>
>Things aren't right about Andrew >Grove. WATCH OUT!!
>
>No ...
>

I agree one have to be cautios here. Especially when there's nothing really NEW about what he says, like the Pentagon $ trillions, he could have just read it himself on the web and is promoting himself now with it.

I've seen such people in discussions elsewhere, they have a little bit of info, like, OK, he was working in the WTC, and was at the scene. But then blows it out of proportion by feeding you tiny bits of new info mixed with TONs of what you already know until after hours you might discover it leads nowhere (like Hopsicker).

What we really need is some TIP with absolute precision where to look. Which trail of evidence to follow. Like a clear statement when was the WTC7 prepared for demolition, and what Silversteins role truly was. Or where the WTC steel was really being brought and where some of it might still be hidden.

Remember TomFlocco.com reported that Flight 77 'passenger' Barbara Olson was arrested recently. There ought to be a followup to that. Where are these passengers, what names have they now?

im telling you, that scumbag Clinton is a very, very smart guy. those comments on the towers were clearly very calculated.
i mean shit, why the hell would he even be talking about that in the first place? what context was that in?
Chris | Homepage | 05.31.06 - 6:27 pm | #

Yeah, that's what I thought the day I heard it live on TV. It seemed like a way to subtly reinforce the OV to the parents and grads that day (and whoever caught it on TV). Very calculated, I thought. Especially the bit about the absence of concrete.

i mean shit, why the hell would he even be talking about that in the first place? what context was that in?

Regarding blueprints:
Here's an article that tries to analyze the WTC collapses, and demands that blueprints be released:
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/wtc-demolition.htm

It's crazy that this post got 17- (troll ratings):

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/5/30/171451/602/98#c98

He says that the FEMA report even states they don't know what happened with WTC7. He even gives them a specific page.

Apparently they'd rather mark troll than read. It's the most specific citation in the whole thread and also the most troll-rated.

benthere: I just recommended it. :)

"I'll read the article and that's it."

And perhaps recommend it, or can even recommending a controversial diary cause one to be ousted from Kos? That what the FAQ seemed to say.

At this time in the 9-11 truth revolution this man stands up to inform us that the situation is much worse then we need to prove our case. Although his story is compelling he spends most of his statement informing us about himself and how his actions have affected his life. Credibility doesnÂ’t start with playing the victim, it starts with self sacrifice, and you are not sacrificing if you have already lost everything as he says that he has.

If I had information that I wanted to share with the American public I would use the excellent work, the factual scientific work of others as a sounding board for my own evidence thus both enforcing my own credibility and that of a growing movement. Credibility is a valuable commodity when sharing information with the public. At this time for the 9-11 truth movement to have to step back to re-establish credibility would be the same as denying the credibility already attained; which only can harm an already strong community and effort.

It is just an opinion...

Please go to my Canadian friend Corinne Allen's web site. www.yayacanada.com She has an interesting take on Richard Grove. She is very skeptical and makes some good points. I also have my doubts about this man's credibility. Some how he seems too good to be true.

Ok, most of us probably haven't digested Grove's article yet. Unfortunately, that libertypirate^ double-talk is of no use in determining anything.

To good to be true- flame him???

Sorry guys, we just should check the facts he presentend...

And afterwards we can decide, what a meaning we have of him!

I found this while browsing through wiki. It amused me, especially the bit at the end

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-1-1

"When the 9-1-1 system was originally introduced, it was advertised as the "nine-eleven" service. This was changed when some panicked individuals tried to find the "eleven" key on their telephones. (This may seem bizarre and amusing, but it is important to remember that in emergencies people can easily become extremely confused and irrational.) Therefore, all references to the telephone number 9-1-1 are now always made as nine-one-one — never as "nine-eleven".

Some newspapers and other media require that references to the phone number be formatted as 9-1-1; nine-eleven is still used occasionally but less so since the term came to refer to the September 11 attacks in the United States, as most Americans write dates month/day. It is advised that members of the media or other persons writing or speaking of the events of September 11, 2001 should never refer to those events as nine-one-one as this causes even more confusion."

I dont think I need to comment on how amusing this is. Especially considering what Grove said about AT&T. At the top of this article;

" The burden then fell on the Federal Communications Commission, which then met with AT&T in November 1967 in order to come up with a solution.

In 1968, a solution was agreed upon. AT&T had chosen the number 911, which met the requirements that it be brief, easy to remember, dialed easily, and that it worked well with the phone systems in place at the time."

libertypirate, genuine credibility doesn't come with who one is, but whether what one says is true.

If Richard Andrew Grove is telling the truth, then it seems worthly to research it further.

On a political and economics basis, one flaw I found in Richard Andrew Grove's speech was near the end, wherein he said something to the effect of capitalism having run amok.

The word Richard Andrew Grove and almost all other critics of so-called "capitalism" are looking for is *mercantilism*--as the system they are describing is governmental insiders using the apparatus of the state to favor certain businesses over others who do not have said governmental insider connections.

This fact is quite ironic, as it means that the useful-idiot socialists fighting against so-called "capitalism" are in fact fighting against socialism, i.e., government control over the economy (of which mercantilism is merely a subset, as is fascism and communism). Governments love this and indeed institute this very thinking, as so long as the masses are caught up in begging for more government then its place (and hence power, control and funding) is secure. All the while, the option of *liberty* is never on the table, so far as the options the ruling elite present us.

And so the masses are scared to death of liberty. They fear liberty above all else, because they have been systematically conditioned to fear their only genuine escape from slavery and insecurity. Thus the masses fight against liberty as if it were Death itself come to consume them. And they really do believe it is, more or less.

And so they'll argue with you. They'll tell you how they really do need to be ruled over. They'll tell you how freedom could never work. They will literally argue for their own enslavement. And so they are enslaved, because they cannot wrap their minds around the concept of liberty: that liberty is not something to fear, but is the only thing that can provide them genuine security and wealth--wealth beyond all imagining.

For those who would like to tackle the scary boogeyman of Liberty, below are some excellent articles concerning the nature of government, of liberty, and the free-market production of defense:

"The Anatomy of the State," Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer 1965), pp. 1-24. Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (Washington, D.C.: Libertarian Review Press, 1974), pp. 55-88:

http://www.mises.org/easaran/chap3.asp

"Defense Services on the Free Market," Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, Chapter 1 from Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City, Kansas: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; originally published 1970):

http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/marketdefense.html

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/power&market.pdf

"The Private Production of Defense," Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Winter 1998-1999), pp. 27-52:

http://www.mises.net/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf

http://www.mises.org/journals/scholar/Hoppe.pdf

"Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security," Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Winter 1989), pp. 27-46:

http://www.mises.net/journals/jls/9_1/9_1_2.pdf

"Police, Courts, and Laws--On the Market," Chapter 29 from The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism, Prof. David D. Friedman (La Salle, Illinois: Open Court Publishing Co., 1989; originally published 1971):

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freedom/MofF_Chap...

Concerning the ethics of human rights, the below book is the best book on the subject:

The Ethics of Liberty, Prof. Murray N. Rothbard (New York, New York: New York University Press, 1998; originally published 1982):

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp

If one desires a solid grounding in economics then one can do no better than with the below texts:

Economic Science and the Austrian Method, Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Auburn, Alabama: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1995):

http://www.mises.org/esandtam.asp

"Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics," Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, On Freedom and Free Enterprise: The Economics of Free Enterprise, Mary Sennholz, editor (Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand, 1956), pp. 224-262. Reprinted in The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School, Murray N. Rothbard (London, England: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255:

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/toward.pdf

Man, Economy, and State, Prof. Murray N. Rothbard (Auburn, Alabama: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, second edition, 2004; originally published 1962):

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/mes.asp

Power and Market: Government and the Economy, Prof. Murray N. Rothbard (Kansas City, Kansas: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; originally published 1970):

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/power&market.pdf

These texts ought to be read in the order listed above. I would also add to the above list the below book:

America's Great Depression, Prof. Murray N. Rothbard (Auburn, Alabama: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, fifth edition, 2000; originally published 1963):

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf

The above book concerns the how governments create depressions (i.e., nowadays called recessions) through credit expansion.

