Friday, October 7, 2011

“9/11 Science and Conspiracy” Another Mind Control “Special” from National Geographic Television  (originally published October 2, 2009; revised October 7, 2011)

Many people might expect television programming produced under the hallowed banner of the The National Geographic to be impartial, unbiased, and definitely nonpolitical. Such assumptions could not be further from the truth. In reality, National Geographic continues to carry water for The Establishment, as they manufacture and produce psy-op warfare against the people of the United States in the guise of objective programming.

Continuing their unblemished string of supposedly fair and evenhanded examinations of controversial topics (UFOs, alien abductions, crop circles, etc.), National Geographic Television has once again applied their “unbiased” expertise to 9/11 conspiracy theories and those who pursue them.

If you missed this National Geographic TV show, “9/11 -- Science and Conspiracy,” which aired on August 31st of 2009, I urge you to do whatever necessary to track it down and see it, for it is truly a classic example of mind-control, subterfuge, misdirection and diversion parading as objective research.

“9/11--Science and Conspiracy” once more illustrates NatGeo’s slick, formulaic approach towards any issue of controversy that threatens The Establishment they serve so well. And if any issue really threatens “The Establishment” today, it is obviously those who continue to insist that 9/11 was an “inside job.”

The title itself let’s the cat slip out of the bag. “Science” is posited against “Conspiracy.” So obviously, “Science” and the evidence it has accumulated MUST be on the rational side of the argument, against the “irrational” side, and therefore against Conspiracy Theory, according to NatGeo's simplistic framing of the issue for us.

Unfortunately, for both the U.S. Government AND NatGeo, “science” increasingly points to one unavoidable conclusion: that a faction of the United States Government, aided and abetted by our ‘Great Ally” in the Middle East, was the driving force behind the mass murder of nearly 3,000 U.S. citizens on September 11, 2001 for financial and political gain.

NatGeoTV wastes little time in revealing their unique perspective regarding investigators who have the temerity to question “official” government dogma, nor do they forego any trick of subtle media manipulation, including the withholding of contradictory evidence, manipulative editing and narration, psychological marginalization of all 9/11 investigators, and deletion of all inconvenient truths during this program, in order to achieve their aims of discrediting any credible inquiry into the mass murder and subversion of our government which 9/11 actually represents.

Lest the casual reader happen to think that the process I am about to dissect and examine was simply due to an unfortunate assemblage of differing points of view, let me be very clear that in my considered opinion,  NatGeoTV was directly involved in the process of mind control and the purposeful shaping of popular opinion for reasons which can only be considered as being directly detrimental to the core values of this great Republic they pretend to fairly represent with their documentaries.

Let us now descend into this NatGeo special on 9/11 and the conspiracy theories and theorists that still swirl around its carcass.

o o o

Less than 5 minutes into the program, we are informed via voice over, that those who question the official government version of the incidents of 9/11 are henceforth to be called “truthers.” This immediately provides a negative psychological slant to all investigators of the crimes associated with 9/11 by equating anyone who questions the so-called “official” government version of the atrocities committed on that day with some lunatic fringe cult.

Rather than being correctly described as concerned citizens, skeptical inquirers, citizen investigators, (usually composed of a large sprinkling of architects, pilots, structural engineers, etc.) we are informed that all of these people -- this sub-group of humanity -- shall be henceforth be thought of, referred to and known as “truthers” throughout the remainder of the documentary.

Truthers -- now where have we heard this subtle bit of sarcasm used before? Of course -- those who question the birth place of Barrack Obama are not investigators or concerned citizens of Constitutional government either -- they are “birthers!”  Just another Establishment Main Stream Media trick to trivialize and marginalize honest citizen inquiry by those who expect to have their “official” conspiracy theories accepted without question.

o o o

To help illustrate the Government/Establishment side of the 9/11 explanation, NatGeo provides viewers with a three pronged approach during this nefarious documentary designed to marginalize critics of The Official 9/11 Government report:

1. NatGeo stages elaborate recreations purporting to show that the issues 9/11 critics and investigators have “obsessed” upon are very simple to explain;

2. NatGeo brings in authoritative experts from leading universities (MIT and Purdue) to explain “what really happened” when the airplanes struck the twin towers and how their analysis “proves” 9/11 skeptics wrong;

3. NatGeo attempts to marginalize, trivialize and and ridicule ALL 9/11 skeptics, critics, doubters, investigators and researchers as being mentally deficient, paranoid, untrusting, and antigovernment.

The physical examples and re-creations NatGeo arranged for viewers included:

o the launch of a small rocket on a sled to attempt to duplicate an airplane striking the Pentagon;

o suspending a naked steal beam directly under a 2000 degree fire which causes the beam to bend and buckle;

o viewing a sample of thermite that cannot cut thru a steel beam;

o seeing a controlled demolition of a building with dynamite which leaves behind evidence of the devices (blasting caps) used in its demolition, and

o an amusing computer animation of “rogue” planes substituting for the planes which supposedly struck the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon.

All of these examples, of course, are either bogus, irrelevant, or contrived.

a. The rocket sled launch of an aluminum cylinder meant to represent an aircraft slamming into the Pentagon is not required to go through 5 layers of brick, limestone, concrete and rebar, nor create the same size entry hole and exit hole (16 feet in diameter) as happened at The Pentagon. Their model proves nothing;.

b. The weighted steel beam which deforms directly under a 2000 degree focused fire does not address the fact that kerosene fires at the World Trade Center did not burn hotter than 1200 degrees (and probably not more than 600-700 degrees), not 2000 degrees, due to incorrect air-fuel ratios that were not jet engine “ideal.”

