Connect with us

Alternative News

‘9/11 Unmasked’: The Ultimate Evidence-Based Challenge To The Official Narrative

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A new evidence-based book that challenges the official story about 9/11 is being touted as the Bible of future 9/11 research.

  • Reflect On:

    Despite a flawed official narrative that has not been displaced despite 17 years of counter-research and activism, can we in the Awakening Community continue to work enthusiastically with the latest 9/11 research to bring the truth to humanity?

The internet is replete with videos and articles that purport to investigate, analyze, and explain how 9/11 is not what it has been made out to be. The difficulty is in distinguishing the sensational, speculative theories from truly evidence-based challenges to the official narrative.

advertisement - learn more

It seems as though there are those who will readily believe conspiracy theories without needing much evidence, while on the other side there are those who are not comfortable with considering the official government narrative to be a lie. Those are the people who are unwilling to do even the most rudimentary research into the subject.

So one might suggest that any effort to build an evidence-based refutation of the official narrative will result in simply preaching to the converted, and that those who are not ready to shift their paradigm will resist listening to any of the evidence. Certainly, the group Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth have had this experience, doing presentations and trying to get more architects and engineers to join them and sign on to the contention that the official National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) findings on the collapse of the three towers on 9/11 (1, 2 and 7) is based on flawed science. Their tireless efforts to present and communicate alternative theories to their professional community has been widely met with indifference and skepticism, though bit by bit new professionals have been signing on to the idea that the towers were brought down by controlled demolitions, thus implying that this had to be an inside job with a vast network of conspirators.

Researching Is Believing

I have met and heard from many people who have been willing to research into the issue with an open mind, and the conclusion is inevitably the same: whether or not they are sure about exactly what happened to bring about the destruction on 9/11, they are sure that there is much more to it than the official story.

On the other hand, I have never met or even heard about a single person claiming to have done extensive research on the anomalies and inconsistencies of 9/11 and have a cogent explanation as to why these exist and how the official story holds up to the scrutiny of objective scientific investigation. Researching this material basically turns non-believers of this ‘conspiracy theory’ into believers. It’s as simple as that.

So why does a fully evidence-based challenge to the official narrative become important in this environment? For some in the fields of engineering and architecture, it provides an important piece of research for detailing evidence-based information to colleagues who maintain a skeptical attitude towards the possibility that the world is not as it seems. For the average person who has already realized that 9/11 is an inside job, reading and selecting information from this volume provides them with the credibility and verifiable talking points with which to continue to challenge those around them into considering that much of the official story is a lie.

advertisement - learn more

9/11 Unmasked

In this book review, which informs much of the rest of this article, Dick Lowman tells us that 9/11 Unmasked is the end product of a seven-year effort by two top experts in the field who have thoroughly analyzed the available evidence and are presenting the documented and relevant material in a succinct single volume. To ensure that no aspect of their research would be overlooked or misrepresented, the authors, David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, assembled and employed an impressive roster of international reviewers called the 9/11 Consensus Panel. This panel, according to the book, “includes people from the fields of physics, chemistry, structural engineering, aeronautical engineering, piloting, airplane crash investigation, medicine, journalism, psychology, and religion.” Each of the panelists is identified and credited by name and qualifications.

The book also explains the purpose of the panel: “to provide the world with a clear statement, based on expert independent opinion, of some of the best evidence opposing the official narrative about 9/11.” Griffin and Woodworth set the bar very high when determining what constitutes “best evidence.” Indeed, given the 875 reference notes that document virtually every statement, it seems improbable that any valid criticism of the panel’s consensus points can ever be found.

Avoiding ‘Groupthink’

That said, critics of panels like this sometimes allege that panelists can be influenced, consciously or subconsciously, by the opinions of fellow members. The “groupthink” phenomenon, these detractors say, often comes into play, making panelists reluctant to express any opinion contrary to the group’s position. In particular, a lower ranking or passive person might mimic the opinions of a higher ranking or more aggressive member of the group.

