rescue worker drops 911 revelations:

[Dr Deaf]

Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia was a rescue worker at 9/11. He joined Alex to discuss how rescuers were prevented from doing their jobs properly, were not protected from harmful asbestos, and how explosives, possibly tactical nukes, brought down the towers.


Interview of Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia
Alex Jones Radio Show
March 24, 2005
(in progress)


MT: FEMA was allowed to have cameras. The police, the Port Authority, certain people who I was attached with were allowed to have cameras. And I had a camera also. After my second full day there, I just decided that it was stupid to pull that camera out unless I saw something that absolutely that could not be passed up. Mostly what you saw was evidence of an implosion. Mostly what you saw was that there are cameras everywhere and it’s more of what they say they couldn’t catch on camera had to be caught on camera if it was on. And I had no reason to believe that those cameras were not working before or on that day. I know for a fact, I believe you saw my certificate there. They are from FEMA, several of them. I am a FEMA trained person and FEMA certified. That means that if there’s a situation in my area, even sick and laying down, semi-retired or whatever I’m doing. If I have the most experience, I am the OIC officer in charge, until someone can relieve me, who has more training. That’s the law. There is a secret government. I’m sorry, it’s not a secret anymore. But it is a government that is set-up and there is a fear-based, martial law solution and that’s what it’s all about. It’s all about fear. But moving on…..

a chilling read that kept my attention for the duration of the interview.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2005/300305newrevelations.htm

[EN[i]GMA]

Why would the people behind the massive 9/11 conspiricy allow Alex Jones to be free AND HAVE A NATIONALLY SYNDICATED RADIO SHOW?

He's been arrested on numerous things like driving licence offenses. Wouldn't that provide the perfect chance to lock him up and throw away the key?

Why would this massive conspiricy allow Alex and those like him to run dozens of websites that supposedly show them for what they are?

What's so hard to understand about 9/11?

Why would the 'globalists' do any of this? If they can't stop one loon from running some websites, how can they take down some buildings?

[Qdrop]

*puts on shitty diaper and picks up pots and pans* ;)

so, Deaf....are these the same people who used a nuclear earthquake/tsunami machine a few months back?


what i find far more interesting with people like this, (and Deaf himself) is why they believe in and foster these notions.

i wonder what the psychology is behind these "grassy knoll" nuts....


i mean, Deaf....you won't even let Beth show your face on this website....it has to covered up...
where does this paranoia and conspiracy theory complex come from? are your parents, siblings, friends like this?

[D_Raay]

Why would the 'globalists' do any of this? If they can't stop one loon from running some websites, how can they take down some buildings?

Well, not saying I believe any of this, but come on... To start a war they would otherwise not have the support for. It was pretty widely known that the neo-cons wanted to get their hands on Iraq and Afghanistan. That pipeline needed to be built, and they weren't going to allow the Taliban to negotiate with other interests over it.

Why do you think all the red flags went up when Iraq was mentioned? It certainly gave people like Alex Jones fuel for their fire. BTW what was the reason we invaded Iraq? Something about WMD's wasn't it?

Oh and stopping one "loon", as you put it, wouldn't really be necessary if he is perceived as a loon now would it?

[catatonic]

I want to know how the earthquake machines supposedly work, although with the Tsunami that was an expected earthquake, and there are more expected large earthquakes to come in that region.

[D_Raay]

*puts on shitty diaper and picks up pots and pans* ;)

so, Deaf....are these the same people who used a nuclear earthquake/tsunami machine a few months back?


what i find far more interesting with people like this, (and Deaf himself) is why they believe in and foster these notions.

i wonder what the psychology is behind these "grassy knoll" nuts....


i mean, Deaf....you won't even let Beth show your face on this website....it has to covered up...
where does this paranoia and conspiracy theory complex come from? are your parents, siblings, friends like this?

CIVIL DISCUSSION ;)

Now I am NOT saying that I agree with this, there simply aren't enough facts supporting them. That being said though, the conspiracy theories don't just come out of nowhere. If you google 9/11 you will find several hundred sites promoting the idea that we were complacent, or even implicated, in the attacks. On some of these sites they have gone to great lengths and in great detail explaining this. There are people out there that believe this completely.
So are they just nuts? If not, what would they have to gain by lying? The satisfaction of knowing they may have influenced someone out there to their way of thinking? Seems awfully risky for such a base reward. Oh wait, a massive left wing conspiracy right? Boy, that would really boost the left if the public found out.

These people can't simply be discounted as conspiracy theorists or nuts. They should be heard just like anyone else. I mean we have to hear Jerry Falwell and Ann Coulter don't we?

[EN[i]GMA]

Well, not saying I believe any of this, but come on... To start a war they would otherwise not have the support for. It was pretty widely known that the neo-cons wanted to get their hands on Iraq and Afghanistan. That pipeline needed to be built, and they weren't going to allow the Taliban to negotiate with other interests over it.

Why do you think all the red flags went up when Iraq was mentioned? It certainly gave people like Alex Jones fuel for their fire. BTW what was the reason we invaded Iraq? Something about WMD's wasn't it?

Oh and stopping one "loon", as you put it, wouldn't really be necessary if he is perceived as a loon now would it?

He has plenty of followers.

Not to mention, if he wasn't a tin-foil hat crazy, he might have a lot more. That is, if he were actually correct.

[Qdrop]

yeah, there is a school of thought that for a proper cover-up, you NEED to have "loons" trying to expose it all......because they were looked upon as crackpots to begin with, and "nobody wants to believe what this crazy crackpot is saying....do you?"

it uses social scorn and embarrassment to align beliefs....

i'm still not buying any of this.

if this evil gov't could go through all the hastle and planning of orchestrating planes crashing, bombs in the foundation going off, the death of thousands of innocents and the subsequent planning involved to cover it all up...
wouldn't they have had the ability to fabricate MUCH more credible and damaging evidence of Iraq's links to al-queda and WMD's?

[D_Raay]

GMA']He has plenty of followers.

Not to mention, if he wasn't a tin-foil hat crazy, he might have a lot more. That is, if he were actually correct.
Well, what do you think draws people to him? People that are just pissed off that their lives didn't go the way they had anticipated and are blaming the government for it? Or maybe people who are just cynical by nature? Or does he make alot of sense therefore, when exposed to him, people can't help but follow him?

[D_Raay]

yeah, there is a school of thought that for a proper cover-up, you NEED to have "loons" trying to expose it all......because they were looked upon as crackpots to begin with, and "nobody wants to believe what this crazy crackpot is saying....do you?"

it uses social scorn and embarrassment to align beliefs....

i'm still not buying any of this.

if this evil gov't could go through all the hastle and planning of orchestrating planes crashing, bombs in the foundation going off, the death of thousands of innocents and the subsequent planning involved to cover it all up...
wouldn't they have had the ability to fabricate MUCH more credible and damaging evidence of Iraq's links to al-queda and WMD's?
I agree with you to an extent.

However, it would be much easier to control events in your own backyard than in some other part of the world. It may not have been possible to do so. Or it would have been too difficult to pull off. I am just speculating of course.

[Qdrop]

If you google 9/11 you will find several hundred sites promoting the idea that we were complacent, or even implicated, in the attacks. On some of these sites they have gone to great lengths and in great detail explaining this. There are people out there that believe this completely.
So are they just nuts? If not, what would they have to gain by lying? The satisfaction of knowing they may have influenced someone out there to their way of thinking? Seems awfully risky for such a base reward.


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0805070893/qid=1112296402/sr=2-2/ref=pd_ka_b_2_2/103-9861175-5495046

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0805074791/qid=1112296402/sr=2-3/ref=pd_ka_b_2_3/103-9861175-5495046

[EN[i]GMA]

Well, what do you think draws people to him? People that are just pissed off that their lives didn't go the way they had anticipated and are blaming the government for it? Or maybe people who are just cynical by nature? Or does he make alot of sense therefore, when exposed to him, people can't help but follow him?

Or he's a crazy.

Should we listen to David Icke?

Or the guys that say Bill Clinton is an alien from the 11 galaxies?

Some people are mentally infirm, among other things.

Alex Jones actually seems like a smart guy, but he really might be mentally disturbed.

And it's almost like a religion. People want to believe in things bigger and better than themselves. God or aliens or ghosts or conspiricies.

It gives them some purpose.

[EN[i]GMA]

I agree with you to an extent.

However, it would be much easier to control events in your own backyard than in some other part of the world. It may not have been possible to do so. Or it would have been too difficult to pull off. I am just speculating of course.

It would have been so easy to ship some tons of antrax over in a C-130, drop t in a bunker and come back 2 weeks later and say "OMG LOOK, they had anthrax ALL ALONG".

Do you know how easy it would be to plant this stuff in a bunker in the middle of the desert?

They could create any type of evidence they wanted, mass graves, WMDs, documents, planting people etc.

Why didn't they?

[D_Raay]

GMA']Or he's a crazy.

Should we listen to David Icke?

Or the guys that say Bill Clinton is an alien from the 11 galaxies?

Some people are mentally infirm, among other things.

Alex Jones actually seems like a smart guy, but he really might be mentally disturbed.

And it's almost like a religion. People want to believe in things bigger and better than themselves. God or aliens or ghosts or conspiricies.

It gives them some purpose.
Yeah, I suppose you are right. Personally, I sift through such material just to be intellectually capable of making my own assumptions about the individual.
Besides, I have absolutely no faith in what the mainstream is spewing, so my news and info foraging always ends up elsewhere.

[EN[i]GMA]

Yeah, I suppose you are right. Personally, I sift through such material just to be intellectually capable of making my own assumptions about the individual.
Besides, I have absolutely no faith in what the mainstream is spewing, so my news and info foraging always ends up elsewhere.

This is true.

But there are better sources than Alex Jones.

[D_Raay]

GMA']It would have been so easy to ship some tons of antrax over in a C-130, drop t in a bunker and come back 2 weeks later and say "OMG LOOK, they had anthrax ALL ALONG".

Do you know how easy it would be to plant this stuff in a bunker in the middle of the desert?

They could create any type of evidence they wanted, mass graves, WMDs, documents, planting people etc.

Why didn't they?
Well, for one thing, you are talking about lots of people involved in such shipping to also be complicent in the plant. All the way down the line. Where do they get the Anthrax without someone knowing it is gone? Who flies it there? You see where I am going? It would be much easier in the case of 9/11. Foreigners on planes. No witnesses left alive. Forgive my ignorance but, where was the massive joint investigation between the Saudi Arabian government and our own? Why doesn't anyone know all the exact details of these hijackers? We just gave several hundred media hours to a poor unfortunate brain dead woman, but most Americans couldn't tell you a single name of any of those hijackers. Again there are reasonable questions that were never answered about 9/11 that people like Alex Jones won't let go of. He probably does more harm than good however.

[Qdrop]

GMA']
And it's almost like a religion. People want to believe in things bigger and better than themselves. God or aliens or ghosts or conspiricies.

It gives them some purpose.


(lb) (lb)

[Qdrop]

Again there are reasonable questions that were never answered about 9/11 that people like Alex Jones won't let go of. He probably does more harm than good however.

but what gets higher *ratings*?

that's the #1 disease infecting the mass media AND some of the underground media....
"news" that sells....rather than news that matters.

[D_Raay]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0805070893/qid=1112296402/sr=2-2/ref=pd_ka_b_2_2/103-9861175-5495046

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0805074791/qid=1112296402/sr=2-3/ref=pd_ka_b_2_3/103-9861175-5495046
As much as I like to throw money out the window, I don't feel the need to be educated by Michael Shermer. Could you give me the gist of it?

[D_Raay]

but what gets higher *ratings*?

that's the #1 disease infecting the mass media AND some of the underground media....
"news" that sells....rather than news that matters.
Ah, you have reinvigorated my faith in you with this insightful observation.

[EN[i]GMA]

Well, for one thing, you are talking about lots of people involved in such shipping to also be complicent in the plant. All the way down the line. Where do they get the Anthrax without someone knowing it is gone? Who flies it there? You see where I am going? It would be much easier in the case of 9/11. Foreigners on planes. No witnesses left alive. Forgive my ignorance but, where was the massive joint investigation between the Saudi Arabian government and our own? Why doesn't anyone know all the exact details of these hijackers? We just gave several hundred media hours to a poor unfortunate brain dead woman, but most Americans couldn't tell you a single name of any of those hijackers. Again there are reasonable questions that were never answered about 9/11 that people like Alex Jones won't let go of. He probably does more harm than good however.

9/11 would have required thousands of people knowing what was going on bo compy for it to work.

Also, liberties can be taken with troops that can't with civilians.

[Qdrop]

As much as I like to throw money out the window, I don't feel the need to be educated by Michael Shermer. Could you give me the gist of it?

no love for shermer?
he's such a great, down to earth writer...

well the amazon site will give you the summary.....
the jist of both books is primarily debunking....which isn't rather difficult in most cases....

but he get's into psychology of belief pretty deep too...and brings in some noted authorities on the subject....

[D_Raay]

GMA']9/11 would have required thousands of people knowing what was going on bo compy for it to work.

Also, liberties can be taken with troops that can't with civilians.
Well, maybe not. Do you recall after the dust settled after 9/11 and people started thinking about it all of the questions that arose? All the stonewalling of independent investigations? Why on earth would our government do that? No one has ever answered that for me. You would think it would have immediately been investigated on a massive level. It was not. Again I am not saying I buy any of the theories, but the actions taken by the administration both before and after 9/11 were dubious at best. Complete incompetence or lack of the understanding on how to proceed? If that's the case then I could actually be satisfied. Just not exactly reassured on the safety of our country in the future.

