Thursday, November 11, 2010

The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men, Gang aft agley

Robert Burns knew.

Ohio Edison tower blasted, falls wrong way 11-10-10

It can be speculated that the demolition of WTC7 was supposed to be accomplished at the same time that one of the twin towers fell. It would have been the best cover. It didn't happen that way. Even the best laid plans of demolition 'experts' and false flag schemers often go astray.


  1. I tend to think 93 was supposed to hit WTC7 but was shot down. Off topic-kenny, I fear you were right to doubt Gordon Duff-he sent all of my comments down the memory hole when I questioned the wisdom of latching on to Sibel Edmonds fairly obvious limited hangout campaign. One of his lackeys attacked me, I attacked back and he used that as an excuse to scrub all of my comments. Still some great articles, but Duff is clearly not to be trusted.

  2. I believe that WTC7 was supposed to collapse at the same time as the other towers. Perhaps they were all supposed to come down together.

    An area I would like to see investigated is who were all those busy little beavers around the towers facilitating the collapses? The announcer who told the workers to go back into the building...the person who was heard 'counting down' the WTC7 collapse...all the people who were working on the "drills" that were going on that day...the person who ordered up all the newly painted red trucks to haul off the debris, starting the next day.

    These people and more were perps..they have NO right to walk the streets free today. They should be rounded up, tried, and if found guilty, made to face a firing squad for the traitors they are.


  3. Anonymous:I had only just started to read your comments on Duff's site (as C) this morning. I thought you made excellent points with regard to Sibel, it reminded me of the blind faith most had placed in Julian Assange, only to learn later that he is/was a definite tool. I went back to finish reading your comments and all your posts were gone. Is there any other source I might find the same points you discussed, or if you could reiterate your reasons for doubt elsewhere and let me know here where I might find them. I also think there is more to her story than meets the eye. Please let me know where I might learn more. Thanks. P.S. I was very disappointed to see Duff scrub those posts. Very disconcerting.

  4. Thanks for the kind words, that was indeed me(C). Just yesterday I was telling a friend how Duff was up there with Paul Craig Roberts as one of my favorite writers so it disappoints me greatly as well. You really can't trust anyone.

    I'll just reiterate a couple of my concerns about Sibel here, sadly there are not a lot of links that I could find on Sibel possibly being limited hangout/controlled opposition like I suspect she is.

    First, while being ex-FBI is not in and of itself reason to be skeptical, its not exactly a great sign in my eyes. Second, contrary to popular belief, the media in fact did promote her fairly heavily, including in Murdochs MSM rag in London. This is always a red flag.

    Third and I think most importantly as a 9/11 activist is her substantiation of the phony "muslim hijacker" myth that keeps in place the 9/11 lie. Lots of talk about "so and so helping the hijackers", she has yet to call them patsies, and I'm not even sure shes ever explained why many of "them" have turned up alive(I pointed out that this would make sense if there were no actual "hijackers", just stolen identities).

    She ignores virtually everything 9/11 related except the "hijackers". I pointed out how the so called "hijackers" appeared on none of the airport surveillance tapes(serviced by ICTS), except for one with an incorrect time stamp, and that beyond the obviously phony phone calls there was actually no proof of "hijackers" even being on the planes, let alone flying them. I then told them to ask Dov Zakheim how the planes were actually flown(and I asked Sibel to google him if she didn't already know.)

    I admit that much of what she has to say rings true, and it if true is pretty damning, but the old saying about disinfo being 95% truth applies here imho. But much more damning is Israeli and American involvement in 9/11, and promoting the myth of these "hijackers" is meant to divert from that damning truth in my opinion.

    I just reminded the people there to be skeptical and not blindly accept this woman's word as gospel, check her and her allegations out and pay attention to what she is NOT saying in addition to what she is. Apparently Gordon Duff felt the need to "protect" Sibel and some little cretin Michael Volz from my "venom". Red flag for Duff. I admit I got a little harsh with Volz after he attacked me but my first comments about Sibel were fine I thought, certainly no reason for banning/censoring. I didn't even come right out and call her an "agent" or anything even though I suspect she is still "professionally employed" if you know what I mean:

  5. Anonymous C: Thanks for recapping, they are all well-founded causes to be wary, especially clinging to the hijacker, AlQueda memes. If you try googling anything about her it's all laudatory, heroic, courageous patriot BS... And just the fact that she's still amongst the living makes it appear to me that her whistleblowing was sanctioned by someone above her. As cynical as that makes me. Duff I'm still trying to figure out. I want to trust him but there are red flags as you say. Thanks again for taking the time to go over the Sibel thing.

