Friday, August 26, 2011

"I, His Royal Majesty 'Mikey" Rivero, Proclaim You Are An IDIOT!"

I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, have sent out this proclamation to inform my subjects that if you do not agree with ANYTHING I proclaim, then you are an idiot and probably need psychiatric help.

When it comes to the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero agree with the official government explanation that a Boeing 757, made out of mostly aluminum, crashed into the Pentagon and smashed thru SIX WALLS of heavily reinforced concrete and that the anti-aircraft missile batteries that presumably ring the building, didn't not track and destroy the incoming 757.

I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero will use my alternative news blog to make fun of you uppity bastards who have the NERVE to disagree with His Royalness on anything, but mostly when you don't agree to the 'official' government explanation of WHAT REALLY HAPPENED to the Pentagon on 9/11.

I will make snarky comments about those who dare use their minds to actually think for themselves by making such proclamations as these:

The "Pod People" And The Plane That Crashed Into the Pentagon

(Which contained this comment: 1. The perpetrators have to get rid of the plane and the passengers anyway. Why NOT crash them into the Pentagon? What it to be gained by a deception? Why take the risk of a swap?)

Then pray tell your Majesty, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED at Shanksville, PA that day? Or do you believe the 'official' explanation that the ground 'liquefied' and swallowed 100 TONS of a Boeing jetliner?

Please, your Majesty, I am just a humble peon, don't toss me into a dungeon for daring to use my brains to ask logical questions.

If I could be so bold, your Highness to inject some TRUTH here about the FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB of 9/11, you won't 'lop off my head,' will you?
The Shanksville Deception of 9-11

Flight 93 disappeared into the crater without leaving a trace. Leverknight, an active member of the Air National Guard, was assigned by the editor to handle my questions. His answers were quite incredible. About the disappearance of the plane, Leverknight said, “It [the ground] liquefied.” One of the plane’s massive engines, he said, “bounced” off the ground and was found at a very considerable distance — in the woods.

"We haven't seen anything bigger than a phone book, certainly nothing that would resemble a part of a plane," said Cpt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police.
His Majesty will also make more condescending statements about those who disagree with the 'official' 9/11 Commission findings that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, like this one:

For the no planers/missile penatards, shut the fuck up, you make us all look retarded

I WILL NOT tolerate any dissent from my views, even those of Pentagon EYEWITNESSES, like April Gallop, who said:
George Washington's Blog: Interview with April Gallop

Me: April, did you hear any warning alarms go off before the Pentagon was hit on 9/11?

AG: No I did not

Me: What type of warning alarms would you normally expected to go off in the case of an attack on the building?

AG: While I worked at the Pentagon. At random times, there would be drill exercises utilizing an alarm for us to evacuate the building.

Yet on that particular day no alarm. [This is] especially [odd] considering the fact of what had already taken place at the World Trade Center.

AG: ...But here is my statement for the record.

I was located at the E ring. From my inside perspective, with no knowledge of what had actually happened on the outside, it did sound like a bomb. And we had to escape the building before the floors, debris etc collapsed on us.

And I don't recall at anytime seeing any plane debris. Again, I don't know what plane debris would look like after hitting a building. But I would have recalled unusual looking pieces similar to plane parts.

... When I review the pictures regarding the Boeing, in my opinion, the hole didn't appear to be big enough for the 757...

I didn't know it was a plane until I was informed at the hospital. If I wasn't informed I would have never believed it. I walked through that place to try to get out before everything collapsed on us . . . surely we should have seen something.
I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, will put my hands over my ears and scream repeatedly, "I CAN'T HEAR YOU," when another Pentagon eyewitness, Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) makes the following statement:
Patriots Question 9/11-Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner....

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...
These 'eggheads' at "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" will soon be dispatched to the chopping block, even if they are scientists, engineers, architects, psychologists, emergency workers, and educators.
A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer, who spent many years in Aerospace, including structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9 feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly perfectly cut circular hole in a reinforced concrete wall, with no subsequent damage to the rest of the wall.. (If we are to believe that somehow this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this sixth final wall.)


American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, is alleged to have punched through 6 blast-resistant concrete walls, a total of nine feet of reinforced concrete before exiting through this hole

It is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean cut circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with an explosive shaped charge. An explosive shaped charge, or cutting charge is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is referred to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind the initial shaped charge to enter whatever has been penetrated.

You can call me a "tin hat", crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused by a Boeing 757.
This too, I command thee to ignore,since it came from a firefighter and everyone knows you can't trust those who you trust to save your life :)

Lt. Robert Medairos, "First Incident Commander at the Scene" declared: "My first thought was I couldn't believe what happened and they said it was a plane and I didn't see any pieces of any plane and I couldn't believe that a plane hit the building."

