Speaking of money, 911blimp.net has a standing unclaimed $500 reward offer http://911blimp.net/$500reward.shtml to anyone who can establish that Bush was lying, or even just mistaken, when he told us that he was in the loop on the very beginning of the "surprise" "secret" "terrorist" 9/11 attack.

This was done because, within the "9/11 truth movement", there are a lot of fake 911 truthers (wolves in sheep[dog]'s clothing) who've mislabeled Bush's statements as "lies", "impossible", "erroneous", etc, without a shred of evidence to back up their distractive, evidence-dismissing statements! Some have gone out of their way to misdescribe what Bush actually said. In other words, it's clear that some of them are lying http://911blimp.net/sounds/BarrieZwickerMisdescribesIncriminatingBushTVs... about Bush's statements, even though it is not at all clear that Bush was lying (or even just mistaken).

That list includes, but is hardly limited to, Barrie Zwicker, Mike Rivero (wrh.com), Jarrett Murphy (Village Voice reporter), and Jared Israel (tenc.com).

AFAIC, it's quite possible (and seemingly evident!) that, in a loose-lips-sink-ships kind of way, our illustrious fearless leader talked too much and, indirectly, out slipped a "national security secret" (IOW, a 911-lie-killing truth), and now all the co-conspirators and participants in the 9/11 cover-up either have to ignore the statement or else try to cover for it.

The only thing more revealing than the content of Bush's statements are the bizarre ways people have reacted to them. Democrats (and Republicans) just pretend Bush didn't make them (same as the 9-11 Commission); some of the loudest voices within the "truth movement" go out of their way to try to get us to disregard them. (That's another example of how a significantly large chunk of the "truth movement" acts like a false-flag operation.)
______________________________________

Someone wrote in an earlier thread that the probability for all three WTC buildings to have collapsed as a result of fires is 3 percent or something like that (of course, that must have been just an example).

DRG argues here that the probability must be infinitesimally low:

"The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True"
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

If you haven't read that article, do so now. It's very compelling.

I think that article is precisely the kind that newbies to 9/11 Truth should be directed to.

Another excellent choice for newbies is the following article by DRG:

"Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93: The 9/11 Commission's Incredible Tales"
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20051205150219651

I would go so far as to say that these two compact articles by DRG are all that it takes to "convert" any at least somewhat open-minded person into a 9/11 skeptic.

Newbies should not be presented with extensive link lists or too much initial information. That can be frightening.

A colleague at work told me yesterday that he had been relying on my "filtering" of reading. He had mostly read what I had linked in my emails to him. He said that had helped very much, as there is *so much* information out there.

Did I tell you that most (14!) of the colleagues with whom I've discussed the issues are by now skeptical of the official account, while a few still haven't made up their minds or believe the official story, and an older boss, although skeptical of alternative theories, has actually started to re-examine the collapses? ;-)

All you have to do is ask... "Why didn't they want to investigate 9/11?"

Well Well Well...

9/11 Police Chief Pleads Guilty To Accepting $165,000

I've often seen the suggestion to ask the question "do you believe every word of the official 911 story?"
I don't know how effective that would be with the average person.
Everyone I speak to have no idea what the official words are!
Nor do they give a shit.

I watched that Declaration of Independence vid posted above
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYyttEu_NLU&search=Declaration%20of%20Ind...
Made me both sad to see what developed from these freedoms and also gave me a little hope that the American spirit is still alive out there.
We need a breakthrough. A huge breakthrough.

As long as supposed 911-lie-breakers keep on focusing on Afghanistan and Muslims and alQaeda and Osama and Atta, they are revealing themselves as agents of disinfo, as they are clearly working for "the other side", regardless of their actual motives/intent. (They may [pretend that they] think that establishing/embellishing CIA-Mujahadin ties implicates the CIA in 9/11, but that's backwards from the actual effect; such an approach presupposes that the blow-back lie, upon which the government's official theory of 9/11 is predicated, must be true. Oops...)

CDI: 'Pull It' Means 'Pull It Down'

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/06/cdi-pull-it-means-pull-it-down_30.html

Nothing like a bunch of fireworks going off to calm the nerves.

Ok. Seems to be downloading now.

Sorry for the technical difficulties.

Kevin Spacey was the narrator for a WTC video, I wonder what he thinks of 9/11.

He is Lex Luther at the moment.

I have this sneaking suspicious a MAJOR bombshell will hit the mainstream media by 9/11 in regards to 9/11 Truth and questioning the official story. As in, something that would shock the hell out of us, and give the millions of us vindication against the idiots yelling "tinfoil". Because of this age of the internet, people are coming round.

I really believe 9/11 was outsourced to some private companies/front companies, Mossad and double agents...and that only a small handful in the actual US government were "in" on it. Cheney I'd say is suspect #1.

Yes, the "hundreds or thousands must have been involved" as an arguement confuses me. However, a friend said something the other day that really creeped me out. His father is a former CIA agent and apparently when the pentagon was getting a bit of coverage he began to speak:
Father:son?
son: yes dad?
father:does that seem a little fishy to you?
son:I guess so(careful in front of dad)
father:well, I need to tell you something. Sometimes you need to create your enemies to live the way that we do.

exit stage left

Was he sending a message, or is he just crazy? Could all CIA be like this? I think it was a message. Thoughts?

"Was he sending a message, or is he just crazy?"

Well, there was a lot of talk for a moment about a "peace dividend" when the wall came down in Berlin.
If the government didn't have a reason to keep us safe from outside enemies how could it justify it's existence?

I think one argument anti-77ers can make is that Dick Cheney was so ready to make sure "the orders still stand" because there wasn't much loss of life in an empty area with an empty vessel, where the theories are broad for that issue.

My thoughts. I'm agnostic to 77 since there is so much else to focus on.

"I have this sneaking suspicious a MAJOR bombshell will hit the mainstream media by 9/11 in regards to 9/11 Truth and questioning the official story."

My guess is that the bombshell would be related to the sealed vs. sealed indictment that came down when everyone in the old media was expecting an indictment on Karl Rove. Rove's lawyer says Rove wasn't indicted, but the way that everyone jumped on Jason Leopold of truthout.org when he stuck by his sources saying Rove was indicted makes the whole thing very unusual. I read that it's rare for an indictment to read sealed vs. sealed. It's usually U.S. vs. sealed.

So they saw a danger, but needed to make it a bit more visual or emotional for us? Or they need to create the enemies to help us live in a Walmart society? Perhaps to keep people in need of a sense of "security" through needless things from China and Taiwan. It seems to make a bit of sense(not that I agree!). Could we have major shopping malls without major theatre wars? You could argue that other Western countries don't take it as far but US and co. are doing enough fighting for everyone combined. They can just sit back, rake profits and laugh as we collapse.

There's a book that explains it all called "The End of All Evil" by Jeremy Locke. While I don't agree with everything in the book it is a fast and fascinating read.

In other words we are perhaps just part of a Western experiment. Bush and Cheney will take the blame if this gets out, it may be written into history as a coup. Unless Peak Oil exists! Then all those Frenchies can die with us!!!

Is this the time and place to offer some interesting tid bits about transponders? No need to keep OR remove Flight 77 from the discussion.

These two quotes say a lot.

"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks." Lord Acton

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they
have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the Government at defiance. The issuing power should
be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson

"Sometimes you need to create your enemies to live the way that we do."

Or as Immortal Technique says "The oldest trick in the book is making enemies"

The US intentionally riled up al Qaeda most likely using double agents, got the wasps to come here, then pulled off the movie we all saw on 9/11. 9/11 was way too perfect to be the work of cessna flunkies.

Btw, the best thing to say to a liberal who says it's all lies and theories, ask them

"Do you believe every word of the Bush administration about 9/11?"

Job One of 9/11 was enemy creation.

Making alQaeda seem like a real enemy, in free videos (like that too-spooky WKJO, as well as other vehicles, like that "Able Danger" Pentagon-created legend) which are being presented as somehow pro-911-truth, is a real masterstroke by the propagandameisters, and a sad failure on the part of supposedly-honest 911-lie-breaking decision-makers who act as if they still don't have a coherent view of 9/11, and so they are easily socially steered into helping promote blowback-theory-bolstering info.

When will more of the avowed 911-lie-breakers realize that the only way to tear down The Big Lie of 9/11 is to attack its very core -- the lie which says that we can blame 9/11 on evil suicidal fundamentilist Islamist hijacking pilots?

As long as supposed 911-lie-breakers keep on focusing on Afghanistan and Muslims and alQaeda and Osama and Atta, they are revealing themselves as disinfo agents, as they are clearly working for "the other side", regardless of their actual intent. (They may [pretend that they] think that establishing/embellishing CIA-Mujahadin ties implicates the CIA in 9/11, but that's backwards from the actual effect; such an approach presupposes that the blow-back lie, upon which the government's official theory of 9/11 is predicated, must be true. Oops...)
______________________________________

Yeah we're disinfo agents for exploring Atta and the ISI. Riiight. Hey and maybe not only was there no planes, maybe there was no towers! All just a hologram by the CIA!

Just look at that pic of that plant, it looks so wartermelony gummy like.
I feel so wrong for wanting to just pluck one and pop into my mouth like a piece of bubblicious.
After it's processed though, it looks like sin.

How about that Noriega's cocaine that daddy bush stole from him?--geggy | 06.30.06 - 10:20 pm | #

--Is their actual proof that Noriega is incarcerated? I have this sneeky feeling that he's hanging out with Osama at a Tapas restaurant somewhere.

WAKE UP: Noriega was pardoned and given control over the operations in Haiti! He's been working with Carter since the coup in Venezuela and no telling what all. He gets safe-haven in Florida, and probably is based out of Gitmo.

BASICS:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ha.html&revid=16316447...

I would love to watch this, but the .avi isn't working for me... any chance it could be converted to .mov, or .wmv?