France’s rejection in French-speaking Africa punishes 12 years of betrayal

  Understanding the turmoil in the Sahel region and the revolt against France.

by Thierry Meyssan

Nothing happens by chance in politics. The French don’t understand why French-speaking Africans suddenly reject them. They console themselves by accusing Russia of dark machinations. In reality, they are only reaping the rewards of what they have sown over the last 12 years. This has nothing to do with colonialism or Françafrique and everything to do with putting the French army at the service of U.S. strategy.

Voltaire Network | Paris (France) | 12 September 2023

Deutsch ελληνικά Español français italiano Nederlands norsk Português русский

Faced with the wave of regime changes in French-speaking Africa, the French media are stunned. They can’t explain the rejection of France.

The old refrains about colonial exploitation are unconvincing. For example, Paris is exploiting Niger’s uranium, not at market price, but at a ridiculously low one. However, the putschists have never raised this argument. They’re talking about something else entirely. Accusations of Russian manipulation are no more credible. Firstly, because Russia doesn’t seem to be behind the putschists in Mali, Guinea, Burkina-Faso, Niger or Gabon, but above all because the evil far predates their arrival. Russia only arrived in Africa after its victory in Syria, in 2016, whereas the problem dates back to at least 2010, if not 2001.

As always, what makes the situation unreadable is forgetting how it came about.

Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States assigned a role in Africa to its vassal, France. The aim was to maintain the old order there, while waiting for AfriCom to settle in, and for the Pentagon to extend to the dark continent the destruction of political institutions it was already carrying out in the "wider Middle East". [1] Gradually, Republican politics gave way to tribal politics. From one point of view, this was an emancipation from heavy French aid; from another, it was a formidable step backwards.

In 2010, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, probably on Washington’s advice, took the initiative to settle the Ivorian conflict. While the country was riven by tribal conflict, an operation led first by ECOWAS, then by Barack Obama’s cousin [2] Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga, attempted to negotiate the departure of Ivorian President Laurent Gbagbo. Their problem is not Gbagbo’s authoritarian regime, but the fact that he has transformed himself from a submissive CIA agent into a defender of his nation. Paris intervened militarily after the presidential election to arrest Gbagbo - allegedly to stop genocide - and replace him with Alassane Ouattara, a long-standing friend of the French ruling class. Laurent Gbagbo was subsequently tried by the International Criminal Court, which, after an interminable trial, recognized that he had never committed genocide and that France was therefore not justified in intervening militarily.

In 2011, President Nicolas Sarkozy, advised by Washington, committed France to Libya. Once again, the official aim was to stop a genocide committed by a dictator against his own people. To lend credibility to this accusation, the CIA, which was behind France’s actions, organized false testimony before the Human Rights Council in Geneva. In New York, the United Nations Security Council authorized the major powers to intervene to stop the massacre, which did not exist. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev turned a blind eye. U.S. President Barack Obama wanted AfriCom to finally begin operations in Africa, where he did not reside, as his soldiers were still stationed in Germany. But at the last minute, AfriCom’s commander refused to fight against Muamar Gaddafi alongside the jihadists who had fought his comrades in Iraq (the US military still hasn’t admitted the CIA’s double game of supporting the jihadists against Russia, often to the detriment of Westerners). Barack Obama therefore called on NATO, forgetting that he had previously promised not to mobilize it against a Southern country. Nevertheless, Muamar Gaddafi was tortured and lynched, and Libya was dismembered.However, the Libyan Arab Jamahariya, which was not at all a dictatorship but a regime inspired by the French socialists of the 19th century and the Paris Commune, was the only African force aiming to unite Arabs and blacks. Gaddafi wanted to liberate the continent as he had liberated his compatriots from Western colonialism. He was even preparing to pilot, with IMF Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a common currency for several African states. His fall awakened his enemies. Blacks were once again massacred by Arabs, even if they were Libyan nationals, and reduced to slavery, under the insensitive eyes of the Western victors. The poor African states economically supported by Libya collapsed, starting with Mali [3]. Arab jihadists, brought to power in Tripoli by NATO, supported certain Tuaregs against blacks in general. The problem gradually spread to the whole of Sahelian Africa.

Yet, unable to learn from these crimes, French President François Hollande organized a new regime change in Mali. In March 2012, as President Amadou Toumani Touré’s term of office drew to a close and he was not standing for re-election, a group of U.S.-trained officers overthrew him, without being able to explain their action. He interrupted the current presidential campaign and appointed Dioncounda Traore as "transitional president". This sleight of hand was endorsed by ECOWAS... now chaired by Alassane Ouattara. Unsurprisingly, transitional president Dioncounda Traore called on France for help in fighting the jihadists who were attacking him. Paris’ idea was to station troops in Mali so as to be able to attack Algeria, its real target, from the rear. This was "Operation Serval". Aware that they were next on the list, the Algerian generals cracked down hard on a hostage-taking by jihadists at the In Amenas oil site. In so doing, they discouraged France from intervening against their people.

No problem! France reorganized its forces, calling it "Operation Barkhane". The French army was placed at the disposal of its American overlord. Everything was organized by AfriCom, still stationed in Germany. French troops, now backed up by members of the European Union (Denmark, Spain, Estonia, the United Kingdom, Sweden and the Czech Republic), destroyed the targets indicated to them by AfriCom. In this formerly French region, the French military had good contact with the local population, whereas the Americans faced a language barrier.

At this stage, the first observation is that operation Barkhane, regardless of its results, was not legitimate. True, it was officially a question of the West containing the jihadists, but any Sahelian understands that it is these same Westerners who created the jihadists in the region by destroying Libya. And that’s not all.

The planning of the Sahel War, on May 11, 2022, in Morocco sparked the current wave of coups d’état in French-speaking Africa. Only Morocco is not directly endangered, since it is to host US troops.

Let’s take a step back. Let’s remember that all this began with the Pentagon’s determination to destroy African political structures with AfriCom, just as it had begun to destroy those of the "wider Middle East" with CentCom. On May 11, 2022, the US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, the Straussian Victoria Nuland, convened a meeting in Morocco of the 85 states participating in the coalition against Daesh. She announced the next step in the program: the jihadists are re-forming Daesh in the Sahel. They have weapons, officially destined for Ukraine. Soon, the whole region will be one huge inferno [4]. In November, Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari confirmed the massive influx of US weapons into the hands of jihadists in the Sahel and the Lake Chad basin, initially destined for Ukraine.

It was in the face of this existential risk that the soldiers of Mali, Burkina-Faso and Niger took power to defend their people.

It’s important to understand that for years, African leaders have been complaining about France’s support for the jihadists it is supposed to be fighting. The point is not to blame the French military, but the role of its secret services working for the United States.

Right from the start of Operation Serval, Syrian jihadists complained that France had abandoned them in favor of their Sahelian counterparts. And President François Hollande had to hold back his troops until the Qatari instructors of the Malian jihadis withdrew. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov discussed the matter with his French counterpart Laurent Fabius, who replied with a laugh: "It’s our realpolitik!

A sanctuary of al-Qaeda military camps was formed between the towns of Ghat (near the Algerian border) and Sabbah (close to Niger) in the Fezzan desert of southern Libya. According to the very serious Canard enchaîné, these jihadist academies were organized by the British and French secret services.

