Huffington Post Editor Has A Question for 9/11 'Conspiracy Buffs'

A Question for 9/11 Conspiracy Buffs - huffingtonpost.com

I can't pretend to have researched all this in detail, but at the behest of some apparently rational acquaintances of mine I have looked into it. And I have seen enough to know this much: if 9/11 was the result of a Bush administration plot, the scope of the enterprise was enormous.
..
So here's my question: if these folks could arrange something as logistically complex as 9/11, couldn't they have arranged for us to "discover" some WMD in Iraq? That would have been child's play by comparison. If they had just done that little thing, their whole agenda would be on track today. Bush's numbers would have stayed up, support for the Iraq war would have held firm, and patriotic US citizens would be chomping at the bit for an attack on Iran.

Big thanks to Cloak & Swagger for the heads up!

That seems like a reasonable

That seems like a reasonable question to me. Not the sort of question that magically evaporates all the evidence of complicity, but still one that should cause some collective head scratching.

The plan all along has been

The plan all along has been to make the U.S. look bad. You can't make the New World Order's one-world government omelet without cracking eggs--and this includes breaking the U.S. most of all.

Below are some of my comments from a few years ago concerning the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, which explains what I'm here talking about:

Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com also concludes that the creation and release of these torture photos was quite planned and intentional by the U.S. government, as part of a Psychological Operations (PsyOps) tactic. But where Raimondo gets thrown for a loop is buying into the made-for-public-consumption rationale published by David Leo Gutmann, emeritus professor of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences at Northwestern University Medical School, in Chicago, purporting to describe "Arab psychology." (See "Shame, Honor and Terror in the Middle East" by David Leo Gutmann, October 24, 2003 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10489 ; and see the U.S. military study which would have us believe that the U.S. government takes Prof. Gutmann's behavioral analysis on Arabs seriously: "The Iraqi Insurgency Movement," November 14, 2003 http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/Iraqi%20Insurgent%20Movement.pdf .)

But like I said, this is simply a made-for-public-consumption rationale intended for those who have caught-on to how well-planned and apparently intentional the release of these torture photos have been, of which rationale its own ostensible promoters don't even take seriously. The gist of this cockamamie rationale is that by publically shaming and emasculating the Arab people in the most humiliating and degrading of ways you will thereby make them lose their will to fight and make them docile and submissive to the will of the U.S government. Yeah, right. The U.S. government has an army of 180 I.Q. egg-head behavioral psychologists--they know quite well that "there is no better recruitment poster for al-Qaida and their affiliates" (in the words of Claude Salhani, United Press Internationl editor) than such public degradation of Arabs as the Abu Ghraib torture photos.

For Justin Raimondo's article on this, see:

"The S&M War: Are the Abu Ghraib photos 'wanton' acts of deranged individuals--or the very latest in 'black propaganda'?," Justin Raimondo, May 7, 2004:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2490

The orders for this prison torture came from on-high: according to U.S. Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba's report and other U.S. military sources, Military Intelligence and the CIA ordered the torture at the Abu Ghaib prison. Such intelligence agencies could have just as easily ordered no cameras to be allowed in the prison, or that any cameras allowed were to be handled by authorized personel only with the pictures being classified; obviously some people high-up want this out accross the datasphere. (For more on this, see http://www.infowars.com/print/iraq/newer_photos.htm .)

But it just so happens that this intentional swatting at the hornet's nest on the part of the U.S. government is quite neatly explained in a little-covered and quickly forgotten news item back in October 2002, concerning the U.S. government's Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG). Quite literally, the purpose of the P2OG is to provoke would-be terrorist groups by means of PsyOps/PsyWar/BlackOps tactics into committing acts of terror in order to supposedly "smoke them out," so to speak. For more on that, see:

"Into the Dark--The Pentagon Plan to Provoke Terrorist Attacks" by Chris Floyd, November 1, 2002:

http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd1101.html

"The Secret War--Frustrated by intelligence failures, the Defense Department is dramatically expanding its 'black world' of covert operations" by William M. Arkin, October 27, 2002, Special to the Times:

http://www.latimes.com/la-op-arkin27oct27.story

"Rumsfeld's Plan to Provoke Terrorists":

http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/4.html

"Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG)--Formal Acknowledgement of Problem-Reaction-Solution Strategy," November 4, 2002:

http://www.cryptogon.com/2002_11_03_blogarchive.html

Besides using these Abu Ghraib torture photos to intentionally provoke useful-idiot Arabs to join and die for the CIA-controlled al-Qaida (and hence provide the necessary pretext to take over other Arab countries), it also serves other vital objectives in helping to establish the elite globalists' self-termed New World Order.

The plan all along has been to turn Iraq over to the U.N. It's called Good Cop/Bad Cop. The U.S. is simply the Bad Cop to the U.N.'s Good Cop--the U.S. is playing the role of the international bad-boy so that the rest of the world will run to the U.N. See:

"Nations Seek World Order Centered on U.N., Not U.S." by Richard Bernstein:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/19/international/europe/19EURO.html

The biggest obstacle for the globalists' establishment of a one-world government is the United States--specifically the common people that make up the mass of the populace in this country. Even though Americans have been greatly and intentionally dumbed-down through the government's Prussian-model, Fabian Socialist mis-education system, Americans still have a nationalistic sense of being the John Wayne "good guys," having a sense of nationalistic independence, and faint vestiges of libertarian ideology; not to mention that the U.S. is the most-armed populace (at least in total numbers). The "revelation" of these torture photos is designed to shock and weaken Americans' sense of nationhood; or for those Americans who insist on "standing by their government," to cause Cognitive Dissonance whereby they are induced to make excuses for "their" government's use of torture (and thereby accept such torture).

Here is one

Here is one possibility:

With the discovery of any WMD in Iraq, international bodies would probably have insisted on verification particularly b/c they doubted Iraq possessed these weapons. It would have been an international issue that could have raised serious problems for Bush. On the other hand, the neocons would have known that 9/11 would be regarded as a domestic affair and no international investigations would be permitted.

My post:

My post: http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dazinith/115015729746051431/#154236
has yet to get approval on Huffpo.
I did my best to provide a reasonable explanation with sources cited.
Still nothing. This is what pains me.
Maybe I should try again.

That seems like a reasonable

That seems like a reasonable question to me. Not the sort of question that magically evaporates all the evidence of complicity, but still one that should cause some collective head scratching.
anonymous

Reasonable ? This your first day here @ 911blogger or what ?

We should all be pointing

We should all be pointing out to Mr. Zengotita that questions about Iraq are not answers to questions about 9/11.

Cloak & Swagger, they are

Cloak & Swagger,

they are prolly sleeping? mine hasn't been approved yet either.

dz, I still wanna cry about

dz,
I still wanna cry about it.
...shoulder...anybody?

Good response C&S. Too bad

Good response C&S. Too bad this Mr. de Zengotita doesn't do a bit more thinking before writing about "conspiracy buffs." The fact that the NY Times article used precisely the same term says a great deal about the liberal alternative media. That is, it's really not so alternative. Anyways, it's very possible the neocons knew the international scrutiny over this issue would be too great and could expose the WMD as having a non-Iraqi source.

