I agree, but nothing has happened and it's 2022, maybe we should focus on more obvious shit that's currently right in front of us. Sadly I had to unsubscribe because 911 at this point isn't going to do anything.
It can take a long time to prevail against institutionalized forces. They count on, among other things, the sentiment you expressed - nothing has happened yet maybe we should focus on other things. I could list countless examples of where it took decades, centuries of stubborn persistence to bring out the truth. We can do both, deal with today and ferret out the roots of yesterday that are entangled with and nourishing current day abominations.
But properly understanding 9/11 helps us better understand other psyops, including this one. After four years of study, my epiphanous realisation that death and injury were staged on 9/11 prompted my questioning of other events known by some at least as "false flags". When I looked at the post-9/11 anthrax attacks, Pearl Harbour and the 1980 Bologna station bombing I could see that all three were completely staged, they weren't "false flags" per se where the crime assigned to one group was really committed by another, it was a case of the actual crime not being committed at all - sure the bombings were real enough in the case of Pearl Harbour and Bologna station but the evidence shows they were evacuated bombings just as 9/11 comprised evacuated bombings. In fact, many bombings put forward as killing and maiming people are evacuated bombings - another example is the 2017 Mogadishu truck bombing. You simply cannot find a single instance on the internet of a person genuinely maimed by a bomb. I found a video of a guy once who'd just lost his legs and it was absolutely horrific. When you see a real maiming from a bomb you don't forget it. What you see on the internet for bomb victims is laughable.
My pages on anthrax, Pearl Harbour and Bologna station can be accessed here:
From properly understanding 9/11, I recognised immediately the signs of a psyop with the alleged covid pandemic and I predicted multiple streams of propaganda designed to fragment and confuse the opposition argument. I knew that there wouldn't be a virus because I understood from 9/11 that in psyops they only do what they want for real and fake the rest. They didn't want a virus, they didn't need a virus to make us believe in one ... and a real virus (although it seems now we have no evidence of viruses at all) wouldn't have worked for their narrative.
The most instructive information I believe on the current psyop is found in the series, The Viral Delusion, which includes interviews with a number of doctors, scientists and others including Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, Mark Bailey, David Rasnick, Kevin Corbett, Larry Palevsky, Amandha Vollmer, Pam Popper and Harald Wallach. www.theviraldelusion.com
Anyone who looks at the evidence will know the truth. It was an inside job with a massive media coverup. The faux CGI planes were added for effect. They showed a fuselage and wings imprint of a plane slicing through the building like it was made of butter not reinforced steel. A real plane would have crumbled like a tin can. Building 7 was textbook controlled demo. 1 and 2 had nano-thermite that melts steel the dust. The Pentagon showed a round whole the cruise missile made , no plane parts or bodies from a plane. No intercept fighter jets. No video. The same with Shanksville.
But what we really need to take into consideration is that by its nature power blinds the majority to the evidence no matter how obvious and no matter how well it's explained (eg, Richard's excellent tutorials), a phenomenon that gives power carte blanche to show us one thing and tell us - in eye-watering blatant contradiction - it's another and get away with it. Understanding that shifts our lens and gives us a better understanding of how they dupe us. The three most important things to understand about 9/11 in my opinion are:
--- They TELL us that they did it in their preposterous basic narrative in the first place with numerous gratuitous clues such as Larry's "pull it", pre-announcement of WTC-7 collapse, passport in dust, etc.
--- 9/11 is a tale of two narratives: the primary narrative is directed to the believing majority while the secondary narrative is directed to the anticipated smaller group of disbelievers of their cockamamie story. The power elite haven't controlled us for centuries, millennia even, by simply focusing on those they know will believe them no matter what and leaving the disbelievers to their own devices - no way, at least not for big psyops, the smaller ones yes but not the big ones. They wish to control ALL our minds so they will target those they know won't believe them in addition to those who will. We are all profiled with their propaganda targeted accordingly, not just according to the believer/disbeliever profiles but according to other criteria depending on the requirement - left/right, racist/anti-racist, rich/poor, WASP/Arab/Zionist/Hispanic, whatever.
