Recently, two prominent articles were published – in opposing veins: “NPR & Trust in Government,” by Robert Shetterly (04/19), which called out NPR for allowing the propaganda operative Philip Zelikow to “frame [a] discussion” on “Trust in government,” while failing to note his long record of purposeful (world stage) obfuscation, including a treacherous role in the area of WTC 7, and “Shame On Jesse Ventura!,” by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro (another operative) (04/21), who asserts “that [Larry] Silverstein planned to use controlled demolition on WTC 7” – as if it’s common knowledge/no big deal. The focus here is on Shapiro’s brash, out of the blue, aggressiveness (under the cover of being clueless to the overall picture/consequences), while Shetterly’s should be read for many reasons: clarity, as a depiction of rare courage in our dominant landscape, and as a partial portrayal of how Timing works in our fabricated environment.
Perhaps what Ventura is missing is that there is probably more incontrovertible evidence and more witnesses who have already established what happened on Sept. 11, 2001 than most major historical events. To dispute the conventional historical account is intellectually dishonest and nonsensical.
Classic. Regarding WTC 7, the major “news” Shapiro is presently “sharing” (upcoming exclusive!) destroys “the conventional historical account.” So, was he “intellectually dishonest and nonsensical” in all of his relative writings since 9/11 – until this month? Yet now, he can be taken as honest, wise, and forthcoming? Further, all “evidence” to the contrary of the “historical account” was banished from allowable discussion or review from Day One – as were any testimonies of opposing “witnesses.” (What changed?)
Shapiro: “I know this because I was working as a journalist for Gannett News at Ground Zero . . . , and I remember very clearly what I saw and heard.”
Here’s a quote from one of those other witnesses, Barry Jennings (who didn’t have a column, and was not permitted to speak freely without a modern Scarlet letter):
I’m just confused about one thing . . . , why WTC 7 went down in the first place. I know what I heard. I heard explosions. The explanation I got was, it was the fuel-oil tank. I’m an old boiler guy. If it was a fuel-oil tank, it would have been one side of the building.
Exclusive! :
Shapiro: Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein . . . was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.
Got that? Remember all the uproar over the Silverstein video (“Pull It”) – scenarios of which he personally denied in Public, over an over, for years? (New angle!) “Already unstable and expected to fall.” Remember this: 1) No plane hit WTC 7. 2) “Fires [alone] have never [In History] caused a steel-framed building to totally collapse [including core columns],” – not “before or after September 11th, 2001.” Moreover, review/remember NIST’s “Officially” “Scientific” conclusion:
Yet! :
Shapiro: A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy (emphasis added).
“Many [on the inside] were aware of this possible option.” Really? How “many” people (across the earth) would regard this as the first they ever heard of it? Are we to believe that this article is the first members of NIST and the 9/11 Commission are hearing of it? Barry Jennings was inside. Did he, from the occurrence until his death, consider himself as in on the openness, without any “secret” “conspiracy” ramifications?
Why? Why would Shapiro make such fomenting claims as Casual Facts (at this time)? How clearly obvious is this as a representation of Subversive (“discredited”) planting from a “[defaming]” Provocateur? One answer, as referenced in a recent post:
Another in a series of setups: First, controlling interests decide what direction, or policy, will be implemented. Next, many months ahead, they dispense ‘talking points’ to certain major publications and pliable ‘news’ sources. Then, people are incrementally (sold) ‘informed’ as to what is inevitably upcoming. Under the guise of facts simply being reported, it works like a well-timed machine.
The KEYS: What this would mean (supposedly unbeknownst to Shapiro): 1) NY and U.S. government officials did not inform the public (for at least 8½ years). (Why? What benefits would ensue? Control of narrative, which equals controlled reactions – as well as the sphere of questions.) 2) They tarnished, ridiculed, and destroyed entire livelihoods of numerous people who challenged the official storyline through flourishing “conspiracy theories” – without, for at least 8½ years, ever acknowledging even the possibility of demolition. (Modus operandi: fully utilizing the “paranoid, delusional pack of lies” angle/label.) 3) It may explain why all WTC 7 references were left out of the 9/11 Commission report. But, it would also clarify the worldwide subterfuge of NIST’s 2008 (guided) assertions – as well as all the other attributing (staged) “reports” and “scientific” conclusions put forward. 4) For even the possibility of demolition standby to be true, WTC 7 had to have been rigged – AHEAD. (See relevant section in “The Huffington Post Bans 9/11 Truthers” from last September:
Unsurprisingly, they might come up with a statement like: ‘Well, NIST did what they were directed to do. But, now that this has come out (where, undeniably, we could not have set WTC 7 up – while it was burning), our currently released position is one where we have been secretly rigging buildings all over the U.S. – ahead of time – just in case it’s needed – for many years.’)
5) If rigging ahead is finally admitted (used), the associated revelations are staggering in their clarifications. 6) LIE after lie after lie after lie, after report after report after report, year after year after year. (Yet, Believe us Now. There’s new (old/“minitrue”) information!!)
Controlled demolitions. Controlled presentations. And yes, Shapiro “should be ashamed of himself and embarrassed” (to the point of begging God for forgiveness), but he does not work within or for the same world we perceive; he works within and for the elite (who mold our perceptions):
Karl Rove: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
(Why? What benefits would ensue? Control of narrative, which equals controlled reactions – as well as the sphere of questions.) (That way, everything becomes “Fair and Balanced.”)
Update (11/16/2010): Geraldo Rivera: “It is an Intriguing topic. I certainly am much more open about it than I was, and it is because of the involvement of the 9/11 families and all these engineers and architects. Clearly they know more than I do.”
Notice how he gives no credit to 9/11 Truthers, in general, regardless of how long they have fought — and withstood national trashings. Nevertheless, it is interesting to see these new angles (of enlightenment) from a “Balanced” (cough) FOX.
The Huffington Post Bans 9/11 Truthers
NPR “Obscures the Truth”
World Stage Actors
InfoWars Article
Posted by SeaClearly 