[D_Raay]

no love for shermer?
he's such a great, down to earth writer...

well the amazon site will give you the summary.....
the jist of both books is primarily debunking....which isn't rather difficult in most cases....

but he get's into psychology of belief pretty deep too...and brings in some noted authorities on the subject....
I may be wrong but my initial impression of Shermer is he is a shill. They come from all forms of media.

[Qdrop]

I may be wrong but my initial impression of Shermer is he is a shill. They come from all forms of media.

Really? how so?

he also runs and publishes Skeptic magazine...has for years....

i'm curious as to where you got this idea from....i've had ALOT of respect for this man for some time....

http://www.skeptic.com/director.html

[EN[i]GMA]

Well, maybe not. Do you recall after the dust settled after 9/11 and people started thinking about it all of the questions that arose? All the stonewalling of independent investigations? Why on earth would our government do that? No one has ever answered that for me. You would think it would have immediately been investigated on a massive level. It was not. Again I am not saying I buy any of the theories, but the actions taken by the administration both before and after 9/11 were dubious at best. Complete incompetence or lack of the understanding on how to proceed? If that's the case then I could actually be satisfied. Just not exactly reassured on the safety of our country in the future.

There are very possibly things surrounding it they don't want us to know about.

I can't really say.

[D_Raay]

Really? how so?

he also runs and publishes Skeptic magazine...has for years....

i'm curious as to where you got this idea from....i've had ALOT of respect for this man for some time....

http://www.skeptic.com/director.html
The January/February 1994 issue of The Journal of Historical Review contains an article by Mark Weber concerning the all important role of Jewish Marxists in bringing Communism to power in Russia. In his critique of Weber's main point, Shermer writes: "This is a typical denier line of reasoning. Fact: The Communists killed the Romanovs and instigated the Bolshevik Revolution. Fact: Some of the leading Communists were Jewish. Conclusion: The Jews killed the Romanovs and caused the Bolshevik Revolution. By the same logic: Ted Bundy was Catholic. Ted Bundy was a serial killer. Catholics are serial killers."

This is an excellent example of a "straw man" fallacy. Shermer created an implausible, simplistic, dishonest and false caricature of Weber's main point, struck it down, and then pretended that he refuted a much more profound viewpoint. In the article Weber made it perfectly clear that "all Jews" are not to blame for Communist oppression and atrocities. He opined "to blame 'the Jews' for the horrors of Communism seems no more justifiable than to blame 'white people' for Negro slavery, or 'the Germans' for the Second World War or the 'Holocaust.'"

Being an intellectual, he must know this. Hence the "shill" reference. For whom I could not tell you.

Shermer attempts to convince his readers that Holocaust revisionism is, in essence, a racist, right-wing, neo-Nazi movement.

Bradley Smith is a prominent revisionist spokesman and publisher who married a Mexican lady, and for numerous years prior to his involvement with the revisionist movement was a liberal free speech advocate-hardly the "right stuff" for a neo-Nazi Nordicist. Shermer made repeated references to Smith yet he conspicuously failed to mention this relevant biographical data.

In both instances in which he writes about the father of Holocaust revisionism , Frenchman Paul Rassinier, there is a failure to note the latter was a pacifist, former Communist and left-wing socialist who opposed the Nazis during WWII, and for his activities in the French Resistance was interned by the Germans in Nazi concentration camps.

[ericg]

If you've simply been true.. in good stead and momentum with your humble experiences... educated and kept your mind right... you should have been able to trust, consumate and hold conviction in, of, and for your instincts a long time ago...! What evidence do you need for goodness sakes?!! Don't play skeptic on all fronts... it never becomes you or anything else... Facts are facts... how much do they need to be summed up before the nation/ world gets rolling with a pair of balls? You wouldn't even be here if you didn't think... It's all so overt and obvious... In any case, the evil seed that is our government has been let to grow so big, it has and is suffocating all benign life on the earth. Elementary Watson. Elementary.

[Dr Deaf]

*puts on shitty diaper and picks up pots and pans* ;)

so, Deaf....are these the same people who used a nuclear earthquake/tsunami machine a few months back?



same people meaning some facet of the us government? i'd think so yes. they have agendas you can't fathom and won't understand until it's too late. i don't expect you to believe or contribute to any articles i post. please don't feel obligated. resume your regularly scheduled news broadcast and bask in the comfort of widely believed misconceptions and false truths.


what i find far more interesting with people like this, (and Deaf himself) is why they believe in and foster these notions.

i wonder what the psychology is behind these "grassy knoll" nuts....


i watched 911 unfold via newcasts as it was happening. i've worked in avation for a decade and nothing seemed to make sense with the way the equipment struck the tower. later that afternoon i spoke with aircrews that had diverted from UNITED that were in the gate next to one of the planes that hit the tower. it's obviously not as close as those that were in NYC that day, but hearing their accounts of that day emphasized that something wasn't right.

i've researched and confirmed timelines of the events. to me the official account of the events with arabs, boxcutters and minimal PIC hours on insignificant equipment that has factory installed aerobatic limitations to guarantee passenger comforts etc etc etc just doesn't add up.

how can you accept such a blatant lack of response on the part of the DOD? the towers were designed to withstand the impact of a B707, the largest commercial airliner at the time. we've all watched planned implosions on tv. why did the towers fall so perfectly? why did tower 2 fall before tower 1? the bulk of the fuel in strike 2 exploded outside of the towers, what fuel was able to burn 1000f to melt steel? jet fuel really isn't all that volatile. it's basically high grade diesel fuel. diesel fuel works by compression vs gasoline (considerably more volatile) working by combustion.

that evening i heard eye witness accounts from rescue crews-- "i heard a series of explosions". coverage in later days had no mention of such explosions. how did wtc7 just fall down? there's only so much bullshit you can swallow before you start to question the alleged "facts". you've written me off as a nutjob, that's fine. i'm going to continue to believe what i do and you can do the same.


i mean, Deaf....you won't even let Beth show your face on this website....it has to covered up...
where does this paranoia and conspiracy theory complex come from? are your parents, siblings, friends like this?


i really can't understand the relevance between me not posting my picture on the interent and being an alleged conspiracy theorist. to me you are faux fact theorist. you believe what you're told. no amount of scientific factual data can lure you from the intended truths you and other americans have been fed.

i've read a lot since 0911 almost daily. i had ideas of my own that had been confirmed. i've discovered a lot of confirmed viable evidence that back these alleged conspiracies. i'll continue to be a nut job conspiracist and you can continue to live life with blinders on. take your loving spoonfu;l a lil sugar helps the medicine go down.

bump this post in a decade and we can compare notes and ideas. the america you think you know is long gone. the future is bleak and you're naive.

[EN[i]GMA]

i watched 911 unfold via newcasts as it was happening. i've worked in avation for a decade and nothing seemed to make sense with the way the equipment struck the tower. later that afternoon i spoke with aircrews that had diverted from UNITED that were in the gate next to one of the planes that hit the tower. it's obviously not as close as those that were in NYC that day, but hearing their accounts of that day emphasized that something wasn't right.

i've researched and confirmed timelines of the events. to me the official account of the events with arabs, boxcutters and minimal PIC hours on insignificant equipment that has factory installed aerobatic limitations to guarantee passenger comforts etc etc etc just doesn't add up.

how can you accept such a blatant lack of response on the part of the DOD? the towers were designed to withstand the impact of a B707, the largest commercial airliner at the time. we've all watched planned implosions on tv. why did the towers fall so perfectly? why did tower 2 fall before tower 1? the bulk of the fuel in strike 2 exploded outside of the towers, what fuel was able to burn 1000f to melt steel? jet fue.l really isn't all that volatile. it's basically high grade diesel fuel. diesel fuel works by compression vs gasoline (considerably more volatile) working by combustion

that evening i heard eye witness accounts from rescue crews-- "i heard a series of explosions". coverage in later days had no mention of such explosions. how did wtc7 just fall down? there's only so much bullshit you can swallow before you start to question the alleged "facts". you've written me off as a nutjob, that's fine. i'm going to continue to believe what i do and you can do the same.

So then why would the government set up the building to fall in such a blatently planned manner?

Wouldn't they have set up the explosives to go off all on one-side, so it falls sideways, in a less conscpicous manner?

WTC7 fell down due to all the damage two collapsing towers would cause. It was also on fire, I do believe.

You asked why 2 fell before 1? Wouldn't our overlords have sense that this would be a point of suspicion and not detonate them in this manner?

'a series of explosions'

None of the tape shows that. Your stories contradict each other. Either they took the towers down demolition style (Simultanious explosions) or they had multiple explosions going off at different times (Random explosions).

And how did they install all these explosives? It must have taken tons.

And how did they fly the planes into the towers?

If this 'plane scenario' is as far-fetched as you make it out to be, why not make up another story, say that terrorists used 4 trucks filled with C4 to take down the towers from the base (Or something, this is purely for speculative purposes and may not even be feasible).

Why pick so conspicous a method when you could easily have used a bunch of explosives on the ground floor?

Have you read the Popular Mechanics article and the 9/11 Comission Report?

They seem to bebunk most of your claims...

[Funkaloyd]

And how did they install all these explosives? It must have taken tons.
NOT IF IT WAS A NUKE!!1

[EN[i]GMA]

NOT IF IT WAS A NUKE!!1

It's actually my theory that the Green skinned Nazi alien-Jews from a small planet near Alpha Cenauri did it with their mind bullets.

But my tin foil hat protected me.

[Dr Deaf]

GMA']So then why would the government set up the building to fall in such a blatently planned manner?

because the bulk of the american people will buy anything they're told.

GMA']Wouldn't they have set up the explosives to go off all on one-side, so it falls sideways, in a less conscpicous manner?
WTC7 fell down due to all the damage two collapsing towers would cause. It was also on fire, I do believe.

it was wired for implosion. the owner admitted it after the initial attacks. it was admittedly demolished, "to be on the safe side". he retracted that statement a few times.

GMA']You asked why 2 fell before 1? Wouldn't our overlords have sense that this would be a point of suspicion and not detonate them in this manner?

someone fucked up, that's what happened.

GMA']None of the tape shows that. Your stories contradict each other. Either they took the towers down demolition style (Simultanious explosions) or they had multiple explosions going off at different times (Random explosions).

watch footage of the towers falling. you can see perimiter explosives going off -- floor by floor. controlled demolition experts all agree. it was wired and rigged to fall floor by floor, nice and neat

GMA']And how did they install all these explosives? It must have taken tons.

i don't have time to dig up all the source links etc. i've read a week before the attacks a contract security firm was hired to prepare for the drill that was to take place on or around the 11th.

GMA']And how did they fly the planes into the towers?

remote-con-fucking trol. fly by wire. i think it was raytheon that had developed this technology. i've watch video of a FED EX b727 outfitted with it. i'm pretty sure some of the same technology has been incorportated into the drones that do recon missions in afgan / iraq as well.

GMA']If this 'plane scenario' is as far-fetched as you make it out to be, why not make up another story, say that terrorists used 4 trucks filled with C4 to take down the towers from the base (Or something, this is purely for speculative purposes and may not even be feasible).


GMA']Why pick so conspicous a method when you could easily have used a bunch of explosives on the ground floor?

the people behind it wanted a performance. they quietly celebrated it's brilliance. they knew they had set the stage for a war. wars in the middle east and beyond but more importantly a war on civil liberities right here at home.


GMA']Have you read the Popular Mechanics article and the 9/11 Comission Report?

They seem to bebunk most of your claims...

they debunk the claims of the nuts and the nuts debunk their claims. it just matter which side you're on i suppose.

PM debunk 1 (http://www.rense.com/general63/secnd.htm)
PM and the CIA (http://www.rense.com/general63/brutalpurgeofPMstaff.htm)
A lesson in avionics for PM (http://www.rense.com/general63/remo.htm)
real science for PM (http://www.rense.com/general63/st.htm) the hole truth about the pentagon (http://www.rense.com/general63/pmm.htm)
20 years ago: fly by wire (http://www.rense.com/general63/pm.htm) all the facts you need to know (http://www.rense.com/general63/hiding.htm)

alternate news sources aren't hard to find. maybe spend a day surfing the nut job sites just to read a different point of view. you might be surprised / horrified what you discover.

spend some time at liberty forums (http://www.libertyforum.org/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=consp_911). in all honesty i'm not attempting to gain recruits for my cause. articles like this one should open some eyes, but if they're dismissed as bullshit that doesn't change what i believe. i'm very selective about the articles i post here to avoid flooding the forum. i hope no one is insulted by what i post.

thanks for contributing.

[Ace42]

So then why would the government set up the building to fall in such a blatently planned manner?

Wouldn't they have set up the explosives to go off all on one-side, so it falls sideways, in a less conscpicous manner?

None of the tape shows that. Your stories contradict each other. Either they took the towers down demolition style (Simultanious explosions) or they had multiple explosions going off at different times (Random explosions).

And how did they install all these explosives? It must have taken tons.

A controlled implosion is designed to maximise the efficiency of a demolition, allowing you to use the minimum amount of explosive possible.

Clearly, if "it must've taken tons" - then using an uncontrolled explosive detonation would've required prohibitively larger amounts of explosives?

I think you might've 'bebunked' your own argument.

9/11 would have required thousands of people knowing what was going on bo compy for it to work.

Yes, but not in the way that you think. The more people that are involved as individuals, the bigger it is, the less possible it is for one small person to see the big picture. Every person just sees their little piece of the jigsaw, so to them everything seems normal and reasonable. The guy who gets a pager message from his boss saying the meeting is delayed - to him it is not out of the ordinary. Nor to any of the 300 other people who all had their appointments cancelled on that floor, despite three different businesses (which are in no way connected) having this anomally simultaneously.

You could see how, quite easily, a whole floor of the WTC could be evacuated for bombs to be placed on it without anyone being any the wiser. The boss who makes the call doesn't even have to be in on it - he just relays the message that an "important contract" (with someone whom he will never have to meet in person once the WTC falls down and his business records are all destroyed) has pulled out, or has decided to meet elsewhere.

The chain can go on and on and on, with each person in it knowing very little, but still doing their one little job perfectly. The pilot on the jet-plane doesn't have to be in on it, and let the hijackers take the plane - procedure instructs them to acquiesse.

With the army smuggling anthrax to Iraq, it is much harder. The US army is under a lot of scrutiny due to war-crimes and the skepticism of various anti-war groups. Furthermore, it is not alone in a coalition, it has little control over the non-army infrastructure, and it is very hard to "plant" several platoons of standard army regulars without having at least a few "odd men out."

Furthermore, WMDs were NOT necessary anyway - as is evidenced by Dubbyah's re-election. No need to go to that expense in the first place. They knew that once it was done and the back-patting could begin, the rights and wrongs of it would melt away.

We can see it on this very board from time to time. Numerous otherwise reasonable posters have said "Ok ok, enough already. We know it is wrong, but that's in the past, let's talk about solutions and what to do NOW!"

That in itself prevents any retrospective action.

A man breaking his journey between one place and another at a third place of no name, character, population or significance, sees a unicorn cross his path and disappear. That in itself is startling, but there are precedents for mystical encounters of various kinds or, to be less extreme, a choice of persuasion to put it down to fancy; until - 'My God,' says a second man, 'I must be dreaming, I thought I saw a unicorn.' At which point, a dimension is added that makes the experience as alarming as it will ever be. A third witness, you understand, adds no further dimension but only spreads it thinner, and a fourth thinner still, and the more witnesses there are the thinner it gets and the more reasonable it becomes until it is as thin as reality, the name we give to common experience... 'Look, look!' recites the crowd. 'A horse with an arrow in its forehead! It must have been mistaken for a deer.'

- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildernstern Are Dead

[Dr Deaf]

Government Insider Says Bush
Authorized 911 Attacks
From Thomas Buyea
9-17-4


Keep in mind when reading this, that the man being interviewed is no two-bit internet conspiracy buff.

Stanley Hilton was a senior advisor to Sen Bob Dole (R) and has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades. This courageous man has risked his professional reputation, and possibly his life, to get this information out to people.

The following is from his latest visit to Alex Jones' radio show.

Forwarded with Compliments of Free Voice of America (FVOA): Accurate News and Interesting Commentary for Amerika's Huddled Masses Yearning to Breathe Free.

Note: All honor to Stanley Hilton for risking his life so that we may know the truth of 9/11.

The Bush Junta Unmasked

"This (9/11) was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder." --Stanley Hilton

Alex Jones interview of Stanley Hilton, attorney for 911 taxpayers' lawsuit

Alex Jones Radio Show September 10, 2004 Transcription by 'RatCat'

AJ: He is back with us. He is former Bob Dole's chief of staff, very successful counselor, lawyer. He represents hundreds of the victims families of 9/11. He is suing Bush for involvement in 9/11. Now a major Zogby poll out - half of New Yorkers think the government was involved in 9/11. And joining us for the next 35 minutes, into the next hour, is Stanley Hilton. Stanley, it's great to have you on with us.

SH: Glad to be on.

AJ: We'll have to recap this when we start the next hour, but just in a nutshell, you have a lawsuit going, you've deposed a lot of military officers. You know the truth of 9/11. Just in a nutshell, what is your case alleging?

SH: Our case is alleging that Bush and his puppets Rice and Cheney and Mueller and Rumsfeld and so forth, Tenet, were all involved not only in aiding and abetting and allowing 9/11 to happen but in actually ordering it to happen. Bush personally ordered it to happen. We have some very incriminating documents as well as eye-witnesses, that Bush personally ordered this event to happen in order to gain political advantage, to pursue a bogus political agenda on behalf of the neocons and their deluded thinking in the Middle East. I also wanted to point out that, just quickly, I went to school with some of these neocons. At the University of Chicago, in the late 60s with Wolfowitz and Feith and several of the others and so I know these people personally. And we used to talk about this stuff all of the time. And I did my senior thesis on this very subject - how to turn the U.S. into a presidential dictatorship by manufacturing a bogus Pearl Harbor event. So, technically this has been in the planning at least 35 years.

AJ: That's right. They were all Straussian followers of a Nazi-like professor. And now they are setting it up here in America. Stanley, I know you deposed a lot of people and you've got your $7 million dollar lawsuit with hundreds of the victim's families involved.

SH: 7 billion, 7 billion

AJ: Yeah, 7 billion. Can you go over some of the new and incriminating evidence you've got of them ordering the attack?

SH: Yes, let me just say that this is a taxpayers' class action lawsuit as well as a suit on behalf of the families and the basic three arguments are they violated the Constitution by ordering this event. And secondly that they [garbled] fraudulent Federal Claims Act, Title 31 of the U.S. Code in which Bush presented false and fraudulent evidence to Congress to get the Iraq war authorization. And, of course, he related it to 9/11 and claimed that Saddam was involved with that, and all these lies.

AJ: Tell you what, stay there. Stanley, we've got to break. Let's come back and get into the evidence. BREAK

AJ: All right my friends, second hour, September 10th, 2004, the anniversary of the globalist attack coming up tomorrow. It's an amazing individual we have on the line. Bob Dole's former chief of staff, political scientist, a lawyer, he went to school with Rumsfeld and others, he wrote his thesis about how to turn America into a dictatorship using a fake Pearl Harbor attack. He's suing the U.S. government for carrying out 9/11. He has hundreds of the victims' families signing onto it - it's a $7 billion lawsuit. And he is Stanley Hilton. I know that a lot of stations just joined us in Los Angeles and Rhode Island and Missouri and Florida and all over. Please sir, recap what you were just stating and then let's get into the new evidence. And then we'll get into why you are being harassed by the FBI, as other FBI people are being harassed who have been blowing the whistle on this. So, this is really getting serious. Stanley, tell us all about it.

SH: Yeah, we are suing Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Mueller, etc. for complicity in personally not only allowing 9/11 to happen but in ordering it. The hijackers we retained and we had a witness who is married to one of them. The hijackers were U.S. undercover agents. They were double agents, paid by the FBI and the CIA to spy on Arab groups in this country. They were controlled. Their landlord was an FBI informant in San Diego and other places. And this was a direct, covert operation ordered, personally ordered by George W. Bush. Personally ordered. We have incriminating evidence, documents as well as witnesses, to this effect. It's not just incompetence - in spite of the fact that he is incompetent. The fact is he personally ordered this, knew about it. He, at one point, there were rehearsals of this. The reason why he appeared to be uninterested and nonchalant on September 11th - when those videos showed that Andrew Card whispered in his ear the [garbled] words about this he listened to kids reading the pet goat story, is that he thought this was another rehearsal. These people had dress-rehearsed this many times. He had seen simulated videos of this. In fact, he even made a Freudian slip a few months later at a California press conference when he said he had, quote, "seen on television the first plane attack the first tower." And that could not be possible because there was no video. What it was was the simulated video that he had gone over. So this was a personally government-ordered thing. We are suing them under the Constitution for violating Americans' rights, as well as under the federal Fraudulent Claims Act, for presenting a fraudulent claim to Congress to justify the bogus Iraq boondoggle war, for political gains. And also, under the RICO statute, under the Racketeering Corrupt Organization Act, for being a corrupt entity. And I've been harassed personally by the chief judge of the federal court who is instructing me personally to drop this suit, threatened to kick me off the court, after 30 years on the court. I've been harassed by the FBI. My staff has been harassed and threatened. My office has been broken into and this is the kind of government we are dealing with.

AJ: Absolutely and now it has come out - five separate drills of flying hijacked jets into buildings that morning - which you told us about before it even broke in the Associated Press. They were trying to get out ahead of you. You talked about how you interviewed military people who were told it was a drill that morning. Then to get out ahead of that, the news finally reported on it. Now, we've learned that all these operations - I want to get into that, I want to talk about the new incriminating evidence of ordering it and how they had drilled on this, how Cheney was in the bunker controlling this. That has even come out in the mainstream news but they won't release the details of that, Stanley. But what type of FBI harassment are you going through? SH: First of all, my office was burglarized in San Francisco several months ago. Files were gone through and some files were seized - particularly the ones dealing with the lady that was married to one of the hijackers. Fortunately, I had spare copies in a hidden place so nothing disappeared permanently. But more significantly, FBI agents have been harassing one of my staff members and threatening them with vague but frightening threats of indicting them. And it's just total harassment. They have planted a spy, an undercover agent, in my organization, as we just recently discovered. In other words, these are Nazi Germany tactics. This is the kind of government you have in this country. This is what Bush is all about.

AJ: Stay there, Stanley, Bob Dole's former chief of staff. We'll come back after this quick break. Please stay with us. BREAK

AJ: All right, eight minutes, 25 seconds into the second hour. Stanley Hilton, political scientist, lawyer, Bob Dole's former chief of staff, is suing the government for 7 billion dollars for carrying out 9/11 and for racketeering. And he joins us now. During the break, I first really did the big interview with Stanley Hilton after I saw him attacked on Fox News. And that interview got massive attention. And then he kind of went underground for a while because a judge, we're going to talk about that, ordered him to not do any more interviews. And now he's back doing interviews. He's had his office broken into, FBI threats and harassment. Bottom line, he has deposed military individuals, wives of hijackers, you name it, it was a government operation. It has even come out in mainstream news, a piece here, a piece there. They had drills on 9/11, that's why NORAD stood down. Cheney was in control of the whole thing. Stanley Hilton has now gotten documents about how Bush ordered the whole operation. And I'll tell you right now, his life is in danger, folks. And he's got so much courage. He went to school with these neocons at the University of Chicago. He wrote his thesis on how the government could use terrorist attacks to set up martial law. He is the man for the time and folks wondered why he disappeared for a while and just did his lawsuit and wasn't doing interviews, it was because he was ordered to. Stanley, can you get into that for us?

SH: I did an interview with you, Alex, back in March of 2003, about a year and a half ago, and literally two weeks after that, I was contacted by the emissary of the chief judge of the federal court where I have the lawsuit. And I was warned not to publicize it but to keep it quiet and threatened with discipline. And it remained quiet until a couple of months ago and then I got on the air on some programs and some publicity and July 1st, I was threatened directly by the chief judge here, threatened with court discipline. This particular judge has been circulating communiqués to the other federal judges seeking anything negative she can get against me to try and discipline me after I've been on the court here for 30 years with no disciplinary problems at all. This is suddenly happening. And her assistants who are on the committee of the court met with me on July 1st in Palo Alto, California, and threatened me directly. They handed me a copy of the lawsuit and said that the judge wants me to dismiss this. What's this? She doesn't like the content of it. This is politically incorrect. This is outside the norm. I said I represented more than 400 plaintiffs, how am I going to dismiss this case? And they threatened me directly and they said, "the next time you'll be disciplined." And also they've threatened me not to go public, etc. And this is just outrageous.

AJ: It's all color of law. No direct orders, just all in your face.

SH: They sent a letter out, and of course they deny it's because of the political content of the suit but they told me directly on the phone that it is because of this suit and this judge is very, very angry, apparently has been in contact with Ashcroft's Justice Department. I got a call from Ashcroft's Justice Department a few months ago about this, demanding that I drop the suit, threatening sanctions and all kinds of things. I refused to drop it. AJ: Now let's go back over, you had them break into your office, harassment. Let's go over that in detail.

SH: My office was broken into about 6 months ago. The file cabinets - it was obvious they had been rifled through. Files were stolen. Files dealing with this particular case and particularly with the documents I had regarding the fact that the - some of these hijackers, at least some of them were on the payroll of the U.S. government as undercover FBI, CIA, double agents. They are spying on Arab groups in the U.S. And, in effect, all this led up to the effect that al Qaeda is a creation of the George Bush administration, basically. That the entity that he called al Qaeda is directly linked to George Bush. And all this stuff was stolen. Fortunately, I had copies. But this was just part of the harassment. The FBI has also been harassing some of my assistants and has planted a spy in our midst. And it is just outrageous that these Nazi tactics are being used - and the obstruction of justice, these people are criminals. And that's what's happening under the tremendous pressure here to just drop it. Or to shut up now and just go away.

AJ: Now, let's talk about what they want you to drop. Let's talk about, without giving names, the people you deposed, what really happened, the picture you've got. You said earlier that Bush ordered this, they were simulating this which they now admit there were simulations on that morning. Let's go over what they don't want you to talk about, Stanley.

SH: We have evidence both documentary as well as witness sworn statements from undercover former FBI agents, FBI informants, etc., that other officials in the Pentagon and the military and the Air Force that deal with the fact that there were many drills, many rehearsals for 9/11 before it happened. Bush had seen this simulated on TV many times. He blurted this out at a press conference in California a few months after 9/11 where he said he had, quote, seen the first plane hit the first building on the video. And that's not possible because there was no official video of that. There was one of the second plane not the first one. He had seen the first one. We do have some incriminating documents that Bush personally ordered 9/11 events. It was well planned. A FEMA official has admitted on tape that he was there the night before - September 10th, that is

AJ: And now Mayor Giuliani, a few months ago in the 911 Commission, admitted that - Tripod II. They had their whole command post already moved out of Building 7. Now, this is very, very important. This is a key area of this whole event. You said months before it came out on the CIA's own website and the Associated Press, you said I deposed people. They said there were drills that morning and exactly what happened, happening - that was the smoke-screen for the stand-down. And then to get out ahead of it, the CIA comes out and said yeah we were running a drill that morning. Now, we've learned that five, possibly six, were confirmed. Five of these - one drill with the exact same thing happening that actually happened, at the exact same time in the morning. That's why NORAD stood down with 24 different blips on the screen. You've said this. You brought this up first. Now, I know you can't get too much into detail but can you tell us how you learned of this?

SH: I have interviewed individuals in NORAD and the Air Force. I personally toured NORAD many years ago around the time that I worked for Dole. I'm very familiar with the operations at Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs, where NORAD is. Individuals that work in NORAD as well as the Air Force have stated this, off the record, but the point is, yes, this was not just five drills but at least 35 drills over at least two months before September 11th. Everything was planned, the exact location

AJ: But five drills that day.

SH: That day, that day, and Bush thought it was a drill. That's the only explanation for why he appeared nonchalant

AJ: We also had NORAD officers and civilian air traffic controllers going, "Is this part of the exercise? Is this a drill?"

SH: Yes.

AJ: On the tapes and in TV interviews, they thought it was, quote, a drill.

SH: That's right. That's exactly what I said long before it became public. I've known about this since earlier in March of '03, as I stated before. This was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder. And now, obstruction of justice by attempting to use a federal judge and FBI agents to inhibit a legitimate civil lawsuit in this country, in federal court. Even a chief judge in this court tried to harass and threaten me personally for representing legitimate plaintiffs. And they got Clinton for allegedly lying under oath about Paula Jones and now - look what's happening now. And Ken Starr used to be across from me in Duke Law School in the early `70s and it´s interesting that he got away with trying to get Clinton impeached, so we have a far worse criminal sitting in the oval office today - somebody guilty of mass murder as well as obstruction of justice.

AJ: Well, I mean look, they say they never heard of a plan to fly planes into buildings - said it all over television - Rice, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft. And then we find out they were running all these drills that morning. Even if they weren't involved, that proves they were liars about ever hearing of such a plan.

SH: Well, I'm trying to take their depositions - I've been trying to take their depositions for months. They've been trying to object to it. They will have to admit they were either lying then or now. It's clearly perjury either way. They are liars and perjurers; that's what they are. These are the people that we have running this government and, of course, they knew about it. How are they going to claim now that they didn't know about these drills? Their idea is that nobody knew anything. It's the old know-nothing mentality. And how anybody considers this believable is beyond me.

AJ: All right, now people ask how could a huge organization, how could the AWACs, how could the military let this happen; whereas before, if your Cessna got off course for five minutes, they would launch F-16s on you. It's real simple. It's what Stanley Hilton said here a year and a half ago. It's what came out in the news after that. The military, good people, were told this was all a drill. And it was not a drill. And ABC News admits that Cheney was in control of [?] out of the White House [?] and that he ordered the military to quote "do something." Our inside sources from Hilton and others say it was a stand down and they admit they will not release that under national security. Stanley?

SH: Well they are going to admit it, they're going to release it in the court case because if you demand it under subpoena powers and they must release it. And part of our lawsuit is brought in the name of the U.S. because under the federal fraudulent [Claims Act], we accuse the Bush Administration of presenting a fraudulent claim to Congress. And under the statutes of Title 31 of the U.S. code, they must release this information. That's why they are trying to threaten me, harass me, invade my office, steal my files, commit blatant obstruction of justice and other crimes to try and prevent a legitimate civil suit from exposing these criminals and their acts of treason and mass murder.

AJ: I think you need to publicly tell folks that you are not planning suicide. Would you like to tell folks that?

SH: (laughs) I'm not planning suicide. I've got family and I'm not planning that but I don't like the threats I'm under - but I can tell you this, it's taking a toll emotionally on me and my staff. And particularly, when you get a threat from the chief judge of your own court.

AJ: Why have you decided to go public again after a year of being under the radar? SH: Because the more and more evidence that I've been adducing over a year and a half has made it so obvious to me that this was now without any doubt a government operation and that it amounts to the biggest act of treason and mass murder in American history. I mean George Bush makes Benedict Arnold look like a patriot. He makes Benedict Arnold look like George Washington. I mean that's what we have - a criminal and a traitor sitting in the White House pretending he's a patriot, wrapping himself in the flag. And it's pretty disgusting because the other side of the so-called opposition, the Kerry camp is just saying nothing because they're afraid to speak.

AJ: Stay right there. We'll be right back.

BREAK

AJ: Stanley Hilton will be with us for another 15 or 16 minutes. Then he's got to go into court. Bob Dole's former chief of staff, political scientist, lawyer, represents 400 plus plaintiffs - most of them victims of 9/11. When I was in New York last week, everybody I was talking to, I mean 90 plus percent of them at ground zero - "I had family, I worked in the buildings, my son's a Navy Seal - he called the night before and said don't go to work." You know, all of this, and then now they never had any idea - and it turns out they had all these drills - and one drill of hijacked jets flying into the World Trade Center and Pentagon at 8:30 in the morning. That morning - come on people! And Stanley Hilton brought all this out on this show before it was in the mainstream news. And I was talking to him during the break. I mean, the harassment, the moles, the threatening of his staff, the judge threatening him. Stanley, let's get specifically into the documents that you have now got that they have now been robbing you for, that you luckily, thank God had copies. Specifically, Bush ordering this. Can you get into that for us - ordering 9/11? SH: National Security Council classified documents which [garbled] and it's was part of a series of documents that were involved with the drill documents. This was all planned - they had it on videotape. These planes were controlled by remote control, as I stated previously a year and a half ago, there's a system called Cyclops. There is a computer chip in the nose of the plane and it enables the ground control, the military ground control, to disable the pilot's control of the plane and to control it and to fly it directly into those towers. That's what happened. It's also a technology used on what's called the Global Hawk, which is an aircraft drone - a remote- controlled aircraft. And they were doing it. We are talking about National Security Council classified documents that clearly indicated that [garbled] had a green light to order this to go and this is no drill. These drills that were running were clearly a dress rehearsal and this was a government operation. You wonder why these people are trying to threaten people and trying to intimidate people who have written this suit, I guess if you murdered 3000 of your own citizens, in conjunction with the corrupt Royal family of Saudi Arabia as Bush did. And if you then waste billions more on a worthless garbage war in Iraq, I guess you've got something to worry about and you want to threaten people to prevent it from coming out.

AJ: I mean let's look at this. Not only are there dress rehearsals, they are smoke screens so the good military stands down and doesn't know what's happening. But it's now coming out, even in mainstream news, that yes these drills were going on. Yes, and some of these drills, quote, passenger-type jets were under remote control - this is decades old technology. In 1958, NORAD was [ ] old jets and using them for target practice. Decades ago they flew jumbo jets from LA to Sidney Australia. So since that's going on, everybody knows that. And it's the same MO. Just like the first World Trade Center [bombing] where they get two retarded men who followed this blind sheik who had a tiny mosque above a pizza parlor. And they set them up as the patsies. Then the FBI cooks the bomb, trains the drivers. This informant goes, "You're not going to bomb the building? They go "Yeah, we're letting it go forward." He tapes them to protect themselves. The two retarded gentlemen, thank God, didn't park it up against the column, as the FBI instructed them to do, so it didn't bring down the tower - because you have to be right up against the column. That doesn't happen. Yet, it's the same thing with 9/11. You've got these CIA agents, these Arabs, who were trained at U.S. military bases, Pensacola Naval Air Station - mainstream media, out creating their legends for this background. They're on board the aircraft. My military sources say nerve gas kills everybody on board the plane - nerve gas packets. Then they fly the planes into buildings. From your inside sources, is that accurate?

SH: It's one of the things that we are looking into - that nerve gas or something else disabled people. It's possible. I can't say for sure to be honest with you

AJ: All you know is they were government agents and they were on board and the planes were remote controlled.

SH: Yeah, it was basically a smokescreen. I mean, the events of the hijackings, how someone snuck in those cutters, it was a plant. It was like a classic decoy. I've got some military background. And it's called decoy. It's a decoy operation. You make the people focus on the decoy to avoid looking at the real criminals. So they are focusing on these so-called nineteen hijackers and saying, "Oh, it must have been these Arabs. When, in fact, the guilty person is at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue - sitting in the oval office. That's the guilty person. That's the one who authorized it. There is only one man who could have authorized this operation and that's Bush. And anyone at NORAD will tell you as I have been told personally at NORAD in the war control room, there is only one man who has the power to do this kind of thing and that's Bush. Even though many believe he's a puppet. And I think in many ways he is. The fact of the matter is where was [ ] Cheney, Rumsfeld and these other traitors. The fact is Bush personally ordered and he's guilty and liable and he's going to be re-elected apparently because the media's asleep and [garbled] for Bush. AJ: Well, the media is owned by the same military industrial complex that carried out the attacks.

SH: Yeah, the media is only interested in maintaining the official government fantasy that this was a little lone Arab. These Arabs couldn't even steer that plane down a runway.

AJ: Stay there Stanley, final segment coming up. BREAK

AJ: Mr. Hilton, when you talk to these FBI agents, when you talk to these military men and women, what's their attitude? They've got to be pretty freaked out to have the big picture and know what actually happened on 9/11.

SH: Yes, you know it's like clouds just before a thunderstorm in the sense that they are sort of pregnant with rage. They are just enraged at the criminal politicians who have perverted and misused the government to murder its own citizens and pursue these dubious political ends. And many of them, in increasing numbers, are willing to talk and will talk under subpoena - but only under subpoena because the official party line of the government is shut up and don't talk to the trial lawyer. But more and more, they are very outraged that part of the government has done this to its own people, to its own people. I mean you have to go back to Stalin to see something - not even Hitler did this to his own people. You have to look at Stalin who murdered the Kulaks, the Russians for his own dubious gains. Also we've got - we have a Stalinist mentality in this country. And, if these people pose as patriots and wrap themselves in the flag, it's disgusting. I wanted also to point out that the Japanese television network, Asahi, is going to be airing a special on primetime tomorrow, on September 11th. They interviewed me for eight hours a couple of weeks ago. I'll be on that. I wish - of course, the America media don't care so they are not going to care. But in Japan, people are very serious in interviewing me and others. And we have a website now, called deprogram.info, if more people are interested: www.deprogram.info. But the other thing, I just wanted to say that if anything happens to me - and I don't know why - because I'm being threatened here now. And it seems you can't bring a case in this country anymore against criminals in power without being threatened. And this is how they operate. The stakes are pretty high when you've got a world historical level of treason and fraud by this government against it's own people. I guess this is what you have to expect.

AJ: Stanley, the globalists, the new world order crowd, definitely intend to carry out more terror attacks. I know they would have carried out more attacks if we wouldn't have done what we've been up to, if you wouldn't have been out there boldly speaking out and many others. And then their electronic Berlin wall has a bunch of cracks in it now. Thanks to good people like yourself and many others who are speaking out and telling the truth. But do you think that they may carry out what they've been hyping - a suitcase nuke attack, a biological release to try to smokescreen all of this? I know it's a catch 22, you've got to expose the murderers. We've got to get the word out on this but some government people that I've talk to say, "Yeah, but if you do that, they are going to go even more hard core and must totally try to take over." But I say regardless, they are already doing that. So what do you say to that?

SH: Well, yeah, I think they have an agenda. They have contingency plans. I think they are laying low now because there are an increasing number of people, like myself, who are openly challenging them and accusing them of criminal conduct. I think they would have done it again if we had not spoken up. I think they're planning, what they would like to do is silence any dissenters. That's why we are trying to get the Patriot Act declared unconstitutional in this lawsuit also.

AJ: Let's talk about polls. In the beginning a patriot is a scarce man, hated and feared, but in time when his cause succeeds, the timid join him, because then it costs nothing to be a patriot. You are one of those guys who hit the barbwire for us, or figuratively jumped on the hand grenade for America. But when you've got a Zogby poll, who is highly respected, half of New Yorkers believe that the government was involved. When you have a Canadian poll, 63% on average believe that the U.S. government was involved. And some groups, as high as 76% in polls believe the government was involved. European polls, two- thirds show the same thing. We have German defense ministers and technology ministers and another member of their government now, three of them going public, known conservatives, and progressives. You have an environment minister, Michael Meacher, saying that if they didn't do it, they sure as hell knew what was going on. Look, if anybody who is a thinking person looks at the evidence, their official story is impossible. Then you investigate and they are involved in it. Comments to this massive awakening and what's happening.

SH: Well, I think that's why they want the Patriot Act to suppress political dissent. They have to, they're anticipating, they are not dumb individuals. I know these people personally, Wolfowitz. These are criminal individuals but they are smart and so they anticipated political dissent. And that's why, like the Nazis, their forebears, and their blood brothers, the Nazis and the Stalinists, they're all for political repression. Every corrupt and criminal government has done this - they suppress their own people: Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Mao Tse-Tung, that's why we have the Patriot Act. So it's hand in hand. They had it planned to go right up to September 11th, this was all part of the plan. You have to do it. It was part of my senior thesis. You must follow through the terrorists attacks with a political suppression mechanism in the law. And that's why they want Patriot I and Patriot II and their plans are to continue launching more terrorist attacks to justify even more repression. The goal is to make this a one party dictatorship in this country, to pursue their dubious ends with their blood brothers like the Saudi Royal family. And also, historical blood brothers, such as the Nazi Germany and the Communist Russian. That's the goal

AJ: You've got to go in just a minute or two. But I wanted to also tell you about New York. Sound cannons that are used in Iraq, they're against us. Men in black ski masks. 41,000 police, accredited media being arrested randomly. Children being arrested, people in wheelchairs, 2000 plus people put in a camp with barbwire fences inside with no bathrooms. You had to have permission to go to the porta-potties. Police screaming at you. It had nothing to do with terrorism. They are openly setting the precedent for martial law.

SH: Well, that's right, the word terrorist is now being overly broad and overly defined [garbled] and also, you know, it's like the word communist was used for anything during the McCarthy witch hunt. And anybody can be called a terrorist by Bush's definition. But the irony is that the number one terrorist in the world is living at the White House at the oval office today. That's the real irony. For sheer hypocrisy, I think he deserves the world prize and ought to be in the Ripley book, Believe It or Not, and the Guinness book of world records for sheer brazen chicanery and fraud.

AJ: Let me ask you a question on this because this is the experience that I had. Watching television, watching the killers, watching those that are guilty, stand up there as our saviors is incredibly painful. It's like watching Ted Bundy being the judge at his own trial. I mean it is just painful to know who these people are. To see them putting America in a shredder. Now we are going to have forced psychological testing of every American, forced drugging, you know Pan-American unions, I mean it's just all happening, it's in our face, Stanley.

SH: Yeah, it's very disturbing and as one who has studied the theory and concept of dictatorships, I personally interviewed Albert Speer, who was Hitler's armaments minister. I interviewed him in 1981 in Munich. And I've studied the psychology and history of totalitarianism and there is no question that it's very frightening. And it has, today, with high technology, albeit for the first time in history, the chance of having a world empire dominated by corrupt, technologically oriented government - an elite government. And they've got now what people like Napoleon and Hitler didn't have, which is the technological means to dominate not only their own country but others - the world.

AJ: The answer is to expose them as the terrorists, to show how PNAC [Project for the New American Century] said we need helpful Pearl Harbor events, to show how Northwoods called for the exact 9/11-style attacks, to show their own plans. And to force people to face this horror. What are they going to do in a year or two when 80% of us, not half of us, know the truth?

SH: Well, that's why they want repression and, then again, the ancient old diversion, launch another terrorist attack to get people to pitch it away. I mean who knows what they'll do next. I mean their capacity for ingenious creation of these events is sort of unraveled. I mean there is no limit. My guess is they are going to try another stunt - maybe a stunt just before the election to justify getting Bush reelected. Although it seems like he is running against a straw man or a ghost right now, anyway. But, my guess is they'll try some other tactic to get people's attention away from 9/11 if it gets to be too much attention. What you really want is for the public to just lose interest because the public - and it's like remember the Alamo, you know, people don't forget things like that. To me it's like the Alamo, remember 9/11, that ought to be the slogan for this outrageous act of treason. That's what it is. It's not

AJ: We are at a crossroads, I don't think they anticipated this much resistance, Stanley.

SH: Yeah, I hope they are truly wrong and as incompetent as they are corrupt and guilty. That means their incompetence is exceeded only by their corruption and their guilt. And eventually, if enough people are going to get outraged enough, these people in the bureaucracy and in the civil service and our military, and eventually we can get people under subpoena these individuals will be exposed.

AJ: Stanley, their whole operation hinges on us being naïve and not recognizing evil. This is what they got with Hitler and others. People couldn't recognize evil so they continued to repeat succumbing to it. We are recognizing it this time. We are putting our lives, our treasure, our future on the line for freedom because we cannot let these blood-thirsty control freak terrorists capture us and use us and turn us into the empire and have a draft and use us as their slaves to invade the planet. And that's their PNAC plan. Stanley Hilton, I know you've got to get to court. God bless you. I want to thank you for being here with us today. Can we get you back on next week?

SH: Sure, just give me a call.

AJ: God bless you my friend. Any closing comments?

SH: My closing comments would be, I think people ought to just think about the consequence of having someone like Bush in the White House and the danger for the future that these sorts of individuals pose. This is not just a historical event of the past. This is part of the plan and the camera is still rolling. They have an agenda. These individuals are extremely dangerous. They are armed and dangerous. They pose a clear and dangerous threat to every freedom-loving person not only American but in the whole world.

AJ: You are absolutely right Stanley Hilton. They have captured the government. They have not captured the peoples' minds and they are counting on us not facing up to it.

SH: And they are counting on the repressive Patriot Act and threats and chief judges and FBI agents threatening people who are exposing them. That's what they are counting on.

AJ: But you're not backing down are you, my friend.

SH: No, I'm not

AJ: Well, we all stand with you, my brother, and God bless you.

SH: All right. Thank you.

To hear Alex's interview with Stanley Hilton -
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/091204hilton.htm

[Beth]

when people have pre-existing beliefs....they'll see what ever they want.

[Funkaloyd]

it was wired for implosion. the owner admitted it after the initial attacks. it was admittedly demolished, "to be on the safe side". he retracted that statement a few times.
Yes, the NYFD was in on it too!

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."
Seriously, there's more than one way to take that statement. Why do you assume that "pull it" = blow it up?

[Dr Deaf]

Yes, the NYFD was in on it too!


Seriously, there's more than one way to take that statement. Why do you assume that "pull it" = blow it up?


'zactly. so why assume 'pull it' meant anything else? do you suggest they hooked a chain around the base of WTC7 hooked it to a hook and ladder and 'pulled' the motherfucker down in a literal sense? how do you physically remove a buliding without the aid of explosives?

they didn't blow it up, they knocked 'er down. i presume it was wired at the same time as tower 1 and tower 2.

come on, on the order to 'pull it' ...it collapsed in a neat pile on command like tower 1 and tower 2, but there's no other explanation for it's dismantlement?

bump, set -- spike.

[D_Raay]

Originally Posted by EN[i]GMA
Have you read the Popular Mechanics article and the 9/11 Comission Report?

They seem to bebunk most of your claims...

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=66176

With high federal offices being given to the wives, sons and daughters of senior members of the Bush administration, the Hearst Corporation executives that publish Popular Mechanics magazine probably didn't worry about the ethical considerations of hiring a cousin of Michael Chertoff, a former Assistant Attorney General and the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as senior researcher.

But the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics (PM) plumbs new depths of nepotism and Hearst-style "yellow journalism" with its cover story about 9/11. PM's senior researcher, 25-year-old Benjamin Chertoff, authored a propagandistic cover story entitled "Debunking 9/11 Lies" which seeks to discredit all independent 9/11 research that challenges the official version of events.

Hey deaf, do you ever peruse Mike Rivero's website whatreallyhappened.com?

He's a good friend of mine and is always hard at work uncovering all he can about our government. He is of the same mindset as you and has a pretty good following. Here's a link to a piece he wrote about 9/11:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hoax.htmlwebsite? (http://whatreallyhappened.com)website? (http://whatreallyhappened.com)

[Funkaloyd]

why assume 'pull it' meant anything else?

Occam's Razor. Interpreting his statement as "pull the firefighters out and let the building burn" takes less assumptions.

Why did the FDNY try to save the building in the first place? Why did they wait until they thought the fire couldn't be stopped before destroying it?

[D_Raay]

Occam's Razor. Interpreting his statement as "pull the firefighters out and let the building burn" takes less assumptions.

Why did the FDNY try to save the building in the first place? Why did they wait until they thought the fire couldn't be stopped before destroying it?
Like Ace pointed out above, not all were completely privy to said events, rather had their only little job to perform.

[Ali]

9/11 would have required thousands of people knowing what was going on bo compy for it to work. But the Government tells us it was done by 12 people and some sort of shadowy, Arab-funded terror network. It backs this up with the miraculous discovery of the Hijackers' passports in the rubble and a conveniently parked rental car, complete with Arabic flight manuals. What? were they reading up on flight procedure on their way to the airport?!?

I find the conspiracy theorists' stories a bit easier to believe...They said there were drills that morning and exactly what happened, happening - that was the smoke-screen for the stand-down. And then to get out ahead of it, the CIA comes out and said yeah we were running a drill that morning. Now, we've learned that five, possibly six, were confirmed. Five of these - one drill with the exact same thing happening that actually happened, at the exact same time in the morning. That's why NORAD stood down with 24 different blips on the screen. You've said this. You brought this up first. Now, I know you can't get too much into detail but can you tell us how you learned of this?

SH: I have interviewed individuals in NORAD and the Air Force. I personally toured NORAD many years ago around the time that I worked for Dole. I'm very familiar with the operations at Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs, where NORAD is. Individuals that work in NORAD as well as the Air Force have stated this, off the record, but the point is, yes, this was not just five drills but at least 35 drills over at least two months before September 11th. Everything was planned, the exact location

AJ: But five drills that day.

SH: That day, that day, and Bush thought it was a drill. That's the only explanation for why he appeared nonchalant

AJ: We also had NORAD officers and civilian air traffic controllers going, "Is this part of the exercise? Is this a drill?"

SH: Yes.

AJ: On the tapes and in TV interviews, they thought it was, quote, a drill.That I can definitely believe. Not difficult to do, either. Well, I mean look, they say they never heard of a plan to fly planes into buildings - said it all over television - Rice, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft. And then we find out they were running all these drills that morning. Hmm, curiouser and curiouser.

Why doesn't the Bush administration not take this guy to court and debunk these allegations? Why is he being ordered to drop the case?

They've nothing to hide, do they?

[EN[i]GMA]

because the bulk of the american people will buy anything they're told.


So? They could have fooled MORE americans doing it that way AND cause more damage by taking out some surrounding buildings.


it was wired for implosion. the owner admitted it after the initial attacks. it was admittedly demolished, "to be on the safe side". he retracted that statement a few times.

I really would like to see this statement.


someone fucked up, that's what happened.

Argumentum ad ignorantiam


watch footage of the towers falling. you can see perimiter explosives going off -- floor by floor. controlled demolition experts all agree. it was wired and rigged to fall floor by floor, nice and neat

You cannot see any explosives going off. You see dust expelled from the tower as the floor collapses. You see this dust AFTER the initial collapse, so how could it have been explosives?


i don't have time to dig up all the source links etc. i've read a week before the attacks a contract security firm was hired to prepare for the drill that was to take place on or around the 11th.

I'm sure.


remote-con-fucking trol. fly by wire. i think it was raytheon that had developed this technology. i've watch video of a FED EX b727 outfitted with it. i'm pretty sure some of the same technology has been incorportated into the drones that do recon missions in afgan / iraq as well.

So to back up your ludicrous claim you have to make up even MORE unsubstantiated crap?

There's no way to debunk this because you'll just make something else up.

Who put the remote controlls on? When? Do you have any evidence of this? What about the phone calls from inside the plane to the family members?

Those alone completely debunk any argument. And I've heard people say they were placed by actors from call centers! Don't you see the absolutely and ruthlessly absurd lengths conspiricy theorists will go to defend their 'religion'? Their like Christians. When their claims are debunked, Christains revert to 'God did it'--making shit up. When a conspiricy theorist is debunked he says 'someone else did it'-- making shit up.


the people behind it wanted a performance. they quietly celebrated it's brilliance. they knew they had set the stage for a war. wars in the middle east and beyond but more importantly a war on civil liberities right here at home.

Oh yeah. I'm so unfree. In fact, they Federalis will be here any minute after I type this: "Fuck President Bush, the Freemasons, the Illuminati and 11 Galaxies".

Or not.


they debunk the claims of the nuts and the nuts debunk their claims. it just matter which side you're on i suppose.

alternate news sources aren't hard to find. maybe spend a day surfing the nut job sites just to read a different point of view. you might be surprised / horrified what you discover.

What's really quite is funny is out of all those articles, NONE of them bebunk the article claim by claim, they just say "It was antinae on the bottom of the plane!" and "He's the cousin of CIA member!" and all this other HEARSAY.


in all honesty i'm not attempting to gain recruits for my cause. articles like this one should open some eyes, but if they're dismissed as bullshit that doesn't change what i believe. i'm very selective about the articles i post here to avoid flooding the forum. i hope no one is insulted by what i post.

thanks for contributing.

I'm not insulted, I just don't think it makes any sense.

[EN[i]GMA]

But the Government tells us it was done by 12 people and some sort of shadowy, Arab-funded terror network. It backs this up with the miraculous discovery of the Hijackers' passports in the rubble and a conveniently parked rental car, complete with Arabic flight manuals. What? were they reading up on flight procedure on their way to the airport?!?

Can you prove those were planted or are you just arguing from ignorance?

[Ace42]

GMA']
I'm sure.


Like you were sure all swiss men had guns?

Or "sure" in your strictly private sense?

[Qdrop]

i watched 911 unfold via newcasts as it was happening. i've worked in avation for a decade and nothing seemed to make sense with the way the equipment struck the tower. later that afternoon i spoke with aircrews that had diverted from UNITED that were in the gate next to one of the planes that hit the tower. it's obviously not as close as those that were in NYC that day, but hearing their accounts of that day emphasized that something wasn't right.

such as?


i've researched and confirmed timelines of the events. to me the official account of the events with arabs, boxcutters and minimal PIC hours on insignificant equipment that has factory installed aerobatic limitations to guarantee passenger comforts etc etc etc just doesn't add up.

more....details. let's hear it.


i really can't understand the relevance between me not posting my picture on the interent and being an alleged conspiracy theorist.

because, man....that's fuckin wierd. are you really just shy and want to protect you anonymity...or do you think that "certain people are trying to track you down for what you know!"
i'm just saying that it falls in line with the typical paranoia and delusions of grandure that often come with people such as yourself.
shit, i got an uncle that trumps you ten times over with conspiracy theories...
he thinks the new world order is taking over the planet.


i've read a lot since 0911 almost daily. i had ideas of my own that had been confirmed.


when people have pre-existing beliefs....they'll see what ever they want.

(thanks beth)


i've discovered a lot of confirmed viable evidence that back these alleged conspiracies. i'll continue to be a nut job conspiracist and you can continue to live life with blinders on. take your loving spoonfu;l a lil sugar helps the medicine go down.

you believe what you're told. no amount of scientific factual data can lure you from the intended truths you and other americans have been fed.


see, that's the thing. say what you want about my attitude, my arrogance, attention seeking...whatever.
but one thing i have gone to great lengths on, when it comes to serious NON-SUBJECTIVE matters such as creationism vs. evolution, human nature, genetics, ect..is that i use science and objective fact/sources and as my foundation.
check every fuckin post i've made here.
i could run fuckin circles around you in those areas.

when it comes to subjective matters like politics, historical foriegn policy, if acedemia are lazy fuckers....well, hey...that's subjective opinion. there is no right or wrong in most cases.

but you cannot fuckin say that i am an atypical blinded american. i am well informed, well educated...and in case you haven't noticed, EXTREMELY SKEPTICAL.
i hate this current administration and the neo-cons FAR more than i dislike you (i don't even know you)....if theories such as this had any credibility....i would be one the first to jump on board.
they are not credible.....they do not hold up to reason.

[Ace42]

blah

Nude?

[EN[i]GMA]

A controlled implosion is designed to maximise the efficiency of a demolition, allowing you to use the minimum amount of explosive possible.

Clearly, if "it must've taken tons" - then using an uncontrolled explosive detonation would've required prohibitively larger amounts of explosives?

I think you might've 'bebunked' your own argument.

Wait a second, wouldn't the plane's hitting the towers have set of the explosive prematurely? How can you protect explosives from the force of the hit, the blast, and the jet fuel burning?

I don't see how I debunked my own argument. It still would likely have taken tons of explosives, controlled or uncontrolled.


Yes, but not in the way that you think. The more people that are involved as individuals, the bigger it is, the less possible it is for one small person to see the big picture. Every person just sees their little piece of the jigsaw, so to them everything seems normal and reasonable. The guy who gets a pager message from his boss saying the meeting is delayed - to him it is not out of the ordinary. Nor to any of the 300 other people who all had their appointments cancelled on that floor, despite three different businesses (which are in no way connected) having this anomally simultaneously.

I'm not talking about them. There are still thousands of people who got orders that were more than suspect, at least, if this is how it really went down.


You could see how, quite easily, a whole floor of the WTC could be evacuated for bombs to be placed on it without anyone being any the wiser. The boss who makes the call doesn't even have to be in on it - he just relays the message that an "important contract" (with someone whom he will never have to meet in person once the WTC falls down and his business records are all destroyed) has pulled out, or has decided to meet elsewhere.

Sure that concievably COULD happen. But it didn't. You're arguing from ignorance.


The chain can go on and on and on, with each person in it knowing very little, but still doing their one little job perfectly. The pilot on the jet-plane doesn't have to be in on it, and let the hijackers take the plane - procedure instructs them to acquiesse.

This much is true.


With the army smuggling anthrax to Iraq, it is much harder. The US army is under a lot of scrutiny due to war-crimes and the skepticism of various anti-war groups. Furthermore, it is not alone in a coalition, it has little control over the non-army infrastructure, and it is very hard to "plant" several platoons of standard army regulars without having at least a few "odd men out."

Not really. They could tell their men a little as well. Tell them to carry those boxes to that bunker. Maybe have some CIA guys do it or whatever. 'Find' this cache a few weeks later and voila, instant justification.


Furthermore, WMDs were NOT necessary anyway - as is evidenced by Dubbyah's re-election. No need to go to that expense in the first place. They knew that once it was done and the back-patting could begin, the rights and wrongs of it would melt away.

We can see it on this very board from time to time. Numerous otherwise reasonable posters have said "Ok ok, enough already. We know it is wrong, but that's in the past, let's talk about solutions and what to do NOW!"

That in itself prevents any retrospective action.


But this would have provided instant justification. If Iraq had tons of anthrax or whatever, many people would say "Look, they were a threat".

Hell, they could have tied Iraq to the Florida anthrax scare or something.

[EN[i]GMA]

Like you were sure all swiss men had guns?

Or "sure" in your strictly private sense?

Sure in my sarcastic sense.

[Qdrop]

Nude?

clothed?

[Qdrop]

GMA']
Don't you see the absolutely and ruthlessly absurd lengths conspiricy theorists will go to defend their 'religion'? Their like Christians. When their claims are debunked, Christains revert to 'God did it'--making shit up. When a conspiricy theorist is debunked he says 'someone else did it'-- making shit up.

(lb)

[Ace42]

GMA']Wait a second, wouldn't the plane's hitting the towers have set of the explosive prematurely? How can you protect explosives from the force of the hit, the blast, and the jet fuel burning?

If you had any knowledge of modern high explosives, you'd not be asking that. HE components can have a variety of exclusive detonation agents, including but not limited to (exclusively) - percussive effect, electricity, heat, resonance, radioactivity, oxidant inititiation.

All of these can be fine tuned to be redundant unless triggered by the precise intentional detonator.

I don't see how I debunked my own argument. It still would likely have taken tons of explosives, controlled or uncontrolled.

Coming from the person with no knowledge of HE detonation mechanisms. Meanwhile people with actual real life experience are constructing theories which you are dismissing.

I'm not talking about them. There are still thousands of people who got orders that were more than suspect, at least, if this is how it really went down.

So it was so badly organsied that it is impossible that a well-organised government coverup (which is the only cover-up the government would attempt) could achieve?

And you can't see the hole in that?

Sure that concievably COULD happen. But it didn't. You're arguing from ignorance.

And 100% of the males in Switzerland own guns...


Not really. They could tell their men a little as well. Tell them to carry those boxes to that bunker. Maybe have some CIA guys do it or whatever. 'Find' this cache a few weeks later and voila, instant justification.

What a surprise. When it suits his argument, governments cover-ups are easy, despite the logistics. When it "bebunks" his argument, they are symptomatic of paranoics...

[Ace42]

(lb)

You are such a man-beast.

[EN[i]GMA]

If you had any knowledge of modern high explosives, you'd not be asking that. HE components can have a variety of exclusive detonation agents, including but not limited to (exclusively) - percussive effect, electricity, heat, resonance, radioactivity, oxidant inititiation.

All of these can be fine tuned to be redundant unless triggered by the precise intentional detonator.

Honestly, my modern high-explosives knowledge is lacking.



Coming from the person with no knowledge of HE detonation mechanisms. Meanwhile people with actual real life experience are constructing theories which you are dismissing.

Yeah, the real pros are writing articles for Rense.com ...

Real professionals are also on the side of the 'the man'.

The Popular Mechanics article sourced a demolitions expert.


So it was so badly organsied that it is impossible that a well-organised government coverup (which is the only cover-up the government would attempt) could achieve?

And you can't see the hole in that?

You overestimate the government.


And 100% of the males in Switzerland own guns...

Yawn.


What a surprise. When it suits his argument, governments cover-ups are easy, despite the logistics. When it "bebunks" his argument, they are symptomatic of paranoics...

Not at all.

Did you even read my post? I was postulating, bullshiting, whatever you want to call it.

I was saying that if the government did do 9/11 (Which it didn't), why didn't it plant anthrax or something?

It just doesn't make sense. Why would the government use an elaborate hoax to get us into the war but not one to defend it's decision?

[Qdrop]

You are such a man-beast.

where is this coming from?

why are you hating on me all of the sudden?

[Ace42]

where is this coming from?

why are you hating on me all of the sudden?

Heh, culture clash. Here a man-beast is more of a mouthful. If you catch my drift...

[EN[i]GMA]

Q, I think he's hitting on you.

[Ace42]

GMA']Q, I think he's hitting on you.

Envy is a deadly sin. Or something. Ask (aks) racerstang for details.

Also CC: Sodomy

[ASsman]

I guess it's deadly because of AIDS!

[Qdrop]

this thread just got really wierd.



Ace: i get it.

but sorry, no pics will be sent. ;)



also, ace: you seem to be implying that you believe in, or parts, of this theory of "bush did it".
do you?

[bb_bboy]

Has anyone spent much time on the cooperative research site? I looked at it quite a while ago and haven't been determined enough to read through the whole timeline, but it is very thorough in content and references.

Check it out here:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline

It is not as much a conspiracy theory as it is a potential reference for conspiracy theorists. Oh what a tangled web we weave...

[Qdrop]

i guess what bugs me, and SHOULD bug (and tip off everyone else) is that these conspiracy nuts like Deaf always think that EVERYTHING HAPPENS FOR A REASON-- A DEEP DIABOLICAL REASON.

bush wins the election, a tsunami hits, earthquakes, JFK gets assinated, 9/11, anthrax scare, school shootings, UFO sightings, ect ect...
according to people like Deaf, they all have be tied to something bigger....they must all have been devised on a grand scale....by some demonized higher organization that few know about....all while the sheeple sleep.

nothing just happens in thier world....it's all planned...."the answers are all around you.....it's all under control...open your eyes!!"

it gets so redundant.....you can only cry wolf so many times before you're labeled paranoid and you trash the credibililty of any other similar theories on future events.

it's really not the "facts" or the search for the "truth" that drives these people.....
it's self-serving ego. they want to be important....to be part of something important....they want to beleive in something bigger.....
it gives them meaning.....drive...


i mean WTF, Deaf? you're stating that you think bush and the neo-cons orchestrated 9/11!
how can you not expect me and others to laugh at you?
how can you be offended or get pissed at me!?


conspiracy theorist: "the sky is FALLNG!!"

man: *looks up* "no it's not....."

conspiracy theorist: "YOU FUCKING BLIND SHEEP! WAKE UP!!"

[Beth]

he's not a conspiracy nut -- he's a skeptic. he doesn't believe everything the government puts out there, and with good reason; our government lies.

as for why he doesn't post his face, he has. once. people (myself included) put way too much information about themselves out there. there are lots of people with bad intentions who scour for information, be it for identify theft, stalking purposes, etc. and why do you need to see his face anyway? is that going to somehow make him more credible to you? no, it won't. people he's close to know what he looks like, and that's all the people who really need to know.

[Qdrop]

he's not a conspiracy nut -- he's a skeptic.

that doesn't jive.
he doesn't seem to be the slightest bit skeptical about theories such as this one (which require the MOST skepticism).

a pretty fundamental technique of skeptics is the use of Occams's Razor (as FunkLoyd alluded to)......
funny how conspiracy nuts alway gloss over that.

trust me, i would LOVE for this to be proven true....so we could roast Bush and his neo-cons in the flames....and use the momentum to purge more rats from the political sewer....

but this is about as likely as aliens crashing in a new mexico desert in 1947...


as for why he doesn't post his face, he has. once. people (myself included) put way too much information about themselves out there. there are lots of people with bad intentions who scour for information, be it for identify theft, stalking purposes, etc. and why do you need to see his face anyway? is that going to somehow make him more credible to you? no, it won't. people he's close to know what he looks like, and that's all the people who really need to know.
whatever....it's none of my business really (nor do i give a shit)....i just never saw someone go to such lengths to keep his face of the net.
it's one thing not to post one....another to actually go in and have it blocked out of each photo.....
it shows a tad bit of paranioa to me....to go along with the conspiracy shit.

[D_Raay]

trust me, i would LOVE for this to be proven true....so we could roast Bush and his neo-cons in the flames....and use the momentum to purge more rats from the political sewer....

No you wouldn't.

According to our founding fathers and the Constitution of the United States, we are supposed to be the constituents of the goverment. Not the other way around. This country should be full of skeptics. Especially with all the holes in this 9/11 story. Calling everyone a conspiracy theorist or a nut is disingenuous.
When an event such as 9/11 happens that leads to us invading a sovereign nation and causing countless lives in the process, we should not be skeptical about obvious shortcomings or faults in the tale of events that got us there?
Bullocks. The only reasonable people on this board are the ones who question 9/11. There's too much left unanswered or covered up.

[EN[i]GMA]

No you wouldn't.

According to our founding fathers and the Constitution of the United States, we are supposed to be the constituents of the goverment. Not the other way around. This country should be full of skeptics. Especially with all the holes in this 9/11 story. Calling everyone a conspiracy theorist or a nut is disingenuous.
When an event such as 9/11 happens that leads to us invading a sovereign nation and causing countless lives in the process, we should not be skeptical about obvious shortcomings or faults in the tale of events that got us there?
Bullocks. The only reasonable people on this board are the ones who question 9/11. There's too much left unanswered or covered up.

There are a lot of questions, a lot of questions that haven't been sufficiently answered.

Hell, the govervnment very likely is hiding something.

But with all that being said, it was still some Muslim guys who flew those planes into those buildings on September 11th for Osama bin Ladin.

But when I hear talk of the New World Order, and the Illumaniti, and the Masons and all that shit, I just have to wonder about the mental faculties of the purveyors of these 'theories'.

[EN[i]GMA]

And why do it in the first place?

Power? They're already the most powerful men in the world, why risk anything?

Money? They have more money than they know what to do with.

Oil? Why do they care about oil? They'll die before it comes a problem.

None of the motives are good enough. Why do they want to enslave the human race? Just because their evil? This isn't a fucking comic book, people have motives.

Enslaving the human race isn't going to do shit for the neo-cons.

Do you analyze anything?

