 |
|
Add to My Group
|
December 4, 2007 at 11:20:30
by Alan Miller 
|
|
|
Dr. Roberts currently serves as Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Previously he was the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. He also served as a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and as Associate Editor of The Wall Street Journal.
Paul Craig Roberts, PhD
 Catherine Austin Fitts |
Prior to her appointment to the first Bush administration, Ms. Fitts served as Managing Director and Member of the Board of Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co. She previously was President of The Hamilton Securities Group. In a 2004 essay, Ms. Fitts wrote, "Much has transpired since September 11, 2001. ... We have emerged deeply disturbing unanswered questions of 9-11 through global Internet media. We have worked with [Paul Thompson's Complete] 911 Timeline and realized that the official explanation of events is conspiracy theory, not conforming to documented fact. |
We have watched the U.S. government suppress facts and restrict of the 9-11 Commission's access to information. We have watched the 9-11 Commission fail to answer the unanswered questions and concede to official suppression of information. We have watched the leaders of the national security infrastructure richly rewarded for their failure to protect America on 9-11. We have noted the material omissions of the corporate media. Something does not add up. Someone has something to hide. ... The Administration has something to hide. Rather than lose time and resources getting lost in the White House fog, let's follow the alleged advice of one of the 9-11 Commissioners, Fred Fielding ..."Follow the Money." [4]
 Morgan Reynolds, PhD |
In a 2006 video interview with Alex Jones, Morgan Reynolds, PhD, former Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Labor under current President George W. Bush said, "I first began to suspect that 9/11 was in inside job when the Bush-Cheney Administration invaded Iraq. ... We can prove that the government's story is false." [5] Prior to his appointment to the Bush administration, Dr. Reynolds was Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. He is also Professor Emeritus of Economics, Texas A&M University. And in a 2005 essay, Dr. Reynolds wrote, "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the Twin Towers [each 1300+ feet tall, 110 stories] and Building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely [to] prove to be sound." [6] |
WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." Watch the collapse video here. And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.
Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan. He's a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). He was also appointed by President George H. W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 – 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. He was Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. (1990 – 1994).
 Col. Ronald D. Ray |
In an interview on Alex Jones' radio show on June 30, 2006 [7], Col. Ray described the official account of 9/11 as "the dog that doesn't hunt", meaning it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In response to Alex Jones' question, "Is it safe to say or is the statement accurate that you smell something rotten in the state of Denmark when it comes to 9/11?" Col. Ray replied, "I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that that's accurate. That's true." |
Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Mary Schiavo. Appointed under the administration of President George H. W. Bush, Ms. Schiavo served as the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Transportation from 1990 - 1996. Ms. Schiavo and her staff secured more than 1,000 criminal convictions and uncovered billions in waste and abuse at the U.S. DOT. Since leaving the Transportation Department, Ms. Schiavo has represented passenger and crew families in every major U.S. air crash, as well as pilots and passengers on private planes.
 Mary Schiavo |
In an article written by Gail Sheehy that appeared in the New York Observer on Feb. 16, 2004, Ms. Sheehy wrote, "Ms. Schiavo sat in on the commission's hearing on aviation security on 9/11 and was disgusted by what it left out. 'In any other situation, it would be unthinkable to withhold investigative material from an independent commission,' she told this writer. 'There are usually grave consequences. But the commission is clearly not talking to everybody or not telling us everything.' " [8] |
In a press conference on June 10, 2002 regarding the events of 9/11, Ms. Schiavo stated, "First of all, the question is not 'What they [the U.S. government] should have known?' And I believe I can show you in just a few seconds the question is, 'What did they know?' And believe me, they knew a lot. The second thing to emphasize is that in every single aviation disaster, whether there was intervening criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of modern aviation history it has been followed by, not only were it necessary, a criminal investigation, but also a National Transportation Safety investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system. And the reason for that is so that it never happens again."
