February was an action packed month. Significantly, and ominously, Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations heavy Zbigniew Brzezinski set the tone with his warning to the Senate's Committee on Foreign Relations;
"A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq, or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a "defensive" U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan." - Brzezinski's warning, Feb. 1, 2007
(Brzezinski was preceded in January by Congressman+Ron+Paul's warning of a "contrived Gulf of Tonkin type incident" as a pretext for war with Iran.)
The significance of Brzezinski's warning can't be overstated. Webster Griffin Tarpley was so moved by Zbig's oratorio that he issued this press release, calling for protests to bring awareness to the issue of a staged pretext. The protests continue, every Saturday at 1pm, at Lafayette Park in front of the White House.
Brzezinski's warning is as close as we likely to get to an actual admission from the supposedly non-existent oligarchy in this country that they do occasionally stage events to herd the sheeple in the direction that they deem best. LIHOP, MIHOP, IHOP... when Zbig is nervous enough to go before the Senate with that kind of message, parsing 9/11 into degrees of HOP is rather moot.
The very next day, The Maginot Line of the Left was broken with a significant penetration by Sander Hicks at AlterNet.org, "9/11: The Case Isn't Closed". A tsunami of support for the article is seen in the comments section below the main posting. That's what you get for marginalizing 9/11 skepticism for 5 years, AlterNet. Hicks used the momentum generated with his piece to urge the Brooklyn DA to investigate 9/11.
Gwynne Dyer is one of the best minds out there when it comes to military history, and the history of war. He is also remarkably prescient at times when it comes to short-term projection of tactical scenarios. However, it's pretty clear that he knows next to nothing about 9/11 skepticism, but he still felt a need to write this crappy hit piece about Loose Change. My comments in red. -r.)
Growing obsession with 9/11 doc’s theories only detracts from Bush’s real crimes (Because Gwynne Dyer says so! If indeed 9/11 was a complex psychological operation designed to trigger a knee-jerk fascist military response to initiate the “Global War on Terror” – then the “real crimes” that Dyer alludes to are a bunch of bat-squeeze by comparison. It’s not “obsession” it’s a mass awakening via the new medium of the internet. Deal with it.)
By GWYNNE DYER
03/07/07 "ICH "
Wednesday, 07 March 2007
By David Ray Griffin
In “Bayoneting a Scarecrow The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a coward’s cult.” (Guardian, February 20), George Monbiot accuses members of the 9/11 truth movement of being “morons” and “idiots” who believe in “magic.” Having in his previous attack---“A 9/11 conspiracy virus is sweeping the world,” Guardian, February 6---called me this movement’s “high priest,” he now describes my 9/11 writing as a “concatenation of ill-attested nonsense.”
If my books are moronic nonsense, then people who have endorsed them must be morons. Would Monbiot really wish to apply this label to Michel Chossudovsky, Richard Falk, Ray McGovern, Michael Meacher, John McMurtry, Marcus Raskin, Rosemary Ruether, Howard Zinn, and the late Rev. William Sloane Coffin, who, after a stint in the CIA, became one of America’s leading civil rights, anti-war, and anti-nuclear activists?
Here is a more critical review of the Hersh piece by Kurt Nimmo, thanks, Bull.
Once again, the “al-Qaeda” myth will be put to the test, for Mr. Hersh tells us there are “at least three jihadist groups… connected at al-Qaeda” at work in Lebanon against the Shi’a, i.e., Hezbollah, and they are financed by the Saudi monarchy.
Rest assured, Saudi intelligence, Al Mukhabarat Al A’amah, does not act without explicit instructions from the United States. It is no mistake Turki bin Faisal al-Saud, former intelligence head, now comfortably ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland, was Osama bin Laden’s handler in Afghanistan, although the corporate media has turned mighty somersaults to make this relationship appear innocent, if not disappear altogether...
...In short, Seymour Hersh buys into the “al-Qaeda” fairy tale, as does the rest of the corporate media.
(Yet another reason to file the 9/11 Commission Report in the "General Fiction" section. -r.)
What the 9/11 Commission didn't consider.
BY EDWARD JAY EPSTEIN
Thursday, February 22, 2007
The 9/11 Commission relied on information derived from two captured al Qaeda perpetrators for much of its picture of the conspiracy leading up to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The interrogations of these men--Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, or "KSM," ... and Ramzi Binalshibh, who acted as KSM's liaison with ... Mohamed Atta--were performed by the CIA at secret locations.
KSM claimed that he left almost all the tactical details to Atta, and therefore could not say where Atta went, or whom he visited, in the final months of the plot. Binalshibh claimed he was Atta's only contact with al Qaeda during this period and that, other than himself, Atta never met with anyone on his trips abroad in 2001...
Tuesday February 20th 2007, 8:07 pm
It stinks of desperation. George Monbiot, inveterate leftist of the foundation financed environmentalist persuasion, has once again taken a swing at the “conspiracy idiots” who believe government is capable of mass murder, including the reflexive murder of its own subjects.
Not unlike his brethren, most notably Noam Chomsky and Alex Cockburn, Monbiot buys the Ward Churchill version of events in regard to the attacks of September 11, 2001—that is to say Osama and a small number of cave-dwelling Wahhabi fanatics magically made NORAD stand down and defied the immutable laws of physics, thus delivering one to the conclusion a piece of paper cannot be slipped between Monbiot and the moonstruck followers of the neocons, as they all buy the same Brothers Grimm fairy tale...
(Thanks, Kevin for sending this in.)
February 9, 2007
by Jay Esbe
Theories abound. And really, why shouldn't they. What else could possibly be expected when this government, this President, blocked the creation of the commission to investigate the biggest mass murder in American history. And what else could possibly be expected when this President then hand-picked the commission members after losing his battle for "silence"? And then there was the "mission statement" of the commission itself, or rather, the NON-mission statement: "Our purpose is not to assign RESPONSIBILITY for the attacks". This, by the DIRECTIVE of the President AS A CONDITION FOR THE CREATION OF THE COMMISSION.
I want to leave aside all the thermite, the too small holes in the pentagon, even the incredible "failures" or NORAD and the "mysterious" change of command structure by the Vice President. I want to leave aside for now, everything we suspect. It's a mountain, and whether you think the mountain smells like bullshit or not, it's far too big to just go away. No, what I want to talk about is not what we suspect, but WHAT WE KNOW. What we already have learned is a fact, and facts, beyond any reasonable doubt or further arguments, lest those who doubt expose their own patent dishonesty immediately.
I want to talk about Bush, Cheney, and what they've done SINCE 9/11. Because if I knew nothing else about 9/11, I'd know this: Their "conduct" has demonstrated a number of things which are now beyond debate in this country by anyone serious...
February 7, 2007 at 05:40:43
by Andrew Mills
9/11 is unquestionably the most important event in American history since December 7, 1941, when Japanese forces attacked Pearl Harbor. The magnitude of its impact on America and the world cannot be overstated. The terrible acts of 9/11 and the events leading up to them deserve a thorough and unimpeachable investigation to learn the facts. And if some rogue elements within the U.S. government were complicit in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11, it is critical that these elements be exposed and removed from power. A new commission is clearly called for because the investigation and report by the 9/11 Commission were badly flawed, as will be discussed below.
The most important tools of any criminal investigators are the accounts of the eyewitnesses and first responders. The first thing the police do at an accident scene is to gather all witness accounts and within a week the insurance companies are also telephoning the witnesses to take their testimony. Many New York City firemen who were eyewitnesses are calling the Commission's report a cover-up, and victims' family organizations are saying the same thing.
If it had been a comprehensive and thorough scientific investigation it would have looked like the investigation that followed the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. Although there may remain minor questions concerning some of the peripheral conclusions, the report on the Columbia accident on the whole stands without major dispute within the scientific community. Contrast this with the 9/11 Commission report, which sidestepped critical questions, and the FEMA 9/11 report and its major inconsistencies.
These are posted in the comments bin below Monbot's (sic) article at the Guardian;
February 6, 2007 02:33 AM
"...but it drowns the truth in an ocean of nonsense..."
and lies...and half truths and hidden truths. Could be talking about the Bush and Blair years and legacy.
WMD had no basis in fact either and hundreds of thousands have died due to an illegal war,so what's a little conspiracy theory sweeping the world among friends?
Aren't we just reaping the whirlwind of our governments' deception and manipulation?
Blair and Bush should be put on trial for war crimes,
lest some other jumped up nutters try a re-run in the future...maybe invading Iran.
There are plenty more in the comments bin, check it out;
February 6, 2007 02:35 AM
Certainly a lot of Loose Change is, well, less than true. But for a couple of kids working on a laptop with zero budget, its fairly good. But there is more to 9/11 than simply the "Bush used it" theory.
The NIST and Commission reports are garbage. NIST 'proves' its collapse theory with a circular argument (50% of columns had to be cut for the building to fall. The building fell, therefore 50% of columns were cut) The 9/11 Commission Report spends 20 pages blaming the problems of the middle east on socialism. Pure propaganda.
The money train is discussed at length in the more grounded film 9/11 Press for Truth, made by the victim relatives. The money trail points clearly back to the Pakistani ISI. The head of the ISI had wired $100k to the hijackers in the weeks before 9/11. On the day itself, this man happened to be in Washington DC, meeting his counterparts in the CIA. When the FBI discovered this in 2002 they wanted to question the ISI. Bush killed the investigation on national security grounds.
Now, maybe there were no bombs in the twin towers and maybe a plane did hit the pentagon. But the money trail is plain as day and indisputable. And it smells of a cover up.
