Good question. It depends - "prior knowledge", YES, but only within the context of those multiple, confirmed reports, circulating among emergency responders that WTC 7 was "UNSTABLE AND MIGHT COLLAPSE", which has been well documented by 9/11 Truthers. Given the chaos surrounding Ground Zero on 9/11, it seems reasonable that most people including MSM reporters or FDNY emergency responders, would not instinctively suspect rumors or warnings of possible or imminent collapse of WTC 7, however, we know from AE911TRUTH and other 9/11 Truthers that lots of scientists, engineers and even ordinary folks immediately suspected controlled demo when they first witnessed the collapse of WTC 7. However, "IT WOULD BE TAKEN DOWN", is a huge red flag of criminal prior knowledge, because it basically acknowledges that WTC 7 was either rigged for controlled demo BEFORE 9/11, or someone rigged WTC 7 for controlled demolition AFTER the "hijacked planes" hit the Twin Towers, the latter of which is totally ludicrous: nobody can rig a 47-story steel-reinforced skyscraper for controlled demolition on the fly in few hours in the midst of a destroyed World Trade Center.
Why would Larry "pull it" Silverstein make such a dumb statement? Why wait all afternoon to "pull it"? Your guess is as good as mine, but the real 9/11 perps finally decided to "pull it" without the plausible deniability of another "hijacked plane", i.e., there was no Arab Lee Harvey Oswald with box cutters to account for the bogus jet fuel fires that NIST could then claim weakened steel and collapsed WTC 7, which was the spook central command post. In fact, "pull it" seems like a stupid way to jeopardize a long-planned false flag operation, but not everything went according to plan on 9/11, unless those Dancing Israelis intended to be arrested in New Jersey after filming the WTC collapse with multiple passports, $$$ stuffed in their socks and driving a moving van for a front company easily identified as Mossad. There were also reports that other false flag hijacking missions were scrapped on 9/11, after FAA ordered all airborne aircraft over CONUS to land. So, it seems to me that WTC 7 posed quite an unintended predicament for the real false flag perps to handle on the spur of the moment. They couldn't risk leaving WTC 7 standing and risk discovery of its previously rigged controlled demo equipment, right? So, after several hours of deliberation, they had no other option. One plausible deniability theory is that UA 93 was intended to hit WTC 7 - NOT the Capitol, however, it's delayed departure from Newark messed up the false flag timeline and allowed the good guys or forced the bad guys to shoot down whatever really crashed thru the woods and across the pond behind the official Shanksville crash site, whether that object was the remote-controlled UA 93 or its radar swap.
I don't know what the hell made that strange hole at the official Shanksville crash site, but it certainly wasn't made by UA 93, right?
NB: CBS newsman Dan Rather also reported the live collapse of WTC - verbally recognizing that its collapse reminded him of standard controlled demolition. Years later during an interview about 9/11, Rather chose to stand by the official NIST story. Dan Rather, just like Brian Williams and the rest of the MSM, now stand by the official NIST explanation for the collapse of WTC 1, 2, and 7 and "controlled demo" is "conspiracy theory". Dan Rather and Brian Wilson are all now a witting part of the 9/11 coverup. No bout a doubt it.
When analysing psyops it's helpful to understand a feature that seems counterintuitive but isn't really when you understand how power works. The feature is known as "revelation of the method" or "hidden in plain sight". Of course, 9/11 was massively hidden in plain sight, there is simply no other psyop more hidden in plain sight that I can think of. Supposedly, the power elite who've been ruling us for millennia using the same techniques believe that they absolve themselves of their evildoing by making it very obvious to us which pushes the onus onto us to call them out. If we don't call them out the fault's on us, not them and they are spared karmic repercussions.
The basic narrative is massively hidden in plain sight right off the bat because it is an impossibility within US air space for planes to lumber around off-course without interception, certainly not four of them. That's an impossibility. But they over-egg the omelette in eye-watering fashion by not only having two planes into the twin towers, they have one significantly later than those two plough into Defence HQ.