"We should all be pointing

"We should all be pointing out to Mr. Zengotita that questions about Iraq are not answers to questions about 9/11."

I doubt this guy has an honest interest in learning about 9/11. If he did he would have done more research and his questions about 9/11 would have been directed at the neocons, not "conspiracy buffs." Call me cynical.

And I have seen enough to

And I have seen enough to know this much: if 9/11 was the result of a Bush administration plot, the scope of the enterprise was enormous...

Oh, but 20 Arabs fellows could pull it off??? Do caveman Osama & his 19 flunkies have magic carpets?

Furthermore, Bush & the Neocons got their invasion & massacre of Iraq without the risk in planting WMD.

Things are now going much worse than Bushy expected because he & Rummy underestimated the Iraqi resistance.

Ditto, Zengotita's

Ditto, Zengotita's "questions" are extremely naive & simplistic.

"That seems like a

"That seems like a reasonable question to me."

And with a little reflection there are very reasonable answers.

I just read the Big Wedding

I just read the Big Wedding by Sander Hicks and the thing that makes everyone be so skeptical of the truth movement is thinking Bush was the one behind it. Everyone dismisses it because he is too "incompetent".

Wake up people...

This is beyond Bush! He was the gopher that just let it happen. The planning of 9/11 involved players from the United States, but also other countries-most of all Pakistan. Osama who?

I don't have links at the moment because I just finished the book. I am planning on researching everything I read so I can back it up to try and create a plausible explanation that maybe those who don't believe our truth movement will consider. Stay tuned!

"Everyone dismisses it

"Everyone dismisses it because he is too "incompetent"."

Yeah, as if people in the truth movement think Bush planned it all over a cup of coffee. There are very people who think Bush played a leading role in 9/11, and certainly not in the planning or execution.

Isn't it true that Valerie

Isn't it true that Valerie Plame stopped a large shipment of newve gas headed to Iraq from Turkey? I could have sworn that I read that somewhere. I think the plan WAS to plant WMDs in Iraq but just like the 9/11 plan, it went wrong. This administration is powerful regardless of their intellect.

Meant to say *NERVE* gas.

Meant to say *NERVE* gas.

Man, 9/11 truth gives me

Man, 9/11 truth gives me terrible heartburn.

justin, you are correct -

justin, you are correct - here is some google info on that:
google search! brewster jennings nerve gas turkey

911blimp.net is not a

911blimp.net is not a conspiracy theory site, it is a conspiracy theory debunking site, and it presents more than enough 9/11 evidence to debunk the government's ludicrous preposterous "19 guys with boxcutters did all that" conspiracy theory.

So I'll take a whack at answering the hypothetical, illogically-based, falsely-premised, presumptively-framed question on the condition that huffingtonpost must then respond to any of the 5 pieces of government-9/11-lie-bashing evidence featured on the cover page at http://911blimp.net (keep in mind that an honest person would have to be able to dismiss all 5 -- and many others -- in order to feel OK about continuing to believe in the govt's impossible/disproven/discredited conspiracy theory of 9/11.)

Here goes:

In Iraq, embedded NBC reporter David Bloom stumbled onto the freshly-U.S.-planted WMDs, and carved his initials into them, and so both they, and David Bloom ("blood clot", my ass!), had to be destroyed. Subsequently, the war criminals who've taken over our government and stolen our Constitution from us recognized that We The People were only pretending to be asleep, and would not blow our fake-sleep cover by pretending to wake up over the fact that we'd been massively lied to yet one more time, so the military-industrial-intelligence-media complex no longer felt the need to make another attempt at planting WMDs.

How's that for a "conspiracy theory"? (Note how the people who covered up a famous "lone gunman" assassination, and who labeled anyone who didn't buy into the "lone gunman" theory a "conspiracy theorist", did such a good job at selling that label that now, people who do not believe the government's conspiracy theory of 9/11 are called "conspiracy buffs", while people who do believe the government's conspiracy theory are not so labeled...) Go ahead and disprove it, I really don't care; just address a http://911blimp.net cover page featured issue (or 2 or more, if you dare, and if you care...), you gatekeeping weasels at huffingtonpost!
______________________________________

"I doubt this guy has an

"I doubt this guy has an honest interest in learning about 9/11. If he did he would have done more research and his questions about 9/11 would have been directed at the neocons, not 'conspiracy buffs.' Call me cynical."

I think you're probably right. However, I also think that all of us went through a phase while learning about 9/11 where we asked ourselves, "Well if they did this, why didn't they do this other thing?" or something like that. It's just initially hard to believe. He did say, "I can't pretend to have researched all this in detail, but at the behest of some apparently rational acquaintances of mine I have looked in to it." So it's possible that this guy is just in the early stages of waking up to the reality of 9/11. Hell, if nothing else, he's created a good place for us to post some facts for people that may otherwise never have seen them.

It could be as simple as who

It could be as simple as who was in charge or perhaps how many times they underestimated the ease of planting them or the fact that we had sold them to Saddam and could not imagine that he had jettisoned them. Attempts were made to plant them, after all, which were discovered and thwarted. How many times could they risk exposure?

This is a nice example of trying to dismiss objective scientific evidence that proves the demolition of the Twin Towers on the basis of simpistic thinking. Strictly speaking, it is a "straw man". Given they were able to pull off 9/11, why weren't they able to pull off WMD in Iraq? Among other points, it ignores that Iraq was awash with UN weapons inspectors, which makes it harder to fake it.

This is also a nice example of the politics of distraction. Since laws of physics and engineering are violated by the official government account, it can't be true, whether or not WMD were found in Iraq. Evidence about 9/11 is not to be found in Iraq. I cannot abide arguments like this. But, like The Force, they can have a powerful affect on the weak-minded.

Well said, Jim

Well said, Jim

What!. did this fellow only

What!. did this fellow only just get born yesterday, as any good liar will tell you to get a lie believed you offer up a small truth. Hence the mind control works. Remember this war is not with Iraq as a nation its with its people and any of the worlds non Elites IE probably me and you. Ask yourself even if the war was over? would health care, public services, democracy (LOL) improve for the masses, NO.
I find it hard to believe sheeple with no power to think individually still exist with the state of the world. I doubt another tsunami would wake this lot up.
short answer of course they could have placed WMD's in Iraq but they obviously want you to think they made a little mistake and forgive them. Trouble is most will.

I do not understand the

I do not understand the question ...
why would 9/11 be much more difficult
for a cabal inside the US gouv. than
for a conspiracy of arabs hidding in
a cave in Afghanistan ?

For everyone who's so

This idiot is just trying to

This idiot is just trying to confuse the issue. Another shill.
The undeniable facts of the world trade centers controlled demolition will stand on it's own.
Wheather some event happened somewhere else in the world doesn't have anything to do with it.