To avoid any possibility of groupthink, the authors employ the Delphi Method as a model for achieving best-evidence consensus. This method provides all panel members with a way of sharing their honest opinions without being influenced or constrained by external sources. Questions are sent in writing to each member individually to prevent anyone from being swayed by what other members are saying. Any subject receiving less than an 85% consensus from reviewers is removed from consideration.

51 Points Of Contention

Thus far, the international team of 9/11 Consensus panelists has reached agreement on 51 points where documented evidence conclusively contradicts the official story. Each point is addressed in its own chapter, and the 51 chapters are grouped into nine categories:

  1. Destruction of the Twin Towers
  2. Destruction of WTC 7
  3. Attack on the Pentagon
  4. The 9/11 Flights [includes Flight 93]
  5. U.S. Military Exercises
  6. Claims About Military and Political Leaders
  7. Osama Bin Laden and the Hijackers
  8. Phone Calls from the 9/11 Flights
  9. The Question of Insider Trading

Each chapter is structured in a format akin to an executive summary. First, a claim that constitutes a part of the official account is summarized and presented with references to source material. The official claim is followed with facts that disprove it, and those facts are amply documented with notes at the end of the book.

One challenge the panelists face in analyzing the official account is that it is often a moving target, i.e., an evolving narrative. In nine of the 51 chapters (Chapters 11, 12, 19, 20, 29, 30, 36, 49, and 50, to be specific), the authors show how the government’s story has changed over time. In each of those chapters, they provide verifiable evidence that discredits the multiple versions.

Keeping It Objective

9/11 Unmasked stands out not only for what is included, but also for what is not included. There is no speculation about who perpetrated the attacks. Moreover, emotional subjects such as first responder cancer deaths are not mentioned. 9/11 Unmasked simply lays out the facts that show the official story cannot be true.

Any one of the 51 chapters, by itself, presents ample evidence to disprove the official account. When all 51 are taken together, the evidence is overwhelming and the conclusion inevitable: A new, independent investigation of 9/11 is imperative.

In the technical world, executive summaries of research are typically presented in one or two paragraphs. The events of 9/11 are so complex, so far-reaching, that one or two paragraphs on any aspect of the subject hardly suffices. Yet Griffin and Woodworth’s 308-page book might rightly be considered an executive summary of their many years of research, presented as a non-political, non-controversial compilation of facts.

9/11 Unmasked is destined to be the Bible, the foundation, the go-to source of future research. It belongs on the bookshelf of anyone who has nagging questions about what really happened on September 11, 2001. And it will surely be on the desk of each and every government official who might one day be tasked with reinvestigating that monumental event.

The Takeaway

Perhaps no other event is as emblematic of the search for truth in the Awakening Community as 9/11. It should be obvious to us that it would take extremely powerful forces to be able to keep this highly flawed official narrative in place, and prevent a new and objective investigation from ever taking place.

Is there is a deeper reason that the truth has not been revealed yet, that the timing depends on the stage we are at in our collective awakening? Perhaps each of us still needs to be provided opportunities to proliferate the truth and play our part in the great awakening. In that regard, books like 9/11 Unmasked serve as yet another valuable tool in our toolbox.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Japan Demands More Proof From The U.S. That Iran Attacked Tankers

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Japan is asking for more proof that Iran was responsible for tanker attacks. The US has made rash claims that Iran was without providing any strong evidence.

  • Reflect On:

    Are we witnessing the rise of yet another false flag attack that could push for war? Is it not interesting to witness the difference between Japanese government culture and US government culture?

A chance for awareness and a change in conversation here. The Japanese government has been requesting that the United States provide concrete evidence that shows Iran did, in fact, attack the two tankers near the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave a statement hours after the attacks that alleged Iran was responsible, the US had no proof to make these claims.

Not long after, The Department of Defense released a video allegedly showing an Iranian patrol boat removing an unexploded mine attached to the side of the Japanese-operated tanker Kokuka Courageous. This, of course, does not mean that Iran put the mine there, nor is there any evidence of this.

The Pentagon most recently released a photo showing an Iranian patrol boat near the tanker, again, proving nothing.

Iranian patrol boat near tanker.

Japanese government officials remain unconvinced that Iran is responsible, and they are not unwise to think so, the evidence is still very weak.  “The U.S. explanation has not helped us go beyond speculation,” said one Japanese senior government official.

The US has made their assertions based on  the fact that their “intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication.”

advertisement - learn more

Let’s recall how sure the US was about the 9/11 attacks as well, which to this day remain a mystery for anyone who’s done even a shred of their own research on the topic. Even now, it’s difficult to know who was truly involved and what really happened in detail on that day. To cover-up 9/11’s laughable story, the term conspiracy theory has riddled intelligent and scientific questioning.

The 9/11 attacks began a war that has still not ended. It has seen millions perish and the power elite have made billions of dollars off the war along the way.

Let’s also not forget the Pentagon has been known to invest in creating fake PR material to push war as revealed when the Pentagon paid a PR firm over $500 Million to create fake terrorist videos.

Japan Not So Quick To Fire

Thankfully, a source close to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said, “These are not definite proof that it’s Iran.” “Even if it’s the United States that makes the assertion, we cannot simply say we believe it,” he said.

Using the US’ logic, Japan’s Foreign Ministry has stated that if the proof is simply having the expertise sophisticated enough to conduct the attack then “That would apply to the United States and Israel as well.”

“The attacks have severely affected the prime minister’s reputation as he was trying to be a mediator between the United States and Iran,” said the source close to the premier. “It is a serious concern, and making mistakes when determining facts is impermissible.” (source)

Still, the Japanese government has held back on stating who they feel is responsible for the attacks, a wise, peace-seeking move.

The Takeaway

In a classic, calm style, Japan remains unconvinced that Iran attacked the tankers because there is no evidence this is the case. Much like what transpired with 9/11, where still there is no evidence for who the US attacked being responsible for 9/11, a more calm and collected approach keeps war racketeering out of the picture.

I feel this is an important observation to make as we, as a people, can change the conversation away from the gullible assertions that Iran is responsible, fuelling our governments into war, and instead have a more grounded discussion of figuring out any details prior to coming up with the next step, which truly doesn’t even have to be war. A great chance for humanity to wake up and take a new path here. It starts with conversation. The key detail is think and assess before acting. Heart-based decision making vs head based or agenda based.

Are we witnessing the rise of yet another false flag attack that could push for war?

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Donald Trump Finally Shares His Thoughts About UFOs

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Donald Trump was recently asked about UFOs, and he hinted towards the fact that he's not really a believer, despite the fact that the reality of these objects can no longer be denied.

  • Reflect On:

    How much do presidents really know about UFOs and other programs that don't really have any government oversight? What's really going on?

Talking about the existence of UFOs is no longer taboo. It’s gone quite mainstream, and it appears that it’s not really a question of belief. There is more evidence for the existence of UFOs than there is evidence for many things humanity accepts as 100 percent real.

This evidence comes in the forms of actual military and commercial radar trackings of UFOs, videos and pictures of UFOs that’ve been released by multiple governments, and statements from hundreds of the highest ranking military personnel from across the world about UFOs being far more technologically capable than any aircraft on Earth.

Furthermore, we’ve had mainstream UFO disclosure. For example, Christopher Mellon, who served 30 years in the federal government and was Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Intelligence from 1997 to 2002, has published multiple articles on mainstream media outlets like the Washington Post and New York Times about the reality of these objects and the need for governments to take them seriously.

Mellon’s Washington Post article detailed a number of extremely credible UFO encounters with the military. But again, this isn’t new information. In the 1950s, President Harry Truman went on national television announcing to the world that UFOs are real, and that they discuss the topic at every conference that they have with the military, that “there’s always things like that going on, flying saucers and they’ve had other things.” (source)

This is why it was very interesting to hear Donald Trump finally share his thoughts on the UFO phenomenon, as you can see below.

advertisement - learn more

Was He Lying? Important Points To Consider

Being a UFO researcher for approximately 15 years myself, one thing has become quite clear to me and others in this field who have looked into the subject in depth: This topic goes far beyond the knowledge of the highest ranking people within the government, including the President. We are talking about Special Access Programs (SAP). From these, we have unacknowledged and waived SAPs. These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as ‘deep black programs.’ A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.”(source)

You can read about the latest discoveries on the black budget, here.

