“The greatest charity one can do to another is to lead him to the truth.” -St. Thomas Aquinas
On that fateful day, September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush was visiting a reading class at the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida, right before his aide whispered in his ear that a second plane had hit the World Trade Center.
This was the exercise the teacher, Mrs. Daniels, had the students do, pointing to words written on a sheet of paper tacked to the blackboard (beginning at the 0:38 mark):
Teacher: “Let’s read these words as fastly without stopping without mistake. Get ready!” — teacher points at a word.
Teacher: “Yes, kite. Get ready!”
Teacher: “Yes, hit. Get ready!”
Teacher: “Yes, steel. Get ready!”
Teacher: “Yes, plane. Get ready!”
Teacher: “Yes, must.”
The teacher then instructs the students to open their books, when Bush’s chief of staff Andy Card walks in, bends down and whispers in his ear . . . .
Albert Stubblebine III (February 6, 1930 – February 6, 2017) was a United States Army major general whose active duty career spanned 32 years. Beginning as an armor officer, he later transferred to intelligence. He is credited with redesigning the U.S. Army intelligence architecture during his time ascommanding general of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) from 1981 to 1984, after which he retired from active service.
In this next video, General Stubblebine is interviewed by a reporter for German NuoViso TV (1:27 mark):
Reporter: “So on September 11, 2001, what hit the Pentagon?”
Stubblebine: “I don’t know what exactly hit it. But I do know from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane.”
Reporter: “What makes you believe that?”
Stubblebine: “Well, for one thing, if you look at the hole that was made in the Pentagon, the nose penetrated far enough so that there should have been wing marks on the walls of the Pentagon. I have been unable to find those wing marks. So where were they? Did this vessel, vehicle, or whatever it was have wings? Apparently not, because if it had wings, they would have made marks on the side of the Pentagon. One person counteracted my theory and said, ‘Oh, you got it all wrong. And the reason that it’s wrong is that as the airplane came across, one wing tipped down and hit the ground and broke off.’ I said fine, that’s possible, one wing could have broken off. But if I understand airplanes correctly, most airplanes have two wings. I haven’t met an airplane with only one wing. So where was the mark for the second wing? Okay, one broke off; there should have been a mark for the second wing. I could not find that in any of the photographs that I’ve analyzed. Now I’ve been very careful to not say what went in there. Why? Because I don’t have that evidence.
I’ve never believed it was an airplane since I’d looked at the photographs. Up until that time I looked at the photographs, I accepted what was being said. After I looked at it, no way. We pride ourselves with the free press. I do not believe the free press is free anymore. It’s very expensive, it’s very expensive, and the press is saying what they have been told to say about this. Now, do I have proof of that? No. But I believe . . . the stories that we’re told all about 9/11 were false. I mean you take a look at the buildings falling down. They didn’t fall down because airplanes hit them; they fell down because explosives went off inside — demolition. Look at Building 7 for God’s sakes. It didn’t fall down to its side; it didn’t fall this direction or that direction. Just like the two towers. When you look at the temperatures that you can create with fuel in a gas tank or fuel tank of an airplane, and then uou investigate the amount of heat that would be required to melt, to melt the superstructure of the buildings that came tumbling down, when you put all of that together, the one thing that shows, it does not match the facts. What is it they do not want the public to know?”
H/t Joseph BC69
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
This is so cool!
Today is the 17th anniversary of 9/11.
Do you remember that horrible devil face in the billowing smoke of the stricken Twin Towers on 9/11?
I’ve never seen that picture again in any accounts of that terrible day since.
I was beginning to think it was my imagination….
So I went looking for it on the net.
I found an account of the devil face on Urban Legends, the link of which is now defunct:
Images of Tuesday’s terrorist attacks have been captured in thousands of photographs. Some of the pictures are horrific, some poignant, and some gut-wrenching, but viewers have written in to newspapers and television stations, saying that that they see an even more haunting image in the smoke billowing from the World Trade Center.
Viewers said that in two specific instances, in a photo taken by an Associated Press photographer, and in a video by CNN, they can clearly identify the eyes, nose, mouth and horns of a devil in the black and gray smoke. They questioned whether the photographers manipulated the photo to include a satanic face.
Vin Alabiso, an AP vice president and executive photo editor, said that the AP photo was untouched…. “AP has a very strict written policy which prohibits the alteration of the content of a photo in any way,” Albiso said. “The smoke in this photo combined with light and shadow has created an image which readers have seen in different ways.”
I found that CNN had removed the image from their website. The video that was the source of that image had also been disabled by YouTube. See here.
Why is that?
Below is the AP photo of the devil face, which was taken by photographer Mark D. Phillips. On June 19, 2013, FOTM received an email stating that ©Mark D Phillips has the copyright on the above image and that the image cannot be reprinted without written consent from Mr. Phillips. FOTM is grateful for his permission.
But there was not just one Devil face in the WTC smoke, but many, like this one below:
What is less known is that there was another image in the Twin Towers’ billowing smoke that terrible day.