Ms. Schiavo continued, "This is the first time, and this is the worst disaster, but this is the first time that families have been attempted to be silenced through a special fund, which I believe is about silence more so than about money. Why? ... And from my rounds on the Hill to find these facts and others, I found that the airlines approached members of Congress and the Senate to get their bailout and their immunity and their protection starting on 9/11. They sent their first lobbyist up to the Hill on 9/11. And this has been confirmed to me personally by Senators and members of Congress. Now to me that's very shocking but to me it raises another question, Why? Why did they have to rush to the Hill to change the law? ... So in the wake of September 11, 2001, when we heard the carriers and governments alike saying, 'Oh, no one could have foreseen this. No one knew that this was coming. No one knew that there was any risk like this in the world,' is absolutely false. ... In the last thirty years we have had 682 hijackings. 682. Here's an interesting statistic. When we had the United States saying, 'Oh, we couldn't have known this.' " [9]
 Barbara Honegger |
Another critic of the official account of 9/11 is Barbara Honegger, who served as Special Assistant to the Chief Domestic Policy Adviser to President Ronald Reagan and as a White House Policy Analyst. "The US military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11," she wrote. [10] "A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, steep, high-speed 270- to 330-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Dulles Air Traffic Controllers were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens that morning. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable the Pentagon's anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building. Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response systems on 9/11." |
Ms. Honegger also served as Project Director of the Attorney General's Anti-Discrimination Federal Law Review at the U.S. Department of Justice in Reagan's administration. She is a graduate of the Naval War College master's program in National Security Decision Making and for over 12 years has served as Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy's and the Defense Department's premier science, technology and national security affairs university.
Ms. Honegger has become a prominent critic of the official account of 9/11 as a private researcher, author and speaker at conferences. This is not Ms. Honegger's first experience with allegations of serious executive branch misconduct. In 1983, she resigned from the Reagan administration in protest to planned domestic policy decisions. In 1989, she authored the pioneering Irangate expose October Surprise, which led to a full-subpoena-power U.S. House of Representatives investigation. Her book alleged that prior to the 1980 Presidential election, members of the Reagan campaign cut a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of the 52 American hostages, in order to prevent President Jimmy Carter from arranging their release and prevent him from winning the November election. The hostages were released on the day of Ronald Reagan's inauguration, after 444 days in captivity.
 Edward Peck |
Shortly after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, a group of over 100 prominent Americans signed a petition [11] urging Congress to immediately reinvestigate 9/11. In addition to four prominent former CIA officials [12], the signers included Catherine Austin Fitts (mentioned above), Edward Peck, and Morton Goulder. Edward Peck served as Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism under President Ronald Reagan. Mr. Peck, a 32-year veteran of the U.S. Foreign Service also served as Deputy Coordinator, Covert Intelligence Programs at the State Department and as U.S. Ambassador and Chief of Mission in Iraq (1977 - 1980). |
 Morton Goulder |
Morton Goulder was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Warning under President Richard Nixon and continued in that capacity under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. In World War II, he served as a Lt. Commander in the U.S. Navy. He is a co-founder of Sanders Associates, a billion dollar defense contractor, now a division of BEA Systems. |
The petition stated, in part, "We want truthful answers to questions such as:
1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
4. Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
5. Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?"
These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11. As the statements of these eight senior Republican Administration appointees show, the need for a new thorough, and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, mentally ill, or disloyal Americans. It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America's security and the future of the entire world.
Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by more than 800 credible individuals can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com
Additional information on skeptics of the official account of 9/11 can be found in the author's other articles on this subject.
Sept. 23, 2007 - Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report - Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up" featured statements by CIA veterans Raymond McGovern, William Christison, Melvin Goodman, Robert Baer, Robert David Steele, Lynne Larkin, and David MacMichael.
Sept. 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11, featured the statement of Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' pilot.
Sept. 4, 2007 - Former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member Calls for New Investigation of 9/11 featured the statement of Joel S. Hirschhorn, Ph.D., who served for 12 years as a Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and later as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association.
Aug. 27, 2007 - National Academy of Sciences Member Calls for New 9/11 Investigation featured the statment of Lynn Margulis, Ph.D., world renowned scientist.
Aug. 21, 2007 - Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation featured the statement of James Quintiere, Ph.D., one of the world's leading fire science researchers.
July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission.
Endnotes [1] Is American Democracy Too Feeble to Deal with 9/11? By Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2006 http://www.vdare.com/roberts/060910_911.htm [2] 9/11, Six Years Later by Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2007 http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070910_911.htm [3] Interview of Catherine Austin Fitts by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show Sept. 9, 2004 http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=4024 [4] 9/11 Profiteering by Catherine Austin Fitts on March 22, 2004 on GlobalResearch.ca http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FIT403A.html [5] Video interview of Morgan Reynolds, PhD, by Alex Jones June 2, 2006 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8180123292618944278 [6] Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse? by Morgan Reynolds, PhD on LewRockwell.com June 9, 2005 http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html [7] Radio interview of Col. Ronald D. Ray by Alex Jones, June 30, 2006 (Subscription required.) Summarized in July 1, 2006 article on propagandamatrix.com http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2006/010706doesnthunt.htm [8] Stewardess ID'd Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show by Gail Sheehy, New York Observer, Feb. 15, 2004 http://www.observer.com/node/48805 [9] Press conference with Mary Schiavo June 10, 2002 Video: http://www.propagandamatrix.com/multimedia/mary_schiavo.html Transcript: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0206/S00159.htm#mary [10] "The Pentagon Attack Papers" by Barbara Honegger, published in The Terror Conspiracy by Jim Marrs 2006 http://physics911.net/pdf/honegger.pdf [11] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11 Signed by Over 100 Prominent Americans Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633 [12] Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report by Alan Miller, Sept. 23, 2007 http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_070922_seven_cia_veterans_c.htm |
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Reinvestigate 9/11
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 |
|
|
|
|
| 13 comments |
|
Come to the big Boston Tea Party and 9/11 conference
BAD IMAGE - http://www.boston911truth.org/dnld/btp_130a.gif (must exist and begin with http) by Joel S. Hirschhorn (141 articles, 50 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 546 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 4, 2007 at 4:09:09 PM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: Questions for the Speakers
Steven Jones: *At the February 2007 conference, you made a statement suggesting that it is safe for one to dip their finger in molten metal. Did you ever try this yourself? Please provide information on this experiment of yours. (Here's a memory refesher video of your statements in case you forgot.) *You have boasted numerous times about the "scientific method". Do you consider it scientific to ridicule other theories, such as the directed energy weapon theory, with statements such as "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." (Here's a memory refresher link of your quote.) *Many people believe that you discredited 'free energy' Cold Fusion research in 1989 in order to keep us addicted to oil. (I made a blog on this issue myself.) Also, you promoted the idea of Peak Oil at a 9/11 presentation in the past. Are you aware that a guy named Dr Richard Duncan "predicted" Permanent Worldwide Blackouts to strike (via Peak Oil) circa 2012 (before he updated it to 2008)? It's widely known that you, Mr Jones, wrote a paper titled "Behold my Hands, evidence for Jesus Christ visiting America" where you use Mayan depictions as evidence. Do you have any association with 2012, the final year in the Mayan calendar? Bob Bowman: *As former Directer of the Star Wars Program, you obviously have knowledge of directed energy weapon technology. What is your opinion of Drs Judy Wood / Morgan Reynolds Star Wars Beam Weapon paper? What, if not energy weapons, could explain the data in their paper? *What is your opinion on Dr Wood's court case in the US District Court, Southern New York, alleging that directed energy weapons were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center? Are you aware that a mainstream attorney, Jerry Leaphart, is representing Dr Wood? *As you may know, the government contracted with several sponsors of the Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS) for the NIST Report. Many believe NIST chose these entities for their expertise and ability to cover up evidence of directed energy weapons at the World Trade Center. What is your opinion? Richard Gage: *On your AE911Truth website, you claim that "tons of molten metal" existed at Ground Zero. My question to you is: where were all the steam explosions? You must know that water contacting molten metal causes steam explosions. You also must know that the Fire Department of New York would NEVER spray water anywhere near molten metal, due to it being a safety and fire hazard. You also know that it rained the week after 9/11. So, where were the steam explosions? Where are the reports of FDNY personnel receiving burns from splattering molten metal after spraying water? Have you seen this article? It casts much doubt on the existence of any molten metal at Ground Zero and shows the existing evidence to be fabricated. *Your site mentions the (cough, cough) "collapse" of the Towers and WTC 7. But what about the damage to WTC 4,5 and 6, all of which show evidence of directed energy weapons? Why are they not mentioned on your site? **Let's take this Vertical Cut on WTC 4 as an example. **Have you noticed... the WTC 4 cut is in the same path as the South Tower's north wall? The South Tower is also "missing". **How about these Cylindrical Holes in WTC 5 and WTC 6? All Speakers: * Please review the information at the following link and give your opinion. 9/11 Directed Energy Weapon / TV-Fakery Suppression Timeline by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 5, 2007 at 8:54:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Bush: Bust Uncle Sam Hijackers
I find this issue more important than the next up coming Presidential Election. All we know we are voting for people who had a hand in the crime of 911. Who protects the voters votes? The fact that we don't come up with the answers this article clearly brings out, makes the whole issue of Democracy in Iraq a discovery of fools gold. This compounds the murder of innocent people on 911 to an additional nearly 4,000 US troops falsely killed by this crime the Bush Administration setup and executed on Americans. Not to mention the thousands of Iraqis who lost their lives. The War will not be over until we solve 911. Everything outside that time frame are the consequences from that. Any administration that would halt investigations to answers for 911 are supporting criminals of the crime. by Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments) on Tuesday, Dec 4, 2007 at 6:52:41 PM (0+)
|
|
Read some History!
