Government complicit in 9/11

Check out this awesome letter to the editor!! This is something we can all do, lets all send this to our local media. Just copy this article, print it out, and send it to your local papers. The only thing it needs is a way for a reader to follow up on their own, maybe a link to the David Ray Griffin article he mentions, or a link to your favorite 911 Truth site.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060110/NEWS/601100362/1022

Bush told us that Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11. We didn't question it, and it wasn't true.

Bush told us that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons. We didn't question it, and it wasn't true.

Bush told us that Saddam Hussein had mobile chemical labs to churn out weapons of mass destruction. We didn't question it, and it wasn't true.

Bush assured us that our government was always getting warrants when conducting domestic wire-tapping, that his administration would stop paying for fake news articles that were made to look real, that nobody in his administration broke Valerie Plame's cover, and that our government isn't torturing people or maintaining secret prisons in foreign countries. None of this was true.

And worst of all, Bush told us that the terror attacks of 9/11 were conducted entirely by foreign terrorists and that all of our defenses just happened to fail. We didn't question it. We didn't ask for a single shred of evidence. But this almost certainly wasn't true either.

I challenge everyone to read David Ray Griffin's essay, "The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot be True." It's on the internet. And Larry Silverstein, the WTC leaseholder, inadvertently admitted that controlled demolition brought down one of the buildings - just Google "Silverstein Pull It Comment." If you have the courage to open your mind and actually review the facts, you will agree that the evidence of government complicity in 9/11 is overwhelming.

Frank B. Haddleton

Burlington

Here's my favorite 9/11

Here's my favorite 9/11 site. Not only is it the best 9/11 site, but it's the greatest site ever created!!! :)

Yeah, but that site is run

Yeah, but that site is run by an idiot.

http://www.infowars.com is

http://www.infowars.com is the best 9/11 and New World Order truth website. Alex Jones was saying two months before the 9/11 attacks that the globalist elite were going to attack the city of New York and blame it on CIA asset Osama bin Laden. Alex Jones had a campaign in July into September 2001 asking people to call the White House and Congress to tell them that we know that the U.S. government is planning to carry out terrorist attacks in order to blame CIA asset Osama bin Laden, and Alex called this campaign "Operation Expose the Government Terrorists."

Below you can see video of a July 25, 2001 Austin, Texas cable access show of Alex Jones talking about his Operation Expose the Government Terrorists:

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/video/260804alexwarns.WMV

As well, Alex Jones was saying that the 9/11 attacks were a government-staged attack on day one, i.e., on the very day of September 11, 2001 itself. (Even I was saying this same thing that very morning to my coworkers at the time, even though I had only heard about the first plane strike via the mainstream media radio on my drive to work, and only heard about the rest that morning second hand from my coworkers. But then, I was already quite well educated about the Luciferian New World Order of the New Age.)

Alex Jones has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than anyone. Indeed, no one else even comes anywhere remotely close to Alex Jones when it comes to this. But that's because he is educated about the whole New World Order agenda, whereas many of the people posting on this blog are still naïve babes who are easily deceived by government propaganda. They don't realize that what is occuring now has been in the works for a long, long time.

And so such naïve babes fall for the government propaganda that we're all going to drop dead any second now unless the government steps in to run all our lives, necessitating massive increases in funding, power, and control for the government. Whether it has to do with the "Peak Oil" scam or the phoney "environmental" movement, such naïve dupes just eat it up. They don't comprehend that the 9/11 attacks have little to do with the Bushes or the neo-conmen. The globalist elite can throw such puppets away like a used condom and the agenda will still move forward. But the naïve babes believe in the fairy tale told to them growing up, that if they can just get the "right" people into office, and get the "baddies" out, then things will be better.

Such naïve babes have a very short outlook, politically speaking. Whereas the globalist elite play them like a fiddle, and in the chess board of life are many moves ahead of them. That's because such naïve dupes have had their entire Weltanschauung shaped since birth by the ruling elite, and the ruling elite have put in place many seemingly different political avenues which all lead to the same end.

The worst thing that ever happened to the cause of liberty was and is so-called public "education" (i.e., miseducation). This most definitely includes the universities (as well as so-called "private" schools), which are beholden to government. The Prussian-model miseducation system has worked very well for the ruling elite. Add to that the mass media and it becomes very hard for people to break out of their conditioning and see the entire picture.

Hey James, you're right, AJ

Hey James, you're right, AJ did call the attacks didn't he...

"Alex Jones has done more

"Alex Jones has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than anyone."