The small book Economic Science and the Austrian Method by Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe doesn't get into political theory, but only concerns the methodological basis of economics (i.e., the epistemology of economics). I would recommend that everyone read this article *first* if they're at all interested in economics. There exists much confusion as to what economics is and what it is not. This article is truly great in elucidating the nature of what economics is and what it is not. If one were to read no other texts on economics, then this ought to be the one economic text that one reads. Plus it doesn't take all that long to read it.

---

"The State is the coldest of all cold monsters."--Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

"The question is not who should rule, but whether anyone should rule."--Roy Childs

"I heartily accept the motto, 'That government is best which governs least'; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe--'That government is best which governs not at all'; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."--Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience (1849)

Oh NO!!!

with James Redford we have a free-market-fascist in the house!

It was wonderful while the BUSINESS SCHOOL ARSEHOLE IDIOLOGUES wer absent.
Now we are going to hear their evil rants.. Jesus was a capitalist, yeah right. Mises, Milton Friedman, Hayek ... soon you arrive at the NEOCON POPE Leo Strauss and other fascists.

A. Rüstow is the only economist you should take seriously.

after the war he wrote:

Das Versagen des Wirtschaftsliberalismus, 1945 The failure of economic liberalism... the title says it all. Hitler and the corporations... nuff said.

To what extent does Grove's discussions about enterprise architecture software either parallel, intersect with, illuminate, support or negate the "testimony" of Indira Singh in re: PROMIS?

Is it possible that some readers or listeners of the Grove material or the Singh material do not "get it" because they do not have a good understanding of what this software is, or can do?

For the average American, I'd bet that much of this is over their heads, outside their personal or professional experience, etc. This also may help us understand the American public's lack of outrage about the NSA surveillance issues... because they don't understand that it's not about listening ot them talk to their Aunt Mabel or anyone else... it's about creating a profile through which they can selectively target and destroy anyone who raises so much as an eyebrow. Here, they are not likely concerned with you and I, but more with people who are in positions to "play ball" politically, corporately, etc.

If you and I were to sit down and conceive and construct a product or a service that were to effectively compete with one of their chosen, they'd be able to read our "blueprints" before we could get them off the printer.

If you and I and a few others were to conceive an effective tactic to be used in a legislative maneuver next week, they'd have the counter-ploy up and running before we arrived.

The effect of this is that we no longer play on a level playing field. That's inherently unfair, inherently depressing, inherently against the American spirit, and not in sync with "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

I believe in conspiracies

John Laughland says the real nutters are those who believe in al-Qa*eda
and weapons of mass destruction, * The Spectator, 17 January 2004.

Believing in conspiracy theories is rather like having been to a grammar
school: both are rather socially awkward to admit. Although I once sat
next to a sister-in-law of the Duke of Norfolk who agreed that you can*t
believe everything you read in the newspapers, conspiracy theories are
generally considered a rather repellent form of intellectual low-life, and
their theorists rightfully the object of scorn and snobbery. Writing in the Daily Mail last week, the columnist Melanie Phillips even attacked
conspiracy theories as the consequence of a special pathology, of the
collapse in religious belief, and of a *descent into the irrational*. The
implication is that those who oppose *the West*, or who think that
governments are secretive and dishonest, might need psychiatric treatment.

