The effects of the 9/11 false flag operation, orchestrated by Israel, still reverberate around the world today. Here’s a quick overview of the crime of the century.
Shownotes:
*****
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles. He is author of the books Break Your Chains and , the book series Controversial Truths Revealed (Cancer: The Lies, the Truth and the Solutions and 40 Incredible Real Life Alien Abductee and Contactee Experiences) and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com. Makia is on Rumble, BitChute and Odysee.
18 Comments
I don't believe it was bombs that brought the Twin Towers down and that it was a controlled demolition and am very surprised you say this knowing about directed energy weapons. If it was a controlled demolition the entirety of the buildings would have come down as one, not by each floor as the video shows. If we compare it with building 7, which really did seem like a controlled demolition, we see that the building came down as one, not floor by floor as the Twin Towers did.
Building 7 collapse
https://youtu.be/JnLcUxV1dPo
With the Twin Towers there was an incredible amount of dust, as pointed out by Dr Judy Wood, who also pointed out the impossibility of a collapse as the result of controlled demolition which in turn would have been registered on the Richter scale instead of the negligible blip on the scale as it was, and also that the collapse of two building weighing over a million tons of concrete and steel would have ruptured the retaining wall holding the river back resulting in flooding of the New York subway and the whole of Manhattan. As she pointed out, none of these things happened which shows it was not bombs and or controlled demolition. I thought all of this was well established after two decades among people who do not buy into the fake official narrative of which bombs and controlled demolition is part of!
Another point is the 14 firemen who survived after the disappearance of the North Tower, along with 14 other people in the same building. Some of the firemen said they felt they were levitating while in the building. Other people reported actually being levitated for a few blocks while others reported seeing people and cars being levitated through the air. Bombs and controlled demolition cannot do this! There was also a remarkable lack of concrete and steel after the Towers had disappeared and just strange empty holes in the ground, not to mention strange fires which the firemen could not put out using water and oxygen tanks and cars spontaneously combusting. Again, an impossibility if it was bombs and controlled demolition.
Thanks for your comment. Could it not have been both methods, bombs and DEW? Could not the Directed Energy Weapons have also caused a demolition as they also caused the dustification? Or could not DEW have finished off the job that the bombs started? Not sure if it needs to be either/or.
Yes, clearly the DEW was used to pulverize the concrete and steel, cause the strange fires, etc.
If there were no bombs at all, that would contradict the many eyewitness reports (including firemen) who heard the bomb explosions, plus the visual evidence of multiple separate floors exploding out, far below where the plane supposedly hit … unless you think DEW can account for all of that?
In the 4 years leading up to 9/11, there were Israeli so-called “artist” groups (Mossad fronts) who were selected to be part of a Lower Manhattan Cultural Council program that allowed them to work and live in the WTC on different floors, including 91st and 92nd of the North Tower. Additionally, they were given 7-days-a-week construction access to the WTC that allowed them to freely move all sorts of materials in and out of the complex. One of these groups was called “Gelatin” (gelignite is known as blasting gelatin). Do you think all of this was for show, or that they were planting real bombs?
https://peakd.com/conspiracy/@budz82/9-11-and-the-israeli-bomb-expert-infiltrated-art-groups-gelatin-demo-wiring-team-and-e-team-sol-gel-team
I do not rule out Mossad involvement but the controlled demolition narrative just isn't possible because we see the huge difference between how building 7 collapsed (seeming controlled demolition) and the disintegration of the towers. How does the world's tallest buildings disintegrate into dust after controlled demolition with the use of bombs? It is possible that bombs were used to weaken the structure and DEW used to disintegrate the buildings but that is not at all controlled demolition as seems to have been the case with building 7. So no, controlled demolition as normally understood cannot have played a part.
Firemen also reported hearing the floors above them collapse onto each other as they got nearer to the floors they were on which again rules out controlled demolition as normally understood because controlled demolition cannot collapse buildings floor by floor.. And what would account for people and cars being levitated for blocks, spontaneous combustion of cars and oxygen tanks and weird fires that water couldn't extinguish? Certainly not bombs. What do you think was Mossad's agenda with 9/11?
