Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Inserting LIES into Shocked American Brains on 9/11

With Americans reeling from the horror and shock of being attacked on 9/11, it didn't take long for the psyops to kick in, deftly inserting the key words needed to poison many a brain with hatred of Muslims and lusting 4 revenge..

10.22.14 photo Jerome__zpscb0dbbe6.png

At the 2:40 mark in this interview with WTC security chief Jerome Hauer, Dan Rather states that it's explosives in the Towers that caused the collapse, which Hauer disputes, then goes on to say it has "Bin Laden's fingerprints."

Dan Rather interviews Kroll security's Jerome Hauer:

One segment of the video [starting at 2:30] documents the following exchange, from the morning of September 11, 2001:

Dan Rather: Based on what you know, and I recognize we’re dealing with so few facts, is it possible that just a plane crash could have collapsed these buildings, or would it have required the, sort of, prior positioning of other explosives in the, uh, in the buildings? I mean, what do you think?

Jerome Hauer: No, I, uh, my sense is just the velocity of the plane and the fact that you have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building, uh, that burned, uh, the velocity of that plane, uh, certainly, uh, uh, had an impact on the structure itself, and then the fact that it burned and you had that intense heat, uh, probably weakened the structure as well, uh, and I think it, uh, was, uh, simply the, uh, the planes hitting the buildings, and, and causing the collapse.

But let's get back to the attack itself. Who did it? Who could have done it? If you were watching CBS that morning, you would have heard this:

Dan Rather: What perspective can you give us? I mean, there have been these repeated reports that, well, yes, Osama Bin Laden, but some think he’s been over-emphasized as, as responsible for these kinds of events. I know many intelligence, uh, people at very high levels who say, listen, you can’t have these kinds of attacks without having some state, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, somebody involved. Put that into perspective for us.
Yes, there was a state involved, and that state is Israel, which masterminded the 9/11 False Flag with help from American traitors in the WH, the Pentagon, CIA, FBI and NSA.
Jerome Hauer: Yeah, well I’m not sure I agree that, umm, this is necessarily state-sponsored. Umm, it, as I mentioned earlier, certainly has, umm, the, uh, fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden.

The attack of 9/11 was of such scope and ferocity that it was virtually unimaginable -- except to the people who planned it -- just a day before it happened. But when it did happen, Jerome Hauer was able to contradict the intelligence experts and claim it bore the fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden!

Jerome Hauer knew the entire official story before it became public knowledge.

Jerome Hauer helped the official story become public knowledge!

In November of 2001, Jerome Hauer participated in the Council on Foreign Relations' "Independent Task Force on America's Response to Terrorism," along with Henry A. Kissinger and others; their task included the following items:

Release a White Paper explaining our goals and rationale for the war in Afghanistan, and outlining the evidence that the al-Qa'eda network was responsible for the 9/11 attacks

Disseminate stories of particular victims to convey the range of people killed in the 9/11 attacks -- stress range of religions, races, income levels, etc.

Counteract [the] myth that Mossad was behind the attacks by showing Jews killed, etc.

Routinely monitor the regional press in real time to enable prompt responses

On September 11, 2001, Jerome Hauer was a national security adviser with the National Institute of Health, a managing director with Kroll Associates, and a guest on national television.

On September 11, 2001, Jerome Hauer advised the White House to begin taking Cipro, an antibiotic which is effective against anthrax.

Mr. Hauer's advice was not made public. Its value may have been underestimated at the time, but it was clearly demonstrated a week later, when the first anthrax letters appeared, and again three weeks after that, when anthrax appeared in letters to Democratic Senators Daschle and Leahy.

The obvious question is: Did Jerome Hauer know about the anthrax attacks in advance?

Strangely, perhaps, Jerome Hauer managed the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. The anthrax used in the attacks was identified as an Ames strain, which means it had to have come from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Jerome Hauer received relatively good information for tracking down the origin of the anthrax. He even got a list of people from various institutes, including USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. But his response was slow and hidden behind a public relations campaign spreading Orwellian claims like "Suspects are Osama bin Laden and his Al-Q'aeda network and sympathizers to US right wing extremists".

Strangely, perhaps, on 9/11, Kroll was in charge of security for the entire World Trade Center complex.

The head of security at the WTC on September 11, 2001, was former FBI counter-terror specialist John P. O'Neill.
FBI Agent John O'Neill resigned from the bureau due to his belief that the government was blocking his investigation into the USS Cole attack in October 2000. O'Neill had developed leads that pointed to Israel being behind the attack. When US Ambassador to Yemen Barb Bodine found this out, she first tried to get O'Neill's security team disbanded. When that failed, she had US Secretary of State 'Bloody Maddy' Albright recall O'Neill stateside and refuse to send him back.
Hauer hired O'Neill shortly before the 9/11 False Flag to help with WTC security and O'Neill died on that 'day of infamy.'

How's that for destroying evidence?


  1. singularly

    great post

  2. I can understand falling for the emotional lies as it happened. But, as time goes on and a person hears details from the echo chambers, odd discussions, and fabulous websites such as this one... there really is little excuse to continue to support the official narrative.

    Now, after all these years, it really is obvious.

    That is why this is one of the main nut-cuttin issues that I use to judge if someone is real or not.

    Sure, there are some dense people still that are just ignorant or bull-headed or so trust-worthy in government that they CAN NOT do otherwise. I don't think its as many though as say 5 years ago.

    But there are a BUNCH of assholes who are intentionally still misleading searchers.

    And if you get too close to the REAL truth with a "trusted" cohort in this battle, then these assholes reveal themselves and do something like pull your radio show.

    They had good things to say about this blog (and mine, as well).

  3. Have you seen this?

  4. But there are a BUNCH of assholes who are intentionally still misleading searchers.

    A bunch of WELL PAID assholes misleading researchers.

    If they're not getting paid and only part of the great, unwashed masses, they either can't believe our own government would attack its citizens or they're so fucking dense, no more time should be wasted on enlightening them.


Please stick to the topic at hand. Anyone trying to hijack this blog with long, winding comments about other topics or spam will be booted.

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