I don't give a rats ass why

I don't give a rats ass why the Bush mob didn't plant WMD's in Iraq. What the hell does that have to do with 9/11 being an inside job. Bush and his boys are insane so who can figure out why they do anything. Nobody but the Bush government could have pulled off 9/11. (and they did an awful sloppy job of it)Arabs with boxcutters? Yea right. Get a life Tom.

.

How about writing them

How about writing them something along the lines of:

"Did it occur that maybe one of the reasons WMD's weren't planted, is because then there would have been WMD's to destroy; with the WMD's destroyed, there would have been no purposeful reason to stay in Iraq.

With no WMD's, there are still all of the other "reasons" to stay in Iraq; which works out perfectly for people who want to use Iraq as a launch pad to invade other countries in the close vicinity -- can you say Iran.

And don't forget about the necessity of needing to stay to take all of that oil laying underneath Iraq's Depleted Uranium contaminated sands.

How about this, Huffington Post editor, this is what you should be thinking:

They lied about WMD's, and lied profusely. They propagated those lies as justification for an Iraq invasion. Yet, there were NO WMD's.

They lied about the 9/11 attacks, and lied profusely. They propagated those lies -- and still continue to -- as justification for their War for Proft and power, ahem, "War on Terror".

If they lied about something as serious as WMD's, to achieve their goal of going into Iraq, is it really that far of a stretch to question their honesty (I use that word lightly) with regard to what happened on 9/11, and how it really happened?

No!

How about instead of trying to steer the readers attention away from 9/11, toward something in Iraq that doesn't even exist, you focus your (and the readers') attention on 9/11 related issues that are still unanswered and unresolved!?

How about you flex your journalistic muscle (you do have muscle?!) and investigate the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 for your readers?

How about you contact NIST and ask why, after all of the time and money they spent doing their "investigation" into the collapse of WTC 7, they aren't going to be releasing their findings because the government has given a private company [can't remember the company's name, Bloggers!] the responsibility of answering what happened; because NIST couldn't offer up even a remotely possible explanation for WTC 7's collapse, without the controlled demolition factor being incorporated.

Is that not a huge smoking gun that needs to be openly investigated and questioned? With only logical, reasonable, scientifically provable and complete direct answers being sufficient!?

I could offer up many such examples regarding 9/11, but how about you start with that."

You guys, whoever, add whatever you wan etc. What I wrote can be copied if you want to send it, altered, so long as it is altered in a good fashion.

They tried to. They got

They tried to. They got caught.

Edit: How about this,

Edit:

How about this, Huffington Post editor, this is what you should be asking and writing for your readers:

They lied about WMD's, and lied profusely. They propagated those lies as justification for an Iraq invasion. Yet, there were NO WMD's.

They lied about the 9/11 attacks, and lied profusely. They propagated those lies -- and still continue to -- as justification for their War for Profit and power, ahem, "War on Terror".

The answer is quite

The answer is quite simple.

AFTER 911 you cannot do that sort of thing anymore. Even your own soldiers will be suspicious then.

Also, handling WMD is very dangerous, and needs specialist personell, special transport and special equipment.

Also, the WMD would have to be checked by the swedes, norwegians or whatever smart socialist controllers. Imagine if the WMD-planters would have forgotten to remove a recent-date-US-label or something. Nah, too dangerous to be caught.

The 911 thing was easier .. first, there are no international nosy-people who are allowed to investigate. Secondly, much of the evidence WAS EXPLODED TO SMITHEREENS...

Still a good deal of planning had to be done for 911. The NOPLANES theory makes it all rather workable. I am still unsure about planting the explosives in the WTC though... unless nukes were used. Look up Red Mercury george bluewin.ch and http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Elevated+values+of+tritium

Of course this is all madness.

janedoe's revised essay on

We cannot say why they did

We cannot say why they did not plant WMD in Iraq. All the answers are possible: maybe they thougth it was too dangerous because indipendent controls by the UN could have discovered the plot, maybe they thought it was not necessary, maybe they want the world to know that they make all they want without needing a justification, or maybe they tried, found some difficulties (after all US WMD are tracked and controlled with great attention, even if you are the president you cannot go to some stockage facility and say "uhm I'll take this, this...and this"!), and then gave up. We don't know, but it is not reasonable to ask this thing as it was OBVIOUSLY related to 9-11.

We know for sure that there are a lot of things unexplained in 9-11 events. And these things point at some sort of government involvement. But we do not know the complete truth ("who did and how?"), we just know that the government explanation is nearly completely false.

Do you think that if Cheney-Bush were put on trial for 9-11 their lawyers would defend them saying that after all they did not plant WMD in Iraq? It would be really childish!

If WMD were found in Iraq what would have been the answer to someone saying "Bush put US WMD there" ? It would be "Oh you are really a conspiracy theorist! You are a nut!".

Please keep considering 9-11 and related events, individuate the contraddictions and the things that are not explained by the official theory and stop speculating on unraleted things!

I think its a good question.

I think its a good question. I think the answer is very simple. WMD's in Iraq doesn't get them their entire agenda. It doesn't get them wiretapping in the US via the Patriot Act. It doesn't get them invasion of afghanistan and the pipeline to the energy sources in the caspian. It doesn't get the CIA the profits from the heroin trade in Afghanistan. They probably thought that just lying about WMD's was good enough and guess what - they were right. Bush's numbers will gradually come up again before the 2008 elections with some well placed captures of more patsies like Al Zaqari. And they can cook the elections again if they have to - they already got away with that twice.

Easy Why bother trying to

Easy

Why bother trying to plant WMD ? It's easier to blame the "error" on the intelligence agency and the gullible public will swallow it. And once you are in the place in Iraq, Say you are there finally for restoring "democracy" and just create so much chaos and insurgency that the public will think that Military presence is needed to maintain "Peace".

Published on Tuesday, April

Published on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 by the Mehr News Agency (Tehran, Iran)
New Reports on U.S. Planting WMDs in Iraq

BASRA -– Fifty days after the first reports that the U.S. forces were unloading weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in southern Iraq, new reports about the movement of these weapons have been disclosed.

Sources in Iraq speculate that occupation forces are using the recent unrest in Iraq to divert attention from their surreptitious shipments of WMD into the country.

An Iraqi source close to the Basra GovernorÂ’s Office told the MNA that new information shows that a large part of the WMD, which was secretly brought to southern and western Iraq over the past month, are in containers falsely labeled as containers of the Maeresk shipping company and some consignments bearing the labels of organizations such as the Red Cross or the USAID in order to disguise them as relief shipments.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, added that Iraqi officials including forces loyal to the Iraqi Governing Council stationed in southern Iraq have been forbidden from inspecting or supervising the transportation of these consignments. He went on to say that the occupation forces have ordered Iraqi officials to forward any questions on the issue to the coalition forces. Even the officials of the international relief organizations have informed the Iraqi officials that they would only accept responsibility for relief shipments which have been registered and managed by their organizations.

The Iraqi source also confirmed the report about suspicious trucks with fake Saudi and Jordanian license plates entering Iraq at night last week, stressing that the Saudi and Jordanian border guards did not attempt to inspect the trucks but simply delivered them to the U.S. and British forces stationed on IraqÂ’s borders.