I have found some amazing information about the course to Pearl Harbor here on the internet. (Google is amazing, no es verdad?) It appears to me that 9-11 has pretty much the same run-up and course of action by our government. The country we live in is not run by the 'Good Guys', nor has it ever been. Which says some pretty unpleasant stuff about the rest of us. Veteran 66-68 by Roger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [22 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 4, 2007 at 8:31:02 PM (0+)
|
|
US District Court Southern NY Hosts "Inside Job" Court Case
Dr Morgan Reynolds and Dr Judy Wood are represented by attorney Jerry Leapart. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Dec 4, 2007 at 10:50:11 PM (0+)
|
|
Other than Morgan Reynolds, these seem to be credible people
Reynolds is very active in the 9/11 Truth Movement. In his articles and public presentations, his typical MO is to make a very persuasive case that the towers couldn't have collapsed due to jet fuel/damage and that explosives were responsible. He then goes into detail about why he believes no planes were involved in the attacks, i.e. that the images were faked on TV, or the planes were holograms and the plane-sized holes in the towers were caused by explosives. His audiences are typically interested until he gets to the "no planes" part of his presentations, then many become skeptical of Reynold's claims, and by extension, some become skeptical of "the 9/11 Truth Movement". Reynold's claims to sincerely believe no planes were involved in the 9/11 attacks, and acknowledges his "no planes" theories are "out of the mainstream" of the views held by people who advocate for a full criminal investigation, and answers to the 70% of the questions posed by 9/11 families, which were ignored by the 9/11 Commission. Polls have shows that only 16% of Americans believe the Bush Administration is telling the truth about what they knew prior to 9/11, as many as 2/3 believe the Feds knew the attacks were coming and did nothing, but only 12% believe a missile hit the Pentagon. Considering Reynold's intelligence, background and credentials, his true intention may in fact be to get people to dismiss claims that important truths about 9/11 have been covered up. Mixing good info with bad is a classic disinfo technique known as "poisoning the well" by Better World Order (4 articles, 568 quicklinks, 39 diaries, 1110 comments [56 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 5, 2007 at 10:10:28 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Reynolds is Right
No planes hit the towers. The videos are fake. They violate the Laws of Physics and not one scientist has shown otherwise. (Not even Steven Jones.) The reason why the "no-plane-theory" is considered so "out there" within the "truth movement" is due to the fact that the truth movement has been a 9/11 perp controlled operation since day one. See my article here for proof of this: No-plane-theory / TV-Fakery is the basis of a COURT CASE in the US District Court, Southern New York. Dr Morgan Reynolds is represented by mainstream attorney Jerry Leaphart. See here for the court document. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 5, 2007 at 2:12:07 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Worse World Order
"Better World Order" makes some incorrect statements: " His audiences are typically interested until he gets to the "no planes" Where do you get this information from? Have you done an audience survey? Or does your "better world order" involve simply making sweeping disparaging statements with no evidence to back them up? Perhaps it would be better to inform people about the Qui Tam Court cases and RFC's Both Wood and Reynolds decided not to call for a new investigation into 9/11, they decided to do it themselves, publish the results and take legal action. So, they've done more than most others to try and at least fix part of the problem. Unfortunately, both the mainstream media and posters like you (whoever you are) continue to cover up the truth and distort facts. Until this sort of activity comes to an end, the "World Order" will stay exactly the same. So, Same World Order, think carefully before posting. Thanks. by Andrew Johnson (2 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 97 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Dec 6, 2007 at 2:21:09 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: It's very hard to see something that you believe
I take the position that you can explain the image of flt 175 entering WTC tower and penetrating both sides without the nose section being deformed at all...... If it is a digital image. This was on VCRs all over the country that were tuned in to Fox news that morning. It was the very first feed with a curious fade to black sequence at the end in an attempt to cover up the error the devils made. You can see it for yourself at livevideo dot com/socialservice placed for your viewing shock by a Norweigan Commercial Video Editor who caught it I know that it is impossible for an airframe that is 16 feet in diameter to pass between concrete floors 12 feet apart. It does not help that steel columns are spaced about one yard apart on both sides of the building where the aircraft image entered and exited. A REAL nose section of a Flt 175 would have been turned to aluminum-composit hamburger. I don't like being fooled, and suspect others don't either. All the subsequent video feeds were covered or changed to omit the "error" for your viewing overload on that day of terror induced trauma and conditioning. The only other possibility is this whole video image thing was deliberately faked to muddy up the waters. That in itself would also be proof of a Conspiracy leading to Hight Crimes and Treason since having the equipment in place to fake this stuff to feed to the TV Networks would indicate Premeditation. It could be done with a handful of people and no one else would know, unless an error was made. by Julius No (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Monday, Dec 10, 2007 at 11:38:18 AM (0+)
|
|
The flack gets heavy when you're over the target.
