http://www.myspace.com/foolmetwicethemovie

This well-crafted, well-documented film from Australia exposes the 2002 Bali Bombings as yet another case of False Flag Terror.

Using a formula that has worked so well for the Loose Change crew, the filmmaker has crafted a very watchable piece that flows well, with interesting visuals, a soundtrack that moves from hip to emotionally engaging, and most importantly, and most damaging of all to the powers that be... the Truth.

"Fool Me Twice" examines well-known examples of False Flag terror, and adds an excellent new sequence about the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that leaves the viewer with no doubt that Emad Salem was a controlled asset. Utilizing audio that features Salem covertly recorded while talking with FBI agent John Anticev, "Fool Me Twice" cuts to the chase regarding the 1993 bombing, and goes deeper, examining the CIA's links to this milieu.

Author Naomi Wolf draws parallels between nascent fascist states and the United States. This is not necessarily a 9/11 video, but the relationship should be obvious. This recent interview sums up her point of view, very interesting and informed perspective. Here's a little photo essay to go along.

(Digg is for the OpEd News version)
The Committee on Homeland Security will soon begin to flesh out more bills that will affect everyone on U.S. soil. It's important to make it clear to Rep. Harman's Subcommittee that testimony which has no basis in fact will be challenged every step of the way, before legislation is drawn up that makes outlaws out of what one Committee considers "conspiracy theorists". I urge anyone who has questions about 9/11, anyone who wants to see a new investigation, to write to the Subcommittee and let them know, if I may quote the Big Lebowski, "This agression will not stand... man."

November 16, 2007

U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Homeland Security
176 Ford House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Att: Jane Harman, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment.

Dear Jane Harman,

As Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment (Committee on Homeland Security) I want to bring to your attention what appears to me a troubling tendency by two of the witnesses that testified at the November 6, 2007 Hearing, “Using the Web as a Weapon: the Internet as a Tool for Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism”. I hereby submit this open letter to you, cc'ed to the Subcommittee.

(You can hear Peter Dale Scott talk about "The Road to 9/11", in this interview with Bonnie Faulkner, which aired October 10, 2007.)
(A slightly older video here, from August 8, 2007 - good biographical background on Scott, as well as a long talk about the book.)

"9/11 was the largest homicide by far in American history, yet it has never been adequately investigated. The public has been told of a conspiracy that included terrorist conspirators organized and financed abroad. But if U.S. defenses had functioned on that day as they had previously, the four planes at a minimum should have been intercepted by fighter aircraft. Yet we are told that even this did not happen. There is a domestic side to 9/11 as well, about which we still know next to nothing. Key evidence requested by the commission was initially withheld until subpoenas were issued, and some evidence was deliberately destroyed. Worse, there are systematic suppressions of evidence in the 9/11 Commission Report itself, along with unresolved contradictions in testimony and occasional misrepresentations of some crucial facts.

This chapter and the next will explore these issues and make the case that Vice President Cheney is himself a suspect in the events of 9/11 who needs to be investigated further."

- Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11, p.194 (emphasis added)

In a major new book from the The University of California Press, author Peter Dale Scott turns up the heat on the George Walker Bush administration, (with a spotlight focused firmly on Vice President Cheney), and presents a carefully researched scholarly volume that offers several challenges to the official narrative of 9/11 as presented in the 9/11 Commission Report.

Scott's case against Cheney is presented toward the end of a text that is much more than just another volume focused on the events of 9/11. With the craftsmanship of a published author and English Professor, Scott uses his expertise to take the reader on a guided tour of recent American history, placing 9/11 within a context-rich environment rife with malfeasance, malice, and the never-ending meddling of rich and powerful entities, through proxy politicians and organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Heritage Foundation.

The Bay of Pigs invasion is another example of a "False-Flag" operation, replete with airplanes re-painted to disguise their true origins, an actual attack, (on Cuba), and a complex cover story that unraveled quickly as the operation went down the tubes.

The book "The Invisible Government" by David Wise and Thomas B. Ross chronicles the debacle of this bungled operation, but paints JFK as a fully witting participant in the operation. This is contradicted by testimony by, among others, RFK, in the book, "Operation Zapata", a book that researcher John Hankey uses as source material in his underground film, "JFK II: The Bush Connection". (Pertinent screen caps here.)

Things are gettin' out of hand there! Are you all ok?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/23/wildfire.ca/index.html

A GlobalResearch.ca exclusive.

