How Did They Know? Examining 9/11 Foreknowledge of WTC Building 7’s Destruction

By Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Global Research, March 22, 2015

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Region: USA

Theme: 9/11 & 'War on Terrorism', Media Disinformation

by Dennis McMahon, J.D., L.L.M. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
WTC Building 7, also known as the Salomon Brothers Building or WTC 7, was a 47–story skyscraper that was part of the World Trade Center complex. Built in 1984, Building 7 would have been the tallest high-–rise in thirty–three of our United States. Building 7 housed several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the NYC Office of Emergency Management’s Emergency Operations Center, more commonly known as “Giuliani’s Bunker,” along with several major financial institutions.

BBC correspondent Jane Standley reported the destruction of WTC 7 before it collapsed – even though the building was still standing behind her.

Building 7, which was 100 yards from the Twin Towers, was not hit by an airplane on September 11, 2001, and suffered only minimal damage from debris falling from the North Tower. Several fires began burning on a few floors, and the entire building completely collapsed – almost into its own footprint – at 5:20 p.m. Numerous eyewitnesses, including members of the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) and other first responders, and multiple news sources, made statements that indicate that there was foreknowledge that WTC 7 was going to come down, despite the fact that no skyscraper in history had ever completely collapsed due to fire. (Much of this evidence of foreknowledge is detailed on the website of the Remember Building 7 campaign and other related sites.)
Where foreknowledge of an extremely unusual event is demonstrated, the possibility must be considered that the foreknowledge derived directly or indirectly from those who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself. Thus, if foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 can be shown, this would be a strong indication that Building 7 was subjected to controlled demolition, and that advance warning of Building 7’s demise derived ultimately from those who intended to bring the building down. Thus, foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 is not only consistent with, but supportive of, the controlled demolition hypothesis.

Certainty of impending collapse

To worry that a damaged building might collapse in some fashion is one thing. But to be certain that it will collapse is another. A detailed study of the FDNY accounts by 9/11 researcher Graeme MacQueen shows that more than half of those who received warnings of WTC 7’s collapse (where a degree of certainty can be determined from the reports) were certain or were told with certainty that Building 7 was coming down. (The figures calculate to 31 out of 58. See MacQueen’s report “Waiting for Seven…” at page 4.)

Early FDNY announcements of collapse

If someone were observing the fires in WTC 7 and able to determine, in the last few moments of the building’s existence, that a peculiar set of circumstances was beginning to threaten the building, that would be one thing. But to receive warnings of the building’s collapse well before this set of circumstances arose raises suspicion. Yet, a detailed study of the FDNY reports shows that of the thirty-three cases where the time of warning can be determined, in ten cases warnings were received two or more hours in advance, and in six cases warnings were apparently received four or more hours in advance. (See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven…” at page 4.) In other words, the warnings came long before the unique set of circumstances had allegedly come together to cause the building’s collapse.

Precise warnings of collapse

If the collapse warnings were derived from vague worries and concerns, as claimed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the warnings would not have been precise. A complete collapse, such as happened to WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 on 9/11, was unknown – unless the building was being brought down by controlled demolition. That is why FDNY member James McGlynn could say on 9/11, in reference to one of the Towers, “Any time I’ve heard of a collapse, it was never an entire building like this turned out to be.” (See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven‚” at page 21.) Nevertheless, somehow, many people knew in advance that WTC 7 would suffer an unprecedented collapse. Which begs the question, “How did they know?” Consider the following exchange from the FDNY oral histories:

• Q. “Were you there when building 7 came down in the afternoon?”
• A: “Yes”
• Q. “You were still there?”
• A. “Yes, so basically they measured out how far the building was going to come, so we knew exactly where we could stand.”
• Q. “So they just put you in a safe area, safe enough for when that building came down?“
• A. “Five blocks. Five blocks away. We still could see. Exactly right on point, the cloud stopped right there.”(See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven…” at page 8.)

How did construction workers and police on the scene of WTC 7 that afternoon know that “The building is about to blow up”?

It is quite remarkable that a debris cloud estimate could be so precise for a collapse that was supposedly caused by unforeseen and unplanned events. Had Building 7 “tipped over,” which would have been more realistic, given the structural damage that was supposed to be the reason for its collapse, the building could actually have ended up crushing several other tall buildings, creating a destruction zone much farther away from the building.

