a woman like this, who was outed as having no ‘dead’ relative. It was a while back.
But Bob seems to have powerful masters; that’s my sense of him. He’s been at it too long and is so, so very good at his act (the details are incredible and for the most part, consistent) with only a few true cynics (like me) who have done the easy work of exposing his ruse. Who would be so callous as to question a grieving father’s gut-wrenching biography?
What made it even harder for me was that before I drove off, Bob gave me a check for $2,000 as help for my film. Over the years Bob has immersed himself ‘in character’ and would no doubt pass a polygraph with flying colors. There are FBI agents gone undercover with the mob for years who say this sort of thing has happened to them.
Still, in most cases, state disinfo agents know very well what they are doing. Where the state gets them and how they get them is a subject for some deep analysis, even on the level of simple crisis actors and Net puppets. MKULTRA and so forth with their trauma-based horrors is just the tip of an iceberg I don’t know if I really want to understand. For those who do, I recommend Cathy O’Brien’s ‘Trance-formation of America.’
Not sure I want to understand either. Not sure there’s a point. How do you expose such unbelievable evil. Maybe better to say a prayer for the broken souls.
…….reprove the works of darkness…….
……the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD’S……
…… it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret…
trying to understand the minds of those whose goal is to provoke god to anger may be as crazy as they are……. he observed times, and used enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with familiar spirits, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.
But I am probably going to take a look at Transformation
You’re right. There is probably some op here in progress since too much truth is getting out contradicting the obvious lies perpetrated by the 9/11 Commission. I mean here we have A&E for 9/11 Truth promoting this guy and a bill to open a reinvestigation of 9/11.
What happens if Bob is “exposed” as a “fraud”?
It wouldn’t surprise me if this was their objective as a means of “discrediting” the truth movement.
It would surprise me. Allan says Bob is a hell of an actor. Who of the A&E folks have been to Bob’s home to see the lack of photos of the son? If they are honest — and many if not most of them must be — their first move will be to assume other people, like Bob, are too.
Also, it’s been 17/seventeen(!!) years. I know of one guy — runs the whatreallyhappened dot com news aggregator — who’s been saying since at least 2002 that “any day now” they are going to release the *full* video of the plane hitting the Pentagon just to discredit the “no planes” claim. Yep. Aaaany day now.
Seriously, over the last 17 years how many folks have come round to realizing they were lied to? If they could make fools of the 9-11 truth movement, they should have done it long since. People have been born and grown to critical-thinking age in that time.
My own wake-up wasn’t till December of 2001, with the video of Dubya not even looking surprised, let alone shocked, when whatshisname (Card?) whispered in his ear. It would be interesting to survey “when did you realize — ?”
I always read your blog as I believe you. Your gift is in resolutely seeking truth and relentlessly exposing the pretenders. Maybe you have no need to take issue with all these lying deceptive bumped up pumpkins who are paid to try and deceive and confuse us all. Their other motives may be irrelevant and they didn’t do a very good job on 9/11 or much else, except perhaps their own delusion, thanks in part to your services.
Their BS is imo a normal human characteristic and unfortunately they’ve got the world believing so much of the collective deceptive crud we’ll never know anything like the whole truth anyway. Not even if all political leaders, intelligence forces and international businessmen were first to be administered truth serum and then put on trial. Probably they wouldn’t even be believed. Events and life have truly entered the realms of fantastic evil and have gone too far for the average citizen or many judges to comprehend the monstrous international globalist deception and ambition as many are part of it. At its heart [as no surprise] seems to be ambition for money, power and control, as in globalist ambitions. A literate person or a movie maker of integrity needs to reveal the whole deception.
I agree with it’s a monstrous job even to catalogue the abuse of democratic power, all the schemes and deception, never mind all that in totalitarian states. Maybe the truly awake could send in their lists for analysis, comment and selection. Mine starts with the end of WW2 when much of the psychopathic organisation was first put in place. It all grew from there, as the UN Agenda 21 has shown us and as your own exposure of the sad and evasive alt media confirms.
I’ll try to deal with a motive deeper than power/money in my Open Letter to William Engdahl. Meanwhile, I again suggest you give him a look. His site is excellent, as are his many YT talks/interviews.
