TruthArchive.ai - Related Post Feed
@bennyjohnson - Benny Johnson
Tucker Carlson: Yes, the CIA killed President Kennedy. Your government is a lie. Happy Thursday! https://t.co/S0vXgpQGcH
Video Transcript AI Summary
We spoke to someone with access to hidden CIA documents about their involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The response was clear: yes, the CIA was involved. This revelation suggests that there are powerful forces within the U.S. government that operate beyond democratic control, capable of influencing elections and concealing their actions, including the murder of a president. This undermines the very concept of democracy. Trust in the government has declined since Kennedy's assassination, and those in the know, including every CIA director since 1963, have been aware of this troubling reality.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We decided to find out. We spoke to someone who had access to these still hidden CIA documents. A person was deeply familiar with what they contain. We asked this person directly. Did the CIA have a hand in the murder of John f Kennedy, an American president?
And here's the reply we received verbatim quote, the answer is yes. I believe they were involved. It's a whole different country from what we thought it was. It's all fake. It's hard to imagine a more jarring response than that.
Again, this is not a quote conspiracy theorist that we spoke to. Not even close. This is someone with direct knowledge of the information that once again is being withheld from the American public And the answer we received was unequivocal. Yes. The CIA was involved in the assassination of the president.
Now some people will not be surprised to hear that. They suspected it all along. But no matter how you feel about or what you thought about the Kennedy assassination pause to consider what this means. It means that within the US government, there are forces wholly beyond democratic control. These forces are more powerful than the elected officials that supposedly oversee them.
These forces can affect election outcomes. They can even hide their complicity in the murder of an American president. In other words, they can do pretty much anything they want. They constitute a government within a government mocking by their very existence the idea of democracy. As cynical as we have become after 30 years of watching government officials ignore the voters who employ them, we were shocked to learn this.
It's not acceptable. Americans have trusted their government less with every passing year since the killing of John f Kennedy. Maybe this is why. And people have known this for a long time. The people who knew would include every director of the CIA since November of 1963, and that list would include Obama's CIA director John Brennan, one of the most sinister and dishonest figures in American life.
That list would also include we are sad to say our friend, Mike Pompeo.
@bennyjohnson - Benny Johnson
Tucker Carlson takes flamethrower to Regime Psy-Op to GASLIGHT you about January 6th— Debuks LIE AFTER LIE😳 https://t.co/vMGdlYlldA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Two years ago, Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd shot unarmed Ashley Babbitt during the January 6th events. Despite a history of negligence, Byrd faced no consequences and was celebrated as a hero. In contrast, Babbitt's mother was arrested for holding a memorial for her daughter. The narrative surrounding January 6th has been manipulated, with false claims about police fatalities and misleading accounts of events, including the death of Officer Brian Sicknick, who actually died of a stroke later. Questions remain about the involvement of federal agencies and the identity of the pipe bomber near the DNC. Additionally, Ray Epps, who encouraged illegal actions, has not faced charges, raising concerns about accountability and transparency in the official narrative.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: An anniversary. 2 years ago today, a Capitol Hill police officer called Michael Byrd shot an unarmed woman in the neck. At the time of that killing, Byrd had a documented history of gross negligence with a firearm. He left a loaded Glock pistol in a public men's room at the capitol which for a law enforcement official is a firing offense. But for some reason, Michael Bird was still in the force that day.
Woman he killed was called Ashley Babbitt. Babbitt was a married 14 year veteran of the US military. She ran a pool cleaning company with her husband in San Diego. Physically, she was tiny. She was also unarmed.
Michael Byrd later admitted he had no indication at all that Babbitt was carrying a weapon. She posed no visible threat. He killed her anyway. Under normal circumstances, Byrd would have been fired immediately and charged with murder, which he clearly committed. But that's not what happened.
After doing essentially no investigation into the shooting, Nancy Pelosi's congressional police force declared Byrd a national hero and the media strongly agreed. Byrd went on television to accept accolades and to complain about racism. He was never punished for killing Ashley Babbitt. He was rewarded for it. Ashley Babbitt's mother meanwhile got a very different sort of treatment.
Babbitt's mother was arrested today in Washington by the Capitol Police. Her crime trying to hold a memorial service for her daughter. 2 years later, it's clear that Ashley Babbitt is her death is by far the most significant thing that happened at the US Capitol building that day. But at the same time, it is the least talked about event of January 6th. Why is that?
Well, because the facts about what actually happened on January 6th disrupt the lies. What they told you happened on January 6th. And those lies have proven very useful to the Biden administration and to permanent Washington. On the basis of a wholly created myth about what happened that day, the Biden Pentagon conducted an unprecedented political purge of the entire US military. The FBI and various intel agencies increased their control over the American media.
And most obviously, the DOJ has been allowed to prosecute and jail hundreds of nonviolent political protesters whose crime was having the wrong opinions. Lies about January 6 which have been relentless have enabled some of the most unscrupulous people in our country to make a mockery of our bill of rights and to steal our core freedoms. So they can't talk about Ashley Babbitt. Talking about Ashley Babbitt makes it very clear who the real culprits are and who the real threats to this country continue to be. And they're not the January 6th protesters.
So instead they lie about what happened that day and they do it in the boldest possible ways without shame and with maximum aggression. Here's Hakeem Jeffries leader of the Democrats in the house telling you that 5 police officers were killed on January 6th when in fact the real total is 0.
Speaker 1: We are gathered here to honor their memory and acknowledge with deep gratitude the tremendous bravery of the hundreds of officers who defended us at this citadel of democracy, that faithful day. As a result of the events, on January 6th, the lives of 5 heroic officers were lost.
Speaker 0: Five heroic officers were lost. He said, it's almost impossible to believe that adults could stand behind him as he said that because everyone in the picture you just saw knows that is not true. It's not a stilted interpretation of events. It's a flat out lie. No police officers were killed on January 6th period.
Ashley Babbitt was killed on January 6th. But chances are your grandchildren will not know that because history will likely record the lie you just heard as true simply because it's been repeated so often everyone in authority has said the same thing in unison for 2 solid years. As our thoroughly dishonest attorney general recently put a quote, we will never forget the 5 officers who responded selflessly on January 6th, who do have and who have since lost their lives. His boss, Joe Biden, repeated that lie today from the White House.
Speaker 2: These people and the people representing those who couldn't be here because they gave their lives for this did is incredibly consequential. Because that's not political talk. That's historical fact.
Speaker 0: That's historical fact, says Joe Biden as he manufactures history as he tells lies. They've been doing this telling these same lies since the very first day, January 6, 2021. Almost like it was a coordinated operation. Remember when they told you that Brian Sicknick, officer Brian Sicknick was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher?
Speaker 3: Officer Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. Officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the hours long attack. They beat a capitol police officer to death with a fire extinguisher.
Speaker 0: Officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the fight.
Speaker 2: He died at the age of 42 after he was bludgeoned, the fire extinguisher.
Speaker 0: That's not true. And in the end, thanks to the medical examiner in the District of Columbia, we learned the fact, which is that Brian Sicknick died of a stroke well after the January 6th protest. He was not beaten to death with a fire extinguisher, but that did not stop their lying or even slow them down. Joe Biden just awarded one of this country's highest civilian honors the presidential citizens medal to officers working on January 6 and that would include the officers who opened the doors of the capitol building to the so called Insurrectionist the officers who let them inside and then were rewarded for it by the president of the United States. What's going on here?
You may wonder well don't ask you're not allowed to know what's going on here nor can you know about the very obvious clandestine role of federal agencies that encouraged the events of January 6th that happened, but its details have never been explained. A lot has still not been explained from that day despite a committee that was impaneled for more than a year. For example, you remember the pipe bomber who planted explosives outside the Democratic National Committee? Well those explosives it turns out were under a bench at the same moment that Kamala Harris who had secret service protection with her who swept the building was there. So how did the US Secret Service miss a bomb sitting in plain sight during its security sweep?
Well, we can't answer that because the FBI still to this day refuses to release all the security footage. Why? What's going on here? Almost unique among media outlets, Revolver News asked that question.
Speaker 4: The pipe bomber even looks at camera to head on for some reason. It's very frustrating because we can't see the moment the pipe bomber plants the pipe bomb, but the FBI can. That's because the whole scene should be captured on camera 1 as well and much more clearly than camera 2. Camera 1 has a clear shot of both benches. If the FBI released the full tape from camera 1, we could see the pipe bomber planting the bomb.
Speaker 0: So somebody planted bombs outside the headquarters of this country's 2 main political parties. That would seem to be a big story and yet no one ever mentions it again, including the FBI. In fact, the bureau won't disclose any information about the suspect. Not his height, weight, shoe size, anything. So if they wanted to catch this person wouldn't they be telling you all they can about who it is?
But they're not. Why aren't they? And what was Kamala Harris doing there? Why did she lie about being there? We can answer those questions.
We should be able to nor does anyone in authority want to talk about Ray Epps. Ray Epps, of course, is the man who was caught on tape encouraging the crowd outside the Capitol both on January 5th 6th to commit felonies by rushing inside. Now what's interesting is that the January 6th committee under public pressure did in the end interview Ray Epps. Now we don't have all of the committee's records about that interview. We should but we don't but some have been released and what they tell is a remarkable story.
In the testimony that we have the committee coaches Ray Epps on how to answer questions about his involvement quote. I was in the front with a few others. I also orchestrated it. I helped get people there. End quote.
Now Epps admitted that in a text message to a relative on January 6th. He's admitting crimes. He's never been even charged for those crimes. But what's so fascinating is it when those facts came up in his interview with the committee, someone on the committee responds this way and we're quoting. I just want to understand a little more your use of the word orchestrated.
It sounds to me like at this point when you sent this text you had turned away in part because of seeing some things you didn't agree with is that right? Like when you sent this you are already on your way from the capitol because it concerns of people taking it in a different direction. Is that the most leading question ever asked in the history of a congressional hearing? Probably. And the whole interview goes on like this.
Keep in mind, Raheb's is one of the only people caught on camera that day encouraging others to break the law. He's one of the only ones. And then he's never been charged.
Speaker 2: And
Speaker 0: the January 6th committee was
@FrontlineFlash - Frontline⚡️Flash™
Tucker Carlson DISMANTLES the Jan 6 hoax, piece by piece. J6 is not only a grotesque series of lies…it is the most brazen assault by the U.S. government against innocent citizens in modern history. It is pure evil. https://t.co/tyFM0tBnuN
Video Transcript AI Summary
Two years ago, Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd shot unarmed Ashley Babbitt during the January 6th events. Byrd had a history of firearm negligence but faced no consequences for the shooting. Instead, he was celebrated, while Babbitt's mother was arrested for holding a memorial for her daughter. The narrative surrounding January 6th has been manipulated, leading to false claims, such as the deaths of five police officers, which are untrue. Officer Brian Sicknick, initially reported to have died from violence, actually suffered a stroke later. Key events, like the pipe bomb incident and the role of Ray Epps, have been obscured, raising questions about federal agency involvement. Despite evidence of orchestrated actions, Epps faced no charges, highlighting inconsistencies in the official narrative surrounding that day.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: An anniversary. 2 years ago today, a Capitol Hill police officer called Michael Byrd shot an unarmed woman in the neck. At the time of that killing, Byrd had a documented history of gross negligence with a firearm. He left a loaded Glock pistol in a public men's room at the capitol which for a law enforcement official is a firing offense. But for some reason, Michael Bird was still in the force that day.
Woman he killed was called Ashley Babbitt. Babbitt was a married 14 year veteran of the US military. She ran a pool cleaning company with her husband in San Diego. Physically, she was tiny. She was also unarmed.
Michael Byrd later admitted he had no indication at all that Babbitt was carrying a weapon. She posed no visible threat. He killed her anyway. Under normal circumstances, Byrd would have been fired immediately and charged with murder, which he clearly committed. But that's not what happened.
After doing essentially no investigation into the shooting, Nancy Pelosi's congressional police force declared Byrd a national hero and the media strongly agreed. Byrd went on television to accept accolades and to complain about racism. He was never punished for killing Ashley Babbitt. He was rewarded for it. Ashley Babbitt's mother meanwhile got a very different sort of treatment.
Babbitt's mother was arrested today in Washington by the Capitol Police. Her crime trying to hold a memorial service for her daughter. 2 years later, it's clear that Ashley Babbitt is her death is by far the most significant thing that happened at the US Capitol building that day. But at the same time, it is the least talked about event of January 6th. Why is that?
Well, because the facts about what actually happened on January 6th disrupt the lies. What they told you happened on January 6th. And those lies have proven very useful to the Biden administration and to permanent Washington. On the basis of a wholly created myth about what happened that day, the Biden Pentagon conducted an unprecedented political purge of the entire US military. The FBI and various intel agencies increased their control over the American media.
And most obviously, the DOJ has been allowed to prosecute and jail hundreds of nonviolent political protesters whose crime was having the wrong opinions. Lies about January 6 which have been relentless have enabled some of the most unscrupulous people in our country to make a mockery of our bill of rights and to steal our core freedoms. So they can't talk about Ashley Babbitt. Talking about Ashley Babbitt makes it very clear who the real culprits are and who the real threats to this country continue to be. And they're not the January 6th protesters.
So instead they lie about what happened that day and they do it in the boldest possible ways without shame and with maximum aggression. Here's Hakeem Jeffries leader of the Democrats in the house telling you that 5 police officers were killed on January 6th when in fact the real total is 0.
Speaker 1: We are gathered here to honor their memory and acknowledge with deep gratitude the tremendous bravery of the hundreds of officers who defended us at this citadel of democracy, that faithful day. As a result of the events, on January 6th, the lives of 5 heroic officers were lost.
Speaker 0: Five heroic officers were lost. He said, it's almost impossible to believe that adults could stand behind him as he said that because everyone in the picture you just saw knows that is not true. It's not a stilted interpretation of events. It's a flat out lie. No police officers were killed on January 6th period.
Ashley Babbitt was killed on January 6th. But chances are your grandchildren will not know that because history will likely record the lie you just heard as true simply because it's been repeated so often everyone in authority has said the same thing in unison for 2 solid years. As our thoroughly dishonest attorney general recently put a quote, we will never forget the 5 officers who responded selflessly on January 6th, who do have and who have since lost their lives. His boss, Joe Biden, repeated that lie today from the White House.
Speaker 2: These people and the people representing those who couldn't be here because they gave their lives for this did is incredibly consequential. Because that's not political talk. That's historical fact.
Speaker 0: That's historical fact, says Joe Biden as he manufactures history as he tells lies. They've been doing this telling these same lies since the very first day January 6, 2021. Almost like it was a coordinated operation. Remember when they told you that Brian Sicknick, officer Brian Sicknick was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher?
Speaker 3: Officer Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. Officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the hours long attack. They beat a capitol police officer to death with a fire extinguisher.
Speaker 0: Officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the fight.
Speaker 2: He died at the age of 42 after he was bludgeoned, the fire extinguisher.
Speaker 0: That's not true. And in the end, thanks to the medical examiner in the District of Columbia, we learned the fact, which is that Brian Sicknick died of a stroke well after the January 6th protest. He was not beaten to death with a fire extinguisher, but that did not stop their lying or even slow them down. Joe Biden just awarded one of this country's highest civilian honors the presidential citizens medal to officers working on January 6 and that would include the officers who opened the doors of the capitol building to the so called Insurrectionist the officers who let them inside and then were rewarded for it by the president of the United States. What's going on here?
You may wonder well don't ask you're not allowed to know what's going on here nor can you know about the very obvious clandestine role of federal agencies that encouraged the events of January 6th that happened, but its details have never been explained. A lot has still not been explained from that day despite a committee that was impaneled for more than a year. For example, you remember the pipe bomber who planted explosives outside the Democratic National Committee? Well those explosives it turns out were under a bench at the same moment that Kamala Harris who had secret service protection with her who swept the building was there. So how did the US Secret Service miss a bomb sitting in plain sight during its security sweep?
Well, we can't answer that because the FBI still to this day refuses to release all the security footage. Why? What's going on here? Almost unique among media outlets, Revolver News asked that question.
Speaker 4: The pipe bomber even looks at camera to head on for some reason. It's very frustrating because we can't see the moment the pipe bomber plants the pipe bomb, but the FBI can. That's because the whole scene should be captured on camera 1 as well and much more clearly than camera 2. Camera 1 has a clear shot of both benches. If the FBI released the full tape from camera 1, we could see the pipe bomber planting the bomb.
Speaker 0: So somebody planted bombs outside the headquarters of this country's 2 main political parties. That would seem to be a big story and yet no one ever mentions it again, including the FBI. In fact, the bureau won't disclose any information about the suspect. Not his height, weight, shoe size, anything. So if they wanted to catch this person wouldn't they be telling you all they can about who it is?
But they're not. Why aren't they? And what was Kamala Harris doing there? Why did she lie about being there? We can answer those questions.
We should be able to nor does anyone in authority want to talk about Ray Epps. Ray Epps, of course, is the man who was caught on tape encouraging the crowd outside the Capitol both on January 5th 6th to commit felonies by rushing inside. Now what's interesting is that the January 6th committee under public pressure did in the end interview Ray Epps. Now we don't have all of the committee's records about that interview. We should but we don't but some have been released and what they tell is a remarkable story.
In the testimony that we have the committee coaches Ray Epps on how to answer questions about his involvement quote. I was in the front with a few others. I also orchestrated it. I helped get people there. End quote.
Now Epps admitted that in a text message to a relative on January 6th. He's admitting crimes. He's never been even charged for those crimes. But what's so fascinating is it when those facts came up in his interview with the committee, someone on the committee responds this way and we're quoting. I just want to understand a little more your use of the word orchestrated.
It sounds to me like at this point when you sent this text you had turned away in part because of seeing some things you didn't agree with is that right? Like when you sent this you are already on your way from the capitol because it concerns of people taking it in a different direction. Is that the most leading question ever asked in the history of a congressional hearing? Probably. And the whole interview goes on like this.
Keep in mind, Raheb's is one of the only people caught on camera that day encouraging others to break the law. He's one of the only ones. And then he's never been charged.
Speaker 2: And
Speaker 0: the January 6th committee was
@ThePatriotOasis - The Patriot Oasis™
Tucker Carlson calls out Liz Cheney, Anderson Cooper, KJP & Garland’s Blatant Lies about J6 https://t.co/5L2xg898r5
Video Transcript AI Summary
The death of Officer Brian Sicknick remains unclear, but video evidence shows he was not beaten to death by Trump supporters at the Capitol. Despite claims from media and politicians, including Liz Cheney and Anderson Cooper, that he was murdered during the January 6 events, these assertions are false. Attorney General Merrick Garland stated that five officers died that day, but this includes officers who later died by suicide, not directly related to the events of January 6. The actual number of officers assaulted is reported as over 100, which is unacceptable, but labeling January 6 as the worst assault on the U.S. government since the Civil War is exaggerated.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Consider the death of police officer Brian Sicknick. Now we still don't know exactly how officer Sicknick died. We're not certain that anyone does know. No one has explained it. But after reviewing the previously withheld video evidence, we can tell you with certainty that officer Sicknick was not beaten to death by Trump voters at the capitol.
The tape shows very clearly Brian Sicknick walking through the building in apparent health after the media told us for 2 years that he had been murdered. So they were wrong about that. Okay. They got caught. Here's the interesting thing.
They won't admit it. Liz Cheney's tweet is still on Twitter tonight. Officer Sicknick was killed defending our capital from the violent mob on January 6th. No correction. Anderson Cooper of CNN still has not apologized.
Quote, officer Brian Sicknick died after being hit in the head with a fire extinguisher during the fight. He told us, those are lies. So why not just admit it and move on? But they won't. In fact, this week, the White House trotted out both the press secretary and Joe Biden's attorney general, the attorney general of the United States, to claim not just that Brian Sicknick was actually murdered by Republicans at the capitol, but that other officers were murdered too.
It's it's almost beyond belief. Watch this.
Speaker 1: The right rage of bipartisan lawmakers. You heard them all yesterday. You guys reported on it who have condemned, this false depiction of the unprecedented violent attack on con on our constitution and the rule of law, which cost police police, officers their lives.
Speaker 2: It was a violent attack on a fundamental tenet of American democracy, That power is peacefully transferred from one administration to another. Over a 100 officers were assaulted on that day. 5 officers died.
Speaker 0: 5 officers died on that day. Now that's just not some guy in Twitter. That's the attorney general of the United States. That's a man whose honesty is central to his job. If you had a choice between IQ and integrity in an attorney general, of course, you go with integrity because it's essential.
But Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, is a liar. He just lied about something that is provably false. Who are these 5 officers who were quote killed that day? Notice he didn't tell you. No one ever tells you.
No one ever shows you their autopsies. They don't want any detail. They just want the slogan. Now they're counting Brian Sicknick. That's a lie.
But who are the other 4? Well, those are 4 officers who killed themselves after January 6th. In some cases, long after January 6th. But their suicides we know for a fact were the result of the republican mob at the capitol. It's just it's just false.
And it's not some esoteric fact. That fact is available to anyone who has internet access. No police officers died that day on January 6th. None. Not one.
Some were assaulted. That is true. And their assaults are indefensible. So how many were assaulted? Well, Garland said over a 100.
The government accountability office says the number is 114. We're just gonna roll with that. We We don't know if it's true, but we'll take it at face value. And that is bad. We are opposed to assaulting police officers in any context.
We said that on January 6, 2020. Almost say it again. We're against that. But is January 6th the worst assault on the US government since the civil war? That's insane.
It's not even close.
@DC_Draino - DC_Draino
Powerful clip from Tucker’s recent spot on the Full Send podcast He says media is controlled by powerful people who run the world, it shouldn’t be trusted, and he regrets being part of the propaganda machine for so many years https://t.co/KqxyoGiHnf
Video Transcript AI Summary
I've spent my whole life in the media, but now I realize that the media is part of the control apparatus. I regret defending the Iraq war and not being more skeptical. When someone makes a claim, the important question is whether it's true or not. I participated in a culture that dismissed anyone who thought outside the prescribed lanes as crazy or a conspiracy theorist, and I'm ashamed of that. The media's purpose is not to inform, but to serve the small group of people who run the world. We should treat them with contempt because they have earned it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Like, I've spent my whole life in the media. My dad was in the media. Like, that is a big part of the revelation that's changed my life is the media are part of the control apparatus. Like, there's no yeah. I know.
I know. Because you're younger and smarter, and you're like, yeah. Yeah. But what if you're me and you spent your whole life in that world? And to look around and all of a sudden you're like, oh, wow.
Not only are they part of the problem, but I spent most of my life being part of the problem defending the Iraq war. Like, I actually did that. Can you imagine if you did that? What do you think what is one of your biggest regrets in your career? Oh, defending the Iraq war.
That is it. Well, I've had a 1000000 regrets not being more skeptical, calling people names when I should have listened to what they were saying. Look. When you when someone makes a claim, there's only 1 question that's important at the very beginning, which is is the claim true or not? So I say, you know, you committed murder or you rigged the last election Before you attack me as a crazy person for saying that, maybe you should explain whether you did it or not.
Right. Yeah. And For too long, I participated in the culture where I was, like, anyone who thinks outside these pre prescribed lanes is crazy, is a conspiracy theorist, and I just really regret that. I'm ashamed that I did that, and and partly, it was age, partly, it was the world that I grew up in, so when you you know, the media, the media, the media, the media, the media, the media, the media, the I just didn't see it at all at all, and I'm ashamed of that. Isn't that what the media tries to do, though?
It it's their only purpose. Right. They're not here to inform you, really, even on the big things that really matter, like the economy and war and COVID, and, like, things that really matter that will affect you. No. Their job is not to inform you.
They are working for the small group of people who actually run the world. They're their servants. They're their praetorian guard, and we should treat them with maximum contempt because they have earned it.
reSee.it AI Summary
In a comprehensive compilation of evidence, it is suggested that the events of 9/11 were not as they seemed. Claims include the covert engineering of Osama Bin Laden's house arrest, the unaccounted-for trillions of dollars at the Pentagon, and the predictive nature of Donald Trump's book. Eyewitness testimonies, the collapse of Building 7, and the discovery of active thermite material in dust samples further fuel suspicions. The Patriot Act's swift implementation following the anthrax attacks raises questions, as does the involvement of the CIA and the funding of gain-of-function research. These revelations challenge the official narrative and call for a closer examination of the events surrounding 9/11.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
MASTER THREAD 🧵 911 BOOKMARK THIS THREAD! I am releasing everything I have collected over the years into this one thread over the next 12 hours. I was going to attempt to organize it to tell a story, but there’s simply too much.. I’m just dumping it all. Let’s begin..
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
911 - Confirmed Treason We Discovered the Bush & Obama Administration Covertly Engineered the House Arrest of Osama Bin Laden - Hillary Clinton & Leon Panetta’s fingerprints are all over this - “Bin Laden is being Protected by Us & We don’t Really want to Get Him” January 6, 2011 Two phone calls took place back to back between Allan Parrot, Congressman Curt Weldon & Brian S. Ettinger. Brian Ettinger is Joe Biden’s best friend and an Attorney. PART 1 “You can become the next president if you help Allan bring Bin Laden back.” “Leon Panetta on two occasions said do not pursue Bin Laden in Iran.” “I’m putting together a bipartisan coalition to go to Iran to discuss Bin Laden’s transfer to the United States.” Reply: “you’ll never have that happen because our government will never let that happen.” “This is a ticking time bomb…. He’s [Obama] got to designate (individual’s) to negotiate with Iran, and if he (Obama) doesn’t, we will go public about this…. We have determined without a doubt, I have the proof, that Hillary Clinton’s fingerprints are all over this.” “Biden sends Brian S. Ettinger on secret missions, the most recent of which was to Pakistan, WITHOUT the State Department involved.” PART 2 Listen 👂 💥💥💥💥💥💥 “Recently, between November 2004 up until now, my team members have met Osama Bin Laden SIX times inside of Iran…. We have repeatedly notified the US Government & first we were ignored, next we were obstructed, then we were threatened……” (9/11 occurred on September 11, 2001…) “Here’s the problem sir… we have identified with documentation, three mechanisms used by the Bush administration to covertly engineer Bin Laden’s house arrest inside Iran…… we have identified two mechanisms used by this administration (Obama) to continue the legacy….. and Hillary Clinton’s fingerprints are all over this…. Leon Panetta’s fingerprints are all over this…” Brian S. Ettinger (then VP Joe Biden’s attorney) reply 👇 “He (Bin Laden) is being protected by us. We don’t really want to get him. We want him under the radar screen…..” Understand what you just heard. ### https://rumble.com/v3gtv5j-911-alan-parrot-to-brian-ettinger-bush-admin-covertly-engineered-osama-bin-.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses their efforts to bring Osama bin Laden back to the United States from Iran. They mention speaking with Leon Panetta, who advised them to focus on North Korea and not pursue bin Laden in Iran. They claim to have had discussions and negotiations with the Iranian government and have corresponded with President Ahmadinejad. They also mention their desire to involve Senator Susan Collins and Joe Lieberman in negotiations with Iran. The speaker expresses concerns about their family's security and mentions a book being written by a US attorney. They plan to have a conference call with Brian Ettinger, who is Joe Biden's close friend and former staffer. The speaker mentions their involvement in falconry and their connections to the royal family in the United Arab Emirates. They also discuss their interactions with Sheikh Mohammed and Sheikh Saud. They mention their opposition to the Bush administration and Hillary Clinton's involvement in protecting bin Laden.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He was all excited and he said, I can become his staff advisor was saying, you can become the next president if you help Alan bring Bin Laden back. We discussed that we were going to give him a share of the Rewards for Justice Money, which is $50,000,000. He was all excited, but then he said he said, twice, he said, I cannot ask permission from Leon Panetta to work with you to get bin Laden out of Iran, but I can ask my good friend Leon Panetta if he has any objections. Are you still there, sir?
Speaker 1: Go ahead.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And so he spoke to Leon Panetta on two occasions, we got it back in writing and verbally that Leon Panetta told him, focus on North Korea only, And in the 2nd conversation, he said, do not pursue Bin Laden in Iran. Now, I have had daily discussions and negotiations with the highest level of the Iranian government. It's been supervised by my attorney so that I'm not breaking the federal laws on subverting the policies of the US State Department. I have had, 88 pages of correspondence translated and delivered directly to president Ahmadinejad.
In this correspondence, I am analyzing and discussing 6 scenarios for bin Laden's transfer to US custody. I'm discussing 5 concessions from the United States and analyzing them. We have proof that that I'm putting together a bipartisan coalition to go to Iran to discuss bin Laden's transfer to the United States.
Speaker 1: Because our government won't let that happen.
Speaker 0: You were very astute. Yesterday, I had a conference call with Senator Susan Collins people, and it included Brandon Millhorn, who's On the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, also Robert Strayer and Molly Wilkinson. My request to Collins is that we get Collins and Lieberman and you to accompany us to the Oval Office to tell the president that this is a ticking time bomb, and if they will not that that he's got to designate you and Susan Collins and Lieberman to negotiate with Iran. And if he will not do so, we will go that Hillary Clinton's fingerprints are all over this policy. She has actually inherited the policy from the Bush administration and enlarged Who?
Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 1: I have no idea.
Speaker 0: There there were 3 What's that?
Speaker 1: The airport now to pick up Brian Edinger, who's one of my partners. Brian is Joe Biden's closest friend, was his first staff director. When do I pick him up? I will, I would ask you to call me back. Let me have a conference call with Brian in the car, with you.
I'm in my car just myself and I'll have Brian. You just called me, which means you landed. So I'll have him in the car in 15 minutes.
Speaker 0: You want me to call you in 15 minutes, sir?
Speaker 1: Call this number back, and you'll be with my Jonathan, Brian Ettinger.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Ettinger is Biden's closest friend. He meets with Biden monthly. He was his 1st legislative director and he's an attorney. More importantly, Brian is the unpaid chairman of the He organized in her agency, he organized crime passports for the US, which he does provide, which means He works for all works with all of our agents. And Biden sends him on secret missions.
The most recent of which was to Pakistan, without the State Department of law. Now you can't mention that while I have Brian on the phone, but I'm telling you that To give you an idea of who he is.
Speaker 0: Yes, sir.
Speaker 1: Call call me back and, he just called, so he should probably getting off the plane now. Give me 15 minutes and then call back.
Speaker 0: Very good. I will call you in 15 minutes. And also, sir, privately, between us, if we can work out A cooperative agreement, I will share a a significant percentage of the rewards for justice.
Speaker 1: You've always said that. And you know, Alan, let me say this. You told my daughter it was about money. It's really never been about money. You know, I have my daughter's house invaded by the FBI.
You've never had that done. They did that to my daughter that you talked to weeks before my election, and they never talked to her. They all and and that intimidation and that threat, I know they've talked to you, but you've never had that done publicly. That was done to me.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: My my book will be out this year, which is being written by a US attorney
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: 23 who is Brian Enger's best friend Because he wants to bring out the truth, which is gonna rock this country to its roots. So that's been my concern all along. The 5 year statute on being able to do anything against me ends this year.
Speaker 0: I'm a big supporter of you, sir, and I never wanted to offend anybody. And and forgive me for calling your daughter.
Speaker 1: No. I thought you talked to him, but, you know, you told her that, you told her that it was about money. My daughter's house was raided by the FBI to push the bus. That's what it's about I see. About me not wanting my family abused.
Speaker 0: I understand. Yeah.
Speaker 1: They never talked to her. Yeah. They raided her they raided her to create an incident to get me out of office. Yes. Probably partly because I was dealing with you.
I don't know.
Speaker 0: Well I know
Speaker 1: the I know the CIA, set me up because I know the names of the people in the agency from all their friends. So it's not, I mean, honestly, I can't work for free, but it's more about my stability and my security and my family security. But let me have this call with Brian. Yes. It's now, it's now 11:35 EST.
Yes. Call me back at 11:50 when I have him in the car.
Speaker 0: I will call you at 11:50. Alan Perot.
Speaker 1: Alright. I'm gonna put you on the phone with myself and Brian Hetty. I told you who Brian is. He's a good Good friend and a trusted partner of mine. He, he has access he does a good thing.
He does this as a favor for Biden With the interagency organized crime task force that works with our agencies.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: But he's also very close to Biden on a number of issues. He was his former staffer. I trust him with my life and we're business partners. So I'm gonna have you I told him about you. You don't have to go through all the background about who you are.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: I want you to tell him the most recent situation and, and then Brian and I are gonna talk about it, because we're gonna have to do it got it. So would I put you on speakerphone now that I'll issue? Yes. Alan, can Hear me?
Speaker 0: Yes, sir.
Speaker 1: Can I put the volume up? You've gotta speak loudly. This is Brian Ettinger. Yes, sir. Oh, how are you?
Speaker 0: Very well, sir. How how are you, Brian?
Speaker 1: Good. Speak very loud, Alan, so we can hear you. We're in a car. Kurt told me about I guess the latest incident was, with with, with our governor, Richardson, and, He gave me one through your background and who you are and the people that you previously contacted. And he indicated You know, you were gonna try to get Susan Collins and Lieberman united together to go in and see the to brief The president or the vice president about the situation.
Speaker 0: You are correct.
Speaker 1: But but I understand you're, you know, you're into the the preservation of falcons. I know I'm sure you do know most of the royal members of the royal family because That's what they hunt with this Falcon as well as Bin Laden, that, that used to hunt with Falcons.
Speaker 0: Well, sir sir, I worked exclusively for President Sheikh Zayed, the former the late president of the United Arab Emirates. I lived With him and his family for 20 years, I also trained falcons for the Saudi crown prince before he became King Abdullah, yes, Falconry is the Rosetta Stone for Al Qaeda. I met Victor Boot in Sheikh Zayed's Falconry camps and recently, between November 2004 and up until recently, my team members have met Osama bin Laden 6 times inside Iran. We have repeatedly notified the US government and only received, first, we were ignored, then we were obstructed, and then we were threatened.
Speaker 1: I mean, that doesn't Surprised me, there's a friend of mine who's a international hunter and he hunts with falcons with the royal family I mean, of the UAE and his name is, Saeed Khan Farajah.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: I don't know if he knows But he takes them in the Himalayas, to go this mountain goat, they go hunting with the world family there.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And he told me about a year So that, because he led the other house also in Queda, he told me that, he knew recently that Bin Laden Was ignored in Iran and and he's an American citizen and told people at the embassy and they they ignored him, but I like the plug. I haven't told you this, but along my most recent trip to Kuwait, I was with my 2 closest friends there, Sheikh Mohammed, who's the foreign minister, Deputy prime minister, and former US ambassador and Sheikh Saud, who was the ambassador during Desert It's Storm.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: George Bush, the father's closest friend in the Middle East.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: He's a very close friend of mine and were having a private dinner with his son Noah, who's another really close friend of mine, and, we got to talking about Bin Laden. I Said, Jake, so where do you think he is? He said, oh, Kurt. He said, there's no doubt he's in Iraq. Yeah.
I just told Kurt. I said, no. The the better way of doing it, if Susan Collins and Lieberman are on board, I wouldn't go see Obama. I'd go see Biden. And Brian can arrange that, Brian can arrange that directly, Alan.
Speaker 0: Here's the here's the problem, sir. We have identified With documentation, 3 mechanisms used by the Bush administration to covertly engineer Bin Laden's house arrest inside Iran, we have identified 2 mechanisms used by this administration, to continue the legacy. And Hillary Clinton's fingerprints are all over this and Leon Panetta's Fingerprints are all over this. We will have tremendous opposition.
Speaker 1: Okay. Because he's being I told Kurt He's being he is being protected by us. We don't really wanna get him. We want him under the radar screen because he basically made a deal that He's not gonna hit us here in the US. Well
911 - Alan Parrot to Congressman Weldon Brian Ettinger - Bush & Obama admin Covertly Engineered Osama Bin Laden’s House Arrest
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
911 Donald Trumps Book “The America We Deserve” named Osama Bin Laden by name & predicted a Terror Attack 19 Months Before 911 Occurred “I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the [1993] trade center look like kids playing with Firecrackers. One day we’re told that a shadowy figure with no fixed address named Osama bin-Laden is public enemy number one and US jet fighters lay waste to his camp in Afghanistan… He escapes back under some rock, and a few news cycles later it’s on to a new enemy and a new crisis.” https://rumble.com/v3guj9a-911-donald-trumps-book-the-america-we-deserve-predicted-911.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
BuzzFeed uncovered an old quote from Donald Trump in his 2000 book, where he expressed concern about the possibility of a large-scale terror attack. Trump compared it to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and mentioned Osama bin Laden as a threat. The hosts question the authenticity of the quote, but confirm its accuracy. They discuss the timing of the book's publication and suggest that Trump may have had some foresight regarding the attacks. The transcript ends with the acknowledgment that Trump predicted the attacks.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: BuzzFeed dug up an old quote from Donald Trump talking about a large scale terror attack 19 months before 911. In his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, Trump wrote, I really am convinced we're in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the 1993 trade center, looked like little kids playing with firecrackers. Trump also mentioned the mastermind of the attack, writing, quote, one day, we're told that a shadowy figure year with no fixed address named Osama bin Laden is public enemy number 1, and US jet fighters lay thousand Tishkanban, Afghanistan, he escapes back under some rock. And a few news cycles later, it's on to a new enemy and a new crisis. Trump wait.
Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.
Okay. Hold on a second. Mhmm. Is this really Trump Before 911? Have you read this?
2000 in his Are we making that? Somebody did you make this up, Mica? Nick. I did. Did you make this up, Nick?
Nick, tell us it's four. Right? Because We used to stop everything. Mika, stop. Got it.
Thing. It's over. What's that? What's the rage here? Will you stop?
No. It's cute. I think it's cute. Well, go for it. Really quickly, though.
I mean so, Willie, that was 2000. 2000, a book he wrote in the year 2000. Wall was published in 2000. It could've written in 1999, for a while. Exactly.
He might have been a little bit more precious. No. He predicted basically predicted The attacks from us.
911 - Donald Trump’s Book “The America We Deserve” Predicted 911
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Follow the money… The day before 911, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced the Pentagon could not account for $2.3 Trillion dollars. Lucky for whomever stole this money 911 dominated the news cycle and this story was buried. https://rumble.com/v1jilhf-the-pentagon-cannot-account-for-over-2.3-trillion-dollars-in-transactions-s.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
Our financial systems are outdated, hindering our progress. It is estimated that $2.3 trillion in transactions cannot be tracked. Additionally, we face challenges in sharing information within this building due to incompatible and inaccessible technological systems.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates we cannot track $2,300,000,000,000 in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of different technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.