Most of the fuel on both aircraft burned outside of the buildings, not inside; moreover, all the steel beams of the building were covered with asbestos, and the government speculation that this asbestos was shaken loose by the collision of the aircraft with the building is nothing more than an unproved supposition which -- even if it were accurate -- would still make the three World Trade Center towers the first steel high-rise buildings anywhere on the planet to collapse due to fire.

c. Thermite can cut steel quite easily -- yet the example NatGeo used could not cut thru a steel beam. Why NatGeo’s thermite was not capable of cutting thru steel remains a mystery as there are numerous examples on YouTube of regular thermite destroying entire automotive engine blocks, even entire automobiles, in seconds.

d. And of course, by using regular thermite in their demonstration, NatGeo conveniently bypasses the most recent findings -- that much more powerful NANO-THERMITE was used to destroy the structural integrity of the World Trade Center towers; and NANO-THERMITE would leave no debris residue in its aftermath like the blasting caps and wires used in the ordinary dynamite demolition of the building used in NatGeo's demonstration;

e. finally, the “rogue plane” replacement computer animations are merely speculation, distraction and misdirection from the central inquiry of the documentary.

Viewers are then introduced to Mete Zosen, PhD, Purdue University, who states that Purdue’s findings “confirmed the NIST (National Institute of Science and Technology) report.” But of course, the NIST report and the “official” government report on 9/11 never bothered to try to explain the collapse of the THIRD TOWER, building # 7, which was visually shown in the documentary but never identified by name.  Moreover, Dr. Zosen fails to acquaint the viewer with ALL of the findings of the NIST report. How convenient -- for the Government!

For instance, Mark H. Gaffney, writing in an article on 12/15/06 about the NIST reported, entitled: “NIST -- Dead on Arrival” revealed the following about the NIST report that Dr. Zosen, for some reason, did not feel necessary or relevant to share with NatGeo viewers:   “Because the NIST did not have the necessary facilities, it contracted Underwriters Laboratories to conduct a series of fire endurance tests on trusses like those in the World Trade Center. (The recovered truss samples were too badly deformed during the collapse to test them directly so NIST fabricated new trusses identical in design). The purpose of the tests were to establish a baseline, and the results were surprising.

Not one of the truss assemblies failed during a series of four tests, not even the truss sprayed with the minimum amount of fire proofing. ‘The floors continued to support the full design load without collapse for over TWO HOURS.’ The Underwriter’s Laboratory tests not only laid to rest the theory that the trusses were the cause of the collapse on 9/11, but if anything, the tests demonstrated the fundamental soundness of the World Trade Center design.”

And yet, DESPITE Underwriter Laboratory findings that these identical trusses would have easily held their loads for at least two hours or more, Dr. Zosen never sees fit to mention these findings that directly contradict his theory of the World Trade Center collapses.

Next, Thomas Eagar, PhD, MIT Professor of Materials Engineering, takes another, more innovative approach to prove that the “pile driver” effect brought down both World Trade Center towers #1 and 2.

Dr Eagar’s “pile driver” analogy is based on the idea that after the the jet aircraft crash and fire weakened the floors of the World Trade Center where the plane had stuck, all the floors above the plane strike then acted like a “pile driver” to collapse the floors below it, pan-caking every single floor stack, one after another (at nearly free fall speed!) until the entire building was destroyed.

There are just a few things wrong with Dr. Eagar’s “pile driver” analogy, but the main problem with it is quite simple: it is laughably, embarrassingly, amazingly ludicrous!

Think about this quite clearly: if you have ever watched a real “pile driver” in action, you would see a very large weight hoisted above a beam or pile to be driven deeper into the ground. After the weight was hoisted many feet above the “pile” it would be SLAMMED DOWN into that pile by an hydraulic mechanism to add accelerative force against the pile below it.

Now, imagine if instead of SLAMMING that “pile driver” onto the top of the pile to ram it further and deeper into the earth, the mechanism of the pile driver simply and gently rested the pile driving weight on top of the pile. How long do you think it would take for a STATIC pile driver weight to “ram” the “pile” below it downwards? A few centuries perhaps? Millennia? Never?

Well, that is EXACTLY the analogy we have before us when viewing the tops of either World Trade Center Tower exerting force on the structure of the towers below the impact of the airplanes! THERE IS NO PILE DRIVER EFFECT!

The building structure below the impact strike of the planes is supporting almost EXACTLY the same amount of weight as it had before the impact, and moreover, the TOP of either World Trade Center was not “raised” and then “slammed” onto the floors below it, like it must be to truly act “like a pile driver” -- it was simply resting and being supported by the same 47 central core steel columns of the building as it had for several decades.

There was ABSOLUTELY NO REASON why any of the floors should have pan-caked and collapsed; yet even if one or two or three of them somehow had done so (a possibility that was ruled out by the Underwriter’s Laboratory tests of the trusses that supposedly collapsed on 9/11, EXCEPT that they did not collapse even under more extreme conditions during testing!) the remaining floors of the building would have supported the structure above it because the weight of the building and the vertical forces acting upon it HAD NOT CHANGED!  The impossibility of this collapse occurring for this reason has been demonstrated repeatedly by Richard Gage, AIA, President of “Architects for 9//11 Truth” (representing over 1500 architects throughout the United States) on numerous occasions.

But let us go against all of the real evidence regarding the strength of the World Trade Center’s internal structure. Let’s forget that both World Trade Center towers were designed to withstand MULTIPLE impacts by FULLY LOADED 707 JET AIRCRAFT STRIKING THE CENTRAL CORE OF THE BUILDING ; let’s forget that NEITHER of the jets striking either of the World Trade Center towers hit the central core, but rather the outer corners of the core and the building; let’s forget that Underwriter’s Laboratory PROVED that the trusses of the floors which had supposedly collapsed due to the fire of the jet fuel would actually hold structurally for at least TWICE as long as they did on the day of the World Trade Center collapse; let us forget that most of the jet fuel burned up as fire balls outside of the building, and that the remaining fuel burned far lower than 2000 degrees which was indicated by the black smoke of an oxygen-starved fire.

Let’s forgot ALL OF THE ABOVE. And now let’s pretend, just like our government does, that somehow NONE OF THE ABOVE is relevant, and that somehow all the floors of the World Trade Center started to pancake and collapse, one after another, on top of each other. Oh, one other thing we have to forget here.... we must forget that this collapse of every floor below the airplane impact proceeded at nearly FREE FALL SPEED, and that the ALL of the structurally integral floors below the aircraft impact provided almost ZERO resistance to the collapse of any of the floors above!

Granting this government fairy tale with all of the above assumptions, declarations and statements which have been proven to be lies, distortions, manipulations or omissions, we still must deal with this structurally unavoidable fact: the 47 central core columns of both World Trade Centers below the aircraft impact WOULD HAVE REMAINED STANDING!!!

Yet they did not -- they cold not -- for one and only one simple reason -- they were cut off BENEATH THE FOUNDATION OF THE BUILDING. That is the only possible explanation for the COMPLETE AND UTTER COLLAPSE OF WORLD TRADE CENTERS # 1, # 2, and of course, NUMBER SEVEN -- the World Trade Center tower that was never struck by any aircraft!

So it now appears that even professors at major universities are willing to play “patty cake” with the government to support its fairy tale conspiracy theory of 9/11. While such an assessment may seem harsh, the only avenues of thought left open to questioning citizens at this juncture is that these two professors have either been “persuaded,” “compelled” or “compensated” to mislead and misdirect -- OR that they are both so obviously incompetent that they should turn in their degrees and start over again.

Yet for all the obfuscation and misdirection provided by these two university professors, nothing compares to the sinister psy-ops used in this NatGeo special as the malicious aspersions cast directly against anyone who would dare question the Government/Media created fantasy of the “official” 9/11 Neo-Con-Spiracy report.

o o o

While people who have raised valid objections to the government white wash of this mass murder include architects, engineers, investigators, eye witnesses, members of our military, concerned citizens, pilots, first responders, family members -- all of them are repeatedly  trivialized and reduced to the label of “truthers”

On the side of actual research of the physical evidence, we have authors David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage of Architects for 9/11 Truth, and Dylan Avery, who wrote and produced “Loose Change” and “Loose Change II.”

Weighing in on the side of the Establishment and the Government/Media complex, we find such notables as smirking journalist Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone, and writers David Baldacci and David Adamovitch, all of whom project a detached, intellectual analysis of 9/11 investigators -- excuse me --“truthers,” -- as they attempt to explain the deficient mental state of these poor, benighted souls who simply cannot accept the government cover-up, or “official explanation,” for what occurred on that horrific day.

What is notable about these individuals is the pernicious mental manipulation and negative aspersions cast by these three “objective journalists” in their blanket condemnation and ridicule of any 9/11 investigators whose conclusions do not support the government fairy tale they so eagerly embrace.

To compound the subtle skewing of this inquiry into the 9/11 atrocity, and its supposedly objective presentation by NatGeo, we are treated to the delicate, dulcet narrative female voice of Randy Thomas, whose condescending tone towards anyone who would dare question government dogma and the government’s 9/11 conspiracy cover story is presented as hopelessly naive -- or worse. Hers is a voice, woven throughout the tapestry of this propaganda piece, that would make Tokyo Rose and her minions proud!

Matt Taibbi recites the two government conspiracy viewpoints held by the majority of those who feel 9/11 was an inside job: LIHOP or MIHOP. Either the U.S. government “Let it happen on purpose” or “made it happen on purpose.”

Early on the in program, Mr. Taibbi states: “The US govt. has been involved in all sorts of shenanigans to make money.” Talk about an interesting choice of whitewash words! “Shenanigans” -- such as overthrowing more than a dozen governments thru bloody assassinations and revolutions while torturing and killing thousands of people so that their countries can be raped by US business interests. Shenanigans....!  What a great choice of a word to marginalize and trivialize murder and treason.

Undoubtedly a crack, investigative reporter like Matt Taibbi might look at our latest great war of liberation in Iraq, where we have killed 1,300,000 civilians to install a puppet regime, as yet another example of more U.S. government “shenanigans.” So it should come as no surprise that Mr. Taibbi shrugs off any possibility that 9/11 could be anything other than exactly the way the U.S. Government has described it to be.  Trusting soul!

Mr. Taibbi continues: “Not knowing bothers people. People don’t want to think JFK was taken out by one guy. There had to be a conspiracy. JFK, Marilyn Monroe, 9/11, the list goes on...”

The narrator’s voice tell us how Americans have been “conditioned” to take a conspiratorial view of history; NatGeo mentions that 50% of Americans thought Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor in advance and allowed it to happen; 75% of Americans do not think that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, and 33% of Americans think that our government either let 9/11 happen or made it happen.

This subtle piece of mind control immediately places the viewer on notice that, from the perspective of NatGeo and its production company, it is laughable that such a large percentage of Americans suspect Pearl Harbor was known beforehand and allowed to happen by President Roosevelt, or that there might have been more than one assassin who killed President Kennedy. And, by association, the idea that anyone in the audience could ever seriously entertain the notion that people in our government could have had any foreknowledge or worse -- enabled, permitted and abetted the commission of the crime of 9/11 is equally absurd.

Only one problem here: those who have done ANY investigation into these events can see the patterns of deception woven by those who wish to control the memory and ramifications of these events to their historical and political advantage.

