Friday, April 28, 2006

Welcome to the Truth

If you have just awoken to the fact that 9/11 was an inside job, a warm and hearty welcome.

We will not hold it against you that credible people have been pointing this out for years with clear evidence, and yet you have ridiculed us.

We will not hold it against you that we have tried to speak, but you have gagged us.

But -- now that you DO know -- if you do not use all of your strength, creativity and passion to help prevent more false flag terror attacks, further assaults on our freedoms, and further unjustified wars -- we will not forgive you.

Now that you know, you must ACT.

Welcome to the club of those who know. Now its time to pay your membership dues by picking yourself up, dusting yourself off, wiping the shock off your face, and dedicating yourself to saving America.

There is no time to feel hopeless. Its not too late, EVEN NOW.

There's no time to be numb, or to be afraid, or to be indecisive, or to feel sorry for yourself. There is only time to act.

If you act, we will win. If you do not, we will lose. It is really that simple.


14 comments

Protection Racket

In a previous essay, I addressed the natural resistance to believing that someone you trust could commit an atrocity. This essay focuses on a related issue: abuse and our supposed protectors.

You're a 10-year old. You don't know how to put a roof over your head, how to put food on the table, or how to defend yourself against bad guys. Your father takes care of those things (its a traditional marriage).

Your mother tells you that your father is abusive and hits her. Will it be easy for you to believe that?

You're a modern American. You don't know how to build a school, drive a fire truck, or defend yourself from foreign armies. Your government takes care of those things (its a traditional society).

Your friend tells you that 9/11 was an inside job. Will it be easy for you to believe that?

The answer in both cases is no, and for the same reasons. If you don't know how to protect yourself, you will be very reluctant to believe that your protector could be abusive, crazy or outright evil.

How Widespread?

Physical abuse might seem like a poor analogy to 9/11. However, there are 2 million reported cases of child abuse per year, and millions more acts of spousal abuse occur each year:

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found in a national survey that 34 percent of adults in the United States had witnessed a man beating his wife or girlfriend

• An act of domestic violence occurs every 15 seconds in the U.S.

• Victims and abusers are found in every social and economic class, race, religious group, and sexual orientation.


(these figures are apparently just for overt physical abuse. The numbers for emotional abuse are probably much higher.)

Protecting the Protector

Witnesses to abuse and even the victims of abuse themselves will go to great lengths to ignore or explain away the abuse. Indeed, it is often easier for victims to identify with their abuser than to face the terror of having their protector abandon them or to realize they've been abused.

Think about it. If you're a 10-year old, realizing that your father is an abuser might mean facing that the guy who puts food on the table and a roof over your head will pull the plug, and you'll be out on your ear stuggling in the cold, hard world without a provider and protector.

The child might find it easier to identify with the abuser than to face the terror of having to fend for him or herself in an overwhelming world. That is part of the reason why one of every three abused children becomes an adult abuser or victim. Either way, the adult makes the abuser right.

Similarly, one of the main reasons that people are so resistant to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job by our government is that that realization would mean that our provider and protector -- the "parent" that protects our borders, puts out the fires and builds the schools -- will not be there for us.

That is a terrifying idea for most people.

Abused Nations

Does this same dynamic hold true for nations? Have the Israelis become abusers in the Middle East because Jews were the victims in the holocaust? Have Christians launched a new "crusade" against Muslims because Christians were thrown to the lions by the Romans?

This sounds whacky, doesn't it? But think about it. Is it possible that Israel overreacts to perceived threats because of past abuse or -- at the very least -- falls into a bully role when it is the least bit pushed? And while the U.S. is -- the sole superpower with little real threat -- invades and threatens move preemptive wars, isn't it acting like it is being persecuted by muslims who are trying to mortally wound and snuff out its Christian way of life (85% of Americans are Christian, and many think of the U.S. as a Christian nation)?

Just like the abused child often grows up to be a domineering, bullying abuser, nations may also. After all, they are led by people who -- despite their supposed rationales and high-sounding rhetoric -- are driven by emotions.

Historical Waves

Indeed, a well-established branch of psychology, called "PsychoHistory", teaches that war and fascism are caused by the mass "acting out" of abusive childhoods on the national and world stages. Many psychohistorians know about false flag operations and understand that 9/11 was an inside job (indeed, the leading scholar in the field of psychohistory is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth).

So not only are national leaders driven by their experience or ideas of abuse, but individual citizens also project their individual experiences, emotions and insecurities onto the national stage.

For example, Americans as a whole may right now be acting out our childhood issues in the form of our faulty assumptions about 9/11, our slide towards fascism, and our eagerness to fight the "war on terror".

Waking Up

We are not children anymore. We are adults, and we can take care of ourselves. We don't need government to act like our parent.

When we realize that, we know longer have to act like an abuser or a victim, we know longer have to perpetuate the myth of the protector. We can see things as they truly are, and make informed decisions as individuals and as a nation.


5 comments

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Truth Ministry

In a previous essay, I addressed the Scriptural call to "do justice". In this essay, I look at the concept of 9/11 truth as a ministry.

While I focus mainly on the Christian concept of ministry (85% of Americans are Christian), Jews also have a concept of ministry, Buddhists of "dharma work", Hindus of "karma yoga", etc. These are fairly universal concepts. Indeed, even atheists have the analogous concept of helping their fellow man live a better life in a humanistic sense. And if you are an atheist, please remember that you will not be able to reach the vast majority of Americans unless you understand a little about Christianity.

The word "ministry" is defined as "the act of serving".

The traditional Christian concept of "ministry" includes converting non-believers to Christianity, so that they may be saved. But is that enough? In order to "save souls", what types of darkness do we have to save people from? Is it solely from beliefs other than Christianity?

And the concept of "ministry" often includes helping the poor. But what about the poor in spirit, and the poor in understanding? Financial poverty is not an impediment to salvation, but lack of understanding of the big picture may be. For isn't failure to embrace God a lack of understanding which prevents salvation? Isn't poverty of understanding more harmful to the state of the soul even than financial poverty?

If so, then wouldn't helping people to gain understanding and insight, saving their souls from ignorance and false assumptions, be a vital component of ministry?

Who are the Needy?

We can't just preach to the choir. We have to find out who and where the souls in need of salvation are and reach out to them.

The good news and the bad news is that they are easy to find. As shown in this discussion, the marketing industry has dumbed-down and confused most Americans (I don't agree with some of what the author says; however, he does summarize some very important and interesting information from other sources).

The majority of Americans -- no matter what they may call themselves -- are likely suffering from ignorance, confusion, false assumptions, and lack of awareness. Most Americans still wallow in darkness regarding the secret history of false flag attacks, hold incorrect assumptions about the "evil" nature of the Islamic faith as a whole, and have a childish view about the goals and intentions of our political leaders.

Exciting Ministry

Our political and military crises are really manifestations of a spiritual crisis: the poverty of the soul. Millions of Americans are too afraid to look at the darkness of deception and manipulation that surrounds us, and at the same time are too afraid to reach for a more empowered, gratifying, meaningful, spiritually-connected life. Remember, willingness to face the darkness and to reach for the light are connected: for only when people are filled with the light of spiritual connection, hope and meaning will they have the courage and ability to face the darkness and take appropriate action. Without a high-power flashlight, no one would head off into the darkness and kill the tigers that lurk there.

It is exciting that we have the opportunity to minister to people who so desperately need it, to educate, teach, and raise awareness.

We should use every ounce of our strength to try to spread 9/11 truth, to prevent another false flag attack, and to bring the perpetrators of the 9/11 crimes to justice. We should and must do this, as I've said in previous essays.

But if we only think of 9/11 work as an "activist" campaign, then we will be thrown by every curve, be battered by the ups and downs, and quickly burn out.

If, instead, we remember that we are engaged in a ministry, then we won't be so thrown by downturns in our progress. As the prominent pscyhologist James Hillman said, even if the world is going destroy itself, we can still ease people's suffering along the way. (Even if people do not thank us in the short-run, we will be easing their suffering in the long run, and their souls will be thankful.)

Not only are we engaged in a heroic outward struggle to save our nation and prevent terror and fascism, but we are also helping souls by educating them, stripping them of false assumptions, shining a light into their darkest corners of ignorance, whether or not we win the ultimate battle for nationwide truth and justice.

Talking about 9/11 is a chance to simultaneously reveal the darkness of false flag attacks and to give them the light of hope of obtaining a true democracy, a sustainable politics, and a better way of life.

9/11 is the most traumatic thing to happen to Americans in modern times, and it is also an unprecedented teaching opportunity: for evil has shown itself, and the velvet glove has come off to reveal the iron fist of empire and greed.

I hope and pray that we win the struggle for 9/11 truth and justice in an outward sense, and I will do everything in my power to make that happen. But along the way, by talking to people about the real facts of false flag terror, of propaganda and disinformation and fascism, by exposing the dark secrets and by lighting candles of hope and of clarity, I am engaged in a truth ministry.

I can't think of a higher calling.


4 comments

Thursday, April 20, 2006

They Wouldn't Do That

The following essay deals with dark subjects. However, it is only by exposing and working through the darkness that we can break through into the light.

Psychologists tell us that many people's view of the government is a projection of their view of their parents. In other words, whatever they believe about their parents, they also believe about the government. The personal is the political in more ways than one.

Try to step into the shoes of the average American. He or she assumes that the government wants to protect its citizens, just as his or her parents tried to protect their family (or at least he or she believed they did). So for this average American, believing that the government could do something cruel would be extremely difficult.

An Analogy

Let's call an average American "A". Let's say that A's brother is murdered. Police find the wallet of A's next door neighbor at the crime scene. The neighbor is arrested.

Months later, someone tells A that it was not the neighbor who killed A's brother, rather it was A's own parents.

Would A believe them? Probably not. A would have a very difficult time believing that her own parents -- who she thought were good, protective parents -- would do something so terrible.

This is basically the level of emotional resistance which the average American has to the idea that 9/11 was an inside job. Remember, many Americans project their family experience onto the government and the family as a whole. So thinking about the government murdering 3,000 of its own citizens is pretty much the same as contemplating that your parents would kill one of your siblings.

You may think that this analogy is far-fetched. A parent killing their kid is destroying perhaps 1/4 th of their family, while a government killing 3,000 citizens out of a population of over 200 million is a much smaller percentage. But this is a difference in degree, not in kind. And admittedly, murdering one's own flesh and blood is different from killing members of one's "national" family.

But despite these differences, the analogy is still useful for exploring emotional issues, as discussed below.

Exposing the Truth

But let's assume that, over the course of several years, people inform A about how numerous other parents in town have killed a child for horrible and criminal -- but logical -- reasons. Let's assume that the town has experienced a severe drought. And only some people have wells deep enough to draw water.

And some horrible person killed his own kid and planted the neighbors' wallet at the crime scene in order to get the neighbor arrested and buy the neighbor's house (and well) cheaply at a foreclosure sale. And then maybe this monstrous behavior catches on, and other townspeople start killing their own kids, planting fake evidence, and taking over for little cost their neighbor's property and drinking water wells.

This is very disturbing, horrific, disgusting stuff to think about. And this is how many Americans will react when being told that 9/11 was an inside job.

After years of exposure to the truth about this mass wave of murders in her town for monstrous but logical reasons, A may finally accept that her parents might have done it (assuming there is convincing evidence linking them to the crime).

Likewise, we have to approach people who are resistant to hearing 9/11 truth by respecting the emotional difficulty they probably will have to the false flag scenario.

How Do We Reach Them?

Like the neighbors who have to educate A about the rash of murders, we have to educate people about the common government ploy of false flag terrorism, as well as the evidence linking our government to 9/11. We have to educate people to the horrible fact that governments commonly commit acts of terror against their own people and blame it on others to justify wars against neighboring countries, to steal their resources, or to consolidate power. Are these things any less monstrous -- or more rational -- than parents killing their children? For the average American, it is hard to see the difference. Indeed, it is hard to think about either.

It will take alot of people doing alot of teaching. And just as importantly, it will take real sensitivity to the difficulties the A's of this country have in believing that their government -- the projection of their fathers and mothers -- could do so horrible an act.

How can we approach A in a way which recognizes where she is at emotionally and her natural emotional resistance to horribly disturbing news? How can we educate her? How can we reach her?

It won't be easy. But the future of our country, our liberties and our safety may be at stake.

We have to find a way to reach A. That is our assignment.

It would be nice, of course, if we could educate people that people in government do NOT necessarily behave like their parents do. But that is not necessarily an easy fix, as it may take people some time to see their projections clearly.


9 comments

How to Act

Serve the downtrodden,
Demand that our leaders serve us

Clothe the naked,
Acknolwedge that the emperor has no clothes

Heal the sick,
Stand up to the well-heeled

Empower the sensitive,
Sensitize the powerful


1 comments

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

9/11 Addiction

How do you get drug abusers, alcoholics, out-of-control gamblers or other addicts to quit their addiction? Do you have a logical debate with them about the costs of their destructive behavior?

You can try, but it probably won't work.

A better approach might be to substitute healthier, more sustainable habits. For example, alcoholics often get hooked on spirituality and donuts at AA meetings (I am not in any way belittling either, as you'll see below).

Likewise, drug addicts might become "hooked" on exercise and gamblers could get "obsessed" with work.

In all of these cases, the addict is able to focus on an alternative habit which is also pleasurable but less destructive, which makes it much easier to kick the old habit.

Instead of going "cold turkey", which many people do not have the willpower to do, they can reach for something else which ALSO gives them pleasure. That makes it alot easier to kick the addiction.

The 9/11 Addiction

Believe it or not, this principle also applies to 9/11 truth. Specifically, millions of Americans are "addicted" to one of the following:

• The idea that they are in control

• The belief that the world is safe and stable

• The notion that they are too smart to have been fooled

• The warm, comfortable feeling of being asleep to harsh realities

• The habit of feeling helpless or cynical as an excuse for not having to take difficult actions

• The reassurance of being part of, or rooting for, the "winning team"

• An excuse to go bomb somebody else (fill in the country here) and feel powerful

• The idea that our government is good and will protect us

These are, admittedly, emotional and mental addictions. But make no mistake about it -- they are very powerful addictions. Indeed, people will fight and die for ideas.

(Emotions and thoughts actually effect our body's neurochemistry, so addictions not involving ingested substances can still be very deeply rooted and hard to kick. For example, gambling is a recognized addiction, which is strictly behavioral).

So talking to someone with one or more of these addictions about 9/11 without offering them a substitute pleasure is like trying to get a drug addict to quit cold turkey: some can do it, but most can't.

We need to offer these emotional and mental addicts something else to reach for, a more healthy and sustainable pleasure.

Like What?

That's up to you to figure out. There are many possible healthy substitute pleasures for believers of the official 9/11 story. Here are a couple:

• A sense of community will work for many. Indeed, that is a large part of the reason that so many young people took part in the 60's protests -- they felt like they were joining a community, the in-crowd, like they belonged. And there was plenty of entertainment in the form of music, etc.

I am NOT arguing that the same type of community be offered. This is a different era, and many members of the 9/11 truth community are conservative.

But in a fragmented, isolated society, a sense of community can be very attractive. And 9/11 truthers are a passionate, committed, creative bunch. So we are a community well worth joining.

Community is also a sustainable pleasure. Rather than being a short-term pleasure which causes long-term harm, a sense of community increases well-being.

• The adrenaline rush. Finding out the truth about false flag operations and trying to prevent future ones is quite an adrenaline rush. It gives a sense of excitement and purpose which can be quite pleasurable. It also links one with a long line of patriots and heroes who changed the world for the better.

The rush of throwing oneself into this type of work is sustainable in the sense that it gives one a sense of meaning in life, which -- some like Victor Frankl have argued -- is the cornerstone of happiness and mental well-being.

In addition, this type of work will protect our country from dictatorship, violence and possibly even war, which makes our society more sustainable.

• Spirituality and religion will work for some. God wants us to bring the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice.

9/11 is the "shadow" side of spirituality, the "doing justice" part of religion. Our growth as religious people, our spiritual growth, cannot break through to a higher or deeper level until we confront and deal with those who committed these monstrous acts of false flag terror.

Until we can name the devils, we are under their spell. Until we recognize and dethrone the perpetrators, they retain power over us. We cannot grow to the next level of our souls' potential until we do.

Indeed, one of the reasons AA is so successful is the sense of shared spirituality -- of connecting to a higher power with others -- that it gives.

Some of the most religious and spiritual people I know are 9/11 activists. Indeed, instead of the traditional concept of individual religious salvation or spiritual enlightenment, 9/11 may be an issue which helps us to create a group worship, a shared sprituality, the ability to walk our talk and act on our prayers within a group context more than just once-a-week in church, temple or mosque.

And what could be more sustainable than the development and growth of our souls?

There are undoubtedly other "healthy" addictions which people can substitute as they wake up to 9/11 truth, so they don't have to try to quit the official story "cold turkey".

Postscript: Intervention is another method for treating addiction. But I cannot see how an intervention could be done with adherents to the official 9/11 story. If you can think of a way it could be done, let me know.


4 comments

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

New 9/11 Photos

Judge Brinkema has ordered photos and other documents which government prosecutors have introduced in the Moussaoui trial to be publicly released. The documents are posted here, with new documents being released every day.

The photos should provide new leads for 9/11 researchers.


2 comments

Now What?

What are your ideas for promoting 9/11 truth, preventing a war with Iran, and protecting the U.S. Constitution?

Best idea wins a prominent mention in a future post.


6 comments

Monday, April 10, 2006

Do Justice

If you are Christian or Jewish, the importance of the Bible may be obvious to you.

If you are not, please note that 85% of the American population identifies itself as Christian, and millions more identify themselves as Jewish.
Therefore, if you are trying to reach Americans with 9/11 truth, it might help to know a little about the Bible. If you can quote scripture, you may more easily reach people who might not otherwise listen.

9/11 Is a Religious Issue

As prominent former professor of theology David Ray Griffin has pointed out:

"on September 13, [President Bush] declared that the following day would be a National Day of Prayer and Remembrance for the Victims of the Terrorist Attacks. And on that next day, the president himself, surrounded by Billy Graham, a cardinal, a rabbi, and an imam, delivered a sermon in the national cathedral, saying:

'Our responsibility to history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of Evil. War has been waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. . . . [W]e ask almighty God to watch over our nation, and grant us patience and resolve in all that is to come. . . . And may He always guide our country. God bless America.'

Through this unprecedented event, in which the president of the United States issued a declaration of war from a cathedral, French author Thierry Meyssan observed in 2002, 'the American government consecrated . . . its version of events. From then on, any questioning of the official truth would be seen as sacrilege.'"

(From 9/11: The Myth and the Reality; see also 9/11 and the American Empire:How Should Religious People Respond?)

Because 9/11 has been framed as a religious issue by President Bush and others, and because the overwhelming majority of Americans are Christian, we may more easily re-frame 9/11 as an issue of justice by looking to the Bible.

Do Justice

The Bible mentions justice over 200 times -- more than just about any other topic. The Bible asks us to do justice and to stand up to ANYONE -- including powerful leaders -- who do injustice or oppress the people.

Indeed, one of the first things God asks of us is to do justice:

"He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" (Micah 6:8)

While many churches and synagogues have become obsessed with other issues, they have ignored this most important of God's demands of us. As pointed out by a leading Christian ministry, which rescues underage girls trapped as sex slaves in third world countries:

"In Scripture there is a constant call to seek justice. Jesus got upset at the Pharisees because they neglected the weightier matters of the law, which He defined as justice and the love of God . . . Isaiah 58 complains about the fact that while the people of God are praying and praying and praying, they are not doing anything about the injustice."

Should Christians pray for justice and leave the rest to God? NO! We are God's hands for dispensing justice, and God uses us to "administer justice." (Hebrews 11:33) . We have to "walk our talk" and put our prayers into action.

God demands that we do everything in our power to act as "God's hands" in bringing justice. And as Saint Augustine reminds us, "Charity is no substitute for justice withheld."

Please reflect on the following Scripture:

'The Lord looked and was displeased that there was no justice. He saw that there was no one, He was appalled that there was no one to intervene.' (Isaiah 59:15-16) (this is the only place where the word appalled is used for the way God feels -- in other words, the only thing which we know God is appalled by is if people are not doing justice)

"Blessed are they who maintain justice . . . ." (Psalm 106:3)

"This is what the LORD says: Maintain justice and do what is right . . . ." (Isiah 56:1)

"This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right." (Jeremiah 22:3,13-17)

"Follow justice and justice alone.” (Deuteronomy 16:19, 20)

"For the LORD is righteous, he loves justice . . . ." (Job 11:5,7)

"Learn to do right! Seek justice . . . ." (Isaiah 1:17)

There are hundreds of other references to justice in the Bible.

Might Makes . . .

Does might make right? It might be tempting to think so. But would a terrorist be right because he can blow up a marketplace? Obviously, the answer is no. The ability to kill does not make one right.

Likewise, the Pharoah of Egypt was the most powerful man in the empire. Did that make him right when he refused to release slaves? Again, the answer is clearly no.

What About Romans 13?

Some people argue that Romans 13 states that Christians must submit to government authority, since the government is divinely empowered and sustained. This is actually the argument which Adolph Hitler used in order to convince the German churches to follow him and his policies.

However, Romans 13 does not teach subservience. Rather, as explained by a Baptist minister, it teaches that any government that is a "terror to good works" is acting beyond its authority and must be resisted.

Therefore, if elements of the U.S. government participated in the 9/11 attacks, then Romans 13 compels us to remove such elements from power.

What Does Justice have to Do with 9/11?

It is clear that the Bible requires us to seek justice even against the high and mighty. Moses obtained justice -- freeing the slaves -- from the Pharaoh, the highest and mightiest person in the entire Egyptian empire.

Likewise, we should -- and we are actually REQUIRED by God -- to bring the perpetrators of 9-11 to justice -- no matter who they are or what station in life they hold.

Justice can only done after the truth is determined. How can a judge render a fair judgment if he hasn't heard all of the facts? And it would clearly be unjust to convict the wrong people. Judgment can only be rendered after the true perpetrators of the crime are determined.

Therefore, no stone should be left unturned in determining the truth. Especially as to a crime as monumental and horrible as 9/11.

It is our duty to do justice, but only after learning the full story and learning who is really guilty of the crime. Once we have found out, we must bring the 9/11 perpetrators to justice, whether they be janitors or kings, no matter what country they live in. That is our sacred duty as people of faith.

And please remember that even if a person calls herself religious, we must judge that person by her deeds and the fruits of her labor. Even if a person is a Christian or Jewish leader, please remember the Biblical warning:

"Beware of false prophets . . ." (Matthew 7:15)

For we must be God's hands and do his justice against ALL those who commit evil acts, no matter what they may call themselves.

Afterword: numerous prominent ministers and Christian theologians have called for all of the facts behind 9/11 to be revealed. And prominent Jewish scholars and rabbis have gone on record saying that doing justice in connection with 9/11 has the power to bring positive, lasting change to our nation and to our world.


8 comments

Now is the Time

While the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776, the American revolutionary army lost virtually all of its battles with British troops over the next couple of months. Without a military victory, the Declaration would have been just a worthless piece of paper, and its authors would have been hanged for treason.

Indeed, by late 1776, with thousands of American troops taken prisoner, substantial guns and artillery lost, and a large proportion of the American army sick, shirtless, and even shoeless, many thought the war was lost. Part of the problem was that George Washington had been indecisive in several battles, and moved too slowly when action was required.

Because they faced imminent defeat due to the weak state of the army and the overwhelming British military superiority, General Washington concluded that only a "bold" move could save the American struggle for independence.

So in the dead of winter in 1776, Washington led his troops on a high-stakes gamble to confront the highly-trained Hessian troops (German mercenaries working for the British) in Trenton, New Jersey. Before starting the assault, Washington declared "Now is the time . . . ."

Marching many miles in blizzards with bare feet, Washington's troops captured the Hessians and turned the tide of the war. With this one, bold move, Washington rallied the spirits of the entire patriotic American population, and even captured the admiration and support of foreign countries for the revolutionary cause.

Today, the Administration and its allies constitute the new empire. Our basic freedoms and liberties are under attack by an administration pushing to consolidate dictatorial powers and to plunge us into global war. While the internet has allowed us to get the word out about what's really happening, the net is under sustained attack by the Pentagon, mainstream media, cable companies, and politicians. And anti-war protestors or anyone else who speaks out against the Administration's policies are being criticized if not harassed by modern-day brownshirts and thugs.

Moreover, with plans apparently under way for another false flag attack in the U.S., and a nuclear attack on Iran, the situation is indeed dire.

When Will We Be Stronger?

Its easy to kill a monster while its small. Its very hard to get rid of the darn thing once its full-grown.

Similarly, it would have been easy to boot Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the other rascals out of office right after they carried out 9/11, stole elections, authorized torture and domestic spying, and started dismantling the Constitution.

But now the monster of imperial dictatorship has gotten bigger, its tentacles have entwined themselves in more of our formerly-democratic institutions, and its become a little bit harder to get rid of it.

Should we despair that its too late? Should we whine and give up hope?

Well, about a month before the American Revolutionary War, Patrick Henry said:

“They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year?”

If not now, when? Like Patrick Henry asked, when will we be stronger?

The monster of imperial repression is only going to get bigger. This is the last chance for democracy and freedom.

We missed the chance to kill the monster when it was still small. Let's act before it gets much bigger.

Now Is The Time

Our cause -- truth and justice, and the exposure of the age-old secret history of false-flag terrorism to control populations and justify empire -- is a righteous one, like the American revolutionary war. But we are becoming shoeless (metaphorically), as we are losing our basic rights to free speech, our internet freedoms are under attack, our votes are no longer counted, and our letters to a sold-out congress now go straight into the wastebasket. We are facing a vastly wealthier enemy, armed with the best propaganda money can buy, in control of the entire mainstream media, and unconstrained by all normal rules of civility, truth, or even sanity.

While the odds of preventing another 9-11 style false flag attack and world war may seem slim, a bold move by dedicated patriots can turn the tide, awaken people from their slumbers, and change the momentum towards truth and justice.

This time, the bold move will not be a military one, but an intellectual one. We have to win the battle for the hearts and minds of the American public in order to turn the tide. We are in an "information war" with the forces of empire and oppression. Its truth versus deceit, news versus psyops (psychological operations). Its a battle for hearts and minds.

Now is the time for a bold move.

We each have our own skills: computers, art, writing, music, pranks, debate, etc. (and for the religious and spiritual, we have faith and prayer, although we need to match our inner work with outer works.)

For everyone who has thought of a great idea for winning the battle for truth and justice, for preventing further terrorist attacks by our own government, for exposing the lies, torture, and crimes of the administration, it is now the 11th hour, and there is no time to waste. We need a bold move to turn the tide and capture the imagination of all Americans and, indeed, of the world. Its time for all whistleblowers to come forward -- speak now or you will go to your grave with regret. It is now or never.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it" -Goethe. Let's dream that truth, justice and freedom will prevail. Let's act boldly and make it happen.

If George Washington's ragtag army could do it, so can we.






I am NOT using word "kill" literally, and I do not advocate violence of any kind against any person.

Nor am I calling for the overthrow of the government. In fact, I am calling for the reinstatement of our government. I am calling for an end to lawless dictatorship and a return to the rule of law. Rather than trying to subvert the constitution, I am calling for its enforcement. Do you disagree with these goals? If so, then YOU are anti-American.


11 comments

Sunday, April 09, 2006

Real Men Stand Up to Fascists

The fascists' view of masculinity is that -- to be a real American man -- you have to rally around the "strong leader", you have to talk tough about the "war on terror", you have to get pleasure out of watching "our team" (the sole superpower) beat the stuffing out of a bunch of third-rate armies like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Are they right? Well, psychologists tell us that rallying around the authoritarian leader is actually a very infantile way to affirm one's masculinity.

Okay, listen up guys. Real men don't bluster like George W. Bush or Bill O'Reilly. Real men stand up to fascists.

Our forefathers stood up to the British king and fought for our freedom. Our forefathers stood up to tyrants and won their liberty and freedom.

THAT's what masculinity really means. That's where the pedal hits the metal and the rubber meets the road. It is the dictators running our country who are the danger, who are stealing the future from us, and our kids, and our grandkids.

Come on, buddy . . . stop posing. And start acting like a real man.

"If you're really a patriot, you will defend the constitution. If you're a coward, you'll defend the elite who want to subvert it. Real men stand up to fascism. Cowardly men become boot lickers."
- Chris D

"Most Americans aren't the sort of citizens the Founding Fathers expected; they are contented serfs. Far from being active critics of government, they assume that its might makes it right."
- Joseph Sobran

Note: Of course, real women stand up to fascists, also. And I welcome women to write about why they are standing up to the strong men.

Moreover, it is not a question of how much testosterone or estrogen one has in one's body. Instead, I believe it is a question of
how much one cares.

This essay focuses solely on men who lack confidence, and who fall for a "quick fix" for their insecurities, because they are the ones who tend to rally around authoritarians. Women who are confident in their femininity don't tend to fall for the authoritarian trap, and so this essay does not address them.


23 comments

Thursday, April 06, 2006

You Don't Have to be a Scientist To Understand that the Collapse of the Towers was Unusual

You might assume that the Twin Towers collapsed on 9/11 because of their design or because the fires were so hot or because of the damage from the hijacked planes. You probably assume that someone who knows alot more than you -- a structural engineer, or a fire expert, or a tall building designer -- has an explanation of why the towers collapsed, and that it all makes perfect sense. At the very least, you assume that you don't have the expertise to even think about why the Twin Towers collapsed, right?

Well, a contradiction in the way the towers collapsed shows that this is not so.

Specifically, there are two possibilities regarding the collapse of Twin Towers on September 11th:

EITHER the towers experienced virtually no resistance from their steel-reinforced concrete floors as they collapsed, in which case, how could the buildings have been pulverized in mid-air into massive dust clouds (see also this photo), and why how could heavy steel beams have shot out sideways up to 500 feet as the buildings collapsed?

OR -- if there was sufficient resistance from the floors of the buildings to have caused the dust clouds and sideways ejection of material -- how could the buildings have collapsed at virtually free-fall speeds?

Did I lose you? Okay, let's back up and start over.

The mid-air pulverization of tons of concrete indicates massive and competing forces -- incredibly violent collisions between objects. Concrete usually cracks when dropped or hit, it is not pulverized. Either the pulverization was caused by some type of explosion, or by the heavy tops of the buildings hitting massive inertial resistance in the form of the lower floors, which were steel-reinforced concrete floors solidly bolted into the steel core.

Likewise, the sideways ejection of heavy steel beams indicates either explosive forces or, at the very least, tremendous resistance by the floors to the downward collapses, thus forcing heavy objects to shoot out sideways.

If the buildings collapsed from any cause other than controlled demolition -- which violently blows out all supports of the buildings being demolished -- then there would have been a crumpling of the buildings. In that case, there might have generated dust clouds near the end of the collapse, but not towards the very beginning. And, clearly, the collapse would not have approached free-fall speeds, since the intact floors would have put up alot of resistance against the momentum of the falling floors.

Bottom line: There could not have been both beginning-of-collapse dust clouds (indicating huge, violently-competing forces) AND collapses at virtually free-fall speeds (indicating only small, minor competition of forces and little resistance).

The towers collapsed as fast as a house of cards, and yet produced enormous dust clouds from early on in the collapses.

The defenders of the official story of 9/11 can't have it both ways.

Instead, the towers had to have been brought down with explosives:

• The near free-fall speed is easily explained by the demolition of the towers' support structures, which took away the resistance which should have slowed the collapse time

And

• The tremendous dust clouds seen early in the collapses can be explained by the massive explosions caused by pre-set demolition charges which pulverized concrete and shot it out of the towers.

See also this article by a PhD chemist on how laypeople can understand that the towers were demolished.

And you can also see what scientists, structural engineers, and other professionals say about the destruction of the World Trade Center.




Monday, April 03, 2006

9/11: a 7-Man Job

A common objection to the argument that 9/11 was an inside job is that the conspiracy would be too big to keep quiet. In other words, the argument is that it is impossible that so many people could have kept quiet for so long. SOMEONE would have talked or made a mistake, so that the conspiracy would have been discovered.

Is that true? Maybe.

But we didn't learn about the conspiracies to cook the Iraqi wmd intelligence, or to spy on Americans, or any of the many other Bushco conspiracies until years later.

Moreover, to anyone who knows how covert military operations work, it is obvious that segmentation on a "need-to-know basis", along with deference to command hierarchy, means that a couple of top dogs can call the shots and most people helping won't even know the big picture.

I Can't Hear You

It has now been shown that a handful of people were responsible for willfully ignoring the evidence that Iraq lacked weapons of mass destruction. See, for, example this article. Indeed, Iraq was not the first time the U.S. has ignored or faked intelligence in order to justify war.

The facts are also clear that it was also obvious to U.S. intelligence that 9/11 was going to happen on or around the date it happened.

So how many people would it have taken to ignore the intelligence that hijackers were going to attack? How hard would it have been for a handful of top-level administration officials to stick their fingers in their ears, say "nah nah nah" (like kids do when they don't want to hear what you're saying), and let it happen?

Its Happened Before

As confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence, NATO, with the help of U.S. and foreign special forces, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security."

In the early 1950s, agents of an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers). Israel's Defense Minister was brought down by the scandal, along with the entire Israeli government. See also this confirmation.

But not in the U.S., right? Well, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See this ABC news report, the official documents, and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings (click link entitled "Joint Chiefs Guilty-Northwoods").

But that was a plan that – while it would have involved a large conspiracy - was never carried out, right? True.

But as shown by this BBC special (which contains interviews with some of the key players), it is probable that America knew of the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor -- down to the exact date of the attack -- and allowed it to happen to justify America's entry into World War II. The case for foreknowledge is even more definitively made by this short essay by a highly-praised historian summarizing some of the key points (the historian, a World War II veteran, actually agreed with this strategy for getting America into the war, and so does not have any axe to grind). According to top WWII scholars, the Pearl Harbor conspiracy involved hundreds of military personnel. And -- most stunning -- the FDR administration took numerous affirmative steps to ensure that the Japanese attack would be successful

These are just a few of many examples of what are called "false flag operations", where governments attack their own people or allies – then blame it on their enemy – in order to justify a war against that enemy. There are many more examples from recent history.

In all of these cases, more than a handful of people were involved in planning, funding and carrying out the attacks. And yet no one spilled the beans or – if someone did – they were not believed.

But 9/11 Was Much Bigger

But 9/11 would have involved a much bigger conspiracy theory, which – unlike the examples above – would have been too big to keep quiet. Right?

Not necessarily.

NATO's Italian terror campaign would have involved quite a few people.

Pearl Harbor, according to top historians, involved hundreds of people.

9/11, in contrast, could have involved fewer people.

Indeed, one could argue that it involved ONE person. Let's say -- just as an example randomly pulled out of a hat -- Vice President Dick Cheney.

Cheney was apparently in charge of the entire U.S. government’s counter-terrorism program prior to 9/11, and in charge of ALL 5 of the war games which occurred on 9/11, and Mr. Cheney also coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. See this CNN article; and this essay. Being in charge of all counter-terrorism in the U.S., Cheney was probably the person who moved up major war games so that they would overlap with games and terror drills already planned for 9/11. And see this interview of the former head of the Star Wars program and a former Air Force colonel.

And Cheney is the one who monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon and -- when a military man asked "do the orders still stand?" -- Cheney responded affirmatively:

"The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Watch the video for yourself.

In addition, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that Cheney was in charge of the entire military and the secret service during the 9/11 attacks, that the secret service has its own communications system which is parallel to and can even cut into normal military communication channels.

Most people acknowledge that Cheney is one of the most powerful vice presidents in history. In addition, Cheney has a long-standing history of falsifying and manipulating facts and taking brutal actions in furtherance of his imperial goals. For example, in the 70's -- Cheney was instrumental in generating fake intelligence exaggerating the Soviet threat in order to undermine coexistence between the U.S. and Soviet Union, which conveniently justified huge amounts of cold war spending. See also this article. And the former director of the CIA accused Cheney of overseeing torture policies. Colin Powell's former chief of staff also stated that Dick Cheney is guilty of war crimes. I'm not trying to be long-winded about Mr. Cheney's resume. I'm simply pointing out that Mr. Cheney seems to have the ability to make large U.S. policy decisions and take sweeping actions -- and to order others to do so -- without much problem.

Now, of course, there was probably more than one person involved in this hypothetical example. Mr. Cheney would probably have had 1 guy manning the secret service communications system and another guy sitting at a computer inserting false radar blips onto air traffic controllers' screens. But this demonstrates that you didn’t need thousands to pull off 9/11.

Wrecking Crew

Let’s take it one step further. How many people would it have taken to demolish World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7 with bombs? Hundreds? Thousands?

How about 3.

Specifically, there was plenty of opportunity to plant bombs in the Twin Towers. By way of example only:

Bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly and inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers in the weeks preceding 9/11

There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved

The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11

And, as an interesting coincidence, a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers

So here's a potential scenario:

One guy in the Bush-linked security company lets in the bomb-setters;

A 2-man crew of demolition experts sets the radio-controlled explosives while everyone is out of the building;

And the same crew detonates the explosives using a radio transceiver.

That adds only 3 more guys.

So, we're now up to perhaps 7 people total to pull off 9/11 (Cheney, another guy making sure intelligence warnings aren't acted on, the secret service agent and the the radar guy, the security guy and the two-man demolition crew).

9/11 Commission Cover-Up

Indeed, there is already documentation of a cover-up about 9/11. By who? Well, let's start with the 9/11 Commission itself.

Years after the 9/11 Commission issued its report, governmental whistleblowers have leaked the following facts:

The Pentagon and Norad intentionally lied about what happened on 9/11 (free subscription required), and the 9/11 Commission knew this, but concealed this fact from the American people

The U.S. government was tracking many of the 9/11 hijackers long before 9/11, and the 9/11 Commission was informed of this, but hid this fact from the American people

These cover-ups were carried out by the Commissioners, their staff, and the Pentagon, Norad and other military personnel directly involved in the relevant acts on and before 9/11, numbering collectively in the low hundreds.

So a cover-up regarding 9/11 has already been established.

How did they Keep Them Quiet?

Jason Bourne (the fictional character in the Bourne movies) kept people quiet by offering 2 alternatives: He told them that he'd pay them alot of money if they cooperated; or he'd kill them if they didn't.

Bourne had his own code of honor and was a good guy. If the 9/11 masterminds wanted to keep people quiet, they would probably be alot more ruthless, as they apparently do not follow Mr. Bourne's code of honor.

In addition, there already have been whistleblowers who have come forward. See, for example, this short essay. But these whistleblowers have been wholly ignored by the 9/11 Commission and the media.

Indeed, famed Pentagon Papers whistleblower Ellsberg has confirmed the media's censorship about 9/11:
Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today's American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take [9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations.

As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York Times, who "sat on the NSA spying story for over a year" when they "could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have changed the outcome."

"There will be phone calls going out to the media saying 'don't even think of touching it, you will be prosecuted for violating national security,'" he told us.

* * *

"I am confident that there is conversation inside the Government as to 'How do we deal with Sibel?'" contends Ellsberg. "The first line of defense is to ensure that she doesn't get into the media. I think any outlet that thought of using her materials would go to to the government and they would be told 'don't touch this . . . .'"

Because the whistleblowers who have come forward have been completely ignored, other whistleblowers have been discouraged from risking it all to come forward. For example, 9/11 family member Patty Casazza stated:
"part of the problem with testifying ... as someone who's working for one of the agencies, is that, they have to be careful with state secrets, what they reveal. And, in order to be a whistle-blower, and not be retaliated against, most whistle-blowers need to be subpoenaed, cause then their co-workers, and those who might retaliate against them, know that under penalty of, ya know, law, they could be... um... ya know, accused of being traitors and what not, and put in jail, or executed. So, most whistle-blowers were... did not come forward on the basis of what happened to Sibel Edmonds [since the 9/11 Commission refused to subpoena her or make her testimony public].
Moreover, many of the people who carried out 9/11 probably did so for ideological reasons -- they actually believed that killing 3,000 Americans was justified in a "ends justify the means" way as an excuse to carry out their agenda. Never underestimate the conviction of an idealogue.

These people would not need to be quieted. Even after the disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, torture, spying, etc., they probably still believe they did the right thing by creating the justification for the administration's policies. They would thus have no desire to speak out.

Just because no one you know is this extreme an idealogue doesn't mean people like that don't exist. There are people who will go to their grave believing that their monstrous crimes were the acts of patriots.

As famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said:
It is a commonplace that "you can't keep secrets in Washington" or "in a democracy, no matter how sensitive the secret, you're likely to read it the next day in the New York Times." These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. Of course eventually many secrets do get out that wouldn't in a fully totalitarian society. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public. This is true even when the information withheld is well known to an enemy and when it is clearly essential to the functioning of the congressional war power and to any democratic control of foreign policy. The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.
Indeed, a BBC documentary shows that:
there was "a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by a group of right-wing American businessmen . . . . The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression."
Moreover, "the tycoons told General Butler the American people would accept the new government because they controlled all the newspapers."

Have you ever heard of this conspiracy before? It was certainly a very large one. And if the conspirators controlled the newspapers then, how much worse is it today with media consolidation?

How Many?

Were more than 7 guys involved? Probably. But it could still have involved many less people than were needed to carry out NATO's Italian terror campaign or to hide the fact that an entire fleet of Japanese ships was sailing towards Pearl Harbor.

Contrary to popular misperception, conspiracies are not that uncommon. Just because the government tries to claim that conspiracy theories are crazy does not mean that they don't exist.

There are, to be sure, crazy people who believe that everything is a conspiracy, which it isn't. However, it is just as crazy to believe that nothing is a conspiracy as it is to believe that everything is.

Indeed, the commonly-parroted statement that there are no conspiracies is propaganda spread to protect the criminals who carry out false flag operations, and just may be the biggest conspiracy of them all.


75 comments

Saturday, April 01, 2006

Oops

The administration's claim that terrorists crashing planes into buildings was not foreseeable on 9/11 is contradicted by numerous sources.

According to MSNBC, "There have been a slew of reports over the past decade of plots to use planes to strike American targets".

For example, a 1998 report forwarded from the FBI to the Federal Aviation Administration concluded that "a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive-laden plane . . . into the World Trade Center"

The CIA Director had warned congress shortly before 9/11 "that there could be an attack, an imminent attack, on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected" according to a broadcast on National Public Radio

It was widely known within the FBI shortly before 9/11 that an imminent attack was planned on lower Manhattan.

An employee who worked in the south tower stated "How could they let this happen? They knew this building was a target. Over the past few weeks we'd been evacuated a number of times, which is unusual. I think they had an inkling something was going on"

And a guard who worked in the world trade center stated that "officials had recently taken steps to secure the towers against aerial attacks"

More importantly, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the military air defense agency responsible for protecting the U.S. mainland, had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft". In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run.

And the military had conducted numerous drills of planes crashing into the Pentagon. For example, see this official military website showing a military drill conducted in 2000 using miniatures; this article concerning a May 2001 exercise of a plane crashing into the Pentagon (see also this article and this one); and this article about yet another drill of a plane hitting the Pentagon from August 2001. Indeed, many of the drills appear to have included warning alarms and evacuation of the building..

The military had also run war games involving multiple, simultaneous hijackings (first paragraph), so this aspect of 9/11 was not as overwhelming as we have been led to believe.

See this short excerpt of a Peter Jennings newscast on 9/11 (excuse the music and subtitles)

Not convinced yet? Substantial additional evidence also indicates that the U.S. knew of the impending attacks:

In June-Aug 2001, German intelligence warned the CIA that Middle Eastern terrorists were training for hijackings and targeting American interests. Russian President Vladimir Putin alerted the US of suicide pilots training for attacks on U.S. targets. In late July, a Taliban emissary warned the US that bin Laden was planning a huge attack on American soil. In August, Israel warned of an imminent Al Qaeda attack. See, for example, this article from Fox News and this article from the Independent

In July 2001, Bin Laden is alleged to have received kidney treatment at the American Hospital in Dubai. During his stay, bin Laden is alleged to have been visited by one or two CIA agents. See this Guardian article, this article from the Sydney Morning Herald, this story from the London Times, and and this one from United Press International

On July 26, 2001, Attorney General Ashcroft stopped flying commercial airlines due to a threat assessment . In May 2002, Ashcroft walked out of his own office rather than answer questions about it.

On August 6, 2001, President Bush received an intelligence briefing warning that bin Laden might be planning to hijack commercial airliners. Titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” the briefing specifically mentioned the World Trade Center. See this Washington Post story, and the actual partially-declassified briefing.

On August 27, 2001, an FBI supervisor saied he was trying to keep a hijacker from “flying a plane into the World Trade Center.” (Senate Report Hill #2). FBI headquarters chastised him for notifying the CIA.

On September 10th, intelligence services intercepted messages between the alleged lead hijacker and the mastermind behind 9/11 stating "the match begins tomorrow" and "tomorrow is zero hour"

Newsweek stated "On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns" (pay-per-view; cached version of article here)

And on 9/11 itself, data recovery experts extracted data from 32 damaged world trade center computer drives. The data revealed a surge in financial transactions shortly before the attacks. Illegal transfers of over $100 million may have been made through some trade center computer systems immediately before and during the 9/11 disaster. See this article and this one.

It is also known that military bases, such as the Navy's Sixth Fleet Ocean Surveillance Information Facility in Rota, Spain, have for many years produced daily reports on all Middle East activity. There are also mobile intel station on large naval vessels which monitor electronic communications in the Middle East.

In addition, Bin Laden was reported to have used walkie-talkies which required booster stations with easily-interceptable signals.

As if that's not enough, the Americans (see also this article and this one were trailing the hijackers on the ground in the U.S. before 9/11. A former White House Policy Analyst and Special Assistant to the President has recently stated in a letter sent to the New York Times that the NSA was tracking all of the alleged hijackers before September through wiretaps. Our close allies the Israelis were also apparently tracking the hijackers.

And remember that Cheney tracked flight 77 from many miles out as it approached the Pentagon, and yelled "the orders still stand" as the plane got closer and closer and then struck the Pentagon.

Given the above-described facts, it is impossible that we didn't see it coming. And therefore, the "innocent mistake" line just doesn't fly.

When my kid claims she broke something by "accident" but the facts prove otherwise, I give her a time out. "Oops" doesn't work with me when I know she did it on purpose. If my kid gets a time out, shouldn't the grown men who let (or made) 9/11 happen on purpose?

Time out in my kid's case means she goes to her room. Time out in the 9/11 perpetrators' case means they go to jail.


4 comments

Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokers to the Right

Have you noticed how Democrats who say 9/11 was an inside job are attacked as leftwing nutcase Bush-haters? For example, Fox news made a pathetic attempt to discredit 9/11 truth by running a caption at the bottom of the screen saying "People don't believe 9/11 story because they hate Bush"). (True, viewers of Fox news are the least informed people in the country; but that's not the issue I'm addressing).

Likewise, have you noticed how Republicans who say 9/11 was an inside job are attacked as disinformation agents who are trying to discredit the left and waste its time by starting it on a wild goose chase, so that Democrats ignore the real dangers facing our country and keep the Democrats from unifying around "important" issues? Listen to radio host Ed Schultz or go to Daily Kos or any other major Democratic news site and you'll hear this line.

Uh . . . you can't have it both ways. The reason democrats and republicans say that 9/11 was an inside job was because

... drumroll, please ...

IT WAS!

The truth is that officials from across the political spectrum question 9/11, and false flag attacks and faked intelligence have been carried out by both the left and the right, so it an issue which is truly non-partisan and is of vital concern to every American.

The whole left-right paradigm is a false dichotomy, a divide-and-conquer strategy, whipped up to confuse and disempower people. So this strategy of repulicans saying its Bush-haters and democrats saying its right-wing disinfo is a very, very old and tired one, which has been used for thousands of years to confuse and disempower people.

As a prominent member of the 9/11 truth movement jokes: "4 out of 5 dictators agree: divide and conquer works!"

A humorous example of this is the recent attack on Alex Jones. Alex has always been attacked by liberals as being a right-winger. But last week, he was attacked for being a liberal traitor. Nice try, but you can't have it both ways.


16 comments

Money

Here's an easy and very effective way to spread 9-11 truth:

Simply write "ST911.org" on every dollar bill which you have. Don't say anything, don't make a big fuss about it. Just write it, and then use your money like you normally do.

If thousands of people did this, it would get many people who would otherwise not check out the Scholars for 9/11 Truth website to take a peek out of curiousity. There are many other good 9/11 websites. However, ST911.org is very short and easy to remember. Also, people can't tell right away what the site is from its domain name, so many people who wouldn't otherwise check out 9/11 truth might.

Think about how easy it would be to go "viral" with this. People that get interested in 9/11 truth could write on their own bills, and multiply the effect.

Money could act as a free billboard. The mainstream media can't censor it or black it out.

Everyone handles money. Rich people and poor people alike. Money that's spent in a big city might end up in a small, rural town (see this site if you don't know how far money can travel).

Instead of being "the root of all evil", money could end up being an important means for spreading 9/11 truth, in a climate where the mainstream media doesn't want to discuss this issue in any depth.

Please note that it is apparently unlawful to alter a bill with the "intent to render [such] bill unfit to be reissued." I don't know what "unfit to be reissued" means. Maybe if you don't write too large, it will remain fit? I also don't know what type of intent is required.

Also, if you write the domain name of your own website, it might be considered unlawful "advertising", especially if you take in any money through your website.

You should research this issue yourself to decide whether or not it is illegal. I am not advocating that anyone break the law. I have spent a grand total of 30 seconds researching this, and urge you to thoroughly research this issue yourself to make sure that you don't break the law. Think for yourself. I do.


4 comments