The image obscured by the plane’s impact on the Twin Towers
When the media manipulates information
October 23, 2005
I plan to revisit the issue of September 11 as soon as I have some time. Amidst this veritable avalanche of catastrophic news coming from all corners of the globe, one hardly knows where to begin or what to write.
What seems clear is that, more than ever, we live in a civilization of lies. If there were any announcement to be made nowadays, it would be:
We desperately seek moral values.
Ah, before you plunge into all these horrors, let me recommend a good antidote. Go watch a relatively recent movie full of dreams—where CEOs are poor guys trapped within systems, where high school teachers have kind hearts, where young North African girls are beautiful and adorably naive, where teenagers are romantic. Watch “Saint Jacques la Mecque.” I was reluctant at first; I was grumbling. But two friends dragged me there and I got a breath of fresh air. I wandered through landscapes reminiscent of the American Wild West, like in “Dances with Wolves”—except this was in France. I laughed heartily. Everything in this film is guaranteed: the villains and bitter people transform into very decent folks. The happy ending is assured. These men, women, and children reflect us—with both dark and bright sides. At the end, everyone’s dark clouds dissipate and everything becomes warm light. It feels good to dream that things could suddenly turn out this way. Without dreams, we cease to exist; it is dreams that change the world. Remember Martin Luther King’s words:
“I had a dream.”
Must we constantly echo the horrors of the world? Must we hunt down lies and demand investigations? Is there a solution? We must believe in it, against all odds. Believe that the edifice of lies is akin to a house of cards, a chain of dominoes. That’s the stance I choose:
The future isn’t written anywhere.
The world isn’t under tranquilizers; it’s under sleeping pills. Have you ever tried to wake someone who’d swallowed a sleeping pill in the middle of the night? Or perhaps this has happened to you? It’s agonizing, almost painful.
“Wake up! The house is on fire!” – “Leave me alone! Let me sleep!”
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, “emotion engineers” already produced what we now call audiovisual materials meant to keep people in a state of unconsciousness. When those same people resisted treatment, there remained the “soma” pill—a drug with no side effects.
These drugs exist; they’re called tranquilizers. Occasionally, scientific media report that scientists are very close to creating “the happiness pill.” You’re not dreaming; it’s all real. But frankly, the more time passes, the more these scientists bore me—they lack moral values, ideals, even dreams.
Sometimes you feel like bursting out laughing. Bird flu—which I’ve been stressing on my site since May 2005—is at our doorstep. If you don’t know where Croatia is, consult an atlas: it’s a thousand kilometers from us, on the eastern Adriatic coast.
Progress of bird flu as of October 23, 2005
But “all precautions have been taken.” And that’s when we see an unimaginable farce on TV. A “representative of French veterinary services” is called to a field where a dead crow was found. Wearing rubber gloves, he carefully picks it up and puts it in a plastic bag. Then, instead of removing his gloves and tossing them in the bag, he keeps them on and starts writing his report, handling the pen and paper with those gloves. At the end, we don’t see whether, after leaving the journalists, he shakes hands with them while still wearing those gloves!
Who put this together? Where did they find this “representative of veterinary services”? What can one say? As I’ve written before:
Between alarmism and blindness, where does the right position lie?
I know no more than you do. There’s a lexicon allowing us to translate official statements. For instance:
“Those responsible for these acts will be prosecuted, regardless of their position.”
means:
“Rest assured we’ll do everything to bury this affair.”
Another example:
“A series of measures are being prepared; their gradual implementation should improve the situation.”
means:
“We have absolutely no idea what to do and we’re telling you whatever comes to mind...”
Finally:
“The risk must be considered extremely low; in any case, all precautions have been taken.”
should be translated as:
“We have no clue what might happen to us; anyway, we’re practically unprepared.”
Just in case, go buy some cardboard masks and paper towels—they’re cheap and might come in handy. You can find them at hardware stores. A friend of mine is about to accompany a tourist group to Vietnam. I know Tamiflu is nowhere to be found in regular pharmacies. I advised her, armed with proof, to try getting it at her local military hospital—presumably better equipped to procure doses of this precious stock, as shown countless times on TV. It’s a precautionary measure in a region already affected by a deadly variant of the virus. But I doubt she’ll do it; it would mean acknowledging the scale of the problem.
Get vaccinated. That doesn’t mean it’ll save you in case of a pandemic. Nor does it mean this vaccine will protect you from ordinary flu viruses, which mutate constantly. But if a pandemic breaks out, your doctor’s first question will be: “Are you vaccinated?” Personally, I asked my doctor for a prescription and I’ll get vaccinated. I bought the vaccine; I noticed the dose came in a disposable syringe, all wrapped in plastic, ready to use. These measures aim to prevent drug addicts from spreading AIDS by reusing syringes.