Am intrigued that you are writing an open letter to William Engdahl and I look forward to reading it with much interest.
Hi, Ian. Thanks. Have found mine goes back to the 1870s, in the planning for WW1, the Bolshevik Revolution, The League of Nations, but if a person goes further back, no doubt roots are there. I mean, just have a read of the diaries of a priest/brother who accompanied
‘Christopher Columbus’ (whoever he was) and the ghastly stuff of their times in new lands. Then, delve deeper into who these guys were, then keep digging further down. No end.
And here’s a question that helped me: “Where do all the most credible current alt media
not go – what do they leave out?” (Not the shills, LHs, but genuine a.m.). Back to work. Anyway, thanks.
Exactly. What they don’t say tells us as much as what they do say.
Duncan, ian – it might help you further by reading Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed. Goes back further than WW1 for sure…
You burnt a lot of words scolding me. If you are for real why not use the space to explain the questions/observations that Honegger also avoided? If you can’t and you continue with your rants (you and ‘hank’ and ‘your brother’) then you are either a fool or a state shill. I see no other possibilities.
You lost me after the first 3 sentences Henry… Lotta hot-air long-winded stuff, so please carry on with yourself…
RE: Robert Hansteen September 13, 2018 at 2:25 pm
He lost me after incorrectly spelling Allan’s name. However, I read his post through anyway to get a ‘feel’ on what Allan is talking about concerning The Deception. Whether they be psy op, limited hangout, actor, State shill, Truther Movement – we need to be able to discern all they say in order to weigh what holds water and what doesn’t. Like Honegger, I was believing what she had to say in the 3-hour video. Afterward, I began to think on it more critically and that’s when a red flag came up. Whenever there’s big money behind something of the public nature – especially when it concerns anything of controversy – anything, there’s gotta be a red flag.
Note also at the 2:58-59 mark on Honegger’s video that her left eye begins to ‘go wild’ as the questioning becomes too much for her to truthfully answer. Body language is a very good way to tell T from L.
Robert Hansteen, stay and entertain us a while longer. Stay, because what you have to say will be a lesson for all of us here who are seeking the real Truth of what the PTB are up to. We’ll be able to pick apart your brains and see where you’re NOT coming from in so far as the Truth.
Kind regards to all – including what’s his name Robert-Hank-Henry.
~Kimberlie
Thanks Alan, great work. 911 just keeps on giving, spawning more contradictions year by year. The “Walter” factor is the touchstone mystery that allows it to continue with no resolution.
The steel in the perimeter columns was not “thicker than tank armor”. Near the top, it was only .25″ (1/4 of an inch) thick. The ends of the perimeter columns were bolted together. To suggest that a 250,000 pound mass of high strength aluminum alloy, steel, and titanium traveling at 500mph could not break the bolted connections or bend those columns, exactly as engineers expected, and exactly as *all* the photos and video prove, is quite *simply* and provably, bat shit crazy delusional nonsense. An it makes truthers look like deluded nut jobs. That’s why there is not even *one* credible, qualified, or respected 9-11 truth researcher or group who agrees with you. Not *one*. Why are you trying to help mass murdering terrorists and war criminals get away with their crimes by portraying truthers as delusional, laughable nut jobs? Fortunately, only a relatively few people will ever see your blatantly absurd disinformation, so its impact will be negligible.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html
Luckily the readers here are a bit smarter than Hank gives them credit for being. First the planes did not hit the top of the towers. Second the 47 core columns or hundreds of outer columns were not 1/4″ thick as implies. Yes they do get thinner as they go up since there is less weight above them to hold up. Third describing the airplanes as if they were missiles is crazy. “high strength aluminum alloy, steel, and titanium”. How pathetic. They are airplanes made of quite light weight aluminum and that any bird in flight can do massive damage to if they collide. 100’s of steel columns are somewhat stronger than birds. Watch the videos! So obviously fake that it isn’t even a discussion
Just as there are shills to counter those who say we didn’t land on the moon, so there are shills to counter those who say no planes hit the towers.
Moreover, there are faux-truther shills, e.g. those who agree the Apollo footage was faked, but that NASA really does have hundreds of space craft beyond the Van Allen belts that have taken thousands of full-disk photos of Earth (when no such photos/images have been published).