I don't agree with that statement. When's the last time he announced a 9/11 event? When I spoke with Violet, his wife, she offerered to have one of us on from 911Truth.org to tell people what they could be doing, etc... I haven't heard from them since, and have called a few times. Not to mention the fact that he has promoted a few questionable things in the past... ie.. Stanley Hilton, etc...

The Bush administration

The Bush administration implied the 9/11-Saddam connection. Bush himself was careful to go on camera and say "We've found no connection between Saddam Hussein and the Sept. 11th." That way, he could deny it was ever implied.

Meanwhile, Cheney and Pearl (who the fuck is Richard Pearl anyway? I never saw his name on a ballot anywhere, have you?) were busy saying just the opposite everywhere they went.

Standard procedure for these thugs.

Have you seen the film "Life

Have you seen the film "Life of Brian"? Remember the three groups, the "Judean People's Front", the "Front of the Judean People" and the "People's Judean Front"? who attacked each other rather than the Romans. And there was one guy that kept holding up the meeting because he thought that even though it was impossible, that men should have the right to have babies. Much wisdom in the Pythoners' humor.

I just submitted the letter under my name to the Chicago Suntimes. Keep your fingers crossed.

Btw, I agree with Mr.

Btw, I agree with Mr. Redford here. It's highly imperative that we try to keep the Truth Movement as non-partisan as possible.

The globalists play ball equally well with both sides.

"" "Alex Jones has done more

""
"Alex Jones has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than anyone."

I don't agree with that statement. When's the last time he announced a 9/11 event? When I spoke with Violet, his wife, she offerered to have one of us on from 911Truth.org to tell people what they could be doing, etc... I haven't heard from them since, and have called a few times. Not to mention the fact that he has promoted a few questionable things in the past... ie.. Stanley Hilton, etc...
""

What's a "9/11 event"? Alex Jones pretty much announced the actual 9/11 event even before it occured, going on the propaganda the U.S. government was putting out beforehand about how we should all give up our rights as Osama is about to attack us any second, and based upon the private warnings he was getting from the same FBI sources that were informing David Schippers, former Chief Council for the House Judiciary Committee, about these matters.

I take that you mean 9/11 truth gatherings. I can't much speak as to why Alex Jones hasn't promoted a number of these. What I can speak to is what I have seen Alex do. Alex has promoted 9/11 truth every show that he has done since the very day of the 9/11 attacks. He's made a number of videos since the 9/11 attacks detailing the truth regarding them, and tells people to make as many copies as they can and pass them out to people for free (of which regarding his previous videos he's been telling people to do even well before the 9/11 attacks). Not to mention his numerous websites which have been detailing 9/11 truths since day one. Also not to mention all the prominent people Alex has interviewed regarding the 9/11 attacks being an inside job.

If I were to speculate as to why Alex hasn't promoted a number of the 9/11 truth gatherings it would be that he probably doesn't agree with their ultimate poltical message (which, from what I have seen of them, is simply the New World Order system). Moreover, I don't think Alex believes that the way to make things better is to have gatherings of like-minded people, but rather educating our neighbors and acquaintances and speaking out on this every day in our usual lives. But that is speculation on my part; if you want to ask Alex yourself you can call into his show.

Nor am I aware about Stanley Hilton being "questionable." Perhaps you would care to explain what you mean as regards this. Although, even if Stanley Hilton is "questionable," I don't see how that would impinge negatively upon Alex Jones. Alex has interviewed Stanley Hilton, just as Alex has also interviewed David Ray Griffin (many times) and Michael C. Ruppert, which are two people who are ultimately detrimental, even if they do speak on some 9/11 truths (i.e., Griffin because he promotes a one-world government, i.e., the New World Order, which is quite literally a Satanic political philosophy, as, e.g., Revelation details the rise of a one-world government as a part of the Antichrist End-Times system; and Ruppert because he promotes the "Peak Oil" scam, which isn't the first time the globalist elite pulled this on us [i.e., the "Oil Crisis" of the 1970s], but people's memories are short.)

Hi guys, have you read

Hi guys, have you read Younghee Cha's book: After 9/11: A Korean Girl's Sexual Journey? If you haven't, prepare for a wild ride that will leave you with hope about our international situation. After 9/11, a Korean girl faces visa and financial problems while living in L.A. Along the way, she encounters her guilty feelings about her first love.. and embarks upon an erotic odyssey...by turns blissful, dangerous and bizarre. The first thing that struck me about her book is it's not only a journey into sexuality but into being human. It's a search for world peace and toward our longevity as a people. I almost cried when I took in the insights it had into the Iraq war and its relation to undocumented residency - especially the DREAM act. A brilliant merging of sexuality with politics happens when she nakedly performs the crane dance, the dance for world peace and longevity, for a powerful but sexually dysfunctional client.