9/11 stealth:First Witness on the scene, Lieutenant Robert Medairos: Didn't See Any "Plane" Pieces ABC 15.25 9/13

His Royal Majesty will also ignore that then Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld stated: "Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center."

This I also issue an Imperial edict to my subjects to ignore:
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies

In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

In 2006, The Washington Post reported... "Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission..."
I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, will also ignore the video evidence released by the FBI showing something hitting the Pentagon, but the film moves so fast and is so grainy, one can't really tell WHAT REALLY HAPPENED to the Pentagon on 9/11:

Both Official Pentagon Clips - Plane or Missile?

View the white missile with black ring around its nose: 4:57 in the second clip. We are looking for a 757 plane in this video, which is more than twice as long as the Pentagon is tall. The FBI says it is here. Did you see it? Whatever is in the first clip is way too short to be a 757. And you can't see what it really is because it is behind a pillar. All I see is the missile in the second clip.

My realm will also ignore more evidence, like this: "9/11 Commissioner slips up, says missile hit Pentagon."

Former 9/11 Commissioner Tim Roemer slips up and says a missile hit the Pentagon on 9/11

HRM Rivero does not have time to explore the web page of "Pilots For 9/11 Truth," as these professional pilots say that the aerial maneuvers made by the alleged pilot of Flight 77, Hani Hanjour, who couldn't learn to speak English fluently (required for pilots) and who couldn't even learn how to fly one of the world's most simple aircraft, a single-engine Cessana, was able to pilot one of the world's largest and most complicated jets, the Boeing 757 using skills that pilot with thousands of hours in the cockpit, say they couldn't perform, a 330-degree spiral dive maneuver into the Pentagon.

I, HRM 'Mikey' Rivero, promulgate the above to be the LAW in my kingdom, which covers the entire universe and if any of you peons dare to use your own thought faculties and come to a different conclusion about WHAT REALLY HAPPENED to the Pentagon on 9/11, I hereby proclaim you who dare to think for yourselves and not worship at my feet, to be fools and idiots and that you SHALL turn your lowly self into the nearest mental health facility to be observed!

I will also steal a phrase from former President George W. Bush, and say, "If you're not agreeing with me, then you're against me!"

CNN Pentagon reporter on 911 LIES about what he saw Media lies 9/11 Conspiracy

Nearly 1 1/2 years later CNN reporter Jamie Mcintyre now recants what he saw that day at the Pentagon. He says, "I was there and I can tell you a plane definitely hit the Pentagon". His earlier statement says "it did not appear a plane had crashed anywhere near the Pentagon."

I, HRM "Mikey' Rivero, will not stand for foolishness like this story, "FBI Withholding 84 More Tapes of Pentagon on 9/11," since it defies me and my royal proclamations.

P.S. Even though HRM Rivero lives in one of the world's most luxurious and expensive places to live, the island paradise of Hawaii, His Royalness is in need of some of YOUR hard-earned cash, so could some of you fools, "AHEM", I mean subjects, send me some dough?

Real 9/11 Truthers realize you must allow for dissension in the ranks, since the only ones who know WHAT REALLY HAPPENED on that fateful day are the NeoCons and Zionists who pulled off that act of treachery.

To use a popular alternative news site like WRH to call people names, infer that they're crazy and need to be on anti-psychotic meds just because you don't agree with HRM Rivero and the government 'hasbara' in the 9/11 Commission report doesn't advance the truth movement, in fact, it does just the opposite; it sends it reeling backwards using one of the oldest tricks around, the 'Divide and Conquer' strategy.

More Thoughts

The Space Shuttle Columbia blew up at an altitude of around 220,000 feet, yet a "... ground search in parts of Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas recovered crew remains and many vehicle fragments."

And a Space Shuttle is much smaller than a Boeing 757, in fact, they use, or did use a Boeing 747 with the shuttle strapped down to the top, to transport the shuttle.

See pics of that here.

Yet a Boeing 757, weighing around 100 TONS (200,000 POUNDS) we're told crashed into the Pentagon and all that's left is this puny piece of twisted metal?


The ones pushing the official lies from the "9/11 Commission" are the ones obstructing the Truth Seekers.

The ones that stand in the way of the search for 9/11 TRUTH are the ones who are suspect, not the ones seeking truth.

Decide for yourself. Don't let those seeking to obscure the REAL TRUTH intimidate you by calling you 'Pentards,' 'pod people,' or "Kool-Aid' drinkers.



  1. Nut-cuttin' issues. If anyone believes any part of the "official story" regarding 911, then their sanity or motivation should be questioned.

    I would recommend, if that site is such a nut-cuttin' selective, that you remove the link from the sidebar (and maybe add mine).


  2. Thanks for saying it. Mikey sure is important dude, to himself and his boot-licking donors.

  3. Mike Rivero has a useful blog, but he seems to get it wrong on certain issues.

    - Aangirfan

  4. I like Mike Rivero, I link to his blog and repost stuff I first see there all the time ... but people need to think for themselves. There is no way I believe a 747 hit the Pentagon, anymore than I believe a plane crashed (that is, was not *shot down*) in Pennsylvania.

