Support 911Blogger


9/11 Truth Next Steps - Butterflies and Guy Fawkes

I don't remember when exactly I decided that the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) was undoubtedly an inside job. I'm certain that it wasn't long after 9/11 because the videos of the collapse raised real questions early for me. However, it's now a decade after the event and a large portion of the US population hasn't seen the physical problems connected with the government's explanation of how those buildings fell. I'm beginning to think that my "seeing" the impossibility of the government's conspiracy theory (GCT) when looking at videos of the falling buildings is largely a wiring thing.

Some people have brains that always seem to know where they are in physical space, others couldn't find north with a compass. So it must be with understanding how physical forces work together. It's totally obvious to me that the symmetry of the debris falling straight down through what should have been largely undamaged lower floors of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at free fall speed (the path of most resistance) means that none of these buildings fell because of fire or because planes hit two of them. Some other force had to remove the support extremely symmetrically in the lower floors. However, most of the people I know don't seem to have the same reaction to this evidence.

I now see that there is no one piece of evidence, no matter how convincing, that is guaranteed to turn the public tide. Instead, I think turning the tide hangs on a wings-of-a-butterfly approach. Chaos theory suggests that the chaotic nature of weather and the broad array of variables that have an effect on weather may mean that the beating of a butterfly's wings in China may ultimately be the cause of a hurricane forming in the Atlantic. Given the difficulty in indentifying the source (or sources) of the apparent changes in public opinion demonstrated by the Arab Spring and the Occupy Wall Street movements, moving public opinion must also work on a chaotic basis.

This, it turns out, is great for those trying to bring a truth to the surface and very bad for people wishing to suppress it. It means that small pressures in odd places may have the desired effects. This means that everything we do to make visible the fraud of the 9/11 report has the potential to be the final straw on the camel's back. So, how do we take advantage of that?

First, I think--for those of us working outside the organized groups like AE911Truth--we have to end defensiveness over believing the GCT is false. In other words, it was an inside job and I'll be glad to talk to anyone about it, because I know enough about the situation to be able to defend my position to rational, reasonably open-minded people. Over the last 10 years there have been so many efforts to defend the GCT, yet in the end not one of them deals with the twin realities of collapse symmetry and speed that are visible to anyone willing to see. In short, the facts of the situation have broadly survived the massive efforts to suppress the truth. Now we only need the serendipity of events (the wings of a butterfly, if you will) to have a innocent child saying (preferably on live TV with an audience of millions), "But, Daddy, those buildings were blown up."

The question is, how do we create that moment of serendipity? The answer is to take on the notions of the GCT in unexpected ways and places. For example, given NIST has "proved" that the failure of a single column in a skyscraper can destroy a steel tower built on a superstructure, how is it safe to allow any more to be built? Isn't the NIST theory of skyscraper weakness an overwhelming public safety concern that should be brought to every single public approval process for new skyscrapers?

Other smaller straws of truthiness are also available like going to the Wikipedia page on 9/11 and filling out the page ratings for trustworthiness, completeness, objectivity, and writing clarity at the bottom of this (very long) web page. Fewer than 1,000 people have rated the page so it would not take many people giving realistic ratings of the page's GCT-supportive approach to get the attention of the dedicated people writing the page. Getting their attention is the point, by the way, not winning some unwinnable numeric competition. You will see, if you read the comments of people deeply involved in writing the page that there is much conflict there that could be affected by strong statements of facts they have overlooked or minimized.

One more public gesture is to sign the petition calling for a new investigation of 9/11 on the White House's website at http://wh.gov/b1N before November 30th, 2011. (N.B. Because of White House rules the petition cannot be found by searching the site and must be accessed using a URL. For those people concerned about being directed to a malicious webpage the full long-form URL for this petition is https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/appoint-and-fund-independent-prosecutor-and-impanel-public-grand-jury-investigate-crimes-911/wkfMY2JQ .) The good news about this petition is that meeting the required number of signatures before November 30th (25,000) requires (based on the website's stated rules) an official response from the administration. In the not-so-good category is the requirement that a website account, giving name, zip code, and email address, must be created in order to sign a petition. Finally, passing on the URL is the only way new signers can access the petition to sign it.

One final suggestion in this butterfly approach, think small. For example, it may be much more effective to write a respectful, heartfelt, personal letter directly to public figures who have expressed disregard for the facts of 9/11 than to approach them publicly in comment sections, blogs, and/or the news media. If the person does actually have an open mind and if you can get them to re-visit their previous reading of the facts you may accomplish a great deal more than any venting in public places.

A large and growing number of people know about many of the facts demonstrating that the GCT is nothing more than a cover-up and many more people already suspect this. Converting public opinion is no longer about amassing enough facts to prove the GCT is a fraud, that's been done. It is about keeping pressure on in lots of unsuspected places until the day when the perpetrators of 9/11 are treated to their own version of the poem about Guy Fawkes:

Remember, remember the fifth of November
The gunpowder treason and plot.
I know of no reason why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.

Perhaps our version will be something like:

Remember, remember the eleventh of September
'tho every government agency says, "not."
I know of no reason why Big Time and Shrub's treason
Should ever be forgot.

Pecosin

Have you ever considered the fact that it is possible the WTC buildings were destroyed by explosives planted with very little involvement or knowledge by U.S. officials?

(Suadi Arabia, Israel, etc....)

Double post. Woops

.

Possible.

The only thing I'm absolutely certain of is that it was an inside job. However, the circumstantial evidence--

defense system shutdown on 9/11,
highly secure building housing CIA and other sensitive agencies (Bldg 7) has explosives planted on multiple floors,
arrival of FEMA on-site in New York on 9/10,
extremely convenient makeover of Presidency with falling polls into "War President",
witnesses throughout the government saying they warned higher ups of the impending attacks,
the care (and real increase of risk for the plotters) taken by plotters not to damage surrounding real estate,
Pentagon plane destroying records of trillion(s?) of dollars in questionable charges to the Pentagon,
Worldcom and Enron fraud cases evidence destroyed in implosion of Bldg 7,
pre-9/11 insider trading by people the FBI says have no possible connection to terrorism,
and etc.--

makes it easy to take the next step in the thought process and connect 9/11 to the people in control here. I'd guess that even this view leaves lots of room for our international "friends" to help.