I laughed out loud reading this and then sat silently mesmerized while absorbing its political and erotic content. Having so throroughly enjoyed it, I believe it's good to share this feeling with others, including those of us here who care so much about America's inclusiveness and ability to transcend a devastating but ultimately petty attack, about our wholeness as people - a variety of ethnicities with a myriad ways of experiencing life. This book concerns our future as a nation that represents all people. Check out more about it at its website - www.youngheecha.com.

James... I'm sorry... but I

James... I'm sorry... but I don't see Dr. Griffin as being detrimental, nor do I agree with your conclusion that he believes in a "New World Order"... He has stated himself he's not sure what he believes the "right" answer is. I don't think Michael Ruppert is detrimental to the movement either. #1 because he's not part of it anymore, and #2 he has turned on as many, if not more to the movement as Griffin...

In regards to Stanley

In regards to Stanley Hilton... the man who has the document that shows Bush signed off on 9/11... where is it?

i would like you to explain

i would like you to explain how you think David Ray Griffin endorses a "new world order" when his books expose one of their operations for what it is.please explain.

David Ray Griffin most

David Ray Griffin most certainly does promote the New World Order. He has said that he desires the formation of a one-world government, of which is the New World Order. Not only that, but it is quite literally a Satanic political philosophy, as, e.g., Revelation details the rise of a one-world government as a part of the Antichrist End-Times system (although all governments are necessarily [i.e., apodictically] Satanic, a one-world government is all the more Satanic for the very reason that it is the ultimate culmination of government).

For more on that matter, see the below article by me:

"Jesus Is an Anarchist," James Redford, revised and expanded edition, November 9, 2005:

http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/anarchist-jesus.pdf

And for a demolition of the "Peak Oil" scam, see my below post:

"The 'Peak Oil' Scam," December 5, 2005:

http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=54&mforum=libertyandtruth

And, Jon Gold, if what you say about Stanley Hilton claiming to have "the document that shows Bush signed off on 9/11" is accurate, then Stanley Hilton might be referring to 199I-WF-213589. Before the 9/11 attacks, as disclosed in the official FBI document numbered 199I-WF-213589 and which came from the FBI's Washington field office--of which was originally an order by former President Clinton and subsequently re-ordered by President George Bush, Jr.--the FBI was ordered to back-off of their investigations into the bin Laden family, the royal House of Saud, and suspected terrorist organizations with links to Osama bin Laden:

"Has someone been sitting on the FBI?," Greg Palast, BBC Newsnight, November 6, 2001 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm

"FBI claims Bin Laden inquiry was frustrated--Officials told to 'back off' on Saudis before September 11," Greg Palast and David Pallister, Guardian (U.K.), November 7, 2001 http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,589173,00.html

"Bush took FBI agents off Laden family trail," Rashmee Z. Ahmed, Times News Network, November 7, 2001 http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1030259305
http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/articleshow?art_id=10302...

"US agents told: Back off bin Ladens," Sydney Morning Herald, November 7, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20011109180353/http://www.smh.com.au/news/011...

"Bush thwarted FBI probe against bin Ladens," Agence France-Presse (AFP), November 7, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20011108002028/http://www.hindustantimes.com/...

"US agents told to back off bin Ladens," Ananova, November 7, 2001 http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_443114.html

"US agents were told to 'back off Bin Ladens'," Independent Online, November 7, 2001 http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=3&art_id=qw1005113520874B221

Very much related to the above articles, see also the below very important article:

"Called Off the Trail?--FBI Agents Probing Terror Links Say They Were Told, 'Let Sleeping Dogs Lie,'" Brian Ross and Vic Walter, ABC News, December 19, 2002 http://web.archive.org/web/20021220054102/http://www.abcnews.go.com/sect...

No. Hilton said he had a

No. Hilton said he had a document that literally signed off on 9/11. As far as DRG calling for a "One-World Government", do you have a source for that?

By all means point out that

By all means point out that Bush has repeatedly lied - and he did so about 9/11. But keep in mind that people's sensory mechanisms are 80% visually oriented. ie we accept information 80% of the time through our eyes. This is why showing people videos about 9/11 is the best strategy (eg Loose Change)

And this is why you should especially include in your submissions to the media the special case of the Osama fake 'confession' video.(http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/binladinvideo.html)

It's 'shock and awe' factor is amazing. But it will also show you what you are up against. I have approached numerous media columnists who are happy to provide cheap putdowns to the usual 9/11 cristicisms I make. But at least they talk to me. But if I point them to a website of the false confession video, they clam up totally. It's too confronting. They just can't accept the contradiction between what they are seeing and what they have been told. So they just never mention it and go away.