There is more to 9/11 than the fanciful "hijackers out of the blue" theory or the "Bush incompetence" theory. There needs to be a proper investigation.
01/27/2007 10:36:14 AM EST
N.B.: An earlier version of this diary was posted to DailyKos, troll-rated, deleted, and led to suspension of my account within two hours.
Hustler magazine's latest issue devotes its lead article ("Was 9/11 An Inside Job?") to "new scientific evidence" that the destruction of the WTC towers was an inside job. This evidence from university and industry scientists and engineers, while certainly not "new" in journalistic terms, suggests the towers were likely brought down by controlled demolition.
Hustler's effort comes almost exactly one year after Maxim's considerably longer and more in-depth feature of March 2006, which asks "What Really Brought Down the Towers?"
What's going on here? Why has the most important media exposure for the 9/11 Truth Movement come from vehicles for male masturbatory fantasies, locker and bathroom humor, and Charlie Sheen?
The question is particularly puzzling since we know full well that numerous times in American history an investigation has been required to find the truth behind an official government story: Watergate, for sure. The official story of a third-rate burglary covered up the White House’s involvement so successfully that Nixon was overwhelmingly re-elected before the Congressional investigations began a year later and impeachment two years later.
And yet important 9/11 investigations are being carried out exclusively in America (not so in Canada, Europe and elsewhere) by private individuals, university professors, ad hoc nonprofit groups, and the editorial staffs of Hustler and Maxim. See for yourself: list of MSM coverage of 9/11 during 2006.
Most important, America's MSM, which have yet to devote any significant investigative resources to examining the official story, are quick to label those who pursue investigations, write books, produce documentaries, and stage 9/11 Truth Conferences as "conspiracy nuts"--a label that also serves as a career warning to other writers and producers.
Thus, Hustler. Thus, Maxim.
Thanks Colombo and parrotfish.
In two parts;
"This unprecedented depiction of instantly initiated and perfectly executed total uniform collapse of unbelievably massive steel skyscrapers from proportionally isolated impacts and similarly localized fires is precisely what the U.S. government and mainstream media have attached to the rapid obliteration of three of the world's strongest buildings on the same day of Sept. 11, 2001 - World Trade Center towers 1, 2 and 7, the last structure never even touched by a plane - despite a mountain of suspicious forensic structural evidence indicating controlled demolitions and thousands of questions being repeatedly raised by hundreds of academics and scientists the world over.
Knocking out a few Lincoln Logs in the side of the middle of the stack doesn't turn the whole damn cabin into exploding sawdust, does it?"
"In September 2000 - one year before the attacks - PNAC released a 90-page report called "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources for a New Century."
In Chapter V of this document, titled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force," PNAC calls for the Department of Defense to "move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts."
But it states "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."
Fast forward one year.
According to The Washington Post, before President Bush went to bed on Sept. 11, 2001, he wrote in his diary:
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today … We think it's Osama bin Laden."
The Rock Creek Free Press
Week of January 27, 2007 - P.8
PEACE MOVEMENT MUST MAKE 9/11 TRUTH THE LEADING EDGE OF FIGHT AGAINST IRAQ-IRAN-SYRIA WAR
by Webster G. Tarpley
The escalation announced in Bush’s January 10 television speech was much bigger than many expected: the threats he made against Iran and Syria threaten a wider US aggression, quite possibly carried out with nuclear weapons. In addition to his 21,000 extra GIs, Bush is sending an additional carrier battle group and Patriot missiles to the Gulf. Admiral Fallon, the new Centcom commander, is a carrier admiral trained in air attacks, not land warfare. John “Death Squads” Negroponte, Rice’s new deputy at the State Department, is said to be assembling a team of private contractors to prepare the attack on Iran. Russian intelligence reports indicate that there are four US missile-firing submarines in the Gulf. The London Sunday Times says that the Israeli air force is actively drilling for a sneak attack on Iranian military facilities at Natanz, Isfahan, and Bushehr. The ING international banking group is telling its clients that the Israelis may attack Iran in February or March. February 17 or March 18, the preferred sneak attack times of the new moon, may thus mark the beginning of a regional Middle East war, a war tending to slide into World War III.
THE 9/11 MYTH IS THE EXPLICIT BASIS OF ALL THE WARS
...Peace activists often ask why the 9/11 truth movement insists on making the truth about terrorism a central component of anti-war agitation. One answer is that we bring up 9/11 frequently because Bush and Cheney do – they incessantly parrot slogans about the “global war on terror” and “the lessons of 9/11.” Bush claims that he is fighting terrorists in Iraq so that the US will not have to fight them over here. He raves that, if US forces pull out of Iraq, the terrorists will follow them back home and launch attacks on US territory. There can be no doubt that 9/11 is the foundation of Bush’s castle of warmonger lying – the fountainhead, motivation, and legitimation of the entire policy of unilateral aggression. To ignore the centrality of 9/11 to Bush’s every move is like trying to fight Hitler without mentioning anti-Semitism. Attacks on Bush that do not include 9/11 truth are simply impotent, and will not be effective.