In theory, you'd think there should be some red faces at that, no? Some people should have been hauled over the coals, headlines should have been saying, "Huh? How did our multi-trillion defence infrastructure fail so massively? HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN?" But no, the headlines said "Act of War", "America under attack". The nation in possession of the best defence system in the world was not going to accept blame for showing ludicrous weakness, no that wasn't the attitude, they were going to blame a bunch of guys armed with boxcutters for exposing this incomprehensible vulnerability.
Whether or not they deliberately push out the truth underneath the propaganda in the ridiculousness of their story or obvious clues such as Larry's "pull it" (obviously, he didn't give the command, that was all planned and organised by the demolition people) to spare themselves karmic repercussions I cannot be sure but regardless, the more ridiculous the better it works!
The most pertinent quote in relation to psyops is this:
"The purpose of propaganda is not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponds to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
Edited quote from Theodore Dalrymple, aka Anthony Daniels, British psychiatrist.
The words above are echoed by pioneering 9/11 analyst, Gerard Holmgren, who sadly died in 2010 at the age of 51 of a brain tumour, in his short essay, A Theory.
"The official story required either that one descended into total intellectual senility in order to still believe it – perhaps deliberately made ridiculous for that very purpose – or else that one keep one's intellect alive but destroy almost everything that one had previously believed about how society works."
Apart from the "hidden in plain sight" hallmark of psyops what's very helpful to understand about how they fool us is that they want to control all our minds, not just those of the majority, the complacent believers who'll go along with whatever they serve up. No! No, that's not enough - they want to (and probably need to in order to maintain power) control the minds of those who DON'T believe them too so for the disbelievers they have special propaganda just for us ... which often goes unrecognised by the disbelievers because it seems counterintuitive just like the "hidden in plain sight" element.
A counterintuitive element of the propaganda-for-the-disbelievers is that sometimes the propaganda goes out of its way to make the perps look really bad. Normal people don't go out of their way to make themselves look bad - in fact, they usually try to make themselves look good - but what is so crucial to understanding power is that it doesn't behave like normal people! Its behaviour so often is opposite to how normal people behave and that's part of how they fool us - we don't expect behaviour that's opposite to normal but we should when it comes to power because power works very differently. Normal people do not push their crimes out in plain sight, they try to use stealth. And nor do they try to make themselves look bad ... whereas power does because it works for them and anything that works for them they'll do, they don't care what it is, they'll do it. As long as it works, they do it. "Hidden in plain sight" works an absolute treat - as we can see with 9/11 - and so does "making themselves look bad".
Can you think of any examples where you might think that the perps have actually made themselves look bad in 9/11?
AM or PM though why bring down 7 on 9/11 at all when 3-6 all came down later so discreetly that many people don't know that 9/11 really involved the destruction of the whole of the WTC not just 1, 2 and 7?
Video done to Tom Petty's Free Fallin' showcasing 7's collapse.
That previous link doesn't work. Here's Heinz Pommer, German physicist, explaining his nuclear hypothesis. I will post another link to his full lecture - it's the best, but it's in German with sub-titles. https://youtu.be/g07D9cRKamY
Gotta get some sleep now, but great discussion! Have you seen the video about possible nuclear demo of the WTC? It's entirely plausible to me and accounts for the obliteration of the entire WTC. If it was nuclear, then official cover-up doesn't surprise me for legitimate national security reasons, one of which is perpetual "Samson Option" blackmail if other such nukes have been planted to "pull" if we don't behave as warned on 9/11.
I think nuclear is a red herring. Loads and loads and loads of red herrings for 9/11 - they're a great form of propaganda and can keep people completely tied up and away from the basics of the operation which is actually not all that complicated. The propaganda is massively complicated while the basics - pretty simple.