9/11: Donald Rumsfeld “The Pentagon Cannot Account for over $2.3 Trillion Dollars in Transactions” September 10, 2001
Donald Rumsfeld: The Pentagon Cannot Account for over $2.3 Trillion Dollars in Transactions- Sept 10, 2001 Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candl
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Did we ever find where Trillions of our dollars went? Prior to these events, Rumsfeld, VP Dick Cheney, & many other Bush administration Operatives were part of a neoconservative think tank called Project for a New American Century. This report argued for a global expansion of American military and economic supremacy, and for the US to transform itself into a "one-world superpower". The report warned that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". Would 9/11 qualify as “ Catastrophic & catalyzing event”? https://www.loc.gov/item/lcwaN0011283/
Page Not Found -- 404 -- Library of Congress
loc.gov
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Quite ironic…. This Documentary describes the 12 chilling Parrales between Pearl Harbor & 911. 911: The Mockinbird Media made a relentless effort to create a direct association to Iraq & Osama Bin Laden. Also comparing the attack to Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor: The Mockinbird Media made a relentless effort to create a direct association to Hitler & Japan. 911: Top level officials & the intelligence community knew there would be an attack and withheld crucial evidence. Pearl Harbor: FDR & top officials knew Pearl Harbor was being painted for a bombing run. They knew the exact date. The intelligence community withheld crucial evidence. 911: FBI agent discovered information that could have prevented the attack. The information she uncovered never made it past her supervisors. Rumsfeld could not be found delaying the chain of command. Pearl Harbor: Hours before the attack, Chief of Staff George Marsh was nowhere to be found, delaying the process of comms in the chain of command. 911: VP Dick Cheney gave direct orders not to interfere with the plane heading towards Washington. Only 4 jets remained on alert to defend the entire sector of the country likely to suffer an attack. Pearl Harbor: FDR gave direct orders not to interfere with the Japanese attack. 911: 3,000 died and justified a war the US had been preparing for months in advance. A military plan to attack Afghanistan was placed on George Bush’s desk on September 10. Pearl Harbor: 3,000 died and justified a war the US had been preparing for months in advance. 911: A commission report was produced to rubberstamp the Governments version of events. Pearl Harbor: A commission report was produced to rubberstamp the Governments version of events. https://rumble.com/v1js7v9-12-parallels-between-the-911-and-pearl-harbor.-the-playbook-for-pre-emptive.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
On September 11, there were parallels drawn between the attacks and the historical events of Pearl Harbor. Both events were used by the US government to go to war, with the ultimate goal not being the one initially stated. The propaganda machine in both cases worked to create a connection between the enemy and the attacks. In both instances, important information was withheld from those who could have used it to defend against the attacks. The failures and confusion in the air defense system on September 11 have been attributed to a series of military exercises that were taking place at the same time. Despite evidence to the contrary, there are still those who support the official version of events and dismiss alternative theories as conspiracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: On the very day of September 11, several Commentators drew a parallel with the historical events of Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 1: And it's today that will, as was the case with Pearl Harbor live in infamy in American history. The last time there was an attack like this on the United States was Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 2: Reminiscent of another terrible day, the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 0: But there was also someone on the same day who offered a prediction.
Speaker 3: After the attack on Pearl Harbor, guess what we did? We went back and found out that, yes, the evidence there. We should have known. And again, I think what we're going to see, even in this instance, this Pearl Harbor of the 21st century is very much the same kind
Speaker 0: of rain. In fact, the more information that has been emerging about September 11, the more we have come to realize that many different aspects of the 2 events bear a chilling resemblance to each other. While both events were needed by the US to go to war, in both cases, the ultimate goal was not the one initially stated.
Speaker 1: Roosevelt knew a surprise This Japanese attack would enrage the public and jump start the American war machine. In this way, FDR would get back door entry into what he really wanted, a war with Hitler.
Speaker 0: According to their own documents before 9/11, the neo knew that a surprise attack like a new Pearl Harbor would enrage the public and jumpstart the war machine against Afghanistan. In this way, they would get a entry into what they really wanted, the war with Saddam Hussein. In the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go.
Speaker 4: He says that going after Saddam Hussein was topic a 10 days after the inauguration, 8 months before September 11th.
Speaker 0: Before and during the war, the propaganda machine made a relentless effort to create a direct connection between Hitler and Japan.
Speaker 1: One poll taken immediately after Pearl Harbor showed that more than 60% of Americans believe that Germany was behind the attack.
Speaker 0: The Bush Cheney propaganda machine made an even harder effort to create a Direct association between Iraq and Osama bin Laden. By the end of 2003, nearly 70% of Americans believed that Saddam was implicated in the September 11 attacks. Top levels of the Roosevelt administration knew in advance that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked.
Speaker 2: General Marshall And Admiral Stark and indeed FDR indeed knew that Pearl Harbor was being painted for a bombing run by the Japanese.
Speaker 0: Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, even knew the exact day of the attack a week before it took place.
Speaker 5: Cordell Hull was Secretary of State. And he called me on Saturday morning, and he started to relate that Pearl Harbor would be attacked On December 7th.
Speaker 0: Before September 11, many in the intelligence community knew the attacks were on their way.
Speaker 4: There was so much discussion about this attack. Everybody was talking about it. George Had meetings at the White House.
Speaker 0: Vital information on the Japanese attack was kept from those who could have used it to defend the Hawaiian port and to minimize the
Speaker 1: number of American casualties. 2 men could use that information immediately. Admiral Husband Kimmel and Lieutenant General Walter Short, the commanders at Pearl Harbor. But they never get it. According to Hill, that was no
Speaker 2: If FDR and his administration deliberately withheld the vital intelligence from Pearl Harbor and all the evidence indicates That they did. Then it was certainly a deliberate conspiracy to set Pearl Harbor up for a total defeat.
Speaker 0: Before September 11, important information was kept from counterterrorism czar Richard Clark, who could have organized the defense and Even have prevented the attacks altogether. You have to intentionally stop it. You have to intervene and say, No, I don't want that report to go. We, therefore, concluded that there was a high level decision in the CIA, ordering people not To share that information. In both cases, the pre knowledge by the US government on the upcoming attacks was denounced in front of Congress.
Speaker 1: In September 1944, Republican Representative Forrest Harness of Indiana made the 1st congressional charge about a Pearl Harbor conspiracy. He said that 3 days before Pearl Harbor, the Australian government had warned Washington that a Japanese aircraft carrier was headed towards Hawaii. But he said, That information was withheld from Kimmel and Shorin.
Speaker 0: After September 11, Republican congressman Kurt Weldon denounced The pre knowledge of information on the upcoming attacks, which was intentionally withheld from the intelligence community.
Speaker 6: This is an attempt to prevent the American people from knowing the facts about how we could have prevented 911, and people are covering it up today.
Speaker 0: When honest officials stumbled on important information on the Japanese attack, they went straight to the superiors only to see that information ignored, diverted, or suppressed altogether.
Speaker 7: The chief of naval intelligence in Washington, Captain Alan Kirk recognized the message as plans for a bombing raid, but his persistent attempts to warn Kimmel ended when he was assigned to other duties. At Pearl Harbor, the admiral had no way of knowing that Kirk had been repeatedly refused permission to warn him.
Speaker 0: In August 2001, FBI agent, Colleen Rowley, discovered information that could have led to uncover the September 11 plot. But her memos Never got past her superiors while she was prevented from pursuing the investigation any further.
Speaker 4: Finally, it turns out they were not by the lawyer and the FBI who had the duty to send those over to the Department of Justice.
Speaker 0: Hours before the Japanese strike, Roosevelt's chief of staff, George Marshall, became unavailable, delaying the process of communication within the chain of command.
Speaker 7: General George Marshall, the man who should have acted, was nowhere to be found. Colonel Rufus Bratton was responsible for keeping Marshall supplied with such vital information. For Bratton, Marshall's sudden unavailability at a time when America was on the brink of war Could not have been accidental.
Speaker 0: In the crucial hours of September 11, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and other top military became suddenly Unavailable, hampering the decisional process within the chain of command.
Speaker 2: For 30 minutes, we couldn't find.
Speaker 0: Withholding information, however, may not have been sufficient to guarantee the success of the Japanese attack. The military capacity of the Hawaiian port was also kept below its requirements. General Short, faced with the need to send out long range patrols, had only
Speaker 7: a handful of suitable aircraft. His demands for war were not seen as a priority.
Speaker 0: On September 11th, only 4 jets remain on alert To defend the entire sector of the country most likely to suffer an attack.
Speaker 1: I've determined, of course, that with only 4 aircraft, we cannot defend the whole North
Speaker 0: President Roosevelt gave direct orders not to interfere with the Japanese attack.
Speaker 2: President Roosevelt told the General Marshall To send a message to the Hawaiian and Philippine commanders, don't interfere with Japan's overt act of war. The United States desires That they Japan commit the 1st over there. There is no argument about what FDR meant. He meant that the U. S.
Naval plan to defend Pearl Harbor should not and cannot be executed.
Speaker 0: On September 11, Vice President Cheney gave a direct order regarding the plane headed towards Washington, which in fact resulted in the plane reaching its target without being shot down. Young man said, Vice President, the plane is 10 miles out. Do the orders still stand? And the Vice President sort of his head around and said, of course, I do. It was thanks to the indignation for the 3,000 sailors killed at Pearl harbor that president Roosevelt could finally enter a war the US had been preparing for months in advance.
Speaker 2: With confidence In our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, We will gain the inevitable triumph, so help us God.
Speaker 0: It was thanks to the indignation for the 3,000 victims of September 11 that President Bush could launch a war that have already been prepared in the smallest detail. CNN and Time Magazine have reported that on September 10, 2000 plan to attack Afghanistan had been placed on George Bush's desk to be signed by the president upon his return from Florida.
Speaker 2: May God grant us wisdom, and may he watch over the United States of America.
Speaker 0: Then came the official commissions, which in both cases were tasked To find out whether there had been a conspiracy by the same authorities that were suspected of having participated in the conspiracy.
Speaker 1: Just 3 months after BJJ, Senator Alvin Barkley of Kentucky convenes the Joint Congressional Committee on the investigation of the Pearl Harbor attack. The committee lays much of the blame on the commanders at Pearl Harbor, and largely exonerates FDR and his top advisers.
Speaker 2: Gross negligence becomes high treason When the motive is discovered or understood In July 2004, the commission published its final report.
Speaker 0: 2 a half 1000000 pages of documents. We've interviewed over 1200 individuals, including Experts and officials past and present.
Speaker 2: However, the commission report failed to meet many of the families' expectations and concluded that 911 was merely a failure of imagination.
Speaker 0: Published in 2004, the 911 Commission report has become the central focus of criticism by the 9 11 truth movement, a movement comprised of thousands of individuals and associations from all over the world, All connected through the Internet. The Commission's report is accused of having simply rubber stamped the government's version of the events by ignoring all the evidence against while covering up its most conspicuous holes with a long series of omissions, distortions, and even plain falsehoods. Led by researcher David Ray Griffin, an international panel of 20 experts on 911 has compiled a list of the strongest evidence against the official version that has emerged to this day. This evidence is available to the public on their website in 4 different languages. Despite all the evidence that has emerged in the last decades, there are many who still reject the idea of a conspiracy at Pearl Harbor, and prefer to reassert the much more simplistic explanation called the official version.
Speaker 8: There was no conspiracy. FDR did not know. Cord Hall did not know the American government did not know that the Japanese were gonna attack Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. It was a, What is, been called a failure of imagination.
Speaker 0: Despite all the evidence presented in the last 10 years by the 911 truth movement, There are many who openly support the official version by the government and dismiss such evidence as irrelevant. These people are known as debunkers as their Stated intent is to debunk the evidence presented by the 9/11 truth movement against the official version. The most authoritative debunker in Italy is Paolo a member of an organization called GCAP, which has openly declared war on the so called conspiracy theorists. Artivisimo has held numerous conferences on 9/11, in which he has covered all the most important aspects of the debate. The most prominent champion for the official version in France is Jerome Kieran, who also wrote a book called September 11 and the conspiracy theories.
Kieran also participated in numerous Conferences and television debates on 9/11 in his own country. But the flagship for the debunkers worldwide is certainly the American magazine, Popular Mechanics. In 2006, they published a book called Debunking 911 Myths, in which the authors purport to have refuted all the major claims against the official version by the 911 truth movement.
Speaker 9: Jim Miggs is the editor of Popular Mechanics Magazine. In 2005, he and a staff of reporters decided to take on the factual and scientific claims made by members of a 911 conspiracy The results were first published in a magazine article, then more fully developed in a book titled Debunking 9 11 Myths: Why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts.
Speaker 10: I think what Popular Mechanics did with the 911 conspiracy theory was just about one of the best things ever done in the history of skepticism. That is exactly how it should be done. Here's the claim. Here's the answer. Here's the claim.
Here's the answer. By the end, they got nothing to stand on. Boom. End of story.
Speaker 0: But is it really so? The debate on September 11 can roughly be divided into these areas of discussion. We have the 4 hijackings as the overarching event of the day, and we have the 3 different locations that were hit by the 4 airplanes. One of them hit the Pentagon. Another crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
The other 2 hit the Twin Towers in New York. The debate on the hijackings is divided in 3 parts. The first one focuses on the air defense and whether the failure to intercept A hijacked airplane is accidental or intentional. The 2nd focuses on the hijackers and whether they were actually aboard the airplanes or just the usual patsies. The 3rd part focuses on the aircraft themselves and whether the 4 airplanes used in the attacks were the same ones that took off from The airports that morning were something that only resembled them from the outside.
What initially raised suspicions on the true role of the military on September 11 is the fact that the U. S. Air defense, which is arguably the most advanced and sophisticated in the world, was unable to intercept even one of the 4 hijacked
Speaker 2: I remember thinking, where on Earth are the interceptors? I'm an old interceptor
Speaker 11: And it's absolutely
Speaker 2: unbelievable that hijacked airliners could fly Around for an hour and 40 minutes without being intercepted.
Speaker 12: As a former Minister of National Defense, why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors after being scrambled, take them with a quick reaction alert, they should have been in the air in 5 minutes or 10 minutes. If not, as a Minister International defense, which I would want to say, why not?
Speaker 0: This astonishing failure to respond was By Senator Mark Dayton in the Post nineeleven Congressional Hearings.
Speaker 13: But what I find much more shocking and alarming were the repeated and catastrophic failures of the leaders In charge and the other people responsible to do their jobs, to follow established procedures, to follow direct orders from civilian and military commanders.
Speaker 0: The official justification for this failure is a series of blunders, miscommunications, and mistakes that has come to be known as the incompetence theory.
Speaker 2: On that day,
Speaker 0: you saw a lot of
Speaker 3: well meaning, confused people struggling to
Speaker 11: make sense of a of a terrible situation. They didn't even know where the planes were.
Speaker 0: One argument for the incompetence theory is that The air defense was conceived to protect the US from external threats, not internal ones.
Speaker 11: The fact is that our our Air defenses, the whole NORAD system was not at all geared towards protecting us from domestic aircraft. Quite the contrary, it was all set up to detect aircraft coming in from overseas.
Speaker 2: That's 45.
Speaker 0: What the debunkers forget to mention is that the responsibility for tracking internal hijacks has never fallen on the military to begin with. This has always been the duty of the civil air traffic controllers, the FAA, as explained by the Secretary of Defense himself.
Speaker 14: So the Department of Defense was oriented externally. Our radars were pointing out, not in. And the FAA was the one that that then had the responsibility to say there's a hijack.
Speaker 0: Only then, Explains author and researcher, Nafeez Ahmed, is the military requested for assistance in scrambling their jets.
Speaker 15: Standard Procedures dictate that as soon as a plane flies off course, the FAA will contact the plane and try to ask them what is going on. If there There is a problem or if they cannot establish radio contact, then immediately, the FAA will contact the Pentagon, who will, within
Speaker 0: The FAA authority over the National Airspace is clearly acknowledged in this exchange between the military from September 11th.
Speaker 2: If you hand the fighters over directly to FAA so they They're still under FAA control. We're never gonna take them. Just work with them, coordinate with them as best that you can with that. Take them to the area and let them, handle that airspace.
Speaker 0: Another argument for the incompetence theory is that by turning off the transponders, The hijackers had made the airplanes very difficult to be tracked on radar.
Speaker 2: That can't be overstated. The fact that once the hijackers turned off the transponders, You had air traffic control who are looking at something like 4,500 primary radar flips. They are trying to pick out the planes that they just lost.
Speaker 0: This is not true. When the transponder is turned off, the controllers lose the information on the altitude, But they can still track the plane as a primary signal. The following example shows how long it took an air traffic controller to find American 11 on his Green after he was told the plane had been hijacked.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Good morning, Boston. I got a situation here with American 11. We believe it's a, possible hijack. Okay.
Tell me more. We lost radio communications with him, then we lost, his transponder. And right now, the, aircraft is just west of Albany 7. Going southbound. And Okay.
I see them.
Speaker 0: United 175 never turned the transponder off. It just switched codes. United 175 is 50 miles northwest of New York city when its transponder code is suddenly changed.
Speaker 2: As I look up, I noticed that United 1 70 five's Code has changed. I just turned around and radioed the pilot. My exact words were 9175, Recycle transponders for
Speaker 16: Hijacker Al Shei obviously intended to turn off that transponder, but because he just changed codes and didn't turn it off, he still left The controllers with a very clear indication of the normal return from an aircraft that was squawking, that's what we call it, with the altitude.
Speaker 0: According to the Secret Service, the plane that hit the Pentagon was tracked for at least 30 minutes before it reached Washington.
Speaker 17: Nelson Garabito was the Secret Service Agent in charge of protecting the White House airspace.
Speaker 5: The first thing I did is I picked up the phone to call my my contact, the FAA. He said, we have 4 planes outstanding. 2 have hit the towers, and 2 are headed to Washington, DC. One of them approximately 45 minutes out.
Speaker 0: The 1 30 minutes out turned out to be the plane that hit the Pentagon.
Speaker 5: As the one nearest us, Got closer and closer, 6 minutes out, 5 minutes out. We knew it was sort of over the CIA, and we thought this out where it's going, but it it kept coming.
Speaker 0: United ninety three was also being tracked after the hijacking.
Speaker 17: We were tracking United ninety three, and I was in conversation with the FBI agent, and He was relaying to me that we suspect that this aircraft has now been taken over by hostile forces, described the sharp turn It made over, Eastern Ohio, and now it's heading back, along southwestern Pennsylvania.
Speaker 0: The airplane was being followed step by step, practically in real time.
Speaker 2: He's, Right now, he is west of Johnstown still, 12 miles.
Speaker 0: At some point, it even turned the transponder back on, showing not only his position but also the altitude.
Speaker 2: It looks like he's still turning. Hey. His transponder just came back on, and it was showing 8,000 feet 200. 8200 feet. 8200 feet, he saw the same cold that he was before.
Speaker 0: Saved for some moments of confusion, the 4 airplanes were being tracked by air traffic controllers All along, the real reason for the failure to intercept the 4 aircraft seems to have been the high number of military exercises that were being run by NORAD on September 11 out of their base in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado. As Webster Tarpley noted in his book, 911 Synthetic terror. Staff exercises or command exercises are perfect for a rogue network, which is forced to conduct its operations using the same communications and computer systems used by other officers who are not necessarily party to the illegal operation. Interestingly enough, on the evening of September 10th, the security level for the computer system called Infocon had been dropped to normal, the lowest level. This made it easier for anyone to penetrate or compromise the computer Networks of the Air Defense System.
On September 11, between 4 10 military exercises had been scheduled, Some of them involving false hijacks of commercial airplanes. This unusual number of exercises had two major consequences. 1, they moved a large number of fighters out to Canada and Alaska. 2, they created a major confusion in the system As soon as the real hijackings were reported.
Speaker 2: We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to
Speaker 18: we need someone to scramble some s 16. There's something up there. Help us out.
Speaker 2: Is this is this real world or exercise?
Speaker 18: No. This is not an exercise, man. Okay?
Speaker 0: The process of authorization for scrambles was lengthy and complicated.
Speaker 1: Hey,
Speaker 2: we just I just talked to others here, and they said they needed, knee as authorization.
Speaker 0: Confusion and pressure kept mounting.
Speaker 2: I don't know where I'm scrambling these guys 2. I need a direction, destination.
Speaker 0: At times, communications were jammed.
Speaker 19: If you could do me a favor and have them call us, we cannot call for some reason.
Speaker 0: Some in the military quickly realized the simulations were causing a problem.
Speaker 2: You know, let's get rid of this goddamn sim. Hey. Turn the sim switches off. Get rid of that
Speaker 19: I hope to cancel the exercise because this is ridiculous.
Speaker 0: But they were not canceled. Even after both towers in New York had been hit, when everyone knew America who is under attack. The war games continued.
Speaker 2: You guys watching the news?
Speaker 20: Yeah. I wasn't sure. I've been watching
Speaker 2: it for about 10 minutes. Did they just study the exercise? Not at this time. No.
Speaker 0: Apparently, someone took advantage of the situation. While the plane headed for the Pentagon was quickly approaching from the west, an unknown source, which was never identified reported that American 11 was headed towards the capital even though the plane had already crashed into the North Tower. I just had
Speaker 2: a report that American 11 is still in the air, and Heavy towards Washington.
Speaker 19: American 11 is still in here.
Speaker 0: This attracted all the attention towards the so called Phantom plane.
Speaker 21: He's still airborne. He's still
Speaker 19: a hijacked out there, but we can't get a position on him.
Speaker 0: The jets from Langley were prepared to intercept him.
Speaker 2: I don't think they might wanna hold it to my staff down there, though, too.
Speaker 19: We have Langley on battle right now.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 0: Then they were scrambled straight for Washington.
Speaker 2: Foxy, scramble, Weinley. Head record to Washington area. I'll do that.
Speaker 0: But a different command post called giant killer sent the fighters out to the ocean.
Speaker 2: Say again
Speaker 19: where you want them?
Speaker 2: We want them in the Wizzie P386 area.
Speaker 0: This didn't sit well with the operation center.
Speaker 2: Freaking giant fella in their wiz and sent them out over the When we scrambled up to Washington By the
Speaker 0: time the plane headed for the Pentagon was circling the capital, it was too late for the Langley Jets to intercept it. Even after the Pentagon was hit, the war games were not suspended. And again, while United ninety three was being hijacked, another false alarm attracted the attention in the opposite direction.
Speaker 2: Did you get the word? I got Delta 89 or south southeast of Toledo.
Speaker 19: 89 at the hijack. They think it's possible hijack. Fuck. South of Cleveland. We have a code on the back.
Good. Pick it Find it. Fuck. Another one.
Speaker 0: Major Nazipani turned to Toledo Air Force Base.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry to be so brief and quick on this, but there's another possible hijack About 50 miles east of Toledo and you guys are the closest and we need somebody airborne.
Speaker 0: But instead of getting help, his authority was questioned.
Speaker 2: What authority is this coming from? What authority is this coming from? The DO, that's how you tell you.
Speaker 0: Nizipani vented his frustration to his superior, Colonel Marr.
Speaker 2: He said tell his commander the commander's gonna call you. He doesn't believe the authority.
Speaker 0: Then they tried Duluth Air Force Base.
Speaker 2: Okay. Duluth, we got no fighters.
Speaker 0: The Ziffany went all the way to the western quadrant looking for help.
Speaker 2: Assistant Agent Kenny. Who is this? Hey, Kenny. This is nasty. How are you doing?
Hey. Doing alright. Hey. We're not doing so good right now. What I'd like to do, possibly steal some aircraft out of Fargo from you guys.
12 Parallels Between the 9/11 & Pearl Harbor. The Playbook for Pre-Emptive War Exposed!
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candlesinthenight Truth Social at @MJTruth Gab https://gab.com/mjtruth My Website— www.theunshakeablepundit.com
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
If you’re saying no way our government would stage 911 to justify war with Afghanistan…. Have you ever heard of Operation Northwoods? Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation that originated within the US Department of Defense of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for CIA operatives to both stage and commit acts of terrorism against American military and civilian targets, blaming them on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The possibilities detailed in the document included the remote control of civilian aircraft which would be secretly repainted as US Air Force plane, a fabricated 'shoot down' of a US Air Force fighter aircraft off the coast of Cuba, the possible assassination of Cuban immigrants, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating terrorism in U.S. cities. The proposals were rejected by President John F. Kennedy. rumble.com/v3gvm0v-operat…
Video Transcript AI Summary
In 1962, the US military proposed Operation Northwoods, a plan to create fake attacks on American targets and blame them on Cuba to justify an invasion. The plan included blowing up a US ship, conducting a terror campaign on American soil, and even shooting down a civilian airliner. However, President JFK rejected the plan. The military's desperation to remove Castro from power and solve the "Cuba problem" is evident in their reckless proposal. This episode highlights the potential abuse of power and the need for checks and balances in government. The US was just one person away from a full-scale invasion, raising concerns about the government's actions and motives.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This was a struggle of Cuban patriots against the Cuban dictator.
Speaker 1: On March 13, 1962, the joint chiefs of Staff put this document in front of the Secretary of Defense for approval from the president. This is a memo prepared by the most senior leaders in the US military, some of the most powerful men in the country. And they're asking for permission to execute a plan. A plan to lob a mortar shells into their own military bases with some damage to installations. And then to make hijacking attempts against civilian air and surface craft.
Left. They're proposing to blow up a US ship in the US naval base, Guantanamo Bay. And even to conduct a terror campaign on American oil exploding a few plastic explosives in carefully chosen spots. We're looking at a plan to blow things up on American soil and then to blame it all on Cuba.
Speaker 0: The Cuban people have not yet spoken their final piece.
Speaker 1: This operation never happened, but it almost did. And that gets to a big question, why would some of America's most powerful leaders charged with safeguarding our nation think that their duty would require them to lie to and terrorized the American people. In other words, why were they planning Operation Northwoods?
Speaker 0: We did not the first time communist tanks have rolled over gallant men and women. But the record show that our restraint is not inexhaustible.
Speaker 2: Before we dive into today's kind of insane video, I need to thank the sponsor who I'm very grateful for. Thank you BetterHelp for sponsoring today's video. For 3 years, maybe, I've been in therapy, and I can say it has truly changed my life. It has changed my mind. It has changed how I see the world, and I've become a huge fan of therapy as a very, very important part of my happiness.
BetterHelp is a place that makes therapy more accessible to people using technology. It's a platform where you sign up, you fill out
Speaker 1: a quick survey, and you get matched with a therapist. They have
Speaker 2: a huge network of tens of thousands of licensed therapists, and you can start therapy in as little as 48 hours. And you can choose how you do it. You can do it as a phone call, call or as a video chat or even as texting, the beauty about this model is that it doesn't bind you to the therapists who are available in your local geographical area, and it makes it so easy to schedule your therapy, to change your schedule, or even to change your therapist for free. Finding a therapist can be hard and emotional and difficult, and BetterHelp makes it easier for you. So if you are somebody who wants to try therapy out, BetterHelp is a fantastic way to try it and see if Sikuk changed your life as much as it has changed mine.
Because they sponsored today's video, they're giving 10% off the 1st month for my audience who tries out BetterHelp. There's a link in my description. It's betterhelp.com/johnnnyharris. Thank you BetterHelp for sponsoring today's video. Let's dive back in to operation Northwoods.
Speaker 1: Of Operation Northwoods was a response to a problem the US government had. They called it the Cuba problem. Cuba became a problem for the Slum. Cuba became a problem for the CIA when they watched this young activist with an affinity for cigars lead a communist revolution on the island, throwing out the American friendly dictator and nationalizing all the valuable land and industries trees that American businesses had been getting rich off for decades. This was the cold war and communism was now 90 miles away, threatening to spread to other countries in Latin America.
Countries that American businesses also wanted to continue controlling and exploiting. And any day, this new leader could align with the Soviet Union, giving the US's biggest geopolitical rival, a military base within breathing distance of Florida. Of so this was what the joint chiefs called their Cuba problem. The US had a few solutions to their problem. 1st, they put an embargo on Cuba, blocking all US exports to the country except for food and medicine.
Second, they stopped buying Cuba's largest export, sugar. This actually ended up backfiring when the Soviet Union stepped in to buy Cuban sugar, her kicking off an economic alliance between these 2 communist countries. Exactly what the US didn't want. And 3rd, the US started making plans. Lots of plans.
Plans to somehow get rid of Castro, to turn Cuba back into the American business friendly client state threw whatever means necessary in one of the secret plans called Operation Zapata. The CIA recruited 1500 Cuban exiles who fled to Miami during the Cuban revolution, it was this little CIA funded army called Brigade 2506. And the goal was to have them invade Cuba and removed Castro from power. So the CIA trains them at this camp in the mountains of Guatemala, where they had just recently executed pursued a coup and installed a US friendly dictator. And right in the middle of the planning stages of this operation, JFK wins the presidency.
Speaker 0: Ask not what your country can Do for you, have what you can do for your country.
Speaker 1: And he inherits the scheme to invade Cuba using exiled Cubans. The CIA briefs him on it. This plan to fix the Cuba problem by forcibly unseating Castro using Cuban exiles. And after some debate, JFK approves the plan. So on the 17th April 1961, they launched their invasion.
Brigade 2506 landed on Playa Giron with the plan to invade the island and spark a popular revolution against Castro.
Speaker 0: The Small has begun on the dictatorship of Fidel Castro. Landings were affected by rebels of several But it
Speaker 1: was a complete failure. Castro had found out about the invasion ahead of time. A radio station on the beach had spotted the invading ships arriving and called for help. Several of the invading ships sank on the coral reef, and the invading forces were met with immediate resistance from Cuban Armed Forces, who defeated them within 3 days. Most of them were captured.
9 US servicemen actually flew combat missions in support of this invasion. 4 of which were shot down and killed in the process. Something the US government and the CIA would go on to deny for almost 30 years. But the point is that this invasion failed miserably, and JFK and his administration were to blame.
Speaker 0: We are on the affixing our eyes on traditional military needs, on Army prepared to cross borders. Conviscals poised for flight. Now it should be clear that this is no longer enough.
Speaker 1: JFK would later fire the CIA director, holding him responsible for the disastrous invasion plan that we know as the Bay of Pigs. But this didn't change anything. The US government was still obsessed with removing Castro from power. They just needed a new plan. So JFK initiates his own plan called the Cuba Project, AKA Operation Mongoose.
Over the next year, the CIA employs hundreds of spies to collect intelligence on Cuba. They send submarines on recon missions to Cuban waters. They fund anti Castro protest movements spreading propaganda throughout the country. They sabotage Cuban infrastructure to create chaos. And they make dozens more plans to assassinate Castro directly.
Including preparing poisonous pills to be planted in a beverage to be drunk by Castro. They even hired the American mafia to deliver the pills, Snowing that the mafia had their casinos kicked out of Havana during the revolution and would want revenge. But none of this worked. The assassination attempts all fell apart. Fidel Castro still remained in power and his support wasn't wavering.
And the US military was getting desperate. They needed to solve the Cuba Cuba problem, before the Soviets could get more involved on the island. So after all these botched assassination attempts and failed invasions, the Joint Chiefs Staff concluded that the only way to get rid of Castro was for the US military itself to invade Cuba and take him out. But they knew that the US public would not fought an outright invasion. They needed to create a reason, a justification.
And this gets us back to our document. S the one that went to the Secretary of Defense for the president's approval, this cover and deception plan to make attacks on American targets, Skits, fake attacks that will be blamed on Cuba to raise tensions between the US and Cuba to justify an invasion. A legitimate provocation as the basis for a US military intervention in Cuba. In other words, a lie to the American public and the international community. A series of false flags to get what they wanted, and all detailed in this classified document that was only meant for a few people, with hopes that the president would approve in the spring of 1962.
Speaker 0: If the nations of this hemisphere should fail to meet their commitments against outside Communist penetration. Then I want it clearly understood that this government will not hesitate of In meeting its primary obligations, which are to the security of our nation.
Speaker 1: So let's see what this plan actually says. It starts with the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, where they would start rumors using fake radio stations and get American friendly locals to stage fake attacks on the base, starting riots in the surrounding area. Another proposed part of the plan was to blow up a US ship and blame it on Cuba. This was specifically called out has a quote, remember the Maine incident, referencing the sinking of an American warship in Cuba in the late 1800 said the US used to justify intervening in Cuba back then, to fight the Spanish. This is often thought of as a planned sabotage to justify the intervention.
And here was the US military in the sixties at it again. The document predicts that the newspapers would start reporting on the casualties, causing a helpful full wave of national indignation. They also wanted to create a fake terrorist campaign on American soil in Miami or Washington. Washington, they wanted to sink boats of Cuban refugees and stage the shooting of refugee targets and even suggested exploding a few plastic bombs in American cities. These weren't all going to be pretend.
They even say in the document that they would go to the extent of wounding people and then making fake arrests with prepared documents so it could all be widely publicized, making Cuba look like an irresponsible civil government, worthy of American intervention. They thought through having American Air Force pilots fly over places like Nicaragua and dropped bombs on cane fields to burn them down using weapons from the Soviet Union. But for this to work, they would have to be flying Cuban some military style aircraft. They would need to ensure that their planes were properly painted. They would also use these planes to harass American civilian air Craft, making it look like it was the Cubans doing this.
They planned a fake hijacking of commercial planes to blame the Cuban government forced to fake shooting down a civilian airliner. And if that wasn't enough, the joint chiefs planned to create an incident which will make it appear that communist Cuban Jets have destroyed a US Air Force aircraft while it was flying over international waters in an unprovoked attack. Operation Northwoods was a reckless plan to lie and hurt people proposed by top government leaders who were more and more desperate to invade Cuba. And they wanted to move fast, they say in just a few months. They needed to do this so that this Attack wouldn't involve the Soviet Union, who still hadn't established any defense pact or military bases in Cuba.
So what we're looking at here is the ceasing desperation of the US military to achieve its goal. To solve the Cuba problem. If JFK would just approve this plan, then the military would get to work blowing things up, attacking their bases and terrorizing the American people. But, he rejected it. Operation Northwoods never happened.
JFK's rejection of this plan is one reason that there was a rift between him and the military, with the military wanting to take a hard line on Cuba and JFK feeling the sting of the Bay of Pigs invasion, thinking that something like this was too much of a risk. A month later another document came to him, the joint chiefs following up with another memo, saying that the only way to remove the communist regime was military intervention by the United States and that Cuba was a vital base of operations for espionage, sabotage and subversion against other countries in the region. The fear was that communism would spread across Latin America because of this. And time is running out. The rift between JFK and the military continued during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the Joint Chiefs hoped to deploy nuclear missiles against the Soviets and invade Cuba.
But JFK stood up to the military once again and said no. JFK eventually went on to deny General Leman Lemenitzer another term as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, likely because of his leading role in planning Operation Northwoods. And looking at this bizarre episode in American history, you might feel like this is the moment where our system worked. Military leaders tried to abuse their power swore to launch an unprovoked and illegal invasion of another country, and the president stopped them. Checks and balances.
Right? But the reality is all these men have the same goal. Castro out of power and Cuba under their control again. Their disagreement was one of just a few degrees. The means, not the ends.
The reality is that the US was 1 man, just 1 person away from this operation happening from a full scale invasion. If JFK had lost the presidency to Nixon, would Operation Northwoods have happened? We can't say conclusively, but it certainly raises the probability. But what's more startling is that outside of a few norms and some ideas about government, nothing fundamentally has changed in our government. The political military machine still runs on the same software it did in the sixties.
If the US government felt like it and had a big enough enemy, a big enough threat to American interests, it could happen again.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Earlier this year there was a bombshell unclassified filing that At least two 9/11 hijackers on American Airlines Flight 77 had been recruited into a joint CIA-Saudi intelligence operation. https://www.floridabulldog.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Canestraro-Declaration-dated-20-July-2021.pdf Max Blumenthal: "You can just point a finger at Langley, the CIA, and Alec Station and say you are responsible for letting 9/11 happen." The CIA proposed False Flag attacks on US Soil to justify war with Cuba. Is it too crazy to think the CIA didn’t propose a False Flag attack on US Soil to justify war with Afghanistan? There are still classified documents to this day. What else does it say? This video https://rumble.com/v2klbew-bombshell-filing-911-hijackers-were-cia-recruits.html 🔗 Article https://thegrayzone.com/2023/04/18/9-11-hijackers-cia-recruits/
Video Transcript AI Summary
According to a court filing, at least two 9/11 hijackers were recruited by the CIA and Saudi intelligence in a joint operation. The lead investigator of the Office of Military Commissions, Don Conestraro, revealed this information in a 21-page declaration. The hijackers, Khalid Al Midhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi, attended an Al Qaeda summit in Malaysia in 2000, where the CIA photographed their passports. Despite being monitored, they were able to board a flight to LA without screening and were met by a Saudi intelligence officer who provided support and arranged flight lessons. The CIA withheld this information from the FBI, raising questions about their involvement in the attacks.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Filing 9/11 hijackers were CIA recruits. At least 2 9/11 hijackers had been recruited into a joint CIA Saudi intelligence operation that was covered up at the highest level according to an explosive new court filing. This is by the Gray Zone's Kit Claringburg. So, Max, talk to
Speaker 1: us about this story. Our worst fears about this particular episode have been seemingly confirmed, through a 2021 court filing, which was just released, which came in the form of a 21 page declaration by the lead investigator of the Office of Military Commissions, which is overseeing the cases of the 911 defendants. His name is Don Conestraro, and he had interviewed several FBI agents who were involved in investigating 911 and seeking actually to prevent the attack in the months leading up to the attack. So basically, this relates to 2 of the hijackers, the so called muscle hijackers who were charged with, overwhelming the one of them was a muscle hijacker, overwhelming the passengers and getting to the cockpit. The other 1 was a pilot, Khalid Al Midhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi.
These were Saudi citizens who Had attended a Al Qaeda they call it like a mega summit, and it was a gathering of of top Al Qaeda figures in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia back in January 22 in January 2000. Now during that summit, which, again, it was a major Al Qaeda summit. During that summit, CIA agents broke into the hotel rooms of Al Hazmi and Almidhar on January 5th and January 8th and photographed their passports. They were being monitored by the CIA. The CIA knew they were there, and they knew that something was being planned.
Something like the day of planes attack, which was already within the kind of in the pipeline that was heavily monitored by US, Pakistani intelligence, all sorts of intelligence services. So Al Hazmi and Almidhar were able to then, Following this summit from Malaysia board a direct flight to LA International Airport, get off the flight without any screening and then be met at the airport by Omar Al Bayoumi Omar Bayoumi, who was posing as an employee of the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority and was in fact a Saudi intelligence officer who then took these 2 characters, Al Qaeda figures to an apartment, paid for their lease, and then arranged for them to receive rides in taxis to flight lessons while shepherding them to and from local Saudi sponsored mosques. This should have set off alarm bells everywhere, but the CIA refused to tell the FBI that they these figures were in the country. The CIA was operating through a shady unit known as ALEC Station, which had been set up in tandem with the FBI, but which operated outside the FBI's purview, and was essentially a black operation charged with the ability to recruit assets. And so not only did the CIA refuse to tell the FBI about these 2 would be hijackers in the US.
They forbade FBI agents assigned to Alex Station from telling other FBI agents. Why would they do that? Why would they be so determined to avoid the detection of these 2 dangerous figures as they were being shepherded through the US by Saudi intelligence. Incident. Well, it's clear now as was everyone suspected through Don Conestraro's filing that they had been recruited by the CIA and were CIA assets whether they knew it or not, and that Omar Bayoumi, the Saudi intelligence agent, was himself a CIA asset working in a US Saudi joint intelligence operation.
And this raises a lot of questions which we'll get to, but here's the the, statement of an agent known simply as c three in this filing Said that Byumi's contact with the hijackers and his support thereafter was done at the behest of the CIA through the Saudi intelligence service. And the explicit purpose of Alec's station was to, quote, recruit Al Hazbi and Almidhar via a liaison relationship. And so as Kit Clarenberg details in this excellent article, which really puts all of this into context, the FBI was not told about Almidhar and Al Hazmi's presence in the US or the fact that I think one of them was actually the roommate of the lead 911 hijacker, Mohammed Atta, at one point, which would have just wrapped up the whole operation until the operation was in its final stages and they had already gone to New York. And then even at that point, it was not made a law enforcement investigation, which would have necessitated arrests. It was simply an intelligence investigation which necessitated nothing more than surveillance.
So the c you can just point of finger directly at Langley, at the CIA, and at Alec Station and say, you are responsible for letting 911 happen. That Is the most conservative analysis we can put forward.
Page not found - Florida Bulldog
floridabulldog.org
Bombshell filing: 9/11 hijackers were CIA recruits
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/04/18/9-11-hijackers-cia-recruits/ Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
Bombshell filing: 9/11 hijackers were CIA recruits - The Grayzone
At least two 9/11 hijackers had been recruited into a joint CIA-Saudi intelligence operation that was covered up at the highest level, according to an explosive new court filing. A newly-released court filing raises grave questions about the relationship between Alec Station, a CIA unit set up to track Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden
thegrayzone.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
This is detrimentally important to understand the next few posts. Operation Mockingbird & the CIA have a history… and that history never stopped. It’s called Tell-A-Vision for a reason. Six corporations control 90+% of all of what you see, hear, & read. Whoever controls the News controls the mind. https://rumble.com/v3braja-the-mockingbird-mainstream-media-the-illusion-of-choice.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
One-sided news stories and the sharing of biased and false news on social media are plaguing our country. Some media outlets publish these fake stories without fact-checking. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: One-sided news story. Plaguing our country. Plaguing our country. The sharing of bias and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories without checking facts first.
The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. History without checking facts first. Unfortunately, response. And agenda control. Exactly.
And this is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is Extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
The Mockingbird Mainstream Media - The Illusion of Choice
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here is a Young Tucker Carlson, at the beginning of his career Denying the Government was somehow behind 911. https://rumble.com/v3gw3ry-young-tucker-carlson-denies-the-government-was-involved-with-911.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
There is no evidence to support the claim that the government was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Alleging such a thing without proof is not only untrue but also implausible.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Have no evidence of the government's behind 911. And I frankly think it's an awful thing to allege considering it's not true, and you haven't proved that it is. It's totally implausible. Like, we would report that
Young Tucker Carlson Denies the Government was involved with 911
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here is a much older & experienced Tucker Carlson calling 911 Truthers Parasites & totally dismisses Tower 7 I am open to about any crackpot theory, just on that subject, come on, that’s too much. “I hate that 911 crap. I wish they’d kick those people out” https://rumble.com/v3gwcan-911-tucker-carlson-911-truthers-are-parasites-and-dismisses-tower-7.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, two speakers discuss their views on the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 questions why Speaker 2 left a Ron Paul event when someone mentioned that 9/11 was an inside job. Speaker 2 clarifies that he didn't leave because he believed it, but because he thought it was stupid. Speaker 1 asks about Building 7, but Speaker 2 refuses to continue the conversation. They also discuss government involvement in terrorism and the need for evidence before making claims. Speaker 2 criticizes Speaker 1 for bringing up the conspiracy without evidence. The conversation ends with Speaker 1 mentioning Alex Jones and Speaker 2 stating that evidence is necessary to imply a conspiracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 1: How are you doing? I'm doing good. Good to see you after, we met briefly at the event in 2008 in Minneapolis for Ron Paul.
Speaker 2: Oh, it
Speaker 1: was fun. I
Speaker 0: remember that.
Speaker 1: But but you had to leave early. What happened? How did you why did you why did you bail on Ron Paul? I'll tell
Speaker 2: you I didn't bail on
Speaker 0: Ron Paul. No. It's when Jeff Ventura got up and started saying 911 was an inside job.
Speaker 1: You didn't say that.
Speaker 0: You you just said that.
Speaker 1: No. He said that it was, curious why the FBI, you know, had been logged in on on on Look. I'm I'm the lawyer.
Speaker 0: I I got it. I was there. And, bye. So you had
Speaker 1: to leave because that 1 I was enraged. I was enraged
Speaker 0: by it wasn't controversial. You were you were
Speaker 1: you were so familiar? Let me let
Speaker 0: me let me answer first. Sure. It wasn't Controversial. It was stupid. And if there's any evidence that the government is behind 911, looks I believe anything If there's evidence, but there isn't evidence.
So knock it off. That's my view.
Speaker 1: Okay. But And I
Speaker 0: said that to him.
Speaker 1: Sure. Sure. But one stupid person says something stupid at a Ron Paul event.
Speaker 0: No. Well, I I hate that. And by the way, I am open to almost any crackpot theory about any. It's just on that subject, come on. You know what I mean?
That's too much. That's even for me.
Speaker 1: So just out of curiosity then, what what's your take on Building 7? Which explanation
Speaker 0: do you believe? Yes. Come on. Rob. What?
No.
Speaker 1: It's a serious question. Which explanation did
Speaker 0: did it Which explanation? I I There's
Speaker 1: 2 explanations. It was either it was, it was pulled or it us. It was isolated pockets of fire in the building that were sort of Underneath the towers coming down that brought it down.
Speaker 0: This is a no win conversation, Ron. So I'm not gonna continue it. But let me just say one thing. The macro my macro view is the obvious one, which is the billing to get down because, like, in that case, we were playing a movie.
Speaker 1: Okay. So are you still supporting Ron Paul?
Speaker 0: I don't know. I I don't really think I'm supporting Ron Paul. I like Ron Paul. I've always liked Ron Paul.
Speaker 1: So are you supporting anybody in the races here? No.
Speaker 0: I don't support. I mean, I don't I don't even You're an objective journalist? Even votes. I'm hardly objective. I'm honest.
I'm not objecting.
Speaker 1: There you go. Certainly not afraid to speak your mind.
Speaker 0: No. I'm not. No. You can assess my views Greg, you're clear. You have any But I hate that 9:11 crap.
Wish they just kicked those people out. When was supposed to be in 93rd court. Really? Office. It's important for people to stand with
Speaker 1: so involved to know the truth whether or not the government was involved or whether
Speaker 0: it was terrorists. But there's
Speaker 1: a history of government sponsored terrorists throughout the past awesome
Speaker 0: time. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So what do you mean kick them out?
Speaker 0: I don't know ever.
Speaker 1: You you anybody who's a 9:11 shooter should be should be kicked out of the the country?
Speaker 0: Of course not. I don't, you know, I don't I don't even believe in parking tickets. I mean, just please. I just don't I think that people Before saying something that heavy ought to present real evidence and not just it's a coincidence or questions remain in dumb
Speaker 1: We we gave them a lot of money. You know? CIA's CIA pretty much trained them. I
Speaker 0: mean, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's that's pretty much enough evidence for me.
Speaker 0: The all the government brought down the Twin Towers.
Speaker 1: The government that was involved in bringing inventory because they would not be trained because who trained them? The government trained them. The PI training.
Speaker 0: Alright. I've I've had this debate so many times. You know, I don't know. I just all. It seems to me that it's kind of beneath, sort of beneath like Adult discourse even really, I guess.
And it definitely discredits otherwise good ideas. I just think that the implication of it, if the government was involved, Intercations are so vast that it should be looked into whether or not it has been ridiculous.
Speaker 1: So for family members of the victims that are asking questions and want the evidence that's been withheld by the government release, you would say that they're less than adults somehow for wanting that
Speaker 0: I would say that parasites like you make it much worse for them. That's what I would
Speaker 1: I'm a parasite now.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's it's filthy to say things like that with no evidence and you have none. That's fine.
Speaker 1: Hey, Tucker. As long as we're hanging out here outside of the
Speaker 0: scrum, You
Speaker 1: you look kinda like a parasite on Michele Bachmann here. How what what's what's a parasite? All
Speaker 2: that's, you know what? I will say that's fair. I would say that That's fair? Depress our parasites.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yourself included?
Speaker 2: Of course.
Speaker 1: Alright. Of course. A lot of people would say that Helene's a little general there. Yeah. Yeah.
That's fair. That's fair. I gotta say you're more fun to talk to than Michelle Bachman. I'm not running for anything.
Speaker 2: Someone just want us Frank.
Speaker 1: Frank? Yeah. We gotta talk to Frank Lutz earlier at the Ron Paul event. He's starting to figure out why Liberty is so popular. He's he's starting to get it.
Speaker 2: But there's an important distinction between on liberty.
Speaker 1: I mean,
Speaker 2: I voted for Ron Paul in 88. I mean,
Speaker 1: I've been around Paul today
Speaker 0: in a while.
Speaker 2: And this nonsense about 911 that morons like you keep bringing up, I mean, truly, that is just the most loathsome thing to say, I think.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't keep bringing it up. It's not really my shtick. I was just, wondering why you, you know, why you walked out of the convention. Rocket. It's not really my issue.
Awful. I'm I'm so awful. And by the
Speaker 2: way, it it only discredits libertarianism and the ideas, Ron Paul and Liberty itself. You start accusing people of things on the basis of no evidence.
Speaker 1: You don't think Alex Jones has brought thousands of people to the message of Liberty? I know. You hate Alex Jones. What do you what would you say to Alex Jones?
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: This is your chance. He watches my channel.
Speaker 2: I I don't know Alex Jones. I don't have any feelings with Alex Jones. I I just think that in order to imply that there was a conspiracy behind 911, have some evidence. That's the one.
Speaker 1: And there's none. There's no evidence whatsoever.
Speaker 2: And I've done a lot of shows on it. I've read a lot about it, and I No. There are ton of coincidences. There always are. August.
That's Jones. He certainly is. All the shows for you. Well, the one I saw Alex Jones hate with Alex. What do you want to do with this scary way?
We're leading a mob I don't really don't know much about
Speaker 1: all the issues that he covers. But you gotta at least respect that he's fighting the same thing.
911 - Tucker Carlson 911 Truthers are Parasites & Dismisses Tower 7
Outside of a GOP presidential campaign event for Michelle Bachman in January 2012, Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit T
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
This is Tucker Carlson today… saying if you talk about Tower 7 on Television, you’ll lose your job. Did Tuckers views change? Don’t know… But Tuckers employment changed recently and all of the sudden he’s now considered a parasite by his own definition. “You can go on television & say the earth is flat & they’ll just laugh at you. It’s not a threat to anyone….. If I were to say, what actually happened to Building 7? If you’re ere to say something like that on television, they’d flip out & your loose your job over that.” “Do building actually collapse like… NO… maybe they do, but why can’t I ask questions about it? Anything you’re not allowed to ask questions about, is something you should be asking more questions about.” https://rumble.com/v2l1dwo-tucker-carlson-brings-up-tower-7.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
If people aren't bothered by crazy ideas like the earth being flat, they just laugh it off. But if you question what happened with building 7, it's a different story. People freak out and think you should lose your job. Why? It's my country, and I want to understand. Do buildings really collapse? I don't know, maybe they do. But why can't I ask questions about it? Anything you're not allowed to question is something you should question more.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If they're not offended by craziness. They're not offended by if if you go on TV tonight and say, I think the earth is flat, people just laugh at you. They don't care if you think the earth is flat. It's not a threat to anyone. But if you say like, what actually happened with building 7?
Like that is weird, right? It doesn't, like, what is that? If you were to say something like that on television, they flip out. They would flip out. You should like lose your job over that.
Why? Why? It's my country. As soon as I tap on my country, can I ask it, like, I don't really understand? Do buildings actually collapse?
No, Maybe they do, I don't know. But like, why can't I ask questions about that? Anything you're not allowed to ask questions about It is something you should be asking more questions about.
Tucker Carlson Brings up Tower 7
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Tower 7 Most Americans still don’t know that 3 buildings collapsed that day. Why? Mockingbird Media. What purpose? Don’t know… but let’s start with who the tenants of this building Tower 7 Tenants: • Clandestine CIA station • Department of Defense • Secret Service • IRS • American Express • Securities and Exchange Commission • NYC Office of Emergency Management • Salomon Brothers, an American multinational investment bank • Quite a few Banks & financial groups. • Floors 14-17 were “Unknown” Lots of powerful entities in that building, with lots of banks & financial groups— could any of this have anything to do with the “missing” $2.3 trillion dollars? Check for yourself. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tenants_in_7_World_Trade_Center_(1987%E2%80%932001)
List of tenants in 7 world trade center (1987–2001) - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Larry Silverstein signed a 99 year lease on the World Trade Center in June 2001, two months before the attacks. Here is Larry Silverstein inadvertently admitting that Tower 7 didn’t collapse from the fire alone. He admitted that the fire department made that decision”to pull it”. Well, that’s odd… that’s not what they official story says… but here is Larry saying that they made the decision to collapse the building. https://rumble.com/v1jn0iw-larry-silverstein-owner-of-the-world-trade-center-admits-that-tower-7-was-a.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
World Trade Center 7, located north of the slurry wall, was cleared quickly after the 9/11 attacks. There were no casualties to recover, and the building caught fire after being hit by debris from the collapsing north tower. The fire department commander called to say they might not be able to contain the fire. In light of the tragic loss of life, a decision was made to pull the building down, and it subsequently collapsed.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: World Trade Center 7 had always been considered the starting point for rebuilding. Located north of the slurry wall, 7 had been cleared faster than the rest of the site, and there had been no bodies to recover. Helted by debris when the north tower collapsed, 7 burned until late afternoon allowing occupants to evacuate to safety.
Speaker 1: I remember getting a call from the, fire department commander Telling me that they were not sure they're gonna be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we've had such a terrible loss of life. Maybe this one I was gonna do is It's Poland. And they made that decision to Poland, and then we watched the building collapse.
9/11: Larry Silverstein of Silverstein Properties & Owner of the World Trade Center, Admits that Tower 7 Was a Controlled Demolition
9/11 Larry Silverstein of Silverstein Properties, owner of the World Trade Center, infamously admits that Building 7 was a controlled demolition. Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Tower 7 collapsed at 5:20pm ET.. Mysteriously, at 5PM ET, BBC reported that Tower 7 had Collapsed due to “being weakened”… only one problem… Building 7 was STILL THERE, right behind her. Why did BBC say it collapsed when it was clearly in the background? How did they know WT7 was “weakened” so soon? The most logical Explanation: The above post, Larry Silverstein did say they made the decision to bring the building down… on that day, it was likely released to the press to run the narrative prior to its actual collapse, but the media jumped the gun. BBC later apologized for their “mistake” but never explained how they knew. https://rumble.com/v1jnlja-911-bbc-reports-tower-7-collapse-before-it-collapsed.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
A building collapse in New York, near the World Trade Center, is discussed. The collapse was not due to a new attack, but rather because the building had been weakened during the morning's attacks. Details are scarce, but it is known that the Marriott Hotel also collapsed from debris. The World Trade Center is still burning, and the city is in chaos with disrupted phone and subway services. Schools are being used as triage centers, and a field hospital has been set up in New York Harbor. The number of casualties is unknown but is expected to be high. Many people have fled the city, but there is a sense of shock and loss among those who remain. Revenge is not being discussed yet, as people are still traumatized and trying to comprehend the devastation. The security bubble of America has been shattered, and the city and country will never be the same.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now more on the latest building collapse in New York. You might have heard a few moments ago. I was talking about the Salomon Brothers building collapsing, and indeed it has. Apparently, that's only a few 100 yards away from where the World Trade Center towers were. And it seems that this was not a result of a new attack.
It was because the, building had been weakened, during this morning's attacks. Acts. We'll probably find out more now about that from our correspondent Jane Stanley. Jane, what more can you tell us about the Salomon Brothers building and its collapse?
Speaker 1: Well, only really what you already know. Details are very, very sketchy. There's almost a sense downtown in, New York behind me, down And by the World Trade Centers of, just an area completely closed off as the rescue workers try to do their job. But this isn't the 1st building that, has suffered as a result. We know that part of the Marriott Hotel next To the World Trade Center also collapsed as a result of this huge amount of falling debris from a 110 Floors of 2 the 2 twin towers of the World Trade Center.
As you can see behind me, the, trade center appears to be still burning. We see these huge Clouds of smoke and ash, and we know that behind that, there's an empty piece of what was a very familiar New York Skyline, a symbol of the financial prosperity of this city, but completely disappeared now, and New York is still unable to take on board what has happened to them today.
Speaker 0: Presumably, there were very few people in the Salomon building when it collapsed. I mean, there were, I suppose, fears of possible further collapses around the area.
Speaker 1: That's what you would hope because this whole downtown An area behind me has been completely sealed off and evacuated apart from the emergency workers. That was done by the mayor, Rudy Giuliani, much earlier today, because of, of course, the dreadful collapse of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. But, New York very much a city still in chaos. The phones are not working properly. The subway lines are not working properly.
And we know that down there near the World Trade Center, there are 3 schools that, are being turned into triage centers for emergency treatment. And I know that over in New York Harbor, where the famous Statue of Liberty is, there's a field hospital where 1500 people are being treated, And we have heard there is unconfirmed as yet that a 100 New York City police officers have been taken there As well for treatment, but we do need to confirm, those figures for the officers.
Speaker 0: It's now what some 8 hours since the attacks. Is there any estimate yet available of the number of casualties in the World Trade Center?
Speaker 1: I think we can only go at this point with the words expressed by the mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, that it's too frightening to think how many there could be. We know that, it's about almost 300 people on the airliners that were used in these attacks, but you've got to remember this was 9 o'clock In the morning on a Tuesday morning, it's busy in downtown Manhattan in the financial district then. The World Trade Center itself has 50,000 workers. There are tens of thousands of tourists who go out there every day. The figures are almost too frightening to to contemplate.
You can understand why nobody yet Wants to put a figure on them.
Speaker 0: Listening to the mayor, Rudy Giuliani, a bit earlier, one of his messages was, you know, business as usual. You know, we won't let this get us down. But presumably, a lot of Manhattan people must have fled the city to Long Island to get away from impossible further attacks.
Speaker 1: Well, a lot of people were certainly trying to, but you remember that very early on, all the bridges and, tunnels to the city as well as the airports We're closed. New York was sealed, essentially. Now we do note that the Long Island Railroad has become begun running again to get people out of the city if they can. And People who can't manage to get out and perhaps lift in that area, they're being offered accommodation in empty school buildings. But, Certainly, I saw earlier on today, huge crowds of people desperately trying to walk up, up in Manhattan to get as far away as possible.
I think nobody really knows how to go or where to go, and you you have to remember even even now, I don't think people can sink it it can sink in What's happened?
Speaker 0: We haven't for the past hour or so heard much from the people of Manhattan. You're with them there. I mean, what are they saying tonight after this catastrophic attack?
Speaker 1: As I said, many just cannot believe this has happened, and I've seen, you know, big burly men and women with the, You know, tears in their eyes today shaking their heads, wondering what on earth is going on. There was a a sense of Panic. Our reports from the scene were people just absolutely horrified. And I've already seen some photographs of That a man took down in the the downtown area, and it looks like the aftermath of of a huge Atom bomb or something just just full of debris and of like a white carpeting of snow from all the dust and rubbish that had fallen. I don't think people can comprehend.
They certainly have lost any feeling of safety. There's still a great Pride in the city. People are determined to fought to fight back, but a great sense of shock and loss. People keep looking at the sky, for example, where you can see See the plume of smoke and say, when that's gone, it won't be there anymore. Our twin towers won't be there.
Such a symbol of New York.
Speaker 0: Are they talking yet about revenge and what the government should do to counter this, threat? Or are they numb still?
Speaker 1: I think people are still numb, and I don't think people are talking about revenge in that way at all yet. I think people is are still too Traumatized. They we don't know how many people have been killed. We we we can't even put a figure. I think when you talk to people on on they don't even say how How many people might have been killed and injured?
And I think that feeling idea of the of the devastation. People don't really know what to say or what to think. I think they Feel the bubble of their security as being in America has definitely been popped. This city in this country will not be the same, But they don't really know where to turn. That's the very sad thing.
I think there's gonna be a lot of very, very traumatized people that that has hit them very, very hard.
Speaker 0: Jane, I think many of us when we heard the news perhaps on the radio earlier today were, completely flabbergasted by it and and just Couldn't uncomprehend it. I mean, it was it almost sounded too far fetched. I was wondering what it's felt like for you being in Manhattan. Well, unfortunately, I think we've lost the line with, Jane Stanley in Manhattan. Perhaps we can rejoin her and follow that up later.
9/11 BBC Reported Tower 7 Collapse BEFORE it Collapsed!
9/11 BBC Reports Tower 7 Collapse BEFORE it Collapsed Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candlesinthenight Truth Social at @MJTruth Gab https://gab
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
This is ground footage captured right as Tower 7 collapses. Multiple booms can be heard & flashes of light can be seen prior to collapsing. Add this to the above evidence and it all suggests that WT7 was in fact a controlled demolition, just as Larry Silverstein (the owner of the Trade Center Complex) described. https://rumble.com/v2sm1m4-911-tower-7-explosions.html
9/11 - Tower 7 Explosions
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
To compound the evidence that Tower 7 was taken down via explosives… meet Barry Jennings Barry was working in Tower 7 that day and describes multiple explosions occurring in Tower 7 while the Twin Towers were still standing. When the fire department finally got to him, they walked through a decimated lobby, as if an explosion went off. Sadly… A few years later, after speaking out, he died. https://rumble.com/v1jnzph-911-barry-jennings-describes-multiple-explosions-before-tower-7-collapsed.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
Barry Jennings, a former employee of the Office of Emergency Management, recounts his experience during the 9/11 attacks. He and his colleague, Mr. Hess, were on the 23rd floor when the second plane hit. Upon reaching the OEM, they found it deserted except for themselves. As they tried to escape through the stairwell, an explosion caused them to retreat back to the 8th floor. They eventually made it down to the lobby, which was in ruins. They were warned not to look down as they stepped over people. Jennings witnessed more explosions and had to crawl due to swollen knees. He questions why World Trade Center 7 collapsed and mentions hearing explosions. The official explanation was a fuel oil tank, but Jennings finds this confusing.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Walking down the stairs, we made it to the 8th floor. Big explosion. Lewis back into the 8th floor. And I turned to Hesh. I I said, this is it.
We're dead. We're we're not gonna make it out of here. I took, a fire extinguisher and I bust the window out. That's when this general this gentleman here heard my cries for help. Hi.
My name is Barry Jennings. I'm 52 years old. I've worked for, 33 years in one location. When the Office of Emergency Management did an activation, They always they always included our locale. And what it what it what what we did was What they did was monitor the emergency.
They actually coordinated the emergency through several agencies. I I received a call shortly after the 1st plane hit. I got there, I had to be inside on the 23rd floor when the 2nd plane hit. Upon arriving Into the OEM, EOC, we noticed that everybody was gone. I saw coffee that was on There's still the smoke was still coming off the coffee.
I saw I saw, half eaten sandwiches, and Only me, mister Hess, was up there. After I I called several individuals, 1 individual told me that, to leave and leave right away. Mister Hess came running back in and said, we're the only ones up here. We gotta get out of here. He found the stairwell.
So we we subsequently went to the stairwell and we're going down the stairs. When we reached the 8th or the 6th floor, The landing that we were standing on gave way. There was an explosion in the landing gateway, and with I was left there hanging. I had to Climbed back up, and now I had to walk back up to the 8th floor. When I made it to the 6th floor and and and the there was an explosion, explosion was beneath me.
Keep in mind now, it's pitch black in there. All the lights went out. So when the explosion happened, it blew us back. I'm thinking I'm standing on a on on the landing. I'm actually holding on to a pole above us.
Really? And I had to climb back up because Hess is yelling, what do we do now? I said, there's only 1 thing we can do is and it's go back up. Both buildings were still standing. Keep in mind, I told you the fire department came and ran.
They came twice. Why? Because building tower 1 fell, Then tower 2 fell. And then when they came back, they came back with all concern now, like, to get me the hell out of there. I was trapped in there for several hours.
I was trapped in there when when both buildings came down. All this time, I'm hearing all type of explosions. All this time, I'm hearing explosions. When they finally got to us and they took us down To what what they they, called the lobby? Because I asked them, I said, when we got down there, I said, where are we?
He said, this was the lobby. And I said, you gotta be kidding me. It was total ruins. Total ruins. Now keep in mind, when I came in there, lobby had nice escalators.
It was latest. It was a huge lobby. And for me to see what I saw, it was unbelievable. And the firefighter that took us down kept saying do not look down. And I kept saying, why?
He said, do not look down. And we're stepping over people. And you know you can feel when you're stepping over people. This big giant police officer came to me and he says, you have to run. I said, I can't run.
My knees are swollen. He said, you don't have to get on your knees and crawl in. He said, because we have reports of more explosions. And that's when I started crawling, And I saw this guy fall behind me. His comrades came to his aid.
They dragged him to safety. I'm just confused about one thing and one thing only, Why World Trade 7 7 went down in the 1st place? I'm very confused about that. I know what I heard. I heard explosions.
They The the, explanation I got was it was the, fuel oil tank. I'm an old boiler guy. If it was a fuel oil tank, it would have been one side of the building.
9/11 Barry Jennings Describes Hearing Multiple Explosions Before Tower 7 Collapsed!
9/11 Barry Jennings Describes Multiple Explosions Before Tower 7 Collapsed- He Has Since Mysteriously Died! Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/cand
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here is NY1's Gigi Stone Woods on WTC 7 where she describes hearing an "Incredibly Loud Explosion" https://rumble.com/v2z8tks-911-ny1s-gigi-stone-woods-on-wtc-7-incredibly-loud-explosion.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
There was a fire that was expected to worsen. Suddenly, there was a loud explosion, which was captured on video. People started screaming due to the foul odor and being covered in smoke. Everyone started running, except for Warner who filmed the billowing smoke. It was a terrifying scene with hundreds of policemen fleeing and taking anyone nearby.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That the fire was going to get worse. All of a sudden a loud incredible loud explosion. And we have the video to show you. Now what happened was if we started screaming, everyone started screaming. It was a very foul odor.
We were covered in smoke and everyone started running. I started running as well. I could talk to her about, Warner did not run. And he he was there filming all of the clouds, filming the billowing, the billowing smoke and it was, it was just an incredibly frightening scene. Hundreds of police men running away from the scene and, and took anyone that was, in the area.
9/11 - NY1's Gigi Stone Woods on WTC 7: "Incredibly Loud Explosion"
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here is a clip of emergency Personel saying that there were bombs in the building and to clear out. How much more evidence do we need to understand that explosives were involved in 911? https://rumble.com/v2zqbde-911-one-of-many-footage-where-emergency-personal-said-there-were-bombs.html
9/11 - One of Many Footage Where Emergency Personal said There were Bombs
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
The Tell-A-Vision is a powerful tool to set narratives, to tell you what they want you to think happened. Regarding 911– too many people that were there when it happened describes multiple explosions from within. Multiple witnesses even made the claim that there was no second plane and it was a bomb that went off. rumble.com/v2zqezo-911-wi…
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker describes hearing a loud noise and witnessing the south tower explode, but did not see the airplane. Another person with a view of the flight path claims there was enough time to see and hear the plane. Some individuals believe the second tower was bombed, not hit by a plane. One witness recounts being in the basement when they heard an explosion and saw the elevator doors blow open. They rescued a burned man and witnessed the second tower explode. Another witness describes seeing a big hole in the first building, followed by flames and the collapse of the second tower. Some argue that there was no plane involved in the second tower's destruction.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And then heard this noise that seemed to come from everywhere but didn't had no idea what it was. And then the south tower just exploded. It just it just it just blew up. And somebody said that was a plane. And it's like, I was underneath it.
I was looking at the tower. I had my camera in my hand. I heard the noise. I never saw the airplane. I was less than a 100 yards away from the building.
I was standing on West Street.
Speaker 1: He had this view. Each image in the flight path is separated by one second. David Hanchoe would have been able to see the plane for at least 6 seconds. He would have been able to hear it coming For considerably longer than that.
Speaker 0: The south tower just exploded. It just blew up. I was underneath it. I was looking at the tower. I had my camera in my hand.
I never saw the airplane.
Speaker 2: No 2nd flight. It was a bomb. Bombed in another building, not 2nd plane. That was a bomb. Who say the 2nd plane?
Speaker 3: That's what
Speaker 4: we're told. The 2nd plane. We saw it on television. Alright. Thanks a lot.
What happened was I was down in the basement. All of a sudden, we heard a a a loud bang, and the elevator doors blew open. Some guy was was burnt up, So I dragged him out. His his skin was all hanging off. So I dragged him out, and I pulled him out of the parking lot.
This was what was left on it. Pulled him out. When I pulled him out, I looked up, and the second one the 2nd bomb blew off. Just saw a burst, a big burst.
Speaker 3: All of a sudden, you heard a lot of explosions, so we all ran to look. And the 1st building was a big hole on the side of it, and then the other side went to flames. So we stood there in shock. Everyone's screaming. A woman collapsed on me.
I had to lay her down on Textbooks. And before you know it, out of nowhere, the next building blew up. And then every all of a sudden, everybody's in stand everyone's running all over the place with a panic attacked.
Speaker 4: We actually didn't see the 2nd plane, but we saw the explosion hit the other tower. It has
Speaker 2: to be a bomb. Right?
Speaker 5: Yes. Of course. That exploded right in front of us. No. A bomb.
I saw it. It no no plane hit nothing. That
Speaker 4: is not a plane. They don't know what they're talking about. How would When did you see a plane hit that shit hit that?
Speaker 5: Dude, I saw the 2nd explosion. There was no plane that hit the 2nd building. It exploded from the inside out.
Speaker 4: I did not see a plane. I did I said the plane with the 1st building. The 2nd building just exploded.
Speaker 0: It looks like a 2nd plane.
Speaker 4: I didn't see a plane go in. That just exploded.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here are multiple witness accounts of hearing multiple explosions & not even seeing a plane. The fire department was sitting in front of the Trade Center complex all morning. “I didn’t even know that was a plane, I learned that from the news media.” Tell-A-Vision - Can you believe what you see? rumble.com/v2zqgem-911-wi…
Video Transcript AI Summary
Jean initially didn't see a plane approaching the World Trade Center. She saw the top part of the building explode and later learned it was a plane. The fire department had been waiting for something to happen. Another bomb went off on the other side of the building. Jean questions why the CIA and FBI didn't check with them. She didn't see anything hit the building. The media's credibility is questioned. Jean saw the second building explode and urges everyone to go home. The size of the plane is unknown. The speaker questions how an aluminum plane could penetrate the steel perimeter of the Twin Towers. A plane went through one side of tower 2 and out the other.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Jean, you're saying that you didn't see anything initially. You didn't see a plane actually approach the building.
Speaker 1: I had no idea it was a plane. I just, I just saw the entire, top part of the World Trade Center explode. So, I turned on the TV when I heard they said it was a plane. It was really strange. A section of the building is blown out around, like, the 80th floor.
Speaker 2: Was it hit by something, or was it something inside? Inside. It was inside.
Speaker 3: The fire department was sitting here all morning. Top Yeah. So top Is that what I thought? See, I thought I was shooting the apple. I said, was it top because the water bottoms have been waiting there, like they've been waiting for them to come in.
Speaker 2: They bombed the World Trade Center. I'm looking at it. Mik Kyung's top Video taping it. Oh, another bomb just went off on the other side. You guys, I saw the I Saw the 2nd building explode.
I couldn't
Speaker 3: said what you're doing right now.
Speaker 2: I saw it, and I had nothing hit it. I didn't see anything hit
Speaker 3: of it. Is looking too realistic. I'm fine. But I don't here's what I don't get is how our CIA and FBI had no That's what you're gonna say. Side check with them, dude.
Speaker 2: I had thought That there was an explosion from within the trade center. So you have so you really have have no idea of how large a plane the first one was? No. I didn't even know that was a plane. I learned that from the news media.
Top. Can you rely on what you read? Can you trust what you hear? Can you believe what you see? Top.
The media. Are they serving you or serving themselves?
Speaker 3: That's, I got this in film. That's not blowing up. That star just blew up the moon. It just blew up. A blackout blew up.
I saw that 2nd building blow up. It was a bomb. You're going up the building. Go home. Go home.
Everybody go top Take the day off. The clone of the building.
Speaker 4: Aluminum projectiles cannot penetrate steel targets. Okay. So what how it how could it happen that subsonic aluminum plane top penetrate double walled steel perimeters of the World Trade Center Twin Towers.
Speaker 1: Top. The plane coming out the other side of tower 2.
Speaker 2: Completely in one side and out the other.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Someone Captured the Explosion of the Second Tower “It was not a plane!” rumble.com/v1jpfd0-911-ey…
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 expresses shock and disbelief at something they just witnessed. Speaker 1 argues that what they saw was not a plane, but Speaker 0 disagrees. They discuss the explosion and the confusion surrounding it. Speaker 1 mentions people jumping off the building, and Speaker 0 reacts with disbelief. Speaker 1 mentions filming the incident and witnessing the second building explode. Speaker 0 reacts with shock, mentioning that the prime minister is gone.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Oh my god. Oh my god. Holy shit. I just got that. Oh my god.
Speaker 1: The thing is a plane. The thing is a plane. That that It just blew up 2 minutes ago, way after that one.
Speaker 0: You know the joke is in the joke right here.
Speaker 1: That is not Plain. They don't know what they're talking about. How would they see a plane hit that you hit that? It was a matter of 2 seconds. Know.
I mean, this year, before involving, you know, something that's not so slow. I'm not gonna Yeah. But then that side exploded. How did that side explode? People have been jumping.
No. No. No. People have been jumping off the building like you see them flying down.
Speaker 0: Are you fucking
Speaker 1: insane? That's, I got some film. That started rolling up. And that started just blew up and remember, I saw that 2nd building blow up. It just blew up.
A
Speaker 0: No. The prime minister is gone.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Endless Eyewitness testimonies from those who were there on on the ground hearing of Secondary Explosions in the Twin Towers. Media reports of car bombs. Emergency personnel reported that bombs were going off. Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom rumble.com/v1jnov3-911-en…
Video Transcript AI Summary
Multiple witnesses describe hearing a series of explosions before and after the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. They mention the sound of booming and crackling, and some believe there were bombs in the lobby. One survivor recounts being pushed to the ground by the force of the attack and being buried in debris. Another witness mentions seeing people with injuries, including a woman with her face blown off. The transcript ends with a reporter mentioning ongoing explosions near the site.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah. Here's one of the guys who can tell you I'm okay. Alright? Yeah. Hold on.
You wanna call you wanna call your mother or something? Don't worry about me. You need to make calls right now. No gas. Another
Speaker 1: Hours after the attack, many smaller explosions rumbled through downtown. Now.
Speaker 2: Because once the tower fell, you heard boom boom boom boom boom boom boom.
Speaker 3: And we heard this
Speaker 0: boom boom boom. Hey, wait. Plans take down
Speaker 3: our buildings.
Speaker 0: All the way down. I was like, boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom. Like that.
Speaker 3: And then it sounded like firecrackers. Crack. Crack. Crack. Ma'am.
And we've looked up in a second down. It's coming down. There were numerous secondary explosions taking place in that building. There was con there were continuous explosion. She's been there a long time.
Speaker 2: Arthur Del Bianco is one of the lucky few able to tell a tale of survival from a hospital bed.
Speaker 0: All of a sudden, it was like bang,
Speaker 3: bang, bang, bang, bang, like bullet shots. And then all of a sudden, 3 tremendous explosions. And everything started coming down.
Speaker 2: Del Bianco was at work in the doomed trade towers when they were attacked.
Speaker 3: The force just pushed us to the ground. Were pushed up against marble slabs and other people and glass and smoke. We're buried in that stuff.
Speaker 2: He made it out with a broken leg And today was reunited with his wife.
Speaker 1: We're we're hearing a number of large booms coming from Matter, we can only guess what is going on.
Speaker 0: Of the secondary explosion, we've got numerous people covered with dust from the secondary explosion. And we got another explosion on the tower. 10:30
Speaker 3: And the lobby booked as though a bomb had exploded there. All the glass was taken out, there were 10 foot by 10 foot marble panels that were once walls, They were loose from the wall of the trade center. I went around by the freight elevator and
Speaker 0: I could see it was just blown.
Speaker 3: It was just a giant 30th floor. We hear another explosion.
Speaker 0: I think a brawl went up
Speaker 3: to the lobby first, then a plane hit the building, then another plane hit the other building. And but I was coming through the doors on the other side of the
Speaker 0: trade center, something either they blew the lobby up something because it blew
Speaker 3: the glass out of the doors and knocked us all down,
Speaker 0: and I got smoke and everything on don't Can you tell me what happened? What'd you say? I saw I
Speaker 4: don't know. I had some windows coming out of the building and the ceiling falling on the floor where I was working. Heading for the exit. And, we got downstairs. We got to the 1st floor from 87
Speaker 0: o'clock. And all of a sudden it was a big explosion. I don't know about And everything went down. Building in another smoke plant. Okay?
Let it go to that smoke plant. Mom, I just want to send you some more bread.
Speaker 2: The ladies that are with me were in World Trade Center on the on in the 1st building and escaped through the lobby where they report they believe there was a bomb in the lobby. We ran down the steps to the lobby. Boss ran
Speaker 5: My boys ran out of the office. He said one thing, run. Everybody just ran, and we ran downstairs. They told us to come back up the stairs. And we were, like, come back up the stairs.
Are you crazy? So we continued down the stairs. Nurse. We came outside the lobby. There was no lobby.
The lobby was totally gone.
Speaker 2: Did you see other people? People. There's a
Speaker 5: woman named her face blown off. And as we were coming out, we passed the lobby. There was no Lobby. So I believe the the bomb hit the lobby first and a couple of seconds in the first plane.
Speaker 6: Yeah. Hi. I am just about, between 5 10 blocks north Of the actual site of where those 2 towers have come down, we're obviously having a bit of trouble right now maintaining our location because we just heard one more They're exploding, but every time one of those happens, there's a flurry of
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
#911 Firefighters Describe Secondary Explosions From INSIDE the Buildings AFTER the Planes crashed into the buildings. https://rumble.com/v1jot0k-911-firefighters-describe-secondary-explosions-after-the-planes.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
There was an explosion in the lobby, causing it to collapse. The building was on fire. Witnesses mentioned multiple explosions, with the second one occurring while they were on the stairs. They arrived after the fire had started and saw three explosions in total. They observed the first explosion and continued watching the building.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What happened? It was an explosion. It was in the lobby, and it the the 3rd explosion, the whole lobby collapsed on us. The building's in fight. Horrible.
No one in hell. The whole building just collapsed inside the lobby. Final problem. Yeah. Definitely secondary explosion.
So he was inside waiting to go upstairs. And on the way stairs, the whole fucking thing blew. And we just just collapsed on his right side of the lobby. I don't know about the first one, but I know the second one, here is telling me. Then we were the 3rd one too after that one.
Everybody just by the Kelvin, the way you It was like 3 explosives after that. We came in after the after the fire. We came when the fire was going on already. We was in the staging area inside the building Here we are. Sorry.
I'm gonna pull it running. I'll give you now I'll give you a chat inside. We watched the 1st explosion as we watched these building there.
9/11: Firefighters Describe Secondary Explosions From INSIDE the Buildings AFTER the Planes
9/11: Firefighters Describe Secondary Explosions AFTER the Planes Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candlesinthenight Truth Social at @MJTruth Gab
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
In non-military applications shaped charges are used in explosive demolition of buildings and structures, in particular for cutting through metal piles, columns and beams and for boring holes. Four Pictures 1. Top Left - A weaker outer structure remained intact with minor holes blown out 2. Top Right - The Core Support Columns are completely blown out 3. Bottom Left- One of the Towers support beams with a evidence that a shaped Charge took place. 4. Bottom Right- A shaped charge placed diagonally on a support beam. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge#:~:text=In%20non%2Dmilitary%20applications%20shaped,have%20become%20plugged%20with%20slag.
Shaped charge - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
In a peer reviewed study performed in 2009, dust samples were collected and analyzed. Active THERMITE Material was discovered from dust from 9/11 that was collected from FOUR separate sites. Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approxi- mately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms oc- curring at approximately 430 ̊C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic. https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf
Bentham Open ArchivesTwitterSM-FacebookSM-Youtube
benthamopenarchives.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
General Wesley Clark "We're going to take-out 7 countries in 5 years." (2007) • Days after 9/11, one of the Generals called him in and said we’ve made the decision to go to war with Iraq. I said why? He said…. I don’t know. He said I guess they don’t know what else to do. • Weeks later, I asked are we still going to war with Iraq? “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out 7 countries in 5 years.” (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran) Wars are manufactured. https://rumble.com/v2l4at6-general-wesley-clark-were-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years..html
Video Transcript AI Summary
After 9/11, the speaker had a conversation with a general who informed him that the US had decided to go to war with Iraq, even though there was no evidence connecting Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda. The speaker later learned about a memo outlining plans to attack seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq and ending with Iran. The speaker believes that Iran saw the US presence in Iraq as a threat and got involved to protect its interests. The speaker also discusses the possibility of the US planning a bombing attack on Iran and Saudi Arabia funding covert operations in the Middle East. The speaker warns against using force as a first resort and highlights the complexities of the situation in Iraq.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Right after 911. About 10 days after 911, I went through the Pentagon and I saw secretary Rumsfeld and and deputy secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the joint staff who used used to work for me. And 1 of the generals called me and he said, sir, you gotta come in you gotta come in and talk to me a second. I said, well, you're too busy.
He said, no, no. He says, we've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq. This was on or about the 20th September. I said, we're going to war with Iraq. Why?
He said, I don't know. He said, I guess they don't know what else to do. So, I said, well, did they find some information collect connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda. He said, no, no. He says, there's nothing new that way.
They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq. He said, I guess it's like we don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can take down governments. And, he said, I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail. So I came back to see him a few weeks later. And by that time, we were bombing in Afghanistan.
I said, are we still going to war with Iraq? And he said, oh, it's worse than that. He said he reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. He said, I just he said, I just got this down from upstairs, meaning the secretary of defense office today.
And he said, this is a memo that describes how we're gonna take out 7 countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran. I said, is it classified? He said, yes, sir. I said I said, well, don't show it to me. And I saw him a year or so ago.
And I said, you remember that? He said, sir, I didn't show you that memo. I didn't show it to you.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. What did you say his name was?
Speaker 0: I'm not going to give you his name.
Speaker 1: So go through the countries again.
Speaker 0: Well, starting with Iraq, then Syria Syria and Lebanon, then Libya, then Somalia and Sudan, and then back to Iran. So when you look at Iran, you say is it a replay? It's not exactly a replay. But here's the truth, that Iran from the beginning has seen that the presence of the United States in Iraq was threat. A blessing because we took out Saddam Hussein and the Baathists.
They couldn't handle them. We took care of it for them. But also a threat because they knew that they were next on the hit list. And so, of course, they got engaged. They lost a 1000000 people during the war with Iraq.
And they've got a long and unprotectable, unsecurable border. So it was in their vital interest to be deeply involved inside Iraq. They tolerated our attacks on the Baathists. They were happy we captured Saddam Hussein. But they're building up their own network of influence.
And to cement it, they occasionally give some military assistance and training and advice, either directly or indirectly to both the insurgents and to the militias. And in that sense, it's not exactly parallel because there has been, I believe, continuous Iranian engagement. Some of it legitimate, some of it illegitimate. I mean, you can hardly fault Iran because they're offering to do eye operations for Iraqis who need medical attention. That's not an offense that you can go to war over, perhaps.
But it is an effort to gain influence. And the administration has stubbornly refused to talk with Iran about their perception. In part because they don't want to pay the price with their domestic, our US domestic political base, the right right wing base. But also because they don't want to legitimate a government that they've been trying to overthrow. If you were Iran, you'd probably believe that you were mostly already at war with the United States anyway, since we've asserted that their Government needs regime change.
So, and we've asked Congress to appropriate $75,000,000 to do it. And we are supporting terrorist groups, apparently, who are infiltrating and blowing up things inside Iraq Iran. And if we're not doing it, let's put it this way, we're probably cognizant of it and encouraging it. So it's not surprising that we're moving to a point of confrontation crisis with Iran. My point on this is not that the Iranians are good guys, they're not.
But that you shouldn't use force except as a last, last, last resort. There is a military option, but it's a bad one.
Speaker 1: I wanted to get your response to Seymour Hersh's piece in The New Yorker to 2 key points, this week. Reporting the Pentagon's established a special planning group within the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to plan a bombing attack on Iran. That This is coming as the Bush administration and Saudi Arabia are pumping money for covert operations into many areas of the Middle East, including Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, in an effort to strengthen Saudi supported Sunni Islam groups and weaken Iranian backed Shias. Some of the covert money has been given to Jihadist groups in Lebanon with ties to Al Qaeda. Fighting the Shias by funding with Prince Bandar, and then with US money not approved by Congress.
Funding the Sunnis connected to Al Qaeda.
Speaker 0: Well, I don't have any direct information to confirm it or deny it. It's certainly plausible. The Saudis have taken a more active role. You know, the the Saudis, You were just there in Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 1: You just came back Yeah,
Speaker 0: well, the Saudis have basically recognized that they have an enormous stake in the outcome in Iraq. And they don't particularly trust the judgment of the United States in this area. We haven't exactly proved our competence in Iraq. So, they're trying to take matters into their own hands. The real danger is, and one of the reasons this is so complicated is because, let's say, we did follow the desires of some people who say, just pull out and pull out now.
Well, yeah, we we could mechanically do that. It would be ugly and it might take 3 or 4 months, but you could line up the battalions on the road 1 by 1 and you could put the gunners in the Humvees and cock load and cock their weapons and shoot their way out of Iraq. You'd have a few roadside bombs, but if you line everybody up, there won't be any roadside bombs, maybe some sniping. You can fly helicopters over, do your air cover you probably get safely out of there. But when you leave the Saudis have got to find someone to fight the Shias.
Who they going to find Al Qaeda because the groups of Sunnis who would be extremist and willing to fight would probably be the groups connected to Al Qaeda. So one of the weird inconsistencies in this is that were we to get out early, we'd be intensifying the threat against us of a super powerful Sunni extremist group, which was now legitimated buy overt Saudi funding in an effort to hang on to a a toehold inside Iraq and block Iranian expansionism.
General Wesley Clark "We're going to take-out 7 countries in 5 years."
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Three times Senator Rand Paul said the the US armed & funded Osama Bin Laden in the 1980’s. Was Osama Bin Laden working with the CIA re 911? rumble.com/v3gysui-911-th…
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the 1980s, the United States supported the freedom fighters in Afghanistan, including Osama bin Laden. We funded them because we believed they hated the Russians more than us. However, once they defeated the Russians, they turned against us. This has been a recurring problem in our foreign policy, regardless of political party. We have seen these weapons come back to threaten Israel, and the support for Syrian rebels has also posed a threat. The War Caucus in Congress armed bin Laden and the Mujahideen against the Soviet Union, which was the official position of our State Department. It is clear that this strategy did not work out well.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Do we know who the rebels are? During the 19 eighties, we supported the freedom fighters in Afghanistan. Do you know who turned out to be the leader of the freedom fighters or one of the leaders? Osama bin Laden, now our mortal enemy, was receiving monies from money from the United States in support of the United States for over a decade. In fact, the state department's stated goals in Afghanistan during the 1980s was radical jihad.
We were in favor of radical jihad because we thought the Islamic radicals hated the Russians worse than us. They did until they got rid of the Russians. Now they they hate us as much or more. But this has been our problem with our foreign policy for decades, Republican and Democrat. We funded Bin Laden.
We Under the mujahideen, we were in favor of radical jihad because they were the enemy of our enemy. We've done this so often. I see these weapons coming back to threaten Israel. I see support for Syrian rebels coming back to to threaten Israel as well. I see some problems in the 1980s, War Caucus in Congress armed Osama bin Laden and the Mujahedeen in their fight against the Soviet Union.
In fact, it was the official position of our State Department to support radical jihad against the Soviets. We all know how well that worked out.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
At the Pentagon— Raw Footage shows no plane was found whatsoever. https://rumble.com/v3gyy8k-911-at-the-pentagon-no-plane-in-sight.html
9/11 - At the Pentagon - No Plane In Sight
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
THE PATRIOT ACT WAS THE GOAL HOLY COW! LISTEN TO THIS! RFK Jr • June 2001 - Pandemic simulation that simulated a biological attack by Saddam Hussein and sparked a lot of media interest. • CIA people like Judith Miller from NYT, did talk shows, triggered two senate hearings by Joe Bidens committee. 💥 • That hearing was going on during 9/11 and as soon 9/11 happened, the neocons which were working on all this stuff with the CIA, pulled out the Patriot Act. THEY HAD IT READY! • One thing the Patriot Act did, it did not get rid of the Geneva convention or the bioweapons treaty, but it said no federal official can be prosecuted for violating those two statutes. 🤯 • The patriot act was being held up by two senators… then coincidentally there was an anthrax attack on the US Capital and was blamed on Saddam Hussein wow 🤯 • Within two days, the Patriot Act was passed. • GUESS WHO got attacked with that Anthrax attack? —THE TWO SENATORS who were blocking the Patriot Act, Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy,…. HOLY COW!!!!!! 🤯 • The FBI did a year long investigation & determined the anthrax was unique and it was an Ames anthrax and it could only come from one place, Fort Detrick, a CIA lab. HOLY COW!!!!! 🤯 • After the Patriot Act was established, the Pentagon was nervous about the legality because it was the death penalty to violate the Geneva convention. Instead, they funneled money through DTRA and DARPA. From that point, Tony Fauci became the biolabs tsar. In 2014, three of Fauci’s bugs escaped from federal labs. “300 scientists wrote a petition to President Obama, saying you have to shut down Tony Fauci. He’s gonna cause a global pandemic. Obama declared a moratorium and told Fauci to shut down the 18 studies he was doing. He didn’t do it. He instead moved that science offshore to the Wuhan lab and to Ukraine. When he did that, he was not the only one who did it. Tony Fauci spent about $29 million dollars on gain of function science in Wuhan. The CIA spent over $100 million. The military spent about $64 million. The CIA funneled the money mostly through USAID.” https://rumble.com/v2hw8z0-wow-robert-f-kennedy-jr-on-a-simulation-and-cia-involvement-before-911.html ##
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the speaker discusses the connection between pandemic simulations, the 9/11 attacks, the passing of the Patriot Act, and the increase in bioweapons development. They claim that the CIA and neoconservatives used the anthrax attack on the U.S. Capitol to justify going to war with Saddam Hussein and passing the Patriot Act. They also mention that Tony Fauci became the bioweapon czar in 2001 and received a significant budget increase. The speaker alleges that Fauci and others funded gain-of-function studies in Wuhan, China, and Ukraine. They criticize the lack of a thorough investigation into the origins of COVID-19.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: With the pandemic simulations. It simulates a biological attack on Washington DC by Saddam Hussein. This is in June 2001. That simulation got international press. And a lot of the CIA people like Judith Miller from The New York Times was promoting it, going around doing all the talk shows.
It, it triggered 2 Senate hearings, 1 by Joe Biden's committee, and That hearing was in September 2001. What happened in September 2001? The 9/11. So that hearing was going on during 9/11. As soon as 9/11 happened, The neocons, which were working on all this stuff with the CIA, pulled out the Patriot Act, a 3 50 page statue from a shelf where it had been waiting a while.
And in 1 week, said we wanna pass this in a week. There's only 1 member of Congress who read it, which was Dennis Kucinich. And he went crazy and said, you have no idea this is the end of American democracy if you do this. It allows the CIA to spy on Americans. One of the things the Patriot Act did is it did not get rid of the Geneva Convention or the bioweapons treaty, but it said no federal official can be prosecuted for violating those 2 statutes.
So it reopened the bioweapons arms race globally. And when the A week after, when the Patriot Act was being debated, and it was being held up by 2 senators, There was an anthrax attack on the U. S. Capitol. It was blamed on Saddam Hussein.
And I although the neocons Zola said, see, we were right in the pandemic simulation. Saddam Hussein attacked us. And we used that as a justification to go to war against Saddam Hussein. And within 2 days, we passed the Patriot Act. Who got the anthrax?
2 Senate offices, Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy, the 2 senators who were blocking the Patriot Act. The FBI did a 1 year investigation. They said this anthrax was unique. It was Ames Anthrax, and there's only 1 place in the world it could have come from, for Dietrich, the CIA lab. So, we went to war.
We passed the Patriot Act and immediately started giving $2,000,000,000 a year to bioweapons development. The Pentagon didn't want to do it because it was nervous about the legality because it was a death penalty to violate the Geneva Convention. Oh, you would have been committing a, you know, a war crime even if Somebody told you it was okay. It wasn't. And so they funneled it through DITRA And DARPA, they funneled all of that money to NIH, to NIAID, which became the Primary spear tip of bioweapons development.
So Tony Fauci became the bioweapon czar in 2001. His budget went up by $2,200,000,000. He was personally given a 68% raise from the military. That's why he was the highest paid individual in the federal government because he was getting about this 68% bonus every year from the military. But it meant that he could not stop.
And the thing the military wanted was gain of function studies, where they could take wild Viruses and turn them into bioweapons. And bioweapons development always includes vaccine development. Because unlike chemical weapons, with bioweapons, there's always blowback. It's called the boomerang effect. If you give your enemy bubonic plague, your guys are gonna get it first too.
They're gonna get it quickly. So, the only way you can deploy a bioweapons is if you have already developed a vaccine. So the race is to Develop a vaccine simultaneously with the bioweapons, and then you can deploy the bioweapons and your enemy will take a couple of years to develop the vaccine. And you can inoculate all of your team. So in 2014, Three of Tony Fauci's bugs escaped from federal labs.
And they their escapes were public. And it caused a huge, brouaha. There were Senate hearings. And people were immensely upset. And, and 300 scientists wrote letter wrote a petition to President Obama saying you have to shut down Tony Fauci.
He's going to cause a global pandemic. And Obama declared a moratorium and told Fauci ordered Fauci to shut down the 18 Studies he was then doing. As I show in my book, he didn't do it. He instead took that science,
Speaker 1: And he
Speaker 0: moved it offshore to the Wuhan lab and to the Ukraine. And when he did that, he was not the only one who did it. Tony Fauci, spent about $29,000,000 on gain of function science in Wuhan. But the CIA spent over $100,000,000. And the military spent about that much too about 64,000,000 And they the CIA funneled the money, most of it through USAID.
But They also the CIA, as we now know, was also running this organization called the EcoHealth Alliance, which Fauci was funneling his money through. It was like a laundromat where they funneled, federal money so that It was so that their fingerprints would not be would not be visible on those studies.
Speaker 1: Jane, here's what's so amazing is that for a great nation, given the fact we're hit by a bioweapon, and I don't believe it was purposely released, but I'm open to that if the facts prove it. I know that once it inadvertently got out of the Wuhan lab as a bioweapon, the Chinese Communist Party exacerbated It spread. It's it stuns me that as a great nation, we've never really had any True investigation. Now, the house has got some things going on, but honestly, that's a little bit in fits and starts, it's not organized right there. Those are some stunning revelations from Robert F.
Kennedy, Jr. And he wrote the book, The Real Anthony Fauci,
Speaker 0: Which is
Speaker 1: a block by, you know, sold 1,000,000 and a half copies, almost 2,000,000 copies.
Speaker 0: What's your
Speaker 1: I mean, he walks you through logically the entire bio the bioweapons, Industry in the United States, and Tony Fauci is one of the key or the key government, kinda coordinator and funder of this, James Durkle.
Speaker 2: Well, not only does he correctly address the origin of COVID nineteen, he understands the historical origin of it all. He Paints the picture how one thing has led to another to eventually get us to this point. And I think his candidacy is a really big asset to the American people because he is able to break these rare very, very complex issues down and put them in a historical perspective, you know, going back 2014 when he got in trouble under the Obama administration. I mean, the outrage that came out from his bugs leaking then, and you see how this You're correct. This incredibly corrupt individual has been allowed to continue on stealing from the American people and working government and porting our resources over to the CCP, which got us where we are today.
Speaker 1: Okay. We're going to take a, we're going to take we've got a bunch more clips to go through. I want to make sure it's get as many as possible. We're going to take a clip now, Take it to the break, then Jane and I are gonna come back after the break.
Wow Robert F Kennedy Jr on a Simulation & CIA involvement Before 9/11
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Donald Trump Questioned 9/11 & Suggests Bombs Exploded Simultaneously https://rumble.com/v1jo0g8-donald-trump-questioning-911-and-suggests-bombs-exploded-simultaneously.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the World Trade Center and suggests that the collapse was not solely due to an architectural defect. They mention that the building had previously withstood a bomb in the basement and that the columns were blown out but the building remained standing. The speaker describes the building's unique structure with steel on the outside and narrow windows. They question how a plane could have penetrated the steel and suggest the possibility of bombs being involved. The speaker also comments on the speed and angle of the planes and emphasizes the strength of the buildings. Overall, they find the destruction to be astonishing.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Architectural defect or possibly by bombs or or aftershocks. Do you have any thoughts on that?
Speaker 1: Well, it was an architectural defect. You know, the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building. Don't forget, that took a big bomb in the basement. Now the basement is the most vulnerable place because that's your foundation. And it withstood that.
And I got to see that area about 3 or 4 days after it took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building. And I said, that I can't believe it. The building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out. This was an unbelievably powerful building. As if you know anything about structure, it was one of the 1st buildings that was built from the outside.
The steel, the reason the World Trade Center had such narrow windows as is that in between all the windows, you had the steel on the outside. So you had the steel on the outside of the building. That's why when I first looked and you had big as heavy I beams. When I first looked at it, I couldn't believe it because there was a hole in the steel. And this is steel that was you remember as the windows of the World Trade Center folks.
I think if you're ever up there, they were quite narrow. And in between was this heavy steel. I said how could as plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this deal? As I happen to think that they had not only a plane but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most as buildings are built with the steel is on the inside around the elevator shaft.
This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have. And it was almost just like a can of soup.
Speaker 2: You know, Donald, we were looking at pictures all morning long of that plane coming into building number 2. As And when you see that approach the the far side and then all of a sudden within a matter of millisecond, the explosion pops out the other side. Right.
Speaker 1: As I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think obviously they were very big planes, they were going very rapidly because as I was also watching where the plane seem to be not only going fast, it seem to be coming down into the building. So it was getting the speed from going downhill so to speak. As it just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane because you're talking about taking out steel, as the heaviest caliber steel that was used on a building. These buildings were rock solid.
And, it's just an amazing it's an amazing thing.
Donald Trump Questioning 9/11 & Suggests Bombs Exploded Simultaneously!
Donald Trump Questioning 9/11 & Suggests Bombs Exploded Simultaneous Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candlesinthenight Truth Social at @MJTruth
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
911 - George Bush - “He told us the EXPLOSIVES Went Off High Enough” https://rumble.com/v3gztqs-911-george-bush-he-told-us-the-explosives-went-off-high-enough.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
On the 5th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has obtained valuable information from interrogations. This information has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including attacks within the United States. Kalayk Sheikh Mohammed, for instance, provided details about planned attacks on US buildings and how operatives were directed. He mentioned that the explosives were set to go off at a high point, preventing people trapped above from escaping. This information is crucial for those responsible for protecting the American people.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Pause to mark the 5th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. The information that the Central Intelligence Agency has obtained by questioning men like, has provided valuable information and has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including strikes within the United States. For example, Kalayk Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks on buildings inside the US and how operatives were directed to That is valuable information for those of us who had the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives have been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high A point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping. He told us the operatives have been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping The explosives
911 - George Bush - “He told us the EXPLOSIVES Went Off High Enough”
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
911 - Bill Cooper - Months Prior to 911 “whatever is going to happen, They’re Going to Blame Osama Bin Laden— Don’t you Believe It!” https://rumble.com/v3gzvf8-911-bill-cooper-months-prior-theyre-going-to-blame-osama-bin-laden.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker criticizes the FBI for not being able to find Osama bin Laden despite a reporter with no budget managing to interview him in his hideout. The speaker questions whether the intelligence community is incompetent or lying about their search for bin Laden. They claim that the CIA created bin Laden, trained him, and funded him to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Now, bin Laden is being used as a scapegoat to further the agenda of world government. The speaker urges viewers not to believe anything that will be blamed on bin Laden in the future.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The FBI also, under the leadership of Louis Free, has been looking for Osama bin Laden for years years years years and many years and can't find him. Some doofus jerk off reporter with a camera crew bosses right into his hideout and interviews it. And you know what his budget is? Zip, zilch, nothing. Now that tells us 2 things.
Either everyone in the intelligence community and all of the intelligence agencies of the United States government are blithering idiot and incompetent fools, including the entire apparatus of the FBI and all of their personnel are they're lying to us? They're not looking for him at all. And the 2nd is the truth. You see, the CIA created Osama bin Laden. They recruited him.
They trained him. They found his leadership. They brought them all together. They showed him them how to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. And when that was over, they still continued to fund him and train him, and they're now using him to help bring about world government by making him the big boogeyman because they can't use Saddam Hussein anymore because they needed a new boogeyman.
A reporter from CNN and his little camera crew got in to Osama bin Laden's secret hideout and conducted an interview. If you don't believe me, tune in to CNN. They're probably running it right now as I'm speaking. And if you believe it, you are one of the stupidest jerks that ever lived on the face of this earth. And whatever is gonna happen that they're gonna blame on Osama bin Laden, don't you even believe it.
911 - Bill Cooper - Months Prior “They’re Going to Blame Osama Bin Laden”
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Jeffrey Epstein had this painting in his home. George Bush with a Paper Airplane Weird https://nypost.com/2019/08/14/epstein-had-bizarre-painting-of-bill-clinton-in-dress-heels-in-townhouse/
Epstein had bizarre painting of Bill Clinton in dress, heels in townhouse
"It was hanging up there prominently — as soon as you walked in — in a room to the right," a source told The Post. "Everybody who saw it laughed and smirked."
nypost.com
reSee.it AI Summary
Rudy Giuliani, once recorded admitting he was told about the World Trade Center collapse, denies it now. Why is he celebrated as a hero? Patriot platforms seek justice for 9/11, yet honor the man who allowed it and covered it up. Plastic conservatives lead people away from these questions, even posing with Giuliani.
@Prolotario1 - Ariel
Did you all know Rudy Giuliani was recorded (On Record" stating officially that he was told "The World Trade Center" would collapse? But if you question him about it he will deny it even though the phone call is still available. Why is he celebrated as if he is some hero? All these patriot platforms want justice for 9/11 but they all honor & praise the man who allowed it to happen then helped cover it up. Do you see how many plastic conservatives we have leading people away from these types of questions? Some of them are even seen taking pictures with Rudy Giuliani.
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson's recent text messages, revealed in the Dominion lawsuit, show that he was dismissive of claims about the 2020 election being stolen. However, it seems that Tucker has now fully embraced the idea that the election was rigged, possibly as a way to solidify his support for Donald Trump and his departure from Fox. It's unclear why Tucker's stance has changed, but it's clear that he is now fully committed to this narrative.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Tucker Carlson Is Scared to Cover the 2020 Election “I was far too dismissive of some of the claims made about it and I think there may be some merit to the wildest possible claims…” MY THOUGHTS: One of the common things I hear from people is what Tucker said in text messages that were “brought to light” by the Dominion lawsuit… that he didn’t believe the election was stolen and said some other things blah blah. I will say that Tucker, since at least 2020 (publicly), knew his devices were being monitored. What I do know is that Tucker appears to have gone all-in now on solidifying his support for Donald Trump and the fact that the 2020 election was rigged. Why? Maybe it has to do with leaving Fox. Tucker is a very smart and bright man; so it’s more than “I simply changed my mind” on these subjects..Therefore, was he freed? https://rumble.com/v41b9ah-tucker-carlson-scared-to-cover-the-2020-election.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
I am scared to cover two things. Firstly, the 2020 election. I may have been too dismissive of some claims made about it, and there might be some validity to the wildest claims. It's hard to know what's true with all the lying and sleazy people involved in politics. It may take years to figure it out, but not all the claims about fraud were baseless. Secondly, there is another topic, but the speaker does not provide any information about it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Are there things that you're scared to cover? You're sitting there saying, wow, this is, like, soul crushing. Like, to the point where, like, it really scares you in your soul. There are 2. Yes.
There are 2. 1 is the 2020 election, and I think that I was far too dismissive of some of the claims made about it, and I think there may be some merit to some of the wildest possible claims about that election. And I haven't proven it yet, but I've, you know look. I'll just say and you know this, of course, very well, both of you, that whenever you have politics, you've got a lot of sleazy people and liars and people who just wanna get their candidate elected or get paid or whatever. You've got a lot of lying around all political campaigns, so it's very hard to know what's true.
And sometimes it takes years to figure it out. So there were a lot of stupid mercenaries making claims about fraud in that past election that were you know, they couldn't back up. But that doesn't mean that all of those ideas were wrong. And I think that some of them were right, is is what I'm learning. And, you know, I'll just leave it there.
The second
Tucker Carlson Scared to Cover the 2020 Election
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Oper
rumble.com
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson has been accused of spreading numerous lies and misinformation over the years. Examples include falsely claiming to be the only journalist trying to interview Putin, blaming windmills for the Texas electrical grid collapse, spreading false conspiracy theories, and promoting debunked claims about COVID-19 and the vaccine. There are also allegations of his close ties to Hunter Biden, his association with a racist writer, and his defamation of individuals like Ray Epps. Additionally, leaked text messages suggest that Carlson privately acknowledged there was not enough fraud to change the outcome of the 2020 election, despite promoting the opposite view on air. Carlson's focus on shaping right-wing narratives and his disregard for facts have been criticized.
@dartagnank - Xanderman 🇺🇲 🇧🇷
#TuckerCarlson #RésuméofLies #PutinAsset #Receipts These are some of the more egregious lies from Tucker over the years. And I might as well start off with the most recent example when Tucker pretends he is being a courageous person for trying to interview Putin, insisting no one else had the guts to try it. In fact, real journalists all around the world have been trying to get an interview with Putin. This remark was so dishonest that even the Kremlin had to fact check him. What does it say about your credibility when your BS is too much even for the Kremlin😆 - tinyurl.com/mss6vb97 Fun Fact: Tucker Carlson was Hunter Biden's next door neighbor and close friend for years. Something he never really disclosed to any of his listeners while at FOX. At one point Tucker and his wife begged Hunter to use some of his "Biden influence" to help get their son into Georgetown. - tinyurl.com/vw8vavur (But even with Hunter's letter, their kid was too stupid for Georgetown and he didn't get in. - tinyurl.com/yc2y8wka ) When the Texas electrical grid collapsed during a winter freeze, Carlson immediately blamed windmills. He falsely claimed the state had "become totally reliant on windmills." This was quickly debunked and Tucker could have easily avoided embarrassment on this matter had he simply looked into it. But as it is with most fake news pundits, he heard something on social media and ran with it as "breaking news." Tucker Carlson spread false homophobic conspiracy regarding the attack on Paul Pelosi -tinyurl.com/3tfffmpj Tucker Carlson lies about John Hopkins "admitting that lockdowns didn't actually work." -tinyurl.com/29rmt92p Tucker Carlson deceptively edited a Twitter clip to make false claims about racial preferences in COVID-19 treatment -tinyurl.com/52xmz58m Tucker Carlson spread a well debunked claim about covid-19 deaths -tinyurl.com/3r8ezxbp During the pandemic Tucker was using dubious data from VAERS, an unverified database for "vaccine incident reports" that anyone can submit to, to claim the COVID-19 vaccine campaign is the deadliest vaccination campaign in US history. FOX and Russian media have an incestuous affair as the Russians promote Tucker Carlson as a truth teller while he attacks Ukraine and defends Russia. -tinyurl.com/5aknvnc6 Tucker Carlson's texts with Alex Jones reveal he knew the severity of the virus and tried to warn Trump about taking it seriously, but when Trump chose not to, Tucker decided to follow Trump's lead and downplay it as well. -tinyurl.com/y4sw5hkp Tucker Carlson's close friend who was responsible for writing most of the material for his shows, was exposed after racist social media posts and he immediately resigned. The fact that a Neo-Nazi was writing the content for Tucker Carlson's nightly shows isn't really surprising given the constant "White Man's Plight" themes that dominated his segments -tinyurl.com/34n2djbx Tucker Carlson frequently reported to his audiences that Ray Epps was an undercover Fed who helped stage the Jan 6th attack to make MAGA folks look bad. Ray Epps is actually a Conservative Trump voter and was a fan of Tucker Carlson! He is now in hiding because of the death threats against him after Carlson defamed him. He is also demanding a retraction from FOX's repeated lies about him. -tinyurl.com/ez7arp5n During the 2020 election, Tucker Carlson falsely claimed three people voted in Georgia even though they were dead. CNN quickly debunked this when it interviewed one of the voters he alluded to. Tucker was forced to go on air and apologize, although he only apologized for lying about one of the three, insisting the other two were actually dead. CNN then subsequently found out that those two voters were also alive, and Tucker never did his minimal research to see if perhaps there were multiple voters in the same district with the some exact name. Carlson initially spent several nights dedicated to these false claims, but he dedicated only 8 seconds apologizing for getting it wrong about one. He never acknowledged being wrong about the other two, giving his audience the impression that while he was wrong about one example, his overall argument about dead voters remained strong. A legal filing from the Dominion lawsuit unveiled text messages from Tucker Carlson that produced the stunning revelation that Carlson never believed there was voter fraud that threw the election to Biden. And yet, he still promoted those view anyway. Carlson wrote privately that Trump needed to concede the election, agreeing that "there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome" of the 2020 election. Then on November 21, Carlson said that it was "shockingly reckless" to claim that Dominion rigged the election When FOX News journalist Jacqui Heinrich tweeted that "top election infrastructure officials" had found there to be "no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," Tucker Carlson was livid that she was doing her job by reporting facts that undermined the FOX narrative of election fraud. So he immediately requested that Sean Hannity have her terminated for doing her job: "Please get her fired. Seriously...What the fuck? I'm actually shocked....It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It's measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke." Tucker Carlson was never interested in reporting facts, he was only interested in shaping Right Wing narratives that benefit his ideology. And he also made it clear that lying and deceiving his audience was necessary for his personal wealth to increase. Prior to his termination at FOX, Carlson falsely claimed U.S. troops were actually fighting in Ukraine. "As we speak American soldiers are fighting Russian soldiers." This lie was quickly corrected Jacqui Heinrich, one of the few real journalists working at FOX, and the same woman Tucker wanted fired for reporting the facts. Former FOX reporter Carl Cameron explains why Tucker Carlson lies about vaccines -tinyurl.com/muten9va
@JzeViewing - Jimbo
Tucker Carlson is CIA https://t.co/IE9nmm6dcf
Video Transcript AI Summary
Tucker Carlson has given varied responses regarding his connections to the CIA. He stated that he applied to the CIA as a college senior wanting to work in operations, influenced by his father's friends who were operations officers. He claimed he "had no idea what the CIA was, actually" at the time.
Carlson acknowledged his father's work in conjunction with the CIA. According to Alan MacLeod, Carlson's father, Richard Carlson, directed the US Information Agency (USIA) under Ronald Reagan, overseeing Radio Liberty and Voice of America, which the New York Times called a CIA-built "worldwide propaganda network." Radio Free Europe was directly funded by the CIA until the 1970s. Richard Carlson ran Voice of America, essentially the broadcasting wing of the CIA's propaganda machine, at the height of the Cold War.
Carlson now claims to be a "sworn enemy of the CIA." When asked about the Nord Stream pipeline explosion, Carlson denied involvement, but the CIA was implicated. The speaker questions whether it is a coincidence that the son of the former head of the US intelligence agency and director of Voice of Liberty for the CIA is one of the most influential political pundits in America.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When Tucker Carlson is asked about any of his connections to the CIA, he always seems to give a very confusing mix of responses. In an interview with a former member of the CIA, Sean Ryan, he was asked about it. He recounted how everyone around him growing up was in the CIA because his father was. Despite this, he also says that he had no idea what the CIA really was.
Speaker 1: You were trying to get into CIA? Yes. Vladimir Putin reminded me. I don't know how he knew that. Yeah.
I applied to CIA when I was a senior in college. What did you want to do for the CIA? Operations. Yeah, it was completely different. Completely different organization.
Well, who knows what it was, actually? I don't know. I mean, I was operating on the basis of a lot of my father's friends served as operations officers, some really wonderful guys, who I guess I probably shouldn't name, but who were always at our house and were just legit interesting people. So I applied to CIA and that whole application process then, this was 1990, and I should just say, for the record, that I, like, had no idea what the CIA was, actually. And I didn't believe any of the I think Kermit Roosevelt actually lived right down the street from us.
Are you kidding? No. Oh, man. That's cool.
Speaker 0: This isn't particularly relevant other than this being like a CIA super spy. Kermit Roosevelt Junior is a very famous intelligence officer who worked in the OSS and then the CIA. He was best known for his role in orchestrating the nineteen fifty three coup in Iran.
Speaker 1: But I didn't know I mean, but that was just the world you live in in Northwest DC. Like, I didn't I I never thought any of it was bad. And so when I applied to CIA, and I've taken a lot of crap, including from Putin, Oh, you're from a CIA family. Well, yeah, obviously my father worked in conjunction with CIA. Mean, that's what that is.
And I tried to join the CIA, but I'm not being false about it. I am a sworn enemy of the CIA at this point. No doubt about that. I just wanted a life that was interesting. I wanted to see stuff.
Speaker 0: This would all be a lot more believable conspicuous if he hadn't ended up becoming one of the most influential conservative news pundits in American history. Tucker Carlson himself says that he comes from a CIA family and that his father worked for the CIA. Alan MacLeod of Minton Press writes, Richard Carlson is an important journalist and high state official who was appointed by Ronald Reagan as director of the US Information Agency, USIA, which oversees Radio Liberty and Voice of America, which Dick was also the director. Together, these outlets are part of what The New York Times called a worldwide propaganda network built by the CIA. Their goal is to bombard enemy countries with regime change propaganda.
Until the nineteen seventies, Radio Free Europe was directly funded by the CIA. Richard Carlson would have been running Voice of America and then the branch of the CIA that oversaw Voice of America at the height of the Cold War, basically the broadcasting wing of the CIA's propaganda machine.
Speaker 2: With the backing of CIA, of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day, as I understand. We should thank God they didn't let you in. Although, it is a serious organization. I understand. My former vis a vis, in the sense that I served in the first main directorate, Soviet Union's intelligence service.
Who
Speaker 1: blew up Nord Stream?
Speaker 2: You for sure.
Speaker 1: I was busy that day. Nate, do you have do you I did not blow up Nord Stream.
Speaker 2: Thank you though. You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi. Is
Speaker 0: it a coincidence the former head of the US intelligence agency and director of voice of liberty for the CIA's son is one of the most influential political pundits in America?
reSee.it AI Summary
I reacted strongly to the news of the second assassination attempt on Trump, feeling frustrated by the media's portrayal of the suspect as a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham's claim that he worked for Iran shocked me. It turns out this individual had extensive connections and had been interviewed by numerous outlets in Washington, revealing a more complex background than initially reported. I can't help but wonder about the true motivations and affiliations at play here.
@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra
Tucker Carlson Reacts to the 2nd Trump Assassination Attempt They Said he was a Trump Supporter.. huh? Lindsey Graham said he worked for Iran on Fox… what!? “I’m screaming at my television… They LIED! They’re Lying!” Come to find out, this guy was had been interviewed by every media outlet in Washington.. he was a neocon who did a lot of interviews, and had a lot of contacts with members of Congress and their staff, and other US government agencies. 🤔 I wonder who? https://rumble.com/v5fcwbd-tucker-carlson-reacts-to-the-2nd-trump-assassination-attempt.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker watched news coverage claiming the man arrested for attempting to murder Trump was a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham blamed Iran. However, the speaker says the would-be assassin's politics align with Graham's, as he is a neocon who volunteered in Ukraine.
The speaker believes the media is lying by omission, distorting reality, and preventing the average person from knowing the truth. The attempted assassin was interviewed by every major media outlet and has a lengthy criminal record, yet The New York Times portrayed him as a "freedom fighter" in Ukraine and detailed his contacts with US government agencies. The speaker fears this information will be memory-holed, and the public will be misled into believing a false narrative.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I'm I'm watching this. They're literally telling me that this guy whom they've arrested is a Trump supporter. So you flip channels and then you learn that I flipped over to a channel I used to work on. And there's Lindsey Graham. And I know, I know, I know.
He's a Republican senator from one of the most conservative states. How does that happen by the way? If democracy is real, how is Lindsey Graham a senator? But whatever. So I'm watching Lindsey Graham and Lindsey Graham's looking right into the camera and he's like, you know who did this?
Iran. Iran? So I looked into this. Yeah. That's for sure.
Well, it turns out someone has yelled warmonger. Well, the guy who shot Trump was also a warmonger. And in fact, the closer you look at it, the more you realize his politics are exactly the same as Lindsey Graham's. He's a neocon. He literally volunteered in Ukraine.
And Lindsey Graham's like, no, Iran did. I was like, no, you have no opinions that are different from this guy's. And you're lying to me. And the audience I used to speak to five nights a week, you were lying to them. I'm shouting this in my hotel room, nobody heard me.
My wife was brushing her teeth. She's like, what is that? They're lying. It drove me completely insane. And there's no mention of the fact that this guy who by the way has been interviewed by every media outlet in Washington.
This guy was like a very famous guy. You may not even know this. There's only really one place to learn any facts at all and that's Elon Musk's social media app. It's crazy. I don't have a TV at home, so I'm spared most of this.
I have no idea what's going on. By the way, I strongly recommend ignorance. If you're looking to stay happy in a moment like this, just know less. Unfortunately, my job requires me to know more, but if you think about it, did God punish Adam and Eve for ignorance? I don't think he did.