The Military Drills of September 11th: Why a New Investigation is Needed

by Elizabeth Woodworth - 9/27/2007

Information regarding military exercises is classified and difficult to research. Though there was unusually high and confusing drill activity on 9/11, this strange coincidence has not gained much public notice. This essay quotes military officials from their own magazines, and compares their statements to what the 9/11 Commission wrote about the so-called surprise factor, and also to the Commission's position that the drills aided the response.

Though both the 9/11 Commission Report and members of the Bush Administration repeatedly stated that the use of planes as weapons could not have been predicted, other official sources indicate that military exercises had been underway to counteract this very possibility.

1. Was it a Surprise that Hijacked Planes Were Used as Weapons on 9/11?

The element of surprise has been widely given (and quoted) as the reason why the 9/11 attacks were so successful against the world’s greatest military power.

Before proceeding to the statements on both sides of the issue, the context for these attacks should be understood in light of three defense procedures which were unusually and significantly changed in the months preceding 9/11:

1. A May 8th 2001 Statement by the President gave responsibility for coordinating, training and planning all national defense programs related to weapons of mass destruction to Vice President Cheney, whose office was not part of the National Command Authority. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta testified before the 9/11 Commission that he was present and observed Dick Cheney in the Presidential Emergency Operating Center tracking the position of Flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. “Based on Norm Minetta's testimony and other information, it appears that the military have regarded Cheney as a ‘Deputy Commander-in-Chief’. They also understand that he is the real power behind the throne...It appears that Vice President Dick Cheney was in charge of all the many air defense exercises that took place on the morning of September 11, 2001."

2. The 1997 hijacking scramble protocol CJCSI 3610, which distinguished emergent situations (requiring immediate action between the FAA and the military) from non-emergent situations (requiring decision input from the highest levels of the DoD) was rewritten June 1, 2001, as ordered by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. As a result, the number of fighter-interceptor scrambles fell from the usual average of 7-8 per month before the rewrite, to zero during the 3.3 months before September 11th, and to zero on September 11th itself.

3. Changes in the dates of annual and semi-annual military air defense exercises resulted in an unprecedented concentration of air drills on September 11th, and included hijackings and drills in which planes hit buildings. These will be explored later.

The transfer of two line defense roles to senior members of the Bush-Cheney Administration, paired with the concentration of air drills on the day itself, raise serious questions regarding the success of the attacks.

Continued...
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6906

Is the segment referred to in this blog entry viewable online anywhere?

http://911blogger.com/node/10425

After much trial and error, we have re-introduced real-time comments. This is due to the massive amount of feedback from site users.

However, we do have some favors to ask:

If you find a back-and-forth comment exchange extending to the full length of the page, start a new thread at the 911blogger section at www.truthaction.org . Invite the user you are trading comments with to the thread. Otherwise, I or one of the other team members will ask you to do so.

Refrain from proselytizing about specific theories that time and again, the majority of users at 911blogger.com have rejected. This includes: TV Fakery, DEW theories and Holocaust Revisionism. For nearly two years, when these topics are raised at this site, the users who post the topics are shouted down, and voted down. The theories are attacked. Whether the users posting the topics are zealous or just curious, the reaction is the same. We can't control this. We can't force people to moderate their tone on these topics either. The internet is a big place, find a message board with a community that wants to talk about these topics rather than trying to change the community at 911blogger, because advised by our experience, this is not likely to happen. Posting about those three topics will get your real-time posting ability "pulled".

Don't attack other users. Just don't do it. If you are offended by a post, vote it down and appeal to a Team Member to moderate. You are not the 911blogger police. If you feel a need to debate a user about one of their posts, resolve it via email (users are recommended to enable the Personal Contact Form in their profiles for this purpose), or invite the user to a debate at www.truthaction.org or another message board of your choice. Again, constantly picking fights with other users will land you in the drunk tank (Moderation Queue).

Sorry this took so long.

reprehensor
Somebigguy
George Washington

What would it be?

Philip Zelikow to speak at Chautauqua Institution, Jamestown, NY, August 9th, 2007.

Senator Gravel has been very supportive of the idea of a new 9/11 investigation.

He has a staff that is very friendly to 9/11 skeptics, and if we can show the campaign that we want a candidate that will stand with us, Gravel could be that man.

All 9/11 skeptics are hereby called upon to write an email to the Gravel campaign to invite Mike to attend the WeAreChange/Alex Jones fundraiser in NYC, or to come and join the festivities in Washington on 9/11/07.