Books like “Day of Deceit” by Robert B. Stinnett, regarding our deciphering of the Japanese Purple Code months before December 7, 1941, and Michael Collins Piper’s seminal work on the JFK murder, “ Final Judgment” would make even the most hardened skeptics reconsider facts that have been kept covered up and which point to outright conspiracies in both events. But by using these events as subtle camouflage, and by denigrating those who profess a lack of acceptance of the “official” government version of Pearl Harbor and the JFK assassination as conspiracy theorists, NatGeo immediately pushes its viewer into the ludicrous proposition that because these tragic events in American History have generated investigations into potential conspiracies behind them, now new conspiracy theorists have found a “fertile ground” to propagate and view every tragedy like 9/11 as more evidence for their conspiratorial frame of mind!

Only an extraordinarily naive viewer -- or a government educated “consumer” -- could be so easily deceived by official government propaganda. Perhaps that is why so many people are reluctant to accept the official government version of 9/11 -- even though the authors of the official Federal government whitewash on 9/11 themselves admitted nearly a year later after publication that evidence had been withheld from them and that they had been deceived while they were writing their report!

Ironically, many times throughout this documentary, we see book after book of the Federal Government’s official fairy tale of 9/11 come flying off the printing presses, as if to visually re-enforce the message that THIS IS THE TRUE VERSION OF THE TRUTH . Yet not once does NatGeo bother to mention that both the chairman of the 9/11 commission and members of the commission have publicly stated that they were lied to and deceived by the U.S. military, and that their investigation into 9/11 was “....set up to fail...”

But please -- do not bother NatGeo with the facts. NatGeo has more important fish to fry -- trying to provide a “scientific” smoke screen for the thousands of pieces of evidence which clearly point to government foreknowledge, complicity and cover-up of this atrocity against humanity and our civil liberties. NatGeo knows on which side their bread is buttered!

David Baldacci, critic, then states that “ -- the government time line has been consistent --” Well, that’s Mr. Baldacci’s OPINION, but it is not THE TRUTH. On the contrary, David Ray Griffin, an investigator featured in this NatGeo special, mentions several times that the government has had to quietly change many of their time lines because of discrepancies and inconsistencies... not one instance of which, of course, is ever mentioned by NatGeoTV.

David Adamovitch, writer and 9/11 skeptic, states: “As soon as they get into issues of what happened, they need to supply evidence.” This ‘they’, of course, refers to 9/11 conspiracy investigators. Except that any evidence provided by 9/11 conspiracy investigators is routinely dismissed because it does not fit into the fairy tale fantasy of the government spin doctors, OR it has not come from “official” government sources.

Consider what commentator Paul Craig Roberts had to say about this continuing investigative debacle: “People don’t even notice the contradictions. Recently, an international team of scientists, who studied for 18 months dust samples produced by the twin towers’ destruction collected from three separate sources, reported their finding of nano-thermite in the dust. The US government had scientists dependent on the US government to debunk the finding on the grounds that the authenticity of custody of the samples could not be verified. In other words, someone had tampered with the samples and added the nano-thermite. This is all it took to discredit the finding, despite the obvious fact that access to thermite is strictly controlled and NO ONE except the US military and possibly Israel has access to nano-thermite.”

We are told by Mr. Adamovitch that it was “unlikely” that a cruise missile struck The Pentagon. Why unlikely, one wonders, when ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE points to a cruise missile, including the fact that the jet rotor compressor found in front of the Pentagon was 4 X smaller than one that would be found from a 767, the type of jet that supposedly struck the Pentagon!

We are told, point blank, that there is “no evidence for demolition” of any of the 3 World Trade centers, other than the evidence of our own eyes, of course. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that there is no evidence of a demolition which anyone in our government or NatGeo would accept. Yet evidence for a controlled demolition of all 3 World Trade Centers is simply overwhelming.

NatGeo tells its viewers that within the dynamics of the 9/11 “truther” movement, “...they do not process information that challenges their beliefs.” On the contrary, skeptical 9/11 investigators started from the BELIEF that the story of 9/11 was EXACTLY as their government had described it; it was only when multiple, recurring facts kept contradicting these beliefs, stated as “facts” by the 9/11 Commission, that so many citizens began to question the validity and honesty of the “Official” 9/1l Government report.

The NatGeo program continues throwing red herrings into the path of the curious and skeptical by stating that the alleged perpetrators would have to have access to the 47 core columns of both buildings in order to plant demolition charges-- how could that be possible, they ask? Well, what about the elevator renovations that were done just a few months prior to 9/11, when just such access was granted for both buildings?

What about the total electrical shutdown of both World Trade Center towers for 3 days, and the removal of bomb sniffing dogs, while “technicians” went into every level, nook and cranny of both World Trade Centers, without any defined purpose, bringing rolls of wire and large drills with them, less than two months before 9/11? When the electricity was turned back on the following Monday, and people returned to their offices to find a 1/2 inch layers of gray dust covering everything, no reason was ever given for the dust OR the shutdown. But hey, NatGeo...let’s pretend this never happened either!

And NatGeo also fails to mention that Marvin Bush (George Bush’s brother) was the head of Securicom and Stratesec, both responsible for the World Trade Center’s security, and security at Dulles International Airport. Somehow, NatGeo decided to just leave this little tidbit out... guess it could not possibly be relevant....

Nor is there ever any answer to Dylan Avery, creator of the “Loose Change” documentaries, about what caused molten metal to be observed in both basements of the World Trade Centers on 9/21 and 12/13, over three months later. Why was molten metal still flowing in the World Trade Center’s basements over three months AFTER 9/11? All this heat was supposedly generated by a fire from a simple jet fuel (kerosene) fire that had stopped burning more than two months earlier?