  6. No problem. And yep, its all puff pieces and many of them from either MSM or offshoot fake "alternative" sites. The "most gagged person in America" line is a GREAT way to build cred, and so are the puff pieces.

    I have changed my opinion radically about Gordon Duff in less than 24 hours. Just recently I asked kenny to add him to his blog roll and he graciously did. Today I'm being censored by Duff. I will still read his articles, and probably still enjoy them and agree with many of them, but I will also warn people about his censorship and his promotion of certain limited hangouts.

  7. I've viewed Sibel as you guys do for a long time now. She fails the bottom line litmus test with her incorporation of parts of the official story.

    I would like to see some of the names she names in front of a legitimate grand jury though.

  8. Yeah, no doubt she dropped some major bombs on high profile people and it all sounded so brave and honorable, but to have done so as an unknown underling would surely have met her an ill fate.
    Meanwhile, she's now a professional heroine among the truther set and seems to operate freely and with no apparent fear of reprisal. Something doesn't seem right especially when so little is known about her other personal and professional connections.

  9. P.S.This may be the product of an overactive imagination, and I'll just throw it out there as food for thought, but a couple of days ago Duff changed his photo to one of him standing in front of a religious statue. Someone inquired about the photo switch and he briefly explained the location was Le Magdalene Chapel and mentioned Rennes l' Chateau. I googled both and one building is now owned by the Freemasons and the other had some lesser association with a Freemason group. He also signs all his comments "g" which is a letter highly significant with Freemasons. Probably nothing but these days who the hell knows anymore.

  10. If Duff is protecting and promoting limited hangout artist Sibel Edmonds then I would say its less likely he is working on behalf of masons and more likely he is working on behalf of zionists/neocons directly connected to 9/11. And yes, Sibel names names, and some pretty cretinous names at that-but what recriminations have come from that? What accountability has taken place? NONE. They knew this would be the case.

    Her non-9/11 related stuff is all about building cred so her obfuscations on 9/11 are more effective. Her purpose is to sell the "muslim hijacker" myth and thus the overall 9/11 narrative we have been spoon fed.

    If Sibel ACTUALLY talked about 9/11 and stopped selling the obvious lies about the "hijackers" she would be a real threat to the establishment she pretends to take on now. As it stands she is a great benefit to them and if Duff is promoting her he too is helping them in spite of some of his admittedly good articles.

  11. Hey, Anonymous C/Duff is Disinfo! Bravo if that was you who just left that comment at Duff's site calling him out on Sibel censorship. How long will that stay up? You just just went from Anonymous C to Tenacious D. I'm looking forward to his response.

  12. Yeah, that was me, and my comment is already gone. He didn't respond yesterday(and I was nothing but respectful with him until this mornings comment) and he won't today. Makes you wonder about his motives. He made sure Sibel didn't see my comments as well, I think that may have been the point.

    I see plenty of so called "personal attacks" all over Duffs stories from time to time, including criticism of Duff and other writers there. I have never seen him send comments down the memory hole and continue to censor everything a user says after criticism of "VT staff" until now(though who knows how many people he has done this to in the past, its possible many if they came with similar criticism that got too close to some truth that bothers Duff and his possible handlers). Warn your friends of his duplicity if you drop/email his links around.

  13. Will do. Another thing, have you ever wondered if he's really the one writing the pieces he's become so well known for. His comments don't sound at all like they're from the same writer as his articles. They tend to often be poorly phrased, awkwardly worded and more misspellings than what you'd expect from a professional writer. Even "Anonymous Smith" who used to respond regularly there once asked Duff why his writing voice changes so frequently.

  14. Very good question. He never says much in the comments section so its a distinct possibility.

  15. Duff is so prolific that I've also wondered if he actually writes all of them. Not often but on occasion I've had to re-read his posts several times to try and figure out what he's trying to say.

    It's a real shame that we have to question anyone in the 'truth movement' but the infiltration is so deep that I guess we must. And just asking honest questions should not be grounds for censorship.

  16. Yeah, I'll bet he's fronting for another writer(s). He once said his day job is running a wine import/export business. It doesn't seem plausible that he has time to do that, run VT and invest the required time to research and write all his articles, plus travel frequently.

  17. Yeah Kenny, its a shame but sadly very predictable, as you say the infiltration is very deep in this line of activism/research. Literally a day or 2 after I recommend adding Duff to your blog roll he censors me. Kind of a gut punch.

    Not that I ever trusted Duff but I must confess I totally did not see either the promotion of obvious tool Sibel Edmonds or the censorship of myself coming. If you cannot question an ex-FBI agent who floats ridiculous portions of the official 9/11 story as fact in Duffs idea of the "truth movement" who can you question? He'll be exposed soon enough, all of the controlled opposition gets exposed eventually.