Yet now these disposable syringes could pose another kind of danger. For now it’s just speculation: that worldwide vaccination campaigns could be used to inject “chips” smaller than a grain of sand into people—chips easily passing through syringe needles and virtually invisible in liquid. I’ve explained before that such chips could serve as antennas enabling manipulation of large groups of people, via pulsed microwave sources on the ground, satellite transmitters, or ground-based reflectors made of ionized gas.
See the file on the HAARP project.
I wonder if it wouldn’t be wise to try finding old equipment: grandpa’s Pyrex syringe with removable needle, sterilized with steam. Then the plan to inject 100-micron chips (already operational) could be thwarted. All you’d need is filter the liquid using filter paper, or even a simple paper towel or handkerchief taken from its packet. When you show up at the nurse’s or doctor’s office with the disposable syringe, you could ask:
“Would you mind filtering the contents and using this other syringe instead?”
You can also learn to give injections yourself; it’s child’s play. I’ve done dozens after practicing on a pillow. Should a mass vaccination campaign ever materialize, I’ll open a free clinic at my home. We just need to find such equipment. Where? At an antique shop? If anyone has such gear, I’d love to acquire it for my future clinic. Follow my example; equip yourselves. You never know...
This page was meant to discuss media manipulation. I have two sequences to share. The first aired on TF1 on October 14. Bush made a clumsy blunder: amid plummeting media approval ratings, he wanted to present a “very open” dialogue with members of the expeditionary force in Iraq. “Handsome, clean-cut” Marines surrounded by a pretty brunette on the left, as if all female soldiers were gorgeous! But nothing came of it. The commentary claimed this interview was “very positive” and that American troops’ morale seemed excellent there. Then, oops—the footage continues and all U.S. TV channels broadcast a rehearsal where a Pentagon representative checks whether soldiers have memorized their lines.
A manipulation error? Perhaps. Could also be a technician fed up with all the lies. The Pentagon... apologized to the American people. But how can one recover politically from something like that?! It defies comprehension.
Excerpt from TF1’s 1 PM news, October 14, 2005
The second sequence required work by my collaborator Matthew Pearlson. French TV aired two documents related to September 11. The first is the scandalous “September 11 Didn’t Happen,” broadcast on Arte in 2004; it may be found on sites like Emule. The second is a documentary where the designer of the Twin Towers explains “Why the towers collapsed.” That’s the title. According to him, it was due to “an initial design error.” We’re analyzing this film frame by frame, theme by theme; results will appear on the site in HTML pages with short animated GIF sequences. We can’t extract elements from these videos due to copyright held by creators and broadcasters.
For now, know that the document on the towers is no more credible than the one previously aired by Arte. The designer explains that to maximize office space, load-bearing elements were placed along the perimeter. The towers are built like cages with wavy bars welded together; this technique allowed rapid construction. Lightweight floors are then attached to this outer framework. In the center there’s also a more conventional support structure, housing elevators and stairs—but the designer barely mentions it.
His thesis: planes striking the towers weakened the floors “so they fell one atop another,” and “the kerosene explosion ripped off thick fireproof coating protecting these structures.” Result: the spectacular vertical collapse of both towers, straight as “i’s.”
He tries to explain (I’ll show you this with images and GIFs) how floor detachment weakened the external structure. He shows two models: the first tower can bear heavy loads thanks to its “floors”; the second lacks them, so the “tower” sags and twists. I’m an engineer and know a bit about material strength and structures; this phenomenon is called “structural buckling.” Yet if his theory were true, buckling wouldn’t cause vertical collapse—especially since the fire affected only one side of each floor. The towers would bend (as seen in his model, which proves the opposite of his claim!). No Sherlock Holmes needed to spot these flaws in the film. Also remember that Building 7 collapsed vertically too, in classic “controlled demolition” fashion, despite having a completely different, conventional structure and suffering no plane impact; its fire was minor. Photos prove this. The official report simply ignored Building 7’s fate—even though it was half the height of the Twin Towers.
We’ll have to compile all these documents; it’s a huge task. Fortunately, my collaborators will extract short clips and convert them to animated GIFs.
But there’s a sequence at the end of the second film, aired in 2004 on a French channel. After that brilliant technical demonstration, the film ends with slow-motion shots set to violin music. It’s the kind of piece you’d hear in a crematorium. We see the “fatally wounded” towers collapsing slowly, to music. One thing caught my eye immediately: if you doubt it, you can look up both the aired film and other repeated videos. It’s the scene where one of the planes strikes a tower (actually four planes hit; this flash appears on all four, as shown in Jimmy Walter’s “Painful Deception”). The French version shows it in slow motion—but curiously, the flash disappears!
