Months ago when you or somebody else referenced Dr Judy Wood's work about the Star Wars Beam Weapons [1] in relation to 9/11 and how exactly could someone "dematerialize" two big towers, I remembered what I saw in a documentary about 9/11 several years ago. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find it on YT since then.daniel wrote:Riddle me this...
A man was filming the whole situation directly in front of the two towers, but across the bay, in an area where you could see the whole skyline. Before the police came and chased away all the people who gathered there, he managed to capture on the tape a black (quite ordinary-looking) helicopter flying over the first tower, which was shrouded in smoke, emitting a beam of light - I guess it came out of the helicopter, since it was the only object that approached it in that moment -, turning around and leaving the place. I don't remember, but I think that a few seconds or minutes after this the first tower collapsed.
Since this footage wasn't featured in any mainstream or alternative reports or well-known documentaries, I had a feeling this whole event must have been a lot more complex. I know what I saw, so I can't deny it. But I thought the buildings went down solely because of the detonations, as was shown on the Internet. Only when I found out about Dr Wood's work, I started asking myself how in the world could all that material just "vanish" in the air.
The next question is how come there were only a few clips repeatedly shown by the mainstream media - I would say somebody or some security camera must have caught the planes or other events that day. It's interesting to read an analysis about how Jules Naudet's 9/11 Film was Staged. [2] Jules Naudet is the person who "accidentally" filmed the impact of the first plane - a year later, he and his brother released a documentary about it, with "exclusive" shots also from the inside of the towers etc. [3][4]
A few months ago somebody published "never before seen" [5] footage of the events which took place that day. One of the things that caught my attention were the words of a guy shouting on the street: "Get out of the street, go home, go home, it's terr. attacks, they're blowing up the buildings." How could he be sure it was a t. attack? Then, funny, when you listen to the conversation among some young people, one of them asks how come the two agencies didn't know about it, and another guy says "because it's an inside job" (and then the shot ends, as if the filmmaker wanted it that way) - I believe this new footage came around just a few months ago when stories about the 'inside job' started appearing in the mainstream media, along with the campaign (on Times Square or another important place in NY) about the collapse of the third tower etc. When I noticed this, I wondered who and why is trying to bring this at the front pages of the news right in this period. You can also hear the people on the tape saying that they heard explosions in the basement and flames coming out etc.
Another thing I find important is the pilot episode of the Lone Gunmen series. [6] In short, they "predict" the whole thing around 9/11. Here are some excerpts:
In response to the making of this episode, two of the four creators of the series said that they were only trying to imagine crimes that weren't paranormal, which would be serving terr., and that writers are supposed to imagine the unimaginable etc. (08:55) [8] Since the pre-programming in the entertainment industry had been alluding to 9/11 long before they made that episode, it could be possible that such circumstances (power of subliminals, as shown in some of Derren Brown's shows) could have brought them to write such a story; Wilcock's writing about thought transference in relation to simultaneous discoveries around the world also comes to my mind. I wonder what Chris Carter's answer would be.BYERS SNR: What the hell are you doing? Why can't you stay out of this. Leave me buried.
BYERS: What is scenario 12-D? (BYERS SNR doesn't respond.)
BYERS: We know it's a war game scenario. That it has to do with airline counter-terr. Why is it important enough to kill for.
BYERS SNR: Because it's no longer a game.
BYERS: But if some terr. group wants to act out this scenario, then why target you for assassination?
BYERS SNR: Depends on who your terr.s are.
BYERS: The men who conceived of it the first place. You're saying our government is planning to commit a terr. act against a domestic airline?
BYERS SNR: There you go again. Blaming the entire government as usual. In fact, a small faction ...
BYERS: For what possible gain?
BYERS SNR: The Cold War's over, John. But with no clear enemy to stockpile against, the arms market's flat. But bring down a fully loaded 727 into the middle of New York City and you'll find a dozen tinpot dictators all over the world just clamouring to take responsibility, and begging to be smart-bombed.
BYERS: I can't believe this. This is about increasing arms sales? (BYERS SNR nods.)
[...]
BYERS: Are you absolutely sure this is the targeted flight?
BYERS SNR: This flight was chosen primarily for its visibility. It's schedule to pass over Manhattan on its way to Boston.
BYERS: You said they intend to bring this down in the middle of New York City?
BYERS SNR: Shush!
BYERS: What if there is no bomb.
BYERS SNR: Well, how they going to bring it down?
BYERS: The same way a dead man can drive a car.
[...]
BYERS: World Trade Center. (He turns to his father) They're going to crash it into the World Trade Center.
BYERS SNR: I'll tell the flight crew.
[...]
BYERS SNR: My name is Bert Byers. (He shows them his ID) I work for the government. I believe this plane has been commandeered.
PILOT: Sir, passengers are not allowed in the cockpit. I need you to return to your seat now.
BYERS SNR: You don't have control of this plane and I don't know what we can do to get it back. Turn off your auto-pilot. There may be a chance we can override it. [7]
But, that's not all ... In the tenth episode Tango De Los Pistoleros, we find this:
Hussein was, interestingly, portrayed also at the beginning of the movie Equilibrium, [11] which was released on 11/11/2002:(The computer shows he has accessed the Department of DEFENSE SECURE DOCUMENT DEPOSITORY - CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS AREA. The next screen shows STAR WARS MISSILE DEFENSE SATELLITE DATA.)
LANGLY: Missile defence?
(A molecular structure appears on the screen.)
KIMMY: Or lack thereof. Apparently the DoD has a new composite that can absorb electromagnetic transmissions, as in, it's completely invisible to radar.
JIMMY: Wow! Way to go America.
KIMMY: Yeah, but if the bad guys get their hands on it we're talking Romulan Cloaking Device. Tanks, ships, ICBMs — Saddam Hussein could build a Cessna out of this stuff and fly it right into the White House.
FROHIKE: What does all of that have to do with Santavos? ["a suspected smuggler with international connections"]
BYERS: It's what he's smuggling. A sample would be worth millions to a foreign power. [The invasion of Afg. and Iraq brought millions in drugs and oil to certain corporations. [9]]
KIMMY: Hell, yeah. And he wouldn't need that much either, just enough to analyse. [10]
The movie is clearly alluding to nazism and Christianity, especially the symbol of the Tetragrammaton Council, [14] headed by the Father. I remember Maxwell saying once that when the Democrats come to power Hollywood makes movies with communist contents, while during the Republican rule movies with nazi-fascist contents are released.The opening shows what to expect: a monologue details the origins of the society, leaving nothing for the viewer to infer, while intertitles punctuate generic images of modern warfare and photographs of Stalin, Hitler, and, bizarrely, Saddam Hussein.[12]
The film is set following a future third world war which nearly destroys all life on the planet. [13]