In fact, it is the other way round. British and American foreign policy is
itself based on a series of highly improbable conspiracy theories, the
biggest of which is that an evil Saudi millionaire genius in a cave in the
Hindu Kush controls a secret worldwide network of *tens of thousands of
terrorists* *in more than 60 countries* (George Bush). News reports
frequently tell us that terrorist organisations, such as those which have
attacked Bali or Istanbul, have *links* to al-Qa*eda, but we never learn
quite what those *links* are. According to two terrorism experts in
California, Adam Dolnik and Kimberly McCloud, this is because they do not
exist. *In the quest to define the enemy, the US and its allies have
helped to blow al-Qa*eda out of proportion,* they write. They argue that
the name *al-Qa*eda* was invented in the West to designate what is, in
reality, a highly disparate collection of otherwise independent groups
with no central command structure and not even a logo. They claim that
some terrorist organisations say they are affiliated to bin Laden simply
to gain kudos and name-recognition for their entirely local grievances.

By the same token, the US-led invasion of Iraq was based on a fantasy that
Saddam Hussein was in, or might one day enter into, a conspiracy with
Osama bin Laden. This is as verifiable as the claim that MI6 used mind
control to make Henri Paul crash Princess Diana*s car into the 13th pillar
of the tunnel under the Place de l*Alma. With similar mystic gnosis,
Donald Rumsfeld has alleged that the failure to find *weapons of mass
distraction*, as Tony Blair likes to call them, shows that they once
existed but were destroyed. Indeed, London and Washington have shamelessly
exploited people*s fear of the unknown to get public opinion to believe
their claim that Iraq had masses of anthrax and botulism. This played on a
deep and ancient seam of fear about poison conspiracies which, in the
Middle Ages, led to pogroms against Jews. And yet it is the anti-war
people who continue to be branded paranoid, even though the British Prime
Minister himself, his eyes staring wildly, said in September 2002, *Saddam
has got all these weapons ...and they*re pointing at us!*

In contrast to such imaginings, it is perfectly reasonable to raise
questions about the power of the secret services and armed forces of the
world*s most powerful states, especially those of the USA. These are not
*theories* at all; they are based on fact. The Central Intelligence
Agency, the National Security Agency, the Office of Naval Intelligence,

the National Reconnaissance Office, the Defense Intelligence Agency and
other US secret services spend more than $30,000,000,000 a year on
espionage and covert operations. Do opponents of conspiracy theories think
that this money is given to the Langley, Virginia Cats* Home? It would
also be churlish to deny that the American military industry plays a very
major role in the economics and politics of the US. Every day at 5 p.m.,
the Pentagon announces hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts to
arms manufacturers all over America * click on the Department of Defense*s
website for details * who in turn peddle influence through donations to
politicians and opinion-formers.

It is also odd that opponents of conspiracy theories often allow that
conspiracies have occurred in the past, but refuse to contemplate their
existence in the present. For some reason, you are bordering on the
bonkers if you wonder about the truth behind events like 9/11, when it is
established as fact that in 1962 the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, Lyman L. Lemnitzer, tried to convince President Kennedy to
authorise an attack on John Glenn*s rocket, or on a US navy vessel, to
provide a pretext for invading Cuba. Two years later, a similar strategy
was deployed in the faked Gulf of Tonkin incident, when US engagement in
Vietnam was justified in the light of the false allegation that the North
Vietnamese had launched an unprovoked attack on a US destroyer. Are such

http://www.dedefensa.org/article.php?art_id=2755

Can someone please HTML-ise the transcript?

The WinWORD format is corrupted..

thanks.

What ever happened to Jimmy Walters? I was reading a little on him, and seeing his appearences on mainstream cable. I feel bad for him. His heart seems to be in the right place, but I think he was tricked into believing very false 9/11 theories that have mostly been disproven, instead of tackling the theories we know have been substantiated. According to him he has sunk a lot of money into advertising his 9/11 theory stuff, but did it do any good? The Loose Change kids have done more with just a few thousand dollars than Walters did with millions...both I feel have promtoed some bogus ideas, but I believe in the spirit of what they are saying: question 9/11. I just wish Walters hadnt been fed a bunch of bogus material, which made him look like an idiot on tv. and thus whenever the MSM needed to laugh at 9/11 activism, they brought him on tv.

