Before the 9/11 Conspiracies, There Was the Oklahoma Bombing
As OWN the NWO posted yesterday, Matt Taibbi is at it again.
Like a little kid who can't stop wiggling a loose tooth or stop picking at a scab, Taibbi is back, taking pot shots at Nico Haupt, and bravely setting up a handful of strawmen to decisively tackle. The ones he can't tackle, like the collapse of WTC7, he mocks.
The best part of the Alternet post is actually the comments area below his article (which was originally written for Rolling Stone). Try reading them sometime, Taibbi, you might actually learn something.
A hardcore Sixteen Percenter to the bitter end, Taibbi offers the official story a blank check for benefit-of-doubt while at the same time offering no quarter to the majority who just don't buy the official line anymore.
Hope that formula continues to work out for ya when you're an Eight Percenter, Taibbi. Looks like it's all ya got.
- Login to post comments
i read this assclowns stuff
i read this assclowns stuff pretty regularly, i get Rolling Stone. he does a pretty good job on left/right issues that dont really change anything. friggin scumbag.
An idiot
Rolling Stone is a rag, at best. Garbage that needs to be thrown out.
Rolling Stone
Same mag that employed James Howard Kunstler, author of "The Long Emergency", hate-filled peak oil doom frenzy novel, title just a step away from the Bush admin's "The Long War" scenario. Connections?
Peak oil doom
All the talk about peak oil doom is BS. The people discussing it are either schills for the energy industry or they are completely ignorant of alternative sources of energy. I personally think the establishment is building this line so they can prepare the population of the world for major manipulation down the road. It's like a psychological priming for the masses. When the manipulation is in full swing the bulk of the masses will think, "Well hey, they've been telling us this is the doom scenario we would be facing and here we are..." rather than "Why aren't alternative fuel sources in use that actually exist and work well."
Dig deep folks. You'll find 9/11 isn't the only thing the establishment has been perceptually managing.
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
I totally agree "Peak Oil"
I totally agree "Peak Oil" is a Malthusian inspired pile of disinfo, I can't believe how many people have been duped by that bs. Luckily though the words out on it.
I didn't bother to read it...
But I glanced...
1) Nico Haupt is used against us yet again.
2) Controlled Demolition is apparently tackled yet again.
3) The Pentagon theory is tackled yet again.
$#%^#@%^$$@@^&*$#@^!!!
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
Anyone...
Noticing a trend?
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
For years i've seen this trend
jesus christ - the 9/11 commission admitted in an august 2nd story in the washington post that they considered criminal charges against norad for knowingly giving false information.
Jesus. we should be filing criminal charges against the commissioners themselves for still publishing their report.
we have the evidence of wrongdoing STARING US IN THE FACE and people are still talking about squibs????
fine - the building was demolished. fine. can we get down to the business of holding people accountable now? can we? can we start with the people who have demonstrably lied to us?
or should we continue to talk about molten steel for the next year?
are we allowed to ask why our military did not protect us on 9/11? are we permitted to ask that? most people can understand that a helluva lot easier than CD.
our airforce was missing for 2 hours.
hello?
no - lets continue to debate physical evidence. lets forget that the liars are still alive and accessible - and can be held accountable. train the young to hold up signs of squibs. i am sure the perpetrators of this crime LOVE IT.
and this article proves it.
I've seen it...
As well... I was being a smart ass.
If Controlled Demolition is such a strong argument, then how are people able to argue against it time and time again?
You know why? Because Ruppert was right.
Whether Controlled Demolition took place or not, it is the "Magic Bullet Theory." Something that will keep this movement going in circles forever.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
people will argue against EVERYTHING
but it doesn't mean anything when what they say makes no sense.
controlled demolition is nothing like the magic bullet theory--again and again, Jon, we will have to point out to you that building 7 was an obvious CD, and it doesn't take much to go from that easy step to understanding that the towers were also CD. In fact, if building 7 was CD (as it obviously was) it would be a giant leap to assume the towers were anything but, and that is not even taking into consideration the destruction of evidence, the molten steel, the eyewitnesses to explosions, the simple fact that as constructed they could not have collapsed in the manner observed without using explosives--I mean, it doesn't get any more slam dunk than that.
I welcome your interest in the Pakistani connection, and don't periodically lash out at what I think is a secondary issue and call it a waste of time. Some people, though, take every opportunity to criticize controlled demolition as a waste of time any time the MSM prints a hit piece focusing on it. WE do not decide what the MSM publishes. Are you really suggesting that if WE focused instead on foreknowledge and other LIHOPpy stuff, that the MSM would suddenly say--OH MY GOD, how can we refute this! We're going to have to write about it! And agree with the conspiracy theorists to boot!
Of course not. The reason they talk about CD and the Pentagon is because these are the most obvious problems with the OT, and if they don't attack on these points, they know people will assume that the "conspiracy theorists" are on to something. If the things you're pushing instead are so incredibly powerful as evidence, then why does the MSM not attack them? Maybe because they know people are more intrigued by the physical evidence?
You want to talk about going in circles? Chasing a few passports as if they were real people? Blaming "hijackers" who are still alive and making videos as part of their cooperation with the perps? Please! People care about the TOWERS, not some cokehead agent's wire transfer. Nobody was killed by that wire transfer.
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
"LIHOPpy stuff"
First of all... Pakistan is not the only thing I focus on, yet, you repeatedly act as if that's the case. It is not.
Secondly, to say the "reason they talk about CD and the Pentagon is because these are the most obvious problems with the OT" is complete, and utter bs.
The REASON they focus on CD, and the Pentagon is because it just SOUNDS crazy, and they FOCUS on that "craziness", and use it to make us look crazy.
Third, the absense of our military that morning is the absolute smoking gun that nobody seems to focus on.
Finally, if you think Pakistan is LIHOP, you are sorely mistaken. If you don't know why, then I can't help you. However, I will say that the Pakistan Connection goes DIRECTLY to the White House.
Who was responsible for the Controlled Demolition? The Mossad? The CIA? The FBI? I've heard all kinds of culprits, but the Pakistani connection only goes to one place, and that is DIRECTLY to the White House.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
Jon, can you
provide us a link of the Pakistan connection going straight to the white house?
georgewashington.blogspot.com.
You mean...
A link that shows Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmed, the man who ordered Omar Sheikh to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta was meeting with Goss, Graham, and according to 9/11 Press For Truth, members of the White House at the time of 9/11? I will look for that story later on Paul's timeline.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
A few tidbits...
