BALLISTICS 11/9 . Part 2.

Beginning. Part 1.

https://telegra.ph/BALLISTICS-119-09-10

Fake Bin Laden

And since now there is no evidence of the involvement of the "hijackers" in the terrorist attacks, it means that al-Qaeda seems to have nothing to do with it, and it is not necessary to bomb Afghanistan. 

But within days of the skyscrapers falling, the U.S. "suddenly" had a video of Osama bin Laden's confession of December 14, 2001. She was allegedly found in a house in Jalalabad. And it is this record that forms the basis of the final conclusion of the official commission – the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Osama bin Laden and, of course, al-Qaeda. 

But immediately draws attention to the fact that this video is of very low quality. And the man himself, who according to the FBI's assurances is bin Laden, does not look like him at all, and this is clearly visible even despite the poor quality. It is denser, it has a different shape of the nose, lips, eyebrows and cheekbones. The FBI dossier says that bin Laden is left-handed, and in the video he records something with his right hand. In addition, he has a gold ring on his finger, and Islam, as you know, forbids a man to wear gold jewelry, and there is not a word about this in the dossier on bin Laden.

We will offer our reader a few Bin Laden, and the reader himself has the right to choose anyone who is more like a real terrorist: 

These photos below are purely for visualization of the terrorist 👇

Two Bin Ladens + Two Bin Ladens barry Obama and Hillary Clinton. So, we were not mistaken? 

The photo shows two bin Ladens: on the left - an simulator from the Jalalabad video, on the right - the real one. Even the naked eye can see that in the frame from the video and in the photo there are two completely different people, and the only similarities between them are a beard and a turban. And again, the fantastic arrogance of the American intelligence services, which did not even bother with such a "trifle" as the use of someone at least slightly similar to the real bin Laden, is striking.

As a result, realizing that bin Laden also had a puncture, the head of the FBI Investigation Department, Rex Tomb, admitted: "The September 11 attacks do not appear in the dossier of Osama bin Laden, since there is no evidence of his involvement in the events of September 11."

On March 29, 2006, Vice President Richard Cheney split: "We never claimed that Osama bin Laden had anything to do with the events of September 11. We never had conclusive evidence."

However, in the official report of the "Keane Commission", Osama bin Laden remained the main actor, and the main material evidence is the already refuted video forgery. 

How evidence was destroyed

The steel left after the destruction of the frames of the WTC towers was hastily sent for processing, not even allowing investigators to access it. More than 185 thousand tons of steel were eliminated from the "epicenter". Firefighters reported to the US Congress that about 80% (!) of the steel debris was removed, and investigators could not even demand the preservation of the remains for analysis. In particular, the Chinese corporation Shanghai Baosteel Group purchased fifty thousand tons of steel from the collapses of the WTC in the form of scrap at a price of $ 120 per ton. Thousands of tons of steel were sent for processing to India.

Such actions caused a wave of indignation among independent researchers and the families of the victims, but the newly minted mayor of New York, Mike Bloomberg, who replaced Rudolph Giuliani in late 2001, replied that there were other ways to investigate the tragedy of September 11. He also noted that "a simple inspection of a piece of metal will not tell you anything." 

Despite the protests of all those who wanted to look at these "pieces of metal", the removal of scrap was in full swing. The official reason for this rush was that it was "completely useless garbage that only gets in the way." Apparently, this "garbage" was so "useless" that its removal took place under the strictest control, and trucks that took out steel debris from the "epicenter" area were equipped with expensive tracking devices so that, God forbid, this completely useless garbage did not end up anywhere but smelting furnaces. Steel was removed from the "crime scene" in such a high-speed mode that even a specially created government commission of the GATE {Building Performance Assessment Team), having only had the opportunity to look at the remains, had no right to study these very remains or get acquainted with the drawings of the buildings. Which, in fact, calls into question the very meaning of the creation of this commission.

Bill Manning, editor-in-chief of Fire Engineering Magazine, on behalf of firefighters, expressed dissatisfaction with the actions of government organizations to destroy evidence and completely remove independent researchers from the possibility of studying them: "We have reason to believe that "official investigations" ... are nothing more than a blatant farce imposed on us by political forces whose main interests, to put it mildly, are very far from revealing the truth... The destruction of evidence must stop immediately."

Manning also stressed that the destruction of this steel is illegal: "according to the national standard for fire investigation, all evidence for any fires in buildings larger than 10 floors must be preserved, and there are no exceptions to this rule." 

And on September 26, 2001, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani banned all video and photography in the "epicenter" area. One photographer, who chose not to be named, had the police erase the digital camera images and threatened arrest if he reappeared, but he was able to recover the erased images using photoRescue.

As a result, everything that could shed light on the "9/11 attack" was very quickly destroyed and no expert could not get acquainted with the "physical evidence".

Consequences of "terrorist attacks"

Less than two weeks after September 11, a very interesting piece of legislation (the so-called Patriot Act) was submitted to Congress for approval, which in just a month turned into law. And in early October 2001, the American invasion of Afghanistan began. This is an unprecedented pace of decision-making, preparation for their implementation and actual implementation. That's just the essence of these same measures raises a large number of questions.

