Career Intelligence Officer Blames Cheney

Keep President & SecDef, Fire the VP, DNI, and DCI

Robert David STEELE Vivas, a career intelligence officer who went on to found the Marine Corps Intelligence Command and then the international Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) movement, spoke today in praise of Mary McCarthy, and simultaneously called for the resignation of Vice President Dick Cheney, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Negroponte, and Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Porter Goss.

"This is a no-brainer. Dick Cheney personally destroyed the Boren-McCurdy National Security Act of 1992. Dick Cheney personally blew off the warnings on 9-11 and chose to focus on secret deals with Enron and Exxon, and missile defense, as well as a war on Iraq where the only winners are Halliburton and other friends of the Vice President who have looted tens of billions from the U.S. taxpayer. Dick Cheney, more than any other single individual, personally sidelined Secretary of State Colin Powell, gave the accommodating Secretary of Defense his marching orders, and single-handedly destroyed the entire U.S. policy process across all topics, from Defense to Diplomacy to Economy to Treasury.

This article is not 9/11 based, but has an interesting quote worth noting.

Thanks Matthew for the heads up!

http://www.rense.com/ lots

http://www.rense.com/

lots of stuff on the a-3 sky warrior that hit the pentagon on 9-11-01

http://www.rense.com/general7

http://www.rense.com/general70/tarp.htm

was it a sky warrior wing under the blue tarp at the pentagon?

a-3 pentagon pictures at

a-3 pentagon pictures at rense are very very interesting.

Guess who's our next

Guess who's our next president?

http://www.pollingreport.com/

Rudy Giuliani !!

i thought it was agreed that

i thought it was agreed that the "tarp" was a tent.

I must admit that Jim

I must admit that Jim Hoffman has really helped me realize that AA77 may have struck the pentagon after all.

One of my main problems was the acrobatic maneuvers supposedly made by the inept pilot, Hani Hanjour. But hoffman answers this up by suggesting auot pilot:

"Although the adjustments required to maintain the shallow angle of descent may have challenged a human pilot, they would seem an easy task for a 757's autopilot, with its ability to read instruments and adjust control surfaces accordingly with great speed and accuracy."

That, and much more about the Pentagon, is stated my Hoffman here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

The tarp/tent pic has

The tarp/tent pic has already been explained. If you notice, they are walking towards the Pentagon with it.

http://img4.picsplace.to/img4/20/Blue_tarp.jpg

But the pics of the purported wing segments are very interesting.

I submitted this story

I submitted this story having come to a realisation.

Im an ethics student, and I think I could write a convincing paper to show that on a moral basis, the distinction between LIHOP and MIHOP is only one of audacity, but not of ethical severity.

I view LIHOP in the following way: Imagine you worked security in an apartment building, and you wanted a resident of the building dead so that you could sleep with his wife. You also know that this guy is being stalked by a well known mental patient that has escaped.

So, when the mental patient comes to the building, you happily let him in, because you yourself want the guy to be murdered. You cover the evidence of letting him in by forging security tapes and whatnot, and orchastrate the surrounding events so that everyone is so upset that a man was murded in their building, the question of who let him in is forgotton. You do this all purposefully.

In this situation, its fair to say that you have used the deranged mental patient as a tool for a purposeful murder, as it is your direct action that brought the murder about, which you did knowingly and with intent.

Note, that this is NOT what I think actually happened on 9/11, and as we are concerned with the truth, the benifits of such an argument are purely for the sake of perspecuity.

In my experience, also, once the moral blurring of MIHOP and LIHOP have been made clear, the believer in the fable is more likely to accepta that MIHOP would, could and did take place. I think its amazing how many people (especially in britain) will accept LIHOP fairly easily, but will deny MIHOP on the basis of "they would never do that".

I think showing that in the eyes of God it amounts to pretty much the same thing will make the ground for accepting the truth more fertile.

That is a very fine essay,

That is a very fine essay, Matthew Day!

When those who accept LIHOP but deny MIHOP based on "they would never do that", ask them who would have believed that "patriot" Hitler would murder millions of men, women, & children in concentration camps!

Press Conference at wtc7 at

Press Conference at wtc7 at 2;30 with silverstein TODAY!

Matthew, exactly. I've never

Matthew,

exactly. I've never understood why LIHOP should be seen as a smaller crime than MIHOP. If the end result is the same, it doesn't matter is the crime was allowed to happen or was made to happen.

However, in practice, I don't believe LIHOP could have resulted in the amount of devastation we saw on 9/11.