However, the source expressed ignorance whether the governments of Saudi Arabia and Jordan were aware of such movements.

A professor of physics at Baghdad University also told the MNA correspondent that a group of his colleagues who are highly specialized in military, chemical and biological fields have been either bribed or threatened during the last weeks to provide written information on what they know about various programs and research centers and the possible storage of WMD equipment.

The professor also said these people have been openly asked to confirm or deny the existence of research or related WMD equipment. A large number of these scientists, who are believed to be under the surveillance of U.S. intelligence operatives, have claimed that if they refuse to comply with this request, they may be killed or arrested on charges of concealing the truth if these weapons are found by the Bush administration in the future.

He said that the Iraqi scientists believe their lives would be in danger if they decline to cooperate with the occupation forces, especially when they recall that senior U.S. officer Michael Peterson once said, “Iraqi scientists are at any case a threat to the U.S. administration, whether they talk or not.”

A source close to the Iraqi Governing Council said, “In the meantime, many suspect containers disguised as fuel supplies have been moved about by some units of the U.S. special forces. The move has been carried out under heavy security measures. Also, there are unofficial reports that the containers held biological and bacteriological toxins in liquid form. It is possible that the news about the discovery of the WMDs would be announced later.”

He also said that such mixtures had been used by the Saddam regime in the 1990s.

The source added that some provocative actions such as the closure of Al-Hawza periodical by U.S. administrator Paul Bremer, the secret meetings between his envoys with some extremist groups who have no relations with the Iraqi Governing Council, the sudden upsurge in violence in central and southern Iraq, a number of activities which have stoked up the wrath of the prominent Shia clerics, and finally, the spate of kidnappings and the baseless charges against the Iranian charge dÂ’affaires in Baghdad are providing the necessary smokescreen for the transportation of the WMD to their intended locations.

He said they are quite aware that the White House in cooperation with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has directly tasked the Defense Department to hide these weapons. Given the recent scandals to the effect that the U.S. president was privy to the 9/11 plot, they might try to immediately announce the discovery of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in order to overshadow the scandals and prevent a further decline of BushÂ’s public opinion rating as the election approaches.

© Copyright 2004 Mehr News Agency

###

CIA and DOD Attempted To

CIA and DOD Attempted To Plant WMD In Iraq
Iraqwar.ru 20 June 2003
www.globalresearch.ca 15 August 2003
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/IRA308A.html

A DOD whistleblower detail an attempt by a covert U.S. team to plant weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The team was later killed by friendly fire due to CIA incompetence. Pentagon Whistleblower Reveals CIA/ DoD Fiascos 20.06.2003 [08:07]

In a world exclusive, Al Martin Raw.com has published a news story about a Department of Defense whistleblower who has revealed that a US covert operations team had planted “Weapons of Mass Destruction” (WMDs) in Iraq – then “lost” them when the team was killed by so-called “friendly fire.”

The Pentagon whistleblower, Nelda Rogers, is a 28-year veteran debriefer for the Defense Department. She has become so concerned for her safety that she decided to tell the story about this latest CIA-military fiasco in Iraq.

According to Al Martin Raw.com, “Ms.Rogers is number two in the chain of command within this DoD special intelligence office. This is a ten-person debriefing unit within the central debriefing office for the Department of Defense.

The information that is being leaked out is information “obtained while she was in Germany heading up the debriefing of returning service personnel, involved in intelligence work in Iraq for the Department of Defense and/or the Central Intelligence Agency.

“According to Ms. Rogers, there was a covert military operation that took place both preceding and during the hostilities in Iraq,” reports Al Martin Raw.com, an online subscriber-based news/analysis service which provides “Political, Economic and Financial Intelligence.”

Al Martin is a retired Lt. Commander (US Navy), the author of a memoir called “The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran Contra Insider, " and he is considered one of America's foremost experts on corporate and government fraud.

Ms. Rogers reports that this particular covert operation team was manned by ex-military personnel and that “the unit was paid through the Department of Agriculture in order to hide it, which is also very commonplace.”

According to Al Martin Raw.com, “the Ag Department has often been used as a paymaster on behalf of the CIA, DIA, and NSA and others."

Accordng to the Al Martin Raw.com story, another aspect of Ms. Rogers' report concerns a covert operation which was to locate the assets of Saddam Hussein and his family, including cash, gold bullion, jewelry and assorted valuable antiquities.

The problem became evident when “the operation in Iraq involved 100 people, all of whom apparently are now dead, having succumbed to so-called ‘friendly fire.’ The scope of this operation included the penetration of the Central Bank of Iraq, other large commercial banks in Baghdad, the Iraqi National Museum and certain presidential palaces where monies and bullion were secreted.”

“They identified about $2 billion of cash in US dollars, another $150 million in Euros, in physical banknotes, and about another $100 million in sundry foreign currencies ranging from Yen to British Pounds,” reports Al Martin.

“These people died, mostly in the same place in Baghdad, supposedly from a stray cruise missile or a combination of missiles and bombs that went astray,” Martin continues. “There were supposedly 76 who died there and the other 24 died through a variety of 'friendly fire,' 'mistaken identity,' and some of them – their whereabouts are simply unknown.”

Ms. RogersÂ’ story sound like an updated 21st Century version of Treasure Island meets Ali Baba and the Bush Cabal Thieves, writes Martin.

“This was a contingent of CIA/ DoD operatives, but it was really the CIA that bungled it, Ms. Rogers said. They were relying on the CIA’s ability to organize an effort to seize these assets and to be able to extract these assets because the CIA claimed it had resources on the ground within the Iraqi army and the Iraqi government who had been paid. That turned out to be completely bogus. As usual.”

“CIA people were supposed to be handling it,” Martin continues. “They had a special ‘black (unmarked) aircraft to fly it out. But none of that happened because the regular US Army showed up, stumbled onto it and everyone involved had to scramble.

These new Iraqi “Asset Seizures” go directly to the New US Ruling Junta. The US Viceroy in Iraq Paul Bremer is reportedly drinking Saddam Hussein’s $2000 a bottle Napoleon era brandy, smoking his expensive Davidoff cigars and he has even furnished his Baghdad office with Saddam’s Napolean era antique furniture

The Iraq Debacle Du Jour has evidently been extensively documented by the DIA debriefing teams with “extensive tape recordings of interviews with the Iraqi returnees, the covert operatives (as well as their affidavits).”

Al Martin Raw.com has dubbed this “Operation Skim Iraq.”

If there had been a few

If there had been a few isolated findings of WMD in Iraq then people opposed to the Bush administration both in the US and worldwide would have become suspicious and would have certainly called for a closer examination of the "evidence". That might have then quickly lead to the falsification of that evidence, and that would have made for a worse situation for the administration than it is now in.

While people could easily imagine the Bush administration falsifying WMD evidence in Iraq, with 9/11 nobody really originally thought that they would be behind that.

What really protects the truth behind such plots from coming out, is the "unimaginability" of such plots in the minds of average people, not the actual amount of evidence uncovering it, so the administration stays well away from plots that people could easily imagine them doing.

(This is not connected with

(This is not connected with the current topic, but the threads seem to get "old" pretty quickly...)

I found pictures of the fire in the Doha skyscraper half a year ago:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=286211

The picture below shows especially well the extent of the fire. The fire has engulfed the highrise from the top to the bottom. It must have been as big, if not bigger, as all three WTC buildings' fires combined:

http://img457.imageshack.us/my.php?image=5an702950vh.jpg

I haven't seen many mentions of this fire, or of the very recent fires in the same buildings. I think it should be important to include them in the comparisons with WTC fires.

If anyone has further information about these buildings (structure etc.) and the fires (length etc), I'd appreciate it very much. Perhaps the main 911 sites should be notified as well.

1. What in hell makes this

1. What in hell makes this guy or others of you think their plans are NOT on track? They just overturned stopping NO permanent bases in Iraq,which is what pure evil PNAC group wanted from the start! WHAT in hell makes you think THEIR GODDDAMN PURE EVIL AGENDA IS NOT ON TRACK,BIG TIME? IT SURE AS HELL IS!

just saw this. we're

just saw this. we're doomed.

Rove won't be charged in CIA leak case By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer
3 minutes ago

Top White House aide Karl Rove has been told by prosecutors he won't be charged with any crimes in the investigation into leak of a CIA officer's identity, his lawyer said Tuesday, lifting a heavy burden from one of President Bush's most trusted advisers.

Attorney Robert Luskin said that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald informed him of the decision on Monday, ending months of speculation about the fate of Rove, the architect of Bush's 2004 re-election now focused on stopping Democrats from capturing the House or Senate in this November's elections.

Fitzgerald has already secured a criminal indictment against Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

The announcement cheered Republicans and a White House beleaguered by war and low approval ratings.

http://cryptome.sabotage.org/

http://cryptome.sabotage.org/mil-911-study.htm

excerpt:

" One of the people from the group had done calculations and had came up with a time frame for a 100 story building to collapse after being hit by an airliner, it was between 1 and 2 hours the exact minutes I can't remember. Later when he was questioned by Military higher ups about a building's engineers disputing his calculations; he said, that unlike him they had to say that to keep their job. "

Didn't I already answer

Didn't I already answer this?

Secret Mililtary Unit Sought

Secret Mililtary Unit Sought To Solve Political WMD Concerns Prior To Security Iraq

Let's also not forget how powerful our media is. They didn't need to find WMD. I'm sure there's still a great percentage of Americans who believe there were WMD's found in Iraq. Just as 85% of the soldiers serving in Iraq think Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11.

blimp- wtf does a piece of

blimp- wtf does a piece of paper folded like a dragon have to do with no planes?

"They come in the summer of

"They come in the summer of 2003, bringing in Iraqis, interviewing them," the UN source said. "Then they start talking about WMD and they say to [these Iraqi intelligence officers] that 'Our President is in trouble. He went to war saying there are WMD and there are no WMD. What can we do? Can you help us?'"

The source said intelligence officers understood quickly what they were being asked to do and that the assumption was they were being asked to provide WMD in order for coalition forces to find them.

they were being asked to

they were being asked to provide WMD in order for coalition forces to find them.

Next...

Why didn't BushCo plant WMDs

Why didn't BushCo plant WMDs and why didn't the hijackers attack a nuclear power plant rather than office buildings?

First of all, aren't WMD

First of all, aren't WMD traceable? Isn't every piece down to the most minute detail categorically stored somewhere? If a bomb goes off, don't they have technicians that can tell where it was made, etc...?

I'm guessing it's not as

I'm guessing it's not as easy to "plant" WMD than you think.

Which is why they had to

Which is why they had to resort to, "'Our President is in trouble. He went to war saying there are WMD and there are no WMD. What can we do? Can you help us?'"

"why didn't the hijackers

"why didn't the hijackers attack a nuclear power plant rather than office buildings?"

Is Gold stored at the bottom of a Nuclear Power Plant?

Whatever happened to the

Whatever happened to the Gold stored at the bottom of the WTC?

>why didn't the hijackers

>why didn't the hijackers attack a >nuclear power plant rather than office >buildings?

Bush wanted the economy to get back going as quick as possible, pushed to reopen Wall Street, and so forth. But not out of patriotism but to please his lobbyists.

Anyone: how about the

Anyone: how about the McNivet quote above: is this a military double agent, sent to divert attention from controlled demolition? or why is he saying this

http://911review.com/motive/g

Apparently it doesn't matter

Apparently it doesn't matter whether there were WMD's or not, because this douchebag from HuffPo and his candyassed Democrat colleagues have let BushCo implement their entire agenda anyway. As far as I'm concerned, the hysteria over WMD's was just PR for the American public, and bad PR at that, since anyone who cared could find out in about 5 minutes that we backed Saddam with WMD's, intelligence, money, agricultural exports, and other materiel when he was at the height of his crimes.

Either the Dems didn't fight because they agree with this agenda of full spectrum dominance and American hegemony, or they didn't fight because they're gutless political opportunists.

Either way, the author's question is bullshit because he and his kind are on board with Bush, militarism, and the "war on terror" no matter what the facts are about Iraq.

The bottom line... you

The bottom line... you couldn't have invaded either Afghanistan or Iraq without 9/11.

As Ray McGovern said, in July 2001, Colin Powell said that Saddam didn't have any WMD. Magically, 6 weeks after 9/11, Saddam had WMD.

As for why they didn't bomb

As for why they didn't bomb a nuclear power plant, I'd say because everything that happened on 9/11 was intended more for show than for effect: an almost vacant section of the Pentagon was hit and the WTC towers were brought down early in the morning before most employees had arrived for work. Can't speculate on Flight 93 since we don't know what its intended destination was.

If maximum damage was intended, the Pentagon would have been hit from above, or better yet, the CIA building in Langley would have been hit, and the WTC towers would have been toppled sideways into Manhattan.

The minimization of damage was one of the things that first made me skeptical of the official story, because it really doesn't make sense if these attacks were really terrorism.

Sorry... it was Condi in

Sorry... it was Condi in July 2001 who said, "But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

Here's the

The reason WHY they just

The reason WHY they just couldn't put WMD's in Iraq by planting them is because WE invaded Afghanstan FIRST to make it safe for Unocial OIl company to build a pipeline through Afghanistan, under BOGUS BS of trying to catch Bin LAden, NOT! Planting WMD's in Iraq would NOT have given them the cover they needed to invade Afghanistan and keep the BOGUS worldwide "WAR ON TERRORISM" going FOREVER! Yes, there are "terrorists" out there BUT THEY ARE BEHIND AND IN BED WITH THEM AND ARE FUNDING THEM ALSO!

1) Secret operations in a

1) Secret operations in a middle eastern country infested with weapons inspectors is much harder than pulling off a false flag terrorist attack in your own country where you have control over the agencies/media.

2) Pre 9/11, Bush was under less suspicion. After making the fallacious link between 9/11 and Iraq, all eyes were upon the administration in anticipation of a move like planting of WMD's - it would be much harder to pull off.