Wait for the animated GIF to load. This is what it looks like.
Left: Original sequence. Right: Sequence aired on Arte: the flash has been removed!
Note also that you clearly see a container hanging under the plane—not a commercial airliner but a military craft. Who was aboard? No one. It was flown automatically, guided by a radio beacon. Any professional pilot would tell you it’s impossible to pull off such a maneuver manually at 650 km/h, especially in a sharp turn. And we’re supposed to believe terrorists with minimal training could achieve what professionals deem impossible!
As noted by reader Serge Bougaieff, we have a photo of the impact from CNN—hardly a conspiracy site:
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/gallery/unimaginable.html
Here’s the photo:
Impact image as seen on CNN
But why that flash? That container?
There’s an explanation: the Twin Towers indeed have an outer load-bearing shell, like tight corsets. Naturally, thanks to its kinetic energy, the plane stood a good chance of penetrating inside. Engines and wing spars form rigid structures; steel turbine shafts behave like punches at such speeds (though they didn’t seem to help during the “Boeing 757” crash into the Pentagon). The problematic part is the fuselage; its front, made of lightweight alloy, resembles chocolate paper. So, to ensure penetration, why not fire a “contact missile” using the “contact firing” technique mentioned in the Koursk file? Note that it’d be tough for our “beginner pilot” to time this shot perfectly, to the hundredth of a second. All this must be commanded automatically by a radar rangefinder inside the ventral pod/container.
But where was the real plane? What happened to its pilots, passengers, terrorists filmed boarding?
Trivial details. When you decide to kill thousands of citizens to stage a domestic “Pearl Harbor,” would you hesitate to make one or several aircraft disappear, along with dozens more people? All it took was for an agent to leave Mohamed Atta’s passport intact and visible a few blocks from the towers.
Can you imagine this “brave guy,” with mere hours of training on a single-engine trainer, steering a fully loaded airliner straight into a tower, in a sharp turn... then at the last moment tossing his passport out the window at 650 km/h? Have you ever imagined the wind blast caused by opening a cockpit window at such speed?
None of this makes any sense, none.
Yet I’ve received messages from readers “surprised that a scientist of my caliber engages in such disinformation operations.”
“Do you have your own explanation?” – “Of course. I’ve been convinced for a long time.” – “So you’ve compiled your own evidence?” – “Absolutely!” – “Then you’ll share it with us. I’m ready to offer you space here, as I did a year ago for computer expert Jean-Sylvain Delroux, who could thus develop his quite original explanations.”
I’m still waiting.
History is full of monstrosities. The difference is we learn of them 40 years later. Consider Delouvrier’s testimony (Source: November 2004 special issue of Science et Vie on the Algerian War): High Commissioner of the Republic in Algeria under De Gaulle, he admitted before dying that with French oil companies’ complicity he paid the FLN to avoid sabotaging the gas pipeline carrying “French gas” from Hassi-Messaoud to Bougie on the Mediterranean.
Yet even when culprits are still alive, no one moves; not a single journalist speaks up. We honor and decorate a Defense Minister who covered up negligences amounting to crimes. Our leaders aren’t politicians but mere thieves, saved from prosecution only by extended parliamentary immunity.
Earth’s inhabitants will choose. If they opt to keep ignoring daily lies, they’ll pay dearly. Horrific chaos awaits—compared to which past world wars will seem like playground squabbles—within just a few years.
What measures? They’re simple yet utopian: abolish banking secrecy, eliminate safe havens for criminals (think of Ziegler’s book “Switzerland Cleans Whiter”; he knows what he’s talking about, being Swiss). Current IT technology, inspired by Google, could allow everyone on Earth near-instant access to all financial transactions and accounts worldwide—at least the major ones. Transparency and economic truth would emerge, naked, from their murky, putrid pit. I believe it was ecologist René Dumont who wrote:
Utopia or death.
The message remains valid. But this time the deadline is less than five years, mark it well.
Failing to shatter banking secrecy, we’ll attempt counter-investigations on the toughest subjects. Top of the list: September 11, 2001—the subject I’ll devote most energy to now. Goal: post all available evidence, including that relating to pathetic broadcasts defending the official line, some of which are a disgrace to journalism, such as Arte’s infamous “September 11 Didn’t Happen,” “...so courageous, so honest, uncompromising...”
**Number of views since October 23, 2005: ** ---