One of the latest “proofs” of this came in the form of a testimony from Dr. Edgar Mitchell. It was a video testimony within UFO researcher Dr. Steven Greer’s “Sirius” documentary, where Mitchell details a meeting him and Greer had with Amiral Thomas Ray Wilson, who was the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, regarding extraterrestrial space crafts and “crash retrieval” programs. This meeting was in 1997.(source)

What’s interesting is that a document was just leaked detailing notes from the well known scientist Dr. Eric Davis, who had a meeting with Wilson in 2002 regarding that specific meeting and what happened after it.

The document shows how Admiral Wilson was denied access to information about crash retrieval programs about downed extraterrestrial craft. This would mean crafts that were either shot down or who had potentially crash landed. (not sure what this means! like an extraterrestrial craft that was shot down? Please rephrase for clarity! thanks!)

It now makes sense why Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Defence Minister, said that the protocol with regards to these objects is to “shoot first and ask questions after.”

The document outlines how defense contractors have more knowledge regarding this subject, more so than the highest ranking people within the government. The document doesn’t include specific names but states, in this case, a popular aerospace contractor.

You can access that document and learn/read more about it here.

So, we are talking about your Bigelow’s and your Lockheed Martins. When I think about Bigelow aerospace, I think about the comments made by its CEO Robert Bigelow, stating that he has knowledge that extraterrestrials are and have been visiting our planet. When I think about Lockheed Martin, two former directors come to mind who have pretty much said the same thing: Ben Rich (former Lockheed Skunkworks Director) and To The Stars Academy’s (TTSA) Steve Justice, who was a Lockheed Aerospace Director.

The point is that Donald Trump probably knows very little about this topic, as with most presidents before him. It is controlled by a power that goes far beyond the government, perhaps by an international group of ‘powerful’ people with tremendous amounts of resources. One thing is certain: The private contractors definitely have more knowledge, as they are the ones that work with these crafts and perhaps even reverse engineer them and what not. But again, there are those above them that probably control this issue.

Trump may be telling the truth. He could be sharing how he feels, and he may not have come across information that convinced him, or he could be lying and thinking about the upcoming election as well – playing politics if you will.

Either way, the reality is that the existence of UFOs cannot be denied, so it’s surprising that Trump would make such comments.

The Takeaway

Some people believe that all of this is a hoax. The trust is that’s what the elite wanted us to think for so long. The subject has long been branded as a “conspiracy” theory, with high ranking officials like the very first director of the CIA, Roscoe Hillenoetter, admitting that:

Behind the scenes, high ranking air force officers are soberly concerned about the UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that the unknown flying objects are nonsense. (source)

Today, there’s been a complete flip flop in opinions, and the subject is now slowly but surely being acknowledged. Some people believe this is part of the elite’s plan to create a false flag alien invasion and/or control the narrative in a certain way. We have yet to see that.

Related CE Article: And Just Like That, UFOs Are Real In The Mainstream

At the end of the day, the idea that other life forms are and have been visiting us dates back thousands of years. It has huge implications and leaves no aspect of humanity untouched. We still, however, have a lot to uncover/discover.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Jordan Peterson Is Backing A Censorship-Free Platform Called ‘Thinkspot.’ Here’s Why

Published

on

Image: Gage Skidmore at https://flickr.com/photos/22007612@N05/29054996858

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Jordan Peterson has stated he will be backing a new platform called Thinkspot that promises to offer free speech and create meaningful conversation around video creators topics.

  • Reflect On:

    Does the conversation had on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter truly contain value? Or is there a great deal of trolling to weed through? Will this help create a space where Big Tech can't control speech?