Building 7’s collapse reported in advance by CNN and the BBC

Click on the image above to play the video clip…

In this BBC video, correspondent Jane Standley reports that Building 7 has collapsed; meanwhile (at the 1:17 mark), a fully intact Building 7 can actually be seen — still standing — behind her. Who fed this information to Standley? Apparently, someone who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself, released that information to the media prematurely.

CNN’s Aaron Brown searches for WTC 7 in the New York skyline after reporting that it had collapsed an hour early. The arrow points to WTC 7 – Click on the image above to play the video clip…

In another news clip, while Building 7 is seen standing fully erect and showing no signs of impending trauma, CNN’s Aaron Brown gives the following report: “We are getting information now that one of the other buildings, Building 7, in the World Trade Center complex, is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing…” Who is he “getting information” from? Again, it appears to be from someone who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself, and who released that information to the media prematurely. Only such an individual could have expected Building 7 to come down.
In sum, both CNN and BBC did not merely report that WTC 7 was damaged or that it might collapse. Instead, they prematurely announced the actual collapse of Building 7. No satisfactory explanation has been given about these premature announcements, which were obviously based on data fed to the announcers, apparently by an unknown person or persons who had inside information about, and/or control over, the event itself, and who bungled matters by releasing that information to the media prematurely.

Click on the image above to play the video clip…

More evidence of foreknowledge of the collapse of Building 7 is preserved in this video where an eyewitnesses can be heard saying: “Keep your eye on that building. It’ll be coming down soon.” And “The building is about to blow up. Move it back.” And also, “We are walking back. The building is about to blow up.”
These reports were later corroborated by first responder Indira Singh, who, in a radio interview about Building 7, revealed that the FDNY had stated that “We’re going to have to bring it down.“

Countdown…

First responder Kevin McPadden has provided key eyewitness evidence regarding the foreknowledge of WTC 7’s destruction. – Click on the image above to play the video clip …

The testimony of Kevin McPadden, an emergency medical technician and 9/11 first responder, is even more shocking. In a taped interview, McPadden indicated that there was an actual countdown preceding Building 7’s collapse:
“The Red Cross rep was like, he goes over and he says [to us], ‘You gotta stay behind this line because they’re thinking about bringing the building down.’…He goes over and he asks one of the…firefighters what was going on…He came back over with his hand over the radio and [you could hear] what sounded like a countdown. And, at the last few seconds, he took his hand off [the radio] and you heard ‘three-two-one,’ and he was just saying, ‘Just run for your life! Just run for your life!’ And then it was like another two, three seconds, you heard explosions. Like, BA-BOOOOOM! And it’s like a distinct sound…BA-BOOOOOM! And you felt a rumble in the ground, like, almost like you wanted to grab onto something. That, to me, I knew that was an explosion. There was no doubt in my mind…”

NIST’s Response to WTC 7 foreknowledge

NIST has tried to evade the issue of foreknowledge of WTC 7’s collapse in its report on the building’s destruction by implying:

• (a) that the FDNY, on the scene, saw the damage to the building caused by the collapse of WTC 1 and rationally concluded that WTC 7 might collapse; and
• (b) that an engineer, early in the day, saw the damage to the building and concluded it might collapse passing on this assessment to others (as per NIST Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder, in a discussion with Graeme MacQueen on CKNX Radio, Wingham, Ontario, on Aug. 25, 2008).

It is true that damage to WTC 7 was directly witnessed by some firefighters and, apparently, led a few (about seven) of them to worry that the building might collapse. However, the great majority (approximately fifty) who were worried about collapse did not base this worry on the physical damage but on what they were told. (See MacQueen’s “Waiting for Seven…” at page 5.) Moreover, while an engineer may have communicated his opinion, early in the day, that the building might collapse, neither this communication nor communications from the FDNY is sufficient to explain all of the collective evidence indicating foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse.
Individually, each of the factors discussed above indicates the possibility of foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse: the certainty of Building 7’s impending collapse as expressed and memorialized in the FDNY oral histories, the early announcements made by the FDNY, the precise nature of the early announcements, CNN’s and the BBC’s premature reporting of Building 7’s collapse, and the actual countdown to Building 7’s demise. Collectively, these factors provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that this foreknowledge is most readily explained by the fact that Building 7 was brought down in an explosive controlled demolition carefully planned months in advance.

