Tuesday, March 1, 2016

Tagged under: ,

Manufactured Hysteria

Frank O'Brien lambasts the war on terror as a scam. Frank O'Brien is a long time resident of Troy, NY, USA, and former head of Clan na Gael in same city, and area.

The infamous "Oded Yinon Plan" for a greater Zionist Israel, which is an expansionist idea proposed a number of years ago[1982], serves as the hidden agenda of the current far right wing Likud Party[Netanyahu's party] who now control Israel.


The neoconservatives of the PNAC[Project for the New American Century], now known as The Foreign Policy Initiative, famously called for, in September 2000, a New Pearl Harbor that would act as the galvanizing event to reinvigorate the US and its military/industrial/intelligence complex. To name but a few of these traitors to America, there is Dick Cheney, Douglas J. Feith and Paul Wolfowitz, all of whom played key parts to the lead up to 9/11, being all pro-Israel and part of the deep state, though of course not being so secret about it.

The unabashed and unapologetic Zionists in both Israel and in Uncle Sam's backyard are cunning and mischievous to an extreme, so it is not at all surprising that the cheering Israelis seen near the World Trade Center, while they were burning on 9/11, turned out to be part of a MOSSAD espionage network here in the United States.

The current Syrian conflict is in part a part of the conquer and divide strategy of both Israel and the neocons of the US, keeping the Muslims at each other's throats rather than joining together to fight Israel, and it is part of a plan to destabilize the Shia land bridge, that runs from Iran to Lebanon, along Shia population lines. There had been a deal between Syria, Iraq and Iran for a pipe line going from Iran's South Pars gas field to Europe via Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea, which now is in jeopardy from the expansion of the Syrian conflict, and the Daesh/ISIS/ISIL caliphate. Turkey, which has been the crossroad for oil coming from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the other Gulf states, were understandably upset at this proposed plan, so it is not surprising that both Saudi Arabia and Turkey have served as the West's proxy supporters of Daesh/ISIS/ISIL, who have served to nip this in the bud, besides destabilizing Syria, and the whole Middle Eastern region.

After the US led destabilization of Libya in which Daesh/ISIS/ISIL played a role, it thought that it could role right on into doing the same thing to Syria, but thankfully it has turned out to be more difficult given both the resilience of al-Assad's military, and the complex ethnic and religious makeup of the country. Most of the Daesh/ISIS/ISIL fighters are mercenaries from foreign countries, coupled with former Al Qaeda fighters from eastern Iraq, and are a wholly manufactured lot, who secretly are serving the agenda of the United States, its Gulf proxies, and Israel. Saudi Arabian intelligence, or Al Mukhabarat Al A'amah, under Prince Bandar Bush have supplied weaponry and munitions to Daesh/ISIS/ISIL, while Turkey has helped the latter sell their black market oil. Israel has an interest in nixing the proposed Iran/Iraq/Syria pipeline since it has discovered its own gas field called the Leviathan gas field off its coast, and Qatar too has an interest in nipping in the bud the proposed pipeline so its own natural gas can instead be one of the primary sources of energy to the world.

So as one can see, it is an all too complicated situation in the Syrian conflict, with both geopolitical ambitions being conjoined with monetary interests, both serving to be the real causes of the literal mess it is now. The much ballyhooed chemical weapons attack on Ghouta, a suburb of Damascus, on August 21, 2013, turned out to be from Salafist jihadists who were supplied with chemical weapons by Prince Bandar Bush.

This was a hoped for false flag that was meant to be blamed upon the al-Assad government, which was than to be the instigation for foreign intervention. All of the attacks since, like in Paris's two attacks in 2015, no doubt had deeper objectives as the false flag attempt in Damascus did in 2013, yet none of this pertinent information has been covered in the dinosaur corporate mainstream press.