In fact, we might think that even 7 is a type of red herring because the question is raised: why bring it down so seemingly incriminatingly on 9/11 and showcase its collapse on 9/11 when we can see no reason why it couldn't have been brought down later as 3-6 were. Could they be focusing us on the building demolitions to get us away from the planes?
Here's a great link to lots of Truther videos about 9/11 and related topics.
Everything is linked to 9/11, which not only launched the bogus Global War on Terrorism, but more importantly, it created the domestic police state agenda in America. They can't build a one world government without destroying every nation-state, but they've got to take out America First, but they will NOT succeed. THE LIGHT OF GOD NEVER FAILS!
I'll never get to sleep! I love Gage's new website. Your same questions racked my mind for the last 7 years, ever since I watched Richard Gage on C-SPAN in 2014. Potential for lots of red herrings indeed, lots of strange red flags for sloppy false flag tradecraft, too. Ciao for now!
Great question! Was it just a savvy hunch by the camera crew, who anticipated a similar collapse of Bldg 7 even though it wasn’t hit by a hijacked plane like the Twin Towers? Or did they have prior knowledge of controlled demo?
BW: "Can you confirm it was No 7 that just went in?" ["Went in" is a term used in controlled demolition that comes from the fact that the buildings fall in on themselves.]
DR: "Yes, sir."
BW: "And you guys knew this was comin' all day."
DR: "We had heard reports that the building was unstable and that eventually it would either come down on its own or it would be taken down."
Good question. It depends - "prior knowledge", YES, but only within the context of those multiple, confirmed reports, circulating among emergency responders that WTC 7 was "UNSTABLE AND MIGHT COLLAPSE", which has been well documented by 9/11 Truthers. Given the chaos surrounding Ground Zero on 9/11, it seems reasonable that most people including MSM reporters or FDNY emergency responders, would not instinctively suspect rumors or warnings of possible or imminent collapse of WTC 7, however, we know from AE911TRUTH and other 9/11 Truthers that lots of scientists, engineers and even ordinary folks immediately suspected controlled demo when they first witnessed the collapse of WTC 7. However, "IT WOULD BE TAKEN DOWN", is a huge red flag of criminal prior knowledge, because it basically acknowledges that WTC 7 was either rigged for controlled demo BEFORE 9/11, or someone rigged WTC 7 for controlled demolition AFTER the "hijacked planes" hit the Twin Towers, the latter of which is totally ludicrous: nobody can rig a 47-story steel-reinforced skyscraper for controlled demolition on the fly in few hours in the midst of a destroyed World Trade Center.
Why would Larry "pull it" Silverstein make such a dumb statement? Why wait all afternoon to "pull it"? Your guess is as good as mine, but the real 9/11 perps finally decided to "pull it" without the plausible deniability of another "hijacked plane", i.e., there was no Arab Lee Harvey Oswald with box cutters to account for the bogus jet fuel fires that NIST could then claim weakened steel and collapsed WTC 7, which was the spook central command post. In fact, "pull it" seems like a stupid way to jeopardize a long-planned false flag operation, but not everything went according to plan on 9/11, unless those Dancing Israelis intended to be arrested in New Jersey after filming the WTC collapse with multiple passports, $$$ stuffed in their socks and driving a moving van for a front company easily identified as Mossad. There were also reports that other false flag hijacking missions were scrapped on 9/11, after FAA ordered all airborne aircraft over CONUS to land. So, it seems to me that WTC 7 posed quite an unintended predicament for the real false flag perps to handle on the spur of the moment. They couldn't risk leaving WTC 7 standing and risk discovery of its previously rigged controlled demo equipment, right? So, after several hours of deliberation, they had no other option. One plausible deniability theory is that UA 93 was intended to hit WTC 7 - NOT the Capitol, however, it's delayed departure from Newark messed up the false flag timeline and allowed the good guys or forced the bad guys to shoot down whatever really crashed thru the woods and across the pond behind the official Shanksville crash site, whether that object was the remote-controlled UA 93 or its radar swap.
I don't know what the hell made that strange hole at the official Shanksville crash site, but it certainly wasn't made by UA 93, right?
NB: CBS newsman Dan Rather also reported the live collapse of WTC - verbally recognizing that its collapse reminded him of standard controlled demolition. Years later during an interview about 9/11, Rather chose to stand by the official NIST story. Dan Rather, just like Brian Williams and the rest of the MSM, now stand by the official NIST explanation for the collapse of WTC 1, 2, and 7 and "controlled demo" is "conspiracy theory". Dan Rather and Brian Wilson are all now a witting part of the 9/11 coverup. No bout a doubt it.
When analysing psyops it's helpful to understand a feature that seems counterintuitive but isn't really when you understand how power works. The feature is known as "revelation of the method" or "hidden in plain sight". Of course, 9/11 was massively hidden in plain sight, there is simply no other psyop more hidden in plain sight that I can think of. Supposedly, the power elite who've been ruling us for millennia using the same techniques believe that they absolve themselves of their evildoing by making it very obvious to us which pushes the onus onto us to call them out. If we don't call them out the fault's on us, not them and they are spared karmic repercussions.
The basic narrative is massively hidden in plain sight right off the bat because it is an impossibility within US air space for planes to lumber around off-course without interception, certainly not four of them. That's an impossibility. But they over-egg the omelette in eye-watering fashion by not only having two planes into the twin towers, they have one significantly later than those two plough into Defence HQ.
In theory, you'd think there should be some red faces at that, no? Some people should have been hauled over the coals, headlines should have been saying, "Huh? How did our multi-trillion defence infrastructure fail so massively? HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN?" But no, the headlines said "Act of War", "America under attack". The nation in possession of the best defence system in the world was not going to accept blame for showing ludicrous weakness, no that wasn't the attitude, they were going to blame a bunch of guys armed with boxcutters for exposing this incomprehensible vulnerability.
Whether or not they deliberately push out the truth underneath the propaganda in the ridiculousness of their story or obvious clues such as Larry's "pull it" (obviously, he didn't give the command, that was all planned and organised by the demolition people) to spare themselves karmic repercussions I cannot be sure but regardless, the more ridiculous the better it works!
The most pertinent quote in relation to psyops is this:
"The purpose of propaganda is not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponds to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
Edited quote from Theodore Dalrymple, aka Anthony Daniels, British psychiatrist.
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/124952-political-correctness-is-communist-propaganda-writ-small-in-my-study
The words above are echoed by pioneering 9/11 analyst, Gerard Holmgren, who sadly died in 2010 at the age of 51 of a brain tumour, in his short essay, A Theory.
https://www.yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/A-theory.pdf
"The official story required either that one descended into total intellectual senility in order to still believe it – perhaps deliberately made ridiculous for that very purpose – or else that one keep one's intellect alive but destroy almost everything that one had previously believed about how society works."
Apart from the "hidden in plain sight" hallmark of psyops what's very helpful to understand about how they fool us is that they want to control all our minds, not just those of the majority, the complacent believers who'll go along with whatever they serve up. No! No, that's not enough - they want to (and probably need to in order to maintain power) control the minds of those who DON'T believe them too so for the disbelievers they have special propaganda just for us ... which often goes unrecognised by the disbelievers because it seems counterintuitive just like the "hidden in plain sight" element.
A counterintuitive element of the propaganda-for-the-disbelievers is that sometimes the propaganda goes out of its way to make the perps look really bad. Normal people don't go out of their way to make themselves look bad - in fact, they usually try to make themselves look good - but what is so crucial to understanding power is that it doesn't behave like normal people! Its behaviour so often is opposite to how normal people behave and that's part of how they fool us - we don't expect behaviour that's opposite to normal but we should when it comes to power because power works very differently. Normal people do not push their crimes out in plain sight, they try to use stealth. And nor do they try to make themselves look bad ... whereas power does because it works for them and anything that works for them they'll do, they don't care what it is, they'll do it. As long as it works, they do it. "Hidden in plain sight" works an absolute treat - as we can see with 9/11 - and so does "making themselves look bad".
