Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Let me put it this way

I've been surprised by some of the reaction to The Guns of 9/11. My point, I thought, was modest and uncontentious: the case for conspiracy should be led by the strongest material and with the least amount of speculation. I suggested that the weakest evidence, as it is the most subject to interpretation, is the physical. "Enough happened that is beyond reasonable dispute," I wrote. "We shouldn't let our conjecture about how it happened dominate the argument. Even if it's well-founded." As examples of stronger material, I suggested such things as the movement of wealth, the coincident war games, and the Florida flight schools. And there is much more.

Charles Shaw wrote:

Although your “Coincidence Theorist’s Guide” is one of the most brilliant things on 9/11 I have as yet read, I am absolutely flummoxed by the obtuseness and spinelessness of “The Guns of 9/11”. Are you trying to sabotage our movement? Or have you just completely lost your moxie? If you are not part of the solution, you are merely another part of the problem. If that is in fact the case, do us all a favor and get the hell out of the way.

Charles, you're not the first I've flummoxed with obtuseness, so here's another stab at clarity. And while I'm glad you appreciate the "Coincidence Theorist's Guide", I wrote in "Guns" that I intentionally omitted from the Guide issues of physical evidence because I didn't want to dilute its argument. So if you think I didn't have moxie last week, maybe I didn't have it last August, either.

And perhaps I should repeat here something I wrote last September about the "9/11 Truth Movement":

"As my quotation marks hopefully suggest, I don't exactly embrace the term. Truth, especially with a capital "T," is elusive at the best of times, and these aren't they. We ought, rather, to be 9/11 skeptics, of not only the official story but also the competing narratives, because if we abandon critical thought and lapse into solipsistic dogma, we become nothing but evangelizing priests of a conspiracist cult. (And if that happens, then my wife is going to say 'I told you so.')"

My fear for the "9/11 Truth Movement" is that it is making the same missteps the Kennedy assassination researchers made 40 years ago when there was still a chance for something like justice.

Philadelphia lawyer Vincent Salandria was one of the earliest and best critics of the Warren Commission. Immediately after its Report was issued, he wrote a highly detailed critique for The Legal Intelligencer analyzing how the trajectories and ballistics were all wrong. In 1975, as Gaeton Fonzi was preparing for work as a government investigator on the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, he visited Salandria, whom he found dejected about the fruits of a dozen years of research.

Fonzi quotes Salandria in his important book, The Last Investigation:

I'm afraid we were misled. All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time and effort microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy. Don't you think the men who killed Kennedy had the means to do it in the most sophisticated and subtle way? They chose not to. Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: "We are in control and no one not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official - no one can do anything about it." It was a message to the people that their government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message....

The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but repression. I suggest to you that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact - and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down.

Microanalyzing keeps us busy. Meanwhile, they get away with it, again. 9/11 is a crime, and as I've said, crimes are not in the end How Done Its, they are Who Done Its. And if we are ever to reach the end, which is justice, then we had better get it through our heads that knowing the mechanics of their magic doesn't get us there.

Consider the superior studies of 9/11. Michael Ruppert's Crossing the Rubicon takes the form of the case for the prosecution, and Daniel Hopsicker's Welcome to Terrorland regards Florida as a crime scene. Neither touch the physical evidence.

Here's Ruppert, writing in the Fall of 2003, in The Kennedys, Physical Evidence, and 9/11:

To those with long-suffering sacrifice in the field of assassination research, the fortieth anniversary of the death of JFK must seem like a bad dream that has finally ended. There are many lessons from the barrage of JFK anniversary programming, from JFK's death itself, and from the murder of his brother Robert, which show that physical evidence - as obvious and as glaring as it might be - has never before succeeded in overturning an established government lie in the minds of the people. That awareness was with me on 9/11 and it remains validated by experience in the post-9/11 world.

Once I knew the meaning of Kennedy's murder, it no longer mattered to me how many gunmen there were, or from where they pulled their triggers. I knew who paid for the bullets.

Once I knew the meaning of the falling towers, it no longer mattered to me how they fell. I knew who paid for that, too.

68 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

In many ways, the physical anomalies of 9/11 are a double edged sword - Events such as the linear collapse of WTC7 have had the effect, for many, of being the catalyst in opening their eyes to the many other anomolies and downplayed facts of 9/11. Physical evidence has been extremely powerful in this sense. At the same time, it is the nature of such physical evidence that provides fuel for sustained argument, derision and ridicule.

Whilst we should NOT discard physical evidence, it is the factual evidence that should reign supreme.

3:56 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

its truly laughable to suggest that sensible caution regarding 911 theories is tantamount to trying to undo the 'truth' movement.
the greatest friends to this genuine and i think exciting movement towards uncovering the bullshit are those that demand rigour, that 'suspect' certain theories to be correct but dont leap to conclusions without sufficient evidence, quite that is just plain stupid.

4:15 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I absolutely agree.
If we want to have an impact we need to concentrate on the smoking guns. The behaviour of Bush, Rummy and Myers and the absence of the air defense on the one hand and the complete absence of identification of the alleged hijackers (the basic rules of any trial) should suffice to make a strong case. And we should spend more time on building that case.

4:36 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You want smoking guns for 9/11?
The planes that flew, the planes that didn't. The buildings that were hit, the buildings that collapsed. The people on the planes, the people that weren't. The money that moved. There are nothing but smoking guns everywhere; a landscape of smoking guns.
Sometimes, smoke gets in your eyes.

6:48 a.m.  
Blogger spooked said...

I think it's all worth investigating. The "movement" is not going to live or die because some researchers micro-analyze physical data.

I am still dubious that a broad enough spectrum of the US public will ever accept the obvious truth that 9/11 was an inside job. Moreover there is just too much at stake for the US government to admit to wrong doing. There is more than enough evidence out there to convince anyone with an open mind that there was government complicity. I think with time, more and more people will question the official government story-- there are plenty of excellent books out there to help people along. Maybe eventually enough people will see the light to have a political effect.

I pass on my thoughts on 9/11 to those who might be open to it, and I run my blog on 9/11. Starting serious 9/11 activism is hard because I have a job and a family to support, and frankly it is extremely difficult to go to strangers and start talking about 9/11. But I have given plenty of time and money to seeking 9/11 truth.

Meanwhile, I analyze the physical data (such as what exactly hit the pentagon, how did flight 93 disappear into the ground, how did the towers collapse?) because it is an interesting intellectual puzzle. And maybe we can uncover some little nugget that will bring the whole story together.

8:36 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of my responsibilities in my work is to do investigations. Perhaps I'm not the best in the business, but I do the usual who, what, where, when, how stuff. Grunt work, to be sure. I don't find a separation between what happened and who did it. It's all in the art of asking the questions. In that sense, I appreciate Ruppert's work, and because I know the value of critical thinking, I have no confidence whatsoever that an abandonment of accepting the official narrative on the 9/11 will ever reach a critical mass in the US.

We just don't have the guts to own the messy but more accurate story. We don't want the rage. We want the myth. We want NFL football. We want SUVs. We want American puffery.

Like the West Indians who reportedly couldn't see European explorers' ships on the horizon, we can't see how power is really being used to run our country. We can't see the exploding skulls, the ruthlessness of those who order them, the complete lack of compassion in those whom we choose as rulers.

America is a religion. The place of worship is the television. Let is pray.

9:28 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Jeff,

I have enjoyed reading the articles on your site, as far-out as some of the subject matter is. Just wanted to add my 2c on the issue of physical evidence. I agree that most of the speculation on just how, physically, 9/11 happened is not very interesting or compelling. Some of the more outlandish theories about explosives and such just distract from the larger picture of where and through whom the money flowed.

However, the physical anomalies are perhaps the first sign that something is amiss. I remember very clearly the moment I started to suspect something was up. In the week or so after 9/11, it was reported that Mohammed Atta's passport was found in the ruins. The passport of the alleged ringleader just happened to survive a fiery crash that demolished a plane and one of the world's tallest buildings? And just happened to be found on top of a pile of rubble that would take several months to clear out? When I saw these reports, my immediate interpretation was that MSM was telegraphing state propaganda. That insight has led me down a 4-year rabbit hole, the features of which you (Jeff) have described so well in just one blog.

So, the physical anomalies are worth documenting in that they might lead people to question the official story. But on the other hand, if you haven't questioned it by now you probably are never going to.

9:38 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The "nugget" most likely to "bring the whole story together" to prove conspiracy in the case of 9-11 would be a confession by one of the perpetrators of the conspiracy. Deathbed or otherwise.

I'm not sure anything less would suffice, for the majority of Americans. But the inquiry needs to proceed anyway.

What most tends to incriminate the Bush administration in my mind is their behavior in response to the attacks. The whole mythic promulgation of "Islamofascist terror" as a "global threat"...whaat?

In the aftermath of the Cold War, it's possible to argue pro or con on whether the Soviet Union comprised a global military threat bent to global domination. But in defense of the Cold Warriors, at least the Russians and their satellites and allies had well-equipped armies, navies, air forces, and military technologies ranging from the competently modern to world-class state of the art, with capabilities ranging from nuclear submarines to jet fighter interceptors and the ability to deploy "fractional orbital bomabardment systems"- space-based nuclear-armed ballistic weapons.

Attempting to invoke the same "global threat" case based on the activities of a small band of renegades is simply ludicrous- no matter what cinematic spectacular they may have pulled off on Sept. 11, 2001. And my basic opinion about that won't even change in the event that they some day manage to successfully smuggle in and detonate a tac nuke in my hometown of Sacramento. ( I'm located about midway between the State Capitol and the local mosque, incidentally. )

They just aren't the same magnitude of threat as the Cold War era Soviet Union, and they never will be. So enough of the rubbish about "fighting them over there so we won't have to fight them over here", and bring the boys home. And let's return to our collective senses here in America, casting a cold eye on those who have sought to manipulate our fears.

If there's a tac nuke in my event horizon, the USA invading the Middle East will have done nothing to forestall it. To say the least.

9:38 a.m.  
Blogger Jeff Wells said...

"I have no confidence whatsoever that an abandonment of accepting the official narrative on the 9/11 will ever reach a critical mass in the US."

I think it will, eventually, when it becomes untenable to maintain the cognitive dissonance between the myth and reality of America. By then it will be too late to do anything about it, except to duck and cover and say "I told you so." But it will be a precondition of constructing a new republic out of the ashes of empire.

9:49 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff,

I agree with you that one should not get bogged down in details concerning the physical evidence. As far as I am concerned Nico Haupt and his group of researchers have pretty well answered most of the questions.

An interesting comment is made by "Angie" in her blog "Watching the Watchers" (she specialises in exposing disinfo agents):

"There's also been another possible motive for the 9-11 attacks that I've speculated about since the beginning. Have you ever wondered why the 9-11 official story was so implausible and so sloppily put together? (you know, the simultaneous hijacking of four different planes by people armed with mere boxcutters, the suicide notes found in luggage that inadvertently didn't make it on the planes, Arabic flight manuals left in cars in the airport, and a million other things they did which seem like obvious plants, or things they didn't do or create which would have squelched many of the 9-11 skeptics early on.) It's as if they want us to see through the whole thing. Could the perpetrators, in fact, want a 911 Truth Movement to flourish? And if so, why?

Perhaps the perpetrators are deliberately setting up the U.S. to be the bad guy to the rest of the world, perhaps to give the rest of the world the notion that they'd have to consolidate to fight the sole superpower, getting us that much closer to a one world government that so many global elite long for. Perhaps the 'transparent 9-11 inside job/ mass murder deliberately painted on others for a non-ending war pretext' is just a part of that, part of the intentional plotting to have the U.S. be seen as the real rogue nation that others must get together to fight against.

Everywhere you look, it seems, the U.S. goes out of its way, against its interests, to put itself in the worst possible light. The U.S. could easily have, for example, planted weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to make itself look better, but it didn't. And the U.S. could perform identical horrible actions around the world without the seemingly intentionally abrasive and arrogant foreign policy pronouncements which alienate our allies' populations. And why has the U.S. media and even governmental officials taking a liking recently to reporting on war prisoner abuse when they've never paid such close attention to it so close in time to it before? It's hard to believe that the sloppiness of 9-11, and these other items, are just due to the incompetence of those in charge, and so I speculate."

It seems to me the official story was deliberately transparent, meant to ridicule and mock the American public.

10:28 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I, too, was surprised that no WMDs turned up in Iraq. As they quip, "We had the receipts." What did he do with them all? Anyhow, I read later - I think it was by Gordon Thomas, Global Intel - that a secret mission had indeed been dispatched to plant the evidence, but they were killed by friendly fire before they reached their destination!

10:45 a.m.  
Blogger Professor Pan said...

Anonymous writes:

Perhaps the perpetrators are deliberately setting up the U.S. to be the bad guy to the rest of the world, perhaps to give the rest of the world the notion that they'd have to consolidate to fight the sole superpower, getting us that much closer to a one world government that so many global elite long for. Perhaps the 'transparent 9-11 inside job/ mass murder deliberately painted on others for a non-ending war pretext' is just a part of that, part of the intentional plotting to have the U.S. be seen as the real rogue nation that others must get together to fight against.

Everywhere you look, it seems, the U.S. goes out of its way, against its interests, to put itself in the worst possible light.

I lean towards this theory myself.