Choguel Kokalla Maïga’s interview with RIA-Novosti

Three years ago, on October 8, 2021, Mali’s Prime Minister, Choguel Kokalla Maïga, gave an interview to RIA Novosti [5] that has been widely picked up and commented on throughout the region, but not in France, where no one but our readers know about it.

According to Yaou Sangaré Bakar, Niger’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Cooperation and Nigeriens Abroad, who wrote to the Security Council (Ref. S/2023/636), last month French agents freed terrorists who had been prisoners. They were rounded up in a valley in the village of Fitili (28 km northwest of Yatakala), where a planning meeting was held with the aim of attacking military positions in the tri-border area. Sixteen terrorist leaders were apprehended in three operations, including two in Niger and one in Mali.

In passing, Yaou Sangaré Bakar’s letter raises important questions about the role of ECOWAS [6], questions which are not new and have been raised since the change of regime in Côte d’Ivoire. This international institution has just imposed sanctions against Niger and mobilized troops to restore constitutional order. But the ECOWAS statutes do not authorize it to impose such sanctions, any more than the UN Charter authorizes it to take military action against one of its members.

The cases of Guinea and Gabon are somewhat different. They are not Lake Chad or Sahel states. They are not yet under threat. Their militaries first rebelled against authoritarian regimes, that of Alpha Condé in Guinea and Ali Bongo in Gabon. Both refused to relinquish power against the wishes of their populations. But the putschists in both countries were quick to blame the French military presence. Simply because they can safely predict that the French army will not defend the interests of the Gabonese, or even the French, but only those of Washington.

War is prepared years in advance. Today, the United States is transferring weapons in the shadow of the conflict in Ukraine. Tomorrow, it will be too late.

Against this backdrop, it is surprising to hear French President Emmanuel Macron preaching the defense of constitutional order. On the one hand, because all these states are in immediate danger, and on the other, because by placing the French army at the service of the ambitions of US leaders, he himself has betrayed his own Constitution.

WHO Global Takeover Advances to Final Stages

  This is unbelievably nefarious and we have only months to react to this! (See the timeline at the end.)

By Dr. Joseph Mercola

September 16, 2023

In this September 1, 2023, Highwire interview,¹ Dr. Meryl Nass, a biowarfare and epidemics expert, exposes the threat posed by the World Health Organization’s pandemic treaty and the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs), which add to and further strengthen the WHO’s powers under the treaty. The WHO’s One Health agenda is also part of this power grab.

Nass also recently published an article, “The WHO’s Proposed Treaty Will Increase Manmade Pandemics,”^2,3 in which she reviews the history of biological warfare and the role of gain-of-function research, where we are right now, and what the globalists’ plan for our future is. It’s imperative everyone understand what the plan is, because we can only stop it by rejecting it en masse.

Nass Persecuted by Lawless State Medical Board

But first, Nass provides an update on her personal situation. In January 2022, the Maine medical board suspended Nass’ medical license for spreading “COVID misinformation” and prescribing ivermectin. They also ordered her to undergo a psychological evaluation by a board-selected psychologist.⁴ Nass refused.

As she points out in the interview, “misinformation” refers to information that may be mistaken or inaccurate, but being wrong is not a crime — no matter how badly government wants you to think it is.

We have the First Amendment — freedom of speech — for a reason. Government does not have the legal right to suppress our speech, and the medical board is a state government agency. So, by censoring doctors like Nass and punishing them for speaking their minds and sharing medical and scientific data, they are actually the ones breaking the law.

Nass didn’t, because there’s no law against sharing information, even if it is suspected of being incorrect, or can be proven to be wrong. And, in this case, the board is actually punishing her for sharing truths.

So, in mid-August 2023, Nass sued the Maine medical board, and every board member in their personal capacity, for violating her free speech rights.⁵

“Telling me that I can’t talk about the vaccine or I can’t talk about the treatment of COVID or masks or distancing, even when the things that I was saying were based on published medical literature, that is a First Amendment violation,” Nass said in a statement.

“The state government and the federal government are not allowed to restrict the speech of people. So we are looking for a jury trial to see whether the Board of Licensure in Medicine is guilty of a malicious, political prosecution and targeting of me.”

The Plan in Broad Strokes

So, what is the globalists plan for our future? Summarized into as few words as possible: global dominion by the few and total control of the masses.

As explained by Nass, the COVID pandemic showed us that the technocratic cabal has control over most if not all Western governments. World Economic Forum (WEF) founder Klaus Schwab has even bragged about how his Young Global Leaders have “penetrated” governments of the world.⁶

The technocratic cabal also has control over the bureaucratic structure of the WHO. Eighty-five percent of the WHO’s funding comes from private entities, most of which is earmarked for specific programs. “So, the WHO is already owned by private interests,” Nass says.

According to the WHO, the reason the COVID pandemic got so bad is because nations failed to cooperate. Hence, the reasoning goes, we need an international treaty that centralizes pandemic response powers to the WHO. The problem, of course, is that most nations did follow the WHO’s irrational and unscientific recommendations. Its ineptitude — whether intentional or not — is what destroyed economies and resulted in needless deaths.

Based on the current treaty draft and proposed IHR amendments, it’s clear that mRNA-based vaccinations will be mandatory under the WHO’s power structure, and these vaccines will be made in 100 days rather than 10 years by skipping human trials and shaving safety and efficacy testing down to the bare bones.

The WHO will also decide which medications can be used in medical emergencies, and which you cannot have. In other words, the WHO director-general will decide the health care for every person in every member state, and your local doctor will be required to follow his edicts. You’ll have no medical freedom or bodily autonomy anymore.

Nations will also be forced to implement massive nationwide biosurveillance programs to identify potential pathogens with pandemic potential. This will include swabbing and testing humans, domesticated animals, farm animals, wildlife, farms, factories, wastewater and more, and the chances of finding a pathogen with pandemic potential if searching for it in every nook and cranny of the world are 100%.

The WHO director-general will then have the sole authority to declare a pandemic, or even potential pandemic, at which point all decision-making powers fall under the WHO. However, there are no standards that must be met before a public health emergency can be declared.

The way these documents are written, the director-general can even act on what amounts to hearsay. He doesn’t have to have proof that a pandemic is imminent or in progress. He can act on suspicion. Even more disturbing, the treaty will be in force all the time, so the director-general doesn’t even need to declare an emergency. He will have the authority to dictate public health even when there’s no pandemic. That’s how far-reaching this treaty is.

Nations will also be required to surveil and censor social media. The WHO’s narrative will be the only one allowed. YouTube has already implemented this policy, even though the treaty is not even in place yet.

The History of Biological Warfare and How We Got Here

Nass also reviews the history of biological weapons and why we’re in a situation now where most of the pandemics that have occurred are basically the result of biological weapons development.

In 1969, President Nixon announced the U.S. would end its offensive biowarfare program. This was a strategic rather than altruistic move, because the U.S. was far ahead of other nations when it came to chemical and nuclear weapons. By banning biological weapons, which are relatively simple and inexpensive to create, the U.S. would gain a strategic advantage on the global stage.

Nixon initiated the first global treaty to prevent the creation and use of biological weapons in 1972. The Biological Weapons Convention took effect three years later, in 1975. However, in 1973, genetic engineering was discovered, which suddenly allowed the U.S. to gain a technological advantage that would allow us to make better and more precise biological weapons.

The problem with the Biological Weapons Convention is that there’s no enforcement. To be effective and verifiable, a nation needs to be able to challenge another nation and have the right to carry out inspections, and add sanctions in cases of noncompliance. But this enforcement method was not included, and the U.S. has blocked all efforts to add enforcement articles to the treaty since 1991. So, as explained by Nass:⁷

“Under the guise of preparing their defenses against biowarfare and pandemics, nations have conducted ‘dual-use’ (both offensive and defensive) research and development, which has led to the creation of more deadly and more transmissible microorganisms. And employing new verbiage to shield this effort from scrutiny, biological warfare research was named ‘gain-of-function’ research.”

SARS-CoV-2, for example, appears to be the direct result of gain-of-function research. As noted by Nass, it has “unusual homologies (identical short segments of nucleotides) to human tissues and the HIV virus, which may have caused or contributed to the late autoimmune stage of illness, an impaired immune response and ‘long COVID.’”

As such, SARS-CoV-2 is a biological weapon. David Martin, Ph.D., has also done many interviews, speeches and lectures exposing COVID-19 as a biological warfare crime.

Video Link

Are We Funding Public Health or Bioweapons Development?

As noted in Nass’ article, funding for natural epidemics, such as seasonal influenza, has been lumped together with biodefense funding, which hides the cost of our nation’s bioweapons development, because in reality, “biodefense” is “bioweapons development.”

And, while bioweapons development is dangerous and violates the international treaty, biodefense is useless and a complete waste of money, so it’s a lose-lose proposition for taxpayers.

In March 2023, former CDC director Dr. Robert Redfield testified before Congress stating that gain-of-function research had never, to his knowledge, resulted in a single beneficial drug, vaccine or therapeutic.⁸

In other words, while they conduct this research under the guise of “defense,” all gain-of-function research is biological weapons research and has no beneficial public health applications.

The pandemic treaty promotes the proliferation of biological weapons, and opens the door wide to biological weapons research and testing. It will take us in the opposite direction of where we need to go to prevent future pandemics.

The WHO treaty makes matters even worse by requiring member nations to look for pathogens with pandemic potential, and when they find them, to share them, and any research done on them, with everyone else.

So, the WHO treaty quite literally promotes the proliferation of biological weapons, and opens the door wide to biological weapons research and testing. This will also remove the ability to cast blame on any particular nation for starting a pandemic (read unleash a biological weapon), as everyone is working with the same pathogens.

The treaty also requires nations to eliminate administrative hurdles to gain-of-function research on pathogens with pandemic potential, when we really need far more stringent regulations on this type of work, if we’re going to engage in it at all.

So, the WHO treaty will move us in the complete opposite direction of where we actually need to go if we want to prevent future pandemics. To prevent them, we need to stop gain-of-function research, because that’s the greatest pandemic threat out there.

Pandemic Preparedness Is a Smokescreen

Similarly, the idea that the world can prepare ahead of time for a global pandemic is “a smokescreen behind which lies a fascist approach to social management,” Nass writes. She adds:⁹

“There’s no known way to prevent pandemics, and the methods that governments are spending money on are actually going to make this problem a great deal worse.

The concept of a ‘response’: withholding cheap, available generic drugs in favor of the warp speed development of patentable drugs and vaccines, which will undergo minimal testing and have no liability, is another disaster in the making.”

Our Health Agencies Are Selling Us Out

Importantly, the U.S. government — including our health agencies — have been central in developing and writing these documents, which strips us of our sovereignty as a nation, bodily autonomy as a people, along with freedom, human rights and democracy in general.

Indeed, the IHR amendments specifically remove the need to respect “human rights, dignity and freedom of persons” during public health emergencies. This deletion did not go unnoticed, however, and after severe criticism, language “guaranteeing” human rights was inserted into the latest draft (the Bureau draft) of the pandemic treaty.

The bottom line is, our health agencies are not protecting us. They’re controlled by private, globalist interests, and they’re selling us out.

We also see this in the way the U.S. health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration refused to course correct once it became clear that the COVID shots were not preventing infection or transmission, and were causing historically high rates of injuries.

Instead, they doubled down and imposed mandates, and started fiddling with database algorithms to hide the extent of injuries and deaths. Likewise, the WHO is working on an international vaccine passport, even though the entire premise for it has been eliminated. If the shots don’t prevent infection or transmission, then what good does proof of “vaccination” do?

Same with the masks. No matter how much scientific evidence was thrown at them, health authorities refused to admit that masks don’t work and pushed for wearing two or three masks instead. And what can we say about the worldwide recommendation to treat only advanced-stage infection? It’s medicine 101 to treat a condition as early as possible, especially when it comes to infections.

As noted by Nass, “There can be no question about it: Our health agencies are guilty of malfeasance, misrepresentation and deliberate infliction of harm on their own populations.”

All the basic rules of medicine were tossed out during COVID, and under the pandemic treaty, common sense and basic medical facts will be ousted forever. Nass goes through much more in her article, so I urge you to read it¹⁰ in its entirety.

The Timeline

The IHR amendments will only require a 50% vote of whoever is in the room at the time of the vote, which will take place at the World Health Assembly’s annual meeting, May 22 through 24, 2024.¹¹ The amendments will take effect 10 months later for any nation that does not opt out.

Nations that have not officially opted out will then be bound by the new terms laid out in the amendments. The pandemic treaty will also be voted on during that meeting. It will require two-thirds vote in favor by the members that are in the room and will go into effect as soon as 30 nations have ratified it.

Thirty days after that, the treaty will go into effect for all the nations that have signed on. Any nation that has not signed the treaty will be excluded from its terms. Those who sign the treaty must wait three years before they can get out.

American mRNA fanatics and health bureaucrats just made their worst decision yet

   It will never stop because it can't. Accepting defeat would be a catastrophe. 

  So sooner or later, expect the next stage. Some people are probably already working hard preparing the next crisis. What could it be? A deadlier virus? Unlikely, we still have too little control and understanding for this. A war? Far more likely. A manageable enemy such as Iran would have been ideal. But all potential target countries have learned to avoid provocations. How do you create a crisis big enough to mobilize the population while not completely blowing up the system?

Guest Post by Alex Berenson

The Centers for Disease Control is about to push a new round of Covid boosters on healthy teenagers and adults, even as the rest of the world admits defeat and gives up on the jabs.

How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?

In April 1971, John Kerry famously asked the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that question.

Kerry was talking about the Vietnam War, but he might as well have meant the mRNA Covid jabs. Once again, the American elite refuses to accept a reality obvious to almost everyone else and drags out failed policies to save its pride.

On Tuesday afternoon, an advisory committee to the Centers for Disease Control recommended all Americans receive mRNA Covid boosters this fall. The CDC is already pressing full speed ahead with that terrible advice.

This morning, CDC director Dr. Mandy Cohen wrote in the New York Times that she, her husband, and her preteen daughters “will all be rolling up our sleeves to get our updated Covid-19 vaccines along with our flu shots soon. I hope you and the people you care about will do the same.”

Yet the CDCs own statistics show the mRNAs have now failed and boosters will quickly make no difference.

They become ineffective against Omicron variants of Covid within months, possibly weeks. “Updating” them – that is, changing the mRNA they contain, in an effort to keep current with the current variant – does not help.

Why? Imprinting from the original jabs makes our immune systems produce antibodies tailored to fight the now-extinct original coronavirus variant, no matter the specifics of the mRNA in the booster.

In its slide presentation to the CDC yesterday, Moderna simply ignored this fact by refusing to disclose how much better its new booster works against the original Sars-Cov-2 than the new variants. Pfizer didn’t even bother to offer data on how well the new shots work in humans. Instead, it presented data from 20 mice.

—

The evidence that the jabs now protect against hospitalization or serious illness is also much weaker than mRNA advocates claim.

The CDC reported yesterday the jabs have roughly 0 to 25 percent effectiveness against hospitalization within three to four months. (For several reasons I won’t repeat here, those estimates are likely biased upwards, in favor of the jabs.)

—

(See those dots at the bottom, the ones left of the vertical line? That’s the CDC reporting that vaccinated people are MORE likely to be hospitalized than unvaccinated ones with Omicron this year. Yes, you read that right. MORE likely.)

SOURCE

—

Health authorities originally promised the Covid vaccines needed at least 50 percent effectiveness for approval.

But the CDC’s own data show booster effectiveness against Omicron is nowhere near that level. Further, the mRNAs have much more severe side effects than flu shots, the only vaccines that are comparable in terms of their (lack of) effectiveness.

This combination makes the mRNAs a very bad bet – particularly for children, who are at miniscule risk of hospitalization or death from Covid.

The CDC itself estimated yesterday that 1 million mRNA boosters in adolescents would prevent at most one death from Covid (and probably zero), as well as roughly 10 Covid intensive care admissions.

—

(They said it, not me. The real numbers are probably significantly lower, as in zero, but this makes the point.)

(SOURCE (page 65))

—

At the same time, giving teenagers a million additional mRNA doses will cause anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000 cases of severe short-term side effects, such as fevers and nausea.

They will also cause anywhere from 50 to 300 cases of myocarditis severe enough to cause hospitalization (depending on which estimates and what mix of Pfizer and Moderna shots are used).

That math has led most of the world, including Japan, Germany, Britain, and Australia, to stop recommending Covid boosters for children and teenagers. In fact, the latter three countries no longer recommend Covid shots for the vast majority of people under 65.

But the United States will not back down.

Admitting that most people won’t benefit from shots this fall would raise questions the CDC and White House cannot tolerate. So they are pushing on, no matter that their own (biased) data suggests they’re making a huge mistake.

The only good news is that the rejection of last fall’s booster campaign suggests what is happening now is mostly theater and the vast majority of Americans will ignore these recommendations.

But some will not.

They will trust the CDC – for themselves, or their parents, or their children.

And some of those – we will never know how many, but some, like this 27-year-old man – will pay the ultimate price.

The Government Slaughter in Lahaina: Maui Revisited!

  Even if you don't buy into the conspiracy theory of this article, it is clear that the fire of Lahaina in Hawaii was strange to say the least.

  The precise targeting, the unbelievably high temperatures high enough to melt metal, the fact that blue "things" (almost anything blue) didn't burn. Strange is not a strong enough word to describe the scene. 

 As for the role of the government, criminal is unfortunately quite accurate. 

The Government Slaughter in Lahaina: Maui Revisited!

September 13, 2023

“Whoever lays his hand on me to govern me is a usurper and tyrant, and I declare him my enemy.”

~ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

We are in the midst of a heinous crime in what is falsely referred to as the ‘American’ State of Hawaii, so vile and evil, that it should sicken all who have any remote possibility of exhibiting mental acquaintance with truth, compassion, or empathy. The State’s attack on the people of Maui was in my studied opinion, premeditated, brutal, murderous beyond explanation, and targeted to achieve a preconceived agenda which was the total destruction of Lahaina by extreme property devastation and mass death of much of the local population. This was necessary in the mind of the State in order to steal the land and rebuild based on the World Economic Forum and U.N. plan for captured cities, as evidenced by the evil piece of garbage governor, Josh Green, who immediately claimed he wanted to acquire by theft the purposely destroyed land and property for the State, while smoldering embers still burned, and bodies had not been found.

Today, I went to the ten top mainstream news sites searching all news stories, and did not find a single story about the Lahaina fires, except one showing the slimy Biden sleeping while at a meeting with Maui victims; this after offering these victims $700 per family after they had lost everything, including many of their family members. In other words, this story has been purposely scrubbed from view, not different than what happened after the intentional chemical fire devastated East Palestine, Ohio, and left that town and many others with deadly pollutants. A tall black fence was actually built around the town of Lahaina, at taxpayer cost of course, and a no fly zone order was given to hide the gruesome murder scene from any view and scrutiny.

What is insanely troubling about the reporting concerning this horrific crime in Maui by all mainstream outlets, and even many alternative sites, is that most continue to call this a ‘wild fire,’ while the evidence of such nonsense does not exist. The anomalies and reactions to this so-called ‘natural’ event, are staggering beyond recognition, and reek of the stench of total corruption at the highest levels. This was a land grab of epoch proportion, but it was much worse than that, as high death counts were pursued by the State thugs, as they locked the residents of Lahaina inside the rings of deadly fire likely caused by directed energy and microwave attacks; creating fires that were strategically targeted, with heat that was in some cases double that of any wild fire. This was clearly evident given the melting of aluminum and steel, and also the melting of automobile windshields which requires heat at or above 2,500 degrees. Cars were melted where no evidence of a fire was even present, and the scene looked eerily similar, almost exact, as to what happened in New York on September 11, 2001. This is not coincidental, it is apparent, and telling of a pre-planned slaughter and mass destruction.

The fires in Maui that were said to have been caused ‘naturally,’ a brazen lie, were almost identical to the fires in Paradise, California as well; fires that were targeted, burning homes to white ash without burning trees or plastic, and in areas desired by the State criminals for rebuilding so-called “smart cities.” In Lahaina, homes of the very rich were magically spared, as were certain state buildings, grand hotels, and other areas of State favor. But the homes and families of the local residents were attacked head on, with absolutely no regard for the lives or property of these innocent people. The ‘crime’ supposedly committed, as seen by the State, was not bowing down, and giving up their homes and lives voluntarily, so a direct false flag action of slaughter and murder was created to complete the State’s agenda of land theft. To hell with the people and their property was the private battle cry of these State politicians and their murderous enforcers called police.

No sirens were turned on even though there were 80 active sirens on Maui. All water was turned off so fires could not be fought. Wi-fi was turned off, as was most all electric power. Roads out were closed, and police roadblocks were manned to forcibly keep all the residents inside the fire perimeter, causing purposeful mass death. Schools were shut down, so that children were home alone when these intentional fires raged through Lahaina, and many burned to death without help from any State service. The real numbers of deaths are still being hidden as far as I can tell. In addition. before and after the fire, speculators were attempting to buy these properties, and while bodies were still unfound, the government announced its intentions to buy up this land. None of these are coincidences, but the State and its complicit media would have you believe that all of these, and many, many, more impossibilities are all coincidental. How could anyone with two brain cells to rub together, buy into the propagandized narratives being presented by the evil State?

I fully realize, especially considering the nearly complete lack of any ability to think critically by the masses, that what I am presenting here will be ignored by a very large swath of the population. The long-term dumbing down of individuals, and the now digitally-manipulated population, has embraced indifference to such an extent, as to have escaped all reality. In fact, common sense, logic, and reason appear to be nearly non-existent generally speaking. It is much easier for the collective herd to believe the State narratives than to do the work necessary to ferret out fact and truth. Unfortunately, the ruling class understands this weak and apathetic trait that seems to have captured the very large percentage of dead men walking among us. How much more obvious corruption, lies, and murder at the hands of the State will have to take place before any majority comes to terms with the reality that this world is ending in favor of mass slavery and depopulation? Will the flock ever fight back?

The forced annexation of Hawaii, the staged Pearl Harbor attack, the world wars, Operation Northwoods, MK Ultra, the Cuban missile crisis, the JFK assassination, Operation Gladio, U.S. aggressive invasion after invasion, Desert Storm, 9/11, the Patriot Act, the War of Terror, the fake ‘covid pandemic,’ bogus ‘climate change, intentional chemical spills, and weather geo-engineering; these just a few of the major false flag events, and government terror operations that have taken place. Now there are deliberately set fires in Canada, all over the U.S., Hawaii, Australia, Turkey, Greece, China, and many other areas, and the sheep continue to hide their proverbial heads in the sand.

Everything happening is planned, and being done intentionally in order to achieve a particular agenda. This has been outlined, discussed openly, warned about, written about in policy journals at the WEF, WHO, U.N., and most everywhere else I might add. The big picture has been discussed for decades, and the agenda being sought is a one-world governing order, where the ‘elite’ rule all, and the rest of us are slaves of the State. This agenda is as clear as day, so why cannot the lowly collective herd see that the way to achieve this evil goal is for the State to destroy the current system in favor of a system that will allow the control of everyone? Each planned event, whether fire, weather, war, geo-engineering, bio-weapon production and use, fake ‘viruses,’ and every so-called emergency, are staged only to create fear and panic through economic devastation, property theft, (land grabs) monetary and transaction digitization, mass surveillance, and total censorship.

Will the blind ever see, will the deaf ever hear, will the dumb ever speak, or will the bulk of this dependent and lazy population, simply sit back locked inside their cell phones and ‘social media’ absurdity, waiting for the end of times?

No one should forget or ignore what happened, and is happening in Maui. Your neighborhood could be next, and what chance will you have given the advanced weapon systems being used against us by the military industrial complex, and its controllers? The government controls nothing, as all politicians and their enforcers are fully controlled themselves, and act on orders from the real ruling class. Denounce them, abandon them and eliminate them, so that the real rulers will have no cover!

“I have certain rules I live by. My first rule: I don’t believe anything the government tells me. Nothing. Zero.”

~ George Carlin

Best explanation by 48 year arborist concerning Lahaina, Maui fires

Maui Fire video and comments

Lahaina land grab

Lahaina, Maui and California fire anomalies

Arson, DEW, HAARP, fake ‘climate change’ and fires

The U.S. is the false flag empire

Hawaii governor declares ’emergency’ three weeks before Maui fire

CIA Tried to Pay Off Analysts to Bury Findings that COVID Lab Leak Was Likely

  Now the interesting question is WHY? The CIA is officially an information agency, well, most often a desinformation agency and therefore there has to be a motive for whatever they do when information is weaponized. Could it be that the origin of Covid-19 is actually quite murky and following the Wuhan trail may lead to a more complex and less than "legal" origin involving the US?  

CIA Tried to Pay Off Analysts to Bury Findings that COVID Lab Leak Was Likely

September 13th, 2023

Just another day at the office…

Via: New York Post:

The Central Intelligence Agency offered to pay off analysts in order to bury their findings that COVID-19 most likely leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China, new whistleblower testimony to Congress alleges.

A senior-level CIA officer told House committee leaders that his agency tried to pay off six analysts who found SARS-CoV-2 likely originated in a Wuhan lab if they changed their position and said the virus jumped from animals to humans, according to a letter sent Tuesday to CIA Director William Burns.

Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) requested all documents, communications and pay info from the CIA’s COVID Discovery Team by Sept. 26.

“According to the whistleblower, at the end of its review, six of the seven members of the Team believed the intelligence and science were sufficient to make a low confidence assessment that COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China,” the House panel chairmen wrote.

“The seventh member of the Team, who also happened to be the most senior, was the lone officer to believe COVID-19 originated through zoonosis.”

“The whistleblower further contends that to come to the eventual public determination of uncertainty, the other six members were given a significant monetary incentive to change their position,” they said, noting that the analysts were “experienced officers with significant scientific expertise.”

Trump Just Said THIS About Vaccines And It Changes EVERYTHING

  Mask mandates and vaccinations won't work twice! This is obvious by now. So the next question is: What comes next in the "shock doctrine" logic? We'll see soon!

 

Germany Passes Controversial 'Green' Heating Law Estimated To Cost Economy €1 Trillion

  This is simply madness. It may be that the rest of the world is lucky that Germany is rushing ahead in a nonsensical race to save the planet as we will all see very soon what happens. i.e. they will kill the German economy much faster than they save the planet!

Authored by Junge Freiheit via Remix News,

After six months of fierce debate, Germany’s left-wing government has passed the country’s controversial green heating law, the Building Energy Act (GEG), with high estimates indicating the law will cost Germany’s economy over €1 trillion over the next 20 years.

While politicians belonging to Germany’s three-way politician applauded the heating law coming into force on Friday last week, the political fallout has likely yet to be fully realized.

Many Germans — already struggling with inflation and a slowing economy — balked at the mandate to install new expensive heating systems, with the law being rejected by the majority of the populace, according to polling. The government is also being accused of a hasty legislative process and a lack of parliamentary hearings, calling into question the democratic basis for the law in its entirety.

The law mandates that Germans with older heating systems replace them within a certain time period, although the final bill passed watered down some requirements and carved out some exceptions. Nevertheless, the final cost of the bill is still expected to be enormous, with high estimates placing it at €1 trillion and lower estimates hovering at €600 billion.

Many Germans have all of their savings in their home, and for many seniors, their homes, often featuring older heating systems, have seen their value take a hit due to the law. At the same time, in the coming years, they will be forced to make costly heating upgrades — usually in the form of a heat pump and the associated costs of making it work efficiently inside a building — to meet new green standards. Experts are also warning that landlords will have an incentive to increase rents in response to the Building Energy Act.

The problem is that approximately three-quarters of the old buildings in Germany were built before the first thermal insulation regulations came into force in 1979. Many of these buildings will now need to be made energy efficient, representing an enormous cost burden at a time when Germany has also phased out nuclear power and the price of energy, particularly oil and natural gas, has soared.

The Free Democrats (FDP), usually seen as a pro-business party, first fought their coalition partners on the proposed law, but in the end, the liberal party helped pass the law on Friday. There are already signs the FDP is paying the price for its decision, with the latest YouGov poll putting the party at just 5 percent, which is the threshold for entering the German parliament.

“There is fear among the population,” shouted Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) in parliament.

He said it is “the height of disrespect” for the citizens to pass the law and that the CSU would work to abolish it.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD), which saw its polling numbers soar around the same time the heating debate raged, has also said it will abolish the law should it come to power, saying it is an arduous tax on German businesses, pensioners, and those who invested in a home or apartment.

“The AfD faction strictly rejects Habeck’s (…) heating hammer. Despite severe criticism, the law was neither postponed nor defused,” said Marc Bernhard, a parliamentary spokesperson for the AfD.

