Flight 77

Pentagon debates expose emptiness of large-plane-impact scenario

compmix2

We can see in this composite photo that there is no room for a plane to have entered without large pieces of wreckage remaining outside.

The work that Craig Ranke (of Citizen Investigation Team) has done on the witnesses for the north path is some of the most solid, irrefutable evidence that one could ever assemble on 9/11, period – Massimo Mazzucco, creator of September 11: The New Pearl Harbor

It was my understanding there would be no math ― Chevy Chase as Gerald Ford in 1976 presidential debate, Saturday Night Live

March 16, 2016

By Craig McKee

It’s like watching someone try to dance between raindrops while they accuse you of being all wet.

Those who are determined to push the impossible claim that a large plane really did hit the Pentagon on 9/11 – despite the absence of a plane at the “crash” site – go to incredible lengths to try and make their case. They speculate, hypothesize, assume, and concoct imaginative and “plausible” scenarios that they claim “fit the data” or are “consistent with an impact”. They focus on minor details as if they are conclusive, they mention the “witnesses” as if the word (more…)

Jenkins misleads by linking Pentagon plane impact theory to AE911Truth

Jenkins cut Pentagon section out of September 11: The New Pearl Harbor without permission.

October 19, 2015

By Craig McKee

In my last post, I deconstructed David Chandler’s very disturbing Pentagon presentation at last month’s 9/11 Truth Film Festival in Oakland, CA. But as troubling as his reinforcement of most of the official story was, it wasn’t the only talk at the festival given by a member of his “Team” of researchers.

Festival organizer Ken Jenkins—who along with Chandler wants the rest of the Truth Movement to believe a large plane actually hit the Pentagon as the official story claims—tried in his brief (more…)

Win converts using these ‘plane-hit-the-Pentagon’ talking points: just keep repeating, ‘It’s so divisive!’

If someone says they think this is an actual aerial photograph, don’t correct them. This way you retain plausible deniability.

If someone says they think this is an actual aerial photograph, don’t correct them. This way you retain plausible deniability.

June 10, 2015

By Craig McKee

You feel your eyes getting heavy … your breathing is becoming slow and regular … you are becoming sleepy, so sleepy … you will accept what I am about to tell you without question … you will repeat this to others over and over and over until everyone assumes it must be true.

Now that you’re feeling relaxed, we are ready to begin looking at the best ways to steer the 9/11 Truth Movement away from the strongest evidence that the event was an inside job – what happened at the Pentagon. The first thing is to adopt this basic list of talking points. The fact that the points are untrue should not deter you.

Slip these into 9/11 conversations whenever possible:

  • “The Pentagon is so divisive.”
  • “Discussing it always causes infighting.”
  • “It is tearing the 9/11 Truth Movement apart!”
  • “Science tells us that a plane hit the Pentagon.”
  • “Yes, this part of the official story is true.”
  • “We’ll never know because the government has all the evidence.”

The key is to get the overwhelming evidence that no plane hit the Pentagon off the table while seeming like you really (more…)

A novel idea: Rebekah Roth’s Methodical Illusion and what happened to the planes on 9-11

Rebekah Roth signs copies of her book Methodical Illusions.

Rebekah Roth signs copies of her book Methodical Illusion.

By Paul Zarembka (Special to Truth and Shadows)

Rebekah Roth’s 9-11 novel Methodical Illusion is getting a lot of attention.  It claims to provide proof that all four 9-11 planes took off, but did not go to targets and instead were landed in Westover Air Reserve Base in Massachusetts where cell phone calls were set-up to implicate Muslims [sentence added, May 13, 2015. P.Z.].

The author has done many interviews since the book was published in November 2014, with almost all interviewers receiving her novel enthusiastically. Many of the 230+ reviews of the book on Amazon have four- and five-star ratings, and even those who give the book a lower rating rarely contest the substance regarding 9-11.

While Roth’s claims about what may have happened on September 11, 2001 give us a lot to absorb, there (more…)

Not a shred of evidence that any 9/11 ‘hijackers’ boarded any planes

Atta and al-Omari in Portland: note two different time stamps.

Atta and al-Omari in Portland: note two different time stamps.

By Craig McKee

To believe the official story of 9/11 you have to swallow an awful lot. You have to believe the laws of physics can be suspended for a day, that planes can disappear after crashing, and that Muslims accused of being suicide hijackers can still be alive after the deed is done.