A viewer wrote in to TheDenverChannel.com that she saw an image of an angel, which gave her hope despite seeing the devil face, and left her with a feeling of peace.
The image of what appears to be a winged figure, captured by WABC, has also been untouched. Here’s the angel pic, from WDIV Local 4‘s archives:
There is a psychological phenomenon called pareidoliais — the human inclination to perceive a pattern or meaning where it does not actually exist. An example is the “man in the moon” — seeing human features on the moon.
But given how little we humans actually know about the Universe — with its multiple dimensions, black holes, the mysterious dark matter that cosmologists say constitutes the bulk of our Universe, and the notion of multiple universes — who’s to say the devils and angel on 9/11 were mere pareidoliais?
After all, St. Paul did warn us in his letter to the Ephesians:
“For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens.“
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
On September 9, 2016, a professional photographer named Richard McCormack took a pic of the New York city skyline, and captured the beam of light shooting up from One World Trade Center — Ground Zero of 9/11.
On Sept. 12, 2016, McCormack posted the pic to his Facebook page, with this comment:
Zoom in to the top of beam do you see something, I took this photo no photo shop no gimmicks took many and only one showed this image ,copyright Richard J McCormack 9/9/2016
Here’s a close-up of the figure at the top of the beam of light.
His intriguing photo has been published in a number of venues, including New Jersey 101.5:
Richard McCormack took several pictures of the Sept. 11 memorial lights on Friday. All of the pictures looked pretty much the same – all but one that depicts an image he can’t quite explain.
At the very top of one of the beam, where it meets the clouds, there appears to be a distinctly human-like figure. The Jersey City man, who freelances as a photographer around Hudson County, said the image didn’t appear in any of the identical photos he took from the same location, and the pictures wasn’t altered or edited in any way. In fact, McCormack said, he doesn’t even know how to use editing programs such as Photoshop.
According to McCormack, the picture was taken from the waterfront in Hoboken during a festival late last week — just two days before the country held countless services and events in memory of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. The Hudson County man, a former postal worker who serves on the Jersey City Zoning Board, has seen the memorial lights before. He’s photographed them numerous times, but he says seeing the image at the top of the beam was a complete surprise.
“I did a double-take not knowing really what it was, but as I zoomed in it almost looked liked a vision of the Lord with his arms crossed,” said McCormack, who still remembers the horror that unfolded on 9/11. “I got very emotional, and I got tears in my eyes.”
McCormack said that while he does believe in prayer, he admittedly doesn’t go to church every week. He can’t say with any certainty what the image at the top of the beam is, but several people who commented on his picture on Facebook believe it’s spiritual, with many people saying they believe it to be an angel. At least one person recalled seeing it with her own eyes as she was driving.
“Yup. It’s an angel. Noticed it last night driving on the parkway,” Diane Brennan commented on the image, which McCormack posted around 9 p.m. Monday night and was quickly shared almost two dozen times.
Other people also commented, saying they believed it to be an angel or Jesus. Others, who know of McCormack’s lack of photo editing abilities, even commented on the authenticity of the picture.
“If someone else took the pic I would think this was Photoshopped…great pic Rich,” Linda Conner said.
Another person, Yvette Cid, also posted a comment saying, “Rich I know you don’t photo shop that’s an awesome pic wow I lost my two boys and I believe this is a sign to all that have lost a love one.”
Nancy Diaz, another commenter, said “it looks like there’s someone up there looking down.”
In fact, although he took the photos last week, McCormack said he didn’t even notice the anomaly until today. He said had he seen it yesterday, on 9/11, he would’ve been even more emotional.
“That day turned a lot of things around and changed our country,” he said of the terrorist attacks.
McCormack acknowleged that many people would either assume the photo was altered or that they would believe the image atop the beam can be easily attributed to other, non-spiritual factors such as the shape of the clouds. As of now, though, he still has no explanation but said he’s content knowing that so many people found a sense of comfort in seeing the photo.
See also “Angel and Devil on 9/11“.
Sat, 16 Jul 2016 17:58:05 +0000
Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee released the long-awaited and much-speculated-about 28 pages from the report by the congressional Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001. 9/11 was the worst attack on U.S. soil in U.S. history, second only to the 1941 Imperial Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Until yesterday, those 28 pages had been classified and, we were told, withheld from the American people by both the George W. Bush and Obama Administrations. But it turns out all along it was within the power of Congress to make public those 28 pages! No wonder politicians are held in such low regard by the American people.
The released 28 pages still contain a number of redactions, that appear to be the names of individuals and of Saudi businesses. The pages also make clear that they are based on FBI and CIA documents that the Joint Inquiry had not itself investigated, using the lame excuse that it did not have the resources to conduct such an investigation, which of course is horse manure.