Also, it's my belief that there will need to be a major breakthrough in uncovering some aspect of the 9/11 coverup in the mainstream for the 9/11 acticists/truth movement to go from conspiracy theory to legitimate activism in the public's mind. And this would have to happen before too long. We dont want this to become another JFK. This would mean a high level whistleblower, documents, something...something the mainstream media could not ignore.

Capitalism

is the correct name for a system in which capital (accumulated investable wealth) makes the decisions about how it is invested - and in which growth and maximum profit margin become imperatives, because whoever grows faster in economic terms ends up swallowing the rest. (Also because the system has banking as its alpha and omega, and that means interest, which demands growing rates of profit to pay it off.)

Capitalism requires a powerful state. The "free market" never functioned without the state clearing the way for it. That the market magically generates itself or can sustain itself is one of the central myths of capitalism (the other being that all wealth is traceable to the agency of entrepreneurial individuals). In fact, the state provides the violence required for opening new markets; the subsidies that sustain industries until they are profitable (at which point they are privatized and private owners pretend they created the wealth); and the force required to keep certain industries profitable once initial markets are exhausted.

Capitalism inevitably leads to the situation described by Redford as "mercantilism," in which the state is appropriated by the wealthiest and most capital-mobile sectors and used in their interest. This is not a corruption; it is where capitalism under conditions of big-fish may eat the little-fish inevitably leads.

Very good 14 minute summary by ex M15 David Shayler on 9/11, on how a legitimate plot by Islamic terrorists became an inside job:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974&q=911

Things aren't right about Andrew Grove. WATCH OUT!!

No senior corporate manager would provide such a scatterbrained and sensational approach to a serious issue. They would do more than join a few dots. They would provide evidence.

Moreover they would be out the door in a week if their presentation skills were as poor as Grove's.

I hope people can speak to Maria Heller, or some other respected journalist, and get them to ask some hard questions.

MAJOR FLAGS WARNING!!!

thanks NL... we need short precise clarifications.

You'd enjoy Alex Carey on tucradio.org

Damn.. does it mean the high-brow
economic theorists are interested in the outcome of 911-truth?

What do you economists think of bush being fried on the chair? Will that make the stockmarket go up, or down?

Is there a summary of this statement anywhere? I'm guessing many don't have the time to go through the whole thing right now.

what happened to 911studies.com?

Hey guys...

Keith Phucas asked for my help in getting his two stories 2000 views a piece. I think it's because they may do more stories.

Here are the two stories.

http://www.timesherald.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=16670601&BRD=1672&PAG=4...

http://www.timesherald.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16703919&BRD=1672&PAG=46...

Thanks.

Hey all, I've been communicating with Richard Andrew Grove and he seems more than forthcoming with his information.

Save up your questions, we'll hopefully having a little question and answer session soon. He will also be at the Chicago Conference, so you might be able to track him down there...

Some WTC nostalgia pics from 08/2001:

http://members.aol.com/mon/gi/wtc.htm

http://scoop.kuro5hin.org/

that's how you do it like kos.

yeah my previous name "notaterroristiswear" is disallowed from posting there anymore because of those fucks. I hate Mia Dolan especially...

There are 9/11 posts almost every day now.

I think some people there are more willing to believe that the GOP is sabotaging their dialogue with "conspiracy diaries" than they are that the administration has lied about 9-11. Which is tragic.

Speaking of 9/11 disinformation, Bill Clinton in the last commencement speech at the Univ. of Texas LBJ School, had a line to the effect that "the Internet allowed the highjackers to research the blueprints of the WTC to see that the steel was not reinforced with concrete and could thus be brought down by crashing airplanes"(!)
They did?????
I watched it live on local TV. I almost fell out of my chair.
It seemed like a totally gratuitous inclusion in the speech at the time.
ltruest | 05.31.06 - 11:37 am | #

Wow, if Bill Clinton stated this blatant propaganda, I must conclude that he is involved in perpetrating and/or covering-up the 9/11 mass murders!

Does anyone have a link for the Bill Clinton speech^?