He punished them for knowledge. So maybe I shouldn't watch cable news. This was my I don't wanna know what they're saying, but this week I've had to pay close attention. And every single thing is a lie either directly or it's a lie more much more prevalent and much more sinister. It's a lie by omission.
They're just not telling you the facts. And without belaboring the point, I'm using this as just one example among a countless number of examples where reality is completely distorted and the average person has not only no idea but no way of knowing what the truth is. So the guy who is now in custody for attempted murder against the Republican nominee, the former US president Donald Trump. That guy has been interviewed countless times by every big media outlet in The United States. He's got, you know, a criminal record, the length of your arm, 20 charges including possession of weapons of mass destruction.
The New York Times didn't bother to learn any of that before they held him up as a freedom fighter in Ukraine where he was living. And then the piece describes the contact he's had with members of congress and their staffs and other US government agencies. Wait a second, that's the same guy who brought a rifle with a scope to a golf course in South Florida to murder Donald Trump and he's had all these contacts with US government agencies. I don't know what that's about, but I think it's time to find out. No?
Yes. But no one's gonna find out. It's just gonna be memory holding. In a week, will never have happened. And you'll be the crazy person for remembering.
People like what? Didn't some Trump supporter bring a rifle because you're against gun control or something? No, no, no, That's not what happened. A guy who was a darling of the New York Times who has the exact same world view as Lindsey Graham decided to try and murder Donald Trump and it will be completely gone. Will have disappeared.
@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC
TUCKER CARLSON: This is unfathomably based from him. Tucker calls for complete DECLASSIFICATION of EVERY DOCUMENT related to 9/11. And his audience looks VISIBLY uncomfortable. Gosh, I wonder why the FUCK that is.😒
reSee.it AI Summary
I find it appalling how some individuals exploit their identities to obstruct justice for serious crimes like human trafficking and bioterrorism. This is America, and I believe that anyone taking advantage of our resources while protecting criminals should be held accountable. It's frustrating to see people, like Mike, perpetuating false narratives and potentially being linked to harmful organizations. I want to make it clear that I won't stand for this behavior and will fight against those who threaten our values and safety.
@RichardEntuboca - Richard Entuboca
What an absolutely disgusting fa***t and traitor. And for the record, this is America. This isn’t Israel. You being a Jew doesn’t mean you get to obstruct justice for kid traffickers, bioterrorists, organ harvesters and pedophiles, then soak up all available resources and time of the honest people who genuinely want to save this country that you’re taking advantage of… which was founded and paid for by MY ancestors, not yours. You’re a guest in OUR house and YOU’D better straighten the fuck up and stop protecting Jew criminals or we’ll come for you too. PS: It’s bad enough you’re a fucking Holocaust hoaxer thief, Mike. But let me find out you’re related to the Mossad/NSA COVID bioterrorists at Cleveland Clinic and you’ll get expedited to the top of the “must destroy” list. Moshe. (Palantir/Eric Topol/Serbian diaspora/Phebe Novakovic/Merck/BlueVoyant/8VC/K2 Integrity/Duke Energy/Marsh McLennan/etc.)
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a screenshot of FARA documents showing Qatar paid over $200,000 for an interview between Tucker Carlson and the Qatari Prime Minister, despite Qatar's funding of Hamas. This interview appears to be a propaganda piece, as Qatar is known for financing Islamic terrorism globally. I believe Tucker's views on Iran are compromised by this financial relationship, and his media company has ties to a Muslim investor connected to Qatar. It's concerning that conservative voices may be influenced by these interests, undermining pro-American and pro-Israel perspectives.
@LauraLoomer - Laura Loomer
Here’s the screenshot from the FARA documents filled out this year that prove Qatar paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for an interview between @TuckerCarlson and the Prime Minister of Qatar (the same Qatar which funds HAMAS) regarding the “war with Iran”. This was a paid propaganda piece in which over $200,000 was paid by the Embassy of the State of Qatar for Tucker to interview a Qatari official all while knowing HAMAS is an Iranian proxy and funded by Qatar. Qatar funds Islamic terror all around the world and they think they can just pay everyone off to make them turn a blind eye. The Qataris are global funders of Islamic terrorism and their money has been used to murder American citizens. These are not good people. Tucker Carlson wants you to think his thoughts on Iran are based and original, but he’s literally participating in paid for interviews by the Qataris, who are funding and providing pent houses and luxury lifestyles to the leaders of HAMAS in DOHA. Tucker should just be honest that he’s a mouthpiece for genocidal Muslims. His media company was literally funded by a MUSLIM investor who is half Pakistani and half Iranian and who spends a lot of time in Qatar. And trust me when I say a lot of people in pro-Trump circles are very uncomfortable with this. Tucker is controlled by Muslims. People need to wake up and stop pretending like this is a conspiracy theory. Qatar and Iran are buying off conservative podcasters to push pro-Islamist, anti-American and anti-Israel talking points to undermine President Trump.
reSee.it AI Summary
This is a false accusation. The contract and filing mentioned have nothing to do with us, and neither Tucker nor TCN has accepted any foreign money, including from Qatar. The real issue seems to be a disagreement with Tucker's views on a war you support. It would be more straightforward to address him directly about that. Your attacks are not new; they echo the tactics used against President Trump for stepping outside the pro-war narrative. The FARA report you referenced pertains to Lumen8Advisors, which clarified that they were paid for preparing the Qatari Prime Minister, not for Tucker's interview.
@NeilPatelTDC - Neil Patel
This is a lie. This contract and filing has nothing to do with us. Tucker and TCN have never accepted any foreign money, Qatari or otherwise. None of this is even about the interview anyway, of course. It's about you not liking Tucker's views on a war that you want. That's your right, but it would be more honest if you addressed Tucker directly on the real topic. There's nothing new to your attack — if there’s one thing President Trump has made clear, it's that stepping out of line with the pro-war monolith is dangerous. That’s why they’ve spent the last 10 years trying to destroy him with lies and violence. You're now trying to run that type of playbook against Tucker and it's not going to work any better. The FARA report you posted was for payments to a group called Lumen8Advisors that is registered to work for Qatar. Lumen8 has now made clear in the statement below that neither they nor the Qatari government paid Tucker to do this interview as you wrongly alleged. Lumen8 also makes clear in the statement that it was they who were paid for their work prepping the Qatari Prime Minister for the interview. You already knew all that of course, but for other people who care about the truth, Lumen8's entire statement is pasted below.
@LauraLoomer - Laura Loomer
Here’s the screenshot from the FARA documents filled out this year that prove Qatar paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for an interview between @TuckerCarlson and the Prime Minister of Qatar (the same Qatar which funds HAMAS) regarding the “war with Iran”. This was a paid propaganda piece in which over $200,000 was paid by the Embassy of the State of Qatar for Tucker to interview a Qatari official all while knowing HAMAS is an Iranian proxy and funded by Qatar. Qatar funds Islamic terror all around the world and they think they can just pay everyone off to make them turn a blind eye. The Qataris are global funders of Islamic terrorism and their money has been used to murder American citizens. These are not good people. Tucker Carlson wants you to think his thoughts on Iran are based and original, but he’s literally participating in paid for interviews by the Qataris, who are funding and providing pent houses and luxury lifestyles to the leaders of HAMAS in DOHA. Tucker should just be honest that he’s a mouthpiece for genocidal Muslims. His media company was literally funded by a MUSLIM investor who is half Pakistani and half Iranian and who spends a lot of time in Qatar. And trust me when I say a lot of people in pro-Trump circles are very uncomfortable with this. Tucker is controlled by Muslims. People need to wake up and stop pretending like this is a conspiracy theory. Qatar and Iran are buying off conservative podcasters to push pro-Islamist, anti-American and anti-Israel talking points to undermine President Trump.
@RichardGage_911 - Richard Gage, AIA, Architect
[RG911Team] What made Tucker Carlson turn against the Republican establishment? Ted Cruz probably doesn’t know… but we do. It had something to do with 9/11… https://t.co/QHTgkmVdhv
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11, which was not hit by a plane. A video clip shows the building's collapse, described as reminiscent of a controlled demolition.
One speaker recalls news reports announcing the building's collapse before it happened. Another speaker, with a background in fire protection and insurance, states that a 47-story building doesn't typically collapse due to fire.
One speaker admits to previously attacking 9/11 conspiracy theorists but now questions the official narrative, particularly regarding Building 7. An Alaskan structural engineering professor's four-year study allegedly debunks the NIST analysis of the collapse. Molten steel was reportedly present in the Twin Towers. The symmetrical nature of Building 7's collapse is questioned, with one speaker suggesting it resembles a controlled demolition.
One speaker suggests they broadened the Overton window on the topic because they were part of the cover-up and feel guilty.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Alleging not simply a cover up by the US government, but by the entire American media. It's totally implausible. Like, we would report that if that were true. Tucker, not quite entire. One thing to hold on to.
How you make this these claims or appear to make these claims. Do you have any
Speaker 1: Let's go to the top here. Sure. Sure. Let's start with the collapse of Building 7. Can you roll the video clip that I sent to you?
Speaker 0: Okay. I'm not sure if we can. Building 7 was not hit by an airplane. No. I've seen conveniently.
I know. And if there's any evidence that the government's behind 911, what's I I believe anything if there's evidence, but there isn't evidence. So knock it off.
Speaker 2: That's seen Building 7 collapse, the Solomon Brothers Building?
Speaker 0: No. I wanna show you that right now.
Speaker 3: Now here, we're gonna show you a videotape of the collapse itself. Describe that feeling. Go to videotape the collapse of this building. It's amazing. Amazing.
Incredible. Pick your word. For the third time today, it's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before when a building was deliberately store destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.
Speaker 0: Was this after the collapse of the other two?
Speaker 2: Yes. So she's saying it's fallen, Building 7.
Speaker 4: Familiar New York skyline, a symbol on by the mayor Rudy Giuliani, much earlier today, because of the course, the dreadful collapse of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. But, New York very much a city still in chaos. The phones are not working properly.
Speaker 2: They announced Building 7 fell twenty five minutes before it did, and then Lyden said this wasn't real and later admitted it. And we have the up close footage of CNN. Police saying, get back. They're gonna bring it down.
Speaker 0: Walking back to the building about to blow here. Alright, guys? We are walking about to up. We're
Speaker 3: It's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television television before when a building was deliberately destroyed by world place dynamite in Michael Brown.
Speaker 2: What do you think of that?
Speaker 0: You know, I'm not a structural engineer. I think it's upsetting to watch it. I remember when that happened. I mean, look, I have no idea. I I don't know any I mean, I I don't understand how buildings collapse.
I don't understand how Building 7 collapsed. What what actually happened with Building 7? Like, that is weird, right? It doesn't
Speaker 5: what is
Speaker 0: that? If you were to say something like that on television, they'd flip out. They would flip out. You should, like, lose your job over that. Why?
Why? But it's an entirely fair question. It is not crazy to ask how did those buildings collapse in the way they did, particularly the building that was not hit by a plane. Like, what was that? And you get to a certain point where you realize people are lying right to your face.
What began to make me wonder, and I have no idea what happened to nine eleven, but it's very clear that there's a lot of lying around it, was the collapse of Building 7. And all the wackos would be like, Building 7, Building 7. I'd be like, shut up, wackos. And then if you just sort of look at it, you're like, well, that is very weird, actually. No plane hit that building, and it does this happen a lot when buildings catch fire?
Right. Okay.
Speaker 5: Besides being a firefighter, I worked for the INA, largest insurance company in North America. I was responsible for training their fire protection arson people for eighteen years. That doesn't happen. You never have a 47 story building just collapse, which this is. By the way, I never
Speaker 0: questioned anything about nine eleven, and I actively attacked people who did. I'm ashamed of that, but that's a fact. I did it on tape more than once. Because my feeling was, well, you know, like, that's divisive or whatever. I was a child and an idiot.
Now that you've looked into it and you said you don't have a coherent theory as to what it was, but you've got a lot of questions, which questions trouble you the most?
Speaker 6: Well, starts with Building seven. Yes. Where you look at that and it just yeah. I mean, this this is really weird. You know, it it does come down just like a, you know, building demolition type of project.
You you get a documentary of this Alaskan structural engineering professor that does a four year study on it. Pretty well debunks NIST analysis. Again, you don't have to be a structural engineer to say this really doesn't make sense. When you start putting together at what temperature steel melts, They had molten steel in the the Twin Towers, and I'm not sure we had a number seven. But if if one column said in one column expanded, went off kilter, and that's what brought the whole thing down, well, it wouldn't come down so symmetrically.
You wouldn't have a free fall. You know, why have you been so instrumental in broadening the Overton window on some of these things? And and, of course, the Overton window is is is all is all about this is what you can discuss without threat or without, you know, risk. And but you gotta go beyond that. So
Speaker 0: because I was part of the cover up, and I feel guilty about it. That's why. And I'm trying to atone for my previous sense. That's the real reason.
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson suggested that Nick Fuentes must be a government informant for knowing about his father's CIA background, which I found surprising since this information has been publicly available for years. I pointed out that many online users, including myself, had shared this info long before Tucker claimed to have discovered it. His recent admission about learning this from a Fuentes video, despite his father's lifetime knowledge, seems implausible. I also noticed Tucker's similarities to Ben Shapiro's past criticisms of Fuentes.
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
1/ Tucker Carlson tells Candace Owens that Nick Fuentes must be a Fed, because how else could Nick know Tucker's dad was CIA when Tucker just found out this year? "How the hell would this child from Chicago know this?" But it's been publicly available info for years on the internet. Originally posted to bitchute 4 years ago (where it has 100k views), I even posted it to Gab over 2 years ago. Am I a Fed, too, Tucker? What does it say about Tucker's credibility that hundreds of thousands of internet anons figured out that his dad worked for the CIA before Tucker did? And why would Tucker be mad at people for their sleuthing of publicly available internet info?
Video Transcript AI Summary
Someone sent the speaker a video of a young, talented person from Chicago attacking him, claiming his father was in the CIA. The speaker initially dismissed this as untrue. However, after his father's death in March, he learned his father was indeed involved in that world, which shocked him.
The speaker questions how this person knew about his father's involvement in intelligence, given his father's age. The person in the video claimed the speaker was a CIA operative. The speaker vehemently denies this, expressing strong animosity towards the CIA. He also says the person has since claimed he is funded by Russia. The speaker finds the CIA accusation personally offensive.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But I had the only reason I know who he is is because someone sent me a video a few years ago of him attacking me, I was like, so I'm looking at this. And I'm like, well, first of this kid's really talented, like legit. And I can assess that just having done the job for so long. So I was like, wow. Lots of talent.
Native talent. And he's attacking my dad as a CIA. His dad's in the CIA or whatever. And I'm like, Well, that's no. Untrue.
Then my father dies, and I learn, actually, yeah, was involved in that world. I was completely shocked by it. So, no one has to believe me, but that's just a fact. This was in March. And I'm like, well, why would how the hell would this child from Chicago my dad was 84 when he passed.
Like, how who's this guy know my dad is? And, like, he's in an intelligence world. How would he know that? And I didn't Wait. So that was his critique of you because I didn't see it?
Yeah. Someone just sent me this video, and it was like, you can't believe anything Carlson says because his father was in the CIA and he's a CIA working on behalf of the CIA. Well, I mean, I think it's pretty obvious and I'm pretty I mean, I actually feel emotional in my anger towards CIA. And I think that that comes out on the air quite regularly. Right.
And so the idea that I'm working for the CIA is like deranged. Well, it helps, he said I was I'm funded by Russia now. Since the interview, he then did a thing and said I was funded by Russia. A lot more likely to take Russian money than I would be to work for the CIA because you would never take Russian money and you're not Russian. But but I mean, really hate the CIA.
I mean, I would I mean, that's like very offensive to me. So why would you It's like personal for you. Well, little bit. Yeah. And anyway, like, who is this kid exactly?
And maybe it's just an accident that the guy goes after exclusively goes after people who are in the same
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
2/ To be clear, the info in the "Tucker Carlson Company Man" video has been publicly known for decades. That video put it all together and made it digestible to the masses. You can find it by following my Gab link: https://gab.com/SamParkerSenate/posts/110347283262710429
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
3/ Or, you can watch it right here, and find out the information that Tucker knew his whole life but is pretending to have just found out this year. Do you find Tucker credible? https://t.co/2hwJ97H7Mr
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker alleges Tucker Carlson is a CIA puppet due to his and his father's connections to various organizations. Carlson's father, Richard, was Director of Voice of America, a propaganda broadcasting division with ties to the CIA, and later U.S. Ambassador to the Seychelles. Tucker supposedly attempted to join the CIA and later worked for publications with ties to individuals and organizations connected to the CIA, including the Heritage Foundation and The Weekly Standard.
The speaker highlights connections between individuals associated with Carlson, such as Paul Greenberg, William Kristol, and Rupert Murdoch, to organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations, the Rothschilds, and individuals with alleged CIA ties. The speaker claims Carlson ridicules 9/11 conspiracy theories and avoids discussing the Rothschilds due to his controlled opposition role. The speaker suggests media personalities and outlets are controlled, and encourages viewers to research independently and avoid blindly trusting mainstream media figures.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The owners of this country know the truth. It's called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
Speaker 1: Before I begin my video, I just want to remind you my dating site, clownworlddating.com, is up and running. Sign up is free. If you'd like a premium account, it's $10 a month. You could also donate or share a link if you don't want to sign up. Trying to get the idea off the ground.
If you want to meet someone who's not an NPC, give Clown World Dating a try. In this video, I will document the many connections Tucker Carlson has to the CIA and other groups. The reason I'm doing this is because right now, he is leading a major part of America off a cliff with his false conservative platform. He rages about the elite and how America seems to be going down the drain when he himself couldn't be more connected to these same elites helping to do it. He is a total shill, a puppet being used to distribute propaganda.
What people need to realize is the left and right paradigm we are given is entirely false. Whether you watch CNN or Fox, you are getting CIA agents highly trained in propaganda, usually coming from wealthy families. Take Anderson Cooper, for example. He admittedly interned at the CIA and was born into the Vanderbilt family. He could be called the face of CNN just as Tucker is the face of Fox.
Follow me as I take you through his career and document his highly suspect rise in journalism. Don't forget to take notes and research these things yourself. Tucker Carlson was born on 05/16/1969 in San Francisco, California. When he was six years old, his father Richard divorced his mother Lisa and married Patricia Swanson, one of the heiresses to Swanson Enterprises most notable for their TV dinners. Carlson attended many boarding schools during his youth, including locations in Switzerland and Rhode Island.
He graduated from Trinity College in Connecticut in 1991, which is known as one of the Little Ivies, which are a group of private schools which compete with Ivy League schools. Supposedly, Tucker attempted to join the CIA when he graduated, but his application was denied. I can't find an explanation as to why he wanted to be in the CIA or why they rejected him. His father was a very well connected man in the media industry and encouraged him to pursue journalism because, quote, they'll take anybody. His father Richard started his career in journalism at the young age of 22.
He had jobs as a copy boy at the Los Angeles Times as well as a reporter for United Press International, which at the time was one of the largest newswire services in the world. He worked for a few TV stations in Los Angeles and San Diego before joining San Diego Federal Savings and Loan in 1977. The bank was headed by Gordon Luce, who was the former public affairs director for Reagan. Richard became vice president of finance within three years, and during this time, the bank had a lot of political controversies due to their connections to current and former members of the Reagan administration. In 1983, he decided to get into politics, and in 1984, ran for mayor of San Diego.
He lost to his opponent Roger Hedgecock, who was later forced from office in 1985 after it was revealed he received over $350,000 illegally during his campaign. Coincidentally, he would also go on to become a conservative radio host. In 1986, using his connections to the White House, Reagan personally announced his intention to nominate Richard as associate director of the United States Information Agency. He became Director of Voice of America, which was a propaganda broadcasting division of USIA. He served as their longest running Director.
Voice of America started in 1941 when President Roosevelt established the Foreign Broadcast Information Service as a program directed by the Office of Strategic Services, which became the CIA. The intention stated publicly was to communicate America's views abroad, but it was really an outfit to disseminate propaganda. The first few broadcasts for Voice of America were done over British Broadcasting Corporation transmitters but expanded rapidly and fell under control of the Office of War Information in 1942. The Office of War Information was tasked with creating and distributing propaganda domestically and internationally. They did this through various means such as broadcast, newspapers, posters, films, and other media.
The agency was terminated by President Truman in 1945, their offices were transferred to the State Department and most of the responsibilities were transferred to the CIA. It should also be noted that a Voice of America relay station in Thailand was used as a CIA black site referred to as Cat's Eye or Detention Site Green. These overlaps and connections between Voice of America and the CIA should not be glossed over. In 1991, Richard Carlson was personally nominated by President George H. W.
Bush to be The U. S. Ambassador to The Seychelles, a nation of islands off the Eastern Coast Of Africa. In 1997, he became CEO of King World Public Television, which was later purchased by CBS in 1999 for $2,500,000,000 He became the vice chairman of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which is an organization that is part of the Israel lobby in The United States. It was founded by Clifford May, who was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the project for the new American century, and vice chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition.
Now you're starting to see that it was no mistake Tucker wanted to join the CIA and become a journalist, like father like son. Tucker Carlson got his start in journalism when he was hired as a fact checker for policy review. This was a publication put out by the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973 by three men: Paul Wyrick, a political activist and commentator Edwin Feulner, an academic who attended London School of Economics, which is a Rothschild controlled school who was also advisor to different government agencies and domestic policy consultant to Reagan, and last but not least, Joseph Coors of the Coors Brewing family. In 1975, Congress investigated the activities of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency in The US.
Mr. Had met with the KCIA station chief, Kim Young Hwan, and in the early nineties, the Heritage Foundation started receiving donations from the KCIA. It should also be noted that in 02/2005, Mr. Fuelner was appointed to a task force on UN reform, which included such people as former CIA Director James Woolsey with the goal of achieving a more effective United Nations. The task force was also supported by the Council on Foreign Relations.
In 1977, Paul Wyrick hired a man named Roger Pearson to write for policy review. In 1986, an intelligence agency watchdog publication called the Covert Action Quarterly documented Pearson's connections to James Jesus Engelton, who was the former chief of CIA counterintelligence, as well as Daniel Graham, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. The Heritage Foundation was largely funded by Joseph Coors through his family wealth, but it also received funding from Chase Manhattan Bank, Pfizer, Dow Chemical, Sears, General Motors, Amoco, and Mobile. David Rockefeller was CEO and Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank at the time. It should also be noted that David's grandfather, John D.
Rockefeller, who started the Standard Oil Company, had to break it up due to antitrust laws, and Amico, as well as Mobile, were once part of the company. John D. Rockefeller also donated the 16 acres of land upon which the United Nations headquarters sits in New York. In David Rockefeller's O Memoirs, he is quoted as saying, some even believe we, the Rockefeller family, are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of The United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalist and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure, One world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
He also funded and was chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. A quick little fun fact. Before the homosexual political commentator David Brock, founder of Media Matters for America, a leftist propaganda outlet which received funding from George Soros and given office space by alleged pedophile and human trafficker John Podesta, he was on the board of the Heritage Foundation. He supported Hillary Clinton for president twice and dated James Alifantis, has been accused of being a pedophile and human trafficker. He is also a friend of Lynn Rothschild.
Lynn Rothschild supposedly abhors Trump and fawns over Clinton publicly, yet her and Trump go way back as well. Also, here's a photo of Trump laughing it up with happy Rockefeller, wife of former vice president and New York governor Nelson Rockefeller. It's a great example to show you that these people are all liars and actors. They will fill whatever role they need to fill when they need to fill it. Sometimes that involves swinging to the total opposite side of the false paradigm politically if it's advantageous to the agenda of the elite.
Pick your central banking puppet, left or right. It's all controlled, and these people are shameless whores. When Tucker Carlson left his job at policy review, he went to work for the Arkansas Democrat Gazette under the tutelage of editor Paul Greenberg. Mr. Greenberg was very well connected having his pieces published across 1,400 different newspapers within the Tribune Content Agency Syndicate at the time.
He also won a Pulitzer Prize in 1969, appeared on major television networks as a political commentator on talk shows such as Charlie Rose. Now I can't actually prove that Mr. Greenberg was CIA, but when I started to look at a few publications he put out, it made me start to wonder. In one article entitled How to Break the CIA, published on jewishworldreview.com 09/02/2009, he defends the CIA from what he believes to be unfair persecution. He defends the torture of possibly innocent people as justified in the, quote, war on terror.
When referring to the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he says, are we supposed to be sorry about that and proceed to punish those who uncovered these plans? On what theory? That no good deed for your country should go unpunished? He also boohoos about the morale of the CIA and how investigations might increase their agents' anxiety. In another article by Mr.
Greenberg entitled Hooray for Snooping, published in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette 10/23/2013, he talks about a national conference of editorial writers he attended in Calgary, Alberta in the seventies or eighties. In the article, he says that, quote, that year at Calgary, one solemn resolution proposed that we stop talking to the CIA since a number of journalists abroad had been assassinated on the pretext that we were all CIA agents, capitalist spies, tools of imperialism, and, well, you know the rest. As if the killers were so lacking in imagination, they couldn't come up with some other excuse to do away with us if they hadn't invented this one. So there we were, an all too solemn convention assembled, First Amendment or no, debating whether we should gag ourselves. I dissented, being an American, and unaccustomed to being told whom I could talk to or not talk to.
Memory grows furtive, but I believe the resolution was defeated. That it was ever considered was disgraceful enough. It occurs to some of us that if the CIA and FBI and NSA had been allowed to talk even to each other before 09/11/2001, that date might not have become another one that will live in infamy. If only big data could have been mined back then the way it is now, the country might have been a lot safer along with the thousands of innocent victims who found themselves in the Twin Towers that fateful day and others rushing to their rescue as firefighters and cops. And the troops who were stationed at the Pentagon as airliners were turned into flaming engines of destruction, their passengers and crews wiped out, including those who, like the ones aboard Valiant Flight United 93, were the first to mount a counterattack against the terrorists in the still continuing war.
It would seem Mr. Greenberg, a very well connected columnist, was very sympathetic to the ambitions of the CIA for seemingly no reason. It should also be noted he was Jewish and a Zionist. When Tucker left the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, he went to work for the Weekly Standard News magazine in 1995. It was founded by William Crystal and Fred Barnes.
William Crystal is Jewish and the son of Irving Crystal, who's been described as, quote, the godfather of neoconservatism. Irving Crystal was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and worked for the Congress for Cultural Freedom. The Congress for Cultural Freedom was a group started by a Jewish CIA agent named Mikkel Jocelyn in 1950. It distributed anti communist propaganda in 35 countries and published over 20 magazines. In 1966, The New York Times are in a series of articles exposing it as a front for the CIA to transfer money to the State Department and the United States Information Agency, the same agency which broadcasted Voice of America, which Tucker's dad was the director of.
In the book, Finks, How the CIA Tricked the World's Best Riders, author Joel Whitney talks about, quote, how the good versus bad CIA is a false divide and that the cultural cold warriors again and again used anticommunism as a lever to spy relentlessly on leftist and indeed writers of all political inclinations, and thereby pushed US democracy a little closer to the Soviet model of the surveillance state. He alleges that Kristol was in fact a CIA employee, The man who referred to Irving as the godfather of neoconservatism was a man named Jonah Greenberg, also Jewish and editor in chief of The National Review, a semimonthly magazine. The magazine was founded by William F. Buckley Jr. And has played a significant role in the development of conservatism in The United States.
Like Krystal, Buckley was also outed as a CIA employee in Joel Whitney's book. It should also be noted that Fred Barnes, co founder of The Weekly Standard, currently moderates a show on Voice of America called Issues in the News, again, the same program Tucker's father, Richard, was director of. It would seem William Crystal was also a fan of Paul Greenberg, Tucker's first mentor at the Arkansas Democrat Gazette since he quoted him in an article he published in the Washington Examiner 11/01/2004 entitled the 09/11 connection. In the article, quotes Paul as saying, everything we had thought, assumed, expected in the golden nineties hadn't been so. The surface piece of the nineteen nineties had been bought at a great price.
On nine eleven, a failure of American leadership was revealed, a failure to look ahead and act forcefully to forestall threats, to do what Bush has called, quote, the hard work of fighting terror and spreading freedom. William's father Irving, alleged CIA employee, also only had kind words to say about mister Greenberg when he wrote the foreword to his 1991 book, Resonant Lives, 50 Figures of Consequence. He said, and I quote, our intellectual and spiritual elites today are, with some notable exemptions, semi educated at best. This explains why someone like Mr. Greenberg has not received the recognition he deserves.
Oh yes, he has won a Pulitzer Prize and other awards, which is nice, but these are tributes to his journalistic talents as a columnist and editorial writer. As a master of the brief moral essay, he has yet to come into his own. These men all seem to connect to one another in some way, and they all seemingly support the, quote, alleged war on terror while increasing the size of the government in the name of preserving freedom. They protect Israel and promote their agenda while scapegoating Muslims for false flag attacks meant to justify giving more power to their think tanks and intelligence agencies, which answer to nobody except the people lining their pockets. After leaving The Weekly Standard, Tucker then went on to write for New York Magazine, Reader's Digest, Slate, Esquire, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Daily Beast, and The Wall Street Journal.
He would also go to work on camera for CNN, PBS, and MSNBC before finally settling into his role at Fox News as the poster boy for conservative values. During those years, he also somehow found time to appear on shows like King of Queens, 30 Rock, and Dancing with the Stars. While he is now on Fox News as arguably their most popular personality, this wasn't his first tango with News Corporation, which owns Fox News. News Corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch also owned The Weekly Standard where Tucker worked under Bill Crystal. News Corporation headquarters is located in none other than the Rockefeller Center Complex in New York.
Rupert Murdoch is also on the board of Genie Energy, an American energy company located out of New Jersey. Other noteworthy people on the board of Genie Energy include Jacob Rothschild, the head of the Rothschild banking dynasty, and James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, who if you remember earlier, was also on the UN Reform Task Force in 2005 with Heritage Foundation founder Edwin Feulner, whose goal was to create a more effective United Nations, the same United Nations which resides on land donated by John D. Rockefeller. In a 2015 article written by Charlie Rose in Vanity Fair, he details a merger between Jacob Rothschild and David Rockefeller. Rothschild bought 37% of shares in Rockefeller Financial Services through his RIT Capital Partners.
This is the same Charlie Rose who would have Arkansas columnist Paul Greenberg on his show to talk politics, and the same Paul Greenberg who was held in such high regard by William Crystal and his father Irving. There are so many overlapping connections that can be made that I probably missed dozens, if not more, during my research into the topic. Given these connections to the CIA, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, etcetera, it's no wonder Tucker Carlson ridicules people who believe that 09:11 was an inside job and calls these people parasites.
Speaker 0: Now I go back to our intermentors' policies way back in the '16 when we first funded Al Qaeda. Yeah. Back well, not yeah. Back back when they were fighting the Soviets. We we gave them a lot of money.
Know, CIA CIA pretty much trained them. I mean I mean, that's that's pretty much enough evidence for me.
Speaker 2: Did the government brought down the Twin Towers?
Speaker 0: You know The government that the government was involved in bringing them to them because they would not be trained because who because who trained them? The government trained them. The CIA trained them. Special ops trained them. It's
Speaker 2: alright. I've I've had this debate so many times. It's not you know, I
Speaker 3: don't know.
Speaker 2: I just it it seems
Speaker 4: to me that it it's kinda beneath sort
Speaker 2: of beneath like adult discourse even really, I guess. And it and it definitely discredits otherwise good ideas. I just think that the implications if if the government was involved, the implications are so vast that it should be looked into whether or not it seems ridiculous.
Speaker 5: So for family members of the victims that are asking questions and want the evidence that's been withheld by the government released, you would say that they're less than adults somehow for wanting
Speaker 2: that I would say that parasites like you make it much worse for them. That's what I would say.
Speaker 5: I'm a parasite now?
Speaker 2: Yeah. It's it's filthy to say things like that with no evidence, and you have none.
Speaker 1: You should say.
Speaker 2: That's my
Speaker 1: It's also no wonder Tucker Carlson won't seriously address the Rothschilds on his show as his boss probably wouldn't be too happy even though they have so much control and influence. Whenever people bring up legitimate issues, it's his job to mock them so his viewers won't get to the truth of the matter.
Speaker 6: Washington DC experienced a mild snowfall last week. Luckily, city councilman Trayon White was on it. He knows why it happened. Watch this.
Speaker 7: It just started snowing out of nowhere this morning, man. Y'all better pay attention to this climate control, man. This climate manipulation, and DC keep talking about we're a resilient city, and that's a model based off the Rothschilds controlling the climate to create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities, man. Be careful.
Speaker 6: Yep. The Rothschilds control the climate. The Rothschilds, of course, are a wealthy Jewish banking clan. They're included in a great many conspiracy theories, but those theories rarely give them credit for the weather. That's an ambitious new twist.
Mark Stein is an author and columnist and a part time meteorologist, and he joins us tonight. What do you make so this is by the way, I live here, so you can laugh all you want, but that's actually my city councilman speaking there. The Rothschilds control the weather. Did you know that?
Speaker 3: Well, I did actually, Tucker. They've, they they bought the weather, from God, back in 1929, when he had a bit of a liquidity problem after the Wall Street crash, and, they keep it in the wine cellars at the Chateau Mouton Rothschild estate in France. And, they're able to micro target the climate. For example, it was light snow in your part of Washington, but I gather in the stairwell of Trayon White's apartment building, he actually had an avalanche just on his floor. That's that's how micro targeted the big Jew weather machine is able to be.
And he may and by the way, you may you may think it's a light snowfall, but if you actually examine it, it's actually small pieces of gefilter fish, which is why it doesn't melt. And that's why the Jews control the snowplow business. So they scoop all the Gefilte fish in Washington away, and they use it to make Louis Farrakhan calypso albums, which they put out to discredit, Louis Farrakhan from telling the truth about the synagogue of Satan. It all makes
Speaker 6: sense. See, the funny thing is
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't
Speaker 6: know if it's funny. It's actually so appalling and shocking that it's hard. It's hard. I'm just gonna laugh about it. That was that was you made me feel better about a city out of control.
So then I wanna run this by you. May maybe you can make me feel better about this too. There's a new uproar on social media over microaggressions at UC Santa Cruz. The school has assembled a list of microaggressions. Tucker
Speaker 1: Carlson seems to be everywhere. He has become the face of the conservative and right wing movement in The United States, surely due to the incredible amount of connections he has to intelligence agencies and the government. This is why the gatekeepers in the media attempt to give him credibility and publish stories like how he's being spied on by the NSA, or how a seemingly random man confronted him in Montana at a fly fishing shop and insulted him trying to start a confrontation, and it turns out that the man was actually an employee of the Asia Foundation, which was created in 1951 by the CIA as a front organization to distribute propaganda. If you had any doubts before watching this that Tucker Carlson was controlled opposition, I hope the research I presented will put that to bed. Mainstream media is all controlled in its one big incestuous pit.
Don't worship these people as heroes because they will sell you down the river in a heartbeat. Is Tucker Carlson CIA? Well, you can't prove that directly, but once you pour through all of his connections, you would find it incredibly hard not to believe that is the case. About the only thing we're missing at this point is official government documents detailing as much, which I am sure will come out at some point in the future. The CIA has a very long and documented history of infiltrating and controlling the media.
Operation Mockingbird is a great example of that. Tucker Carlson is just one of many examples you could make. Remember to always do your own research and turn off the television.
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
4/ Tucker just literally admitted he heard in a Nick Fuentes video from "a few years ago" that his dad was in the CIA--while his dad Dick Carlson was still alive, mind you--yet still claims to have only discovered the truth in March of this year after his father had passed? GTFOH. Laughably unbelievable.
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
5/ Did you notice this? https://t.co/7urbo645UI
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
@_BarboDoll_ Lamest claim I've heard in a while. Tucker really exposed himself here
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
@Poisonflats I am Spartacus!
@BasedSamParker - Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯
@_hyperborean_ @TuckerCarlson 💯
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson has a complex relationship with the CIA, having grown up in a world filled with former agents, including his father, Dick Carlson, who held significant positions like Director of Voice of America. Despite admitting in 2024 that his father worked with the CIA, he claimed in 2025 to be shocked by this revelation. I pointed out the inconsistencies in his narrative, noting that he had previously expressed admiration for the CIA and even applied to join. The timeline reveals a pattern of changing stories, suggesting a deeper connection to the agency than he admits.
@indexredtv - Index Red
Tucker Carlson spent decades surrounded by CIA spooks, applied to join them himself, and just claimed he was ‘shocked’ to learn his dad was one. Bro… @TuckerCarlson - you’re a fed. 🧵 Let’s talk about feds, family, and the one lie Tucker didn’t expect you to notice.
@indexredtv - Index Red
Let’s be crystal clear. 🗓️In 2024, Tucker casually admits: “Yeah, obviously my father worked in conjunction with the CIA…” 🗓️ In 2025, he says he was completely shocked to learn that exact same thing. He lied. https://t.co/VHaCelh0Ye
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 recalls applying to CIA and facing criticism, including from Putin, like, oh, you're from a CIA family. Well, yeah, obviously, my father worked in conjunction with CIA. I mean, that's what that is. And I tried to join the CIA, but I'm not being false about it. Native talent. And he's attacking my dad as the CIA is dad to the CIA or whatever. And I'm like, well, that's no. Untrue. Then my father dies, and I learn, actually, yeah, you know, did was involved in that world. I was completely shocked by it. So no one has to believe me, but that's just a fact. Right.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And so when I applied to CIA, and I've taken a lot of crap, including from Putin, like, oh, you're from a CIA family. Well, yeah, obviously, my father worked in conjunction with CIA. I mean, that's what that is. And I tried to join the CIA, but I'm not being false about it. Native talent.
And he's attacking my dad as the CIA is dad to the CIA or whatever. And I'm like, well, that's no. Untrue. Then my father dies, and I learn, actually, yeah, you know, did was involved in that world. I was completely shocked by it.
So no one has to believe me, but that's just a fact. Right.
@indexredtv - Index Red
Let’s rewind even further. 🗓️ December 2022 - Tulsi Gabbard podcast: “There were a ton of former CIA officers in our neighborhood… my father worked for the government… that’s the world I lived in.” He literally says he applied to join the CIA himself. This world wasn’t new to him. He grew up inside it.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker recalls whether he considered joining the CIA before journalism; "No. Yeah." He notes growing up in Georgetown and says, "And this was obviously, it was ten years before 09/11. It was eleven years, 1990." There were "a ton of former CIA officers in our neighborhood." His father "worked for the government," and CIA officers, from his perspective as a child, were like kind of dashing, physically brave intellectuals, including "some guy who'd studied classics at Yale who wound up in Beirut as station chief." He says he wanted "an interesting life"—"That's the that's the main thing that I wanted out of life." He adds, "I never was interested in money" and, "I had the privilege of not being interested in money because I I didn't grow up in a family where we were worried about money, so I just never really thought about money."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Is it true before you got into journalism, you were thinking about joining the the CIA?
Speaker 1: No. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Yes. I I actually just I read that somewhere recently. I I didn't I didn't know that. Oh, yeah. What was what was what was your interest?
What what drove that?
Speaker 1: Well, that's the world that I lived in. I mean, we lived in Georgetown. Mhmm. And this was obviously, it was ten years before 09/11. It was eleven years, 1990.
And there were a ton of former CIA officers in our neighborhood. My father worked for the government and, you know, there are a lot of them in that world, and CIA officers, from my perspective as a child, were like kind of dashing, physically brave intellectuals. You know, some guy who'd studied classics at Yale who wound up in Beirut as station chief. You know what I mean? Right.
Right. Interesting life. And I wanted an interesting life. That's the that's the main thing that I wanted out of life. I never was interested in money.
I had the privilege of not being interested in money because I I didn't grow up in a family where we were worried about money, so I just never really thought about money.
@indexredtv - Index Red
“I was like, oh, CIA. They send you to foreign countries as a case officer and you do vaguely patriotic things, and I was patriotic and I thought that would be great.” Tucker admired the CIA. He applied to join. He knew his neighbors were agents. He wasn’t “shocked” in 2025. He just changed his story.
Video Transcript AI Summary
She explains that she wanted an interesting life, not a boring one, and imagined the CIA would send her abroad as a case officer, doing vaguely patriotic work. She says she was patriotic and believed that would be great. She notes that she did not think the CIA was a sinister force, and it never occurred to her that the CIA might be playing a role in domestic politics. The excerpt ends with an unfinished thought—‘Like, that was ins’—hinting at an evolving reflection on the CIA’s role. This reveals an early perception of espionage as exciting and patriotic, and a lack of awareness of potential domestic political involvement.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But I but I wanted an interesting life. I didn't want a boring life, and so I wanted I was like, oh, CIA. They send you to foreign countries as a case officer, and you do vaguely patriotic things, and I was patriotic, and I thought that would be great. And I didn't I didn't think the CIA was a sinister force. It never occurred to me that the CIA might be playing a role in domestic politics.
Like, that was ins
@indexredtv - Index Red
Let’s walk the timeline. 📆 Dec 2022 – Tells Tulsi he grew up around CIA officers, wanted to join. 📆 June 2024 – Admits on camera: “Yeah, my dad worked with the CIA.” 📆 March 2025 – His father dies. 📆 Aug 2025 – Claims he was “completely shocked” to find out.
@indexredtv - Index Red
His father Dick Carlson wasn’t some anonymous bureaucrat. He was: Director of Voice of America (1986–1991) U.S. Ambassador to the Seychelles Long rumored in D.C. to be CIA-connected His obituary called his career “never completely clear” but “undeniably intriguing.” That’s spook speak for: don’t ask.
@indexredtv - Index Red
Tucker was born in it. Tucker was raised by it. Tucker tried to join it. Tucker is a CIA Nepo Baby.
reSee.it AI Summary
I find it interesting that Tucker Carlson, who once called those questioning the official 9/11 narrative “morons” and criticized Alex Jones, has now released a documentary challenging that narrative. His shift seems influenced by his views on the Iraq War, though the exact moment of change is unclear.
@triffic_stuff_ - J Stewart
With Tucker Carlson releasing a documentary questioning the official 9/11 narrative, it’s worth noting the political journey he’s undertaken. He once harshly criticised those who questioned the official narrative, calling them “morons” and “loathsome”. He even said Alex Jones “freaks me out”. It’s unclear what specific moment shifted his views, but he has frequently cited the Iraq War as a catalyst for questioning established narratives.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 asserts a distinction in liberty while recalling voting for Ron Paul in '88, then condemns "this nonsense about 09/11 that morons like you keep bringing up," calling it "the most loathsome thing to say." Speaker 0 says it's not his shtick and questions why the other walked out of the convention. They argue that "it discredits libertarianism and the ideas of Ron Paul and liberty itself" to "imply that there was a conspiracy behind nine eleven, you ought have some evidence." Speaker 0 asks, "You don't think Alex Jones has brought thousands of people to the message of liberty?" Speaker 1 replies he doesn't know Alex Jones and has "no feelings about him," but stresses that, "in order to imply that there was a conspiracy behind nine eleven, you ought have some evidence." They note coincidences and differences among audiences, and mention respect for differing issues.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Figure out why liberty is so popular. He's he's starting to get it.
Speaker 1: But there's an important distinction between liberty I mean, I voted for Ron Paul in '88. I mean, I've been a Ron Paul fan a while. And this nonsense about 09/11 that morons like you keep bringing up. I mean, truly, that is just the most loathsome thing to say, I think.
Speaker 0: Well, I don't keep bringing up. It's not really my shtick. I was just wondering why you, you know, why you walked out the convention because it's not really my issue. Awful. And by the
Speaker 1: way, it just totally discredits libertarianism and the ideas of of Ron Paul and liberty itself. You you start accusing people of things on the basis of no evidence.
Speaker 0: You don't think Alex Jones has brought thousands of people to the message of liberty?
Speaker 1: I think
Speaker 0: Ask him. I know you hate Alex Jones. What do you what would you say to Alex Jones?
Speaker 1: I'm gonna This
Speaker 0: is your chance. He watches my channel.
Speaker 1: I I don't know Alex Jones. I don't have any feelings about Alex Jones. I I just think in order to imply that there was a conspiracy behind nine eleven, you ought have some evidence. That's all
Speaker 0: I'm And there's none? There's no evidence whatsoever.
Speaker 1: And I've done a lot of shows on it. I've read a lot about it. And I no. There are a ton of coincidences. There always are.
I don't really don't know much about
Speaker 0: him. He's he's he's a he's of parents. I understand like you're a different there's there's lots of different types of different terms and different And a lot of people don't like the issues that he covers. But you gotta least respect that he's fine for the same
@DebiLuvzGold - Debi Gold
Truther > Joother Hitler was the good guy. Jews are inherently evil.
reSee.it AI Summary
I found some intriguing discussions about Andrew Kolvet and Johnnie Moore, suggesting they might be Israeli spies. There’s a stark contrast drawn between them and the tragic situation involving the daughter of Raytheon Israel’s Chairman, who lost her husband. The conversation escalated, with accusations against Israeli spies and a mention of potential manipulation within TPUSA by Tucker Carlson. There's a strong sentiment against perceived anti-White narratives, and the tone is charged with frustration and anger towards various parties involved.
@StaceyLynne_0 - JClynne
*THE KAIROS COMPANY* Ahhh, THAT makes sense. So Andrew Kolvet and Johnnie Moore are just Israeli spies. Interesting stuff. You hate to see it.🤣🖕 https://t.co/SZ5yJ1Z5OB
@StaceyLynne_0 - JClynne
Great to see the new TPUSA Chairman & CEO and the daughter of Raytheon Israel’s Chairman in such chipper spirits just 2.5 weeks after her husband was murdered by Israel in front of her and the whole world.
@AndrewKolvet - Andrew Kolvet
The one and only Erika Kirk joins us next!
@StaceyLynne_0 - JClynne
As opposed to, say, the Israeli spies who murdered Charlie Kirk, traffic and rape kids, steal from taxpayers, treasonously spy on non-Jew Americans for Israeli interests and genocide Palestinians and White Americans simultaneously, still owning it? Why do you hate Whites, Laura?
@StaceyLynne_0 - JClynne
*staple*
@SpeakWithDeeDee - SpeakWithDeeDee
Regardless of what you think of Tucker Carlson, he was spot on here. https://t.co/421pWlDTLt
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers identify TikTok as the “most important purchase” and name X as the other key platform, stressing the need to talk to Elon. They describe an on‑camera remark by a foreign leader as “censoring Americans” and include “This guy runs a country of 9,000,000 people that's totally dependent on our tax dollars to exist.” They argue this underscores the push to “force a TikTok sale” through Congress. They insist “the only reason we have free speech in The United States right now is because of Elon Musk.” They also claim “Free speech is central to the entire idea of America” and contrast it with “not our market economy” but “freedom of speech.” They contend the censorship drive aims to silence opposing views in the United States and emphasize engaging Elon to address the issue.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And the most important purchase that is going on right now is glass Followers. Five followers. No. Box?
Speaker 1: TikTok. TikTok. TikTok.
Speaker 0: Number one. Number one. And I hope it goes through because it's it can be consequential. Mhmm. And the other one what's the other one that's most important?
Oh, Alex. X. Mhmm. X. Oh.
Speaker 1: Successful. Very good.
Speaker 0: And, you know, so we have to talk to Elon. He's not an enemy. He's a friend. We should talk to him. Now if we can get those two things, we get locked, and I could go on on other things, but that's not the point right now.
We have to fight the fight.
Speaker 1: It's almost unbelievable that he said that on camera. Imagine. This is a foreign leader bragging about how he's censoring Americans. Again, this guy runs a country of 9,000,000 people that's totally dependent on our tax dollars to exist. And here he is on camera, he's a sophisticated guy.
He of course, he knows that he's being filmed saying, anyone who opposes me in The United States who opposes more aid to Israel or opposes getting sucked into war with Iran, which does not serve American interest, that person is not simply mistaken or wrong. I'm not gonna bother to explain why that person is wrong. That person is a Nazi, part of the woke Reich, a Nazi. And the only way to fix it is by preventing Americans in the last country on Earth with guaranteed freedom of speech, prevent Americans from hearing the other side. And so we push congress to force a TikTok sale, which is true, by the way.
And when that happened and various members of congress, like, no. Really, it's about China. There were people in line who said, no. I think it's really about Israel. You you you kinda wish it was about China.
Here he is just admitting. No. No. No. We pushed the US congress to censor in The United States to commit censorship in The United States because we think it's bad for us, and we need to talk to Elon.
The only reason we have free speech in The United States right now is because of Elon Musk. By way, a naturalized American, a foreigner who looked at The United States and said, what's great about that country? People can say what they believe because they're not slaves. They're not subjects of the state. They're citizens of a nation that they own.
Free speech is central to the entire idea of America. In fact, it's really the only thing that sets us apart from any other country on Earth. It's not our market economy. It's freedom of speech.
Speaker 0: And
@Bobby1_x - Bobby Thorne
Is Tucker Carlson is a CIA asset? Yes. And here's 30 minutes-worth of proof: https://t.co/UPRNcgWihR
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 3 launches a documentary-style indictment of Tucker Carlson, asserting he has “many connections Tucker Carlson has to the CIA and other groups,” that Carlson is “leading a major part of America off a cliff with his false conservative platform,” and that he is “a total shill, a puppet being used to distribute propaganda.” The speaker argues the left-right paradigm is false, claiming CIA agents train people in media propaganda regardless of network (CNN or Fox). Anderson Cooper is cited as an example, with the claim he interned at the CIA and was born into the Vanderbilt family, making him the face of CNN and Carlson the face of Fox. The speaker then traces Carlson’s background in detail: born 05/16/1969 in San Francisco; his father Richard Carlson divorced and remarried Patricia Swanson; Carlson attended multiple boarding schools in Switzerland and Rhode Island; graduated from Trinity College in 1991. The claim is made that Carlson attempted to join the CIA after graduation but was denied, with the suggestion that his journalism path was encouraged by his well-connected father.
The narrative then catalogs Carlson’s father’s career: Richard Carlson started in journalism as a copy boy at the Los Angeles Times and a UPI reporter; later worked at several LA and San Diego outlets; became involved with San Diego Federal Savings and Loan (headed by Gordon Luce, a Reagan-era figure); ran for mayor of San Diego in 1984 and lost; Reagan announced his nomination to the United States Information Agency in 1986; served as Director of Voice of America, described as a propaganda broadcasting division; VOA is linked to the CIA, with the assertion that its purpose shifted from abroad broadcasting to domestic and international propaganda, including a CIA black site in Thailand (Cat’s Eye/Detention Site Green). The father’s later roles included ambassador to the Seychelles and CEO of King World Public Television; he became vice chairman of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (an Israel-lobby-linked group).
The speaker asserts that Carlson’s path mirrors his father’s, arguing that Carlson’s early journalism work included policy review (Heritage Foundation publication), where Heritage Foundation’s founders (Paul Wyrick, Edwin Feulner, Joseph Coors) are described as influential, with Feulner allegedly connected to KCIA donations and UN reform task forces linked to CFR and the Project for the New American Century. The Heritage Foundation’s funding is linked to Coors, Chase Manhattan, Pfizer, Dow, Sears, GM, Amoco, Mobil, with David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan leadership invoked to support broader conspiratorial links among the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, CFR, and related networks. The claim is made that Buckley and Crystal (William Crystal) were CIA-connected or staffed, and that Tucker Carlson’s journalism career spanned outlets including Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Weekly Standard, New York Magazine, Reader’s Digest, Slate, Esquire, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Daily Beast, The Wall Street Journal, and television work for CNN, PBS, MSNBC, before Fox News.
The video then connects Carlson to Murdoch’s News Corporation (which also owned The Weekly Standard) and to Genie Energy, with other board members named such as Jacob Rothschild and James Woolsey; Carlson’s overlap with Rockefeller- and Rothschild-linked networks is highlighted, including Charlie Rose’s Vanity Fair article about a Rothschild–Rockefeller merger and Rose’s program history. The speaker argues “these overlaps” explain why Carlson ridicules 9/11 skeptics and avoids addressing Rothschilds on his show, implying his gatekeeping role.
A separate segment covers a Washington, DC climate-conspiracy joke by a city official about Rothschilds controlling the climate, followed by a joking discussion about microaggressions at UC Santa Cruz.
Speaker 3 reiterates the claim that Carlson is “CIA?” and contends mainstream media is controlled, citing Operation Mockingbird as a precedent. The speaker concludes that even if direct government documentation isn’t present, Carlson’s numerous connections and the overlaps among the elites make his CIA linkage plausible to believe, urging viewers to do their own research and turn off the television.
The transcript then shifts to a late-appearing discussion involving a Ron Paul event in Minneapolis (2008) with speakers debating 9/11, Building 7, and government involvement, with participants sharing mixed views on 9/11 conspiracy theories, evidence, and the appropriate stance on such claims.
Towards the end, Steven Jones, a Brigham Young University physicist, offers a televised segment presenting a hypothesis that explosives might have contributed to the World Trade Center collapses, including Building 7, mentioning molten metal in basements, thermite, and a kink in the collapse symmetry, while acknowledging FEMA’s report noting only a low probability for the conventional (fire) hypothesis and calling for further investigation. The exchange ends with a brief acknowledgment of the need for follow-up by viewers. A final red-string/prophecy monologue introduces a biblical-tinged conspiracy frame involving “Jews” and “the red string,” Rahab the harlot, and spies, cutting off before a concluded point.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You're about the most unordinary person I know. You're an elitist. You're an asshole.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't know. I'm a but see, I'm an out of the closet elitist. I don't run around pretending to be a man of the people. I'm absolutely not a man of the people at all.
Speaker 2: How do you pay your bills?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm, like, extraordinarily loaded just from, like, money I, you know, inherited.
Speaker 0: You're a trust fund baby, are you not?
Speaker 1: No. Completely. I've never needed to work. I mean, it's all just the whole cable news thing was like a phase I was going through.
Speaker 3: I will document the many connections Tucker Carlson has to the CIA and other groups. The reason I'm doing this is because right now, he is leading a major part of America off a cliff with his false conservative platform. He rages about the elite and how America seems to be going down the drain when he himself couldn't be more connected to these same elites helping to do it. He is a total shill, a puppet being used to distribute propaganda. What people need to realize is the left and right paradigm we are given is entirely false.
Whether you watch CNN or Fox, you are getting CIA agents highly trained in propaganda, usually coming from wealthy families. Take Anderson Cooper for example. He admittedly interned at the CIA and was born into the Vanderbilt family. He could be called the face of CNN just as Tucker is the face of Fox. Follow me as I take you through his career and document his highly suspect rise in journalism.
Don't forget to take notes and research these things yourself. Tucker Carlson was born on 05/16/1969 in San Francisco, California. When he was six years old, his father Richard divorced his mother Lisa and married Patricia Swanson, one of the heiresses to Swanson Enterprises most notable for their TV dinners. Carlson attended many boarding schools during his youth, including locations in Switzerland and Rhode Island. He graduated from Trinity College in Connecticut in 1991, which is known as one of the Little Ivies, which are a group of private schools which compete with Ivy League schools.
Supposedly, Tucker attempted to join the CIA when he graduated, but his application was denied. I can't find an explanation as to why he wanted to be in the CIA or why they rejected him. His father was a very well connected man in the media industry and encouraged him to pursue journalism because, quote, they'll take anybody. His father Richard started his career in journalism at the young age of 22. He had jobs as a copy boy at the Los Angeles Times as well as a reporter for United Press International, which at the time was one of the largest newswire services in the world.
He worked for a few TV stations in Los Angeles and San Diego before joining San Diego Federal Savings and Loan in 1977. The bank was headed by Gordon Luce, who was the former public affairs director for Reagan. Richard became vice president of finance within three years, and during this time, the bank had a lot of political controversies due to their connections to current and former members of the Reagan administration. In 1983, he decided to get into politics, and in 1984, ran for mayor of San Diego. He lost to his opponent, Roger Hedgecock, who was later forced from office in 1985 after it was revealed he received over $350,000 illegally during his campaign.
Coincidentally, he would also go on to become a conservative radio host. In 1986, using his connections to the White House, Reagan personally announced his intention to nominate Richard as associate director of the United States Information Agency. He became Director of Voice of America, which was a propaganda broadcasting division of USIA. He served as their longest running Director. Voice of America started in 1941 when President Roosevelt established the Foreign Broadcast Information Service as a program directed by the Office of Strategic Services, which became the CIA.
The intention stated publicly was to communicate America's views abroad, but it was really an outfit to disseminate propaganda. The first few broadcasts for Voice of America were done over British Broadcasting Corporation transmitters but expanded rapidly and fell under control of the Office of War Information in 1942. The Office of War Information was tasked with creating distributing propaganda domestically and internationally. They did this through various means such as broadcast, newspapers, posters, films, and other media. The agency was terminated by President Truman in 1945.
Their offices were transferred to the State Department and most of their responsibilities were transferred to the CIA. It should also be noted that a Voice of America relay station in Thailand was used as a CIA black site referred to as Cat's Eye or Detention Site Green. These overlaps and connections between Voice of America and the CIA should not be glossed over. In 1991, Richard Carlson was personally nominated by President George H. W.
Bush to be The U. S. Ambassador to The Seychelles, a nation of islands off the Eastern Coast Of Africa. In 1997, he became CEO of King World Public Television, which was later purchased by CBS in 1999 for $2,500,000,000 He became the vice chairman of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which is an organization that is part of the Israel lobby in The United States. It was founded by Clifford May, who was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the project for the new American century, and vice chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition.
Now you're starting to see that it was no mistake Tucker wanted to join the CIA and become a journalist, like father, like son. Tucker Carlson got his start in journalism when he was hired as a fact checker for policy review. This was a publication put out by the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973 by three men: Paul Wyrick, a political activist and commentator Edwin Feulner, an academic who attended London School of Economics, which is a Rothschild controlled school, who was also advisor to different government agencies and domestic policy consultant to Reagan, and last but not least, Joseph Coors of the Coors Brewing family. In 1975, Congress investigated the activities of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency in The US.
Mr. Feulner had met with the KCIA station chief, Kim Young Hwan, and in the early nineties, the Heritage Foundation started receiving donations from the KCIA. It should also be noted that in 2005, Mr. Feulner was appointed to a task force on UN reform, which included such people as former CIA Director James Woolsey with the goal of achieving a more effective United Nations. The task force was also supported by the Council on Foreign Relations.
In 1977, Paul Wyrick hired a man named Roger Pearson to write for policy review. In 1986, an intelligence agency watchdog publication called the Covert Action Quarterly documented Pearson's connections to James Jesus Engelton, who was the former chief of CIA counterintelligence, as well as Daniel Graham, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. The Heritage Foundation was largely funded by Joseph Coors through his family wealth, but it also received funding from Chase Manhattan Bank, Pfizer, Dow Chemical, Sears, General Motors, Amoco, and Mobil. David Rockefeller was CEO and Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank at the time. It should also be noted that David's grandfather, John D.
Rockefeller, who started the Standard Oil Company, had to break it up due to antitrust laws, and Amico, as well as Mobile, were once part of the company. John D. Rockefeller also donated the 16 acres of land upon which the United Nations headquarters sits in New York. In David Rockefeller's O Memoirs, he is quoted as saying, some even believe we, the Rockefeller family, are part of a secret cabal working against the best interest of The United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalist and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure. One world, if you will.
If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it. He also funded and was chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. A quick little fun fact. Before the homosexual political commentator David Brock, founder of Media Matters for America, a leftist propaganda outlet which received funding from George Soros and given office space by alleged pedophile and human trafficker John Podesta, he was on the board of the Heritage Foundation. He supported Hillary Clinton for president twice and dated James Alifantis, has been accused of being a pedophile and human trafficker.
He is also a friend of Lynn Rothschild. Lynn Rothschild supposedly abhors Trump and fawns over Clinton publicly, yet her and Trump go way back as well. Also, here's a photo of Trump laughing it up with happy Rockefeller, wife of former vice president and New York governor Nelson Rockefeller. It's a great example to show you that these people are all liars and actors. They will fill whatever role they need to fill when they need to fill it.
Sometimes that involves swinging to the total opposite side of the false paradigm politically if it's advantageous to the agenda of the elite. Pick your central banking puppet, left or right. It's all controlled, and these people are shameless whores. When Tucker Carlson left his job at policy review, he went to work for the Arkansas Democrat Gazette under the tutelage of editor Paul Greenberg. Mister Greenberg was very well connected having his pieces published across 1,400 different newspapers within the Tribune Content Agency Syndicate at the time.
He also won a Pulitzer Prize in 1969 and appeared on major television networks as commentator on talk shows such as Charlie Rose. Now I can't actually prove that mister Greenberg was CIA, but when I started to look at a few publications he put out, it made me start to wonder. In one article entitled How to Break the CIA, published on jewishworldreview.com 09/02/2009, he defends the CIA from what he believes to be unfair persecution. He defends the torture of possibly innocent people as justified in the, quote, war on terror. When referring to the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he says, are we supposed to be sorry about that and proceed to punish those who uncovered these plans?
On what theory? That no good deed for your country should go unpunished? He also boohoos about the morale of the CIA and how investigations might increase their agents' anxiety. In another article by Mr. Greenberg entitled Hooray for Snooping, published in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette October 2333, he talks about a national conference of editorial writers he attended in Calgary, Alberta in the seventies or eighties.
In the article, he says that, quote, that year at Calgary, one solemn resolution proposed that we stop talking to the CIA since a number of journalists abroad had been assassinated on the pretext that we were all CIA agents, capitalist spies, tools of imperialism, and, well, you know the rest. As if the killers were so lacking in imagination, they couldn't come up with some other excuse to do away with us if they hadn't invented this one. So there we were, an all too solemn convention assembled, First Amendment or no, debating whether we should gag ourselves. I dissented, being an American, and unaccustomed to being told whom I could talk to or not talk to. Memory grows furtive, but I believe the resolution was defeated.
That it was ever considered was disgraceful enough. It occurs to some of us that if the CIA and FBI and NSA had been allowed to talk even to each other before 09/11/2001, that date might not have become another one that will live in infamy. If only big data could have been mined back then the way it is now, the country might have been a lot safer along with the thousands of innocent victims who found themselves in the Twin Towers that fateful day and others rushing to their rescue as firefighters and cops, and the troops who were stationed at the Pentagon as airliners were turned into flaming engines of destruction, their passengers and crews wiped out, including those who, like the ones aboard Valiant Flight United 93, were the first to mount a counterattack against the terrorist in the still continuing war. It would seem mister Greenberg, a very well connected columnist, was very sympathetic to the ambitions of the CIA for seemingly no reason. It should also be noted he was Jewish and a Zionist.
When Tucker left the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, he went to work for the Weekly Standard News magazine in 1995. It was founded by William Crystal and Fred Barnes. William Crystal is Jewish and the son of Irving Crystal, who's been described as, quote, the godfather of neoconservatism. Irving Crystal was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and worked for the Congress for Cultural Freedom. The Congress for Cultural Freedom was a group started by a Jewish CIA agent named Mikkel Jocelyn in 1950.
It distributed anti communist propaganda in 35 countries and published over 20 magazines. In 1966, The New York Times are in a series of articles exposing it as a front for the CIA to transfer money to the State Department and the United States Information Agency, the same agency which broadcasted Voice of America, which Tucker's dad was the director of. In the book, Finks, How the CIA Tricked the World's Best Riders, author Joel Whitney talks about, quote, how the good versus bad CIA is a false divide and that the cultural cold warriors again and again used anticommunism as a lever to spy relentlessly on leftist and indeed writers of all political inclinations and thereby pushed US democracy a little closer to the Soviet model of the surveillance state. He alleges that Crystal was in fact a CIA employee, The man who referred to Irving as the godfather of neoconservatism was a man named Jonah Greenberg, also Jewish and editor in chief of The National Review, a semimonthly magazine. The magazine was founded by William F.
Buckley Jr. And has played a significant role in the development of conservatism in The United States. Like Krystal, Buckley was also outed as a CIA employee in Joel Whitney's book. It should also be noted that Fred Barnes, cofounder of The Weekly Standard, currently moderates a show on Voice of America called Issues in the News, again, the same program Tucker's father, Richard, was director of. It would seem William Crystal was also a fan of Paul Greenberg, Tucker's first mentor at the Arkansas Democrat Gazette since he quoted him in an article he published in the Washington Examiner 11/01/2004 entitled the 09/11 connection.
In the article, he quotes Paul as saying, everything we had thought, assumed, expected in the golden nineties hadn't been so. The surface piece of the nineteen nineties had been bought at a great price. On nine eleven, a failure of American leadership was revealed, a failure to look ahead and act forcefully to forestall threats, to do what Bush has called, quote, the hard work of fighting terror and spreading freedom. William's father Irving, alleged CIA employee, also only had kind words to say about mister Greenberg when he wrote the forward to his 1991 book, Resonant Lives, 50 Figures of Consequence. He said, and I quote, our intellectual and spiritual elites today are, with some notable exemptions, semi educated at best.
This explains why someone like Mr. Greenberg has not received the recognition he deserves. Oh, yes, he has won a Pulitzer Prize and other awards, which is nice, but these are tributes to his journalistic talents as a columnist and editorial writer. As a master of the brief moral essay, he has yet to come into his own. These men all seem to connect to one another in some way, and they all seemingly support the, quote, alleged war on terror while increasing the size of the government in the name of preserving freedom.
They protect Israel and promote their agenda while scapegoating Muslims for false flag attacks meant to justify giving more power to their think tanks and intelligence agencies which answer to nobody except the people lining their pockets. After leaving The Weekly Standard, Tucker then went on to write for New York Magazine, Reader's Digest, Slate, Esquire, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Daily Beast, and The Wall Street Journal. He would also go to work on camera for CNN, PBS, and MSNBC before finally settling into his role at Fox News as the poster boy for conservative values. During those years, he also somehow found time to appear on shows like King of Queens, 30 Rock, and Dancing with the Stars. While he is now on Fox News as arguably their most popular personality, this wasn't his first tango with News Corporation, which owns Fox News.
News Corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch also owned The Weekly Standard where Tucker worked under Bill Crystal. News Corporation headquarters is located in none other than the Rockefeller Center Complex in New York. Rupert Murdoch is also on the board of Genie Energy, an American energy company located out of New Jersey. Other noteworthy people on the board of Genie Energy include Jacob Rothschild, the head of the Rothschild banking dynasty, and James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, who, if you remember earlier, was also on the UN reform task force in 2005 with Heritage Foundation founder Edwin Feulner, whose goal was to create a more effective United Nations, the same United Nations which resides on land donated by John D. Rockefeller.
In a 2015 article written by Charlie Rose in Vanity Fair, he details a merger between Jacob Rothschild and David Rockefeller. Rothschild bought 37% of shares in Rockefeller Financial Services through his RIT Capital Partners. This is the same Charlie Rose who would have Arkansas columnist Paul Greenberg on his show to talk politics and the same Paul Greenberg who was held in such high regard by William Crystal and his father Irving. There are so many overlapping connections that can be made that I probably missed dozens, if not more, during my research into the topic. Given these connections to the CIA, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, etcetera, it's no wonder Tucker Carlson ridicules people who believe that 09:11 was an inside job and calls these people parasites.
It's also no wonder Tucker Carlson won't seriously address the Rothschilds on his show as his boss probably wouldn't be too happy even though they have so much control and influence. Whenever people bring up legitimate issues, it's his job to mock them so his viewers won't get to the truth of the matter.
Speaker 4: Washington DC experienced a mild snowfall last week. Luckily, city councilman Trayon White was on it. He knows why it happened. Watch this.
Speaker 5: It's just started snowing out of
Speaker 6: nowhere this morning, man. Y'all better pay attention
Speaker 5: to this climate control, man. This climate manipulation, and DC keep talking about we are resilient city, and that's a model based off the Rothschilds controlling the climate. It should create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities, man. Be careful.
Speaker 4: Yep. The Rothschilds control the climate. The Rothschilds, of course, are a wealthy Jewish banking clan. They're included in a great many conspiracy theories, but those theories rarely give them credit for the weather. That's an ambitious new twist.
Mark Stein is an author and columnist and a part time meteorologist, and he joins us tonight. What are you making? So this is by the way, I live here, so you can laugh all you want, but that's actually my city councilman speaking there. The Rothschilds control the weather. Did you know that?
Speaker 7: Well, I did actually, Tucker. They've they they bought the weather from God back in 1929, when he had a bit of a liquidity problem after the Wall Street crash, and, they keep it in the wine cellars at the Chateau Mouton Rothschild estate in France. And, they're able to micro target the climate. For example, it was light snow in your part of Washington, but I gather in the stairwell of Trayon White's, apartment building, he actually had an avalanche just on his floor. That's that's how micro targeted the big Jew weather machine is able to be.
Speaker 6: And he may and, by the way,
Speaker 7: you may you may think it's a light snowfall, but if you actually examine it, it's actually small pieces of gefelter fish, which is why it doesn't melt. And that's why the Jews control the snowplow business. So they scoop all the gefelter fish in Washington away, and they use it to make Louis Farrakhan calypso albums, which they put out to discredit, Louis Farrakhan from telling the truth about the synagogue of Satan. It all makes sense.
Speaker 6: See, the funny thing is I mean, I don't
Speaker 4: know if it's funny. It's actually so appalling and shocking that it's it's hard. I'm just gonna laugh about it. That was that was you made me feel better about a city out of control. So then I wanna run this by you.
May maybe you can make me feel better about this too. There's a new uproar on social media over microaggressions at UC Santa Cruz. The school has assembled a list of microaggressions. Tucker
Speaker 3: Carlson seems to be everywhere. He has become the face of the conservative and right wing movement in The United States, surely due to the incredible amount of connections he has to intelligence agencies and the government. This is why the gatekeepers and the media attempt to give him credibility and publish stories like how he's being spied on by the NSA or how a seemingly random man confronted him in Montana at a fly fishing shop and insulted him trying to start a confrontation, and it turns out that the man was actually an employee of the Asia Foundation, which was created in 1951 by the CIA as a front organization to distribute propaganda. If you had any doubts before watching this that Tucker Carlson was controlled opposition, I hope the research I presented will put that to bed. Mainstream media is all controlled in its one big incestuous pit.
Don't worship these people as heroes because they will sell you down the river in a heartbeat. Is Tucker Carlson CIA? Well, you can't prove that directly, but once you pour through all of his connections, you would find it incredibly hard not to believe that is the case. About the only thing we're missing at this point is official government documents detailing as much, which I am sure will come out at some point in the future. The CIA has a very long and documented history of infiltrating and controlling the media.
Operation Mockingbird is a great example of that. Tucker Carlson is just one of many examples you could make. Remember to always do your own research and turn off the television.
Speaker 6: Good to see you after, we met briefly at the event in 2008 in Minneapolis for Ron Paul.
Speaker 1: Oh, that
Speaker 6: was fun.
Speaker 2: I remember that.
Speaker 6: But but you had to leave early. What happened? The
Speaker 2: truth is stopping. The truth is stopping. I'll tell you why.
Speaker 1: I didn't bail on Ron Paul. No.
Speaker 6: I don't
Speaker 2: It's when Jesse Ventura got up and started saying 09:11 was an inside job.
Speaker 6: He didn't say that. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah. He did say that. Answer your question. Sure. It wasn't controversial.
It was stupid. And if there's any evidence that the government is behind nine eleven, looks you know, I believe anything if there's evidence, but there isn't any. So knock it off. That's my view.
Speaker 6: Okay. But And
Speaker 2: I said that to him.
Speaker 6: Sure. Sure.
Speaker 8: But one stupid person says something
Speaker 6: stupid at Ron Paul event.
Speaker 2: No. No. But I I hate that. And and by the way, I am open to almost any crackpot theory about anything. It's just on that subject, come on.
You know what I mean? That's too much. That even for me.
Speaker 6: So just out of curiosity then, what what's your take on Building 7? Which explanation do you believe?
Speaker 7: Yeah. Come
Speaker 6: on. It's like it's a slick. No. That's a serious question. Which explanation did did
Speaker 2: it Okay. Which explanation?
Speaker 4: I I There's two explanations.
Speaker 6: It was either it was it was pulled or it was isolated pockets of fire on the building that blew that that were Let
Speaker 2: me let me get let
Speaker 6: me The towers coming down. They're coming down.
Speaker 2: This a no win conversation, so I'm not gonna continue it. But let me just say one The macro my macro view is is the obvious one, which is the buildings came down. There's a bunch of nutcases. We're playing into them.
Speaker 6: Okay. So are you still supporting Ron Paul? So are you supporting anybody in the race this year? No.
Speaker 2: I don't support. I mean, I don't even vote. I don't even vote. I'm hardly objective. I'm honest.
I'm not objective.
Speaker 6: There you go. Certainly not afraid to speak your mind.
Speaker 2: No. I'm not. No. You can assess my views. They're very clear.
You don't have any But I hate that nine eleven crap. Wish they just kicked those people out.
Speaker 6: I mean was supposed to be on the ninety third floor. Really? Oh. It's important for people and their families still involved to know the truth whether or not the government was involved or whether it was terrorists, but there's a history of government sponsored terror throughout the past century. I'm Yeah.
Exactly. So what do you mean kick them out?
Speaker 1: I don't know. Whatever.
Speaker 6: You you anyone who's a 09:11 intruder should be should be kicked out of the the country? Of course not. I don't, you know, I don't
Speaker 2: I don't even believe in parking tickets. I mean, didn't you please? I just don't I think that people, before saying something that heavy, ought to present real evidence and not just it's a coincidence or the questions remain a dumb
Speaker 6: I think like steel doesn't weaken until 2,400 degrees is evidence that that jet fuel couldn't cause a collapse of the tower from being at
Speaker 2: the top. Except the thing is it did.
Speaker 9: So
Speaker 10: problem. We we gave them a lot
Speaker 6: of money.
Speaker 10: See, see, pretty much trained them. I mean, mean, that's that's pretty much enough evidence for me.
Speaker 2: Did the government brought down the Twin Towers? You know
Speaker 10: what? The government that the government was involved in bringing that into our because they would not
Speaker 6: be trained because who because who trained them? The government trained them. The CIA trained them. The special ops trained
Speaker 2: them. Alright. I've I've had this debate so many times. It's not you know, I don't know. I just it it seems to me that it it's kinda beneath, sort of beneath, like, adult discourse even, really, I guess.
And it and it definitely discredits otherwise good ideas.
Speaker 6: I just think that the implications if if the government was involved, the implications are so vast that it should be looked into whether or not it seems ridiculous. Ridiculous.
Speaker 11: So for family members of
Speaker 6: the victims that are asking questions and want the evidence that's been withheld by the government released, you would say that they're less than adults somehow for wanting that
Speaker 2: I would say that parasites like you make it much worse for them. That's what
Speaker 10: I would say.
Speaker 12: I'm a parasite now?
Speaker 2: Yeah. It's it's filthy to say things like that with no evidence, and you have none. So you should stop. That's my point. Well, this is deal with this
Speaker 10: is insult of politics today.
Speaker 4: Back. Millions of people watch the horror of 09:11 right before their very eyes live on television. Two planes crashing into the World Trade Center. And less than a couple of hours later, both towers, of course, collapsing. My next guest says that hijackers may not have brought down the towers by themselves.
Here to explain his controversial theory, Steven Jones. He's a professor of physics at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Professor Jones, thanks for coming on.
Speaker 9: Sure. Thanks, Tucker.
Speaker 4: Well, just sum up this, obviously, your theory, the one sentence that I just explained in the intro contradicts what we all think we know about how these towers collapsed. Quickly sum up your explanation for what happened.
Speaker 9: Well, I'd like to start with this paper that you referred to. It's available online. What I'm doing, Tucker, is presenting evidence, but it's a hypothesis to be tested. That's a big difference from a conclusion. And so I just wanted to clarify that.
But to sum up, I've looked at the official reports by FEMA and so on regarding the collapse of these buildings. I'd like to look at the collapse of Building 7 in just a minute. It was not even hit by a jet. So we should look at that one.
Speaker 4: Two towers. The explanation has been that the fire inside was so intense that it weakened the structural steel and that each floor collapsed collapsed down upon the next in a pancake fashion and they imploded in on themselves. Is that essentially I think what people think?
Speaker 9: Doctor. Yeah. That's basically it. Yeah. And so what I've done is to analyze these reports.
I would like to do a little experiment with you, Tucker, if I could. I sent out a video clip of the collapse of Building 7 because most people haven't actually seen that one and that's the crux of the argument I'm presenting.
Speaker 4: Sum up very quickly the argument for us. You believe there were explosives in the buildings planted by someone, detonated.
Speaker 9: Is that correct? In other words, hypothesis to be tested there's two hypotheses here. One is fire and damage caused all three buildings to collapse. The other is that explosives in the buildings may have caused the collapse. And so then we analyze and see which fits the data better, and I've done that in my in my 25 page paper.
Speaker 4: I wanna read you a quote from the Deseret Morning News, a paper in Utah from you. I'm quoting now. It is quite plausible that explosives were preplanted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes, you, which were actually diversion tactic. Muslims are probably not to blame for bringing down the World Trade Center buildings after all. That's, I would think, pretty offensive to a lot of people listening.
Do you have any evidence for that?
Speaker 9: Well, not to the Muslims, I might say. I've got a lot of emails saying
Speaker 4: I'm sure your writings have been greeted with glee in Islamabad and Peshawar and places like that.
Speaker 9: Well, I haven't received any notes from there, but just good people. I have Muslim friends. Let me read for example, but I'm not going to let you off the hook. Really want to do this experiment with you.
Speaker 4: We don't have lot of time for experiments, Professor, but if you could just give us one thing to hold on to. You make these claims or appear to make these claims. Do you have any
Speaker 9: collapse of Building 7. Can you roll the video clip that I sent to you?
Speaker 4: Okay. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: if we
Speaker 4: can, but to specify that is World Trade Center Building 7, smaller than the other two, not hit by a plane, of yet it collapsed.
Speaker 9: Right. It's 47 stories.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 9: 24 steel columns in the center. Right. Trusses asymmetrically supported. Now, I can't see what you're seeing.