 “The tricky thing about the law, however, is that the heating has to be torn out again if it does not meet the municipalities’ heat planning required by 2028. In this way, the government is hiding the devastating consequences for millions of people and is transferring the risk of the heat transition to the citizens.”

He further pointed out that the nuclear power plants would save twice as much CO2 if they were allowed to continue to operate.

As Remix News reported last year, the proportion of poor people in Germany reached a new high, according to the Federal Statistical Office, with the data highlighting a sea change in the German economy. The report also only covered data up until the end of 2021 before the dramatic increase in food and energy prices in 2022.

9/11 & The Strangest Fires Ever Told

  This post is focused on the fires of 9/11 and how implausible the explanation that they led to the collapse of the towers is. I have personally thought so from the very beginning although at first I could not admit the possibility of a planned demolition. But then again, if not that, then what? 

  Having visited the towers in 1977 just after they were built, I still remember how strong the core was and the fact that it was specifically designed to resist winds which exerted forces an order of magnitude larger than a plane.  

  This was then the question on everyone's lips and the answer then was clear: The towers were built for the next 100 years and with some refurbishment they could easily last much longer...

News anchor Dan Rather's reaction to the THIRD total building collapse on 9/11

By L. Reichard White

September 12, 2023

“For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before when a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down …” –well-known CBS news anchor Dan Rather

The extraordinary claim that fire was the ultimate cause of the complete progressive collapse of three skyscrapers on September 11, 2001 is the flimsy foundation upon which the Police State is being constructed. How realistic is that claim?

Ever since a B-25 hit the Empire State Building on the morning of July 28, 1945, high-rises have been designed to withstand the impact of airliners similar to the ones that hit the Twin Towers on 9/11.

Even unprepared, the Empire State Building, hit on Sat. morning, was back in service in two days.

In the case of the Twin Towers, based on a study definitively described in City in the Sky as “the most complete and detailed of any ever made for any building structure,” this plane-strike resistant design is verified by Towers head structural engineer John Skilling like this – – –

Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building, Skilling’s people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. …According to Skilling, “There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed,” he said. “The building structure would still be there.” –Seattle Times, Feb. 27, 1993

This is further verified by Chief NIST 9/11 Investigator Dr. Shyam Sunder in The New York Times like this:

“The newly disclosed documents, from the 1960’s, show that the Port Authority considered aircraft moving at 600 m.p.h., slightly faster and therefore more destructive than the ones that did hit the towers.”

In the video clip below, Twin Towers project manager Frank D. Martini summed it up this way: “It would be like sticking a pencil through mosquito netting.” Martini claimed the towers could withstand several airliner impacts without serious danger of failure.

Towers would survive plane impacts

Towers Project Manager Frank D. Martini

As predicted — and thus verifying the above design assumptions — each tower returned to a stable configuration within approximately four minutes after the planes struck. The South Tower remained standing for 56 minutes after the plane hit and the North Tower for 102 minutes.

Since neither tower collapsed till well after the plane impacts, it’s clear that the collapses must have been the result of something other than structural damage.

In fact, our skyscrapers are incredibly durable. For example, there was the Feb. 26, 1993 1,336-pound bomb attack on the North Tower. It blew a 98 foot hole through four basement pylons — and killed 6 and injured 1,042. But the Tower didn’t collapse and was back in service in short order.

However, the fact that structural damage was not the cause of collapse on 9/11 is most clear in the case of the least well-known — some say “hidden in plain sight” — of the three, Building 7 (WTC7). NIST, charged by Congress with the official investigation, summarizes the role of structural damage in Building 7’s collapse like this:

“Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7. The building withstood debris impact damage that resulted in seven exterior columns being severed …This was near the west side of the south face of the building and was far removed from the buckled column that initiated the collapse. …” –NIST NCSTAR 1A, WTC Investigation… xxxvii… xxxvii

So if these three collapses weren’t the result of structural damage, what was the cause?

At first glance, it seems reasonable to suppose that fire must have been that cause, especially since it was present in all three cases — and NIST’s Dr. Sunder specifically claims fire for Building 7 this way:

“We really have a new kind of progressive collapse that we have discovered here, which is a fire-induced progressive collapse. In fact, we have shown FOR THE FIRST TIME that fire can induce a progressive collapse.” –WTC Building 7 Chief Investigator Dr. Shyam Sunder

However, things aren’t that simple.

Dr. Sunder’s claim of a “first time” is the first clue. It points out that such a fire-induced progressive collapse had never happened before in the entire 117 year history of high-rises at that time. That makes Dr. Sunder’s fire-induced claim unprecedented (without a precedent) and thus by definition, extraordinary.

And there’s another clue: On Feb. 14, 1975, the North Tower had a serious fire burn out of control for about three hours and spread to an estimated 65% of floor eleven without doing any structural damage (two to three times as long as the fires burned in the Towers on 9/11) — and the building was open for business the next day.

And this from head structural engineer John Skilling, remember. “There would be a horrendous fire. …” he said. “The building structure would still be there.”

In fact, this extreme level of fire resistance in all steel-framed high-rises has been designed-in for over a century and was common and accepted knowledge. Dr. Sunder’s extraordinary “for the first time” claim for starters. And – – –

“New York City, 2001. No tall building had ever collapsed primarily due to fire …” –NIST commentator (intro to NIST Building 7 video linked above)

“…prior to that day [Sept. 11, 2001] high-rise structures had never collapsed…” –FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro’s statement on WTC7

Chief Nigro’s statement “high-rise structures had never collapsed” is the more comprehensive statement. And correct. And, as of this writing, except for one in Mexico City as the result of an 8.2 magnitude earthquake, none have completely collapsed, let alone in seconds, from any cause or combination of causes since 9/11.

This extreme general durability of skyscrapers was well-known throughout the entire architectural and structural engineering community and was the basis of this initial reaction:

On September 13, 2001, the cover of the New Civil Engineer in the UK consisted of a picture of 1 WTC during its collapse with a single word written across it: “unthinkable”. “Just hours earlier, it had been genuinely inconceivable that structures of such magnitude could succumb to this fate.” While the initial damage from the airplanes was severe, it was localized to a few floors of each tower. The challenge for engineers was to explain how local damage could result in the complete progressive collapse of three of the biggest buildings in the world. –Collapse of the World Trade Center: “Unprecedented!”

Note for later use: “The challenge for engineers was to explain how local damage could result in complete progressive collapse… .”

But that’s only the tip of the iceberg, and the tip of the strangest fires ever told – – –

The question is, “If it wasn’t fire and/or structural damage, what was it?”

Dan Rather sees WTC Building 7 collapse on 9/11

CBS NEWS, New York City, Sept. 11, 2001

There’s only one thing that causes any steel-framed high-rise to collapse the way those three buildings did on 9/11 — in fact to collapse at all — and Dan Rather nailed it:

“For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before when a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down …“

In other words, the answer to “If it wasn’t fire and/or structural damage, what was it?” is “planned and engineered demolitions.”

See HERE for examples of what other engineered demolitions look like. You’ll notice that few if any are as well-done as Building 7.

Since nothing else has caused such a collapse, the way they fell, that is, the “collapse signature” itself — in fact, that they fell at all — is prima-facie evidence of demolitions of some sort.

So, with controlled demolition in mind, it isn’t the three building collapses that were extraordinary, it’s the claim they were caused by fire and/or structural damage that’s extraordinary.

And since none of the three buildings was damaged in the same place — and so each suffered different damage — NIST needs three different extraordinary explanations, one for each building.