---

The BBC’s Response

Part of the conspiracy?

[There was foreknowledge of the attack. The BBC to this date has failed to provide an explanation. How is it that the knew that building 7 would collapse prior to the actual event.  Read carefully their response. ]

Richard Porter | 17:12 UK time, Tuesday, 27 February 2007

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are pretty well known by now. The BBC addressed them earlier this month with a documentary, The Conspiracy Files, shown within the UK.

Until now, I don’t think we’ve been accused of being part of the conspiracy. But now some websites are using news footage from BBC World on September 11th 2001 to suggest we were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience. As a result, we’re now getting lots of emails asking us to clarify our position. So here goes:
1. We’re not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn’t get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn’t receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.
[if the did not have advanced knoweldge, how come they announced the collapse 20 minutes before its occurrence]
2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I’m quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate – but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did – sourced our reports, used qualifying words like “apparently” or “it’s reported” or “we’re hearing” and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.
3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I’ve spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn’t remember minute-by-minute what she said or did – like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.
4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I’d love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don’t help clear up the issue one way or another. [the video of the BBC report is available on the internet, the BBC says it no longer has it, how absurd]
5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error – no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today “so the guy in the studio didn’t quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy… ”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

MELUSINE: RACE TO GET HER

• Posted on March 23, 2015
• by Clyde Lewis
• in Articles

MELUSINE: RACE TO GET HER

In our office building where we do our radio show we are fortunate to have our own Starbucks coffee shop downstairs in the lobby. The only other special Starbucks coffee shop that is like this that I am aware of was a Starbucks built special in the home of Motley Crue drummer Tommy Lee.
He had it built in the basement of his house as a gift for his then-wife Pamela Anderson.
Say what you will about Starbucks, but they most certainly know how to market coffee, and in the Northwest where I live of course it is seen on every street corner. There are even Starbucks’ across the street from one another.
You can always depend on Starbucks to provide great coffee and great customer service.
However there has been some controversy recently over a marketing proposal that began and ended abruptly. The “#RaceTogether” campaign was an idea where in some stores, baristas have been writing the words race together on that latte cup or that Americano cup. The idea is to encourage us to talk about race. Baristas were encouraged to even ask customers “When did you first become aware of your race?”
Starbucks announced the Race Together initiative March 16 to “stimulate conversation, compassion and action around race in America.” Racial tensions flared in rallies and riots last year after police killed two unarmed black men — Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and Eric Garner in New York — with no charges brought against the officers.
The Seattle-based company’s leadership team visited almost 2,000 employees in St. Louis, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago and New York over the past three months to discuss racial issues.
It may have been an idea that looked good on paper, and with the recent political climate focusing on civil upheavals regarding race, the CEO of Starbucks thought that baristas could strike up conversation about race while serving either a black cup of coffee, or their latest creation a “Single-Origin Flat White”: a cup of coffee with a dot of white cream in the middle.
The campaign was immediately talked about unfavorably in the social media. It was a said that customers would be going into Starbucks and literally ordering a grande, venti, or double shot of awkward conversation.
This also sparked a number of humorous coffee suggestions for new coffee products on Twitter, like the “Malcom X-spresso,” the “Police Brew-tality,” “Roast-a-Parks,” someone also suggested a “Some of my friends are black” coffee, turning the campaign to a roast that they were not planning on. The firestorm even prompted Corey duBrowa, a communications executive at the company, to delete his Twitter account.
The “Race Together” cup messages were called ham-fisted by critics and were stopped on Sunday morning.
This isn’t the first time a so called “cup campaign” has gone wrong at Starbucks.
Back in 2007 there were cups that were printed with the words “The Way I See It.” The cups featured words of Starbucks customers who saw themselves as intellectuals and sent their thoughts in to be featured on a cup.
Michelle Icanno, an Ohio woman, was steaming after reading an anti-God message published on the side of a Starbucks coffee cup. The message that got Michelle Incanno’s blood boiling reads:

Why in moments of crisis do we ask God for strength and help? As cognitive beings, why would we ask something that may well be a figment of our imaginations for guidance? Why not search inside ourselves for the power to overcome? After all, we are strong enough to cause most of the catastrophes we need to endure.