Tonight I read the comic book on 9/11. Pathos and pathetic pride poured from every page. Children mourned the loss of Parents and Heroes. Lessons were learned. Contrary to the artists' intent, however, the book awoke my sleeping anger. I want vengeance on the traitors--not on Al Qaeda--but on the poisoners in corporate boardrooms, White House bunkers and Pentagon propaganda rooms.
America is poisoned by its own arrogance and greed. The villains of 9/11 are AMERICAN. These goons deserve gruesome "endings" drawn from the Tower of London and the Dungeons of the Inquisition. The punishments get more gruesome depending on the difficulty of prosecuting the parties involved...
...No plot by al Qaeda has undermined "the rule of law" like Congress, the President and Courts have undermined our Constitution by adopting militarism in place of the law. If our nation's defense is not militaristic, but legal--if we are willing to spare no effort in the person-by-person prosecution of those who break our laws from without or WITHIN--then we are engaged in justice. If there is no active pursuit of justice, our country is a sham. This is Bush's legacy: the dismantling of America. The dismantling of the World Trade Center Complex was the dumbshow preceding the play...
...There is no militaristic smokescreen that can hide the offenses of the actual traitors in our midst, the men and women responsible for 9/11 and those who have steered our state away from justice ever since. Thinking persons know that this crime requires diligent prosecution and the mass distraction of Iraq, Iran and Israel--the hysteric rhetoric of Christian Armageddonists--cannot suppress our knowledge. The negligence of do-gooder Democrats or the calming techniques of Quislings like Joe Lieberman cannot diminish the importance of our task.
Give us THE FACTS about THE CRIME! This investigation is not synonymous with impeachment of Bush and Cheney unless impeachment proceedings subpoena and provide evidence of negligence or complicity. 9/11 Inquiry is not "for show" as my vivid fantasies of public impaling imply. 9/11 is not a vehicle for personal gain, but for public awareness. Our leaders lit a fuse on 9/11 that leads straight to the Constitution. The fuse is still burning. Though several buildings fell so far, the real target has not yet been destroyed. When will IT go up in flames?
Dead On Arrival
The NIST 911 Report On The World Trade Center Collapse
By Mark H. Gaffney
Note to the reader: The following is a critique of the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) report on the World Trade Center (WTC) collapse. The 43 volume NIST report was the result of a 3 year investigation, and was released in September 2005. It remains the official US government explanation for why the WTC collapsed on 9/11. As you are about to discover, the report itself collapses under scrutiny. There is no doubt that the NIST investigation was politically controlled by limiting its scope. This is one way to kill an investigation.
Fires raged at ground zero for many weeks after 9/11. In fact, it was not until December 19, 2001 that the NYC fire marshall declared the fires extinguished.
The fires burned long into the cleanup. The removal of steel beams and debris from the top of the pile allowed oxygen to reach the fires smoldering below. As a result, the flames often flared up, hampering worker on site. Joel Meyerowitz, a photographer, made note of this in his 2006 retrospective book, AFTERMATH. Armed with his trusty camera Meyerowitz roamed ground zero for months following the attack. Police repeatedly ejected him, but he kept returning in order to document what had happened. Eventually Meyerowitz amassed an impressive photographic record. In his fine book he remarks that the ground in places was so hot it melted the workmen's rubber boots.
But Meyerowitz was hardly the first to comment on the pile's incredible residual heat. The first accounts of molten steel came just hours after the attack: from the search and rescue teams who were among the first on the scene. Sarah Atlas, a member of New Jersey Task Force One Search and Rescue, was one of these emergency responders. Sarah reported seeing molten steel in the pile even as she searched in vain for survivors.
Many have denied the existence of molten steel at ground zero. But there are too many eyewitness accounts to dismiss, including the testimony of engineers, city officials and other competent professionals who toured the ruin. One of these, Dr Keith Eaton, Chief Executive of the London-based Institution of Structural Engineers, later wrote in The Structural Engineer about what he had seen, namely: "molten metal which was still red-hot weeks after the event," as well as "four-inch thick steel plates sheered and bent in the disaster."
If we ever find the time, perhaps we should conduct a group analysis of the hit pieces emanating from the intellectual/academic left against the '9/11 Truth Movement'. Among other similarities, they each exhibit a noteworthy "dual consciousness." In a 1997 interview, the great 20th century sociologist Pierre Bourdieu used the phrase to refer to the mindset of media professionals who publicly deny the insidious workings of the invisible structures of corporate broadcasting - masking it even from themselves to an extent - all the while they take advantage of the media tool at their disposal and denounce their critics, claiming they have uncovered nothing which hasn't been known for ages about the media.
Thus we can hear in one breath from Alexander Cockburn that US intelligence infiltrates terror cells and foments terrorism for the purpose of catching the terrorists in the act, and in the next also that even the suggestion that 9/11 could have had false-flag origination is "nutty." Cockburn admits that "Sometime (sic) an undercover agent will actually propose an action, either to deflect efforts away from some graver threat, or to put the plotters in a position where they can be caught red-handed." But according to Cockburn it’s completely nutty to even consider the possibility that these same murderous double and triple-dealers would be utilized to plan a terror event that will ultimately be blamed on official enemies for the purposes of gaining a stronger hold on power. Has he heard of Operation Gladio? Of course he has, so his puzzling insistence on limiting the range of possibility needs explanation.
November 10, 2006
by Mikael Rudolph
...When I slid my ballot into the voting machine at McRae Park in Minneapolis on Tuesday, the number "911" came up. I was the nine hundred and eleventh voter at my precinct polling place. A coincidence to be sure, but 911 represents two things:
1). An emergency call. This election was an emergency. The health, perhaps even the continued existence of our nation a we know it was at risk. It was the most important election of my lifetime - maybe of our nation's 230 year history.
2). 9/11. The events of September 11th, 2001 provided the justification for a comprehensive assault on the "inalienable" freedoms, liberties and identifiable character of Americans as codified in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights as well as our commitment to the Geneva Accords, the Nuhremberg Principles, World Peace, and finally the innocent civilians of Iraq.
The events of September 11th, 2001 also were used to justify the theft of billions of dollars from the U.S. Treasury as funneled into Halliburton, Bechtel, Brown & Root and other "CheneyCo" and "CheneyCrony" bank accounts as well as billions of dollars in resources rightfully owned by the Iraqi people.
The events of 9/11 could not have possibly taken place without inside help. That isn't conspiracy theory, that is fact.
The planes could not have possibly gotten through to their targets without a "stand down" order - possibly by the same man who arranged long before to have most of our SAC fighters out of range for "exercises"....
Thanks to Joe for this submission.
Comparable Examples of Fictional Media Reports
By Douglas Herman
Exclusive to Rense.com
In a complex and well-coordinated heist, combining speed and stealth with an uncanny knowledge of automobile security systems, four tots hotwired a Toyota Land Rover and cruised along fabled Deco Drive in South Beach Miami. The merry group spent the evening crashing top night spots and easily eluding waitresses, bartenders and bouncers. Credit card receipts, obviously signed by one of the tots, showed thousands in charges for table dances, champagne and limo service. A crayon drawing left by one of the tots lent conclusive proof of their guilt, according to local law enforcement officials.
A trio of nuns broke into a North Dakota missile site in a complex and well-coordinated heist, combining speed and stealth with an uncanny knowledge of USAF security systems. The nuns quickly removed the nuclear warhead in 20 minutes from the ICBM using a crescent wrench, car jack and plastic crucifix. A nun's habit and Gideon Bible, inscribed with the name of one of the nuns, providently found at the crime scene, indicated conclusive proof of their guilt and the trio was quickly captured.
October 16, 2006
by John Perry, http://www.opednews.com
The gutless purveyors of fraud trying to shout down the 9/11 Truth movement are not going to like this news. The "official" story is on life support, and the prognosis is not good.
A new New York Times/CBS poll reveals that only 16 percent of Americans think they're being told the whole truth about 9/11, down from 21 percent in May of 2002. Over this same period, the number who believe the administration is "hiding something" has actually decreased from 65 to 53 percent, which might seem odd, but only until you take into account that the ranks of those who think the Bush crime family is "mostly lying" has skyrocketed from 8 to 28 percent. Feelings are getting stronger. Skepticism is giving way to certainty. The 9/11 Truth Movement is growing exponentially.
This growth appears to be striking nerves in the "debunker" community. They're no longer just laughing feebly and attempting to toss us into the imaginary dustbin of negative connotations with labels like "conspiracy theorists", "paranoid liberals" and "clown shoe conspiradroids" (which I'm sure somebody spent hours coming up with and thinks is really clever).
It now seems that we are beginning to move from stage one of nineteenth century philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer's three stages of truth, which is ridicule, to stage two, which is violent opposition (stage three is acceptance of the truth as being self-evident). This is apparent in the fact that many in the "debunking" crowd have now taken to equating us with people who deny the Holocaust. That's right folks, we're "9/11 deniers"...
UPDATE: This has already gotten over 800 votes on Digg. Make sure to Digg it: http://www.digg.com/politics/Scientific_Poll_84_Reject_Official_9_11_Story
(Jon Gold posted this yesterday in his blog, but I wanted to make sure it got a top slot here. Pretty good rebuttal piece to Weinberg. -r.)
by Michael Kane
FTW Energy Affairs Editor
October 9th 2006, 3:56PM [PST] – New York – Recently Bill Weinberg has trashed everyone who believes 9/11 was perpetrated by the U.S. Government in a report published at GNN.tv.