In order to fight an endless global war, the U.S. needs an endless supply of enemies. It's a very simple equation -- blood is the oil that lubricates the insatiable War Machine.

The coup de grace was the Abu Ghraib PSYOPS. Those iconic images of brutality and degradation are burned into the brains of every Muslim on this planet -- which is precisely why they were carefully composed and leaked. They are recruiting images for the necessary generations of enemies.

And don't kid yourself -- the orchestrators of 9/11 are happy to see a "9/11 Truth Movement" materialize because it frames any inquiry into the crimes as "conspiracy," effectively ghettoizing legitimate inquiry. I wish that wasn't the case, but in the mediasphere it's a truism. Once the wall of "conspiracy" goes up it becomes monolithic, and people on both sides disappear from each others' view, the conspiracists degenerating into nit-picking squabbles over scraps of evidence and the programmed mass of consumers returning to their regularly scheduled programs.

Asking someone whose most pressing concern is the winner of American Idol or Survivor to contemplate the ramifications of 9/11 is like trying to convince a starving man that he should refrain from eating a snack because it's made from genetically-modified corn. Opening up to the truth is painful and it demolishes the sugary illusions that sustain our bloated, trivia-obsessed lifestyles.

This is cleary not one of my more optimistic days ;-)

12:52 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We fight our battle for the truth/reality on all fronts, just as they fight against us. What ever moves us towards a more just and equitable society...Malcolm said it best "By any means necessary!" Don't get caught up in symantics. Just because something hasn't been done before or didn't work in the past is not cause to abandon the same path. The boldness of both the JFK assassination and 9/11, indeed, the very arrogance of both actions (not to mention the thousands of other corrupt government actions, agendas, etc.) may be their undoing. Chisle away, piece by piece, brick by brick, the wall of lies will falter under it's own weight.

1:08 p.m.  
Blogger Jeff Wells said...

They are not mutually exclusive, either or; in fact, they are just different aspects of the same issue, they go in tandem with each other. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.

bin'dare, I agree with this exception, which was my initial point: they don't go tandem, they go one after the other.

1:28 p.m.  
Blogger spooked said...

The US is undoubtedly and covertly trying to piss off the muslim world. This goes hand in hand with the idea that 9/11 was trying to spark a clash of civilizations with the Islamic world, since this group has been perceived as a threat to US global hegemony by the elites.

I don't think the US is trying to make everyone in the world mad at us -- I think this is more aimed at the Islamic world. We are also trying to dampen China's growth as well, and trying to control the oil supply helps this. On the other hand I don't think we want to truly anger anyone who can really threaten us, such as the Chinese, the Russians and the Europeans. These nations are probably just looking at us with a jaded eye and watching us over-extend ourselves and then help kick us over when we are ready to fall. I think the idea that US elites want a "one world government" is unlikely. The fact is, the elites basically get what they want as it is.

And I think this is VERY true:
"the orchestrators of 9/11 are happy to see a "9/11 Truth Movement" materialize because it frames any inquiry into the crimes as "conspiracy," effectively ghettoizing legitimate inquiry. I wish that wasn't the case, but in the mediasphere it's a truism. Once the wall of "conspiracy" goes up it becomes monolithic, and people on both sides disappear from each others' view, the conspiracists degenerating into nit-picking squabbles over scraps of evidence and the programmed mass of consumers returning to their regularly scheduled programs."

I think one thing 9/11 researchers need to do is to get on better terms with the media because right now they are walling each other off when they could really help each other considerably. Granted the mainstream media coverage of 9/11 has been total propaganda and this has turned away people like me and I can't trust these people at all now. I really don't know what to do about this. Any suggestions?

2:10 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In general, I agree with the guns of 911 article. However, people react differently to the anomolies and physical evidence. It was the physical evidence (letsroll911) that actually started my journey of discovery over a year ago. I am now fully in the MIHOP camp. For others, especially skeptics, my new approach is to give them the CSPAN David Ray Griffin dvd, and if they are interested, then the Loose Change dvd (one of the better 911 dvds). If they are readers, I suggest both books by David Ray Griffin, and then Michael Ruppert, who present information in a logical manner, and do not rely on physical evidence. Books are great, but many people will not spend the time reading, and many people really don't read anymore, thats why I have changed tactics to open source dvds. People still watch TV.
What upsets me is the arguments within the 911 truth movement, pod, no pod, etc.... There is some evidence for each one of these anomolies, some may be disinfo or real, but don't forget about the big picture that something happen that the official story doesn't really explain, and lets concentrate on that, instead, of holograms, pods, or ego fights within the movement. Alex Jones is a great source of info and the first person to question 911 in the public media, he actually predicted and warned of the 911 attacks prior to september 11, but to the non-informed he appears a little kooky and can turn people off. I now believe he is closer to the truth than others. Ruppert gets flak for peak oil. Whether, you believe in peak oil or not, I believe that it is part of the reason for 911 and industry (i.e. oil companies) are reacting that way, either in response to reality, or to foster this reality to drive prices up. In the last year, I convinced at least 10 people about 911, and I know they have convinced others. Hopefully, there are more people doing this and eventually we will reach critical mass in the near future. The CSPAN DRG talk, is the best initial mechanism for spreading this info. I'm hoping there are other activist out there spreading this information to church organizations, fireman, police, etc...

2:51 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also I forgot to mention Karl Schwarz's "One Way Ticket to Crawford" which is an excellent book about the reasons behind 911 (Afganistan pipeline, Bridas Corporation). But, like Ruppert's book its over 600 pages, and I've had many people say, "Oh I'll never finish a book that long". Dvd's are the best for the TV generation. Hook them with the dvd, and then provide the reading material to support the dvds.

CSPAN- David Ray Griffin talk Or DRG's Santa Rosa talk with graphics
Loose Change dvd (not pod oriented)
Michael Ruppert's the truth and lies of 911
Alex Jones Martial Law
911 In Plane Site
Painful Questions

3:05 p.m.  
Blogger Peter of Lone Tree said...

Jeff,
Your blogsite title of course is "Rigorous Intuition". Here's my intuition: As I stepped into my front yard on 9/11, still ignorant of the events, my neighbor told me about "hijackers crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon". My immediate thought was "hijackers--piloting huge passenger jets--that sounds ridiculous"?

3:43 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous says: Could the perpetrators, in fact, want a 911 Truth Movement to flourish? And if so, why?

Great comments that follow as well. It all reminds me of Don Delillo's comments about JFK and LHO on an old Frontline episode:

The 20th century was built largely out of absurd moments and events. In time we had to invent an adjective, European and literary, that might encapsulate the feeling of impending menace and distorted reality and the sense of a vast alienating force that presses the edges of individual choice.

These things are Kafkaesque.

In America it is the individual himself, floating on random streams of disaffection, who tends to set the terms of the absurd.

A man walks into a diner and shoots 11 strangers. What city was that, and who remembers the shooter's name?

A couple of teenagers wander through their school building shooting teachers and students. How many times did this happen, and where exactly, and who were the kids with the guns?

Oswald changed history not only through his involvement in the death of the president, but also in prefiguring such moments of the American absurd. He was not media-poisoned, as many of the others have been, and his crime was not steeped in the supermarket cult of modern folklore and dread. But think of the outrages and atrocities that flowed from the psychic disorientation of the 1960s -- the assassinations, the cult murders, the mass suicides. It was surely the assassination of President Kennedy that began to give us a sense of something coming undone. This was vintage American violence, lonely and rootless, but it shaded into something older and previously distant, a condition of estrangement and helplessness, an undependable reality. We felt the shock of unmeaning.

6:21 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous says: Could the perpetrators, in fact, want a 911 Truth Movement to flourish? And if so, why?

One thought: It represents an alternative solution to their problems. Remember, "Problem, Reaction, Solution" & "Order out of Chaos". If the end goal is to reduce America to a 2nd/3rd world country so the populace will embrace a one-world-government, then exposing 911 and the geo-political ramifications, might help this agenda. The current plan seems to be use up American troops for PNAC goals, dilute America via illegal immigration, eliminate American manufacturing via outsourcing. World market will change to Euros eventually thus causing a finacial collapse, and then the real powers in control will pick up the pieces. The finacial collapse and battle over oil and resulting wwwIII will happen in either case, but maybe exposing 911 will lessen the negative. If you believe in Karma, then the right thing to do is to expose 911 independent of the results.
I'm sure there are multiple scenarios that have been "gamed", with possible fallback plans and alternative paths depending on how the populace reacts.

6:47 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff -- You said that rejection of the official theory of 9/11 will reach a critical mass in the US "eventually, when it becomes untenable to maintain the cognitive dissonance between the myth and reality of America." I agree. The question is how best, and most rapidly, to bring Americans to that myth-shattering epiphany. You've already gone some way toward answering that question, but it's worth adding that 9/11-related cognitive dissonance exemplifies a much more general phenomenon. The myth persists because of a profoundly felt need, arising from the very depths of Americans' humors, to regard their government as the Benevolent and Wise Father. That is the real barrier to seeing the old man for the serial abuser in soiled drawers that he truly is. With regard to 9/11, there's not much point in bickering over which type of evidence, e.g. physical details vs. movements of wealth, to lead with. No doubt there's plenty there to persuade, or at least strongly incline, anyone with an open mind. But opening minds comes first, and the best way to open minds smothered in the swaddling cloths of paternalism is by encouraging people to get better acquainted with their nation's history.

The shift in attitudes takes time. Like the mariner in Neurath's figure, people must rebuild their boats plank by plank while staying afloat in the open sea. But an American who has read Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States or (to mention an example that crossed my browser yesterday) Harvey Wasserman's article
'Four bloody lies of war, from Havana 1898 to Baghdad 2003' is much more likely to look at 9/11 with an unjaundiced eye than one who hasn't. Relevant literature abounds; no doubt you and your readers are familiar with much of it. And yes, I know, I know, asking Americans to read is like unplugging their TVs -- something undertaken at the risk of a severe pummeling -- but if you can think of a better way (SpongeZinn SquarePants, The Movie?), my mind is open to it.

6:54 p.m.  
Blogger Peter of Lone Tree said...

wolf pauli,

(SpongeZinn SquarePants, The Movie?)

Maybe Michael Moore would be interested in the idea.

9:33 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you're on to something, wolf pauli, on the popularizing notion and particularly about the idea to educate people about the real history of this country as a way of helping them open their eyes to present reality.

The raging success, from purely an entertainment phenomenon point of view if nothing else, of Moore's movie is an inspiration to popularize political commentary and persuasion. Why not some brilliant, creative and entertaining way to tell the truth? Is it really so impossible?

1:51 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think eyeballkid basically nails it; even if (as with Oswald and JFK) the general populace comes to disbelieve the official story at some later date, very little will come of that shift...

Whatever justice comes to those behind 9/11 etc. will if it comes at all be vigilante justice of some sort or another...this guy gave me some hope:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/01/24/MN115878.DTL

but unfortunately he was a bit too much off his rocker to accomplish anything...sometimes I think el Bush may be the weakest link in the 9/11 chain, because he's basically a coward at heart despite the bluster...I can see Cheney smirking all the way to the bitter end but it might be possible to crack the chimp once he's free from the protective bubble that comes with being president.

3:35 a.m.  
Blogger Vanished friend said...

"Why not some brilliant, creative and entertaining way to tell the truth? Is it really so impossible?"

Plays.
Screenplays.
Teleplays.
Songs.
Novels.

Seems like a good idea (Rigorous Intuition: The Movie) but getting anything produced/published would be improbable. And then, has anything like that ever worked before? Not that a precedent is necessary, though...how do we suppose it might work today? How can our side win a meme war? How do you see it happening?

What are some other methods?
Guerrila-type, low-budget:
Graffiti campaigns?
Flash mobs?
Sit-ins, civil disobedience, etc.?
Pamphleteering, postcarding?
Bumper stickers? Buttons? ("LIHOP")

Problem is, those kind of methods are used already by counter-cultural movements, and they don't seem to work that well. Also, the illegality of some of them turns law-abiding people off.

How about getting the Lone Gunmen pilot shown at independent theatres, drive-ins, etc.?

How about a "slander/libel" campaign against the perps? That is, provoking high-profile officials into suing our side for slander/libel.

How about a reward for information?
Could be money, or perhaps some other kind of compensation.

How about we hire a mock Gerald Posner and demand that he be given equal time on TV to attack coincidence theorists?

We need to consult PR experts.

10:35 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I heard there is going to be a weekly series called 911 and it will revolve around the events of September1 11, 2001

11:12 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I doubt that a weekly series about 911 from the Corporate media will reveal any truth except to burn the official story into the minds of the TV audience. Don't expect corporate media to expose anything.

11:32 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous One,how bout we have a show called Get Smart?We have two special agents battle a sinister group called Chaos.One agent will be number 99 and the other 86,in one show they will try to figure out how Chaos gets buildings to fall down in their own foot prints.The Chaos agent thinking he has 99 and 86 where he wants them,tells them the explosives were put in the bricks before the building was constructed.Oh,I am sorry that was already one of the plots of the real show back in the late 60's.It is said some of the writers of Get Smart were connected to CIA spooks,hard to belive,later.

12:12 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Will the day come when the US mainstream press has the balls to follow the UK mainstream press and post something like this?

4:37 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reading your book falling gravity gave me an erection. Reading your blog made me lose it!

7:57 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff's book is called Anxious Gravity, not Falling Gravity.

Jeff -- Maybe you can call your next book Falling Gravity in honor of this chap's lost boner.

8:50 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff - where are you on the RealID act? I'd really love to hear your take on this amazingly fucked piece of legislature.

9:42 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

fact schmact! a fact is nothing more than a juicy steak in the matrix. what matters when trying to influence lives is this: who's telling the most compelling narrative? that is, never let the facts get in the way of a good story. we're all doing this, just some better than others :)

[falling gravity + lost boner = comic genius]

11:40 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the only "physical evidence" of 9/11 that no one disputes is also the claim that most of the "physical evidence" advocates ignore -- the fact the Pentagon was hit in the nearly empty part of the building.

http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html
how the "no plane" claims serve the interests of the conspirators

2:53 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

spyvspy recommends we read Karl Schwarz and watch In Plane Site, Loose Change, Alex Jones and Painful Questions

Schwarz has claimed the towers were rusty and dangerous, but this is almost certainly nonsense. He's also pushing the absurd "Wing TV" site (which seems to specialize in pushing extreme claims and making nasty accusations about 9/11 truth activists who have worked hard to raise the level of awareness). How nice that WingTV magically appeared to throw abuse at us just as 9/11 truth issues started to get taken more seriously by the public.

In Plane Site is a hoax (www.oilempire.us/inplanesite.html). Loose Change seems to be a mere recycling of In Plane Site (same stuff in a different package).

Alex Jones is a mix of real and not-real -- if sincere, he could use a fact checker. He's been used to promote hoaxes on 9/11 complicity numerous times ...


spyvspy also recommends David Griffin and Michael Ruppert (who have accurate material)

Griffin's book "The 9/11 Commission: Omissions and Distortions" is recommended.

Mike Ruppert's book "Crossing the Rubicon" is probably the closest we will get to figuring out how the war games were used to ensure the success of 9/11.


a good list of films is at http://www.oilempire.us/movies.html

a good list of books is at http://www.oilempire.us/books.html

2:59 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff wrote:

As I've said, I suspect WTC 7 was demolished

Well, then, Jeff is a physics-ignorant weenie!

Anyone who studied high-school physics knows the law of free-falling bodies, and how even air resistance causes deviations from what the law predicts. So when a building "collapses" in near-free-fall-time, even though steel resistance is thousands of times greater than air resistance, we thinking humans know that the collapse has not been legitimately described to us by our government.

Nevermind that no airplane hit the building, and no steel framed building has ever in the history of the world had ever collapsed from fire.

Jeff's willful ignorance of this truth seems to be a blissfully self-fullfilling prophecy regarding the merits of the evidence in the case of 9/11.

For him to so seemingly-intellectually make it seem sane to not be certain of the willfull intentional demolition of WTC 7 is the sort of thing the corrupt U.S. goverment might(!) actually pay some people to do.

There are other examples.

Perhaps Jeff would like to turn 9/11 truth into a matter of belief, as with religion, and thus it is somehow sacreligious to think certain thoughts. As if we did not have so much physical evidence in this case!!! Jeff, and some others, would rather focus on "coincidences". (That is unacceptable. Mention them, fine; focus on them, and you're opposing the movement of truth about 9/11.)

Note that this so-called rigorous intuition blog links only to a cadre of 9/11 sites (some of which have boards of directors!) which all not only strictly avoid any discussion of the anomalous physical evidence of 9/11 (just what the corrupt government wants!), but also avoid linking to any web site (which links to any web site) which does consider the anomalous physical evidence (again, just what the corrupt government wants!).

But wait, it gets worse:

This alliance of sites (just look at the 9/11 sites this blog/site links to for a sampling...) also all not only link to the web site of Mark Robinowitz, many of them go out of their way to say what a swell "nose for disinformation sites" Mark Robinowitz possesses (without ever bothering to say how he came to possess this magic nose of his).

Then, this Robinowitz character (who, amazingly, has convinced some 9/11 truthers that we risk falling into "a government trap" if we suggest that it might not have been a 757 which struck the Pentagon!), goes out of his way to label 9/11 sites which honestly present the anomalous physical evidence of 9/11 as "bogus" (again, without saying how he reached or why he makes this pronouncement. It's all kind of secret, just like the corrupt government itself...).

So this cadre of intertwined 'leading' 9/11 sites (incl but not limited to 911truth, 911visibility, septembereleventh, 911citizenswatch, justicefor911) has effectively subcontracted out the divisive attempted-censorship (mis-)labeling to Robinowitz, whom they then all tout as a magically good disinfo detector.

Jeff Wells seems to be an active particpant in this government-serving gratuitously-divisive info-suppressing mechanism. His blog's 9/11 links toe the line, and his blog's recent link to Bush Implicates Bush (ie, a link to a Robinowitz-proclaimed and cadre-declared "bogus" site that honestly presents 9/11 evidence) was quickly eliminated from Jeff's pages.

Jeff, a writer never at a loss for words, has declined comment on this strange disappearance of the link he'd seen fit to add to all his blog's pages only days earlier. Curiously, this removed link presents Bush's self-incriminating quotes as being truthful, while the cadre- and Robinowitz-approved sites present Bush's self-incriminating quotes as lies. (Another interesting anomaly which, coincidentally, just happens to serve the corrupt government, rather than the movement of truth about 9/11.

The type of yellow journalism smear jobs and ridicule and name-calling and mis-labelings against presentations, which only seek to see the truth about 9/11 become known to the general public, might have been expected to have come from the corrupt government which brought us 9/11 and now wishes to suppress/conceal all talk/thought of the scope of The Big Lie of 9/11.

Instead(?), it has come from many of the so-called leaders withIN the so-called (but obviously constipated) 9/11 truth movement.

It is one thing to disagree on strategy details, but quite another for a secretive organization atop a supposedly open movement to go out of its way to systematically marginalize and smear certain presentations of 9/11 evidence, rather than wanting the public to learn and decide for themselves. (One might have expected that it was only those with something to hide, who would prefer for some 9/11 information to not become known, and that some speculations remain suppressed!)

It is also very interesting that this corrupt-government-serving practice has seemingly never been noticed, explained, questioned, nor examined. Barrie Zwicker, another great communicator, who acknowledges that such practices are to be expected, has been strangely silent.

As Jeff quoted Charles Shaw:

Are you trying to sabotage our movement? Or have you just completely lost your moxie? If you are not part of the solution, you are merely another part of the problem. If that is in fact the case, do us all a favor and get the hell out of the way.

Amen to that, Charles!

And that goes double for the corrupt-government-serving secretive divisive information-constraining practices by the so-called leaders and spokesmen among 9/11 truthers.