Speaker 4: Are you rolling that? No, we just see the building. And just so our viewers know, the explanation that I think is conventional is that there was a large tank of diesel fuel stored in a lower level of that which caught fire and the resulting fire collapsed the building.
Speaker 9: That's basically it. But as we read in the FEMA report, it says here, and I put this in my paper, of course, the best hypothesis, which is the only one they looked at, the fire, has only a low probability of occurrence. Further investigation, analyses are needed to resolve this issue and I agree with that. But they admit there's only a low probability. And if you look at the collapse, see what I've studied is the fall time, the symmetry, the fact that it first dips in the middle, that's called the kink, which is very characteristic, of course, of controlled demolition.
Speaker 4: Professor, that we are out of time and I'm not sure that you've J.
Speaker 9: One fully other thing I want to mention
Speaker 1: about Doctor.
Speaker 4: Okay, if you can hit it,
Speaker 6: really quick.
Speaker 9: Doctor. Here we go. Molten metal in the basements of all three buildings. Yet, all scientists now reasonably agree that the fires were not sufficiently hot to melt the steel. So what is this molten metal?
It's a direct evidence for the use of high temperature explosives such as thermite. Thermite produces molten iron as an end product. Okay. So, we do have Yeah, it's very short time, but people will read the paper, then I talk about the molten metal, the symmetry of the collapse, and the weaknesses and inadequacies of the fire hypothesis.
Speaker 4: Professor, we're going to have to leave it to our viewers who are interested enough to follow-up to do just that. We appreciate you coming on. Even if I don't understand your theories, we appreciate you trying to explain them. Thanks. Okay.
Speaker 13: The red string is a symbol to show the Jews that they are helping the Jews usher in the new world order. The reason they do it is so that the Jews spare them from the nasty population that is happening. Not many people are allowed to live in a new world order. In the Old Testament, the book of Joshua, God was giving the Israelites the land of Canaan. Joshua sent in spies.
The Canaanites found out and were searching for the spies. The spies got help from a harlot called Rahab. The Canaanites went to Rahab's house, and she told them she did not see anyone. When they left, Rahab, the harlot, made a deal with Israelite spies. Since she helped the spies, she asked that they spare her and her family.
The Israelite spies agreed and Rahab let them down on a red rope from the on the wall, and the spies escaped safely. The Israelites killed all the Canaanites except Rahab and her fam
@TheMilkBarTV - Nathan Livingstone (MilkBarTV)
You really want to play this game with Tucker Carlson? The man's been on the wrong side of every issue only until it was profitable not to be (Israel included) - he worked at CNN, MSNBC & PBS. https://t.co/5vBVjpfBpX
Video Transcript AI Summary
- Tucker Carlson Today debuts with Douglas Murray as the chosen guest, presenting him as someone with “crystal clarity” on global and national events, though Carlson previously described Murray as clever but not an expert on anything.
- Carlson discusses Trump, saying he would not be a good president and would likely cancel the next election if elected; he adds, “We didn’t understand the country we preside over,” encompassing both the political class in DC and those with authority or money in the United States.
- A speaker quotes Carlson stating, “I hate him passionately. I can’t handle much more of this.” and notes Carlson saying, “We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights,” adding that Trump is a “demonic force, a destroyer, but he’s not gonna destroy us.”
- Carlson mentions following Bobby Kennedy Jr. at a Donald Trump rally in Madison Square Garden as part of discussions on American politics and national sentiment.
- In an aside about foreign policy and allies, Carlson says: “America’s supporting Israel because it’s an ally,” and notes that Qatar is a close ally with “the largest American air base in The Middle East” located there.
- On global health, the discussion references “The Chinese coronavirus” as a major event that will affect life, adding that it’s “definitely not just the flu,” and includes a claim about past flu deaths versus COVID, with one remark questioning if anyone they know died of COVID and noting uncertainty about that.
- The conversation touches on military ethics and civilian harm, with a claim that incinerating tens of thousands of civilians would be “a bad thing,” and then a provocative line about not calling for nuclear weapons against Ayatollah if there’s a belief in a murderer with nuclear weapons.
- A controversial topic is raised about teenage sexuality, asserting that a 15 to 17-year-old boy is biologically driven to procreate and faces a choice between harming a peer emotionally or seeking a safer, though illegal, outlet with a professional partner; the stance is framed as “harm reduction.”
- There is a reference to Emmanuel Macron, with a claim that he was 14 or 15 when he met someone, and a challenge to the assertion that it is wrong or child molestation; the broader point is about Buchanan’s argument that American involvement in World War II may have been a mistake, inviting scrutiny of that view.
- The host recounts a summer after freshman year spent in Nicaragua to engage in war, linking to broader foreign policy debates about war and citizenship.
- A provocative claim is made that anyone who serves in a foreign military should lose his citizenship immediately.
- On Sharia law, the transcript states: “Sharia is intolerant. Women have, in the Quran, fewer rights than men do. I think that in every Muslim majority country in the world, non Muslims are treated, have fewer rights. Sharia law is bad, Seth. I don’t know if you’ve heard that. It’s bad. It’s worse than what’s happening in New York and Detroit. It’s just bad.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello, and welcome to the very first episode of Tucker Carlson Today. We had a broad range of possibilities for the first person to talk to as we begin this new show, this new series. But really, in the end, there was only one choice. The one person we know who has crystal clarity on what's happening, not just in this country, but in the world, someone who's watched it and chronicled it for years now. His name is Douglas Murray.
I know Douglas, and I think that I'm always gotten along with him, I think he's clever, but he's hardly an expert on anything. Well, Mike, what? I don't think Trump would be a good president. I think he'd probably cancel the next election if he got elected. You know?
It happened because we didn't understand the country we preside over. And by we, not just the political class in DC, but anybody with authority or money in The United States.
Speaker 1: Referring to Trump, Carlson says, I hate him passionately. I can't handle much more of this.
Speaker 0: We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights. I truly can't wait, Carlson texted. That Trump is, in his words, a demonic force, a destroyer, but he's not gonna destroy us. It's such an honor to be here, and it's wild. Just another day following Bobby Kennedy junior at a Donald Trump rally in Madison Square Garden.
I mean, what? America's supporting Israel because it's an ally. I don't even know what those words mean. I'm just saying my principles. They're ally.
Right? I mean, they they both what that means to be an ally. Qatar is, like, one of our closest allies in the world. The largest American air base in The Middle East is in Qatar. They're a close ally of ours.
The Chinese coronavirus is a major event. It will affect your life. And by the way, it's definitely not just the flu. Oh, so thousand twelve, 2013, I read up, More people died of the flu that year than COVID did. Yeah.
Would you know anyone who died of COVID? Did people really die of COVID? I don't know. I never knew anyone who did. Technology.
They've only been used once. If you end up killing, incinerating tens of thousands of civilians, that's just a bad thing. Let's let's just be honest. That's just a bad thing. And I just don't understand why you're not calling for the use of nuclear weapons against the Eyatollah right now.
I'm serious. If they're if you really believe there's a murderer nuclear weapons. See, whatever is the case. So you're a 15 to 16, 17 year boy. You're you are driven by biology to procreate.
Yes. You're either going to be inflicting your attentions on one of your peers who is, let's be honest, not ready for it. She's gonna get hurt emotionally. Or you can have a safer, albeit technically illegal outlet with someone who knows what she's doing. You're not gonna hurt her.
You know what I mean? Like, this is harm reduction.
Speaker 1: Now admitting that Emmanuel Macron was only 14 when they met, when he was in that play. 15, she says, whenever this affair happened.
Speaker 0: I'll just go with 15 and say that's wrong. Yeah. Isn't that child molestation? Theme, it's the it's the larger point that Buchanan is making that perhaps American involvement in World War two was a mistake that that that people are upset about and that I think you can take him to task over. Because I think it's a it's a wrong and in some ways an odious point.
I think the story we got about World War two is all wrong. I think that's right. And you can hardly say that this country won that war. In what meaningful sense? The summer after my freshman year, my roommate and I decided to go down to Nicaragua for the summer and work and, you know, get involved in the war.
Think anybody, by the way, who serves in a foreign military should lose his citizenship immediately. Sharia is intolerant. Women have, in the Quran, fewer rights than men do. I I think that in every Muslim majority country in the world, non Muslims are treated, have fewer rights. Sharia law is bad, Seth.
I don't know if you've heard that. It's bad. It's worse than what's happening in New York and Detroit. It's just bad.
@MsBlaireWhite - BLAIRE WHITE
Dude who pushed the COVID vaccine and Iraq war says someone else is sabotaging America. https://t.co/Y6zeIWnSDA
reSee.it AI Summary
How can I trust someone amplified by the biggest outlets, feeding me alternative versions to trap me in the narrative? It’s obvious if I step back. If I really want to understand the theatre, I’ll watch my series urgently and stop being played https://realityrevolt.com
@reality_revolt_ - Dimitri Legrand
How can you trust someone who is constantly amplified by the biggest media outlets? Someone who feeds you the alternative version just to keep you trapped inside the narrative. It’s obvious if you step back. If you really want to understand the theatre, watch my series urgently and stop being played https://realityrevolt.com
Video Transcript AI Summary
They argue that Candace and Charlie are not being killed; they claim the protests place people where the system wants them, making them participate and play a role in a scripted scenario. Without conflict, there is no attention; without attention, they cannot be controlled. Politics is described as a form of catch or wrestling, with roles that are always written in advance. If Erika is caricatured and not credible, it is intentional, resulting in people being drawn toward Candace. Belief that one is awake because they rejected the official version leads them into the alternative version, the one tolerated by the opposition. Charlie is said to have been betrayed for asking too many questions, and the phrases often cited by supporters are that “they” know everyone is in the same club, and that Charlie did not die, causing the game to collapse.
The speaker notes that an hologram and a shirt lifting before impact were observed. They claim that Trump’s ear was never touched. Days is described as keeping people inside, channeling their anger and locking in their position. Like Trump and Erika, she is primarily an actress, and her friend Roussel is described as a comedian. They are actors who create headlines on major channels.
A genuine figure is said not to make CNN headlines, because if you truly disturb the system, you are not talked about. While people remain distracted, the real threat advances. The replacement of politics by an algorithm is asserted as the true shift, and Candace is said not to denounce this development.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Ils ne vont pas tuer Candace et ils n'ont même pas tué Charlie. Quand tu protestes, tu es là où le système te veut, tu participes, tu joues un rôle dans leur scénario. Sans conflit, pas d'attention. Sans ton attention, ils ne te contrôlent pas. La politique, c'est du catch.
Les rôles sont toujours écrits à l'avance. Si Erika est caricaturale et pas crédible, c'est volontaire. Résultat, tu es poussé dans les bras de Candace. Tu crois être éveillé parce que tu as rejeté la version officielle, mais tu tombes pile dans la version alternative, celle de l'opposition tolérée. Charlie s'est fait trahir, il posait trop de questions, voilà les phrases que tu aimes, mais quand on sait qu'ils sont tous dans le même club et que Charlie n'est pas mort, alors le jeu s'effondre.
Pourtant on a vu l'hologramme et le t-shirt se soulever avant l'impact. On a compris que l'oreille de Trump n'a jamais été touchée. Mais quand Days vous maintient à l'intérieur, elle canalise votre colère et verrouille votre position. Comme Trump et Erika, elle est avant tout une actrice et son amie Roussel avant tout comédien. Ils sont des acteurs qui font les headlines sur les grandes chaînes.
Un vrai ne fait pas la une de CNN parce que si tu déranges vraiment, on ne parle pas de toi. Et pendant que tu restes distrait, la vraie menace se met en place. Le remplacement de la politique par l'algorithme. Et ça, Candace ne le dénonce pas.
Reality revolt
realityrevolt.com
reSee.it AI Summary
In a bombshell revelation, evidence suggests that the Bush-Obama administrations covertly engineered the house arrest of Osama Bin Laden. Leon Panetta and Hillary Clinton's fingerprints are all over it. Furthermore, Donald Trump's book predicted a terror attack by Bin Laden 19 months before 9/11. The Pentagon's unaccounted 23 trillion dollars, along with the neoconservative think tank's call for a "new Pearl Harbor," raise suspicions. Startling parallels between 9/11 and Pearl Harbor emerge, while Operation Northwoods exposes the potential for false flag operations. The CIA's history of manipulation, Operation Mockingbird, and media control are also concerning. Tucker Carlson's evolving views on 9/11 raise questions. The truth must be sought, even if it challenges the official narrative.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
MASTER THREAD 🧵 911 BOOKMARK THIS THREAD! I am releasing everything I have collected over the years into this one thread over the next 12 hours. I was going to attempt to organize it to tell a story, but there’s simply too much.. I’m just dumping it all. Let’s begin..
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
911 - Confirmed Treason We Discovered the Bush & Obama Administration Covertly Engineered the House Arrest of Osama Bin Laden - Hillary Clinton & Leon Panetta’s fingerprints are all over this - “Bin Laden is being Protected by Us & We don’t Really want to Get Him” January 6, 2011 Two phone calls took place back to back between Allan Parrot, Congressman Curt Weldon & Brian S. Ettinger. Brian Ettinger is Joe Biden’s best friend and an Attorney. PART 1 “You can become the next president if you help Allan bring Bin Laden back.” “Leon Panetta on two occasions said do not pursue Bin Laden in Iran.” “I’m putting together a bipartisan coalition to go to Iran to discuss Bin Laden’s transfer to the United States.” Reply: “you’ll never have that happen because our government will never let that happen.” “This is a ticking time bomb…. He’s [Obama] got to designate (individual’s) to negotiate with Iran, and if he (Obama) doesn’t, we will go public about this…. We have determined without a doubt, I have the proof, that Hillary Clinton’s fingerprints are all over this.” “Biden sends Brian S. Ettinger on secret missions, the most recent of which was to Pakistan, WITHOUT the State Department involved.” PART 2 Listen 👂 💥💥💥💥💥💥 “Recently, between November 2004 up until now, my team members have met Osama Bin Laden SIX times inside of Iran…. We have repeatedly notified the US Government & first we were ignored, next we were obstructed, then we were threatened……” (9/11 occurred on September 11, 2001…) “Here’s the problem sir… we have identified with documentation, three mechanisms used by the Bush administration to covertly engineer Bin Laden’s house arrest inside Iran…… we have identified two mechanisms used by this administration (Obama) to continue the legacy….. and Hillary Clinton’s fingerprints are all over this…. Leon Panetta’s fingerprints are all over this…” Brian S. Ettinger (then VP Joe Biden’s attorney) reply 👇 “He (Bin Laden) is being protected by us. We don’t really want to get him. We want him under the radar screen…..” Understand what you just heard. ### https://rumble.com/v3gtv5j-911-alan-parrot-to-brian-ettinger-bush-admin-covertly-engineered-osama-bin-.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses their efforts to bring Osama bin Laden back to the United States from Iran. They mention speaking with Leon Panetta, who advised them to focus on North Korea and not pursue bin Laden in Iran. They claim to have had discussions and negotiations with the Iranian government and have corresponded with President Ahmadinejad. They also mention their desire to involve Senator Susan Collins and Joe Lieberman in negotiations with Iran. The speaker expresses concerns about their family's security and mentions a book being written by a US attorney. They plan to have a conference call with Brian Ettinger, who is Joe Biden's close friend and former staffer. The speaker mentions their involvement in falconry and their connections to the royal family in the United Arab Emirates. They also discuss their encounters with bin Laden in Iran and their opposition to the Bush and Clinton administrations' handling of the situation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He was all excited and he said, I can become his staff advisor was saying, you can become the next president if you help Alan bring Bin Laden back. We discussed that we were going to give him a share of the Rewards for Justice Money, which is $50,000,000. He was all excited, but then he said he said, twice, he said, I cannot ask permission from Leon Panetta to work with you to get bin Laden out of Iran, but I can ask my good friend Leon Panetta if he has any objections. Are you still there, sir?
Speaker 1: Go ahead.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And so he spoke to Leon Panetta on two occasions, we got it back in writing and verbally that Leon Panetta told him, focus on North Korea only, And in the 2nd conversation, he said, do not pursue Bin Laden in Iran. Now, I have had daily discussions and negotiations with the highest level of the Iranian government. It's been supervised by my attorney so that I'm not breaking the federal laws on subverting the policies of the US State Department. I have had, 88 pages of correspondence translated and delivered directly to president Ahmadinejad.
In this correspondence, I am analyzing and discussing 6 scenarios for bin Laden's transfer to US custody. I'm discussing 5 concessions from the United States and analyzing them. We have proof that that I'm putting together a bipartisan coalition to go to Iran to discuss bin Laden's transfer to the United States.
Speaker 1: Because our government won't let that happen.
Speaker 0: You were very astute. Yesterday, I had a conference call with Senator Susan Collins people, and it included Brandon Millhorn, who's On the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, also Robert Strayer and Molly Wilkinson. My request to Collins is that we get Collins and Lieberman and you to accompany us to the Oval Office to tell the president that this is a ticking time bomb, and if they will not that that he's got to designate you and Susan Collins and Lieberman to negotiate with Iran. And if he will not do so, we will go that Hillary Clinton's fingerprints are all over this policy. She has actually inherited the policy from the Bush administration and enlarged Who?
Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 1: I have no idea.
Speaker 0: There there were 3 What's that?
Speaker 1: The airport now to pick up Brian Edinger, who's one of my partners. Brian is Joe Biden's closest friend, was his first staff director. When do I pick him up? I will, I would ask you to call me back. Let me have a conference call with Brian in the car, with you.
I'm in my car just myself and I'll have Brian. You just called me, which means you landed. So I'll have him in the car in 15 minutes.
Speaker 0: You want me to call you in 15 minutes, sir?
Speaker 1: Call this number back, and you'll be with my Jonathan, Brian Ettinger.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Ettinger is Biden's closest friend. He meets with Biden monthly. He was his 1st legislative director and he's an attorney. More importantly, Brian is the unpaid chairman of the He organized in her agency, he organized crime passports for the US, which he does provide, which means He works for all works with all of our agents. And Biden sends him on secret missions.
The most recent of which was to Pakistan, without the State Department of law. Now you can't mention that while I have Brian on the phone, but I'm telling you that To give you an idea of who he is.
Speaker 0: Yes, sir.
Speaker 1: Call call me back and, he just called, so he should probably getting off the plane now. Give me 15 minutes and then call back.
Speaker 0: Very good. I will call you in 15 minutes. And also, sir, privately, between us, if we can work out A cooperative agreement, I will share a a significant percentage of the rewards for justice.
Speaker 1: You've always said that. And you know, Alan, let me say this. You told my daughter it was about money. It's really never been about money. You know, I have my daughter's house invaded by the FBI.
You've never had that done. They did that to my daughter that you talked to weeks before my election, and they never talked to her. They all and and that intimidation and that threat, I know they've talked to you, but you've never had that done publicly. That was done to me.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: My my book will be out this year, which is being written by a US attorney
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: 23 who is Brian Enger's best friend Because he wants to bring out the truth, which is gonna rock this country to its roots. So that's been my concern all along. The 5 year statute on being able to do anything against me ends this year.
Speaker 0: I'm a big supporter of you, sir, and I never wanted to offend anybody. And and forgive me for calling your daughter.
Speaker 1: No. I thought you talked to him, but, you know, you told her that, you told her that it was about money. My daughter's house was raided by the FBI to push the bus. That's what it's about I see. About me not wanting my family abused.
Speaker 0: I understand. Yeah.
Speaker 1: They never talked to her. Yeah. They raided her they raided her to create an incident to get me out of office. Yes. Probably partly because I was dealing with you.
I don't know.
Speaker 0: Well I know
Speaker 1: the I know the CIA, set me up because I know the names of the people in the agency from all their friends. So it's not, I mean, honestly, I can't work for free, but it's more about my stability and my security and my family security. But let me have this call with Brian. Yes. It's now, it's now 11:35 EST.
Yes. Call me back at 11:50 when I have him in the car.
Speaker 0: I will call you at 11:50. Alan Perot.
Speaker 1: Alright. I'm gonna put you on the phone with myself and Brian Hetty. I told you who Brian is. He's a good Good friend and a trusted partner of mine. He, he has access he does a good thing.
He does this as a favor for Biden With the interagency organized crime task force that works with our agencies.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: But he's also very close to Biden on a number of issues. He was his former staffer. I trust him with my life and we're business partners. So I'm gonna have you I told him about you. You don't have to go through all the background about who you are.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: I want you to tell him the most recent situation and, and then Brian and I are gonna talk about it, because we're gonna have to do it got it. So would I put you on speakerphone now that I'll issue? Yes. Alan, can Hear me?
Speaker 0: Yes, sir.
Speaker 1: Can I put the volume up? You've gotta speak loudly. This is Brian Ettinger. Yes, sir. Oh, how are you?
Speaker 0: Very well, sir. How how are you, Brian?
Speaker 1: Good. Speak very loud, Alan, so we can hear you. We're in a car. Kurt told me about I guess the latest incident was, with with, with our governor, Richardson, and, He gave me one through your background and who you are and the people that you previously contacted. And he indicated You know, you were gonna try to get Susan Collins and Lieberman united together to go in and see the to brief The president or the vice president about the situation.
Speaker 0: You are correct.
Speaker 1: But but I understand you're, you know, you're into the the preservation of falcons. I know I'm sure you do know most of the royal members of the royal family because That's what they hunt with this Falcon as well as Bin Laden, that, that used to hunt with Falcons.
Speaker 0: Well, sir sir, I worked exclusively for President Sheikh Zayed, the former the late president of the United Arab Emirates. I lived With him and his family for 20 years, I also trained falcons for the Saudi crown prince before he became King Abdullah, yes, Falconry is the Rosetta Stone for Al Qaeda. I met Victor Boot in Sheikh Zayed's Falconry camps and recently, between November 2004 and up until recently, my team members have met Osama bin Laden 6 times inside Iran. We have repeatedly notified the US government and only received, first, we were ignored, then we were obstructed, and then we were threatened.
Speaker 1: I mean, that doesn't Surprised me, there's a friend of mine who's a international hunter and he hunts with falcons with the royal family I mean, of the UAE and his name is, Saeed Khan Farajah.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: I don't know if he knows But he takes them in the Himalayas, to go this mountain goat, they go hunting with the world family there.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And he told me about a year So that, because he led the other house also in Queda, he told me that, he knew recently that Bin Laden Was ignored in Iran and and he's an American citizen and told people at the embassy and they they ignored him, but I like the plug. I haven't told you this, but along my most recent trip to Kuwait, I was with my 2 closest friends there, Sheikh Mohammed, who's the foreign minister, Deputy prime minister, and former US ambassador and Sheikh Saud, who was the ambassador during Desert It's Storm.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: George Bush, the father's closest friend in the Middle East.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: He's a very close friend of mine and were having a private dinner with his son Noah, who's another really close friend of mine, and, we got to talking about Bin Laden. I Said, Jake, so where do you think he is? He said, oh, Kurt. He said, there's no doubt he's in Iraq. Yeah.
I just told Kurt. I said, no. The the better way of doing it, if Susan Collins and Lieberman are on board, I wouldn't go see Obama. I'd go see Biden. And Brian can arrange that, Brian can arrange that directly, Alan.
Speaker 0: Here's the here's the problem, sir. We have identified With documentation, 3 mechanisms used by the Bush administration to covertly engineer Bin Laden's house arrest inside Iran, we have identified 2 mechanisms used by this administration, to continue the legacy. And Hillary Clinton's fingerprints are all over this and Leon Panetta's Fingerprints are all over this. We will have tremendous opposition.
Speaker 1: Okay. Because he's being I told Kurt He's being he is being protected by us. We don't really wanna get him. We want him under the radar screen because he basically made a deal that He's not gonna hit us here in the US. Well
911 - Alan Parrot to Congressman Weldon Brian Ettinger - Bush & Obama admin Covertly Engineered Osama Bin Laden’s House Arrest
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
911 Donald Trumps Book “The America We Deserve” named Osama Bin Laden by name & predicted a Terror Attack 19 Months Before 911 Occurred “I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the [1993] trade center look like kids playing with Firecrackers. One day we’re told that a shadowy figure with no fixed address named Osama bin-Laden is public enemy number one and US jet fighters lay waste to his camp in Afghanistan… He escapes back under some rock, and a few news cycles later it’s on to a new enemy and a new crisis.” https://rumble.com/v3guj9a-911-donald-trumps-book-the-america-we-deserve-predicted-911.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
BuzzFeed uncovered an old quote from Donald Trump in his 2000 book, where he expressed concern about the possibility of a large-scale terrorist attack. Trump compared it to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and mentioned Osama bin Laden as the mastermind. The hosts express surprise and question the authenticity of the quote, but confirm its accuracy. They discuss the timing of the book's publication and speculate that Trump may have had some foresight regarding the attacks. The video ends with the acknowledgment that Trump predicted the attacks.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: BuzzFeed dug up an old quote from Donald Trump talking about a large scale terror attack 19 months before 911. In his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, Trump wrote, I really am convinced we're in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the 1993 trade center, looked like little kids playing with firecrackers. Trump also mentioned the mastermind of the attack, writing, quote, one day, we're told that a shadowy figure year with no fixed address named Osama bin Laden is public enemy number 1, and US jet fighters lay thousand Tishkanban, Afghanistan, he escapes back under some rock. And a few news cycles later, it's on to a new enemy and a new crisis. Trump wait.
Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.
Okay. Hold on a second. Mhmm. Is this really Trump Before 911? Have you read this?
2000 in his Are we making that? Somebody did you make this up, Mica? Nick. I did. Did you make this up, Nick?
Nick, tell us it's four. Right? Because We used to stop everything. Mika, stop. Got it.
Thing. It's over. What's that? What's the rage here? Will you stop?
No. It's cute. I think it's cute. Well, go for it. Really quickly, though.
I mean so, Willie, that was 2000. 2000, a book he wrote in the year 2000. Wall was published in 2000. It could've written in 1999, for a while. Exactly.
He might have been a little bit more precious. No. He predicted basically predicted The attacks from us.
911 - Donald Trump’s Book “The America We Deserve” Predicted 911
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Follow the money… The day before 911, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced the Pentagon could not account for $2.3 Trillion dollars. Lucky for whomever stole this money 911 dominated the news cycle and this story was buried. https://rumble.com/v1jilhf-the-pentagon-cannot-account-for-over-2.3-trillion-dollars-in-transactions-s.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
Our financial systems are outdated, hindering our progress. It is estimated that we are unable to trace $2.3 trillion in transactions. Additionally, the lack of compatibility between various technological systems prevents us from sharing information within this building.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates we cannot track $2,300,000,000,000 in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of different technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.
9/11: Donald Rumsfeld “The Pentagon Cannot Account for over $2.3 Trillion Dollars in Transactions” September 10, 2001
Donald Rumsfeld: The Pentagon Cannot Account for over $2.3 Trillion Dollars in Transactions- Sept 10, 2001 Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candl
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Did we ever find where Trillions of our dollars went? Prior to these events, Rumsfeld, VP Dick Cheney, & many other Bush administration Operatives were part of a neoconservative think tank called Project for a New American Century. This report argued for a global expansion of American military and economic supremacy, and for the US to transform itself into a "one-world superpower". The report warned that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". Would 9/11 qualify as “ Catastrophic & catalyzing event”? https://www.loc.gov/item/lcwaN0011283/
Page Not Found -- 404 -- Library of Congress
loc.gov
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Quite ironic…. This Documentary describes the 12 chilling Parrales between Pearl Harbor & 911. 911: The Mockinbird Media made a relentless effort to create a direct association to Iraq & Osama Bin Laden. Also comparing the attack to Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor: The Mockinbird Media made a relentless effort to create a direct association to Hitler & Japan. 911: Top level officials & the intelligence community knew there would be an attack and withheld crucial evidence. Pearl Harbor: FDR & top officials knew Pearl Harbor was being painted for a bombing run. They knew the exact date. The intelligence community withheld crucial evidence. 911: FBI agent discovered information that could have prevented the attack. The information she uncovered never made it past her supervisors. Rumsfeld could not be found delaying the chain of command. Pearl Harbor: Hours before the attack, Chief of Staff George Marsh was nowhere to be found, delaying the process of comms in the chain of command. 911: VP Dick Cheney gave direct orders not to interfere with the plane heading towards Washington. Only 4 jets remained on alert to defend the entire sector of the country likely to suffer an attack. Pearl Harbor: FDR gave direct orders not to interfere with the Japanese attack. 911: 3,000 died and justified a war the US had been preparing for months in advance. A military plan to attack Afghanistan was placed on George Bush’s desk on September 10. Pearl Harbor: 3,000 died and justified a war the US had been preparing for months in advance. 911: A commission report was produced to rubberstamp the Governments version of events. Pearl Harbor: A commission report was produced to rubberstamp the Governments version of events. https://rumble.com/v1js7v9-12-parallels-between-the-911-and-pearl-harbor.-the-playbook-for-pre-emptive.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
On September 11, there were parallels drawn between the attacks and the historical events of Pearl Harbor. Both events were used by the US government to go to war, with the ultimate goal not being the one initially stated. The propaganda machine in both cases worked to create connections between the attacks and other countries. In both instances, there was evidence of pre-knowledge by the US government, which was denounced in front of Congress. Important information was withheld from those who could have used it to defend against the attacks. The failures and confusion in the air defense system on September 11 were attributed to a series of blunders and miscommunications. The military exercises being conducted on that day added to the confusion and hindered the response.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: On the very day of September 11, several Commentators drew a parallel with the historical events of Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 1: And it's today that will, as was the case with Pearl Harbor live in infamy in American history. The last time there was an attack like this on the United States was Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 2: Reminiscent of another terrible day, the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 0: But there was also someone on the same day who offered a prediction.
Speaker 3: After the attack on Pearl Harbor, guess what we did? We went back and found out that, yes, the evidence there. We should have known. And again, I think what we're going to see, even in this instance, this Pearl Harbor of the 21st century is very much the same kind
Speaker 0: of rain. In fact, the more information that has been emerging about September 11, the more we have come to realize that many different aspects of the 2 events bear a chilling resemblance to each other. While both events were needed by the US to go to war, in both cases, the ultimate goal was not the one initially stated.
Speaker 1: Roosevelt knew a surprise This Japanese attack would enrage the public and jump start the American war machine. In this way, FDR would get back door entry into what he really wanted, a war with Hitler.
Speaker 0: According to their own documents before 9/11, the neo knew that a surprise attack like a new Pearl Harbor would enrage the public and jumpstart the war machine against Afghanistan. In this way, they would get a entry into what they really wanted, the war with Saddam Hussein. In the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go.
Speaker 4: He says that going after Saddam Hussein was topic a 10 days after the inauguration, 8 months before September 11th.
Speaker 0: Before and during the war, the propaganda machine made a relentless effort to create a direct connection between Hitler and Japan.
Speaker 1: One poll taken immediately after Pearl Harbor showed that more than 60% of Americans believe that Germany was behind the attack.
Speaker 0: The Bush Cheney propaganda machine made an even harder effort to create a Direct association between Iraq and Osama bin Laden. By the end of 2003, nearly 70% of Americans believed that Saddam was implicated in the September 11 attacks. Top levels of the Roosevelt administration knew in advance that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked.
Speaker 2: General Marshall And Admiral Stark and indeed FDR indeed knew that Pearl Harbor was being painted for a bombing run by the Japanese.
Speaker 0: Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, even knew the exact day of the attack a week before it took place.
Speaker 5: Cordell Hull was Secretary of State. And he called me on Saturday morning, and he started to relate that Pearl Harbor would be attacked On December 7th.
Speaker 0: Before September 11, many in the intelligence community knew the attacks were on their way.
Speaker 4: There was so much discussion about this attack. Everybody was talking about it. George Had meetings at the White House.
Speaker 0: Vital information on the Japanese attack was kept from those who could have used it to defend the Hawaiian port and to minimize the
Speaker 1: number of American casualties. 2 men could use that information immediately. Admiral Husband Kimmel and Lieutenant General Walter Short, the commanders at Pearl Harbor. But they never get it. According to Hill, that was no
Speaker 2: If FDR and his administration deliberately withheld the vital intelligence from Pearl Harbor and all the evidence indicates That they did. Then it was certainly a deliberate conspiracy to set Pearl Harbor up for a total defeat.
Speaker 0: Before September 11, important information was kept from counterterrorism czar Richard Clark, who could have organized the defense and Even have prevented the attacks altogether. You have to intentionally stop it. You have to intervene and say, No, I don't want that report to go. We, therefore, concluded that there was a high level decision in the CIA, ordering people not To share that information. In both cases, the pre knowledge by the US government on the upcoming attacks was denounced in front of Congress.
Speaker 1: In September 1944, Republican Representative Forrest Harness of Indiana made the 1st congressional charge about a Pearl Harbor conspiracy. He said that 3 days before Pearl Harbor, the Australian government had warned Washington that a Japanese aircraft carrier was headed towards Hawaii. But he said, That information was withheld from Kimmel and Shorin.
Speaker 0: After September 11, Republican congressman Kurt Weldon denounced The pre knowledge of information on the upcoming attacks, which was intentionally withheld from the intelligence community.
Speaker 6: This is an attempt to prevent the American people from knowing the facts about how we could have prevented 911, and people are covering it up today.
Speaker 0: When honest officials stumbled on important information on the Japanese attack, they went straight to the superiors only to see that information ignored, diverted, or suppressed altogether.
Speaker 7: The chief of naval intelligence in Washington, Captain Alan Kirk recognized the message as plans for a bombing raid, but his persistent attempts to warn Kimmel ended when he was assigned to other duties. At Pearl Harbor, the admiral had no way of knowing that Kirk had been repeatedly refused permission to warn him.
Speaker 0: In August 2001, FBI agent, Colleen Rowley, discovered information that could have led to uncover the September 11 plot. But her memos Never got past her superiors while she was prevented from pursuing the investigation any further.
Speaker 4: Finally, it turns out they were not by the lawyer and the FBI who had the duty to send those over to the Department of Justice.
Speaker 0: Hours before the Japanese strike, Roosevelt's chief of staff, George Marshall, became unavailable, delaying the process of communication within the chain of command.
Speaker 7: General George Marshall, the man who should have acted, was nowhere to be found. Colonel Rufus Bratton was responsible for keeping Marshall supplied with such vital information. For Bratton, Marshall's sudden unavailability at a time when America was on the brink of war Could not have been accidental.
Speaker 0: In the crucial hours of September 11, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and other top military became suddenly Unavailable, hampering the decisional process within the chain of command.
Speaker 2: For 30 minutes, we couldn't find.
Speaker 0: Withholding information, however, may not have been sufficient to guarantee the success of the Japanese attack. The military capacity of the Hawaiian port was also kept below its requirements. General Short, faced with the need to send out long range patrols, had only
Speaker 7: a handful of suitable aircraft. His demands for war were not seen as a priority.
Speaker 0: On September 11th, only 4 jets remain on alert To defend the entire sector of the country most likely to suffer an attack.
Speaker 1: I've determined, of course, that with only 4 aircraft, we cannot defend the whole North
Speaker 0: President Roosevelt gave direct orders not to interfere with the Japanese attack.
Speaker 2: President Roosevelt told the General Marshall To send a message to the Hawaiian and Philippine commanders, don't interfere with Japan's overt act of war. The United States desires That they Japan commit the 1st over there. There is no argument about what FDR meant. He meant that the U. S.
Naval plan to defend Pearl Harbor should not and cannot be executed.
Speaker 0: On September 11, Vice President Cheney gave a direct order regarding the plane headed towards Washington, which in fact resulted in the plane reaching its target without being shot down. Young man said, Vice President, the plane is 10 miles out. Do the orders still stand? And the Vice President sort of his head around and said, of course, I do. It was thanks to the indignation for the 3,000 sailors killed at Pearl harbor that president Roosevelt could finally enter a war the US had been preparing for months in advance.
Speaker 2: With confidence In our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, We will gain the inevitable triumph, so help us God.
Speaker 0: It was thanks to the indignation for the 3,000 victims of September 11 that President Bush could launch a war that have already been prepared in the smallest detail. CNN and Time Magazine have reported that on September 10, 2000 plan to attack Afghanistan had been placed on George Bush's desk to be signed by the president upon his return from Florida.
Speaker 2: May God grant us wisdom, and may he watch over the United States of America.
Speaker 0: Then came the official commissions, which in both cases were tasked To find out whether there had been a conspiracy by the same authorities that were suspected of having participated in the conspiracy.
Speaker 1: Just 3 months after BJJ, Senator Alvin Barkley of Kentucky convenes the Joint Congressional Committee on the investigation of the Pearl Harbor attack. The committee lays much of the blame on the commanders at Pearl Harbor, and largely exonerates FDR and his top advisers.
Speaker 2: Gross negligence becomes high treason When the motive is discovered or understood In July 2004, the commission published its final report.
Speaker 0: 2 a half 1000000 pages of documents. We've interviewed over 1200 individuals, including Experts and officials past and present.
Speaker 2: However, the commission report failed to meet many of the families' expectations and concluded that 911 was merely a failure of imagination.
Speaker 0: Published in 2004, the 911 Commission report has become the central focus of criticism by the 9 11 truth movement, a movement comprised of thousands of individuals and associations from all over the world, All connected through the Internet. The Commission's report is accused of having simply rubber stamped the government's version of the events by ignoring all the evidence against while covering up its most conspicuous holes with a long series of omissions, distortions, and even plain falsehoods. Led by researcher David Ray Griffin, an international panel of 20 experts on 911 has compiled a list of the strongest evidence against the official version that has emerged to this day. This evidence is available to the public on their website in 4 different languages. Despite all the evidence that has emerged in the last decades, there are many who still reject the idea of a conspiracy at Pearl Harbor, and prefer to reassert the much more simplistic explanation called the official version.
Speaker 8: There was no conspiracy. FDR did not know. Cord Hall did not know the American government did not know that the Japanese were gonna attack Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. It was a, What is, been called a failure of imagination.
Speaker 0: Despite all the evidence presented in the last 10 years by the 911 truth movement, There are many who openly support the official version by the government and dismiss such evidence as irrelevant. These people are known as debunkers as their Stated intent is to debunk the evidence presented by the 9/11 truth movement against the official version. The most authoritative debunker in Italy is Paolo a member of an organization called GCAP, which has openly declared war on the so called conspiracy theorists. Artivisimo has held numerous conferences on 9/11, in which he has covered all the most important aspects of the debate. The most prominent champion for the official version in France is Jerome Kieran, who also wrote a book called September 11 and the conspiracy theories.
Kieran also participated in numerous Conferences and television debates on 9/11 in his own country. But the flagship for the debunkers worldwide is certainly the American magazine, Popular Mechanics. In 2006, they published a book called Debunking 911 Myths, in which the authors purport to have refuted all the major claims against the official version by the 911 truth movement.
Speaker 9: Jim Miggs is the editor of Popular Mechanics Magazine. In 2005, he and a staff of reporters decided to take on the factual and scientific claims made by members of a 911 conspiracy The results were first published in a magazine article, then more fully developed in a book titled Debunking 9 11 Myths: Why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts.
Speaker 10: I think what Popular Mechanics did with the 911 conspiracy theory was just about one of the best things ever done in the history of skepticism. That is exactly how it should be done. Here's the claim. Here's the answer. Here's the claim.