NatGeo also tells us that the search of remaining steel beams shows no evidence of thermite. Now let’s think this thru... IF factions of our government actually had a hand in this atrocity, would that same government keep beams which would reveal evidence of their use of nano thermite? What a surprise that no thermite or nano thermite was found on the beams or debris still stored in Hangar # 17 in New York City!

The 16’ hole in the front wall of the Pentagon matches the 16’ hole in the back wall of the Pentagon made by a 767 jet airliner-- thru 3 layers of steel and re-enforced concrete -- even though the nose cones of airliners are so fragile that they can be destroyed by birds in flight, or even a strong wind! But somehow this airliner must have used a tungsten carbide depleted uranium cover for its fuselage nose cone to get through THREE 18 inch layers of concrete and steel rebar, and still exit out the rear of the building creating the same diameter hole in which it had entered 3 walls earlier!

But if so -- where is that nose cone? After it exited those 3 layers of Pentagon steel, rebar, concrete and limestone, it must have still been intact in order to leave another, perfect 16 foot hole in the rear Pentagon wall. So where is that tungsten carbon depleted uranium nose cone???

And why is both the first and last hole in the Pentagon 16 feet in diameter, when the diameter of the fuselage of the 767 jet passenger plane which struck the Pentagon is substantially larger?

How, NatGeo, with an “...aircraft moving at 500 mph...” was the pilot, who had never flown anything larger than a single engine Piper Cub, somehow able to keep both wings perfectly level and parallel to the ground, only inches above the grass, without ever dragging either engine or wing tip on the grass below?

And how is it that the maneuver this planes’ novice hijacking pilot performed would be impossible for experienced pilots with thousands of hours of flight experience? Further, these pilots have stated that flying a 767 jet plane at nearly 500 mph at ground level is a physical impossibility, according to these professional airline pilots, because the “ground effects” from the wing at that speed would lift the plane far above ground level. Yet NatGeo ignores their testimony.

Of course, NatGeo fails to mention “Dick” Cheney’s assertion and correction that a missile struck the Pentagon. Or that “Dick” Cheney just “happened” to be at the Pentagon that day (on the exact opposite side of the building) conducting 4 dummy “war games” involving -- such a coincidence! -- hijacked air liners striking the World Trade Center!!!

That really is a silly coincidence, NatGeo! Let’s just forget about it and let’s not mention that either!

And still the silken, condescending female NatGeo voice-over continues during the visuals of the show.... “Truthers are not convinced....” “Truthers” believe that a missile struck the Pentagon.” “Clearly the ‘truthers’ are reluctant to accept the results of Pentagon tests of any of the online OFFICIAL explanations.” “Truthers are determined to believe...”

More accurately, the real ‘believers’ are those who believe in the official government fairy tale version of events and explanations, despite the thousands of discrepancies and anomalies and outright lies that have since come to light.

Yet again the dulcet female Randy Thomas voice over... “When confronted by evidence that challenges their beliefs, ‘truthers’ reject it.” This sound much more like how the government supporters of the official white wash and cover-up -- the 9/11 Commission Report -- would respond.

Then David Baldacci adds: ”The idea that shadow forces are at work in the government is more comforting than the real explanations.” I would add that they are not simply more ‘comforting’ but also more logical and more believable, considering all the available evidence.

Again, anyone who digs beneath the surface of the murders committed at Pearl Harbor, JFK’s assassination and the mass murders of 9/11 can see the pattern of the pieces of the puzzle. But if one is born hopelessly naive, or worse -- a paid hack to spout government propaganda -- then they will obviously replicate the 3 sitting monkeys of See -- Hear -- and Say No Evil. Perhaps NatGeo’s producer is after this ultimate Establishment award for their trophy case.

Again, David Baldacci states that “....there are strong psychological components in choosing conspiracy theory over reality (ie., ‘official’ government explanations)....” And among them are that these conspiracy minded people are paranoid, that a ‘story’ is better than ‘the reality’ or that worse than paranoia is the betrayal of indifference -- because an organizing intelligence is more comforting...” to them.  David Adamovitch continues this train of thought by telling viewers that “...people who argue against the Official Government Explanation cannot accept the ‘sincerity’ of others.”

But what, pray tell, does sincerity have anything to do with “factual evidence” or telling the truth? Cannot a person sincerely believe that they are stating the truth, when they are doing nothing more than actually stating a sincere falsehood?

Does another person who has access to evidence not available to the first person shirk his duty to The Truth by telling himself that the person stating the falsehood is so sincere that they should just accept what they say to be true so as not to hurt the former’s feelings? Or does such a person have a higher obligation to accept only that which is factual and provable, regardless of the sincerity of the person promulgating the falsehood?

Again, we are treated to the lilting, lulling voice of Randy Thomas, as she intones during a voice over that instead of accepting ‘facts’ presented by experts, ‘truthers’ continue to look elsewhere. But of course they do, Miss Thomas. They simply reject being lied to for political expediency to cover up MASS MURDER!

David Adamovitch continues: --” ‘Truthers’ have a religious need to believe in the conspiracy, a need which grows with every meeting and e-mail.” This assertion is almost laughable. If any group of people exhibit the classical need to genuflect to authority figures without question, it is the uncritical acceptors of the official government 9/11 fairy tale -- perhaps we should label them the “tailers.”

So, gentle reader, I think I have connected the dots of the Big Picture with enough accuracy that even the blind among us can see where NatGeo has tried to lead us, whereas The Truth would lead us elsewhere.