Why don't these people just vote themselves emperor or something, if their ultimate plan is so malevalent?

[Qdrop]

^preach on, enigma...

you're taking the words out of my mouth before i can type em.

[Qdrop]

No you wouldn't.

why do always have to say shit like that?

is it still easier to paint me a GOP conservative so you can dismiss and marginalize me?

broken record.


According to our founding fathers and the Constitution of the United States, we are supposed to be the constituents of the goverment. Not the other way around. This country should be full of skeptics. Especially with all the holes in this 9/11 story. Calling everyone a conspiracy theorist or a nut is disingenuous.
When an event such as 9/11 happens that leads to us invading a sovereign nation and causing countless lives in the process, we should not be skeptical about obvious shortcomings or faults in the tale of events that got us there?
Bullocks. The only reasonable people on this board are the ones who question 9/11. There's too much left unanswered or covered up.

yeah, obviously we were lied to.
the WMD's, the iraq-alqueda connection....and there's more.

we are aware of these things.

but that does not require me to take the leap into "whodunnit world" and start claiming the US fabricated the whole thing from the start.

[D_Raay]

yeah, obviously we were lied to.

Hehe, you said it yourself. WE WERE LIED TO.

Why would they do that? Why would they "risk" that? Why are they not being held accountable? It's not like they accidentally spilled the milk. They lied and killed people. And got Americans killed. They claimed we would be safer. We are, in fact, NOT safer. They have an agenda. The fossil fuels left in this world are finite and they know that all too well. I mean come on we are alot smarter than they give us credit for, but at the same time they know we can never really do anything about it. Money makes the world go round, and the ones who hoard it are the real power, and their thirst for it never is quenched.

I will align with the "conspiracy theorists" on this one. Not that I am satisfied with the lot of it, but because a reasonable person would do so.

[Qdrop]

Hehe, you said it yourself. WE WERE LIED TO.

yeah, but you're taking that and running with it.
you are using it as a spring board to justify any crazy theory that puts the most blaim where you want it.

if your wife lies to you about how much money is in her checking account, it doesn't mean she's fucking the milkman too.


Why would they do that? Why would they "risk" that?

because....

They have an agenda. The fossil fuels left in this world are finite and they know that all too well.






Why are they not being held accountable?

i'm with you on that.....
it's a fuckin travesty.


they took full advantage of a disgusting act of terrorism by some al-queda offiliates (from saudi arabia).

Bin Laden ordered and planned the attack.

our tragically pathetic intelligence and President failed to ring enough alarms and take intitail response before 9/11.
they fucked up.

the neo-cons saw an oppurtunity to act on thier "OIL and forced democracy from the middle east" agenda and focused on Afganastan (who's Taliban trained al-queda operatives and was protecting Bin Laden). When the Taliban didn't give up bin laden....the neo-cons went in and did their thing.
perfect.
they made it too easy for the neo-cons.

the neo-cons continued to milk 9/11 by setting the stage for the "axis of evil" theory.

first up- Iraq.

the neo-cons agenda really hinged on that place.
what a fuckin oppurtunity....

problem was, Iraq had no real link with Al-queda... like Afganastan.
fuck it, make it up...fabricate it.
ride the 9/11 sentiment and patriotism....use FoxNews to the fullest.

need more.
need to make Saddam a viable threat to the US.
but he wasn't.
fuck it, make it up...fabricate it. WMD's are there....really.
ride the 9/11 sentiment and patriotism....use FoxNews to the fullest.

and ride on saddam with his nasty past (which was true...YAY!)

go to war....sloppily.
lie to the public about our progress.
not fast enough progress?
fuck it, make it up...fabricate it.
ride the 9/11 sentiment and patriotism....use FoxNews to the fullest.

now, the shit slowly starts to hit the fan....
what now?

can we get enough national support to go after these neo con fuckers before they try and repeat all of this with Iran?

THAT'S the deal, D....
that's the stank on it....



I will align with the "conspiracy theorists" on this one. Not that I am satisfied with the lot of it, but because a reasonable person would do so.
what about the Tsunami machine that Deaf posted about earlier?
you believe that too.?
why not?

[Beth]

it's one thing not to post one....another to actually go in and have it blocked out of each photo.....
um, i did that. i could have cropped him out of the photos, but i chose not to.

[Funkaloyd]

GMA]Their like Christians. When their claims are debunked, Christains revert to 'God did it'--making shit up. When a conspiricy theorist is debunked he says 'someone else did it'-- making shit up.

There are other correlations too. After the tsunami, many Muslims were saying "this is a punishment from God." I think that one of the main reasons religion has survived through the ages (despite the introduction of logic, Socratic method, and scientific method) is because humans want to understand tragedy, and even pretend that they can control it. A polytheist would have blamed an evil god, which is pretty much what some conspiracy theorists did.

[EN[i]GMA]

There are other correlations too. After the tsunami, many Muslims were saying "this is a punishment from God." I think that one of the main reasons religion has survived through the ages (despite the introduction of logic, Socratic method, and scientific method) is because humans want to understand tragedy, and even pretend that they can control it. A polytheist would have blamed an evil god, which is pretty much what some conspiracy theorists did.

Very true.

A chaotic world is scarier to people than an evil world, where the evil is SOMETHING. Chaos is just something humans cannot understand at all. We need and crave order.

Take chaos theory or quantam mechanics for instance. Even Einstein couldn't come to grips with a chaotic Universe. "God does not play dice" was his statement.

Some arab guys 6,000 miles away killing for zealous reasons is something outside of our comprehension, but a nice evil government is something we're accustomed to via tv, books, and history.

We KNOW what evil governments are like, we can associate them with some objects in our mind and we can do something about it.

It's empowering in a totally pitiful way to believe in theories that place everything at the feet of some malavalent entity, it's much easier than trying to figure out a world where a bunch of shit happens for no apparent reason.

[D_Raay]

I'm totally with you Q on everything you said, save for the part about the neo-cons just happening into this equation by dumb luck.

Now, I believe I said that I don't buy all the theories that are out there. That doesn't mean that I don't consider them though as any rational person would. I think the scope of the whole deal is, as of yet, unbeknownst to us all. Someone said before we would probably know alot more in 10 years. My wager would be layed on that. Whenever your ready to start the revolution Q I am right here waiting.

[Ace42]

also, ace: you seem to be implying that you believe in, or parts, of this theory of "bush did it".
do you?

No, but I believe that there was more to it than meets the eye. And I definitly believe that the conspiracy is "more plausible" that a lot of dismissives credit it.

Really I'm just making sure everyone who is critical of the theories is so for valid reasons.

[El Nino]

Has anyone spent much time on the cooperative research site? I looked at it quite a while ago and haven't been determined enough to read through the whole timeline, but it is very thorough in content and references.

Check it out here:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline

It is not as much a conspiracy theory as it is a potential reference for conspiracy theorists. Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Right on. I have read the entire timeline. It only refrences mainstream sources so people can't easily dismiss it as "conspiracy theroy". Paul Thompson did a terrific job compiling the 1300+ articles that make up the timeline. Former terrorism czar Richard Clarke calls the timeline required reading. I think that anyone who wants to argue on the 9/11 subject with any degree of authority (especially the conspiracy skeptics) should read it.
It does not try to lead you to conclusions, rather it gives you a mountian of evidence from which you can draw your own. all involved in this thread should read it, bump the post when everyone has done their homework and resume the discussion. It would be interesting to see where people's heads are at then. props to bb_bboy.

[D_Raay]

Has anyone spent much time on the cooperative research site? I looked at it quite a while ago and haven't been determined enough to read through the whole timeline, but it is very thorough in content and references.

Check it out here:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline

It is not as much a conspiracy theory as it is a potential reference for conspiracy theorists. Oh what a tangled web we weave...
I am overwhelmed... Anyone who hasn't read this definitely should. It will take you a couple of hours , but it is well worth it. Thanks B

[ericg]

Props to Dr Deaf and bb bboy for turning this out, and tuning it up....!!! I just wanted to take a moment to thank them for the worthwhile...

[Ali]

GMA']There are a lot of questions, a lot of questions that haven't been sufficiently answered.

Hell, the govervnment very likely is hiding something.

But with all that being said, it was still some Muslim guys who flew those planes into those buildings on September 11th for Osama bin Ladin.

But when I hear talk of the New World Order, and the Illumaniti, and the Masons and all that shit, I just have to wonder about the mental faculties of the purveyors of these 'theories'.And how do you know it wasn't made to look as if the Evil Muslims did it? Do you really believe that the people who flew those planes with such precision needed to read up on how to fly the planes on the way to the airport and leave it all in a hired car, conveniently parked there? It's not hard to get a bunch of Arabic guys to sign up for flight school and act all suspicious right before the event. Don't forget who Osama used to work for and where is he now? Why is there so little success in finding him and so little effort being made? I'll tell you why, it's because he's being used to scare you into letting the Bush administration do whatever the fuck it wants. Why did the Taliban and Saddam get nailed for 9/11, instead of the guy who "really" did it? There's no Illuminati, Lizard Men or Masons involved, just a bunch of corporate-sponsored Greedheads wanting power at all costs. They've considered this in the past. (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/) Please, please read the linked .pdf and tell me it's fake. Please tell me that your government wouldn't consider killing U.S. civilians in order to have an excuse for war.

I ask you again. Why does the Bush Administration take this Stanley Hilton nutter to court and prove once and for all that he's a fake telling lies? Why did they go to such lengths to get him to drop the case, rather than take him on and prove their innocence. What has happened to the case? Why was it thrown out?

Why do you find it so hard to believe that your government would do such a thing. They had everything to gain for it and it gave them immense power, both in the US and internationally. How do you explain the constant drilling for exactly such an event and the strange occurrance of the actual event right in the middle of the drilling, catching everybody by suprise. I remember the Bushies claiming they never expected such a thing, why the drilling? There is no ways in hell that Bin Laden could have orchestrated the drilling and if independent hijackers had really taken control of those aircraft and flown them off-course for as long as they had, the sky would have been black with F-16's screaming in at full throttle to intercept them. Yes, I know that one of the planes did get shot down, but they had to make it look as if they did something!

This whole thing STINKS! It stank from the moment it happened. I never believed that terrorists could pull of such an elaborate stunt. A bomb, maybe, hijacking one or two planes, perhaps, it's been done before. But there is no ways that some Arabs who had a few hours on simulators could perform the manevours (http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/aerobatics.html) required to hit those towers and definitely not the Pentagon! And how do you explain the drills?

I am waiting to see what you come up with next to keep your head buried in the sand.

[DroppinScience]

i mean, Deaf....you won't even let Beth show your face on this website....it has to covered up...
where does this paranoia and conspiracy theory complex come from? are your parents, siblings, friends like this?

Even though Deaf has his face covered up, it's not that hard to see what he looks like. Between the immensely long and stuff, I have become convinced that Deaf was... MY JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE TEACHER!!!! :eek:

[Funkaloyd]

Motive and capacity don't imply guilt.

Besides, Operation Northwoods was more of a Wag the Dog style propaganda campaign than an actual terrorist plot. Illegal and sick, sure, but nothing like what you suggest happened on 9/11.

[D_Raay]

Motive and capacity don't imply guilt.

Besides, Operation Northwoods was more of a Wag the Dog style propaganda campaign than an actual terrorist plot. Illegal and sick, sure, but nothing like what you suggest happened on 9/11.
Or is it just Northwoods on a much larger scale? I live in Virginia, and the climate of fear that the snipers created around here were most effective...

[D_Raay]

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plan, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.

The idea may actually have originated with President Eisenhower in the last days of his administration. With the Cold War hotter than ever and the recent U-2 scandal fresh in the public's memory, the old general wanted to go out with a win. He wanted desperately to invade Cuba in the weeks leading up to Kennedy's inauguration; indeed, on January 3 he told Lemnitzer and other aides in his Cabinet Room that he would move against Castro before the inauguration if only the Cubans gave him a really good excuse. Then, with time growing short, Eisenhower floated an idea. If Castro failed to provide that excuse, perhaps, he said, the United States "could think of manufacturing something that would be generally acceptable." What he was suggesting was a pretext a bombing, an attack, an act of sabotage carried out secretly against the United States by the United States. Its purpose would be to justify the launching of a war. It was a dangerous suggestion by a desperate president.

Sounds pretty familiar...

[Funkaloyd]

Or is it just Northwoods on a much larger scale?
The significant difference is that the "incidents" planned for Operation Northwoods would never have killed any Americans.

[DroppinScience]

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plan, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.

The idea may actually have originated with President Eisenhower in the last days of his administration. With the Cold War hotter than ever and the recent U-2 scandal fresh in the public's memory, the old general wanted to go out with a win. He wanted desperately to invade Cuba in the weeks leading up to Kennedy's inauguration; indeed, on January 3 he told Lemnitzer and other aides in his Cabinet Room that he would move against Castro before the inauguration if only the Cubans gave him a really good excuse. Then, with time growing short, Eisenhower floated an idea. If Castro failed to provide that excuse, perhaps, he said, the United States "could think of manufacturing something that would be generally acceptable." What he was suggesting was a pretext a bombing, an attack, an act of sabotage carried out secretly against the United States by the United States. Its purpose would be to justify the launching of a war. It was a dangerous suggestion by a desperate president.

Sounds pretty familiar...

And why didn't Eisenhower go through with this idea?

Besides wasn't Operation Northwoods thought up during Kennedy? And didn't McNamara say no to the idea?

[DroppinScience]

Ah yes... Wikipedia has got it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Operation Northwoods was a document drafted in 1962 by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and presented to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara (and possibly President John F. Kennedy himself) on March 13, 1962. Long believed to be residing in the imagination of conspiracy theorists, the document was declassified in recent years by the Freedom of Information Act.