5:49 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me ask you, what is it that people remember about the Reichstag Fire? The type of Molotov used? Was it really a Molotov, was it diesel or kerosene? Was the fuel throw or placed?
No, nobody remembers and if you dig into it you will STILL find controversy.
The Reichstag Fire is known for the political actions taken in the name of the Reichstag Fire. It will be the same with 9-11, eventually.

We all need to know the physical evidence and it is not to be ignored, it just has to be set in the proper place and remember, Occam's razor cuts both ways.

9:49 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, all researchers are just swimming endlessly upstream in all this...

What is needed in a public Redress of Grievances hearing by and for the world public as the First Amendment spells out for us.

Why Alex Jones isn't sponsoring such a step reveals some remaining impurity in the patriotic cause.

11:09 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sweejak wrote:

Let me ask you, what is it that people remember about the Reichstag Fire? The type of Molotov used? Was it really a Molotov, was it diesel or kerosene? Was the fuel throw or placed?

Well that narrow line of questioning/reasoning totally misses the point, Sweejak! (Too bad you didn't ask about how the corrupt disinfo cadre within the 9/11 truth movement dismisses Bush self-incriminating statements as yet more mere lies.) Let me answer (try to enlighten) you:

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that it is correct to think/talk in terms of Molotov cocktails, suppose that a prompt forensic physical examination of the Reichstag Fire evidence had revealed that thousands of gallons of accelerant -- far more than accused-arsonist Van der Lubbe could have carried or thrown -- was used in carrying out the Reichstag arson!

The German people could then have easily and immediately seen through that early Big Lie of Hitler's, and all the subsequent [political] horrors to which you referred never would have occurred!

Similarly, recognizing that no amount of "hijackers" aboard "767s" could have caused the highly anomalous and seemingly inexplicable "flash frames" (which the shadow government is deathly afraid of becoming more widely discovered) permits even Stupid American Sheeple (zombies) to easily and immediately recognize the scope of The Big Lie now being fed to us by our own government.

People who claim to be in (or worse, leading) the 9/11 truth movement but who oppose -- and work against -- the dissemination or even recognition of this truth are working for the corrupt government and its Big Lie, and against We The People learning the truth about 9/11.

It's just that simple.

The 9/11 truth movement is seriously and severely and systematically compromised from within, by the likes of Kyle "you did not see that flash frame" Hence, and John Judge, and David Kubiak, and Mark Robinowitz, to name just a few prominent limited-hang-out evidence-suppressing 9/11 disinformation agents...

These governmental types (enemies within the 9/11 truth movement) are working hard at suppressing the evidence, and thus the horrible truth(s) about the bogus 'terrorist' attacks of 9/11. And these corrupt zealots are unwilling to accept any difference of opinion -- they actively oppose/suppress/censor the dissemination of this valuable revealing critical information.

So just pick which side you want to be on: the side which helps the lying, mass-murdering, corrput shadow government get away with mass murdering We The People with impunity (by helping keep the dirty government's dirtiest secrets for it by keeping incriminating evidence from We The People), or the side that wishes to expose the great injustice and The Big Lie known as 9/11, by simply making the obvious government-contradicting evidence more widely known.

2:18 p.m.  
Blogger Jeff Wells said...

"The 9/11 truth movement is seriously and severely and systematically compromised from within, by the likes of Kyle "you did not see that flash frame" Hence, and John Judge, and David Kubiak, and Mark Robinowitz, to name just a few prominent limited-hang-out evidence-suppressing 9/11 disinformation agents... these corrupt zealots are unwilling to accept any difference of opinion"

I don't understand how you can be critical of those who do not embrace your conclusions, when you call those with whom you disagree corrupt disinformation agents.

3:38 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff responded:

I don't understand how you can be critical of those who do not embrace your conclusions, when you call those with whom you disagree corrupt disinformation agents.

Well I'll try to help you understand, then, Jeff. It's pretty simple, really:

It's not that those 911 "truth squad" disinformation agents "do not embrace" certain conclusions, it is that they actively and systematically marginalize and thus act to suppress/censor sites which reach conclusions based upon 9/11 evidence that they do not want the American people to become aware of!

As the 9/11 Truth Squad does as much -- if not more -- to suppress such information than does the U.S. government, it is time to recognize the need to filter our 'friends' every bit as critically as we do those we've perceived to not be on our side.

Disinformation agents are easy to recognize, by their actions: Preferring to link to a site which dismisses/devalues Bush's self-incriminating statements as yet more mere lies is a quite good indicator.

So, Jeff, since you've finally responded: what's the deal with your (this) blog's disappearing link to Bush's self-incriminating statements?

2:46 p.m.  
Blogger Jeff Wells said...

I apologize, it was my mistake: I should never have linked to you in the first place.

4:00 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Given that you still do link to 9/11 sites (mostly different heads of the same monster) which self-compromisingly dismiss/devalue Bush's self-incriminating statements as yet more mere lies (among other forms of suppression and compromising of evidence), and that you no longer link to the page with some teeth in it which covers the same evidence, perhaps you are now mistaken about the nature of your mistake.

Or perhaps you are in cahoots with the cadre of evidence-suppressing 9/11 "truth squad" sites to which you once-again-exclusively link, and your unapproved deviation displeased them?

See, Jeff, people will start to recognize that my points (and questions) are well-illustrated and fact-checkable, while yours, like those of the 911 truth squad, and the government proper, are secretive...

I think you owe your readers more than an apology; you owe your readers an explanation.

4:31 p.m.  
Blogger Jeff Wells said...

I answer only to my conscience, and since your site promoted theories I could not support, I dropped the link. Your postings here have only confirmed for me that I made the right decision.

4:49 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

go jeff.

this reminds me of the first book of the iliad, where agamemnon and achilles have a falling out and achilles pulls out of the war.

when there's a valid cause at stake, i always root for the people who refrain from internecine warfare.

- - -

while i'm at it, i enjoyed 2 hours of webster tarpley audio which was linked from an earlier thread here. ordered his new book.

he seems to think that the 9/11 plot came out of the military realm, and they used the nuclear codes to manipulate bush and cheney in certain ways.

but i wonder whether that was a false flag arranged by cheney and rumsfeld. if so, it was pretty clever. you know, faceless guys deep in the military labyrinth, wanting to get back to fighting the russians, feeling that eight years of opportunity had been lost under clinton. it's pretty plausible.

it's also possible that cheney and rumsfeld used this premise to manipulate bush.

in any event, i would expect that the whole operation was designed from the beginning to be full of confusing elements.

confusing enough to set some of the truth seekers at the throats of some of the others...

9:14 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff wrote:

I answer only to my conscience, and since your site promoted theories I could not support, I dropped the link.