Part of the objective of shills is to seduce the less enthusiastic amateur researchers into not going beyond their comfort zone, i.e. “Don’t research beyond 911, there’s nothing to find out. Just stay here and argue the toss with us as to precisely how 911 was staged…”
So, planes vs no planes, is just a shill quagmire.
Ask any special effects expert if the plane video footage could have been faked (even though it of course wasn’t – you should hastily add).
If you’re still arguing about 911 in a year’s time, the shills will have done a good job.
Although I disapprove of replying to shills (or fools for that matter): I posted two photos of bird damage as examples of your point. Anyone in doubt can search for ‘Birds + plane damage’ and click ‘images.’ If that doesn’t do it there is cognitive impairment.
Same goes for the Pentagon/light poles issue: That they planted several poles that ‘Fl 77’s wings supposedly knocked down is all you really need to know that a plane strike never happened. Ask a pilot about ‘fear of light poles.’ Hit one, your wing comes apart: A bad day…. ANY ‘9/11 Researcher’ who doesn’t bring this up in speaking of the ‘airplane’ that hit the Pentagon is 100% sure to be a state disinfo employee. (‘Hank’ links us to examples of this.)
Thank you Allan for your generous 9-11 Anniversary Gift! I’m flabbergasted at the Smorgasbord you’ve set before us!
We’ve got much work to do!
Very kind regards,
~Kimberlie
So, you’re saying that birds are sturdier than the WTC walls?
Ouch Hank, I guess you didn’t get thru physics class – maybe a D or less? Which 3-letter agency payroll are you on?
I understand why you’d reply to him but as suggested it’s best to just ignore shills. We’ll move on from 9/11 soon and if he keeps it up I’ll ban him, to save everyone’s time…
Todd, what is it you’re disagreeing with, specifically? No way I’m gonna try to read your “mind”. 😉
Hi Allan,
You nailed it, those load bearing columns are pretty much tank armor and would have acted like a cheese grater on everything but the 6 ton engines. We will probably never know how it was done, we can only speculate.
One thing I always remind myself is that truth is like the shortest distance between points A and B – it exists.
In our egocentrically warped views of life, most of us are blind, deaf and dumb and pursue our agendas consciously or unconsciously adnoseam.
Carry on regardless
Allan, as you say, “He didn’t want to show me his other forums because the comments would not jibe with those here.”
Different forums/blogs are at different stages of revelation/research, but as you progress your research you will probably end up reading the same forums/blogs.
And when you figure out how to deprogram Walter without breaking him, I’ll be interested to hear about your technique. I’ve concluded it’s best to let sleeping dogs lie.
I’ve also realised you can lead a horse to water, but not make him drink, i.e. you can point someone in the direction of fruitful research, but you have to leave it to them to decide if they’re thirsty.
And throwing a bucket of water at someone doesn’t help at all.
And now I’m reminded that apparent know-it-alls really get up people’s noses.
I’ll try to be less obnoxious in that respect.
But, I’ll probably fail.
Thus: ” the answer lies in the occult ‘morality’ of the perps. They must tell us what they’ve done: When, as surely is the case so far, we do nothing about their heinous crimes, they are ‘exonerated’ from guilt, the added bonus being that we look as weak as they believe we are. ”
Revelation of the method, etc.
There is no motive to gloat, to make the deceived feel foolish and impotent, to know that they are ruled by superiors with evil intent. This is an inferiority complex trying to get out.
The revelations are put there to help the perceptive. Even as they spare little expense reassuring those who aren’t perceptive that “There’s nothing to see here – please move along”.
It’s just another paradigm shift that awaits you, that the deceptions are intended for the audience that recognises them as deceptions.
Of course, I have been saying this for a while. And I’m not backing it up, because I don’t know how to with revealing the reason as to why.
So, it’s not very helpful. Similarly, none of my comments are very helpful. I can stop commenting, especially if it just causes irritation instead of insight.
Dude, stop dicking around and get to your point WITH specifics. You still haven’t answered Allan’s questions and your excuse for not showing us b/c we will do a ‘Walter’ is getting old. So either shit or get of the pot and move along.