The quote was written by a Canadian Starbucks customer, and was included as part of a campaign called “The Way I See It.” The Seattle-based coffee giant claims that was intended to spur discussion on different viewpoints. But Incanno stated, “As someone who loves God, I was so offended by that. I don’t think there needs to be religious dialogue on it. I just want coffee.”
That wasn’t the only offending Starbucks coffee cup. A Starbucks cup promoting a pro-homosexual message caused a lot of controversy in Waco, Texas. As WorldNetDaily reported in September 2005, officials at Baylor University told the Starbucks store on its Waco, Texas, campus to remove a cup featuring the words of a homosexual novelist.
And last but not least, a third anti-God sentiment appeared on a Starbucks cup in 2007, slamming the Christian faith and the Bible’s message regarding Heaven and Hell. While Starbucks’ disclaimer states that the messages on their cups do not necessarily reflect the views of the corporation, there were a lot of people that were steamed that the coffee cups had been taken over by godless hipsters.
Controversy over the Starbucks image has also gone all the way back to the choice they have made for the logo of the company. We all have seen the mermaid with a split tail and a crown adorning the coffee cup, but it wasn’t always that tame.
As some veteran Starbucks coffee drinkers may know, Starbucks changed their corporate logo not once but twice because some consumers found the split tail of their topless siren too lurid and suggestive. Many women complained that the mermaid or siren looked like she was spreading her legs as if she was looking for sex. She also had bare breasts which also offended some people.
Starbucks replied that the symbol was that of a split-tailed “Melusine” from a 15th-century wood carving found in a mariner’s book.
In ancient stories the tale of Melusine (sometimes “Melusina”) is spoken in reference to a water fairy. The story can be traced back to the figure of Melisande, wife of Fulk the Black, Count of Anjou in the 11th century.
As the story went, Melisande insisted that her husband never look at her on the Sabbath day. This he agreed to, and so every Sunday, she would go inter her private apartments to hide. As most fairy tales or legends usually go, nothing ever goes according to plan. Well, the husband decided to spy on her as she was bathing on the Sabbath. He saw that she was a strange scaled creature from the waist down with either two fish tails or two serpents for legs, depending on which version you read. After the husband broke his promise, Melisande transformed into a full-bodied dragon and shrieked away, never to be seen again.
Perhaps the real reason she had serpents for legs ( a mythological body type called an “anguepede”) is that, according to Fulk’s descendant, Richard the Lionheart, his bloodline was descended from “The Devil,” which would mean that Melisande/Melusine was too.
In Greco-Roman mythology, the Liliths were the “Melusines” or “mermaids” that have the head and breasts of a seductive woman. Her breasts are full of sweet milk and blood that can be boiled away to fine gold. Her lower body has the fins that split in two to allow for men to be seduced into a sexual bond with them. This leads the man into the water where he drowns and remains in the water forever without salvation.
In alchemy, Melusines were a symbol of the element of Mercury, which alchemists purportedly used to transmute other metals. In symbolic alchemical depictions she was shown shooting milk and blood shooting from her breasts, which would purportedly be boiled to make gold.

Room for cream? Melusine sprays milk and blood from her paps, from Azoth of the Philosophers by Basil Valentin, 1659