In the era of dire need for new and meaningful social media platforms, author and clinical psychologist Dr. Jordan B. Peterson confirmed he is backing a new free-speech platform called Thinkspot. He confirmed the platform is in beta testing during a podcast last week.

According to Peterson, Thinkspot.com, will be a space where creators can monetize their work and users can engage in thoughtful conversation about topics without worrying about Big Tech censorship. An issue that is currently heavily seen on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

Some argue that these issues more greatly affect conservative voices vs left-leaning voices, and this appears to be true, although from my analysis it seems to be less about conservatives/politics and more about truths coming to the surface about agendas being push by the elite through the left.

A nuanced look at this censorship reveals that the political agnostic elite is simply using the left to create a culture of outrage to widen the gap within humanity and create an environment where censorship is widely requested by the people, instead of being unwelcomely proposed by the elite. This is a classic case of the power elite creating a problem, getting the needed reaction, and then proposing their pre-thought solution.

More About Thinkspot

“Per the Joe Rogan podcast this week, I’m backing a new platform called Thinkspot, currently in Beta,” Peterson announced via Twitter on Monday. “Get on the waitlist here, exciting announcements coming very soon.”

During the podcast where Peterson was speaking to podcast host and comedian Joe Rogan last week, he explained that Thinkspot’s terms of service will uphold free speech principles. “Once you’re on our platform, we won’t take you down unless ordered to by a court of law.”

The platform, like many others in the works, will be less about accruing gigantic audiences where people have access to everything for free, and instead will be a subscription service where creators can monetize their work. the reason for this is simple, money has to be made somewhere to run these things. If the users don’t pay, you bet it will mean data harvesting is the driving force.

“We’re hoping we can really add dialogue to the podcast and YouTuber world,” explained Peterson. “We’re also gonna do the same things with books, so if you buy an e-book on the platform, you’ll be able to annotate publicly. … We can do that with books that are in the public domain, too.”

“We’re hoping that we’ll be able to pull people who are interested in intelligent conversation, specifically, into this platform, maybe start pulling them away from YouTube and some of the less specialized channels — that, plus our anti-censorship stance,” he added.

Specialization is the key in the end. YouTube is great, but conversation is often limited to good mixed with a lot of trolling and those who don’t really add much value to the mix. Trolling is also prominent. This is where users simply come to the conversation to throw down just a few words of hate, aggression or disbelief without ever actually explaining one’s position. What value does this truly have? This behaviour is very prominent on Facebook and YouTube.

Thinkspot has thought of that. In an effort to avoid “trolling,” Peterson states the platform will have a 50-word minimum when it comes to comments.

“If minimum comment length is 50 words, you’re gonna have to put a little thought into it. Even if you’re being a troll, you’ll be a quasi-witty troll,” said Peterson, adding, “If your ratio of upvotes to downvotes falls below 50/50 then your comments will be hidden, people will still be able to see them, if they click, but you’ll disappear … We don’t know if 50/50 is right.”

In the end, this policy is a good attempt at creating more meaningful conversation without censoring people because of what they say. Ultimately, the platform has two barriers of entry if you will, a small fee, and time. These should be effective means of weeding out those who don’t have anything of value to add to the conversation which, arguably, will lead to more meaningful and productive conversation.

The Takeaway

As we covered in detail in a recent podcast and video on CETV, it appears as though mainstream media, like Vox, has the power to create enough of a stink about something that Big Tech will respond and follow their demands. Is this coordinated? Perhaps, but there isn’t enough evidence to say for sure yet.

What this has done is given those who are willing to make enough noise, whether they are right or not, the power to have Big Tech begin censoring or demonetizing users. Just so happens, many of them are on the right of the political spectrum. Again, we don’t see this to be so much about left/right politics as much as it seems to be about a concerted effort by the power elite to maintain a divide and silence those who try to expose the divides and agendas being pushed.

Once again, the right simply is less driven to give up all their power to the government at the moment, to the elite, this message cannot spread.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod