It's The Real Thing (Rigorous Intuition Retrospective).

This is a pretty good retrospective and very appropriate response to those who want to ignore the 9/11 evidence that often gets ripped as LIHOP/limited hangout.

It's the Real Thing

He drank Coca-Cola, he was eating Wonder Bread,
Ate Burger Kings - he was well fed - Bob Dylan

I really want to leave this subject alone, and you probably wish I would, too, but unfortunately I have a few more things to winge about before moving on.

You may have seen this by now: the trailer for The Ultimate Con ("the 9/11 Documentary you can't debunk"). It's creator is "Lucus," about whom all I know is that he says "Dave Vonkleist, Jack Blood, and Alex Jones are going to help me promote it," which almost says enough for me right there. It's ten minutes of mostly "I heard explosions" footage shot during the attacks, though to its credit there are some clips I hadn't seen before, such as real-time reports of an alleged bomb-laden van in the WTC garage and rumours of suspected "devices."

I don't mean to open up another can of thermate here, so I won't comment on the merit of the quadruple redundancy of car bombs, planted explosives in the basement, cutting charges and demolition squibs, except to say I wish some of those who defend the accuracy of eyewitness testimony with respect to the World Trade Center would apply the same standard to the Pentagon crash. (Consider, for instance, these 87 accounts of having seen a passenger jet, and not a cruise missile or a fighter aircraft, overfly DC and strike the building.)

Instead, let's do like the Jimmy Castor Bunch. What we're going to do right here is go back. Waaay back; back into time. When 9/11 Truth could look like the 2004 9/11 Citizens' Commission.

Go ahead, and watch The Ultimate Con. But then watch anti-fascist researcher John Judge deconstruct the official Commission report, beginning with the simple question, "Who wrote it?" Authorship is unascribed, but it's written in a "lucid, almost novelistic" fashion, with a single voice. Judge mentions the Warren Commission Report also had a single, anonymous author, brought over from the Pentagon's Army Historical Division. Otto Winnacker's previous employer had been Adolph Hitler, as one of 26 official historians of Nazi Germany.

Watch Michael Springmann, former State Department diplomat, testify that the CIA were running the Jeddah consulate, instructing officials to issue visas to terrorists for reasons of "national security." Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah.

Watch Indira Singh describe her discovery of PTech's deep black links to both US security infrastructure and global narco-terror ("When I ran into the drugs I was told that if I mentioned the money to the drugs around 9/11 that would be the end of me," says Singh), the sheltering of al qaeda financier Yassin al-Qadi (he "talked very highly of his relationship" with Dick Cheney, claims PTech's CEO Oussama Ziade), and the two years PTech spent with Mitre in the "FAA's basement" prior to 911.

Watch Paul Thompson rattle off ignored intelligence, the Randy Glass story (which some may find of particular interest since Glass claims he was told by Pakistani intelligence prior to 9/11 that "those towers are coming down"), and the triangulation of the ISI, the CIA and al Qaeda. Then there are the wargames, the reconstruction of Cheney's command and control, Sibel Edmonds.....

Any wagers on how often controlled demolition is mentioned?

It's a bit wistful and over the shoulder, viewing these now: this Truth Movement moment seems much longer ago than a mere three years. Is this the same 9/11 I hear about today? Because I hear none of these things anymore. Is this the same "Truth Movement"? Because today's sounds nothing like this. Is this even the same truth?

A tough question. It's like asking Coke drinkers in the mid-80s, What is this shit?

Had Truth Classic's market share plateaued? Was its flavour too complex to break out of a niche market, or were there other reasons for finessing its formula? Because New Truth certainly goes down differently. "Smoother, rounder, yet bolder," in the stammering nonsense of Coca Cola CEO Roberto Goizueta. And in my experience it comes back up just the same.

Can you taste the difference, and can you tell what's missing? New Truth is now 100% Jihadist free.

Something less than 100% would be true enough, and would have served as a corrective to the official comic book which informs Americans that their enemy has dark skin and strange beliefs. But entirely erasing bin Laden and al Qaeda from the 9/11 equation makes no more sense - not even polemical sense - than trying to talk sensibly about the JFK assassination without mention of the Mafia or the anti-Castro Cubans. And was it any less an "inside job" for their involvement and manifold reasons for wanting him dead?

But it's impossible not to ascribe some such sentiments to racism, and sometimes something more. (For instance, neo-Nazi Curt Maynard writes, "there is considerably more tangible evidence to suggest that the United States government and Israel carried out the crime, not 19 troglodytes, i.e. cave dwellers from the Middle East.") And then there's the executive producer of Loose Change and Afghanistan war vet, Korey Rowe, who told CNN "I met my enemy and the people who supposedly pulled off this attack, and these people are not strong enough and they're not, uh, advanced enough." However, I think there is also something else happening here.

Some of the most damning evidence presented by Classic Truth is that which ties state power to supra-state terror and criminality. Peter Dale Scott's definition of Deep Politics is "the constant, everyday interaction between the constitutionally elected government and forces of violence, forces of crime, which appear to be the enemies of that government." Al Qaeda, a creature of intelligence agencies, is one such node of contemporary deep politics. As recently as the mid-90s its Mujahadeen were NATO's unambiguous partner in Bosnia, helping to secure and profit by the Balkan trade route of Afghan heroin into Europe. The CIA were demanding visas for al Qaeda operatives in the consulate of bin Laden's hometown, and an al Qaeda financier was also hardwired into Washington's security apparatus. 9/11 cells were hosted by FBI informants and their flight schools were up to their altimeters in Iran-Contra-like narco-dollars. Al Qaeda's structure was penetrated up to the senior operational level, possibly including assets of ambiguous loyalty who helped plan and fund the attacks. (For instance Fort Bragg instructor and FBI informant Ali Mohammed, who trained those involved in the 1993 WTC bombing, oversaw al Qaeda's relocation to Afghanistan and taught hijackers how to smuggle box cutters onto aircraft.)

New Truth hamstrings itself - and perhaps on the part of some, that's the entire point of New Truth - by clearing the table of everything pertaining to al Qaeda and defining "inside job" as merely "inside the Beltway." Because it is by their parapolitical linkages to, and patronage of, the very forces of violence which appear to be their enemy, that governments most condemn themselves.

Doing away with all that does away with much of the High Crime, which a few might think a good thing. Watch the 2004 videos. How does the health and rigor of New Truth compare? Which do you think the High Criminals prefer?

Someone told me recently that "common sense shows that CD is the 'back and to the left' of 9/11." That's the problem. It is. Look at where 40 years of "back and to the left" has got John Kennedy.

posted by Jeff at 3/20/2007 03:07:00 AM



Doesn't matter which blog you enter. However, I have promised to be cordial, and I intend to do my very best.

I thought this was an excellent article, and mentioned everything that's been on my mind lately.

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton

Jeff is right

Although I partake of the CD discussions, I agree with Jeff's assessment. You only have to look at the posts on 911blogger that attract the most comments, to see that anything related to CD or the Pentagon by far exceeds the interest of other topics.

His definition of deep politics is worth repeating: "it is by their parapolitical linkages to, and patronage of, the very forces of violence which appear to be their enemy, that governments most condemn themselves." Arguably, these linkages also provide the most prosecutable lines of evidence. Physical evidence is important, but in events that are as clouded by propaganda as 9/11 the odds of making a case on physical evidence are remote, simply because even scientists are susceptible to propaganda and the fear it engenders.

Despite my support for Jeff's position, I don't think it's fair to disparage those who are compelled to action by the physical evidence of 9/11. The problem, as I see it, is that obsessing over physical evidence produces theories that disparage the deep politics of 9/11, theories that begin to speculate about increasingly complex and unlikely scenarios, such as the no-plane at the Pentagon theories, and distract from the rubber-meets-road reality of deep political connections.

If 9/11 is ever going to come undone, I believe it will be in connection with dirty money. Sibel Edmonds may be our best chance. But don't expect a sudden rush of engineers to storm the Justice Department crying foul over freefalling skyscrapers.

I think one of the reasons

I think one of the reasons this movement has been redirected to 24/7 CD theories is because it's been infiltrated.

Certainly a honeypot to misdirect attention

I's yellowish, it's rather liquid...but wait -- it's melting through the jar! That is not your usual honey! It's molten iron! RUUUN!!

misterguy, can you be just a tad less transparent? Or like...get another moniker? Oh well, maybe you have...

Are you disagreeing with me

Are you disagreeing with me or agreeing with me? I can't tell.

To the extent they can be answered

the deep politics of 9/11 - links between CIA, Al Qaeda, Pakistan, etc. - have already been answered. These links cannot explain the physical phenomena, but they can explain how patsies would act guilty before and after 9/11.

It is even easier to cloud these political connections with propaganda - sting gone bad, Pakistani extremists that have been dealt with, etc., etc.

CD & #7

I have always felt the obession with WTC7 is a loosing premise, some form of CD probably happened that day, but I think if we can get 25 credible witnesses to testify about the coincidences that all fell in place that day in one place at one time that would sway public opinion big time. Ofcource testifying needs to take on a different form, since the system itself is corrupt, we can not depend on the criminal justice system to supply a venue, so we must adapt. Our venues will be Google, You Tube, podcasts, etc..

After all, this is our democracy, we should practice it, if the government will not investigate, indict, then convict, then the people must. The spectacle of a 9/11 trial on the streets of NYC is where I'm gong with this. Now that would be cool, kinda like Shakespear in the Park.

You see, they LET Oswald do it on purpose!

I think the author of this piece is unclear on a number of points.

Most importantly, if CD is the "back and to the left" of 9/11, Atta et al. are certainly the Oswald of 9/11. How far would skepticism of the official account of that event have gotten if everyone was equally hung up on Oswald? As Webster Tarpley puts it, patsies are lowlifes with plenty of criminal intent, but their commission of the acts ascribed to them is physically impossible. Establishing the physical impossibility of the patsy's authorship of the crime is essential in expanding the circle of people who might be blamed. In the JFK case, the "magic bullet" and "backward and to the left" expanded that circle to include additional gunmen on the grassy knoll, and by implication, a large conspiracy. In the case of 9/11, the physically impossibilty of plane crashes completely destroying three buildings as shown in the video record necessitates the inclusion as suspects of the people who blew up the buildings. The de-emphasis of the patsies and all the evidence that goes with the creation and maintenance of the patsy cell is not an attempt to remove al Qaeda from the narrative -- it is about expanding the narrative to include actors who are much more powerful and therefore much more evil.

And those people are NOT to be found only inside the Beltway.

you make an excellent point

"Establishing the physical impossibility of the patsy's authorship of the crime is essential in expanding the circle of people who might be blamed."

But as Michael Ruppert, and now Jeff Wells, has said, What became of the JFK case? What happened to its patsies? They were well covered up, as was the crime. Are you, like I, awaiting the news that KSM suffered a heart attack while in prison? Do you know, as I do, that KSM and the others will never see a fair trial, if they are in fact in custody? (And I should add that perhaps KSM isn't even the most meaningful patsy in all of this. I mean, would they flaunt him like this if he were?)

The physical evidence that JFK was killed by a conspiracy has remained common knowledge for 40 years and it changed nothing about that case. Most newbies to 9/11 Truth will look at the towers collapsing and conclude immediately that what they are seeing is two buildings exploding not collapsing. The evidence seems obvious to us, but nothing has changed.

If I were the democrats poking around the corners of this case, I would start by hauling Sibel Edmonds before anyone who would listen. She probably knows nothing about the perps of 9/11, but the drug money trail she has witnessed no doubt leads to the likely culprits, or at least to their corrupt brethren.

Or somebody should find out what happened to those recovered hard drives. The put options demonstrating foreknowledge are now a certifiable fact. But where has the hard evidence gone?

Perhaps my main point is that to re-open the entire 9/11 investigation based on physical evidence would be political suicide, and the parties know it. So, one has to be more stealthy, search for threads around the perimeter of the event.

As I said, I agree that physical evidence matters. But people don't seem to get prosecuted for important crimes of government anymore. They get convicted for mundane crimes that usually have to do with money. Think of Watergate. Think of how the mundane crimes sometimes lead back to the real crimes. That's how I've been thinking about 9/11.

I don't disagree

and I don't have a problem with "searching for threads around the perimeter" with the aim of a new investigation.

In fact, it hasn't been common knowledge that JFK was killed by a conspiracy for more than 40 years. It has been known by some, but not by a critical mass. Something more like a critical mass came into existence after the Oliver Stone film -- which led to the early release of many documents, which in turn led to the release of the Op Northwoods documents, which I believe was real progress in bringing the "false flag terrorism" idea closer to being "common knowledge." I mention this because there is a goal that is parallel to the goal of a new investigation, and that is generating a critical mass of popular awareness that will derail the next 9/11 or false-flag event designed to hijack our whole culture and lead us into the next war. (A new investigation would further this aim as well.)

Even though "nothing happened" with the information about JFK in the sense of someone being hanged in the public square, that information has played a significant part in counteracting American exceptionalism ("That kind of crap only happens in other countries -- the US is different.") I have never had any doubt that our government, in collaboration with whoever else, could do this to us. I'd attribute that in equal parts to living through Iran-Contra and the JFK movie, plus my natural cynicism.

Plus, I don't think it's overdramatic to say that the advent of the internet will rival or exceed the invention of the printing press in its transformational impact. It's a quantum leap in how we collectively process information, so all bets are off, if not for how 9/11 plays out, then in how we react to the next 9/11.

As for KSM dying in custody, I acknowledge that I have no way of knowing that he hasn't already. It is a given that if he is a real person and still alive, he will not get anything remotely resembling a real trial. 1984 is happening in Gitmo and elsewhere right now.

Bring it....