Yeah, Todd, he sure can string a lot of words together while avoiding imparting actual information.
I’m going for insight not having much luck
seems there is not much out there to back it all up….
Just for the record: have you heard of Dmitri Khalezov, supposedly a Russian/Ukrainian ex-military and nuclear disposal expert ?
He suggests that a Russian Granit cruise-missiles were used in all three cases (2 x WTC and Pentagon). This missiles have a stable and hardened fuselage, to penetrate war ships.
At least for the WTC buildings, I have a serious problem with that – the sizes do not match. The missile wing span is much too small.
Not sure in what category to put him – state agent or UP …
And to rumble on:
Such a Granit missile seems quite plausible in the Pentagon case.
The initial flight path, the evasive maneuvers, the acute attack angle and the low impact point (near the water line of a ship) and the impact size are a good match for the line of attack of those weapons.
In his document (can’t find that PDF at the moment …) he describes how that missiles were unloaded from the Kursk submarine, which, according to him, was sunk for that very purpose.
Even more frightening are the implications. If he is true, it means the Russian government was privy to this plan. Including the lauded “Saviour Of Western Values” and Christianity, the ex-KGB guy Putin. Remember, he got a free hand in his military adventures, like Chechnya. And basically kept their mouths shut about Al-Quaeda, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Which in turn would mean, the whole new cold war and “BRICS vs. West” is nothing but a ruse, a “divide and conquer” game to keep you/us frightened and in control. Or ?
You can find Dimitri Khalezov’s The Third Truth here:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:911_The_Third_Truth_v2.pdf
I also recommend reading The Curve of Binding Energy which can be borrowed from the Internet Archive:
https://archive.org/details/curveofbindingen00mcph
Even though it was written back in 1973 and released in 1974. Ted Taylor an expert in designing tactical and SADM nukes:
https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/w54.htm
back then discussed how the World Trade Center specifically could be taken down by using such a device.
I also recommend the PDF entitled American Holocaust put out by Veterans Today:
https://www.scribd.com/document/379999367/American-Holocaust#
Now I figured out why Barbara Honegger’s long winded explanation never resonated with me and it was the exact point you mention Allan where she claims that “at least one plane hit the building.” A statement that totally defies physics and common sense.
Anyway I find it interesting that the so called that the big named Troofers as opposed to independent researchers like you and others like yours truly are proscribed and admonished against forwarding the “no planes” theory or talking about nukes.
What it tells me that those who control the opposition want those two hypothesis strenuously avoided at all costs because they each contain the truth.
Imagine what would happen if the American public found out that 9/11 was not only a staged production but that they were nuked in the process and that the subsequent death toll of thousands so far can be attributed to radiation sickness?
Much like Gulf War Syndrome which can be attributed to the use of Depleted Uranium on the battle field but only worse since it involves thousands of non-combatants and first responders!
Mini-nukes? ‘Cos there were supports left standing with clear, clean 45-degree sheared ends, a la controlled-demolition cuts. If there were nukes (I don’t dispute that), and/or DEWs, it would mean that rather a number of different destructive techniques were used. Maybe they wanted to be thorough. Maybe the nukes were aimed at (set for), I dunno, more hardened sections? Like the bunker-y area in WTC7, kind of thing.
Very true, Different methods were used. Check out this article on Secret barometric bomb technologies, nuclear technologies, used to bring WTC towers down:
Secret barometric bomb technologies, nuclear technologies, used to bring WTC towers down: Proof
Thanks Robin, I had read Khalezov’s “Third Truth” a few years ago, and it’s lurking somewhere on my external hard drives…
I use to take away the plausible theories, and extraordinary observations tend to keep sticking in my memory. Like Khalezov’s research of the term ground zero, which, as he supposes, was “Orwelled” (changed backward in dictionaries and encyclopaedias).
Yes. Seems it was. In fact I have one of the Dictionaries he mentions allegedly published in the mid 90’s that describes Hong Kong as part of China and also has the modified definition of ground zero.
How could a missile cause the towers to explode from the top down in a series of hundreds of precisely timed explosions? That’s as absurd as the nuclear bomb and space beam disinformation.
https://youtu.be/hSApOavkHg8?list=PL3705E482383CCA91
.