Here's the answer. By the end, they got nothing to stand on. Boom. End of story.
Speaker 0: But is it really so? The debate on September 11 can roughly be divided into these areas of discussion. We have the 4 hijackings as the overarching event of the day, and we have the 3 different locations that were hit by the 4 airplanes. One of them hit the Pentagon. Another crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
The other 2 hit the Twin Towers in New York. The debate on the hijackings is divided in 3 parts. The first one focuses on the air defense and whether the failure to intercept A hijacked airplane is accidental or intentional. The 2nd focuses on the hijackers and whether they were actually aboard the airplanes or just the usual patsies. The 3rd part focuses on the aircraft themselves and whether the 4 airplanes used in the attacks were the same ones that took off from The airports that morning were something that only resembled them from the outside.
What initially raised suspicions on the true role of the military on September 11 is the fact that the U. S. Air defense, which is arguably the most advanced and sophisticated in the world, was unable to intercept even one of the 4 hijacked
Speaker 2: I remember thinking, where on Earth are the interceptors? I'm an old interceptor
Speaker 11: And it's absolutely
Speaker 2: unbelievable that hijacked airliners could fly Around for an hour and 40 minutes without being intercepted.
Speaker 12: As a former Minister of National Defense, why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors after being scrambled, take them with a quick reaction alert, they should have been in the air in 5 minutes or 10 minutes. If not, as a Minister International defense, which I would want to say, why not?
Speaker 0: This astonishing failure to respond was By Senator Mark Dayton in the Post nineeleven Congressional Hearings.
Speaker 13: But what I find much more shocking and alarming were the repeated and catastrophic failures of the leaders In charge and the other people responsible to do their jobs, to follow established procedures, to follow direct orders from civilian and military commanders.
Speaker 0: The official justification for this failure is a series of blunders, miscommunications, and mistakes that has come to be known as the incompetence theory.
Speaker 2: On that day,
Speaker 0: you saw a lot of
Speaker 3: well meaning, confused people struggling to
Speaker 11: make sense of a of a terrible situation. They didn't even know where the planes were.
Speaker 0: One argument for the incompetence theory is that The air defense was conceived to protect the US from external threats, not internal ones.
Speaker 11: The fact is that our our Air defenses, the whole NORAD system was not at all geared towards protecting us from domestic aircraft. Quite the contrary, it was all set up to detect aircraft coming in from overseas.
Speaker 2: That's 45.
Speaker 0: What the debunkers forget to mention is that the responsibility for tracking internal hijacks has never fallen on the military to begin with. This has always been the duty of the civil air traffic controllers, the FAA, as explained by the Secretary of Defense himself.
Speaker 14: So the Department of Defense was oriented externally. Our radars were pointing out, not in. And the FAA was the one that that then had the responsibility to say there's a hijack.
Speaker 0: Only then, Explains author and researcher, Nafeez Ahmed, is the military requested for assistance in scrambling their jets.
Speaker 15: Standard Procedures dictate that as soon as a plane flies off course, the FAA will contact the plane and try to ask them what is going on. If there There is a problem or if they cannot establish radio contact, then immediately, the FAA will contact the Pentagon, who will, within
Speaker 0: The FAA authority over the National Airspace is clearly acknowledged in this exchange between the military from September 11th.
Speaker 2: If you hand the fighters over directly to FAA so they They're still under FAA control. We're never gonna take them. Just work with them, coordinate with them as best that you can with that. Take them to the area and let them, handle that airspace.
Speaker 0: Another argument for the incompetence theory is that by turning off the transponders, The hijackers had made the airplanes very difficult to be tracked on radar.
Speaker 2: That can't be overstated. The fact that once the hijackers turned off the transponders, You had air traffic control who are looking at something like 4,500 primary radar flips. They are trying to pick out the planes that they just lost.
Speaker 0: This is not true. When the transponder is turned off, the controllers lose the information on the altitude, But they can still track the plane as a primary signal. The following example shows how long it took an air traffic controller to find American 11 on his Green after he was told the plane had been hijacked.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Good morning, Boston. I got a situation here with American 11. We believe it's a, possible hijack. Okay.
Tell me more. We lost radio communications with him, then we lost, his transponder. And right now, the, aircraft is just west of Albany 7. Going southbound. And Okay.
I see them.
Speaker 0: United 175 never turned the transponder off. It just switched codes. United 175 is 50 miles northwest of New York city when its transponder code is suddenly changed.
Speaker 2: As I look up, I noticed that United 1 70 five's Code has changed. I just turned around and radioed the pilot. My exact words were 9175, Recycle transponders for
Speaker 16: Hijacker Al Shei obviously intended to turn off that transponder, but because he just changed codes and didn't turn it off, he still left The controllers with a very clear indication of the normal return from an aircraft that was squawking, that's what we call it, with the altitude.
Speaker 0: According to the Secret Service, the plane that hit the Pentagon was tracked for at least 30 minutes before it reached Washington.
Speaker 17: Nelson Garabito was the Secret Service Agent in charge of protecting the White House airspace.
Speaker 5: The first thing I did is I picked up the phone to call my my contact, the FAA. He said, we have 4 planes outstanding. 2 have hit the towers, and 2 are headed to Washington, DC. One of them approximately 45 minutes out.
Speaker 0: The 1 30 minutes out turned out to be the plane that hit the Pentagon.
Speaker 5: As the one nearest us, Got closer and closer, 6 minutes out, 5 minutes out. We knew it was sort of over the CIA, and we thought this out where it's going, but it it kept coming.
Speaker 0: United ninety three was also being tracked after the hijacking.
Speaker 17: We were tracking United ninety three, and I was in conversation with the FBI agent, and He was relaying to me that we suspect that this aircraft has now been taken over by hostile forces, described the sharp turn It made over, Eastern Ohio, and now it's heading back, along southwestern Pennsylvania.
Speaker 0: The airplane was being followed step by step, practically in real time.
Speaker 2: He's, Right now, he is west of Johnstown still, 12 miles.
Speaker 0: At some point, it even turned the transponder back on, showing not only his position but also the altitude.
Speaker 2: It looks like he's still turning. Hey. His transponder just came back on, and it was showing 8,000 feet 200. 8200 feet. 8200 feet, he saw the same cold that he was before.
Speaker 0: Saved for some moments of confusion, the 4 airplanes were being tracked by air traffic controllers All along, the real reason for the failure to intercept the 4 aircraft seems to have been the high number of military exercises that were being run by NORAD on September 11 out of their base in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado. As Webster Tarpley noted in his book, 911 Synthetic terror. Staff exercises or command exercises are perfect for a rogue network, which is forced to conduct its operations using the same communications and computer systems used by other officers who are not necessarily party to the illegal operation. Interestingly enough, on the evening of September 10th, the security level for the computer system called Infocon had been dropped to normal, the lowest level. This made it easier for anyone to penetrate or compromise the computer Networks of the Air Defense System.
On September 11, between 4 10 military exercises had been scheduled, Some of them involving false hijacks of commercial airplanes. This unusual number of exercises had two major consequences. 1, they moved a large number of fighters out to Canada and Alaska. 2, they created a major confusion in the system As soon as the real hijackings were reported.
Speaker 2: We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to
Speaker 18: we need someone to scramble some s 16. There's something up there. Help us out.
Speaker 2: Is this is this real world or exercise?
Speaker 18: No. This is not an exercise, man. Okay?
Speaker 0: The process of authorization for scrambles was lengthy and complicated.
Speaker 1: Hey,
Speaker 2: we just I just talked to others here, and they said they needed, knee as authorization.
Speaker 0: Confusion and pressure kept mounting.
Speaker 2: I don't know where I'm scrambling these guys 2. I need a direction, destination.
Speaker 0: At times, communications were jammed.
Speaker 19: If you could do me a favor and have them call us, we cannot call for some reason.
Speaker 0: Some in the military quickly realized the simulations were causing a problem.
Speaker 2: You know, let's get rid of this goddamn sim. Hey. Turn the sim switches off. Get rid of that
Speaker 19: I hope to cancel the exercise because this is ridiculous.
Speaker 0: But they were not canceled. Even after both towers in New York had been hit, when everyone knew America who is under attack. The war games continued.
Speaker 2: You guys watching the news?
Speaker 20: Yeah. I wasn't sure. I've been watching
Speaker 2: it for about 10 minutes. Did they just study the exercise? Not at this time. No.
Speaker 0: Apparently, someone took advantage of the situation. While the plane headed for the Pentagon was quickly approaching from the west, an unknown source, which was never identified reported that American 11 was headed towards the capital even though the plane had already crashed into the North Tower. I just had
Speaker 2: a report that American 11 is still in the air, and Heavy towards Washington.
Speaker 19: American 11 is still in here.
Speaker 0: This attracted all the attention towards the so called Phantom plane.
Speaker 21: He's still airborne. He's still
Speaker 19: a hijacked out there, but we can't get a position on him.
Speaker 0: The jets from Langley were prepared to intercept him.
Speaker 2: I don't think they might wanna hold it to my staff down there, though, too.
Speaker 19: We have Langley on battle right now.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 0: Then they were scrambled straight for Washington.
Speaker 2: Foxy, scramble, Weinley. Head record to Washington area. I'll do that.
Speaker 0: But a different command post called giant killer sent the fighters out to the ocean.
Speaker 2: Say again
Speaker 19: where you want them?
Speaker 2: We want them in the Wizzie P386 area.
Speaker 0: This didn't sit well with the operation center.
Speaker 2: Freaking giant fella in their wiz and sent them out over the When we scrambled up to Washington By the
Speaker 0: time the plane headed for the Pentagon was circling the capital, it was too late for the Langley Jets to intercept it. Even after the Pentagon was hit, the war games were not suspended. And again, while United ninety three was being hijacked, another false alarm attracted the attention in the opposite direction.
Speaker 2: Did you get the word? I got Delta 89 or south southeast of Toledo.
Speaker 19: 89 at the hijack. They think it's possible hijack. Fuck. South of Cleveland. We have a code on the back.
Good. Pick it Find it. Fuck. Another one.
Speaker 0: Major Nazipani turned to Toledo Air Force Base.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry to be so brief and quick on this, but there's another possible hijack About 50 miles east of Toledo and you guys are the closest and we need somebody airborne.
Speaker 0: But instead of getting help, his authority was questioned.
Speaker 2: What authority is this coming from? What authority is this coming from? The DO, that's how you tell you.
Speaker 0: Nizipani vented his frustration to his superior, Colonel Marr.
Speaker 2: He said tell his commander the commander's gonna call you. He doesn't believe the authority.
Speaker 0: Then they tried Duluth Air Force Base.
Speaker 2: Okay. Duluth, we got no fighters.
Speaker 0: The Ziffany went all the way to the western quadrant looking for help.
Speaker 2: Assistant Agent Kenny. Who is this? Hey, Kenny. This is nasty. How are you doing?
Hey. Doing alright. Hey. We're not doing so good right now. What I'd like to do, possibly steal some aircraft out of Fargo from you guys.
12 Parallels Between the 9/11 & Pearl Harbor. The Playbook for Pre-Emptive War Exposed!
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time Telegram is my home base of Operations— follow me at t.me/candlesinthenight Truth Social at @MJTruth Gab https://gab.com/mjtruth My Website— www.theunshakeablepundit.com
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
If you’re saying no way our government would stage 911 to justify war with Afghanistan…. Have you ever heard of Operation Northwoods? Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation that originated within the US Department of Defense of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for CIA operatives to both stage and commit acts of terrorism against American military and civilian targets, blaming them on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The possibilities detailed in the document included the remote control of civilian aircraft which would be secretly repainted as US Air Force plane, a fabricated 'shoot down' of a US Air Force fighter aircraft off the coast of Cuba, the possible assassination of Cuban immigrants, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating terrorism in U.S. cities. The proposals were rejected by President John F. Kennedy. rumble.com/v3gvm0v-operat…
Video Transcript AI Summary
In 1962, the US military proposed Operation Northwoods, a plan to create fake attacks on American targets and blame them on Cuba to justify an invasion. The plan included blowing up a US ship, conducting a terror campaign on American soil, and even shooting down a civilian airliner. However, President JFK rejected the plan. The military's desperation to remove Castro from power and solve the "Cuba problem" is evident in their reckless proposal. This episode highlights the potential abuse of power and the need for checks and balances in the government. The US was just one person away from executing this operation, raising concerns about the government's ability to repeat such actions if the circumstances align.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This was a struggle of Cuban patriots against the Cuban dictator.
Speaker 1: On March 13, 1962, the joint chiefs of Staff put this document in front of the Secretary of Defense for approval from the president. This is a memo prepared by the most senior leaders in the US military, some of the most powerful men in the country. And they're asking for permission to execute a plan. A plan to lob a mortar shells into their own military bases with some damage to installations. And then to make hijacking attempts against civilian air and surface craft.
Left. They're proposing to blow up a US ship in the US naval base, Guantanamo Bay. And even to conduct a terror campaign on American oil exploding a few plastic explosives in carefully chosen spots. We're looking at a plan to blow things up on American soil and then to blame it all on Cuba.
Speaker 0: The Cuban people have not yet spoken their final piece.
Speaker 1: This operation never happened, but it almost did. And that gets to a big question, why would some of America's most powerful leaders charged with safeguarding our nation think that their duty would require them to lie to and terrorized the American people. In other words, why were they planning Operation Northwoods?
Speaker 0: We did not the first time communist tanks have rolled over gallant men and women. But the record show that our restraint is not inexhaustible.
Speaker 2: Before we dive into today's kind of insane video, I need to thank the sponsor who I'm very grateful for. Thank you BetterHelp for sponsoring today's video. For 3 years, maybe, I've been in therapy, and I can say it has truly changed my life. It has changed my mind. It has changed how I see the world, and I've become a huge fan of therapy as a very, very important part of my happiness.
BetterHelp is a place that makes therapy more accessible to people using technology. It's a platform where you sign up, you fill out
Speaker 1: a quick survey, and you get matched with a therapist. They have
Speaker 2: a huge network of tens of thousands of licensed therapists, and you can start therapy in as little as 48 hours. And you can choose how you do it. You can do it as a phone call, call or as a video chat or even as texting, the beauty about this model is that it doesn't bind you to the therapists who are available in your local geographical area, and it makes it so easy to schedule your therapy, to change your schedule, or even to change your therapist for free. Finding a therapist can be hard and emotional and difficult, and BetterHelp makes it easier for you. So if you are somebody who wants to try therapy out, BetterHelp is a fantastic way to try it and see if Sikuk changed your life as much as it has changed mine.
Because they sponsored today's video, they're giving 10% off the 1st month for my audience who tries out BetterHelp. There's a link in my description. It's betterhelp.com/johnnnyharris. Thank you BetterHelp for sponsoring today's video. Let's dive back in to operation Northwoods.
Speaker 1: Of Operation Northwoods was a response to a problem the US government had. They called it the Cuba problem. Cuba became a problem for the Slum. Cuba became a problem for the CIA when they watched this young activist with an affinity for cigars lead a communist revolution on the island, throwing out the American friendly dictator and nationalizing all the valuable land and industries trees that American businesses had been getting rich off for decades. This was the cold war and communism was now 90 miles away, threatening to spread to other countries in Latin America.
Countries that American businesses also wanted to continue controlling and exploiting. And any day, this new leader could align with the Soviet Union, giving the US's biggest geopolitical rival, a military base within breathing distance of Florida. Of so this was what the joint chiefs called their Cuba problem. The US had a few solutions to their problem. 1st, they put an embargo on Cuba, blocking all US exports to the country except for food and medicine.
Second, they stopped buying Cuba's largest export, sugar. This actually ended up backfiring when the Soviet Union stepped in to buy Cuban sugar, her kicking off an economic alliance between these 2 communist countries. Exactly what the US didn't want. And 3rd, the US started making plans. Lots of plans.
Plans to somehow get rid of Castro, to turn Cuba back into the American business friendly client state threw whatever means necessary in one of the secret plans called Operation Zapata. The CIA recruited 1500 Cuban exiles who fled to Miami during the Cuban revolution, it was this little CIA funded army called Brigade 2506. And the goal was to have them invade Cuba and removed Castro from power. So the CIA trains them at this camp in the mountains of Guatemala, where they had just recently executed pursued a coup and installed a US friendly dictator. And right in the middle of the planning stages of this operation, JFK wins the presidency.
Speaker 0: Ask not what your country can Do for you, have what you can do for your country.
Speaker 1: And he inherits the scheme to invade Cuba using exiled Cubans. The CIA briefs him on it. This plan to fix the Cuba problem by forcibly unseating Castro using Cuban exiles. And after some debate, JFK approves the plan. So on the 17th April 1961, they launched their invasion.
Brigade 2506 landed on Playa Giron with the plan to invade the island and spark a popular revolution against Castro.
Speaker 0: The Small has begun on the dictatorship of Fidel Castro. Landings were affected by rebels of several But it
Speaker 1: was a complete failure. Castro had found out about the invasion ahead of time. A radio station on the beach had spotted the invading ships arriving and called for help. Several of the invading ships sank on the coral reef, and the invading forces were met with immediate resistance from Cuban Armed Forces, who defeated them within 3 days. Most of them were captured.
9 US servicemen actually flew combat missions in support of this invasion. 4 of which were shot down and killed in the process. Something the US government and the CIA would go on to deny for almost 30 years. But the point is that this invasion failed miserably, and JFK and his administration were to blame.
Speaker 0: We are on the affixing our eyes on traditional military needs, on Army prepared to cross borders. Conviscals poised for flight. Now it should be clear that this is no longer enough.
Speaker 1: JFK would later fire the CIA director, holding him responsible for the disastrous invasion plan that we know as the Bay of Pigs. But this didn't change anything. The US government was still obsessed with removing Castro from power. They just needed a new plan. So JFK initiates his own plan called the Cuba Project, AKA Operation Mongoose.
Over the next year, the CIA employs hundreds of spies to collect intelligence on Cuba. They send submarines on recon missions to Cuban waters. They fund anti Castro protest movements spreading propaganda throughout the country. They sabotage Cuban infrastructure to create chaos. And they make dozens more plans to assassinate Castro directly.
Including preparing poisonous pills to be planted in a beverage to be drunk by Castro. They even hired the American mafia to deliver the pills, Snowing that the mafia had their casinos kicked out of Havana during the revolution and would want revenge. But none of this worked. The assassination attempts all fell apart. Fidel Castro still remained in power and his support wasn't wavering.
And the US military was getting desperate. They needed to solve the Cuba Cuba problem, before the Soviets could get more involved on the island. So after all these botched assassination attempts and failed invasions, the Joint Chiefs Staff concluded that the only way to get rid of Castro was for the US military itself to invade Cuba and take him out. But they knew that the US public would not fought an outright invasion. They needed to create a reason, a justification.
And this gets us back to our document. S the one that went to the Secretary of Defense for the president's approval, this cover and deception plan to make attacks on American targets, Skits, fake attacks that will be blamed on Cuba to raise tensions between the US and Cuba to justify an invasion. A legitimate provocation as the basis for a US military intervention in Cuba. In other words, a lie to the American public and the international community. A series of false flags to get what they wanted, and all detailed in this classified document that was only meant for a few people, with hopes that the president would approve in the spring of 1962.
Speaker 0: If the nations of this hemisphere should fail to meet their commitments against outside Communist penetration. Then I want it clearly understood that this government will not hesitate of In meeting its primary obligations, which are to the security of our nation.
Speaker 1: So let's see what this plan actually says. It starts with the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, where they would start rumors using fake radio stations and get American friendly locals to stage fake attacks on the base, starting riots in the surrounding area. Another proposed part of the plan was to blow up a US ship and blame it on Cuba. This was specifically called out has a quote, remember the Maine incident, referencing the sinking of an American warship in Cuba in the late 1800 said the US used to justify intervening in Cuba back then, to fight the Spanish. This is often thought of as a planned sabotage to justify the intervention.
And here was the US military in the sixties at it again. The document predicts that the newspapers would start reporting on the casualties, causing a helpful full wave of national indignation. They also wanted to create a fake terrorist campaign on American soil in Miami or Washington. Washington, they wanted to sink boats of Cuban refugees and stage the shooting of refugee targets and even suggested exploding a few plastic bombs in American cities. These weren't all going to be pretend.
They even say in the document that they would go to the extent of wounding people and then making fake arrests with prepared documents so it could all be widely publicized, making Cuba look like an irresponsible civil government, worthy of American intervention. They thought through having American Air Force pilots fly over places like Nicaragua and dropped bombs on cane fields to burn them down using weapons from the Soviet Union. But for this to work, they would have to be flying Cuban some military style aircraft. They would need to ensure that their planes were properly painted. They would also use these planes to harass American civilian air Craft, making it look like it was the Cubans doing this.
They planned a fake hijacking of commercial planes to blame the Cuban government forced to fake shooting down a civilian airliner. And if that wasn't enough, the joint chiefs planned to create an incident which will make it appear that communist Cuban Jets have destroyed a US Air Force aircraft while it was flying over international waters in an unprovoked attack. Operation Northwoods was a reckless plan to lie and hurt people proposed by top government leaders who were more and more desperate to invade Cuba. And they wanted to move fast, they say in just a few months. They needed to do this so that this Attack wouldn't involve the Soviet Union, who still hadn't established any defense pact or military bases in Cuba.
So what we're looking at here is the ceasing desperation of the US military to achieve its goal. To solve the Cuba problem. If JFK would just approve this plan, then the military would get to work blowing things up, attacking their bases and terrorizing the American people. But, he rejected it. Operation Northwoods never happened.
JFK's rejection of this plan is one reason that there was a rift between him and the military, with the military wanting to take a hard line on Cuba and JFK feeling the sting of the Bay of Pigs invasion, thinking that something like this was too much of a risk. A month later another document came to him, the joint chiefs following up with another memo, saying that the only way to remove the communist regime was military intervention by the United States and that Cuba was a vital base of operations for espionage, sabotage and subversion against other countries in the region. The fear was that communism would spread across Latin America because of this. And time is running out. The rift between JFK and the military continued during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the Joint Chiefs hoped to deploy nuclear missiles against the Soviets and invade Cuba.
But JFK stood up to the military once again and said no. JFK eventually went on to deny General Leman Lemenitzer another term as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, likely because of his leading role in planning Operation Northwoods. And looking at this bizarre episode in American history, you might feel like this is the moment where our system worked. Military leaders tried to abuse their power swore to launch an unprovoked and illegal invasion of another country, and the president stopped them. Checks and balances.
Right? But the reality is all these men have the same goal. Castro out of power and Cuba under their control again. Their disagreement was one of just a few degrees. The means, not the ends.
The reality is that the US was 1 man, just 1 person away from this operation happening from a full scale invasion. If JFK had lost the presidency to Nixon, would Operation Northwoods have happened? We can't say conclusively, but it certainly raises the probability. But what's more startling is that outside of a few norms and some ideas about government, nothing fundamentally has changed in our government. The political military machine still runs on the same software it did in the sixties.
If the US government felt like it and had a big enough enemy, a big enough threat to American interests, it could happen again.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Earlier this year there was a bombshell unclassified filing that At least two 9/11 hijackers on American Airlines Flight 77 had been recruited into a joint CIA-Saudi intelligence operation. https://www.floridabulldog.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Canestraro-Declaration-dated-20-July-2021.pdf Max Blumenthal: "You can just point a finger at Langley, the CIA, and Alec Station and say you are responsible for letting 9/11 happen." The CIA proposed False Flag attacks on US Soil to justify war with Cuba. Is it too crazy to think the CIA didn’t propose a False Flag attack on US Soil to justify war with Afghanistan? There are still classified documents to this day. What else does it say? This video https://rumble.com/v2klbew-bombshell-filing-911-hijackers-were-cia-recruits.html 🔗 Article https://thegrayzone.com/2023/04/18/9-11-hijackers-cia-recruits/
Video Transcript AI Summary
According to a court filing, at least two 9/11 hijackers were recruited by the CIA and Saudi intelligence in a joint operation. The lead investigator of the Office of Military Commissions, Don Conestraro, revealed this information in a 21-page declaration. The hijackers, Khalid Al Midhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi, attended an Al Qaeda summit in Malaysia in 2000, where the CIA photographed their passports. They were then able to board a flight to LA without screening and were met by a Saudi intelligence officer who provided them with an apartment and arranged for flight lessons. The CIA refused to inform the FBI about these individuals, raising questions about their involvement in the attacks.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Filing 9/11 hijackers were CIA recruits. At least 2 9/11 hijackers had been recruited into a joint CIA Saudi intelligence operation that was covered up at the highest level according to an explosive new court filing. This is by the Gray Zone's Kit Claringburg. So, Max, talk to
Speaker 1: us about this story. Our worst fears about this particular episode have been seemingly confirmed, through a 2021 court filing, which was just released, which came in the form of a 21 page declaration by the lead investigator of the Office of Military Commissions, which is overseeing the cases of the 911 defendants. His name is Don Conestraro, and he had interviewed several FBI agents who were involved in investigating 911 and seeking actually to prevent the attack in the months leading up to the attack. So basically, this relates to 2 of the hijackers, the so called muscle hijackers who were charged with, overwhelming the one of them was a muscle hijacker, overwhelming the passengers and getting to the cockpit. The other 1 was a pilot, Khalid Al Midhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi.
These were Saudi citizens who Had attended a Al Qaeda they call it like a mega summit, and it was a gathering of of top Al Qaeda figures in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia back in January 22 in January 2000. Now during that summit, which, again, it was a major Al Qaeda summit. During that summit, CIA agents broke into the hotel rooms of Al Hazmi and Almidhar on January 5th and January 8th and photographed their passports. They were being monitored by the CIA. The CIA knew they were there, and they knew that something was being planned.
Something like the day of planes attack, which was already within the kind of in the pipeline that was heavily monitored by US, Pakistani intelligence, all sorts of intelligence services. So Al Hazmi and Almidhar were able to then, Following this summit from Malaysia board a direct flight to LA International Airport, get off the flight without any screening and then be met at the airport by Omar Al Bayoumi Omar Bayoumi, who was posing as an employee of the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority and was in fact a Saudi intelligence officer who then took these 2 characters, Al Qaeda figures to an apartment, paid for their lease, and then arranged for them to receive rides in taxis to flight lessons while shepherding them to and from local Saudi sponsored mosques. This should have set off alarm bells everywhere, but the CIA refused to tell the FBI that they these figures were in the country. The CIA was operating through a shady unit known as ALEC Station, which had been set up in tandem with the FBI, but which operated outside the FBI's purview, and was essentially a black operation charged with the ability to recruit assets. And so not only did the CIA refuse to tell the FBI about these 2 would be hijackers in the US.
They forbade FBI agents assigned to Alex Station from telling other FBI agents. Why would they do that? Why would they be so determined to avoid the detection of these 2 dangerous figures as they were being shepherded through the US by Saudi intelligence. Incident. Well, it's clear now as was everyone suspected through Don Conestraro's filing that they had been recruited by the CIA and were CIA assets whether they knew it or not, and that Omar Bayoumi, the Saudi intelligence agent, was himself a CIA asset working in a US Saudi joint intelligence operation.
And this raises a lot of questions which we'll get to, but here's the the, statement of an agent known simply as c three in this filing Said that Byumi's contact with the hijackers and his support thereafter was done at the behest of the CIA through the Saudi intelligence service. And the explicit purpose of Alec's station was to, quote, recruit Al Hazbi and Almidhar via a liaison relationship. And so as Kit Clarenberg details in this excellent article, which really puts all of this into context, the FBI was not told about Almidhar and Al Hazmi's presence in the US or the fact that I think one of them was actually the roommate of the lead 911 hijacker, Mohammed Atta, at one point, which would have just wrapped up the whole operation until the operation was in its final stages and they had already gone to New York. And then even at that point, it was not made a law enforcement investigation, which would have necessitated arrests. It was simply an intelligence investigation which necessitated nothing more than surveillance.
So the c you can just point of finger directly at Langley, at the CIA, and at Alec Station and say, you are responsible for letting 911 happen. That Is the most conservative analysis we can put forward.
Page not found - Florida Bulldog
floridabulldog.org
Bombshell filing: 9/11 hijackers were CIA recruits
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/04/18/9-11-hijackers-cia-recruits/ Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
Bombshell filing: 9/11 hijackers were CIA recruits - The Grayzone
At least two 9/11 hijackers had been recruited into a joint CIA-Saudi intelligence operation that was covered up at the highest level, according to an explosive new court filing. A newly-released court filing raises grave questions about the relationship between Alec Station, a CIA unit set up to track Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden
thegrayzone.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
This is detrimentally important to understand the next few posts. Operation Mockingbird & the CIA have a history… and that history never stopped. It’s called Tell-A-Vision for a reason. Six corporations control 90+% of all of what you see, hear, & read. Whoever controls the News controls the mind. https://rumble.com/v3braja-the-mockingbird-mainstream-media-the-illusion-of-choice.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
One-sided news stories and the sharing of biased and false news on social media are plaguing our country. Some media outlets publish these fake stories without fact-checking. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: One-sided news story. Plaguing our country. Plaguing our country. The sharing of bias and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories without checking facts first.
The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. History without checking facts first. Unfortunately, response. And agenda control. Exactly.
And this is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is Extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
The Mockingbird Mainstream Media - The Illusion of Choice
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here is a Young Tucker Carlson, at the beginning of his career Denying the Government was somehow behind 911. https://rumble.com/v3gw3ry-young-tucker-carlson-denies-the-government-was-involved-with-911.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
There is no evidence to support the claim that the government was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Alleging such a thing without proof is not only untrue but also implausible.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Have no evidence of the government's behind 911. And I frankly think it's an awful thing to allege considering it's not true, and you haven't proved that it is. It's totally implausible. Like, we would report that
Young Tucker Carlson Denies the Government was involved with 911
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https:
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Here is a much older & experienced Tucker Carlson calling 911 Truthers Parasites & totally dismisses Tower 7 I am open to about any crackpot theory, just on that subject, come on, that’s too much. “I hate that 911 crap. I wish they’d kick those people out” https://rumble.com/v3gwcan-911-tucker-carlson-911-truthers-are-parasites-and-dismisses-tower-7.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, two speakers discuss their views on the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 questions why Speaker 2 left a Ron Paul event when someone mentioned that 9/11 was an inside job. Speaker 2 explains that he found it stupid and lacking evidence. Speaker 1 then asks about Building 7, to which Speaker 2 dismisses the conversation as a no-win situation. They briefly discuss their support for Ron Paul and their views on government involvement in terrorism. Speaker 2 expresses his dislike for conspiracy theories without evidence. The conversation ends with Speaker 1 mentioning Alex Jones and Speaker 2 reiterating the need for evidence in conspiracy claims.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 1: How are you doing? I'm doing good. Good to see you after, we met briefly at the event in 2008 in Minneapolis for Ron Paul.
Speaker 2: Oh, it
Speaker 1: was fun. I
Speaker 0: remember that.
Speaker 1: But but you had to leave early. What happened? How did you why did you why did you bail on Ron Paul? I'll tell
Speaker 2: you I didn't bail on
Speaker 0: Ron Paul. No. It's when Jeff Ventura got up and started saying 911 was an inside job.
Speaker 1: You didn't say that.
Speaker 0: You you just said that.
Speaker 1: No. He said that it was, curious why the FBI, you know, had been logged in on on on Look. I'm I'm the lawyer.
Speaker 0: I I got it. I was there. And, bye. So you had
Speaker 1: to leave because that 1 I was enraged. I was enraged
Speaker 0: by it wasn't controversial. You were you were
Speaker 1: you were so familiar? Let me let
Speaker 0: me let me answer first. Sure. It wasn't Controversial. It was stupid. And if there's any evidence that the government is behind 911, looks I believe anything If there's evidence, but there isn't evidence.
So knock it off. That's my view.
Speaker 1: Okay. But And I
Speaker 0: said that to him.
Speaker 1: Sure. Sure. But one stupid person says something stupid at a Ron Paul event.
Speaker 0: No. Well, I I hate that. And by the way, I am open to almost any crackpot theory about any. It's just on that subject, come on. You know what I mean?
That's too much. That's even for me.
Speaker 1: So just out of curiosity then, what what's your take on Building 7? Which explanation
Speaker 0: do you believe? Yes. Come on. Rob. What?
No.
Speaker 1: It's a serious question. Which explanation did
Speaker 0: did it Which explanation? I I There's
Speaker 1: 2 explanations. It was either it was, it was pulled or it us. It was isolated pockets of fire in the building that were sort of Underneath the towers coming down that brought it down.
Speaker 0: This is a no win conversation, Ron. So I'm not gonna continue it. But let me just say one thing. The macro my macro view is the obvious one, which is the billing to get down because, like, in that case, we were playing a movie.
Speaker 1: Okay. So are you still supporting Ron Paul?
Speaker 0: I don't know. I I don't really think I'm supporting Ron Paul. I like Ron Paul. I've always liked Ron Paul.
Speaker 1: So are you supporting anybody in the races here? No.
Speaker 0: I don't support. I mean, I don't I don't even You're an objective journalist? Even votes. I'm hardly objective. I'm honest.
I'm not objecting.
Speaker 1: There you go. Certainly not afraid to speak your mind.
Speaker 0: No. I'm not. No. You can assess my views Greg, you're clear. You have any But I hate that 9:11 crap.
Wish they just kicked those people out. When was supposed to be in 93rd court. Really? Office. It's important for people to stand with
Speaker 1: so involved to know the truth whether or not the government was involved or whether
Speaker 0: it was terrorists. But there's
Speaker 1: a history of government sponsored terrorists throughout the past awesome
Speaker 0: time. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So what do you mean kick them out?
Speaker 0: I don't know ever.
Speaker 1: You you anybody who's a 9:11 shooter should be should be kicked out of the the country?
Speaker 0: Of course not. I don't, you know, I don't I don't even believe in parking tickets. I mean, just please. I just don't I think that people Before saying something that heavy ought to present real evidence and not just it's a coincidence or questions remain in dumb
Speaker 1: We we gave them a lot of money. You know? CIA's CIA pretty much trained them. I
Speaker 0: mean, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's that's pretty much enough evidence for me.
Speaker 0: The all the government brought down the Twin Towers.
Speaker 1: The government that was involved in bringing inventory because they would not be trained because who trained them? The government trained them. The PI training.
Speaker 0: Alright. I've I've had this debate so many times. You know, I don't know. I just all. It seems to me that it's kind of beneath, sort of beneath like Adult discourse even really, I guess.
And it definitely discredits otherwise good ideas. I just think that the implication of it, if the government was involved, Intercations are so vast that it should be looked into whether or not it has been ridiculous.
Speaker 1: So for family members of the victims that are asking questions and want the evidence that's been withheld by the government release, you would say that they're less than adults somehow for wanting that
Speaker 0: I would say that parasites like you make it much worse for them. That's what I would
Speaker 1: I'm a parasite now.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's it's filthy to say things like that with no evidence and you have none. That's fine.
Speaker 1: Hey, Tucker. As long as we're hanging out here outside of the
Speaker 0: scrum, You
Speaker 1: you look kinda like a parasite on Michele Bachmann here. How what what's what's a parasite? All
Speaker 2: that's, you know what? I will say that's fair. I would say that That's fair? Depress our parasites.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yourself included?
Speaker 2: Of course.
Speaker 1: Alright. Of course. A lot of people would say that Helene's a little general there. Yeah. Yeah.
That's fair. That's fair. I gotta say you're more fun to talk to than Michelle Bachman. I'm not running for anything.
Speaker 2: Someone just want us Frank.
Speaker 1: Frank? Yeah. We gotta talk to Frank Lutz earlier at the Ron Paul event. He's starting to figure out why Liberty is so popular. He's he's starting to get it.
Speaker 2: But there's an important distinction between on liberty.
Speaker 1: I mean,
Speaker 2: I voted for Ron Paul in 88. I mean,
Speaker 1: I've been around Paul today
Speaker 0: in a while.
Speaker 2: And this nonsense about 911 that morons like you keep bringing up, I mean, truly, that is just the most loathsome thing to say, I think.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't keep bringing it up. It's not really my shtick. I was just, wondering why you, you know, why you walked out of the convention. Rocket. It's not really my issue.
Awful. I'm I'm so awful. And by the
Speaker 2: way, it it only discredits libertarianism and the ideas, Ron Paul and Liberty itself. You start accusing people of things on the basis of no evidence.
Speaker 1: You don't think Alex Jones has brought thousands of people to the message of Liberty? I know. You hate Alex Jones. What do you what would you say to Alex Jones?
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: This is your chance. He watches my channel.
Speaker 2: I I don't know Alex Jones. I don't have any feelings with Alex Jones. I I just think that in order to imply that there was a conspiracy behind 911, have some evidence. That's the one.
Speaker 1: And there's none. There's no evidence whatsoever.
Speaker 2: And I've done a lot of shows on it. I've read a lot about it, and I No. There are ton of coincidences. There always are. August.
That's Jones. He certainly is. All the shows for you. Well, the one I saw Alex Jones hate with Alex. What do you want to do with this scary way?
We're leading a mob I don't really don't know much about
Speaker 1: all the issues that he covers. But you gotta at least respect that he's fighting the same thing.
911 - Tucker Carlson 911 Truthers are Parasites & Dismisses Tower 7
Outside of a GOP presidential campaign event for Michelle Bachman in January 2012, Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit T
rumble.com
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
This is Tucker Carlson today… saying if you talk about Tower 7 on Television, you’ll lose your job. Did Tuckers views change? Don’t know… But Tuckers employment changed recently and all of the sudden he’s now considered a parasite by his own definition. “You can go on television & say the earth is flat & they’ll just laugh at you. It’s not a threat to anyone….. If I were to say, what actually happened to Building 7? If you’re ere to say something like that on television, they’d flip out & your loose your job over that.” “Do building actually collapse like… NO… maybe they do, but why can’t I ask questions about it? Anything you’re not allowed to ask questions about, is something you should be asking more questions about.” https://rumble.com/v2l1dwo-tucker-carlson-brings-up-tower-7.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
If people aren't offended by crazy ideas like the earth being flat, they just laugh it off. But if you question what happened with building 7, they freak out and think you should lose your job. Why? It's my country, and I want to understand. Do buildings really collapse? I don't know, but why can't I ask questions about it? Anything you're not allowed to question is something you should question more.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If they're not offended by craziness. They're not offended by if if you go on TV tonight and say, I think the earth is flat, people just laugh at you. They don't care if you think the earth is flat. It's not a threat to anyone. But if you say like, what actually happened with building 7?
Like that is weird, right? It doesn't, like, what is that? If you were to say something like that on television, they flip out. They would flip out. You should like lose your job over that.
Why? Why? It's my country. As soon as I tap on my country, can I ask it, like, I don't really understand? Do buildings actually collapse?
No, Maybe they do, I don't know. But like, why can't I ask questions about that? Anything you're not allowed to ask questions about It is something you should be asking more questions about.
Tucker Carlson Brings up Tower 7
Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Operations https://t.me/candlesinthenight TWITTER https://mobile.twitter.com/MJTruthUltra Truth Social https://truthsoci
rumble.com