About that last one. Essential to the deception was the premise that 19 Muslim extremists hijacked four domestic flights on the morning of September 11, 2001 with the intention of flying them into predetermined targets.

But do we really know who these alleged hijackers were? Do we know they carried out any hijackings? Do we know they were even at the scenes of the crimes? In fact, as researcher Elias Davidsson demonstrates in his recent book Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11: Counterfeiting Evidence, there is not one shred of authenticated evidence that any of the 19 men blamed for the “attacks” ever boarded any planes. And even if there were, this would not prove they participated in (more…)

Here are 10 things about 9/11 that deserve more attention – and 5 that deserve less

People need to know just how absurd the official story of the Shanksville "crash" is.

People need to know just how absurd the official story of the Shanksville “crash” is.

By Craig McKee

Let’s face it: the 9/11 Truth Movement is all over the place. But that’s not surprising – nor necessarily bad.

When you have an official story that is so clearly false in so many ways, there are going to be a multitude of valid angles from which to examine and expose the deception. There are also going to be many directions the movement can take to advance the cause and to awaken the uninitiated.

But all these ways are not created equal. When you have many thoughtful and intelligent truthers, some not-so-intelligent and not-so-thoughtful truthers, and an undetermined number of outright disinformation agents, you’re bound to get a “diversity of opinion” that would make Cass Sunstein very happy indeed.

So how do we decide what is important and was is not? How do we know where our efforts are best directed? It’s clear that we must keep our focus on things that will (more…)

Why Ferguson, Boston bombing, OKC, and 9/11 are part of the same plan for domestic control

Ferguson as war zone 7

By Craig McKee

The sight of police in camouflage uniforms with assault rifles, grenade launchers, and mine-resistant armored vehicles advancing on protesters in Ferguson, Missouri has shocked a lot of people.

But it shouldn’t have.

Those paying attention know that law enforcement across America has been undergoing a transformation over the past two decades with the process accelerating noticeably since 9/11. This is thanks to the Pentagon and its “1033 program” (section 1033 of the National Defense Authorization Act), which allows it to transfer surplus military equipment to law enforcement agencies across the country.

The result is police forces being turned into small armies, officers into soldiers, and citizens into potential enemy combatants. The emphasis is no longer on protecting and serving – it’s now about controlling and intimidating. Meanwhile, dozens of movies and (more…)

Doctored Pentagon video proves 9/11 cover-up and inside job

 

pentagon-video-frames

From the frames released in 2002: notice the wrong date and the helpful descriptions so you know what you’re seeing.

June 13, 2014

By Craig McKee

A single frame gives it away.

All but one frame of two sets of surveillance videos purporting to show the impact of Flight 77 into the western face of the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001 appear to show the same thing. But it’s that one frame that tells the tale. It shows that evidence was falsified and that a deliberate plan was carried out to fool the public into thinking that a plane hit the building when it did not.

This, combined with other key evidence (including the nature of the damage to the building, the lack of debris outside the building, and the on-camera accounts of credible witnesses who put the plane on a different flight path that the one (more…)

9/11 film reaches beyond the choir: 50 questions that blow ‘debunkers’ away

September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor

By Craig McKee

The questions have been debated since the very beginnings of the 9/11 Truth movement.

How do we get people who believe the official story of 9/11 to consider the possibility that what they’ve been told is false? How do we go beyond preaching to the choir? And at what point is it necessary, or desirable, to simplify and/or soften some of the truth to avoid scaring people off?

The question is being asked again (well, at least by me) following the recent release of Massimo Mazzucco’s impressive five-hour, three-part documentary September 11: The New Pearl Harbor. The film brings together evidence from dozens of sources (particularly documentaries and TV programs) on 9/11. It ties this evidence together very nicely and makes it clear and easily understandable, particularly for those who are (more…)

The Barbara Honegger Show: DC 9/11 conference spun as new consensus

Panel 2

Pentagon panel: From left, Deets, Honegger, Sullivan, and Barrett.

By Craig McKee

Barbara Honegger calls last month’s “9/11: Advancing the Truth” conference “historic” and a “major triumph for the movement.”

More than that, she thinks it’s a huge step towards that elusive “consensus” about the Pentagon that so many of us have thought was neither possible nor particularly desirable.

But who can blame Honegger for her enthusiasm? It was clearly her show. Not only was she part of the organizing committee for the conference, but she spoke both on Saturday and on Sunday. The latter talk went on for nearly two hours – longer than the other two Pentagon speakers combined (I’ll return (more…)