With the intervention by Russia in Syria, the power blocs angling for supremacy in the region are complete, with the West on one side, and Russia, China and Iran on the other. Not so ironically the perpetual War on Terror has seen Uncle Sam creating more terrorists who thirst for American and European blood, even while these jihadists are simultaneously serving the geopolitical desires of the West. Uncle Sam is responsible for over a million dead Iraqis, besides the puppet Iraq government death squads who have killed Sunnis indiscriminately. One need look no further for the cause of the orchestrated "Arab Spring," the Libyan debacle, and Syrian conflict, then to the dirty hands of the West, and its proxies like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel.

There is a special place in Hell for these nimrods, and if we are drawn into a global conflict, or third world war, one need not look far for those responsible. Upon reflection, 9/11 was funded mainly by Saudi Arabian money, as per the 28 pages redacted from the 9/11 Commission report, and likely factions of MOSSAD and Saudi Intelligence, with a faction of the CIA, and Pentagon brass, were part of the 9/11 attacks, as per an exhaustive investigation by ALT news reporters and researchers.

These are the reasons why the American public ought to rise up to overthrow this corporate owned and run farce that passes itself off as the legitimate government of the United States. Our current presidential primary and campaign season is laughable in the extreme considering all the above information, so one must ask in reflection why the American public puts up with such an illegitimate system of governance.

Perhaps not enough people have awakened to the truth about 9/11, the continuance of Bush's regime embodied in the Obama administration, and the continued farce that is the War on Terror. If one desires to end the War on Terror, and terrorism in general, all we need do is withdraw our military forces back to the homeland, concentrating all our resources on building back up the declining American economy. By changing our bully like foreign policy to being a friendly and more responsible policy, we can build back up the reputation that we once may have had prior to our meddling in the sovereign affairs of the Middle East, and Far East. By forcing the Pentagon and CIA to admit their parts in building up terrorism, we can realize a future where the people of America decide their own future instead of it being decided for them by a bunch of goof neoconservatives.

Manufactured terrorism is what we have had from 9/11 on down the line to this very day, and it must be stopped by whatever means are necessary. If that means a military coup d'etat by an inspired and loyal to the US Constitution faction, than so be it. However it is done, we the people must take back what has been stolen from us, and must repair the damage done to our image all over the world. Don't continue to feed an illegitimate system that enslaves you, monitors you and decides for you what it is that we stand for.

Be a part of the solution, stand up, fight the good fight to turn around the massive scam that actually is the manufactured War on Terror. To do otherwise is to spell your own doom, and cause a bleak future for your children and grand children. As always it is up to you.

16 comments :

sean bres said...

Another brave article from Frank but I don't think there are many who want to get into a discussion on the primary point he continues to raise, that the 9/11 Commission Report is a total fabrication and the events of that terrible morning in New York were not a matter of a 19-strong rogue terrorist outfit sneaking under the radar. Why do people brush this under the carpet, are they afraid to be seen as 'not right in the head'? I'd imagine that's the biggest end of the problem, itself a clear demonstration that modern society is in reality a prison - a prison for your mind

Buncrana Together said...

I could not agree more. On 9/11 Building 7 coming down symmetrically was impossible, never happened through fire ever in the world. Then of course we had 'weapons of mass destruction' which could not be found.

DaithiD said...

Conspiracy Theorists : If building 7 didnt fall down due to fire damage...it must mean the government laid explosives.
You guys have the lowest evidentiary threshold possible, keep watching old debunked documentaries from 10 years ago if you think thats a good way to form an opinion.
Steel cables brought down building 7, its never been hidden , except in Truther media.

sean bres said...

David, if what you say about 'steel cables' fashioning the collapse of Building 7 is true then why was the 9/11 Commission unable to determine that and report it? Probably because the idea steel cables somehow caused a solid structure to suddenly collapse into its own footprint, symmetrically and at free-fall speed, is not only beyond the laws of physics, it is beyond the realms of possibility.

