We Are CHANGE confronts Zbigniew Brzezinski Again!
constitutional911 Fri, 03/28/2008 - 7:31am
We Are CHANGE confronts Zbigniew Brzezinski Again!
We Are CHANGE confronts Zbigniew Brzezinski Part I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9pDY_ny6Qo
We Are CHANGE confronts Zbigniew Brzezinski Part II
- constitutional911's blog
- Login to post comments
Bildenberg
Are you going after Brzezinski for attending bilderberg meetings ? If so that's lame. Why not ask him to clarify his statements in The Grand Chessboard about a Pearl Harbor type catalyzing event. Then ask him to clarify his recent remarks in the Senate hearing regarding the possibility of terrorist event used as pretext for attacking Iran.
LaRouche
I think he was right about one thing. There is too much LaRouche influence in the 9/11 Truth movement.
The "NWO" obsession is, IMHO, a shallow right-wing analysis based on the same kind of non-realistic thinking that blinds people to the facts surrounding 9/11. There is nothing sacred about U.S. national sovereignty, when a person knows what's been done in its name.
U.S. imperialism was dominating and killing people well before the Bilderbergs, the Trilateral Commission, or the first use of the phrase "New World Order". The country was founded on racism and territorial/economic expansionism. Those who have a romantic view of the U.S. "Republic" should delve a little deeper into history.
Good points!
NWO is vague and intentionally so. Designed apparently to take the focus off a rather clearly identifiable "Ruling Class" in the U.S. and Capitalist world. (Domhoff "Who Rules America" for instance) But since that reality happens to fit a marxist analysis they flee from it. I don't agree though that there is so much a significant LaRouche influence as there is a John Birch Society influence. Those people are colossal fakes who play with libertarian rhetoric to push through a pro Police State agenda. I think A. Jones has played a huge and mostly positive role but it's kind of painful to watch him try to fit what he now knows into a completely bankrupt ideological framework.
I suspect that LaRouche has
I suspect that LaRouche has different degrees of influence in different communities. I know here in Portland, Oregon there's a definite presence, and it leads to decidedly Jew-hostile rhetoric. I've been publicly accused of being a Mossad agent, I suspect because I have a Jewish last name, and because I've been allied with other Truthers who have advocated that the group take a clear stand on racism, anti-semitism, sexism and homophobia. Somehow it's considered divisive to stand up against exclusion and divisiveness.
LaRouche and his movement
are strange phenomena indeed. I wouldn't overestimate their influence though. Ralgh Schoenman seems to be convinced that they are intelligence agency assets. If so maybe i'll have to take them a little more seriously. i still say the main influence on the rightest, xenophobic types in the TRUTH milieu comes from the Birchers (and by extension the National Socialists, i.e. Marxist/Jewish/Capitalist alliance) - pure fiction to befuddle the unwary.
Speaking of the La Rouche people - it's very strange that Tarpley was tied up with them. But I'm going to withhold judgement about him - his book is very good as are his radio interviews/programs, etc. IMO
My concern is with newly
My concern is with newly politicized people who are grappling with very complex realities. It's very easy for opportunists to sweep them off their feet with simplistic, confused, even racist analysis. I suppose I should have more faith in people, but ruling class counter-intelligence agencies have had over half a century of practice in how to confuse populist movements.
That said, there are certainly opportunists on the other side who, for example, use accusations of anti-semitism to thwart all rational efforts to analyze the role that right-wing zionism has played in world affairs for the past 150 years. It's why we have to strive for precision in our analysis and our use of language.
The "New World Order" is, in fact, just more of the same old shit. The Capitalist ruling class, with the aid of the Church as its ideological "shock troops" and its control of the State as its instrument of violence, has been destroying peoples all over the planet for centuries. Why should it come as a surprise, and why is it a source of particular indignation, that the people of the U.S. are also subject to the machinations of the Empire?
Birchers, et. al. who seem to have no problem with the entire history of U.S. imperialism prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, and who somehow see the plans for a NWO as a socialist (!) conspiracy, are morally and/or intellectually challenged. Perhaps it's just a problem with semantics. I know what I mean when I use the word "socialist" and it certainly does not equate with an evil elite cabal hell-bent on taking over the world by destroying "democracy."
Agreed
nothing "New" here. Most of the people with the NWO analysis were on board with U.S. intervention and militarism and sort of missed the past century of U.S. aggression, oops. But now we have a world historical opportunity to work together with people from diverse backgrounds and traditions. The complete and total collapse of U.S. propaganda image as a result of 9-11 has created a basis for very broad unity. Like you say we need to be careful with words and analysis - no sense dividing ourselves up over simple misunderstandings, etc. No sense capitulating to narrow bigotry like immigrant bashing either.
Balls are Good!
Just a note of applause to you Luke, and to the others who are asking uncomfortable questions towards those who are supposed to be working on our behalf. You folks are doing what others are still pondering about, and you are getting better with each encounter. Read as much history as you can from all points of view. I would give the Bilderberg issue a rest- there are plenty of other pikes to deliver your point home. Hone your craft! My thanks to you all!
Not had a chance to watch it
Not had a chance to watch it yet but people please note that nobody in We Are change is a trained journalist. As part of Change UK and confronting people over here I know we will all get better over time. Everything I've done with hindsight could have been done better and next time it will. For those who do make negative comments, there is nothing stopping you going out and asking the questions you want answered.
It is best in confrontations at talks to have a game plan and to try and stick to it. If you are going to a talk, spread out. All it takes is one question from a cluster and they will avoid that cluster again. Do your research on the target and stick to facts. another good method is to give everyone involved a list of top ten questions, the first to ask a question asks the top question, the second person the second question etc. this means your top questions will always get out there.
If confronting someone individually, try asking for an interview politely(you can be doing a media degree or something) . If you research them well enough you can ask them some nice softball questions before going in with the tough stuff. This way if they do run away it will only make them look worse.
Keep up the great work to all those involved in all of this.
BRZEZINSKI WAS TRUTHFUL ! !
Well at least Mr. Brzezinski was truthful for one fleeting moment when he said his main agenda was sucking the blood from the people. May we quote you on that sir?
I love you guys and thank God daily for your efforts.
I would like to suggest that when you go to these confrontations, you have as much supporting material as possible in your hands. These maniacs will always feign ignorance, challenge veracity and deny quotes whenever they are cornered. Brzezinski did so at least twice during this Q&A, and I would have loved to have seen his face when he was corrected and proven wrong. Instead he was able to defuse the questions with dismissals which were clearly lies. Be prepared for this in the future.
And please, never...EVER...stop.
He said amongst other things:
"...sucking blood out of poor people, exploiting them.."
Very sarcastic
BRZEZINSKI telling the truth as they often do.....
..."sucking blood out of poor people, subverting them...."
Do you have a reflection in the mirror, Zbig? It's pretty amazing how little Brzezinski has mellowed with age?
He did dodge the important questions about another false flag event and the statement from his book "Grand Chessboard," about a catalyzing event?
It's too bad the question wasn't directed more clearly--but it was still adequate he knew what was being asked! If you're so damn belligerent why don't you have an answer for these questions, Zbig? It's because you don't have as much guts as you like us believe, that's why!
Luke and Philly 9/11 Truth are raising the Truth Squad to an art form--not everyone can do this! It's clear, Luke has some talent for this!
It's great stuff! All I gotta say is keep it up!
Brzezinski...
...don't believe them!
From the Washington Post today:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/27/AR200803...
Zbigniew Brzezinski does have some thoughtful things to say too. He uses us, perhaps we can use him as well.
Title: Zbigniew Brzezinski
Title: Zbigniew Brzezinski gives a policy report card on the last three presidents and hope for the future.
This is the man who wrote the Grand Chessboard.
Perfect Chameleon.
Highly Dangerous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
Good Stuff...couldn't agree more
"Perfect Chameleon.
Highly Dangerous."
Thanks for the link to Comedy Central. You're so right,.
Zbig...
...don't believe him!
Zbigniew Brzezinski The
Zbigniew Brzezinski
The Grand Chessboard
http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard
American Primacy And It's Geostrategic Imperatives
Key Quotes From Zbigniew Brzezinksi's Seminal Book
"Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world power."- (p. xiii)
"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)
"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)
“Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)
“The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)
"In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p.209)
"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." (p. 211)
Zbigniew Brzezinski's Background
According to his resume, Zbigniew Brzezinski lists the following achievements:
Harvard Ph.D. in 1953
Counselor, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Professor of American Foreign Policy, Johns Hopkins University
National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (1977-81)
Trustee and founder of the Trilateral Commission
International advisor of several major US/Global corporations
Associate of Henry Kissinger
Under Ronald Reagan - member of NSC-Defense Department Commission on Integrated Long-Term Strategy
Under Ronald Reagan - member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
Past member, Board of Directors, The Council on Foreign Relations
1988 - Co-chairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force.
Brzezinski is also a past attendee and presenter at several conferences of the Bilderberger group - a non-partisan affiliation of the wealthiest and most powerful families and corporations on the planet.
The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski – More Quotes
"...The last decade of the twentieth century has witnessed a tectonic shift in world affairs. For the first time ever, a non-Eurasian power has emerged not only as a key arbiter of Eurasian power relations but also as the world's paramount power. The defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as the sole and, indeed, the first truly global power...” (p. xiii)
"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)
"The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.” (pp 24-5)
"For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia... Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia - and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained.” (p.30)
"America's withdrawal from the world or because of the sudden emergence of a successful rival - would produce massive international instability. It would prompt global anarchy." (p. 30)
"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. Eurasia is the globe's largest continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for 60 per cent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)
“It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)
"Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;... second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above..." (p. 40)
"...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)
"Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power." (p.55)
"Uzbekistan, nationally the most vital and the most populous of the central Asian states, represents the major obstacle to any renewed Russian control over the region. Its independence is critical to the survival of the other Central Asian states, and it is the least vulnerable to Russian pressures." (p. 121)
[Referring to an area he calls the "Eurasian Balkans" and a 1997 map in which he has circled the exact location of the current conflict - describing it as the central region of pending conflict for world dominance] "Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold." (p.124)
"The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades. Estimates by the U.S. Department of energy anticipate that world demand will rise by more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)
"Uzbekistan is, in fact, the prime candidate for regional leadership in Central Asia." (p.130)
"Once pipelines to the area have been developed, Turkmenistan's truly vast natural gas reserves augur a prosperous future for the country's people.” (p.132)
"In fact, an Islamic revival - already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by Saudi Arabia - is likely to become the mobilizing impulse for the increasingly pervasive new nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian - and hence infidel - control." (p. 133).
"For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain Geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan - and to deny to Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and Tajikistan - and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea." (p.139)
"Turkmenistan... has been actively exploring the construction of a new pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea..." (p.145)
"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it." (p148)
"China's growing economic presence in the region and its political stake in the area's independence are also congruent with America's interests." (p.149)
"America is now the only global superpower, and Eurasia is the globe's central arena. Hence, what happens to the distribution of power on the Eurasian continent will be of decisive importance to America's global primacy and to America's historical legacy." (p.194)
"Without sustained and directed American involvement, before long the forces of global disorder could come to dominate the world scene. And the possibility of such a fragmentation is inherent in the geopolitical tensions not only of today's Eurasia but of the world more generally." (p.194)
"With warning signs on the horizon across Europe and Asia, any successful American policy must focus on Eurasia as a whole and be guided by a Geostrategic design." (p.197)
"That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacy..." (p. 198)
"The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role." (p. 198)
"In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p.209)
"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." (p. 211)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
The Horror - And Comments
The Horror - And Comments From Someone Who Worked With Brzezinski
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/zbig.html
Brzezinski's book is sublimely arrogant. While singing the praises of the IMF and the World Bank, which have economically terrorized nations on every continent, and while totally ignoring the worldwide terrorist actions of the U.S. government that have led to genocide; cluster bombings of civilian populations from Kosovo, to Laos, to Iraq, to Afghanistan; the development and battlefield use of both biological and chemical agents such as Sarin gas; and the financial rape of entire cultures, it would leave the reader believing that such actions are for the good of mankind.
While seconded from the German defense ministry to NATO in the late 1970s, Dr. Johannes Koeppl traveled to Washington on more than one occasion. He also met with Brzezinski in the White House on more than one occasion. His other Washington contacts included Steve Larabee from the CFR, John J. McCloy, former CIA Director, economist Milton Friedman, and officials from Carter's Office of Management and Budget. He is the first person I have ever interviewed who has made a direct presentation at a Bilderberger conference and he has also made numerous presentations to sub-groups of the Trilateral Commission. That was before he spoke out against them.
His fall was rapid after he realized that Brzezinski was part of a group intending to impose a world dictatorship. "In 1983/4 I warned of a take-over of world governments being orchestrated by these people. There was an obvious plan to subvert true democracies and selected leaders were not being chosen based upon character but upon their loyalty to an economic system run by the elites and dedicated to preserving their power.
"All we have now are pseudo-democracies."
Koeppl recalls meeting U.S. Congressman Larry McDonald in Nuremburg in the early 80s. McDonald, who was then contemplating a run for the Presidency, was a severe critic of these elites. He was killed in the Russian shootdown of Korean Air flight 007 in 1985. Koeppl believes that it might have been an assassination. Over the years many writers have made these allegations about 007 and the fact that someone with Koeppl's credentials believes that an entire plane full of passengers would be destroyed to eliminate one man offers a chilling opinion of the value placed on human life by the powers that be.
In 1983, Koeppl warned, through Op-Ed pieces published in NEWSWEEK and elsewhere, that Brzezinski and the CFR were part of an effort to impose a global dictatorship. His fall from grace was swift. "It was a criminal society that I was dealing with. It was not possible to publish anymore in the so-called respected publications. My 30 year career in politics ended.
"The people of the western world have been trained to be good consumers; to focus on money, sports cars, beauty, consumer goods. They have not been trained to look for character in people. Therefore what we need is education for politicians, a form of training that instills in them a higher sense of ethics than service to money. There is no training now for world leaders. This is a shame because of the responsibility that leaders hold to benefit all mankind rather than to blindly pursue destructive paths.
"We also need education for citizens to be more efficient in their democracies, in addition to education for politicians that will create a new network of elites based upon character and social intelligence."
Koeppl, who wrote his 1989 doctoral thesis on NATO management, also authored a 1989 book - largely ignored because of its controversial revelations - entitled "The Most Important Secrets in the World." He maintains a German language web site at www.antaris.com and he can be reached by email at jbk@antaris.com.
As to the present conflict Koeppl expressed the gravest concerns, "This is more than a war against terrorism. This is a war against the citizens of all countries. The current elites are creating so much fear that people don't know how to respond. But they must remember. This is a move to implement a world dictatorship within the next five years. There may not be another chance."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
Can you update the main blog entry with the following?
target="_blank">
border="0" alt="ZBig 1">
target="_blank">
border="0" alt="ZBig 2">
Brzezinski's Belligerent Bout at Columbia University
March 25, 2008
Activist groups Philly 9/11 Truth and We Are CHANGE (New York)
inundated former presidential adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski with
criticisms and questions at Columbia University on Tuesday. In the
face of seven educated questioners, Brzezinski immediately invoked
sophistic rhetoric to placate the audience and whats more used
adhominem attacks against those posing the questions. Brzezinski
derisively responded to inquiries about the nature of his Bilderberg
affiliation quipping that they, Bilderberg, try to find ways to "suck
the blood out of the poor." The truth-squad was neither amused nor
daunted by Brzezinski's disdainful remarks and continued to grill the
pompous self proclaimed elitist. Brzezinski was then confronted on
the issue of the US role in culturing the conflict between the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan and the Soviets, a move intended to
facilitate the downfall of communism, however a pursuit antithetical
toward preexisting policies that actually supported communist
regimes. Brzezinski attempted to straw man the question by claiming
that the inquirer incorrectly paraphrased his comments from the Le
Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 1998 interview by citing that the Soviets
were already engaged in Afghanistan and therefore "we didn't lure
them." To clarify, Brzezinski stated in that interview "We didn't
push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the
probability that they would", so in his mind increasing the probability of
intervention and luring are not one in the same apparently. His
pomposity did not end there, when confronted with the shortcomings
and admitted impediments placed on the 9/11 Commission, Brzezinski
once more tried to dismiss the question by asserting that the
inquirer was mistaken in his interpretation of the adversities faced
by the 911 Commission.
Ask him about false flags.
Ask Brzezinski if the US government has ever committed false flag terrorism.
Ask him if false flags are an option that is "on the table" for the white house.
If he denies it, mention Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio.
70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11
John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/
johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.
Superb!
Superb!
It was a good Truth Action.
Yet, there are those who vote it down.
They may have good reasons.
Perhaps the choice of questions on the Bilderbegers.
However, secretive globalists meetings that PRE-PLAN WARS are actually very very dangerous.
ZB is very cunning and evasive.
WAC tried their best to get this man to implicate himself on the record.
His evasive denial of the PG 211 quote from the Grand Chessboard is telling.
"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
Probably the best question asked and he pretended it was incoherent and he could not understand it..
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
Obama Is Zbigniew Brzezinski Puppet
Zbigniew Brzezinski -- Obama's Foreign Policy Adviser
http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard
to those criticizing Luke about the questions ...
... of course your opinions on the matter are welcome. But, here's a thought for you ...
Video cameras are cheap. You can even get a suit at the Goodwill. Why don't you get out there and show us all how it's done? I even agree with some of your points as well. So even better. GO DO IT. Maybe Luke can take the afternoon off and go see a flick.
Thanks for the awesome action, Luke. See you on the streets.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Thanks for the suggestion. Here's an additional thought. There are all kinds of people involved in this movement will all kinds of talents doing all kinds of things. Some of us are good behind the scenes doing research, and such. Some of us are good writers. Some of us are just getting old and may have some wisdom, but not a lot of energy. Some people may just be better at doing the kind of direct public confrontation that these guys did. For the record, I think it's GREAT that this cunning and crafty Rockefeller operative is confronted head on and, yes, it takes gonads to do it. I was wrong for not expressing an overall appreciation for the courage and commitment that it takes to do this kind of action before offering my ideas. BUT. . .
...wouldn't it be great if we had a movement in which the folks doing the public stuff felt a sense of responsibility to the broader movement such that significant public actions were understood to be the public face of the movement, and should therefore strive to be representative of the clearest, best elements of the movement. One of the reasons that more people don't feel comfortable publicly proclaiming themselves 9/11 Truthers is possibly due to the discomfort around being associated with certain political factions. To simply say, "If you don't like it, do it yourself" does, in my opinion, perpetrate the particular U.S. movement dis-ease of uber-individualism. I'd prefer to see us learning from each other, sharing tactics and expanding them in cooperative, collaborative and creative ways.
"Opposition" research in support of Truth Squads
is very much needed to facilitate more effective confrontations.
BTW, I have a camera and more than one suit, but living near SF puts me 3,000 miles away from where most of these well-dressed thugs spend most of their time. I may have to make a long visit to my kin* in NY to indulge in some joyful questioning of these obvious "persons of interest" regarding the crimes of 9/11/01 (before, during and after the fact).
* Unfortunately, these particular kin folk are in extreme denial regarding 9/11, the only part of my family that is (sigh).
We need to create a clearing house for this "opposition" research, perhaps right here on 911Blogger, and update it frequently as questions are asked and answers (or non- answers as too often the case) are given.
Short, precise questions based on previous statements or direct quotes from books (with the pages cited) asked in a quiet and civil manner are, in my opinion, far more effective than long, angry statements followed by poorly framed questions about nebulous global conspiracies.
As Sgt. Friday used to say: "Just give me the facts, ma'am"
Finally, Zbig is a very sharp guy, if you're going to take him on and prevail, you have to prepare, prepare, prepare (that means pare your questions down and do a lot of mock Q & A sessions in advance). The idea of creating a list of questions that everyone has going in and working off that is an excellent strategy.
Keep up the good fight, Luke, Tom and company!
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
"Pull it" and "pull"
More power to Luke and Tom Folksie,but sending them out with easily disproven claims is counterproductive.Silverstein never admitted blowing up Building 7 and that should be obvious by now.Remember,he said he was talking to a fire commander and he used the terms "pull it" and "pull".It's entirely plausible that they were referring to pulling fire and search and rescue personnel back from a collapse zone.It's entirely absurd to claim they were discussing the utilization of the controlled demolition option.I think it would prove useful to find out where this "evidence" originated from.Was it Eric Hufschmid or David Irving? Perhaps it was someone connected to the American Free Press publication.? That would be sad,because these are all individuals or sites dedicated to a particularly retarded view that presses us to believe that Jews run the world.Do we want to be in a movement with Neo Nazis riding shotgun?
If you look into this further you will see
that there is no evidence that this alleged phone call ever took place. Chief Nigro has denied having the conversation and when recently asked about it, Silverstein was very evasive and began backtracking. He clearly needs to be nailed down on this.
The historical record, btw, shows that the firemen were ordered out of the building (WTC 7) hours before this alleged phone call was said to have taken place.
We know he's lying, he knows he's lying, we just have to get him to admit it or so completely contradict himself as to destroy his own credibility for all to see.
Finally, there is clear and undeniable evidence indicating at least some involvement by elements of the Mossad.
I hope that you and yours are well.
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
pulling fire and search and rescue back
We have made great use of the NYC Fire Department testimonies brought forth by the New York Times that provide devastating evidence of explosions at the Trade Center.They also provide extensive testimony concerning Building 7 and internal discussions within the Fire Department.Apparently there was substantial damage to the building and concern that it might collapse.There were search and rescue operations being conducted very close to #7 that involved many people,fire personnel among them.It is entirely plausible,indeed probable,that the use of the terms "pull" and "pull it" would be in reference to pulling people back and away from a dangerous situation.Pulling would seem to be fire fighting slang and NOT demolition slang,as has been proselytized by our Movement,for years now.It's not enough to just say:"I know he's guilty,so any claims will do." Actually there is no evidence that Larry was a part of the plot and it's positively desperate to pin this supposed confession on him.Now people are going hog wild with this antenna nonsense as if Silverstein is a scientist weighing in.What he says,or said is utterly useless to the truth movement and,I would think,undermines our outreach in a big way.Who cares what he says,he's probably just an inarticulate person,as the supposed smoking gun quote shows.Besides this red herring,what actual evidence is there on him besides the "slip up"?