The amount of reaction to Wood and Reynolds is very telling. The media and the military industrials have perpetrated this heinous act and it's many armed cover-up. They are not just going to turn themselves in! 9/11 was a showcase for these black project technologies and the world knows it! These sexy new weapons and cartoons have cost us Trillions and led to millions of deaths! When will you face the friggin' music cowardly Americans? by Sha Llel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 90 comments) on Wednesday, Dec 5, 2007 at 6:29:47 PM (0+)
|
|
Right on, Shal Lel
I have to agree here! The thing I try to think of is how these black technologies can be used for peaceful purposes. The challenge for humankind is now to work out how we use almost infinite almost free energy to undo the damage done to planet earth. The 1st step is to realise how terrible things are now - in that this energy technology was used to destroy 2 of the world's tallest buildings in 20 seconds. by Andrew Johnson (2 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 97 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Dec 6, 2007 at 2:12:44 AM (0+)
|
|
9/11 was an inside job
There's only one important question concerning the attacks, did the US gov't allow/participate in 9/11? The answer to that query would explain the illegal wire-taps, suspension of habeas corpus, banning of books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, detaining of dissenters in fences miles away from events, and multiple wars based on lies. How can the gov't be innocent in 9/11 when we have caught it lying so many times (WACO, Ruby Ridge, no WMDs, USS Liberty, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, ETC.)? In law, if you determine a person lies ONCE during his testimony, it can be assumed that he lied in the remainder of his testimony. How come we do not hold the gov't to the same standard as it holds us to? The gov't lied to us about Iraq and more Americans have died there than in 9/11. If the gov't lied about Iraq then why is everyone so reluctant to believe that the gov't lied about 9/11? Final link (before Google Books bends to pressure and drops the title): http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0 by Lorring II (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 87 comments) on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 8:05:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Two Points:
Another poster shouts (above) about "cowardly Americans" Americans are generally no more and no less "cowardly" than any other group of people. You proabably won't want to shout that to a crowd of random Americans - lest you find out on very personal level just how many Americans will be all over your sorry ass in a heartbeat. WHAT Americans ARE generally is "optimistic." Most of us believe whatever is wrong in government can be remedied with the next election cycle. THAT is how a democracy handles problems. The bigger problem we face is, the people in power now don't believe in democracy - and they are not planning to let some quiant notions of democracy remove them from power. Since democracy in the former US was co-opted and subverted by the corporations we are experiencing a sharp rise in corporate-driven fascist tendencies. Once the inevitable feedback of that fascism begins to impinge on consumer cooperation with corporate profit margins we will see the same corporations scrambling to create some sort of remedial actions to regain support and confidence of the consumer base. Consumers can help speed this process by withholding their financial support whenever & wherever possible. Ideally speaking, a "general strike" would deliver an obvious message. The general population needs someone(s) willing to provide leadership toward an action of this sort. To date no person or group has emerged to apply for that position. Second point regarding the subject of the original posting: After working for 30 years in advertising it has become a mental habit (and a challenging exercise) to try to distill complex marketing campaigns down to ten words that can fit on a bumper sticker or make a pointed headline. My suggested rallying cry regarding the 9/11 inside job terror attack follows, and please feel free to use it if you see fit: IMPEACH THE TERRORISTS! by mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 311 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 8:32:29 PM (0+) |
