911 and 77 (21)
"Henry Deacon" says that he heard of the 9/11 plot years beforehand and it included the plan to use planes to hit the twin towers.
I wondered how that could be as it was clear to me that no planes were used (see other articles of mine on this for details of why it is clear eg On Being A No Planer and Thin aluminium can't slice through thick steel).
At first I was suspicious that Henry might not be genuine but then I realized that this contradiction was probably due to the original plan being changed (and again, see my other articles relating to no planes).
I let Bill and Kerry know of my thoughts on this and then today I read their latest additon (7th July) in which Henry states that he was told this years ago but also just hours before the "attack".
Once again I puzzled over this.
My surmising now is that is unlikely that anyone would have been told about the plan in the hours before the "attack" in order to allay their fears, as Henry says they were told. I think the agenda was not one of care and consideration.
But there would have been a reason for announcing the "attack" as an inside job and I think it was to substantiate the idea that planes were used.
Now why would they want to do that?
I think, from the evidence, that the perpetrators want to give higher secrecy status to certain parts of the atrocity.
The idea that planes hit the twin towers and caused fires which caused the virtual vapourization of the towers (by volume, 97% approx disappeared in very fine dust, concrete, steel an'all, and about 3% left as rubble) protects the real techniques from being revealed.
The idea of the planes is absurd for more than one, but one would be enough, good reason. I can think of about four or more off the top of my head:
A single tool cut to the brake pipes of a car found at the bottom of a cliff is enough for any decent Columbo to conclude that it was not an accident. The evidence we all saw is far more than we need to conclude that the planes were all part of a 'smokescreen'.
When it comes to 9/11 Truthers, those of us who say that "9/11 was an inside job" (actually it still IS an inside job) conspiracy theorists, there are well defined sub groups. If we believe 9/11 was an inside job I don't think, personally, that our differences should antagonize us to each other. I also don't think it is likely that 'disinfo' agents would posit or push the space beam idea to discredit the 'movement' but I do think they would infiltate any growing group in order to instigate antagonism. Among 9/11 truthers there are those who are 'no planers' like my self and those who don't like the 'no planers', there are those who believe that a DEW, Directed Energy Weapon, was involved and, again those who don't like such Space Beamers and then there are the Mini Nukes believers and, yet again, those who don't like mini nukers. I believe that mini nukes, space beams, and no planes were used and I do so because the evidence is clear and unambiguous. I am surprised though, that it occurs to very few truthers that this combination is a minimum technology configuration - no lesser combination could account for the bizzarre evidence.
For me, I sometimes think of the DEW or Space Beam as a Ray Gun. When I was a boy there was a period when the term Ray Gun was quite common. In a comic, the Eagle, it featured quite regularly. It was my older brother's comic of choice and I only ever glanced at it (too many words for my liking, being a few years younger). This era, I think long gone, when ray guns were part of the language of boys probably ended in the early 60s which is when the talk of lasers took over and then, in Star Trek 'phasers' came in. In fact, I would say that the term ray gun was slightly before my time and would be more in the back of male minds who are now aged at least sixty and perhaps more like sixty five to seventy. The idea of a ray gun has been 'pre set' for males in that age range.
What has all that to do with anything? Well a US president by the name of Reagan, pronounced very much like "ray gun", introduced the "Star Wars" space program. The program was portrayed as one thing (go discover) but these indications suggest that what the real purpose of the program was and what the current 'state of play' is with it. I am suggesting that, therefore, the Star Wars program produced the ray gun that we can see strong evidence for in the evidence that Judy Woods has bravely published ( Dr Judy Wood). This DEW or Space Beam or Ray Gun operates from space (or a high altitude, possibly a satellite, possibly a space station, possibly an aeroplane) and was used to vapourize the walls of the twin towers. This seems to be the bigger secret. I surmise this; I do not know it. I surmise it from the clear evidence available to anyone using the internet and wanting to find our for themselves.
So I am inclined to conclude that Henry was told that planes would be used so that this information would cover the real technology and thus maintain it's secrecy. I assume that the intention would have been that this would, to some extent, be leaked after the event itself by one or more people.
Professor Judy Wood, a DEWer, (thanks to her work so am I), explains her reasons for 'going public' with great speed. One of her students, Michael Zebuhr, was murdered. He had been enthusing others about the DEW evidence. After his murder Judy was emailed a threat "we can do it again". I believe her immediate action to throw everything onto the internet saved her life. But the point is that this supports my suspicion that the DEW is of higher secrecy status.
I am a no planer, a space beamer, a mini nuker and of course a 9/11 is still an inside jobber. I go further too. I am a new nazi era is upon us (UK and USA minimum). But I am not entirely convinced by the eye in the pyramid stuff - why? Because a centuries old conspiracy seems to align, or be explained more sensibly with my ideas to do with metaphor (and symbolism). I mean, take the Eagle comic and it's era of the ray gun. Do I really have to join the dots? Okay, yes, I do but not in this article; another one, another time.
By Paul E. Coughlin
SaneThinking.com
8 July 2008
![[Valid RSS]](valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
