 |
|
Add to My Group
|
September 23, 2007 at 08:53:46
Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report by Alan Miller 
|
|
|
Official Account of 9/11 a “Joke” and a “Cover-up” September 23, 2007 – Seven CIA veterans have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and have called for a new investigation. “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke,” said Raymond McGovern, 27-year veteran of the CIA, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates during the seventies. “There are a whole bunch of unanswered questions. And the reason they’re unanswered is because this administration will not answer the questions,” he said. McGovern, who is also the founder of VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity), is one of many signers of a petition to reinvestigate 9/11.[1] During his 27-year CIA career, McGovern personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials. Upon retirement in 1990, McGovern was awarded the CIA’s Intelligence Commendation Medallion and received a letter of appreciation from then President George H. W. Bush. However, McGovern returned the award[2] in 2006 in protest of the current George W. Bush Administration’s advocacy and use of torture. In his blurb for 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out,” edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, McGovern wrote[3]: “It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole “war on terror” was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people---indeed the people of the world as a whole---with an issue second to none in importance and urgency. I give this book, which in no way can be dismissed as the ravings of ‘paranoid conspiracy theorists,’ my highest possible recommendation.” William Christison, a 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis also describes the 9/11 Commission Report as a “joke” and offers even more outspoken criticism. In a 2006 audio interview[4] he said, "We very seriously need an entirely new very high level and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all.” Earlier this year, in an endorsement of David Ray Griffin’s book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Christison wrote[5], “[There’s] a strong body of evidence showing the official U.S. Government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies.” And in an online essay[6] in late 2006, he wrote, “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.” Prior to his retirement from the CIA in 1979, Christison served as Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis, overseeing 200 analysts who collected intelligence and provided analysis on all regions and every country in the world. Prior to that, he served as one of only a handful of NIO’s in the intelligence community. NIO’s are responsible for the intelligence community efforts in a particular area and are the principal advisors to the Director of Central Intelligence. Christison was NIO for Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. Melvin Goodman, PhD, is another former senior CIA official who calls the 9/11 Commission Report a “coverup” and who signed the petition to reinvestigate 9/11.[7] Goodman was the Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs and served as Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004. In testimony before a 2005 Congressional briefing on the 9/11 Commission Report[8], Goodman said, “I want to talk about the [9/11] Commission itself, about the flawed process of the Commission and finally about the conflict of interest within the Commission that is extremely important to understand the failure of the Commission. … The final report is ultimately a coverup. I don't know how else to describe it." Goodman is currently Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy and Adjunct Professor of Government at Johns Hopkins University. Baer has repeatedly questioned whether al-Qaida could have accomplished 9/11 alone. The 9/11 Commission Report categorically found al-Qaida to be entirely responsible for 9/11, stating, "Similarly, we have seen no evidence that any foreign government -- or government official -- supplied any funding." However, this 9/11 Commission finding directly contradicts the earlier finding of the Joint House-Senate Select Intelligence Committee's 2002 Report[9] (p.415) of "sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers.” In a 2002 essay[10] for The Guardian, Baer wrote, "Did bin Laden act alone, through his own al-Qaida network, in launching the attacks? About that I'm far more certain and emphatic: no." In subsequent interviews, Baer has suggested that support for the attacks could have come from Saudi Arabia and Iran. In 2006, during an interview by Thom Hartmann[11], Baer, after commenting on the financial profits being made from 9/11, was asked: “What about political profit? There are those who suggest that ... someone in that chain of command ... had pretty good knowledge that 9/11 was going to happen -- and really didn't do much to stop it -- or even obstructed efforts to stop it because they thought it would lend legitimacy to Bush's ... failing presidency.” Baer replied: “Absolutely.” Hartmann then asked, “So you are personally of the opinion ... that there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government?" To which Baer replied, "There is that possibility, the evidence points at it." When Hartmann continued, "And why is it not being investigated?” Baer replied, "Why isn't the WMD story being investigated? Why hasn't anybody been held accountable for 9/11? We held people accountable after Pearl Harbor. Why has there been no change in command? Why have there been no political repercussions? Why has there been no -- any sort of exposure on this? It really makes you wonder." In his blurb for the revised and updated edition of David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Baer wrote[12]: "Until we get a complete, honest, transparent investigation …, we will never know what happened on 9/11.” "I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war,” wrote well-known intelligence analyst Robert David Steele in 2006 in a review of the book, 9/11 Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley[13]. Steele is the author of numerous books on the intelligence services and is currently the CEO of OSS.net, a proponent of Open Source Intelligence. Steele has 25 years of combined service in the CIA and the U.S. Marine Corps. He also served as the second ranking civilian (GS-14) in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988 - 1992 and was a member of the Adjunct Faculty of Marine Corps University. Steele continued, “I have to tell anyone who cares to read this: I believe it. I believe it enough to want a full investigation that passes the smell test of the 9/11 families as well as objective outside observers.” In a subsequent interview on the Alex Jones Show[14], Steele said, "The U.S. government did not properly investigate this [9/11] and there are more rocks to be turned over," and added, "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that, as far as I'm concerned, means that this case has not been properly investigated. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition." In late 2004, a group of 25 intelligence service and law enforcement veterans sent a joint letter to Congress[15] expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation. Their letter was apparently entirely ignored. Among the signers were four CIA veterans; Raymond McGovern and Melvin Goodman (both mentioned above) and Lynne Larkin and David MacMichael. David MacMichael, PhD, is a former Senior Estimates Officer at the CIA with special responsibility for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the CIA's National Intelligence Council. Prior to joining the CIA, he served as a U.S. Marine Corps officer for ten years and for four years as a counter-insurgency advisor to the government. Their letter read: "[W]e the undersigned wish to bring to the attention of the Congress and the people of the United States what we believe are serious shortcomings in the report and its recommendations. … And they and thousands of dedicated, loyal, and experienced military officers, intelligence service and law enforcement veterans, and government officials still stand ready to provide assistance for a thorough, impartial, and honest investigation into the terrible acts of 9/11. [1] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11. Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633 [2] I Do Not Wish to be Associated with Torture by Ray McGovern March 2, 2006 http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/58/18096 [3] Ray McGovern’s blurb for 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out,” edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott. March, 2007 http://www.interlinkbooks.com/product_info.php?products_id=1545&osCsid=5a22b94fffd724962a118f454c5d7194 [4] William Christison interviewed by George Kenney on Electric Politics. Sept. 29, 2006 http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2006/09/the_case_for_intellectual_inte.html [5] William Christison’s blurb for David Ray Griffin’s book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking March 2007 http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/product-description/156656686X [6] Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11 by William Christison Aug. 16, 2006 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Christison14.htm [7] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11. Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633 [8] The 911 Commission Report – One Year Later, a Congressional Briefing July 22, 2005 http://www.vt911.org/McKinneyReport20050722transcript.pdf [9] Congressional Reports: Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 December, 2002 http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html [10] See No Evil (part 2) by Robert Baer in The Guardian January 12, 2002 http://books.guardian.co.uk/extracts/story/0,,631434,00.html [11] Robert Baer interviewed on The Thom Hartmann Show June 9, 2006 http://www.911blogger.com/2006/06/former-cia-member-robert-baer-comments.html [12] Robert Baer’s blurb for the revised and updated edition of David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 9/11 Debunking March 2007 http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/product-description/156656686X [13] Robert David Steele’s review of the book, 9/11 Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley Oct. 7, 2006 http://www.amazon.com/dp/0930852370 [14] Robet David Steele interviewed on The Alex Jones Show Oct. 27, 2006 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2006/271006googlecia.htm [15] Letter to Congress signed by 25 intelligence service and law enforcement Sept. 13, 2004 http://www.pogo.org/m/hsp/hsp-911commission-040913.pdf 
Raymond McGovern
William Christison
Melvin Goodman, PhD
Robert Baer is another well known CIA veteran who has questioned the official account of 9/11. A 21-year CIA veteran and specialist in the Middle East, Baer was awarded the Career Intelligence Medal upon his retirement in 1997. After retirement, he wrote two best-selling non-fiction books about the CIA, See No Evil and Sleeping with the Devil, the former of which was the basis for the Academy Award-winning movie Syriana, starring George Clooney. Baer was also the writer and on-camera commentator for the Emmy Award-nominated documentary Cult of the Suicide Bomber. 
Robert Baer
Robert David Steele
Lynne Larkin was a CIA Operations Officer who served in several CIA foreign stations before being assigned to the CIA's Counter-Intelligence Center. There, she co-chaired a multi-agency task force, which, among other functions, provided direction to other federal agencies for coordinating intelligence efforts among the many intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
Lynne Larkin
David MacMichael
Omission is one of the major flaws in the Commission’s report. We are aware of significant issues and cases that were duly reported to the commission by those of us with direct knowledge, but somehow escaped attention. …
The omission of such serious and applicable issues and information by itself renders the report flawed, and casts doubt on the validity of many of its recommendations. ...
The Commission, with its incomplete report of "facts and circumstances", intentional avoidance of assigning accountability, and disregard for the knowledge, expertise and experience of those who actually do the job, has now set about pressuring our Congress and our nation to hastily implement all its recommendations. …
We the undersigned, who have worked within various government agencies (FBI, CIA, FAA, DIA, Customs) responsible for national security and public safety, call upon you in Congress to include the voices of those with first-hand knowledge and expertise in the important issues at hand. We stand ready to do our part.”
Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by hundreds of credible individuals can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
http://www.PatriotsQuestion911.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 28 comments |
|
Excellent List of Former High Level Government Insiders
The more who speak up, the better. The more people who sign the petition, the better. It's about time Americans started taking some responsibility for their government's actions and work together to remove the corruption! There are a few new short videos that people should become familiar with: Pilot who flew 2 planes used on 9/11 doesn't believe official story - Professional Commercial Airline Pilot with 30+ years experience (military flight experience as well), who flew Flights 175 and 93 before 9/11, says the alleged hijackers could not have flown those planes. The following information is also important: Dr Morgan Reynolds, the former Chief Economist of the US Dept of Labor, is suing private contractors alleging they defrauded the government by supplying bogus analyses for the official 9/11 NIST Report of an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone gliding into a steel/concrete building. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 2:23:23 AM  (0+)
|
|
Directed Energy Weapons
One must also learn of the evidence for directed energy weapons at the World Trade Center. See Dr Judy Wood's site for full information. Dr Wood's attorney, Jerry Leaphart, said in an interview with Kevin Barrett: Dr Wood, a former Clemson University Professor of Mechanical Engineering, is the only 9/11 research scientist to get NIST to confirm the statement in their own report of not having analyzed the "collapses" of the towers. This confirmation comes in NIST's response to Dr Wood's Request for Correction, both archived on this page. The criminals are working hard. They murdered Dr Wood's Clemson 9/11 research student Michael Zebuhr, as well as her instructors at Virginia Tech. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 3:11:23 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: cb brooklyn...
Interesting that this is the only comment you seem to have for significant 9-11 articles. I'm not as critical of that research as I am of the way it divides our growing momentum toward demanding the truth. Quite honestly, I care much less about how they came down then I am to have a new independent investigation. The article wasn't about the methods...it is about the need for a new investigation. That is the message of the 9-11 truth movement...a message that we can all agree. "WE NEED A NEW INVESTIGATION." Messages of who did it and how they did it unecessarily divided our movement...but then I would guess you already know that...you thrive on controvercy? Is 9-11 truth not controvercial enough for you? I don't know of course, but I would say that it has little to do with the intent and content of the article. by sherry clark (47 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 116 comments [4 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 10:22:45 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The Importance of Directed Energy Weapon/TV-Fakery Exposure
Not being part of the "mainstream" 9/11 Truth crowd, and fully aware that the 9/11 perps are controlling the theories promoted by the "truth movement", I appreciate the importance in exposing the factual information about TV-Fakery and Directed Energy Weapons. The perps are doing everything possible to discourage people from looking at the evidence. This is the reason to promote it. The method by which 9/11 was orchestrated certainly does matter, and I will explain why: Let's say a new investigation was forced. Obviously, the 9/11 perpetrators would want this investigation to be based on the planted propaganda, such as Ground Zero molten metal. This investigation would fail once it's widely exposed that there was no molten metal at Ground Zero, and that it's a proven hoax. Where would that leave us? More than obviously, the perps would want to control the direction of the investigation, just like they control the direction of the "truth movement". Let's say a new investigation "proves" explosives and thermite at the WTC. What would happen?? Answer: The perps would blame Al Qaeda. Thermite can be purchased on Ebay, and Bush already blamed Al Qaeda for the explosives in this speech he gave. The Truth of 9/11 >>> Directed Energy Weapons and TV-Fakery TV-Fakery directly implicates the Corporate Media. This is why it is so vitally important to expose the REAL truth of 9/11, even when promoting a new investigation! The 9/11 "truth movement" is being controlled by the 9/11 perpetrators. Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 12:40:22 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: No, CB, more talk is not more truth.
Saying which way a consequential 9.11 Truth investigation would obtain and would go and would come out, repeats the mistake of saying we know -- you know -- the truth that will be. People cannot be jury-called to support finding a result in advance. People only can be called to support a process and procedure. And that call for 9.11 Truth investigation is drawing a crowd and growing. Your call for 9.11 Truth's conclusion is deadening and counterproductive. The effect you have is the same as the guilty parties intend, remaining unindicted, at-large and free to re-offend ... are you an infiltrated 'plant' as you describe 'they' so often send? The gold standard of Truth in news reports, is the 5 W's and How -- Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How. Factual news does NOT include Will and Would, (or Won't and Wouldn't). Do NOT say some development would happen. Do NOT say which step will start down a slippery slope. Those are NOT facts, those are predictions, and truth seekers reject those for informing news advancing the story and its understanding. by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 572 comments [22 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 3:49:26 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Meremark
See the comment I made below titled Meremark, here's a few questions for you to ask yourself by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 7:26:16 PM (0+)
|
|
Mum's this administration's word
...the reason they’re unanswered is because this administration will not answer the questions,” From the beginning...Bush sealed his father's, Clilton's and his governorship's records, which was followed by Richard "The Dick" Cheney's refusal to reveal one word about his oil tycoon's energy summit. Surprise! They lied about the facts of 9/11! I'm still trying to figure out why we know [think] bin Laden was the mastermind. It's like it's always been there, but I can't remember how we know or who told us. Yes, I agree we need more investigating of 9/11, but with all the investigations over the past fifty years, we still don't know who shot Kennedy. by Sandy Sand (198 articles, 0 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 1548 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 8:10:27 AM (0+)
|
|
Theives and murderers do not investigate themselves!
We may as well quit beating the 'new investigation' drums - it ain't a-gonna happen. Our 'government' of d*mn liars and rip-off artists are NEVER going to investiagte themselves - and you better believe it, 90% of everyone of the Congress members at the time - as well as huge numbers of Bush administration henchmen, military baby killers, CIA spooks, filthy CEOs and all the rest - are ALL culpable. They can't put ANY of them under oath about ANYTHING - some goon might squeal and all HELL would break loose. Besides, most of the lot are Masons and would probably be gunned down in the street by their brothers if they hinted at a REAL investigastion. by JacksonHolly (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 9:32:28 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Jackson Holly
Wow! You're probably right, but what should be the 9-11 truth rally cry if not for a new investigation? Why do we have to suppose that this new, independent investigation would necessarily need to be in the same government that planned the attacks? To me, an independent investigation would perhaps be comprised of investigators that may or may not be employed by "our" government... YOu made some excellent points--it's so strange about the Masonic fraternity...there are so many seemingly benign elements--even charitable ones, but the secrecy of this and other clubs is what is suspicious...Skull and Bones, Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations....these groups may be legal, but what so many of their members are doing is not. As patterns of criminal activity by such groups is recognised by the public, perhaps we could pass legislation that to be a government servant-you must swear non-membership to any such groups which are found to be involved in CONSPIRACY to derail our American way of life...FREEDOM. by sherry clark (47 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 116 comments [4 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 11:36:47 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The Nine Eleven Op TRUTH rally cry is as you say
The Nine Eleven Op TRUTH rally cry is "Investigate 9.11 In Truth, Open and Reported." This rally cry has brought and continues bringing more people, and more understanding, in its common sense. That, is winning. All that is left to do is hasten the consensus day the bell tolls the losers. by meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 572 comments [22 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 3:17:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Question for CB Brooklyn
Given that 9/11 was an inside job, and the Bush Administration is responsible for mass murder, why should I care whether they murdered all these people with directed energy weapons, dynamite, thermite, plastic explosives, RDX or some other type of explosives? Isn't it more important to just expose who the perpetrators of this crime are? by Rolf Lindgren (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 40 comments [27 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 6:05:03 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Excellent Questions, Galileo
One mistake the "truth movement" makes is blaming the Bush administration for 9/11. While they certainly are mass murderers and must be removed from power, there just isn't any evidence linking them to the actual orchestration of 9/11. The evidence shows, in general, 9/11 to have been orchestrated by two entities: 1. The Military Industrial Complex - Directed Energy Weapons (branches out to organizations such as the Directed Energy Professional Society or Directed Energy Directorate) 2. The Corporate Media - TV-Fakery (scum corrupted down to the newscaster level, as this video proves) Removing Bush from power does not remove the 9/11 perpetrators from power. Besides, the United States Government has not been in power for about 75 years! Ever since around the time that Bush's grandfather and private companies tried to overthrow the Constitution, assassinate FDR, and turn the USA into a Nazi Camp, the US has been controlled by private entities. While removing Bush is necessary, it will not solve the problem. The reason why exposing the two items mentioned above is so important... ***The public must learn that these dangerous directed energy weapons exist, and are being used against us. ***The public must learn that the corporate media is corrupt to the point where they broadasted cartoons as if they were of real events. ***The public must learn who the real perpetrators of the attacks are. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 8:27:20 PM (0+)
|
|
Anonymity - ah - such a comfort
Well, well, well meremark. I am pleased to know CB Brooklyn and pleased to see him posting here under his real name. As am I - Andrew Johnson. It's now time for people to look at all the evidence carefully. Perhaps there is a self-winnowing process happening - those who are prepated to follow the evidence, wherever it takes them and those who go so far, and stall out in a flurry of cognitive dissonance. Perhaps the first sign of this stall is the use of anonymity, in some shape or form. Perhaps there are other factors too.... I say - let's see what this directed energy tech. can do to solve the world's problems - not create a fake "war on terror". That's what I say. How about you? Did you vote for its use on 9/11? I didn't. by Andrew Johnson (2 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 97 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 6:59:17 PM (0+)
|
|
CB Brooklyn is COINTELPRO
CB Brooklyn is COINTELPRO. Anyone who promotes idiotic, unproven notions like "TV video fakery" vis a vis 9/11, or disputes the well proven FACT of molten metal under the buildings, is working for the govt. Keep that in mind. by Jeff Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 13 comments) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 7:16:02 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Jeff Smith is a GULLIBLE FOOL
...a gullible fool who blindly believes whatever he's told instead of looking at the information. Or, perhaps he's COINTELPRO himself! I provide analysis to back my claims. The analysis that proves the molten metal at Ground Zero "stories" to be a hoax, is located in my article "WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?", archived here. Although I take no credit for the actual analysis, I am happy to have put the analyses from different sites all in one place. I encourage people to actually look at the information and to think for themselves instead of blindly believing that silly comment by Jeff Smith. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 7:46:21 PM (0+)
|
|
Meremark, here's a few questions for you to ask yourself
