|Building 7 was the third skyscraper to be reduced to rubble on September 11, 2001. According to the government, fires, primarily, leveled this building, but fires have never before or since destroyed a steel skyscraper.
The team that investigated the collapse were kept away from the crime scene. By the time they published their inconclusive report in May, 2002, the evidence had been destroyed.
Why did the government rapidly recycle the steel from the largest and most mysterious engineering failure in world history, and why has the media remained silent?
9/11 Revealed is impressively packaged. It has 253 pages with scores of color photographs, and sophisticated graphic design. The writing is dramatic. It has a broad scope, and appears to cover most of the challenges to the official story of the 9/11/01 attack.
The book pretends to speak for the 9/11 Truth Movement. It is written in the third person, and presents most challenges as things that “9/11 skeptics” or “Nine/Eleven skeptics” say. The undiscerning reader is likely to think that the book represents the work of the community of serious independent investigators working to expose the truth about the attack. Finding that the book fails to make a strong case that the attack was the work of insiders, the reader may conclude, incorrectly, that investigators have failed to make a compelling case.
Was 911 An Inside Job? A debate at University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. April 1st 2014.
Wracked by allegations of ad fraud and tax evasion, Newsweek’s senior editors are resigning and it looks like the whole organization is falling apart…But from this chaos has emerged a tiny sliver of truth amidst the torrent of MSM lies. Could this be a sign that the truth will out when the editorial gatekeepers fall, or is this a mere glitch in the matrix?
On Wednesday, February 21st, the UK’s Minister of Defence, Conservative Gavin Williamson, announced that the United Kingdom is changing its fundamental defence strategy from one that’s targeted against non-state terrorists (Al Qaeda, etc.), to one that’s targeted instead against three countries: Russia, China, and North Korea. He acknowledged that a massive increase in military spending will be needed for this, and that “savings” will have to be found in other areas of Government-spending, such as the health services, and in military spending against terrorism.
The headline in the London Times on February 22nd was “Russia ‘is a bigger threat to our security than terrorists’”. Their Defence Editor, Deborah Haynes. reported:
Het wordt tijd dat welwillende journalisten uit hun hypotheek-slaap komen en oprecht de puzzelstukjes combineren.
Het ligt er zó dik op dat het kennelijk ‘too big to believe’ is geworden!
Maar als zelf de VN en een VS-minister dit roepen..??
Als het de MOSSAD lukt om Frankrijk te infiltreren –de Franse geheime dienst nota bene (aanslagen Parijs?)- waarom dan niet de Syrische..? Of zoals nota bene François Dumas het schreef in zijn boek: https://www.wanttoknow.nl/nieuws/franse-geheime-dienst-is-in-handen-van-israel/
Ja, dan is het een ‘koud kunstje’ die gifgasaanvallen te etiketteren met de handtekening van Assad: