Perdana Global Peace Foundation (PGPF) would like to invite you to the International Conference 9/11 Revisited – Seeking The Truth. Below are the details of the event:Monday, 19th November 2012
9.00am until 5.30pm
PWTC Kuala Lumpur
Please find the attached a copy of the program and the RSVP slipKindly RSVP by the 15th November 2012 by calling Aishah at +603 2092 7248 or fax it to +603 2273 2092 or by emailing it to aishah86@gmail.com
I’m pasting a home made transcript of the below interview with George Galloway and Paul Stott. Will comment on it later and boy is there a lot to say about it
–
Transcript:
GG: We’re going to talk to a man who I think will emerge in time as the principle debunker of the conspiracy theorists on 9-11. I had the privilege of interviewing today for my television show which goes out on Sunday night, and I immediately thought that we should him to a wider audience and that wider audience is you. Let me say right up top that I have never argued, never, and don’t now, that there are many things about 9-11 that we do not know. And I’m certainly not saying that there are not things that raise very serious question marks. And I’m not saying, I’m definitely not saying, that George W Bush and Dick Chaney are not capable of very nefarious deeds indeed. But I am saying and have always said, will continue to say until someone proves otherwise to me, that to allege, as many do, that this act of mass murder on 9-11 ten years ago was some kind of conspiracy by the Americans themselves, that it might not even been what we thought it was, that it might be for example that these planes were not planes or that these planes were empty, that the passengers were duped or stooges or agents or any of the other plethora of other conspiracy theories that I hear – I just don’t buy them. That doesn’t make me a part of the conspiracy – although many of you out there think I am. Most people listening will find this hard to believe, but there is a class of person on the internet that thinks I am an agent… for George W Bush. I’m not making that up. They think I’m covering for George W Bush. They think that the radicalism you hear from me most of the time, is actually a cover, that I’m a gate-keeper. So, I’ve decided to call in some expert witness and Paul Stott the editor of the 9-11 Cult-watch blog, who’s a distinguished academic, he’s my man. Paul., welcome to the show.
PS: Good evening George, you’re all-right?
GG” Yes. Give me your top 5 will you? What’s your top 5 debunking facts?
PS: Well, I think the first thing to talk about really George it’s why people get these theories and why they believe in some of these theories and I’ve spent a lot of time going to 9-11 truth meetings, speaking to truthers, arguing with them on the internet, and I think very often they have a general… there looking for certainty, there looking for explanations from a world that’s lost a lot of its certainties and they don’t really seem to believe in anything anybody tells them anymore which is probably the fault of some of the politicians you mentioned earlier and they find their answers on the internet, they find their answers on you YouTube and once they start it just becomes a viscous circle really.
GG: Well when I hear people say “I’ve been doing a bit of research”, I know that they mean they’ve been on the Internet. And this assumption that exists that if because something is written on the internet, that it’s true, astounds me.
PS: Yeah I mean there was a time George that if you wanted to understand about American Foreign Policy you would read a book by Chomsky to read a criticism of it, or you read a book by one of the neo-Cons if you were a supporter of a that foreign policy. That period seems to have long gone now. It’s all about little snippets of information, little you know it’s a a sort of three minute culture almost and we’re actually all the poorer for that.
GG: Well it’s the old adage that a little knowledge is dangerous and when people have got that little knowledge from the internet, it’s particularly dangerous
PS: Yeah
GG: Now lets deal with some of the main arguments
PS: OK
GG: The argument that in fact these towers could not have fallen down with only two large passenger plane jets flying into them, that they therefore must have been dynamited down. Answer that.
PS: OK. Well, first thing to say there’s absolutely no evidence that anything other than planes hit. So that’s one of the, you know, you get these no plane theory guys. For people to have brought the towers down with explosives – I don’t know if you’ve ever attended a demolition of an old tower block in London or Glasgow,
GG: Yes, I have yes,
PS: Or wherever, there quite lengthy periods and an enormous amount of cabling has to be laid. Nobody has been seen laying any cabling in either of the twin towers, there was no evidence of any workers going in you know laying the thousands of yards of cabling that would have been needed and to be brutally honest, if your flying two planes into the towers at great speed, why do you actually need also lay explosives?
There is actually some rather interesting research being done that makes the point that for both of the twin towers the NY authorities revoked certain building regulations when the twin towers have been built so that they could be build cheaper so I’m afraid there’s probably some evidence that thy were Jerry build and weren’t as sturdy as they should have been. But we’ve all seen the planes hit. We haven’t’ seen anything of explosives in there.
GG: Now, seems to me that the official versions weakest point is building 7.
PS: Yes…. I think with building 7 the line you always get from thruthers is the focus on this line of ‘Lets pull it”, that one of the owner of WTC7, is alleged to have made. In a way exactly the same arguments apply to World Trade Centre 7 as to 1 and 2. Nobody has been seen placing any explosives in there. A considerable conspiracy of an extremely large number of people would have been needed. No whistle-blowers have come forward, Nobody has been cited up to anything they shouldn’t have been. So, there’s just no evidence as week as strong or as strong as the official story may be. That’s the best story we have until somebody comes up with something else. The line “Let’s pull it” – that’s pretty vague. It could mean let’s putt it down in the future.
GG: Yeah that’s not the main argument about building 7 though. The main argument is “How could it have fallen down?”
PS: Well you’ve just had two planes fly into tow neighboring buildings and those two building come down. You also have uncontrolled fires in that building. You’ve had the Jerry built nature arguably of some of the developments in the world trade centre complex. I think also there’s a background difficulty here George that what you get with 9-11 truthers is they set for everybody else the burdon of proof the prosecution., you know you’re expected to prove every single aspect of the story beyond all reasonable doubt whilst all they require themselves to do is to really play the role of a rather haphazard defence barrister, raising the odd doubt here and there and there’s enough. The world isn’t like that in practice.
GG: What about the Pentagon. They say that there’s no footage ever been released of an aeroplane striking the Pentagon. That the space that was destroyed in the façade of the building was not wide enough for it to have been the size of jet airliner it’s supposed to have been.
PS: Well the, first of all the Pentagon is a military building. By in large you don’t get a lot of footage being released of what’s going on inside all that military buildings. So I’m not hugely surprised we’ve not have every single camera shot of every single angle. The footage you had of the plane going in – you may have seen some news footage of it – the most likely explanation which you see a little bit of I think in the footage, the plane goes through and the wings have followed through, the debris of the wings has gone through behind the planes. It’s also worth noting that with the Pentagon that with the sort the truthers big theory on that emerges from a French guy, Theirry Maison. who wrote the book ‘The big lie’. Not unusually in 9-11 circles, that was actually a work of fiction that eventually got turned into a work of fact. Its’ the same with the film Loose Change. There’s a strong correlation in a way, a strong over-cross between fact and fiction in these circles.
GG: And lastly flight 93. What happened to it? Was it shot down or brought down but the passengers trying to lead a revolt?
PS: I think that’s a harder one. I think at the time of 9-11, America was battered, was humilated and was humbled.
GG: Needed some heroes.
PS: And so I thing that’s the only part of the sort of questions you’ve asked, I can see a little bit on both sides, George. I think we certainly know Bush had given instructions that any additional planes were to be shot down. You’ve got the whole sort of mythology of “Let’s Roll” and what have you. We’ll see on that, really. I’m open perhaps on discussion on that than anything else personally.
GG: Now, how do people follow your Cult Watch blog. What’s the website.
PS: Well, it’s my name, Paul Stott dot typepad dot com and then slash 9-11 Cultwatch or you can just Google my name, go onto the 9-11 Cultwatch blog. The reason really we talk about is from arguing and debating with some truth activists here in London. And you know the use of these terms ‘gatekeeper’, I mean I’m an academic Gatekeeper keeper, Chomsky’s a left gatekeeper, You’re no doubt a media gatekeeper now. And I’m afraid it’s was rather reminiscent from talking to people from Cults, there’s very little, very little you can do to get through to people.
GG: Yeah, there are serious people with serious questions but there’s undoubtedly also a cult around this developed. Undoubtedly.
PS: Yes, yes, and I’m afraid I don’t really see that changing in the short term because obviously the more serious analysts, if you like, or those who’ve perhaps got more interesting arguments to say, there eventually gonna tire of the more you know wacko elements I’m afraid.
GG: That’s Paul Stott, S-T-O-T-T. Paul Stott if you Google him, you’ll end up on the cult watch blog. And it’s worth doing I can tell ya.
Perhaps it’s best not to lift too much stuff when blogging, but I do it (occasionally) because I don’t want you to miss something I feel is quite important/informative, although for 9/11 boffins, this may not be so new.
Paul J. Balles summarizes author David Ray Griffin’s “21 reasons to question the official story about 9/11”, published in his book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited and other studies.
In March 2004, publication of David Ray Griffin’s book The New Pearl Harbor, challenging the official story of 9/11, sired widely different reactions.
Then in 2008, Griffin published The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, an update of his original study in which he said: “The exposé of what happened on 9/11 has shown virtually every dimension of the official account of 9/11 to be false beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Based on his continuing studies, Griffin compiled “21 reasons to question the official story about 9/11”.
“Forget about conspiracy theories. How can we simply allow falsifications lapse into history without demanding the truth?”
Forget about conspiracy theories. How can we simply allow falsifications lapse into history without demanding the truth? It’s past time to demand honest answers to the questions generated by the official story.
Here are summaries of Griffin’s 21 points that challenge the official stories.
1. The official story has Osama Bin Laden behind the attacks. However, the FBI “has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”.
2. Alleged hijackers who regularly drank heavily, went to strip clubs and paid for sex could hardly be devout Muslims.
3. The claim that passengers on the airliners made cell phone calls to relatives has been contradicted by the FBI.
4. The FBI contradicted Ted Olson’s claim that his wife phoned him twice from AA77.
5. Reported evidence for Muslim hijackers shows clear signs of having been fabricated.
6. The story that incriminating evidence was found in [alleged 9/11 ring leader] Muhammad Atta’s luggage was a revision of the original story.
7. Planes showing signs of in-flight emergencies are normally intercepted within about 10 minutes. The military’s failure implies something prevented this standard procedure.
8. Vice-President Dick Cheney, while in the bunker under the White House, apparently confirmed a stand-down order prior to the strike on the Pentagon.
9. The 9/11 Commission removed a report from video records of its hearings about when Cheney entered the shelter conference room.
10. The 9/11 Commission’s timeline for Cheney contradicts what Cheney himself told NBC television channel’s weekly news programme “Meet the Press”.
11. Hani Hanjour, who could not safely fly even a single-engine airplane, could not possibly have executed the trajectory reportedly taken by American Flight 77 hitting Wedge 1 of the Pentagon.
12. Wedge 1 would have been the least likely part of the Pentagon to be targeted by foreign terrorists.
13. Claims by Pentagon officials that they did not have the Pentagon evacuated because they had no way of knowing an aircraft was approaching it are false.
14. Why would the secret service allow President Bush to remain in the Florida classroom for 30 minutes after news of attack?
15. On the first anniversary of 9/11, the White House started lying about Bush immediately leaving the Florida classroom.
16. The official explanation of the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 contradicts all prior history: steel-frame high-rise buildings have never collapsed except when brought down by controlled demolition.
17. Firefighters, emergency medical workers, police officers, city officials, WTC employees, and television and print journalists reported explosions going off in the Twin Towers and WTC 7.
18. The destruction of the Twin Towers can only be explained in terms of powerful explosives. The fires could not have come within 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit of the temperature needed to melt steel.
19. Rudy Giuliani falsified stories about knowing the WTC buildings were going to collapse. His fire chiefs didn’t expect them to come down.
20. The National Institute of Standards and Technology has repeatedly postponed its report on the collapse of WTC 7.
21. The official story about 9/11 is rejected by growing numbers
of professors, physicists, architects, engineers, pilots, former military officers and former intelligence officials.
War by Deception (sept 2010 rework) by sections
Chapter 1 Conspiracy Deniers vs Kooks ignore the extremes Covert ops are normal.
Chapter 2 Iran Contra comparison, 911 hypothesis
Chapter 3 Mass Media lies
Chapter 4 PNAC, Zionist origins for war hype This is the dry part of the film going over documentation, sorry I don’t have any giant owls or spooky symbolism to spice it up, but what I do have is reality, real people, real documented propaganda and real consequences.
Chapter 5 The Lemming Effect Neocons selling nuclear secrets, spies, lies, and Israeli ties
Chapter 6 Where was the cabal on 911?
Chapter 7 Anthrax and USreal Connecting Iraq and Al Qaeda to anthrax neither sent
Chapter 8 “Al Qaeda” Hijackers, are not what you’re told
Chapter 9 Disclaimer distancing from the 911 kook movement and Jones town sensationalism
Chapter 10 The 911 Commission/cover up
Chapter 11/12, 911 truck bombs and bombers caught Israelis released. WTC 7 and 911 damage control
Chapter 12/13 WTC 7 and the 911 damage control
The MIC How they waste your money[/size]
And what their long term plan is.
Extras
*The Bush and Schmitz families an orgy of global organized crime and weird sex scandals
* How They Fuck you 101
* DOD the revolving door
* Climate cultist don’t want you to see
* Iraq prewar lies chalk board flow chart
* Dear Richard Perle Fuck you (he even gets flicked off by a 1 year old)
* Obama same shit new ass hole
* Palestine RIP
* Blackmail… Congress possibly more backwards than the Vatican.
Anything not linked is loading. Chapter 10 is an extra. You can watch the film without it.
More information has recently come out about the 911 commission so what I am doing is making an extra chapter to go over the commission members first and then the bogus report separately. So check back for it.
_________________
END THE GOD DAMN WARS
This site is against war, Zionism, (or any other form of racism), profiteering, and all forms of government corruption, mass media deception, and cover ups. This is not a site to flail on about space aliens-illuminati-masonic-deathcult-jewish-catholic-lizard-lucifarian-jesuit-queen-barvarian-etc bull hockey. Take that junk somewhere else. My Twitter
“It doesn’t matter who we are underneath. It is what we do that defines us.” Batman
“If a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it or see it.
Would Israel still blame it on Iran?”-Ry Dawson
It is impossible to not comment on Ahmadinejad’s iron balls declaration that many around the world are suspicious that the 9-11 was an inside job. (I’m paraphrasing)
It was, of course.
The accumulation of all the evidence allows us to arrive at that decision. As it does regrding the crime of the war against Iraq.
It is noteable at who walked out… Largely ‘white-scum-nations’, you know, the centres of power that have brought untold misery to the good ordinary people of this planet for more centuries than I’d like to count, while having the chutzpah to calim they are the most righteous states that have ever been.
*puke*
The history of these obnoxious bastards lying, conducting black-ops/false-flags is undenyable, and the reaction of those devils who went along with these dasterdly events reveals perfectly that they have not the slightest bit interest in the truth.
Daniel Ellsberg, David Shayler, Craig Murray, the leaker of the Collateral Damage video, etc etc etc… were all subject to to hostilities by the state when they pubically exposed the states can-of-worms. The same has (obviously) happening to Jaddie babes.
The walk-out Ahmadinejad got for pointing the spotlight on the crown jewels which these scum-states use for the lawlwss slaughter from Sept 2001 into the forseeable future, actually gives some vindication to what he said at the UN on behalf of millions across the world.He did the same thing about the other crown jewels… what some dubb the holohoax (or as Finklestein said of it: shoah business / holocaust industry).
According to the IBBC (Israyhelli British Broading Corporation), the delagates that walked out were the US, UK, all other EU states, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Costa Rica. Most of them being those scum-states which don’t give a bluebottles gonad about slaughtering millions.
In the age of lies, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
This is a dangerous game. Any UN ‘team’ will be studded with sabateurs, just like the original one was with that very slippery American Israyhelli Phillip Zlikow. So be careful Mahmood! You might get something that might thicken the muddy waters.
On a dad note: Marwan Bishara, an otherwise excellent journalist and intelligent man is acting like your commoner garden presstitute, saying of Ahmadinejad:
“So you can now say President Ahmadinejad is both a 9/11 denier and a Holocaust denier.” – source
Ridiculous!
Not to mention the fact Marwan is making the news here, tagging ‘value added’ properties onto the story, not reporting it or as journalists should do, challenge ahmadinejad on his claim and pick them apart. Marwan is an utter fool if he believes the 9-11 Commission Report. But hey, perhaps that’s why he’s precisely where he is.
Please note: In NONE of the Al Jazeera English reports is NO ONE including US citizens who agree with a new investigation is necessary, or wven those USans who believe their government did 9-11, or well known figures like the “(New)Jersey Girls”
In Their Own Words:
9/11 Press For Truth:
Al Jazeera English’s reportage here is certainly not to their credit. It is a very clear and display of operating firmly within the box of permitted dissent.
Breaking his self-imposed rule against talking about 9/11, former Senior BBC Mideast Correspondent and authorAlan Hart described what he thinks may have really happened on that fateful day on yesterday’s Kevin Barrett show.
Hart, who got to know Yasser Arafat and Golda Meir while serving as a Security Council-briefed Mideast peace negotiator, said that he has been assured by a top-level demolitions/engineering expert who wishes to remain anonymous that the three World Trade Center skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolitions, not plane crashes and fires. (For the names of more than 1000 experts willing to go on the record with the same opinion, see http://www.ae911truth.org).
During the hour-long interview, Hart discussed Israel’s record of engaging in outrageous attacks on friend and foe alike, and spreading even more outrageous lies to cover them up. (Around the midpoint of the show he explained the real reason Israel attacked the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967.)
Regarding 9/11, Hart suggested that while there may have been some original terrorist plot conceived by fellow-travelers of Osama Bin Laden, the Israeli Mossad, with its near-total penetration of Middle Eastern governments and terrorist groups alike, would have quickly detected and hijacked the operation to its own ends, orchestrating a spectacularly successful attack on America designed to be blamed on its Arab and Muslim enemies. Hart added that the Mossad operation that became 9/11 would have been aided and abetted by certain corrupt American leaders.
Sounding a chilling note, Hart added that the U.S. is in grave danger of an Israeli-instigated false-flag nuclear attack, perhaps using an American nuclear weapon stolen from Minot Air Force Base during the “loose nukes” rogue operation of August, 2007. The motive would be to trigger a U.S. war with Iran, and perhaps to finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine under cover of war–which Hart is convinced the Zionists are planning to do as soon as the opportunity presents itself.
When a warning this serious is delivered by a messenger with the stature of Alan Hart, the American people had better find a way around the news blackout imposed by the Zionist-dominated corporate and pseudo-alternative media. The only thing standing in the way of an Israeli false-flag nuclear attack on America, a disastrous US war on Iran, and a horrendous acceleration of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, is the awareness of the American people. Please copy, post, and mass-email this story.
Alan Harthttp://www.alanhart.net/ is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East.
Veteran Middle East correspondent Alan Hart: Largest engineering firm studied collapse of twin towers and said there was no doubt it was a controlled explosion
Respected Middle East expert and former BBC presenter Alan Hart has broken his silence on 9/11, by revealing that the world’s most prominent civil engineering company told him directly that the collapse of the twin towers was a controlled demolition.
Speaking on the Kevin Barrett show yesterday, Hart said he thought the 9/11 attack probably started as a Muslim operation headed up by Osama Bin Laden but that the plot was subsequently hijacked and carried out by Mossad agents in collusion with elements of the CIA, adding that since its formation, Israel has penetrated every Arab government and terrorist organization.
“My guess is that at an early point they said to the bad guys in the CIA – hey this operation’s running what do we do, and the zionists and the neo-cons said let’s use it,” said Hart, making reference to how top neo-cons like Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their fellow Project For a New American Century authors had called for a “catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor,” the year before 9/11.
“The twin towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion, not the planes,” said Hart, adding that this view was based on his close friendship with consultants who work with the world’s leading civil engineering and construction firm.
Hart asked the company to study the collapse of the twin towers, after which they told him directly, “There’s absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion.”
Hart then explained how the five dancing Israelis seen celebrating the attack on the World Trade Center in New Jersey as it unfolded, who turned out to be Mossad agents, proves at at a minimum Israel knew the attack was going to happen. Hart went further in speculating that the planes had been fitted with transponders and that the Israelis were guiding them in to the towers.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Host Barrett pointed out that to carry out the successful controlled demolition of three of the biggest buildings in history, the conspirators would have to ensure that they were hit, making the use of remote controlled airliners a distinct possibility. In addition, Barrett mentioned the fact that he had interviewed numerous pilots who dismissed the chances of accurately guiding a huge commercial airliner into a building while flying at sea level at around 600 miles per hour, especially considering the alleged 9/11 hijackers struggled to even fly basic Cessna light aircraft.
“Sounding a chilling note, Hart added that the U.S. is in grave danger of an Israeli-instigated false-flag nuclear attack, perhaps using an American nuclear weapon stolen from Minot Air Force Base during the “loose nukes” rogue operation of August, 2007. The motive would be to trigger a U.S. war with Iran, and perhaps to finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine under cover of war–which Hart is convinced the Zionists are planning to do as soon as the opportunity presents itself,” writes host Barratt.
Given his biography and standing, Hart’s comments are not to be taken lightly. Hart is a former Middle East Chief Correspondent for ITN News and has also presented for BBC Panorama specializing in the Middle East. He was also a war reporter in Vietnam and the first journalist to reach Suez Canal with the Israeli army in 1967. Over the decades, Hart has developed close relationships with numerous high profile political figures, including the Shah of Iran, Yasser Arafat and Shimon Peres.
Hart has been a successful author for years and has no reason to fabricate the fact that a top construction firm told him point blank that the towers were brought down in a controlled demolition.
In forwarding this information, Hart joins legions of other credible experts who to some extent or other have all publicly challenged the official 9/11 story, with many outright stating that the attacks were an inside job, people like 20-year decorated CIA veteran Robert Baer, who told a radio host that “the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job.
Living with the Conspiracy 24-7 
Recent Comments