Yes, I agree that “controlled demolition” as normally understood cannot explain the disintegration and dustification of WTC 1 and 2.
Mossad wasn’t just “involved” – Israel literally ORCHESTRATED and EXECUTED the entire event. For the evidence, see David Icke’s “The Trigger” and Rebekah Roth’s 4-book series “Methodical Illusion” etc. (both of which are mentioned in the video).
I didn't mean to understate Mossad involvement, I just didn't express it properly. But what was the Mossad agenda?
The Cult that orchestrated WW1 and WW2, as well as the founding of modern-day Israel, is the same cult that has hijacked Judaism and turned it into a nationalistic, land-grabbing, setter-colonial endeavor. This cult can be called the Sabbatean-Frankist-Zionist Cult. They have owned America for a long time. Their agenda was to increase their control over the average American and get America to fight Israel’s wars.
I reference some of that here:
https://rumble.com/v4rgpuk-at-the-top-theyre-all-on-the-same-side-part-1-video-103.html
https://rumble.com/v4rmeb6-at-the-top-theyre-all-on-the-same-side-part-2-video-104.html
Yes I see what you mean. What is the solution which can defeat them?
Lawsuits that lead to spreading of the of the truth and the punishment – e.g. removal from power – of the guilty. I have plans, but operational secrecy would make it imprudent to publicize them. I believe that I won't be murdered, but that doesn't mean that I shouldn't be calculating with regards to the risks I take.
Public enemy #1 is their stooge Antipope – i.e. fraud – Francis. The pope is Pope Gregory XVIII. See tcwblog.
Do you really think such lawsuits would be allowed to see the light of day? A recent lawsuit was brought against the independent researcher Richard D Hall by a man called Martin Hibbert on his own and his daughter's behalf on the vague charge of causing "harm", harassment, and having inaccurate opinions about the Manchester Arena bombing (2017) which Hibbert and his daughter allegedly attended. Yes this case actually got as far as the High Court. Unbelievable!
RDH contends that the bombing was a false flag and can back this up with irrefutable evidence. Hibbert claims he and his daughter now have to use wheelchairs because of injuries sustained in the bombing. No one else has sued RDH who was blocked from presenting his evidence by the judge. This meant he and his lawyer was effectively stopped from putting up a proper defense in the trial.
The true situation is that Hibbert is being backed by intel services who are really behind the lawsuit against RDH in order that the evidence could not be presented in court, where the media would be reporting on it followed by the public learning of it, showing the bombing was a false flag. This is why the charges against him are so vague ensuring that the evidence is deemed irrelevant to the charge and so cannot be presented! Extremely crafty and dishonest! It is easy to get a corrupt judge to go along with the fake trial. The state and its intel services can control how a lawsuit goes by controlling what evidence is allowed to be presented. First you would have to get the guilty and corrupt removed from power before a genuine trial could take place and I do not see that happening anywhere at present. Do you? A lawsuit under the present system has zero chance of succeeding. Some other solution needs to be found. In the meantime, the state will continue to get away with murdering people because they are in fact well above the law. It only applies to you, me and millions of others!
https://iaindavis.substack.com/p/the-bizarre-trial-of-richard-d-hall
https://www.richplanet.net/legal.php
There may be hope.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QeD1uUgmKw
It is possible/probable that – secretly – law enforcement is not totally corrupt.
You don't know what you don't know.
The fraud of "legal positivism" was perpetrated by the Jews and it is dominant in "law" schools in the USA. Justice is found in moral theology as taught by the Catholic Church led by Pope Gregory XVIII. An example of this is the natural right for a breadwinner to earn a living.
The key is to make sure that attorneys don't lost their licenses AND that they work for justice. The "adversary system" isn't just. Morally speaking, no attorney should ever defend an unjust CIVIL cause as soon as he becomes convinced that it is not just, or refuse to assist in a just CIVIL cause until he has convincing proof that it is not just. Attorneys only have clients because of immoral behavior.
I don't know how things work in the UK or its former colonies, but freedom of contract is also a fraud. For England, truth concerning the fraud can be found in the book "The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract" 1979. p. 416.