May 2001: Tenet Visits Pakistan; Armitage Calls on India Richard Armitage.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a former covert operative and Navy Seal, travels to India on a publicized tour while CIA Director Tenet makes a quiet visit to Pakistan to meet with President Pervez Musharraf. Armitage has long and deep Pakistani intelligence connections (as well as a role in the Iran-Contra affair). It would be reasonable to assume that while in Islamabad, Tenet, in what was described as “an unusually long meeting,” also meets with his Pakistani counterpart, ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed. [SAPRA (New Delhi), 5/22/2001]
September 4-11, 2001: ISI Director Visits Washington for Mysterious Meetings
ISI Director Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed visits Washington for the second time. On September 10, a Pakistani newspaper reports on his trip so far. It says his visit has “triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council” as well as meetings with CIA Director Tenet, unspecified officials at the White House and the Pentagon, and his “most important meeting” with Marc Grossman, US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. The article suggests, “[O]f course, Osama bin Laden” could be the focus of some discussions. Prophetically, the article adds, “What added interest to his visit is the history of such visits. Last time [his] predecessor was [in Washington], the domestic [Pakistani] politics turned topsy-turvy within days.” [News (Islamabad), 9/10/2001] This is a reference to the Musharraf coup just after an ISI Director’s visit on October 12, 1999 (see October 12, 1999).
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
and all that adds up to is?
"Hey Mahmoud, could you , like, wire some dough to this agent of ours so we can later say there was this Saudi guy getting money to pull off an operation that is actually going to involve having three WTC buildings owned by Larry Silverstein demolished? Thanks, buddy--check your Swiss bank account afterwards--it will be worth your while!"
"Sure George, will do."
Then India is told to go ahead and leak out the info that the money came from Pakistan, worth their while, etc.
So, Pakistan ends up screwed for helping out Tenet, Tenet gets the medal of freedom, and we invade the middle east and let Larry collect his jackpot and build a freedom tower.
In other words, Pakistan is a state-patsy, nothing more nothing less, and a distraction from the real crimes--the destruction of a building on top of thousands of human beings, which Pakistan did nothing to facilitate.
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
and where is the link to the white house?
DIRECT link I should say? :)
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
What part of...
"unspecified officials at the White House" don't you understand?
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
I'm sorry...
You're 100% correct.
We should not focus on facts like members of the White House meeting with a financier of the attacks of 9/11.
That's just stupid.
Instead, let's focus on theories.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
Great article on Patsystan!
Read this and see if it resonates with anything being discussed here...
"The ISI played the part of a worthless pawn in Operation 9/11—as insignificant as the hijackers themselves. The stakes of the game are much higher—the strategic military might of Pakistan and other Muslim states, and the Muslims’ struggle toward self-determination. The ISI was used as simply an individual intelligence asset of the CIA. The question we must ponder is: What will happen when it is time for the chess masters to discard the ISI, particularly when the ISI’s fingerprints are all over the 9/11 crime scene? It matters little if the ISI knew little or nothing about the scope of the crime. The remaining evidence is all that matters.
Since the ISI has been such a valuable asset for the planners of Operation 9/11, it is highly unlikely that the agency itself will ever face the charges laid against them—Pakistan will be held responsible for the ISI’s cooperation in its various dubious activities. It seems that immoral agencies and individuals always undermine the existence of their home nations and bring misery to the world, and Pakistan will soon find itself increasingly bearing the consequences of the ISI/CIA partnership. This vicious cycle will lead to a downward spiral—ISI’s direct or indirect participation in crimes will be used to punish Pakistan. Musharraf’s story be a dull shadow of Saddam’s—a tale of the "good soldier" who salutes, gets promoted, is used and abused, and is finally discarded."
http://english.alarabonline.org/display.asp?fname=2006%5C09%5C09-27%5Czc...
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Yep, I saw that...
I saw this as well...
http://www.yourfilelink.com/get.php?fid=187766
Mark Robert's tells us about the lies regarding WTC7...
At least your article doesn't deny Pakistan's involvement.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
BTW...
Mark Robert's is a prick.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
Anyone who refutes you is a "prick".
You just keep outing yourself, Jon, like this 9/11 Truther:
http://911blogger.com/node/3011
"The puffs of smoke coming from the towers and wtc7 may not be proof, but they look like explosives. That is concrete evidence and proof that it looks like explosions. Don't you agree?"
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality.
Puffs
Since when does not something looking like something not evidence. If you see a person clearly and there are video tapes of that person commiting a crime and that person looks exactly like the suspect you have in custody, that is evidence against that suspect. You agree with that right, if not then all those people in jail because of security cameras should be released. The visual evidence of building 7 collapsing indicated it was controlled demolition because it looks like it was controlled. I am at a complete loss why you think that video tape is not evidence. What are you thinking?
.
They made a wasteland and called it peace. ~ Tacitus
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral. ~ Rev. Alexander Campbell
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~ Stephen Roberts
BTW...
Aren't "patsies" the person/people that the Government puts forward in order to hide the real culprits behind something?
Pakistan's involvement wasn't mentioned in the 9/11 Report, and the media completely ignores them.
It seems to me that Pakistan doesn't fulfill the job of patsy. In fact, it seems to me they more fit the role of partner.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
LOL check the disruption
LOL check the disruption agent right here sniffing out the infighting and pouring fuel on it. Get of this site shill!
also note which side he takes!
where are MY anonymous shills?? >snif<
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
LOL
Nice try and thanks for the laughs!
So you're saying...
Essentially that the Director of Central Intelligence meeting with, months before, a man who helped to finance the attacks of 9/11, and that same man meeting with several different people in Washington D.C. at the time of 9/11 isn't the least bit supicious?
Hmmm... I guess the funding behind 9/11 is of "little practical significance."
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
how is a wire to Atta helping to fund the attacks?
did Atta use the money to plant the explosives in building 7? really, what is Atta alleged to have used the money for?
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Wow...
You're starting to cross the line here... I'm not going to say what that line is... but you are definitely close to crossing over it.
I'm done here.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
do tell
not sure what that means Jon, other than you're tired of being contradicted--don't blame you, so am I!
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Jon Gold won't say anthing meaningful
Since many of outed Jon months ago, he's running scared.
Ok Jon, RT, let’s just all
Ok Jon, RT, let’s just all agree to disagree and let that be that.
Whatever...
My work speaks for itself.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
ok - now you are just being immature
everything has to go back to Building 7?
its not enough that we caught the head of the Pakistan ISI wiring money to the alleged hijackers? we have to explain to you that this is incriminating?
unless we can tie it to CD for you it is worthless?
this is exactly the problem with the CD people. its all you know - and its all you want to know. and you act as if this is some sort of competition.
[ Poll ] What should self-appointed 9/11 truth leaders...
discuss when appearing on mainstream media TV & Radio Shows if they could only talk about one 9/11 related issue for one minute?
http://www.jackbloodforum.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9567
i do rib you on Pakistan
but that doesn't mean I don't think you also cover a lot of other useful stuff. it's only when you attack CD that I have to complain, sorry!
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Is that what you think I'm doing?
Attacking controlled demolition? Or am I, instead, trying to figure out a way to end this miserable nightmare?
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
I rest my case
The CD advocates are so fanatical that they will throw the baby out with the bathwater if you do not only agree with their theory - but agree that it should be the central issue of the movement.
I am in Jon's camp on this one - and i find it shameful that you would resort to debunking legitimate evidence to retaliate.
No man sry that's total bunk
No man sry that's total bunk from "Duppert" as Kevin Barrett would say lol, the collapse of building 7 is one of the things waking people up the fastest. You hardly ever see a video of building 7's collapse when a media outlet attacks 9/11 truth and cites controlled demolition, and you’ll never see a more reasoned and accurate augment presented as to why the buildings weren’t demolished, only regurgitations of already debunked and uncredible government reports.
"You hardly ever see..."
Sorry DBLS, but that is also total, and utter bs.
Do you want to know what you "hardly ever see?"
How about mention of Sibel Edmonds?
How about mention of Mineta's Testimony?
How about mention of Philip Zelikow?
How about mention of the Energy Task Force?
How about mention of the 7 stories given by our military as to why they didn't protect us on 9/11?
How about mention of the wargames?
That list goes on and on DBLS. It's not rocket science to figure out why those are things you "hardly ever see."
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
You're right Jon
Those are all important aspects of the alternative version of 9/11.
However, I have a different interpretation about why these are things that you "hardly ever see". First, to cover even some of the questions you mentioned would take a significant amount of time. Many MSM audience members don't even know the questions you raised are even issues, so any story that briefly touched on it would probably not be understood by those that have never looked into the matter. The MSM to date has simply not devoted more than 4 or 5 minutes (in the case of TV) or a few hundred word article (in print). In order to fully cover these topics, and others you have astutely raised, you would need, at a bare minimum 30 minutes of TV time, if not a full hour. No way MSM will give it that attention.
More importantly, I can see very easy grey areas and plausible explanations for the non-initiated to get into when looking at the questions you raised. For example, a neophyte might say:
Sibel Edmonds? Maybe she's simply lying, or a disgruntled employee, etc etc.
Mineta? Maybe he was mistaken about when he got to the PEOC and what took place when. He is an old man
Zelikow? Sure he may have had ties to the White House, but surely there would be at least one or two Democratic commission members that would tell the truth about the conspiracy if they saw any evidence for its existence.
Energy Task Force? Ok, maybe Dick and friends got together to talk about how great it would be to have control over Iraq's oil fields. Does that mean they would murder Americans for it? Some have trouble making that leap
7 stories? Perhaps they were simply mistaken. Maybe different members of the military remembered the day differently.
Wargames? Bad luck. Terrible coincidence.
I'm not saying these grey areas or plausible explanations are by any means the correct or even most likely explanations. But given the choice about whether to believe one plausible explanation not involving our government killing 3000 Americans or another plausible explanation involving a government conspiracy, many many people will take the plausible explanation not involving our government killing its own people. It's just that simple.
For WTC-7 on the other hand - it is the difference between black and white, night and day: CD or Collapse In Six Seconds Into Its Own Footprint Due To Fire Alone. FEMA already said its best fire hypothesis has a low probability of occurence. You've got the newscasters saying it looks like CD. When people look at it themselves it looks like CD. There is no PLAUSIBLE explanation other than CD. It is the smoking gun.
As others have said, the fact that words are able to be written in an attempt to refute this undeniable fact does not mean it is the easiest to attack. The words used must be persuasive and plausible to the audience, which is not the case with any attempts to refute the CD of building 7. Also as others have stated, it is a small leap from there to CD of the Twin Towers, which is also night and day different than the official story.
In fact, if the MSM chose to give lip service to the questions you raised, they would probably respond with exactly what I have stated above. I realize my answers to your questions don't look persuasive to you. They don't even look persuasive to me. I'm just making the point that not mentioning them at all doesn't mean there are absolutely no responses to the questions presented.
Again, I'm not saying these are avenues that should not be pursued, but they are not the Holy Grail. A balanced approach that covers all of the glaring holes in the official story is the best course of action IMHO. Some people get dragged in on CD, some on foreknowledge/stand down. You never know who will best identify with which hole, but there is a hole for everyone, rest assured.
So basically...
That really long post said it's better to focus on a theory, than fact because Controlled Demolition is, "the difference between black and white, night and day."
I disagree.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
I disagree with your
I disagree with your distinction between theories and facts. The facts you cite (ie. existence of wargames, different stories told, Energy Task Force meeting taking place, etc, etc.) can point in several directions. I showed how they can be seen by some to point in a different direction than the direction you see. You THEORY, based on the facts you cite, is that our government is lying and Sibel Edmonds and Mineta are telling the truth. This is a theory, not a fact. One could just as easily believe the THEORY that the military was mistaken in their early accounts of the events of the day and that Edmonds and Mineta are either mistaken or lying. Both are theories that take into account the facts.
Moreover, the press reports you cite from the Thompson timeline are from foreign press sources. Most Americans don't know the New Dehli Star Telegram (not saying that's the actual newspaper) from the National Inquirer. In other words, there is no credibility there in the minds of most Americans. In fact, I would think most Americans would be more likely to believe the 9/11 Commission Report of the "facts" than some foreign newspaper's version of the "facts". Your THEORY is that these foreign news reports are the true version of the "facts".
The FACTS cited for controlled demolition are: free fall speed, dust, fall into its own footprint, very little asymetrical damage from falling debris. These are facts, Jon, whether you recognize them as such or not. The only plausible THEORY to fit those facts is CD.
So, we are still reduced to the question of which THEORY to promote. I say promote all theories that fit reasonably well with the facts. Your theory, Jon, and the CD theory fit quite well with the available facts and I think both should be put forth.
what are you talking about? MSM covered Able Danger
and so did the left gatekeepers. let me see if I understand your argument--if the MSM doesn't cover something (as you claim of Able Danger, but not very convincingly) then that is a sign that we should. So here's some results from a quick Google search--yeah they won't touch able danger. Of course they will--it implies that tehre were these hijackers, who got money from Pakistan. Really, people, does anyone else have trouble understanding what the issue is here?
The Final Verdict on Able Danger
Washington Post, United States - Sep 25, 2006
... This tendency is on display in the "scandal" over a Top Secret special operations effort -- "Able Danger" -- that existed before 9/11 to develop a "campaign ...
Inquiry Blasts 'Able Danger' Source
Tampa Tribune, FL - Oct 1, 2006
... A year ago, Tony Shaffer was a media sensation, a spy in from the cold with a riveting account of what a secret military unit called Able Danger had uncovered ...
FBI raids home of congressman's daughter
CNN International - Oct 16, 2006
... In the last year, he has repeatedly said a secret military unit called "Able Danger" used data-mining to link four September 11 hijackers to al Qaeda more than ...
Searches Carried Out in Influence Inquiry
New York Times, United States - Oct 16, 2006
... He maintained that a secret military unit known as Able Danger had used sophisticated data mining to tie several of the September 2001 hijackers to Al Qaeda ...
The Very Proactive Congressman: Curt Weldon deserves honorable ...
Harper's Magazine, New York - Oct 17, 2006
... in places ranging from the Defense Department to the 9/11 Commission, buried evidence that a secret Pentagon unit called Able Danger had identified Mohamed ...
MATT TAIBBI
Rolling Stone - Sep 28, 2006
... Strikingly, there is no obvious answer to that question, since for all the many articles about "Able Danger" and the witnesses who heard explosions at Ground ...
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
yikes it is.
I do, John, and notice the dates--all very recent, I could have gone back farther but I thought that would suffice to show you were wrong.
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Then
with all due respect - it shows your ignorance on this topic. no insult intended - i just don't see that you grasp the issue here.
I would offer a different
I would offer a different theory as to why the MSM *doesn't* as opposed to *will not* cover these points. I posit that it is due to the fact that the vast majority of Americans have never heard of these people or issues. By stark contrast, if people remember only a few things about that day it is that 2 airplanes crashed into the twin towers and they collapsed, an airplane crashed into the pentagon, and a fourth airplane crashed in a field somewhere. Therefore, the only thing MSM can use in the small soundbites and short articles on the subject are these major points that everyone remembers.
In order to cover the Pakistan, whistleblowers or Able Danger, the MSM would not only have to refute our claims as to their significance, the MSM would also have to lay the ground work for the story. This would take far more time than MSM has devoted or will devote to the topic.
In other words, it's just much easier to say "These kooks think the WTC was brought down with explosives" because their audience will immediately identify with that claim. You are correct, at first blush it sounds crazy. But guess what, any of the points you have raised that implicate our government in a conspiracy sound crazy when they are first set forth. They could just as easily say "These kooks think the government had a program called Able Danger that was a secret CIA program to manage the highjackers. Government sources tell us this program [INSERT ANY ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE A CONSPIRACY]" There. Job done. Go back to sleep.
With each and every one of these theories, either the MSM or the individual person is going to have to take a close look at it from all sides and come to a conclusion. It has nothing to do with which ones can be easily attacked, because any theory can be attacked when people have not problem lying through their teeth.
Sorry..
"You THEORY, based on the facts you cite, is that our government is lying and Sibel Edmonds and Mineta are telling the truth."
This just came out today in regards to Sibel...
About whether or not she's lying... ask Patrick Leahy, and Chuck Grassley. Ask the Inspector General who found that she was wrongly fired. Ask John Ashcroft who used the States Secrets privilege to silence her. Ask the FBI agents who validated her story.
In regards to Mineta... if he's lying, then that means his prepared statement that said he got to the PEOC, and the Pentagon was hit, the testimony he gave, and that television appearance where he gave the identical story is all a lie, and that Richard Clarke's account, and that reporter who corroborates his story is also a liar.
"the press reports you cite from the Thompson timeline are from foreign press sources"
Our press ranked 44th in the world last year. Your point was?
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
In regards...
To Clarke and that reporter corroborating his story... the story about when he arrived.
_________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
Jon, I don't disagree with
Jon,
I don't disagree with you at all that you are correct about everything. All I'm saying is that many people who have not looked into the matter, and moreover, do not have the time/energy/interest to investigate it for themselves to see if your sources check out, will believe the plausible explanations I have provided. The MSM could gloss over all of your points by saying she is a lying disgruntled former employee, and most people will believe it.
My point about the foreign press reports was about credibility and believability amongst the general population. Again, I don't disagree that our press is horrible and much worse than many foreign press sources, but the people we are trying to reach don't hold that same opinion.
I hear you...
But believe me, if it's one thing I've learned how to do, it's to make our media look like fools.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
I wish one of them would let
I wish one of them would let you write an Op Ed piece that breaks them down, but sadly that will probably never happen.
Can you at least admit that the MSM can gloss over the points you raised just as easily as they gloss over the CD theories?
Seriously, when they have no problem completely and utterly lying about things, all it takes is a few "unnamed sources" or for that matter, a few high up named officials denying what you have said, and instead of a battle of the physical evidence experts, its a battle of credibility. I know our government has lied about so many things, but for some reason getting people over the hurdle that our government would also lie about 9/11 seems to be very high, perhaps due in part to the fact that Repubs are in control, and the Dems won't accuse them of lying about it.
That's no reason to stop trying to convince people, but credibility judgments can go either way.
I don't agree...
Which is why you will NEVER see Paul Thompson on the Mainstream media.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
Let's just agree to disagree
However, I strongly encourage you to keep pressing forward with your foreknowledge/stand down ideas in all forums.
Perhaps the best approach is for those that have a good understanding of the foreknowledge/stand down issues (ie. you, Jon) to present those issues the best way they know how, for those that understand the CD issues (me) to present those issues in the best way they know how, and for those that understand still other issues to present those (except of course for no-planes/space beam weapons, which are far more damaging than helpful regardless of truth). A multi-pronged assault on the official myth.
I honestly couldn't make a strong case off the top of my head about foreknowledge that would even come close you your arguments, Jon. But, I have a degree in chemical engineering, so the engineering aspects of the twin towers' collapses are much more interesting to me than foreknowledge. It's just personal taste. Consequently, I understand, and can argue (and have argued) with pepole about CD much more effectively than I can about the issues you raise.
Hello!
SteveB's talkin' some sense here, folks.
With regards to Sibel Edmonds
Sibel Edmonds is an interesting issue. When I first read about her a while back I asked, "Why the hell doesn't she record in some format all of her observations which are being silenced and then submit them online or to some media outlet??" It has never made any sense to me that she has let the government gag her. Why hasn't she just gone to the media if what she knows implicates treasonous officials? The gag orders would be an obvious obstruction of justice and any patriot should ignore them for the good of our nation. Some people may want to say that she might fear for her life or doesn't want to go to jail. Well she should fear for her life even if she doesn't speak out because if she has the goods on some people then they would be stupid to let her live because she could speak up later. She's interesting no doubt but I personally don't think she's worth wasting much of our time on. She's alive and she could damn well give the public her knowledge of illegal activities. Since when has National security become an issue that only our politicians can talk about in private? It effects all of us. She needs to just come out with what she knows and stop playing this game of "I have a secret!".
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
I guess it bears repeating.
I doubt that Sibel Edmonds' testimony is the be-all end-all, but probably a very useful puzzle piece.
Unfortunately, I think you take threats to heart in a different way when they are aimed not directly at you, but at your family. Unless you can really imagine what you would do in *that* situation, I think you should let up.
I agree her testimony will
I agree her testimony will not clear everything up. But I fully disagree on the issue of threats aimed not just at the messenger but their family. If individuals are too afraid to speak up about treason then they are giving in to tyranny. The price of freedom can mean ones life. Our soldiers are not the only ones who die for our "freedom". This is supposed to be the land of the brave. What happens when this becomes the land of cowards too scared to speak up? Freedom does not come cheap. And no I am not in her situation but if I was I do know what I would do, and it would not involve cowering in silence.
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
So...
You're making her out to be the "bad guy" because she's afraid for her life, and that of her families'?
Put things in perspective. She is not the criminal in this soap opera.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
I'm not calling her the bad
I'm not calling her the bad guy at all. Let me make my stance clear. The "bad guys" are the perps behind 9/11. The "bad guys" are the ones she supposedly has some serious dirt on. To the best of my knowledge she has had nothing to do with these "bad guys". What I DO know is that she claims that she could shed light on the activities of these individuals which could include treasonous acts against the US but she isn't. If she wants to be a coward that's her prerogative. It doesn't make her a criminal to behave cowardly. As I stated above, Freedom is not free. Our soldiers are not the only ones who die for it.
When the land of the brave becomes the land of cowards you can forget about freedom.
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
this is the best post I've seen this entire thread
The rest is petty squabbling and territorial pissing.
Except Jon won't tell us...
Another one of Jon's famous list of questions that have no meaning or context since he can't tell us what they are supposed to mean. We're just "supposed to know...."
Fallacy name: Argument by Innuendo
Even if the proof was 100%
incontrovertable..... it still does not prove that members of the Bush administration are complicit.
it just shows that this highly sensitive building was pre-wired for destruction - and they pulled it.
who knows...... maybe all CIA buildings are pre-wired for demolition.... lol
this tape will self destruct in 60 seconds....
i'm sorry - i think this obsession with constrolled demolition is taking attention away from ACTIONABLE evidence.
a TV personality can easily make you look pretty silly on this topic. i should know.....
but - asking why NORAD failed to protect us - and lied to the commission - and no one has been held accountable - and standard protocols were not followed to scramble jets....... these are issues that don't SOUND so silly. it is a call for accountability. no theories. just questions that cut straight down to the bone.
re: a TV personality can easily make you look pretty silly
Only if you let them. Just ask them how THEY think the steel melted, if THEY think the witnesses to explosions imagined them, or are lying, and what happened to the core structure. It's not hard! Maybe they know how to pick people who will have trouble presenting the case. Maybe that's why they never have an actual debate on the issue lasting more than 2 sound bytes.
As far as CIA buildings being pre-wired for demolition--it was not a CIA building, it was private property belonging to Larry Silverstein. And if he had it pre-wired for demolition, it doesn't matter whether or not Bush was complicit--it's a crime that he must answer for. Who ever said this was just about Bush? Maybe members of the Clinton administration are responsible--who knows! Democratic congresspeople? We KNOW that they are complicit in the coverup.
And you keep saying CD sounds silly--how so?
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
yet
the MSM will not even TOUCH able danger or Pakistan.
hmmmm....... i wonder why.
duh
see my post above John--your insistence is not helping your case
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
"who knows...... maybe all
"who knows...... maybe all CIA buildings are pre-wired for demolition.... lol"
Sorry I just have to disagree with this. It would be absolutely nuts to have demo charges prepositioned while people are working in those buildings. They couldn't garauntee that some rival country would find out about them and find a way to set them off. Or that there could be an accident triggering one or more.
TV personalities can make anyone look silly if that's what they do for a living. Take for example Tucker Carlson trying to fire off some zingers at Jon Stewart on Crossfire. Trying to ridicule a top notch comedian just got turned around on him. If researchers are worried about a non-scientific debate then maybe they just shouldn't use that kind of a forum even if it does reach the masses.
People know when they go on O'Rielly factor that the man uses Ad Hominem attacks and emotional appeals rather than actual logic. If they can't handle that then they should just avoid programs like that and stick to academic forums.
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
You're probably right, Jon.
You're probably right, Jon. It's frustrating, though, to feel as though we should stop talking about something that appears to us to be an obvious truth. But as long as an element of ambiguity remains, and does so because the other side only needs one "expert" to back its story, there will be no "winning" that debate outright.
Even if CD remains contentious "out there," I think it's still a powerful tool for recruitment. It's compelling. People see it and they know the truth without explanation (though explanation solidifies the power of their conviction).
The Magic Bullet Theory
The Magic Bullet theory is why no one believes the official version of the JFK assassination. In case you didn't know ir Gold, the reason that Oswald was "convicted" is because the government, courts and media are corrupt.
That's not...
What I'm talking about.
The Magic Bullet was put out there so the folks of this country could argue about whether or not it was capable of being the "Magic Bullet."
They could argue about it for years and years and years, and never get off of their asses to do something about their President being shot and killed by their very own Government.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
John you're not making any sense
Why are you blaming us for the fact that no one is being held accountable? We should be filing criminal charges eh? Go ahead, what's stopping you? Talk of squibs? And of course we're allowed to ask why the military didn't protect us. But we also have to ask what they failed to protect us from. If you want to cling to fake hijackers, go ahead, but don't complain that our refusal to go down that LIHOP road is what's preventing a sudden surge in truth. If you don't like the way most truthers approach the evidence, that's too bad--they DON'T AGREE WITH YOU. You should commiserate with Nico, another who feigns shock at everyone not buying his version of what the truth should be. I'm out of the business of accusing people of being shills, because I realize that often people are just wrong and that doesn't mean it's on purpose. But this movement took off with building 7 and the Pentagon's missing plane, and has grown thanks to the understanding people now have of why the towers could not have been felled by plane impacts. Instead of having a problem with that, and ignoring the fact that skepticism has grown even as Ruppert tucks tail, you should be rejoicing. Why do you always seem so pessimistic when we're clearly making progress?
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
while WTC7 has in fact
while WTC7 has in fact surged the movement's progress in the last year+, it is also the primary focus of the growing counter-movement (as well as the pentagon). that doesn't mean that we shouldn't still talk about them, or focus on them, etc. but what it does mean is that the entire movement is being lambasted as 'conspiracy idiots' because 'all engineers know exactly how WTC7 collapsed'.. whether or not these things are true, they are going to outweigh our message with the average american, so it is important that we counter balance with solid disproving of the 'official story' (some call this LIHOP), so that in the end the person is left not believing in the official story, and looking further into the subject matter as a whole - which we all would agree leads towards our 'side'.
just my 2 cents.
Disproving the official story has nothing to do with this argume
We disprove it all the time with everything we say, and of course we all agree that that is important.
Question is, how to do that? Pointing out that the official story depends on believing nonsense about building 7 based on absolutely no credible explanation from anyone is a great way to do that. Pointing out that the damage to the Pentagon is inconcistent with a Boeing crash also helps undermine the official story.
Pointing out NORAD's lies leads to assumptions that they simply bungled and lied to cover it up.
Pointing out Pakistan's transfer of 100,000 to Atta who has not been proven to have hijacked anything only helps it seem that the cover up is about nothing but foreknowledge.
The ONLY thing at this point that could possibly help the perps save face is for LIHOP to be widely accepted, and that is something I will fight to the bitter end to prevent from happening. My local shills, the boots on the ground that work to control leftist student opinion denied everything until it was becoming so obvious that they decided to divide themselves between NOHOP and LIHOP in a classic false dichotomy.
The main problem with LIHOP is that you can't ever prove it was intentional and not just bungling. Since we KNOW that left-gatekeepers are fond of the incompetence theory, we should be careful not to give them yet another false dichotomy--the INCOMPETENCE vs LIHOP debate that will go absolutely nowhere.
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
You are mischaraterizing my position
and acting all too territorial about CD.
1 - i am not blaming "us". i am just trying to point out the reality of this situation.
2 - telling me that i cling to fake hijackers and LIHOP is both inaccurate and unfair. i am not LIHOP.
3 - i am not alone in this assessment. I believe Jon Gold understands my position - as well as many other respected members of this forum.
CD is very compelling evidence - but your response kinda makes my point for me in that people have become SO defensive about it, and so absolutist and territorial about the issue, that it causes them to lose sight of any balanced debate on the issue, and lash out at anyone who wonders if it is the best approach for activism and handling the media.
the fact that you accuse me of being LIHOP is a perfect example. i have found the CD advocates to be so rightiously indignant on this issue that they are willing to call into question the integrity of anyone who disagrees with them.
this is not fair - and it is not how we should conduct ourselves. i am a big fan of your posts - and consider you an ally.
i am not advocating censoring CD. But Jon Gold is VERY correct in pointing out that the MSM appears to use CD against us. This is because it is viewed by many as inconclusive - as a conspiracy theory. As someone here said - it could (like the magic bullet) be debated for decades.
meanwhile - we see ALL physical evidence being MOCKED by the no-planes, mini-nukes, keebler elves star war beams crowd - muddying the waters.
read the writing on the wall.
adapt.
hit them where they are weakest.
they have built their defenses up against this issue. try something new.
that's my opinion - and i really do respect your presence here and most of what you write. its just another way of strategizing.
Real Truther
Please especially note two sentences in John's post above:
"I am a big fan of your posts and consider you an ally."
"That's my opinion -- and I really do respect your presence here... It's just another way of strategizing."
Agreeing to disagree and acknowledging that there are different but complementary strategies is the most important thing people can do WITHIN the movement now. I don't mean to imply that I'm telling you something you don't know, but those two sentences are an especially candid expression of willingness to cooperate that stand out like (insert noncheesy simile here, because apparently I can't -- I'm just too verklempt.)
if someone is spoiling for an argument I give em one!
That's not to say that we're not on the same side--that's up to each person to decide. But when issues are raised about how the movement should proceed and someone asserts something I find to be just plain wrong and playing into the oppositions hand, I'll say so. Like I said before, I've learned not to be quick to accuse people of being shills, but with that comes the need to be very clear on certain issues, and discouraging people from promoting the truth about controlled demolition (not theories--the truth) is unhelpful and I will be very clear and explicit when I explain why I think so. I'm certainly not making this personal. Anyone who is truly in this struggle for the right reasons has my eternal gratitude and respect, regardless of whether or not we disagree. That said, I don't trust anyone 100% implicitly, even if they seem to have a great track record. I go by ideas, not personalities, as everyone should, including those who think that Steve Jones or Jim Fetzer somehow embody the issues. The MSM will cover this however they want and nothing we do will change that--all we can do is eductae people on all aspects of the case. I don't work for the MSM nor do I write for their benefit. They are irrelevant and it is our job to make others see that by not playing by their rules. No one is ever able to get the better of me in an argument on the street about controlled demolition, and it is those who deny it that end up looking like loonies without reasons for their beliefs. If certain people can't make that translate onto the MSM then pooh on them--who booked them anyway? Someone who wanted to inform people? No, so why do we care about them?
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
"Spoiling for an argument."
@%$&^*(*#!
JFC, did someone spike the virtual water here with excessive testosterone today?
Do what you want; describe your strategy's virtues. That's what the Jo(h)ns are doing. They are not playing into the opposition's hand, although certainly some people here are (and I don't mean you.)
There is no debate about the
There is no debate about the CD. It's proven, NIST offered no alternative explanation. The endless debates are for those who deal with every idiotic theory that comes down the pike. All we need concern ourselves with is the NIST report.
As far as no defense, that can be spun as incompetence or LIHOP and it won't amount to a damn thing. Guess what, this goes beyond Bush and Cheney and that's as far as LIHOP takes us, at best.
There ain't gonna be no fucking trial, there's got to be a revolution.
THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION IS THE ISSUE.
The pattern
Yep. This hack is attacking the 9/11 truth movement's greatest assets:
1. Obvious WTC controlled demolition
2. Oblviously no plane at the pentagon
3. The irrepressible genius Nico Haupt
Anyone attacking these three great assets should be assumed a war criminal until proven otherwise.
more LOLs
Great stuff - anyone "attacking" the "irrepressible genius Nico Haupt... should be assumed a war criminal until proven otherwise". LMAO
that comments page is outtasight!
seriously, it's almost as if he's making it easy for us on purpose! (MIEFUOP)
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
As I have said in my various
As I have said in my various posts on this blog, you need to bring the movement to a mature level. You need to focus on the new investigation. You need to seek support people like the Jersey Girls and less from people like Alex Jones (who is more of a liability then a help). IN next two weeks you should be asking your members to get the vote for their Democrat or Independents candidates, especially in the Senate. If people don't have a close race in their district have them call into other districts. Have them simply say...
"Hello. I'm calling on behalf of the 85% of patriotic American's that believe the current republican administration is covering up and explicitly lying about not only the war in Iraq, but the events surrounding 9/11. Did you know that your republican congressman won't support a full investigation of the events on 9/11? Did you know that members of the original 9/11 commission called it a whitewash and quit? Did you know your republican congressman doesn't want you to know that the government's own scientific report still can't explain the total collapse of the three, yes three, world trade center skyscrapers on 9/11, or why Pakistan wasn't attacked for its direct involvement in 9/11, or the military keeps changing its story as to why they didn't intercept the planes? I urge you to support your democratic or independent candidate so we can find out the truth, because a republican vote this year is a vote the continued lies, distortions, and revisionist histories."
I personally don't see Alex
I personally don't see Alex Jones as a liability. No one is perfect. I don't agree with everything he does or says; however, the man should be given credit for being on the ball with calling our government to task. He has been on top of the Waco massacre, the OKC bombing(people who have not read detailed reports of it damn well need to. It appears the McVeigh was a patsy and elements of our government have established a modus operandi.), and 9/11. The man has been right on target with his focus on the NWO attempting to exert control over America. Yes he's loud an boisterous but sometimes that's needed to get the attention of the apathetic.
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
His shots at Haupt are understandable
Haupt is a living breathing strawman - easy to knock down - guaranteed to pop back up like a bozo clown - and designed to make us all look bad.
no planes? judy woods' star wars beams and keebler elves? mini-nukes? pods?
too bad the illegitimate research acts as the proverbial squeaky wheel - getting the most oil from the media - while the real incriminating stuff continually gets ignored.
i sometimes wonder if Ruppert was correct when he announced that the 9/11 Truth movement has already lost.
either this movement finds a new message and approach - a new charismatic leader who will set the record straight - or we are going to continue to suffer from movement drift.
Janice and I...
Were talking about a "new approach" last night.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
i will email you tonight
i want to hear your ideas.
i have a new short-subject film coming out shortly that i want to tell you about also. (i hope the tin-foil-hat crowd is ready for this one.)
Looking forward to that
Looking forward to that dude, are you including what Dr William Pepper said about disinfo at the Chicago conference? Because that would be so relevant, I can't remember what minuet it’s on the video but this is the quote;
"So I’m going to say this group, more then any other that I can think of in terms of a movement, is going to be infiltrated, is infiltrated and there are going to be all kinds of efforts to subvert your work, all kinds of efforts to corrupt your work and all kinds of efforts to discredit you. Please understand that and take it in the spirit in which is being given because this is what will happen and probably is happening. So please your work is too important, your mission is too precious. Be careful in every aspect of the work, make sure your allegations, your claims are well founded because if there not you will be discredited. "
-- Dr. William F. Pepper
There's a high quality avi here if you need it;
http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?cat=9998&med=0&ord=Name&strt=0&vi...
Yes - i did!
i could not find a video of it - so i did the voice-over myself.
i also examine the cointelpro from the 1960's - (e.g. the Black Panther coloring books distributed by the FBI).
like Operation NOrthwoods it shows that - yes - our government does indeed infiltrate and disrupt peaceful activist groups.
Dude grab the video from
Dude grab the video from that link and use that as opposed to the voice over is what I'd suggest. But if you just want the audio there's another public appearance that he made that I heard on guns and butter, and he basically says the same thing, I think a little more passionately though. I'll try and find the minuets on the video and the radio show where the quotes start....
Ok the radio show starts at
Ok the radio show starts at 32mins 47sec here;
http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=147
Wayne Madsen & William Pepper Speak at the Fifth Anniversary of 9/11 in New York
Speeches by Washington D.C. based investigative journalist, Wayne Madsen, and attorney and author, William Pepper, at events marking the Fifth Anniversary of 9/11 in New York City in September 2006. Fundraiser for KPFA Radio in Berkeley with Bonnie Faulkner and Jim Bennett.
And on the video the
And on the video the quote starts at about 35mins 30 sec but right before that he's explaining his personal experience with a disinformation campaign and that's at roughly at 33mins 40sec. Hope that helps man!
new approach research
Were talking about a "new approach" last night.
Did you find yet another video with a new contradicting approach pattern for the cgi UA175?
Do tell...
No...
We wouldn't waste time on that nonsense.
___________________________________
"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."
No John, I certainly agree
No John, I certainly agree about Nico and all the other disinfo. But Ruppert (and don't be offended by this) is an absolute fool in my opinion especially with that pathetic defeatist attitude. He did do solid work on the stand downs etc, but I hope he stays in Caracas frankly. The movement does have a message (we need a new investigation) and an approach (let's honestly debate the issues) and charismatic leaders with different styles (David Ray Griffin/Alex Jones etc). The media will choose to focus on the absurd so I think we need a written declaration of what the 9/11 truth movement stands for that we all agree on, as to clear up any misunderstandings and misrepresentations e.g.;
The 9/11 Truth Movement's immediate primary goals are,
An end to the fraudulent "War on Terror"
For a new truly trusted and independent inquiry into the attacks to be instigated as soon as possible.
etc
And what it doesn’t stand for e.g.
Wild speculation about 9/11. Instead we proclaim as Dr Bowman stated that "The truth about 9/11 is that we still don't know the truth about 9/11, and we should".
It's all there already, we just need to shout it a bit louder.
"taking pot shots at Nico
"taking pot shots at Nico Haupt" who doesn’t do that lol? Nico presents himself as the perfect "nut job" for cocksmokers like this Matt Taibbi to fraudulently blanket as representative of the vast majority of genuine and rational 9/11 sceptics. Disinfo like "no planes at the wtc" and people like Nico who is perhaps the most industrious spreader of that shit that I'm aware of, need to be completely distanced from the real 911 Truth Movement. They 100% don't speak for me at least and I’m sick of being associated with them.
Records destroyed in Murrah Bldg
I heard that the records o the Nazi importation program named
Operation Paperclip were housed in the Murrah Bldg, and the Mena Clinton drug records were in Bldg 7. Not sure o the latter, but these creeps always accomplish multiple objectives in their attacks on us, all with the prime goal o moving us to a police surveillance state.
sources?
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
I had read somewhere that
I had read somewhere that the Mena records were housed in the Murrah building. I have no idea if this is true. A good book on the whole CIA involvement in the drug trafficking is "Whiteout". From what I could gather in the book the CIA never had any of its agents move drugs in the Contra affair. They just outsourced this task to people like Barry Seal and others who did not directly work for the agency.
People should question why the hell we still implement the "Drug War" when the price and availability of drugs are the best they've ever been. This failed policy just has soooo much money tied up in it, illegal and legal that our politicians are not going to give it up. The war on terror has so many parallels to it that one has to wonder if it's just a new and improved tool to rule over the masses.
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
nice post Reprehensor!
nice post Reprehensor!
Reprehensor,
"Sixteen Percenter" is an awesome insult. Nice job.
georgewashington.blogspot.com.
Media Flak
I was at the meeting in the diner.
Up until today I couldn't figure out why Taibbi supposedly wanted to talk with us. If it had been me, and I had the feelings and thoughts about us he had expressed in his first article, I would've just blown us off - walked by and chuckled to myself. Well, he was a writer and just wanted more material to slam us with further - so he pretended he wanted to "talk about it" with us. Typical "journalist." Anything for a cheap laugh.
And he wanted so much for us to know that he was a real journalist - had worked overseas on controversial stories and wasn't just a flak or mouthpiece. Why would he care what we think? If he's really doing his job and after slamming us like he did?
I guess with this article fullfills the need for some follow-up, since his first one was in-your-face dross. This one is supposed to be more subtantial. But it's only a more subtle attempt and untimately just as transparent.
At first I felt sorry for him. Others, not just Nico, were giving him a hard time. But after I slept on it that night I realized that he actually deserved it because of the false analysis he had spread about 9/11, with his snide and arrogant attitude - and hypocrisy he accuses us of, as he doesn't show in person but only on paper.
I thought Haupt was right to provoke him. Taibbi was the one who wanted to hit Nico in the face. He didn't like what Nico was saying. And couldn't really answer him. Not because he didn't have the time, he was given time to talk. But because he had done very little research actually on the 9/11 events, and so really couldn't answer. The first article, apparently, was just blown out of his mouth.
Taibbi went outside first, challenging Haupt. Nico tried to go outside (after thinking a bit, since he is quite slight!), but the owner stopped it. And I remember Taibbi's face looking through the glass at us, like he was trying to intimate Nico was a coward. Glaring through the glass and saying with his look, "Come out here."
Nico had really gotten to him. It's sad because the only way Taibbi can get back now is to write more fake debunking pieces - that don't actually debunk anything, and try to smear us further - a quixotic task.
He also misrepresented me and my point of view about the Media. But what can you expect? He's just dishonest.
Now why is he dishonest? Are there subconscious factors at work which cause him to really believe he is righteous in his tarring and feathering of our group, or is he actually in bad faith?
I think both.
He has a political ax to grind - he admitted he was angry with our movement since we distracted from real politics - the stuff that really matters - hating and defeating Bush. And I think he'll be dishonest. either with himself or with his audience. to further that agenda. The irony is that our movement has the greatest chance to defeat Bush and all he stands for.
The main reason he *must* prove us wrong is because he believes it's impossible. He believes it's impossible, because he trusts mainstream news sources. (I believe his father works for a major network.) He tries to make us look silly, since that is a reflex. His mind is made up before he even examines the evidence - since he thinks he knows we must be wrong. He tries to find flaws in our arguments, and when that proves more difficult than imagined and our numbers are greater than he could predict, he ramps up the disdain and anger.
He tried to inform us that if we didn't have all the details of how our story worked out, if we couldn't supply him with the complete provable narrative, then we couldn't be taken seriously. He really looked surprised when that contention was not accepted. He takes that as axiomatic: The government can just state facts and those will be taken on faith. But anyone who questions those facts and statements must know every little detail of the operation or else be dismissed. This is a double standard and an hypocrisy which was so ingrained in the man that he was astounded anyone could question it.
I suppose he learned this or picked this up from other information authorities, or just made it up. But he really became discomfited when told that, as a matter of fact, we are not in a position to have all the details of exactly how 9/11 was carried out. In fact we can't. But we *can* nevertheless, show that the Government's tale should not be accepted. And we are also allowed to connect the dots and demonstrate who are the prime suspects.
congrats
you did irreparable harm to the movement.
you should be ashamed of yourself Margarite.
I think that's your job, John
Glad you approve!
sure
but you advocate no-planes, star wars beams, mini-nukes, Keebler elves, little green men, and any other ridiculous theory Haupt/Reynolds/Wood endorse.
so - your opinions really do not concern me.
what concerns me is that you and Haupt attempt to pawn yourselves off as legitimate researchers representative of this movement - which you clearly are not.
You sound like O'Reilly
You sound like O'Reilly John.
no - i am just tired of the no-planers
claiming to speak for the other 99% of the movement.
and, i think ignoring them has proven to be a failed strategy.
We need more action posts like this-
We are owning the comments on Alternet, and that is great. We should have one of these every day to focus our energies!
____
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Like Ive Said...
The Left Is VERY Dangerous...Alternet, whose gone on and on about stolen election theories and Iraq theories, is going out of their way to bash any alternate opinion to the official neocon 9/11 narrative.
Whats striking here, is that he admits no journalists has dared o investigate anything regarding 9/11
that goes away from the official story. Even Palast, whose too retarded to see past "incompetence",
did an expose on WF-199I and other tidbits. This Alternet guy should see 9/11 Press For Truth.
And I had to laugh about his poo pooing of alternate OKC beliefs...um, the FBI and OK governor CONFIRMED bombs had been found in the Murrah fed building...hello? Like I said, th eleftgatekeepers are some of THE WORST. And what's this Ed Asner stuff? He's clearly a truther.
I also get very agitated at a lot of 9/11 Fictioners, err wait, I mean 9/11 Truthers...the wild eyed paranoid ones who think anyone who doesnt buy their specific pet theories is a"government disinfo shill", and if you dont buy swapped planes/fake Osama/fake cell calls/alive hijackers" youre a "shill". Well guess what, I dont buy a lot of the mockumentary Loose Change posits. Great film, but its asking the wrong questions.
And thats the way it is...the debate has been perfectly shaped so anyone asking questions is seen as nuts, so that even the left thinks were nuts...and then if you dont agree with bizarre theories, people start to get angry at you. Remember, if you dont agree that the planes were swapped, and some fake Flight 77 hit the pentagon, youre just a shill!
This twin tower/7 and pentagon fetish is ALL the mainstream attacks us for...
they NEVER go into:
NORAD war games/blips/etc
DEEP Pakistani ISI complicity
DEEP Saudi complicity
Saudi embassy officials told to let hijackers in
Saudi Visa Express
Able Danger
Sibel Edmonds and dozens of other FBI agents
corporate insider trading
protected CIA assets like Ali Mohammed
WTC 1993 and Emad Salem
Ptech, PROMIS and the FAA
Atta's true origins and connections
Omar Saaed
WF-199I
the massive post 9/11 coverup
FFA tapes ordered destroyed
how the hijackers knew to turn the transponders off, and then back on again
What Atta was up to in Vegas and Portland Maine
I can name a thousand 9/11 points of investigation needed that have NOTHING to do with towers "being demolished" or fake planes
Matt Taibbi and the Rolling
Matt Taibbi and the Rolling Stone are doing a great disservice to their reputations. Once they dismiss WTC CD, there is still a litany of documented and mainstream plausible of distortions and omissions to deal with ranging from foreknowledge of 9/11 to the cover up of these lies and incompetence.
By categorizing all 9/11 truth movement as a conspiracy theory, Matt Taibbi and the Rolling Stone are throwing out the baby with their bath water. This is such a strategic blunder of "objective" reporting that really calls into question the quality and ability of Matt Taibbi and the Rolling Stone as credible journalist and journal.
I have no problem with someone not willing to accept WTC CD but as the polls have been telling anyone who cares to see, that the issues of foreknowledge of 9/11 and LIHOP, are on everyone's minds and the doubt about the government's story is growing (see "Bush admin not telling 911 truth - Oct 8, 2006 poll"
http://blogbartblog.blogspot.com/2006/10/bush-admin-not-telling-911-trut...)
As far as the object of Matt Taibbi and the Rolling Stone reporting, the people that helped me to doubt the official story were Paul Thompson, Dr David Ray Griffin at first. Later people like James Fetzer, Prof Stephen Jones, Barry Zwicker have continued to influence my interpretation of what I have learned. I've read Rupperts' Rubicon, and seen lots of Alex Jones, but frankly, IMO its not useful to get into NWO or peak oil, too distracting. Someone like Nico Haupt is so far off of my radar as to be inconsequential in terms of my conclusions about 9/11. So to have Matt Taibbi and the Rolling Stone focus on Haupt as representative of what I consider to be the reality of 9/11 is so off the mark as to be absurd, and just highlights Matt Taibbi and the Rolling Stone inability to find the real story - something which is fatal for a real journalist and any magazine that intends to serve its readers.
Also, An Apology To Nico
Quick apolkogy to Nico from months back, for calling you nuts.
I think throwing food at this liberal retard at the dinner absolves Nico of past flame wars:)
But really, we bash Nico...but everyone holds their own pet theories.
Again, look at how many people get upset when someone wnats to focus on the Pakistan connection, or get sall defensive when you say the fo cus shouldnt be on "controlled demolition". I liked 9/11 Mysteries and Improbable Collapse, and have read pretty much everything on the issue...but it can never be proven short of a confession or leak. Til then, its all speculative. The ISI connection I feel cuts way deep into the official narrative and into the pre Bush late 90's time frame. Thats why I believe 9/11 Press for Truth is the best doc out there to make people think.
"liberals suck, liberals are
"liberals suck, liberals are to blame for everything, blah blah blah". same shit different day. get a new angle dude. liberals have no power, your irrational and constant anger at them is laughable.