Can you think of any examples where you might think that the perps have actually made themselves look bad in 9/11?
The bonus question is a softball!
The “pilot” was Larry Silverstein, but the question is WHY did the real perps wait all day to give Silverstein the green light to “pull it”?
AM or PM though why bring down 7 on 9/11 at all when 3-6 all came down later so discreetly that many people don't know that 9/11 really involved the destruction of the whole of the WTC not just 1, 2 and 7?
Video done to Tom Petty's Free Fallin' showcasing 7's collapse.
https://youtu.be/Vgx8Uwo-Vxc
great summary of AE911 models, Judy Woods, and Heinz Pommer, whose nuclear theory fits everything that happened on 9/11 and up to today.
Oligarchs, perpetual Samson Option blackmail with other such nukes planted "to pull" if we don't comply as warned on 9/11.
https://youtu.be/Lg8yPomBh3w
That previous link doesn't work. Here's Heinz Pommer, German physicist, explaining his nuclear hypothesis. I will post another link to his full lecture - it's the best, but it's in German with sub-titles. https://youtu.be/g07D9cRKamY
Gotta get some sleep now, but great discussion! Have you seen the video about possible nuclear demo of the WTC? It's entirely plausible to me and accounts for the obliteration of the entire WTC. If it was nuclear, then official cover-up doesn't surprise me for legitimate national security reasons, one of which is perpetual "Samson Option" blackmail if other such nukes have been planted to "pull" if we don't behave as warned on 9/11.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vbwYEzrB-g0
I think nuclear is a red herring. Loads and loads and loads of red herrings for 9/11 - they're a great form of propaganda and can keep people completely tied up and away from the basics of the operation which is actually not all that complicated. The propaganda is massively complicated while the basics - pretty simple.
In fact, we might think that even 7 is a type of red herring because the question is raised: why bring it down so seemingly incriminatingly on 9/11 and showcase its collapse on 9/11 when we can see no reason why it couldn't have been brought down later as 3-6 were. Could they be focusing us on the building demolitions to get us away from the planes?
Here's a great link to lots of Truther videos about 9/11 and related topics.
Everything is linked to 9/11, which not only launched the bogus Global War on Terrorism, but more importantly, it created the domestic police state agenda in America. They can't build a one world government without destroying every nation-state, but they've got to take out America First, but they will NOT succeed. THE LIGHT OF GOD NEVER FAILS!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJfUw7aBrzWkaq3Lh_FdbEw/videos
Thanks, Michael.
I'll never get to sleep! I love Gage's new website. Your same questions racked my mind for the last 7 years, ever since I watched Richard Gage on C-SPAN in 2014. Potential for lots of red herrings indeed, lots of strange red flags for sloppy false flag tradecraft, too. Ciao for now!
Who filmed WTC-7's collapse from seven vantage points?
Great question! Was it just a savvy hunch by the camera crew, who anticipated a similar collapse of Bldg 7 even though it wasn’t hit by a hijacked plane like the Twin Towers? Or did they have prior knowledge of controlled demo?
What about Brian Williams, MSNBC News Anchor and David Restuccio, FDNY EMS Lieutenant? Do you think these guys might have had prior knowledge?
https://youtu.be/Vgx8Uwo-Vxc?t=224
BW: "Can you confirm it was No 7 that just went in?" ["Went in" is a term used in controlled demolition that comes from the fact that the buildings fall in on themselves.]
DR: "Yes, sir."
BW: "And you guys knew this was comin' all day."
DR: "We had heard reports that the building was unstable and that eventually it would either come down on its own or it would be taken down."