Congress began consideration of the so-called anti-terrorism bill, called the Patriot Act, on September 24, 2001. This bill in general turned out to be very remarkable both in content and in the methods of its implementation.

First, it came to Congress without first discussing it under the Office of Administration and Budget. 

Second, then-Justice Secretary John Ashcroft demanded that Congress pass it within one week and without change. Despite such strict and specific instructions, the contradictory document still caused some discussions - to the obvious dissatisfaction of the minister. Realizing that it would not be so easy to "push" the bill, Ashcroft at a joint meeting with the heads of the Senate and the House of Representatives warned that new terrorist attacks were certainly coming, and Congress would be guilty if the law was not passed immediately. It was clear blackmail, and the statement itself seemed absurd, but Congress was not ready to withstand such pressure from the minister.

Just in case, in order to finally "push" the adoption of this act, two particularly stubborn congressmen - Tom Daschle (Tom Daschle) and Patrick Leahy (Patrick Leahy), who actively opposed, received by mail envelopes with anthrax spores ... 

Republican Congressman Ron Paul told the Washington Times that no congressman was even allowed to read the act. However, on October 12, it was approved by both houses of Congress, and on October 26, 2001, President Bush signed the document, thereby giving the Patriot Act the status of law.

What is the meaning of the Patriot Act? First, the act authorizes federal employees to search citizens' homes, workplaces, computers, and private property, either without notice at all or with notice after the fact, when the search has already been carried out.

Second, the CIA has been given unlimited ability to spy on its citizens without a court order if it is done "for intelligence purposes." This includes listening to telephone conversations, and tracking the user's Internet activity. By the way, up to this point, the purpose of the CIA was to do intelligence exclusively against foreign "elements."

Third, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have the right to request medical, financial, and academic records and government archives on any person only by presenting a warrant, which the court is obliged to issue if it is required for an investigation to protect against "international terrorism." At the same time, a sufficient basis for a search is not even required, and the organization to which the warrant is presented has no right to inform anyone that the FBI has requested this data. Including the one whose data was requested!

Fourthly, freedom of speech is de facto restricted, because any careless phrase can now be regarded as a terrorist plot. According to this act, domestic terrorism includes "actions that are exchanged as attempts to influence the political course of the State through threats or violence." As you can see, the concept of "domestic terrorism" is defined so vaguely that almost any political or other activist group (the same Greenpeace, for example) can fall under this definition. And anyone who disagrees with the actions of the government is also not immune from this. In addition to these acts, several other directives of a similar orientation appeared. 

And this is only a small part of the "evidence" that was found in the "most reliable" official investigation of the tragedy of 9/11. But this is enough to understand what methods the US intelligence services are going to their goals, killing more than three thousand Americans. And about the mysterious plane that crashed into the Pentagon and strangely disappeared, there are also materials. 

Maj. Gen. Stubblebine: "I can prove it wasn't an airplane (9/11)"

Albert N. Stablebine, a retired U.S. Army Major General who led the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, was responsible for monitoring all air defense systems during 9/11 in his last (he died in 2017) interview spoke about the facts confirming the staging of 9/11. The interview is all the more remarkable because from the very beginning Stubblebine believed the official story of September 11 and was one of its main "movers to the masses." And then he turned his attention to the hole in the Pentagon from the alleged Boeing 757.

All but one of the sensors around the Pentagon were turned off. This single, working sensor captured an image of an object that hit the Pentagon. It was like a rocket. But after it became public, the image of the object was changed.

In the video, Stubblebine, visibly upset and discouraged by his discovery, describes how he felt when he realized the truth about his government after he always firmly believed in his country: "From the age of five, my belief system has been so strong..."

The general calls facts and statements dots (DOTs), connecting which any sober person will come to the conclusion that the destruction of the twin towers was caused by controlled demolition, and not fuel from the aircraft, and the holes in the Pentagon were made by a missile. 

- Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC complex, admitted that this 7th building had only a small fire and "was intentionally 'pulled out'" is a phraseology used for controlled demolition. DOT.

All air defense systems around Washington were shut down that day. DOT.

- Also on September 11, there were exercises simulating an attack on high-rise buildings with the help of aircraft. DOT.

When you connect DOT, the picture suggests that what we were told by the media was not a real story. Below are some notes from the interview, including a partial transcript of the interview, at the end of which, when he remembered the moment when he realized that his government, the government he had proudly served for more than 30 years, was not what he thought, a deep sorrow and pain was clearly visible on the face of the General and the Isit Patriot of his country.

Initially, he believed it was a terrorist attack committed by other forces: "Not my government." Then (7:45) Stubblebine saw a pentagon photo showing a hole in the Pentagon, presumably made by a Boeing 757. "Something is wrong. Something is wrong with this picture..."