But in parting, I must add my own list of questions I wish NatGeo would have addressed, or at least even admitted, into their court of inquiry -- but for some inexplicable reason, they just could not quite seem to fit them into their “special” examination of “Science” versus 9/11 “Truthers”

I will let you be the judge as to why.



o The World Trade Center was a financial white elephant. Tenants were leaving because there was no provision for wired high speed internet and other modern telecommunications systems. Rewiring the entire building would have cost an enormous amount of money.

Moreover, the entire facade of both twin towers had to be replaced due to unexpected, galvanic corrosion between the aluminum ribs and the steel frame. Again, that replacement process would have cost nearly as much as both buildings originally had cost to build.

On top of that, both World Trade Center 1 and 2 had to have complete asbestos removal, a job that also would have cost more to do than it would have cost for both buildings to be rebuilt.

But shrewd real estate investor Lucky Larry Silverstein, knowing all of the above, somehow thought that the World Trade Center was a great real estate investment!

o No steel framed high rise building anywhere in the world -- before or after 9/11 -- was ever brought down by a fire. But somehow, the THREE World Trade Center steel beam towers totally collapsed from brief fires on the same day.

o The 47 story World Trade Center building #7 was never struck by an aircraft, but still completely collapsed due to two small fires that were not even fueled by kerosene (jet fuel).

o World Trade Center # 7’s collapse was never explained by NIST, and never explained by the “official” 9/11 government report. It was instead ignored because it could not be explained.

o Larry Silverstein said that he gave the order to “pull” World Trade Center #7 (on video tape) which alludes to pre-planted charges in the building; if World Trade Center #7 had pre-planted charges, why could not World Trade Center #1 and 2 also have had them?

o The complete electronic and power “shut down” of World Trade Centers #1 and 2 for an entire weekend immediately prior to 9/11, along with the removal of bomb sniffing dogs while work crews went in and out of the building with rolls of wire and drills, was never mentioned, nor was any reason ever given for this unprecedented “maintenance” operation.

o When tenants came back to work at both World Trade Center buildings the next week, they found all their cabinets and equipment covered with a 1/4 to 1/2 inch of fine powdered concrete dust, indicative of the drilling going on internally inside the building. Again, NatGeo never mentioned this.

o There is no discussion of the 17 second delay of all radio and television feeds going out “live” from New York City that day, which were satellite up-linked to prevent any errors from escaping the government censors (see YouTube).

Nevertheless, one major error did escape; the 2nd plane is shown entering the tower of the World Trade Center and then -- after going thru the entire building -- the COMPLETELY INTACT fuselage and nose cone of the same plane is seen exiting the building for a few brief seconds before a large on-screen “crawl” is hastily erected to cover the plane’s exit to hide this obvious computer enhanced error. Why no mention of this “interesting” anomaly?

o No mention is made of what sort of force could pulverize concrete, glass, and steel beams into microscopic dust, as happened at all World Trade Centers. What force did this? What force would have been able to do this? Surely not a simple building collapse!

o No mention is made of the antenna on top of World Trade Center #2 which can be seen being vaporized into dust before it disappears during the fall of the tower.

o No mention is made of the numerous vehicles -- fire trucks, taxi cabs, private cars, up to 6 blocks from the World Trade Center that were MELTED as if they had been in a blast furnace; what caused that???

o No mention is made of the fact that the debris pile from the two World Trade Center buildings would have been at least 9 stories high if they had simply fallen into their own footprint according to various architects.

o No mention is made of the fact that both World Trade Center towers fell at nearly free fall speed, with absolutely no resistive force encountered as the tops of the building supposedly ‘pan caked” through dozens of INTACT floors below. This is simply a physical impossibility.

o The qualities and capabilities of nano-thermite are never discussed or debated; moreover, the fact that only a government weapons laboratory could produce nano-thermite is ever discussed.

o Although there is a mention of the molten metal found flowing through the basements of both World Trade Centers over THREE MONTHS after their collapse, no rationale, no reason, no logical explanation for this inexplicable event is ever offered by NatGeoTV. The molten metal is simply mentioned -- then dropped -- as if the subject is irrelevant or “too hot to handle” -- or as if it had never happened.

o The fact that there was an extremely hot radiation signature directly over the World Trade Center towers for over a month after their destruction strongly suggests that a nuclear component -- mini-nukes -- were used to cut the World Trade Center towers from their foundation.

ONLY the use of mini nukes would account for fact that MOLTEN STEEL was observed by many people to be running under the foundations of the World Trade Center towers over THREE MONTHS after their collapse. But this highly radioactive contamination found over the World Trade Center site is never mentioned either.

o No mention is made of the series of seismic disturbances recorded by two seismographs 20 seconds prior to the actual visual collapse of both World Trade Center towers, but which may very well have been the signatures of the mini-nukes used to sever the towers from their foundations.

o No mention is made of the FLEET OF TRUCKS used to remove GOLD, SILVER and other precious metals stored in the basement of the World Trade Center, one of which did not make it out before the building collapsed. The scheduling of this fleet for the gold and silver removal strongly suggests prior knowledge of this event. NatGeo never thinks of mentioning it.

o Why was debris from the World Trade Center shipped to China under armed guard?  Why was this shipment scheduled more than a month in advance of the 9/11 attack?  Who scheduled it, and how did they know to schedule it???

o Why were police, firemen and other first responders allowed and encouraged to immediately begin rescue work and breathe unfiltered air while FEMA workers were completely enclosed in total plastic body suits complete with respirators? What did FEMA know about the hazards of that debris pile that they did not share with other rescuers?

o The fact that there were 5X as many ‘puts’ (short) options on the two airlines and other companies housed in the World Trade Center which would be obliterated during the coming catastrophe days before 9/11 is never mentioned, a fact which strongly illustrates foreknowledge of what was to come. But apparently NatGeo never found this anomaly to be of sufficient interest to inform the general public.

o The investigation into who collected the money from these ‘put’ options was started, stopped, and drooped. It turns out that one of the men who made a great deal of money from these “put” options was the ex #2 man at the CIA, Walter Krongard. But NatGeo never found this anomaly warranted telling the general public about it.


o World Trade Center building # 7 -- the 47 story steel-framed skyscraper that fell on 5:20 that day, was never struck by any aircraft. Yet two small fires supposedly collapsed the entire building in a perfectly symmetrical pattern. NatGeo never mentions that World Trade Center number 7 fell the same day due to these two small, low temperature fires.

o The fact that ALL ongoing SEC investigations against fraud and corruption were housed in building number 7 of the World Trade Center, and therefore all ongoing investigations against fraud and corruption concerning Wall Street banks and brokerage houses were TERMINATED by the collapse of building # 7, is never mentioned.

o Rudy Gulliani, in World Trade Center # 7 just before it collapsed, was warned to evacuate because the building was going to collapse, but he won’t say who told him to do so. NatGeo thought better than to confuse us by mentioning this.

o Eyewitnesses at World Trade Center # 1, 2 and 7 report hearing bombs go off, IN SEQUENCE, exactly like a controlled demolition. But they are never mentioned once during the program.

o World Trade Center owner Lucky Larry Silverstein, who normally had breakfast at the top of the World Trade Center every day, but for some reason did not on 9/11, is recorded on video tape saying that he gave the orders to “pull” (demolish) World Trade Center #7. This is never mentioned in the program.

o The BBC reported LIVE that World Trade Center # 7 had fallen 25 minutes before it actually fell, with the live outline of World Trade Center #7 stands in the background of the reporter describing how it had already collapsed. This ‘discrepancy’ is never mentioned on the program.

o Both NIST (National Institute of Science and Technology) and the 9/11 Commission refused to investigate the collapse of World Trade Center # 7 or include it in their report. Apparently, if the “reality” does not fit the ‘conspiracy theory’ of the OFFICIAL government story -- then it can be conveniently ignored by both The Government and NatGeo. But why didn’t NatGeo tell their audience about this discrepancy?

o Only 5% of Americans even know that World Trade Center #7 collapsed that day, because the Media has refused to discuss it, publicize it or investigate it. NatGeo continues the same cover-up tradition regarding “facts” that do not fit the “official” Government conspiracy theory.


o If flight 83 actually struck The Pentagon, and the nose of that same plane also exited through ALL THREE 18 inch internal WALLS of the Pentagon, then why is there a 16 foot hole in the outer wall (too small for the jet airplane that supposedly struck the Pentagon) thru 3 layers of limestone, brick, rebar and concrete -- and yet another identical 16 foot hole in the last wall of the Pentagon?

o Where is the depleted uranium nose cone of this aircraft that struck the Pentagon? Because only a guided missile, or a nose cone made of solid depleted uranium, could penetrate THREE 18 inch thick LAYERS OF LIMESTONE, BRICK, CONCRETE, AND REBAR -- not an aircraft! Tell us where is is, NatGeo!

o Why, with 85 video cameras surrounding the Pentagon, did the FBI make available only 4 still frames from only ONE of those cameras, while confiscating and sequestering the remaining video footage from the remaining 84 cameras?

o If an “airplane” really hit the Pentagon, what possible rationale or motivation could exist to hide all the continuous video footage that would show this event to have occurred exactly as The Government states that it happened?

Logically, there is only ONE possible conclusion to draw -- seeing the video footage from any of the other 84 video cameras would conclusively prove that a missile, not an aircraft, hit the Pentagon. There is no other possible explanation for hiding video from these other cameras and not making these videos available to the public.  But NatGeo never even mentions this peculiar suppression of evidence by the US Government and the Military.

o Ironically, even the 4 frames released by the FBI would show the tail of the plane as the nose slammed into the Pentagon building. But the photo does not, because the tail of the plane (72 feet high) does not exist.

It doe not exit because the “jet aircraft” that slammed into the Pentagon was actually a missile -- just like Dick Cheney accidentally admitted when questioned. But NatGeo never mentions “Dick” Cheney’s slip about “the missile” striking the Pentagon, or that even in the 4 frames released by the FBI, the 72 foot tall tail of the plane would have been visible had it actually been present. Why did they not mention this anomaly?

o The fact that 31 people who died at the precise impact point where the “plane” struck the Pentagon were Army investigators trying to determine where 3.5 trillion dollars disappeared to under the watchful eye of dual Israeli citizen, Dov Zakheim, head of Pentagon finances, is never mentioned.


o The 9/11 “official” Government explanation and book was based on the work of the 9/11 Commission, a commission which was only created under pressure of the victims’ families after Pres. George Bush blocked a Congressional inquiry into these events for 441 days.

The report that was finally released ignored 70% of the questions raised by the victims’ families and excluded every single fact that contradicted the official story. Why didn’t NatGeo mention THIS in their genuflection before the Federal Government's whitewash?

o Thomas Keene, Chairman of the 9/11 Commission Report, said the commission was “...set up to fail.” Sixty percent of the 9/11 commissioners said they were lied to and misled by the military and the Bush administration. Why did NatGeo not report that the head of the 9/11 Commission as well as its commissioners had publicly stated that they had been lied to and that evidence had been withheld from them?


o The 8 mile long debris trial, along with eyewitness accounts of a jet interception, and cockpit voice recorder data indicating that flight 93 was shot down by our military, directly contradict the “heroic” takeover of the aircraft. The “takeover” by the passengers NEVER HAPPENED. It was yet another manufactured event designed to promote and evoke public sympathy and outrage, a blatant attempt at the mental-emotional manipulation of the American Public. Yet NatGeo never mentions this 8 mile debris trail.