But this isn't a bad thing. US media (and Bush) have been using propoganda 'shock and awe' for quite some time - and it works! It's about time the method was used on them. A bad thing, you say? Your trying to get people onside? Maybe. But keep this in mind: most journalists aren't too bright and value their social identity above everything else. Also, everybody tells them they're wonderful. So they get to believing it. They even have pidgeon holes for everything you say. And most of them have a filing cabinet of 9/11 stuff right next to lizards and aliens. So stopping them in their tracks is not a bad thing.

Here's a tactic for you: send a picture of the false Osama and a big sign saying "Aren't you happy they lied to you?" - then refer them to a website.

There are two other points you might like to consider:

(1) Ignore the media, go direct to the public: hand out flyers, talk to friends etc.

(2) Another very useful question to ask is: "You know the US government has admitted that a foreign nation assisted the 9/11 hijackers - and we haven't invaded them yet. Would you like to know which one?" Then refer them to the PBS Lehrer Hour interview with Sen Bob Graham in which he admits that a foreign nation was involved (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/july-dec02/intelligence_12-11.html)

I used to believe that people would respond if only they knew. That's not true. The media is comfortable and lazy. They need to be shaken up. The public doesn't know the evidence contradictions. Their curiosity needs to be aroused.

Go Hard!

"Have you seen the film

"Have you seen the film "Life of Brian"? Remember the three groups, the "Judean People's Front", the "Front of the Judean People" and the "People's Judean Front"? who attacked each other rather than the Romans. And there was one guy that kept holding up the meeting because he thought that even though it was impossible, that men should have the right to have babies. Much wisdom in the Pythoners' humor."

This says everything there is to say about all the folly in so-called 9/11 truth movement.

Jon Gold, 199I-WF-213589

Jon Gold, 199I-WF-213589 would be a document that literally signs off on the 9/11 attacks. What exactly is it that you're expecting, a document in George Bush, Jr.'s handwriting that says something along the lines of, "I, President of the United States of American, George W. Bush, do hereby authorize BlackOp agents of the U.S. government to stage massive Hegelian dialectical PsyOps attacks upon properties and persons within the domain of the United States on the date of September 11, 2001 in order that the U.S. government may obtain more funding, power, and control. [signed] George W. Bush"?

Somehow I don't think such a blatant document ever existed, even though all the evidence proves that was the operative intent of those who control the U.S. government, with Bush merely being one among many of their political figureheads. That's not how BlackOps are done. Obviously it would make no sense for the President to give official authorization for a BlackOps act that is illegal to begin with. The President would only be officially involved to the extent necessary. In this case getting well-meaning FBI agents off the back of the Arab U.S. government agents involved in creating the "legend" backstory of the 9/11 attacks--hence 199I-WF-213589, first authorized by Clinton and then by Bush.

Now, Jon Gold, if you would please tell me wherein I can find where Stanley Hilton said that he held the document George Bush, Jr. signed-off on the 9/11 attacks along the lines of the crude manner which I presented above, which you are apparently suggesting, then I would be appreciative.

As to the fact that David Ray Griffin supports the creation of and existence of a one-world government, what would even be the point of me proving this fact to you, Jon Gold? Once I go ahead and prove this fact to you you're just going to create an excuse as to why that's hunky-dory.

In other words, I must be a liar if I say something as truly bad as that about David Ray Griffin. But if I prove that what I'm saying is true about him then all of a sudden David Ray Griffin's promotion of a one-world government is alright.

But just so you know that I'm not pulling magical rabbits out of my ass and that I do indeed know what I'm talking about, below you can see where David Ray Griffin in his own words supports the creation of a one-world government. Not that me proving myself correct on this subject even matters, as I'm sure you'll just create a psychological rationalization as to why it's all cheery.

"David Ray Griffin Responds & So Do I, (With Links on 'Sustainable Development' Scam)":

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze25x9n/id25.html

"One of your reasons [to beware of David Ray Griffin] appears to be that both I and Richard Falk, the author of the Foreword to my book, are 'one world government aficionados.' It is certainly true that I am in favor of global democracy and have been working on a rather big book on this topic for many years. But I was surprised that you would assume that there is something 'creepy' to what I have in mind without looking at my arguments and the particular form of 'world government' that I advocate."--David Ray Griffin, September 13, 2004