The Melusine has always been the prominent fixture in the Starbucks logo. Even through several changes the crowned goddess of the sea has remained.
First, a simplified logo was introduced, hiding the siren’s breasts under waves of hair, but it still showed the belly button and the two tails.
Then second, this image was cropped and enlarged so the split in the siren’s tail would no longer show. Now, the only indication that this female icon is a sea creature is in the wavy lines, which originally were part of the representation of the two tails.
Although the image is that of a split-tailed sea creature or mermaid, it is still a siren.
More specifically, it is a double-tailed siren or a baubo siren, which The Woman’s Dictionary of Symbols and Sacred Objects points out, is “a cross between a mermaid and a sheila-na-gig.” This is what Melusine is.
Her suggestive pose refers to female sexual mysteries and the lure of temptation for any simple-minded fellow. The sheila-na-gig is rooted in paganism and the worship of evil spirits, yet ironically, it is found on many European churches and cathedrals as a decorative motif. In European heraldry, a Melusine is a device often used on coats of arms.
Carl Jung suggests that supernatural forces spring from the fusion of two biologically different entities, opposites that embrace and explain practically everything. Jung explained how archetypes have a mesmerizing affect on all of us. Even though most combinations of man and animal are typically chimera or monsters, such as the Minotaur, the goat headed fawn or Baphomet, we also are now entertained by other creatures such as winged angels, horned demons, and mermaids.
Jung believed that these images of fused man and animal sprung forth from our dreams. They may have existed in one form or another, and they have anciently been programmed into our collective unconscious to remind us of a time where the world was far more enchanted and maybe even more dangerous as the myths about such creatures always ended up with man being seduced and later killed while under the hypnotic influence of such beasts.
The creatures go beyond time and space and remain in a matrix that so far is unexplained yet remains deep in our subconscious minds.
We still respond to these images and they most certainly guide us magically through the real world.
Jung supposes that these primordial images bring us feelings of accumulated memory, and with enough thought and pondering can take on a life of their own. This can be felt and even seen by human beings that have had their individual opinions on logic stretched and molded to respond to ancient memories and images of so-called supernatural beings.
In truth, what these beings symbolize is something more than the obvious and immediate meaning.
In order to understand the evolution of thought forms and identifying that which is a basic human archetype, we must go back to the first man and woman and the Garden of Eden.
An archetype that has hidden in the shadows of the creation story is the serpentine woman known as Lilith. She has been known as “the goddess with a thousand names” if not more. She has many of the personality attributes that have been described in other so-called goddesses. In his book The White Goddess, poet Robert Graves described her:

The Goddess is a lovely, slender woman with a hooked nose, deathly pale face, lips red as rowan-berries, startlingly blue eyes, and long-fair hair; she will suddenly transform herself into sow, mare, bitch, vixen, she-ass, weasel, serpent, owl, she-wolf, tigress, mermaid or loathsome hag. Her names and titles are innumerable. In ghost stories she often figures as ‘The White Lady,’ and in ancient religions, from the British Isles to the Caucausus, as the ‘White Goddess.’ I cannot think of any true poet from Homer onwards who has not independently recorded his experience of her. The trest of a poet’s vision, one might say, is the accuracy of his portrayal of the White Goddess and of the island over which she rules. The reason why the hair stands on end, the eyes water, the throat is constricted, the skins crawls and a shiver runs down the spine when one writes or reads a true poem is that a true poem is necessarily an invocation of the White Goddess, or Muse, the Mother of All Living, the ancient power of fright and lust–the female spider or the queen-bee whose embrace is death.

She is the most popular identifying archetype in human culture. She dates as far back as 2000 years BC, and her image has been described and seen in ancient Sumerian tablets.
Lilith is usually depicted as a beautiful woman from the waist up and as a snake from the waist down. This same image has also been used to represent the demon Lamashtu or Abysuth. These are two other female demons that are considered child eaters.
Lilith is full of rage, rebellion and has a voracious sexual appetite. In later rabbinic tradition, she plays the role of the succubus. She has been called the “Bride of Satan” and according to Christian legend was the first wife of Adam.
In the Syrian Book of Baruch, an apocryphal work published at the time of Christ, Lilith is considered a siren of the sea. It says:

“I will call on the Sirens of the sea,
The Lillths who come who come out of the Wilderness
And on the Shedim and Tannim of the forests.”

As Siegmund Hurwitz explains in Lilith the First Eve: Historical and Psychological Aspects of the Dark Feminine, even today there is a belief in Greece that:

…The Sirens of Parnassus lure sailors in danger from a storm by bewitching songs in the hope of immanent salvation. The unhappy ones steer in the direction of theses sweet sounds, but the closer hey believe to be to the deceptive voices, the farther away these move and so they are tempted to sail on and on until eventually they are drowned.