If nothing else a pro se lawsuit reveals to those who are aware of it – e.g. at least attorneys – that there is serious corruption. Theoretically, attorneys should care about corruption.
I don't see how freedom of contract is a fraud. Individuals should have the freedom to come to mutually advantageous agreements without the interference of governments who want to take a cut from the agreement. The big problem is that contract law ( rules governing commerce and written as legislation) has been allowed to take over the actual system of law, ie common/case law.
Pope Gregory XVIII that you have mentioned twice is not part of the Roman Catholic Church but the Palmerian Catholic Church based in Andalucia, Spain. He is regarded by his own church as an apostate after he stood down to marry a nun. He has not been their Pope since 2016. I am not getting into a debate on the rights and wrongs of the case because it is not connected to the 9/11 issue but I mention it to show not all is as it seems in this breakaway church.
https://www.palmarianchurch.org/ex-pope-gregory-xviii/
I don't know about how things work in the UK – i.e. what freedom of contract precisely means.
When you have 0 attorneys who will serve you with regards to a just cause, and 0 employers who will hire you, it should be easy for the unprejudiced person – e.g. non-employer – to see the injustice of freedom of contract. A person has the freedom to speak, but no one ought to admit that he has the freedom to lie – because he doesn't.
There are a number of torts/crimes which can be committed by means of conspiracy with regards to contracts which cause very serious wrongs. Examples are tortious interference with (prospective) business relations, price fixing/gouging (e.g. wages prices), conspiracy in restraint of trade, and blacklisting. Technically, to refuse to serve a customer – even if he can not pay – are the crimes of theft and coercion, and to refuse to hire an unemployed breadwinner is attempted murder.
I gave you a reference with regards to Pope Gregory XVIII. Note that he is the head of the Catholic Church, NOT the Palmarian Church. The website is tcwblog. His predecessor was Pope Gregory XVII (a.k.a. "Cardinal" Siri).
There is no Pope Gregory XVIII of the Roman Catholic Church only the Palmerian Catholic church as shown in the link I posted. The last Gregory Pope of the RCC was Gregory XVI in the 19th century. Gregory XVIII, the one you are talking about, is of the Palmerian CC. His name is Ginés Jesús Hernández y Martínez, religious name, Sergio María de la Santa Faz. He abdicated in 2016 after marrying a nun, left the Palmerian church and became reconciled as a layman with the RCC.
Freedom of contract means the same in the UK as it does in other countries. A big part of the problem, as I said previously, is that commercial rules (legislation) has usurped the rule of law which is the real law and takes account of morality. Most lawyers are trained in the rules of commerce which they wrongly believe is the real law.
Commercial rules/Admiralty law/Maritime law/Law of the Sea or simply Water Law (among its many names), treats human beings as commercial vessels with a commercial value on their heads. This stems from centuries ago when most commercial trading was done by ships delivering merchandise into the port/dock and being loaded with other merchandise before going back on to the high seas of commerce to its next port. Common law/real law/case law on the other hand, treats human beings as actual human beings who are innocent until proven guilty with the burden of proof on the prosecution. In the legislative system everything is reversed and you are guilty until proven innocent with the burden of proof on YOU not the prosecution. To get people to comply with their commercial rules they use their enforcement arm called the legal system. This is one of the reasons for the lack of morality you mention.
Your first paragraph is incorrect, but it is because of incorrect reasoning. If I was to say "President Roosevelt who was president of the United States" would you know exactly who I was referring to?
Satan – i.e. the Devil – probably played a trick here. This conversation has happened a number of times before. You trust a source that is referring to a different person.
With regards to the rest, I don't believe that you are correct with regards to your explanation (You would need more proof and probably a lawsuit.), but the concept is analogous enough – i.e. human being vs. "commercial vessel."
The key explanation is "the natural law." Justice is synonymous with law. An unjust law – e.g. which contradicts the natural law – is a contradiction. Reasons for the lack of morality are bribery, greed, blackmail, and tight control by very powerful and evil persons.
Those who know that mortal sin exists will do whatever it takes to get to Heaven which – at a minimum – means avoiding mortal sin. Those who believe that everyone goes to Heaven – e.g. Jews – will behave much differently.