Rather than admit this you instead suspend rational logic so your core belief systems can escape what is an obvious truth; that the building could not have collapsed because of the actions of the hijackers. The term for this peculiar phenomenon is 'cognitive dissonance', an extremely powerful actor on the human brain. Even the 9/11 Commission conceded this point and was forced to describe the collapse of WT7 as an 'anomaly' to preserve the integrity of its wider explanations, before swiftly moving on and removing it from all other discussion.

Once we accept that something else caused Building 7 to collapse then it exposes the rest of the official narrative and how it explains what happened on 9/11, empowering the more reasonable and plausible hypothesis that what caused 7 to fall would most likely account for the collapse of 1 and 2 (given that all three buildings fell in identical fashion). You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to admit to any of this, it is written in the pages of the 9/11 Commission Report and the submission of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to that same Commission.

DaithiD said...

Where do they deal with any of the building collapses outside the North and South tower?

Is there anything unusual about its ommision like you hint at? There are too many examples to ignore of professionals talking about the cables though.

9/11 Report

There was no loss of life in the building, so I cant see why its omission would be important.

Its a charecteristically foolish comment to suggest the three buildings fell the same. You arent going to know that looking at videos Sean, there is more to classical mechanics than that, ive yet to come across a simulation of the wtc7 collapse, would you even know about querying the assumptions of such models?

You just trot out the building fell at “free fall” as if it were a fact, it isnt (and ive watched loose change too remember, i know about the seimograph readings) Here is where you can blidnded by scientists telling you they are right without having the gumption to question them : the seismograph readings are not consistent, , they dont all support free fall, and the most unbaised from columbia uni estimate a fall time nearly ~1.6x that of free fall assuming CNN’s clock times are accurate (to sync with columbias instruments). A much easier example is to look at pictures of the beginning of the collapse : are the columns (which are free falling) falling faster than the section of building they fell from : answer is yes in every photo. Not beyond the laws of physics or reality, you havent stumbled onto anything profound Sean. You speak alot of hyperbolic guff in the rest of it , it might impress some Sean, and shame others who dont want confrontation into silence, but it really register with me. So building 7 was pulled with cables, and the North and south tower didnt fall a freefall. Anything else confusing you?

frankie said...

Daithi,

Building 7 was pulled...the local branch of the New York Taliban didn't hijack the planes. In fact the blue print for hijacking planes and using them in a false flag goes far back to Cuba- Castro crisis and the Pentagon.. that was hit by a bunker buster/cruise missile...



At its most basic level Daithi the events of 9/11 was an insurance scam........

Syria was planned since at least 2009.......

sean bres said...

Are you really saying the three buildings did not collapse in the same manner? That's some statement but judging by your heated response I can see I've touched a nerve and it's only yourself who's confused. Perhaps that's why rather than replying to what I said you instead attempted to dismiss it through what is nothing less than a diatribe of this 'guff' you mention. A clever tactic but doesn't hold any water against the facts of the case. Ultimately, whether those buildings fell at free-fall or near free-fall speed is not as important as you're trying to present and the fact remains that both NIST and the 9/11 Commission conceded they did not fall for the same reason as the Towers, thus describing it in their official presentations as an anomaly in order to cover themselves. That they were singularly unable to find and test a simulated model to account for the collapse of WT7, as indeed you inadvertently admitted, only lends weight to the case of those who believe something other than an anomaly caused the collapse. I've not said it was the government, I'm only arguing that the official explanation is a fantasy - as is your own. Steel cables caused a building to suddenly collapse into its own footprint? What happened these cables and what caused them to react as they did, fresh air?

Steve Ricardos said...

"The term for this peculiar phenomenon is 'cognitive dissonance', an extremely powerful actor on the human brain. "

"Confirmation bias" is also an 'extremely powerful actor on the human brain' Sean, you may need to keep that in mind.

There was nothing unusual in the way the towers fell though, the conspiracy lays behind it not on video.

chris said...

