- Credibility of Toronto 9/11 hearings jeopardized by replacing of Pentagon witness
- Quest for consensus: Toronto 9/11 hearings navigate Pentagon minefield
- Americans Are Living In 1984
- World ADMITS That They Carry Out False Flag Terror
- Fallout of 9/11: a secret America
- Are we hard-wired not to question 9/11 official story?
- Critical, open-minded thinking is in short supply in 9/11 debate
- Banned from Blogger: 9/11 taboos, disinformation, and hope
- How Occam’s Razor can be twisted to serve “the official story”
- Why they didn't use planes
- Inconvenient 911 Truth goes back to GHWBush
- GHW Bush’s Shadow Government Blackmailed By 9/11 C...
- PNAC: Rebuilding America's Defenses
- A War Against the West - published on 9-11-2001 b...
- Critical History - The U.S. is a CORPORATION
Showing posts with label zs_911_why. Show all posts
Showing posts with label zs_911_why. Show all posts
2011-09-11
9/11 Why
2011-05-15
Americans Are Living In 1984
http://www.pakalertpress.com/2011/05/10/americans-are-living-in-1984/
By: Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Date: May 10, 2011
The White House’s “death of bin Laden” story has come apart at the seams. Will it make any difference that before 48 hours had passed the story had changed so much that it no longer bore any resemblance to President Obama’s Sunday evening broadcast and has lost all credibility?
By: Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Date: May 10, 2011
The White House’s “death of bin Laden” story has come apart at the seams. Will it make any difference that before 48 hours had passed the story had changed so much that it no longer bore any resemblance to President Obama’s Sunday evening broadcast and has lost all credibility?
So far it has made no difference to the once-fabled news organization, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), which on March 9, eight days later, is still repeating the propaganda that the SEALs killed bin Laden in his Pakistani compound, where bin Laden lived next door to the Pakistani Military Academy surrounded by the Pakistani army.
Not even the president of Pakistan finds the story implausible. The BBC reports that the president is launching a full-scale investigation of how bin Laden managed to live for years in an army garrison town without being noticed.
2011-03-02
Governments From Around the World ADMIT That They Carry Out False Flag Terror
Source: http://www.articles/Governments-From-Around-th-by-George-Washington-100219-205.html
Title: World ADMITS That They Carry Out False Flag Terror
By: George Washington
Date: February 19, 2010
Governments from around the world admit they carry out false flag terror:
A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that - under orders from the chief of the Gestapo - he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.
Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goring admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.
Title: World ADMITS That They Carry Out False Flag Terror
By: George Washington
Date: February 19, 2010
Governments from around the world admit they carry out false flag terror:
A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that - under orders from the chief of the Gestapo - he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.
Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goring admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.
2010-12-27
Fallout of 9/11: a secret America
http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/national_world/stories/2010/12/21/fallout-of-911-a-secret-america.html?adsec=politics&sid=101
By Dana Priest and William M. Arkin
The Washington Post
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Nine years after the terrorist attack of 2001, the United States is assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state homeland security offices and military criminal investigators.
The system, by far the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation's history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of wrongdoing.
The government's goal is to have every state and local law-enforcement agency feed information to Washington to buttress the work of the FBI, which is in charge of terrorism investigations in the United States.
This localized intelligence apparatus is part of a larger "top-secret America" created since the Sept. 11 attack, The Washington Post has found. It involves a web of 4,058 federal, state and local organizations, each with its own counterterrorism responsibilities. At least 935 of these organizations have been created since the 2001 attack or became involved in counterterrorism for the first time after 9/11.
The monthslong investigation found that:
• Technologies and techniques honed for use on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan have migrated into the hands of law-enforcement agencies in America.
• The FBI is building a database with the names and certain personal information, such as employment history, of thousands of U.S. citizens and residents whom a local police officer or a fellow citizen believed to be acting suspiciously. It is accessible to an increasing number of local law-enforcement and military/criminal investigators, increasing concerns that it could somehow end up in the public domain.
• Seeking to learn more about Islam and terrorism, some law-enforcement agencies have hired as trainers self-described experts whose extremist views on Islam and terrorism are considered inaccurate and counterproductive by the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies.
By Dana Priest and William M. Arkin
The Washington Post
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Nine years after the terrorist attack of 2001, the United States is assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state homeland security offices and military criminal investigators.
The system, by far the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation's history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of wrongdoing.
The government's goal is to have every state and local law-enforcement agency feed information to Washington to buttress the work of the FBI, which is in charge of terrorism investigations in the United States.
This localized intelligence apparatus is part of a larger "top-secret America" created since the Sept. 11 attack, The Washington Post has found. It involves a web of 4,058 federal, state and local organizations, each with its own counterterrorism responsibilities. At least 935 of these organizations have been created since the 2001 attack or became involved in counterterrorism for the first time after 9/11.
The monthslong investigation found that:
• Technologies and techniques honed for use on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan have migrated into the hands of law-enforcement agencies in America.
• The FBI is building a database with the names and certain personal information, such as employment history, of thousands of U.S. citizens and residents whom a local police officer or a fellow citizen believed to be acting suspiciously. It is accessible to an increasing number of local law-enforcement and military/criminal investigators, increasing concerns that it could somehow end up in the public domain.
• Seeking to learn more about Islam and terrorism, some law-enforcement agencies have hired as trainers self-described experts whose extremist views on Islam and terrorism are considered inaccurate and counterproductive by the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies.
2010-12-19
Good (Disinfo) Document on the WTC Towers Collapse
Bruecke Note: Again when I shine a light on wannabe disinfo agents, I do it in hushed tones and whisper it conspiratorily in your ear while scanning our environment for suspicious looking characters who might be listening in.
We don't want to scare the agent-in-training into 9/11 pulling the blog prematurely. Remember: You didn't learn about it here. "*Wink* *Wink* *Nudge* *Nudge* Say no more, say no more."
Although some of your readers might be inclined to engage Mr. Limey (who is a frequent circular comment contributor to Truth and Shadows and Mr. Rational), it can be just as important to simply observe him in his habitat(s) initially without disturbing him. Better the devil you know, as they say.
Do you know of other disinfo blogs? Where are those cyber playgrounds? How do you handle them? Do they resemble the influence of Zelikow and Sunstein?
Refresher:
Allow me to offer you encouragement to make more frequent postings to your blog. They are very representative and hold up well, but not quite in the direction that you would surmise.
In one of your previous postings, you lamented:
We don't want to scare the agent-in-training into 9/11 pulling the blog prematurely. Remember: You didn't learn about it here. "*Wink* *Wink* *Nudge* *Nudge* Say no more, say no more."
Although some of your readers might be inclined to engage Mr. Limey (who is a frequent circular comment contributor to Truth and Shadows and Mr. Rational), it can be just as important to simply observe him in his habitat(s) initially without disturbing him. Better the devil you know, as they say.
Do you know of other disinfo blogs? Where are those cyber playgrounds? How do you handle them? Do they resemble the influence of Zelikow and Sunstein?
Refresher:
- Dr. Phillip Zelikow did research at Harvard into "public presumption", which in his words "is akin to [the] notion of ‘public myth’ but without the negative implication sometimes invoked by the word ‘myth.’ Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community." This was before he became famous as the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission and author of their report.
- Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein claims that the United States government should infiltrate and discredit activist groups, including those who challenge the official views of the 9/11 attacks. Oh, and President Obama appointed Sunstein to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).
Dear Mr. Limey,
Allow me to offer you encouragement to make more frequent postings to your blog. They are very representative and hold up well, but not quite in the direction that you would surmise.
In one of your previous postings, you lamented:
How (do you) deal with the incorrectly held view that refuses to be educated, and worse still, continues to peddle its nonsense to others?
The onus is on you to prove that the adverb incorrectly and the noun nonsense apply. As for the phrase refuses to be educated, does this branding apply to you?
Mr. Limey wrote:
I, like many sensible and critically thinking people, can not comprehend why there is still a vocal movement who denies the truth of what happened on that awful September 11th, when the WTC towers were struck by passenger planes, in a terrorist attack.
2010-12-04
Are we hard-wired not to question 9/11 official story?
http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/are-we-hard-wired-not-to-question-911-official-story/
I’m not into conspiracy theories, except the ones that are true or involve dentists. – Michael Moore
By Craig McKee
The human brain is a fascinating thing. It controls everything we perceive. It is the vehicle through which all information passes, the filter through which all external events are processed. We can use it to search for the truth, but it can also stop us from looking.
We believe that any opinion we might have is based simply on our understanding of the facts. Sure we all have our biases, but we’re aware of them, right?
Not necessarily. We may be aware of the obvious ones, but the subtle ways we resist facts presented to us often slip under the radar. The things that motivate us to defend what we believe to be true and to fight contrary opinions seem to have a lot to do with how we feel about ourselves.
I’m not into conspiracy theories, except the ones that are true or involve dentists. – Michael Moore
By Craig McKee
The human brain is a fascinating thing. It controls everything we perceive. It is the vehicle through which all information passes, the filter through which all external events are processed. We can use it to search for the truth, but it can also stop us from looking.
We believe that any opinion we might have is based simply on our understanding of the facts. Sure we all have our biases, but we’re aware of them, right?
Not necessarily. We may be aware of the obvious ones, but the subtle ways we resist facts presented to us often slip under the radar. The things that motivate us to defend what we believe to be true and to fight contrary opinions seem to have a lot to do with how we feel about ourselves.
2010-12-03
Critical, open-minded thinking is in short supply in 9/11 debate
http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/11/24/critical-open-minded-thinking-is-in-short-supply-in-911-debate/
It’s all about assumptions – that immoveable foundation of ideas we won’t compromise under any conditions even when those ideas are proven wrong. These are the dogmatic beliefs that block us from considering new possibilities.
We all have biases. We all operate with a set of core beliefs about how the world works. We all see things through the filter of our upbringing and our experiences. But truly wise people are those who realize the limiting effects of their biases, and who will consider new information even when it contradicts their existing beliefs.
The 9/11 Truth movement was born as a result of people who were willing to look beyond the obvious. They didn’t take what they were told as unchallengeable truth; they used their brains to evaluate what they were told and what they saw. They tested the information critically.
People are very open-minded about new things – as long as they’re exactly like the old ones – Charles KetteringBy Craig McKee
It’s all about assumptions – that immoveable foundation of ideas we won’t compromise under any conditions even when those ideas are proven wrong. These are the dogmatic beliefs that block us from considering new possibilities.
We all have biases. We all operate with a set of core beliefs about how the world works. We all see things through the filter of our upbringing and our experiences. But truly wise people are those who realize the limiting effects of their biases, and who will consider new information even when it contradicts their existing beliefs.
The 9/11 Truth movement was born as a result of people who were willing to look beyond the obvious. They didn’t take what they were told as unchallengeable truth; they used their brains to evaluate what they were told and what they saw. They tested the information critically.
2010-11-30
Banned from Blogger: 9/11 taboos, disinformation, and hope
http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/banned-from-blogger-911-taboos-disinformation-and-hope/
By Craig McKee
I have to admit that when I started writing about the so-called terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 just three months ago, I was somewhat naive. I thought that everyone who doubts the official story about 9/11 would be working towards a common goal.
Now, I’m not so sure.
I am sure that there are thousands of sincere people around the world who feel we’ve been conned and who don’t want to let it happen. What has come to be known as the 9/11 Truth movement is made up of many educated and intelligent people who know that the official story is impossible on hundreds of different grounds. Without people like David Ray Griffin, Barrie Zwicker, Richard Gage, Mark Gaffney, Dylan Avery and others, we’d be nowhere.
But the online world of 9/11 discussion and debate has a dark side. And this comes in the form of web sites that censor certain views and online “contributors” who ridicule certain beliefs about what happened. They don’t refute them, they just dismiss. Reminds me of how the media has treated the 9/11 Truth movement.
I got a taste of this myself recently when I was banned from the largest 9/11 truth site in the world: 9/11 Blogger with its claimed 18 million hits. Apparently I’m not the first; many have been banished to voiceless purgatory. Or at least to other sites.
I had a blog post of mine posted on the site about three weeks ago, and I was pleased about this. I felt that if I could post my own articles there, my blog would gain readership. So I registered, was accepted, and posted two more articles. One, accusing USA Today’s Mike Walter of lying about what he saw at the Pentagon, was censored. I lived with it.
By Craig McKee
I have to admit that when I started writing about the so-called terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 just three months ago, I was somewhat naive. I thought that everyone who doubts the official story about 9/11 would be working towards a common goal.
Now, I’m not so sure.
I am sure that there are thousands of sincere people around the world who feel we’ve been conned and who don’t want to let it happen. What has come to be known as the 9/11 Truth movement is made up of many educated and intelligent people who know that the official story is impossible on hundreds of different grounds. Without people like David Ray Griffin, Barrie Zwicker, Richard Gage, Mark Gaffney, Dylan Avery and others, we’d be nowhere.
But the online world of 9/11 discussion and debate has a dark side. And this comes in the form of web sites that censor certain views and online “contributors” who ridicule certain beliefs about what happened. They don’t refute them, they just dismiss. Reminds me of how the media has treated the 9/11 Truth movement.
I got a taste of this myself recently when I was banned from the largest 9/11 truth site in the world: 9/11 Blogger with its claimed 18 million hits. Apparently I’m not the first; many have been banished to voiceless purgatory. Or at least to other sites.
I had a blog post of mine posted on the site about three weeks ago, and I was pleased about this. I felt that if I could post my own articles there, my blog would gain readership. So I registered, was accepted, and posted two more articles. One, accusing USA Today’s Mike Walter of lying about what he saw at the Pentagon, was censored. I lived with it.
2010-11-28
How Occam’s Razor can be twisted to serve “the official story”
http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/11/13/how-occam%E2%80%99s-razor-can-be-twisted-to-serve-%E2%80%9Cthe-official-story%E2%80%9D/
By Craig McKee
Conspiracy “debunkers” have a number of weapons at their disposal to discredit those who try to expose deceptions and cover-ups.
They will often condescendingly brush aside what these people say by making fun of their ideas so they don’t have to actually refute them. If that doesn’t work, they can explain how the conspiracy would be too involved or that someone would give away the secret or that the powers that be “would just never do anything that terrible.” Failing that they can resort to putting their hands over their ears and singing, la la la la la la la la until their opponents go away.
But there’s another way touted enthusiastically by believers of official stories. That is to invoke the dreaded Occam’s Razor, which most people take as being “the simpler of two theories is usually the best.” Once this has been cited, any conspiracy proponent is supposedly left helpless.
What is Occam’s Razor? It is a principle credited to William of Occam, a 14th century Franciscan friar. His notion was that when choosing between two competing theories – all other things being equal – the simpler one is usually better.
It can be very useful for scientific debates, but unfortunately it has been co-opted to mean that conspiracies don’t happen because the explanation of how they were done seems more complicated than the explanation of the cover story. This, of course, makes no sense when the possibility of deception is involved.
By Craig McKee
Conspiracy “debunkers” have a number of weapons at their disposal to discredit those who try to expose deceptions and cover-ups.
They will often condescendingly brush aside what these people say by making fun of their ideas so they don’t have to actually refute them. If that doesn’t work, they can explain how the conspiracy would be too involved or that someone would give away the secret or that the powers that be “would just never do anything that terrible.” Failing that they can resort to putting their hands over their ears and singing, la la la la la la la la until their opponents go away.
But there’s another way touted enthusiastically by believers of official stories. That is to invoke the dreaded Occam’s Razor, which most people take as being “the simpler of two theories is usually the best.” Once this has been cited, any conspiracy proponent is supposedly left helpless.
What is Occam’s Razor? It is a principle credited to William of Occam, a 14th century Franciscan friar. His notion was that when choosing between two competing theories – all other things being equal – the simpler one is usually better.
It can be very useful for scientific debates, but unfortunately it has been co-opted to mean that conspiracies don’t happen because the explanation of how they were done seems more complicated than the explanation of the cover story. This, of course, makes no sense when the possibility of deception is involved.
2010-11-16
Why they didn't use planes
Bruecke Note: Gerard Holmgren passed away Sunday May 2nd 2010. He was 51. Gerard only found out 2 weeks prior to his passing that he had inoperable cancer, and spent his final days in the palliative care unit of Canterbury Hospital surrounded by loving friends.
After reading the article below, I recommend to this audience that they explore other Holmgren writings on the 9/11 Close Up website and to google his name. The Truth and Shadows blog has offered a re-publishing of a gem of 9/11 satire by Holmgren that is also worth reading.
Why they didn't use planes
By Gerard Holmgren
http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=71
Sometimes people ask me "why would they use missiles or whatever and run the risk of being caught out ? If they're going to sell a story about planes, why not make it as convincing as possible and use real planes" ?
It's a silly question, because in the face of direct visual and forensic proof that they didn't use planes (mostly supported by what little witness evidence we have), speculations about their thinking and planning are meaningless.
Nevertheless, since we live in extremely silly times, I'm going to address this question on its own terms.
Put yourself in the position of the perps. You have to think through what could go wrong in each possible scenario and then decide which scenario poses the smallest risk.
You want to sell a story about hijacked planes.
At the first level of decision making, you have two choices.
1) Actually use planes.
2) Use missiles or whatever the blobs 11 thing is, and convince people that they were planes.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
After reading the article below, I recommend to this audience that they explore other Holmgren writings on the 9/11 Close Up website and to google his name. The Truth and Shadows blog has offered a re-publishing of a gem of 9/11 satire by Holmgren that is also worth reading.
Why they didn't use planes
By Gerard Holmgren
http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=71
Sometimes people ask me "why would they use missiles or whatever and run the risk of being caught out ? If they're going to sell a story about planes, why not make it as convincing as possible and use real planes" ?
It's a silly question, because in the face of direct visual and forensic proof that they didn't use planes (mostly supported by what little witness evidence we have), speculations about their thinking and planning are meaningless.
Nevertheless, since we live in extremely silly times, I'm going to address this question on its own terms.
Put yourself in the position of the perps. You have to think through what could go wrong in each possible scenario and then decide which scenario poses the smallest risk.
You want to sell a story about hijacked planes.
At the first level of decision making, you have two choices.
1) Actually use planes.
2) Use missiles or whatever the blobs 11 thing is, and convince people that they were planes.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
2010-09-11
Inconvenient 911 Truth goes back to GHWBush
Bruecke Note: The importance of this posting is neither the commentary nor the extracted passages. It is the linked PDF files and websites for you to download, read, and research the matter on your own. 9/11 wasn't just a forward facing event designed to shock & awe the nation into achieving the PNAC's shopping list. 9/11 was at the onset a backward facing event, whose purpose was to clean up some legal loose ends from the G.H.W. Bush Administration and their misdeeds that would otherwise have come due and come to light... If the destruction of the SEC and its WTC records, as well as the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) and all of its records and investigative personnel at the Pentagon in the only wing attacked had not been so thorough. Again, George Orwell's words: he who controls the present, controls the past; he who controls the past, controls the future. If all whiff of stink is purged from the G.H.W. Bush administration, many of whom found posts within the G.W. Bush administration [present-2001 investigations into the past], then, by golly, those seasoned experts are given a green light into doing whatever the hell they wanted -- creating their own reality and forcing it on the world -- going forward.
Inconvenient 911 Truth goes back to GHWBush
Commentary by Maxwell C. Bridges
2009-08-10
Here's the most comprehensive report I've seen yet to justify 9/11 as an inside job, and thankfully ties in the criminality of former CIA Director G. H. W. Bush as both Vice President (to clueless Reagan) and President.
- Collateral Damage of 9/11 (PDF)
- Collateral Damage of 9/11 Part II(PDF)
The above provides motive for the insiders. Below is proof of insider involvement as documented by the NIST Final Report on WTC-7. NIST writes with emphasis added:
Gravitational acceleration means freefall; the entirety of stage 2's potential energy was converted into kinetic energy (accelerating downward motion); and no energy was available to destroy columns, floors, or building content. (Even if we accept the theory of how heavily damaged WTC-7 was without exploring how it got so damaged and when) how could 8 stories of columns (whether or not weakened), floors, and material suddenly transition into negligible support?
The ramifications of freefall in any stage of collapse in any of the WTC buildings is additional energy sources (like explosives) has to be planted and therefore the circle of 9/11 conspirators was much larger and included insiders.
For further information into this high school physics, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
Inconvenient 911 Truth goes back to GHWBush
Commentary by Maxwell C. Bridges
2009-08-10
Here's the most comprehensive report I've seen yet to justify 9/11 as an inside job, and thankfully ties in the criminality of former CIA Director G. H. W. Bush as both Vice President (to clueless Reagan) and President.
- Collateral Damage of 9/11 (PDF)
"[N]ot only were the buildings targets, but ... specific offices within each building were the designated targets. ... [T]he attacks of September 11th were intended to cover-up the clearing of $240 billion dollars in securities covertly created in September 1991 to fund a covert economic war against the Soviet Union, during which 'unknown' western investors bought up much of the Soviet industry, with a focus on oil and gas. The attacks of September 11th also served to derail multiple Federal investigations away from crimes associated with the 1991 covert operation.
~ E. P. Heidner
- Collateral Damage of 9/11 Part II(PDF)
"The U.S. Subprime and global financial crises of 2008 was the direct result of a covert monetary policy implemented by the U.S. financial institutional caretakers of the World War II Black Eagle Gold Fund."
~ E. P. Heidner
The above provides motive for the insiders. Below is proof of insider involvement as documented by the NIST Final Report on WTC-7. NIST writes with emphasis added:
"In stage 2, the North face descended at gravitational acceleration as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the North face. The free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 meters (105 feet), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 and t= 4.0 seconds."
Gravitational acceleration means freefall; the entirety of stage 2's potential energy was converted into kinetic energy (accelerating downward motion); and no energy was available to destroy columns, floors, or building content. (Even if we accept the theory of how heavily damaged WTC-7 was without exploring how it got so damaged and when) how could 8 stories of columns (whether or not weakened), floors, and material suddenly transition into negligible support?
The ramifications of freefall in any stage of collapse in any of the WTC buildings is additional energy sources (like explosives) has to be planted and therefore the circle of 9/11 conspirators was much larger and included insiders.
For further information into this high school physics, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
"Perhaps the greatest fantasy of the present moment is that there is a choice here. We can look forward or backward, turn the page on history or not. Don't believe it. History matters.
~ Tom Engelhardt
"Truth, through her eternal laws, unveils error. Truth causes sin to betray itself... Even the disposition to excuse guilt or to conceal it is punished. The avoidance of justice and the denial of truth tend to perpetuate sin, invoke crime, jeopardize self-control, and mock divine mercy."
~ Mary Baker Eddy (ca. 1865)
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
PNAC: Rebuilding America's Defenses
Source: PNAC: Rebuilding America's Defenses.
Bruecke Note: The Ship of State is a huge vessel. It does not change course on a dime. Ignoring the higher-level communication chain that gives order to the Caption, the ship's communication chain passes from the Captain to various bridge crew members to the engine room and elsewhere about the ship, to align all hands with the tasks before them and implement the new headings and speeds. This PNAC document is the on-ship communication from the late 1990's that directed the crew (PNAC members who joined the Bush Administration) that would turn the Ship of State in a radical manner starting in September 11, 2001 (if you discount the overtly rigged 2000 election). This document contains much more than the often quoted passage about a new Pearl Harbor to motivate the masses into accepting and backing such change.
The report states that integrating information technologies into the military will take a long period of time, unless an unexpected attack reveals our technological inferiority, in the same way Pearl Harbor led to the huge expansion of our Navy.
It also "urges regime change in Iraq."
* PNAC saw Iraq (South Korea, and Iran) as a threat for acquiring ballistic missiles.
* PNAC wanted to project American force into the Gulf region with permanent military bases regardless of Saddam Hussein's regime, but that the unresolved Iraqi conflict provided immediate justification.
* PNAC wanted to transform the military with respect to global missile defenses, control of space and cyberspace, and conventional forces (like using contractors and mercenaries). However, such change to the military would not happen quickly without a catalyst and needed to occur within the larger framework of U.S. national security strategies.
Connect the freakin' dots. With 9/11 as the catalyst, PNAC (who by then had become influential members of the Bush Administration) could and did achieve its shopping list.
Bruecke Note: The Ship of State is a huge vessel. It does not change course on a dime. Ignoring the higher-level communication chain that gives order to the Caption, the ship's communication chain passes from the Captain to various bridge crew members to the engine room and elsewhere about the ship, to align all hands with the tasks before them and implement the new headings and speeds. This PNAC document is the on-ship communication from the late 1990's that directed the crew (PNAC members who joined the Bush Administration) that would turn the Ship of State in a radical manner starting in September 11, 2001 (if you discount the overtly rigged 2000 election). This document contains much more than the often quoted passage about a new Pearl Harbor to motivate the masses into accepting and backing such change.
The report states that integrating information technologies into the military will take a long period of time, unless an unexpected attack reveals our technological inferiority, in the same way Pearl Harbor led to the huge expansion of our Navy.
It also "urges regime change in Iraq."
* PNAC saw Iraq (South Korea, and Iran) as a threat for acquiring ballistic missiles.
* PNAC wanted to project American force into the Gulf region with permanent military bases regardless of Saddam Hussein's regime, but that the unresolved Iraqi conflict provided immediate justification.
* PNAC wanted to transform the military with respect to global missile defenses, control of space and cyberspace, and conventional forces (like using contractors and mercenaries). However, such change to the military would not happen quickly without a catalyst and needed to occur within the larger framework of U.S. national security strategies.
Connect the freakin' dots. With 9/11 as the catalyst, PNAC (who by then had become influential members of the Bush Administration) could and did achieve its shopping list.
Critical History - The U.S. is a CORPORATION
Bruecke Note: One of the reasons why normal citizens of the United States refuse to grasp that its elected leaders could seemingly act in direct contradiction to their campaign promises is that they don't understand the true corporate structure of the government. Although the Constitution spells out what the duties of each branch of government and some of its key individuals are, its original form put liability on the shoulders of Congress, et al. So just like a for-profit corporation can shield (to a certain degree) an individual (and an individual's assets) from the liability of actions undertaken at the corporations behest, a legal CORPORATION was established around the running of government. Many of the positions within the corporation retained the titles of the parallel public position, but the corporate government performed duties to please the board of directors and its shareholders, and not the public who seemingly voted them into office. This article gives insight into how that shadow government came into being. It is a long piece well worth reading when you have time.
When the War was over they formed a new foundational document, The Articles of Confederation, that document recognized this nation as a nation made up of independent sovereign United States, and gave the name “The United States of America” to the new government. Many of the people of this new nation felt that it was wrong to leave England. Sure there were rights violations but those were livable and their future was a certainty as an English Colony. Now that they were on their own nothing at all was sure.
Over the next ten years conditions in this country continually got worse. The individual States gave little regard to any other State and paid nearly no attention at all to the central government. After ten years of independence from Great Britain conditions were far worse than they had ever been under Great Britain’s rule and protection. Many wanted government officials to go back to Great Britain and beg the King to take us back, and they almost did.
Critical History - The U.S. is a CORPORATION
Posted by: wacla.org on May 23, 2010On the Fourth of July 1776,
the American states were united at war with Great Britain and had just declared their Independance. But what did it mean? What does it mean now? - Independence. This nation acted like one of England’s colonies for hundreds of years and in that time had grown to become one of Great Britain’s most productive resources. Then the French American War began and England came to defend the “colonists” incurring great debts and finally winning the war. Britain decided that it needed to keep troops here even though it did not have sufficient forts and that it could not afford to build such forts; therefore they decided to compel the people here to quarter the British troops in their homes with room and board; for protection of such troops they confiscated the peoples guns; the King also created a sales tax. The rights of the colonists became so abused that it became necessary to stand against Great Britain’s abuse over, “the last straw” — though most of the sales taxes were dropped, on a few key imported items like tea and shugar they went from from 3% to 6%. In response, rather than paying the increased tax, some of the colonists had a party (the Boston Tea Party) and threw a load of tea into the harbor; while others formed the Declaration of Independence and went to war.When the War was over they formed a new foundational document, The Articles of Confederation, that document recognized this nation as a nation made up of independent sovereign United States, and gave the name “The United States of America” to the new government. Many of the people of this new nation felt that it was wrong to leave England. Sure there were rights violations but those were livable and their future was a certainty as an English Colony. Now that they were on their own nothing at all was sure.
Over the next ten years conditions in this country continually got worse. The individual States gave little regard to any other State and paid nearly no attention at all to the central government. After ten years of independence from Great Britain conditions were far worse than they had ever been under Great Britain’s rule and protection. Many wanted government officials to go back to Great Britain and beg the King to take us back, and they almost did.
GHW Bush’s Shadow Government Blackmailed By 9/11 Co-Conspirator, Mossad
Bruecke Note: The more one delves into the range of conspirators on 9/11, the more static and disinformation from all sides we get to deflect the blame elsewhere: Zionists, British elite, US Military, US Government, CIA, NSA, corporate media, Israeli Mossad, Pakistan. These conspirators thought that they could name a CIA Afghanistan asset and a database application on drug warlord (Osama bin Laden and Al Queda, respectively) as the sole source of the demolitions and destruction observed on 9/11. Beep-Beep, No! The correct answer is "All of the above."
The interesting thing about disinformation is that it cannot all be lies. In order to be accepted as believable, it has to have grains of truth, even if misapplied or misinterpreted.
I do not know where this article falls on the disinformation spectrum, and I apologize for any inference there. What I do know is that it has some grains of truth that need to be plucked out.
GHW Bush’s Shadow Government Blackmailed By 9/11 Co-Conspirator, Mossad
The interesting thing about disinformation is that it cannot all be lies. In order to be accepted as believable, it has to have grains of truth, even if misapplied or misinterpreted.
I do not know where this article falls on the disinformation spectrum, and I apologize for any inference there. What I do know is that it has some grains of truth that need to be plucked out.
GHW Bush’s Shadow Government Blackmailed By 9/11 Co-Conspirator, Mossad
By: plunger Thursday March 18, 2010 4:53 am
With the US moving bunker buster bombs into place for an imminent attack on Iran, now is the time for all patriots to reveal why the US is being forced by Israel to acquire more territory and resources on Israel’s behalf – to create "Eretz Israel." It’s as simple as Blackmail.
The bond between GHW Bush and Israeli intelligence (initiated in the sixties) was cemented around the Iran Hostage Crisis. Begin had been furious that he was effectively forced into a bad deal for Israel (giving up territory) by Jimmy Carter, and wanted to ensure that Carter would not be re-elected.
It was at that point that Israel aligned itself with the Republican party, and GHW Bush brokered the relationship that would ensure a Reagan victory. This set the stage for the co-conspirators to form their own Shadow Government within the United States Government – which remains in place despite an apparent change of party control. The Lewinsky affair with Clinton was arranged by these co-conspirators to take down Clinton at the behest of GHW Bush, who was pissed that Clinton had denied him a second term. Israel had their own reasons to apply pressure to Clinton.
This Shadow Government, with Mossad as its co-conspirator, planned and executed 9/11, the (Rumsfeld/Zack) Anthrax attacks, and all that followed. What the Christian Zionists never expected was that Israel would use these same events to blackmail their co-conspirators, which serves to explain why the US Government is so actively engaged in the cover-up of 9/11, while allowing Israel to do as it pleases in Gaza, Lebanon, and coming soon – Iran. All of the Shadow Government operatives, all the way up to David Rockefeller, are being held hostage by Israeli blackmail. Israel has ALL the evidence hanging over their heads, and effectively controls America (and its nuclear arsenal) as a result:
With the US moving bunker buster bombs into place for an imminent attack on Iran, now is the time for all patriots to reveal why the US is being forced by Israel to acquire more territory and resources on Israel’s behalf – to create "Eretz Israel." It’s as simple as Blackmail.
The bond between GHW Bush and Israeli intelligence (initiated in the sixties) was cemented around the Iran Hostage Crisis. Begin had been furious that he was effectively forced into a bad deal for Israel (giving up territory) by Jimmy Carter, and wanted to ensure that Carter would not be re-elected.
It was at that point that Israel aligned itself with the Republican party, and GHW Bush brokered the relationship that would ensure a Reagan victory. This set the stage for the co-conspirators to form their own Shadow Government within the United States Government – which remains in place despite an apparent change of party control. The Lewinsky affair with Clinton was arranged by these co-conspirators to take down Clinton at the behest of GHW Bush, who was pissed that Clinton had denied him a second term. Israel had their own reasons to apply pressure to Clinton.
This Shadow Government, with Mossad as its co-conspirator, planned and executed 9/11, the (Rumsfeld/Zack) Anthrax attacks, and all that followed. What the Christian Zionists never expected was that Israel would use these same events to blackmail their co-conspirators, which serves to explain why the US Government is so actively engaged in the cover-up of 9/11, while allowing Israel to do as it pleases in Gaza, Lebanon, and coming soon – Iran. All of the Shadow Government operatives, all the way up to David Rockefeller, are being held hostage by Israeli blackmail. Israel has ALL the evidence hanging over their heads, and effectively controls America (and its nuclear arsenal) as a result:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)