David Shayler, MI5 Whistleblower, Discusses 9/11 - Video

David Shayler, MI5 Whistleblower, Discusses 9/11 in two part series courtesy of www.911truthbristol.com.

Part 1
Part 2

Thanks Matt for the heads up!


Excellent condensed/concentrated presentation.

Thanks for the links!!!!

I second that. And very

I second that. And very actual.

Excellent summary of the

Excellent summary of the 9/11 events and their implications. Being an MI5 agent is a plus. It gives him credibility. WE need more like him to step up.

"Incompetence" claims by the

"Incompetence" claims by the FBI, CIA, etc are not just an excuse and part of the coverup but an actual part of the ongoing disinfo campaign to make us believe in the false-flag claims that "Muslims did it".

So when Shaylor talks about "incompetence ... what the authorites want you to think", be careful. He says that taking it a step further means that 9/11 was "actively helped by certain elements of the American government". So even though he mentions how it is important to be careful about how we speak of this, and blames elements within the government for failing to uphold their Constitutional oaths of office, it is he who carelessly talks of those treasonous government traitors helping [the patsies], as if it is still logical for the purported/mythical Muslim patsies to be thought of as "the bad guys", and real.

Even as he says that he believes that "the LIHOP position" is "nonsense", he keeps on referring to "[Muslim] terrorists" and "them" even as he says why we can't do that!

As he talks about "the planes (sic) which we saw going into the twin towers", the backdrop video shows the Naudet video of the first crash, minus the lie-breaking "flash frame" which reveals that it was not a hijacked 767 which struck the North tower. He goes on to say that it is impossible for "either side" to prove that the government allegations are correct. But by leaving out that lie-breaking evidence, he helps make it possible for the uncertainty to persist! It's as if he's helping to hide the very same evidence of which he accuses the 9-11 Commission of trying to hide. At 5:52 Shayler's video, in one of the video insets, just like Jim Hoffman has done in a static web page, focuses on the entry of the aircraft into the North Tower, again with the lie-breaking "flash frame" left out. Hmmmmm. Like Hoffman, he'll tell us that we cannot blame the collapses on "airplanes", hijacked or otherwise, but he's kept alive the notion that there were Muslim "hijackers". That's starting to be a lot of "coincidences"...

When the video inset shows the Penatagon Video Frames, it doesn't show the 1st frame, the one which reveals that someone from our government released visual evidence that shows that the [obscured] attacking aircraft was too small to have been a 757. Well, maybe that's just an oversight omission. He suggests that one must be gullible to believe that the Penatgon aircraft could have been vaporized, but left out mention of the government's self-contradictory claim that DNA evidence survived the same 'inferno'. Then he says that we don't know who's telling the truth...

He says that WTC7 is the only steel-framed building to have collapses without having been hit by an airplane, even though he's just propounded his supposed belief that "airplanes" had nothing to do with the collapses of the twin towers. (Which is it, David?)

He then touts Steven Jones as an expert (which Jones obviously is not), as if Jones was able to account for the "hot spots" (Jones has not done so; he's merely blowing an untenable "thermite" hypothesis past the unknowing. Nor has Jones accounted for all the smaller-than-2.5-micron dust particles). Those thermal satellite images also, clearly, understated the unnaturally high temperatures involved (if it was that hot days afterward, why was it hotter than that -- molten metal found -- weeks later?)

At the end of part 1 (all I've watched), he says that 9/11 was an inside job. I agree with that conclusion, but not how he's illogically and incompletely gone about supposedly trying to support that truth.

Can you say "limited hangout"? Can you recognize one? Once MI5, always MI5?