--- The main purpose of the narrative directed to the anticipated disbelievers is to maintain their belief in real death and injury when death and injury were, in fact, staged. This hamstrings the disbelievers from getting out the truth because the believers simply won't come at the US government killing their own citizens in such a cold-blooded callous way. Half-truths make great lies. When we realise that fact, 9/11 transforms from a false flag "inside job" event to a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise comprising numerous smaller exercises and drills, a number of which they informed us of with a few crucial ones they didn't such as the drills that produced the alleged injured. The FBI brazenly titled their 9/11 investigation PENTTBOM (Pentagon Twin Towers Bombing). Yes, effectively all the buildings came down by bombing - people injured by bombings don't look like the people they show us who are allegedly injured. Those images are a complete joke. Bombs maim, the effect of bombs is really terrible.
The disbelievers have been led down the garden path. We have taken WTC-7's collapse to be the "smoking gun" but - hang on a minute! - they didn't need to bring it down and showcase it on the day, did they? The reason we don't question its collapse on 9/11 is that it doesn't occur to us that they would brazenly bring it down when it wasn't part of the terror story and they didn't need to. But they can do that because they know that no matter that its collapse is the most perfect you will ever find, that it couldn't be clearer that it is an implosion, the majority will be blind to it. They have carte blanche to push the truth right in our faces ... and get away with it.
We need to change the lens through which we see 9/11. Of course, it was CD, of course, the airliners were faked. Of course! It was a psyop where all that was really wanted was to destroy buildings. Sure, I didn't really understand the CD until I watched Richard's tutorials but now that I do understand it's so obvious and would be obvious to anyone who understands the physics of buildings. We don't have to do cartwheels proving CD and plane fakery, we just have to call out 9/11 for what it was - a massive exercise.
I watched all your tutorials, Richard, on the three towers a few years ago. They are excellent and show in great detail conclusively how controlled demolition brought the towers down. The thing is though that as the tutorials indicate - collapses by controlled demolition and collapses by fire can't be confused, their signatures are completely different - they are two entirely different beasts and the notion that one can be confused with the other certainly at least in the case of steel frame skyscrapers which simply cannot come down from fire anyway is laughable.
But more intriguing than determining what brought down WTC-7 (it's an undisguised flawless implosion after all) is the question, "Why bring down WTC-7 on 9/11 and film it from at least seven vantage points when WTCs 3-6 all came down discreetly later." See the A&E 9/11 video, Free Fallin', to the Tom Petty song for the showcasing.
Why showcase WTC-7's perfect implosion so self-incriminatingly when it wasn't part of the terror story and there was no urgency to bring it down? They obviously wanted all the buildings down at the WTC as they all came down and regardless of whether WTC-7 housed the control room for the operation or whatever there simply was no need to bring it down on the day, it could have been brought down later as 3-6 were. There had to be a purpose to bring it down on the day and showcase its collapse.
What we need to keep in mind is that the power elite know that they can push Emperor's-New-Clothes style events at us and get away with it because no matter how much the evidence contradicts the narrative the majority will choose to believe the propaganda over the evidence - the perps can be as sloppy as they like with their fakery and narrative and still the propaganda will be believed - in fact, the more ridiculous the better it seems to work. It's truly phenomenal how people will argue black and blue that WTC-7 came down by fire when the implosion is so admirably perfect - I defy anyone to present a better example - and its collapse not disguised by even one lick of flame. It just defies credibility ... but they do. The perps knew they could showcase WTC-7's collapse and have ONLY the small percentage of people who fit the profile of truth-seeker recognise its collapse for what it was while the majority would maintain blindness to it. They're very experienced in these matters. We can go back at least to the 1600s and determine that the narratives for both the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 and the Great Fire of London of 1666 are obvious nonsense just like the 9/11 nonsense ... they have always gotten away with their nonsense and know they can rely on it.
We don't really need to spend a second on the buildings when we show that the planes were faked because faked planes means:
--- automatically that the buildings came down by a controlled method (controlled demolition, however, doesn't mean faked planes - it doesn't work the other way)
--- faked planes means faked passenger deaths (unless they killed the alleged passengers another way which starts to get rather unlikely)
They don't want to simplify the analysis by killing two birds with one stone with the faked planes and they certainly don't want to alert attention to fakery of death because if the deaths of the plane passengers were faked we might start to ask about the deaths of the people in the buildings. We can see that the focus has gradually moved to be far more on the buildings than on the planes. It's all about the focus! WTC-7 focuses us on the buildings and away from the more revealing planes.