8:30 a.m. "Something is wrong. And so I didn't just analyze it photographically, I took measurements... I checked the plane, the length of the nose, where the wings were... I took measurements of the Pentagon - the depth of destruction in the Pentagon<... > (9:05)Conclusion: it was not the plane that made this hole<...> (9:10) I believe that I am the highest-ranking officer who has ever been public... 

In fact, the official story is not true. <...> (9:25) I was very careful not to say it was because I couldn't prove it. I was careful to say it wasn't an airplane because I can only prove that it wasn't an airplane. <...> (9:45) However, there was a turbine in the hole that looked like a turbine from a rocket ... I can't prove it, I don't know. But there was something there that didn't look like an engine from an airplane, but it looked like a turbine from a rocket. <...> (10:10) Later, I saw another photo taken by one of the sensors on the outside of the Pentagon. Now all the sensors were turned off, which is pretty interesting, isn't it? Why were all the sensors around the Pentagon turned off that day? It's weird. 

I don't care what that excuse is. That's weird. But there was one sensor that obviously wasn't turned off. And in this picture, you see this object flying and entering the Pentagon, and it hits the Pentagon. When you look at it, it doesn't look like an airplane. Some time later, after I became public, these pictures were changed. Around him was a new "suit" that looked like an airplane. But when you shoot a 'suit,' it's more like a rocket than an airplane."

Interesting conclusions were made by the Major-General regarding the demolition of high-rise buildings.

"(11:30)Let me return to the following very important information. The amount of energy to melt the beams – the steel in the tower – cannot be achieved by burning the fuel that was in the plane. It's just not possible! So there was no melting. Dot. I call it a period. OK? Dot. <...> (12:10) When you look at the falling tower, on each floor you see successive clouds of smoke: fluff, fluff, fluff, fluff... and so all the way down. 

Where do the smoke clouds come from? Well, they claim they're from a crumbling floor... No. No. No. These plumes of smoke are controlled destruction. That's exactly what they [controlled destruction] are, because that's how it happens. And so, the fact that the plane crashed did not cause the building to collapse. The collapse of the building was caused by controlled demolition. <...> (13:05)," says the general, then moving on to the demolition of Building 7, "Fact: Building 7 - Silverberg, I believe this is the name of the owner ... (actually his name is Larry Silverstein, author's note) was on video, and you could see Building 7. And there was a fire in Building 7, there's no doubt about that. Not a single plane hit it. 

I'm guessing the fire came from some debris, but I'm not even sure. But there was a fire in the lower right corner of the building - not a very big fire. It doesn't seem to get out of hand. The fire engulfed a small part of the building. But then, it's heard in the video, and he (the owner of the building, Larry Silverstein, author's note) says, "pull" him. Then the building collapsed. What does it mean to "pull"? Let me tell you. This is a controlled demolition order. It's a phrase that professionals use to blow something up."

It is worth reminding readers that leading aviation expert on the September 11 attack and teacher Philip Marshall, who wrote a book about 9/11, his teenage children and a dog were found dead in their home on Sandalwood Drive in February 2013.

54-year-old Philip Marshall, his daughter 14-year-old Mikalya Phillips and his 17-year-old son Alex.

"... Think about it. The official version says about some ghost (Osama bin Laden) in some cave on the other side of the world, defeating our entire military establishment in the United States, is absolutely ridiculous. <...> The real reason the attack was successful is because of the military standoff and the coordinated operation that prepared the hijackers to fly heavy commercial airliners. We have dozens of FBI documents confirming that this flight training was conducted in California, Florida and Arizona 18 months before the attack," Philip wrote.

As a supplement to the General's version, if you believe that what was previously written by science fiction writers often comes to mind in reality, it is appropriate to recall the American post-apocalyptic sci-fi action movie of 1981 "Escape from New York", where the plane also crashes into the WTC buildings.

Taxi driver admitted that the Pentagon was not destroyed as a result of the crash of the plane 9/11 (hidden camera) 

The taxi driver, who publicly stated that his taxi was damaged when the plane hit the Pentagon building at 9/11, admitted when he was recorded by a hidden camera that the attack was the internal work of U.S. intelligence agencies, that his wife worked for the FBI, and that he himself damaged his car with a baseball bat by breaking the windshield in it. As he himself said, when he was recorded by a hidden camera, "Big People" came to him.

First, on camera, Lloyd confirmed the version of the damage to the car in the crash of the plane and its hit in the Pentagon building. However, later, when he did not see that the camera was still working, he explained that he himself had broken the windshield of the car, and also explained the reasons why he had to publicly lie about the plane crash and claim that the car was damaged by shrapnel in the crash.

- These are too big people for me, big things. Man, it's a world-class affair. I'm a little person. My life is very different (far from) from that. I don't have to be involved in this. It's for other people. People who have money and all the power. I can't be involved in that. I have nothing. It's their business. <...> Event that they must have planned. You have to understand one thing, that people are doing things somewhere. They come to me, and when "It" comes, it's so huge that there's nothing I can do about it," Lloyd justifies.

Fed notes printed after 911, folded in the form of an airplane on the line of co-base of its "wings" you can clearly see images of collapsed buildings:

eDItOr-in-cHiEf TRiBUlE