1. Without knowing the timeline, readers might actually tend to believe your answer. Knowing the timeline, however, makes your answer seem flimsy, at best:

April 8, 2005 to Jeff:

I'm so impressed by the greatness of your blog. I don't know how or where you find the time...

I have a comment about your 9/11 links. Your site links to some 9/11 sites which seem to go out of their way to let Bush off the hook for his self-incriminating 9/11 statements, by devaluing/discarding them as (yet more) mere lies.

Since that is something no sane investigator would ever do, especially given that the statements have never been questioned, I'm hopeful that you will add a link to the URL in my sig-line.

This page, rather than explain why the statements shouldn't be given too much thought ("Nothing to hear here, Citizen. Move along."), explains how the dubious statements could have been true (and points out that no one has ever questioned them).

PS: http://911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml
goes well with your
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/10/skinny-on-osama.html


April 8, 2005 from Jeff:

Thanks Dave. Next time I update the links, I'll add "Bush implicates Bush."

From 4/14 to 4/19, click-throughs from Jeff's pages appeared in the 911blimp web server's log.

April 25, 2005 to Jeff:

Thanks, Jeff, for the update. Too bad it didn't "take":

I'm wondering why the link failed to remain, among all the
9/11 links your pages offer...


(no reply)

2. What theories which you find unsupportable do you believe (or claim) that www.911blimp.net promotes? (And do these theories to which you refer bolster the government's case, or weaken it? How?)

I'd like to think that you, Jeff, aren't just a cog in some big secretive smear campaign, that tells people which sites to avoid, without ever quite being able to tell anyone why...

The government wants the people to remain ignorant of some aspects of 9/11.

Ditto some portions of the 9/11 truth squad.

Corrupt governments act secretively.

So do corrupt truth movements.

You wrote:

Your postings here have only confirmed for me that I made the right decision.

Only someone looking for an excuse after-the-fact would mention that. Nor would someone truly interested in seeing the whole ugly truth about 9/11 become widely known allow personalities to get in the way of success.

Your non-informational replies here have only served to engender a suspicion that you are a disinformation agent, in cahoots with the 9/11 truth squad, who disapproved of your unapproved link to an uncensored 9/11 truth site. And that's really why the link was removed, without any explanation or even reply to my subsequent inquiry.

The treacherous 9-11 truth squad has devoted significant resources to marginalizing sites such as this one which are more interested in honestly presenting 9/11 evidence than they are about being afraid to say something of which Agent Robinowitz and his ilk might not approve! I can imagine the static you got over having unwittingly undermined their work...

You had hunks of time to examine/explore the site before you added the link, something any and every responsible blogger would have done. Further, the site is a relatively concise collection of Red Pills, and it doesn't take much time to see the whole site.

Given that fact, and the timeline, your 'explanation' seems rather feeble, and difficult to believe, Jeff.

...far more likely that you heard from Agent Robinowitz, who 'splained things to you.

You seem more willing to lead your readers down blind, dead-end, time-consuming rabbit holes than you are to direct them to some truths the government wants to remain buried.

In fact, it's just like your blog heading says: "What You Don't Know Can't Hurt Them".

And you don't want your readers to know the information available at the only 9/11 site to which you've ever linked that says that we ought to not discount/dismiss/disbelieve Bush's dubious self-incriminating 9/11 statements (even though, for a few days last month, you did).

11:03 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

recognizing disinfo agents is easy said:

"Well that narrow line of questioning/reasoning totally misses the point, Sweejak! (Too bad you didn't ask about how the corrupt disinfo cadre within the 9/11 truth movement dismisses Bush self-incriminating statements as yet more mere lies.) Let me answer (try to enlighten) you:"

Disinfo cadre? Well, yes I'm sure of it. I know of it.

Let me enlighten you regarding such narrow evidences as Molotovs.

The fact is that we don't have enough of the evidence, it has been made secret, shipped to Asia or other wise obscured.
Hence you do not know. You do not have enough evidence to draw some of the conclusions and they will and shall remain inconclusive until this evidence is revealed.

You are left with exactly what I was trying to say and just what the Kennedy investigator says: "microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy".

You can run in circles all you want and try the very difficult and elastic effort of trying to prove intent among those you think are disinfo agents. Likely also, in many instances, to be inconclusive.

The very fact that the evidence is hidden allows for conclusions and demands answers. Just as the Germans didn't need molotov analysis to see what the hell it was that was coming down the pike, or perhaps in that case the autobahn. Wouldn't the larger question be why didn't they see it or did they?

The reason disinfo agents are successful is because they focus on just those elements that are able to be used.

For instance, could I not just as easily say of you that it is you who are a disinfo agent by fiddling with the impossible to prove and smearing those who prefer to look at the larger global, psychological,and geopolitical aspects of what is a obvious conspiracy. Why? To keep the movement mired in the unprovable?

You see how it works.

Look, we're probably on the same side, but if your building your case only on things like the disproved seismic spikes you will get blown out of the water (Has Bollyn retracted that bit yet? Disinfo agent?) On the other hand the PNAC documents will never suffer such a fate.

I said it in my other post, "Occam's razor cuts both ways" and it is they, "them" who owe the answers and indeed it is they that have the evidence.

You yourself alluded to deeper problems when you quoted Hitler: "Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation." There, that's a real problem.

I'm not minimizing evidence just putting it in it's place, the place that fits my belief system and my standards. It does not mean I am automatically your enemy.