Interestingly, one of the theories for the meaning of the name Melusine breaks it down into the Greek words “Melas-Leuke” meaning “Black and White.” Of course, that was probably a reference to the idea that she was a mixture of both light and dark energy, being a descendant of the Devil, rather than having any racial implication. The race Melusine came from was that of the Serpent.
This afternoon, my producer and I both went to Starbucks together and began discussing the company’s logo with the baristas. Let me tell you: it was awkward.
So the next time the people at Starbucks try to start an awkward conversation with you about race or religion, ask them why they work for a company that uses a logo featuring the daughter of Satan spreading her serpent legs. See if that doesn’t shut them up.

A Fully Transparent Solar Cell: This Could Make All Windows & Screens A Power Source

March 24, 2015 by Alanna Ketler http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/03/24/a-fully-transparent-solar-cell-this-could-make-all-windows-screens-a-power-source/

Another incredible technology has been invented by researchers at Michigan State University: a fully transparent solar concentrator which has the capability of turning any window or sheet of glass into a photovoltaic solar cell. Just think about the possibilities! You could keep your phone charged whenever you are outdoors or in the sun, power gadgets inside your home, and power functions on your car such as air conditioning.

According to lead researcher Richard Lunt, the team is confident that these transparent solar connectors can be efficiently used in numerous settings from “tall buildings with lots of windows or any kind of mobile device that demands high aesthetic quality like a phone or e-reader.”

Doesn’t This Already Exist?

Some of the other solar cell technologies that have come out claiming to be transparent, simply put, aren’t. Many have been trying to create such a thing, but it is a tough technology to develop because when you think about turning light into energy, and then you think about how light simply passes through glass, how is it even really possible? Other transparent wannabes are also known to cast a colorful shadow when the light does shine through.

Lunt stated an obvious observation about this: “No one wants to sit behind colored glass, it makes for a very colorful environment, like working in a disco. We take an approach where we actually make the luminescent active layer itself transparent.”

What Makes This Device Different?

The beauty of this device is that the solar concentrator that is harvesting the light for power can be layered on top of a clear piece of glass without completely weakening the sunlight’s ability to pass through it. The perimeter of the cell contains small photovoltaic strips, which means it is basically a miniaturized version of a solar panel. These react with infrared light, which is invisible to the naked eye and produces solar electricity.

Unfortunately at this time theses panels are only offering an efficiency of 1%, but researchers are confident that they can reach at least 5% in the near future. Sure, these aren’t huge figures overall, but multiply that by every window in a house, or car, and you can begin to see that this could be very beneficial, particularly for skyscrapers and office buildings where virtually every wall is just windows.

The Possibilities Are Endless

Just imagine being able to have these solar concentrators wherever you like without having to have those big, intrusive solar panels sticking out like a sore thumb. This makes energy from sunlight a lot more appealing to business and homeowners alike. Not too mention the fact that energy from the sun itself is virtually free! All you need is the solar connector and you are good to go.

The future of technology is exciting.
Much Love

The Coming of Transhuman Society

"Real Politik" with Dr. James Tracy - Interview 41: Sofia Smallstorm 03-15-2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXsGDOBqQwo

Interviews • Tags: geoengineering, social engineering, transhumanism, wireless technology

On this edition of Real Politik James speaks with Southern California-based independent researcher Sofia Smallstorm. She has written extensively on hidden agendas and complex events since her controversial work on 9/11.http://memoryholeblog.com/2015/03/18/the-coming-transhuman-society/

In the process of researching that topic, she discovered the phenomenon of artificial clouds, geoengineering, or “chemtrails.” From this Smallstorm came to acknowledge the presence of a synthetic biology agenda in the activities that constitute everyday life.

Smallstorm’s “From Chemtrails to Pseudolife” lectures explain the relationships between synthetic biology and radiation biology. In 2013 she began researching the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. The project resulted in her DVD, “Unraveling Sandy Hook in 2, 3, 4, and 5 Dimensions.” The presentation offers a different take on the use of staged events to shape society as we are moved to a posthuman world. Smallstorm is a graduate of Brown University, writes a monthly newsletter, Avatar Update, and hosts a biweekly series of podcasts. Her websites are aboutthesky.com and avatarproducts.com.

Interview Highlights

In this discussion Sofia discusses transhumanism, and how the state will use biotechnology and artificial intelligence to develop a transgender and eventually genderless citizenry and workforce to serve the transnational corporate state.