    If one had time, it might be worthwhile to make a study of the eyewitnesses to the plane crashing into the Pentagon. I know Bobby Eberle, former boss of George W.'s boy-toy presstitute Jeff Gannon, was one of them. Someone already made a study of the passengers of that flight, many of whom worked on Global Hawk.

    One thing that's disconcerting is, when you ask the question, why so adamant that a 747 *did* hit the Pentagon (what difference does it make in the long run) is because if it were a missile and there were explosives you'd have to conclude there were some very high-level people in the Pentagon that were in on it. Is Rivero protecting someone? Who might that be...?

  5. I would recommend, if that site is such a nut-cuttin' selective, that you remove the link from the sidebar

    BM, I'm basically self-taught on this blogging stuff and anytime I go into the blog's guts, it's an experiment in terror.

    The last time I tried that, screwed up something and it took me TWO hours to get the damned thing back online.

    I'm going change ISP's in the near future and if the next one has more reliable service and doesn't drop connections, I might just go in and try to re-arrange the sidebar.

    I have nothing against his WRH site, it's not polite to call people names for disagreeing with what you think happened on 9/11 or for that matter, anything.

    That's the province of FOX; CNN. Limbaugh; Hannity, etc, which means 9/11 truthers are on to something.

  6. Greg... I fully agree with your assessment....

    I too have used whatreallyhappened as a great source of material, but it is very strange that Mike Rivero uses the site to squash anyone who wishes to object to his own points of view.... What ever happened to having a healthy debate on issues???

    Thanks for putting up this article... and BTW... from my own research, a large missile did hit the Pentagon... most probably a cruise missile with at least a one ton warhead...

  7. Have never messed with Blogger (I'm a Wordpress fan/user), so I am no help.

    At first, I thought that Rivero was at least an honest searcher of truth. But like another dude we know (that I refuse to frequent ever again for the very same reason as you list here), there is a narcissistic tendency, especially when they start seeing large numbers of visitors.

    I am opinionated, but still open to dialogue over virtually any subject, except 911 issues.

    Rivero is splitting hairs over an issue that he is obvious incorrect about. And you have done an excellent job in explaining the discrepancies.

    If he reads that and still acts an ass, then he is suspect, imo.

  8. Thanks Northern Truth Seeker and BM for the positive comments.

    Rational people can agree to disagree without calling each other names and saying they're nuts and need to be on meds.

    We can have heated arguments about What Really Happened at the Pentagon that day, but they should be civil and each party should respect the others opinion, since we don't know for sure what hit the Pentagon, but I'm sticking by my interpretation that it wasn't a Boeing 757.

  9. Hey Greg, great article! There was certainly no Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon, Rivero is dead wrong on this subject (and HAARP I might add). It's so obvious he's wrong, too. What he fails to understand is that there is absolutely no evidence for his contention that a plane hit. His point that the US government would not risk engaging in such a deception is baseless and wrongheaded- the entire operation is a major deception, a major psyop, including the "hijacked" airliners, many of the "victims", and videos. It's amazing he's invited to speak at that 9/11 conference, and he's even asking for money to send him there. That's weak. I could buy a blight to New York tomorrow if I really wanted to, and I know I'm not pullin' in the dollars like he is.

  10. Hey Greg.

    I heard the show where he talked about this, I don't spend much time on the site.
    My hubby does.
    Anyway, myself, I don't see the Pentagon as the smoking fun issue of 9/11.

    I see building # 7 and the plane in Pennsylvania as the clincher for false flag.
    Flight 93 was "supposed" to hit building # 7, BUT, had to be shot down because it was not carrying out it's prescribed mission.

    (Which IMO was not flown by the moronic hijackers making whether they were on the plane or not moot)

    Building # 7 which was ready to go, had to go!
    If not the ruse would be found out.

    I see the plane (flight #93) as obviously shot down and building
    # 7 as a demolition.

    IMO there was enough information in the public domain to make the case 93 was shot down so the pentagon reinforced the official story with that Hollywood propaganda flick.

    that all said, i don't worry to much about the Pentagon.
    since flight 93 and building 7 destroy the official story, in an obvious fashion.

    But, I do have a problem with the plane bringing down the reinforced walls of the Pentagon.

    Though rather then a missile I lean towards explosives.

    Just like 1,2 and 7.
    But that is just me.

  11. oops sorry that was smoking gun issue, not smoking fun...



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Fair Use Notice

This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity's problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. Consistent with this notice you are welcome to make 'fair use' of anything you find on this web site. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. You can read more about 'fair use' and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. This notice was modified from a similar notice at Information Clearing House.

Blog Archive