Oct. 2006 May 2002

Telling the truth 16% 21%

Hiding something 53% 65%

Mostly lying 28% 8%

Not sure 3% 6%

That's WEIRD. Can you link us to that 2002 survey?

click on this text "only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth"

The article contains both sets of data.

If these figures are accurate, over the last four years "mostly lying" increased by 20 percentage points, at the expense of the other 3 categories.

Those four years were a time of virtually no coverage by the MSM. DVDs had been distributed, but certainly not in the numbers or of the quality that is happening now. Moreover, the truther community was only 8%.

From here on out, what do we have? A population of 28% truthers, many more DVDs in circulation, and better ones, and the free publicity that comes from being attacked in the MSM that most people don't trust/respect anyway.

Think about it. Our position is stronger, we are more numerous, and the momentum is totally on our side. If you were on the other side, would you feel comfortable with these stats? No, you'd be very very worried. You'd be circling your wagons and farming out hit pieces to your allies in the media. This is what is happening, and it's not working, from what I have seen in my work (well over 20 hours a week now) in the streets.

It is unraveling, and the concern now should be to preserve the integrity of our movement. Why? Because the liars are going to abandon the idiots and "join" the truthers in order to try to control the developments. Their goal will be confusion and division. They will smear truthers while pretending to be truthers themselves, and split the truth movement to make it ineffective. Remember who the real truthers are, who have been in this for the long haul and since before it was popular. Remember what we've learned at this point, before issues become obscured by the HEAVY disinfo.

Remember though, we've won a victory, a major victory by getting to this point, and truthers are pouring in to the movement, real ones not just liars. I know it's exhausting, but we have to keep it up--that's how we have made history until now, and will continue to do so into the future.

RT

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

keep in mind that in May 2002, LIHOP (before it had the name) hadn't really become taboo yet. MIHOP theories were barely getting off the ground - mostly just Pentagon stuff - but the censoring of the Congressional Joint Inquiry had left a lot of people suspicous. This was also pre- 911 Comission of course. I think a poll from 2003 or 2004 would be even more revealing of the recent progress.

Sucks they didn't release the damn poll then...

Do a little research before you go around parroting Bill O'Liely's crapola.

Alex jones has a note on prisonplanet saying a huge 9/11 story is about to break. Is this what he's talking about? Or is it something else?

BIGGER

Nope, same story. Alex scooped by 911blogger!!!

9/11. Twin Towers Attack - New twist

On 9/16/2006
The article, below, gives a new twist to the whole 9/11 attack.

You've got to be lucky to make $4 Billion killing on a 6-month investment of $124 Million

Larry Silverstein is the New York property tycoon who purchased the entire WTC complex just 6 months prior to the 9/11 attacks. That was the first time in its 33-year history the complex had EVER changed ownership.

Mr. Silverstein's first order of business as the new owner was to change the company responsible for the security of the complex. The new security company he hired was Securacom (now Stratasec). George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin's cousin, Wirt Walker III, was its CEO. According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines - two key players in the 9/11 attacks.

The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for many years to the Bush family. KuwAm has been linked to the Bush family financially since the Gulf War. One of its principals and a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah, served on the board of Stratesec.

Now, consider: The members of a small cabal owned the WTC complex, controlled its electronic security, and also controlled the security not only for one of the airlines whose aircraft were hijacked on 9/11, but the airport from which they originated.

Another little "coincidence" -- Mr. Silversten, who made a down-payment of $124 million on this $3.2 billion complex, promptly insured it for $7 Billion. Not only that, he covered the complex against "terrorist attacks".

Following the attacks, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy ($7B), based on the two -- in Silverstein's view -- separate attacks. The insurance company, Swiss Re, paid Mr.Silverstein $4.6 Billion - a princely return on a relatively paltry investment of $124 million.

There's more. You see, the World Trade Towers were not the real estate plum we are led to believe. From an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception by the NY Port Authority -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, and protected in the rough-and-tumble real estate marketplace. How could Silverstein Group have been ignorant of this?

The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. It was well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an aging dinosaur, attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability reasons, but being turned down due the known asbestos problem. Further, it was well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it was too costly to disassemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority was prohibited legally from demolishing the buildings.

The projected cost to disassemble the towers: $15 Billion. Just the scaffolding for the operation was estimated at $2.4 Billion!

In other words, the Twin Towers were condemned structures. How convenient that an unexpected "terrorist" attack demolished the
buildings completely. WTC Building 7 was a part of the WTC complex, and covered under the same insurance policy. This 47-storey steel-framed structure, which was NOT struck by an aircraft, mysteriously collapsed 8 hours later that same day into its own footprint at freefall speed - exactly in the manner of the Twin Towers.

How could this have happened? Mr. Silverstein gave the world the answer when he slipped up during a PBS television interview a year later, on 9/11/2002:

"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."

As anyone who knows anything about construction can tell you, "Pull" is common industry jargon for a controlled demolition.

One thing is for sure, the decision to 'pull' WTC 7 would have delighted many people. Especially because it has been reported that thousands of sensitive files relating to some of the biggest financial scams in history - including Enron and WorldCom -- were stored in the offices of some of the building's tenants:

US Secret Service
NSA
CIA
IRS
BATF
SEC
NAIC Securities
Salomon Smith Barney
American Express Bank International Standard Chartered Bank Provident
Financial Management ITT Hartford Insurance Group Federal Home Loan Bank

The Securities and Exchange Commission has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed by the collapse of WTC 7. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom.

..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max
Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases."

Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack.

Inside WTC 7 was the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. "All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran.

What a neat, complete, and fortuitous turn of events was 9/11.

Incidentally, it's worth noting that one of Lucky Larry's closest friends - a person with whom it's said he speaks almost daily by phone
- is none other than former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Screw 911truth.org. 90% of the stories they post are LAME as hell. I think we should take away their URL and give it to an organization that could actually post like ORIGINAL CONTENT and stuff...

Just think about how many possible recruits we lost from the South Park airing, when they all visited the site and found a bunch of nothing there... Look at their page now, and the complete absence of any MIHOP 9/11 stuff: South Park, South Park, Kucinich/Iran, election stuff, a Buzzflash editorial, Rice/Ground Zero air, etc. etc. DOWN WITH 9/11 TRUTH.ORG! THEY ARE NOT OUR SPOKESMAN

I disagree 100%, 911truth.org is the most credible 911truth site on the Internet. I to didn’t like that second article they wrote about South Park, but they took that shit down fast! They’ve only got the initial fair response up now;

http://911truth.org/index.php

^ And check it out the sites had a dope facelift, looks wicked.

Edit: They’ve got that gay article by Brian Sacks still up, but still that site has done a lot of good work, don't write it off just because of that.

What does it mean to say that an article is "gay"?

are you over 30? Because after riding these young guys' asses for several months over the use of the word "gay" in this context, which is, of course, highly objectionable, I've come to the conclusion that it's a generational thing. Just like many people of Gen-X and up (of which I am an older member) just don't think there's anything wrong with the word "fuck," some of these darn youngsters today just keep using the word "gay" in a pejorative, and thus offensive sense, even after the sexual politics of the situation are explained to them. So, whaddya gonna do? I don't think DBLS is a homophobe, he's just using a word in a way that seems careless and offensive to us. I actually think he's a bright guy, so maybe one of these days he'll come around. In the meanwhile, if you'd like to take on the role of semantics police here, I could definitely use a break.