And as Carl Sagan famously quipped, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

Further, “prima-facie” means accepted until proven wrong, so for anyone who wants to claim something other than engineered demolitions, they must first prove that it couldn’t have been engineered demolitions. Merely providing three alternative hypotheses doesn’t do the job.

So has anyone disproved demolition? We’ll see shortly.

None the less, despite 130 years of no-collapse design and history, as proponents of the official government conspiracy theory like to point out, things do sometimes unexpectedly happen for the first time. But in this case, despite the proven design principles, that would be three fire-mediated collapses on the same day and never before and never again.

You can find examples of other high-rise fires HERE, HERE and HERE for comparison. None of them — nor any other fires — have ever caused a 9/11-like progressive collapse.

So, if you’re going to claim “fire did it — three times,” after you disprove demolition, the evidence you provide for fire had better be hellaciously extraordinary.

Here’s some perspective on the organization assigned to come up with that hellaciously extraordinary evidence – – –

Until 1988, when renamed the “National Institute of Standards and Technology” (acronym: NIST), the organization had been the National Bureau of Standards, ultimately responsible for things like the accuracy of your fillup at the local gasoline pump. It wasn’t until the NCST Act was passed in October of 2002 that NIST took on the massive — and what turns out to be politically sensitive — 9/11 investigation.

Most likely the NIST investigators didn’t have a clue what they were getting into until later. But whenever it did occur to them – – – let me put it like this: Since demolitions would have to have been set up well ahead of 9/11 – – – “How would you like to be the first bureaucrat on your block to suggest — let alone prove — demolition brought even one building down on 9/11 — let alone three?”

Which may well explain a lot of what follows. Especially NIST’s failure to seriously investigate controlled demolition despite the unique and unmistakable collapse signatures of all three buildings. The collapse signatures even Dan Rather nailed.

So what did NIST do about investigating the prima-facie most likely cause of the collapses?

They try to avoid telling you, but if you look carefully – – –

In the case of the towers, NIST forth-rightly asks itself in point 8 of its Towers Investigation FAQ, “Why didn’t NIST consider a ‘controlled demolition’ hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation like it did for the ‘pancake theory’ hypothesis?”

The important point is in the question itself: despite the three prima-facie collapse signatures, for some reason, NIST didn’t “consider a ‘controlled demolition’ hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation.”

Did NIST even test for explosives or residue as required by NFPA 921 guidelines? Here’s the answer, straight from the horse’s mouth:

“22. …Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel. ” FAQs – NIST WTC Towers Investigation | NIST

When pressed for a definitive answer as to why they didn’t, you discover that NIST unrealistically assumed — either honestly or otherwise — a commercial style controlled demolition (which none of the three could possibly have been) — which used the loudest (RDX) explosives available. Then, ignoring the unmistakable collapse signatures, NIST claimed it didn’t hear the proper level of noise for these assumed commercial demolitions and so failed to investigate further.

OK, so one way or another, despite NFPA guidelines, NIST critically screwed up by failing to seriously investigate demolition, possibly because they had their fingers stuck in their ears and were humming loudly.

Given the implications of what would have been of necessity pre-planted explosives, can you blame them?

And there’s plenty of evidence that demolitions did occur. There’s peer-reviewed proof that a quieter non-standard technique using someting called thermite — or thermate — was used. If you’re interested, a good place to look is in the 100 plus peer-reviewed papers published here and with the ~2,300 members of Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth.

And, while it would be difficult to “wire” the buildings for demolition, not as difficult as you might think – – –

Donald Hartley: “Roll them [explosives] in a locked gang box at the loading dock every day and bring them up the service elevator leaving them on every floor in locked gang tool boxes, no one question the Construction worker…I worked High rise construction tenant work many years of my life and it could be done easily. Hell 4 men could ride the top of an elevator hard wiring evey floor. Just put a sign up Elevator under repair use other car, we did it for electricians all the time, peice of cake.” –Does ANYONE deny that given the time, engineering, and equipment, ANY building can be brought down by controlled demolition?

So NIST failed to disprove demolition, and they failed three times. The prima facie evidence provided by the collapses themselves — and their unique signatures — stand. That makes any alternative hypotheses or theories, conspiracy or otherwise, moot.

But just for the fun of it, what about NIST’s own competing fire-mediated version of what happened? Clearly whatever they come up with — to satisfy Sagan — had better be hellaciously excellent, especially since they failed to rule-out demolition in all three cases.

First, to an unprecedented degree in its 9/11 work, NIST counted on computer modeling.

NIST’s former Fire-Sciences head, Dr. James Quintiere, explained the underlying problem with that intensive use of modeling like this:

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. –statement to the U.S. House Science Committee hearings on WTC collapse

Within certain limits, such models are, by design and function, easy to manipulate. As one of my compadres put it, slightly tougue-in-cheek, “Even with “AutoCAD,” “SOLIDWORKS,” etc., you could model a building to blow over flat in a 30 mph wind.”

That’s why some nerds call computer simulations “technical fiction.”

Such flexibility is a good thing for NIST, though, since its explanations must satisfy this, remember: “The challenge for engineers was to explain how local damage could result in complete progressive collapse… ”

To satisfy that challenge, NIST needed to accomplish at least two main things with their modeling:

1. Prove that a fire-mediated total progressive collapse of a model of the building was even possible. Given the inherent flexibility of modeling tools, that’s the easier part.
2. Prove that modeled collapse looked like the collapse that actually happened.

With the inherent flexibility of modeling in mind, how hard could that be?

For the towers, NIST came up with their final reports quickly and on time. They were reluctant, though, to make their Towers simulations available to the public — and wouldn’t do so until pressured by the architectual and engineering community.

“WTC investigators resist call for collapse visualisation,”

“World Trade Center disaster investigators [at NIST] are refusing to show computer visualizations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers, NCE has learned. Visualizations of collapse mechanisms are routinely used to validate the type of finite element analysis model used by the [NIST] investigators.” –Parker, Dave, New Civil Engineer, October 6, 2005

Hmmmm – – –

And remember, they need two such visualisations since none of the three buildings was damaged in the same place — and so each suffered different damage – – –

Moving right along, NIST’s approach and mind-set are most transparent and revealing in its attempt to explain Building 7’s collapse. Which wasn’t so easy. You can tell because the final report took an extra three-plus years.

Here’s Dr. Quintiere’s take in the middle of that delay:

6. The critical collapse of WTC 7 is relegated to a secondary role, as its findings will not be complete for yet another year. It was clear at the last NIST Advisory Panel meeting in September [2005] that this date may not be realistic, as NIST has not demonstrated progress here. Why has NIST dragged on this important investigation?” –Former Chief of NIST’s Fire Science Division

Can you think of any reason NIST might have “dragged on this important investigation” for more than three years?

The final report on Building 7 wasn’t released until 2008.

What was in that report?

Based on one of its technical fictions, NIST’s final report on Building 7 claims that “the most probable initiation sequence” started when Column #79, in the northeast corner of the building, buckled as a result of thermal expansion, and this caused the entire building to collapse in a matter of seconds.

You might want to review that collapse above. It’s the clip Dan Rather commented on.

