This week, a radio adaptation of part 1 of a new video by Massimo Mazzucco. Short on conjecture and theorizing, long on salient facts, The New Pearl Harbor is the best and most up to date general 9/11 video I have yet come across. This first part focuses on the shortcomings of the official conspiracy narrative in the areas of the US air defense, the '19 hijackers' and the airplanes themselves.
Historically, Sep 11th has been perhaps our most popular topic on this show, with over 10% of episodes from 2001-2006 being on the topic. As such, regular listeners should be pretty familiar with the events of that day. It is no accident that I've only made 6 episodes on 9/11 in 3 and a half years; I felt that the show already had enough material on it. Nevertheless, new information continues to surface, and it points more strongly than ever to an audacious False Flag attack by a handful in key positions. The continued silence of commercially-controlled media on the topic speaks volumes about the craven and misguided nature of those involved in the whole enterprise.
I'm revisiting 9/11 with a radio adaptation of the best film I've yet seen on the topic, that deserves a wider audience, The New Pearl Harbor by Massimo Mazzucco. In part 1, we hear three angles:
1) The US Air Defense - Was the remarkable failure to intercept the hijacked planes incompetence or intention?... As the head of NE Air Command for that day laments, an exception number of training exercises that day mean that only 4 fighters were available to defend the whole, large, area in which the attacks happened. The NORAD tapes reveal unidentified voices giving disinformation about planes and ordering the available fighters out to sea.
2) The 19 Hijackers - Were they actually about the airplanes? Is there no CCTV footage of the 19 hijackers in the airport? Why then has not a such single photograph from that day been released? Given their lack of flying experience, could they possibly have piloted the paths they flew?
3) The Planes - Were the planes in fact what they appeared to be? If so, how did they manage to exceed the VMO (Maximum operating speed) near ground level by almost 200 mph? And why did the supposed hijackers, who were decidedly amateurish pilots try such risky maneuvers, which were judged extremely difficult even for experienced jet pilots?
Thanks to Olivier for pointing me to the video.
The film references Consensus911.org
I'm revisiting 9/11 with a radio adaptation of the best film I've yet seen on the topic, that deserves a wider audience, The New Pearl Harbor by Massimo Mazzucco. In part 1, we hear three angles:
1) The US Air Defense - Was the remarkable failure to intercept the hijacked planes incompetence or intention?... As the head of NE Air Command for that day laments, an exception number of training exercises that day mean that only 4 fighters were available to defend the whole, large, area in which the attacks happened. The NORAD tapes reveal unidentified voices giving disinformation about planes and ordering the available fighters out to sea.
2) The 19 Hijackers - Were they actually about the airplanes? Is there no CCTV footage of the 19 hijackers in the airport? Why then has not a such single photograph from that day been released? Given their lack of flying experience, could they possibly have piloted the paths they flew?
3) The Planes - Were the planes in fact what they appeared to be? If so, how did they manage to exceed the VMO (Maximum operating speed) near ground level by almost 200 mph? And why did the supposed hijackers, who were decidedly amateurish pilots try such risky maneuvers, which were judged extremely difficult even for experienced jet pilots?
Thanks to Olivier for pointing me to the video.
The film references Consensus911.org
e-mail:
Homepage:
