Posts Tagged ‘9/11’

Two thirds of respondents in the latest poll in our Underground Knowledge discussion group on state they don’t believe the official 9/11 story that World Trade Center 7 (aka Building 7) collapsed solely as a result of fires.


The poll, which ends April 3rd, poses the following question: Do you believe World Trade Center 7 (aka Building 7), which no plane hit on 9/11, collapsed solely due to fires as per the official story?

Interim results are: 67% say No; 19% say Yes; 14% are unsure.

This comment from one respondent is typical of most received to date: “There’s no doubt in my mind that Building 7 was all part of the plan to make it look like a terrorist attack. Big buildings like that don’t just collapse unless explosives are set in just the right places to cause a controlled implosion.”

More comments follow:

I don’t think many people even know about Bldg 7 – which just goes to show you how they quickly controlled the media and everything to hide the obvious.


I recall a firefighter saying he heard the owner of the building saying to “pull it”. Soon afterward, the building collapsed. The term “pull it” is often used as a demolition term, meaning to activate the explosives to bring a building down.


The mysterious collapse of World Trade Center 7 on 9/11 — Governor Jesse Ventura investigates (video)… Jesse Ventura, the 38th Governor of Minnesota, investigates the bizarre collapse of Building 7 on 9/11.


I believe it was all designed to bring in the anti-terrorism laws that have since stripped the American people of most of their rights and freedoms. Something the Canadian government is trying to bring about too now.


I heard Building 7 was not even investigated in the government’s official 9/11 investigation (which many say had as much credibility as the Warren Commission…)


A man in the UK successfully defended his non-payment of the TV licence by claiming that the BBC knew about WTC 7’s collapse about 20 minutes before it actually did, that they denied this fact, and therefore they were part of the terrorist plot, and his payment of the licence fee would in effect mean that he was providing aid to a terrorist group.


To view all the comments, or better still to have YOUR say, go to our Underground Knowledge group poll at:—a-discussion-group?type=group



Provisional results of our latest (continuing) poll show that 58% of those polled to date believe 9/11 was an ‘inside job’.

9/11 Pictures

The poll, which ends October 24 PST, asks one simple but contentious question: Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job? The question refers of course to those persistent conspiracy theories that the September 11 attacks should be attributed to the US Government (or agencies of) and not to terrorists.

This interim result would seem to reflect the belief of many (Americans especially) that the September 11 attacks – including the “controlled collapse” of New York’s Twin Towers and 7 World trade Center – were orchestrated by US officialdom to provide a ‘false flag’ justification for invading Afghanistan and Iraq.

9/11 Pictures

Predictably, the poll, which is running in our discussion group 29 Conspiracy Theories, is generating some heated discussion.

Your opinion is welcome…so feel free to register your opinion and contribute to the discussion in the Poll thread in our Goodreads discussion group at:


Meanwhile, here’s some of the comments received to date (names redacted):

I’m totally shocked there are still people out here who actually still believe the government’s story!


Inside job as someone in our own Government did this? If that is what this quiz is about then hell no.


Charlie Sheen has by his own admission fried his brain with more drugs than he can probably recall and even he knows the official 9/11 story wouldn’t pass for a bad B-movie script: “It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box-cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75 percent of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory.” -Charlie Sheen


I think yes….only because it was an anniversary to something…and they were using that as justification for this attack. Very sad that people have been reduced to this type of behavior.


The official story is a joke and has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese. Now does that mean it was an Inside Job? Not necessarily. But it sure doesn’t bode well. Anyone who researches 9/11 soon realizes that while there’s no smoking gun, there’s a plethora of anomalies like building 7 and Dick Cheney’s “stand down” orders to his minions which is on-the-record to name only two.


My personal un-provable belief is that, at some level, the US knew this was coming. They calculated the benefits that could be extracted by the rulers under every scenario they could imagine, and this was the result; a perennial war feeding the war machine; a law to strike fear in the heart of every free man; a depleted US Treasury contributing to the economic demise of the population; a logical attempt at a total takeover.


It seems so convenient for those who wanted a “Patriot Act” and provide the excuse to fund the war machine for this to have happened. The tapes of the firefighters indicated that they were hearing continued explosions. These tapes are now “confidential.”


If you simply have faith in your country and government and media that they tell you the truth, then of course you’ll believe 9/11 was the whole known Bin Laden/Al Queada story.


Man, there’s just SO much evidence out there, I don’t know where to begin: the Bin Laden families being flown out of no-go air space the day after. The U.S/Saudi connection. The fact that Building Seven came down without reason, and is most definitely a demolition job, as was the towers themselves- supported by well over two thousand actual architects (see link). The fact that Bin Laden was trained by the CIA. The false excuse for invading Iraq which had nothing to do with Al Queada at that time. The video footage of Bush being told America was under attack, whilst he just nodded and carried on reading a nursery story about a goat…


Reminder: Our poll “Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job?” closes October 24 PST. Your opinion is welcome. Go to:



Just as mineral wealth – oil in particular – is a major reason for wars (look no further than Iraq), many would argue so, too, is heroin. Afghanistan being a case in point.

Afghan farmers collected raw opium in a poppy field.

Operation Enduring Freedom, the on going conflict in Afghanistan that was sparked by 9/11, has rather uncharitably been called Operation Opium by those who subscribe to the theory that heroin is behind that conflict.

One who subscribes to that theory is Canadian economist Dr. Michel Chossudovsky, author of The New World Order and perhaps the foremost authority on drug wars. We quote the good doctor extensively in a chapter titled ‘Drug Wars’ in our book THE ORPHAN CONSPIRACIES: 29 Conspiracy Theories from The Orphan Trilogy.

Here’s an excerpt from The Orphan Conspiracies:  

Dr. Chossudovsky also believes heroin is a primary motivating factor in the war in Afghanistan…In an article published in and dated June 25, 2013, he says, “Since the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, the Golden Crescent opium trade has soared.”

Click on the slide!

The documented Northern Route for drug trafficking out of Afghanistan.

In the same article, Dr. Chossudovsky says in the previous four years there was a surge in Afghan opium production. He quotes UNODC (the UN Office on Drugs and Crime) figures which reveal that poppy cultivation in Afghanistan in 2012 covered an area of more than 154,000 hectares; he also quotes a UNODC spokesperson as confirming in 2013 that opium production is heading toward record levels.

Dr. Chossudovsky is also extensively quoted in the site, which provides some of the most credible, in depth research and reporting on the Afghan drug trade.

On alert in a poppy field in Afghanistan.

Under the tell-all heading “The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade”, Global Research carries yet another article by Dr. Chossudovsky. It was first published in May 2005. In it he states:

“Heroin is a multi-billion dollar business supported by powerful interests…One of the ‘hidden’ objectives of the war (in Afghanistan) was precisely to restore the CIA-sponsored drug trade to its historical levels and exert direct control over the drug routes.

“Immediately following the October 2001 invasion, Opium markets were restored. By early 2002, the opium price…was almost 10 times higher than in 2000.”

Readers are reminded that “prior to the Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989) opium production in Afghanistan and Pakistan was directed to small regional markets” and “there was no local production of heroin.”

Dr. Chossudovsky claims “the Afghan narcotics economy was a carefully designed project of the CIA, supported by US foreign policy”.

History lends some weight to the doctor’s claims. Out of the chaos that followed the Soviet-Afghan War, the ruling Taliban decreed that opium production be significantly curbed. That ruling was followed by another ordering that opium cultivation cease totally.

A solitary US Marine patrols a poppy field in Afghanistan.

There has been considerable speculation that America’s invasion of Afghanistan was prompted by this development. Whether true or not, one result of that military action is not in doubt: the opium ban was quickly lifted and Afghan opium production rapidly rose to record levels.

Of course, this could be passed off as coincidental. An innocent result of an invasion that saw Afghanistan’s war lords back in control and opium growth thriving once again. Indeed, that’s the official line and that’s how many perceive it.

However, if commentators and researchers are united about any one thing it’s that the CIA is inexorably linked to Afghanistan’s illicit drug trade and has been, in the words of one commentator, “since the agency funded Taliban fighters to oppose the Soviets”.


Read more in The Orphan Conspiracies: 29 Conspiracy Theories from The Orphan Trilogy

A book that’s for the common people…the 99%.




The rumors persist that 9/11 was an inside job: bombs, not planes, leveled Twin Towers; inside traders knew about the 9/11 attacks before they happened; Air Defense was ordered to stand down etc. etc.

Image of Twin Towers on September 11th 2001

As the rumor mill continues to churn out theories on what happened on that unforgettable day in 2001, we are reminded of an incident in US history that could have resulted in the officially sanctioned murders of countless American citizens.

The incident we refer to is ‘Operation Northwoods’ – an especially murky episode in American history. It features prominently in the very first chapter of our new release book THE ORPHAN CONSPIRACIES: 29 Conspiracy Theories from The Orphan Trilogy. Here’s an excerpt:

In 1962, the US Government’s Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed carrying out acts of terrorism on American soil to justify military intervention in Cuba.

Hard to swallow or believe, we know, but it’s on the record. Numerous military and intelligence documents recording these disturbing false flag proposals, known as Operation Northwoods, have since been declassified.

Operation Northwoods remained a secret for 35 years. The sinister proposal first came to the public’s attention in November 1997 when The John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Review Board declassified various top secret military records, which included the Northwoods documents. The following year, the National Security Archive published further revealing information on Northwoods.

A (since declassified) ‘Top Secret’ memo dated March 13, 1962, addressed to the Secretary of Defense and signed by then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff makes for interesting reading. Its subject line reads: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba.

Item No. 1 on that memo reads: “The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attached Memorandum for the Chief of Operations, Cuba Project, which responds to a request of that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.”

Operation Northwoods’ plans included the sinking of US war ships, shooting down hijacked passenger planes, killing innocent American citizens, letting off bombs and orchestrating other violent terrorist acts in major cities including Washington DC and Miami.

Every event would be blamed on Fidel Castro and the Cuban regime. The Joint Chiefs of Staff’s logic was that these events would help gain enough support from the American public and the world at large for a US military invasion of Cuba.

Fortunately, President Kennedy immediately rejected the Northwoods proposal and fired one of its main proponents, Lyman Lemnitzer, who was then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

President Kennedy with his Joint Chiefs of Staff incl. Lemnizter (third from left).

The following year, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, while Lemnitzer was appointed Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.

Go figure!

In his 2001 book Body of Secrets, US political journalist and bestselling author James Bamford wrote that Operation Northwoods “called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war”.

Sadly, Bamford is one of the few well-known political commentators to write about Operation Northwoods. When the documents were declassification in 1997, they were almost universally ignored by the media.

Apparently on-the-record discussions within the US Government about murdering its own citizens as propaganda to create a war were not deemed newsworthy.


Read more in The Orphan Conspiracies: 29 Conspiracy Theories from The Orphan Trilogy – available now via Amazon at:

A book that’s for the common people.