http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/subliminalsuggestion/strategic1.html
The Strategic Brains Behind 9/11"Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present contr
ols the past"

Part One

Copyright Joe Vialls, 25 January 2003




Cyclone Zoe Gulf War Syndrome Bali Micro Nuke Vialls Home
Back to the Future: “The dramatic footage of Tristar D-AERC being blown to pieces long ago
in 1995, will be shown as ‘new footage’ at the future sentencing hearing of ‘Shoe Bomber’
Richard Reid. scheduled to take place on 30 January 2003.”...
If you would like to help keep this ailing web site on the Internet, you may do so By clicking on the PayPal link below and donating whatever you can reasonably afford. No sum is too small, and your assistance will be greatly appreciated

The events of 11 September 2001 have become a national obsession in America, but no one has ever worked out who the real perpetrators were. No serious analyst believes for a split second that Osama Bin Laden organized or directed this precision operation from a cave in the mountains of darkest Afghanistan, but beyond that obvious reality, most American analysts are incapable of objective analysis for a number of different reasons. If Americans really want to know who attacked New York two years ago, different analytical techniques must be applied.
Twenty years ago a leading professor of forensic psychology smiled and told me, “You are absolutely incapable of objective thought”, and then sat back in the pub casually cracking his knuckles and waiting for a reaction. The reaction was not long in coming. I was outraged! Probably turning bright pink with carefully suppressed fury, I pointed out forcefully that objectivity lies at the very core of military analysis, and he was therefore talking absolute rubbish.
The Professor remained unperturbed, quietly explaining that every analysis performed by every human on earth is performed within his or her own brain. Each and every step of any analysis is made internally by the individual concerned, rendering the analysis entirely subjective, i.e. the resulting analysis, even if correct, is merely an informed personal opinion. At the very best, he said, we can be as “objective as possible within the severe constraints of personal subjectivity”. And herein, I suspect, lies the main problem for Americans where 9/11 is concerned.
America is a very young country in terms of political and diplomatic evolution, and American tourists overseas frequently display a degree of naivete about international affairs that at times is quite touching. In short, Americans want to be liked by everyone, and fail to see the warning signs when free bottles of Coca-Cola and free Big Macs are not enough to pacify the natives, in what is increasingly seen as the new “American Empire”. With only about 300 years of history behind them, most Americans are diplomatic babes in the wood.
This “We’re all buddies” international American mind-set, seems to have blinded most Americans who have attempted to rationalize those huge Boeing attack aircraft flying with dazzling precision across the New York skyline two years ago. As previously stated, very few are buying the “official” rubbish about incompetent ab-initio Muslim Cessna pilots suddenly developing the extreme level of skill required to hurl 400,000# airliners around the sky like toys, but the blame has not yet at any stage [so far as I know] been apportioned to any nation external to America herself, perhaps with the exception of Israel.
Unwilling or psychologically unable to consider the possibility that America was attacked by one or more of her perceived “buddy” nations overseas [perhaps even those with Coca-Cola and Big Macs], many Americans have turned in one of two decidedly different directions. The first group fervently maintain that, “The Jews did it to gain control of America”, while the second group points instead at the U.S. Military establishment, which also wants “to gain control of America.” Both groups are heavily armed with anecdotal hearsay, but neither has even the smallest piece of hard scientific evidence to back its extraordinary claims.



Ask yourself, would the undeniably “Clever Jews” engineer a situation in which the very heart of their global financial empire was imploded into its own basement, setting them back for years in their operational plans to invade and annex Middle East oil reserves? No, they would not. The problem here lies in the wish fulfillment of those who have themselves been harmed in some way by Jews [mainly Jewish bankers I imagine], and who desperately wish or need to see the Jews expelled from America for good. There is an old adage that says, “If wishes were horses, beggars would ride”, but wishes alone cannot force responsibility for 9/11 on the Jews, when all the hard evidence points in other directions.
Pinning the blame for 9/11 on the U.S. Military is mostly the preserve of “leftists” and “peaceniks”, who traditionally view the military [of which I was once a member] as oppressive right-wing thugs, whose sole covert objective is to imprison all “free thinking” liberals in giant concentration camps surrounded by razor wire, dotted with machine gun towers. Believe me, nothing could be further from the truth. There is not a military man I have ever met who would willingly act as jailer for a million [or even ten] hippies with filthy matted hair and flowery dresses.
Such realities are unlikely to impress the more obsessive personalities in America, but it is now time to move on to a proper investigation of 9/11, in which we must examine not just the attack itself, but more importantly the reactions of American politicians and officials immediately after the aircraft impacted the World Trade Center towers. This is of critical importance. If there was direct collusion between [say] the U.S. political establishment and the Jews, or between the U.S. political establishment and the U.S. Military in planning the event, then the political reaction at media level immediately after the attack, would be self-assured and highly polished.
In other words, just like any other political or military scenario, the public political reaction would have been carefully rehearsed in advance. Under these exact circumstances, the American political establishment would have smoothly continued to drive the global agenda during and after the attack. But that was not the case, was it? American politicians, military leaders and Jewish bankers were all running around with the self-assurance of gut-shot buffalo. At midnight on 9/10 the American Establishment was driving the global agenda, but by midnight on 9/11 the American Establishment was itself being driven by a new global agenda not of its own making. It was a new agenda that America did not understand then, and still does not understand now.
It was at this precise juncture that things started to go seriously wrong for Americans, and the real trails of evidence were unwittingly obscured. America’s political and other leaders, facing for the first time in their lives a situation beyond their comprehension or control, instinctively started to lie in order to cover up, though none were really sure exactly what it was they were supposed to be lying about. Intrinsically, this lying should not come as a surprise to anyone of course. It has been claimed that most politicians learn to lie so successfully at Mommy’s breast, that by the age of two months, the best of them can convince Mommy they are suckling from the right nipple, when in fact they are suckling from the left.
Then, less than three hours after impact, a handful of voices [can you remember exactly which voices?] started to murmur, “Osama! Osama! Osama Bin Laden!”, which irreversibly led American politicians and officials gently, lie by lie, into a deadly one-way trap. Although only days before, the American Administration, in particular Dick Cheney, had promised the Jewish lobbies that it would bomb Baghdad to weaken the Republican Guard in the run up to Israel’s planned invasion of Southern Iraq during October 2001, it was prevented from doing so. Instead, the Administration was obliged to bomb Afghanistan instead of Iraq, which rather neatly returned the CIA’s “lost” trillion dollar heroin trade to its “rightful owners”, but achieved little else.
By this stage American political lying had become obsessive-compulsive, with dozens of new lies designed to cover cracks in the official story, slowly merging together to form a network of crazy paving that made absolutely no sense at all. Politicians and media alike were shrill in their lies about impossible “telephone calls” from the “hijacked” aircraft, leading to justifiable suspicion on the part of the public that the American government must have been directly involved in the atrocity. Not so, but in a desperate attempt to pretend they were still in control of at least a small part of the global agenda, certain American politicians were determined to cement the “hijacker” myth in the minds of ordinary people.



Expensive American propaganda film shown in Australia during 2002, designed to
make you all fervently "believe" in "Muslim Hijackers" armed with pocket knives
Towards early November the entire façade was splintering under the strain, with not a single hijacker’s body in sight, and even more embarrassingly, several alleged “hijackers” turning up alive in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. In order to sustain its “hijacker” lie, now critical because it had been used as an excuse to murder thousands of Afghans, the American Administration needed a real hijacker that everyone could see, touch, and hopefully hate.
For this purpose it introduced the alleged “20th hijacker who missed his airplane”, Zacarias Moussaoui. But no one was even remotely interested in him. Zacarias was surly, not addicted to public confessions, and, put bluntly, simply would not cooperate in the PR exercise. A decision was made, Tel Aviv was asked to assist [yes, “The Jews” were really involved in this bit!] and a “real” potential hijacker was arranged, though the exercise was set up in such a way that the aircraft could not be destroyed. This “hijacker” was to be captured alive, and forced to serve life in a U.S. Prison, as a perpetual subliminal reminder to all Americans that “hijackers” on “American” airliners really do exist. The target selected was an Englishman by the name of Richard Reid.
Richard Reid is important to Part One of this report, because in a few days time he is to be dragged in front of a judge, who will “arrange” for corrupt film “evidence” of an exploding airliner not even related to his case, to be added to his criminal records. The date of Reid’s sentencing hearing is 30 January, which gives any and all Americans reading this report ample time to demonstrate outside the court, though I doubt many will. There is always the omnipotent “Office of Homeland Security” to worry about nowadays.
In order to do Reid any justice at all, we must now delve back through history to examine the birth of “Virtual Terrorism For The Masses”, which might seem to get a bit complicated in places, though it is not really so. What you should bear in mind from the outset is that the civilian technical agencies mentioned in this report [DARPA and DERA], have formal and informal links with very similar civilian agencies in at least seven other sovereign nations to my certain knowledge, and quite possibly more. Their funding is normally derived from government [frequently out of the “secret” vote], and from independent corporations. They are secret and secretive at one and the same time, and their combined agenda is currently unknown.