AMEC Construction Management, a subsidiary of the British engineering firm AMEC, renovated Wedge One of the Pentagon before 9-11 and cleaned it up afterward. AMEC had also renovated Lucky Larry Silverstein's World Trade Center 7, which collapsed mysteriously on 9-11, and then headed the cleanup of the World Trade Center site afterward. The AMEC construction firm is currently in the process of closing all its offices in the United States. Why was this “co-inidence’ never mentioned by you?


o Why were four 747 jets dispatched to whisk members of Osama Bin Laden’s family out of the United States immediately after 911 on the authorization of Michael Cherthoff, head of our so-called “Homeland Security” Department?

If Osama Bin Laden was really the mastermind behind this atrocity, would it not be possible that one or more of his family members just might know of relevant information? How could any of them be questioned if none of them were no longer in the U.S., courtesy of the U.S. Government? Why didn’t NatGeo mention dual Israeli citizen, and Head of the Homeland Security Department Michael Chertoff’s decision to whisk all of Bin Laden’s relatives out of the United States on 4 chartered jet aircraft?

o Why was the Bush family’s decades long business partnerships with the Bin Laden family never made a subject of your inquiry?

o Why was Osama Bin Laden’s CIA name (Tim Osmond) never mentioned as being a paid advisor and operative of the CIA?

o Why was the head of the ISI, Pakistani security, General Ahmad, meeting with officials in Washington DC on the morning of 9/11? Especially when it was later revealed that Mohammed Ata (one of the supposed 19 Arab hijackers) received $100,000 as a cash payment directly from this Pakistani general before 9/11? Why did you never mention this interesting anomaly?

o Why did the management of Odigo, the Israeli telephone company that supposedly received a warning about a ‘bomb’ at the World Trade Center and cleared out all of their employees based on ONE anonymous phone call, NEVER inform World Trade Center Security that they had received a bomb threat call? Why was this anomaly never mentioned by NatGeo?

o The five dancing Israelis "art students," who were standing on the roof of their panel van truck, which was painted with a picture of a jet plane slamming into the World Trade Center, and which tested positive for explosives by bomb sniffing dogs, is never mentioned.

o These 5 Israeli “art students” who were caught and arrested after giving “high fives” to each other as they video taped the collapse of both World Trade Center towers, were later interviewed on Israeli television mentioned, where they state, in their own words, that they were in New York City with video equipment “...TO DOCUMENT THE EVENT.” How did they know there was going to be an “event” to “document”? Just another question NatGeoTV will never examine, investigate or answer.

o Not ONE person ANYWHERE in the Federal Government or the United States Military, or in any civilian agency was reprimanded, demoted, dismissed, fired, tried, imprisoned or prosecuted or executed for the events of 9/11. The fact that NO ONE received any sort of disciplinary action but dozens of people were promoted speaks volumes towards only one conclusion -- MASSIVE COVERUP bought and paid for with complicit silence! But NatGeo never mention this interesting anomaly either.

o How did President Bush manage to see “film footage” of the first plane striking the World Trade Center that morning as he clearly stated to a reporter’s question, when there was none? Please tell us HOW, NatGeo? And WHY did you not mention this?

o The BBC reported that several (8) of the 9/11 hi jackers were reported alive after 9/11 in various parts of the Middle East. One father of one of the hijackers actually stated he talked to his son on the phone the next day. But this little bombshell was never reported stateside or investigated. Nor did NatGeo see fit to tell us about it either.

o None of the 9/11 hijackers had flown anything larger than a single engine piston plane. Yet we are to believe that 4 of them not only took control of large jet planes, and were able to fly them, but to NAVIGATE them as well! What are the odds that 4 of these novice pilots could do this successfully? Why didn’t you mention the nearly impossible odds that all 4 could fly and navigate huge passenger jets using instruments with which they were totally unfamiliar? 

o PNAC -- the think tank Project for a New American Century, a policy document written by Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Donald Feith a few years before 9/11, called for the necessity of a cataclysmic event, like a new “Pearl Harbor” to facilitate a massive invasion of Middle Eastern countries like Afghanistan and Iraq. On 9/11, President Bush wrote that “The Pearl Harbor of the 21st Century” had just taken place today. This PNAC document (or
blueprint) is never once mentioned in NatGeo's documentary.

o o o

The above list represents only the tip of the iceberg that NatGeoTV prefers to ignore. But anyone who is familiar with “pattern recognition” can see the pattern of coverup and subterfuge quite clearly.

NatGeoTV, for whatever reasons (naivety, stupidity, complicity) prefers to not only toe the GOVERNMENT fantasy conspiracy cover-up line, they have turned over new ground to further confuse, mislead, distort, obfuscate and render incomprehensible the trails of clear evidence that only a blind statist could pretend not to see.

NatGeoTV is now, for reasons only they are fully aware, a part and parcel of the 9/11 cover-up and government murder conspiracy to gut all of our Constitutional Rights and Liberties, and to promote yet more killing and murder for control of Middle Eastern oil, minerals and opium.

Why has NatGeoTV lied by obfuscation, misdirection, mislabeling and misleading the search for truth behind the criminal atrocity and mass murder of 9/11?

In a court of law, would not someone acting the same way in National Geographic's corporate capacity be rightly considered to be an accomplice to murder for such acts?

WHY.... NatGeo???  Why did you do this???



Copyright 2009, 2011, L C Vincent, all rights reserved.  No portion of this material may be reproduced in any media, in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of the author.

No comments:

Post a Comment