I think we can safely infer that the Loizeaux company had a great deal to do with the WTC demolitions and if anyone thinks that that organisation would have been willing to participate in those demolitions by completely abandoning their professional ethics and leaving people in the buildings before they blew them up I'm interested to hear about it. Sure, doctors are now administering jabs that we know are maiming and killing people but that's because they believe the propaganda, it's a different matter getting demolition professionals to wittingly kill people by leaving them in buildings.
We can also infer that virtually the whole of the WTC must have been evacuated as all the buildings seemed to be greatly damaged at the time of the building collapses. If WTC-6 hadn't been evacuated, for example, surely people would have been killed and injured by the damage to that building but we hear no mention of it. Are we to believe that they evacuated all the buildings bar 1 and 2?
They didn't need to kill anyone to make us believe they killed people so why would they? Yes, the jab is killing and maiming people now but that seems to be a case of "collateral murder". They are simply using us as lab rats. I have no idea how they justify internally the death and maiming they're causing but I don't think it's intentional as such they just don't care about it because, presumably, they feel that the benefit gained from the knowledge of studying the effects of the administered "gene therapy" outweighs the harm. It simply mystifies and appalls me. I got chatting to a guy in my local cafe the other day who told me his 34 year-old perfectly healthy sister died from blood clots caused by the Astra Zeneca jab. In the case of the buildings, however, there is simply no good reason whatsoever for them to have let the people die in the buildings rather than fake it - after all they faked the plane passengers too - no good reason to let people die ... while there are good reasons not to. What I'm wondering is what the loved ones of those dying and being maimed from the jab will do? Can this massive crime against humanity be kept under wraps the way it is at the moment? Surely not. I highly recommend the 6 hour plus series, The Viral Delusion. www.theviraldelusion.com. The unscientific nature of both virology and vaccinology go right back to their inceptions.
I agree, but nothing has happened and it's 2022, maybe we should focus on more obvious shit that's currently right in front of us. Sadly I had to unsubscribe because 911 at this point isn't going to do anything.
It can take a long time to prevail against institutionalized forces. They count on, among other things, the sentiment you expressed - nothing has happened yet maybe we should focus on other things. I could list countless examples of where it took decades, centuries of stubborn persistence to bring out the truth. We can do both, deal with today and ferret out the roots of yesterday that are entangled with and nourishing current day abominations.
But properly understanding 9/11 helps us better understand other psyops, including this one. After four years of study, my epiphanous realisation that death and injury were staged on 9/11 prompted my questioning of other events known by some at least as "false flags". When I looked at the post-9/11 anthrax attacks, Pearl Harbour and the 1980 Bologna station bombing I could see that all three were completely staged, they weren't "false flags" per se where the crime assigned to one group was really committed by another, it was a case of the actual crime not being committed at all - sure the bombings were real enough in the case of Pearl Harbour and Bologna station but the evidence shows they were evacuated bombings just as 9/11 comprised evacuated bombings. In fact, many bombings put forward as killing and maiming people are evacuated bombings - another example is the 2017 Mogadishu truck bombing. You simply cannot find a single instance on the internet of a person genuinely maimed by a bomb. I found a video of a guy once who'd just lost his legs and it was absolutely horrific. When you see a real maiming from a bomb you don't forget it. What you see on the internet for bomb victims is laughable.
My pages on anthrax, Pearl Harbour and Bologna station can be accessed here:
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/other-events.html
From properly understanding 9/11, I recognised immediately the signs of a psyop with the alleged covid pandemic and I predicted multiple streams of propaganda designed to fragment and confuse the opposition argument. I knew that there wouldn't be a virus because I understood from 9/11 that in psyops they only do what they want for real and fake the rest. They didn't want a virus, they didn't need a virus to make us believe in one ... and a real virus (although it seems now we have no evidence of viruses at all) wouldn't have worked for their narrative.