No form-letter-template here, use your own words, and let Gravel know that you want a candidate who isn't scared to look 9/11 in the eye.

info(at)gravel2008.us

(Feel free to make the letter an open letter and post as a comment below.)

Recent research by authors Nafeez Ahmed, and Diana Ralph, points to the year 1979 as a turning point for Western policy that on the one hand began to facilitate covert warfare and destabilization via the Mujihadeen in Afghanistan, and on the other began to propagate a meme that has become known as "International Terrorism". Most recently, Ahmed gave a talk at the Indian YMCA in London that reiterates his focus on that year.(1)

1979 was definitely pivotal for the United States, as the CIA convinced President Jimmy Carter to sign off on covert operations in Afghanistan, before the Soviet invasion, that would ultimately produce "al Qaeda".(2) Research that dates back to 1982 reveals that at the same time that the CIA was incubating the nascent 'Arab Foreign Legion' in Afghanistan, in Israel, some familiar names were busily framing the concept of "International Terrorism" at the 'Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism'. A paper by a student named Phillip Paul titled, “International Terrorism”: The Propaganda War, (available at the San Francisco State University Library for review), has been cited separately by independent researcher Diana Ralph as well as Ahmed.

(Continued after the jump)

Writer Kevin Quirk is seeking stories of 9/11 Truth:

Dear 911 Bloggers,

I am seeking help and participation in a book I am writing on the 9/11 Truth movement.

As an author, editor, personal historian, and journalist who has written about 9/11 Truth for Online Journal, I am seeking personal accounts of 9/11 truthers from all over the U.S. and worldwide. I would greatly appreciate anyone's response to these three questions:

1) How and when did you first got involved in seeking the truth about 9/11?

2) What one piece of evidence or one specific resource (DVD, book, website, etc.) has been the most convincing to you in rejecting the "official" story of 9/11?

3) How has your search for 9/11 truth impacted your life?

Whatever you share will be helpful to me. Write as informally as you'd like. Simply tell me about some of your experiences, feelings, and beliefs about 9/11 and the movement to bring forward the truth about it. I may be back in touch with brief follow-up questions later, and I will only include anything you write in my book with your express permission to do so.

Dear Mr. Foxman,

Regarding your statement about Rep. Keith Ellison, I must say that it is mostly wrongheaded, and probably fueled by a desire to "catch the wave" of publicity generated by the dissemination of Ellison's remarks.

To begin with, when you say that Ellison's remarks regarding the Reichstag Fire and the events of 9/11 are outrageous and offensive to all Americans, you're way off base.

In fact, scientific polls of American residents, (if not all of them citizens), show a deep skepticism regarding the events of 9/11. This is only logical following the fraudulent entry into Iraq, the whitewash known as the "Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States", the outing of CIA agents detailed to track WMDs, the purging of lawyers disloyal to the regime, rampant election fraud, the dismemberment of the Constitution, and the cold-blooded murder of the Bill of Rights. (And you do remember habeas corpus, don't you?)

Ahmed's Rashid's "Taliban" is an oft-cited history of Afghanistan that chronicles the rise of the Taliban. Along the way, Rashid drops some useful information that he has gathered during his on-the-ground, on-the-scene journalism expeditions:

"...in 1986, CIA chief William Casey had stepped up the war against the Soviet Union by taking three significant, but at that time highly secret, measures. He had persuaded the U.S. Congress to provide the Mujaheddin with American-made Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to shoot down Soviet planes and provide U.S. advisers to train the guerrillas. Until then no US-made weapons or personnel had been used directly in the war effort. The CIA, Britain's MI6 and the ISI also agreed on a provocative plan to launch guerrilla attacks into the Soviet Socialist Republics of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the soft Muslim underbelly of the Soviet state from where Soviet troops in Afghanistan received their supplies. The task was given to the ISI's favourite Mujaheddin leader Gulbuddin Hikmetyar. In March 1987, small units crossed the Amu Darya river from bases in northern Afghanistan and launched their first rocket attacks against villages in Tajikistan. Casey was delighted with the news, and on his next secret trip to Pakistan he crossed the border into Afghanistan with President Zia to review the Mujaheddin groups.

Thirdly, Casey committed CIA support to a long-standing ISI initiative to recruit Muslims from around the world to come to Pakistan and fight with the Afghan Mujaheddin. The ISI had encouraged this since 1982 and by now all the other players had their reasons for supporting the idea." p.129