Try the message boards on IMDB

You will get many an argument, the boards are busy and its got a good format.

Try boards for:

United 93
World Trade center
George w Bush
Fahrenheit 911 and 9/11 1/2
The soapbox(accessable through the "message boards" tab)

Regarding the Clinton speech, here is the link:

http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/webcasts/

He makes the statement about 40% of the way through. I, having only heard it once about 10 days ago, paraphrased it earlier. You get the exact quote when he starts talking about "interdependence".

I would like to know what the "scientific" facts are. Were the girders protected by concrete? Was it necessary? Everything I've read so far tells me that Clinton's statement (on this level, at least) is wrong.

An NSA supervisor using the latest technology listens in on 9/11 researchers.
http://www.enthealth.com/images/photos/horn2ear.jpg

http://www.911closeup.com/nico/rrr3b.html

Clinton is as bad as Bush. He knows all about 9/11. I trust no one in Government. They are all bought and paid for. We need to clean house.

I would like to know more about the Stewart Air Force Base mentioned in Grove's piece.

Did 2 Planes flight paths intersect over that base in NY?

I haven't read anything anywhere else about this.

It raises the possibility of an "Operation Northwoods" type "switch" of airplanes, for one thing.

To Chris, thanks for posting the AJ- Gypsy clip. I hadn't heard that clip before. I can assure you Gypsy is the real-deal. We can all learn from this young lady's courage.
maddog | Homepage | 05.31.06 - 1:08 pm | #
yeah, he had her on for a long time too. do you know where she came from? does she have any backing at all? shes great.

"Clinton is as bad as Bush. He knows all about 9/11. I trust no one in Government. They are all bought and paid for. We need to clean house."

9/11 truth political party.

>Did 2 Planes flight paths intersect >over that base in NY?

that's a key issue that has to be researched. team8 has done some research on it:

http://team8plus.org/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.13

Maybe Richard can enlighten us. if there was a plane-swap this would explain a whole lot. it was much simpler if they used their own prepared drone-planes instead of a real airliners

http://www.kerman94.com/911-Flights.HTM

planes did infact cross over base, south of albany

So they did... it looks like from the animation that they crossed the same path at around the same time, but I don't know if the actually timing is representated in that diagram/animation or only the flight path.

If this Grove guy really was an eyewitness to something, perhaps he might use his real name. Otherwise, to those of us on the rational side of the fence, he's just another kook...

O good - Terrence is back. He always comes around when something big happens.

OT - Have the Loose Change producers considered doing what M. Moore did and that is getting lawyers to fact check their work. It worked for more and left little room for the naysayers to attack. If it's possible, it might work in Loose Change's favour.

About Richard Grove - I would have like to have heard more specifically what he saw at Ground Zero on 9/11. He never really said what activity he was questioning but I did notice on the Naudet film a black cadillac escalade zooming around right after the collapse which strangely weren't covered in soot. Dont know what it means but I would have liked more specifics about the information he had.

Clinton is as bad as Bush. He knows all about 9/11. I trust no one in Government. They are all bought and paid for. We need to clean house.
Anonymous | 05.31.06 - 2:50 pm |
===============================
I agree, but you do realize what that means right?
That means the people have to literally get off of their collective fat asses and go take that power from them.
I don't think the people know the first thing about how to go about doing this, they've been conditioned not to, just as they'll be conditioned to hand over their arms and resign their freedoms in the event of martial law.
I really don't think any of us are quite prepared for the battle that will ensue as a result, they'll kill to stay in power, THEY HAVE KILLED.
THEY'LL KEEP KILLING.
Are you prepared to kill to reclaim it?
I'm not advocating violence, just protection.

about the flight paths: some official from FAA said they lost them off the radar and only knew where the planes were once they appeared in New York hitting the WTC. that struck me: if that statement is taken literally the planes could _very well_ have been doubles taking off from a military base. sorry for posting that much today

Greg - I remember reading sometime, and have the link at home, that 2 ATC personnel watched two of those flights travel out over the Atlantic and then in one sweep of the scope they were gone.