For convenience I have provided you with the answers as well. Question: Why does the mainstream "truth movement" consider the Directed Energy Weapon and TV-Fakery theories to be crazy? Answer: Because the 9/11 perpetrators want them to. Question: Why does the mainstream "truth movement" use the "many unanswered questions" slogan? Answer: Because the 9/11 perpetrators want them to. Question: Why is the "truth movement" calling for new investigation? Answer: Because the 9/11 perpetrators want them to. I understand where you're coming from. You're pushing for a new investigation, which is good. However, you're doing exactly what the 9/11 perpetrators want by not taking other things in consideration as well. You seem to be part of the "mainstream" truth crowd, a crowd which is controlled by the perpetrators. You must look deeper and understand what's happening. This "truth movement" is being setup for a fall. TV-Fakery and Directed Energy Weapons are the most solid theories, based and backed by the available evidence. This evidence is admissible in a Court of Law. If you wish to speak up against counter-productivity, I'd suggest heading over to 911Blogger. Stop them from censoring TV-Fakery and Directed Energy Weapons. While you're at it, tell them to stop promoting "molten metal at Ground Zero", a proven hoax. 911Blogger is the most popular 9/11 site on the internet. I wonder why? Also head to Architects / Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Tell them to stop promoting the GZ molten metal nonsense. Tell them to stop promoting the "3 hi-rise buildings collapsed" nonsense. The towers did not "collapse", they were pulverized. ("Collapse" is a misleading term, a term the perpetrators want the "truth movement" to use.) Why does AE911Truth omit the evidence for TV-Fakery and Directed Energy Weapons? They talk about the towers and WTC 7, but do not mention the clean vertical cut on WTC 4. Nor do they mention the round cylindrical holes in WTC 5 and WTC 6. In addition, they do not promote that one of the most elementary physical laws, Newton's Third Law of Motion, is violated by this, and this, and this. Did it ever occur to you that this AE911Truth organization came out of no where after the TV-Fakery and Directed Energy Weapon Request for Corrections were filed by Drs Wood and Reynolds? How come AE911Truth was published in mainstream newspapers, but not Wood/Reynolds RFCs? Why wasn't Dr Reynolds' Court Case published in any media outlet? How come AE911Truth, an organization that promotes hoaxes, gets all the attention? I hope you can understand the bigger picture. Merely pushing for a new investigation, when the organization doing the pushing is controlled by the perpetrators, is not going to cut it. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 7:23:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Re: Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report
by Munich (1 articles, 86 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 1125 comments [86 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 24, 2007 at 10:11:31 PM (0+)
|
|
facts are facts - it was a demo
Boy, one CB Brooklyn is AWFULLY anxious that we take his point, as dodgy as it is. Almost like he was getting paid or something......To try and change the whole basis of the movement, from the sound facts of a demo to the space weapon theory??? Hmmmmm........Divide and conquer - divide and rule - divide and confuse the issue - the towers were demolished - not because someone wants me to believe that - because its obvious. (Kreskin says.....paid shill types like to make personal attacks and/or insults - I betcha ones coming). Ultimately, it doesn't matter, there are forces closing in, definitely not in public view and we should be getting some very good news, very shortly. I just hope they televise the perp walk. by the dave (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 5:31:27 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Thanks so much for registering to post that one comment!
Fortunately however, most people see right through it. First of all, you use the term "space weapon" to describe the directed energy weapon theory. Why is that? Are you getting paid to promote misinformation? Or perhaps you're merely ignorant to the facts of the theory. Drs Wood/Reynolds have never said the weapon must have come from space. They explain this in the conclusion of their Star Wars Beam Weapons paper, which I certainly hope you read. So why do you say "space weapon"? I'll tell you why: because the "truth movement" is infiltrated with government plants who want you to think the theory is "space based". For instance, Dr Steven Jones uses the term "space beam" to ridicule the directed energy weapon theory and to discourage people from looking at the evidence. Documented proof of this is here. Don't you find it odd that Jones worked at Los Alamos, a place that researches the exact weapon that Jones discourages people from looking at: directed energy weapons? Second of all, if you took the time to read my other comments, you would know the dangers of promoting the "controlled demolition" theory. That theory is often promoted with the "explosives/thermite theory", as well as the "molten metal" hoax. Controlled demolition is a misleading term anyway, because the towers did not collapse. They were pulverized. Third of all, I may have way too much time on my hands, but at least I'm using it wisely. I'm certainly not getting paid for any of this. The so-called "truth movement" is being taken complete advantage of by the perps and this must be exposed. I don't like being tricked. Do you? If so, head on over to 911Blogger! That site is filled with "truthers" who have no idea what's going on. They're being taken for total fools by the perps, and so are you. Take that new post by Steven "Los Alamos" Jones, promoting a paper in his "journal". So... he wants to prove explosives without math, eh? Have you seen this video of George W Bush blaming Al Qaeda for the explosives? Thanks for helping Bush. No doubt he appreciates it!!! by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 9:48:31 AM (0+)
|
|
Demolitions it was Directed Energy Weapons it was not.