1:06 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The funniest part about the 9/11 "official" fairy tale is that one only has to poke a hole in one part of it to prove the government's lying and it was an inside job, and it is not just possible but EASY to poke huge holes in EVERY part of the "official" story. Physics tells us the "collapses" of the WTC twin towers and WTC # 7 were not possible without it being a controlled demolition. Watch the video footage of it, you'll see them come down in ten seconds each, freefall rate. Slow it down to frame-by-frame and one can even see the 'squibs' or puffs of dust out of the windows blowing out just before the dust cloud envelops them. Bush's behaviour in the elementary school is irretrievably damning: Not only did he sit there and be read to for a while, he then milled around socializing THEN carried out his pre-scheduled press conference on the "No Child Left Behind" act, not leaving the school until almost an HOUR after Card told him the news. If this was a genuine terrorist attack then Bush and his Secret Service staff would have HAD TO ASSUME he was a potential target and would have CERTAINLY rushed him out of there to a safer location A.S.A.P.; his staying for almost an hour can mean only one thing: Bush KNEW he wasn't a target, and the only way he could have known that is if he was privy to the whole plan. The scheduling of "war games" involving "mock hijacked airliners" for 9/11 is too cute by half, definitely NOT a coincidence. The allowing of three "hijacked airliners" (read: drones, one being a remotely-piloted tanker) to turn around and fly for over an hour to their targets is possible only with a NORAD stand-down order superceding their standard operating procedure. One even flew PAST New York city, missing its target and flying all the way to Newark, New Jersey before turning back around and came back to hit the South tower. Or the Pentagon's being hit in the wing under renovation, just prior to 9/11 reinforced so a massive fire there wouldn't spread to the other wings. The clear evidence of a cover-up in the seizing of all security camera tapes from the cameras near the Pentagon within MINUTES of the crash. The impossibility of the "Shanksville flight's" cell phone calls of "Let's Roll!" fame.
The fact that the Pentagon fired exactly NO surface-to-air missiles in its own defence. The earliest eyewitness accounts of the South Tower "plane" hitting, saying at least two saw that though it was painted in the airline's livery it had NO WINDOWS. The evidence of a cover-up in having the surviving NY firemen under a gag order regarding 9/11 and their tapes of their radio communications of that day classified; the FAA air traffic controllers also unde ra gag order. The evidence of foreknowledge in the record purchases of "put" options in United Airlines, American Airlines, Merril Lynch (based in WTC) stock in the week prior to 9/11. The impossibility of one of the "hijackers" [read: patsies] "passports" being "found" [read: planted] near the rubble when we were repeatedly told it was such a hot fire that the passengers were all incinerated. The obvious foreknowledge in the people who avoided flying or the WTC on 9/11, like Willie Brown. The immaculate Pentagon lawn with NO GOUGES in it, as seen in photos taken minutes after the drone hit it. One would think an airliner of that size would have at least dragged an engine or something, but no, we are supposed to believe it hit the Pentagon just a couple metres above the ground. Or what about the initial small hole in the Pentagon? Yes, in pictures it is visable as a small hole, much too small for a 757 to have crashed into. Then, a half-hour later they blew out a much larger section of the wall to make it appear less obvious. They also quickly called in sand and gravel lorries to cover over the immaculate gougeless lawn. One thing their wall blowing-out and lawn maintenance could NOT do for them was make an airliner's wings, tail section, luggage parts, people parts, etc. appear on the lawn which if it were a REAL airliner crashing into the Pentagon would surely have been there. No, we are supposed to believe that the entire airliner disappeared into a tiny hole in the Pentagon's E-ring and sucked its wings in alongside? What about the mysterious Lazarus-like behaviour of the six "hijackers" who turned up alive days after 9/11 wondering why they were wrongfully accused? Each one of these points proves it was an inside job and taken together, or separately, there can BE no other conclusion. The biggest problem in listing the proof of an inside job is "where to begin?", as there is a myriad of diverse pieces of evidence all pointing to the same thing, all of great importance. But this "problem" is much preferable to not having enough evidence ANY day.

1:13 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

David Ray Griffin's new book called "9/11 Commission: Ommissions and Distortions" brings out all these damning points and even more. It's a wonder Griffin's still alive.

1:28 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All the best I know how much time and hard work you have put into this project.
my progect here:
porno video

4:04 p.m.  
Blogger Unknown said...

Are you doing business in Brazil. Hire Brazilian attorney lawyers to solve Banking, Civil, Litigation, Consumer, Corporate, Employment, Family, Real Estate disputes. Contact Angélico Advogados for In-Bound & Out-Bound Transactions

8:14 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kemaluan bernanah
Obat kemaluan bernanah / Obat kutil di kemaluan

10:34 p.m.  
Blogger Unknown said...

Jika berbicara mengenai pengertianya maka penyakit jengger ayam ini diketahui adalah penyakit menular seksual yang penyebabnya berkaitan dengan Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). Penyakit ini juga dapat menampilkan diri dalam berbagai bentuk, namun secara umum kutil yang bertumbuh pada bagian genital penderita berbentuk benjolan daging yang berwarna, dan terjadi pada sekitar alat vital. Siapa saja bisa menderita penyakit ini baik yang pria maupun wanita

5:12 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Penyakit ini umumnya muncul karena penderita mengejan terlalu keras pada saat buang air besar. Dengan mengejan terlalu keras, maka pembuluh darah di sekitar anus dapat melebar dan pecah menimbulkan infeksi dan pembengkakan yang berakhir pada masalah wasir atau ambeien tersebut.

4:07 a.m.  
Blogger ekstrakalam said...


Nuwun sewu kula bade nderek promosi
untukandayangterkenapenyakitkulitsepertikadasataukudiskinitelahhadirobat herbaldaride natureyangsudahterbuktikhasiatnya

10:53 p.m.  
Blogger Pengobatan Ambeien Wasir said...

Nuwun sewu kula bade nderek promosiuntukandayangterkenapenyakitkulitsepertikadasataukudiskinitelahhadirobat herbaldaride natureyangsudahterbuktikhasiatnyamantab!!!!!!!!

1:29 p.m.  
Blogger Cara Mengobati Wasir Ambeien said...

berhitung yuk......... 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

1:55 p.m.  
Blogger Unknown said...

Bukan hanya pengobatan medis saja tapi ada juga pengobatan rumah alami yang dapat digunakan untuk menyingkirkan penyakit kutil kelamin ini. Intinya, karena kutil ini muncul di daerah yang sensitif, maka anda harus mencari pengobatan yang terbaik pada kulit Anda dan jika diperlukan juga dibantu dengan tenaga medis yang professional. Sebab dokter akan menjadi sumber informasi yang baik untuk mengobati penyakit ini.

1:40 p.m.  
Blogger obar herbal manjur alami said...

MANTAB * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *******

4:27 p.m.  
Blogger Unknown said...

Kadang disertai
dengan sakit saat kencing, perih, organ intim terasa panas menyiksa,
gatal,..

1:19 p.m.  
Blogger obar herbal manjur alami said...

Bismillahirrohmannirrokhim ..................

5:17 p.m.  
Blogger Unknown said...

Obat Ambeien Resep Dokter Ambeclear dari De Nature Ampuh Tuntaskan Ambeien Sampai Tuntas

10:13 a.m.  
Blogger kLINIK oBAT mANJUR said...

Bismillahhirrohmaanirrokhim.... ***************************

4:21 p.m.  
Blogger kLINIK oBAT mANJUR said...

Bismillahirrohmannirrokhim ......................................

12:00 a.m.  
Blogger obar herbal manjur alami said...

???????????????????????????????????????

12:15 p.m.  
Blogger kLINIK oBAT mANJUR said...

111111111111111111111

4:14 p.m.  
Blogger kLINIK oBAT mANJUR said...

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111

10:44 p.m.  
Blogger kLINIK oBAT mANJUR said...

obat ambeien wasir paling manjur mengobati penyakit wasir ambeien tanpa efek samping terbuat dari bahan alami herbal seperti daun ungu mahkota dewa kunyit putih

8:29 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google