I don't know the validity of this, but it sounded interresting.

The Stewart connection was known about since practically the day.

Official paths of Flights 11 and 175 did cross near Stewart, in fact, they were close enough to raise collision fears.

However, contrary to how Grove has it, the transponder for Flight 11 was switched off earlier and far to the north, before it made a turn for the south, in fact, just as it skirted the primary radar blind spot at the corner of Mass, VT and NY. Now that's suspicious!

Culhavoc has a nice little overview of the Grove transcript.
http://culhavoc.blogsome.com/2006/05/30/911-whistleblower-andrew-grove-c...

NL, have you looked into this? Tried to verify anything?

The Marsh executive he refuses to name would have to be either corrupt former CEO Jeffery Grenberg or Peter Beshar, the Senior VP and General Council. I know at least the former is on Elliot Spitzer's hit list, strange he doesn't follow through on any of the accusations Grove has made...

Note that more bombs and incindiaries can be seen going off in the Marsh and McLennan offices at the top of the North Tower than in any other part of either building.

http://www.spingola.com/Paul%20Sheridan.htm

http://www.spingola.com/rumsfeld%20letter.htm

Wow! This is big...

Greg wrote:
'Fact is, we don't need faster computers anymore, we don't need video cell phones, what we really need is other energy sources/fuels.'

Check this one out. HHO gas, gasoline replacement:

http://www.rratch.com/Misc/WaterFuel/WaterFuel.wmv

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=660759158947266385

>Note that more bombs and >incindiaries can be seen going off >in the Marsh and McLennan offices

"inside job" takes on a new, literal meaning...

I hope Terrence comes to Chicago.

Nice post Cloak... damn Bremmer worked for MMC, I totally missed that.

Let's play connect the cronies!

Jon, did Jim Norton ever get back to you? if he did, im guessing he didnt try and refute any of your points. as usual.

Let's play connect the cronies!
Drew M | Homepage | 05.31.06 - 4:14 pm | #
start with Carlyle.i hear Blair has a spot after he leaves office.what a surprise.

EXCLUSIVE: BOBBY KENNEDY JR. TO QUESTION 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN MAJOR ROLLING STONE FEATURE ARTICLE!
Says 'Evidence Shows High-Level Republicans Suceeded in Scheme to Steal Election in Ohio'!
Mag to Hit Stands Friday, Internet on Thursday, Publicity Push to Accompany

Says 'Evidence Shows High-Level Republicans Suceeded in Scheme to Steal Election in Ohio'!
Mag to Hit Stands Friday, Internet on Thursday, Publicity Push to Accompany

A damning and detailed feature article, written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., for Rolling Stone and documenting evidence of the theft of the 2004 Presidential Election is set to hit...

A damning and detailed feature article, written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., for Rolling Stone and documenting evidence of the theft of the 2004 Presidential Election is set to hit newstands this Friday, The BRAD BLOG can now confirm. The online version of the article will be posted tomorrow (Thursday) morning.

The article, which has been several months in development, will contend that a concerted effort was undertaken by high-level Republican officials to steal the Election in Ohio -- and thus the country -- in 2004!

Kennedy told The BRAD BLOG this morning that "the best evidence says the Republicans succeeded" in their plan.

He writes in the article, and confirmed to us today, that evidence shows Ohio Sec. of State J. Kenneth Blackwell was "certainly in on" the scheme, and "there are indications that the effort went all the way up to the White House."

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002891.htm

i like the article below about the Dems being complicit in 9/11, but its a bit long to post all over the place on blogs. does anyone know of a shorter article on the failings of the Democratic party when it comes to 9/11 that i can post all over the liberal blogs? thanks in advance.

"Jon, did Jim Norton ever get back to you? if he did, im guessing he didnt try and refute any of your points. as usual."

Haven't heard from Norton since my last ass whooping.

Check out the forum at the progressive independent, for some good questions and responses from Mr. Grove.