3) They diudnt even need to, as the american public are happy to believe that the evil iraqi's DO have WMD, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. Exactly like they are happy to believe the evil arabs attack the WTC on 9/11, despite the evidence to the contrary.

No head scratching

No head scratching required.

There are 2 fallacies in the suppostition by the "anonymous" huffpo source. Firstly, this odd concept that the truth movement is pointing the finger aquarely at the Bush administration - and them alone - for 9/11.

9/11 is a symptom of a bad situation, not the bad situation itself. The bankers/globalists who pull the strings of evil ops, then cover it up through their media whores, simply enable entities such as the NeoCons to pull off their scams. The end result is increased global warfare, which dumps money into corporate bank accounts and rings up massive national debts, which also enriches bankers.

As for WMD's in Iraq - yes, the Bush admin would love to have found or planted them. But they don't run things. The globalists don't have a plan to extricate Rummy and his pals from this quagmire. In fact, the quagmire was the gameplan all along. Civil War in Iraq is a confrontation that can, like the Palestine situation, drag on for decades, as both sides are armed with ordnance (by the defense corporatists), conflict is brewed to enhace the image of Arabs as maniacal lunatics who kill almost for pleasure, and Middle East instability continues the sham of highly organized global terrorism. The unflagging, endless, Utopian cash cow of the globalists.

But this is why we must stop letting anyone assume "George W. Bush did it." It's a deliberate obfuscation of blame. BushCo are the low-levels operatives who threw the switches. But unless you identify the globalists behind the curtain who essentially run this planet now... it WILL HAPPEN AGAIN.

There are some really great

There are some really great answers to Mr. Zengotita's question here!

I suggest all of us e-mail this thread to him & to Arianna Huffington.

Rumpl4skn-- I'm not being

Rumpl4skn--

I'm not being facetious here, but do you use this argument to persuade people not to invest money in the stock market? Let's face it, supporting George Bush is no more complicit in the grand scheme of things than giving Exxon or Cargill or Raytheon $50 in the hopes that they'll give us back $60.

There's an idea called "corporate disobedience" that says that if we're serious about standing up against the globalists, elites, ruling class, plutocrats, whatever you want to call them, we have to stop shopping at their stores, investing in their stocks, and funding their war against us whenever we can. Why in the hell are people still rewarding companies like Nike and WalMart for the obscene way they treat people? These companies' practices aren't secrets anymore, so ignorance is no excuse.

You're right that it's not just about Bush, but it's also not just about the government.

They decided to go with the

They decided to go with the mass graves instead of the WMD, because of all of the reasons above, and most importantly it changed the the invasion in Iraq and the War on Terror into a Moral crusade, instead of a tactical defense stratedgy against WMD. The moral battle is much more useful because it fits in with our Righteous American Myths and is unquenchable because it does not rely on 'real' (i.e. acheivable) tactical goals. If you go back and review how the War on Terrorism became the War on Terror, and how the war to destroy Iraqi WMD's became the War to liberate the Iraq's from Evil.......the whole propaganda stratedgy is as clear as day......(.for some.)

The permanent War on Terror has always been the prize, if exposing 911 doesn't stop this War On Terror.......they can still claim mission accomplished. They are more than willing to sacrifice some Middle Managers to aicheve their long term goals. I believe they've been planning on it for some time now.

timber, If you want to get

timber,

If you want to get down to the very root cause of the problem - the issue that, if removed, would bring down the power elite's house of cards - it's the media. That is the weapon they use against us.

The M.O. of control of the masses is a 2-part scenario: (a) allow, encourage, start and abet conflict of all types. Left-right ideology, actual warfare, etc. ANything that pitts 1 entity against another. Then (b) use the media to manipulate the perception of that conflict. Allow the issues that help your cause, disallow those that don't.

Whomever runs the media runs the globe. 9/11 was simply a guarantee to the NeoCons from the globalists that the op wouldn't get serious coverage - as we're all now painfully aware.

Without Perception Management, this type of scam never flies. With it, anything is doable.

there's a great mini-series

there's a great mini-series about Al "the whale" Zarqawi runnng on CNN this week.

good thing we're dropping 500 pound bombs on the "bad" people.

the world is surely more safe because of our explosive compassion.

ONE WORD - IRAN In my book -

ONE WORD - IRAN

In my book - The Last Prophet I lay it out -

This question bothered me as well. Everyone knows the admin will take drastic measures to go to war with Iran. 911 was too sloppy to re-enact another 911 here in the States. ANSWER - IRAN.

What if Iran helped Iraq hide its weapons of mass destruction ie chemical. Just as some propaganda alledged that they helped supply Iraq with road side bombs.

What if IRAN GASSED our TROOPS?

The admin would be totally vindicated AND MORE IMPORTANTLY they would be JUSTIFIED to NUKE IRAN.

That's just one of the many fun topics I cover.

The story about Valerie

The story about Valerie Plame's Brewster Jennings & Associates stopping a shipment of binary VX nerve gas from Turkey into Iraq in November 2002 that was to be used to frame the Iraqi government as having weapons of mass destruction (WMD) comes from Wayne Madsen with only anonymous "U.S. intelligence sources" cited as the reference.

I haven't been able to find this story confirmed by any other source. All references to this story that I have seen simply go off of Wayne Madsen's below article:

##########

http://waynemadsenreport.com/2005_11111118.php

Wayne Madsen Report

Brewster Jennings

CIA counter-proliferation network prevented a WMD "salting" operation by Bush White House in Iraq.

November 11, 2005 -- New aspect of Valerie Plame/Brewster Jennings exposure revealed. According to U.S. intelligence sources, the White House exposure of Valerie Plame and her Brewster Jennings & Associates was intended to retaliate against the CIA's work in limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. WMR has reported in the past on this aspect of the scandal. In addition to identifying the involvement of individuals in the White House who were close to key players in nuclear proliferation, the CIA Counter-Proliferation Division prevented the shipment of binary VX nerve gas from Turkey into Iraq in November 2002. The Brewster Jennings network in Turkey was able to intercept this shipment which was intended to be hidden in Iraq and later used as evidence that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. intelligence sources revealed that this was a major reason the Bush White House targeted Plame and her network.

In fact, U.S. intelligence sources report that the first shipment of VX nerve gas to Saddam Hussein was carried out between 1988 and 1989. The gas was shipped to Iraq by a U.S. company that was established in 1987 -- The Carlyle Group.

U.S. intelligence sources have also confirmed that Israeli military officers served unofficially with the U.S. Central Command headquarters in Baghdad. The Israelis were attached to the J2X (Joint Intelligence Liaison) in Baghdad. Their presence in Baghdad, according to the sources, was kept secret.

##########

Without something more substantial than anonymous "U.S. intelligence sources" as cited by Wayne Madsen, I wouldn't be attempting to use this report to try to convince others as to its validity.

Rumpl4skn: I agree whole

Rumpl4skn: I agree whole heartily with all of your posts above. Well put!

Timbermonkey: You are correct that we should stop supporting these companies, but one of the most effective stratagies they have in America is to turn what could be large organized dissent of the population into a personal consumer decision, that makes us feel good but does little to really change the corrupt system behind the curtain. Organized Boycotts are different, because they are organized and the powers that be don't know where or who that organized power might turn on next.

RP-- I agree that there's

RP--

I agree that there's strength in numbers, and an organized boycott would definitely be more effective than just a few people "opting out."

Until then, though, it helps me sleep better at night to do my part as an individual.

The Iraqi WMDs and the

The Iraqi WMDs and the entire industry supporting them were found, mapped out, and destroyed in a six-year process, largely under the direction of Scott Ritter. This was extremely well-documented. An attempt to pretend that there were still significant WMDs would have to go up against that evidence. In 2003 it is impossible, for example, to plant nerve gas made the Iraqi way of 1997 vintage, which could be tested and found to have been made in 1997 and aged accordingly. These things have clear chemical signatures. Ritter himself being so outspoken on it (and having explained this to me at a meeting, in response to exactly this question), and of course the war being so controversial, you can bet the international community would have demanded to see and test the proof themselves. So the simple answer is this:

1) It is impossible to get away with planting WMDs in Iraq and get this past the international skepticism (though some attempts may have been made, albeit these stories are coming from questionable sources like Al Martin and Wayne Madsen).

2) It is, however, easy to pull off a domestic psyop, control the evidence, have everyone both in the media and at the UN faithfully reproduce your story, and be confident in the power of denial.

Zengotitta should be forced to consider the history of confirmed false-flag and false casus belli operations internationally (Gladio in Italy, Moscow apartment bombings, Gleiwitz, etc.) and then present an argument for why the United States in 2001 is necessarily so different that such an operation would be unthinkable.

They didn't have to find

They didn't have to find weapons just scare the people into believing that they were in danger, which worked perfectly.

R.P."They decided to go with

R.P."They decided to go with the mass graves instead of the WMD, because of all of the reasons above, and most importantly it changed the the invasion in Iraq and the War on Terror into a Moral crusade, instead of a tactical defense stratedgy against WMD. The moral battle is much more useful because it fits in with our Righteous American Myths and is unquenchable because it does not rely on 'real' (i.e. acheivable) tactical goals."...

You're right again! This sort of Christian-warrior stuff goes over extremely well with Bush's base of red-state simpletons!

About 200 black-ops boys

About 200 black-ops boys were sent into Iraq to, among other things plant evidence of WMD. It was easier said than done, and there was allot of money being shipped around on unguarded trucks to distract the operatives. Through reportedly "bungled communications" 100 of these men were killed by "friendly fire". It could be that they were not so easy to control, and an embarrasement if they were caught. I wasn't there, so I wouldn't know, but there were a few survivors who talked: I stumbled on this stunning revelation from the Pentagon whistleblower, Nelda Rogers. She "is a 28-year veteran debriefer for the Defense Department. She has become so concerned for her safety that
she decided to tell the story about this latest CIA-military fiasco in
Iraq. According to Al Martin Raw.com, "Ms. Rogers is number two in the
chain of command within this DoD special intelligence office. This is
a ten-person debriefing unit within the central debriefing office for
the Department of Defense". I have always been amazed that after all those
promisses of uncovering WMD in Iraq, a few werent planted there to
give a better credibility to the pre-war spin. Now we know the
details. More than 100 of these covert operators are dead through
bungeled CIA comunication and friendly fire. (see the article at
http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/edit/index.php?op=view&itemid=331
that I found on http://www.hopedance.org/archive/40/articles/220.html
via the search suggested above.

IRAN IRAN IRAN we need a

IRAN

IRAN

IRAN

we need a reason to nuke a IRAN

(see 8 posts up)

Well, I've tried to respond

Well, I've tried to respond to the Huffpo article twice now, once last night and once today. Citing Dr. David Ray Griffin's lecture on 9/11 myth vs reality, in which the 3rd myth Griffin addresses deals directly with with the first question Thomas de Zengotita raises, and then citing the Rawstory article concerning his last question of US attempts to stage a discovery of WMD recovery in Iraq. What's the point of Thomas De Zengotita asking these questions if he doesn't want to see the answers?

I have daily debates with

I have daily debates with people on other MB's and blogs about the "infeasibility" of this power pyramid of corporate global control. (The reward vs. punishment system that I refer to as the "Carrot and Very Big Stick".) And I think I've derived the source of this prejudice against the scenario - it's blatant prejudice against the concept that global control is not wielded from within our shores. The idea that foreign entities - for that matter, nation-less, corporately defined entities - are running things, is just too bizarre for most people, and they simply can't fathom the possibility that the good old U.S. of A. is ultimately in charge. Personally, I think all globes and ,aps shoul erase national boundaries, and draw in the regions of corporate commerce and influence, according to the world business model.

Some of the text of the movie "Network" is frighteningly realistic.

Myself - I'm definitely mad as hell. I just wish I could figure out a way to not have to take it anymore.

Huffingtonpost isn't letting

Huffingtonpost isn't letting me post. The thing that irks me about this article is that I'm almost 100% sure the writer wrote it with the intent of making our "heads explode" with such an amazing example of logic.

My question to him is this... if they had a good enough reason to invade Iraq, then why did they use fabricated reasons like WMD, ties to Al-Qaeda, and ties to 9/11?

Why didn't they use their other reason?

Could it possibly be because 9/11 was designed specifically for that reason, and that's why it was used MORE than anything else?

I'm so sick of people telling me that they could have invaded without 9/11.

And WHY didn't they invade

And WHY didn't they invade Iraq prior to 9/11 if they had a good enough reason?

FYI, my post from late last

FYI, my post from late last night never appeared either apparently.. it was under username 'dz'.

Here's the reason... before

Here's the reason... before 9/11, the war would have been called, "The War Because They Want One". After 9/11, it became, "The War On Terror".

It's all about the slogans.

It's all about the slogans.

"FYI, my post from late last

"FYI, my post from late last night never appeared either apparently.. it was under username 'dz'."

Yeah, I would have no clue that would be you.

I'm so sick of people

I'm so sick of people telling me that they could have invaded without 9/11.
Jon Gold
=======================
Those are people who have no clue about the political ramifications of such action without public consent. Once you initiate such action, you can expand and escalate it covertly, but the build-up to war and actual invasion moment is not something you do without the populace being sufficiently whipped into a lather over.

GHW Bush didn't launch Gulf War I until they big 'incubator baby deaths scam' he pulled. He couldn't have proceded without that.

Michael Parenti refers to it

Michael Parenti refers to it as the "Patriotic Binge"... (waving the flag) "Yeah, we're going to war... let's kill those guys, let's kill them all... hey, wait a second. This doesn't pay the bills. This doesn't feed the children. What's going on here?"

I mean... it's not like they

I mean... it's not like they would use the media to manipulate us is it?

Naaaaaaaah...

Dr Beeth, does Nelda Rogers,

Dr Beeth, does Nelda Rogers, the 28-year veteran debriefer for the Defense Department, even exist?

The only evidence that I could find that she even exists comes from an article that Al Martin published. All the other articles that I've seen which mention her simply use that Al Martin report as their reference.

"Pentagon Whistleblower Reveals CIA/DoD Fiascos," Conspiracy Planet, circa June 21, 2003:

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=70&contentid=882

http://web.archive.org/web/20031019181751/http://new.globalfreepress.com...

Original Al Martin story:

http://www.almartinraw.com/subscription/column108.html

Think about the 2002 Coup of

Think about the 2002 Coup of Hugo Chavez. There were people being gunned down in the streets by snipers. Some of the citizens were carrying guns. They started firing back in the direction of the sniper fire. The media that was controlled by the group responsible for the coup, filmed the citizens firing their guns, but blamed the deaths of innocents on them, and didn't even bother to mention the snipers.

In other words, they only showed the citizens firing into the direction of the sniper fire, and made it seem as if they were responsible for the deaths of innocents.

Imagine how often our news does that to us.

The United States is ranked 44th in the world for press freedom.

44th?!?

In a country that promotes "Freedom Of The Press", that's disgusting.

JG, I bet if FOX news were

JG,
I bet if FOX news were removed from our roster, The US would immediately jump to the top 20. Still very sad none the less.

This sort of

This sort of Christian-warrior stuff goes over extremely well with Bush's base of red-state simpletons!
Anonymous

The idea that foreign entities - for that matter, nation-less, corporately defined entities - are running things, is just too bizarre for most people, and they simply can't fathom the possibility that the good old U.S. of A. is ultimately in charge.
Rumpl4skn

Combine these two realities with a full exposure of 911 and you have the potential to turn the very patriotism and religious zeal that they have cultivated so carefully , right back at them.

Patriotism becomes taking back our own country from the unaccountable and global financial powers behind the scenes and that religious zeal becomes a thirst for moral justice when they realize they have been lied to and used by these immoral powers.
Do not denigrate the Born-Again experience of Evangelical Christians, but gently show them how their experience has been coopted by immoral leaders and the system that they represent.
(I don't mean the anti-christ crap)

These Christians are not unfamiliar with conspiracies. They just usually focus on the "cultural" conspiracies that are provided to them from the elite, which keeps them impotent in the face the real threats and moral evil.

This why they have been really concerned about , (and manipulating) the militant christian militia movements.........and they have guns.

Combine the Libertatrian Movie Freedom from Fascism (including the wide distrust of middle class american's for the corporations they work for) and the the work of all the 911 Truthers, especially DVG and Jones ( who is Morman) and you have a potentially powerful movement for change
........and a very interesting debate at the new constitutional congress set up to insure this never happens again..

44th seems almost to

44th seems almost to generous for our pathetic press.

very simple reason why the

very simple reason why the government didnt make it look like there were wmd's. if they did that then they could get the war started but they couldnt have gotten the patriot act passed and couldnt have declared a war against terrorism. they also couldnt get the police state that they're trying to get now or all the military funding that they're getting...they need an attack on u.s soil to get all of this

That should have read "they

That should have read "they simply can't fathom the possibility that the good old U.S. of A. is NOT ultimately in charge."

As apparently you deciphered. : )

Answer to James

Answer to James Redford’s question : « Are you sure that « Nelda Rodgers » exists.

No, James, IÂ’m not. I do have compassion for these guys coming back from an operation that in principle didnÂ’t exist, with PTSD and having lost many of their friends. Al MartinÂ’s description of Nelda Rodgers fits in with what I would expect would be the kind of fate that hits a group of operatives who base their actions on lies, deception, and killing for profit and/ or a misplaced confidence in the PentagonÂ’s benevolent intentions.
I would welcome a follow-up article on what happened to the Pentagon whistle-blower Rodgers. I would also welcome to hear first hand from Jesse Macbeth what was true and untrue about the statements he made for the movie with Pepperspray Productions, and what motivated his actions.

There is no doubt in my mind that the so-called “Al Qaeda” international terrorism is initiated, cultivated and magnified by black-ops people, mostly within the Pentagon, MI6 and other masters of war through deception who dispose of generous budgets. Another real life figure, who recently changed his name to Van de Meer (South-African origin) , is CIA(?) shape-shifter / “treasure hunter” Michael Meiring who now lives in Texas Houston with protection from his friends. http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/12/davao-city-bomber-michael-... These people give us an idea on special-ops funded “synthetic” terrorism. It is high time that our own media began to do well researched investigative journalism on these important issues.

"911blimp.net is not a

"911blimp.net is not a conspiracy theory site, it is a conspiracy theory debunking site."

That's a great sales pitch.

The premise of the question

The premise of the question is bogus. It did not take many people to plan and execute 9/11.

Besides, it would have been extremely dangerous for them to plant WMDs in Iraq because they could be traced back to us.

"911blimp.net is not a

"911blimp.net is not a conspiracy theory site, it is a conspiracy theory debunking site."

That's a great sales pitch.
Anonymous | 06.13.06 - 6:59 pm | #
yeah, its too bad blimp is pushing that hologram bullshit that only discredits us.

Our posts finally made it.

Our posts finally made it.

HUFF PO - HERE WE COME !!!

HUFF PO - HERE WE COME !!!

" if these folks could

" if these folks could arrange something as logistically complex as 9/11, couldn't they have arranged for us to "discover" some WMD in Iraq? That would have been child's play by comparison.."

No, actually it would have been more difficult to convince the world public that WMDs were genuine of witch everybody would be suspicuious (I remember even the pro-US TV commentators in my country were mentioning the possibility that WMDs could be faked) than 9/11 witch most of the people could not even immagine it was an inside job. Besides WMDs would be investigated by the UN inspectors from a wide range of countries, much more difficult to control than US 9/11 Comission, in this case Bush's Oil buddies.

Personally, I think it

Personally, I think it relates to the PNAC statement of a new Pearl Harbor event. They already tried forged documents, which failed but even if they hadn't, it is unlikely Americans or the world would have supported an invasion over some documents. These neocons were convinced that they needed a mind shattering event.

Then once they had their war (which is all they wanted in the first place), it was a non-issue. It didn't matter whether they found WMD or not (why do something that brings more risk of getting caught when you've already accomplished what you set out to do).

I have read on

I have read on www.whatreallyhappened.com, a few years ago, the militaryt tried to hide wmds` and were killed by friendley fire. You can find out the date by search of that web site. I also think that the anthrax attacks were supposed to be blamed on Saddam but a good F.B.I. agent found out the anthrax hey sold Saddam was not the same kind used at the Senate anthrax attacks so they had to use

I read a few years ago on

I read a few years ago on www.what reallyhappened.com that the military was trying to hide wmds in Iraq but were killed by friendly fire. Search the site!!!! Also,I think that they were going to say that the anthrax was from Saddam, but some smart, F.B.I. abent,loyal to the Constitution, found out that the anthrax sent to the Senate was not the kind they sold Saddam. So they had to invent wmds!!!!!