The most instructive information I believe on the current psyop is found in the series, The Viral Delusion, which includes interviews with a number of doctors, scientists and others including Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, Mark Bailey, David Rasnick, Kevin Corbett, Larry Palevsky, Amandha Vollmer, Pam Popper and Harald Wallach. www.theviraldelusion.com
Anyone who looks at the evidence will know the truth. It was an inside job with a massive media coverup. The faux CGI planes were added for effect. They showed a fuselage and wings imprint of a plane slicing through the building like it was made of butter not reinforced steel. A real plane would have crumbled like a tin can. Building 7 was textbook controlled demo. 1 and 2 had nano-thermite that melts steel the dust. The Pentagon showed a round whole the cruise missile made , no plane parts or bodies from a plane. No intercept fighter jets. No video. The same with Shanksville.
But what we really need to take into consideration is that by its nature power blinds the majority to the evidence no matter how obvious and no matter how well it's explained (eg, Richard's excellent tutorials), a phenomenon that gives power carte blanche to show us one thing and tell us - in eye-watering blatant contradiction - it's another and get away with it. Understanding that shifts our lens and gives us a better understanding of how they dupe us. The three most important things to understand about 9/11 in my opinion are:
--- They TELL us that they did it in their preposterous basic narrative in the first place with numerous gratuitous clues such as Larry's "pull it", pre-announcement of WTC-7 collapse, passport in dust, etc.
--- 9/11 is a tale of two narratives: the primary narrative is directed to the believing majority while the secondary narrative is directed to the anticipated smaller group of disbelievers of their cockamamie story. The power elite haven't controlled us for centuries, millennia even, by simply focusing on those they know will believe them no matter what and leaving the disbelievers to their own devices - no way, at least not for big psyops, the smaller ones yes but not the big ones. They wish to control ALL our minds so they will target those they know won't believe them in addition to those who will. We are all profiled with their propaganda targeted accordingly, not just according to the believer/disbeliever profiles but according to other criteria depending on the requirement - left/right, racist/anti-racist, rich/poor, WASP/Arab/Zionist/Hispanic, whatever.
--- The main purpose of the narrative directed to the anticipated disbelievers is to maintain their belief in real death and injury when death and injury were, in fact, staged. This hamstrings the disbelievers from getting out the truth because the believers simply won't come at the US government killing their own citizens in such a cold-blooded callous way. Half-truths make great lies. When we realise that fact, 9/11 transforms from a false flag "inside job" event to a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise comprising numerous smaller exercises and drills, a number of which they informed us of with a few crucial ones they didn't such as the drills that produced the alleged injured. The FBI brazenly titled their 9/11 investigation PENTTBOM (Pentagon Twin Towers Bombing). Yes, effectively all the buildings came down by bombing - people injured by bombings don't look like the people they show us who are allegedly injured. Those images are a complete joke. Bombs maim, the effect of bombs is really terrible.
The disbelievers have been led down the garden path. We have taken WTC-7's collapse to be the "smoking gun" but - hang on a minute! - they didn't need to bring it down and showcase it on the day, did they? The reason we don't question its collapse on 9/11 is that it doesn't occur to us that they would brazenly bring it down when it wasn't part of the terror story and they didn't need to. But they can do that because they know that no matter that its collapse is the most perfect you will ever find, that it couldn't be clearer that it is an implosion, the majority will be blind to it. They have carte blanche to push the truth right in our faces ... and get away with it.
We need to change the lens through which we see 9/11. Of course, it was CD, of course, the airliners were faked. Of course! It was a psyop where all that was really wanted was to destroy buildings. Sure, I didn't really understand the CD until I watched Richard's tutorials but now that I do understand it's so obvious and would be obvious to anyone who understands the physics of buildings. We don't have to do cartwheels proving CD and plane fakery, we just have to call out 9/11 for what it was - a massive exercise.
I watched all your tutorials, Richard, on the three towers a few years ago. They are excellent and show in great detail conclusively how controlled demolition brought the towers down. The thing is though that as the tutorials indicate - collapses by controlled demolition and collapses by fire can't be confused, their signatures are completely different - they are two entirely different beasts and the notion that one can be confused with the other certainly at least in the case of steel frame skyscrapers which simply cannot come down from fire anyway is laughable.