Content

The document was drafted with the intent of getting public support for an invasion of Cuba. The Joint Chiefs of Staff argued that the US population would only support military intervention in Cuba in the event of provocative, aggressive action by the island nation against American soldiers, American civilians or Cuban refugees and Cubans in exile. The document frequently refers to staging fake attacks with fake victims, but in other cases does not specify whether the attacks should be fake or real, and for some recommended attacks explicitly notes that they could be real. Had Operation Northwoods been carried out, it would likely have required the coordinative efforts of the Central Intelligence Agency, which is mentioned several times.

Some of the recommendations of Operation Northwoods proposed by the Joint Chiefs were:

* Using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba.
* Start false rumors about Cuba by using clandestine radios.
* Stage mock attacks, sabotages and riots and blame it on Cuban forces
* Sink an American ship at the Guantanamo Bay American military base - reminiscent of the USS Maine incident at Havana in 1898, which started the Spanish-American War - or destroy American aircraft and blame it on Cuban forces. (The document refers to unmanned drones, fake funerals etc.)
* "Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type [sic] planes would be useful as complementary actions."
* Destroy a fake commercial aircraft supposedly full of "college students off on a holiday" (really an unmanned drone)
* Stage a "terror campaign", including the "real or simulated" sinking of Cuban refugees:

"We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute [sic] to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized."

[edit]

Reaction

It has been reported that John F. Kennedy personally rejected the proposal, but no official record of this exists. What is known for certain is that Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara examined and rejected the proposal, and that the President removed General Lyman Lemnitzer as Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff shortly afterward. The continuing press against Cuba by internal elements of the U.S. military and intelligence community (the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion, etc.) prompted President John F. Kennedy to attempt to rein in a burgeoning military-industrial complex that was intent on proactive, aggressive action against Communism around the globe. After the Bay of Pigs disaster, John F. Kennedy fired then CIA director Allen W. Dulles, Deputy Director Charles P. Cabell and Deputy Director Richard Bissell and turned his attention towards Vietnam.

Kennedy also took steps to bring discipline to the CIA's Cold War and paramilitary operations by drafting a National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) which called for the shift of Cold War operations to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and The Pentagon as well as a major change in the role of the CIA to exclusively deal in intelligence gathering.

The Eisenhower thing sounds ludicrous too. Afterall, he warned against the military industrial complex. Not to mention he was vehemently against pre-emptive wars. Ike was truly the last good Republican president.

[D_Raay]

The significant difference is that the "incidents" planned for Operation Northwoods would never have killed any Americans.
called for innocent people to be shot on American streets;
Have you read it?

It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.' See Operations Northwoods page 10, http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-10.htm

A "Remember the Maine" incident could be arranged in several forms: a. We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba." See Operations Northwoods page 8, http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-8.htm

There is a phrase in the text above that could be used to sum up to the morality of Northwoods as a whole: "The only drawback to this scheme appears to be security." Thus the Joint Chiefs recommended that:

"b. This paper NOT be forwarded to commanders of unified or specified commands. c. This paper NOT be forwarded to US officers assigned to NATO activities. d. This paper NOT be forwarded to the Chairman, US Delegation, United Nations Military Staff Committee." See Operations Northwoods page 3, http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-3.htm


So, in not notifying any commanders or officers, your point is invalid.

[D_Raay]

Ah yes... Wikipedia has got it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods



The Eisenhower thing sounds ludicrous too. Afterall, he warned against the military industrial complex. Not to mention he was vehemently against pre-emptive wars. Ike was truly the last good Republican president.
The idea was orchestrated by Lemnitzer, head of the joint chiefs of staff, an Eisenhower appointee...

[Ali]

The significant difference is that the "incidents" planned for Operation Northwoods would never have killed any Americans.Ah, well, that's OK then...[/sarcasm]

Northwoods was not a conspiracy theory, it was conspiracy FACT. If the paper you have seen had never been declassified then you'd be calling it another conspiracy theory and demanding proof.

There are too many similarities between Northwoods and 9/11 for it to be dismissed. The US govt was prepared to kill innocent people and make it look like the Cubans did it in order to have an excuse for war.

Why are you so sure they'd not try it again?

Will you still think it's a theory when the 9/11 documents are declassified.

Why was Stanley Hilton's case thrown out?

[Funkaloyd]

Yes, I have read it.

You're quoting out of context. In the case of the planned commercial airliner, for example, it goes on to give a detailed plan for how a plane with actors will be switched for a drone.

[Qdrop]

Will you still think it's a theory when the 9/11 documents are declassified.



if the conspiracy theory is correct, those documents would never be seen in the light of day....they would have been destroyed by now.

evidence that Bush and the neo cons orchestrated an attack on thousands of innocent americans to wage an illegal war would cause the complete collapse of the GOP, if not the american gov't.....

our country and Bush would historically be on par with Nazi germany and Hitler....and would demonized as such for decades.

there would be war crime trials of all those involved.....

"shit storm" wouldn't do it justice.

even if it was true.....it would never be publically revealed.....

[Ali]

Yes, I have read it.

You're quoting out of context. In the case of the planned commercial airliner, for example, it goes on to give a detailed plan for how a plane with actors will be switched for a drone.IT WAS STILL A PLAN TO START A WAR BASED ON BLAMING ANOTHER COUNTRY FOR A CONCOCTED INCIDENT!

Jeezas! Why are you so sure that this wasn't done by the government. What concrete, solid PROOF do you have that it was done by Arab Terrorists, besides what the Government has told you?

Who ever did this wanted a reason to wage war. Do you believe that Saddam Hussein helped Al Queda do it? You should. This is what you've been told and have been shown 'evidence', for: arabs enrolling at flight schools, (getting drunk in local bars!!!!! these guys were supposedly going to kill themselves for Allah and they go and commit a sin which pretty much fucks up any chance of them ever getting into paradise :eek: ) arabic flight manuals in rental cars, intact passports from air crashes which incinerated one of the mightiest buildings on the earth - the hijackers were flying the plane, weren't they, they were at the front, the point of impact... and yet their passports are 'found' in the rubble and Afghanistan is invaded on the basis of this. Bull fukn shit. Anybody with even half a brain can tell this is a setup and you belive what you were told by Uncle Sam?!? You are not stupid. Why do you believe what you're being told by an organisation famous for deceit?

[Ali]

[QUOTE=Qdrop].....evidence that Bush and the neo cons orchestrated an attack on thousands of innocent americans to wage an illegal war would cause the complete collapse of the GOP, if not the american gov't.....

........our country and Bush would historically be on par with Nazi germany and Hitler....and would demonized as such for decades...........
QUOTE]That would be swell.................

[D_Raay]

if the conspiracy theory is correct, those documents would never be seen in the light of day....they would have been destroyed by now.

evidence that Bush and the neo cons orchestrated an attack on thousands of innocent americans to wage an illegal war would cause the complete collapse of the GOP, if not the american gov't.....

our country and Bush would historically be on par with Nazi germany and Hitler....and would demonized as such for decades.

there would be war crime trials of all those involved.....

"shit storm" wouldn't do it justice.

even if it was true.....it would never be publically revealed.....
What would you suggest they do? Prosecute a bunch of dead guys? Northwoods wasn't released to the public until they absolutely had to. Over 40 years ago this document was written.

[D_Raay]

Yes, I have read it.

You're quoting out of context. In the case of the planned commercial airliner, for example, it goes on to give a detailed plan for how a plane with actors will be switched for a drone.
So this somehow changes the fact that they were willing to sacrifice innocent lives to achieve their agenda. You are not arguing a valid point. And it IS similar to 9/11, not to mention the Spanish-American war.

[Qdrop]

What would you suggest they do? Prosecute a bunch of dead guys? Northwoods wasn't released to the public until they absolutely had to. Over 40 years ago this document was written.

think it would take that long for such documents to resurface?
why would they ever resurface? why would they be kept at all?
what would be the point?
unless it was an accident.

[Funkaloyd]

So this somehow changes the fact that they were willing to sacrifice innocent lives to achieve their agenda. You are not arguing a valid point. And it IS similar to 9/11, not to mention the Spanish-American war.

I just think it's a significant difference that they were willing to sacrifice innocent foreign lives for their agenda (which is much safer politically), and that they were lying to justify killing, not killing to justify killing.

There are better (http://eng.terror99.ru/) examples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair) out there.

[D_Raay]

I just think it's a significant difference that they were willing to sacrifice innocent foreign lives for their agenda (which is much safer politically), and that they were lying to justify killing, not killing to justify killing.

There are better (http://eng.terror99.ru/) examples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair) out there.
I don't see much of a difference except fortuitousness in one particular example, and not so lucky in another.

[Ali]

There are better (http://eng.terror99.ru/) examples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair) out there. Remember the Urban Movers? (http://ww1.sundayherald.com/37707) What was that all about, then? Didn't Israel try to warn the US that 9/11 was being planned? Why were they ignored?

[D_Raay]

You know, also with this Northwood plan, it met approval by the Joint Chiefs. It wasn't until it got to McNamara, and possibly Kennedy himself, that it was rejected. In todays' day and age that would mean Rumsfeld and Dubbya. Scary thought...

[Jasonik]

Oh and stopping one "loon", as you put it, wouldn't really be necessary if he is perceived as a loon now would it?

SH: I did an interview with you, Alex, back in March of 2003, about a year and a half ago, and literally two weeks after that, I was contacted by the emissary of the chief judge of the federal court where I have the lawsuit. And I was warned not to publicize it but to keep it quiet and threatened with discipline. And it remained quiet until a couple of months ago and then I got on the air on some programs and some publicity and July 1st, I was threatened directly by the chief judge here, threatened with court discipline. This particular judge has been circulating communiqués to the other federal judges seeking anything negative she can get against me to try and discipline me after I've been on the court here for 30 years with no disciplinary problems at all. This is suddenly happening. And her assistants who are on the committee of the court met with me on July 1st in Palo Alto, California, and threatened me directly. They handed me a copy of the lawsuit and said that the judge wants me to dismiss this. What's this? She doesn't like the content of it. This is politically incorrect. This is outside the norm. I said I represented more than 400 plaintiffs, how am I going to dismiss this case? And they threatened me directly and they said, "the next time you'll be disciplined." And also they've threatened me not to go public, etc. And this is just outrageous.

AJ: It's all color of law. No direct orders, just all in your face.

Occam's Razor. Interpreting his statement as "pull the firefighters out and let the building burn" takes less assumptions.

Why doesn't the Bush administration not take this guy to court and debunk these allegations? Why is he being ordered to drop the case?

So it was so badly organsied that it is impossible that a well-organised government coverup (which is the only cover-up the government would attempt) could achieve?

AJ: Absolutely and now it has come out - five separate drills of flying hijacked jets into buildings that morning - which you told us about before it even broke in the Associated Press. They were trying to get out ahead of you. You talked about how you interviewed military people who were told it was a drill that morning. Then to get out ahead of that, the news finally reported on it.

SH: Well, yeah, I think they have an agenda. They have contingency plans. I think they are laying low now because there are an increasing number of people, like myself, who are openly challenging them and accusing them of criminal conduct. I think they would have done it again if we had not spoken up. I think they're planning, what they would like to do is silence any dissenters. That's why we are trying to get the Patriot Act declared unconstitutional in this lawsuit also.


AJ: Let's talk about polls. In the beginning a patriot is a scarce man, hated and feared, but in time when his cause succeeds, the timid join him, because then it costs nothing to be a patriot. You are one of those guys who hit the barbwire for us, or figuratively jumped on the hand grenade for America. But when you've got a Zogby poll, who is highly respected, half of New Yorkers believe that the government was involved. When you have a Canadian poll, 63% on average believe that the U.S. government was involved. And some groups, as high as 76% in polls believe the government was involved. European polls, two- thirds show the same thing. We have German defense ministers and technology ministers and another member of their government now, three of them going public, known conservatives, and progressives. You have an environment minister, Michael Meacher, saying that if they didn't do it, they sure as hell knew what was going on. Look, if anybody who is a thinking person looks at the evidence, their official story is impossible. Then you investigate and they are involved in it. Comments to this massive awakening and what's happening.



A man breaking his journey between one place and another at a third place of no name, character, population or significance, sees a unicorn cross his path and disappear. That in itself is startling, but there are precedents for mystical encounters of various kinds or, to be less extreme, a choice of persuasion to put it down to fancy; until - 'My God,' says a second man, 'I must be dreaming, I thought I saw a unicorn.' At which point, a dimension is added that makes the experience as alarming as it will ever be. A third witness, you understand, adds no further dimension but only spreads it thinner, and a fourth thinner still, and the more witnesses there are the thinner it gets and the more reasonable it becomes until it is as thin as reality, the name we give to common experience... 'Look, look!' recites the crowd. 'A horse with an arrow in its forehead! It must have been mistaken for a deer.'
- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildernstern Are Dead

this thread just got really wierd.

I am overwhelmed...

...even if it was true.....it would never be publically revealed.....

You're quoting out of context.

you're taking the words out of my mouth before i can type em.

Heh, culture clash...If you catch my drift...

[ericg]

Dope. Finally, a clever, well-put together summed up read... nice. Does it click for anybody, and are you willing and able to be as conscious in your day to day lives... or is this going to take more time... I guess you'll be wanting a lifetime to figure it all out... Don't miss any details.. or... correlations to get off parsing about...!

No, I suppose I am glad on some level that you're here.. deliberating... for lack of a better word... Better than.. Plus, the wine is helping.