8 Comments

So refreshing to read someone who gets the fake binary propaganda strategy. I wonder why I've never come across you before.

https://www.bigeye.org/the_911_media_show_and_its_victims.htm

"For some unfathomable reason those interested in unravelling 911's mysteries turn to the show's criminal perpetrators for truth about its victims theme, the massacre of nearly 3000 innocent humans. Vengeful unrelated mourners seem blissfully unaware of media's role in creating, scripting, producing, and airing the whole exciting show. Go figure."

I know!

Expand full comment

Richard, did you censor my comment on Israel? Or was it because of the Vision link?

Expand full comment

Your comment appears on the second instance of this post:

https://richardgage911.substack.com/p/video-avail-911-truth-western-australia

Israel is just distraction propaganda - not that it wasn't involved, it was, of course - but every man and his dog was in on 9/11. You don't think intelligence in Australia, NZ, Canada, Pakistan, India, the UK, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, etc weren't all in on it? I have no idea how it all works but we can tell that there were loads of people/nations in on 9/11.

Who informed us of the "Five Dancing Israelis" and the Israeli "art" students?

Mainstream media. Why would mainstream media feed us a narrative contradictory to the Arab terrorist narrative? Because they know that the believers of the mainstream narrative will pay the "Israel did it" narrative no attention while the disbelievers will latch right onto it. I know this is the case because I fell for the Israeli propaganda ... although it did puzzle me how people could think that Israel was actually "responsible" as everything needed to be done under the auspices of the US government.

They lied about the terrorists, they lied about the passenger airliners, they lied about the buildings ... but they told the truth about the 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured?

Expand full comment

Petra -- is this your blog or Richard Gage's blog?

Expand full comment

I find the truth is better arrived at where the focus is on the what rather than the who.

Expand full comment

Of course, it was no coincidence that Little Johnny Howard was in Washington on the fateful day - every man and his dog was in on 9/11. Nor was the calendar of events preceding the November 10, 2001 Australian Federal election unplanned.

August - Tampa affair (completely staged)

September - 9/11 (completely staged apart from the building destructions)

October - "Children overboard" (completely staged)

BANG! BANG! BANG! election! Liberal victory - smoother sailing for Australian troops into Afghanistan and Iraq - with the complicity of Labor opposition leader, Kim Beazley. He was in on it too with the promise of good things to come ...

Professorial fellow at UWA, Ambassador to the US, Governor of WA

Watch the film very deliberately named Leaky Boat made by Screen Australia/Screen West - underneath the propaganda it tells the truth of the staging of the ludicrous refugee boat stories sandwiching 9/11, all leading up to the Federal election.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ccKArhv28U

As David says, the official story is absurd. It falls over at every single turn ... that's the way they made it - they made it even more absurd than it needed to be because propaganda works better the less it corresponds with reality and they can derive more enjoyment from laying on the ridiculousness more and more and more and more. The Big Lie works better than the small lie, that's just the way it works and those in power have very well-placed supreme confidence in the Big Lie because they've used it on us for centuries, millennia even and it's never failed them ... even once.

9/11 is simply awash with propaganda (both for and against the terrorist narrative) and what needs to be done is to focus on the elemental facts, namely:

--- No passenger airliner crashed which means terrorists had nothing to do with anything and none of the alleged passengers died in a plane

--- The building destructions were all controlled ... so obvious

--- All the evidence put forward for death and injury easily fits the category of "pseudo-evidence" - there is nothing to say that the World Trade Centre and the West Wing of the Pentagon weren't completely evacuated before destruction of the buildings, after all, no deaths or injuries were reported in WTCs 4, 5 and 6 which were pretty heavily damaged so why did deaths need to occur in WTCs 1, 2 and 3?

Expand full comment