But more intriguing than determining what brought down WTC-7 (it's an undisguised flawless implosion after all) is the question, "Why bring down WTC-7 on 9/11 and film it from at least seven vantage points when WTCs 3-6 all came down discreetly later." See the A&E 9/11 video, Free Fallin', to the Tom Petty song for the showcasing.
https://youtu.be/Vgx8Uwo-Vxc
Why showcase WTC-7's perfect implosion so self-incriminatingly when it wasn't part of the terror story and there was no urgency to bring it down? They obviously wanted all the buildings down at the WTC as they all came down and regardless of whether WTC-7 housed the control room for the operation or whatever there simply was no need to bring it down on the day, it could have been brought down later as 3-6 were. There had to be a purpose to bring it down on the day and showcase its collapse.
What we need to keep in mind is that the power elite know that they can push Emperor's-New-Clothes style events at us and get away with it because no matter how much the evidence contradicts the narrative the majority will choose to believe the propaganda over the evidence - the perps can be as sloppy as they like with their fakery and narrative and still the propaganda will be believed - in fact, the more ridiculous the better it seems to work. It's truly phenomenal how people will argue black and blue that WTC-7 came down by fire when the implosion is so admirably perfect - I defy anyone to present a better example - and its collapse not disguised by even one lick of flame. It just defies credibility ... but they do. The perps knew they could showcase WTC-7's collapse and have ONLY the small percentage of people who fit the profile of truth-seeker recognise its collapse for what it was while the majority would maintain blindness to it. They're very experienced in these matters. We can go back at least to the 1600s and determine that the narratives for both the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 and the Great Fire of London of 1666 are obvious nonsense just like the 9/11 nonsense ... they have always gotten away with their nonsense and know they can rely on it.
We don't really need to spend a second on the buildings when we show that the planes were faked because faked planes means:
--- automatically that the buildings came down by a controlled method (controlled demolition, however, doesn't mean faked planes - it doesn't work the other way)
--- faked planes means faked passenger deaths (unless they killed the alleged passengers another way which starts to get rather unlikely)
They don't want to simplify the analysis by killing two birds with one stone with the faked planes and they certainly don't want to alert attention to fakery of death because if the deaths of the plane passengers were faked we might start to ask about the deaths of the people in the buildings. We can see that the focus has gradually moved to be far more on the buildings than on the planes. It's all about the focus! WTC-7 focuses us on the buildings and away from the more revealing planes.
I think we can safely infer that the Loizeaux company had a great deal to do with the WTC demolitions and if anyone thinks that that organisation would have been willing to participate in those demolitions by completely abandoning their professional ethics and leaving people in the buildings before they blew them up I'm interested to hear about it. Sure, doctors are now administering jabs that we know are maiming and killing people but that's because they believe the propaganda, it's a different matter getting demolition professionals to wittingly kill people by leaving them in buildings.
We can also infer that virtually the whole of the WTC must have been evacuated as all the buildings seemed to be greatly damaged at the time of the building collapses. If WTC-6 hadn't been evacuated, for example, surely people would have been killed and injured by the damage to that building but we hear no mention of it. Are we to believe that they evacuated all the buildings bar 1 and 2?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_World_Trade_Center
They didn't need to kill anyone to make us believe they killed people so why would they? Yes, the jab is killing and maiming people now but that seems to be a case of "collateral murder". They are simply using us as lab rats. I have no idea how they justify internally the death and maiming they're causing but I don't think it's intentional as such they just don't care about it because, presumably, they feel that the benefit gained from the knowledge of studying the effects of the administered "gene therapy" outweighs the harm. It simply mystifies and appalls me. I got chatting to a guy in my local cafe the other day who told me his 34 year-old perfectly healthy sister died from blood clots caused by the Astra Zeneca jab. In the case of the buildings, however, there is simply no good reason whatsoever for them to have let the people die in the buildings rather than fake it - after all they faked the plane passengers too - no good reason to let people die ... while there are good reasons not to. What I'm wondering is what the loved ones of those dying and being maimed from the jab will do? Can this massive crime against humanity be kept under wraps the way it is at the moment? Surely not. I highly recommend the 6 hour plus series, The Viral Delusion. www.theviraldelusion.com. The unscientific nature of both virology and vaccinology go right back to their inceptions.