Where does one get the documentation that Building 7 was "pulled with cables?"

DaithiD said...

Sean,My emotional state is not the subject of this debate,and is of minimal importance compared to issues at hand,but I guess this apparent observation of yours is a precursor to steering the debate onto your favorite subject : yourself.
Which is really what every comment section becomes eventually (despite AM's gallant attempts) when you realise your "truths" dont stand up even a cursory inspection. You brought up the free fall aspect, its importance is what you gave it.

DaithiD said...

frankie,Operation Northwoods. The guy who proposed it was sacked by Kennedy a week after reading it. There are many of these type of docs.

sean bres said...

In fairness David that's not much of a response, a bit of a rant even and one in which you reveal you are indeed 'emotionally aroused'. Be careful it doesn't become a lasting neural trait. That aside, it's clear you can't even begin to explain your point and are simply winging it, resorting to petty abuse to disguise an inability to discuss the relevant matters. Have you ever walked the streets of Lower Manhattan and have you any idea of the size of the building we're talking about? That you would describe the collapse of WT7 as 'not important' because no-one died shows where your thinking is at. It is of course important. This is not a building as any we would see in this country but a skyscraper in its own right, a magnificent feat of engineering that you say collapsed in on itself because of 'steel cables'. Where did these cables come from or what caused them to react with the building as they did, bringing it down perfectly into its own footprint in a symmetrical collapse? And why does this explain the collapse of Building 7 but not the Towers, which supposedly fell due to jet fuel melting the support columns of the steel structure? Personal abuse won't cut it and you should be able to make your case without it, if it holds any weight that is

DaithiD said...

I'm not winging it, just not playing a bigger part in the Sean show.
But well done on another thread about your interpersonal relationships on this site.

sean bres said...

Again, it's clear you are wholly unable to back up your claims about 'steel cables' and choose instead to hide behind insult. Maith thú

sean bres said...

Just coming back in on this despite David having gone into hiding, the reason being there's a point I'd still like to make. We might note that in his earlier and unprompted reference to a possible use of explosives, whether they were used to fell the building or not, lies a troublesome admission that explosives are one such property that can scientifically account for how the building fell. So it can't be ruled out and would certainly present a more compelling explanation than that forwarded by the 9/11 Commission, that it was the product of an anomaly. There aren't really that many others (thus the lack of a simulated model), except maybe this notion of David's, which he seems unfit to expand on, that 'steel cables' somehow caused the collapse, independent of what happened in the other buildings which came down that day. One thing for certain is that WT7 did not suddenly collapse for no apparent reason, that is of course beyond the realm of physical possibility and that's what I suggested, not that steel cables couldn't have caused it. Maybe they could have, I never said otherwise, but if that's what's being said then it should be explained how these cables came to react with the building as they did, how that would cause the building to fall in the same manner as the Towers and how it all relates to 19 hijackers directed by a man in a cave. It's worth bearing in mind that they (the Towers) supposedly fell due to their steel support columns folding in on themselves all at the one time (thus the so-called 'pancake' collapse) as a result of jet fuel feeding an inferno within the buildings. That no plane hit Building 7 means it collapsed for a different reason if we accept, as David seems to, the official explanation. If he is saying that WT7 fell independently of the Towers and yet collapsed in the same fashion then well and good. He should not though expect anyone to see it as a credible explanation, especially when hiding behind invective and insult once his argument is questioned. Indeed he disappeared completely for the same reason...

frankie said...

DaithiD,

The 9/11 Commission's report has as many holes in it as does both the Warren report. And while one of the people behind the drawing up of Northwoods was sacked....Kennedy got whacked several months after.....

Again drones hit WTC 1&2 and a cruise missile-bunker buster hit the most heavily guarded, security cammed place in the world.

Don't take my word for it.... Field McConnell - Boeing Uninterruptible Auto Pilot Used On 9/11 Planes, Impossible To Hijack!