As rumored, the 28 pages indeed implicate Saudi Arabia in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but not of other rumored countries/governments, such as Israel. The Saudi government has issued a denial, but the 28 pages again and again point to Saudi government officials as being associated and met with, and financially supporting the 9/11 hijackers, including:
The 28 pages are in PDF format that does not enable copy-and-paste. I have therefore painstakingly transcribed the bulk of the pages into text (see below). I emboldened and colored red certain words, for emphasis. To read the 28 pages in PDF, go here.
From the formerly-classified 28 pages:
PART FOUR–FINDING, DISCUSSION AND NARRATIVE REGARDING CERTAIN SENSITIVE NATIONAL SECURITY MATTERS
Finding: While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected with the Saudi Government. There is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers. The Joint Inquiry’s review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which has yet to be independently verified, indicating that individuals associated with the Saudi Government in the United States may have other ties to al-Qa’ida and other terrorist groups. The FBI and CIA have informed the Joint Inquiry that, since the September 11 attacks, they are treating the Saudi issue seriously, but both still have only a limited understanding of the Saudi Government’s ties to terrorist elements. In their testimony, neither CIA nor FBI witnesses were able to identify definitely the extent of Saudi support for terrorist activity globally or within the United States and the extent to which such support, if it exists, is knowing or inadvertent in nature. The FBI’s Washington Field Office created a squad devoted to [redacted]. Only recently and at least in part due to the Joint Inquiry’s focus on this issue, did the FBI and CIA establish a working group to address the Saudi issue. In the view of the Joint Inquiry, this gap in U.S. intelligence coverage is unacceptable, given the magnitude and immediacy of the potential risk to U.S. national security. The Intelligence Community needs to address this area of concern as aggressively and quickly as possible.
Discussion: One reason for the limited understanding is that it was only after September 11 that the U.S. Government began to aggressively investigate this issue. Prior to September 11, the FBI apparently did not focus investigative resources on [redacted] Saudi nationals in the United States due to Saudi Arabia’s status as an American “ally.” A representative of the FBI [redacted] testified that, prior to September 11, 2001, the FBI received “no reporting from any member of the Intelligence Community” that there was a [redacted] presence in the United States.
According to various FBI documents and at least one CIA memorandum, some of the September 11 hijackers, while in the United States, apparently had contacts with individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government. While the Joint Inquiry uncovered this material during the course of its review of FBI and CIA documents, it did not attempt to investigate and assess the accuracy and significance of this information independently, recognizing that such a task would be beyond the scope of this Joint Inquiry. Instead, the Joint Inquiry referred a detailed compilation of information uncovered by the Inquiry in documents and interviews to the FBI and CIA for further investigation by the Intelligence Community and, if appropriate, law enforcement agencies. A brief summary of the available information regarding some of these individuals is illustrative for purposes of this report:
The Joint Inquiry also found other indications that individuals connected to the Saudi Government have ties to terrorist networks, including:
Finally, the Committees are particularly concerned about the serious nature of allegations contained in a CIA memorandum found by the Joint Inquiry Staff in the files of the FBI’s San Diego Field Office. That memorandum, which discusses alleged financial connections between the September 11 hijackers, Saudi Government officials, and members of the Saudi Royal Family, was drafted by a CIA officer [redacted], relying primarily on information from FI files. The CIA officer sent it to the CTC to determine whether CIA had additional information. He also provided a copy to the FBI agent responsible for the investigation of one of the individuals discussed in the memorandum. Despite the clear national implications of the memorandum, the FBI agent included the memoradum in an individual case file and did not forward it to FBI Headquarters. FBI Headquarters, therefore, was unaware of statements in the memorandum until the Joint Inquiry brought the memorandum’s implications to the Bureau’s attention. [redacted]
Possible Saudi Government Connections to Terrorists and Terrorist Groups
While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government. There is information, from FBI sources, that at least two of these individuals were alleged to be Saudi intelligence officers. The Joint Inquiry’s review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which remains speculative and yet to be independently verified, indicating that Saudi Government officials in the United States may have other ties to al-Qa’ida and other terrorist groups. […]
In their testimony before the Joint Inquiry, neither the CIA nor the FBI was able to definitively identify for these Committees the extent of Saudi support for terrorist activity globally or within the United States and the extent to which such support, if it exists, is intentional or innocent in nature. Both the FBI and CIA have indicated to the Committees that they are now aggressively pursuing Saudi-related terrorism issues. […]
It should be clear that this Joint Inquiry has made no final determination as to the reliability or sufficiency of the information regarding these issues that we found contained in FBI and CIA documents. It was not the task of this Joint Inquiry to conduct the kind of extensive investigation that would be required to determined [sic] the true significance of any such alleged connections to the Saudi Government. On the one hand, it is possible that these kinds of connections could suggest, as indicated in a [redacted] dated July 2, 2002, “incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists within the Saudi Government.” On the other hand, it is also possible that further investigation of these allegations could reveal legitimate, and innocent, explanations for these associations.
Given the serious national security implications of this information, however, the leadership of the Joint Inquiry is referring the staff’s compilation of relevant information to both the FBI and the CIA for investigative review and appropriate investigative and intelligence action.
~End of transcription~