Smallstorm encountered the topic of transhumanism while she was researching geoengineering.

I was aware, as many people were, of the things that Clifford Carnicom was finding in his petrie dishes–the cultures that he was creating from tissue samples from people with Morgellons Syndrome, and also people without Morgellens. These were very resilient, very hearty forms of what is not exactly eukariotic cellular material. It’s got properties of the archaea in it. He was able to put Bunsen flames on these cultures and they would not perish. He was able to through bleach and other harsh chemicals on them and they would not perish. He concluded that something was fragmenting in us, and replicating by fragmentation, which is another property of archaea prokaryotes–not our life form. We are eukariotes. And this suggested to me that we were being prepared in some way, on a sub-tissue level.

Then, I just had this dawning when I watched The Age of Transitions by Aaron Franz, which was about transhumanism, Ray Kurzweil, artificial intelligence, and how we were going to be merged with machines. This was back in 2009, and I said, “Wow, this is what they’re doing. They are cultivating us in to something that’s passed what we are now–homo sapiens.” So, I tried to talk about it but I didn’t have much to go on.

As the years unfolded I got to know more about transhumanism. I was able to do the first talk, “From Chemtrails to Pseudolife: The Dark Agenda of Synthetic Biology.” And then I learned about piezoelectricity, and I realized that this was the real wireless electricity and it’s already in the body. The body already uses it. It has to do with crystals. It has to do with voltage created by putting frequencies on crystals, and vice versa. That sealed it for me. I knew that that’s what “they” were doing. And so I gave that second talk on radiation biology.

Audio Player

00:00

Use Left/Right Arrow keys to advance one second, Up/Down arrows to advance ten seconds.

00:00

Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

Download

Sofia asserts that such technology has been introduced throughout the environment to force humanity’s eventual transition to a transhumanist world. The technology “is being used to collapse us, thereby convert us, and force us biologically to go into adaptation mode,” she notes. “If biology cannot conquer something and get rid of it, it needs to and must adapt it, because the biological imperative is to survive and reproduce. So, there’s a giant observation process underway. We are walking laboratories, as a very wise person pointed out to me. We are free, of course. They don’t have to pay for us. In fact, they bill us for their medical care and the solutions they’re offering as we capsize. The conversion process is going to result in masses of casualties, and the enfeeblement of the human race. They are going to observe who capsizes in what way, what conditions are developed by what people at what age, and so forth. Ultimately, not everybody is going to keel over. Not everybody is going to lose all of their capabilities to survive. We’re going to adapt. Some of us are going to do it very well, and these are the prototypes for the next phase of humanity, which will be machine responsive, in terms of frequencies.”

Certain aspects of culture are increasingly emblematic of a developing world where “sustainability” will be paramount, and humans will be encouraged to harvest their own energy to drive personal electronic technology. For example, a new jewelry is now being designed called “energy addicts jewelry.””We’re being called energy addicts,” Smallstorm observes.  “We’ve been trained, very successfully, to never be without out little devices that require energy–our phones and our tablets, and everything in our houses. There is a woman in Israel, Naomi Kizhner, and she has designed jewelry that actually is invasive. It has spikes on either end. These spikes are inserted through your skin into your veins, and then they draw on the flow of your blood to turn these little dials in them, which will eventually create enough kinetic energy to produce electricity. This is what I call ‘human energy harvesting.’ She asks, ‘Will we be willing to sacrifice our bodies in order to produce the energy to run our gadgets and devices?’ Human resources is getting a whole new meaning now.”

Smallsorm also argues that the present controversy over vaccination indicates an increasingly aggressive statist orientation toward families and children. “The doctrine of parens patriae is all the way from English common law. It gave the king the obligation to look out for his subjects and protect them. And it’s being used in America, I learned several months ago, as the basis on which Child Protective Services can storm into a house and seize a child and confiscate that child, move it from its parents care, and ultimately the state owns your children. This is actual fact, the way they see it. I am now expanding the understanding of what parens patriae is, and how it will be uncloaked over the years to come. Because it’s now kind of hidden, and when I got that term it was another light bulb going off … And they’re going to eventually lay claim to our energy product, our work product, through the doctrine of parens patriae. They want to get at the stuff in our bodies.”