He makes some valid points regarding bad analysis and sloppy documentation put forth by some who claim to be 9/11 “skeptics” searching for “truth.” But where Weinberg falls flat on his face is in his evasive analysis of the most important area of research surrounding 9/11: The multiple 9/11 war games.
In his analysis of the war games, Weinberger never once mentions FromTheWilderness.com, Mike Ruppert or Crossing the Rubicon.
FTW is used to getting attacked, in many ways. David Corn and Alexander Cockburn spent a good amount of time attacking Ruppert from 2002 to 2004.
Cockburn denies that global warming exists or is a serious threat to humanity.
This essay will reveal how the false flag operation of 9/11 will transform our nation and world away from a sick war based poverty imposing global order into an era of truth and hope that will begin a global healing unseen by humanity.
Being from Kansas and having written guest columns for the Kansas City Star, Dorothy and the Wizard of Oz metaphors come naturally for me. Fortunately for my essay, the Land of Oz metaphor is dead on.
About 40 percent of Americans have now woken up to the unfolding reality that facts regarding the 9/11/2001 attacks increasingly point to complicity at the highest levels of this current Bush Administration (Scripps-Howard Poll). For that 40 percent, and growing numbers of Americans, we now find ourselves living in the land of Oz. We have seen that the "great and powerful Oz," which sent us all scurrying for duct tape and stumbling all over ourselves to give up the precious civil liberties our father's fought for . . . is a manufactured illusion run by a few rather pathetic figures in this current administration, and at the top of our media . . . hiding behind an ever thinning curtain of diminishing credibility.
We see on the Sunday morning talk shows, and the "informed" guests they have on, whether Democrat or Republican, a discussion of a "terrorist threat" that we now know has been largely manufactured by the pathetic little men behind the control room curtains. The discord this sets up in our minds and hearts is hard to bear. We feel our minds pulled back into the matrix. Their flashy TV sets and well dressed "experts" try to help us forget what we know, that 9/11 was an inside job. They ask us day in and day out, to join them in the grand illusion that the "great and powerful terrorist threat," is a reality that really does demand endless hundreds of billions of military spending, illegal wars, and the destruction of our constitutional rights and liberties...
Thanks, Joe for the tip.
This from Paul Thompson at DemocraticUnderground.com;
Pakistan President Musharraf's new book is being serialized in the London Times. Here's a curious excerpt referring to Saeed Sheikh, one of the 9/11 paymasters, an ISI agent, and the killer of reporter Daniel Pearl:
"It is believed in some quarters that while Omar Sheikh was at the LSE he was recruited by the British intelligence agency MI6. It is said that MI6 persuaded him to take an active part in demonstrations against Serbian aggression in Bosnia and even sent him to Kosovo to join the jihad. At some point he probably became a rogue or double agent."
There have been other suggestions to this effect, that Saeed was a Western double agent. Note for instance this entry of mine:
1999: 9/11 Funder Offered Deal to Turn Informant
9/11 paymaster Saeed Sheikh, imprisoned in India from 1994 to December 1999 for kidnapping Britons and Americans, meets with a British official and a lawyer nine times while in prison. Supposedly, the visits are to check on his living conditions, since he is a British citizen. (Los Angeles Times, 2/8/2002) However, the London Times will later claim that British intelligence secretly offers amnesty and the ability to “live in London a free man” if he will reveal his links to al-Qaeda. The Times claims that he refuses the offer. (Daily Mail, 7/16/2002; London Times, 7/16/2002) Yet after he is rescued in a hostage swap deal in December, the press reports that he, in fact, is freely able to return to Britain. (Press Trust of India, 1/3/2000) He visits his parents there in 2000 and again in early 2001. (Vanity Fair, 8/2002; BBC, 7/16/2002; Daily Telegraph, 7/16/2002) He is not charged with kidnapping until well after 9/11. Saeed’s kidnap victims call the government’s decision not to try him a “disgrace” and “scandalous.” (Press Trust of India, 1/3/2000) The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review later suggests that not only is Saeed closely tied to both the ISI and al-Qaeda, but may also have been working for the CIA: “There are many in (Pakistani President) Musharraf’s government who believe that Saeed Sheikh’s power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA. The theory is that ... Saeed Sheikh was bought and paid for.” (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 3/3/2002)
(A lengthy Op-Ed by Mike Green, author of The Whole Truth About the U.S. War on Terror.)
...In looking at the history of conspiracies in America, one comes away with a queasy feeling in the pit of one's stomach. Our government is corrupt, history says. Our leaders are corrupt, history reminds us. Our institutions have been hijacked and abused, history reveals. American citizens have been targets, history states without hesitation.
And today, we stand ready to ignore history yet again and allow our president, our congress and our media to lead us down yet another road of despair and regret.
"Our government makes mistakes" some say.
These folks are naive. The biggest mistake we've made and continue to make is placing our faith in government. The evidence of conspiracy is clearly all around if we care to look. And even if we do not, history will record it and tell the story to our grandchildren, who, if they are anything like most of us, will laugh and say that conspiracies are for kooks...
"When examining almost any aspect of 9/11, there is strong evidence to support the alternative theory that 9/11 was a false-flag attack committed by elements within the U.S. Government and Military. The controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 is perhaps the strongest argument with the best scientific evidence since all three buildings collapsed at near freefall speed, leaving behind pools of an orange hot material (aka “molten metal”). The degree of pulverization of the concrete in the Twin Towers creating the pyroclastic dust cloud has proven to be nearly impossible to explain with a legitimate building collapse.
The problem with discussing this evidence is that these are scientific arguments that can only be fully understood by experts in the necessary fields. Though my science background is limited, common sense tells me that these scientific arguments are legitimate criticisms of the official theory of the collapse of the three buildings.
Supporters of the official theory have attempted to debunk the scientific evidence supporting the alternative theory (aka, the conspiracy theories), but the argument I present here cannot be debunked. The argument I present in this paper is not a scientific argument, does not require any special knowledge, and can be understood by any rational person. This argument definitely proves that 9/11 was an inside job and no other rational interpretation of these events presented could lead to any other conclusion."
Please check out entire article, the author is looking for some feedback.
Truthout.org keeps bugging me for money.
"You no post 9/11 Truth, you no get dollah."
By Douglas Herman
"Behind every great fortune there is a great crime."
Who benefitted most by the New York Massacre? Millions were invested before the attack. Hundreds of millions were made the same day. Neither crime received much attention by the US government. Perhaps because friends of the US government stood to gain billions of dollars, in the following years. Trillions eventually will change hands, simply because a great crime was never properly investigated.
Behind every great crime lies a great fortune.
Remember those Put Options? "The identity of this person who had foreknowledge of the attack is known and this person's identity is being protected by our government and this is a fact! Period, end of story," reported Jesse Richard, editor of TVNewsLies.com. A few years ago, TNL carried the definitive argument against the official version of 9-11: All The Proof You Need--Two Moves to Checkmate.
"Try to purchase some stock, or some futures, a mutual fund or some put options, without providing your identity. Go ahead and try it! See if you get anywhere. Find out what happens when you tell the investment firm that you want to make a huge investment anonymously. It can't be done.
While you here do snoring lie
His time doth take.
~ William Shakespeare, The Tempest
by Butler Shaffer
I have lost my sense of humor to indulge those who reflexively deny the role of conspiracies in human affairs. In the months following 9/11 – and most strenuously in the days leading up to the fifth anniversary of this event – conventional thinking has dictated that commentaries on that atrocity carry the disclaimer “I am not suggesting a conspiracy.” It seems to be understood that entrance to the temples of respectable journalism, academic scholarship, or polite society would be denied anyone who transgressed this canon.
It is not that a speaker must refrain from expressing any particular conspiracy theory to explain troublesome occurrences: one must avoid the implication that any form of human behavior might be directed or influenced by conspiratorial forces. To even consider the possibility that a given event might have been produced by a conspiracy, is to run the risk of being labeled a “paranoid” or a “wacko.” As we have no desire to appear foolish in the eyes of others, we give in to such intimidation and preface our opinions with the aforesaid mantra.
How easily most of us sell out our intellectual integrity, and at distress-sale prices. Even men and women with excellent minds who should know better have collapsed in the face of such a charge. Do we have such a fear of our own minds that we can no longer stand up to the epistemological inquiry that is at the base of our character and intelligence: how do we know what we know? Upon what basis do we form our opinions about the world: the consensus of our neighbors, or our independent judgments?
Any intellectually respectable opinion must be well-grounded in empirical fact and rational analysis. I have no use for those who spin conspiratorial theories out of little more than fantasy, wishful thinking, or the failure to distinguish a temporal relationship from a causal one. The assumption that because event “X” occurred, and was followed by event “Y,” a causal connection has been established, is among the shabbiest forms of reasoning. One might just as well argue for the proposition that wet sidewalks cause rain. In fact, I have no use for conspiracy theories at all, preferring – as my late friend, Chris Tame, so well stated it – to focus attention on the facts of conspiracies! As annoying as those are who offer lazy, simple-minded explanations for complex events, I am far more aggravated by those otherwise intelligent souls who help to man the barricades of ignorance against honest and empirically-based inquiries into topics they have been told are beyond rightful questioning.
by Bill Douglas
"Propaganda is not meant to fool the intelligencia
. . . but to provide them an excuse."
-- Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propagandist
Early on when it became apparent to me that the official 9/11 story was a massive deception, it became urgent to tell others and spread this information wide and far. Having been a peace & justice activist my whole life, naturally I ran to the peace movement.