Any human ought to know at the most fundamental level that evil behavior deserves punishment. Criminals – if honest – would admit that they had done something deserving of punishment.
No my paragraph is correct because it is based on historical fact. There has never been a Pope Gregory XVIII of the RCC, the last Gregory was Gregory XVI in the 19th century as I said. I am not going to keep going back and forth on this because it is very easy for you to check this from various sources.
I am baffled how you can claim such a person is 1. not the same Gregory XVIII formerly of the Palmerian church, 2. by strange coincidence there just happens to be two Gregory's where one is in the RCC and the other in the PCC, and 3 that Gregory XVIII of the RCC is the real Pope of the RCC! For that to happen there would have to be a Gregory 17. So what happened to him, when did he become Pope and when did he die? You need show proof of this but you will not be able to because Gregorys 17 and 18 of the RCC simply do not exist. It's OK by me if you want to believe it but you are trying to persuade others of a fundamentally wrong idea as well which is not OK. We are not talking about two different Gregory 18s but the same Gregory who is regarded as an apostate by the PCC for abdicating, marrying and worse of all, becoming reconciled with the RCC. The third puts him beyond the pale as far as they are concerned. You can check this out in some many different sources.
The only last point I will make about this is, many people believe the current Pope Francis, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, of the RCC is a fake. He was actually part of a group called the St Gallen Mafia (self titled) within the Vatican. Many say he transferred the equivalent of two million euros from the RCC's Buenos Aires account to the RCC's account in Rome in order to buy his way into the position.
He is a Jesuit. Jesuit's have always been forbidden by the RCC from becoming Popes. But it has been a long held ambition of the Jesuits to get a Jesuit in to the position of Pope and they eventually succeeded. Bergoglio is believed to have forced out Pope Benedict, who in his resignation speech, did not say the full required words sealing his resignation. This means he did not resign but allowed those plotting against him to believe he did. Therefore, Bergoglio is illegitimate. It has been said that Catholic lay people who ask too many questions have been thrown out of planes at 30,000 feet by the Jesuit members of the St Gallen Mafia.
https://www.amazon.com/St-Gallen-Mafia-Exposing-Reformist/dp/1505122872
https://tandirection.com/enemies-of-salvation/exposing-the-st-gallen-mafia/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Gallen_Group
"Natural law" is the same thing as Common Law/Case Law. Religious people would call it God's Law. I am correct in what I say about the difference between the rule of law (common law) and that of the rules of commerce (commercial law/legislation).
You say that justice is synonymous with law. I agree but there is also karmic justice, sometimes known as "what goes around comes around", "poetic justice" and'instant' karma where someone who has harmed another faces immediate consequences for their act.
A lawsuit relies on the legislative process which is itself made up of the rules of commerce. For legislation to work it requires the knowing or unknowing consent of those being governed. This is why it is said in law that ignorance of the law is no defense. Serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter etc are always heard in higher courts which are based on common law not commercial rules of commerce. Lower courts are not capable (neither are the judges) of dealing with serious crimes because they are in essence courts of commercial rules not courts of common law. Common law courts are superior to lower courts because a high degree of skill is required by the judge as well as the fact that a jury is normally used so you are judged by your peers and are innocent unless proven guilty.
You're right on… Multiple tactics were used to make sure the WTC collapsed completely. I don't think that they could predict what the DEWs would do exactly, so they had backups. And the more methods used, the harder it would be to determine what actually caused the collapse. Dr. Judy Wood needs to be heard!
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/if-90000-tons-of-concrete-is-pulverized/
The "crime of the century" label certainly is a subject worthy of debate. I am not a theologian, so I likely couldn't estimate the level of guilt. That said, the blasphemy perpetrated by a Jew with complicity with evil France, and viewed by something like 3 billion people at the very IMMODEST Summer Olympics ceremony is probably much worse. The games themselves are probably almost totally criminally indecent.
Currently, over 40,000 Palestinians have been murdered by Israel (and also much unjust property damage) probably as a result of their stooge Hamas, and the "surprise" attack on the Rothschild-created EVIL Israel.