DARPA, DERA, and Multiple Similar Overseas Agencies, Past Present & Future

Experts in remote-controlled everything, these agencies now have the proven ability to use satellite links to
remotely launch an unmanned VTOL fighter from the deck of an unmanned freighter in mid-Atlantic, direct it
to shoot down an airliner out of range of fighter escort cover, then return it to the freighter for an uneventful
vertical landing. They can then even taxi the VTOL fighter back into its "container" on the freighter's deck, from
the comfort of an armchair located many thousands of miles away from the scene of the crime. .
During December 1988, Pan American Flight 103 exploded exactly on cue overhead a radio beacon in the English Lake District, thereby ushering in a new age of electronic trickery. The giant Boeing 747’s colossal forward momentum ensured that hundreds of bodies and bodies parts were liberally scattered across large swathes of Scotland.
Shock! Horror! The media obediently relayed the gory scenes of Lockerbie’s bloody carnage electronically into our living rooms, and we all failed to recognize the precision process as a new and highly potent form of massed social engineering.
No one was surprised when the highly secretive British Defence Evaluation and Research Agency [DERA] was tasked with investigating Lockerbie, because barely anyone had ever heard of the obscure agency. Accordingly, no one noticed when its “expert” scientific investigators failed to detect the dozens of different pieces of convincing hard evidence, right under their very noses at the crime scene.
The Agency’s credentials were not in doubt. DERA was and still is Europe’s leading authority on remote controlled aircraft, and on the remote radio demolition of aircraft for “simulation” purposes. Obviously the reality of the remote detonation of Pan Am 103, triggered automatically as the aircraft passed overhead the radio beacon at Deans Cross, would not have escaped its expert attention. Nor would the obvious reality of a large explosive “cutting charge” placed hard up against the ribs and stringers inside the outer skin of the forward port fuselage, scientifically designed from the outset to ensure rapid aircraft disintegration.
The DERA experts would in fact have noticed and recorded these various points, were it not for the fact that all such truth had been placed completely out of bounds by DERA’s civilian masters, who from the outset had their own very special agenda to follow. Personnel at the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency thus had two choices. They could keep their mouths shut and quietly follow the special agenda, or run the very real risk of suffering the same sorts of unfortunate fatal accidents that befell so many Marconi scientists during the eighties
Prudence won the day, and DERA officials finally concluded publicly that Pam Am 103 was blown out of the sky by a mere toy of a bomb. Allegedly consisting of only 350 grams of Semtex explosive packed inside a plastic radio-cassette, the bomb was allegedly then packed in turn inside soft baby clothes in a Samsonite suitcase by two “Libyan Terrorists”.
These so-called terrorist experts, the only men in living history to allegedly wrap high explosive in soft shock-absorbent wool, then allegedly loaded the mythical shock absorbent bomb into the center of the Boeing 747’s forward baggage hold. Certain members of DERA were extremely unhappy about this impossible analysis, but at least the Libyans would never be in a position to challenge their forged evidence, or so it seemed at the time.
However, by the mid-nineties the Libyans were openly talking about a trial in a neutral country, and the civilians who controlled DERA know that their convenient forged evidence would not stand up by itself in an open court. Obviously a convincing theatrical charade had to be arranged for the courtroom to help things along, and more importantly to keep the judge and jury’s attention away from reality.
So the DERA officials was ordered to film the dramatic explosion of a wide-body passenger airplane. There was cold logic in this approach, because a spectacular filmed explosion frequently can [and at the Lockerbie Trial finally did] overwhelm hundreds of pages of boring and blatantly inaccurate written evidence.
During mid-1995, an American defense contractor masquerading as a vendor of washing machines, in tandem with a discreet commercial bank, quietly acquired Lockheed L-1011 Tristar D-AERC, placed it on the American register as N329SN, but never flew it under that registration. Instead, the Tristar was sent directly to a top-secret DERA testing ground in southeast England, where it was carefully rigged with explosives, and then destroyed by remote control in front of high-speed color cameras.
Because the secret “sting” operation was designed specifically to convince the judges at any future Lockerbie trial, the 10 KILOGRAM [22 pounds] C4 explosive charge was carefully positioned in the forward lower baggage hold of the Tristar, supposedly mimicking the explosion on Pan Am 103. It did rather more than this, and actually blew the nose of the aircraft right off! The fact that this awesome DERA explosive charge was 28.5 times the weight and power of the diminutive “Toshiba” bomb, alleged to have been planted on board Pan Am 103 in swaddling clothes by the “Libyan Terrorists”, was never disclosed to any judge, jury, or to the public.
The spectacular color film footage resulting from this appalling social engineering scam, was then discreetly passed across the Atlantic to the civilian American Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [DARPA], whose task it was to indirectly feed the material back across the Atlantic through selected media personnel, to the Scottish Lockerbie court as “fresh evidence” in the case. It was considered that any direct British approach to the court would look too obvious, and therefore be deemed suspicious.
In the end, despite several determined attempts, the deliberately misleading Tristar film footage was not allowed by the Scottish Lockerbie Court, and DERA was obliged to also blow up Boeing 747 registration F-BPVE. But this time around at Bruntingsthorpe there would be independent witnesses to the flawed event, which would prove very embarrassing. More about the Boeing blast later on in this series.
As if to prove that both agencies were locking themselves into the deception business for the long haul, DARPA and DERA each filed away copies of the spectacular Tristar explosion that had been recorded on color film during 1995, against the time when it would be needed to cover a future covert operation. That time is now, and the dramatic footage of Tristar D-AERC being blown to pieces in 1995, will now be shown as “new footage” at the forthcoming sentencing hearing of “Shoe Bomber” Richard Reid, scheduled to take place in a few days time, on 30 January 2003.
As always the prosecution is lying to the American public, claiming this aircraft was “Destroyed during 2002 by US Marines, to demonstrate the level of damage to American Airlines Flight 63 if he [Reid] had succeeded in lighting his explosive shoes.” No, it was not. As you can see on the photos, the black target marker grid on the forward lower fuselage of D-AERC, matches precisely the alleged position of the “Libyan Terrorist” bomb on Pan Am 103, proving beyond doubt this is the 1995 scam footage prepared in England.



So why is it so important to show the film at Richard Reid’s sentencing hearing? After all, we know Richard Reid was sitting halfway back along the passenger cabin of American Airlines Flight 63, making this artificially-boosted Tristar explosion completely irrelevant, so why run it in court at all? The answer is illusion, and as we now know, it is illusion alone that has played the principal role in all events involving, surrounding, and following the primary attack on 11 September 2001.
In Part Two we will examine exactly how Richard Reid was lured into becoming the ultimate “hijacker patsy” to cover the immense lie that was and remains nine-eleven, and dissect the reasons why, by mid 2001, a coalition of countries reluctantly but firmly decided they could no longer allow America, itself firmly in the death grip of the Zionist lobby, to dominate the rest of the world any longer.
 http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/subliminalsuggestion/strategic1.html