I discovered two things quickly. 1) Many people in the peace movement shared my concerns about "problems" with the official 9/11 story, however, 2) Much of the top leadership in the peace movement accepted the official story of 9/11, and refused to consider troubling evidence to the contrary.
One woman who was a major peace group leader, who's name I won't mention, said that she wouldn't search for 9/11 truth because "she didn't like the people in the 9/11 truth movement."
So, I decided to make a list of all the reasons I've heard for the "left" or "peace & justice" communities to avoid looking at the hard facts regarding 9/11.
Dear Ms Johnstone,
I write concerning your article in the Sept 15/06 edition of Counterpunch, 9/11: In Theory and in Fact, In Defense of Conspiracy.
You have seemed to be a person of some credibility over the years - I first recall noticing your writing following the Yugoslavia bombing, when you were one of the few who dared speak out against those undertaking this attack, and their false justifications for it. You don't seem like an intellectually dishonest person, yet this Counterpunch article very much meets that description, unless you have been seriously misinformed about the whole 911 truth movement (which is not actually a 'conspiracy theory', as no actual theories are put forward by most people, simply some fairly serious questions about how the official conspiracy theory does not make much sense in a lot of places, indeed there are a lot of things that seem like lies, and many others that seem highly implausible at best, with some somewhat more plausible explanations offered in return).
So I wonder if you are not simply somewhat misinformed about the 911 truth seekers and their actual questions, perhaps through an over-reliance on the mainstream media for your information on this topic - your piece certainly reflects a lack of knowledge of many of the things we believe indicate that the official conspiracy theory is highly unlikely. It may well be, of course, you are simply, for whatever reason, joining the 'debunkers' in an effort to silence those who question the official conspiracy theory, in which case the actual things that we believe represent the strongest indications that 911 was indeed an inside job will be of little interest, and you will relegate this email to the wastebacket anytime now. So not knowing where you stand, please forgive the brevity of the following, and the lack of detailed references - I would be happy to provide such if you wished, or you could check out any of the major 911 truth sites for such things, but I do not wish to spend a lot of time on something that may be speaking to ears that have no interest in hearing what I say.
by Devvy Kidd
"...9/11 is an emotional issue. By the poll numbers, millions of Americans are upset and they are upset because they know they have been fed lies. As I have said before, I came to the 9/11 truth movement kicking and screaming after a year of willfully ignoring nagging questions. I simply didn't want to believe that my dear friends could actually have some valid reason for questioning events that day. Because 9/11 is such an emotional issue, there are Americans who will grasp onto any source that refutes any reasonable questions being asked and sling popular labels such "whack job" because they cannot go where it might lead.
Who in their right mind doesn't want to believe that what happened that day was exactly as presented by the Bush Administration? Any alternative train of thought is beyond painful and requires the individual to look evil straight in the eye. I also find it quite interesting that so many in the media who have questioned the government's actions in cover ups like the OKC bombing, TWA Flight 800, Ron Brown and other tragedies, refuse to ask even one question about the official story sold about 9/11. I suppose that's a tribute to the excellent job done by the Ministry of Propaganda in combating any efforts to find answers. The exception and kudos to Lou Dobbs for stepping up to the plate:
"Incompetence and ineptitude on the part of this government on September 11th and in the weeks and months leading up to it are established. The fact that the government would permit deception after a deception, whether honestly, if you can call it that, honestly intended or not. But the fact that they were continue and perpetuate the lie, suggests that we need a full investigation of what is going on and what is demonstrably an incompetent and at worst deceitful federal government." ..."
A hit piece article, not far fetched to be described as mostly based on pure demagogic overtures appeared in one of the most distributed Czech daily newspapers, the Mf Dnes, which is seen by many as rather renowned outlet for its regular unbalanced and slanderous political "journalism".
But firstly, to tackle another recent controversy, the Mf Dnes editorials called for unquestionable and unconditional support for accommodating a proposed US military missile/radar base which should be part of the controversial anti-ballistic missile system deployed within the Central European region and outside the NATO/EU security structures. Despite the, fact that the first '06 summer poll showed 83% opposition across the party line of the general Czech public to such a proposal.
Grassroots rallies "Ne zakladnam! No to bases!" and antiwar initiatives have mobilized against both the large part of the corporate as well as the public broadcasting media, which were firstly reluctant to cover the issue before the summer parliamentary elections at all. Large chunk of the media later jumping on the unpopular pro base rightwing government bandwagon.
Although, the author of the main conspiracy article and additional "expert" interview did plug the recent Scripps – University of Ohio poll and also mockingly mentioned in passing the science community on the issue (not mentioning specifically 9/11 Scholars for Truth or any individuals) the articles were conducted in bluntly uninformed, and dishonest distractive manner, not unlike the infamous Ann Coulter style.
(more after the jump..)