"Two complementary videos are combined here in the order that they were presented at the 9/11 Truth Film Festival in Oakland, CA, on Sept 10, 2015.
The first video is a preview of the witness section of a forthcoming film by Ken Jenkins titled The Pentagon Plane Puzzle.
That is followed by a PowerPoint presentation by David Chandler titled Going Beyond Speculation – A Scientific Look at the Pentagon Evidence.
In post-production, Ken Jenkins of 9/11 TV added many additional graphics to the live video footage of Chandler’s presentation.
David Chandler's presentation starts at 26:40."
Ken Jenkins has ask me to post this to 911Blogger and we hope that you will share it around with other activists.
Kind regards John
Since 2006, “North Texans for 9/11 Truth” has tenaciously worked on projects, events, actions and outreach throughout the North Texas Area and Dallas-Ft Worth Metroplex, along with supporting many national 9/11 Truth campaigns. To date, “North Texans for 9/11 Truth” has given out more than 68,000 DVDs and literally tons of literature.
This September 2015, the “North Texans for 9/11 Truth Meetup Group” (http://www.meetup.com/9-11-249/ ) again performed a variety of actions to expose the 9/11 Cover-up which included an event designed to reach new people with more than 140 people attending, a successful Sign Wave, and also a far reaching Advertising Campaign.
Today is the first day of the 3-day Architecture Boston Expo/ABX2015, with 10,000 architects in attendance, to include our 12-strong crew of AE911Truth volunteers. Reaching out to hundreds of Architects, today we secured 19 additional AIA member sponsors for a new resolution calling upon the AIA to call for a new WTC 7 investigation.
The team also secured 44 new signatories for our petition at AE911Truth.org demanding a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11.
This Thursday, November 19 from noon-12:30pm, Richard Gage, AIA, will be presenting at ABX's Learning Stage LSC02: The Third Tower: Solving the Collapse of 47-Story WTC Building 7.
If you support a new investigation, sign our petition: http://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/ae.html
Follow the News: http://www.ae911truth.org/news.html
The New York Times led the propaganda behind 9/11 and the 9/11 Wars. It did so by ignoring many of the most relevant facts, by promoting false official accounts, and by belittling those who questioned the 9/11 events. The Times eventually offered a weak public apology for its uncritical support of the Bush Administration’s obviously bogus Iraq War justifications. However, it has yet to apologize for its role in selling the official account of 9/11, a story built on just as many falsehoods. Instead, the newspaper continues to propagandize about the attacks while putting down Americans who seek the truth about what happened.
The New York “newspaper of record” has published many articles that promote official explanations for the events of 9/11. These have included support for the Pancake Theory, the diesel fuel theory for WTC 7, claims based on the torture testimony of an alleged top al Qaeda leader, and accounts of NORAD notification and response to the hijackings. Since then, U.S. authorities have said that none of those explanations were true. However, the Times never expressed regret for reporting the misleading information.
Instead, the Times continued to sell every different official explanation. When a new government theory for destruction of the WTC was put forth, it was immediately promoted. The newspaper never reported any critical analysis of the official accounts, despite the fact that all of them, including the final reports for the Twin Towers and WTC 7, have been proven to be wrong.
By Kristen Breitweiser - 9/11 widow and activist
I'm going to keep this really simple.
In response to your comment that you could personally "plead guilty" to not having imagined terrorists would use passenger aircraft as weapons→please stop lying.
As proof, I provide the "Iron Man" documents from the Asymmetrical Threats Division of Joint Forces Intelligence Command (JFIC), also known as DO5, whose task it was to track UBL from mid 1998-mid 2001.
I would first note that you were National Security Advisor to the President of the United States -- that means that you had pretty much access to anything and everything available regarding terrorist threats from groups like Al Qaeda.
Fourteen years later, everyone now knows about the summer of 2001 and the more than one dozen intelligence reports blinking red about an impending Al Qaeda terrorist attack. There was the August 6 PDB, FAA reports, CIA reports, DoD reports, and FBI reports -- all indicating and discussing terrorist cells inside the US planning attacks inside the US.
What most people don't know about is the smoking gun report from JFIC, DO5.
People sometimes wonder why is it important to investigate the alleged hijackers and others officially accused of committing the 9/11 crimes. After all, the accused 19 hijackers could not have accomplished most of what happened. The answer is that the official accounts are important because they are part of the crimes. Identifying and examining the people who created the official 9/11 myth helps to reveal the ones who were responsible overall.
The people who actually committed the crimes of September 11th didn’t intend to just hijack planes and take down the buildings—they intended to blame others. To accomplish that plan the real criminals needed to create a false account of what happened and undoubtedly that need was considered well in advance. In this light, the official reports can be seen to provide a link between the “blaming others” part of the crimes and the physical parts.
Pushing the concept of “Islamic Terrorism” was the beginning of the effort to blame others, although the exact 9/11 plan might not have been worked out at the time. This concept was largely a conversion of the existing Soviet threat, which by 1989 was rapidly losing its ability to frighten the public, into something that would serve more current policy needs. Paul Bremer and Brian Jenkins were at the forefront of this conversion of the Soviet threat into the threat of Islamic terrorism. Both Bremer and Jenkins were also intimately connected to the events at the World Trade Center.
New 9/11 Timeline Entries: Pre-9/11 Warnings about Al-Qaeda, Cheney's Military Aide on 9/11, and More
From the History Commons Groups blog:
New entries have been added to the Complete 9/11 Timeline at History Commons, which cover various events relating to the 9/11 attacks. Many of them describe warnings about the danger posed by al-Qaeda that were given in the 12 months leading up to 9/11 and some describe events from the day of September 11, 2001, itself.
Donald Rumsfeld Was Concerned about a Possible 'Modern-Day Version' of Pearl Harbor
A couple of new timeline entries deal with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's preoccupation, in the months before 9/11, with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in December 1941 that led America to enter World War II. In March 2001, Rumsfeld sent members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a copy of the foreword to a book, which discussed the US government failures that led to the attack on Pearl Harbor. And in July that year, he wrote a note to himself in which he expressed his fear of the United States experiencing a "modern-day version" of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Other senior officials talked, in the months before 9/11, about the possibility of a Pearl Harbor-like event happening in the future. In June 2001, Army General Tommy Franks, commander in chief of the US Central Command, gave a speech in which he said the US needed to prepare for an "asymmetric" attack resembling the attack on Pearl Harbor. And on the day before 9/11, Charles Nemfakos, deputy under secretary of the Navy, said during a briefing that the US would have to suffer an attack comparable to the attack on Pearl Harbor before it would address the problems with its defense policy.
Officials Warned about the Danger Posed by Al-Qaeda
warning: trailer contains some profanity and uncensored scenes of war
Post-9/11, the War on Terror had outlived its usefulness.
The minds behind the think tanks that drive America’s interventionist foreign policy decided that the U.S. needed a new enemy,
so they chose an old one -- Russia.
Part 1: A Catalyzing Event 1hr 25mins
Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld were ubiquitous in the news media as they took every available opportunity to market to America an aggressive preemptive war policy. But from where did their ideas originate? The answer is a tightly knit and eminently well placed group of neoconservative thought leaders, chief among them Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan. Part 1 begins in the panicked weeks after 9/11, as Kagan et al. seized upon the hysteria surrounding the anthrax letter attacks to further shape America’s perception of reality, planting the seeds for endless future military engagements. George W. Bush may have been understandably perceived as an idiot, but watching these wonks and academics drive the ideological engine for his administration belies a much more sophisticated strategy at play.