Here’s a quick overview of the problems with NIST’s scenario:

NIST asserts “most probable initiation sequence” ass-u-me-ing never before seen fire as the cause — remember Dr. Sunder’s “first time” claim earlier — and completely ignores that, based on the collapse signature alone, the most probable initiation sequence is clearly demolition of some sort.

To compound the problem, during a NIST Tech Briefing, Dr. Sunder further explained the thermal expansion — and its unprecedented result — this way: “And, of course, the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures.”

From the presentation you also discover the “lower temperatures” he’s talking about are in the 400°C range.

Sounds pretty hot, right? But because of early experience with the damage it can cause, for over a century, steel-framed skyscrapers have been designed and insulated to resist thermal expansion, even thermal expansion that occurs at higher temperatures. And remember, history shows that such damage has never resulted in even one 9/11-type collapse.

Next we have the claim that one column in the northeast corner “buckled” and somehow, within seconds, the whole building collapses, including the columns in the far-removed southwest corner. Because of local structural integrity, this problem is what prompted the engineers big challenge, remember: “to explain how local damage could result in complete progressive collapse.”

That is, how could “local damage” in the northeast corner almost instantly cause the structural steel in the whole building — including the far-removed southwest corner — to all collapse all at once?

HINT: It couldn’t — and in fact, the complete progressive collapse couldn’t have happened unless simultaneous damage was also induced, not only in the southwest corner but in key structural elements throughout the building. Can you think of anything that might have caused that to happen?

And finally, with regards to the Building 7 collapse above, to provide credible evidence at all — forget extraordinary evidence — NIST needed to – – –

2. Prove that their collapse model looked like the collapse that actually happened.

That is, it’s not only the “most probable initiation sequence” their technical fiction needs to show, that’s the easy part. It’s, as the engineers put it right after 911 remember, “How do you explain the complete progressive collapse?” The whole thing, not just the “initiation sequence.”

Are they going to do that? Are they going to show the whole thing? Here’s a clue – – –

“Once the collapse had begun, the propagation of the collapse was readily explained without the same complexity of modeling.” FAQs – NIST WTC Towers Investigation

So the answer is, “No, they are not!” And as you’ll see, they don’t.

So NIST does a good job of ignoring most of the collapse in its collapse animation. Even in that technical fiction, apparently having been unable to model the collapse itself, they don’t show anything beyond their asserted initiation sequence. The problem is that what they do show doesn’t look anything like the actual collapse initiation anyway. But you can judge that for yourself in the video below.

The collapse vs. NIST’s technical fiction

AE911Truth

So, as you can see, despite the extreme flexibility of it’s modeling tools, not only was NIST unable to model the actual collapse with it’s simulations it couldn’t even show a realistic initiation sequence, not even after four extra years of trying.

AND, in the same vein, NISTs simulations were also unable to model the actual collapse of either of the Twin World Trade Center towers, thus ignoring two other elephants in the room.

On the other hand, a more detailed analysis using up-to-date modeling software, strongly suggests there’s no way fire could have caused Building 7 to collapse the way the videos show it did.

But the final affront is that, fighting off a persistent string of FOIA requests using the national security blanket thrown to it on Monday, Aug. 4, 2008 by Obama’s Executive Order 13470, NIST refused to release 74,777 (about 80%) of the key simulation files it used to come up with its shall-we-say-to-be-kind, dubious Column 79 hypothesis.

This makes replication, the back-bone of science, not to mention checking its work for logic, rigor, errors and fibs etc. impossible.

NIST’s excuse for not releasing the key files? Their release “might endanger public safety.” They may have that right if bureaucrats and certain politicians in the stocks or hanging from trees and lamp-posts, etc. is dangerous to public safety.

Or do they wish to assert their work proves U.S. skyscrapers are so delicate that, as another compadre quipped, “They’re afraid terrorists will realize they can bring down our high-rises by setting a wastebasket on fire in the parking garage?”

You can find much more thoroughly detailed and documented critiques of NIST’s less-than-forth-coming shennanigans with its approach, data, and technique, here, here, and here for starters.

You can find an extensive list of what else was ignored and hidden — and how it was done — HERE.

It’s clear that none of the NIST personnel wanted to be “the first bureaucrat on their block to suggest — let alone prove — demolition brought down even one building on 9/11.”

Given their career path and the political implications, can you blame them for trying to hide it? Well can you?

And did NIST provide the hellacious proof that would convince Carl Sagan of their extraordinary claim that fire was the ultimate cause of those three — count ’em, THREE — different completely unprecedented collapses upon which the Police State is being constructed?

And of course, their work, shabby as it is, is moot anyway since they failed to seriously investigate the most obvious prima facie explanation, controlled demolition.

Or, now that its foundation has been compromised, is it time to start deconstructing the Police State? Is it time to throw sand in the gears of the out-of-control machine and indict some of its psychopathic minions? As they have in Malaysia. What do you think?

For updates, comments, and corrections, see The Strangest Fires updates, comments, corrections.

AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!

The Best of L. Reichard White

I'm EXPOSING what they are planning (Tucker Carlson Video - 41')

  Truth? How do you find it in a mad world?

  Manipulation? How do you understand it? 

  The funny way of looking at not so funny subjects!

 

Estimates Of China's Youth Unemployment Hit 50%

  Hikikomori in Japan, laying flat in China: Different names, same disease. 

  This is the failure of a growth model which offers nothing to human beings but fake prosperity. Real prosperity is only available to the top 1%. The rest live in soulless high-rises with little human contacts, mindless work (if they are lucky), virtual amusement and shopping till you drop weekends in crowded malls. 

  Better than misery? For the body, certainly. For the soul, not so much, apparently. 

  In a few years Xi Jinping will wonder where the Chinese miracle"s gone. The choice will be between the sands of the Taklamakan and Taiwan. 

By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

“The younger generation must inherit and carry forward the spirit of self-reliance, and hard work, abandon arrogance, and engrave the passion of youth in the water just like our parents did, on the monument of history,” declared Xi, some time ago.

Youth unemployment across China continued its rise this summer. The official number approached 21% before Beijing halted its publication.

Unofficial estimates stretched to nearly 50% when one counts the “lying flat”, a term adopted by youth who are choosing to quit the rat race altogether. In previous decades, agitated youth took to the streets. New forms of hyper-surveillance make such rebellion far harder. Instead, the young simply opt out.

“The facts of countless successful lives show that in youth, if you choose to endure hardship, you will also choose to gain, and if you choose to contribute, you will also choose to be noble,” said Xi.

Parents across the world nodded in violent agreement, because of course, nothing could be truer.

“In youth, experiencing more beatings, setbacks, and tests, will help you walk a successful life,” said Xi, a cold terror slowly rising in the leader for life. The national savings rate rose further still, his subjects preparing for harder times.

China’s fertility rate collapsed to a stunning new low of 1.09 per woman (from 1.30 in 2020). This symptom of profound pessimism, if not reversed dramatically, will lead to economic and then civilizational collapse.

“In the later years of my life, I always reminded myself that hardship is an opportunity. I must persist in learning more and working more and go to difficult places to train myself,” said Xi, searching for a solution to a problem far more challenging than trade wars, chip dependencies, ghost cities, insolvent banks, stranded infrastructure built for a globalized world that is fading, not to mention his nation’s food, energy and water insecurity.

All such problems are solvable provided a nation has a growing population of ambitious, optimistic, hardworking youth. But how to lift a nation whose young consider their current circumstances, assess their future, and quietly lie flat?