Here there be rants. There will be Freeman stuff, Lawful Rebellion stuff and Random stuff. I am rebelling because I want my country back. My lawful obligations are as follows: “together with the community of the whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways, namely, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can, until redress has been obtained as they see fit…” Article 61 Magna Carta 1215
July 07, 2011
Charlie Veitch On 9/11
I have always had questions about this so-called terrorist attack. I won't repeat them here. This isn't about my thoughts on what happened that terrible day.
The Truthers are up in arms about Charlies U-turn. It all happened within 11 days according to this video.
I don't particularly care what Charlie thinks. It is his right to change his mind based on the information he has. I may change my mind. But until I get my questions answered, I will remain convinced that something very dodgy happened that day. One reason alone (for me) stands out: it looked, from all available angles, like a controlled demolition. Why do I say that? I say it because the Royal Engineers trained me to use plastic explosives and those buildings came down just like the manuals say they should if you have set your charges correctly. It was a textbook example of how one brings down a building with minimal damage to the surrounding architecture. I mean it was perfect. Clear that one up for me and I may start to believe that the bad guys flew planes into those buildings.
Anyhoo, have a listen to Charlie and make your own minds up.
Or change your mind about the event, just like he did.
He tells us why he changed his mind in the second video down.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
As a former ex-Sapper myself (we may know each other) I agree with your position CR.
I spent many, many weeks reading and listening and studying all the evidence. I also read the Commission Report and everything else that was available. I know what my view is and like everyone else we await proper answers.
When you've shaken hands with someone who was there who testifies he heard explosions from the basement before the collapse it tends to bring home the reality of all those words and videos.
Where is all the CCTV video footage of the Pentagon strike? That's a good starting point.
Follow the money.....
Charlie is a clown and I check on what he's up to because he is the only clown who has ever made me laugh. The joke this time is on his 'followers' who just can't see the contradictions. Something I pointed out last December.
I've never bought into the Charlie Veitch fan club, so I couldn't care less if he thinks Australia is the capital city of Venice.
I'll listen to the thousands of architects, engineers, emergency workers and others who have a very long list of questions about the official story.
Magically dissolving buildings are only the start.
How about the absence of crash debris at the Pentagon?
No Charlie fans here then?
I quite liked his Love Police approach. He had a way of getting people to think differently.
His street cred has gone now.
My comment wasn't a put down. I think Charlie would be pretty chuffed at being described as a clown and a funny one at that.
As he so often says himself, he does absurdist street theatre.
No problem. If he feels slighted in any way he can defend himself.
I just listened (again) to him explaining why he changed his mind and his arguments are extremely weak. Especially towards the end when he is told that kerosene cannot generate the temperatures needed to melt a building.
Something smells funny.
I think Charlie is OK
He's done a lot of good work "raising awareness"
Bit of a puzzler why he's done this though.
I've noticed the hundreds of venomous responses he received to this vid, wonder why some people seem to take it all at face value without asking why, and can't help thinking there's more to it than appears.
Even if he believes what he says, he must have realised what a reaction releasing that video would cause. A wierd kind of celebrity suicide.
I don't know. It'll all come out in the wash I suppose.
Quite so Pesky.
I think there is more to this story.
I have no personal experience to draw on but I did talk about this to a contact who is a structural engineer and he's with you Captain. As an example of controlled demolition Fred Dibnah himself could not have done better.
There are all sorts of possibilities, for example that a catastrophic accident up above would trigger a controlled collapse process but until somebody offers some firm evidence that that was the case my nasty, suspicious mind will continue to question the official explanation.
I would also be delighted to learn what happened to the aircraft engines after the plane hit the Pentagon.
Charlie says "They vaporised".
Was this in the split second before the rest of the aircraft vaporised?
Without so much as scratching the brickwork?
The whole plane disappears yet they managed to recover DNA from all 85 passengers?
Too many loose threads.
Obviously the engines weren't anywhere near the passport or wheel that survived remarkably intact on the streets below.
Then there is building 7. Heavily reinforced as an emergency control centre for the guv agencies and mayor. If that collapsed due to some paper basket fires them somebody should be asking for their money back.
Far too many loose threads Capt!
Strange thing is there's no new explanations/info/evidence given, surely Charlie would have heard all of the official line before. So how is it he suddenly believes it now?
Perhaps we should be making planes out of the same material as passports?
It is clearly indestructible.
He says he can't say too much because of the BBC show that is to be aired.
I wonder if all 6 "Conspiracy nuts" that went along for the dog & pony show now agree that it was the bad Mr bin Laden's doing?
I hope the EU Port Pass isn't indestructible. I plan to destroy mine at the earliest opportunity, mate.
When they issue one with Cathy Ashton's hideous mug on it, it'll probably self-destruct anyway.
For there have always been three questions:
1) Why does Mohammed Atta pack a suitcase for his return journey from Portalnd, with a Koran and books on building bombs. If he didn't plan on surviving he wasn't going to be able to read the books was he and had he had his luggage checked the game would have been up. On the other hand, weren't the authorities lucky to come across a suitcase that screamed islamic terrorist?
2) If you're a passenger with only rudimentary / poor flying skills, sat in the passenger area, how when you take over the plane do you work out exactly where you are and change course for New York and Washington DC. That's some hot navigation skills.
3) If you're a terrorist with only rudimentary flying skills, how do you put a plane into an approach that allows you to fly a commercial jetliner 6 feet off the ground into the Pentagon, leaving no marks on the surrounding turf ?
Oh and a 4th unplanned question. How come some of the engine parts from the Pentagon attack don't belong in a commercial Rolls Royce engine but a US navy aircaft?
Just my two pence
By the way, you are all violent extremists - according to Demos and their publication 'The Power of Unreason', for questioning 9/11.
Cas Sunstein has written an American equivalent report.
Which if that is the case, how come the production company managed to get their six 9/11 truthers into clamped down security state USA, and at short notice according to Charlie himself?
With reference to my comment on the 30th April...
"I am very suspicious of Mr 'touchie feelie' Veitch. Like Choudary, he could be working for MI6.
When I challenged him over his now deleted video 'A Message To The Resistance'which clearly depicted a darker side to Mr Sunshine, this was his personal inbox reply..."
Can I come in from the cold now?
For me, the three main problems with the official story are these.
1. When the aircraft stuck Tower 2, you can clearly see the damage to the tower right across the wingspan of the entire aircraft.
Why is there not similar damage at the Pentagon?
2. Why is the CCTV being held back from public release citing reasons of "National Security"?
They say an aircraft hit the Pentagon. Video should show an aircraft hitting the Pentagon, no?
Personally can't see the danger to a Nations Security there? Unless...
3. Where is the wreckage of flight 97? The first plane crash in history with no even medium sized pieces of metal at a crash site.
@ Harry Hook .
On the Internet, nothing is deleted.
Maybe he was embarrassed by the 1970's Action Man look?
Nice find... but he deleted it off his channel tout suite. I think he had a little more to be embarrassed about, than the 1970's Action Man look.
PS I just watched(again) Danny's response to "Message to the Resistance"... it must have taken his personal shamen weeks to get him down from the edge...
Stockholm syndrome and a big pay-out does it every time.
This guy, whoever he is with his well trimmed beard, cool sunglasses and whiny voice is a 20 finger wanker of the first order.
Self-publicist is written all over him.
I think you will find he will be standing for a seat in parliament in the near future. He has all the credentials. Go with whatever seems to be a good publicity stunt.
As a man who worked in the aviation industry all of my life and also have a son who is a captain of a Jumbo I can reasonably say that no aircraft hit anything. Guided missile yes but aircraft no. There would have been lots of evidence left at the scene. Clever video yes. Real eye-witnesses no.
If the lie is big enough people will believe it.
There is so much TV and film spectaculars that people just shrug their shoulders because they cannot now tell what is and what isn't reality or just another block-buster film.
I bet most of the people who witnessed 9/11 are waitng for the sequel 9/11 two.
Three reasons why I do not believe the official government line on 911...
It is from official sources
It is from the government
It is a 'line'
Old fish live deep and ignore the titbits floating around them for plainer fodder...
He was so in to it, then this, makes no sense. I'm still pondering o_O
Like REALLY into it lol http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wvyLeG6AJk&NR=1
Molten steel at the bottom as testified by firefighters - how the hell did that get there when jet fuel can't do it?
No need for me to go into how I feel about CV as you'll have read the article I wrote about him when I was blogging. As you know, I always had his number and unlike you I disagreed with his methods. I don't think he ever respected people's privacy who didn't want to be on camera or have their ears blasted with his megaphone rhetoric about reality. All fair and well, but people have to wake themselves.
As for 9/11, well, far too many holes and all the reason for the attack, as it nicely brought them into their War Of Terror, against the Islamic world, something that the elites wanted.
The first vid on Intelhub has been taken down. Here's what I assume to be another: http://youtu.be/QMONU-bjmEM
And here's his response to TEH HATERZ: http://youtu.be/dplk9WDXLLk. This one's caused another mammoth thread over at the Icke forums :D
Veitch also memorably "changed his mind" on Zeitgeist & the Venus Project.
FWIW my own views on 9-11 chime with those expressed many times in the above comments. While one should always try to keep an open mind one must also carefully evaluate not just any new information but the source of it as well. There is deep irony in the first vid, where he says one of the issues of the "truth movement" is that it's populated by people who have vested interests in a certain theory, and where's he been? Oh yeah, over in the US talking to people who have...vested interests in a certain theory!
The involvement of the BBC should ring alarm bells. It always has an agenda in everything it does, a pre-determined outcome that it sets out to fulfil by any means possible - the last few days show this more than anything.
This could all be part of the documentary, to get the "truthers" worked up so that when it labels all of them as mad cultists - and ropes in anyone labelled as a "conspiracy theorist", which worryingly is being widened (at least more publically) to include anyone who doesn't believe what the govt & MSM says - then the vitriol against him will be used as "evidence", leading to further discrediting of "alternative views". The doc is going out as part of the same programme that thought nothing of faking footage of child labour in order to perform a hatchet job on a major retailer, a programme that whilst occasionally useful generally serves to get people riled up about something. It's to be watched in the same way all BBC news & current affairs is to be watched: dispassionately, warily, and from behind bullshit-proof glass.
For Hitler's reaction: http://youtu.be/LBtZVbnk0_U :D
The general theory (on the freeman/sovereign forums) is that the man has been "got at", but as some of you have pointed out, he wasn't exactly Mr Consistency before.
I think he may just be an indecisive fellow. Not the best trait if you are putting yourself out there.
Not the best trait... if you're asking for donations.
PS I fully expect the Cap'n to be just as philosophical... when the Antiterrorist pays his council tax ;o)
Has the AT ever said he DOESN'T pay his council tax?
I'm still paying mine. If/when the HMRC battle is over I will start in on the council about my CT.
Just for fun, you understand...
You'll be telling me next that AT pays his road tax... some bleedin' revolution... biking through traffic lights on red.
The revolution doesn't have to revolve around* traffic violations you know.
(*revolve around! Geddit?)
There are more ways to skin this mangy cat.
Post a Comment