Who said the missile (if any) caused to towers to explode ?
Are you aware of the difference between a personal opinion and a QUOTE citing another one’s opinion ? Obviously not.
> That’s as absurd as the nuclear bomb and space beam disinformation.
That is a typical association fallacy.
Got to dig deeper in your bag of tricks.
No one said that a missile brought the WTCs down. It seems you are creating a straw man Hank.
Allan, when did Honegger become invested in 9/11 Truth.
In 2015 (article interview) she seemed more concerned that the effects of 9/11 on the “homeland” was going to be a Christian-Taliban takeover including suspending all abortions and implementing “forced slavery to give birth” upon women who couldn’t get them and this was basically one of the worst results of 9/11. She has written a lot about the Reagan administration under whom she worked and seemed worried about “Christian fanatics” taking over the country which, she explained, began under Reagan and continues to this day at alarming rates in which she must dutifully send out an alarm bell of mortal peril. She referred to herself several times as a kind of Edward Snowden.
So, at this point it seems like she’s doing a 9/11 conspiracy thing as cover for some other agenda. What’s that I wonder, more abortions, there haven’t been enough? lol.
At any rate, she has no bio, no wiki and is on other websites where she speaks of occult experiences begin at 8 months inside the womb of her mother giving her special powers of knowing and sensing stuff. She’s hilarious. Is that the intent?
She comes in Spartacus (BTW much better ref than that POS Wiki (or as I call it) Disinfopedia.
http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKhonegger.htm
Anyway her only claim to fame was that she was a Policy Analyst for Regan till ’83 and wrote October Surprise in ’89 where she omits Israel and Saudi Arabia’s (because they’re our bosom buddies donchaknow) involvement in the whole op which later became Iran-Contra.
Can we say limited hangout.
Like I wrote. I watched her long tedious presentation way back and I instinctively felt this chick was covering up something. As Allan noted her response to the no planes question was shall we say ….strange.
I almost forgot…
Regarding Barbara Honegger, as I recall, she’s the one who famously quoted William J. Casey in 1981 during one of Reagan’s first staff meetings. She publicly stated he said, ““We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
She’s a victim of Casey’s own words whom she directly quoted!
So, either she’s forgotten what she said he said, or she’s been given instructions to mislead.
My bet is that she’s been given instructions to mislead and is under orders to maintain that lie. She’s gotta make a living too, ya know.
Excellent gift indeed – thank you Allan!
BTW, your YT views are up to 393.
Yes!
Forgot to say right off to AW, what a great article, tons of stuff in it and I was happy to see it.
This one should be great for comments because Allan gave us a lot to work with here. He did not disappoint.
One thing i never understand of the lawyer of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is why they never use the so called terrorist, allegedly dead in the airplane during 9/11, but turn out to be alive and well in Saudi Arabia, or in Morocco…if the BBC journalist found out they are well and alive why the lawyer of KSM never used them…also why Mr Griffin or any thruter major actor never interview any of those living proof 9/11 was a farce.
They waterboarded this poor guy about 200 times and then got him to confess to a crime he didn’t commit to shore up the bull shit narrative that a buncha Ahabs with box cutters hijacked 4 planes then buried him in some deep dark hole of Calcutta AKA High Security Prison.
Personally I think “his” lawyer was in on the deception.
Ace Baker is on spot with his key…Mr Right is so wrong (Must see the psy opera to undersatnd whos Mr Right)
A note on Youtube’s view count: My ‘Night on Route 101’ video had 60 views before I posted my blog and as of this writing (a day and a half after posting the blog with the vid imbed), it still has 60 views. NO ONE watched it in more than 24 hours?
Haha, seems like I and most of us are on Yotube’s “useless eaters” shit-list and only are accounted for in Alphabet’s metadata-sampling.
OK, back to read your post!
That’s why I call ’em ScrewTube. Seems they’re pissing a lot of people off with their demonetization BS. One chick walked onto their campus locked and loaded and started taking pot shots at the staff. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone drove in there with a truck load of AnFo and did a Murray Federal on their sorry asses.
Me. Why fight ’em. Just move your vids over to RealVideo the new home of Alex Jones and other crazies like yours truly.
https://www.real.video