Very simply speaking there is a growing mountain of evidence showing the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were demolished. There is no evidence that a directed energy weapon was used. In my opinion those who promote the no-plane and DEW theories are COINTELPRO operatives trying to tie the 9/11 truth movement with ridiculous and obviously false theories. Here are a couple good sites to start your serious research: http://www.stj911.org/ - Scholars for truth and justice http://www.ae911truth.org/ - Architects and engineers for truth. by adam ruff (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 3:01:11 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Please Tell Me You're Joking!
Why do you promote those sites? Both of them push the molten metal at Ground Zero hoax. (I already posted the link proving that about five times already - don't make me post it again!!!) Why do you trust sites that promote hoaxes? Below is an excerpt from here. ================================ This is from the ae911truth's list of "characteristics of destruction by explosions." by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 8:52:28 PM (0+)
|
|
9/11
Google and type in "we got nuked on 9/11" by David Howard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 25 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 3:59:52 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Nuclear Weapons Vs Directed Energy Weapons
The photographic evidence certainly does appear to mimic that of a nuclear explosion, but directed energy weapons account for more of the data. Here are some examples (click links for photographs): Clean Vertical Cut on WTC 4. Building material on other side of cut "missing". WTC 4 cut in same path as north wall of South Tower. South Tower is also "missing". Round Cylindrical Holes in WTC 5 and WTC 6. Steel Core Turning to Dust and trickling down. Toasted Parking Lot. Cars with missing engine blocks and unexploded gas tanks. Cars "toasted" in ways only explainable by Directed Energy. Weird serpent copper/gold colored beams, that even confuse the cleanup workers. Also there's this interesting piece of information: Some people skeptical of the directed energy weapon theory often ask how such a weapon could throw steel beams horizontally from the towers. Dr Wood's theory has been refined to include the following: The directed energy weapon did not cause the towers' destruction itself, but instead activated chemical clouds that were released from within the towers, much like how light activates photographic film. Dr Wood has compiled many photographs of these chemical clouds coming from the towers, which can be viewed on page five of her paper "Molecular Dissociation: from Dust to Dirt". She also found photographic evidence of these chemical clouds coming from WTC 7! See here. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 26, 2007 at 10:49:34 AM (0+)
|
|
Free 9/11 Download of Captain McConnell
Earlier this year I made a film featuring the testimony of Commerical jet pilot and F-4 Phantom pilot Captain Field McConnell regarding what he understands about war games, and the operation of jets, and his observations about 9/11. It is not a traditional documentary, but one that presents facts in a measured, artful way that leaves much room for contemplation. It is a film that can be downloaded for free, 1 hour length, at http://www.CaptainSherlock.com Thanks, and keep the message going. Neil Slade by Neil Slade (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 4:43:23 PM (0+)
|
|
A Note About The Mainstream "Truth Movement"
There are at least two posts in this thread (not including the one you're reading now) containing the word COINTELPRO. Consider the following... Notice how the authors of those posts say there's no evidence for directed energy weapons or TV-Fakery. Notice how the authors of those posts don't offer any scientific analysis to refute the directed energy weapon and TV-Fakery evidence that was posted. Notice how the authors of those posts call the directed energy weapon and TV-Fakery theories "ridiculous", "idiotic", "unproven", and "obviously false". Notice how the authors of those posts promote the molten metal at Ground Zero hoax, or sites that promote the molten metal at Ground Zero hoax. Now... consider the following... Steven Jones, who worked at Los Alamos where directed energy weapons are researched, is a strong promotor of molten metal at Ground Zero. Steven Jones, who worked at Los Alamos where directed energy weapons are researched, has numerous "papers" on his site that claim to debunk TV-Fakery. But not one of them explains how an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone can glide through steel girders and concrete slabs. Steven Jones, who worked at Los Alamos where directed energy weapons are researched, discourages the "truth movement" from looking at the directed energy weapon evidence by making statements such as: The current "pet theory" that I have challenged is one now supported by you and (not surprisingly) Wood and Reynolds - the idea that "space beams" or "energy beams" were directed at the Towers to bring them down. Of late, [Jim Fetzer] refers often to his association now with Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. These two are noted for their no-planes-hit-the-Towers theories and for promoting the notion of ray-beams from space knocking down the Towers. I join Kevin Ryan and many others in withdrawing from the group so that my name will not be attached to the personalized attacks and ray-beams-from-space stuff on www.st911.org. We won’t spend much time on ray-beams from space knocking down the Towers! (Sources for the above quotes as well as other quotes are here.) Now consider this... Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." Can people see what's going on??? by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 25, 2007 at 9:37:01 PM (0+)
|
|
Putting some of these nonsense posts in a "Solar Cooker"...
Keep it up CB - I think some of these posters are "running out of lies". Everyone can find out who I am - just go to the website http://www.checktheevidence.com/ and click the "About" link. More details on request. CB cares deeply about people getting to grips with the facts about 9/11 and how bogus sites and operations can "suck you in" as so often happens with similar matters. Just look at the data - you'll work it out easily enough! Enjoy! by Andrew Johnson (2 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 97 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 26, 2007 at 6:24:45 PM (0+)
|
|
what matters?
CB Brooklyn has all the time in the world to fight his fight which is spliting the truth movement. Either he doesn't get it or or he is doing it on purpose. What does it matter if the molten metal under the buildings is a hoax? There was certainly red hot metal there, far far hotter than any office furniture or fuel fire could produce. What can produce such temperatures? Incendiaries. And the appearance of the towers as they fell - how could a space beam pass harmlessly through many floors of a building then knock out a floor, then knock out another floor further away? By their fruits ye shall know them. by gravity32 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 201 comments [38 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Oct 4, 2007 at 2:05:13 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: If one examines gravity32's posts....
it seems he's purposely trying to mislead people. Certainly the reader is smart enough to see through it. gravity32 wrote: CB Brooklyn has all the time in the world to fight his fight which is spliting the truth movement. Since the "movement" is being controlled by the 9/11 perpetrators, it's important for as many people as possible to know what's happening. People should research the following: the year 2012, the Mayan Calender, Peak Oil (hoax), Richard Duncan, Permanent Worldwide Blackouts, and Steven Jones' affiliations to all this. gravity32 wrote: Either he doesn't get it or or he is doing it on purpose. One can say the same about him. gravity32 wrote: What does it matter if the molten metal under the buildings is a hoax? There was certainly red hot metal there, far far hotter than any office furniture or fuel fire could produce. What can produce such temperatures? Incendiaries. Since Jones is a plant, anything and everything he promotes is a distraction. Incediaries like thermite can be purchased on Ebay. Not traceable. DEWs are specific to the US governement and it's contractors. Contractors such as ARA, who NIST contracted for the NIST Report. gravity32 wrote: And the appearance of the towers as they fell - how could a space beam pass harmlessly through many floors of a building then knock out a floor, then knock out another floor further away? You, Jones, and others are the only ones using the term "space beam". It has been pointed out many many times by me (here in OpEdNew) that Drs Wood/Reynolds have never said the weapon must have come from space. But Jones (and others, it seems) use the "space beam" term to ridicule the DEW theory and discourage people from taking it seriously. Why does gravity32 do this? by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Friday, Oct 5, 2007 at 12:56:59 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
